Symptoms Associated with Gadolinium Exposure (SAGE): A Suggested Term.

In this article, members of the American College of Radiology Committee on Drugs and Contrast Media propose a new term for symptoms reported after intravascular exposure to gadolinium-based contrast agents-Symptoms Associated with Gadolinium Exposure, or SAGE. This term is advocated in lieu of other proposed nomenclature that presumes a causal relationship that has not yet been scientifically verified. The purpose of this new term, SAGE, is to assist researchers and clinical providers in describing such symptoms without prematurely causally attributing them to a disease and to standardize reporting of these symptoms to allow for coherent interpretation of related studies.

Antibiotic allergy.

Antibiotics are the commonest cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including anaphylaxis, and organ-specific and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. However, many antibiotic reactions documented as allergies were unknown or not remembered by the patient, cutaneous reactions unrelated to drug hypersensitivity, drug-infection interactions, or drug intolerances. Although such reactions pose negligible risk to patients, they currently represent a global threat to public health. Antibiotic allergy labels result in displacement of first-line therapies for antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. A penicillin allergy label, in particular, is associated with increased use of broad-spectrum and non-ß-lactam antibiotics, which results in increased adverse events and antibiotic resistance. Most patients labelled as allergic to penicillins are not allergic when appropriately stratified for risk, tested, and re-challenged. Given the public health importance of penicillin allergy, this Review provides a global update on antibiotic allergy epidemiology, classification, mechanisms, and management.

New Classification Schemata of Hypersensitivity Adverse Effects After Hyaluronic Acid Injections: Pathophysiology, Treatment Algorithm, and Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Side effects during hyaluronic acid (HA) injection are considered mild and reversible; however, an alarming trend of increased hypersensitivity reactions has recently been reported. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article is to review the hypersensitivity reactions reported in the literature and, in combination with the authors' experience, to create a classification system to sort the timing and clinical manifestations of these reactions, as well as a treatment schema to manage their clinical course. METHODS: A literature search using PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase databases was performed with no date restrictions. Search terms included "hyaluronic acid and hypersensitivity" and "hyaluronic acid and nodules." Data analyzed included study type, number of subjects, HA filler type, injection location, adverse reaction, timing, treatment, and outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were identified, documenting hypersensitivity reactions to HA treatment. Twelve cases described events occurring within a week, 6 within a month, and 31 after a month of treatment. Combined with the authors' experience, a new classification system and management of hypersensitivity reactions to HA fillers is proposed of early (up to a week), intermediate (a week to a month), and late (over a month) hypersensitivity reactions. CONCLUSION: The classification system proposed provides objective measurements and management options that can be helpful for physicians to navigate these hypersensitivity reactions and design treatment protocols that provide the best clinical outcomes for their patients.

EAACI position paper on how to classify cutaneous manifestations of drug hypersensitivity.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are common, and the skin is by far the most frequently involved organ with a broad spectrum of reaction types. The diagnosis of cutaneous DHRs (CDHR) may be difficult because of multiple differential diagnoses. A correct classification is important for the correct diagnosis and management. With these guidelines, we aim to give precise definitions and provide the background needed for doctors to correctly classify CDHR.

Hypersensitivity reactions to therapeutic monoclonal antibodies: Phenotypes and endotypes.

BACKGROUND: The increasing use of mAbs has led to a rise in hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), which prevent their use as first-line therapy. HSRs' symptoms, diagnostic tools, and directed management approaches have not been standardized. OBJECTIVE: We propose a novel evidence-based classification of HSRs to mAbs, based on the clinical phenotypes, underlying endotypes and biomarkers, as well as their management with desensitization. METHODS: Phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers of HSRs to 16 mAbs for 104 patients were described and compared with the outcomes of 526 subcutaneous and intravenous desensitizations. RESULTS: Initial reactions presented with 4 patterns: type I-like reactions (63%), cytokine-release reactions (13%), mixed reactions (21%), and delayed type IV reactions (3%). In contrast, of the 23% breakthrough HSRs during desensitization, 52% were cytokine-release reactions, 32% were type 1, 12% were mixed, and 4% were type I with delayed type IV. Skin testing to 10 mAbs in 58 patients was positive in 41% of patients. Serum tryptase was elevated in 1 patient and IL-6 was elevated in 8 patients during desensitization and was associated with a cytokine-release phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: HSRs to mAbs can be defined as type I, cytokine-release, mixed (type I/cytokine-release), and type IV reactions, which are identified by biomarkers such as skin test, tryptase, and IL-6. These phenotypes can be used to improve personalized and precision medicine when diagnosing HSRs to mAbs and providing management recommendations with desensitization. Desensitization provides a safe and effective retreatment option to remain on culprit mAbs as first-line therapy.

