Serum chemistry profiling and prognostication in systemic mastocytosis: a registry-based study of the ECNM and GREM.

Certain laboratory abnormalities correlate with subvariants of systemic mastocytosis (SM) and are often prognostically relevant. To assess the diagnostic and prognostic value of individual serum chemistry parameters in SM, 2607 patients enrolled within the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) and 575 patients enrolled within the German Registry on Eosinophils and Mast Cells (GREM) were analyzed. For screening and diagnosis of SM, tryptase was identified as the most specific serum parameter. For differentiation between indolent and advanced SM (AdvSM), the following serum parameters were most relevant: tryptase, alkaline phosphatase (AP), ß2-microglobulin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), albumin, vitamin B12, and C-reactive protein (P<0.001). With regard to subvariants of AdvSM, an elevated LDH ≥260U/L was associated with multi-lineage expansion (leukocytosis, r=0.37, P<0.001; monocytosis, r=0.26, P<0.001) and the presence of an associated myeloid neoplasm (P<0.001), whereas tryptase levels were highest in mast cell leukemia (MCL vs. non-MCL, 308 µg/L vs. 146 µg/L, P=0.003). Based on multivariable analysis, the hazard-risk weighted assignment of 1 point to lactate dehydrogenase (HR 2.1 [95% CI 1.1-4.0], P=0.018) and 1.5 points each to ß2-microglobulin (HR 2.7 [95% CI 1.4-5.4], P=0.004) and albumin (HR 3.3 [95% CI 1.7-6.5], P=0.001) delineated a highly predictive three-tier risk classification system (0 points, 8.1 years vs. 1 point, 2.5 years, ≥1.5 points, 1.7 years; P<0.001). Moreover, serum chemistry parameters enabled further stratification of IPSM-AdvSM1/2 risk-score classified patients (P=0.027). In conclusion, serum chemistry profiling is a crucial tool in the clinical practice supporting diagnosis and prognostication of SM and its subvariants.

Prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions in various forms of mastocytosis: A pilot study of 2485 adult patients with mastocytosis collected in the ECNM registry.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions (HR) are common in mastocytosis. However, little is known about triggers and risk factors. The registry of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) enables reliable studies in a larger cohort of mastocytosis patients. We assessed prevalence, triggers and risk factors of HR in adults with mastocytosis in the ECNM registry. METHODS: Data were collected in 27 ECNM centers. We analyzed potential triggers (Hymenoptera venoms, food, drug, inhalant and others) and risk factors at diagnosis and during follow-up. The study group consisted of 2485 adults with mastocytosis, 1379 women (55.5%) and 1106 men (44.5%). Median age was 48.2 years (range 18-91 years). RESULTS: Nine hundred and forty eight patients (38.1%) reported one or more HR`. Most common triggers were Hymenoptera venoms in cutaneous mastocytosis (CM) and indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM), whereas in advanced SM (advSM), most common elicitors were drugs, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and penicillin. In multivariate analyses, tryptase level < 90 ng/mL, <15% infiltration by mast cells in bone marrow biopsy-sections, and diagnosis of ISM were identified as independent risk factors for HR. For drug-induced HR, prominent risk factors were advSM and high tryptase levels. New reactions were observed in 4.8% of all patients during 4 years follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: HR are mainly triggered by Hymenoptera venoms in patients with CM and ISM and by drugs in patients with advSM. Tryptase levels <90 ng/mL, mast cell bone marrow infiltration <15%, and WHO category ISM are predictors of HR. New HR occur in 4.8% of all patients within 4 years.

Mast cell versus basophil activation test in allergy: Current status.

