The Who, What, When, and Where of Inpatient Direct Oral Penicillin Challenge-Implications for Health Services Implementation.

Inpatient direct oral challenge programs are increasingly deployed as part of antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the burden and impacts of penicillin allergy labels on antibiotic prescribing. Using data from a prospective, multicenter cohort inpatient penicillin allergy program, we identify the key targets for delabeling to aid health service implementation.

Oral challenge vs routine care to assess low-risk penicillin allergy in critically ill hospital patients (ORACLE): a pilot safety and feasibility randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Critically ill patients are vulnerable to penicillin allergy labels that may be incorrect. The validity of skin testing in intensive care units (ICUs) is uncertain. Many penicillin allergy labels are low risk, and validated tools exist to identify those amenable to direct oral challenge. This pilot randomised controlled trial explored the feasibility, safety, and validity of direct enteral challenge for low-risk penicillin allergy labels in critical illness. METHODS: Consenting patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy label (PAL) (PEN-FAST risk assessment score < 3) in four ICUs (Melbourne, Australia) were randomised 1:1 to penicillin (250 mg amoxicillin or implicated penicillin) direct enteral challenge versus routine care (2-h post-randomisation observation for each arm). Repeat challenge was performed post -ICU in the intervention arm. Patients were reviewed at 24 h and 5 days after each challenge/observation. RESULTS: We screened 533 patients. 130 (24.4%) were eligible and 80/130 (61.5%) enrolled (age median 64.5 years (interquartile range, IQR 53.5, 74), PEN-FAST median 1 (IQR 0,1)), with 40 (50%) randomised to direct enteral challenge. A positive challenge rate of 2.5% was identified. No antibiotic-associated serious adverse events were identified. 32/40 (80%) received a repeat challenge (zero positive). Post-randomisation, 13 (32%) of the intervention arm and 4 (10%) of the control arm received penicillin (odds ratio, OR 4.33 [1.27, 14.78] p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: These findings support the safety, validity, and feasibility of direct enteral challenge for critically ill patients with PEN-FAST assessed low-risk penicillin allergy. The absence of false negative results was confirmed by subsequent negative repeat challenges. A relatively low recruitment to screened ratio suggests that more inclusive eligibility criteria and integration of allergy assessment into routine ICU processes are needed to optimise allergy delabelling in critical illness.

Study protocol for PREPARE: a phase II feasibility/safety randomised controlled trial on PeRiopErative Penicillin AlleRgy TEsting.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-reported antibiotic allergy labels (AALs) are common. These labels have been demonstrated to have a negative impact on use of appropriate antibiotics and patient-related health outcomes. These patients are more likely to receive suboptimal antibiotics, have increased rates of surgical site infections and are more likely to be colonised with multidrug-resistant organisms. Increasing recognition that antibiotic allergy forms a key part of good antimicrobial stewardship has led to calls for greater access to antibiotic allergy assessment.PREPARE is a pilot randomised controlled trial of beta-lactam allergy assessment and point of care delabelling in perioperative patients utilising a validated antibiotic allergy assessment tool that has been repurposed into a smartphone application. The aim of the study is to assess the feasibility and safety of this approach in the perioperative outpatient setting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adult participants requiring elective surgery and are likely to require prophylactic intravenous antibiotics will be recruited. During the intervention phase, participants will be randomised to the intervention or control arm, with control patients receiving usual standard of care. Those randomised to intervention undertake a risk assessment via the smartphone application, with those deemed low risk proceeding to direct oral provocation with either a penicillin or cephalosporin. Study outcomes will be evaluated in the postintervention phase, 30 and 90 days after surgery.Feasibility of intervention delivery and recruitment will be reported as proportions with respective 95% CIs. Participants who experience an antibiotic adverse event will be reported by group with respective 95% CIs and compared using modified Poisson regression model with robust SE estimation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has received approval from the Austin Health human research and ethics committee, Heidelberg, Victoria, Australia (HREC/17/Austin/575). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals as well as presentation at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001295932.

