Search

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) are a burden for patients and the health systems. This problem increases when taking into account that only a small proportion of patients initially labelled as allergic are finally confirmed after an allergological workup. The diverse nature of drugs involved will imply different interactions with the immunological system. Therefore, IDHRs can be produced by a wide array of mechanisms mediated by the drug interaction with specific antibodies or directly on effector target cells. These heterogeneous mechanisms imply an enhanced complexity for an accurate diagnosis and the identification of the phenotype and endotype at early stages of the reaction is of vital importance. Currently, several endophenotypic categories (type I IgE/non-IgE, cytokine release, Mast-related G-protein coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) or Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition and their associated biomarkers have been proposed. A precise knowledge of endotypes will permit to discriminate patients within the same phenotype, which is crucial in order to personalise diagnosis, future treatment and prevention to improve the patient's quality of life., (© 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Amoxicillin (AX) combined or not with clavulanic acid (CLV) is frequently involved in IgE-mediated reactions. Drug provocation test (DPT) is considered as the gold standard for diagnosis, although contraindicated in high-risk patients. Basophil activation test (BAT) can help diagnose immediate reactions to beta-lactams, although controversy exists regarding the best activation marker. We have performed a real-life study in a prospective cohort to analyze the real value of BAT as diagnostic tool and the best activation marker, CD63 and CD203c, for the evaluation of immediate reactions to these drugs., Methods: We prospectively evaluated patients with a clinical suspicion of immediate reactions after AX or AX-CLV administration during a 6-year period. The allergological work-up was done following the EAACI recommendations. BAT was performed in all patients using CD63 and CD203c as activation markers., Results: In AX-allergic patients, both activation markers, CD63 and CD203c, showed similar SE values (48.6% and 46.7%, respectively); however, specificity was of 81.1% and 94.6%, respectively, with CD203c showing good positive predictive value and like-hood ratio. In CLV-allergic patients, CD203c showed higher SE (50%) than CD63 (42.9%), maintaining the same value of SP (80%). Combining the results of both markers can slightly increase the sensitivity (51.4% for AX and 54.8% for CLV), although decreasing the specificity (79.7% and 73%, respectively). Interestingly, all patients with an anaphylactic shock showed a positive BAT to CLV using CD203c., Conclusions: BAT using CD203c showed a good confirmatory power, especially for AX allergy. Placing BAT as a first step in the diagnostic procedure can help reduce the need of performing a complete allergological work-up in 46.6% of patients, diminishing the risk of reinducing allergic reactions., (© 2022 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Drug hypersensitivity is increasing worldwide as the consumption of drug is increasing. Many clinical presentations of drug hypersensitivity are complex and take place in the setting of illness and/or polypharmacotherapy. To review the most recent findings in the diagnosis and management of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions. Studies were selected based on their relevance, originality and date of publication. The understanding of endotypes, biomarkers and phenotypes has improved the categorization of immediate hypersensitivity reactions. In this review, we discussed the short- and long-term management of anaphylaxis with a special focus on in vivo and in vitro diagnostic methods. Moreover, the clinical management of drug-induced anaphylaxis, the role of hidden allergens and the importance of delabeling are discussed. Endophenotyping is crucial to correctly diagnose and treat patients with immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions, preventing future episodes through drug desensitization., (Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.)

