-
Lancet (London, England) Jan 2019Antibiotics are the commonest cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including anaphylaxis, and organ-specific and... (Review)
Review
Antibiotics are the commonest cause of life-threatening immune-mediated drug reactions that are considered off-target, including anaphylaxis, and organ-specific and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. However, many antibiotic reactions documented as allergies were unknown or not remembered by the patient, cutaneous reactions unrelated to drug hypersensitivity, drug-infection interactions, or drug intolerances. Although such reactions pose negligible risk to patients, they currently represent a global threat to public health. Antibiotic allergy labels result in displacement of first-line therapies for antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment. A penicillin allergy label, in particular, is associated with increased use of broad-spectrum and non-β-lactam antibiotics, which results in increased adverse events and antibiotic resistance. Most patients labelled as allergic to penicillins are not allergic when appropriately stratified for risk, tested, and re-challenged. Given the public health importance of penicillin allergy, this Review provides a global update on antibiotic allergy epidemiology, classification, mechanisms, and management.
Topics: Anaphylaxis; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cross Infection; Drug Hypersensitivity; Drug Resistance, Microbial; Female; Global Health; Humans; Male; Penicillins; Risk Factors; beta-Lactamases
PubMed: 30558872
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32218-9 -
Journal of Investigational Allergology... 2020Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a complex multisystemic severe drug hypersensitivity reaction whose diagnosis and management... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a complex multisystemic severe drug hypersensitivity reaction whose diagnosis and management are troublesome. DRESS syndrome requires management by various specialists. The correct identification of the culprit drug is essential to ensure safe future therapeutic options for the patient. There are no previous Spanish guidelines or consensus statements on DRESS syndrome. Objective: To draft a review and guidelines on the clinical diagnosis, allergy work-up, management, treatment, and prevention of DRESS syndrome in light of currently available scientific evidence and the experience of experts from multiple disciplines.
METHODS
These guidelines were drafted by a panel of allergy specialists from the Drug Allergy Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (SEAIC), together with other medical specialists involved in the management of DRESS syndrome and researchers from the PIELenRed consortium. A review was conducted of scientific papers on DRESS syndrome, and the expert panel evaluated the quality of the evidence of the literature and provided grades of recommendation. Whenever evidence was lacking, a consensus was reached among the experts.
RESULTS
The first Spanish guidelines on DRESS syndrome are now being published. Important aspects have been addressed, including practical recommendations about clinical diagnosis, identification of the culprit drug through the Spanish pharmacovigilance system algorithm, and the allergy work-up. Recommendations are provided on management, treatment, and prevention. Algorithms for the management of DRESS in the acute and recovery phases have been drawn up. Expert consensus-based stepwise guidelines for the management and treatment of DRESS syndrome are provided.
Topics: Algorithms; Allopurinol; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anticonvulsants; Comorbidity; Consensus; Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome; Eosinophilia; Expert Testimony; Humans; Leukocytosis; Liver; Risk Factors; Skin; Spain
PubMed: 31932268
DOI: 10.18176/jiaci.0480 -
American Journal of Health-system... Apr 2021The current evidence regarding iodine-containing compounds and iodine allergy cross-reactivity is reviewed. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The current evidence regarding iodine-containing compounds and iodine allergy cross-reactivity is reviewed.
SUMMARY
Iodine is an essential human nutrient found in the thyroid gland. It is used in the synthesis of the thyroid hormones thyroxine and triiodothyroxine. Patients who report having adverse reactions to iodine-containing substances are often labelled as having an "iodine allergy," which can result in delays in care or patients being denied essential iodinated contrast media (ICM) or other iodine-containing drugs. A literature review was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding iodine allergy and iodine-containing drugs. Of 435 articles considered potentially appropriate for full review (plus 12 additional articles included on the basis of references from the eligible articles), 113 could not be obtained. After exclusion of 353 articles that did not meet all inclusion criteria, the remaining 81 articles were included in the review. The results of the literature review indicated that iodine has not been shown to be the allergen responsible for allergic reactions to iodinated contrast media, amiodarone, povidone-iodine, and other iodine-containing compounds.
CONCLUSION
There is a lack of evidence to support cross-reactivity between iodine-containing compounds in so called iodine-allergic individuals.
Topics: Amiodarone; Contrast Media; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Iodine; Thyroxine
PubMed: 33547463
DOI: 10.1093/ajhp/zxab033 -
Journal of Investigational Allergology... 2018Perioperative hypersensitivity reactions constitute a first-line problem for anesthesiologists and allergists. Therefore, hospitals should have a consensus protocol for... (Review)
Review
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.
