Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 33
Filter
1.
JAC Antimicrob Resist ; 6(1): dlae022, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38372001

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Studies in the USA, Canada and France have reported higher surgical site infection (SSI) risk in patients with a penicillin allergy label (PAL). Here, we investigate the association between PALs and SSI in the UK, a country with distinct epidemiology of infecting pathogens and range of antimicrobial regimens in routine use. Methods: Electronic health records and national SSI surveillance data were collated for a retrospective cohort of gastrointestinal surgery patients at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2021. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to examine the effects of PALs and the use of non-ß-lactam-based prophylaxis on likelihood of SSI, 30 day post-operative mortality, 7 day post-operative acute kidney injury and 60 day post-operative infection/colonization with antimicrobial-resistant bacteria or Clostridioides difficile. Results: Our data comprised 3644 patients and 4085 operations; 461 were undertaken in the presence of PALs (11.3%). SSI was detected after 435/4085 (10.7%) operations. Neither the presence of PALs, nor the use of non-ß-lactam-based prophylaxis were found to be associated with SSI: adjusted OR (aOR) 0.90 (95% CI 0.65-1.25) and 1.20 (0.88-1.62), respectively. PALs were independently associated with increased odds of newly identified MRSA infection/colonization in the 60 days after surgery: aOR 2.71 (95% CI 1.13-6.49). Negative association was observed for newly identified infection/colonization with third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Gram-negative bacteria: aOR 0.38 (95% CI 0.16-0.89). Conclusions: No evidence was found for an association between PALs and the likelihood of SSI in this large UK cohort, suggesting significant international variation in the impact of PALs on surgical patients.

2.
Allergy ; 79(5): 1134-1145, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38146651

ABSTRACT

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease commonly driven by allergic and/or eosinophilic inflammation, both of which may be present in severe disease. Most approved biologics for severe asthma are indicated for specific phenotypes and target individual downstream type 2 components of the inflammatory cascade. Tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody (immunoglobulin G2λ), binds specifically to thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), an epithelial cytokine that initiates and sustains allergic and eosinophilic inflammation in asthma. By blocking TSLP, tezepelumab has demonstrated efficacy across known asthma phenotypes and acts upstream of all current clinically used biomarkers. In a pooled analysis of the phase 2b PATHWAY (NCT02054130) and phase 3 NAVIGATOR (NCT03347279) studies, compared with placebo, tezepelumab reduced the annualized asthma exacerbation rate over 52 weeks by 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 53, 70) in patients with perennial aeroallergen sensitization (allergic asthma); by 71% (95% CI: 62, 78) in patients with a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL; and by 71% (95% CI: 59, 79) in patients with allergic asthma and a baseline blood eosinophil count ≥300 cells/µL. This review examines the efficacy and mode of action of tezepelumab in patients with allergic asthma, eosinophilic asthma and coexisting allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Asthma , Humans , Asthma/drug therapy , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Eosinophils/immunology , Eosinophils/metabolism , Hypersensitivity/drug therapy , Eosinophilia/drug therapy , Cytokines/metabolism , Clinical Trials as Topic
3.
Clin Exp Allergy ; 53(10): 984-985, 2023 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37798260
4.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 11(7): 2008-2022, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37182566

ABSTRACT

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines, the most severe of which is anaphylaxis, are uncommon events occurring in fewer than 1 in a million doses administered. These reactions are infrequently immunoglobulin E-mediated. Because they are unlikely to recur, a reaction to a single dose of a vaccine is rarely a contraindication to redosing. This narrative review article contextualizes the recent knowledge we have gained from the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rollout of the new mRNA platform with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines within the much broader context of what is known about immediate reactions to other vaccinations of routine and global importance. We focus on what is known about evidence-based approaches to diagnosis and management and what is new in our understanding of mechanisms of immediate vaccine reactions. Specifically, we review the epidemiology of immediate hypersensitivity vaccine reactions, differential diagnosis for immune-mediated and nonimmune reaction clinical phenotypes, including how to recognize immunization stress-related responses. In addition, we highlight what is known about mechanisms and review the rare but important contribution of excipient allergies and specifically when to consider testing for them as well as other key features that contribute to safe evaluation and management.


Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , COVID-19 , Hypersensitivity, Immediate , Humans , Anaphylaxis/epidemiology , Anaphylaxis/etiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/adverse effects
5.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 11(7): 2180-2189.e4, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37088372

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic allergy labels are important barriers to treatment and antimicrobial stewardship, but their prevalence in UK hospitals is poorly described. OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the prevalence and characteristics of antibiotic allergy labels in a large UK hospital setting and estimate the proportion of penicillin allergy labels for which point-of-care (POC) delabeling assessment would be appropriate. METHODS: Electronic health records data were analyzed from all patients treated at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in 2019. Validated POC delabeling risk stratification criteria were retrospectively applied to penicillin allergy labels. RESULTS: Recorded reactions to antibiotics were present in 11.8% of all patients (32,148 of 273,216), 16.3% of inpatients (13,874 of 85,230), and 9.7% of outpatients (18,274 of 187,986). Penicillins were the commonest reaction precipitant described (9.0% of patients; 24,646 of 273,216), followed by sulfonamides/trimethoprim (1.4%; 3869 of 273,216) and macrolides/lincosamides (1.3%; 3644 of 273,216). A total of 3.9% of inpatients had recorded reactions to >1 antibiotic class (3348 of 85,230). Cutaneous manifestations were the most commonly described reaction features (40.7% of labels; 15,821 of 38,902). Of 15,949 labels describing probable or possible penicillin "allergy" with sufficient detail to allow for the retrospective assessment of POC delabeling suitability, 1702 were deemed suitable for removal or downgrading of the label to "intolerance" without further investigation (10.7%), 11,887 were appropriate for POC assessment using an oral penicillin challenge (OPC) or OPC with prior bedside skin testing (74.5%), and 2360 were identified as unsuitable for any form of POC assessment (14.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic allergy labels are highly prevalent in a UK hospital setting. A large proportion of penicillin allergy labels may be suitable for POC delabeling assessment.


Subject(s)
Antimicrobial Stewardship , Drug Hypersensitivity , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Penicillins/adverse effects , Hospitals , United Kingdom/epidemiology
6.
Intensive Care Med Exp ; 11(1): 9, 2023 Feb 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36823262

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Divergence between deterioration to life-threatening COVID-19 or clinical improvement occurs for most within the first 14 days of symptoms. Life-threatening COVID-19 shares clinical similarities with Macrophage Activation Syndrome, which can be driven by elevated Free Interleukin-18 (IL-18) due to failure of negative-feedback release of IL-18 binding protein (IL-18bp). We, therefore, designed a prospective, longitudinal cohort study to examine IL-18 negative-feedback control in relation to COVID-19 severity and mortality from symptom day 15 onwards. METHODS: 662 blood samples, matched to time from symptom onset, from 206 COVID-19 patients were analysed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for IL-18 and IL-18bp, enabling calculation of free IL-18 (fIL-18) using the updated dissociation constant (Kd) of 0.05 nmol. Adjusted multivariate regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between highest fIL-18 and outcome measures of COVID-19 severity and mortality. Re-calculated fIL-18 values from a previously studied healthy cohort are also presented. RESULTS: Range of fIL-18 in COVID-19 cohort was 10.05-1157.7 pg/ml. Up to symptom day 14, mean fIL-18 levels increased in all patients. Levels in survivors declined thereafter, but remained elevated in non-survivors. Adjusted regression analysis from symptom day 15 onwards showed a 100 mmHg decrease in PaO2/FiO2 (primary outcome) for each 37.7 pg/ml increase in highest fIL-18 (p < 0.03). Per 50 pg/ml increase in highest fIL-18, adjusted logistic regression gave an odds-ratio (OR) for crude 60-day mortality of 1.41 (1.1-2.0) (p < 0.03), and an OR for death with hypoxaemic respiratory failure of 1.90 [1.3-3.1] (p < 0.01). Highest fIL-18 was associated also with organ failure in patients with hypoxaemic respiratory failure, with an increase of 63.67 pg/ml for every additional organ supported (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated free IL-18 levels from symptom day 15 onwards are associated with COVID-19 severity and mortality. ISRCTN: #13450549; registration date: 30/12/2020.

7.
Clin Exp Allergy ; 52(10): 1135-1141, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36128691

ABSTRACT

The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and a committee of experts and key stakeholders have developed this guideline for the evaluation and testing of patients with an unsubstantiated label of penicillin allergy. The guideline is intended for UK clinicians who are not trained in allergy or immunology, but who wish to develop a penicillin allergy de-labelling service for their patients. It is intended to supplement the BSACI 2015 guideline "Management of allergy to penicillin and other beta-lactams" and therefore does not detail the epidemiology or aetiology of penicillin allergy, as this is covered extensively in the 2015 guideline (1). The guideline is intended for use only in patients with a label of penicillin allergy and does not apply to other beta-lactam allergies. The recommendations include a checklist to identify patients at low risk of allergy and a framework for the conduct of drug provocation testing by non-allergists. There are separate sections for adults and paediatrics within the guideline, in recognition of the common differences in reported allergy history and likelihood of true allergy.


