Rechallenges without desensitization following platinum-based chemotherapy reactions.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in non-desensitization protocols as a potential way to reintroduce chemotherapy following hypersensitivity reactions (HSR). OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into the potential utility of non-desensitization reintroduction, particularly at institutions where allergy consultation may not be available. METHODS: For 70 patients with platinum HSR who underwent rechallenge with standard (≤2 hours), extended (1-bag, 1-step, 4-6 hours), or titrated (4-to-5-bag and -step, 6-7.5 hours) infusions between 1/2014 and 7/2019, demographics and clinical characteristics were reviewed and initial and breakthrough reactions (BTR) were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE v5.0). Tolerance (no BTR) and completion (dose completed despite BTR) were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Patients (mean [standard deviation] age 57 [13] years, initial HSR grade 2 [1]), were rechallenged with standard (n = 8), extended (n = 23), or titrated (n = 22) infusions after oxaliplatin HSR; and standard (n = 5) or titrated (n = 12) after carboplatin HSR. Tolerance and completion were higher for extended versus (vs) standard (tolerance-87%-vs-8%, p < 0.005; completion-96%-vs-38%, p < 0.005) and titrated versus standard (tolerance-76%-vs-8%, p < 0.005; completion-79%-vs-38%, p < 0.05) infusions. CONCLUSIONS: Extended and titrated infusions may increase reintroduction safety compared to standard infusions. Further investigation into extended infusions may provide a safe alternative to standard infusions in patients who may not have access to desensitization at their institution.

United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR) grading scale for immediate drug reactions.

BACKGROUND: There is no accepted grading system classifying the severity of immediate reactions to drugs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to present a proposed grading system developed through the consensus of drug allergy experts from the United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR) Consortium. METHODS: The USDAR investigators sought to develop a consensus severity grading system for immediate drug reactions that is applicable to clinical care and research. RESULTS: The USDAR grading scale scores severity levels on a scale of 0 to 4. A grade of no reaction (NR) is used for patients who undergo challenge without any symptoms or signs, and it would confirm a negative challenge result. A grade 0 reaction is indicative of primarily subjective complaints that are commonly seen with both historical drug reactions and during drug challenges, and it would suggest a low likelihood of a true drug allergic reaction. Grades 1 to 4 meet the criteria for a positive challenge result and may be considered indicative of a drug allergy. Grade 1 reactions are suggestive of a potential immediate drug reaction with mild symptoms. Grade 2 reactions are more likely to be immediate drug reactions of moderate severity. Grade 3 reactions have features suggestive of a severe allergic reaction, whereas grade 4 reactions are life-threatening reactions such as anaphylactic shock and fatal anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: This proposed grading schema for immediate drug reactions improves on prior schemata by being developed specifically for immediate drug reactions and being easy to implement in clinical and research practice.

Drug allergy in older adults: A study from the United States Drug Allergy Registry.

BACKGROUND: Older adults have an increased risk of adverse drug reactions and negative effects associated with alternative antibiotic use. Although the number of antibiotic allergies reported increases with age, the characteristics and outcomes of older adults receiving drug allergy assessment are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the characteristics and outcomes of drug allergy evaluations in older adults. METHODS: We considered patients aged above or equal to 65 years enrolled in the United States Drug Allergy Registry (USDAR), a US multisite prospective cohort (January 16, 2019 to February 28, 2022). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of 1678 USDAR participants from 5 sites, 406 older adults aged above or equal to 65 years (37% 65-69 years, 37% 70-74 years, 16% 75-79 years, and 10% ≥80 years) received 501 drug allergy assessments. USDAR older adults were primarily of female sex (69%), White (94%), and non-Hispanic (98%). Most USDAR older adults reported less than or equal to 1 infections per year (64%) and rated their general health as good, very good, or excellent (80%). Of 296 (59%) penicillin allergy assessments in USDAR older adults, 286 (97%) were disproved. Other drug allergy assessments included sulfonamide (n = 41, 88% disproved) and cephalosporin (n = 20, 95% disproved) antibiotics. All 41 drug allergy labels in USDAR participants aged above or equal to 80 years and all 80 penicillin allergy labels in USDAR men aged above or equal to 65 years were disproved. CONCLUSION: Older adults represented a quarter of USDAR participants but were neither racially nor ethnically diverse and were generally healthy without considerable antibiotic need. Most older adults presented for antibiotic allergy assessments, the vast majority of which were disproved. Drug allergy assessments may be underutilized in the older adults who are most vulnerable to the harms of unconfirmed antibiotic allergy labels.

Impact of an Inpatient Allergy Guideline on ß-Lactam and Alternative Antibiotic Use.

