RESUMEN
Anaphylaxis affects up to 5% of people during their lifetime. Although anaphylaxis usually resolves without long-term physical consequences, it can result in anxiety and quality of life impairment. Rarely and unpredictably, community anaphylaxis can cause rapid physiological decompensation and death. Adrenaline (epinephrine) is the cornerstone of anaphylaxis treatment, and provision of adrenaline autoinjectors (AAI) has become a standard of care for people at risk of anaphylaxis in the community. In this article, we explore the effectiveness of AAIs for preventing fatal outcomes in anaphylaxis, using information drawn from animal and human in vivo studies and epidemiology. We find that data support the effectiveness of intravenous adrenaline infusions for reversing physiological features of anaphylaxis, typically at doses from 0.05 to 0.5 µg/kg/min for 1-2 h, or ~ 10 µg/kg total dose. Intramuscular injection of doses approximating 10 µg/kg in humans can result in similar peak plasma adrenaline levels to intravenous infusions, at 100-500 pg/mL. However, these levels are typically short-lived following intramuscular adrenaline, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic outcomes can be unpredictable. Epidemiological data do not support an association between increasing AAI prescriptions and reduced fatal anaphylaxis, although carriage and activation rates remain low. Taken together, these data suggest that current AAIs have little impact on rates of fatal anaphylaxis, perhaps due to a lack of sustained and sufficient plasma adrenaline concentration. Effects of AAI prescription on quality of life may be variable. There is a need to consider alternatives, which can safely deliver a sustained adrenaline infusion via an appropriate route.
RESUMEN
Case description: Patient (29 years old) with palmo-plantar erythema, goes to the community pharmacy (FC) requesting a cream to treat atopy. Evaluation: The patient accessed the Pharmaceutical Indication Service (SPIF), showing that the manifestations appeared 24 hours after the start of dental treatment with amoxicillin 1g/12h and ibuprofen 600 mg/8h without any concomitant medication. Intervention: After explaining the possible relationship of the symptoms with their medication, patient was derived to the doctor with the referral report completed by SEFAC-eXPERT. Results: The patient went to the emergency where she was treated with intravenous corticosteroid and a prescription for cetirizine 10 mg. The dentist changed the beta-lactam to a macrolide (azithromycin) and the ibuprofen to paracetamol. From the FC, the evolution of the symptoms was monitored, which took 72 hours to disappear. Allergy tests suggested avoiding beta-lactams, cephalosporins, and arylpropionics without being conclusive. Months later, the patient suffered similar symptoms after inhaling a disinfectant spray and the allergy diagnosis was confirmed. Conclusions: The FC identified and immediately referred using SPIF a case of hypersensitivity in a patient susceptible to RNM and the SPIF helps to record the intervention and follow-up, increasing patient safety.
Asunto(s)
Amoxicilina , Ibuprofeno , Humanos , Ibuprofeno/efectos adversos , Ibuprofeno/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Adulto , Amoxicilina/efectos adversos , Amoxicilina/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/administración & dosificación , Servicios Comunitarios de Farmacia , Eritema/inducido químicamente , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiologíaRESUMEN
Background: The clinical consequences of an antibiotic allergy label are detrimental, impacting health care delivery and patient outcomes. We assessed hospital inpatients with intent to offer free antibiotic allergy labeling (AAL) assessment within a randomized controlled trial. Objective: We sought to determine the feasibility of establishing an adult antibiotic allergy delabeling service in a Western Australian tertiary public hospital. Methods: Inpatients (N = 1503) with AAL were identified through medical records and screened for eligibility to participate in a randomized controlled trial. Those recruited were randomized to undergo assessment by skin testing ± oral challenge, or direct oral challenge. A control group received usual care. Results: Of the 1503 inpatients with an AAL, 429 (28.5%) were eligible for AAL assessment. The primary excluding factor (1074 [71.5%]) was contraindicated medication use (387 [36.0%]), followed by cognitive impairment (298 [27.9%]). Thirty-nine patients were randomized, of which 20 received allergy testing and 19 usual care; all patients were followed up for 5 years. Older patients were less likely to be eligible (10-year increase: odds ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.88; P < .0001), whereas surgical patients were more likely to be eligible than medical patients (odds ratio, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.97-3.16; P < .0001). Conclusions: Antibiotic allergy delabeling in the acute care context is not straightforward. Competing clinical concerns and patient acceptance are some barriers to an inpatient service. Nor is it apparent that inpatient versus outpatient testing is cost saving although select patient groups may benefit. Testing younger people and those with predicted high antibiotic usage will derive maximal individual and health system benefits.