Patch testing in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): A literature review.

The literature on positive patch test results in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is reviewed. One hundred and five drugs were identified that have together caused 536 positive patch tests in 437 DRESS patients. By far, the most reactions (n = 145) were caused by carbamazepine, followed by amoxicillin, isoniazid, phenytoin, ethambutol, fluindione, phenobarbital, rifampicin, and ceftriaxone; 43 drugs each caused a single case only. The drug classes causing the highest number of reactions were anticonvulsants (39%), beta-lactam antibiotics (20%), antituberculosis agents (11%), non-beta-lactam antibiotics (6%), and iodinated contrast media (5%). The sensitivity of patch testing (percentage of positive reactions) is high for anticonvulsants (notably carbamazepine), beta-lactam antibiotics (notably amoxicillin), and, possibly, iodinated contrast media. Allopurinol and sulfasalazine frequently cause DRESS but never give positive patch tests. Patch testing in DRESS appears to be safe, although mild recurrence of DRESS symptoms, mostly skin reactions, may not be rare. Multiple drug hypersensitivity was found to occur in 16% of all patients, but it is argued that the true frequency is higher. Clinical aspects of DRESS, including diagnosing the disease and identifying culprit drugs (patch tests, intradermal tests, in vitro tests, challenge tests) are also provided, emphasizing the role of patch testing.

The role of drug, dose, and the tolerance/intolerance of new drugs in multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome (MDH) is used to describe persons with a drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) to at least two chemically unrelated drugs, confirmed by skin test or in vitro assay. METHODS: Medical records of 25 patients with MDH, tested and confirmed at our allergy division, were retrospectively evaluated in terms of clinical course, involved drugs, daily drug dose, latency periods, test results of skin test and cellular assays, and tolerated drugs in subsequent pharmacological treatments. RESULTS: Multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome almost exclusively appeared as a delayed, often severe DHR and started in 14/25 with a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). Penicillins (13/25, 52.0%) and cephalosporins (6/25, 24.0%), typical high-dose drugs, were most often identified as elicitors of MDH, especially at the first DHR, followed by aromatic antiepileptics (7/25, 28.0%), vancomycin (4/25, 16.0%), and antibiotic sulfonamides (4/25, 16.0%). Cephalosporins, clindamycin, and radio contrast media (RCM) were mainly involved in subsequent DHR. The median daily drug dose of all drug trigger was 1875.0 mg (662.5; 2100.0) at the first DHR and 600.0 mg (300.0; 1300.0) at subsequent DHR, P = .0420. CONCLUSION: High-dose drugs, especially beta-lactam antibiotics, RCM and clindamycin, are common elicitors of subsequent DHR in patients with MDH. Macrolides, quinolones, doxycycline, nonaromatic antiepileptics, and paracetamol were often tolerated. As the same drugs elicited both flare-up reactions and real DHR, drug-induced flare-up reactions may be precursors of a possible second DHR and MDH. The administration of highly dosed drugs should be avoided in patients at risk for MDH.

Multiple Drug Hypersensitivity.

Multiple drug hypersensitivity (MDH) is a syndrome that develops as a consequence of massive T-cell stimulations and is characterized by long-lasting drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) to different drugs. The initial symptoms are mostly severe exanthems or drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). Subsequent symptoms due to another drug often appear in the following weeks, overlapping with the first DHR, or months to years later after resolution of the initial presentation. The second DHR includes exanthema, erythroderma, DRESS, Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN), hepatitis, and agranulocytosis. The eliciting drugs can be identified by positive skin or in vitro tests. The drugs involved in starting the MDH are the same as for DRESS, and they are usually given in rather high doses. Fixed drug combination therapies like sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim or piperacillin/tazobactam are frequently involved in MDH, and 30-40% of patients with severe DHR to combination therapy show T-cell reactions to both components. The drug-induced T-cell stimulation appears to be due to the p-i mechanism. Importantly, a permanent T-cell activation characterized by PD-1+/CD38+ expression on CD4+/CD25low T cells can be found in the circulation of patients with MDH for many years. In conclusion, MDH is a drug-elicited syndrome characterized by a long-lasting hyperresponsiveness to multiple, structurally unrelated drugs with clinically diverse symptoms.

