Protocol for a clinically annotated biorepository of samples from Australian immune-compromised patients to investigate the host-microbiome interaction.

INTRODUCTION: The human gut microbiota has the potential to modulate the outcomes of several human diseases. This effect is likely to be mediated through interaction with the host immune system. This protocol details the establishment of a biorepository of clinically annotated samples, which we will use to explore correlations between the gut microbiota and the immune system of immune-compromised patients. We aim to identify microbiome-related risk factors for adverse outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSES: This is a protocol for the development of a biorepository of clinically annotated samples collected prospectively across three centres in Melbourne, Australia. Participants will be recruited across the following clinical streams: (1) acute leukaemia and allogeneic stem cell transplant; (2) end-stage liver disease and liver transplant; (3) patients receiving any cancer immunotherapies (eg, chimeric antigen receptor therapy); (4) deceased organ donors and (5) healthy adult controls. Participants will be asked to provide paired peripheral blood and microbiota samples (stool and saliva) at either (1) single time point for healthy controls and deceased organ donors or (2) longitudinally over multiple prespecified or event-driven time points for the remaining cohorts. Sampling of fluid from bronchoalveolar lavage and colonoscopy or biopsy of tissues undertaken during routine care will also be performed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the relevant local ethics committee (The Royal Melbourne Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee). The results of this study will be disseminated by various scientific platforms including social media, international presentations and publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12623001105639. Date registered 20 October 2023.

SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ T cells from people with long COVID establish and maintain effector phenotype and key TCR signatures over 2 years.

Long COVID occurs in a small but important minority of patients following COVID-19, reducing quality of life and contributing to healthcare burden. Although research into underlying mechanisms is evolving, immunity is understudied. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses are of key importance for viral clearance and COVID-19 recovery. However, in long COVID, the establishment and persistence of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are far from clear, especially beyond 12 mo postinfection and postvaccination. We defined ex vivo antigen-specific B cell and T cell responses and their T cell receptors (TCR) repertoires across 2 y postinfection in people with long COVID. Using 13 SARS-CoV-2 peptide-HLA tetramers, spanning 11 HLA allotypes, as well as spike and nucleocapsid probes, we tracked SARS-CoV-2-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T cells and B-cells in individuals from their first SARS-CoV-2 infection through primary vaccination over 24 mo. The frequencies of ORF1a- and nucleocapsid-specific T cells and B cells remained stable over 24 mo. Spike-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T cells and B cells were boosted by SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, indicating immunization, in fully recovered and people with long COVID, altered the immunodominance hierarchy of SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes. Meanwhile, influenza-specific CD8+ T cells were stable across 24 mo, suggesting no bystander-activation. Compared to total T cell populations, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were enriched for central memory phenotype, although the proportion of central memory T cells decreased following acute illness. Importantly, TCR repertoire composition was maintained throughout long COVID, including postvaccination, to 2 y postinfection. Overall, we defined ex vivo SARS-CoV-2-specific B cells and T cells to understand primary and recall responses, providing key insights into antigen-specific responses in people with long COVID.

Evaluating diagnostic tools, outcome measures and antibiotic approach in diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a scoping review and narrative synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a significant complication of diabetic foot disease; however, diagnosis remains challenging and treatment success is difficult to ascertain. Literature in this space that has utilized varying diagnostic criteria and ideal outcome measures for success is unclear. AREAS COVERED: This scoping review assesses methods of diagnosis of DFO and definitions of treatment outcomes in the literature assessing antibiotic therapy for treatment of DFO. EXPERT OPINION: There is a lack of consensus in the design of diabetic foot trials, resulting in difficulty for clinicians to assess and manage serious conditions such as DFO. The cure for DFO is challenging to ascertain and treatment failure may be a better approach to assess outcomes in research assessing the efficacy of antibiotic therapy. In the absence of gold-standard diagnostic tools, practical approaches to outcome assessment may allow for greater clinical applicability of available data.

A multicentre comparative cohort study of severe maculopapular exanthema and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systematic symptoms.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: In a prospective cohort of antibiotic-associated delayed hypersensitivity reactions, key clinical characteristics and diagnostic discrepancies (in vivo and ex vivo) were noted between DRESS (RegiSCAR ≥4) patients and those with lower RegiSCAR scores (RegiSCAR 2-3) patients.

Rash decisions: Unmasking a risk phenotype in adults with persistent delayed penicillin allergy sensitized during historic infection with Epstein-Barr virus.

