Differential presentation of hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin: Phenotypes, endotypes, and management with desensitization.

BACKGROUND: Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to platinum-based drugs are heterogenous and restrict their access, and drug desensitization (DD) has provided a ground-breaking procedure for their re-introduction, although the response is heterogeneous. We aimed to identify the phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers of reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin and their response to DD. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients presenting with DHRs to oxaliplatin (N = 46) and carboplatin (N = 33) were evaluated at the Allergy Departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Spain. Patient symptoms, skin testing, biomarkers, and outcomes of 267 DDs were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Oxaliplatin-reactive patients presented with type I (74%), cytokine release reaction (CRR) (11%), and mixed (Mx) (15%) phenotypes. In contrast, carboplatin reactive patients presented with predominantly type I (85%) and Mx (15%) but no CRRs. Out of 267 DDs, breakthrough reactions (BTRs) to oxaliplatin occurred twice as frequently as carboplatin (32% vs. 15%; p < .05). Phenotype switching from type I to another phenotype was observed in 46% of oxaliplatin DDs compared to 21% of carboplatin DDs. Tryptase was elevated in type I and Mx reactions, and IL-6 in CRR and Mx, indicating different mechanisms and endotypes. CONCLUSION: Carboplatin and oxaliplatin induced three different types of reactions with defined phenotypes and endotypes amendable to DD. Although most of the initial reactions for both were type I, oxaliplatin presented with unique CRR reactions. During DD, carboplatin reactive patients presented mostly type I BTR, while oxaliplatin-reactive patients frequently switched from type I to CRR, providing a critical difference and the need for personalized DD protocols.

Hypersensitivity to gadolinium-based contrast.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of contrast media is increasing in recent decades. Although gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) are generally well tolerated, adverse reactions, including hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), although infrequent, may occur. It is important to perform a thorough allergological evaluation in patients with suspected GBCA-HSRs to avoid potentially serious reactions in subsequent exposures. RECENT FINDINGS: Data on GBCA-HSRs are scarce. Most published articles dealing with skin tests and drug provocation tests (DPTs) with GBCAs are case series and small cohorts. Controversies exist about the role of premedication for preventing HSRs on subsequent exposures. Selection of well tolerated alternatives is based on potential cross-reactivity among GBCAs; however, the extent of cross-reactivity among them remains unclear. SUMMARY: As premedication is not useful because breakthrough reactions are frequent in patients with GBCA-HSRs in subsequent exposures, an allergological evaluation is required. Available data suggest a high negative predictive value of skin tests, being crucial for guiding the selection of an alternative GBCA. However, DPTs are still necessary to confirm or exclude the diagnosis or find alternative GBCAs. Cross-reactivity is high among GBCAs belonging from the same group, mainly among macrocyclic compounds, so this must be taken into account for selecting alternatives.

Diagnosis of immediate reactions to amoxicillin: Comparison of basophil activation markers CD63 and CD203c in a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Amoxicillin (AX) combined or not with clavulanic acid (CLV) is frequently involved in IgE-mediated reactions. Drug provocation test (DPT) is considered as the gold standard for diagnosis, although contraindicated in high-risk patients. Basophil activation test (BAT) can help diagnose immediate reactions to beta-lactams, although controversy exists regarding the best activation marker. We have performed a real-life study in a prospective cohort to analyze the real value of BAT as diagnostic tool and the best activation marker, CD63 and CD203c, for the evaluation of immediate reactions to these drugs. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated patients with a clinical suspicion of immediate reactions after AX or AX-CLV administration during a 6-year period. The allergological work-up was done following the EAACI recommendations. BAT was performed in all patients using CD63 and CD203c as activation markers. RESULTS: In AX-allergic patients, both activation markers, CD63 and CD203c, showed similar SE values (48.6% and 46.7%, respectively); however, specificity was of 81.1% and 94.6%, respectively, with CD203c showing good positive predictive value and like-hood ratio. In CLV-allergic patients, CD203c showed higher SE (50%) than CD63 (42.9%), maintaining the same value of SP (80%). Combining the results of both markers can slightly increase the sensitivity (51.4% for AX and 54.8% for CLV), although decreasing the specificity (79.7% and 73%, respectively). Interestingly, all patients with an anaphylactic shock showed a positive BAT to CLV using CD203c. CONCLUSIONS: BAT using CD203c showed a good confirmatory power, especially for AX allergy. Placing BAT as a first step in the diagnostic procedure can help reduce the need of performing a complete allergological work-up in 46.6% of patients, diminishing the risk of reinducing allergic reactions.

