Clinical safety of a 1-h infusion of cisplatin approach in a broad cancer population.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Esther L Albuquerque, Justin G Horowitz, Grace C Lee
{"title":"Clinical safety of a 1-h infusion of cisplatin approach in a broad cancer population.","authors":"Esther L Albuquerque, Justin G Horowitz, Grace C Lee","doi":"10.1177/10781552251340630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>IntroductionCisplatin has ubiquitous use throughout many cancer types and is incorporated in various regimens. Nephrotoxicity is a well-known side effect of cisplatin, occurring in up to one third of patients. Early clinical data showed elevated peak concentrations are correlated with increased incidence of nephrotoxicity, suggesting prolonging infusion duration may abate this known toxicity. A recent study showed there was no difference in rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) between rapid (1-h) and standard (3-h) infusions of cisplatin, however, cisplatin was administered inpatient with prolonged and aggressive hydration methods. Therefore, we aimed to compare outcomes in patients who received rapid-infusion vs. standard-infusion cisplatin in the outpatient setting at our institution.MethodsThis single center, pre-post intervention study evaluated outpatient visits between January 2022 and March 2024. Cisplatin was administered over 3-h at Mays Cancer Center, UT Health San Antonio, prior to an institutional practice change to 1-h (rapid infusion) that took place February 2023. The co-primary outcomes were the maximum decrease in eGFR from baseline and the incidence of stage 1 or higher AKI. Secondary outcomes included rates of treatment modification and rates of healthcare resource utilization.ResultsA total of 53 patients with a chemotherapy regimen containing cisplatin met study criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar for the standard (n = 28) and rapid infusion (n = 25) groups. The maximum decrease in eGFR in the standard infusion vs. rapid infusion group did not differ (15.2 vs 18.0 mL/min/1.73 m<sup>2</sup>, respectively; <i>p</i> = 0.89). The incidence of stage 1 or higher AKI was not significantly different between the standard and rapid infusion cohorts (<i>p</i> = 0.13). No differences were identified for the secondary outcomes including rates of regimen modifications or hospitalizations due to AKI or time to AKI in 120 days after the first cisplatin dose.ConclusionIn this pre-post intervention analysis neither occurrence nor severity of nephrotoxicity appeared to be affected by the infusion rate of cisplatin in the outpatient setting. Rapid infusion of cisplatin over 1-h appears to be a feasible option without increased safety risk for patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":16637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":"10781552251340630"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10781552251340630","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

IntroductionCisplatin has ubiquitous use throughout many cancer types and is incorporated in various regimens. Nephrotoxicity is a well-known side effect of cisplatin, occurring in up to one third of patients. Early clinical data showed elevated peak concentrations are correlated with increased incidence of nephrotoxicity, suggesting prolonging infusion duration may abate this known toxicity. A recent study showed there was no difference in rates of acute kidney injury (AKI) between rapid (1-h) and standard (3-h) infusions of cisplatin, however, cisplatin was administered inpatient with prolonged and aggressive hydration methods. Therefore, we aimed to compare outcomes in patients who received rapid-infusion vs. standard-infusion cisplatin in the outpatient setting at our institution.MethodsThis single center, pre-post intervention study evaluated outpatient visits between January 2022 and March 2024. Cisplatin was administered over 3-h at Mays Cancer Center, UT Health San Antonio, prior to an institutional practice change to 1-h (rapid infusion) that took place February 2023. The co-primary outcomes were the maximum decrease in eGFR from baseline and the incidence of stage 1 or higher AKI. Secondary outcomes included rates of treatment modification and rates of healthcare resource utilization.ResultsA total of 53 patients with a chemotherapy regimen containing cisplatin met study criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar for the standard (n = 28) and rapid infusion (n = 25) groups. The maximum decrease in eGFR in the standard infusion vs. rapid infusion group did not differ (15.2 vs 18.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively; p = 0.89). The incidence of stage 1 or higher AKI was not significantly different between the standard and rapid infusion cohorts (p = 0.13). No differences were identified for the secondary outcomes including rates of regimen modifications or hospitalizations due to AKI or time to AKI in 120 days after the first cisplatin dose.ConclusionIn this pre-post intervention analysis neither occurrence nor severity of nephrotoxicity appeared to be affected by the infusion rate of cisplatin in the outpatient setting. Rapid infusion of cisplatin over 1-h appears to be a feasible option without increased safety risk for patients.

在广泛癌症人群中1小时输注顺铂方法的临床安全性。
顺铂在许多癌症类型中普遍使用,并被纳入各种治疗方案。肾毒性是顺铂的一个众所周知的副作用,发生在多达三分之一的患者中。早期临床数据显示,峰值浓度升高与肾毒性发生率增加相关,提示延长输注时间可能减轻这种已知的毒性。最近的一项研究表明,快速(1小时)和标准(3小时)输注顺铂在急性肾损伤(AKI)发生率上没有差异,然而,长期和积极水化方法的住院患者给予顺铂。因此,我们的目的是比较门诊接受快速输注与标准输注顺铂患者的结果。方法本研究为单中心、干预前和干预后研究,评估2022年1月至2024年3月期间的门诊就诊情况。在2023年2月将机构实践改为1小时(快速输注)之前,在UT Health San Antonio的Mays癌症中心进行了3小时的顺铂治疗。共同主要结局是eGFR较基线的最大降幅和1期或更高级别AKI的发生率。次要结局包括治疗改变率和医疗资源利用率。结果53例患者的顺铂化疗方案符合研究标准。标准组(n = 28)和快速输液组(n = 25)的基线特征相似。标准输注组与快速输注组eGFR最大降幅无差异(分别为15.2 vs 18.0 mL/min/1.73 m2;p = 0.89)。1期及以上AKI的发生率在标准组和快速输注组之间无显著差异(p = 0.13)。次要结果没有发现差异,包括方案修改率或因AKI住院率或首次顺铂剂量后120天内AKI的时间。结论在干预前和干预后的分析中,门诊患者肾毒性的发生和严重程度不受顺铂输注速度的影响。1小时内快速输注顺铂似乎是一种可行的选择,不会增加患者的安全风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
276
期刊介绍: Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to educating health professionals about providing pharmaceutical care to patients with cancer. It is the official publication of the International Society for Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP). Publishing pertinent case reports and consensus guidelines...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信