Polymorphisms in eicosanoid-related biosynthesis enzymes associated with acute urticaria/angioedema induced by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are the main triggers of drug hypersensitivity, with NSAID-induced acute urticaria/angioedema (NIUA) the most frequent phenotype. NSAID hypersensitivity is caused by cyclooxygenase 1 inhibition, which leads to an imbalance in prostaglandin (PG) and cysteinyl leukotriene (CysLT) synthesis. As only susceptible individuals develop NSAID hypersensitivity, genetic factors are believed to be involved; however, no study has assessed the overall genetic variability of key enzymes in PG and CysLT synthesis in NSAID hypersensitivity. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate simultaneously variants in the main genes involved in PG and CysLT biosynthesis in NIUA. METHODS: Two independent cohorts of patients were recruited in Spain, alongside NSAID-tolerant controls. The discovery cohort included only patients with NIUA; the replication cohort included patients with NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD). A set of tagging single-nucleotide polymorphisms (tagSNPs) in PTGS1, PTGS2, ALOX5 and LTC4S was genotyped using mass spectrometry coupled with endpoint polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The study included 1272 individuals. Thirty-five tagSNPs were successfully genotyped in the discovery cohort, with three being significantly associated after Bonferroni correction (rs10306194 and rs1330344 in PTGS1; rs28395868 in ALOX5). These polymorphisms were genotyped in the replication cohort: rs10306194 and rs28395868 remained associated with NIUA, and rs28395868 was marginally associated with NERD. Odds ratios (ORs) in the combined analysis (discovery and replication NIUA populations) were 1·7 for rs10306194 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1·34-2·14; Pcorrected = 2·83 × 10-4 ) and 2·19 for rs28395868 (95% CI 1·43-3·36; Pcorrected = 0·002). CONCLUSIONS: Variants of PTGS1 and ALOX5 may play a role in NIUA and NERD, supporting the proposed mechanisms of NSAID-hypersensitivity and shedding light on their genetic basis.

Spanish Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC) Vision of Drug Provocation Tests.

The controlled drug provocation test (DPT) is currently considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of drug allergy. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an increasingly common presenting complaint in both primary and specialized care. In Spain, ADRs are usually assessed via the allergology department, which rules out immunological mechanisms in up to 90% of cases. An adequate approach to ADRs clearly impacts the costs and efficacy of the treatments prescribed by other specialists. Consequently, if we did not use DPTs, patients would require more expensive, more toxic, and less effective treatments in many cases. In recent years, many new drugs have been developed. This document is intended to be a practical guideline for the management of DPTs according to the vision of the Spanish Allergology Society. The diagnostic work-up begins with a detailed clinical history. Skin tests are only useful for some medications, and in most cases the diagnosis can only be confirmed by DPT. Although cross-reactivity is common, DPTs can confirm the diagnosis and help to find an alternative drug. Programmed individualized patient management based on the type of drug to be studied and the patient´s comorbidities usually enables a solution to be found in most cases.

Spanish Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC) Vision of Drug Provocation Tests

The controlled drug provocation test (DPT) is currently considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of drug allergy. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an increasingly common presenting complaint in both primary and specialized care. In Spain, ADRs are usually assessed via the allergology department, which rules out immunological mechanisms in up to 90% of cases. An adequate approach to ADRs clearly impacts the costs and efficacy of the treatments prescribed by other specialists. Consequently, if we did not use DPTs, patients would require more expensive, more toxic, and less effective treatments in many cases. In recent years, many new drugs have been developed. This document is intended to be a practical guideline for the management of DPTs according to the vision of the Spanish Allergology Society. The diagnostic work-up begins with a detailed clinical history. Skin tests are only useful for some medications, and in most cases the diagnosis can only be confirmed by DPT. Although cross-reactivity is common, DPTs can confirm the diagnosis and help to find an alternative drug. Programmed individualized patient management based on the type of drug to be studied and the patient's comorbidities usually enables a solution to be found in most cases (AU)

