Search

Background: The number of allergens to be tested in order to identify sensitized patients is important in order to have the most cost-effective approach in epidemiological studies. Objective: To define the minimal number and the type of skin prick test (SPT) allergens required to identify a patient as sensitized using results of the new Pan-European GA2LEN skin prick test study. Method: In a large Pan-European multicenter (17 centers in 14 countries) patient based study, a standardized panel of 18 allergens has been prick tested using a standardized procedure. Conditional approach allowed to determine the allergens selection. Result: Among the 3034 patients involved, 1996 (68.2%) were sensitized to at least one allergen. Overall, eight allergens (grass pollen, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, birch pollen, cat dander, Artemisia, olive pollen, Blatella and Alternaria) allowed to identified more than 95% of sensitized subjects. However, differences were observed between countries, two allergens being sufficient for Switzerland (grass pollen and cat dander) as opposed to nine for France (grass pollen, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, olive pollen, cat dander, Blatella, cypress, dog dander, alder and [Artemisia or Alternaria]). According to country, up to 13 allergens were needed to identify all sensitized subjects. Conclusion: Eight to ten allergens allowed the identification of the majority of sensitized subjects. For clinical care of individual patients, the whole battery of 18 allergens is needed to appropriately assess sensitization across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Skin prick testing is the standard for diagnosing IgE-mediated allergies. A positive skin prick reaction, however, does not always correlate with clinical symptoms. A large database from a Global Asthma and Allergy European Network (GA2LEN) study with data on clinical relevance was used to determine the clinical relevance of sensitizations against the 18 most frequent inhalant allergens in Europe. The study population consisted of patients referred to one of the 17 allergy centres in 14 European countries ( n = 3034, median age = 33 years). The aim of the study was to assess the clinical relevance of positive skin prick test reactions against inhalant allergens considering the predominating type of symptoms in a pan-European population of patients presenting with suspected allergic disease. Methods: Clinical relevance of skin prick tests was recorded with regard to patient history and optional additional tests. A putative correlation between sensitization and allergic disease was assessed using logistic regression analysis. Results: While an overall rate of ≥60% clinically relevant sensitizations was observed in all countries, a differential distribution of clinically relevant sensitizations was demonstrated depending on type of allergen and country where the prick test was performed. Furthermore, a significant correlation between the presence of allergic disease and the number of sensitizations was demonstrated. Conclusion: This study strongly emphasizes the importance of evaluating the clinical relevance of positive skin prick tests and calls for further studies, which may, ultimately, help increase the positive predictive value of allergy testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Skin prick testing is the standard for diagnosing IgE-mediated allergies. However, different allergen extracts and different testing procedures have been applied by European allergy centres. Thus, it has been difficult to compare results from different centres or studies across Europe. It was, therefore, crucial to standardize and harmonize procedures in allergy diagnosis and treatment within Europe. Aims: The Global Asthma and Allergy European Network (GA²LEN), with partners and collaborating centres across Europe, was in a unique position to take on this task. The current study is the first approach to implement a standardized procedure for skin prick testing in allergies against inhalant allergens with a standardized pan-European allergen panel. Methods: The study population consisted of patients who were referred to one of the 17 participating centres in 14 European countries ( n = 3034, median age = 33 years). Skin prick testing and evaluation was performed with the same 18 allergens in a standardized procedure across all centres. Results: The study clearly shows that many allergens previously regarded as untypical for some regions in Europe have been underestimated. This could partly be related to changes in mobility of patients, vegetation or climate in Europe. Conclusion: The results of this large pan-European study demonstrate for the first time sensitization patterns for different inhalant allergens in patients across Europe. The standardized skin prick test with the standardized allergen battery should be recommended for clinical use and research. Further EU-wide monitoring of sensitization patterns is urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In patients sensitized to beta-lactams, a safe beta-lactam alternative is often needed. The objective was to assess the safety of cefuroxime in patients with a proven beta-lactam allergy., Design: Using the Drug Allergy and Hypersensitivity Database cohort, patients with a proven beta-lactam allergy and tested for cefuroxime between September 1996 and April 2007 were selected. The European Network of Drug Allergy recommendations were followed. Prevalence of sensitization to cefuroxime (as an alternative) was established in patients with a proven beta-lactam allergy., Results: Amongst the 650 subjects tested, 143 (22.0%) presented at least one beta-lactam sensitization other than cefuroxime [39-27.3% male, median age at test 44.0 (32.0-56.0) years]. One hundred and eighteen (82.5%) were sensitized to penicillins, 8 (5.6%) to cephalosporins and 17 (11.9%) to both penicillins and cephalosporins. Nine (6.3%) patients were sensitized to cefuroxime (6 diagnosed by provocation test): 5 (55.6%) in the penicillin-only allergic group and 4 (44.4%) in the penicillin and cephalosporin allergic group. Prevalence of cefuroxime hypersensitivity reaction in patients sensitized to beta-lactams was 6.3% (95% CI 2.3-10.3%) and in those sensitized to penicillin 4.2% (95% CI 0.6-7.9). This rate decreased to 2.9% (95% CI 0-6.9) in patients with prior histories involving a penicillin only (without any history involving an unknown beta-lactam)., Conclusion: Cefuroxime appeared to be a safe alternative in beta-lactam-allergic patients after testing. The risk of giving cefuroxime being not null, a thorough drug allergy work-up, including provocation test, is still needed., (Copyright (c) 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