Background: Cefazolin is a common trigger of perioperative anaphylaxis. The diagnostic approach is controversial because the optimal concentration for skin testing is uncertain, drug provocation tests (DPTs) are contraindicated in severe reactions, and in vitro tests are not thoroughly validated., Objective: We aimed to characterize a large number of patients reporting cefazolin allergic reactions and to analyze the diagnostic role of in vivo and in vitro tests., Methods: We prospectively evaluated patients with suspicion for allergic reactions to cefazolin by clinical history, skin tests (STs), and, if negative, DPT. In a subgroup of patients, basophil activation test (BAT) and radioallergosorbent test were done before allergologic workup was performed and the final diagnosis was achieved., Results: We evaluated 184 patients, 76 of whom were confirmed as allergic (41.3%), 90 were nonallergic (48.9%), and 18 were nonconfirmed (9.8%). All patients reporting anaphylactic shock and most reporting anaphylaxis were confirmed to be allergic (P < .001). Forty allergic patients (52.6%) were confirmed by STs, 22 by DPT (28.9%), and 14 by clinical history (18.4%). All subjects manifesting exanthemas and pruritus were nonallergic. The BAT sensitivity was 66.7% when CD63 and CD203c were combined as activation markers. Six of 8 patients with negative STs and positive DPT had a positive BAT., Conclusions: Patients allergic to cefazolin often reported severe immediate-type reactions. Skin tests enabled a diagnosis in half of patients when using cefazolin at 20 mg/mL. Unfortunately, DPT could not be performed in all patients owing to reaction severity, which makes BAT a promising diagnostic tool. Further research is needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms, especially in severe reactions., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has been widely used to evaluate non-immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (NIDHRs). However, the lack of standardization and the low sensitivity have limited its routine diagnostic use. The drug presentation by dendritic cells (DCs) and the assessment of proliferation on effector cells have shown promising results. Flow-cytometry-based methods can help apply these improvements. We aimed to assess the added value of using drug-primed-DCs and the determination of the proliferative response of different lymphocyte subpopulations in NIDHRs., Methods: Patients with confirmed NIDHR were evaluated by both conventional (C-LTT) and with drug-primed-DCs LTT (dDC-LTT)analysing the proliferative response in T cells and other effector cell subpopulations by using the fluorescent molecule, carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE)., Results: The C-LTT showed a significantly lower sensitivity (29.4%) compared with dDC-LTT (61.8%), which was confirmed analysing each particular clinical entity: SJS-TEN (62.5% vs 87.5%), MPE (15% vs 47.4%) and AGEP (33% vs 80%). When including the effector cell subpopulations involved in each clinical entity, CD3 + +CD4 + T h 1 or CD3 + +NK cells in SJS-TEN, CD3 + +CD4 + T h 1+NK cells in MPE and CD3 + +NK cells in AGEP, we could significantly increase the sensitivity of the in vitro test to 100%, 68.4% and 100%, respectively, with an overall sensitivity of 87% and 85% of specificity in NIDHR., Conclusions: The use of a flow-cytometry-based test, DCs as drug presenting cells, and focusing on effector cell subpopulations for each clinical entity significantly improved the drug-specific proliferative response in NIDHRs with a unique cellular in vitro test., (© 2021 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A correct diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) is very important for both the patient and health system. However, DHRs diagnosis is complex, time consuming, requires trained personnel, is not standardized for many drugs, involves procedures not exempt of risk, and in most cases lacks standardized in vivo and in vitro tests. Thus, there is an urgent need for improving the different approaches to diagnose patients with suspected DHRs. In this review, we have analyzed the advances performed in immediate and nonimmediate DHRs diagnosis during the last two years and obtained several conclusions: the significant heterogeneity in current practice among centers illustrates the need to re-evaluate, update, and standardize in vivo tests and protocols for the diagnosis and management of patients with suspected drug allergy. Regarding in vitro tests, the latest studies have focused on increasing their sensitivity or on establishing the sensitivity and specificity for the tests performed with new drugs. There seems to be a consensus about combining in vivo and in vitro tests as the best way to increase the diagnostic accuracy., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: Quinolones are