Search

Objective: The Drug Lymphocyte Stimulation Test (DLST), recognized for its safety as an allergy diagnostic modality, has been acknowledged for its utility in diagnosing drug-induced pathological conditions. However, reports elucidating DLST outcomes concerning local anesthetics are notably scarce., Materials and Methods: An exhaustive analysis was conducted on the DLST results pertaining to local anesthetics derived from 571 patients presenting with suspected allergies to these specific agents., Results: Remarkably, Stimulation Index (SI) > 1.8 was discerned in 11.4% and 7.8% of patients exhibiting hives or swelling subsequent to the administration of local anesthetics, surpassing the incidence observed in those experiencing post-injection discomfort. Additionally, SI > 3.0 was observed in 3 cases with lidocaine, 3 cases with prilocaine, and 1 case with mepivacaine. The distribution of SI exhibited a non-normal pattern for all three tested local anesthetics. Noteworthy is the case of a singular patient registering an SI of 1.84, who also yielded a positive challenge test, conclusively confirming an allergy to lidocaine., Conclusions: The DLST, holding promise as a potentially invaluable tool in identifying the causative factors behind adverse reactions to dental local anesthetics, lacks sufficient evidence to substantiate its efficacy definitively at present., Clinical Relevance: DLST, coupled with intradermal testing and challenge testing, may be elucidated in patients exhibiting indicators of suspected local anesthetic allergy., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Penicillin allergy is a significant burden on patient, prescribing and hospital outcomes. There has been increasing interest in the incorporation of penicillin allergy testing (i.e. delabelling) into antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programmes to reduce the burden of penicillin allergy labels and improve prescribing. In particular, there has been a focus on point-of-care penicillin allergy assessment and direct oral challenge for low-risk phenotypes. The National Antibiotic Allergy Network has provided a guide to assist AMS clinicians with the incorporation of penicillin allergy programmes, in particular direct oral challenge, into Australian hospitals., (© 2024 The Author(s). Internal Medicine Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

In vitro diagnostics for drug hypersensitivity reactions distinguish between serological and cellular-based tests. A serological test used for the diagnosis of immediate type reactions is the detection of specific IgE antibodies. The cellular tests include the basophil activation test for immediate type reactions and the lymphocyte transformation test, which is mainly used to detect delayed type hypersensitivity reactions. Further cellular-based tests are the CAST-ELISA and the mast cell activation test. None of the above-mentioned tests can definitively exclude an allergy if the result is negative. In addition, it is important to note that even a positive test result is not necessarily associated with an allergy but has to be interpreted in the clinical context., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

The classic approach of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (NSAID-ERD) includes pharmaceutical and surgical treatments, as well as avoidance of cyclooxygenase 1-inhibitor NSAIDs. The introduction of biologics in the treatment of severe asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps represents an alternative therapeutic approach to the classical aspirin therapy after desensitization (ATAD) in some regions, and with convincing results. However, their use is limited due to approval and/or high-cost restrictions. NSAID-ERD is a mainly type 2 and highly eosinophilic disease, and mAbs targeting IgE or IL-5, IL-4, and IL-13 have been shown to be effective for both severe asthma and severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. So far, dupilumab demonstrated greater efficacy in patients with NSAID-ERD than in aspirin-tolerant patients with regard to several clinical outcomes. Patients with NSAID-ERD respond very rapidly to omalizumab also, with reduction in the release of prostaglandin D 2 and cysteinyl leukotrienes. Patients favored biologic treatment over ATAD in multiple retrospective analyses, which must be acknowledged when choosing one or the other option. Although this review will summarize ATAD in general, it will more prominently focus on when ATAD should be considered, even when type 2 biologics are available. In addition, there are conflicting studies as to whether patients on a type 2 biologic become desensitized to NSAIDs, because omalizumab proved to restore tolerance to aspirin in only two-third of patients. This goal of NSAID tolerance should be considered as part of disease control future approaches, representing one of many aspects in a patient-centered care approach., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: A safe and pragmatic guide for labelling and delabelling patients with suspected penicillin allergy is mandatory., Objective: To compare the performance of 4 penicillin-allergy prediction strategies in a large independent cohort., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study for subjects presenting between January 2014 and December 2021 at the University Hospital of Montpellier, with a history of hypersensitivity to penicillins. The outcome targeted by the study was a positive penicillin-allergy test., Results: Of the 1,884 participants included, 382 (20.3%) had positive penicillin-allergy tests. The ENDA (European Network on Drug Allergy) and Blumenthal strategies yielded relatively high sensitivities and low specificities and, by design, did not misclassify any positive subjects with severe index reactions. The PEN-FAST <3 score had a negative predictive value of 90% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 88%-91%), with a sensitivity of 66% (95% CI 62%-71%) and a specificity of 73% (95% CI 71%-75%), and incorrectly delabelled 18 subjects with anaphylaxis and 15 with other severe nonimmediate reactions. For the adapted Chiriac score, the specificity corresponding to 66% sensitivity was 73% (95% CI 70%-75%). Conversely, at a 73% specificity threshold, the sensitivity was 65% (95% CI, 61%-70%). Attempts to improve these prediction algorithms did not substantially enhance performance., Conclusions: The ENDA and Blumenthal strategies are safe for high-risk subjects, but their delabelling effectiveness is limited, leading to unnecessary avoidance. Conversely, the PEN-FAST and Chiriac scores are performant in delabelling, but more frequently misclassify high-risk subjects with positive penicillin-allergy tests. Selection of the most appropriate tool requires careful consideration of the target population and the desired goal., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Self-reported penicillin allergy is highly prevalent. Different studies estimate that 10% of the population is labeled as such. This label, confirmed or suspected, forces us to take precautions and replace the antibiotic treatment of choice (frequently beta-lactams) with other 2nd or 3rd choice alternatives with worse overall results: side effects, resistance, costs, etc. The penicillin allergy label, once placed, remains in the medical record. It is only confirmed in less than 5% of patients, either because it has been placed inappropriately or because over time the sensitivity decreases and may disappear. Penicillin Allergy Decision Rule -PEN-FAST- is a validated and simple clinical prediction rule that estimates the risk of presenting an allergic reaction. Its use, together with algorithms that involve primary care in the study and delabeling of low-risk patients, can change our clinical practice., (Copyright © 2024 Sociedad Española de Médicos de Atención Primaria (SEMERGEN). Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vancomycin infusion reaction (VIR), reportedly mediated through Mas-Related G Protein-Coupled Receptor-X2, is the primary vancomycin-induced immediate drug reaction. Clinically, distinguishing the underlying drug-induced immediate drug reaction mechanisms is crucial for future treatment strategies, including drug restriction, re-administration, and pretreatment considerations. However, the lack of validated diagnostic tests makes this challenging, often leading to unnecessary drug restriction., Objective: To determine whether intradermal tests (IDTs) and, separately, the basophil activation test (BAT) differentiate VIR from vancomycin-tolerant subjects., Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of vancomycin-exposed adults with and without a history of VIR. Data on demographics, allergy-related comorbidities, history of vancomycin exposures, and VIR characteristics were collected. IDT with vancomycin was performed. IDT dose-response EC 50 , IDT-related local symptoms, and BAT results were compared between groups., Results: A total of 11 VIR and 10 vancomycin-tolerant subjects were enrolled. The most reported VIR symptoms were pruritus (82%), flushing (82%), hives (46%), angioedema (27%), and dyspnea (19%). The IDT dose-response mean EC 50 was 328 μg/mL (95% CI, 296-367) in the VIR versus 1166 μg/mL (95% CI, 1029-1379) in the tolerant group (P < .0001). All VIR subjects reported IDT-related local pruritus compared with 60% of tolerant subjects (P = .0185). The %CD63 + basophils were consistently less than 2%, without significant differences between groups (P < .54)., Conclusions: Variations in skin test methodologies could help identify other immediate drug reaction mechanisms beyond IgE. This skin test protocol holds the potential for identifying VIR, particularly in cases where patients have received multiple drugs while BAT is insufficient. Future studies will validate and delineate its predictive value, assessing the risk of VIR., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (NSAID-ERD) is a distinct clinical syndrome characterized by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) hypersensitivity, asthma, and nasal polyposis. Its diagnosis is challenging owing to variable presentations and a lack of simple tests, leading to diagnostic delays. Recent research has revealed its genetic predispositions, environmental triggers, and associations with atopy and second-hand tobacco smoke exposure or smoking cessation. Despite its severity, diagnostic awareness remains low, leading to the delay in effective management. Therapeutically, NSAID-ERD necessitates multidisciplinary approaches, often combining surgical interventions with medical management, including aspirin desensitization and biologic agents. However, predictive biomarkers for treatment response remain elusive. Understanding the underlying mechanisms driving NSAID-ERD pathogenesis and identifying reliable biomarkers are crucial for enhancing diagnostic accuracy and refining targeted therapeutic strategies for this debilitating condition. This review aims to provide a thorough understanding of NSAID-ERD, covering its history, clinical features, epidemiology, diagnosis, systemic and molecular biomarkers, available treatment options, and avenues for future research., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum specific IgE, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported β-lactam allergies., Objective: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum specific IgE in children with β-lactam allergies, with immediate and nonimmediate historic reactions., Methods: Four hundred children with parent-reported β-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or severe cutaneous adverse reactions were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of 3 years., Results: True allergy in children was uncommon; 8.3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within 1 year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing were 12.5%, 98.8%, and 20.0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4.76%, 99.0%, and 25.0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6.9%, 99.0%, and 40.0% for both challenges combined, respectively. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5.7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2.7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15%, with the relabeing being unfounded., Conclusions: Genuine β-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum specific IgE testing did not aid the diagnosis of β-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Maximal skin testing (ST) nonirritant concentrations (NICs) are consistent for penicillin and aminopenicillin among guidelines. However, there is variability among guidelines for maximal ST NICs of cephalosporins., Objective: To determine maximal immediate and delayed ST NICs of 15 β-lactams in β-lactam-tolerant and β-lactam-naïve participants., Methods: We performed a single-center, nonrandomized prospective study between September 2019 and January 2022 in adult participants. Participants received skin prick testing (SPT) and intradermal test (IDT) injections at 6 increasing concentrations of 1 or more β-lactams. A concentration was considered irritant when more than 5% of participants had a positive test. A positive test was defined as a wheal ≥3 mm compared with negative control accompanied by a ≥5 mm flare for SPT/IDT and induration ≥5 mm with associated erythema at 48 hours for delayed readings (dIDT). Sensitivity analyses using 3 alternative IDT positive criteria were conducted., Results: A total of 747 participants with a median age of 64 (interquartile range: 54-72) years (52% male, 85% White, and 92% non-Hispanic) underwent 20,858 skin tests. All undiluted SPT concentrations were nonirritant. We found the following maximal IDT/dIDT NICs (mg/mL): ampicillin (41.6/125), ampicillin-sulbactam (93.8/187.5), aztreonam (6.3/25), cefazolin (55/165), cefepime (35/140), cefoxitin (45/90), ceftaroline (7.5/15), ceftriaxone (58.3/175), cefuroxime (55/110), ertapenem (16.6/50), imipenem-cilastin (6.3/25), meropenem (8.3/25), nafcillin (31.3/62.5), oxacillin (20.9/83.5), and piperacillin-tazobactam (112.5/225). dIDTs were almost all completely nonirritant close to or at undiluted concentrations. There were no differences when we applied 3 IDT positivity criteria to our raw data., Conclusions: Our results suggest that SPTs with undiluted stock β-lactam antibiotic concentrations are nonirritant. Compared with previously published nonirritant concentrations, we propose a 2- to 50-fold increase to the maximal IDT and dIDT NICs of 15 β-lactam antibiotics. When performing dIDTs, a higher concentration should be used rather than the same IDT concentration., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Low-dose aspirin remains the most commonly used antiplatelet agent among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Aspirin hypersensitivity occurs in 1% to 5% of patients and is among the most frequent causes for prohibiting the use of aspirin, posing a significant dilemma on how to manage these patients in clinical practice. Aspirin hypersensitivity is often misinterpreted and confused with aspirin intolerance, with treatment approaches being often unclear and lacking specific recommendations. Aspirin desensitization and low-dose aspirin challenge have emerged as pragmatic, effective, and safe approaches in patients with suspected or confirmed aspirin hypersensitivity who require aspirin therapy, but they are underused systematically in clinical practice. Furthermore, there is confusion over alternative antiplatelet agents to be used in these patients. The pathophysiological mechanisms and classification of aspirin hypersensitivity, as well as alternative strategies and practical algorithms to overcome the need for aspirin use in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with suspected