A Modified Basophil Activation Test for the Clinical Management of Immediate Hypersensitivity Reactions to Paclitaxel: A Proof-of-Concept Study.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (iHSRs) to taxanes are observed in 6% and 4% of gynecologic and breast cancer patients, respectively. Drug desensitization is the only option, as no comparable alternative therapy is available. Surfactants in the taxane formulation have been implicated in the immunopathogenesis of iHSRs, although sporadic skin test (ST) positivity and iHSRs to nab-paclitaxel have suggested the involvement of the taxane moiety and/or IgE-mediated pathomechanisms. In vitro diagnostic tests might offer insights into mechanisms underlying iHSRs to taxanes. The aim of the present study was to address this unmet need by developing a novel basophil activation test (BAT). The study included patients (n = 31) undergoing paclitaxel/carboplatin therapy. Seventeen patients presented with iHSRs to paclitaxel (iHSR-Taxpos), and eleven were tolerant (iHSR-Taxneg). Fourteen patients presented with iHSRs to carboplatin (iHSR-Plpos), and fourteen were tolerant (iHSR-Plneg). The BAT median stimulation index (SI) values were 1.563 (range, 0.02-4.11; n = 11) and -0.28 (range -4.88-0.07, n = 11) in iHSR-Taxpos and iHSR-Taxneg, respectively. The BAT median SI values were 4.45 (range, 0.1-26.7; n = 14) and 0 (range, -0.51-1.65; n = 12) in iHSR-Plpos and iHSR-Plneg, respectively. SI levels were not associated with iHSR severity grading. Comparing BAT results in iHSR-Taxpos and iHSR-Taxneg showed the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve to be 0.9752 (p = 0.0002). The cutoff calculated by the maximized likelihood ratio identified 90.91% of iHSR-Taxpos patients and 90.91% of iHSR-Taxneg patients. Comparing BAT results for iHSR-Plpos and iHSR-Plneg showed the area under the ROC curve to be 0.9286 (p = 0.0002). The cutoff calculated by the maximized likelihood ratio identified 78.57% of iHSR-Plpos patients and 91.67% of iHSR-Plneg patients. Most iHSR-Taxpos patients for which ST was available (10/11) scored ST-negative and BAT-positive, whereas most iHSR-Plpos patients for which ST was available (14/14) scored both BAT- and ST-positive. This suggested the intervention of non-IgE-mediated mechanisms in iHSR-Taxpos patients. Consistent with this view, an in silico molecular docking analysis predicted the high affinity of paclitaxel to the degranulation-competent MRGPRX2 receptor. This hypothesis warrants further in vitro investigations. In conclusion, the present study provides preliminary proof-of-concept evidence that this novel BAT has potential utility in understanding mechanisms underlying iHSRs to taxanes.

Epinephrine Auto-Injector Prescription and Use: A Retrospective Analysis and Clinical Risk Assessment of Adult Patients Sensitized to Lipid Transfer Protein.

Lipid transfer proteins (LTPs) are widely widespread plant food allergens which represents the main cause of food allergy in adults living in the Mediterranean basin. The purpose of this study was to investigate in LTP patients the actual use of prescribed epinephrine auto-injector and appropriateness of its prescription. In addition, we investigated in these patients: (1) occurrence of new food reaction in the following three years after to diagnosis; (2) need and number of access to emergency services; (3) presence of possible predictive factors to further food reactions. One-hundred sixty-five adult patients sensitized to LTPs have been included. During follow-up, we recorded 68 further reactions, most of them (77.9%) characterized by local symptoms; rarely the patients required an emergency-department visits (16.1%) and only one patient (1.7%) used the epinephrine auto-injector. The patients with a previous history of anaphylaxis at baseline turned back to access to emergency services also during the follow-up (p = 0.006). The majority of patients with recorded systemic reactions (p = 0.004) and treated in an emergency room (p = 0.028) did not have any co-factor-enhanced at diagnosis. We noted an association between platanus pollen sensitization and severity of further reactions during the follow-up (p = 0.026). Epinephrine auto-injector were prescribed to 108/165 patients (65.5%) with an over-prescription rate of 25%. The unforeseeable clinical presentation of LTP allergic reactions and the eventual role played by the cofactor make necessary schedule a follow-up to monitor the patients over time and to assess the actual use of epinephrine auto injectors prescribed.

Clinical and quality of life assessment in patients with latex allergy during COVID-19 pandemic: Possible protective role of continuous latex immunotherapy.