La prueba de exposición controlada a fármacos (DPT) se considera actualmente el estándar de oro para el diagnóstico de alergia amedicamentos. Las reacciones adversas inducidas por medicamentos (RAM) son un motivo creciente de consulta tanto en atención primariacomo especializada. Las consultas de Alergología en España son las que habitualmente estudian estas RAM y descartan mecanismosinmunológicos implicados hasta en el 90% de los casos consultados. Un abordaje adecuado de estos casos repercute de una maneraevidente en los costes y la eficacia de los tratamientos requeridos por otros especialistas, de modo que, si no empleáramos los DPT, lospacientes requerirían tratamientos más costosos, más tóxicos y menos eficaces en la mayoría de los casos.En los últimos años se han desarrollado un gran número de nuevos fármacos y este documento pretende ser una guía práctica en lagestión de las DPT con la visión de la Sociedad Española de Alergología. El trabajo de diagnóstico comienza con un historial detalladodel paciente. Las pruebas cutáneas solo son útiles en algunos medicamentos y, en la mayoría de los casos, el diagnóstico solo puedeconfirmarse mediante el DPT. Aunque suele haber reactividad cruzada, las DPT pueden confirmar el diagnóstico y también contribuir aencontrar un fármaco alternativo tolerable. El manejo individual de los pacientes de forma programada, teniendo en cuenta tanto eltipo de fármaco a estudiar como las comorbilidades del paciente, suele permitir encontrar una solución para la mayoría de los pacientes (AU)

Quality of life improvement with allergen immunotherapy treatment in patients with rhinoconjunctivitis in real life conditions. Results of an observational prospective study (ÍCARA).

Summary: Objectives. Evaluate the changes in quality of life of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR), with or without asthma, after one-year treatment with allergen immunotherapy. Methods. This was an observational prospective multicenter study. RQLQ questionnaire and VAS scale to assess treatment satisfaction were used. Impact on AR and asthma was also analyzed. Any adverse reaction was recorded. Results. 127 patients were recruited. Mean values in RQLQ decreased from 2.61 to 1.34 points, reflecting a statistically and clinically significant improvement (p minor 0.01). The percentage of asthmatic patients decreased significantly (p minor 0.01). Mean value of patients' satisfaction was 7.24 (SD = 1.90). Only 11 patients presented systemic reactions (9.17%), none of them serious. Conclusions. One-year AIT treatment significantly increases QoL in patients with AR. Moreover, high patients' satisfaction values were reported, together with an adequate safety profile.

Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions.

BACKGROUND: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1-9) and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. RESULTS: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more) and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. CONCLUSION: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.

Management of a surgical patient with a label of penicillin allergy: narrative review and consensus recommendations.

Unsubstantiated penicillin-allergy labels are common in surgical patients, and can lead to significant harm through avoidance of best first-line prophylaxis of surgical site infections and increased infection with resistant bacterial strains. Up to 98% of penicillin-allergy labels are incorrect when tested. Because of the scarcity of trained allergists in all healthcare systems, only a minority of surgical patients have the opportunity to undergo testing and de-labelling before surgery. Testing pathways can be modified and shortened in selected patients. A variety of healthcare professionals can, with appropriate training and in collaboration with allergists, provide testing for selected patients. We review how patients might be assessed, the appropriate testing strategies that can be used, and the minimum standards of safe testing.

Practical Guidelines for Perioperative Hypersensitivity Reactions.

Perioperative hypersensitivity reactions constitute a first-line problem for anesthesiologists and allergists. Therefore, hospitals should have a consensus protocol for the diagnosis and management of these reactions. However, this kind of protocol is not present in many hospitals, leading to problems with treatment, reporting of incidents, and subsequent etiological diagnosis. In this document, we present a systematic review of the available scientific evidence and provide general guidelines for the management of acute episodes and for referral of patients with perioperative hypersensitivity reactions to allergy units. Members of the Drug Allergy Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC) have created this document in collaboration with members of the Spanish Anesthesia Society (SEDAR). A practical algorithm is proposed for the etiologic diagnosis, and recommendations are provided for the management of hypersensitive patients.

Basophil Histamine Release Induced by Amoxicilloyl-poly-L-lysine Compared With Amoxicillin in Patients With IgE-Mediated Allergic Reactions to Amoxicillin.

