RESUMEN
RATIONALE: At present, there is still insufficient understanding of the progression from persistent allergic reactions to severe reactions. Adrenaline remains the preferred medication for severe allergic reactions, and intramuscular injection of adrenaline can also be considered for patients with grade I reactions that are difficult to alleviate gastrointestinal symptoms. It is worth further discussing whether it is possible to break the conventional intramuscular injection recommended by the guidelines when the effect of intramuscular injection is not ideal for persistent grade I severe allergic reactions. PATIENT CONCERNS: A young male, 20 years of age, was admitted to emergency department because of repeated rash for 3 days and abdominal pain for 6 hours after taking traditional Chinese medicine. After hormone therapy, the rash continued to recur and secondary gastrointestinal symptoms occurred on the 3th day. Adrenaline intramuscular injection was given to temporarily relieve the rash and abdominal pain, but symptoms still persisted. DIAGNOSIS: The patient was diagnosed with persistent severe allergic reaction (grade I). INTERVENTIONS: Continuous intravenous infusion of low-dose adrenaline under electrocardiographic monitoring, real-time monitoring of heart rate and blood pressure, and routine treatment with methylprednisolone, diphenhydramine, calcium gluconate, and cetirizine. During this period, adrenaline intramuscular injection is temporarily added when abdominal pain symptoms are obvious. The entire treatment process used a total of 6.8 mg of adrenaline. OUTCOMES: During the entire period of adrenaline intervention, the patient did not experience any new discomfort, and there were no abnormal fluctuations in heart rate, rhythm, or blood pressure. The symptoms of rash and abdominal pain gradually improved. LESSONS: For patients with persistent grade I severe allergic reactions, intravenous administration of low-dose adrenaline under close vital sign monitoring is safe, feasible, and highly effective in preventing biphasic, persistent, or worsening allergic reactions.
Asunto(s)
Epinefrina , Humanos , Masculino , Epinefrina/administración & dosificación , Adulto Joven , Inyecciones Intramusculares , Infusiones Intravenosas , Dolor Abdominal/tratamiento farmacológico , Dolor Abdominal/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
AIM: To analyze the risk factors for oxaliplatin (OXA)-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions and identify the recurrence rate of the reactions after an OXA rechallenge in patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC). METHODS: Among the 2251 patients treated with HAIC (OXA), 84 patients with gastrointestinal cancer who displayed hypersensitivity reactions between May 2013 and May 2022 were included in this study. Among the 84 patients, 23 (27.4%) developed severe anaphylactic reactions (grade III/IV), and 61 (72.6%) developed grade I/II reactions. We explored the risk factors for severe OXA-induced hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with grade I/II reactions underwent retreatment (HAIC with OXA), and the recurrence rate of the hypersensitivity reactions was determined. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the risk factors for OXA-induced hypersensitivity reaction. RESULTS: In the study, multivariate analysis indicated that the dose of OXA (odds ratio [OR] 3.077, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.106-8.558, p = 0.031) was an independent risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with non-severe hypersensitivity reactions underwent retreatment HAIC with OXA and 14 (51.9 %) experienced HSR recurrence, including 2 (7.4 %) who experienced hypersensitivity shock. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of OXA doses is a risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions in patients treated with HAIC (OXA). Rechallenging HAIC with OXA appears to be associated with a higher recurrence rate of the HSR.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Oxaliplatino/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Anafilaxia/inducido químicamente , Factores de Riesgo , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológicoAsunto(s)
Programas de Optimización del Uso de los Antimicrobianos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Médicos , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: L-Asparaginase is a crucial component of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) treatment. However, hypersensitivity is a common adverse event. This study aimed to identify risk factors for L-asparaginase hypersensitivity in childhood ALL. METHODS: Children treated for ALL at Chiang Mai University Hospital, Thailand, between 2005 and 2020 were included. Demographic data, clinical characteristics, and factors related to L-asparaginase were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: L-Asparaginase hypersensitivity was observed in 24 of 216 children with ALL (11.1%). All patients received native L-asparaginase intramuscularly, and events occurred exclusively during the post-induction phase without concurrent corticosteroid use. Univariable analysis showed that relapsed ALL, higher accumulated doses, increased exposure days, and longer interval between drug administrations were potential risk factors. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, interruption of L-asparaginase administration for ≥ 52 weeks and exposure duration of ≥ 15 days were independent risk factors, with adjusted odds ratio of 16.481 (95% CI 3.248-83.617, p = 0.001) and 4.919 (95% CI 1.138-21.263, p = 0.033), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Children with ALL who require re-exposure to L-asparaginase after 52-week interruption or who have received L-asparaginase for ≥ 15 exposure days are at risk of developing L-asparaginase hypersensitivity. Further management strategies in this setting should be evaluated.