Introduction: During COVID-19 pandemic, the massive use of Personal Protective Equipment could provoke severe adverse reactions in latex allergy patients and could negatively affect their quality of life. Methods: Trough a survey the study aimed: (a) to evaluate the incidence of allergic reactions in patients with latex allergy during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic; (b) to evaluate the protective role of continuous latex sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) during this period; and (c) to evaluate quality of life of natural rubber latex allergy (NRLA) patients during the pandemic. Results: 67 patients (9 males and 58 females, mean age of 45.9 ± 11.4 years) suffering from latex allergy were included in the present study. We recorded among our patients 13 cases (34.2%) of urticarial/angioedema (U/A), 9 cases (23.6%) of respiratory symptoms (dyspnoea, shortness of breath and wheezing) and 7 cases (18.4%) of anaphylaxis. In patients who underwent continuous SLIT, we observed less cases of U/A (p < 0.001), respiratory symptoms (p < 0.001), anaphylaxis (p = 0.003), hospitalizations (p = 0.014) and a lower therapy administration. We compared the results of SF-36 questionnaire in patients who underwent continuous and not-continuous SLIT with a significance differences score between these two groups. Conclusions: Our study is the first that investigated the clinical and quality of life effects of COVID-19 pandemic in NRLA patients.

Treatment of Indolent and Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis.

Management of Indolent and Smoldering SM is focused on preventing anaphylactic reactions and identifying and avoiding symptom triggers. Skin and gastrointestinal symptoms are managed with H1- and H2-antihistamines. When skin symptoms are not adequately controlled, leukotriene antagonists and oral psoralen combined with ultraviolet therapy may be added. Proton pump inhibitors, sodium cromolyn, and oral corticosteroids may be added for gastrointestinal symptoms. Patients should be prescribed self-injectable epinephrine and trained to treat recurrent cardiovascular symptoms or anaphylaxis. Depression and cognitive impairment require a psychiatric evaluation for tailored treatment. Bone involvement is managed with bisphosphonates and eventually interferon. Omalizumab is effective on all vasomotor symptoms, including anaphylaxis, but not on respiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. A cytoreductive treatment is not recommended unless anti-mediator therapy has failed. Venom immunotherapy is mandatory for patients with Hymenoptera venom allergy. There is no curative option for patients with advanced SM. The available therapeutic options include tyrosine-kinase inhibitors and cladribine, with variable duration and extent of response. Imatinib mesylate was the first drug approved for SM lacking the cKIT D816V mutation; dasatinib and nilotinib are ineffective. Midostaurin is active on both wild-type and mutant cKIT D816V, while Avapritinib is a selective cKIT D816V inhibitor: they are approved for the treatment of advanced SM. Cladribine is a purine analog with significant activity against monocytes that were thought to have a common progenitor with mast cells. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation is usually performed in younger selected patients.

Contrast Medium Hypersensitivity: A Large Italian Study with Long-Term Follow-Up.

Hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to contrast media (CM) are a major problem. We compared differences of HRs to iodinated contrast media (ICM) versus gadolinium-based contrast media (GBCM), collecting data on prevalence, type, latency and severity. Secondly, the predisposition to perform new contrast tests, use of premedication and possible appearance of new reactions were explored in a long-term follow-up of 5 years. Clinical data, comorbidities, skin test (ST) results, re-exposure to CM procedures with any new reactions, premedication and CM used were collected. In a retrospective single-center study, 350 patients with mild to moderate HRs were enrolled. Asthma, food allergy, non-allergic drug hypersensitivity and neurologic disease were significantly more frequent in patients with HRs to GBCM compared to the high evidence of cardiovascular disease and history of cancer in patients with HRs to ICM. A marked delay in performing STs was reported by patients with negative results (66 months, p < 0.01). Iomeprol, iopamidol and gadobenic acid were the culprit CM most involved in HRs in patients with positive STs. During follow-up, 7.1% of responders reported new HRs to CM despite negative STs, premedication and infusion of alternative CM in most cases.