BACKGROUND: Amoxicillin (AX) is the ß-lactam most often involved in IgE-mediated reactions. Diagnosis is based mainly on skin testing, although sensitivity is not optimal. We produced a new AX derivative, amoxicilloyl-poly-L-lysine (APL), and analyzed its recognition of IgE using the passive histamine release test (pHRT). METHODS: The study population comprised patients (n=19) with confirmed AX allergy and specific IgE to AX and controls (n=10) with good tolerance to AX. pHRT was performed using "IgE-stripped" blood from a single donor that was sensitized in vitro by patient sera and incubated with AX or APL. Histamine release was determined and expressed as nanograms of histamine released per milliliter of blood. RESULTS: The clinical symptoms were anaphylaxis (n=9), urticaria (n=7), erythema (n=2), and nondefined immediate reactions (n=1). The median (IQR) time interval between reaction and study was 90 (60-240) days and between drug intake and development of symptoms 24 (10-60) minutes. The median sIgE level was 3.37 (0.95-5.89) kUA/L. The sensitivity of pHRT to APL was 79% and the specificity 100%, which were higher than data obtained with pHRT to AX (63% sensitivity and 90% specificity). There was a positive correlation between maximal histamine release levels obtained with AX and APL (r=0.63). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions to AX, APL showed higher sensitivity and specificity than the culprit drug, AX, when tested in vitro by pHRT. This indicates that APL can improve the in vitro diagnostic accuracy of allergic reactions to AX. Further assessment of skin testing is necessary.

Clinical approach on challenge and desensitization procedures with aspirin in patients with ischemic heart disease and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) constitutes a serious problem for subjects with coronary artery disease. In such subjects, physicians have to choose the more appropriate procedure between challenge and desensitization. As the literature on this issue is sparse, this study aimed to establish in these subjects clinical criteria for eligibility for an ASA challenge and/or desensitization. METHODS: Collection and analysis of data on ASA challenges and desensitizations from 10 allergy centers, as well as consensus among the related physicians and an expert panel. RESULTS: Altogether, 310 subjects were assessed; 217 had histories of urticaria/angioedema, 50 of anaphylaxis, 26 of nonimmediate cutaneous eruptions, and 17 of bronchospasm related to ASA/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) intake. Specifically, 119 subjects had index reactions to ASA doses lower than 300 mg. Of the 310 subjects, 138 had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 101 of whom underwent desensitizations, whereas 172 suffered from a chronic ischemic heart disease (CIHD), 126 of whom underwent challenges. Overall, 163 subjects underwent challenges and 147 subjects underwent desensitizations; 86 of the latter had index reactions to ASA doses of 300 mg or less. Ten subjects reacted to challenges, seven at doses up to 500 mg, three at a cumulative dose of 110 mg. The desensitization failure rate was 1.4%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable CIHD and histories of nonsevere hypersensitivity reactions to ASA/NSAIDs, an ASA challenge is advisable. Patients with an ACS and histories of hypersensitivity reactions to ASA, especially following doses lower than 100 mg, should directly undergo desensitization.

Drug allergy passport and other documentation for patients with drug hypersensitivity - An ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group Position Paper.

The strongest and best-documented risk factor for drug hypersensitivity (DH) is the history of a previous reaction. Accidental exposures to drugs may lead to severe or even fatal reactions in sensitized patients. Preventable prescription errors are common. They are often due to inadequate medical history or poor risk assessment of recurrence of drug reaction. Proper documentation is essential information for the doctor to make sound therapeutic decision. The European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology have formed a task force and developed a drug allergy passport as well as general guidelines of drug allergy documentation. A drug allergy passport, a drug allergy alert card, a certificate, and a discharge letter after medical evaluation are adequate means to document DH in a patient. They are to be handed to the patient who is advised to carry the documentation at all times especially when away from home. A drug allergy passport should at least contain information on the culprit drug(s) including international nonproprietary name, clinical manifestations including severity, diagnostic measures, potential cross-reactivity, alternative drugs to prescribe, and where more detailed information can be obtained from the issuer. It should be given to patients only after full allergy workup. In the future, electronic prescription systems with alert functions will become more common and should include the same information as in paper-based documentation.

In vitro tests for drug hypersensitivity reactions: an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are a matter of great concern, both for outpatient and in hospital care. The evaluation of these patients is complex, because in vivo tests have a suboptimal sensitivity and can be time-consuming, expensive and potentially risky, especially drug provocation tests. There are several currently available in vitro methods that can be classified into two main groups: those that help to characterize the active phase of the reaction and those that help to identify the culprit drug. The utility of these in vitro methods depends on the mechanisms involved, meaning that they cannot be used for the evaluation of all types of DHRs. Moreover, their effectiveness has not been defined by a consensus agreement between experts in the field. Thus, the European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has organized a task force to provide data and recommendations regarding the available in vitro methods for DHR diagnosis. We have found that although there are many in vitro tests, few of them can be given a recommendation of grade B or above mainly because there is a lack of well-controlled studies, most information comes from small studies with few subjects and results are not always confirmed in later studies. Therefore, it is necessary to validate the currently available in vitro tests in a large series of well-characterized patients with DHR and to develop new tests for diagnosis.