What can we learn in drug allergy management from World Health Organization's international classifications?

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) represent growing health problem worldwide, affecting more than 7% of the general population, and represent an important public health problem. However, knowledge in DHRs morbidity and mortality epidemiological data is still not optimal and international comparable standards remain poorly accessed. Institutional databases worldwide increasingly use the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system to classify diagnoses, health services utilization, and death data. The misclassification of disorders in the ICD system contributes to a lack of ascertainment and recognition of their importance for healthcare planning and resource allocation. It also hampers clinical practice and prevention actions. To further inform the allergy community and to ensure that the revision process is transparent as advised in the WHO ICD-11 revision agenda, we report the advances and use of the pioneering "Drug hypersensitivity" subsection of ICD-11 and implementation in the WHO International Classification of Health Interventions (ICHI). The new classification addressed to DHRs will enable the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients with drug allergies and better facilitate healthcare planning and decision-making and public health measures to prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to DHRs.

Allergic-like contrast media reaction management in children.

The use of contrast materials as part of imaging examinations is common in children of all ages, as these compounds increase image contrast, lesion detection and lesion characterization. Though modern iodinated, gadolinium-based and ultrasound microbubble contrast materials generally are quite safe, acute physiological and allergic-like reactions are possible. The majority of acute contrast reactions in children are mild and self-limited; however, life-threatening reactions can occur. It is our obligation as radiologists to recognize and manage these adverse reactions. The objective of this article is to review the frequency, manifestations and appropriate treatment of acute contrast reactions in the pediatric population.

Phenotypical characterization of children with hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs.

BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the main cause of drug-induced hypersensitivity in children. Many classifications have been proposed, focusing on adults. So far, no large study has deeply investigated a pediatric cohort. The aim of the present study was to describe a population of NSAID hypersensitive patients reporting a reaction during their childhood and to verify whether it is possible to classify pediatric patients, following the EAACI/ENDA classification. METHODS: We conducted a historical prospective study including patients evaluated from 1996 to 2015 in the allergy unit of the Montpellier University Hospital. We included 635 patients. For each patient, we recorded clinical manifestations and possible comorbidities and tried to identify possible risk factors. RESULTS: NSAID hypersensitivity was diagnosed in 107 of 635 patients (16.9%). In this group, 43 patients (40.2%) could not be classified following the ENDA recommendations. The main discrepancies were on the patients' clinical manifestations and on their possible underlying diseases. We identified, on a multivariate analysis, some risk factors for NSAID hypersensitivity: chronic urticaria (OR 7.737, 3.375-18.296 95%CI), atopic status (OR 2.514, 1.504-4.364 95%CI), and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (OR 1.799, 1.138-2.837 95%CI). On the basis of our results, we are proposing an adapted classification for NSAID hypersensitivity in children. CONCLUSIONS: The current ENDA classification does not seem to be adapted for pediatric patients; a modified version does. Our study could help allergists better understand the differences between adults and children in developing hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs, but further large-scale prospective longitudinal analyses are required to validate this new classification.

Hypersensitivity reactions during treatment with biological agents.