Levels of cytokines in drug hypersensitivity.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple drug intolerance is a serious complication of drug therapy and is an issue of allergology. The aim of the study was the investigation of cytokine status in patients with drug hypersensitivity and multiple drug hypersensitivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 19 patients with multiple drug hypersensitivity, 34 patients with hypersensitivity to one drug, and 35 non-allergic subjects were involved. Only women were included in the study. A multiplex assay of 27 cytokines and chemokines was performed using xMap technology (Human Cytokine Panel I by Bio-Rad). RESULTS: Women with drug allergy revealed increased IL-2 levels (p < 0.05). In the case of the study of cytokine status in patients with multiple drug hypersensitivity, the new data revealed the prevalence of pro-inflammatory cytokine status with the participation of cytokines IL-17, IL-9, TNF-α, IP-10, and MIP-1. CONCLUSIONS: Various immune response arms Th2, Th17, as well as macrophages were the determining factors in the cytokine balance that was found in patients with multiple drug hypersensitivity.

First-line anti-tuberculosis drug challenge reactions in DRESS in an HIV endemic setting.

BACKGROUND: In high HIV prevalence settings, first line anti-tuberculosis drug (FLTD)-associated DRESS poses therapeutic challenges. Sequential and additive drug challenge (SADC) of FLTDs best identifies offending drug(s), avoids unnecessary exclusions, and optimises re-initiation of non-offending drugs. However, SADC-associated reaction complexities limit its utility. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe characteristics of FLTD-associated DRESS patients, their treatment-limiting SADC reactions and related outcomes. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with FLTD-associated DRESS from 2013-2023 in a South African tertiary hospital and enrolled (retrospectively or prospectively) in an existing registry were eligible. RESULTS: SADC was undertaken in 41 patients. Overall, 47 classifiable reactions occurred, 34/47(72%) in 29/41(71%) patients, were treatment-limiting and 12/41(29%) reinitiated FLTDs uneventfully. Fifteen single and eight multiple drug-reactors were identified. Rifampicin, in 13/23(57%) reactors was the commonest individual offender. Ethambutol was most frequently involved in multiple drug-reactors. Median(IQR) time to a detectable reaction was 24(12-120) hours, 6/34(18%) being immediate (<6hours). Itch (65%), eosinophilia (56%), fever (41%), atypical lymphocytosis (41%), rash (38%), transaminitis (32%) and facial oedema (18%), singly or in combination were commonest features. Three reactions, one epidermal necrolysis and two liver derangements, were CTCAE grade 4 (life-threatening) events. No predictors of multiple drug-reactivity were identified, but multiple reactors were hospitalised significantly longer, 125(100-134) versus 60(45-80) days. CONCLUSIONS: SADC optimises FLTD reinitiation. However, timing, clinical presentation and severity of SADC-associated reactions following FLTD-associated DRESS is markedly heterogenous. Additionally, multiple drug-reactors are a complex group requiring longer hospitalisation, and without routine biomarkers to differentiate true multiple drug hypersensitivity from non-specific flare-ups and guide long-term drug avoidance strategies.

Diagnosing Single and Multiple Drug Hypersensitivity in Children: A Tertiary Care Center Retrospective Study.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are a type of adverse drug reactions with heterogeneous pathophysiological mechanisms and a broad spectrum of clinical manifestations. Since over-diagnosing is common in children, a complete allergy work-up is needed. A cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care institution, covering the five-year period. Five hundred and four patients of both sexes, mean age 7.5 and with a medical history suggestive of DHR were evaluated. ENDA/EAACI guidelines were used for a diagnostic algorithm. Single drug hypersensitivity was registered in 375 patients and multiple drug hypersensitivity in 129. The main culprits in medical history were antibiotics (83%), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (8.4%) and analgoantipyretics (3.8%). Skin involvement was registered in 96.2%. DHRs were confirmed in 4.4% patients-six patients had positive skin tests and 13 had a positive drug provocation test. In the proven DHRs group, the main agents were antibiotics (72.7%), followed by NSAIDs (8.3%), and of all the skin manifestations, urticaria was most common (78.2%), followed by exanthema (10.5%) and angioedema (5.3%). Considering the above, anticipating DHRs and a proper referral of children to an allergologist is a key step in the assessment of drug hypersensitivity. A complete allergy work-up prevents unnecessary drug exclusion and allows most children to safely continue the use of first-line medications when needed.

Characterization, epidemiology and risk factors of multiple drug allergy syndrome and multiple drug intolerance syndrome: A systematic review.