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras , Niño , Humanos , Asparaginasa/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/complicaciones , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Factores de Riesgo , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , PolietilenglicolesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pegaspargase is a therapeutic enzyme that is utilized in treatment regimens targeting pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. However, many patients experience hypersensitivity reactions, requiring discontinuation of the therapy. Historically, this necessitated switching to an alternative form of the drug, most commonly asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi; however, in recent years this was difficult due to drug shortages and eventually commercial discontinuation. We report here our experience performing pegaspargase desensitizations in patients with prior hypersensitivity reactions. PROCEDURE: Patients with a clinical hypersensitivity reaction to pegaspargase were identified. When due for their next dose, patients were admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit, bone marrow transplant unit, or oncology unit, and underwent desensitization utilizing a rigorous premedication and multistep dilution-based protocol. Serum asparaginase activity levels were drawn after desensitization to assess for therapeutic levels of enzyme activity. RESULTS: We identified 11 patients who underwent a total of 33 desensitizations to pegaspargase and calaspargase pegol-mknl. No patients experienced clinically significant hypersensitivity reactions necessitating stopping the infusion, nor administration of rescue medications. All serum asparaginase activity levels collected demonstrated enzyme activity levels above predefined therapeutic thresholds. Cost analysis revealed substantial savings when patients received asparaginase desensitization over the now commercially available asparaginase E. chrysanthemi (recombinant) rywn. CONCLUSIONS: Performing desensitization to pegaspargase in the pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia population is feasible, safe, and effective. It is financially advantageous over available alternative approaches, and requires fewer injections and presentations to care.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Erwinia , Hipersensibilidad , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras , Niño , Humanos , Asparaginasa/efectos adversos , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Polietilenglicoles/efectos adversos , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
This JAMA Pediatrics Patient Page describes why it is important for children to see their pediatrician for any concern about a reaction to penicillin before a child is considered to have a penicillin allergy.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Padres , Antibacterianos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the occurrence of cefazolin perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) in patients with and without a penicillin allergy label (PAL) to determine whether the prevalence of cefazolin POA differs based on the presence of a PAL. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: A large U.S. healthcare system in the Baltimore-D.C. region, July 2017 to July 2020. PATIENTS: 112,817 surgical encounters across inpatient and outpatient settings in various specialties, involving 90,089 patients. Of these, 4876 (4.3%) encounters had a PAL. INTERVENTIONS: Perioperative cefazolin administration within 4 h before surgery to 4 h after the procedure began. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was cefazolin POA in patients with and without PALs. Potential POA cases were identified based on tryptase orders or diphenhydramine administrations within the initial cefazolin administration to 6 h postoperatively. Verification included two validation steps. The first checked for hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) documentation, and the second, led by Allergy specialists, identified POA and the probable culprit. The secondary outcome looked at cefazolin use trends in patients with a PAL, stratified by setting and specialty. MAIN RESULTS: Of 112,817 encounters, 1421 (1.3%) had possible cefazolin HSRs. Of these, 22 (1.5%) had POA, resulting in a 0.02% prevalence. Of these, 13 (59.1%) were linked to cefazolin and 9 (40.9%) attributed to other drugs. Only one cefazolin POA case had a PAL, indicating no significant difference in cefazolin POA prevalence between patients with and without PALs (p = 0.437). Perioperative cefazolin use in patients with PALs steadily increased from 2.6% to 6.0% between 2017 and 2020, specifically in academic settings. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of cefazolin POA does not exhibit significant differences between patients with and without PALs, and notably, the incidence remains remarkably low. Based on these findings, it is advisable to view cefazolin as an acceptable choice for prophylaxis in patients carrying a PAL.