Subject(s)
Drug Hypersensitivity , Penicillins , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Child , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/therapy , Hospitals , Humans , Penicillins/adverse effects , beta-Lactams/adverse effects
8.
Immunol Allergy Clin North Am ; 42(2): 239-267, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35469617

ABSTRACT

Excipients are the inactive ingredients in a drug or product that help to stabilize, preserve, or enhance the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of the active ingredients. Excipient allergy is rare and hence often missed or misdiagnosed due to lack of awareness of the need to carefully review all drug ingredients. For the patient, excipient allergy can be frightening and potentially disruptive to health care delivery. This narrative review provides a clinically oriented, international, collaborative perspective on excipient allergy testing, management of future health care safety, limitations in our testing modalities, and barriers to optimal care.


Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Excipients , Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Anaphylaxis/therapy , Excipients/adverse effects , Humans , Pharmaceutical Preparations
10.
Clin Exp Allergy ; 52(1): 12-17, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34822190

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is the excipient found in the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We previously demonstrated PEG allergy was a cause of severe anaphylaxis to the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. PEG is widely used in many household products, cosmetics and medicines. However PEG allergy is rare, there have been few confirmed cases of PEG allergy. The excipient of potential concern in the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is polysorbate 80 (PS80). Cross-reactivity between PEG and polysorbate has been suggested, based on their composition and skin-test data. The aim of this study was to determine whether PEG-allergic patients could be vaccinated with the PS80 containing AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. METHOD: Eight patients with PEG allergy were identified by the allergy clinic at Cambridge University Hospital. Patients underwent skin prick testing to PS80 (20%) and to the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine prior to vaccination. RESULTS: All eight patients allergic to PEG tolerated the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, even in 2 patients where the PS80 skin prick test was positive and 1 with a positive skin prick test to the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine. CONCLUSION: Patients allergic to PEG, previously denied COVID vaccination, may now be safely vaccinated with the PS80 containing AstraZeneca vaccine and need only avoid the PEG-containing mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. This opens up the possibility that these patients will also tolerate other vaccines containing PS80 such as the Janssen/Johnson and Johnson COVID-19 vaccine. Clinical cross-reactivity between PEG and PS80 did not occur in this vaccine setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/immunology , Drug Hypersensitivity/immunology , Polyethylene Glycols , Polysorbates , Adult , Aged , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Skin Tests
12.
J Patient Rep Outcomes ; 5(1): 6, 2021 Jan 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33438083

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This paper reports the duration of moderate and severe exacerbations in patients with house dust mite induced allergic asthma and the impact on patients' quality of life. METHODS: Post-hoc analyses were conducted using data collected during a phase III multi-national trial (MT-04) that investigated time to moderate or severe asthma exacerbation among 485 patients during withdrawal from inhaled corticosteroids. Patient diaries were analysed to ascertain duration of exacerbations. The impact on patients' quality of life was measured by calculating utilities for five health states using the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQL-5D). A regression analysis predicted the disutility of moving from 'well controlled asthma' to the other four health states: 'partially controlled asthma', 'uncontrolled asthma', 'moderate exacerbation' and 'severe exacerbation'. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients experienced exacerbations. Moderate and severe exacerbations involved statistically significant reductions in lung function compared to the constant peak expiratory flow observed for patients without exacerbations. Lung function decline occurred for 28 days, decreasing approximately 14 days before an exacerbation followed by a return to baseline over 14 days. Asthma symptoms, the use of short-acting ß2-agonists, and frequency of nocturnal awakening all increased, starting 10-14 days before an exacerbation, and returned to baseline within 10-28 days following exacerbations. Compared to 'well controlled asthma', the disutility of having a 'moderate exacerbation' ranged from - 0.0834 to - 0.0921 (EQ-5D-3L) and from - 0.114 to - 0.121 (AQL-5D); and of having a 'severe exacerbation' from - 0.115 to - 0.163 (EQ-5D-3L) and from - 0.153 to - 0.217 (AQL-5D), depending on the length of the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of moderate and severe exacerbations in house dust mite induced allergic asthma extends 14 days before and 28 days after the peak exacerbation event. The impact of exacerbations on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) continues long after their occurrence.