Background: Multiple drug allergy and multiple drug intolerance syndrome (MDAS/MDIS) labels are an impediment to clinical care and knowledge regarding these conditions is limited. This systematic review investigated the characterization, epidemiology, risk factors, clinical impact and pharmaco-economics of MDAS and MDIS. Methods: Systematic literature search across 11 databases (01 January 2000-06 November 2020) for MDIS, MDAS and related terminology. Studies were reviewed for quality of evidence and risk of bias by employing Critical Appraisal Skills Programme cohort study checklist. A narrative synthesis approach facilitated by systematic textual descriptions, tabulation and thematic analysis was adopted. Results: There was heterogeneity in terminology and methodology. Few studies applied standard drug allergy diagnostic methods. There is some evidence to suggest that multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome (MDHS; i.e., confirmed allergies in MDAS) is a distinct clinical entity. Prevalence of MDIS and MDAS labels in unselected & selected populations varied between 2.1%-6.4% & 4.9%-90% and 1.2% & 0%-36% respectively. Reported risk factors included female gender, increasing age, body mass index, anxiety, depression, co-morbidities, concurrent allergies and increased healthcare utilization. Drugs commonly implicated were antibiotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. No studies relating to clinical impact and pharmaco-economics were found. Conclusion: There is considerable burden of MDAS and MDIS labels. Data needs cautious interpretation as majority of studies described involved unverified labels. Despite this limitation and heterogeneity of studies, there is some evidence to suggest that MDHS is a distinct clinical entity. Well-designed multi-centre studies applying standardized terminology and diagnostic methodology are needed to gain further insight into these conditions.

High occurrence of simultaneous multiple-drug hypersensitivity syndrome induced by first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs.

BACKGROUND: Multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome (MDHS) results in treatment delay or failure and often results in severe drug hypersensitivity reactions. There are few reports of MDHS in response to anti-tuberculosis drugs; however, clinical information is scarce. Understanding the frequency and clinical characteristics of simultaneous MDHS against first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs in patients with non-severe drug hypersensitivity reactions is necessary. METHODS: We reviewed 27 patients with drug fever or maculopapular exanthem in response to first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs between January 2010 and June 2019. Drug fever or maculopapular exanthem occurred when isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol, and pyrazinamide were administered simultaneously. Drug provocation tests for the 4 drugs were performed to identify the culprit drugs. RESULTS: All patients showed positive reactions to 1 or more drugs. MDHS was diagnosed in 13 (48%) patients, of whom 11 and 2 patients reacted to 2 and 3 drugs, respectively. In comparison to the patients with single-drug hypersensitivity, the patients with MDHS did not exhibit any differences in characteristics. Ethambutol and rifampin were the common drugs that induced a reaction, and the combination of these 2 drugs induced MDHS most frequently. Among the patients with MDHS, there were no differences between the drugs that caused drug fever and maculopapular exanthem. All patients with MDHS were successfully treated with alternative drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous MDHS may occur frequently in patients with drug fever or maculopapular exanthem caused by first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs, indicating the need to evaluate the allergy responses for all 4 drugs, even in patients without severe drug hypersensitivity. The combination of ethambutol and rifampin was the most common trigger that induced MDHS.

Multiple Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome in a Large Database.

BACKGROUND: Multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome (MDHS) is defined as confirmed drug hypersensitivity (DH) to at least 2 chemically and pharmacologically unrelated drugs. Reports of MDHS are scarce and poorly specified, and studies that diagnose MDHS on the basis of positive allergy test results are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate retrospectively the frequency and characteristics of patients with MDHS in a large database. METHODS: We included all patients who consulted and were tested in our Allergy Unit between September 1996 and February 2018 for a suspicion of DH. Clinical history and allergy workup results compiled in our Drug Allergy and Hypersensitivity Database were reviewed, and data of patients with a diagnosis of MDHS were retrieved and analyzed. RESULTS: During this period a total of 9250 patients were explored and 1819 tested positive for at least 1 drug. Forty-five cases, 30 female and 15 male patients cumulating 92 DHs, were confirmed as having MDHS. An immunologic mechanism, as demonstrated by positive skin testing, accounted for 59 DHs. Drug provocation tests were performed to confirm the diagnosis for the remaining 33 DHs. Of the 92 DHs in this series, 38 were classified as type IV and 21 as type I allergies; 33 remained of undetermined mechanism. Drug class occurrences seem to differ from those in monoallergic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the concept of MDHS as a distinct and rare subgroup of DH. The prevalence in our database was 2.5% in the total DH alleged patient population and 0.5% of the demonstrated DHs. Skin testing and drug provocation tests are mandatory for confirming the diagnosis.

Patient Characteristics and Concerns about Drug Allergy: A Report from the United States Drug Allergy Registry.