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Humanos , Cefazolina/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Estudios Transversales , Anafilaxia/inducido químicamente , Anafilaxia/epidemiología , Anafilaxia/prevención & control , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Profilaxis Antibiótica/efectos adversosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Cetuximab, an IgG1 monoclonal antibody, is utilized in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and squamous cell head and neck cancers. Due to the risk of hypersensitivity reactions, standard premedication with a histamine-1 (H-1) antagonist is recommended prior to administration, however, there is less guidance for premedication strategies to assist with rechallenge after infusion reactions. Here, we describe two cases of successful cetuximab treatment after Grade 2 reactions, in addition to risk factors and proposed premedication strategies for successful rechallenge. CASE REPORT: Two patients who experienced Grade 2 hypersensitivity reactions were both successfully rechallenged with increased premedications 1-2 weeks after initial infusions. The first patient was a 56-year-old male diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving cetuximab as part of a clinical trial. The second patient was a 73-year-old male diagnosed with head and neck cancer receiving cetuximab as part of standard of care concurrent with radiation. MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME: Each patient was rechallenged with an increased premedication strategy including dexamethasone, famotidine, diphenhydramine, and acetaminophen in addition to reducing the infusion rate. Both patients either continued treatment or successfully completed therapy, without any additional infusion-related reactions. DISCUSSION: We aimed to review risk factors related to cetuximab infusion reactions and propose a premedication strategy for rechallenge postreaction. Known risk factors include male sex and the accumulation of cetuximab-specific IgE. These may be mitigated by the addition of increased premedication with dexamethasone and famotidine with concurrent reduced infusion rate.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Neoplasias de Cabeza y Cuello , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cetuximab/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/tratamiento farmacológico , Dexametasona , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Famotidina/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de Cabeza y Cuello/tratamiento farmacológico , Antagonistas de los Receptores Histamínicos/uso terapéutico , PremedicaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Cephalosporins are considered safe and first-line prophylaxis in children with non-severe penicillin allergies. However, use of second-line agents is common and is primarily driven by poor allergic response documentation and misunderstanding of cross-reactivity risk. The goal of this project was to improve compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis through improved documentation and targeted educational efforts. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group including representatives from allergy, surgery, infectious disease, and pharmacy developed staged interventions to facilitate compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis. These included: (1) caregiver outreach to clarify incomplete allergy documentation, (2) a decision-support algorithm for prophylaxis use in penicillin-allergic patients, (3) standardized educational resources for surgical faculty and rotating trainees, (4) email reminders with prophylaxis recommendations sent out prior to scheduled cases, and (5) EMR-based decision support during antibiotic ordering. Rates of complete allergy documentation and cephalosporin utilization were compared for general surgery procedures between a 12-month pre-intervention and 14-month post-intervention period. RESULTS: 578 patients with penicillin allergies recorded in the EMR were included (301 pre-intervention and 277 post-intervention), 54.0% of which received prophylaxis. Compared to the pre-intervention period, complete documentation of allergic reactions increased from 57.1% to 84.2% (p < 0.001) following implementation of all interventions. Appropriate prophylaxis utilization increased from 34.5% to 88.5% following implementation of all interventions (p < 0.001), and evidence of a stepwise increase in appropriate utilization was evident with each intervention stage. Persistent compliance failures during the post-implementation period were most commonly associated with urgent and emergent add-on cases. No adverse events or allergic responses were reported before or after project implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with cephalosporin prophylaxis significantly improved following a multidisciplinary effort targeting education, allergy documentation, and clinical support at the point of care. Ongoing efforts include postoperative audits within 24 h for noncompliant cases in order to identify barriers and improve compliance for urgent and emergent add-on cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Niño , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Cefalosporinas/uso terapéutico , Estudios Prospectivos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Monobactamas , Profilaxis Antibiótica/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the role played by the clinical pharmacist and its impact in antibiotic stewardship facing suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics. METHOD: We performed two different independent bibliographic searches. A total of 35 articles were found, and the final number included in the study was 12. We analysed the articles and collected variables of efficacy, safety and applicability of evaluation tools applied to patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams. Also, the variation in the consumption and prescription profile of alternative antibiotics was analyzed. RESULTS: The selected studies analysed questionnaires, allergy delabeling, intradermal tests and oral challenge tests performed by pharmacists. Significant differences in the efficacy endpoint were found in 4 studies in favour of pharmaceutical intervention. In the study of Kwiatkowski et al, cefazolin use increased in surgical patients after pharmacist intervention (65 vs. 28%; p < 0.01). In a quasi-experimental study, the mean defined daily dose of aztreonam and the mean days of therapy per 1000 patients/day decreased (21.23 vs 9.05, p <0.01) and (8.79-4.24, p = 0.016), pre and post-intervention, respectively, increasing antibiotic de-escalations (p ≤ 0.01). In another quasi-experimental study, the