aspirin hypersensitivity, are discussed., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Faraday, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We present the case of a patient with failed desensitisation to paclitaxel that was ultimately successful with omalizumab treatment. Our patient, a female aged between 20-25 and diagnosed with a triple negative breast cancer, received first-line treatment with carboplatin and paclitaxel. During the second cycle of paclitaxel, she experienced heat, dyspnoea, facial angioedema and vomiting. Skin tests for allergic reactions returned negative results, and drug provocation tests showed a positive result (anaphylaxis). Rapid drug desensitisation (RDD) was carried out with two bags of dilutions but at the beginning of the infusion, the patient experienced symptoms again, so the infusion was stopped. Therefore, the use of omalizumab, already reported as a successful adjuvant in desensitisation to other drugs, was considered. The anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibody was administered off-label before the first programmed desensitisation with success: total dose of paclitaxel was infused without any reaction. The patient was able to receive the complete chemotherapy treatment., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JLA acknowledges payments from Lilly, Roche, Novartis and that he is a member of the Safety Monitoring Board of his institution., (© European Association of Hospital Pharmacists 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with anaphylaxis and hypersensitivity reactions. Infectious disease physicians and allergists in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) Network developed guidance for evaluating patients with adverse events following immunization (AEFI) including suspected hypersensitivity. This study evaluated management and adverse event recurrence following subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations., Methods: Individuals aged 12 years and older enrolled at participating SICs before February 28, 2023 who were referred for suspected or diagnosed hypersensitivity reaction following COVID-19 vaccination, or for prevaccination assessment of suspected allergy to a COVID-19 vaccine component were included. De-identified clinical assessments and revaccination data, captured in a centralized database, were analyzed. The Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) for anaphylaxis (2023 version) was applied., Results: The analysis included 206 participants from 13 sites: 26 participants referred for pre-vaccination assessment and 180 participants referred for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination (15/180 [8.3%] with BCCD confirmed anaphylaxis, 84 [46.7%] with immediate hypersensitivity symptoms not meeting BCCD, 33 [18.3%] with other diagnosed hypersensitivity reactions, and 48 [26.7%] participants with a final diagnosis of non-hypersensitivity AEFI). Among participants referred for AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination, 166/180 (92.2%) were recommended for COVID-19 revaccination after risk assessment, of whom 158/166 (95.2%) were revaccinated (all with a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine). After revaccination, 1/15 (6.7%) participants with prior anaphylaxis, 1/77 (1.3%) with immediate hypersensitivity not meeting criteria for anaphylaxis and 1/24 (4.2%) with other physician diagnosed hypersensitivity developed recurrent AEFI symptoms that met the BCCD for anaphylaxis. All 26 participants referred pre-vaccination, including 9 (34.6%) with history of polyethylene glycol-asparaginase reactions, were vaccinated without occurrence of immediate hypersensitivity symptoms., Conclusions: Most individuals in this national cohort who experienced a hypersensitivity event following COVID-19 vaccination and were referred for specialist review were revaccinated without AEFI recurrence, suggesting that specialist evaluation can facilitate safe revaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: MS has been an investigator on projects funded by GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Pasteur; all funds have been paid to his institute, and he has not received any personal payments. VC received honoraria from Pfizer, Aralez pharmaceuticals and CSL Behring financial support for publication from CSL Behring. JEMU reports advisory board for Pfizer, clinical trials with Sanofi, and other from Novartis, all outside the current work. KZ reports honoraria from AstraZeneca and Regeneron. JMP is an investigator on projects funded by MedImmune and Merck; all funds have been paid to his institute, and he has not received any personal payments. ZA reports honoraria for speaker fees for Pfizer outside of the submitted work. AM received honoraria for presentations from Pfizer and Sanofi. ADR participated in multicentric studies with ALK for sublingual immunotherapy as investigator. AC received honoraria for presentations from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline and Moderna. JC received honoraria for presentations from Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and GlaxoSmithKline. KAT has received funding to her institution from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations for vaccine safety studies. All other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Approximately, 10% of people report a penicillin allergy; however, more than 90% can safely undergo delabeling after a detailed history, oral challenge, or other investigations such as penicillin skin testing (PST). Although PST is the gold standard, the results can be heterogeneous, and awaiting specialist assessment may take an inordinate amount of time. Therefore, oral provocation challenge has become acceptable for individuals with low-risk penicillin allergy histories. There also appears to be an association with increased prevalence of adverse drug reaction reporting in female individuals, which may translate to penicillin allergy prevalence; however, the evidence has not been assessed through a sex and gender lens. This systematic review will identify and synthesize the findings from studies that report measures of effectiveness and safety of interventions aimed at delabeling penicillin allergies in low-risk individuals. Information related to sex and gender will be extracted, where available, to understand potential differences in allergy reporting and patient outcomes., Methods: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Centre for Review and Dissemination's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care will be used as frameworks for conducting this systematic review. The literature search will be conducted by a medical librarian (B. M. M.) and will consist of a search strategy to identify and retrieve published studies that meet our inclusion criteria. Studies that require penicillin skin testing (PST) as a step prior to other interventions will be excluded. Integrated knowledge translation involving co-design was carried out for this systematic review protocol creation. Data extraction will be conducted at four levels: (1) study level, (2) patient level, (3) intervention level, and (4) outcome level. A narrative descriptive synthesis of results and risk of bias of all included studies will be provided, and, if relevant, a meta-analysis will be performed., Discussion: The dissemination of findings from this knowledge synthesis to various stakeholders is intended to inform on options for evidence-based interventions to aid in delabeling penicillin allergies in individuals with a low risk of experiencing a hypersensitivity reaction. Detailed reporting on the characteristics of delabeling interventions as well as the effectiveness of similar interventions will benefit policy makers considering the implementation of a penicillin allergy delabeling protocol. Additionally, findings from this systematic review will report on the current evidence regarding the role of sex and gender in both the prevalence and outcomes associated with the presence of penicillin allergies., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022336457., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Paclitaxel is one of the first-line treatments for breast, ovarian, and lung cancers. However, its use is limited by the high frequency of hypersensitivity reactions. In this retrospective chart review at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, we assess clinical factors associated with immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions to paclitaxel and characterize delayed hypersensitivity reactions to paclitaxel in patients with breast cancer. 