Search

Cannabis allergy is a burgeoning field; consequently, research is still in its infancy and allergists' knowledge surrounding this topic is limited. As cannabis legalization expands across the world, it is anticipated that there will be an increase in cannabis use. Thus, we hypothesize that a concomitant rise in the incidence of allergy to this plant can be expected. Initiatives aimed at properly educating health care professionals are therefore necessary. This review presents the most up-to-date information on a broad range of topics related to cannabis allergy. Although the clinical features of cannabis allergy are becoming more well described and recognized, the tools available to make a correct diagnosis are meager and often poorly accessible. In addition, research on cannabis allergy is still taking its first steps, and new and potentially groundbreaking findings in this field are expected to occur in the next few years. Finally, although therapeutic approaches are being developed, patient and physician education regarding cannabis allergy is certainly needed., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Cannabis is the most widely consumed illicit drug in the world and carries a risk of severe IgE-mediated allergic reactions, requiring appropriate diagnostic management. Currently available diagnostics are still relatively limited and require careful interpretation of results to avoid harmful over- and underdiagnosis., Areas Covered: This review focuses on the most up-to-date understandings of cannabis allergy diagnosis, starting with the main clinical features of the disease and the allergenic characteristics of Cannabis sativa , and then providing insights into in vivo, in vitro , and ex vivo diagnostic tests., Expert Opinion: At present, the diagnosis of IgE-mediated cannabis allergy is based on a three-step approach that starts with accurate history taking and ends with a confirmation of sensitization to the whole extract and, finally, molecular components. Although much has been discovered since its first description in 1971, the diagnosis of cannabis allergy still has many unmet needs. The lack of commercial standardized and validated extracts and in vitro assays makes a harmonized workup of cannabis allergy difficult. Furthermore, the epidemiological characteristics, and clinical implications of sensitization to different molecular components are not yet fully known. Future research will complete the picture and likely result in an individualized and standardized approach.

Cannabis is the most widely used recreational drug in the world. Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica have been selectively bred to develop their psychoactive properties. The increasing use in many countries has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Cannabis can provoke both type 1 and type 4 allergic reactions. Officially recognized allergens include a pathogenesis-related class 10 allergen, profilin, and a nonspecific lipid transfer protein. Other allergens may also be relevant, and recognition of allergens may vary between countries and continents. Cannabis also has the potential to provoke allergic cross-reactions to plant foods. Since cannabis is an illegal substance in many countries, research has been hampered, leading to challenges in diagnosis since no commercial extracts are available for testing. Even in countries such as Canada, where cannabis is legalized, diagnosis may rely solely on the purchase of cannabis for prick-to-prick skin tests. Management consists of avoidance, with legal issues hindering the development of other treatments such as immunotherapy. Education of healthcare professionals is similarly lacking. This review aimed to summarize the current status of cannabis allergy and proposes recommendations for the future management of this global issue., (© 2022 European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Uncertainties remain about the molecular mechanisms governing clonal mast cell disorders (CMCD) and anaphylaxis., Objective: This study aims at comparing the burden, phenotype and behavior of mast cells (MCs) and basophils in patients with CMCD with wasp venom anaphylaxis (CMCD/WVA + ), CMCD patients without anaphylaxis (CMCD/ANA - ), patients with an elevated baseline serum tryptase (EBST), patients with wasp venom anaphylaxis without CMCD (WVA + ) and patients with a non-mast cell haematological pathology (NMHP)., Methods: This study included 20 patients with CMCD/WVA + , 24 with CMCD/ANA - , 19 with WVA + , 6 with EBST and 5 with NMHP. We immunophenotyped MCs and basophils and compared baseline serum tryptase (bST) and both total and venom specific IgE in the different groups. For basophil studies, 13 healthy controls were also included., Results: Higher levels of bST were found in CMCD patients with wasp venom anaphylaxis, CMCD patients without anaphylaxis and EBST patients. Total IgE levels were highest in patients with wasp venom anaphylaxis with and without CMCD. Bone marrow MCs of patients with CMCD showed lower CD117 expression and higher expression of CD45, CD203c, CD63, CD300a and FcεRI. Within the CMCD population, patients with wasp venom anaphylaxis showed a higher expression of FcεRI as compared to patients without anaphylaxis. Expression of MRGPRX2 on MCs did not differ between the study populations. Basophils are phenotypically and functionally comparable between the different patient populations., Conclusion: Patients with CMCD show an elevated burden of aberrant activated MCs with a significant overexpression of FcεRI in patients with a wasp venom anaphylaxis., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The reviewer RMC declared a past co-authorship with the authors DE, MF, AG, MMH, CB, ID, and VS to the handling Editor., (Copyright © 2022 Elst, De Puysseleyr, Ebo, Faber, Van Gasse, van der Poorten, Decuyper, Bridts, Mertens, Van Houdt, Hagendorens, De Clerck, Verlinden, Vermeulen, Maes, Berneman, Valent and Sabato.)