prescription of restricted-use antibiotics decreased (42.5% vs. 17.9%, p < 0.01) and the use of pre-surgical prophylactic antibiotics alternative to cefazolin (81.9% vs 55.9%, p<0.01) in another study. Other study showed that the mean time per interview was 5.2 minutes per patient. No adverse events were reported in any study. CONCLUSION: The pharmacist intervention in the evaluation of the patient with suspected allergy to beta-lactams is effective, safe and feasible to implement on daily clinical practice. The standardization of protocols to clarify the history of allergies and development of evaluation tools represent simple screenings to perform delabelling or refer to the Immunoallergology service, improving penicilins use and reducing the need for second line antibiotics. More studies are needed to standardize the desensitization tests made by pharmacists. However, despite these results, the involvement and leadership of the pharmacist in this area is limited and constitutes a future challenge for the profession.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Farmacéuticos , Cefazolina , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Penicilinas/efectos adversosAsunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Embarazo , Femenino , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Demografía , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the role played by the clinical pharmacist and its impact in antibiotic stewardship facing suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics. METHOD: We performed 2 different independent bibliographic searches. A total of 35 articles were found, and the final number included in the study was 12. We analyzed the articles and collected variables of efficacy, safety, and applicability of evaluation tools applied to patients with suspected allergy to beta-lactams. Also, the variation in the consumption and prescription profile of alternative antibiotics was analyzed. RESULTS: The selected studies analyzed questionnaires, allergy delabeling, intradermal tests, and oral challenge tests performed by pharmacists. Significant differences in the efficacy endpoint were found in 4 studies in favor of pharmaceutical intervention. In the study of Kwiatkowski et al., cefazolin use increased in surgical patients after pharmacist intervention (65% vs 28%; Pâ¯<â¯.01). In a quasi-experimental study, the mean defined daily dose of aztreonam and the mean days of therapy per 1000 patients/day decreased (21.23 vs 9.05, Pâ¯<.01) and (8.79-4.24, P = .016), pre- and post-intervention, respectively, increasing antibiotic de-escalations (P = < .01). In another quasi-experimental study, the prescription of restricted use antibiotics decreased (42.5% vs 17.9%, Pâ¯<â¯.01)and the use of pre-surgical prophylactic antibiotics alternative to cefazolin (81.9% vs 55.9%, Pâ¯<â¯.01)in another study. Other study showed that the mean time per interview was 5.2â¯min per patient. No adverse events were reported in any study. CONCLUSION: The pharmacist intervention in the evaluation of the patient with suspected allergy to beta-lactams is effective, safe, and feasible to implement on daily clinical practice. The standardization of protocols to clarify the history of allergies and development of evaluation tools represent simple screenings to perform delabeling or refer to the Immunoallergology service, improving penicilins use and reducing the need for second-line antibiotics. More studies are needed to standardize the desensitization tests made by pharmacists. However, despite these results, the involvement and leadership of the pharmacist in this area is limited and constitutes a future challenge for the profession.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Farmacéuticos , Cefazolina , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Penicilinas/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Asthma trials and guidelines often do not distinguish between adolescents and younger children. Using a large English data set, we evaluated the impact of age on asthma characteristics, management and exacerbations. METHODS: Primary care medical records, 2004-2021, were linked to hospital records. Children were categorised by age at diagnosis and followed until the next age bracket. Ages (based on management guidelines) were 5-8 years, 9-11 years and adolescents (12-16 years). Characteristics evaluated included body mass index, allergies and events before and after diagnosis (symptoms, medication). Exacerbation incidence was calculated. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards determined associations with exacerbations. RESULTS: 119 611 children were eligible: 61 940 (51.8%) 5-8 years, 32 316 (27.7%) 9-11 years and 25 355 (21.2%) adolescents. Several characteristics differed by age; children aged 5-8 years had the highest proportion with eczema, food/drug allergy and cough, but adolescents had the highest proportion with overweight/obesity, aeroallergen sensitisation, dyspnoea and short-acting-beta-agonist only use. Exacerbation rates were highest in the youngest children (per 100 person-years (95% CI): 5-8 years =13.7 (13.4-13.9), 9-11 years =10.0 (9.8-10.4), adolescents =6.7 (6.5-7.0)). Exacerbation risk factors also differed by age; 5-8 years: male, eczema and food/drug allergy were strongly associated, but for children ≥9 years old, obesity and aeroallergen sensitisation were strongly associated. For all children, higher socioeconomic deprivation was significantly associated with having an exacerbation. Delayed diagnosis was most common in children aged 5-8 years and was associated with increased exacerbations across all ages. CONCLUSION: Children's baseline characteristics and exacerbation rates varied according to their age group. Clinical guidelines should consider age at time of diagnosis more discretely than the broad range, 5-16 years, as this appears to impact on asthma severity and management.