12,274 patients were treated with paclitaxel. 6,165 had breast cancer and 1,233 were seen by a dermatologist. 734 patients (11.9%) developed an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Age (p < 0.001), race (p < 0.001), and prior history of allergy (p = 0.05) were associated with immediate hypersensitivity reactions. 147 patients (4.0%) had a rash of interest. The most common phenotypes were maculopapular (52%) and urticaria (36%). Race (p < 0.001) and history of allergy (p < 0.001) were associated with development of a cutaneous reaction. Patients with an immediate hypersensitivity reaction were more likely to have developed a delayed cutaneous reaction (OR = 1.80). Risk factors for development of immediate hypersensitivity reactions in this study were younger age, race, and history of allergy. Patients who developed an immediate hypersensitivity reaction were more likely to develop a delayed hypersensitivity reaction. Risk factors for development of the rash included Asian race and history of allergy. Identification of risk factors is critical to guide care coordination. Awareness of these clinical factors which are associated with development of a rash could guide providers in choosing treatment with paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel. If the cutaneous reactions are bothersome to the patient, the transition of treatment from paclitaxel to nab-paclitaxel may be warranted, or a consideration of re-challenge or desensitization may be discussed., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction-Aim: The iatrogenic risk in the elderly is a real public health problem due to its frequency and seriousness. Our study aimed to analyze the epidemiological, clinical and chronological aspects of adverse drug reactions occurring in elderly subjects and to identify the incriminated drugs., Methods: We carried out a retrospective study of all the observations of adverse drug reactions in elderly subjects, notified to the Clinical Pharmacology department of Monastir over a period of 17 years (2004 - 2020). Drug skin tests were performed according to ENDA recommendations and imputability was analyzed using the French method of Bégaud et al. The drugs have been grouped according to the ATC classification., Results: Among 545 events occurring in elderly subjects, drug responsibility was retained in 209 patients. They were 106 men and 103 women (gender-ratio=1.03). The average age of the patients was 72.3±6 years. Drug hypersensitivity reactions accounted for 75% of all adverse effects. The majority of these reactions were type IV (delayed). The incriminated drugs were: anti-infectives (47%), drugs for the musculoskeletal system (20%), drugs for the cardiovascular system (17%) and drugs for the central nervous system (5%)., Conclusion: Through this study, we noted a predominance of delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions as well as an increased involvement of anti-infectives and allopurinol in the occurrence of adverse effects in the elderly population.

Background: Use of electronic health records (EHR) to provide real-world data for research is established, but using EHR to deliver randomised controlled trials (RCTs) more efficiently is less developed. The Allergy AntiBiotics And Microbial resistAnce (ALABAMA) RCT evaluated a penicillin allergy assessment pathway versus usual clinical care in a UK primary care setting. The aim of this paper is to describe how EHRs were used to facilitate efficient delivery of a large-scale randomised trial of a complex intervention embracing efficient participant identification, supporting minimising GP workload, providing accurate post-intervention EHR updates of allergy status, and facilitating participant follow up and outcome data collection. The generalisability of the EHR approach and health economic implications of EHR in clinical trials will be reported in the main ALABAMA trial cost-effectiveness analysis., Methods: A descriptive account of the adaptation of functionality within SystmOne used to deliver/facilitate multiple trial processes from participant identification to outcome data collection., Results: An ALABAMA organisation group within SystmOne was established which allowed sharing of trial functions/materials developed centrally by the research team. The 'ALABAMA unit' within SystmOne was also created and provided a secure efficient environment to access participants' EHR data. Processes of referring consented participants, allocating them to a trial arm, and assigning specific functions to the intervention arm were developed by adapting tools such as templates, reports, and protocols which were already available in SystmOne as well as pathways to facilitate allergy de-labelling processes and data retrieval for trial outcome analysis., Conclusions: ALABAMA is one of the first RCTs to utilise SystmOne EHR functionality and data across the RCT delivery, demonstrating feasibility and applicability to other primary care RCTs., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04108637, registered 05/03/2019. ISRCTN: ISRCTN20579216., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Paclitaxel is effective chemotherapy against various cancers but can cause hypersensitivity reaction (HSR). This study aimed to identify predictors associated with paclitaxel HSR and develop a clinical prediction model to guide clinical decisions., Methods: Data were collected from the medical records database of Rajavithi Hospital. Patients with cancer treated with paclitaxel from 2015 to 2022 were included, and a multivariable logistic regression analysis identified predictors associated with paclitaxel HSR. The scoring system was transformed and calibrated on the basis of diagnostic parameters. Discrimination and calibration performances were assessed. Internal validation was conducted using bootstrap resampling with 1,000 replications., Results: This study involved 3,708 patients with cancer, with an incidence of paclitaxel HSR of 10.11%. An 11-predictor-based Pac-HSR scoring system was developed, involving the following factors: younger age; poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; previous history of paclitaxel HSR; medication allergy history; chronic obstructive airway disease; lung and cervical cancers; high actual dose of paclitaxel; no diphenhydramine premedication; low hemoglobin level; high WBC count; and high absolute lymphocyte count. The C-statistics was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.76), indicating acceptable discrimination. The P value of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was 0.751. The ratio of observed and expected values was 1.00, indicating good calibration. At a cutoff point of 8, specificity was 75.28% and sensitivity was 57.07%. Internal validation indicated good performance with minimal bias, and decision curve analysis demonstrated improved prediction with the use of this scoring system in clinical decision making., Conclusion: This study developed the 11-predictor-based Pac-HSR scoring system for predicting paclitaxel HSR in patients with cancer. High-risk patients identified by this score should be prioritized for close monitoring and early treatment prophylaxis.