Topics: Allergy and Immunology; Anaphylaxis; Anesthesia; Anesthetics; Consensus; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Societies, Medical; Spain
PubMed: 29411702
DOI: 10.18176/jiaci.0236 -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... Oct 2020The penicillin allergy label has been consistently linked with deleterious effects that span the health care spectrum, including suboptimal clinical outcomes, the... (Review)
Review
The penicillin allergy label has been consistently linked with deleterious effects that span the health care spectrum, including suboptimal clinical outcomes, the emergence of bacterial resistance, and increased health care expenditures. These risks have recently motivated professional organizations and public health institutes to advocate for the implementation of penicillin allergy delabeling initiatives; however, the burden of delabeling millions of patients is too expansive for any one discipline to bear alone. This review presents the unique perspectives and roles of various stakeholder groups involved in penicillin allergy diagnosis, assessment, and delabeling; we emphasize opportunities, barriers, and promising areas of innovation. We summarize penicillin allergy methods and tools that have proven successful in delabeling efforts. A multidisciplinary approach to delabeling patients with reported penicillin allergy, bolstered by evidence-based clinical practices, is recommended to reduce the risks that associate with the penicillin allergy label.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Delivery of Health Care; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Penicillins
PubMed: 33039010
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.04.059 -
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Jun 2022Hypersensitivity reactions including IgE-mediated and delayed cell-mediated reactions to aminoglycosides, clindamycin, linezolid, and metronidazole are rare. For... (Review)
Review
Hypersensitivity reactions including IgE-mediated and delayed cell-mediated reactions to aminoglycosides, clindamycin, linezolid, and metronidazole are rare. For aminoglycosides, allergic contact dermatitis is the most frequent reaction for which patch testing can be a useful step in evaluation. For clindamycin, delayed maculopapular exanthems are the most common reactions. There are case reports of clindamycin associated with drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), acute febrile neutrophilic dermatosis, and symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE). For linezolid, cases of hypersensitivity were exceedingly rare and included urticaria, angioedema, anaphylaxis, delayed rashes, and DRESS. For metronidazole, only rare cases were found across a broad spectrum of reactions including allergic contact dermatitis, fixed drug eruption, angioedema, anaphylaxis, serum sickness-like reaction, SJS/TEN, AGEP, SDRIFE, and a possible case of DRESS. IgE-mediated reactions and anaphylaxis to these types of antibiotics are uncommon, and reports of skin testing concentrations and desensitization protocols are largely limited to case reports and series. Non-irritating skin testing concentrations have been reported for gentamycin, tobramycin, and clindamycin. Published desensitization protocols for intravenous and inhaled tobramycin, oral clindamycin, intravenous linezolid, and oral and intravenous metronidazole have also been reported and are reviewed.
Topics: Aminoglycosides; Anaphylaxis; Angioedema; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clindamycin; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Drug Eruptions; Drug Hypersensitivity; Eosinophilia; Humans; Hypersensitivity, Delayed; Immunoglobulin E; Linezolid; Metronidazole; Tobramycin
PubMed: 34910281
DOI: 10.1007/s12016-021-08878-x -
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical... 2019Cephalosporins are commonly used antibiotics both in hospitalized patients and in outpatients. Hypersensitivity reactions to cephalosporins are becoming increasingly... (Review)
Review
Cephalosporins are commonly used antibiotics both in hospitalized patients and in outpatients. Hypersensitivity reactions to cephalosporins are becoming increasingly common with a wide range of immunopathologic mechanisms. Cephalosporins are one of the leading causes for perioperative anaphylaxis and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. Patients allergic to cephalosporins tend to tolerate cephalosporins with disparate R1 side chains but may react to other beta-lactams with common R1 side chains. Skin testing for cephalosporins has not been well validated but appears to have a good negative predictive value for cephalosporins with disparate R1 side chains. In vitro tests including basophil activation tests have lower sensitivity when compared with skin testing. Rapid drug desensitization procedures are safe and effective and have been used successfully for immediate and some nonimmediate cephalosporin reactions. Many gaps in knowledge still exist regarding cephalosporin hypersensitivity.
Topics: Anaphylaxis; Basophil Degranulation Test; Cephalosporins; Cross Reactions; Desensitization, Immunologic; Drug Eruptions; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Perioperative Period; Pharmacogenomic Variants; Serum Sickness; Skin Tests; beta-Lactams
PubMed: 31495420
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2019.06.001 -
Allergy Jun 2020A recent survey of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Drug Allergy Interest Group (DAIG) on how European allergy specialists deal with...