In the past two decades, we witnessed the evolution of the basophil activation test (BAT) from mainly research applications to a potential complementary diagnostic tool to document IgE-dependent allergies. However, BAT presents some technical weaknesses. Around 10%-15% of tested patients are non-responders, BAT can be negative immediately post-reaction and the use of fresh basophils, ideally analysed within 4 h of collection, restricts the number of tests that can be performed per sample. The need for fresh basophils is especially limiting when conducting batch analyses and interlaboratory comparisons to harmonize BAT methodology. These limitations significantly hinder the wider application of BAT and urge the development of alternative testing, such as the mast cell activation test (MAT). The essential difference between BAT and MAT is the heterogeneity of the starting material used to perform the assays. Mast cells are tissue-resident, so cannot be easily accessed. Current alternative sources for functional studies are generating primary human mast cells, differentiated from donor progenitor cells, or using immortalized mast cell lines. Hence, the methodological approaches for MAT are not only vastly different from BAT, but also different among MAT protocols. This review summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of BAT and MAT assays, dedicating special attention to elucidating the key differences between the cellular sources used and provides an overview of studies hitherto performed comparing BAT and MAT in the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food and drug allergies.

Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis Uncommon in Mastocytosis: Findings From Two Large Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a common feature of patients with mastocytosis, particularly with Hymenoptera venoms. Hence, it is hypothesized that patients with mastocytosis may have an increased susceptibility to developing drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA). Patients and medical practitioners are therefore concerned when there is a need to use various drugs. However, this issue has not been systematically investigated. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prevalence and clinical characteristics of anaphylaxis to various types of drugs among patients with mastocytosis. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among 470 consecutive patients (18 years and older) with confirmed clonal mast cell diseases recruited from 2 independent mastocytosis reference centers. All patients underwent a comprehensive, individualized allergy workup with evaluation of the (self)reported drug hypersensitivity. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of DIA was 6.3%, accounting for one-third of the confirmed drug hypersensitivity reactions. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were the most common elicitors of DIA (56%), followed by perioperative agents (23%) and antibiotics (13%). Anaphylactic reactions were severe in most cases, with 43% of patients experiencing hypotensive syncope. All drug-related hypersensitivity reactions occurred before mastocytosis was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of DIA in mastocytosis tends to be higher than in the general population, but is overall low. However, its severity is more pronounced. Our results suggest that patients with mastocytosis with a previous reaction to drugs should undergo a thorough allergy workup. Well-tolerated drugs can be further used without specific precautions.

Non-IgE-Mediated Immediate Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions.

Immediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions (IDHSRs) have conventionally been attributed to an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated mechanism. Nevertheless, it has now been acknowledged that IDHSRs can also occur independently of IgE involvement. Non-IgE-mediated IDHSRs encompass the activation of effector cells, both mast cell-dependent and -independent and the initiation of inflammatory pathways through immunogenic and nonimmunogenic mechanisms. The IDHSRs involve inflammatory mediators beyond histamine, including the platelet-activating factor, which activates multiple cell types, including smooth muscle, endothelium, and MC, and evidence supports its importance in IgE-mediated reactions in humans. Clinically, distinguishing IgE from non-IgE mechanisms is crucial for future treatment strategies, including drug(s) restriction, readministration approaches, and pretreatment considerations. However, this presents significant challenges because certain drugs can trigger both mechanisms, and their presentations can appear similarly, ranging from mild to life-threatening symptoms. Thus, history alone is often inadequate for differentiation, and skin tests lack a standardized approach. Moreover, drug-specific IgE immunoassays have favorable specificity but low sensitivity, and the usefulness of the basophil activation test remains debatable. Lastly, no biomarker reliably differentiates between both mechanisms. Whereas non-IgE-mediated mechanisms likely predominate in IDHSRs, reclassifying most drug-related IDHSRs as non-IgE-mediated, with suggested prevention through dose administration adjustments, is premature and risky. Therefore, continued research and validated diagnostic tests are crucial to improving our capacity to distinguish between these mechanisms, ultimately enhancing patient care.

Mast Cell-Targeting Therapies in Mast Cell Activation Syndromes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Provide an overview of the expanding landscape of mast cell (MC)-targeting treatments in mast cell activation syndromes (MCAS). RECENT FINDINGS: Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting wild-type and mutated KIT can efficiently induce MC depletion. Avapritinib and midostaurin can also temper IgE-mediated degranulation. Avapritinib has been recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM). Targeting activation pathways and inhibitory receptors is a promising therapeutic frontier. Recently, the anti Siglec-8 antibody lirentelimab showed promising results in ISM. MCAS is a heterogeneous disorder demanding a personalized therapeutic approach and, especially when presenting as anaphylaxis, has not been formally captured as outcome in prospective clinical trials with TKI. Long-term safety of TKI needs to be addressed. New drugs under investigation in diseases in which non-neoplastic MCs play a pivotal role can provide important inputs to identify new efficient and safe treatments for MCAS.