Drug-induced Anaphylaxis.

Drug hypersensitivity is increasing worldwide as the consumption of drug is increasing. Many clinical presentations of drug hypersensitivity are complex and take place in the setting of illness and/or polypharmacotherapy. To review the most recent findings in the diagnosis and management of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions. Studies were selected based on their relevance, originality and date of publication. The understanding of endotypes, biomarkers and phenotypes has improved the categorization of immediate hypersensitivity reactions. In this review, we discussed the short- and long-term management of anaphylaxis with a special focus on in vivo and in vitro diagnostic methods. Moreover, the clinical management of drug-induced anaphylaxis, the role of hidden allergens and the importance of delabeling are discussed. Endophenotyping is crucial to correctly diagnose and treat patients with immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions, preventing future episodes through drug desensitization.

Resensitization in suspected penicillin allergy.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of allergic reactions to penicillins (AR-PEN) is very complex as there is a loss of sensitization over time, which leads to negative skin tests (STs) and specific IgE in serum, and even to tolerance to the drug involved. However, STs may become positive after subsequent exposure to the culprit drug (resensitization), with the risk of inducing potentially severe reactions. The exact rate of resensitization to penicillins is unknown, ranging from 0% to 27.9% in published studies. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the rate of resensitization in patients with suggestive AR-PEN by repeating STs (retest) after an initial evaluation (IE). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with suspected AR-PEN were prospectively evaluated between 2017 and 2020. They underwent STs, and a randomized group also underwent a drug provocation test (DPT) with the culprit. Only patients with negative STs and/or DPT were included. All included cases were retested by STs at 2-8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 545 patients were included: 296 reporting immediate reactions (IRs) and 249 non-immediate reactions (NIRs). Eighty (14.7%) cases had positive results in retest (RT+): 63 (21.3%) IRs and 17 (6.8%) NIRs (p < 0.0001). The rate of RT+ was higher in anaphylaxis compared with all other reactions (45.8% vs 9.1%, p < 0.0001). The risk of RT+ was higher from the fifth week after IE (OR: 4.64, CI: 2.1-11.6; p < 0.001) and increased with the patient's age (OR: 1.02; CI: 1.01-1.04; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Due to the high rate of resensitization, retest should be included in the diagnostic algorithm of IRs to penicillins after an initial negative study, especially in anaphylaxis, to avoid potentially severe reactions after subsequent prescriptions of these drugs.

Shared Clavulanate and Tazobactam Antigenic Determinants Activate T-Cells from Hypersensitive Patients.

ß-Lactamase inhibitors such as clavulanic acid and tazobactam were developed to overcome ß-lactam antibiotic resistance. Hypersensitivity reactions to these drugs have not been studied in detail, and the antigenic determinants that activate T-cells have not been defined. The objectives of this study were to (i) characterize clavulanate- and tazobactam-responsive T-cells from hypersensitive patients, (ii) explore clavulanate and tazobactam T-cell crossreactivity, and (iii) define the antigenic determinants that contribute to T-cell reactivity. Antigen specificity, pathways of T-cell activation, and crossreactivity with clavulanate- and tazobactam-specific T-cell clones were assessed by proliferation and cytokine release assays. Antigenic determinants were analyzed by mass spectrometry-based proteomics methods. Clavulanate- and tazobactam-responsive CD4+ T-cell clones were stimulated to proliferate and secrete IFN-γ in an MHC class II-restricted and dose-dependent manner. T-cell activation with clavulanate- and tazobactam was dependent on antigen presenting cells because their fixation prevented the T-cell response. Strong crossreactivity was observed between clavulanate- and tazobactam-T-cells; however, neither drug activated ß-lactam antibiotic-responsive T-cells. Mass spectrometric analysis revealed that both compounds form multiple antigenic determinants with lysine residues on proteins, including an overlapping aldehyde and hydrated aldehyde adduct with mass additions of 70 and 88 Da, respectively. Collectively, these data show that although clavulanate and tazobactam are structurally distinct, the antigenic determinants formed by both drugs overlap, which explains the observed T-cell cross-reactivity.