Hypersensitivity to exogenous or endogenous progesterone presents with a variety of clinical, usually cutaneous, manifestations. The condition can occur at any age during the reproductive years, causes debilitating symptoms and can impact the use of exogenous hormones. Management strategies include symptom control or hormonal manipulation via desensitisation. Strategic testing confirms the diagnosis, while targeted intervention can significantly and positively impact quality of life and further childbearing., (© 2024 The Author(s). Internal Medicine Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Background: The prevalence of allergies to beta-lactam antibiotics is significantly overestimated based on anamnestic data - with significant medical and economic consequences. The aim of the study was to determine the frequency of immediate and delayed type reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics in order to optimize diagnostics and therapy. One focus was on the time interval between reaction and testing., Patients and Methodology: Anamnestic and diagnostic data of patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics who were examined in our department between 2020 and 2022 were analyzed., Results: 27/116 (23%) patients reacted in the skin tests. Type I sensitizations were detected in 4/35 patients (11%), type IV sensitizations in 23/83 (28%). In the case of negative in vitro diagnostics and skin testing, inpatient provocation tests were performed in 41/89 (46%). Type I allergies were confirmed in two of the 13 provoked patients (15%) with immediate type reactions, type IV allergies in three of 29 (10%) with delayed type reactions. The results were clearly related to the time interval after reaction. At less than one year, 19% (22/116) reacted, whereas only 4% (5/116) reacted at more than one year (for type I reaction 9% vs. 3%; for type IV reaction 23% vs. 5%).  CONCLUSIONS: The importance of the time interval between clinical event and allergological testing supports the guideline recommendation for skin testing within one year. Guideline recommendations on the diagnostic procedure for unclear reactions that occurred in the more distant past are desirable in order to rule out allergies to beta-lactam antibiotics., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

Background: Oxaliplatin is commonly used to treat gastrointestinal malignancies. However, its applications are limited due to potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs), particularly severe anaphylactic shock. There is no method to predict or prevent ADRs caused by oxaliplatin. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the genetic HLA predisposition and immune mechanism of oxaliplatin-induced ADRs., Methods: A retrospective review was performed for 154 patients with ADRs induced by oxaliplatin during 2016-2021 recorded in our ADR notification system. HLA genotyping was conducted for 47 patients with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs, 1100 general population controls, and 34 oxaliplatin-tolerant controls in 2019-2023. The in vitro basophil activation test (BAT) was performed and oxaliplatin-specific IgE levels were determined., Results: The incidence of oxaliplatin-induced ADRs and anaphylactic shock in our cohort was 7.1% and 0.15%, respectively. Of the 154 patients, 67.5% suffered rash/eruption; 26.0% of the patients who could not undergo oxaliplatin rechallenge were considered to show oxaliplatin-induced immune-mediated hypersensitivity reactions (HRs). The genetic study found that the HLA-DRB∗12:01 allele was associated with oxaliplatin-induced HRs compared to the general population controls (sensitivity = 42.9%; odds ratio [OR] = 3.4; 95% CI = 1.4-8.2; P = 0.008) and tolerant controls (OR = 12; 95% CI = 2.3-63.7; P = 0.001). The in vitro BAT showed higher activation of CD63 + basophils in patients with oxaliplatin-induced HRs compared to the tolerant controls (P < 0.05). Only four patients (8.5%) with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs were positive for oxaliplatin-specific IgE., Conclusions: This study found that 26.0% of patients with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs could not undergo oxaliplatin rechallenge. HLA-DRB∗12:01 is regarded as a genetic marker for oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity., (Copyright © 2024 Japanese Society of Allergology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Patients are sometimes mislabeled as having an immune-mediated antibiotic allergy in their medical records. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of subjects with non-immune mediated reactions to antibiotics using a standardized questionnaire. Subjects aged 18 years and older with a documented antibiotic allergy were identified and recruited from 2 outpatient clinics in the greater Chicago area. Subjects completed a standardized questionnaire during a single visit regarding their previous adverse reaction to an antibiotic. For subjects with multiple documented antibiotic allergies, 1 questionnaire was filled out for each antibiotic allergy. Investigators subsequently evaluated the questionnaire responses to determine whether the adverse reaction was a true immune-mediated allergic reaction or an adverse drug reaction. A total of 98 subjects were recruited with completion of 159 questionnaires. Eighteen subjects (18.37%, 95% CI: 10.7%, 26.3%) had antibiotic allergy labels with no corresponding immune-mediated reaction history. There were 35 allergy labels (22.0%, 95% CI: 14.7%, 29.4%) that were unlikely to be immune-mediated. Antibiotics with the highest percentage of clinical histories that were unlikely to be immune-mediated were macrolides (8 of 11 subjects), nitrofurantoin (1 of 2 subjects), and amoxicillin/clavulanate (2 of 8 subjects). The most common antibiotic allergy labels were penicillin (43 of 159 subjects), sulfonamides (25 of 159 subjects), and fluoroquinolones (21 of 159 subjects). Identification of adverse reactions to antibiotics that are unlikely to be immune-mediated can be accomplished using a standardized questionnaire in the outpatient setting. Improved identification of low-risk antibiotic allergy labels can guide de-labeling initiatives to improve antibiotic prescribing., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