Paediatric perioperative hypersensitivity: the performance of the current consensus formula and the effect of uneventful anaesthesia on serum tryptase.

Background: Paired sampling of acute (aST) and basal (bST) serum tryptase has been recommended when investigating patients with a suspected perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) reaction. In the current consensus formula, an aST value exceeding (1.2×bST+2) confirms mast cell activation. The current consensus formula has been validated in adults but not in children. Methods: We prospectively included 96 children who underwent uneventful anaesthesia and sampled serum tryptase at baseline and 60-90 min after induction. Tryptase changes were then compared with those in 94 children with suspected POH who were retrospectively included from four reference centres in Belgium, France, and Denmark. Results: We observed a median decrease in serum tryptase during uneventful anaesthesia of 0.41 µg L-1 (-15.9%; P<0.001). The current consensus formula identified mast cell activation in 31.9% of paediatric POH patients. After generating receiver operating characteristic curves through 100 repeated five-fold cross-validation, aST>bST+0.71 was identified as the optimal cut-off point to identify mast cell activation. This new paediatric formula has higher sensitivity than the current consensus formula (53.2% vs 31.9%, P<0.001) with a specificity of 96.9%. Analysis in the subpopulation where a culprit was identified and in grade 3-4 reactions similarly yielded higher sensitivity for the new paediatric formula when compared with the current consensus formula (85.3% vs 61.8%; P=0.008 and 78.0% vs 48.8%; P<0.001, respectively). Internally cross-validated sensitivity and specificity were 53.3% and 93.3%, respectively. Conclusions: This is the first study suggesting the need for an adjusted formula in children to identify perioperative mast cell activation as tryptase is significantly lowered during uneventful anaesthesia. We propose a new formula (aST>bST+0.71) which performs significantly better than the current consensus formula in our multicentric paediatric population.

Comparison of the passive mast cell activation test with the basophil activation test for diagnosis of perioperative rocuronium hypersensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Rocuronium is a major cause of perioperative hypersensitivity (POH). Skin tests (STs) and quantification of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies (sIgEs) can yield incongruent results. In such difficult cases, the basophil activation test (BAT) can be helpful. Here, we evaluated the passive mast cell activation test (pMAT) as a substitute of BAT as part of the diagnostic tests for rocuronium allergy. METHODS: Sera from patients with a suspected POH reaction potentially related to rocuronium were included. All patients had a complete diagnostic investigation, including STs, quantification of sIgEs to morphine and rocuronium, and BAT. For execution of pMAT, human mast cells were generated from healthy donor peripheral blood CD34+ progenitor cells and sensitised overnight with patient sera. RESULTS: In total, 90 sera were studied: 41 from ST+sIgE+ patients, 13 from ST-sIgE- patients, 20 from ST+sIgE- patients, and 16 from ST-sIgE+ patients. According to BAT results, patients were further allocated into subgroups. Of the 38 BAT+ patients, 25 (66%) showed a positive pMAT as well. Of the 44 BAT- patients, 43 (98%) also showed a negative pMAT. Mast cells that were not passively sensitised did not respond to rocuronium. CONCLUSIONS: We show that the pMAT, in many cases, can substitute for BAT in the diagnosis of rocuronium hypersensitivity and advance diagnosis in difficult cases with uncertain ST or sIgE results when BAT is not locally available.

Biomarkers of immediate drug hypersensitivity.

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) are a burden for patients and the health systems. This problem increases when taking into account that only a small proportion of patients initially labelled as allergic are finally confirmed after an allergological workup. The diverse nature of drugs involved will imply different interactions with the immunological system. Therefore, IDHRs can be produced by a wide array of mechanisms mediated by the drug interaction with specific antibodies or directly on effector target cells. These heterogeneous mechanisms imply an enhanced complexity for an accurate diagnosis and the identification of the phenotype and endotype at early stages of the reaction is of vital importance. Currently, several endophenotypic categories (type I IgE/non-IgE, cytokine release, Mast-related G-protein coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) or Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition and their associated biomarkers have been proposed. A precise knowledge of endotypes will permit to discriminate patients within the same phenotype, which is crucial in order to personalise diagnosis, future treatment and prevention to improve the patient's quality of life.