Asunto(s)
Antiasmáticos , Asma , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Eccema , Niño , Adolescente , Masculino , Humanos , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Asma/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Obesidad , Antiasmáticos/uso terapéuticoAsunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Lactante , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Familia , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios RetrospectivosAsunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , Cefalosporinas/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos , Penicilinas , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Monobactamas , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Reacciones Cruzadas , Pruebas CutáneasAsunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , Cefazolina/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Reacciones Cruzadas , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Penicillin or amoxicillin are the recommended treatments for the most common pediatric bacterial illnesses. Allergies to penicillin are commonly reported among children but rarely true. We evaluated the impact of reported penicillin allergies on broad-spectrum antibiotic use overall and for the treatment of common respiratory infections among treat-and-release pediatric emergency department (ED) visits. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of pediatric patients receiving antibiotics during a treat-and-release visit at a large, pediatric ED in the northeast from 2014 to 2016. Study exposure was a reported allergy to penicillin in the electronic medical record. Study outcomes were the selection of broad-spectrum antibiotics and alternative (second-line) antibiotic therapy for the treatment of acute otitis media (AOM) and group A streptococcus (GAS) pharyngitis. We used unadjusted and adjusted generalized estimating equation models to analyze the impact of reported penicillin allergies on the selection of broad-spectrum antibiotics. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models to determine the probability of children with a documented penicillin allergy receiving alternative antibiotic treatments for AOM and GAS. RESULTS: Among 12,987 pediatric patients, 810 (6.2%) had a documented penicillin allergy. Penicillin allergies increased the odds of children receiving a broad spectrum versus narrow spectrum antibiotic (adjusted odds ratio, 13.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 11.34-16.18). In our adjusted logistic regression model, the probability of children with a documented penicillin allergy receiving alternative antibiotic treatment for AOM was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94-0.99) and for GAS was 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic stewardship efforts in pediatric EDs may consider the delabeling of penicillin allergies particularly among children receiving antibiotics for an acute respiratory infection as a target for intervention.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Otitis Media , Niño , Humanos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Visitas a la Sala de Emergencias , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Otitis Media/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Paclitaxel is associated with hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). Intravenous premedication regimens have been devised to decrease the incidence and severity of HSRs. At our institution oral histamine 1 receptor antagonists (H1RA) and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) were adopted as standard. Standardizations were implemented for consistent premedication use in all disease states. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the incidence and severity of HSRs before and after standardization. METHODS: Patients who received paclitaxel from 20 April 2018 to 8 December 2020 having an HSR were included in analysis. An infusion was flagged for review if a rescue medication was administered after the start of the paclitaxel infusion. The incidences of all HSR prior to and post-standardization were compared. A subgroup analysis of patients receiving paclitaxel for the first and second time was performed. RESULTS: There were 3499infusions in the pre-standardization group and 1159infusions in the post-standardization group. After review, 100 HSRs pre-standardization and 38 HSRs post-standardization were confirmed reactions. The rate of overall HSRs was 2.9% in the pre-standardization group and 3.3% in the post-standardization group (p = 0.48). HSRs, during the first and second doses of paclitaxel, occurred in 10.2% of the pre-standardization and 8.5% of the post-standardization group (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective interventional study demonstrated that same-day intravenous dexamethasone, oral H1RA, and oral H2RA are safe premedication regimens for paclitaxel. No change in the severity of reactions was seen. Overall, better adherence to premedication administration was seen post-standardization.