BACKGROUND: A guideline identifying when inpatients with penicillin or cephalosporin antibiotic allergy labels (PCAAL) can receive ß-lactam antibiotics increased ß-lactam receipt at a large northeastern US health care system. OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of implementing a similar guideline and electronic order set (OS) at an independent academic health care system. METHODS: Penicillin/cephalosporin receipt (percentage of inpatients receiving full doses) and alternative antibiotic use (days of therapy per 1000 patient-days [DOT/1000PD]) were compared over 3 periods before (February 1, 2017, to January 31, 2018) and after guideline implementation (February 1, 2018, to January 31, 2019), and after OS implementation (February 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020) among inpatients with PCAAL admitted on medical services with access to guideline/OS and education (Medical-PCAAL, n = 8721), surgical services with access to guideline/OS without education (Surgical-PCAAL, n = 5069), and obstetrics/gynecology services without interventions (Ob/Gyn-PCAAL, n = 798) and inpatients without PCAAL admitted on the same services (Medical-No-PCAAL, n = 50,840; Surgical-No-PCAAL, n = 29,845; Ob/Gyn-No-PCAAL, n = 6109). χ2 tests were used to compare categorical variables, and analysis of variance was used to compare continuous and interrupted time series analyses (ITSA) to investigate the guideline/OS implementation effect on penicillin/cephalosporin receipt. RESULTS: In the Medical-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (58%-68%, P < .001), specifically for cefazolin (8%-11%, P = .02) and third- to fifth-generation cephalosporins (43%-48%, P = .04), and aztreonam use decreased (12 DOT/1000PD, P = .03). In the Medical-No-PCAAL group, penicillin/cephalosporin receipt increased (88%-90%, P = .004), specifically for penicillin (40%-44%, P < .001), without changes in aztreonam use. Significant changes were not observed in these outcomes on surgical or obstetrics/gynecology services. Per ITSA, guideline/OS implementation was associated with increased penicillin/cephalosporin receipt in the Medical-PCAAL group only. CONCLUSION: Guideline and OS implementation was associated with improved antibiotic stewardship on inpatient services that also received allergy education.

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine administration in patients with reported reactions to polyethylene glycol- and polysorbate-containing therapeutics.

BACKGROUND: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate reactions were initially implicated as a likely risk factor for reacting to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and remain a source of vaccine hesitancy despite increasing evidence that they do not pose an increased risk for COVID-19 vaccine reactions. OBJECTIVE: To investigate COVID-19 vaccine safety outcomes in patients with reported reactions to PEG- and polysorbate-containing medications and vaccines. METHODS: COVID-19 vaccine safety was reviewed in patients with PEG or polysorbate reactions documented in their electronic medical records at a tertiary academic medical center (cohort 1) and patients referred to Allergy and Immunology with reported PEG or polysorbate reactions (cohort 2). COVID-19 vaccine safety was also reviewed following reported symptoms (onset ≤ 12 hours) to first-dose PEG-containing messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine (cohort 3). RESULTS: Of 252 patients in cohort 1 (n = 202) and cohort 2 (n = 50), 236 (94%) received mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (106 Pfizer, 130 Moderna); 235 received both doses. Only 3 patients from cohort 2 developed mild rash following vaccination. None of the 44 patients in cohort 3 with acute symptoms following first-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (27 Pfizer, 17 Moderna) had previously reported PEG or polysorbate reactions. Of these 44 patients, 43 received the second dose and all 3 who developed symptoms following the second dose (1 required epinephrine) had negative PEG skin testing. CONCLUSION: Patients with reported reactions to PEG and polysorbate safely received COVID-19 vaccines. PEG and polysorbate skin testing did not identify patients at risk for first dose or recurrent reactions to COVID-19 vaccines. Screening for PEG and polysorbate allergy may only increase vaccine hesitancy without identifying patients at risk for COVID-19 vaccine reactions.

Practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of secondary hypogammaglobulinemia: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Primary Immunodeficiency and Altered Immune Response Committees.

Secondary hypogammaglobulinemia (SHG) is characterized by reduced immunoglobulin levels due to acquired causes of decreased antibody production or increased antibody loss. Clarification regarding whether the hypogammaglobulinemia is secondary or primary is important because this has implications for evaluation and management. Prior receipt of immunosuppressive medications and/or presence of conditions associated with SHG development, including protein loss syndromes, are histories that raise suspicion for SHG. In patients with these histories, a thorough investigation of potential etiologies of SHG reviewed in this report is needed to devise an effective treatment plan focused on removal of iatrogenic causes (eg, discontinuation of an offending drug) or treatment of the underlying condition (eg, management of nephrotic syndrome). When iatrogenic causes cannot be removed or underlying conditions cannot be reversed, therapeutic options are not clearly delineated but include heightened monitoring for clinical infections, supportive antimicrobials, and in some cases, immunoglobulin replacement therapy. This report serves to summarize the existing literature regarding immunosuppressive medications and populations (autoimmune, neurologic, hematologic/oncologic, pulmonary, posttransplant, protein-losing) associated with SHG and highlights key areas for future investigation.

Drug Allergy Delabeling Programs: Recent Strategies and Targeted Populations.