A patient-reported outcome is directly reported by the patient without interpretation of the patient's response by anyone else. It refers to the patient's health (symptoms and feelings), quality of life, or functional status associated with health care or treatment. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are defined as the tools or instruments that are used to measure patient-reported outcomes. Health-related quality of life has been the most studied psychosocial PROM in food allergy, using validated questionnaires. In drug allergy, PROMs are useful in capturing patients' experiences of potential allergic reactions, including subjective symptoms such as headache, dizziness, or fatigue. Patient-reported outcome measures can also help differentiate true allergies from side effects or other nonallergic reactions and inform decisions about drug challenges and de-labeling strategies. Ensuring the chosen tool is validated for the specific allergy context is crucial for accurate data collection. Integrating patient-reported experiences alongside traditional methods can lead to more accurate assessments and personalized care., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug challenge is the gold standard for identifying causative agents of drug allergies. Although clinical guidelines have recently been published, they do not recommend neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) drug challenges. NMBA challenges are rendered difficult by the lack of homogeneity of routine allergy work-ups and the necessity of a specialised setting. Several scenarios support NMBA challenges, such as an ambiguous allergy work-up, a high suspicion of a false-positive skin test or identification of a well tolerated alternative NMBA strategy. Furthermore, routine allergy work-ups may not recognise non-IgE mechanisms, such as IgG or MRGPRX2, whereas drug challenges may reveal them. Finally, if the culprit NMBA is not identified, subsequent anaesthesia regimens will be challenging to implement, resulting in increased risk., Objectives: This literature review discusses the indications, strategies, doses, monitoring methods, limitations, and unresolved issues related to drug challenges for NMBAs., Design: The literature review included randomised controlled trials, observational studies, reviews, case reports, series, and comments on humans., Data Sources: Studies were retrieved from databases (PubMed) and electronic libraries (OVID, EMBASE, Scopus, etc.)., Eligibility Criteria: All studies that referred to the NMBA challenge were included without publication date limitations., Results: NMBA challenge may be considered in NMBA anaphylaxis patients with inconclusive or ambivalent IgE diagnostic work-up under controlled conditions (presence of anaesthetists and allergists with continuous monitoring in a secured environment). To illustrate its utility, a case report of a double NMBA challenge in a patient with NMBA cross-reactivity is presented, along with biological explorations to detect subclinical cellular activation, a novel aspect of this procedure., Conclusion: Drug challenges could be implemented during the NMBA allergy work-up under strict safety conditions at specialised centres with close collaboration between anaesthetists and allergists. This could decrease uncertainty and contribute to defining a safer strategy for subsequent anaesthetic drug regimens., (Copyright © 2024 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.)

Background: Cefazolin is guideline recommended for perioperative prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery. Despite its unique R1 side chain, cefazolin is often avoided in patients with beta-lactam allergy with concern for cross reactivity. Objectives: The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who received cefazolin perioperatively. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of patients with a beta-lactam allergy clarified following the telephone interview and clinical outcomes including acute kidney injury, surgical site infection, Clostridioides difficile infection, and re-admission at 30 and 90 days. Methods: This single-center, quasi-experimental study evaluated a pilot program in which a pharmacist phoned patients > 18 years of age with a scheduled orthopedic surgery and a documented beta-lactam allergy to assess their allergy preoperatively. Recommendations to use cefazolin were based on an algorithm. Patients were divided into pre- and post-intervention cohorts. Results: A total of 832 patients were screened for inclusion with 135 and 66 patients included in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts. No significant difference was identified in the primary outcome. In the post-intervention cohort, 62% had a beta-lactam reaction updated in the electronic medical record. Those with a beta-lactam allergy delabeled or made less severe were numerically more likely to receive cefazolin than those with an unchanged reaction or a reaction made more severe (95.2% vs 68% vs 65%). There were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. Conclusion: A pharmacist-conducted preoperative beta-lactam allergy interview in adult patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery improved beta-lactam allergy documentation but, did not result in increased utilization of cefazolin., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Wesley D. Kufel has received research grants from Merck and Co. and Melinta Therapeutics and served on the advisory board for Theratechnologies. Jeffrey M. Steele has served on the advisory board for Paratek Pharmaceuticals. All other authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Purpose of Review: Cephalosporins are one of the most prescribed antibiotics worldwide and are implicated in a wide range of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR). This review summarizes recent updates in cephalosporin hypersensitivity with a focus on diagnostic testing., Recent Findings: Reported testing strategies to evaluate different immediate and delayed cephalosporin HSR have included skin testing, in vitro testing, and diagnostic drug challenges. However, the diagnostic performance of in vivo and in vitro tests remains unclear across different hypersensitivity endotypes; adequately powered studies investigating the true positive and negative predictive value of these diagnostic modalities are needed using the reference standard of drug challenges to define cephalosporin hypersensitivity. Refinement of diagnostic testing should be guided by growth in our understanding of cephalosporin antigenic determinants. This growth will be crucial in driving further clarification of cross-reactivity between cephalosporins, and potentially delineating streamlined evaluation processes resulting in reduced unnecessary antibiotic avoidance., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest None.

