RESUMEN
Inpatient direct oral challenge programs are increasingly deployed as part of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the burden and impacts of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic prescribing. Using data from a prospective, multicenter cohort inpatient penicillin allergy program, we identify the key targets for delabeling to aid health service implementation.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Estudios Prospectivos , Pacientes Internos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to the most rapid response and scale-up in vaccine and therapeutic development in history. We highlight the history of these amazing achievements with a focus on the description of the classification and mechanisms of allergic reactions and adverse events relevant to the allergist and immunologist that have been associated with the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Finally, we offer a detailed management approach in the context of a possible allergic reaction. DATA SOURCES: Using defined search strategy, we identified peer-reviewed articles within PubMed that were published between January 1, 2019, and December 4, 2021. STUDY SELECTIONS: All recent articles on COVID-19 published in English were reviewed with focus on the immunogenicity and allergenicity of the current existing COVID-19 vaccines. RESULTS: Following a detailed literature review, we discuss the evolution and development of the new vaccines for SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, we provide evidence regarding the significance and mechanisms of allergic reactions associated with the vaccines and offer a management approach for those with an increased risk of presenting an allergic or other relevant vaccine reaction. CONCLUSION: The international rollout of COVID-19 vaccination started with reports of immediate allergic reactions. Although we still need to understand the mechanisms of these reactions, we can be reassured that patients with underlying allergic disease will not need to avoid SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. In addition, the vast majority of those with a first-dose reaction will tolerate subsequent doses.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Hipersensibilidad , Vacunas , Alérgenos , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines have been associated with allergic reactions. A history of anaphylaxis has been suggested as a risk factor for such reactions. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) has been proposed as a possible culprit allergen. OBJECTIVE: To investigate possible PEG or polysorbate allergy among patients reporting prior reactions to COVID-19 vaccines or PEG and to report their subsequent tolerance of COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: From January 1, 2021, to October 31, 2021, adult patients referred to the McGill University Health Centre allergy clinics who were considered at risk of anaphylaxis were prospectively recruited. The entry criteria were any documented history of reaction to a COVID-19 vaccine or reported allergy to PEG or polysorbate. Evaluated patients underwent skin prick testing (SPT) with PEG and polysorbate. After SPT, placebo-controlled vaccine challenges were carried out. RESULTS: Of the 44 patients recruited, 40 (90.1%) had reacted to the first vaccine dose, with 18 (45%) of them had anaphylactic reaction. All patients underwent SPT and 5 (11.3%) had a positive test result. A total of 39 patients (88.6%) underwent COVID-19 vaccine challenge at the allergy clinic. Most tolerated the vaccine, with 18 (40.1%) received a single full dose, 20 (45.4%) 2 split doses, and 6 (13.6%) a graded dosing protocol. Of the 40 patients who reacted to the first dose, 2 had immediate nonsevere allergic reactions to the second dose. CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and increased risk of allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines, after allergist evaluation, including negative PEG skin testing result, the vaccine was safely administered without any serious adverse events.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Adulto , Anafilaxia/inducido químicamente , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Humanos , UniversidadesRESUMEN
Severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions include Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis and acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis. These eruptions are a type of delayed hypersensitivity reaction and can be life-threatening. The assessment of a severe cutaneous drug reaction requires a detailed clinical history and examination to identify the culprit drug and evaluate the allergy. Allopurinol, antibiotics and anticonvulsants are often implicated. Patch testing and delayed intradermal testing can assist in determining if the reaction was allergic, however there is limited evidence about the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing in severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions. If the testing is non-conclusive or negative, it is recommended to avoid the suspected culprit drug and any structurally similar drug in future. Any decision to reintroduce a drug should be made after considering the harm-benefit ratio. Caution is also needed if considering a possibly cross-reactive drug in a patient with a history of severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this article is to provide an updated understanding and evidence-based approach where possible for antifungal hypersensitivity. This includes recognition of clinical phenotype, implications for cross-reactivity and diagnostic, and management strategy for immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions. RECENT FINDINGS: Antifungal hypersensitivity reactions can be classified according to their latency (immediate or delayed) and clinical phenotype. The majority of the cases described in the literature are delayed T-cell mediated reactions of various severities but immediate reactions consistent with non-Immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated mast cell activation and IgE-mediated reactions have also been described. Ancillary information such as skin testing, drug challenge and ex vivo experimental approaches can aid causality assessments and inform antifungal class cross-reactivity, which help optimize antifungal prescribing and stewardship. SUMMARY: This review will update the clinician on mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity as well as providing a structured approach to the recognition, diagnosis and management of antifungal hypersensitivity reaction.