Background: Studies on the mechanisms that govern mast cell (MC) functions are hindered by the difficulties in isolating sufficient numbers of these tissue-resident cells. Therefore, many research groups use cultured human MCs obtained out of progenitor cells. However, these culture methods significantly differ regarding primary source material, culture durations and conditions. Consequently, the finally obtained cells are likely to exhibit morphological, phenotypical and/or functional heterogeneity., Objective: To compare the phenotype and functionality of cells cultured from peripheral blood and bone marrow progenitor cells from patients with suspected clonal MC disease. These cells are designated as PBCMCs and BMCMCs, respectively., Methods: Twenty paired PBCMCs and BMCMCs cultures starting from CD34 + progenitor cells were compared. Cells were cultured for 4 weeks. Phenotyping included Giemsa and CD117 staining and flow cytometric staining for CD117, CD203c, FcεRI, MRGPRX2, CD300a, CD32, CD63 and CD25. Functional assessment included measurement of the up-regulation of CD63 after cross-linking of the high affinity receptor for IgE (FcεRI) with anti-FcεRI and ligation of MRGPRX2 with substance P., Results: PBCMCs and BMCMCs are phenotypically comparable. Functionally, after activation with anti-FcεRI and substance P, PBCMCs and BMCMCs show similar up-regulation of the lysosomal degranulation marker CD63. However, the yield of PBCMCs is higher than BMCMs and peripheral blood cultures are purer than bone marrow cultures., Conclusion: PBCMCs are an attractive alternative to the more difficult to obtain BMCMCs for the exploration of the complex mechanisms that govern IgE- and MRGPRX2-dependent MC activation and degranulation. Unlike BMCMCs, PBCMCs are easily accessible and enable repetitive analyses., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Drug allergy has been a research topic within the allergy field for decades. However, many drug reactions presumed to be of allergic nature are not and originate from different mechanisms. Drug-induced reactions can affect numerous organ systems, present with various symptoms, and have more than 1 mechanism of action. In this rostrum article, we want to give an overview of the different allergic and nonallergic reactions that can be expected with the (illicit) use of cannabis, cocaine, opioids, and alcohol. In addition, this article focuses on the different methods available to diagnose allergy related to these 4 drug types and highlight the pitfalls of nonallergic reactions or allergy "mimickers" complicating the diagnosis of true drug allergy. Finally, the impact on current medical practices and future research in support of the allergist in diagnosis and treatment of these medical problems is addressed., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Within the last decade there has been a significant expansion in access to cannabis for medicinal and adult nonmedical use in the United States and abroad. This has resulted in a rapidly growing and diverse workforce that is involved with the growth, cultivation, handling, and dispensing of the cannabis plant and its products. The objective of this review was to educate physicians on the complexities associated with the health effects of cannabis exposure, the nature of these exposures, and the future practical challenges of managing these in the context of allergic disease. We will detail the biological hazards related to typical modern cannabis industry operations that may potentially drive allergic sensitization in workers. We will highlight the limitations that have hindered the development of objective diagnostic measures that are essential in separating "true" cannabis allergies from nonspecific reactions/irritations that "mimic" allergy-like symptoms. Finally, we will discuss recent advances in the basic and translational scientific research that will aid the development of diagnostic tools and therapeutic standards to serve optimal management of cannabis allergies across the occupational spectrum., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent studies show that nsLTP sensitization is not limited to the Mediterranean basin and can present diverse clinical phenotypes. It remains challenging to predict clinical outcome when specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to nsLTPs are present. This study compares