The application of advances in personalized medicine requires the support of in vitro diagnostic techniques aimed at the accurate, fast, sensitive, and precise determination of selected biomarkers. Herein, a novel optical centrifugal microfluidic device is developed for clinical analysis and point-of-care diagnostics. Based on compact disc technology, the integrated biophotonic system enables multiple immunoassays in miniaturized mode. The disposable microfluidic discs are made in cyclic olefin copolymer (COP), containing arrays of immobilized probes. In the developed approach, up to six patient samples can each be tested simultaneously. A portable instrument (<2 kg) controls the assay and the high-sensitive reproducible optical detection in transmission mode. Also, the instrument incorporates specific functionalities for personalized telemedicine. The device (analytical method, disc platform, reader, and software) has been validated to diagnose IgE-mediated drug allergies, such as amoxicillin and penicillin G. The total and specific IgE to β-lactam antibiotics were determined in human serum from patients (25 μL). The excellent analytical performances (detection limit 0.24 ng/mL, standard deviation 7-20 %) demonstrated that the developed system could have the potential for a broader impact beyond the allergy field, as it applies to other IVD tests., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:A. Maquieira reports financial support was provided by H2020 program. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this narrative review was to summarize data and official recommendations purporting to paired tryptase determination in patients experiencing drug-induced anaphylaxis, published between January 1, 2023 and June 1, 2024., Recent Findings: Three main lines of evidence obtained through paired acute and baseline tryptase determination were identified: diagnostic criterion for hypersensitivity reactions involving systemic mast cell activation; differential diagnostic criterion for hypersensitivity reactions involving other mechanisms of immediate reactions; and added value of acute and baseline tryptase levels for personalized management following drug-induced anaphylaxis: cause, risk of recurrence, underlying mast cell conditions including hereditary α-tryptasemia, familial clusters., Summary: The implementation of existing guidelines which consensually recommend paired tryptase measurement is a persistent unmet need hampering optimal diagnosis of drug-induced anaphylaxis and patient management. Another major unmet need is the lack of standardized recommendations for hereditary α-tryptasemia testing and counselling. Progress in this field is seen at a rapid pace, requiring significant efforts of continued medical education for practicing clinicians and laboratory specialists worldwide., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Among patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplants, infections, particularly multidrug-resistant infections, pose a grave threat. In this setting, penicillin allergy labels are both common and harmful. Though the majority of patients who report penicillin allergy can actually tolerate penicillin, penicillin allergy labels are associated with use of alternative antibiotics, which are often more broad spectrum, less effective, and more toxic. In turn, they are associated with more severe infections, multidrug-resistant infections, Clostridium difficile, and increased mortality. Evaluating penicillin allergy labels can immediately expand access to preferred therapeutic options, which are critical to care in patients with recent hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Point-of-care assessment and clinical decision tools now exist to aid the nonallergist in assessment of penicillin allergy. This can aid in expanding use of other beta-lactam antibiotics and assist in risk-stratifying patients to determine a testing strategy. In patients with low-risk reaction histories, direct oral challenges can be employed to efficiently delabel patients across clinical care settings. We advocate for multidisciplinary efforts to evaluate patients with penicillin allergy labels prior to transplantation., (© 2024 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Case Description: Patient (29 years old) with palmo-plantar erythema, goes to the community pharmacy (FC) requesting a cream to treat atopy., Evaluation: The patient accessed the Pharmaceutical Indication Service (SPIF), showing that the manifestations appeared 24 hours after the start of dental treatment with amoxicillin 1g/12h and ibuprofen 600 mg/8h without any concomitant medication., Intervention: After explaining the possible relationship of the symptoms with their medication, patient was derived to the doctor with the referral report completed by SEFAC-eXPERT., Results: The patient went to the emergency where she was treated with intravenous corticosteroid and a prescription for cetirizine 10 mg. The dentist changed the beta-lactam to a macrolide (azithromycin) and the ibuprofen to paracetamol. From the FC, the evolution of the symptoms was monitored, which took 72 hours to disappear. Allergy tests suggested avoiding beta-lactams, cephalosporins, and arylpropionics without being conclusive. Months later, the patient suffered similar symptoms after inhaling a disinfectant spray and the allergy diagnosis was confirmed., Conclusions: The FC identified and immediately referred using SPIF a case of hypersensitivity in a patient susceptible to RNM and the SPIF helps to record the intervention and follow-up, increasing patient safety., (Copyright SEFAC. Sociedad Española de Farmacia Clínica, Familiar y Comunitaria. This article is available from url https://www.farmaceuticoscomunitarios.org/.)

Background: Anaphylaxis is a severe systemic hypersensitivity reaction that usually has a rapid onset and can be fatal. Presentations of childhood anaphylaxis vary widely in accordance with the triggers and the patient's age, geographical region and dietary and lifestyle habits., Methods: The medical records of 177 paediatric patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis between January 2021 and January 2024, whose disease progression was monitored at a single tertiary care centre, were reviewed retrospectively., Results: The study included 177 patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis (107 males and 70 females with a median age of 48 months). The most common allergen responsible was food (53.7%). Egg allergy was the most common source of anaphylaxis, afflicting 35 patients (19.3%), while beta-lactam provoked the most common drug allergy, affecting 24 patients (13.6%). The most common organ involved was the skin (92.7%). When the patients were analysed by age group, there were more males in the infancy, preschool and school age groups, while there were more females in the adolescent group (p = 0.44). Food-induced anaphylaxis became less common with increasing age, whereas the rate of drug-induced anaphylaxis increased (p = 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). Cardiovascular system findings were observed more frequently in adolescents compared to other age groups (p = 0.003). Most cases stemming from a food allergy were mild, whereas most drug-induced cases were moderate or severe (p < 0.05). When severity was analysed by age group, mild cases in infants were more common than moderate to severe cases., Conclusion: The aetiological and clinical manifestations of childhood anaphylaxis vary among different age groups., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions collectively are delayed drug reactions such as morbilliform drug eruption and severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs). Morbilliform drug eruption may wane over time, be the result of drug viral interactions, and be amenable to slow reintroduction or rechallenge, whereas SCARs are HLA class I restricted, T-cell-mediated reactions that demonstrate durable immunity and warrant lifelong avoidance. SCARs such as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and generalized bullous fixed drug eruption often occur in the setting of multiple drugs dosed together. Collectively, they lead to significant morbidity, mortality, and drug safety concerns that could severely limit future treatment options. Currently, no single or combination of diagnostic tests for SCARs such as ex vivo or in vitro testing, in vivo (skin) testing, or other adjunctive tests such as HLA typing have 100% negative predictive value. In this "Controversies in Allergy Review" article, we review the current literature on delayed skin testing (patch and delayed prick/intradermal test) and critically assess the evidence base of its utility across different drugs and clinical phenotypes of delayed hypersensitivity reactions., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