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Fitogénicos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Antagonistas de los Receptores Histamínicos H1 , Antagonistas de los Receptores H2 de la Histamina , Paclitaxel , Humanos , Dexametasona/uso terapéutico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Histamina , Antagonistas de los Receptores Histamínicos H1/administración & dosificación , Paclitaxel/uso terapéutico , Premedicación/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Antagonistas de los Receptores H2 de la Histamina/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Inpatient beta-lactam allergy labels may increase the unnecessary use of aztreonam and non-beta-lactam antibiotics, which can then lead to more adverse events and increased health care costs, OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a novel 2-step process (medication history review followed by risk stratification) on rates of beta-lactam delabeling, aztreonam use, and desensitizations on pediatric, adult, and obstetrics inpatients at a tertiary academic center. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on 700 patients who received inpatient consultation from the Beta-Lactam Allergy Evaluation Service between August 2021 and July 2022. Patients were delabeled either by medication review alone, drug challenge alone if with a low-risk history, or penicillin skin test followed by drug challenge if with a high-risk history. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to compare aztreonam days of therapy in the intervention year with the 2 prior years. Drug desensitizations were assessed by electronic chart review. RESULTS: Most of the patients (n = 656 of 700, 94%) had more than or equal to 1 beta-lactam allergy label removed, clarified, or both; 77.9% of these patients (n = 511 of 656) had 587 beta-lactam allergy labels removed. Nearly one-third (n = 149, 27.6%) had 162 allergy labels removed solely by medication history review. All 114 penicillin skin tests performed had negative results, and 98% (8 of 381) of the patients who underwent any drug challenge passed. Only 5.7% of the delabeled patients were relabeled. There was a 27% reduction in aztreonam use (P = .007). Beta-lactam desensitizations were reduced by 80%. CONCLUSION: A full-time inpatient beta-lactam allergy service using medication history review and risk stratification can safely and effectively remove inpatient beta-lactam allergy labels, reduce aztreonam use, and decrease beta-lactam desensitizations.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Adulto , Humanos , Niño , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Pacientes Internos , Aztreonam/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/terapia , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/tratamiento farmacológico , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad/tratamiento farmacológico , Antibacterianos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
RATIONALE: Although rare, systemic hypersensitivity reactions to nedaplatin chemotherapy arise rapidly and can be life-threatening. The causes are unclear, and multiple potential mechanisms exist. Here, we report a case of systemic hypersensitivity reaction to nedaplatin and review the literature to establish a recommended protocol. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 62-year-old man was being treated for squamous lung cancer with multiple metastases. On the first day of chemotherapy, 5 minutes after nedaplatin infusion, he developed panic, shortness of breath, and dyspnea with rapid heart rate, reduced oxygen saturation, and elevated blood pressure. DIAGNOSES: The symptoms indicated that the patient had developed a severe hypersensitivity reaction to nedaplatin, which could be life-threatening without immediate intervention. INTERVENTION: Nedaplatin was discontinued, and he was treated with oxygen, ECG monitoring, finger pulse oximeter monitoring, 10 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate injected intravenously, 20 mg diphenhydramine hydrochloride injected intramuscularly, and 40 mg methylprednisolone sodium succinate injected intravenously. OUTCOME: His allergic symptoms resolved, and once his vital signs stabilized, he was given 5 mg oral desloratadine once daily and 10 mg oral ebastine once daily to alleviate the effects of the allergic reaction. Once his vital signs remained stable without any special supportive treatment, he was discharged from the hospital. His chemotherapy regimen was discontinued, with no plan for a follow-up treatment due to the possibility of cross-allergic reactions between platinum-based drugs. LESSONS: Clinical use of nedaplatin should be monitored and managed intensively for prevention and treatment of hypersensitivity reactions. Care should be taken to control the titration rate during infusion while closely monitoring vital signs. Clinical staff should be prepared to treat allergic symptoms as soon as they appear. The acute phase should involve immediate discontinuation of the drug; intravenous saline infusion for volume expansion; rapid assessment of circulation, airway, respiration, state of consciousness, and skin condition; and administration of oxygen, antihistamines, and epinephrine as appropriate for anaphylaxis. More randomized clinical trials are needed to elucidate appropriate preventative and management strategies to improve patient safety and support their successful completion of clinical treatment programs.