The recent development of biological agents, namely, anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) agents (infliximab, adalimumab and etanercept), anti- CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab) and anti-interleukin 6 receptor (IL-6R) monoclonal antibody (tocilizumab), represents a major breakthrough for the treatment of immune-mediated disorders. Given their structural and functional differences, distinct safety profiles can be expected for each of these agents. Evidence in the literature indicates that patients treated with anti-TNF-α agents and tocilizumab are at increased risk for bacterial infections. However, an increased therapeutic use of these biological agents has disclosed other side-effects, including immediate hypersensitivity reactions, such as anaphylaxis and urticaria. Both under-diagnosis and over-diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents are potential problems. Thus, it is important to identify these reactions and to adopt the right approach to manage them. This article reviews the general aspects of adverse events during biologic treatment, focusing on IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to anti-TNF-α agents, rituximab and tocilizumab, and on the tools for the diagnosis of these life-threatening reactions.

Improving detection and management of drug allergy.

Suspected adverse drug reactions may be subdivided on the basis of mechanism e.g. immunological (requiring sensitisation by previous exposure) versus nonimmunological; timing (e.g. immediate or delayed), or whether the phenomenon is dose dependent or not. In the NICE guideline the main approach is to classify the event according to whether it: is immediate (within an hour of drug administration) or delayed (hours or days); affects a single or multiple systems; is clinically severe/life threatening or not. An immediate, immunologically mediated, multisystem, life-threatening reaction would for example include anaphylaxis (type 1 or typically IgE- mediated hypersensitivity) especially if the clinical features (e.g. bronchospasm, hypotension) are suggestive. Serum mast cell tryptase should be tested ideally within two hours and certainly before four hours post reaction. Detailed investigation of suspected cases in a specialist clinic is ideally delayed for 4-6 weeks after the event. Adverse drug reactions need to be meticulously recorded and the patient fully informed. Documentation should include: date of reaction; drug name (chemical and generic); route of administration; time interval between first dose and event; and nature and severity of symptoms. Written guidance should be provided on which other chemically related drugs also need to be avoided. Specialist referral is indicated for: suspected anaphylaxis; severe/life- threatening episodes e.g. Stevens-Johnson syndrome; severe NSAID reactions with ongoing need for NSAID therapy; suspected penicillin allergy (if alternative antibiotics are not available); and problems related to general and local anaesthesia.

Allergic reactions following contrast material administration: nomenclature, classification, and mechanisms.

In forensic pathology routine, fatal cases of contrast agent exposure can be occasionally encountered. In such situations, beyond the difficulties inherent in establishing the cause of death due to nonspecific or absent autopsy and histology findings as well as limited laboratory investigations, pathologists may face other problems in formulating exhaustive, complete reports, and conclusions that are scientifically accurate. Indeed, terminology concerning adverse drug reactions and allergy nomenclature is confusing. Some terms, still utilized in forensic and radiological reports, are outdated and should be avoided. Additionally, not all forensic pathologists master contrast material classification and pathogenesis of contrast agent reactions. We present a review of the literature covering allergic reactions to contrast material exposure in order to update used terminology, explain the pathophysiology, and list currently available laboratory investigations for diagnosis in the forensic setting.

Drug allergy awareness and perspectives with the implementation of the International Classification of Diseases-11.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To understand the current global scale of drug hypersensitivity (DH) and drug allergy (DA), and to identify possible strategies to increase the accuracy of epidemiological data. RECENT FINDINGS: Global patterns of DH/DA seem to be changing and increasing worldwide, but there are still great challenges in capturing quality DH/DA mortality and morbidity statistics (MMS). DH/DA MMS may gain new perspectives with the global implementation of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to DH/DA should clarify areas of uncertainty, which would lead to better strategies to reduce the burden of these conditions. SUMMARY: DH/DA remains a complex and unaddressed problem globally that often deprives patients of optimal medication choices and places them at risk for life-threatening reactions. DH/DA labels should contribute to people well being, by protecting true allergic individuals from being re-exposed to their allergic drugs and providing needed medications to individuals wrongly labeled as allergic or who have lost allergic sensitivity. The true rate of DH/DA is in fact unknown due to a number of factors, such as misdiagnosis, miscoding and under- and over-notification, among others. Moreover, there is lack of data about DH/DA epidemiology in many countries. Difficulties on collecting accurate and comparable data should be acknowledged, with great impact in the correct labeling DH/DA in electronic health records and official statistics. More accurate definitions, classification and coding may contribute to a better-quality MMS thanks to the ICD-11, under implementation worldwide. Improving the quality of epidemiological data related to DH/DA should clarify areas of uncertainty, which would lead to better strategies to reduce the burden of these conditions. As knowledge derived from populations is key information for more realistic decision-making, the construction of the new section addressed to DH/DA in the ICD-11 will allow the collection of more accurate epidemiological data to support quality management of patients, and facilitate healthcare planning to implement public health measures to prevent and reduce the morbidity and mortality attributable to these conditions.

