Skin testing and oral amoxicillin challenge in the outpatient allergy and clinical immunology clinic in pregnant women with penicillin allergy.

BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergy is frequently reported. In pregnant women, reported penicillin allergy is associated with negative health outcomes and suboptimal group B streptococcal prophylaxis. For individuals having penicillin allergy, skin testing followed by an observed oral challenge is recommended. Previous data indicate a low risk of adverse reaction with skin testing in pregnant women, but the subsequent oral challenge was not routinely pursued. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether skin testing followed by the outpatient oral challenge is tolerated by pregnant women. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all pregnant women who underwent penicillin allergy evaluation at an outpatient allergy and clinical immunology clinic. The patients underwent oral amoxicillin challenges based on the discretion of the allergy provider. We evaluated the index reaction history, skin test results, oral challenge results, and subsequent antibiotic exposure. RESULTS: A total of 46 pregnant women underwent skin testing without adverse reactions, of whom 44 patients (95.6%) received negative results. A total of 18 women (39%) completed an oral challenge without adverse reactions. Patients challenged vs not challenged did not differ in patient age, gestational age, latency since index reaction, or reaction history risk level. Notably, 28 women received intrapartum antibiotics. There was no difference in intrapartum antibiotic administration between those who did or who did not complete an in-office oral challenge (P = .90). CONCLUSION: Penicillin skin testing and oral challenge in pregnant women can safely be performed in the outpatient setting. There was no difference in the intrapartum antibiotic use between women who were and those who were not challenged. Further research is needed to determine the utility of oral challenge in pregnant patients.

Suspected food allergies in a septuagenarian with recurrent anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening reaction that can occur due to a variety of triggers. It is often associated with allergen exposure, such as food, venom, or medications; however, there are other less-common causes, and many patients are ultimately classified as idiopathic. In this report, we described a patient with recurrent reactions attributed to food exposure. Further evaluation revealed an alternative, less common diagnosis.

Anaphylaxis in Pregnancy.

Anaphylaxis in pregnancy is a rare event, but has important implications for the pregnant patient and fetus. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment all carry important considerations unique to the pregnant patient. Common culprits of anaphylaxis are primarily medications, particularly antibiotics and anesthetic agents. Diagnosis can be difficult given the relative lack of cutaneous symptoms, and normal physiologic changes in pregnancy such as low blood pressure and tachycardia. Apart from patient positioning, treatment is similar to that of the general population, with a focus on prompt epinephrine administration.

Relationship of Reaction History to Positive Penicillin Skin Tests.

BACKGROUND: Previous data suggest that up to one-third of patients classified as allergic based on positive penicillin skin tests have a vague reaction history. Direct oral challenge (DOC) has been recommended for patients with a low-risk reaction history. A variety of published models stratify reaction risk to guide the use of DOC. OBJECTIVE: To reassess the proportion of penicillin skin test-positive patients with vague or low-risk reaction histories and evaluate the relationship between the reaction risk history and the likelihood of positive skin test results. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent penicillin allergy evaluation over a 5-year period. We recorded drug reaction history, demographic variables, skin testing, and challenge results. Matched controls whose skin tests were negative were identified for skin test-positive patients. Drug reaction histories were assigned a risk category based on 2 previously published risk stratification models. We used logistic regression to investigate whether reaction history risk was associated with positive skin test results. RESULTS: Penicillin skin testing was performed in 3382 patients; 207 (6.1%) were positive. Positive skin tests were more frequent in outpatients (P < .001), younger patients (P < .001), and female patients (P < .001). Percentages of each risk category in each model were similar in cases versus matched controls. The likelihood for positive skin tests increased with a high-risk reaction history in one stratification model. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm that a substantial proportion of patients who self-report penicillin allergy and have positive skin test results have a low-risk history and imply that penicillin skin testing is associated with a poor positive predictive value.

Anaphylaxis to Drugs, Biological Agents, and Vaccines.

Anaphylaxis is a multi-system syndrome resulting from the release of mediators from mast cells and basophils. Drugs are common causes. Anaphylaxis to certain drugs, vaccines, and biological agents present clinical challenges, and merit referral to a board-certified allergist/immunologist for further evaluation and management.

Anaphylaxis to vaccinations: A review of the literature and evaluation of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.

Recent reports of allergic reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID-19 vaccines have resulted in questions about how and to whom they can be safely administered. Although anaphylaxis was not observed in clinical trials for either vaccine, there have been 21 reported possible cases of anaphylaxis associated with the Pfizer vaccine (11.1 cases per million doses administered) and 10 possible cases associated with the Moderna vaccine (2.5 anaphylaxis cases per million doses administered). The etiology of anaphylaxis in these cases is not fully understood and is an area of active research. The overall incidence of anaphylaxis to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is very low. By following recommendations from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an overwhelming majority of the US population can be safely immunized.

A Systematic Review of the Effect of Physical Activity on Asthma Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease that affects millions worldwide. Medication management is the current mainstay of treatment; however, there is evidence to suggest additional benefit with lifestyle changes, particularly with increased physical activity. OBJECTIVE: To discover and evaluate the effects of physical activity on asthma outcomes. METHODS: Systematic search of PubMed, Excerpta Medica database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine Source, Scopus, and Web of Science identified 11,155 results. Thirty-five articles met our inclusion criteria spanning 20 studies. Data extraction was conducted by 6 independent reviewers, and final results were evaluated by a seventh reviewer and the senior author. RESULTS: Wide variation among selected studies, including the heterogeneity of interventions and outcome variables, did not support a meta-analysis. Mixed results of the effects of physical activity on asthma outcomes were found. Most studies suggest that physical activity improves asthma control, quality of life, lung function parameters, and inflammatory serologies, whereas 3 found no improvements in any of these outcomes. No studies reported worsening asthma outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the emerging and promising role of physical activity as a nonpharmacologic treatment for asthma. Additional high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to overcome the problems of measurement heterogeneity and the dilution of outcome effect size measurement related to physical activity interventions for asthma.

Optimizing lifestyle interventions in adult patients with comorbid asthma and obesity.

The prevalence of obesity and asthma are both increasing at alarming rates. The link between obesity and asthma suggests that obesity contributes to both risk of new onset asthma and increased asthma severity. The emerging evidence demonstrating the role of obesity and other lifestyle factors, such as diet and physical activity, on asthma outcomes warrants lifestyle interventions that can address these components of asthma care. This review examines the current literature on the pathophysiology of obesity's role in asthma, as well as the role of diet and physical activity in weight loss and in asthma outcomes. We discuss recent studies that employ lifestyle interventions to target improved asthma outcomes. Finally, we discuss the future direction of research in this area. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.