BACKGROUND: Drug allergy is frequently reported, but uncommonly confirmed with diagnostic testing. Although drug allergy assessments can improve clinical care, patient concerns may impact the optimal diagnostic approach and/or the clinical effectiveness of diagnostic testing. OBJECTIVE: To assess drug allergy patient concerns. METHODS: Using data from a multisite, prospective longitudinal cohort study, the United States Drug Allergy Registry (January 16, 2019, to January 24, 2020), we determined patient self-reported characteristics and qualitatively coded free-text patient concerns about their drug allergy/allergies. We assessed associations between patient characteristics and drug allergy concerns using multinomial logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 592 patients (mean age, 49 [standard deviation, 17] years, 74% female, 88% white), the most commonly reported drug allergies were penicillins (78%), cephalosporins (12%), and sulfonamides (12%) with common reactions of rash (62%), hives (54%), itching (48%), flushing or facial redness (28%), and swelling or angioedema (24%). Patient concerns, coded from free text, were optimal medication use (41%), no concern (17%), allergic reaction (14%), diagnosis (12%), and severe allergic reaction (12%). Using multinomial regression, the presence of drug allergy concerns increased with greater age, higher number of reported drug reactions, more antibiotic use, and certain reaction symptoms, most notably mouth or palate itching. Female sex was associated with increased severe allergic reaction concern. Poorer general and mental health was associated with increased allergic reaction concern. CONCLUSION: Patients with drug allergy were concerned about their options for medical treatment, having an allergic reaction, and receiving clarity about their diagnosis. Capturing and addressing patient concerns may improve the approach to patients with drug allergy and/or the effectiveness of drug allergy testing.

Tackling the Patient with Multiple Drug "Allergies": Multiple Drug Intolerance Syndrome.

As populations age, the prevalence of reported drug "allergy" increases, often leading to suboptimal care and increased morbidity because of unnecessary avoidance of safe and effective medications. Evaluation by a drug allergy specialist is often warranted when a patient has more than 2 unrelated drug "allergies" listed in the medical record. In this commentary, we clarify and propose standard terminology to use when evaluating patients with multiple drug allergy labels including and more specifically when diagnosing multiple drug intolerance syndrome and the much rarer multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome. We review epidemiology and key features of multiple drug intolerance syndrome and multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome. We summarize the methodologic and practical diagnostic workup and management of individuals with MDIS to assist with the accurate delabeling of drug "allergies" in the electronic health record.

Drug-related relapses in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS).

BACKGROUND: A drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a severe T cell mediated hypersensitivity reaction. Relapses of symptoms in the recovery phase are frequent and linked to the reduction of the corticosteroid treatment, to viral reactivations or to the exposure to new drugs. Here, we analyzed, how often the exposure to new drugs leads to new sensitization or drug-related relapses without detectable sensitization. METHODS: 46 patients with DRESS treated in the allergy division of the Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, were retrospectively assessed. Drug-related relapses were analyzed in terms of frequency and whether a possible sensitization evaluated by skin tests and/or lymphocyte transformation tests (LTT) to the new drugs was detectable. Furthermore, drug tolerance was evaluated in a subset of patients. RESULTS: 56 relapses were observed in 27 of 46 patients with DRESS (58.7%). 33 (58.9%) of these relapses were associated with the use of new drugs, 30 drug-related relapses were evaluated by patch test and/or lymphocyte transformation test. In 8/30 (26.7%) drug-related relapses, a sensitization to the new drug was demonstrated, suggesting the emergence of a multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome (MDH). 14 patients experienced 22 drug-related relapses without any detectable sensitization and only 1/6 patients developed new symptoms upon reexposure. CONCLUSION: Patients with DRESS frequently suffered from drug related relapses. Half of the patients with drug-related relapses developed a MDH with proven sensitizations not only to the DRESS inducing drugs, but also to newly applied drugs. When not sensitized, drugs involved in drug related relapses could be reintroduced, if needed. Here, we propose a procedure for drug testing and future management of drug-related relapses in DRESS.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome caused by valproic acid as a monotherapy for epilepsy: First case report in Asian population.

Valproic acid (VPA) is a broad-spectrum antiseizure drug used for a variety of clinical conditions, such as epilepsy and mood disorders. Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DRESS) accompanied by hyponatremia, thrombocytopenia, hypoalbuminemia and elevated aminotransferase has never been reported as an adverse effect of VPA monotherapy during titration for epilepsy in Asian population. Hereby, we present the case of a 73-year-old Chinese male who suffered from DRESS and other complications two weeks after initiating VPA treatment for epilepsy. Understanding the risk associated with VPA-induced DRESS, and taking effective measures to avoid the severe side effects are necessary.