both clinical and in vitro allergy characteristics but also diagnostic performance of a basophil activation test (BAT) and sIgG4 in nsLTP-sensitized patients from Antwerp (ANT, Belgium) and Barcelona (BCN, Spain)., Methods: Adult subjects with positive sIgE rPru p 3 and/or rMal d 3 ≥ 0.10 kU A /L (n = 182) and healthy controls (n = 37) were included. NsLTP-sensitized individuals were stratified according to clinical symptoms with peach/apple, respectively. BAT rPru p 3 and rMal d 3 were performed and sIgG4 antibodies to both components quantified., Results: In BCN, only ratios of sIgG4/sIgE rMal d 3 and BAT rMal d 3 (0.001 µg/mL) can identify clinically relevant Mal d 3 sensitization (sensitivity of 60%-63% and a specificity of 75%-67%, respectively). In ANT, only the sIgE/total IgE rPru p 3 ratio shows added value (sensitivity 60% and specificity 83%). Finally, it appears that symptomatic patients in BCN are more sensitive to lower allergen concentrations compared to ANT. In addition, it was shown that ANT patients were more often sensitized to pollen and that specific pollen sources differed between regions., Conclusions: NsLTP-related allergy profiles and diagnostic performance differ significantly between regions and are component-specific, which makes extrapolation of data difficult to do. In addition, it seems that basophil sensitivity might show geographical differences. Additional research is needed to confirm these findings., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: Expatriates (expats) from European countries regularly migrate to low-income countries where infectious diseases are more prevalent. Little evidence exists however on pediatric expatriates' compliance with preventive measures related to infectious diseases. This study aims to evaluate compliance in Belgian expat-children., Methods: Data of 135 Belgian expat-children, visiting the Institute of Tropical Medicine (Antwerp, Belgium), were collected from clinical notes, laboratory results and from a web-based immunization-register. Information on routine vaccinations, yellow fever, hepatitis A, rabies, typhoid fever, meningococcal ACW 135 Y, Japanese encephalitis, BCG vaccine and anti-malaria chemoprophylaxis was collected., Results: Overall, 87% of expat-children were up-to-date with their routine vaccinations. Although all children were eligible for hepatitis A, typhoid and rabies vaccination, only 8-21% were fully vaccinated. Only 29 and 61% of eligible children were vaccinated against meningococcal (ACW 135 Y) or yellow fever respectively. Finally, only 10% of children who lived in malaria-endemic-areas, reported chemoprophylaxis-use., Conclusion: Although routine vaccination coverage in expat-children seems adequate, additional preventive measures are often needed. Whether this is due to lack of high-quality health care-access, fear of side-effects or insufficient knowledge about the risks/available preventive measures, remains elusive. Nevertheless, expats seem to constitute a separate risk-group for infectious diseases and destination-related health issues., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite numerous efforts to describe the clinical manifestations and the epidemiology of perioperative hypersensitivity (POH), there remains room to increase awareness among anesthetists and immunologists/allergists., Objective: To report the findings of a 17-year survey of suspected POH in Antwerp, Belgium., Methods: We analyzed clinical and diagnostic data from 715 patients referred because of a suspected POH reaction, between January 1, 2001, and May 31, 2018. A total of 456 patients demonstrating a POH could be queried about subsequent anesthesia., Results: A total of 608 cases formed the final dataset; 208 had a non-life-threatening reaction and 400 a life-threatening reaction. In life-threatening reactions, hypotension was predominating. In the non-life-threatening reactions, 83.9% of the patients displayed cutaneous manifestations. In life-threatening reactions, intravenous adrenaline and fluids were administered in 75.7% and 31%, respectively, and 41.3% had their intervention abandoned. Mast cell activation (MCA) was mainly, but not exclusively, observed in severe grades but did not predict the mechanistic process nor the culprit. A cause was identified in 77.8% of severe and 48.6% of milder cases. Main culprits were neuromuscular blocking