Diagnosis of penicillin allergy revisited: the value of case history, skin testing, specific IgE and prolonged challenge.

BACKGROUND: Skin testing in duplicate, correlation between case history of immediate and nonimmediate reactions and challenge outcome and prolonged oral treatment with penicillin in the diagnostic evaluation of allergic reactions to ß-lactam antibiotics, mimicking real-life situations, have only been addressed in few studies. METHODS: A total of 342 patients suspected of having ß-lactam allergy were investigated according to the European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA) guidelines and patients found to be negative in the ENDA program were supplemented with a 7-day oral treatment with penicillin. Skin testing with penicillins was performed in duplicate. Patients with case histories of reactions to other ß-lactams were also subsequently challenged with the culprit drug. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were IgE-sensitized to penicillin. Then, intracutaneous tests (ICTs) were performed, in which 35 patients tested positive for allergy, 21 with delayed and 14 with immediate reactions. Only three patients tested positive for the major (PPL) and/or minor (MDM) penicillin determinants, all being positive for penicillin G in ICT. The remaining 291 patients were challenged with penicillin: 10 tested positive in single-dose challenge and 23 tested positive in the 7-day challenge. A total of 17 of 78 patients with a negative penicillin challenge tested positive during challenges with other ß-lactams. We found no correlation between case histories of immediate and nonimmediate reactions and reaction time during challenge. CONCLUSION: The data suggest that case history is often insufficient to discriminate between immediate reactors and nonimmediate reactors. A 7-day challenge with the culprit ß-lactam may yield more positive reactions than the accepted one- or 2-day challenge. Interpretation of skin testing should be made with caution.

How can we better classify NSAID hypersensitivity reactions?--validation from a large database.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is one of the most common drug hypersensitivities. Several clinical subtypes have been distinguished depending on symptomatology (respiratory, cutaneous, anaphylaxis), timing (immediate, delayed), underlying chronic disease (asthma, chronic urticaria) or putative mechanism of the reaction (allergic, nonallergic mediated). The aim of the present study was to better classify the many hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs. METHODS: In the present retrospective study, during an 11-year study period, we collected data from all patients with a proven NSAID hypersensitivity. Reactions were classified according to clinical patterns, chronology, underlying diseases and the results of oral provocation tests into 5 and 7 groups in line with two published classifications, respectively. RESULTS: Forty-nine and 88 out of 307 reactions (in 122 patients) could not be classified on the basis of the two previously published classifications. We created a new classification which could include all patient reactions. CONCLUSIONS: Our new classification is more suitable for clinical expression of NSAID hypersensitivity. It allows clinicians to identify patients at a high risk, based on the clinical history and clinical manifestations. Moreover, it is helpful for a better understanding and teaching of these reactions.

Chapter 30: Drug allergy.