Efficacy of a Clinical Decision Rule to Enable Direct Oral Challenge in Patients With Low-Risk Penicillin Allergy: The PALACE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fewer than 5% of patients labeled with a penicillin allergy are truly allergic. The standard of care to remove the penicillin allergy label in adults is specialized testing involving prick and intradermal skin testing followed by an oral challenge with penicillin. Skin testing is resource intensive, limits practice to specialist-trained physicians, and restricts the global population who could undergo penicillin allergy delabeling. Objective: To determine whether a direct oral penicillin challenge is noninferior to the standard of care of penicillin skin testing followed by an oral challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-arm, noninferiority, open-label, multicenter, international randomized clinical trial occurred in 6 specialized centers, 3 in North America (US and Canada) and 3 in Australia, from June 18, 2021, to December 2, 2022. Eligible adults had a PEN-FAST score lower than 3. PEN-FAST is a prospectively derived and internationally validated clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment for adults reporting penicillin allergies. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to either direct oral challenge with penicillin (intervention arm) or a standard-of-care arm of penicillin skin testing followed by oral challenge with penicillin (control arm). Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was a physician-verified positive immune-mediated oral penicillin challenge within 1 hour postintervention in the intention-to-treat population. Noninferiority was achieved if a 1-sided 95% CI of the risk difference (RD) did not exceed 5 percentage points (pp). Results: A total of 382 adults were randomized, with 377 patients (median [IQR] age, 51 [35-65] years; 247 [65.5%] female) included in the analysis: 187 in the intervention group and 190 in the control group. Most patients had a PEN-FAST score of 0 or 1. The primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (0.5%) in the control group, with an RD of 0.0084 pp (90% CI, -1.22 to 1.24 pp). The 1-sided 95% CI was below the noninferiority margin of 5 pp. In the 5 days following the oral penicillin challenge, 9 immune-mediated adverse events were recorded in the intervention group and 10 in the control group (RD, -0.45 pp; 95% CI, -4.87 to 3.96 pp). No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, direct oral penicillin challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy was noninferior compared with standard-of-care skin testing followed by oral challenge. In patients with a low-risk history, direct oral penicillin challenge is a safe procedure to facilitate the removal of a penicillin allergy label. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04454229.

Victorian Specialist Immunisation Services (VicSIS) - bolstering adult clinics for COVID-19 vaccines.

The Victorian Specialist Immunization Services (VicSIS) was established in Victoria, Australia, in February 2021, aiming to enhance vaccine safety services for Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines. VicSIS supports practitioners and patients with complex vaccine safety questions, including those who experience adverse events following immunization (AEFI) after COVID-19 vaccines. VicSIS provides individual vaccination recommendations, allergy testing, vaccine challenges, and vaccination under supervision. VicSIS initially comprised of eight adult COVID-19 specialist vaccination clinics, subsequently, expanding to better support pediatric patients as the Australian vaccine roll-out extended to adolescents and children. Since their establishment to September 2021, the inaugural VicSIS clinics received a total of 26,401 referrals and reviewed 6,079 patients. Consults were initially predominantly for pre-vaccination reviews, later predominantly becoming post-vaccination AEFI reviews as the program progressed. Regardless of the type of consult, the most common consult outcome was a recommendation for routine vaccination (73% and 55% of consult outcomes respectively). VicSIS is an integral component of the COVID-19 vaccination program and supports confidence in COVID-19 vaccine safety by providing consistent advice across the state. VicSIS aims to strengthen the health system through the pandemic, bolstering specialist immunization services beyond COVID-19 vaccines, including training the next generation of vaccinology experts.

Study protocol: Australasian Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (AUS-SCAR).

INTRODUCTION: Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR) are a group of T cell-mediated hypersensitivities associated with significant morbidity, mortality and hospital costs. Clinical phenotypes include Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and acute generalised exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP). In this Australasian, multicentre, prospective registry, we plan to examine the clinical presentation, drug causality, genomic predictors, potential diagnostic approaches, treatments and long-term outcomes of SCAR in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adult and adolescent patients with SCAR including SJS, TEN, DRESS, AGEP and another T cell-mediated hypersensitivity, generalised bullous fixed drug eruption, will be prospectively recruited. A waiver of consent has been granted for some sites to retrospectively include cases which result in early mortality. DNA will be collected for all prospective cases. Blood, blister fluid and skin biopsy sampling is optional and subject to patient consent and site capacity. To develop culprit drug identification and prevention, genomic testing will be performed to confirm human leukocyte antigen (HLA) type and ex vivo testing will be performed via interferon-γ release enzyme linked immunospot assay using collected peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The long-term outcomes of SCAR will be investigated with a 12-month quality of life survey and examination of prescribing and mortality data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and approved by the Austin Health Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/50791/Austin-19). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000241134).