the second most frequent cause of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to antibiotics. A marked increase in the number of patients with HSRs to quinolones has been detected., Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with HSRs to quinolones and present methods for their diagnosis., Methods: Patients attending the allergy unit due to reactions suggestive of HSRs to quinolones were prospectively evaluated between 2005 and 2018. Diagnosis was achieved using clinical history, skin tests (STs), basophil activation tests (BATs), and drug provocation tests (DPTs) if ST and BAT results were negative., Results: We included 128 subjects confirmed as having HSRs to quinolones and 42 found to be tolerant. Anaphylaxis was the most frequent entity in immediate HSRs and was most commonly induced by moxifloxacin. Patients were evaluated a median of 150 days (interquartile range, 60-365 days) after the reaction. Of patients who underwent ST and BAT, 40.7% and 70%, respectively, were positive. DPT with a quinolone was performed in 48 cases, giving results depending on the culprit drug: when moxifloxacin was involved, 62.5% of patients gave a positive DPT result to ciprofloxacin, whereas none reacted to levofloxacin. The risk of HSR was 96 times higher in subjects who reported moxifloxacin-induced anaphylaxis and 18 times higher in those reporting immediate reactions compared with clinical entities induced by quinolones other than moxifloxacin and nonimmediate reactions., Conclusions: The diagnosis of HSR to quinolones is complex. The use of clinical history is essential as a first step. BAT shows higher sensitivity than STs. DPTs can be useful for finding safe alternative quinolones., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients can react to amoxicillin (AX) and clavulanic acid (CLV) taken in combination because of selective reactions to either drug. However, scant information exists concerning patients who react simultaneously to both compounds., Objective: To analyze the mechanisms involved in 4 patients who developed allergic reactions to AX-CLV administration (3 with immediate IgE-mediated reaction and 1 with nonimmediate T-cell-mediated reaction) and who responded specifically to both AX and CLV., Methods: Skin tests with benzylpenicillin (BP), AX, and CLV were done and, if necessary, drug provocation tests with BP/penicillin V, AX, and AX-CLV were carried out. In immediate reactors, serum specific IgE to benzylpenicilloyl and amoxicilloyl was determined by using the CAP-FEIA system (Pharmacia Diagnostics, Uppsala, Sweden), and basophil activation test to BP, AX, CLV, and AX-CLV was done. In nonimmediate reactors, immunohistochemistry of skin biopsy and analysis of dendritic cell maturation and T-cell-specific response to BP, AX, CLV, and AX-CLV at both acute and resolution phases of the reaction were conducted., Results: All patients with immediate reactions (N = 3) had good tolerance to BP and penicillin V. Two cases also had specific IgE to AX and all had a basophil activation test positive to AX, CLV, and AX-CLV. The patient with a nonimmediate reaction exhibited dendritic cell and T-lymphocyte responses specific to both AX and CLV. Finally, the analysis of the cells infiltrating the skin and peripheral blood during the acute phase indicated a T H 1 pattern response., Conclusions: Our study provides evidence that reactions to both AX and CLV can appear in the same patient., (Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The optimal recognition of penicillin determinants, including amoxicillin (AX), by specific IgE antibodies is widely believed to require covalent binding to a carrier molecule. The nature of the carrier and its contribution to the antigenic determinant is not well known. Here we aimed to evaluate the specific-IgE recognition of different AX-derived structures. We studied patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions to AX, classified as selective or cross-reactors to penicillins. Competitive immunoassays were performed using AX itself, amoxicilloic acid, AX bound to butylamine (AXO-BA) or to human serum albumin (AXO-HSA) in the fluid phase, as inhibitors, and amoxicilloyl-poli-L-lysine (AXO-PLL) in the solid-phase. Two distinct patterns of AX recognition by IgE were found: Group A showed a higher recognition of AX itself and AX-modified components of low molecular weights, whilst Group B showed similar recognition of both unconjugated and conjugated AX. Amoxicilloic acid was poorly recognized in both groups, which reinforces the need for AX conjugation to a carrier for optimal recognition. Remarkably, IgE recognition in Group A (selective responders to AX) is influenced by the mode of binding and/or the nature of the carrier; whereas IgE in Group B (cross-responders to penicillins) recognizes AX independently of the nature of the carrier.

