Clinical management of plant food allergy in patients sensitized to lipid transfer proteins is heterogeneous: identifying the gaps.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients sensitized to lipid transfer protein (LTP) present a wide clinical variability. The lack of practical diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines complicate their management. The aim of the study was to describe the clinical approach of Spanish allergists to this pathology using a survey designed by PICO method and subsequent Delphi approach validation. METHODS: Designed survey was answered by 224 allergists (75% women; 57.1% with >20 years of professional experience). Homogeneity regarding clinical practice on the main points of LTP allergy diagnosis was observed, except for patients with suspected NSAID hypersensitivity (44.6% frequently include LTP skin testing). Oral food challenges were not frequently performed (63.6% occasionally to never), and they were generally (75.5%) used to confirm tolerance. It was common to recommend fruit skins avoidance (77.2%) and maintaining consumption of foods to which patients are sensitised but tolerant (99.1%). RESULTS: There was heterogeneity on other dietary indications, modifications due to co-factors, or traces avoidance. Peach sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) was considered very/quite effective by 55.9% of allergists. The majority (79.5%) consider SLIT indicated in <25% of LTP allergic patients, based on severity (95.2%), frequency of reactions (99.4%), allergy to multiple food families (97.4%), and the quality of life/nutrition impairment (91.5%). There was different practice on SLIT prescription based on co-factor involvement. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that there is a need to increase evidence to reduce the clinical practice heterogeneity in the management of LTP allergy.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Quinolones.

The consumption of quinolones as first-line treatment has increased in recent years, leading to an increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to this antibiotic group. Both diagnosis and management of HSRs to quinolones are complex and controversial. These practical guidelines aim to provide recommendations for effective clinical practice. The recommendations were drafted by an expert panel that reviewed the literature regarding HSRs to quinolones and analyzed controversies in this area. Most HSRs to quinolones are immediate and severe. The risk for HSRs is higher in patients who report allergy to ß-lactams, moxifloxacininduced anaphylaxis, and immediate reactions than in patients who report reactions to quinolones inducing other symptoms. The usefulness of skin tests in diagnosing HSRs to quinolones is controversial, with sensitivity and specificity varying between studies. Most in vitro tests are produced in-house, with no validated commercial options. The basophil activation test has proven useful for diagnosing immediate reactions, albeit with diverse results regarding sensitivity. Drug provocation testing is currently the gold standard for confirming or excluding the diagnosis and for finding safe alternatives, although it is contraindicated in patients with severe reactions. Cross-reactivity between quinolones has proven controversial in several studies, with the lowest cross-reactivity reported for levofloxacin. Desensitization may be considered in allergy to quinolones when no other alternatives are available.

Spanish Guidelines for Diagnosis, Management, Treatment, and Prevention of DRESS Syndrome.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a complex multisystemic severe drug hypersensitivity reaction whose diagnosis and management are troublesome. DRESS syndrome requires management by various specialists. The correct identification of the culprit drug is essential to ensure safe future therapeutic options for the patient. There are no previous Spanish guidelines or consensus statements on DRESS syndrome. Objective: To draft a review and guidelines on the clinical diagnosis, allergy work-up, management, treatment, and prevention of DRESS syndrome in light of currently available scientific evidence and the experience of experts from multiple disciplines. METHODS: These guidelines were drafted by a panel of allergy specialists from the Drug Allergy Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC), together with other medical specialists involved in the management of DRESS syndrome and researchers from the PIELenRed consortium. A review was conducted of scientific papers on DRESS syndrome, and the expert panel evaluated the quality of the evidence of the literature and provided grades of recommendation. Whenever evidence was lacking, a consensus was reached among the experts. RESULTS: The first Spanish guidelines on DRESS syndrome are now being published. Important aspects have been addressed, including practical recommendations about clinical diagnosis, identification of the culprit drug through the Spanish pharmacovigilance system algorithm, and the allergy work-up. Recommendations are provided on management, treatment, and prevention. Algorithms for the management of DRESS in the acute and recovery phases have been drawn up. Expert consensus-based stepwise guidelines for the management and treatment of DRESS syndrome are provided.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Contrast Media.

The objective of these guidelines is to ensure efficient and effective clinical practice. The panel of experts who produced this consensus document developed a research protocol based on a review of the literature. The prevalence of allergic reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) is estimated to be 1:170 000, that is, 0.05%-0.1% of patients undergoing radiologic studies with ICM (more than 75 million examinations per year worldwide). Hypersensitivity reactions can appear within the first hour after administration (immediate reactions) or from more than 1 hour to several days after administration (nonimmediate or delayed reactions). The risk factors for immediate reactions include poorly controlled bronchial asthma, concomitant medication (eg, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, ß-blockers, and proton-pump inhibitors), rapid administration of the ICM, mastocytosis, autoimmune diseases, and viral infections. The most common symptoms of immediate reactions are erythema and urticaria with or without angioedema, which appear in more than 70% of patients. Maculopapular rash is the most common skin feature of nonimmediate reactions (30%-90%). Skin and in vitro tests should be performed for diagnosis of both immediate and nonimmediate reactions. The ICM to be administered will therefore be chosen depending on the results of these tests, the ICM that induced the reaction (when known), the severity of the reaction, the availability of alternative ICM, and the information available on potential ICM cross-reactivity. Another type of contrast media, gadolinium derivatives, is used used for magnetic resonance imaging. Although rare, IgE-mediated reactions to gadolinium derivatives have been reported.