Allergies and COVID-19 vaccines: An ENDA/EAACI Position paper.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis, which is rare, has been reported after COVID-19 vaccination, but its management is not standardized. METHOD: Members of the European Network for Drug Allergy and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology interested in drug allergy participated in an online questionnaire on pre-vaccination screening and management of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, and literature was analysed. RESULTS: No death due to anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines has been confirmed in scientific literature. Potential allergens, polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate and tromethamine are excipients. The authors propose allergy evaluation of persons with the following histories: 1-anaphylaxis to injectable drug or vaccine containing PEG or derivatives; 2-anaphylaxis to oral/topical PEG containing products; 3-recurrent anaphylaxis of unknown cause; 4-suspected or confirmed allergy to any mRNA vaccine; and 5-confirmed allergy to PEG or derivatives. We recommend a prick-to-prick skin test with the left-over solution in the suspected vaccine vial to avoid waste. Prick test panel should include PEG 4000 or 3500, PEG 2000 and polysorbate 80. The value of in vitro test is arguable. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will lead to a better knowledge of the management and mechanisms involved in anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines and enable more people with history of allergy to be vaccinated.

Allergic reactions to midazolam: A case series from an Italian allergy unit.

Midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine with central nervous system depressing action, commonly used for conscious sedation for various procedures and for its pharmacologic properties.In literature, severe adverse reactions to this drug are described, but only in few cases positive allergological tests were demonstrated.The authors collected herein five clinical cases of different allergic reactions to midazolam demonstrated by positive skin tests.

Allergic reactions to midazolam: A case series from an Italian allergy unit

Midazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine with central nervous system depressing action, commonly used for conscious sedation for various procedures and for its pharmacologic properties. In literature, severe adverse reactions to this drug are described, but only in few cases positive allergological tests were demonstrated. The authors collected herein five clinical cases of different allergic reactions to midazolam demonstrated by positive skin tests. The 1° case is a suspected Kounis syndrome with cardiorespiratory arrest during an elective video laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The 2° and 5° cases are two systemic reactions with involvement of the skin and the gastrointestinal/respiratory system during elective surgeries in two patients with clinical history of atopia, while the 3° and 4° cases are local skin reactions in correspondence with the infusion site of midazolam during the execution of a colonoscopy. All the patients performed a complete allergological evaluation for the reaction involved drugs. In all cases, only the intradermal test (IDT) with midazolam at 0.5 mg/mL was positive. Allergological tests performed in 10 healthy controls with negative results supported the diagnosis. Therefore, midazolam is often considered a safe drug, because it does not have any active metabolites, in rare cases, it could cause different types of allergic adverse reactions: from severe anaphylaxis with cardiorespiratory arrest to simple local skin reactions. Skin tests remain the first line in the diagnosis of an immediate-type hypersensitivity to midazolam; even if they could lose in sensitivity with increasing latency from the event. However the concentrations recommended by current guidelines of European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA) and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) drug allergy interest groups might not rule out some false-positive reactions due to an irritant effect that should be considered (AU)

Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agents Hypersensitivity: A Case Series.

Gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) are considered to be safe, although sometimes patients report a hypersensitivity reaction when undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The mechanisms of these reactions and of the sensitization to GBCAs are still largely unknown. We describe four cases of patients who experienced immediate adverse reactions to GBCAs with a demonstrated cutaneous hypersensitivity suggesting an IgE-mediated mechanism.

Perioperative anaphylaxis to chlorhexidine: Crucial role of in-vitro testing.

BACKGROUND: Chlorhexidine is a synthetic biguanide with a broad antibacterial activity and has become an important cause of perioperative anaphylaxis. OBJECTIVE: Reactions due to chlorhexidine allergy are usually IgE-mediated. The aim of this report is to demonstrate utility of laboratory in-vitro testing for diagnosis. METHODS: We report the case of a 36-year old man who experienced severe anaphylaxis during general anesthesia. He underwent skin tests, specific detection of specific IgE to chlorhexidine and basophil activation test (BAT). RESULTS: Skin tests gave false positive results due to dermographism. So, on the basis of a clinical reaction to chlorhexidine and positive tests for IgE to chlorexidine and BAT, we assessed the diagnosis of chlorhexidine allergy. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should be aware of the role of chlorhexidine in the etiology of perioperative anaphylaxis. In vitro testing such specific IgE and BAT are useful in patient with suspected chlorexidine allergy and limitation to perform skin tests.

Impact of nickel oral hyposensitization on quality of life in systemic nickel allergy syndrome.