agents, latex, cefazolin, and dyes. A total of 156 cases had uneventful anesthesia, except 1 patient who was inadvertently re-exposed to hidden chlorhexidine., Conclusions: This study highlights that there is room for an improved acute management and an optimized diagnostic workup that should not be restricted to patients with severe reactions and/or showing MCA., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Although the use of cannabis dates back millennia, the first description of cannabis allergy is relatively recent (1971). Recent large-scale data show that cannabis allergy can manifest severe and generalized symptoms with extensive cross-reactions. Thus, it is essential to become familiarized with its clinical presentation, diagnostic aids, and adequate therapeutic guidance. Areas covered: Here we provide a hands-on overview on cannabis allergy focusing on symptomatology and the reliability of diagnostic options. Recent advances in proteomics are discussed in detail, elucidating the link with nsLTP-related allergies. The proteomics advancements have paved the way for more reliable diagnostics, especially component-based tools. Finally, the current experience in treatment options is highlighted. Expert opinion: Cannabis allergy is an allergy entity which can significantly impact the quality of life. For optimal diagnosis, we advise to start with a validated and standardized crude-extract based test such as sIgE hemp complemented by component-based diagnostics such as sIgE Can s 3 quantifications where available. Future research should lift the veil on the true prevalence of cannabis allergy and the importance of other cannabis allergens to further guide our practice.

Background: Cannabis allergy (CA) has mainly been attributed to Can s 3, the nonspecific lipid transfer protein (nsLTP) of Cannabis sativa. Nevertheless, standardized diagnostic tests are lacking and research on CA is scarce., Objective: To explore the performance of 5 cannabis diagnostic tests and the phenotypic profile of CA., Methods: A total of 120 patients with CA were included and stratified according to the nature of their cannabis-related symptoms; 62 healthy and 189 atopic controls were included. Specific IgE (sIgE) hemp, sIgE and basophil activation test (BAT) with a recombinant Can s 3 protein from Cannabis sativa (rCan s 3), BAT with a crude cannabis extract, and a skin prick test (SPT) with an nCan s 3-rich cannabis extract were performed. Clinical information was based on patient history and a standardized questionnaire., Results: First, up to 72% of CA reporting likely-anaphylaxis (CA-A) are Can s 3 sensitized. Actually, the Can s 3-based diagnostic tests show the best combination of positive and negative predictive values, 80% and 60%, respectively. sIgE hemp displays 82% sensitivity but only 32% specificity. Secondly, Can s 3+CA reported significantly more cofactor-mediated reactions and displayed significantly more sensitizations to other nsLTPs than Can s 3-CA. Finally, the highest prevalence of systemic reactions to plant-derived foods was seen in CA-A, namely 72%., Conclusions: The most effective and practical tests to confirm CA are the SPT with an nCan s 3-rich extract and the sIgE rCan s 3. Can s 3 sensitization entails a risk of systemic reactions to plant-derived foods and cofactor-mediated reactions. However, as Can s 3 sensitization is not absolute, other cannabis allergens probably play a role., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Cannabis allergy has mainly been described following recreational use but some cases also point to cannabis sensitisation as a result of occupational exposure. As a consequence, little is known on the prevalence and clinical phenotype of occupational cannabis allergy. Therefore, this study aims to explore the allergy-associated health risks of occupational cannabis exposure in Belgian police force personnel., Methods: 81 participants, active in the police force, reporting regular occupational cannabis exposure during the past 12 months, were included. History was combined with a standardised questionnaire on allergies and cannabis exposure.Basophil activation tests (BATs) with a crude cannabis extract and rCan s 3 were performed. In addition, specific (s)IgE rCan s 3 as well as sIgE to house dust mite, six pollen and three mould allergens were quantified., Results: Although 42% of the participants