Drug allergy delabeling programs have become an essential element of antibiotic stewardship. Development of delabeling programs involves careful selection of target patient population, thoughtful design of delabeling approach, stakeholder engagement, assembly of key team members, implementation, and evaluation of clinical and safety outcomes. Recent programs have targeted patients thought to be most likely to benefit from removal of inaccurate antibiotic allergy labels, those with ß-lactam antibiotic allergies and high-risk populations likely to need ß-lactam antibiotics as first-line treatment. This review provides an overview of current risk stratification methods and ß-lactam cross-reactivity data and summarizes how different inpatient and outpatient delabeling programs have used these concepts in delabeling algorithms. ß-Lactam delabeling programs for inpatients, pediatric patients, and programs utilizing telehealth have been implemented with good outcomes. This review also focuses on delabeling programs for high-risk populations likely to benefit from first-line ß-lactam antibiotics. These populations include perioperative, prenatal, and immunocompromised patients. Delabeling programs have been successful in the inpatient and outpatient settings at enabling appropriate antibiotic use. This article reviews delabeling strategies utilized by these programs with a focus on highlighting elements key to their success and future areas for innovation.

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Platinum Agents and Taxanes.

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy agents can present a serious challenge to treating patients with preferred or first-line therapies. Allergic reactions through an immunologic mechanism have been established for platinum and taxane agents, which are used to treat a wide variety of cancers including gynecologic cancers. Platin HSRs typically occur after multiple cycles of chemotherapy, reflecting the development of drug IgE sensitization, while taxane HSRs often occur on first or second exposure. Despite observed differences between platin and taxane HSRs, drug desensitization has been an effective method to reintroduce both chemotherapeutic agents safely. Skin testing is the primary diagnostic tool used to risk-stratify patients after initial HSRs, with more widespread use for platinum agents than taxanes. Different practices exist around the use of skin testing, drug challenge, and choice of desensitization protocol. Here, we review the epidemiology, mechanism, and clinical presentation of HSRs to platinum and taxane agents, as well as key controversies in their evaluation and management.

Enabling antibiotic allergy evaluations and reintroduction of first-line antibiotics for patients with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) often have a history of antibiotic adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that pose a barrier to receiving recommended first-line treatment. Targeted antibiotic allergy evaluations are increasingly recognized as an important strategy for optimization of antimicrobial stewardship. OBJECTIVE: To improve first-line antibiotic use in patients with CF with antibiotic ADRs by streamlining access to antibiotic allergy evaluations and standardizing documentation of plans for antibiotic reintroduction. METHODS: We incorporated allergy evaluations into a multidisciplinary CF clinic and used telemedicine when allergy evaluations could not be performed during CF clinic. Standard documentation of antibiotic allergy plans was used to enable safe reintroduction of first-line antibiotics by CF providers. RESULTS: Strategies used in this study allowed 81.3% (26 of 32) of patients with CF to receive allergy evaluations and antibiotic allergy plans for prioritized antibiotics (penicillin, cephalosporin, sulfonamide), with removal of 41.0% (16 of 39) of prioritized antibiotic ADRs. Only 5.1% (2 of 39) of prioritized antibiotic ADRs evaluated required strict avoidance after evaluation. There were 9 patients who received at least 1 prioritized antibiotic, with 66.6% (6 of 9) of these patients given the antibiotic after only 1 allergy evaluation visit. Furthermore, these strategies allowed allergy evaluations of 23 nonprioritized antibiotics to occur, with removal of the ADR in 39.1% (9 of 23) and use of 77.8% (7 of 9) of nonprioritized antibiotics after removal. CONCLUSION: Incorporating allergy evaluations into a multidisciplinary CF clinic can liberalize first-line antibiotic use in patients with CF. Standard documentation of antibiotic allergy plans allowed antibiotic reintroduction to occur even before complete removal of documented antibiotic ADRs.

Impact of Rapid Transition to Telemedicine-Based Delivery on Allergy/Immunology Care During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) necessitated wide-scale adoption of telemedicine (TM) and restriction of in-person care. The impacts on allergy/immunology (A/I) care delivery are still being studied. OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcomes of rapid transition to TM-based care (video visit followed by in-person visits dedicated to diagnostic and therapeutic procedures when needed) at an academic A/I practice during COVID-19. METHODS: Demographic data were compared for patients originally scheduled for in-person visits between March 10, 2020, and April 30, 2020, who completed a video visit instead between March 10, 2020, and June 30, 2020, and those who did not. Appointment completion, diagnoses, and drug allergy and skin testing completion were compared for visits between March 10, 2020, and June 30, 2020, and 1 year prior (March 10, 2019-June 30, 2019). RESULTS: Sixty-nine percent (265 of 382) of patients originally scheduled between March 10, 2020, and April 30, 2020, were able to complete video visits. Patients who completed video visits were more likely to be white (52% vs 33%; P < .001), English-speaking (96% vs 89%; P = .01), and privately insured (70% vs 54%; P = .004). With TM-based care compared with in-person care, there were significant decreases in environmental and food skin testing completion rates (91% and 92% in 2019 vs 60% and 64% in 2020, respectively, P < .001). Drug allergy testing completed after internal referral remained low but comparable (51% in 2019 vs 52% in 2020). Transitioning nonprocedural visits to video allowed allergen immunotherapy and biologic injection visits to resume at a volume similar to pre-COVID. No COVID-19 infections resulted from in-clinic exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Although transitioning to TM-based care allowed continued A/I care delivery, strategies are needed to achieve higher testing completion rates and ensure video visits do not exacerbate existing health disparities.