Performance of different in vitro techniques in the molecular diagnosis of peanut allergy.

INTRODUCTION: Peanut allergy is an increasingly serious disorder with a heterogeneous pattern of sensitization across different countries. In vitro diagnostic techniques may help in establishing these patterns. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the usefulness of determining specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) with the ImmunoCAP fluorescence enzyme immunoassay (FEIA), the ImmunoCAP ISAC CRD103 microarray (ISAC), and the basophil activation test (BAT) in the molecular diagnosis of peanut allergy. METHODS: In 26 peanut-allergic patients, sIgE antibodies against allergic components were measured with FEIA, ISAC, and BAT. RESULTS: The major peanut component in our population wasAra h 9.The detection of sIgE toAra h 9 using FEIA and BAT with this allergen yielded a sensitivity of 92% and 88% and a specificity of 95% and 100%, respectively. Overall diagnosis of peanut allergy by ISAC showed a sensitivity of 11% but a specificity of 95% since Ara h 9 was not present in the microarray version used. There was diagnostic agreement between the 3 techniques for the peanut allergens studied. CONCLUSIONS: The determination of sIgE to Ara h 9 using FEIA and BAT offers high sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of peanut allergy in the Spanish population. The CRD103 version of ISAC is not of value in our region as it does not include the most common allergen, Ara h 9.

Diagnosis of patients with immediate hypersensitivity to beta-lactams using retest.

BACKGROUND: beta-Lactams are the drugs most frequently involved in hypersensitivity reactions mediated by immunoglobulin (Ig) E. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a population of patients with suspected B-lactam allergy using a validated algorithm that includes specific IgE antibodies, skin testing, and/or a drug provocation test. METHODS: A total of 1032 patients with symptoms compatible with B-lactam allergy were evaluated by means of their clinical history, specific immunoglobulin (Ig) E antibody determinations (benzylpenicillin, ampicillin, and amoxicillin), and skin tests with major determinants (penicilloyl-polylysine) and minor determinants (minor determinant mixture) of benzylpenicillin, penicillin G, ampicillin, and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. Patients whose skin test results were negative were challenged with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid. Only immediate hypersensitivity reactions were evaluated. All patients with negative study results and for whom a reaction occurred more than 1 year before were retested using the same protocol. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients (16.4%) were finally confirmed as having immediate allergic reactions to beta-lactams (62.3% by skin testing, 16.5% by specific IgE, and 21.2% by drug provocation test). The mean age of these patients was 43.3 years, and the drug most frequently involved in the reaction was amoxicillin (41.1%), followed by the combination amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (36.4%). In the remaining 22.5%, different beta-lactams were involved or the culprit drug was not known. Only mild reactions were observed after the drug provocation test. A retest was required in 23% of patients in order to confirm their hypersensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that a diagnostic protocol based on the combination of skin testing and in vitro determination of specific IgE antibodies plus, if required, drug provocation testing is an appropriate procedure for evaluating immediate hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactams. Because the sensitivity of skin testing and in vitro IgE assays is not optimal and a considerable proportion of patients are tolerant, drug provocation tests are necessary to achieve the diagnosis or confirm tolerance. A large percentage of patients (23%) were diagnosed using retest.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions: response patterns, drug involved, and temporal variations in a large series of patients.

BACKGROUND: Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are among the most frequent reasons for consultation in allergy departments, and are becoming more common due to increasing prevalence and case complexity. OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical characteristics, drugs involved, diagnostic methods, and temporal variation of DHRs in a large series of patients over a 6-year period. METHODS: We included all patients attending our department between 2005 and 2010. The diagnosis was performed by in vivo and/or in vitro tests (basophil activation test and specific immunoglobulin [Ig] E in serum and drug provocation testing [DPT]) when indicated. RESULTS: We evaluated 4460 patients who reported 4994 episodes (mean [SD] of 1.13 [0.36] [range, 1-3] episodes per patient). Based on clinical history, 37% of the episodes were attributed to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 29.4% to beta-lactam antibiotics (BLs), 15% to non-BLs, and 18.4% to other drugs.Analysis of the 1683 patients (37.45%) finally confirmed as allergic showed the most frequent diagnosis to be hypersensitivity to multiple NSAIDs (47.29%), followed by immediate reactions to BLs (18.12%). There was an increase in reactions to non-BLs (from 21.2% to 31.9%; P < .03) over the study period, mainly due to an increase in allergy to quinolones (from 0.5% to 6.8%; P < .02); 44% of patients were diagnosed by clinical history, 14.6% by skin tests, 10.4% by in vitro tests, and 30.8% by DPT. CONCLUSIONS: NSAIDs were the drugs most frequently involved in DHRs and the most common diagnosis was urticaria/angioedema with cross intolerance. Reactions to emerging drugs such as quinolone derivatives and radiocontrast media are becoming more common.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Quinolones