Background: Penicillin-associated exanthems in the setting of infectious mononucleosis caused by Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) are often viewed as a transient event, not a true allergy. Recent evidence challenges this and suggests that a notable subset of patients retain penicillin hypersensitivity. Objective: We investigated the occurrence and predictors of persistent adulthood hypersensitivity in those with penicillin-associated rash occurring in the setting of EBV infection. Methods: Retrospective analysis of data of patients referred for penicillin allergy testing to an Australian tertiary-care hospital captured from 2015 to 2023 was carried out. Results: Of 2066 patients, 23 (1%) had penicillin-associated rash during an historic EBV infection; 16 (70%) were female; and median (interquartile range) age was 18 (16-20) years at index reaction and 38 (33.5-57) years at allergy testing. Skin prick testing and delayed intradermal testing to a penicillin panel were performed, followed by oral provocation challenge in those testing negative. Persistent sensitization was shown in 6 (26%) of 23; 4 (67%) of 6 positive delayed intradermal testing; and 3 (50%) of 6 had positive oral challenge test. Notably, 5 (83%) of 6 had a severe maculopapular exanthem with facial swelling, including 2 (33%) of 6 with probable drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (aka DRESS) during the index reaction, compared to 0 of 17 in patients tolerating penicillin on reexposure. Conclusion: This study highlights the requirement of allergy testing in adult patients reporting a penicillin-associated severe maculopapular exanthem in the setting of EBV, even if it occurred during childhood or adolescence.

Bibliometric analysis of the trends and evolution in ß-lactam allergy research.

Background: ß-Lactams remain the most reported drug allergy globally, with the volume and diversity of related drug allergy research continuing to accumulate. Recognizing evolving research trends can help inform future directions and encourage synergistic collaborations. Objective: We conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of all publications relevant to ß-lactam allergy, with a focus on longitudinal publication rates, international collaborations, and key word/trend analysis. Methods: Meta-data from all original articles, letters, and reviews relevant to ß-lactam allergy on the Web of Science Core Collection up until December 31, 2023, were analyzed. Results: From 1966 to 2023, there were 4451 records (3536 articles, 631 reviews, and 284 letters) from 78 countries. There was an exponential increase in publications, especially during the past decade, with half of all publications on ß-lactam allergy published during this time (50.6% [2252 of 4452]). Overall, 18.1% of the publications (805 of 4452) involved international coauthorships, with a significant increase since the previous decade (12.7% vs 23.3% [P < .001]). The most frequent key words in the first published half of articles were skin testing (84 of 1919), IgE (57 of 1919), and anaphylaxis (49 of 1919); in contrast to the key word skin testing (137 of 3351), the key words drug provocation test (121 of 3351), antimicrobial resistance (120 of 3351), and antimicrobial stewardship (118 of 3351) were the most frequent key words in the latter half. Conclusion: There has been a surge in publications, international collaboration, and shifting paradigms in ß-lactam allergy research. The field has evolved beyond focusing on in vitro tests or desensitization toward antimicrobial stewardship. However, there still seems to be relatively fewer collaborations with non-Western countries. Further international collaborations to harmonize delabeling strategies against the threat of mislabeled ß-lactam allergy should be encouraged.

A call to address penicillin allergy labels in patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplants: How to avoid rash decisions.

Among patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplants, infections, particularly multidrug-resistant infections, pose a grave threat. In this setting, penicillin allergy labels are both common and harmful. Though the majority of patients who report penicillin allergy can actually tolerate penicillin, penicillin allergy labels are associated with use of alternative antibiotics, which are often more broad spectrum, less effective, and more toxic. In turn, they are associated with more severe infections, multidrug-resistant infections, Clostridium difficile, and increased mortality. Evaluating penicillin allergy labels can immediately expand access to preferred therapeutic options, which are critical to care in patients with recent hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Point-of-care assessment and clinical decision tools now exist to aid the nonallergist in assessment of penicillin allergy. This can aid in expanding use of other beta-lactam antibiotics and assist in risk-stratifying patients to determine a testing strategy. In patients with low-risk reaction histories, direct oral challenges can be employed to efficiently delabel patients across clinical care settings. We advocate for multidisciplinary efforts to evaluate patients with penicillin allergy labels prior to transplantation.

Risk of Self-Reported Penicillin Allergy Despite Removal of Penicillin Allergy Label: Secondary Analysis of the PALACE Randomized Clinical Trial.

This secondary analysis of adult patients in the Penicillin Allergy Clinical Decision Rule (PALACE) Study investigates the risk of self-reported penicillin allergy despite removal of penicillin allergy label.