Asunto(s)
Antifúngicos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Antifúngicos/efectos adversos , Reacciones Cruzadas , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Humanos , Inmunoglobulina E , Pruebas CutáneasRESUMEN
The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 presents with a spectrum of clinical manifestations from asymptomatic or mild, self-limited constitutional symptoms to a hyperinflammatory state ("cytokine storm") followed by acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. The objective of this study was to provide an evidence-based review of the associated pathways and potential treatment of the hyperinflammatory state associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Dysregulated immune responses have been reported to occur in a smaller subset of those infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, leading to clinical deterioration 7 to 10 days after initial presentation. A hyperinflammatory state referred to as cytokine storm in its severest form has been marked by elevation of IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, and other cytokines and severe CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell lymphopenia and coagulopathy. Recognition of at-risk patients could permit early institution of aggressive intensive care and antiviral and immune treatment to reduce the complications related to this proinflammatory state. Several reports and ongoing clinical trials provide hope that available immunomodulatory therapies could have therapeutic potential in these severe cases. This review highlights our current state of knowledge of immune mechanisms and targeted immunomodulatory treatment options for the current coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por Coronavirus/inmunología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/virología , Inmunomodulación , Interleucina-6/inmunología , Neumonía Viral/inmunología , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/inmunología , Humanos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Sepsis/inmunologíaAsunto(s)
COVID-19/inmunología , Síndrome de Liberación de Citoquinas/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/fisiología , Enfermedad Aguda , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Interleucina-1/sangre , Interleucina-6/sangre , Masculino , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Monitoreo Fisiológico , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa/sangreAsunto(s)
Combinación Amoxicilina-Clavulanato de Potasio , Hipersensibilidad Tardía , Amoxicilina/efectos adversos , Combinación Amoxicilina-Clavulanato de Potasio/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad Tardía/inducido químicamente , Hipersensibilidad Tardía/diagnósticoRESUMEN
Cutaneous adverse drug reactions collectively are delayed drug reactions such as morbilliform drug eruption and severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs). Morbilliform drug eruption may wane over time, be the result of drug viral interactions, and be amenable to slow reintroduction or rechallenge, whereas SCARs are HLA class I restricted, T-cell-mediated reactions that demonstrate durable immunity and warrant lifelong avoidance. SCARs such as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and generalized bullous fixed drug eruption often occur in the setting of multiple drugs dosed together. Collectively, they lead to significant morbidity, mortality, and drug safety concerns that could severely limit future treatment options. Currently, no single or combination of diagnostic tests for SCARs such as ex vivo or in vitro testing, in vivo (skin) testing, or other adjunctive tests such as HLA typing have 100% negative predictive value. In this "Controversies in Allergy Review" article, we review the current literature on delayed skin testing (patch and delayed prick/intradermal test) and critically assess the evidence base of its utility across different drugs and clinical phenotypes of delayed hypersensitivity reactions.
RESUMEN
Risk stratification in drug allergy implies that specific risk categories (eg, low, moderate, and high) classify historical drug hypersensitivity reactions. These risk categories can be based on reaction phenotypic characteristics, the timing of the reaction and evaluation, the required reaction management, and individual characteristics. Although a multitude of frameworks have been described in the literature, particularly for penicillin allergy labels, there has yet to be a global consensus, and approaches continue to vary between allergy centers. Immune-mediated drug allergies can sometimes be confirmed using skin testing, but a negative drug challenge is required to demonstrate tolerance and remove the allergy from the electronic health record ("delabel" the allergy). Even for quintessential IgE-mediated drug allergy, penicillin allergy, recent data reveal that a direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, is an appropriate diagnostic strategy in those who are considered low-risk. Drug allergy pathogenesis and clinical manifestations may vary depending on the culprit drug, and as such, the optimal approach should be based on risk stratification that considers individual patient and reaction characteristics, the likely hypersensitivity reaction phenotype, the drug class, and the patient's clinical needs. This article will describe low-risk drug allergy labels, focusing on ß-lactam and sulfonamide antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, iodinated contrast media, and common chemotherapeutics. This review will also address practical management approaches using currently available risk stratification and clinical decision tools.