首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Cancer >A Retrospective Review of the Frequency and Nature of Acute Hypersensitivity Reactions at a Medium-Sized Infusion Center: Comparison to Reported Values and Inconsistencies Found in Literature
【2h】

A Retrospective Review of the Frequency and Nature of Acute Hypersensitivity Reactions at a Medium-Sized Infusion Center: Comparison to Reported Values and Inconsistencies Found in Literature

机译:回顾性回顾中型输液中心急性超敏反应的频率和性质:与文献中报道的值和不一致之处的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Purpose: To evaluate acute hypersensitivity reactions at the UCSD Moores Cancer Center in San Diego, compare our findings to those reported previously in the literature, and examine the effectiveness of the objective grading scale as represented by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).Patients and Methods: Using the available pharmacy and electronic medical record data from 2006-2010, we examined our reported hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) using the CTCAE v.3.0 and v.4.0. A thorough literature review was also performed to compare our findings with those previously reported.Results: We found 222 cases of HSRs, of which 50% were due to immunotherapeutics. Most were grade 1 or 2 by any CTCAE criteria. The clinical presentation of HSRs varied between drug classes. Using different versions of grading schema led to inconsistencies in ~50% of all HSRs. Fifty-two percent of all cases not due to blood products were rechallenged on the same day. The reported literature HSR frequencies for each causative agent showed a striking variability, possibly indicating that previous studies used a wide variety of grading and reporting systems for adverse events.Conclusion: HSRs are common in clinical practice, and most are mild or moderate. There are inconsistencies in reporting HSRs between studies. The existence of several grading schema and subjective definitions of hypersensitivity could be contributing to poor clinical generalizability. Along with an improved system of reporting HSRs to minimize underreporting, a standard system of objectively assessing HSRs is necessary for purposes of research and clinical practice.
机译:目的:要评估位于圣地亚哥的UCSD摩尔癌症中心的急性超敏反应,将我们的发现与先前文献中报道的发现进行比较,并检查以不良事件通用术语标准(CTCAE)为代表的客观分级量表的有效性患者和方法:使用2006-2010年间可获得的药房和电子病历数据,我们使用CTCAE v.3.0和v.4.0检查了我们报告的超敏反应(HSR)。结果:我们发现了222例HSR,其中50%是由于免疫治疗引起的。根据任何CTCAE标准,大多数都是1级或2级。 HSR的临床表现因药物类别而异。使用不同版本的分级架构会导致所有HSR中约50%的不一致。同一天,所有非血液制品引起的病例中有52%受到了质疑。报道的每种病原体的HSR频率显示出惊人的变异性,这可能表明以前的研究使用了多种不良事件分级和报告系统。结论:HSR在临床实践中很常见,大多数是轻度或中度。研究之间在报告高铁时有不一致之处。超敏反应的几种分级方案和主观定义的存在可能会导致不良的临床推广性。除了改进的报告HSR的系统以最大程度地减少漏报外,客观地评估HSR的标准系统对于研究和临床实践也是必需的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号