Drug hypersensitivity, in vitro tools, biomarkers, and burden with COVID-19 vaccines.

Hypersensitivity reactions to drugs are increasing worldwide. They display a large degree of variability in the immunological mechanisms involved, which impacts both disease severity and the optimal diagnostic procedure. Therefore, drug hypersensitivity diagnosis relies on both in vitro and in vivo assessments, although most of the methods are not well standardized. Moreover, several biomarkers can be used as valuable parameters for precision medicine that provide information on the endotypes, diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of drug hypersensitivity development, as well on the identification of therapeutic targets and treatment efficacy monitoring. Furthermore, in the last 2 years, the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus) pandemic has had an important impact on health system, leading us to update approaches on how to manage hypersensitivity reactions to drugs used for its treatment and on COVID-19 (Coronavirus disease) vaccines used for its prevention. This article reviews recent advances in these 3 areas regarding drug hypersensitivity: in vitro tools for drug hypersensitivity diagnosis, recently identified biomarkers that could guide clinical decision making and management of hypersensitivity reactions to drugs and vaccines used for COVID-19.

Antibiotic Allergy De-Labeling: A Pathway against Antibiotic Resistance.

Antibiotics are one of the most frequently prescribed drugs. Unfortunately, they also are the most common cause for self-reported drug allergy, limiting the use of effective therapies. However, evidence shows that more than 90% of patients labeled as allergic to antibiotics are not allergic. Importantly, the label of antibiotic allergy, whether real or not, constitutes a major public health problem as it directly impacts antimicrobial stewardship: it has been associated with broad-spectrum antibiotic use, often resulting in the emergence of bacterial resistance. Therefore, an accurate diagnosis is crucial for de-labeling patients who claim to be allergic but are not really allergic. This review presents allergy methods for achieving successful antibiotic allergy de-labeling. Patient clinical history is often inaccurately reported, thus not being able to de-label most patients. In vitro testing offers a complementary approach but it shows limitations. Immunoassay for quantifying specific IgE is the most used one, although it gives low sensitivity and is limited to few betalactams. Basophil activation test is not validated and not available in all centers. Therefore, true de-labeling still relies on in vivo tests including drug provocation and/or skin tests, which are not risk-exempt and require specialized healthcare professionals for results interpretation and patient management. Moreover, differences on the pattern of antibiotic consumption cause differences in the diagnostic approach among different countries. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended to reduce the risks associated with the reported penicillin allergy label.

Detection of Serum-Specific IgE by Fluoro-Enzyme Immunoassay for Diagnosing Type I Hypersensitivity Reactions to Penicillins.

Diagnosis of type I hypersensitivity reactions (IgE-mediated reactions) to penicillins is based on clinical history, skin tests (STs), and drug provocation tests (DPTs). Among in vitro complementary tests, the fluoro-enzyme immunoassay (FEIA) ImmunoCAP® (Thermo-Fisher, Waltham, MA, USA) is the most widely used commercial method for detecting drug-specific IgE (sIgE). In this study, we aimed to analyze the utility of ImmunoCAP® for detecting sIgE to penicillin G (PG) and amoxicillin (AX) in patients with confirmed penicillin allergy. The study includes 139 and 250 patients evaluated in Spain and Italy, respectively. All had experienced type I hypersensitivity reactions to penicillins confirmed by positive STs. Additionally, selective or cross-reactive reactions were confirmed by DPTs in a subgroup of patients for further analysis. Positive ImmunoCAP® results were 39.6% for PG and/or AX in Spanish subjects and 52.4% in Italian subjects. When only PG or AX sIgE where analyzed, the percentages were 15.1% and 30.4%, respectively, in Spanish patients; and 38.9% and 46% in Italian ones. The analysis of positive STs showed a statistically significant higher percentage of positive STs to PG determinants in Italian patients. False-positive results to PG (16%) were detected in selective AX patients with confirmed PG tolerance. Low and variable sensitivity values observed in a well-defined population with confirmed allergy diagnosis, as well as false-positive results to PG, suggest that ImmunoCAP® is a diagnostic tool with relevant limitations in the evaluation of subjects with type I hypersensitivity reactions to penicillins.