Effectiveness of direct delabelling of allergy labels in type A adverse drug reactions to penicillin: a multicentre hospitalwide prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported penicillin allergy labels (PALs) are associated with adverse patient outcomes and inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. Removal of PALs via direct oral challenge (DOC) is associated with increased penicillin utilization post removal. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of direct delabelling (allergy label removal via medical reconciliation alone) of type A adverse drug reaction (ADR) PALs on inpatient prescribing. METHODS: From January 2019 to December 2022 at two tertiary hospitals in Melbourne, patients aged ≥18 years with type A ADR PALs, as defined by the validated Antibiotic Allergy Assessment Tool, were offered direct delabelling or single-dose DOC. The primary endpoint was antibiotic use pre- and post-assessment (during index admission and 90 days post assessment). The secondary endpoint was the proportion of patients delabelled in the direct delabelling and DOC cohorts in the electronic medical record at 90 days post assessment. RESULTS: Allergy labels (n = 4108) were assessed for 488 participants, with 490 individual type A ADR PAL assessments included. Three hundred and thirty-seven patients were directly delabelled, 69 underwent DOC and 84 were not delabelled. There was increased use of any penicillin following direct delabelling (OR 19.19, 95% CI 2.48-148.36) and DOC (OR 56.98, 95% CI 6.82-476.19) during the index admission, higher in the DOC group compared with direct delabelling (OR 2.97, 95% CI 1.39-6.37). Relabelling at 90 days was low with no statistically significant difference between direct delabelling (5/337; 1.5%) and DOC (0/69; 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Both direct delabelling and DOC of type A ADR PALs increased penicillin usage; however, the impact was greatest with DOC. Most patients remain delabelled at 90 days.

How to Define and Manage Low-Risk Drug Allergy Labels.

Risk stratification in drug allergy implies that specific risk categories (eg, low, moderate, and high) classify historical drug hypersensitivity reactions. These risk categories can be based on reaction phenotypic characteristics, the timing of the reaction and evaluation, the required reaction management, and individual characteristics. Although a multitude of frameworks have been described in the literature, particularly for penicillin allergy labels, there has yet to be a global consensus, and approaches continue to vary between allergy centers. Immune-mediated drug allergies can sometimes be confirmed using skin testing, but a negative drug challenge is required to demonstrate tolerance and remove the allergy from the electronic health record ("delabel" the allergy). Even for quintessential IgE-mediated drug allergy, penicillin allergy, recent data reveal that a direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, is an appropriate diagnostic strategy in those who are considered low-risk. Drug allergy pathogenesis and clinical manifestations may vary depending on the culprit drug, and as such, the optimal approach should be based on risk stratification that considers individual patient and reaction characteristics, the likely hypersensitivity reaction phenotype, the drug class, and the patient's clinical needs. This article will describe low-risk drug allergy labels, focusing on ß-lactam and sulfonamide antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, iodinated contrast media, and common chemotherapeutics. This review will also address practical management approaches using currently available risk stratification and clinical decision tools.

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.

Immunoglobulin G genetic variation can confound assessment of antibody levels via altered binding to detection reagents.

Objectives: Amino acid variations across more than 30 immunoglobulin (Ig) allotypes may introduce structural changes that influence recognition by anti-Ig detection reagents, consequently confounding interpretation of antibody responses, particularly in genetically diverse cohorts. Here, we assessed a panel of commercial monoclonal anti-IgG1 clones for capacity to universally recognise two dominant IgG1 haplotypes (G1m-1,3 and G1m1,17). Methods: Four commercial monoclonal anti-human IgG1 clones were assessed via ELISAs and multiplex bead-based assays for their ability to bind G1m-1,3 and G1m1,17 IgG1 variants. Detection antibodies were validated against monoclonal IgG1 allotype standards and tested for capacity to recognise antigen-specific plasma IgG1 from G1m-1,3 and G1m1,17 homozygous and heterozygous SARS-CoV-2 BNT162b2 vaccinated (n = 28) and COVID-19 convalescent (n = 44) individuals. An Fc-specific pan-IgG detection antibody corroborated differences between hinge- and Fc-specific anti-IgG1 responses. Results: Hinge-specific anti-IgG1 clone 4E3 preferentially bound G1m1,17 compared to G1m-1,3 IgG1. Consequently, SARS-CoV-2 Spike-specific IgG1 levels detected in G1m1,17/G1m1,17 BNT162b2 vaccinees appeared 9- to 17-fold higher than in G1m-1,3/G1m-1,3 vaccinees. Fc-specific IgG1 and pan-IgG detection antibodies equivalently bound G1m-1,3 and G1m1,17 IgG1 variants, and detected comparable Spike-specific IgG1 levels between haplotypes. IgG1 responses against other human coronaviruses and influenza were similarly poorly detected by 4E3 anti-IgG1 in G1m-1,3/G1m-1,3 subjects. Conclusion: Anti-IgG1 clone 4E3 confounds assessment of antibody responses in clinical cohorts owing to bias towards detection of G1m1,17 IgG1 variants. Validation of anti-Ig clones should include evaluation of binding to relevant antibody variants, particularly as the role of immunogenetics upon humoral immunity is increasingly explored in diverse populations.