Background: Although ibuprofen and other arylpropionic acid derivatives (APs) are the most common medicines involved in hypersensitivity drug reactions (HDRs) to NSAIDs, no patient series studies have been performed regarding immediate selective reactions (SRs) to these drugs., Objective: To characterize patients with immediate selective HDRs to ibuprofen and other APs through clinical history and challenge., Methods: Subjects who developed an HDR to APs less than 1 h after drug intake were included. Tolerance to aspirin was assessed and challenge was performed with ibuprofen in all cases, and additionally with the culprit drug (if different) in those patients that tolerated ibuprofen. Serum tryptase levels and tryptase immunohistochemical staining in skin biopsies were also assessed in some patients with a positive DPT to ibuprofen., Results: From a total of 245 patients with a confirmed history of HDRs to APs, 17% were classified as selective immediate hypersensitivity reactors by both clinical history and challenge. A selective response to naproxen and dexketoprofen with tolerance to ibuprofen was found in 16 of 20 cases. Significant differences in serum tryptase levels were observed between 2 and 24 h in the 11 cases that were studied further., Conclusions: Within the group of patients with HDRs to NSAIDs, APs can induce immediate SRs. Within this group, selective responses to a single drug or responders to several APs may exist, suggesting potential immunological cross-reactivity., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Pyrazolones are the most common causes of selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) hypersensitivity. We studied a large group of patients with immediate and delayed selective responses to metamizole., Methods: Patients with suspicion of hypersensitivity to metamizole were evaluated. We verified acetylsalicylic acid tolerance and classified patients as immediate or delayed responders if they showed symptoms less or more than 24 h after metamizole administration. Skin tests were performed and if negative, a basophil activation test (BAT) was performed on immediate responders. If it was negative, we performed a drug provocation test (DPT) with metamizole., Results: A total of 137 patients were included: 132 reacted within 24 h (single NSAID-induced urticaria/angioedema/anaphylaxis; SNIUAA) and 5 after 24 h (single NSAID-induced delayed hypersensitivity reaction; SNIDHR). Most SNIUAA patients developed anaphylaxis (60.60%); for SNIDHR, maculopapular exanthema was the most frequent entity (60%). Skin testing was positive in 62.04% of all cases and BAT in 28% of the SNIUAA patients with negative skin tests. In 5.1% of the cases, DPT with metamizole was needed to establish the diagnosis. In 22.62% of the cases, diagnosis was established by consistent and unequivocal history of repeated allergic episodes in spite of a negative skin test and BAT., Conclusions: SNIUAA to metamizole is the most frequent type of selective NSAID hypersensitivity, with anaphylaxis being the most common clinical entity. It may occur within 1 h after drug intake. SNIDHR occurs in a very low percentage of cases. The low sensitivity of diagnostic tests may be due to incomplete characterization of the chemical structures of metamizole and its metabolites., (© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the drugs most frequently involved in allergic reactions of which two main types exist: IgE-mediated and crossintolerance. The diagnosis of crossintolerance reactions is often based on the drug provocation test. The potential value of the basophil activation test (BAT) was evaluated using different basophil markers in the diagnosis of patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs and cutaneous symptoms. We studied 46 patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs and 45 tolerant controls. BAT was performed with acetyl salicylic acid, paracetamol, diclofenac, dipyrone, naproxen, and ibuprofen at four different concentrations using CD193 and CD203c as basophil markers and CD63 as activation marker. We compared BAT results using CD193⁺ or CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ for basophil selection and found a significant increase in the stimulation index when using CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ in both patients and controls (P = 0.004 and P = 0.017, respectively). Selection of living cells only produced an increase in basophil stimulation in patients for both CD193⁺ and CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ (P < 0.001 for both), whereas in controls there was no change with CD193⁺ and a decrease with CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ (P = 0.001). We found that CD193⁺ CD203c⁺ increased the percentage of positive cases in patients and controls when compared with CD193⁺. When excluding dead cells, there was an increase of 21.7% in patients and 10% in controls. These results indicate that using CD193⁺ CD203⁺, excluding dead cells, is the best approach for BAT although this test is not recommended for the diagnosis of patients with crossintolerance to NSAIDs owing to its low sensitivity and specificity., (© 2014 International Society for Advancement of Cytometry.)