Synthetic antigenic determinants of clavulanic acid induce dendritic cell maturation and specific T cell proliferation in patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions.

BACKGROUND: Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) to clavulanic acid (CLV) have increased in the last decades due to a higher consumption alongside amoxicillin (AX). Due to its chemical instability, diagnostic procedures to evaluate IDHRs to CLV are difficult, and current in vitro assays do not have an optimal sensitivity. The inclusion of the specific metabolites after CLV degradation, which are efficiently recognised by the immune system, could help to improve sensitivity of in vitro tests. METHODS: Recognition by dendritic cells (DCs) of CLV and the synthetic analogues of two of its hypothesised antigenic determinants (ADs) was evaluated by flow cytometry in 27 allergic patients (AP) and healthy controls (HC). Their ability to trigger the proliferation of T cells was also analysed by flow cytometry. RESULTS: The inclusion of synthetic analogues of CLV ADs, significantly increased the expression of maturation markers on DCs from AP compared to HC. A different recognition pattern could be observed with each AD, and, therefore, the inclusion of both ADs achieves an improved sensitivity. The addition of synthetic ADs analogues increased the proliferative response of CD4+ Th2 compared to the addition of native CLV. The combination of results from both ADs increased the sensitivity of proliferative assays from 19% to 65% with a specificity higher than 90%. CONCLUSIONS: Synthetic ADs from CLV are efficiently recognised by DCs with ability to activate CD4+ Th2 cells from AP. The combination of analogues from both ADs, significantly increased the sensitivity of DC maturation and T-cell proliferation compared to native CLV.

Advances and highlights in T and B cell responses to drug antigens.

The immunological mechanisms involved in drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are complex, and despite important advances, multiple aspects remain poorly understood. These not fully known aspects are mainly related to the factors that drive towards either a tolerant or a hypersensitivity response and specifically regarding the role of B and T cells. In this review, we focus on recent findings on this knowledge area within the last 2 years. We highlight new evidences of covalent and non-covalent interactions of drug antigen with proteins, as well as the very first characterization of naturally processed flucloxacillin-haptenated human leukocyte antigen (HLA) ligands. Moreover, we have analysed new insights into the identification of risk factors associated with the development of DHRs, such as the role of oxidative metabolism of drugs in the activation of the immune system and the discovery of new associations between DHRs and HLA variants. Finally, evidence of IgG-mediated anaphylaxis in humans and the involvement of specific subpopulations of effector cells associated with different clinical entities are also topics explored in this review. All these recent findings are relevant for the underlying pathology mechanisms and advance the field towards a more precise diagnosis, management and treatment approach for DHRs.

The value of the basophil activation test in the evaluation of patients reporting allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines have been reported to induce hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) in a small number of individuals. We aimed to evaluate the real-world incidence of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine HSR and to determine the value of the basophil activation test (BAT) in the allergological workup of patients reporting these reactions. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled patients with a clinical history indicative of HSR to the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. The allergological workup included skin testing (STs) and BAT with polyethylene glycol (PEG) and the vaccine. In those with negative allergy assessments, the administration of the second dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was offered. RESULTS: Seventeen adults were included. Eleven cases (64.7%) tested negative in the allergological workup and tolerated the re-administration of the second dose of the vaccine and considered non-allergic. Six cases (35.3%) were considered allergic and classified into three groups: 2 subjects displayed positive STs and/or BAT to PEG (Group A), two individuals displayed positive BAT to the vaccine (Group B), and in 2 patients with moderate or severe reactions, the culprit was not identified, tested negative to STs and BAT to both PEG and vaccine (Group C). We further evaluated the value of BAT when the results were positive to the vaccine and negative to PEG by performing BAT in controls groups, finding positive BAT results in 50% of controls, all of them recovered from COVID-19 infection. In contrast, BAT was negative in patients who had not suffered from COVID-19 disease. CONCLUSIONS: BAT can be used as a potential diagnostic tool for confirming allergy to PEG excipient but not to the vaccine as a positive result in BAT may indicate a past COVID-19 infection instead of an allergy.