reported respiratory and/or cutaneous symptoms on occupational cannabis exposure, all cannabis diagnostics were entirely negative, except one symptomatic case demonstrating a borderline result. Furthermore, there is no significant difference between the groups with and without symptoms on cannabis exposure in terms of allergenic sensitisations., Conclusions: The origins of the reported respiratory and cutaneous symptoms during cannabis exposure remain elusive but are probably due to non-immune reactions. It should be noted that the study was volunteer-based possibly reflecting an excessive number of symptomatic individuals. Nevertheless, as only one participant reported using fully protective gear, much improvement is needed for reducing the number of symptoms reported on duty, independent of their origin., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Secondary food allergies due to cross-reactivity between inhalant and food allergens are a significant and increasing global health issue. Cross-reactive food allergies predominantly involve plant-derived foods resulting from a prior sensitization to cross-reactive components present in pollen (grass, tree, weeds) and natural rubber latex. Also, primary sensitization to allergens present in fungi, insects, and both nonmammalian and mammalian meat might induce cross-reactive food allergic syndromes. Correct diagnosis of these associated food allergies is not always straightforward and can pose a difficult challenge. As a matter of fact, cross-reactive allergens might hamper food allergy diagnosis, as they can cause clinically irrelevant positive tests to cross-reacting foods that are safely consumed. This review summarizes the most relevant cross-reactivity syndromes between inhalant and food allergens. Particular focus is paid to the potential and limitations of confirmatory testing such as skin testing, specific IgE assays, molecular diagnosis, and basophil activation test., (Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

IgE-mediated shellfish allergy constitutes an important cause of food-related adverse reactions. Shellfish are classified into mollusks and crustaceans, the latter belonging to the class of arthropoda. Among crustaceans, shrimps are the most predominant cause of allergic reactions and thus more extensively studied. Several major and minor allergens have been identified and cloned. Among them, invertebrate tropomyosin, arginine kinase, myosin light chain, sarcoplasmic calcium-binding protein, and hemocyanin are the most relevant. This review summarizes our current knowledge about these allergens., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHR and impossible for non-IgE-mediated IDHR that result from alternative routes of basophil and mast cell activation. In these difficult cases, diagnosis might benefit from cellular tests such as basophil activation tests (BAT)., Aim: The aim was to review the potential and limitations of quantification of sIgE and BAT in diagnosing IDHR. The utility of quantification of serum tryptase is discussed., Methods: A literature search was conducted using the key words allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors' own experience., Results: The drugs that have been most studied with both techniques are β-lactam antibiotics and curarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). For sIgE morphine, data are available on the value of this test as a biomarker for sensitization to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA, especially rocuronium and suxamethonium. For the BAT, there are also data on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. For β-lactam antibiotics, sensitivity and specificity of sIgE varies between 0 and 85% and 52 and 100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varies between 38.5 and 92% and 85.7 and 100%, respectively. Specific IgE to morphine should not be used in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates. For the BAT, sensitivity generally varies between 50 and 60%, whereas specificity attains 80%, except for quinolones and NSAIDs., Conclusions: Although drug-sIgE assays and BAT can provide useful information in the diagnosis of IDHR, their predictive value is not absolute. Large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory to harmonize and optimize test protocols and to establish drug-specific decision thresholds.