Genetic variants associated with drugs-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review.

Drug hypersensitivity includes allergic (AR) and nonallergic reactions (NARs) influenced by genetic predisposition. We performed a systematic review of genetic predictors of IgE-mediated AR and NAR with MEDLINE and PubMed search engine between January 1966 and December 2014. Among 3110 citations, the search selected 53 studies, 42 of which remained eligible. These eligible studies have evaluated genetic determinants of immediate reactions (IR) to beta-lactams (n = 19), NAR against aspirin (n = 12) and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (n = 8), and IR to biologics (n = 3). We reported two genomewide association studies and four case-control studies on candidate genes validated by replication. Genes involved in IR to beta-lactams belonged to HLA type 2 antigen processing, IgE production, atopy, and inflammation, including 4 genes validated by replications, HLA-DRA, ILR4, NOD2, and LGALS3. Genes involved in NAR to aspirin belonged to arachidonic acid pathway, membrane-spanning 4A gene family, histamine production pathway, and pro-inflammatory cytokines, while those involved in NAR to all NSAIDs belonged to arachidonic acid pathway and HLA antigen processing pathway. ALOX5 was a common predictor of studies on NAR to both aspirin and NSAIDs. Although these first conclusions could be drawn, this review highlights also the lack of reliable data and the need for replicating studies in contrasted populations, taking into account worldwide allele frequencies, gene-gene interactions, and contrasted situations of environmental exposure.

Genetic variants of the arachidonic acid pathway in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced acute urticaria.

BACKGROUND: To date, genetic studies of hypersensitivity reactions to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been carried out mainly in aspirin-induced asthma and to a lesser extent in chronic urticaria, with no studies in patients with acute urticaria (AU), the most common entity induced by these drugs. OBJECTIVE: In this work, we analysed the association of common variants of 15 relevant genes encoding both enzymes and receptors from the arachidonic acid (AA) pathway with NSAID-induced AU. METHODS: Patients were recruited in several Allergy Services that are integrated into the Spanish network RIRAAF, and diagnosed of AU induced by cross-intolerance (CRI) to NSAIDs. Genotyping was carried out by TaqMan allelic discrimination assays. RESULTS: A total of 486 patients with AU induced by CRI to NSAIDs and 536 unrelated controls were included in this large Spanish case-control study. Seven variants from 31 tested in six genes were associated in a discovery study population from Malaga (0.0003 ≤ p-value ≤ 0.041). A follow-up analysis in an independent sample from Madrid replicated three of the SNPs from the ALOX15 (rs7220870), PTGDR (rs8004654) and CYSLTR1 (rs320095) genes (1.055x10(-6) ≤meta-analysis p-value ≤ 0.003). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Genetic variants of the AA pathway may play an important role in NSAID-induced AU. These data may help understand the mechanism underlying this disease.

Response to a selective COX-2 inhibitor in patients with urticaria/angioedema induced by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

BACKGROUND: In subjects with hypersensitivity reactions with cross-intolerance to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tolerance to selective COX-2 inhibitors has not been evaluated in large series of well-phenotyped cases. METHODS: We evaluated 252 patients with urticaria and/or angioedema caused by hypersensitivity owing to cross-intolerance to NSAIDs. In addition to the clinical history, diagnosis was confirmed by provocation to an alternative NSAID. Two groups were considered: (A) patients with cross-intolerance to NSAIDs and intolerance to paracetamol and (B) patients with cross-intolerance to NSAIDs and good tolerance to paracetamol. Etoricoxib was administered to Group A patients and to a representative sample of Group B patients. In the event of a positive response, serum tryptase levels were determined and skin biopsy was performed in five patients in each group. RESULTS: Ibuprofen was the most commonly implicated drug, followed by acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). Urticaria was the most common manifestation, followed by angioedema. Most of the patients developed symptoms within 1 h. Twenty-five percent in Group A (n = 47) and 6% in Group B (n = 50) were intolerant to etoricoxib. Skin biopsy showed mast cell activation with the release of tryptase to the extracellular space but without the increase in serum tryptase levels. CONCLUSION: Selective COX-2 inhibitors may be unsafe in subjects with urticaria and/or angioedema caused by hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs with cross-intolerance if they are intolerant to paracetamol. A quarter of patients who were intolerant to this drug were also intolerant to etoricoxib. In subjects with hypersensitivity to NSAIDs and intolerance to paracetamol, selective COX-2 inhibitors should be administered as a controlled, incremental dose provocation test to assess tolerance.