Background: No consensus exists on the diagnostic approach for immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHR) to radiocontrast media (RCM). We analyzed the diagnostic value of a skin test (ST), drug provocation test (DPT) and basophil activation test (BAT) in patients with symptoms compatible with IHR to RCM., Methods: Ninety patients with symptoms suggestive of IHR to RCM were evaluated. ST with a panel of RCM was performed, and if negative, DPT was carried out with the culprit RCM. If ST or DPT were positive, tolerance was assessed with an alternative RCM and BAT was carried out with the same panel used for ST., Results: Eight (8.9%) cases were confirmed as having IHR, 5 (62.5%) by ST and 3 (37.5%) by DPT. Five from those confirmed as IHR (62.5%) had a positive BAT., Conclusions: Hypersensitivity to RCM was confirmed in 9%, by ST or DPT. BAT proved a valuable method for diagnosis., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Fluoroquinolones (FQs) are photoreactive drugs, but it is not known whether laboratory light exposure can influence the induction of photoproducts and modify in vitro test results. The basophil activation test (BAT) has proven to be useful for evaluating immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitivity to FQs, with a higher percentage of positive responders with ciprofloxacin (CIP) than with moxifloxacin (MOX). We studied the effect of laboratory light on CIP and MOX degradation, and drug-protein conjugate formation, and its influence on the BAT for evaluating IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to FQs. The results showed an important decrease in fluorescence emission intensity under light compared to dark conditions for MOX, and that BAT positivity was lower in light (17.9%) than in dark (35.7%) conditions. No changes were found for CIP in either fluorescence emission intensity or BAT results (46.4% in both conditions). We can conclude that light exposure is a critical factor in BAT results when photolabile drugs like MOX are used. Therefore, light is important when interpreting in vitro results., (Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Skin testing with amoxicillin (AX) is necessary to diagnose immediate hypersensitivity reactions to this β-lactam. A commercial AX (DIA-AX) has recently become available for skin testing., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare DIA-AX with the injectable form (INJ-AX) in patients who have well-demonstrated IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to AX., Methods: Chemical characterization using high-performance liquid chromatography of both DIA-AX and INJ-AX reagents was performed. Patients diagnosed with an immediate allergic reaction to AX and a positive skin test to INJ-AX (N=55) were re-evaluated within 6 months by performing skin testing with INJ-AX and DIA-AX. Basophil activation test (BAT) and Radioallergosorbent test (RAST) inhibition assay using both reagents were performed in a selected group of patients., Results: The chemical analysis indicated that both DIA-AX and INJ-AX contained an AX compound with a purity above 95%. In the re-evaluation, 53 (96.4%) cases maintained skin test positivity to INJ-AX and were also positive to DIA-AX. Comparison of the papule area between the two reagents showed no significant differences between both reagents. BAT was performed in 30 samples and was positive to both compounds in 15 cases; no patient had a positive result to just one reagent. RAST inhibition studies using three individual cases and a pool of positive sera showed that the percentage inhibition detected with DIA-AX and INJ-AX was parallel and almost exactly the same., Conclusions: This study shows that DIA-AX is equivalent to INJ-AX in terms of skin test response, as well as with in vitro immunochemical and biological tests. DIA-AX can therefore be used in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity reactions., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Background:   Hypersensitivity IgE-mediated reactions to quinolones are not easy to diagnose, with skin testing inducing false positive results. The aim of the study was to evaluate the in vitro-specific IgE response in patients with immediate allergic reactions to quinolones., Methods:   We evaluated 38 patients with confirmed immediate allergic reactions to quinolones. Those with anaphylaxis were considered allergic by clinical history, once other possible causes were ruled out, and those with urticaria by drug provocation. Sepharose-radioimmunoassay (RIA) and basophil activation test (BAT) with ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin and levofloxacin were performed., Results:   The quinolones involved were moxifloxacin (N = 24), ciprofloxacin (N = 11) and levofloxacin (N = 3). Sepharose-RIA was positive in 12 cases (31.57%) and BAT in 27 (71.05%). With Sepharose-RIA, 8 (21%) were positive to ciprofloxacin, 7 (18.4%) to moxifloxacin and 7 (18.4%) to levofloxacin. With BAT, 23 (60.5%) were positive to ciprofloxacin, 12 (31.6%) to moxifloxacin and 8 (21%) to levofloxacin. The specificity of the Sepharose-RIA was demonstrated by inhibition tests. To confirm that the BAT results observed were IgE mediated, the PI3K inhibitor wortmannin was used, with this compound inhibiting the BAT when stimulated with anti-IgE and the different quinolones, but not when fMLP was used as the basophil stimulator. Sepharose-RIA and BAT were repeated in positive cases 1 year later, detecting a decrease in all cases, with four becoming negative., Conclusion:   Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones do occur, with moxifloxacin being the drug most frequently involved. The BAT is a useful method for diagnosing patients. Specific IgE was demonstrated by Sepharose-RIA and inhibition assay., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Background: Allergic reactions to systemically administered corticosteroids seem to be infrequent considering their extensive use. The aim of the study was to evaluate the IgE response in patients with immediate allergic reactions to methylprednisolone (MP)., Methods: Four subjects who developed immediate reactions after MP administration and ten controls with good tolerance to MP administration were evaluated. Skin prick and intradermal testing were done using MP, hydrocortisone (HC), and dexamethasone (DX). If negative, a drug provocation test (DPT) was done to confirm the diagnosis and assess cross-reactivity. The in vitro IgE response was evaluated by the basophil activation test (BAT) and ImmunoCAP., Results: Three patients were diagnosed by the presence of a positive skin test in the immediate reading with MP, two by prick and one by intradermal testing, and one patient was skin test negative and diagnosed by DPT. All four patients had good tolerance to HC and DX. The BAT was positive for just MP in those patients with positive skin tests, with all patients being negative for HC and DX. Two patients were also ImmunoCAP positive to MP., Conclusions: This study confirms the existence of immediate allergic reactions to MP and that some are mediated by specific IgE antibodies. Skin testing, ImmunoCAP and the BAT are useful to confirm the diagnosis., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

NSAIDs are the most important group of drugs involved in hypersensitivity drug reactions, and include heterogeneous compounds with very different chemical structures. These reactions can be IgE dependent (immediate reactions), T cell-mediated (non-immediate), or induced by a non-specific immunological mechanism related with the blocking of the COX-1 enzyme and the shunting to the lipooxygenase pathway (cross-intolerant reactions). Cutaneous symptoms are the most frequent, with ibuprofen, naproxen and diclofenac being common culprit drugs worldwide, although others can be involved because patterns of consumption and exposure rates vary between countries. A very important proportion of immunological reactions are immediate, with urticaria and anaphylaxis being the typical clinical manifestations. Non-immediate reactions comprise a number of heterogeneous entities ranging from mild exanthema to severe TEN or DRESS syndrome, as well as organ-specific reactions such as hepatitis or pneumonitis. Cross-intolerant reactions appear to non-chemically related drugs, and involve respiratory airways, skin or both. In vivo diagnostic tests are based on the capacity of the skin to respond to the culprit drug, but their sensitivity is in many instances rather low. The approach for in vitro testing consists of either detecting specific IgE antibodies or studying the proliferation of T lymphocytes toward the eliciting drug. No appropriate tests are yet available for the in vitro validation of cross-intolerance reactions, although techniques based on the stimulation of basophils have been proposed. Based on these findings, the diagnostic approach is often based on the controlled administration of the drug to assess tolerance. In this work we review current knowledge on hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs, including diagnostic approach and genetic studies.