Drug allergy describes clinical adverse reactions that are proved or presumed to be immunologically based. Allergic drug reactions do not resemble pharmacologic actions of the incriminated drug and may occur at fractions of what would be the therapeutic dosage. Allergic drug reactions are unpredictable; nevertheless, there is increased risk of drug hypersensitivity in (1) patients with cystic fibrosis who receive antibiotics; (2) patients with human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) who receive trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole of if HLA-B*5701(+) and receive the antiretroviral agent, abacavir; (3) other genetically susceptible populations such as Han-Chinese who are HLA-B*1502(+) who develop Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis from carbamazepine or if HLA-B*5801(+) are at increased risk for such reactions from allopurinol; and (4) patients with a history of previous compatible allergic reaction to the same medication, similar class, or potentially unrelated medication. Specific patient groups at higher risk for drug allergy include those with Ebstein-Barr virus infection, chronic lymphatic leukemia, HIV/AIDS, cystic fibrosis, patients with seizures being treated with antiepileptic medications, and patients with asthma (especially severe asthma) who are at increased risk of anaphylaxis from any cause including drugs compared with patients without asthma. In patients with a history of penicillin allergy, skin testing helps clarify the current level of risk for anaphylaxis by using the major (penicilloyl-polylysine) and minor penicillin determinants where sensitivity is 99%. If penicilloyl-polylysine and penicillin G are used for skin testing, the sensitivity is ∼85%. When skin tests are negative, graded challenges are performed to administer optimal or truly essential antibiotics.

Hypersensitivity to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) - classification, diagnosis and management: review of the EAACI/ENDA(#) and GA2LEN/HANNA*.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are responsible for 21-25% of reported adverse drug events which include immunological and nonimmunological hypersensitivity reactions. This study presents up-to-date information on pathomechanisms, clinical spectrum, diagnostic tools and management of hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs. Clinically, NSAID hypersensitivity is particularly manifested by bronchial asthma, rhinosinusitis, anaphylaxis or urticaria and variety of late cutaneous and organ-specific reactions. Diagnosis of hypersensitivity to a NSAID includes understanding of the underlying mechanism and is necessary for prevention and management. A stepwise approach to the diagnosis of hypersensitivity to NSAIDs is proposed, including clinical history, in vitro testing and/or provocation test with a culprit or alternative drug depending on the type of the reaction. The diagnostic process should result in providing the patient with written information both on forbidden and on alternative drugs.

Aspects of allergy in rheumatology.

This review focuses on several basic mechanisms of allergy and when a rheumatologist should consider an external agent as being responsible for seemingly 'rheumatic' manifestations. Typical allergic diseases are discussed in order to help the physician to recognise them. In addition, allergic aspects and adverse drug reactions of antirheumatic drugs and biopharmaceutical agent therapies will be discussed.

Perioperative allergy: uncommon agents.

Anesthesia may often be considered as a high-risk procedure and anaphylaxis remains a major cause of concern for anesthetists who routinely administer many potentially allergenic agents. Neuromuscular blocking agents, latex and antibiotics are the substances involved in most of the reported reactions. Besides these three agents, a wide variety of substances may cause an anaphylactic reaction during anesthesia. Basically all the administered drugs or substances may be potential causes of anaphylaxis. Among them, those reported the most in literature include hypnotics, opioids, local anesthetics, colloids, dye, Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs), Iodinated Contrast Media (ICM), antiseptics, aprotinin, ethylene oxyde and formaldehyde, and protamine and heparins. No premedication can effectively prevent an allergic reaction and a systematic preoperative screening is not justified for all patients; nevertheless, an allergy specialist should evaluate those patients with a history of anesthesia-related allergy. Patients must be fully informed of investigation results, and advised to provide a detailed report prior to future anesthesia.

Antibiotic allergy.

Antibiotics are commonly injected during the perioperative period and are responsible of 15 percent of the anaphylactic reactions. Anaphylaxis triggered by antibiotics primarily involves penicillin and cephalosporin. The management of patients with histories of allergic reactions to antibiotics is a common situation in clinical practice. The confirmation or invalidation of the allergic nature of the reported reaction is not based on in vitro tests, but on a rigorous allergological work-up based on detailed analysis of clinical history, skin tests and drug provocation test. Considering a possible cross-reactivity between penicillins, once an immediate penicillin allergy has been diagnosed, skin testing with the alternative molecule (cephalosporin, carbapenem, aztreonam) is mandatory and, if negative, the relevant drug should be given in an appropriate setting at increasing doses.