Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

American Society of Clinical Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23(37), p. 2051-2061, 2019

DOI: 10.1200/jco.18.02439

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Antibodies Predict Pegaspargase Allergic Reactions and Failure of Rechallenge

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

PURPOSE Pegaspargase (PEG-ASP) has largely replaced native Escherichia coli asparaginase (L-ASP) in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia because of its longer half-life and lower immunogenicity. Risk factors for allergic reactions to PEG-ASP remain unclear. Here, we identify risk factors for reactions in a front-line acute lymphoblastic leukemia trial and assess the usefulness of serum antibodies for diagnosing allergy and predicting rechallenge outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS PEG-ASP was administered to 598 patients in St Jude’s Total XVI study. Results were compared with Total XV study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00549848 and NCT00137111 ), which used native L-ASP. Serum samples (n = 5,369) were analyzed for anti–PEG-ASP immunoglobulin G by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Positive samples were tested for anti–polyethylene glycol (PEG) and anti–L-ASP. We analyzed potential risk factors for reactions and associations between antibodies and reactions, rechallenge outcomes, and PEG-ASP pharmacokinetics. RESULTS Grade 2 to 4 reactions were less common in the Total XVI study with PEG-ASP (81 [13.5%] of 598) than in the Total XV study with L-ASP (169 [41.2%] of 410; P = 1.4 × 10−23). For Total XVI, anti-PEG, not anti–L-ASP, was the predominant component of anti–PEG-ASP antibodies (96%). In a multivariable analysis, more intrathecal therapy (IT) predicted fewer reactions ( P = 2.4 × 10−5), which is consistent with an immunosuppressant contribution of IT. Anti–PEG-ASP was associated with accelerated drug clearance ( P = 5.0 × 10−6). Failure of rechallenge after initial reactions was associated with anti–PEG-ASP ( P = .0078) and was predicted by the occurrence of angioedema with first reaction ( P = .01). CONCLUSION Less IT therapy was the only independent clinical risk factor for reactions to PEG-ASP. PEG, and not L-ASP, is the major antigen that causes allergic reactions. Anti–PEG-ASP has utility in predicting and confirming clinical reactions to PEG-ASP as well as in identifying patients who are most likely to experience failure with rechallenge.