| Literature DB >> 33968855 |
Rujiang Zheng1, Yu Li1, Chuyi Guo1, Yuxin Pei1, Zhiyong Ke1, Libin Huang1.
Abstract
Voriconazole is a second-generation azole widely used for the prevention and treatment of fungal infection in leukemia patients. We report a case of 9-year-old girl with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia who developed hallucinations and visual disturbance after using voriconazole twice. These symptoms began acutely after treatment with voriconazole and resolved rapidly when the voriconazole was stopped. No specific cause was identified, and thus the symptoms were considered to be the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of voriconazole. Simultaneous development of hallucinations and visual disturbance caused by voriconazole in children rarely have been reported before and the causes of these ADRs are unknown. Several other cases of hallucinations and (or) visual disturbance caused by voriconazole among 15-81 years old patients have been reported in the literature, and are reviewed. Those patients reminded us of the importance of being aware of hallucinations and visual disturbance associated with voriconazole treatment. In addition, we speculate that the hallucinations and visual disturbance are not related to the dosage form of voriconazole. We emphasize that it is also important to monitor the concentration of voriconazole regularly to avoid potential toxicity.Entities:
Keywords: children; hallucinations; side-effects; visual disturbance; voriconazole
Year: 2021 PMID: 33968855 PMCID: PMC8102700 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.655327
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1The chemotherapy process in this patient.
Literature review of voriconazole induced hallucinations and (or) visual disturbances.
| Zonios et al. ( | 12 | Breast cancer/MDS, myelofibrosis/CMML/ALL/AML/NHL, 33–68 | 9:3 | 3–6 mg/kg Q12H, iv | NA | Visual and/or auditory | 1–8/1–5 or treatment continued | 5.26 ± 0.83 |
| Agrawal and Sherman ( | 1 | Acute myelogenous leukemia, 78 | Male | 300 mg bid, po | Idarubicin, cytarabine, verapamil | Hearing Christmas music | 2/3 | NA |
| Imhof et al. ( | 6 | AML/SCT/AA, 43–78 | 5:1 | 200–300 mg BID, iv | Cyclosporine, mmf, pred | Hypotonia, anxiety, insomnia, visual hallucinations, irritability, | NA/3–4 | 1.5–6.4 |
| Gaies et al. ( | 1 | AA, 38 | male | 300 mg BID, iv | NA | Auditory hallucination, temporo-spatial disorientation. | 7/2 | 7.5 |
| Hideo et al. ( | 6 | ALL/PIDs/pneumonia/fungemia/cervical cancer, 15–81 | 3:3 | 200–300 mg BID, iv | NA | Visual disturbance, hallucinations, shame | 2–42/0–2 | 4.25 ± 2.25 |
| Sakurada et al. ( | 15 | hematological malignancies, 52–78 | 9:6 | 200–400 mg BID, iv/po | Omeprazole, rabeprazole, prednisolone, dexamethasone | Blurred vision, color blindness, photophobia, diplopia | 1–7/2–12 | 5.40 ± 2.37 |
| Bayhan et al. ( | 1 | ALL, 16 | Female | 400 mg BID, iv | Prednisolone, vincristine, daunorubicin, L-asparaginase, methotrexate | Visual and auditory hallucinations and disturbance. | 4/resolved completely 4 days later without VRCZ withdrawment | NA |
| Our patient | 1 | ALL, 9 | Female | 200 mg BID, iv/po | Dexamethasone, vincristine, daunorubicin, dexamethasone, asparaginase, adriamycin | Hallucinations and visual disturbances | 2–3/1 | 3.6 |
VRCZ, voriconazole; CMML, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia; GVHD, graft-vs.-host disease; IV, intravenous; MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome; NHL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma; SCT, stem cell transplantation; PO, per os; ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AA, aplastic anemia; PIDs, primary immunodeficiency disease; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; pred, prednisone.
The weighted scores of our patient on the Naranjo Scale (13).
| 1. Are there previous conclusive reports on this reaction? | +2 | ||
| 2. Did the adverse event appear after the suspected drug was administered? | +2 | ||
| 3. Did the adverse reaction improve when the drug was discontinued or a specific antagonist was administered? | 0 | ||
| 4. Did the adverse reaction reappear when the drug was readministered? | +2 | ||
| 5. Are there alternative causes (other than the drug) that could on their own have caused the reaction? | +1 | ||
| 6. Did the reaction reappear when a placebo was given? | 0 | ||
| 7. Was the drug detected in the blood (or other fluids) in concentrations known to? | 0 | ||
| 8. Was the reaction more severe when the dose was increased, or less severed when the dose was decreased? | 0 | ||
| 9. Did the patient have a similar reaction to the same or similar drugs in any previous exposure? | +1 | ||
| 10. Was the adverse event confirmed by any objective evidence? | 0 | ||
| Total score | 8 |
The total score ≥ 9 was empirically defined as “definitely” having caused the ADR; the total score 5–8 was defined a “probably” caused the ADR; the total score 1–4 was defined a “possibly” and total score ≤ 0 indicated association with drug was “doubtful”.