Hypersensitivity to repaglinide.

Meglitinides (repaglinide and nateglinide) are insulin secretagogues used to treat diabetes mellitus. We present a case of hypersensitivity reaction to repaglinide in a 61-year-old man who developed a maculopapular rash 5 days after treatment. Skin prick tests including repaglinide (0.5 g/mL) and patch tests (0.05% in pet and saline) were performed, and the results were negative. A blind oral challenge test with repaglinide was performed and the therapeutic dose was subsequently taken at home every 24 hours for 7 days. The result was positive with a delayed reaction at day 3. A punch biopsy of the skin lesions revealed drug-induced exanthema. The clinical manifestations, the latency period, the reappearance of cutaneous lesions after rechallenge, and the histopathology report of the skin biopsy suggest a type IV mechanism.

Characteristics of subjects experiencing hypersensitivity to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: patterns of response.

BACKGROUND: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most frequently involved groups of medicines in hypersensitivity drug reactions. Two mechanisms can induce the reaction: immunological (sensitization) due to a specific IgE or T cell response and pharmacological (cyclooxygenase inhibition). The contribution of each of these mechanisms to the reactions is not well known. OBJECTIVE: To analyse a large group of subjects with confirmed hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs. METHODS: The drugs involved, the clinical entities induced and the time interval between drug intake and appearance of the reaction were studied. In cases where the diagnosis was not confirmed, a drug provocation test was carried out. Atopy status was also assessed with prick test and total IgE in serum. RESULTS: A total of 659 patients were finally considered to have had hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs; 76% had cross-intolerance (CI) and 24% were selective responders (SR). The most important drugs involved in CI were propionic acid derivatives, in most cases ibuprofen, and in SR pyrazolones. In CI, the most frequent clinical entity was urticaria and angio-oedema and to a lesser extent airway involvement. The skin and airways were both involved in an important proportion of cases. The most frequent entities in SR were urticaria and/or angio-oedema followed by anaphylaxis. Atopy was significantly associated in the CI group (P<0.005). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions by CI to NSAIDs are the most frequent entities induced by these compounds. In addition to aspirin, other NSAIDs are taking on a predominant role. Atopy can be a predisposing factor in patients with CI.

Role of minor determinants of amoxicillin in the diagnosis of immediate allergic reactions to amoxicillin.

BACKGROUND: Skin testing of subjects with immediate hypersensitivity to amoxicillin is performed using major and minor determinants of benzylpenicillin plus amoxicillin. However, sensitivity is not optimal, and other determinants need to be considered. We assessed the sensitivity of stable, well-characterized minor determinants of amoxicillin in subjects with immediate allergic reactions to amoxicillin to improve skin test sensitivity. METHODS: Amoxicillin, amoxicilloic acid, and diketopiperazine were prepared and characterized by reverse-phase HPLC, tested in vivo by skin testing and in vitro by basophil activation test and RAST inhibition assay. RESULTS: Patients with immediate hypersensitivity to amoxicillin were selected: Group A (n = 32), skin test positive just to amoxicillin; Group B (n = 19), skin test positive to benzylpenicillin determinants; Group C (n = 10), skin test negative and amoxicillin drug provocation test positive. In Group A, 27 subjects (81.8%) were skin test positive to amoxicillin, ten (30.3%) to amoxicilloic acid, two (6.1%) to diketopiperacine, and six (18.2%) negative. In Group B, nine (50%) were positive to amoxicillin, eight (42.1%) to amoxicilloic acid, none to diketopiperacine, and nine (50%) negative. In Group C, skin tests were negative. BAT was positive to amoxicillin in 26 patients (50.9%), to amoxicilloic acid in 15 (29.1%), and diketopiperazine in four (7.8%). RAST inhibition studies showed > 50% inhibition in all sera, with the highest concentration of amoxicillin and amoxicilloic acid. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of minor determinants of amoxicillin, amoxicilloic acid, and diketopiperazine seems to be of no greater value than the use of amoxicillin alone. Further efforts are needed to find new structures to improve sensitivity in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity to betalactams.