Delayed hypersensitivity and cytokine release syndrome to paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to paclitaxel, particularly those mediated by the solubilizer Cremophor® EL, are common, occurring in approximately 10% of patients despite premedication. Nab-paclitaxel, a newer formulation using human serum albumin as the vehicle, is generally considered a safer alternative due to a lower rate of HSRs. We present the case of a 44-year-old woman with breast cancer who developed severe HSRs following multiple doses of paclitaxel and carboplatin. Despite standard premedication, she experienced fever, erythematous skin eruptions, arthralgias, and systemic symptoms following her fourth and fifth cycles of treatment. Subsequent administration of nab-paclitaxel also elicited a similar severe reaction. Skin testing revealed a positive reaction to paclitaxel, but not to carboplatin, suggesting sensitization to paclitaxel. In the context of the similar reaction to nab-paclitaxel, this suggests sensitization to the taxane moiety itself rather than to the solubilizer. The combination of features consistent with both type IV hypersensitivity and cytokine release syndrome further complicates the presentation as well. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of cross-reactivity between paclitaxel and nab-paclitaxel, challenging the assumption that nab-paclitaxel is always a safe alternative. This emphasizes the need for vigilance and thorough evaluation in patients experiencing atypical chemotherapy reactions, as cytokine release reactions may play a role even in the absence of immunotherapy. It also raises the concern that alternative formulations like nab-paclitaxel may not always be safe in patients with atypical or severe reactions, as they could possibly be sensitized to the taxane moiety itself.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".