A recent survey of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Drug Allergy Interest Group (DAIG) on how European allergy specialists deal with beta-lactam (BL) hypersensitivity demonstrated a significant heterogeneity in current practice, suggesting the need to review and update existing EAACI guidelines in order to make the diagnostic procedures as safe and accurate, but also as cost-effective, as possible. For this purpose, a bibliographic search on large studies regarding BL hypersensitivity diagnosis was performed by an EAACI task force, which reviewed and evaluated the literature data using the GRADE system for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation. The updated guidelines provide a risk stratification in BL hypersensitivity according to index reaction(s), as well as an algorithmic approach, based on cross-reactivity studies, in patients with a suspicion of BL hypersensitivity and an immediate need for antibiotic therapy, when referral to an allergist is not feasible. Furthermore, the update addresses availability and concentrations of skin test (ST) reagents, ST and drug provocation test (DPT) protocols, and diagnostic algorithms and administration of alternative BL in allergic subjects. Specifically, distinct diagnostic algorithms are suggested depending on risk stratification of the patient into high and low risk based on the morphology and chronology of the reaction, immediate (ie, occurring within 1-6 hours after the last administered dose) or nonimmediate (ie, occurring more than 1 hour after the initial drug administration), and the reaction severity. Regarding the allergy workup, the main novelty of this document is the fact that in some low-risk nonimmediate reactions ST are not mandatory, especially in children. For DPT, further studies are necessary to provide data supporting the standardization of protocols, especially of those regarding nonimmediate reactions, for which there is currently no consensus.
Topics: Allergists; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Hypersensitivity, Immediate; Skin Tests; beta-Lactams
PubMed: 31749148
DOI: 10.1111/all.14122 -
Allergy Feb 2020Even though 8%-25% of most populations studied globally are labeled as penicillin allergic, most diagnoses of penicillin allergy are made in childhood and relate to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Even though 8%-25% of most populations studied globally are labeled as penicillin allergic, most diagnoses of penicillin allergy are made in childhood and relate to events that are either not allergic in nature, are low risk for immediate hypersensitivity, or are a potential true allergy that has waned over time. Penicillin allergy labels directly impact antimicrobial stewardship by leading to use of less effective and broader spectrum antimicrobials and are associated with antimicrobial resistance. They may also delay appropriate antimicrobial therapy and lead to increased risk of specific adverse healthcare outcomes. Operationalizing penicillin allergy de-labeling into a new arm of antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) has become an increasing global focus.
METHODS
We performed an evidence-based narrative review of the literature of penicillin allergy label carriage, the adverse effects of penicillin allergy labels, and current approaches and barriers to penicillin allergy de-labeling. Over the period 1928-2018 in Pubmed and Medline, search terms used included "penicillin allergy" or "penicillin hypersensitivity" alone or in combination with "adverse events," "testing," "evaluation," "effects," "label," "de-labeling," "prick or epicutaneous," and "intradermal" skin testing, "oral challenge or provocation," "cross-reactivity," and "antimicrobial stewardship".
RESULTS
Penicillin allergy labels are highly prevalent, largely inaccurate and their carriage may lead to unnecessary treatment and inferior outcomes with alternative agents as well as adverse public health outcomes such as antibiotic resistance.
CONCLUSIONS
Operationalizing penicillin allergy de-labeling as an aspect of ASP has become an increasing global focus. There is a need for validated approaches that optimally combine the use of history and ingestion challenge with or without proceeding formal skin testing to tackle penicillin allergy efficiently within complex healthcare systems. At the same time, there is great promise for penicillin allergy evaluation and de-labeling as an individual and public health strategy to reduce adverse healthcare outcomes, improve antimicrobial stewardship, and decrease healthcare costs.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antimicrobial Stewardship; Cephalosporins; Child; Child, Preschool; Cross Reactions; Desensitization, Immunologic; Drug Hypersensitivity; Humans; Intradermal Tests; Penicillins
PubMed: 31049971
DOI: 10.1111/all.13848 -
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Jun 2022Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy agents can present a serious challenge to treating patients with preferred or first-line therapies. Allergic reactions... (Review)
Review
Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy agents can present a serious challenge to treating patients with preferred or first-line therapies. Allergic reactions through an immunologic mechanism have been established for platinum and taxane agents, which are used to treat a wide variety of cancers including gynecologic cancers. Platin HSRs typically occur after multiple cycles of chemotherapy, reflecting the development of drug IgE sensitization, while taxane HSRs often occur on first or second exposure. Despite observed differences between platin and taxane HSRs, drug desensitization has been an effective method to reintroduce both chemotherapeutic agents safely. Skin testing is the primary diagnostic tool used to risk-stratify patients after initial HSRs, with more widespread use for platinum agents than taxanes. Different practices exist around the use of skin testing, drug challenge, and choice of desensitization protocol. Here, we review the epidemiology, mechanism, and clinical presentation of HSRs to platinum and taxane agents, as well as key controversies in their evaluation and management.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Desensitization, Immunologic; Drug Hypersensitivity; Female; Humans; Neoplasms; Platinum; Skin Tests; Taxoids
PubMed: 34338975
DOI: 10.1007/s12016-021-08877-y