IgE-mediated Cannabis (C. sativa, marihuana) allergy seems to be on the rise. Both active and passive exposure to cannabis allergens may trigger a C. sativa sensitization and/or allergy. The clinical presentation of a C. sativa allergy varies from mild to life-threatening reactions and often seems to depend on the route of exposure. In addition, sensitization to cannabis allergens can result in various cross-allergies, mostly for plant foods. This clinical entity, designated as the 'cannabis-fruit/vegetable syndrome', might also imply cross-reactivity with tobacco, natural latex and plant-food-derived alcoholic beverages. Hitherto, these cross-allergies are predominantly reported in Europe and appear mainly to rely upon cross-reactivity between nonspecific lipid transfer proteins or thaumatin-like proteins present in C. sativa and their homologues, ubiquitously distributed throughout plant kingdom. At present, diagnosis of cannabis-related allergies predominantly rests upon a thorough history completed with skin testing using native extracts from crushed buds and leaves. However, quantification of specific IgE antibodies and basophil activation tests can also be helpful to establish correct diagnosis. In the absence of a cure, treatment comprises absolute avoidance measures. Whether avoidance of further use will halt the extension of related cross-allergies remains uncertain., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Correct diagnosis of cefazolin hypersensitivity is not straightforward, mainly because of the absence of in vitro tests and uncertainties concerning the optimal cefazolin concentration for skin testing. Cross-reactivity studies suggest cefazolin hypersensitivity to be a selective hypersensitivity., Objective: The first objective was to confirm that the application of a higher than 2 mg/mL test concentration could increase skin test sensitivity. A second part aimed at investigating the cross-reactivity between cefazolin and other β-lactam antibiotics., Methods: A total of 66 patients referred to our clinic after experiencing perioperative anaphylaxis, and exposed to cefazolin, underwent skin testing with cefazolin up to 20 mg/mL. Patients exhibiting a positive skin test with cefazolin had a panel of skin tests with other β-lactams and, if indicated, graded drug challenges to study cross-reactivity., Results: Increasing skin test concentration from the recommended 2 mg/mL to 20 mg/mL identified an additional 7 of 19 (27%) patients, who would otherwise have displayed negative skin testing. The concentration was proven nonirritating in 30 cefazolin-exposed control individuals in whom an alternative culprit for perioperative anaphylaxis was identified. Graded challenge testing, after negative skin testing, displayed that all patients tolerated alternative β-lactam antibiotics (ie, amoxicillin, cephalosporins, monobactams, and carbapenems). Of them, 11 individuals also tolerated an alternative cephalosporin, suggesting that cefazolin hypersensitivity (generally) is a selective allergy., Conclusions: Increasing cefazolin concentration for skin tests up to 20 mg/mL benefits the sensitivity of diagnosis. Furthermore, our data confirm that cefazolin hypersensitivity seems to be a selective allergy with good tolerance to other β-lactam antibiotics., (Copyright © 2016 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: For many physicians, quantification of serum drug-specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies constitutes the first measure in the diagnostic approach of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR)., Aim: To review the accuracy and limitations of the main drug-sIgE tests, especially those that are commercially available., Methods: A literature search was conducted, using the key-words allergy, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors' own experience., Results: The drugs that have mostly been studied appeared to be β-lactam antibiotics, neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) and morphine, the latter as a biomarker for sensitisation to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA. For β-lactams sensitivity and specificity varied between 0-85% and 52-100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varied between 38.5-92% and 92-100%, respectively. With respect to sIgE to morphine it appears this drug to be a sensitive biomarker for sensitisation to rocuronium and suxamethonium but not for atracurium. However, sIgE morphine should not be applied in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates., Conclusions: Although drug-sIgE assay can provide valuable information they should not be performed in isolation to establish correct diagnosis, as their predictive value is not per se absolute. Larger comprehensive studies are urgently required to determine the accuracy of drug-sIgE assays., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

The last two decades have witnessed that flow-assisted analysis of in vitro-activated basophils can constitute a valuable adjunct in the in vitro diagnostic approach of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). This article summarises the current experience with the basophil activation test in the diagnosis of IDHR, with particular focus on allergy to curarising neuromuscular blocking agents, antibiotics (β-lactams and fluoroquinolones), iodinated radiocontrast media and opiates.