One hurdle in the management of CF, a disease characterized by progressive endobronchial infection, is the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to antimicrobials due to prolonged and repetitive treatment courses. The aim of this review is to compile existing data and provide insight to medical professionals on a long-debated topic for optimum patient care. Clinical studies were inducted from the last 15 years and filtered based on their relativity to drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), antibiotics and CF. After completing the selection process, 10 clinical studies were thoroughly examined. The most frequent antibiotic group related to DHRs were beta-lactams. Frequency of the most common overall type of reaction (immediate or nonimmediate) differed among clinical studies. Although severe reactions seem rare comparatively, they do occur during and even after completion of treatment regimens. The prevalence of true drug allergies should be confirmed using a variety of tests available, however, should not be confused with overall DHR rates. Genetic mutations, gender and lifetime antibiotic dose were not related with an increased risk for DHR development. On the contrary, the most important factor according to most studies was the cumulative antimicrobial dose in a given period of time, especially when delivered parenterally. DHRs are an indisputable problem in the management of CF patients. Understanding possible risk factors and increased awareness is vital in both hospital and outpatient settings as early detection can decrease the severity of the reactions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ten percent of the population is labeled as allergic to penicillin(s), when in fact 90% of these labels are inappropriate. Recent studies have shown that inpatient delabeling by a direct drug challenge (dDC) is safe in low-risk patients. However, there is a need for outpatient and nonallergist delabeling., Objective: To assess the safety of delabeling low-risk adults by means of dDC in primary care., Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to March 15, 2022 (updated June 5, 2023) for studies performing dDC in adults in primary care or other outpatient settings. Two researchers independently screened studies for eligibility. The data extraction and critical appraisal were performed by 1 reviewer, and we pooled the results in a meta-analysis., Results: Of 2138 results, 12 studies (1070 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Three studies evaluated delabeling in primary care and 9 studies in an outpatient hospital setting. There were no critical adverse events during dDC. No reaction occurred in 97.13% of the 1070 patients, who previously labeled as penicillin-allergic, and were safely delabeled. Ten patients (<1%) developed an immediate reaction: 3 had self-limiting reactions and 7 needed antihistaminics, steroids, epinephrine, and/or salbutamol., Conclusions: No serious allergic reactions are observed during direct amoxicillin challenge in adults in an outpatient setting. However, with the exception of 1 recent report, these studies are of low to moderate quality. Nonspecialist delabeling is promising, but further research is required on correct risk stratification and safety assessment in large cohort studies evaluating dDC in primary care., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Summary: Background. Drug hypersensitivity reactions are presumably immune-mediated reactions that cause reproducible signs and/or symptoms. Overdiagnosis of drug allergy, frequently self-reported, is common and carries significant limitations. We intended to analyze the frequency and impact of drug allergy in hospitalized patients. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted in an Internal Medicine ward at a tertiary hospital in Portugal. All patients with a drug allergy report admitted within a 3-year period were included. Data were collected from their electronic medical records. Results. We found that 15.4% of patients had a report of drug allergy, with antibiotics being the most common (56.4%), followed by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (21.7%) and radiocontrast media (7.0%). The allergy report affected the clinical approach of 14.5% of patients by motivating the use of second-line agents, or the eviction of necessary procedures. The usage of alternative antibiotics entailed a cost increase of 2.4 times. There were 14.7% of patients to whom the suspected drug was administered: 87.0% tolerated and 13.0% developed a reaction. Only 1.9% were referred to our Allergy and Clinical Immunology department and proceeded in their allergy study. Conclusions. In this study, a considerable number of patients had a drug allergy label on their records. This label contributed to an increase in the cost of treatment, or the avoidance of necessary exams. However, disregarding an allergy record may lead to potentially life-threatening reactions that proper risk assessment could avoid. Further investigation should always be part of the follow-up routine of these patients, and better articulation between departments should be encouraged.

Background: Antimicrobial resistance poses a significant global health challenge, particularly affecting older adults who are more susceptible to infections and their complications. Accurate diagnosis and documentation of antibiotic allergies are essential for effective antimicrobial stewardship. Despite the recognized overdiagnosis of antibiotic allergies, comprehensive studies on this subject in long-term care (LTC) settings are limited., Objective: To determine the point prevalence of antibiotic allergies and documentation quality in Massachusetts LTC facilities., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, 1-day point prevalence survey from July 1, 2023, to March 31, 2024, across 20 participating LTC facilities in Massachusetts in partnership with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. The survey assessed the prevalence and documentation of antibiotic allergies among 2345 residents. Multivariable logistic regression was used to explore associations between documented penicillin allergy and demographic factors, including non-penicillin antibiotic allergies., Results: The overall point prevalence of documented antibiotic allergies was 39.1%, with the most frequently reported classes being penicillins at 23.1%, sulfonamides at 15.4%, and cephalosporins at 5.2%. Significant documentation gaps were identified, with up to 92.8% of the allergy records found to be incomplete. Factors associated with documented penicillin allergies included female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.16-1.94), White race (aOR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25-2.94), having allergies to non-penicillin antibiotics (aOR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.33-3.59), and receipt of antibiotic (aOR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.68-2.71)., Conclusion: The high prevalence of documented antibiotic allergies and the notable deficiencies in their documentation underscore the urgent need for enhanced antibiotic evaluation, documentation practices, and penicillin delabeling in LTC facilities., Competing Interests: Disclosures All authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to report.