Genetic Variants in Cytosolic Phospholipase A2 Associated With Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug-Induced Acute Urticaria/Angioedema.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are among the main triggers of drug hypersensitivity reactions, probably due to their high consumption worldwide. The most frequent type of NSAID hypersensitivity is NSAID cross-hypersensitivity, in which patients react to NSAIDs from different chemical groups in the absence of a specific immunological response. The underlying mechanism of NSAID cross-hypersensitivity has been linked to cyclooxygenase (COX)-1 inhibition causing an imbalance in the arachidonic acid pathway. Despite NSAID-induced acute urticaria/angioedema (NIUA) being the most frequent clinical phenotype, most studies have focused on NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease. As NSAID cross-hypersensitivity reactions are idiosyncratic, only appearing in some subjects, it is believed that individual susceptibility is under the influence of genetic factors. Although associations with polymorphisms in genes from the AA pathway have been described, no previous study has evaluated the potential role of cytosolic phospholipase A2 (cPLA2) variants. This enzyme catalyzes the initial hydrolysis of membrane phospholipids to release AA, which can be subsequently metabolized into eicosanoids. Here, we analyzed for the first time the overall genetic variation in the cPLA2 gene (PLA2G4A) in NIUA patients. For this purpose, a set of tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (tagSNPs) in PLA2G4A were selected using data from Europeans subjects in the 1,000 Genomes Project, and genotyped with the iPlex Sequenom MassArray technology. Two independent populations, each comprising NIUA patients and NSAID-tolerant controls, were recruited in Spain, for the purposes of discovery and replication, comprising a total of 1,128 individuals. Fifty-eight tagSNPs were successfully genotyped in the discovery cohort, of which four were significantly associated with NIUA after Bonferroni correction (rs2049963, rs2064471, rs12088010, and rs12746200). These polymorphisms were then genotyped in the replication cohort: rs2049963 was associated with increased risk for NIUA after Bonferroni correction under the dominant and additive models, whereas rs12088010 and rs12746200 were protective under these two inheritance models. Our results suggest a role for PLA2G4A polymorphisms in NIUA. However, further studies are required to replicate our findings, elucidate the mechanistic role, and evaluate the participation of PLA2G4A variants in other phenotypes induced by NSAID cross-hypersensitivity.

Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies and desensitization.

OBJECTIVE: To review type 1 hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies and its management with drug desensitization. DATA SOURCES: English-language literature on MEDLINE regarding hypersensitivity, anaphylaxis, and checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies. STUDY SELECTIONS: References were selected based on relevance, novelty, robustness, and applicability. RESULTS: There are well-known tissue toxicities associated to checkpoint inhibitors, but hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been underreported. The presentation of these reactions is based on clinical phenotypes with underlying endotypes identified by specific biomarkers. Drug desensitizations have been successfully applied to checkpoint inhibitor drugs to allow patients with cancer to receive first-line therapies. This review provides current best practices for the recognition and diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitors and their management using drug desensitization. CONCLUSION: Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been identified as potential adverse effects induced by checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies. Drug desensitization is a safe and effective treatment option for patients who experience hypersensitivity reactions in need of these monoclonal antibodies to improve cancer outcomes.

Application of precision medicine to the treatment of anaphylaxis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recognize the presentation of anaphylaxis for prompt management and treatment and to provide tools for the diagnosis of the underlying cause(s) and set up a long-term treatment to prevent recurrence of anaphylaxis. RECENT FINDINGS: The recent description of phenotypes provides new insight and understanding into the mechanisms and causes of anaphylaxis through a better understanding of endotypes and biomarkers for broad clinical use. SUMMARY: Anaphylaxis is the most severe hypersensitivity reaction and can lead to death. Epinephrine is the first-line treatment of anaphylaxis and it is life-saving. Patients with first-line therapy-induced anaphylaxis are candidates for desensitization to increase their quality of life and life expectancy. Desensitization is a breakthrough novel treatment for patients with anaphylaxis in need of first-line therapy, including chemotherapy, mAbs, aspirin and others. Ultrarush with venom immunotherapy should be considered in patients who present with life-threatening anaphylaxis after Hymenoptera sting with evidence of IgE-mediated mechanisms. Food desensitization is currently being expanded to provide increased safety to adults and children with food-induced anaphylaxis.