The consumption of quinolones as first-line treatment has increased in recent years, leading to an increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to this antibiotic group. Both diagnosis and management of HSRs to quinolones are complex and controversial. These practical guidelines aim to provide recommendations for effective clinical practice. The recommendations were drafted by an expert panel that reviewed the literature regarding HSRs to quinolones and analyzed controversies in this area. Most HSRs to quinolones are immediate and severe. The risk for HSRs is higher in patients who report allergy to ß-lactams, moxifloxacininduced anaphylaxis, and immediate reactions than in patients who report reactions to quinolones inducing other symptoms. The usefulness of skin tests in diagnosing HSRs to quinolones is controversial, with sensitivity and specificity varying between studies. Most in vitro tests are produced in-house, with no validated commercial options. The basophil activation test has proven useful for diagnosing immediate reactions, albeit with diverse results regarding sensitivity. Drug provocation testing is currently the gold standard for confirming or excluding the diagnosis and for finding safe alternatives, although it is contraindicated in patients with severe reactions. Cross-reactivity between quinolones has proven controversial in several studies, with the lowest cross-reactivity reported for levofloxacin. Desensitization may be considered in allergy to quinolones when no other alternatives are available (AU)

Allergen Immunotherapy in the Era of SARS-CoV-2

No disponible

Spanish guidelines for diagnosis, management, treatment, and prevention of DRESS syndrome

BACKGROUND: Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a complex multisystemic severe drug hypersensitivity reaction whose diagnosis and management are troublesome. DRESS syndrome requires management by various specialists. The correct identification of the culprit drug is essential to ensure safe future therapeutic options for the patient. There are no previous Spanish guidelines or consensus statements on DRESS syndrome. OBJECTIVE: To draft a review and guidelines on the clinical diagnosis, allergy work-up, management, treatment, and prevention of DRESS syndrome in light of currently available scientific evidence and the experience of experts from multiple disciplines. METHODS: These guidelines were drafted by a panel of allergy specialists from the Drug Allergy Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC), together with other medical specialists involved in the management of DRESS syndrome and researchers from the PIELenRed consortium. A review was conducted of scientific papers on DRESS syndrome, and the expert panel evaluated the quality of the evidence of the literature and provided grades of recommendation. Whenever evidence was lacking, a consensus was reached among the experts. RESULTS: The first Spanish guidelines on DRESS syndrome are now being published. Important aspects have been addressed, including practical recommendations about clinical diagnosis, identification of the culprit drug through the Spanish pharmacovigilance system algorithm, and the allergy work-up. Recommendations are provided on management, treatment, and prevention. Algorithms for the management of DRESS in the acute and recovery phases have been drawn up. Expert consensus-based stepwise guidelines for the management and treatment of DRESS syndrome are provided

ANTECEDENTES: El síndrome DRESS (Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms) es una reacción cutánea grave inducida por hipersensibilidad a fármacos, compleja y multisistémica. Su diagnóstico y manejo es difícil e implica a diferentes especialistas. Es muy importante una correcta identificación del fármaco responsable para que el paciente disponga de opciones terapéuticas seguras en el futuro. No hay guías ni documentos de consenso españoles previos sobre el síndrome DRESS. OBJETIVO: Realizar una revisión y guía sobre el diagnóstico clínico y alergológico, manejo, tratamiento y prevención del DRESS según la evidencia científica disponible y la experiencia de expertos de diferentes especialidades médicas. MÉTODOS: Esta guía ha sido elaborada por un grupo de alergólogos del Comité de Alergia a Fármacos de la SEAIC, junto a otros especialistas involucrados en el manejo del DRESS e investigadores del Consorcio PIELenRed. Se realizó una búsqueda de publicaciones científicas sobre DRESS y el grupo de expertos evaluó la evidencia científica de la literatura y aportaron grados de recomendación. Cuando no existía evidencia se alcanzó un consenso entre expertos. RESULTADOS: Se publica la guía española sobre DRESS. Incluye aspectos prácticos importantes sobre el diagnóstico clínico, la identificación de fármacos causales a través del algoritmo del Sistema Español de Farmacovigilancia y guía para el diagnóstico alergológico. Se realizan recomendaciones sobre el manejo, tratamiento y prevención del DRESS. Se aportan algoritmos sobre el manejo en la fase aguda y en la de recuperación. Se ha elaborado una guía terapéutica escalonada consensuada por expertos especialistas implicados en el tratamiento del DRESS