Diagnostic Significance of Tryptase for Suspected Mast Cell Disorders.

Tryptase has proven to be a very useful and specific marker to demonstrate mast cell activation and degranulation when an acute (i.e., within 4 h after the event) and baseline value (i.e., at least 24 h after the event) are compared and meet the consensus formula (i.e., an increase of 20% + 2). The upper limit of normal determined by the manufacturer is 11.4 ng/mL; however, this boundary has been the subject of debate. According to ECNM and AIM experts, the normal range of baseline tryptase should be 1 to 15 ng/mL. A genetic trait, hereditary alpha tryptasemia, characterized by an increased alpha coding TPSAB1 copy number is associated with a baseline value above 8 ng/mL. Elevated tryptase can also be found in chronic kidney disease, obesity, and hematological neoplasms. A tryptase > 20 ng/mL serves as a minor criterion to diagnose systemic mastocytosis and an increase in tryptase > 20% + 2 during an acute event is a required criterion in the diagnosis of mast cell activation syndrome. The goal of this review is to demonstrate the (in)significance of tryptase using some clinical vignettes and to provide a practical guide on how to manage and interpret an elevated tryptase level.

The Normal Range of Baseline Tryptase Should Be 1 to 15 ng/mL and Covers Healthy Individuals With HαT.

Physiological levels of basal serum tryptase vary among healthy individuals, depending on the numbers of mast cells, basal secretion rate, copy numbers of the TPSAB1 gene encoding alpha tryptase, and renal function. Recently, there has been a growing debate about the normal range of tryptase because individuals with the hereditary alpha tryptasemia (HαT) trait may or may not be symptomatic, and if symptomatic, uncertainty exists as to whether this trait directly causes clinical phenotypes or aggravates certain conditions. In fact, most HαT-positive cases are regarded as asymptomatic concerning mast cell activation. To address this point, experts of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) and the American Initiative in Mast Cell Diseases met at the 2022 Annual ECNM meeting and discussed the physiological tryptase range. Based on this discussion, our faculty concluded that the normal serum tryptase range should be defined in asymptomatic controls, inclusive of individuals with HαT, and based on 2 SDs covering the 95% confidence interval. By applying this definition in a literature screen, the normal basal tryptase in asymptomatic controls (HαT-positive persons included) ranges between 1 and 15 ng/mL. This definition should avoid overinterpretation, unnecessary referrals, and unnecessary anxiety or anticipatory fear of illness in healthy individuals.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents - A practical guide for the oncologist.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) to antineoplastic agents occur frequently, and every oncologist will encounter these reactions in their clinical practice at some point. The clinical signature of IHRs can range from mild to life-threatening, and their occurrence can substantially impede the treatment course of patients with cancer. Yet, clear guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management are scarce, especially from an oncologic point of view. Therefore, herein, we review the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis and management of IHRs to chemotherapeutic agents and monoclonal antibodies. First, we focus on defining the specific entities that comprise IHRs and discuss their underlying mechanisms. Then, we summarize the epidemiology for the antineoplastic agents that represent the most common causes of IHRs, i.e., platinum compounds, taxanes and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Next, we describe the possible clinical pictures and the comprehensive diagnostic work-up that should be executed to identify the culprit and safe alternatives for the future. Finally, we finish with reviewing the treatment options in both the acute phase and after recovery, with the aim to improve the oncologic care of patients with cancer.

A quarter of a century fundamental and translational research in perioperative hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis at the Antwerp university hospital, a Belgian Centre of Excellence of the World Allergy Organization.

Perioperative hypersensitivity constitutes an important health issue, with potential dramatic consequences of diagnostic mistakes. However, safe and correct diagnosis is not always straightforward, mainly because of the application of incorrect nomenclature, absence of easy accessible in-vitro/ex-vivo tests and uncertainties associated with the non-irritating skin test concentrations. In this editorial we summarize the time line, seminal findings, and major realizations of 25 years of research on the mechanisms, diagnosis, and management of perioperative hypersensitivity.