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Patients with immediate type allergic reactions to penicillins are at risk of anaphylaxis on reexposure. Diagnostic gold standard is drug provocation test (DPT) if allergy is not diagnosed by other means, such as skin testing or in vitro testing with measurement of specific IgE. Specific IgE testing carries low risk for the patient and blood sampling can be performed in primary care, but it is reported to have low sensitivity. The aim of this study was to evaluate if clinical characteristics of patients with suspected allergic reactions to penicillin and elevated specific IgE to penicillins, differed from patients without specific IgE, to identify predictors for elevated specific IgE to penicillins. METHODS: Levels of specific IgE to five penicillins (penicillin G, penicillin V, amoxicillin, ampicillin, and penicillin minor determinants) were available for 9,100 patients. Using multiple logistic regression, clinical data from 430 patients in this group who had elevated specific IgE to one or more penicillins were compared to data from 4,094 patients without specific IgE to penicillins, who had undergone DPT with a penicillin. RESULTS: In total 5.2% of patients had elevated specific IgE to one or more penicillins. Significantly more patients with elevated specific IgE had a history of immediate type reactions (<2 h) (OR = 4.34, p < 0.001); circulatory symptoms (OR = 1.63, p = 0.03) or angioedema (OR = 1.46, p = 0.005). Also, significantly more patients with elevated specific IgE had been treated with adrenaline (OR = 2.21, p = 0.005), steroids (OR = 1.76, p < 0.001), or antihistamines (OR = 1.83, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A history of an immediate type reaction requiring treatment, combined with elevated specific IgE to one or more penicillins is suggestive of an IgE mediated penicillin allergy and further allergy investigations may not be needed. Specific IgE to penicillins may be used early in allergy investigation of patients with severe immediate type reactions to penicillins.
RESUMEN
Administering medications to patients with documented drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) poses a significant risk for adverse events, ranging from mild reactions to life-threatening incidents. Electronic healthcare systems have revolutionized the modern clinical decision-making process, with built in warnings. However, as these alerts become a routine part of healthcare provider's workflow, alert fatigue becomes a challenge. This study was conducted within the Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs (MNGHA), a government healthcare system in Saudi Arabia. A taskforce of experts was formed to develop an electronic path that would prevent unintentional overrides of severe drug allergy alerts. The system underwent rigorous testing, and monitoring parameters were established. We outline the implementation of a system upgrade designed to trigger an alternative interruption in the computerized physician order entry (CPOE) process, distinct from the regular allergy pop-up alerts. The alternate path is activated upon a CPOE with a drug-to-drug match and a documented severe drug allergy symptom, necessitating co-signature form another prescriber before proceeding. The adopted upgrade is a proactive approach to enhance medication safety in electronic healthcare systems, ensuring that serious allergy-related warnings are not overridden, ultimately enhancing patient safety. Further monitoring will confirm the safety and effectiveness of this measure. This study provides a model for institutions seeking to prevent allergy-related harm within their patient population.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas , Sistemas de Entrada de Órdenes Médicas/organización & administración , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/prevención & control , Humanos , Arabia Saudita , Errores de Medicación/prevención & control , Sistemas de Apoyo a Decisiones Clínicas/organización & administración , Fatiga de Alerta del Personal de Salud/prevención & controlRESUMEN
In vitro diagnostics for drug hypersensitivity reactions distinguish between serological and cellular-based tests. A serological test used for the diagnosis of immediate type reactions is the detection of specific IgE antibodies. The cellular tests include the basophil activation test for immediate type reactions and the lymphocyte transformation test, which is mainly used to detect delayed type hypersensitivity reactions. Further cellular-based tests are the CAST-ELISA and the mast cell activation test. None of the above-mentioned tests can definitively exclude an allergy if the result is negative. In addition, it is important to note that even a positive test result is not necessarily associated with an allergy but has to be interpreted in the clinical context.