Hypersensitivity reactions to antiepileptic drugs in children.

BACKGROUND: Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) can cause hypersensitivity reactions in children. These reactions are mainly cutaneous, self-limiting, and benign, but life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reactions can occur. Infections can lead to skin eruptions and mimic drug hypersensitivity reactions, if a drug is taken at the same time. The aims of our study were to confirm or rule out the diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs in children and to detect an infection which mimics these reactions. METHODS: A prospective survey was conducted in a group of 100 children with histories of hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs by performing patch tests, delayed-reading intradermal test, and, in case of negative results, challenge test. In all children, a study was performed to detect infections by viruses or Mycoplasma pneumoniae. RESULTS: Maculopapular exanthema and delayed-appearing urticaria were the most reported hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs. Sixty-six (66%) of 100 children had confirmed hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs. Fifty-nine children had positive patch test. No children had positive challenge tests. The most common AEDs causing hypersensitivity reactions were carbamazepine (45.4%) and lamotrigine (43.6%). Thirty-two children had positive tests for viruses or M pneumoniae, and nine of them had also a positive allergy work-up. CONCLUSION: Considering that there are no specific tests to distinguish between a viral infection and hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs in the acute phase, a diagnostic work-up should be performed in all children with suspected hypersensitivity reactions to AEDs, as well as infectious agent study, to remove a false label of hypersensitivity.

Non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics in children - our 10-year experience in allergy work-up.

BACKGROUND: Non-immediate reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) occur more than one hour after drug administration, and the most common manifestations are maculopapular exanthemas and delayed-appearing urticaria and/or angioedema. Infections can lead to skin eruptions and mimic drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR), if a drug is taken at the same time. The most of children are labeled as 'drug allergic' after considering only the clinical history. OBJECTIVE: To diagnose/detect a hypersensitivity or an infection which mimic DHR in children with non-immediate reactions to BL METHODS: A prospective survey was conducted in a group of 1026 children with histories of non-immediate reactions to BL by performing patch tests, skin tests, and in case of negative results, drug provocation tests (DPTs). In 300 children, a study was performed to detect infections by viruses or Mycoplasma pneumoniae. RESULTS: Urticaria and maculopapular exanthemas were the most reported non-immediate reactions. Only 76 (7.4%) of 1026 children had confirmed non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions to BL. Fifty-seven children had positive delayed-reading intradermal tests (18 of these with a positive patch test). Nineteen children had positive DPT. Sixty-six of 300 children had positive tests for viruses or Mycoplasma pneumoniae and 2 of them had a positive allergy work-up. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnostic work-up should be performed in all children with non-immediate reactions to BL, to remove a false label of hypersensitivity. Even though only 57 (5.5%) of 1026 children displayed positive responses to delayed-reading intradermal tests to BL, such tests appear to be useful in order to reduce the risk for positive DPTs.

A Multicenter Retrospective Study on Hypersensitivity Reactions to Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in Children: A Report from the European Network on Drug Allergy (ENDA) Group.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of hypersensitivity (HS) reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in children is complex. The real prevalence of NSAID HS remains unknown because a drug provocation test (DPT) is not always performed with the culprit NSAID. OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the diagnostic workup among different European centers and to find out the real proportion of NSAID HS by performing a DPT with the culprit drug. METHODS: We retrospectively collected data from children (0-10 years) and adolescents (10-18 years) with a history of NSAID reactions and who underwent a complete allergy workup including DPTs with the culprit in 6 different pediatric centers: Belgrade, Florence, Geneva, Madrid, Porto, and Rome. RESULTS: A total of 693 children with a history of NSAID reactions were enrolled, and a total of 526 DPTs were performed with the culprit NSAID. The diagnosis of NSAID HS was confirmed in 19.6% (103 of 526) of children by performing a DPT with the culprit drug. The major differences in the allergy workup among the 6 centers concerned the duration of the DPT and the practical use of skin tests for diagnosing NSAID HS. In addition, the use of acetyl salicylic acid to differentiate single reactor or cross-intolerance patients is not common, except in Spain. CONCLUSION: The value of this study is that although different approaches are used around Europe to diagnose NSAID HS, we found that the percentage of confirmed NSAID HS is less than 20%. This highlights the importance of the DPT in confirming or excluding NSAID HS in the pediatric population.

Evaluation of Food Allergy in Children by Skin Prick Tests with Commercial Extracts and Fresh Foods, Specific IgE and, Open Oral Food Challenge-Our Five Years Experience in Food Allergy Work-up.

IgE- mediated food allergy affects 6-8% of children. Our study aimed to define the correlations between the results obtained with skin prick tests (SPTs) using commercial extracts and fresh foods, and the correlations between these result and those obtained with specific IgE (sIgE) and/ or challenge. Children aged from 2 months to 6 years were recruited prospectively. Overall 571 children were positive to one food. In all children we performed  SPT using commercial extracts of suspected food and fresh foods and sIgE. If SPT and sIgE test results did not correspond to the history, we performed open oral food challenge. Sensitivity of SPT with commercial extracts for all tested food was poor (3-35%), while  sensitivity of fresh food skin prick tests (FFSPT) was excellent (50-100%), and showed correlation with open oral food challenge (p<0.001). Our results suggest that fresh food extracts are more effective in detecting sensitization and with levels of sIgE greater than class 3 could predict clinical reactivity, without the need for potentially hazardous food challenges.