Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Ann Pharmacother ; 46(11): e32, 2012 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23115228

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To report the serial development of oral mucositis following infusion of bevacizumab in a young woman with a malignant brain tumor and history of cutaneous psoriasis. CASE SUMMARY: A 29-year-old woman with a history of active cutaneous psoriasis and a malignant glioneuronal tumor was treated with bevacizumab for 2.5 years. With each infusion of bevacizumab, she developed oral mucositis within 36 hours. She received temozolomide as part of concurrent therapy with radiation and as maintenance therapy; it was discontinued after continuous therapy for 1.5 years. Bevacizumab 10 mg/kg was added after 7 cycles of maintenance temozolomide, as the tumor had minimal response and evidence of increased perfusion with angiogenesis on imaging studies. All medication, including temozolomide, was evaluated and eventually discontinued, with the exception of bevacizumab, which remained the drug suspected of causing the mucositis. DISCUSSION: Oral mucositis is a frequent adverse effect of cytotoxic chemotherapy, but has not been reported with bevacizumab. The Naranjo probability scale indicated a probable adverse drug reaction. This likely indicates that bevacizumab is one of many drugs known to induce exacerbation of psoriatic disease. We speculate that oral mucositis developed as bevacizumab-induced generation of proinflammatory cytokines within the vascular endothelium, leading to mucosal damage and ulceration. In addition, interruption of reparative angiogenic pathways with bevacizumab likely contributed to the severity of mucositis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that bevacizumab can potentially exacerbate psoriatic disease.


Subject(s)
Angiogenesis Inhibitors/adverse effects , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Stomatitis/chemically induced , Adult , Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating/administration & dosage , Bevacizumab , Brain Neoplasms/drug therapy , Brain Neoplasms/pathology , Dacarbazine/administration & dosage , Dacarbazine/analogs & derivatives , Female , Humans , Neovascularization, Pathologic/drug therapy , Neovascularization, Pathologic/pathology , Psoriasis/complications , Temozolomide
2.
Ann Pharmacother ; 43(2): 235-41, 2009 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19193580

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Serum creatinine (SCr)-based formulas are used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) when calculating a dosage for carboplatin using the Calvert equation, but these formulas often underestimate measured GFR. The Modified Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation appears to be a more accurate estimate of GFR in patients with chronic kidney disease, but this equation has not been studied extensively in patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: To determine the absolute difference between the dose of carboplatin administered (traditional SCr-based formulas used to estimate GFR) and the dose calculated using the MDRD equation to estimate GFR and compare the frequencies of thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and dosage modifications between subjects in whom the difference in dose was 20% or more (divergent) or less than 20% (nondivergent). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from patients who received carboplatin. Inclusion criteria were receipt of at least 2 doses of carboplatin, either as monotherapy or combination therapy, and documentation of desired area under the concentration-time curve (AUC). Patients were excluded if the baseline values needed to estimate GFR using the MDRD equation were not available. The absolute difference between the dose of carboplatin administered and that calculated using the MDRD equation was determined and, from this comparison, the subjects were divided into 2 groups (divergent vs nondivergent). RESULTS: The medical records of 186 adults who received more than 2 doses of carboplatin were included in the analysis. The doses were divergent in 89 (48%) patients. The mean target AUC values were 5.3 mg/mL/min and 5.1 mg/mL/min in the divergent and nondivergent groups, respectively, and most patients received cytotoxic regimens with a relatively low risk of febrile neutropenia. The frequencies of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and dosage modifications were similar between the 2 groups. Use of the MDRD equation to calculate the carboplatin dosage did not appear to result in a change in the frequency of myelosuppression or the need for dose modifications compared with traditional SCr-based formulas. CONCLUSIONS: The traditional SCr-based formulas for the calculation of carboplatin dosage should be used to estimate carboplatin dose until more data become available regarding the use of the MDRD equation in this population.


Subject(s)
Carboplatin/administration & dosage , Drug Dosage Calculations , Carboplatin/adverse effects , Carboplatin/pharmacokinetics , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Glomerular Filtration Rate , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neutrophils/drug effects , Platelet Count , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...