Current and future management of chronic spontaneous urticaria and chronic inducible urticaria.

Background: Chronic urticaria (CU), characterized by ≥6 weeks of intense pruritus, remains a debilitating condition for patients. New and safe treatments are needed to manage CU recalcitrant to standard therapy. Objective: A review of the current literature of standard and novel therapeutics in the management of CU was conducted. Methods: A literature search via a medical literature data base and clinical trial data base was conducted to identify treatment options for CU and current clinical trials. Results: Second-generation antihistamines, omalizumab, and cyclosporine remain the most proven therapeutic options for CU. Dupilumab, mepolizumab, benralizumab, tezepelumab, and CDX-0159 are all undergoing clinical trials for CU. Although ligelizumab demonstrated initial promising results, a phase III study was discontinued due to a nonsuperior clinical impact compared with omalizumab. Conclusion: Novel therapies are needed for the treatment of recalcitrant CU. With a deeper understanding of the pathophysiology of CU, promising therapeutics are in clinical trials for CU.

Delabeling penicillin and other antibiotic allergies in solid organ transplantation patients.

BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised populations including solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients have a high likelihood of need for antibiotic therapy for treatment of infection as well as for prophylaxis. Antibiotic allergy is commonly reported and often leads to the use of alternative, second-line antibiotics, which have been associated with poor outcomes, increased adverse effects, and higher cost. Formal allergy assessment and allergy testing can serve as an important antimicrobial stewardship tool in optimizing antibiotic regimens for this patient population. METHODS: A PubMed search with relevant keywords was performed. Review of relevant professional society guidelines was also performed. RESULTS: Documented penicillin and sulfonamide allergies are common impediments to the treatment and prophylaxis of immunocompromised populations, but are rarely formally evaluated in practice; however, there is evidence that most patients with documented allergy to these antibiotics can, in fact, tolerate penicillins and sulfonamide antibiotics. Implementation of an antibiotic allergy evaluation and testing program has been shown to increase the use of first-line antibiotics and can be cost saving. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic allergies have significant clinical consequences, especially in immunocompromised populations. Evaluation of these allergies to prevent the avoidance of first-line antibiotics should be a standard part of the workflow for these patients, prior to transplant. Programs can be tailored to the available personnel and resources of the organization.

Efficacy and safety of an e-consult program for COVID-19 vaccine allergy concerns.

Background: Although severe allergic reactions to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are rare, fear of allergic reactions remains a major source of vaccine hesitancy. For concerned patients and providers alike, allergist consultation is recommended for further guidance on the risk of vaccination. The electronic consultation (e-consult) medium has the potential to make this guidance more widely accessible, thereby supporting vaccination efforts. Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of an e-consult program for COVID-19 vaccine allergy concerns. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of a single-center COVID-19 vaccine allergy e-consult program. Data on demographics, allergy history, and outcomes after recommendations were gathered via review of the electronic medical record (EMR). Patients without EMR data available following the e-consult were called to inquire about vaccination status. Results: Our study included 64 patients, most of whom (51.6% [33/64]) had e-consults placed for second-dose concerns. E-consults were completed within 2 days for all patients. The most common recommendation was that patients receive any COVID-19 vaccination available (62.5%, [40/64]). Forty-one patients (64.1%) were vaccinated after receiving recommendations from an allergist, 11 of whom (26.8%) reported a vaccine reaction. Most of these reactions were nonallergic (9/11 [81.2%]). No anaphylactic events were reported. Conclusion: Results of our study suggest that e-consults were a safe and effective method of providing guidance with regard to COVID-19 vaccine risk in patients with concerns about allergic reactions. The efficiency of this medium, highlighted by the 2-day turnaround time in our study, has the potential to expand access to vaccine risk evaluations by board-certified allergist/immunologists.

Non-IgE-Mediated Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Non-IgE-mediated drug reactions have traditionally been poorly defined and studied, though they are the most common form of hypersensitivity. Their presentations are highly variable and can range in severity from mild, cutaneous-only reactions to severe systemic disease. RECENT FINDINGS: The most notable advance in non-IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions is in diagnostics. HLA alleles have traditionally been used for identifying certain patients at risk for abacavir hypersensitivity syndrome, but more recent studies have shown several other HLA alleles associated with severe cutaneous adverse reactions with various medications. This article also highlights the use of delayed intradermal testing for radiocontrast media and patch testing for delayed antibiotic reactions. Drug reactions remain a major cause of morbidity and reason for treatment changes. Non-IgE-mediated reactions have had an increase in research interest over the past decade with an increased emphasis on better understanding the clinical presentation and underlying pathophysiology.

Safety and efficacy of direct two-step penicillin challenges with an inpatient pharmacist-driven allergy evaluation.

Background: Penicillin allergy is commonly reported and has clinical and financial consequences for patients and hospitals. A penicillin evaluation program can safely delabel patients and optimize antibiotic therapy. Pharmacists who perform this task have focused on a detailed interview or penicillin skin testing (PST). Antibiotic graded challenge after PST requires more resources and is more costly than going directly to a two-step challenge. Objective: To determine whether a pharmacist-driven penicillin allergy evaluation and a testing protocol that primarily uses direct oral challenges can safely delabel patients. Methods: Adult patients (ages >18 years) with a penicillin allergy in their electronic medical record (EMR) who were admitted between September 2019 and June 2020 were eligible. Although all patients with penicillin allergy were eligible, priority was given to patients who required antibiotics. Patients were interviewed, and, if indicated, based on an institutional protocol, were tested by using PST and/or two-step oral challenge. If the patient passed the challenge, then the penicillin allergy label was removed in the EMR and the patient counseled. Demographic information, allergy questionnaire results, testing results, and changes in antimicrobial therapy were collected. Results: Fifty patients were evaluated from September 2019 to June 2020. Ninety-six percent of the patients were delabeled, and antibiotic therapy changed for 54%. Twenty patients were delabeled with an interview alone, and 30 patients underwent oral two-step challenge. Only one patient required PST. Conclusion: A pharmacist-driven penicillin allergy evaluation program focused on direct oral graded challenges and bypassing PST can effectively delabel admitted patients. However, more safety data are needed before implementation of similar programs to optimize antibiotic treatment.

Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: An Update on the Evaluation and Management.

Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) affects 0.5% to 1% of the general population and is often managed by allergy and immunology specialists. Guidelines have evolved over the past several decades with an emphasis on decreasing extensive screening laboratory testing as they are of low-yield and cost-ineffective. The utility of biomarkers remains under investigation but total immunoglobulin E may be helpful in determining specific endotypes and response to omalizumab. Antihistamines and omalizumab remain the primary therapeutic options for CSU, but an expanding body of evidence supports the use of immunosuppressants and anti-inflammatory medications in refractory cases.