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Regorafenib is an oral protein kinase inhinitor approved fot the treatment of metastatic colorecral cancer. We present a first successful case of desensitization in regorafenib-related fix-drug eruption in the literature. CASE REPORT: A 44-year-old female patient was diagnosed with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. The patient received regorafenib treatment for malignancy recurrence. The patient was admitted to adult allergy clinic with developing recurrent fix drug eruption in the second cycle, on the 10th day of regorafenib treatment. The patient was given the third cycle of regorafenib treatment with a 6-day desensitization protocol, the first day of which consisted of 6 steps and and the third cycle was successfully completed. MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME: Regorafenib-mediated delayed hypersensitivity reactions occur less frequently and and regorafenib hypersensitivity reactions are difficult to manage and experience is limited. This is the first successful desensitization protocol developed by us for regorafenib-related fix drug eruption and more cases are needed to be reported to confirm the desensitization protocol. DISCUSSION: There is only one successful regorafenib desensitization protocol for severe delayed hypersensivity reaction in the literature, but there is no protocol developed for mild type delayed hypersensivity reaction. The management of fix-drug eruption primarily involves discontinuation and avoidance of the offending drug but our patient had a mild delayed-type reaction and there was no alternative to regarofenib treatment. We developed the rapid 6-step desensitization protocol (Day 1). According to this protocol, the patient was able to continue regorafenib treatment successfully.
RESUMEN
Epithelioid inflammatory myofibroblastic sarcoma (EIMS) is an extremely rare and aggressive form of inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor. Clinically, it has a high risk of relapse and peripheral organ infiltration, and it responds poorly to conventional chemotherapy. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors are currently the most effective targeted therapy for EIMS. This report discusses a typical case of abdominal EIMS in a 43-year-old woman. The tumors recurred rapidly within one month after surgery. Alectinib was promptly administered upon diagnosis. However, the patient developed a severe allergic reaction to the medication. After a comprehensive assessment and symptomatic treatment, her condition stabilized, leading to a favorable prognosis. This study summarizes cases of abdominal EIMS, highlights the successful use of Alectinib for treatment, and discusses the management of medication-related complications.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a severe systemic hypersensitivity reaction that usually has a rapid onset and can be fatal. Presentations of childhood anaphylaxis vary widely in accordance with the triggers and the patient's age, geographical region and dietary and lifestyle habits. METHODS: The medical records of 177 paediatric patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis between January 2021 and January 2024, whose disease progression was monitored at a single tertiary care centre, were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: The study included 177 patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis (107 males and 70 females with a median age of 48 months). The most common allergen responsible was food (53.7%). Egg allergy was the most common source of anaphylaxis, afflicting 35 patients (19.3%), while beta-lactam provoked the most common drug allergy, affecting 24 patients (13.6%). The most common organ involved was the skin (92.7%). When the patients were analysed by age group, there were more males in the infancy, preschool and school age groups, while there were more females in the adolescent group (p = 0.44). Food-induced anaphylaxis became less common with increasing age, whereas the rate of drug-induced anaphylaxis increased (p = 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). Cardiovascular system findings were observed more frequently in adolescents compared to other age groups (p = 0.003). Most cases stemming from a food allergy were mild, whereas most drug-induced cases were moderate or severe (p < 0.05). When severity was analysed by age group, mild cases in infants were more common than moderate to severe cases. CONCLUSION: The aetiological and clinical manifestations of childhood anaphylaxis vary among different age groups.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos , Humanos , Anafilaxia/epidemiología , Anafilaxia/etiología , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Femenino , Masculino , Preescolar , Niño , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adolescente , Lactante , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a los Alimentos/complicaciones , Factores de Edad , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Alérgenos/inmunología , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/complicaciones , Hipersensibilidad al Huevo/diagnósticoRESUMEN
Severe cutaneous adverse reactions to drugs (SCARs) are rare but life-threatening delayed allergies. While they primarily affect the skin, they can also affect internal organs. Accordingly, they present with diverse clinical symptoms that vary not only between SCARs subtypes but also among patients. Despite the availability of topical and systemic treatments, these only address the symptoms and not the cause. To develop more effective therapies, it is necessary to elucidate the complexity of the pathophysiology of SCARs in relation to their severity. In line with the new type IV hypersensitivity reactions nomenclature proposed by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), this review highlights the current insights into the intricate immune mechanisms engaged, the interplay between the culprit drug and genetic predisposition in drug presentation mechanisms, but also how external factors, such as viruses, are implicated in SCARs. Their relevance to the development of targeted medicine is also discussed.