Adverse reactions to vancomycin and cross-reactivity with other antibiotics.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Glycopeptide antibiotics such as vancomycin are frequently utilized to treat resistant Gram-positive infections such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The current literature on glycopeptide and lipoglycopeptide structure, hypersensitivity and potential cross-reactivity was reviewed, highlighting implications for safe prescribing. RECENT FINDINGS: Structurally similar, glycopeptides could theoretically cross-react. Immediate reactions to vancomycin include non-IgE-mediated reactions (e.g. red man syndrome) and IgE-mediated hypersensitivity (e.g. anaphylaxis), sharing clinical features. Vancomycin can activate mast cells via MAS-related G-protein-coupled receptor X2, an IgE-independent receptor implicated in non-IgE reactions. In-vivo and in-vitro testing for suspected IgE-mediated reactions to glycopeptides remain ill-defined. Vancomycin is increasingly recognized to cause severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR), with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) predominantly reported. Vancomycin DRESS has been associated with HLA-A32:-01, with a number needed to prevent of 1 in 74. Data demonstrating cross-reactivity amongst glycopeptides and lipoglycopeptides is limited to case reports/series. SUMMARY: Further studies and in-vivo/in-vitro diagnostics are required for better differentiation between IgE and non-IgE glycopeptide reactions. Despite its association with vanomycin DRESS, utility of pharmacogenomic screening for HLA-A32: 01 is ill-defined. Although HLA-A32:01 has been associated with vancomycin DRESS, its utility for pharmacogenomic screening is ill defined. Further clinical and immunological cross-reactivity data for glycopeptide/lipoglycopeptide antibiotics is required.

Delayed Diagnosis and Complications of Predominantly Antibody Deficiencies in a Cohort of Australian Adults.

Background: Predominantly antibody deficiencies (PADs) are the most common type of primary immunodeficiency in adults. PADs frequently pass undetected leading to delayed diagnosis, delayed treatment, and the potential for end-organ damage including bronchiectasis. In addition, PADs are frequently accompanied by comorbid autoimmune disease, and an increased risk of malignancy. Objectives: To characterize the diagnostic and clinical features of adult PAD patients in Victoria, Australia. Methods: We identified adult patients receiving, or having previously received immunoglobulin replacement therapy for a PAD at four hospitals in metropolitan Melbourne, and retrospectively characterized their clinical and diagnostic features. Results: 179 patients from The Royal Melbourne, Alfred and Austin Hospitals, and Monash Medical Centre were included in the study with a median age of 49.7 years (range: 16-87 years), of whom 98 (54.7%) were female. The majority of patients (116; 64.8%) met diagnostic criteria for common variable immunodeficiency (CVID), and 21 (11.7%) were diagnosed with X-linked agammaglobulinemia (XLA). Unclassified hypogammaglobulinemia (HGG) was described in 22 patients (12.3%), IgG subclass deficiency (IGSCD) in 12 (6.7%), and specific antibody deficiency (SpAD) in 4 individuals (2.2%). The remaining four patients had a diagnosis of Good syndrome (thymoma with immunodeficiency). There was no significant difference between the age at diagnosis of the disorders, with the exception of XLA, with a median age at diagnosis of less than 1 year. The median age of reported symptom onset was 20 years for those with a diagnosis of CVID, with a median age at diagnosis of 35 years. CVID patients experienced significantly more non-infectious complications, such as autoimmune cytopenias and lymphoproliferative disease, than the other antibody deficiency disorders. The presence of non-infectious complications was associated with significantly reduced survival in the cohort. Conclusion: Our data are largely consistent with the experience of other centers internationally, with clear areas for improvement, including reducing diagnostic delay for patients with PADs. It is likely that these challenges will be in part overcome by continued advances in implementation of genomic sequencing for diagnosis of PADs, and with that opportunities for targeted treatment of non-infectious complications.