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/terapia , Pruebas Cutáneas , Medición de Riesgo , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Penicilinas/inmunología , Inmunoglobulina E , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/inmunologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cephalosporins, ß-lactam antibiotics, commonly cause allergic reactions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical characteristics and management of pediatric patients with suspected cephalosporin allergy using direct graded oral challenges (GOCs). METHODS: Children referred for suspected cephalosporin allergy at 4 Canadian clinics were recruited over 10 years. Data on demographics, clinical reaction characteristics, and management were collected through a questionnaire. Patients underwent a direct GOC (initially 10% of the treatment dose, then 90% after 20 min), and reactions were monitored 1 week postchallenge. Families were contacted annually for up to 5 years to detect subsequent antibiotic reactions. Logistic regression analysis identified factors associated with positive GOC reactions. RESULTS: Among the 136 patients reporting cephalosporin allergy, 75 (55.1%) were males with a median age of 3.9 years (interquartile range 2.3-8.7). Cefprozil represented the most common cephalosporin linked to the index reaction (67.6% of cases). Of the 136 direct GOCs, 5.1% had an immediate and 4.4% a nonimmediate reaction, respectively. Positive GOCs conducted in children with a history of skin-limited nonsevere rashes were classified as mild, benign skin rashes. Positive GOCs were more likely in children with food allergies (adjusted odds ratio 1.14; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.00-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Direct GOCs are safe and effective for diagnosing pediatric cases that report nonvesicular skin-limited symptoms while being treated with cephalosporins.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Masculino , Humanos , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Cefalosporinas/efectos adversos , Pruebas Cutáneas/efectos adversos , Canadá/epidemiología , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Monobactamas , Hipersensibilidad/complicaciones , Penicilinas/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: High-fidelity simulations based on real-life clinical scenarios have frequently been used to improve patient care, knowledge and teamwork in the acute care setting. Still, they are seldom included in the allergy-immunology curriculum or continuous medical education. Our main goal was to assess if critical care simulations in allergy improved performance in the clinical setting. METHODS: Advanced anaphylaxis scenarios were designed by a panel of emergency, intensive care unit, anesthesiology and allergy-immunology specialists and then adapted for the adult allergy clinic setting. This simulation activity included a first part in the high-fidelity simulation-training laboratory and a second at the adult allergy clinic involving actors and a high-fidelity mannequin. Participants filled out a questionnaire, and qualitative interviews were performed with staff after they had managed cases of refractory anaphylaxis. RESULTS: Four nurses, seven allergy-immunology fellows and six allergy/immunologists underwent the simulation. Questionnaires showed a perceived improvement in aspects of crisis and anaphylaxis management. The in-situ simulation revealed gaps in the process, which were subsequently resolved. Qualitative interviews with participants revealed a more rapid and orderly response and improved confidence in their abilities and that of their colleagues to manage anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: High-fidelity simulations can improve the management of anaphylaxis in the allergy clinic and team confidence. This activity was instrumental in reducing staff reluctance to perform high-risk challenges in the ambulatory setting, thus lifting a critical barrier for implementing oral immunotherapy at our adult center.
RESUMEN
Across all settings, women self-report more drug allergies than do men. Although there is epidemiologic evidence of increased drug allergy labeling in postpubertal females, the evidence base for female sex as a risk factor for true immune-mediated drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), particularly in fatal drug-induced anaphylaxis, is low. A focus on the known immunologic mechanisms described in immediate and delayed DHR, layered on known hormonal and genetic sex differences that drive other immune-mediated diseases, could be the key to understanding biological sex variations in DHR. Particular conditions that highlight the impact of drug allergy in women include (1) pregnancy, in which a drug allergy label is associated with increased maternal and fetal complications; (2) multiple drug intolerance syndrome, associated with anxiety and depression; and (3) female-predominant autoimmune medical conditions in the context of mislabeling of the drug allergy or increased underlying risk. In this review, we describe the importance of drug allergy in the female population, mainly focusing on the epidemiology and risk, the mechanisms, and the associated conditions and psychosocial factors. By performing a detailed analysis of the current literature, we provide focused conclusions and identify existing knowledge gaps that should be prioritized for future research.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Embarazo , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Anafilaxia/tratamiento farmacológico , Factores de Riesgo , Autoinforme , Caracteres Sexuales , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , PenicilinasRESUMEN
Importance: Fewer than 5% of patients labeled with a penicillin allergy are truly allergic. The standard of care to remove the penicillin allergy label in adults is specialized testing involving prick and intradermal skin testing followed by an oral challenge with penicillin. Skin testing is resource intensive, limits practice to specialist-trained physicians, and restricts the global population who could undergo penicillin allergy delabeling. Objective: To determine whether a direct oral penicillin challenge is noninferior to the standard of care of penicillin skin testing followed by an oral challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-arm, noninferiority, open-label, multicenter, international randomized clinical trial occurred in 6 specialized centers, 3 in North America (US and Canada) and 3 in Australia, from June 18, 2021, to December 2, 2022. Eligible adults had a PEN-FAST score lower than 3. PEN-FAST is a prospectively derived and internationally validated clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment for adults reporting penicillin allergies. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to either direct oral challenge with penicillin (intervention arm) or a standard-of-care arm of penicillin skin testing followed by oral challenge with penicillin (control arm). Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was a physician-verified positive immune-mediated oral penicillin challenge within 1 hour postintervention in the intention-to-treat population. Noninferiority was achieved if a 1-sided 95% CI of the risk difference (RD) did not exceed 5 percentage points (pp). Results: A total of 382 adults were randomized, with 377 patients (median [IQR] age, 51 [35-65] years; 247 [65.5%] female) included in the analysis: 187 in the intervention group and 190 in the control group. Most patients had a PEN-FAST score of 0 or 1. The primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (0.5%) in the control group, with an RD of 0.0084 pp (90% CI, -1.22 to 1.24 pp). The 1-sided 95% CI was below the noninferiority margin of 5 pp. In the 5 days following the oral penicillin challenge, 9 immune-mediated adverse events were recorded in the intervention group and 10 in the control group (RD, -0.45 pp; 95% CI, -4.87 to 3.96 pp). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, direct oral penicillin challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy was noninferior compared with standard-of-care skin testing followed by oral challenge. In patients with a low-risk history, direct oral penicillin challenge is a safe procedure to facilitate the removal of a penicillin allergy label. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04454229.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Hipersensibilidad , Adulto , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Reglas de Decisión Clínica , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Medición de Riesgo , Antibacterianos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Delayed drug T-cell immune-mediated hypersensitivity reactions have a large clinical heterogeneity varying from mild maculopapular exanthema (MPE) to severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) such as acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and severe skin necrosis and blistering as seen in Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Given the knowledge gaps related to the immunopathogenesis of these conditions, the absence of validated diagnostic tools and the significant associated morbidity and mortality, patients with SCARs often have limited drug choices. We performed a comprehensive review aiming to evaluate in vivo diagnostic tools such as delayed intradermal skin and patch testing and ex vivo/in vitro research assays such as the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) and the enzyme-linked ImmunoSpot (ELISpot) assay. We searched through PubMed using the terms "drug allergy," "in vivo" and "ex vivo" for original papers in the last 10 years. A detailed meticulous approach adapted to the various clinical phenotypes is recommended for the diagnostic and management of delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. This review highlights the current diagnostic tools for the delayed drug hypersensitivity phenotypes.
RESUMEN
Drug allergies are reported in approximately 10% of children and carry significant health and economic impacts. However, only a minority of these reported drug allergies are established on diagnostic workup. Classically, drug allergies were diagnosed by skin prick and/or intradermal tests. However, recent data reveal that a direct ingestion challenge is often an appropriate diagnostic strategy in cases of reported nonsevere reactions to penicillin derivatives in children. This article will review the prevalence, diagnosis, and management of the main culprits of pediatric drug allergies: antibiotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). We will also review severe cutaneous adverse reactions to drugs in children.
Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/efectos adversos , Niño , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/epidemiología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/terapia , Humanos , Penicilinas/efectos adversos , Pruebas CutáneasRESUMEN
Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy may prevent patients from receiving the most effective therapy. This review was undertaken to identify evidence-based preventive premedication strategies that reduce the likelihood of HSR in the first instance and improve the safety of subsequent infusions in patients who have demonstrated HSR to a certain class of chemotherapy. PubMed was searched until October 2021 using the key words: "hypersensitivity to chemotherapeutic drugs," "hypersensitivity to antineoplastic agents," "taxanes hypersensitivity," "platinum compound hypersensitivity," "premedication," "dexamethasone," "prednisone," "hydrocortisone," "antihistamine," "diphenhydramine," "cetirizine," "famotidine," "meperidine," "aspirin," "ibuprofen," and "montelukast." The search was restricted to articles published in English. A total of 73 abstracts were selected for inclusion in the review. Most premedication regimens have been derived empirically rather than determined through randomized trials. Based on the available evidence, we provide an update on likely HSR mechanisms and a practical guide for classifying systemic HSR. The evidence indicates that a combination of prevention strategies using newer antihistamines, H2 antagonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids and other interventions used judiciously reduces the occurrence and severity of HSR and improves safety.