RESUMEN
Febrile neutropenia is a common complication of conditioning chemotherapy for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), but a major barrier for optimal treatment of febrile neutropenia is historical penicillin allergies. Our group recently published a development of a clinical pipeline for delabeling penicillin allergies in adult patients planned to undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). In this retrospective cohort study, we followed patients to evaluate their outcomes during inpatient admission for HSCT. We hypothesized that, among patients planned for HSCT with a self-reported penicillin allergy, completing penicillin allergy testing (amoxicillin ingestion challenge with or without concomitant penicillin skin testing) prior to HSCT admission would be associated with differences in inpatient treatment for febrile neutropenia (including antibiotic selection and timing of antibiotic administration) and improved inpatient resource utilization (including nursing and inpatient physician consults). We identified patients with a self-reported penicillin allergy who answered a penicillin allergy questionnaire and were subsequently admitted to our institution for HSCT. We divided the cohort into 2 groups: patients whose penicillin allergy was evaluated prior to admission (EPTA) and patients whose penicillin allergy was not evaluated prior to admission (NEPTA). We then performed comparison between the 2 groups for general clinical outcomes of HSCT admission (duration of admission, need for ICU transfer, readmission rate, etc.), febrile neutropenia treatment, and inpatient resource utilization. Statistics were calculated using the nonparametric 2-tailed Fisher exact test for categorical outcomes and the nonparametric 2-tailed Mann-Whitney U test for numerical outcomes. Within our cohort, 35 patients completed penicillin allergy testing prior to HSCT admission (EPTA) and 44 patients did not (NEPTA). Demographics were similar between these groups, and there was no significant difference in the rate of febrile neutropenia during HSCT admission (EPTA 64% versus NEPTA 66%, Pâ¯=â¯1.00). EPTA patients were significantly more likely to receive standard first-line antibiotics (cefepime or ceftazidime) for febrile neutropenia (EPTA 95% versus NEPTA 65%, Pâ¯=â¯.015) and time between febrile neutropenia onset and antibiotic administration was shorter (EPTA mean 66 mins versus NEPTA mean 121 mins, Pâ¯=â¯.0058). No patients in the EPTA group experienced an immediate hypersensitivity reaction (hives, anaphylaxis, etc.) or severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR) during HSCT admission. EPTA patients were also significantly less likely to require 1:1 nursing for antibiotic test doses, challenges, and desensitizations (EPTA 0% versus NEPTA 49%, P < .0001); less likely to require inpatient allergy consult (EPTA 0% versus NEPTA 12%, Pâ¯=â¯.031); and less likely to require inpatient antimicrobial stewardship consult (EPTA 0% versus NEPTA 13%, Pâ¯=â¯.013) during their HSCT admission. In summary, patients who completed penicillin allergy testing prior to HSCT admission were more likely to receive first-line antibiotics and received antibiotics more rapidly for treatment of febrile neutropenia. Furthermore, patients who completed penicillin allergy testing prior to HSCT admission were less likely to require 1:1 nursing, inpatient allergy consults, and inpatient antimicrobial stewardship consults during HSCT admission.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Beta-lactam antibiotics (BLAs) commonly cause hypersensitivity reactions in children. These reactions are categorized into immediate reactions, which include urticaria, angioedema, bronchospasm, and anaphylaxis, and non-immediate reactions, such as maculopapular rashes and delayed-onset urticaria/angioedema. Rashes in children, often caused by infections, may be misdiagnosed as BLA allergy. However, over 90% tolerate the medication following an allergic evaluation. METHODS: We aimed to evaluate patients with negative single-day drug provocation test (sdDPT) results for subsequent reactions and to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of sdDPT for immediate (less than 1 h) and non-immediate (more than 1 h) suspected BLA allergy. In addition, non-immediate reactions were assessed by classifying them as occurring within 1-6 h or after 6 h. Patients who underwent sdDPT for suspected BLA allergy and tested negative between 2019 and 2023 were included in the study. They were questioned via telephone interviews about their reuse of the tested drug. RESULTS: 404 patients who underwent sdDPT for suspected BLA allergy were evaluated. The NPV of BLA sdDPT was determined to be 97.3%. When patients were categorized based on the time interval between the last dose and the reaction, the NPV was 97% for those experiencing a reaction within the first hour of drug use and 96.7% for reactions occurring after more than 1 h. Non-immediate reactions were further evaluated, revealing an NPV of 98.7% for reactions occurring between 1 and 6 h, and 92.5% for reactions occurring after 6 h. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that sdDPT has a high NPV for both immediate and non-immediate reactions. However, the NPV of sdDPT was lower for reactions occurring more than 6 h after the last dose.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: When deferasirox is used in iron chelation therapy, maculopapular rash occurs in 10% of patients, but there is no accepted and implemented protocol for the management of these drug reactions in adults. CASE REPORT: A 23-year-old woman diagnosed with thalassemia major is presented. She had taken 1,500 mg oral deferasirox for 1 week. Five hours after the last dose, a pruritic maculopapular rash developed on the body, face, and hands. The rash spread to the whole body within 3 days. The absolute necessity for the patient to take the drug was clarified by the hematology department. The patient's history was evaluated. A delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction due to deferasirox was considered. MANAGEMENT: The slow desensitization protocol described in the literature and applied on a case-by-case basis in pediatric patients was modified to shorten the duration by determining appropriate doses for the current preparation. The desensitization process was started with 1/100,000 of the total dose and the therapeutic dose was reached with a 2- to 2.5-fold increase in dose. No pre-medication was applied. During the procedure, at a low dose of 0.1 mg, local flushing and erythema was observed around the auricle on the face. The reaction did not progress. CONCLUSION: Slow desensitization protocol for oral deferasirox was successfully applied in an adult patient.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The consequences of drug allergy remain a global health concern. Drug allergy is often a neglected topic and many non-specialists lack sufficient knowledge or confidence in evaluating or managing this common condition. Evidence-based interventions to better equip non-specialists to tackle drug allergy are needed. The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intensive educational course on drug allergy knowledge and practice of non-specialists. METHODS: A randomized crossover trial (NCT06399601) was conducted among practicing physicians and nurses participating in an intensive drug allergy course-Advances in Drug Allergy & Penicillin Testing (ADAPT). Participants' baseline knowledge and self-reported practices were assessed with standardized questionnaires (scored from 0 to 100, with "satisfactory" defined as ≥60/100). Participants were randomized into two cohorts and attended ADAPT at different time points. Serial responses before and after the course were compared within and between cohorts. RESULTS: Seventy participants (25 physicians, 45 nurses) randomized into two groups completed the course. Baseline drug allergy knowledge (58.0 ± 19.9) and self-reported practice (36.9 ± 24.3) were unsatisfactory among non-specialists, with significantly lower scores from nurses than physicians in both domains (knowledge: 49.0 ± 17.4 vs. 74.0 ± 12.7; practice: 32.1 ± 21.3 vs. 53.3 ± 23.1; all p < 0.001). Following completion of ADAPT, participants demonstrated significant improvements in knowledge (58.0 ± 19.9 vs. 77.7 ± 15.9, p < 0.001) and self-reported practice (36.9 ± 24.3 vs. 71.0 ± 20.2, p < 0.001). All participants (100%) and 99% of participants agreed that the course improved their clinical knowledge and practice, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ADAPT, an intensive drug allergy educational course was effective in improving drug allergy knowledge and practice for non-specialists. Further longitudinal studies are required to evaluate long-term impact.