14.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 9(2): 709-722.e2, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33271350

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic imposed multiple restrictions on health care services. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of the pandemic on Allergy & Immunology (A&I) services in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A national survey of all A&I services registered with the Royal College of Physicians and/or the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology was carried out. The survey covered staffing, facilities, personal protective equipment, appointments & patient review, investigations, treatments, and research activity. Weeks commencing February 3, 2020 (pre-coronavirus disease), April 6, 2020, and May 8, 2020, were used as reference points for the data set. RESULTS: A total of 99 services participated. There was a reduction in nursing, medical, administrative, and allied health professional staff during the pandemic; 86% and 92% of A&I services continued to accept nonurgent and urgent referrals, respectively, during the pandemic. There were changes in immunoglobulin dose and infusion regimen in 67% and 14% of adult and pediatric services, respectively; 30% discontinued immunoglobulin replacement in some patients. There was a significant (all variables, P ≤ .0001) reduction in the following: face-to-face consultations (increase in telephone consultations), initiation of venom immunotherapy, sublingual and subcutaneous injection immunotherapy, anesthetic allergy testing, and hospital procedures (food challenges, immunoglobulin and omalizumab administration); and a significant increase (P ≤ .0001) in home therapy for immunoglobulin and omalizumab. Adverse clinical outcomes were reported, but none were serious. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic had a significant impact on A&I services, leading to multiple unplanned pragmatic amendments in service delivery. There is an urgent need for prospective audits and strategic planning in the medium and long-term to achieve equitable, safe, and standardized health care.


Subject(s)
Allergy and Immunology/organization & administration , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Pandemics , Pediatrics/organization & administration , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , Child , Humans , Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity/therapy , State Medicine , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom
15.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 9(2): 670-675, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33011299

ABSTRACT

Polyethylene glycols (PEGs) or macrogols are hydrophilic polymers found in everyday products such as foods, cosmetics, and medications. We present 5 cases of confirmed PEG allergy, which to our knowledge is the largest case series to date. Four of the 5 cases developed anaphylaxis to medications containing PEGs, with 1 near-fatal case resulting in cardiac arrest. Skin tests were undertaken to the index medications and to PEGs of different molecular weights. Three were confirmed with positive skin prick test result to PEG, 1 confirmed with a positive intradermal test result, and 1 confirmed after positive oral challenge. Two patients developed anaphylaxis following intradermal test to PEG and 1 a systemic allergic reaction (without hypotension or respiratory distress) following PEG skin prick tests. Before diagnosis, all 5 patients were mislabeled as allergic to multiple medications and their clinical management had become increasingly challenging. An algorithm is proposed to safely investigate suspected PEG allergy, with guidance on PEG molecular weights and skin test dilutions to minimize the risk of systemic allergic reaction. Investigation carries considerable risk without knowledge and informed planning so should only be conducted in a specialist drug allergy center.


Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis , Drug Hypersensitivity , Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Humans , Intradermal Tests , Polyethylene Glycols/adverse effects , Skin Tests
20.
J Allergy Clin Immunol ; 140(4): 1024-1031.e14, 2017 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28687232

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with eosinophilic nasal polyposis frequently require surgery, and recurrence rates are high. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of mepolizumab versus placebo for severe bilateral nasal polyposis. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial recruited patients aged 18 to 70 years with recurrent nasal polyposis requiring surgery. Patients received 750 mg of intravenous mepolizumab or placebo every 4 weeks for a total of 6 doses in addition to daily topical corticosteroid treatment. The primary end point was the number of patients no longer requiring surgery at Week 25 based on a composite end point of endoscopic nasal polyp score and nasal polyposis severity visual analog scale (VAS) score. Secondary end points included change in nasal polyposis severity VAS score, endoscopic nasal polyp score, improvement in individual VAS symptoms (rhinorrhea, mucus in throat, nasal blockage, and sense of smell), patient-reported outcomes, and safety. RESULTS: One hundred five patients received mepolizumab (n = 54) or placebo (n = 51). A significantly greater proportion of patients in the mepolizumab group compared with the placebo group no longer required surgery at Week 25 (16 [30%] vs 5 [10%], respectively; P = .006). There was a significant improvement in nasal polyposis severity VAS score, endoscopic nasal polyp score, all individual VAS symptom scores, and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test patient-reported outcome score in the mepolizumab compared with placebo groups. Mepolizumab's safety profile was comparable with that of placebo. CONCLUSION: In patients with recurrent nasal polyposis receiving topical corticosteroids who required surgery, mepolizumab treatment led to a greater reduction in the need for surgery and a greater improvement in symptoms than placebo.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Endoscopy , Eosinophils/immunology , Immunotherapy/methods , Nasal Polyps/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Interleukin-5/immunology , Male , Middle Aged , Nasal Polyps/surgery , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...