A position paper by the European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA), the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) interest group on drug hypersensitivity, defines drug provocation tests (DPTs) as "the controlled administration of a drug in order to diagnose drug hypersensitivity reactions". The DPT is widely considered to be the "gold standard" to establish or exclude the diagnosis of hypersensitivity to a certain substance, as it not only reproduces hypersensitivity symptoms, but also any other adverse clinical manifestation, irrespective of the mechanism. The DPT can be harmful and thus should only be considered after balancing the risk-benefit ratio in the individual patient. The ENDA position paper specifies two main indications for DPTs with the suspected compounds: 1. to exclude hypersensitivity in non-suggestive histories of drug hypersensitivity and in patients with non-specific symptoms, such as vagal symptoms under local anesthesia; 2. to establish a firm diagnosis in suggestive histories of drug hypersensitivity with negative, non-conclusive, or non-available allergologic tests. A positive DPT result optimizes allergen avoidance, while a negative one allows a false label of drug hypersensitivity to be removed. For these reasons, DPTs are often carried out to exclude a diagnosis of hypersensitivity to beta-lactams when other allergologic tests are negative. DPTs are also performed when the sensitivity of allergologic tests for evaluating allergic reactions to certain drugs, such as non-beta-lactam antibiotics, heparins, and glucocorticoids, is limited. On the other hand, DPTs are also performed to diagnose hypersensitivity reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in subjects with the cross-reactive pattern, because both skin tests and in vitro diagnostic methods are ineffective in such patients.

Background: beta-lactams continue to remain the most commonly involved drug family in allergic drug reactions. They are often essential and there is a cost-effective and favourable risk-benefit ratio for the exploration of all suspicions of beta-lactam allergy. A firm diagnosis is always based on skin tests and sometimes on provocation tests. Recommendations have been published by allergy societies and distinguished scientists but they are not always concordant and can lead to some confusion for the practicing allergologist. The situation has even worsened since the world wide withdrawal of these penicillin determinants and since the predominance of amoxicillin and cephalosporin prescriptions in most countries. OBJECTIVE - METHOD: In a recent article, it was stated that patients with a penicillin allergy history and negative skin tests to major and minor penicillin determinants are at a low risk of relapse (0-5%) when receiving a beta-lactam. In this paper, our Drug Allergy and Hypersensitivity Database, a cohort database, was used to demonstrate that this statement is false. Standardized European Network for Drug Allergy questionnaires, skin test and challenge procedures were followed., Results: One-thousand two-hundred and eighteen subjects, 69.8% of female, 51.7% of atopics, were included. 21.1% had a true beta-lactam allergy confirmed by skin tests (178, 69.3%) or by drug provocation (79, 30.7%). 17.4% of the patients with negative skin tests to major and minor penicillin determinants were positive for a beta-lactam., Conclusion: In the diagnosis of beta-lactams allergy, if all skin tests are negative, skin tests with other determinants and provocation tests under strict surveillance are mandatory.