Prospective Assessment of Penicillin Allergy (PAPA): Evaluating the performance of penicillin allergy testing and post-delabelling outcomes among Hong Kong Chinese.

BACKGROUND: Incorrect penicillin 'allergy' labels predispose patients to adverse outcomes but are under-recognised in many Asian countries. Studies on performance and post-delabelling outcomes of penicillin allergy evaluation among Chinese remain scarce. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of allergy testing and post-delabelling outcomes among Chinese patients in a prospective penicillin allergy cohort - Prospective Assessment of Penicillin Allergy (PAPA). METHODS: All adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who underwent penicillin allergy evaluation between January 2020 to December 2021 were recruited and prospectively reviewed by both medical records and individual interviews at least 6 months after delabelling or allergy confirmation. RESULTS: Out of 372 patients who completed penicillin allergy evaluation, 335 (90%) patients were delabelled. The overall negative predictive value of penicillin skin testing was 95%, but lower for patients with non-immediate type reactions (88%). History of non-immediate symptom onset (OR = 4.501 [95%CI = 2.085-9.716], p < 0.001) and duration since index reaction (OR = 0.942 [95%CI = 0.899-0.987], p = 0.012) were associated with positive skin testing. After at least 6 months, 60 (18%) of de-labelled patients had received penicillins again without any adverse reactions. Fluoroquinolone-use was significantly lower among delabelled patients compared to those with penicillin allergy (38[11%] vs 11[30%], p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: After at least 6 months, one in six delabelled patients already received penicillins again safely, with significantly lower fluoroquinolone usage. None experienced adverse reactions. History of non-immediate onset and shorter duration since index reaction were associated with genuine allergy. In patients with severe non-immediate reactions, skin tests should be supplemented with thorough clinical history and adjunct diagnostic evaluations.

The Role of the Allergist in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccine Allergy Safety: A Pilot Study on a "Hub-and-Spoke" Model for Population-Wide Allergy Service.

BACKGROUND: Hong Kong started its coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination program in February 2021. A territory-wide Vaccine Allergy Safety (VAS) clinic was set up to assess individuals deemed at "higher risk" of COVID-19 vaccine-associated allergies. A novel "hub-and-spoke" model was piloted to tackle the overwhelming demand of services by allowing nonallergists to conduct assessment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of the VAS hub-and-spoke model for allergy assessment. METHODS: Records of patients attending the VAS hub-and-spoke Clinics between March and August 2021 were reviewed (n = 2725). We studied the overall results between the Hub (allergist led) and Spoke (nonallergist led) Clinics. The Hub and the Hong Kong West Cluster Spoke Clinic were selected for subgroup analysis as they saw the largest number of patients (n = 1411). RESULTS: A total of 2725 patients were assessed under the VAS hub-and-spoke model. Overall, 2324 patients (85.3%) were recommended to proceed with vaccination. Allergists recommended significantly more patients for vaccination than nonallergists (odds ratio = 21.58; P < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that 881 of 1055 (83.5%) patients received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccination safely after assessment. Among those recommended vaccination, more patients assessed by allergists received their first dose of vaccination (odds ratio = 4.18; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The hub-and-spoke model has proven to be successful for the vaccination campaign. This study has illustrated the crucial role of allergists in countering vaccine hesitancy. Results from the study revealed considerable differences in outcomes between allergist-led and nonallergist-led clinics. Precise reasons for these differences warrant further evaluation. We are hopeful that the hub-and-spoke model can be similarly adapted for other allergist-integrative services in the future.

Sensitisation profile of Chinese allergic rhinitis patients and effectiveness of a joint allergy-ENT clinic.

Purpose: House dust mite (HDM) is the predominant cause of allergic rhinitis (AR) in Hong Kong but remains under-diagnosed and -treated. The association between patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and nasoendoscopy findings for AR have also not been investigated. This study investigated the demographics, sensitisation patterns, quality of life, use of sublingual immunotherapy and the association of PROMs and nasoendoscopy findings in AR patients through the first allergist-otorhinolaryngologists AR joint (ARJ) clinic in Hong Kong. Methods: This single-centred, retrospective observational study was conducted between January 2021 and December 2021. Clinical data from AR patients attending the ARJ clinic were analysed to identify the prevalence of HDM allergens, change in PROMs and the association of PROMs with nasoendoscopy scores. Results: The three most common sensitising HDM allergens were Dermatophagoides pterynosinus (94.4%), Dermatophagoides farinae (88.9%) and Euroglyphus maynei (88.9%). At the 13- to 32-week follow-up (median 28 weeks), patients who attended the ARJ clinic had significant improvement in Total Nasal Symptom Score (TNSS; p = 0.038). The visual analogue scale (VAS) was associated with nasoendoscopy score (p = 0.018). Patients using SLIT (sublingual immunotherapy) showed overall improvements in PROMs. Conclusion: The ARJ clinic significantly improved AR symptoms. SLIT was effective and safe for patients who failed conventional treatments. VAS positively correlated with nasoendoscopy findings. Testing for Dermatophagoides pterynosinus as a single agent during skin testing was sufficient for the diagnosis of HDM AR and should be prioritized when resources are restricted. Further studies should be done to investigate the treatment outcome of AR patients and the effectiveness of SLIT in the Chinese population. Supplementary Information: The online version of this article (10.1007/s40629-022-00218-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Real-World Outcomes of a Nurse-Led, Protocol-Driven Penicillin Allergy Evaluation From the Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative (HK-DADI).

BACKGROUND: There is a high prevalence of unconfirmed penicillin allergy, which is associated with a multitude of adverse clinical outcomes. With the overwhelming burden of currently incorrect labels and the lack of allergy specialist services, new delabeling strategies are urgently needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness, safety, and real-world outcomes of a nurse-led, protocol-driven evaluation of penicillin allergy, the Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative (HK-DADI). METHODS: Adult patients with suspected penicillin allergy were recruited into HK-DADI. Allergy and postdelabeling outcomes were retrospectively compared between patients evaluated via HK-DADI or traditional allergist evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 312 completed penicillin allergy evaluation: 84 (27%) and 228 (73%) via HK-DADI and traditional pathways, respectively. Overall, 280 penicillin allergies were delabeled (90%). The delabeling rate between HK-DADI and traditional pathways was similar (90% vs 89%; P = .796). Among patients of the HK-DADI pathway, the delabeling rate was significantly higher among low-risk (LR) compared with non-LR patients (97% vs 77%; P = .010). Skin tests did not add diagnostic value among LR patients. No patients developed severe or systemic reactions during the evaluation. Upon 6- to 12-month follow-up (median, 10 months), 123 patients experienced infective episodes (44%) and 63 used penicillins again after delabeling (23%). This proportion was significantly higher in patients who were delabeled via HK-DADI compared with the traditional pathway (32% vs 19%; P = .026). CONCLUSIONS: The Hong Kong Drug Allergy Delabelling Initiative, a nurse-led, protocol-driven evaluation, was safe and effective in penicillin allergy delabeling. It led to an even higher rate of future penicillin use after delabeling and mitigated the need for unnecessary skin testing among LR patients.