Nickel (Ni) oral hyposensitization treatment (NiOHT) is an effective management approach for Ni allergy. No health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data exist for the pre- and post-treatment with NiOHT in systemic nickel allergy syndrome (SNAS). The aims of this study were (a) to explore HRQoL in SNAS patients, (b) to assess changes of HRQoL after 1 year of NiOHT; (c) to evaluate psychological status of patients. SNAS patients completed the Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey and Psychological General Well-Being Index before and 1 week after the end of NiOHT. Moreover, psychological state was assessed with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2). A total of 52 patients self-reported pre- and post-treatment questionnaires. HRQoL was poor at baseline. After 1 year of NiOHT, all outcome measure scores improved by about 20% with respect to baseline data (P < 0.01 for all indices, except depressed mood). Finally, 33 patients performed the MMPI-2. High rates for hypochondriasis and depression were noted. Furthermore, most of the patients had high scores for anxiety, depression, and health concerns. This is the first study showing that NiOHT improves HRQoL of SNAS patients, which can be considered a "personalized medicine" approach.

Eosinophilic oesophagitis (in nickel-allergic patient) regressed after nickel oral desensitization: A case report.

The eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE) is a chronic immune/antigen disorder of the oesophagus clinically characterized by dysphagia and pathologically by mucosa eosinophilic infiltration. Th2-type allergic reactions are considered having important roles in the aetiopathogenesis of EoE. Avoidance of food allergens, administration of steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and dilation of the oesophagus are the most important treatments. 'Systemic nickel allergy syndrome' (SNAS) interests about 20% of patients with nickel contact allergy which could present systemic cutaneous manifestations (urticaria, oedema, etc.) and also respiratory and digestive symptoms (meteorism, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, etc.). In the literature, it is demonstrated that nickel oral immunotherapy is effective in reducing symptoms of SNAS and in modulating inflammatory parameters. We describe the case of a 48-year-old woman suffering from EoE not responsive to the topical steroid administration and diagnosis of SNAS. The patient started nickel oral desensitization according to the literature protocol continuing nickel-free diet. After 1 year from the beginning of the treatment, during the maintenance dose (500 ng three times a week), she decreased gradually the dosage of immunotherapy and reintroduced all the culprit foods. After the immunotherapy interruption, during the free diet, she repeated the oesophagogastroscopy with a complete macroscopic and histological resolution. We showed the first case of an EoE in a patient affected by SNAS responsive to the nickel-free diet and the oral immunotherapy.

Specific oral immunotherapy in food allergic patients: transient or persistent tolerance?

INTRODUCTION: The first therapeutic choice for food allergy is avoidance of the responsible food, but when this approach is not possible, specific oral desensitization could be considered as a good alternative. It is not clear yet whether the acquired tolerance is transient or persistent. AIM: We report on a subset of 13 patients of a larger study, treated successfully with specific oral tolerance induction who experienced secondary loss of tolerance after a period of allergen avoidance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirteen patients affected by IgE-mediated food allergy: to cow milk (3 patients), to hen egg (3 patients), to cod fish (2 patients), to peanuts (1 patient) and to corn (1 patient) confirmed by a complete allergological workup and a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC), were treated with sublingual-oral desensitization. After the interruption of the maintenance phase, the laboratory tests were performed and 12 of 13 patients underwent DBPCFC. RESULTS: Oral specific desensitization was completed successfully in all the 13 reported patients. At different times after the end of treatment, they decided, on their own initiative, to stop the ingestion of incriminated food. A new food allergen re-exposure caused adverse reactions in 12 of 13 patients. The detection of specific IgE and IgG4 during the period of allergen avoidance showed an increase in or a stable level of specific IgE and a decrease in specific IgG4 in 8 patients. CONCLUSIONS: According to our experience, the tolerance obtained through the desensitizing treatment is transient and so the regular allergen intake is necessary for its maintenance.

Latex immunotherapy: evidence of effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: The only etiological and decisive therapy, able to influence the natural history of latex allergy is the specific desensitization. AIM: To verify the clinical efficacy and immunological changes determined by latex sublingual immunotherapy in allergic patients who underwent this treatment for at least 3 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We enrolled 76 patients (16 males and 60 females, mean age 34 years old) with evidence of a natural rubber latex allergy. To assess the effectiveness of the immunotherapy we performed a latex skin prick test, specific IgE and IgG4 and challenge tests before and after at least 3 years of desensitization. RESULTS: We observed a reduction in the mean diameter of the wheal area at the skin prick test and a decrease in latex specific IgE while no significant changes of latex IgG4 values were found. Moreover a reduction of symptoms and scores at the provocation tests were remarked. CONCLUSIONS: Although the primary prevention (which still remains the gold standard treatment for patients suffering from the latex allergy) sublingual immunotherapy can be offered with efficacy in addition to symptomatic treatment to selected patients.