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergy is the most frequently reported drug allergy, yet most patients can tolerate the drug if challenged. Despite this discrepancy, large scale penicillin allergy de-labeling interventions have not been widely implemented in many health care systems. The application of a multi-method implementation science approach can provide key tools to study this evidence to practice gap and provide insight to successfully operationalize penicillin allergy evaluation in real-world clinical settings. METHODS: We followed a four-step process that leverages qualitative analysis to design evidence-based, actionable strategies to develop an intervention. First, we specified the clinician-perceived barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling (intervention targets). We then mapped intervention targets onto Theoretical Domains Framework (domains and constructs) and found the root causes of behavior. Next, we linked root causes of behavior with intervention functions (BCW). In the final step, we synthesized participants' suggestions for process improvement with implementation strategies aligning with the intervention functions. RESULTS: Evidence-based strategies such as focused education and training in penicillin allergy evaluation can address knowledge and confidence barriers reported by frontline clinicians. Other key strategies involve developing a system of champions, improving communications systems, and restructuring the healthcare team. Implementation mapping can provide a powerful multi-method framework to study, design, and customize intervention strategies. CONCLUSION: Empowering clinicians beyond allergy specialists to conduct penicillin allergy assessments requires designing new workflows and systems and providing additional knowledge to those clinicians.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Ciencia de la Implementación , Penicilinas , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Investigación Cualitativa , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Objectives: This report presents a case of pseudoephedrine-induced nonpigmented bullous fixed drug eruption (NBFDE) manifesting as recurrent palmoplantar exfoliation in a scuba diver. It emphasizes the importance of considering drug allergies in the differential diagnosis when divers present with peeling hands and soles. Methods: A 38-year-old female scuba diver experiencing recurrent palmoplantar exfoliation underwent a clinical evaluation, patch testing, an interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assay, and graded drug challenges with pseudoephedrine and phenylephrine. Results: Patch testing yielded negative results; however, the ELISpot assay indicated a strong immune response to pseudoephedrine. A graded challenge involving pseudoephedrine successfully reproduced the symptoms, confirming a diagnosis of pseudoephedrine-induced NBFDE. Subsequently, a challenge with phenylephrine elicited a milder reaction, suggesting it as a potential alternative medication for the patient. Conclusions: This case highlights NBFDE as a potential cause of skin peeling in scuba divers who are allergic to pseudoephedrine. It emphasizes the importance of considering drug allergies when diagnosing palmoplantar exfoliation in divers and underscores the need for a thorough evaluation of medication use in this group. Alternative medications and management strategies should be considered for divers with a pseudoephedrine allergy to prevent ear barotrauma while minimizing the risk of adverse skin reactions.
RESUMEN
In vitro cell activation through specific IgE bound to high-affinity receptors on the basophil surface is a widely used strategy for the evaluation of IgE-mediated immediate hypersensitivity reactions to betalactams. Cellular activation requires drug conjugation to a protein to form a large enough structure displaying a certain distance between haptens to allow the cross-linking of two IgE antibodies bound to the basophil's surface, triggering their degranulation. However, no information about the size and composition of these conjugates is available. Routine in vitro diagnosis using the basophil activation test uses free amoxicillin, which is assumed to conjugate to a carrier present in blood. To standardize the methodology, we propose the use of well-controlled and defined nanomaterials functionalized with amoxicilloyl. Silica nanoparticles decorated with PAMAM-dendrimer-amoxicilloyl conjugates (NpDeAXO) of different sizes and amoxicilloyl densities (50-300 µmol amoxicilloyl/gram nanoparticle) have been prepared and chemically characterized. Two methods of synthesis were performed to ensure reproducibility and stability. Their functional effect on basophils was measured using an in-house basophil activation test (BAT) that determines CD63+ or CD203chigh activation markers. It was observed that NpDeAXO nanocomposites are not only able to specifically activate basophils but also do so in a more effective way than free amoxicillin, pointing to a translational potential diagnosis.