Challenging dogmas: Intravenous versus oral beta-lactam antibiotic provocation tests.

Background: Drug provocation tests (DPT) are considered the gold standard procedure to ascertain the diagnosis of beta-lactam (BL) allergy. Regarding route of administration, current recommendations prioritize oral challenges, considering them safer, and reserving the intravenous route for drugs for which this is the only formulation. Objective: To compare in terms of tolerance and safety two protocols of BL DPT, using an oral protocol (OR-DPT) and an intravenous protocol (IV-DPT). Methods: A descriptive, retrospective study was performed, including adult patients who underwent IV-DPT or OR-DPT for suspected immediate or delayed hypersensitivity to BL antibiotics, over a period of 4 years (between January 2018 and December 2021). Demographical data, index hypersensivity reactions' characteristics and tolerance to DPT were reviewed. Results: A total of 1036 patients underwent DPT, mean age of 56.8 (standard deviation, SD, 17.8) years, 655 were women (63.2%). Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) had occurred in 564 of patients (54.4%). OR-DPT were performed in 439 (42.4%) and IV-DPT in 597 (57.6%). The frequency of reactions during DPT, regardless of the route used, was low (3.6%): only 16 (3.6%) in OR-DPT and 21 (3.5%) in IV-DPT. From IV-DPT, 16 out 21 DHR during DPT were immediate compared with 4 out of 16 in OR-DPT. Adjusted relative risk of developing a hypersensitivity reaction during IV-DPT versus OR-DPT was 1.13 (95% confidence interval (CI)0.57-2.22). Conclusion: The results suggest that OR-DPT and IV-DPT are both safe procedures when adequately performed. However, IV-DPT protocols showed a higher rate of immediate DHR during DPT probably due to the selection of basal high-risk patients to undergo IV-DPT. In conclusion, IV-DPT may be considered as an option for challenges in drug-allergy studies, entailing a precise administration.

HLA-DPB1*05:01 and HLA-A*11:01 Is Associated with Adverse Drug Reactions to Isoniazid and Rifampin for Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in South Korea.

Background: Screening and treating healthcare workers (HCWs) for latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) are essential for tuberculosis (TB) infection control. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to anti-TB drugs present challenges to patient safety and treatment completion. Objective: This study investigated the association between human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles and the risk of ADRs, especially drug hypersensitivity (DHS) and hepatotoxicity, in HCWs with LTBI receiving isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF) therapy. Methods: Korean HCWs with LTBI who received a 3 month INH and RIF regimen were included in this study. HLA genotyping was performed on HCWs who experienced ADRs during treatment, as well as the control group consisted of individuals who did not develop ADRs. Results: Of the 67 patients, 29 (43.2%) experienced ADRs during INH and RIF therapy. The HLA-A*11:01 allele was more frequent in patients with DHS without hepatotoxicity (DSH+/H-) compared to the control group (DHS-/H-) (4/9, 44.4% vs. 3/38, 7.9%; odd ratio [OR], 8.554; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.415-59.869; p = 0.018). Conversely, HLA-DPB1*05:01 was associated with an increased risk of hepatotoxicity regardless of DHS (10/20, 50% vs. 5/38, 13.2%; OR, 5.323; 95% CI, 1.493-21.518; p = 0.011). In the DHS with hepatotoxicity group (DHS+/H+), HLA-DPB1*05:01 was present in a higher proportion (3/5, 60% vs. 5/38, 13.2%; OR, 8.912; 95% CI, 1.110-92.993; p = 0.037), whereas HLA-A*11:01 was not observed in this group. Conclusions: The HLA-A*11:01 allele was associated with an increased risk of DHS without hepatotoxicity, whereas the HLA-DPB1*05:01 allele was associated with an increased risk of hepatotoxicity.

DRESS syndrome due to anti-TB drugs: A complex case with successful re-desensitization of group A drugs.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a rare, life-threatening adverse reaction caused by certain medications. Clinical findings usually include rash, fever, lymphadenopathy, and eosinophilia, and in some cases, they may affect major organs. This reaction caused by antituberculosis (TB) medication poses a public health risk due to treatment discontinuation, adherence, or success in cure. We present a 23-year-old female patient who developed DRESS syndrome as a result of group A anti-TB drugs (ATDs), an exceedingly rare occurrence. The patient's medication was successfully retrieved using a re-desensitization protocol.

Diagnostic evaluation of hypersensitivity reactions to arylpropionic acid derivatives: a descriptive observational study focusing on clinical characteristics and potential risk factors in children.

BACKGROUND: Arylpropionic acid derivatives (APs) are the main triggers of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) hypersensitivity. Data on clinical patterns and risk factors for AP hypersensitivity in children are quite limited. AIM: To assess the clinical characteristics and potential risk factors for proven AP hypersensitivity in children. METHOD: Patients with a history of AP hypersensitivity were retrospectively assessed using a standardized diagnostic algorithm. Children with confirmed hypersensitivity were defined as selective responders or cross-intolerants based on the result of drug provocation tests and further categorized according to the EAACI/ENDA classification. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the potential risk factors for proven AP hypersensitivity. RESULTS: A total of 166 patients (51.2% male, median age of six years) with a history of AP hypersensitivity were included. Ibuprofen (89.2%) was the most frequently reported AP in the patients' histories. The reported hypersensitivity of 40 (22.4%) patients was confirmed by diagnostic testing: eight (13.6%) patients with a history of reaction only to APs and 32 (29.9%) patients with a history of reactions to multiple NSAIDs, including chemically unrelated NSAIDs in addition to APs. Five (12.5%) patients were classified as selective responders and 35 (87.5%) were cross-intolerants. Overall, five (12.5%) of the confirmed cases could not be categorized according to the EAACI/ENDA classification. Older age (aOR: 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21, p = 0.015), chronic urticaria as an underlying disease (aOR: 2.87, 95% CI 1.09-7.54, p = 0.033) and a history of anaphylaxis (aOR: 7.84, 95% CI 1.86-33.04, p = 0.005) were related to confirmed AP hypersensitivity. CONCLUSION: Almost a quarter of children and adolescents were confirmed to have AP hypersensitivity. Older age, the presence of chronic urticaria and a history of anaphylaxis were potential risk factors for proven AP hypersensitivity.

First-line anti-tuberculosis drug challenge reactions in DRESS in an HIV endemic setting.

BACKGROUND: In high HIV prevalence settings, first line anti-tuberculosis drug (FLTD)-associated DRESS poses therapeutic challenges. Sequential and additive drug challenge (SADC) of FLTDs best identifies offending drug(s), avoids unnecessary exclusions, and optimises re-initiation of non-offending drugs. However, SADC-associated reaction complexities limit its utility. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe characteristics of FLTD-associated DRESS patients, their treatment-limiting SADC reactions and related outcomes. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with FLTD-associated DRESS from 2013-2023 in a South African tertiary hospital and enrolled (retrospectively or prospectively) in an existing registry were eligible. RESULTS: SADC was undertaken in 41 patients. Overall, 47 classifiable reactions occurred, 34/47(72%) in 29/41(71%) patients, were treatment-limiting and 12/41(29%) reinitiated FLTDs uneventfully. Fifteen single and eight multiple drug-reactors were identified. Rifampicin, in 13/23(57%) reactors was the commonest individual offender. Ethambutol was most frequently involved in multiple drug-reactors. Median(IQR) time to a detectable reaction was 24(12-120) hours, 6/34(18%) being immediate (<6hours). Itch (65%), eosinophilia (56%), fever (41%), atypical lymphocytosis (41%), rash (38%), transaminitis (32%) and facial oedema (18%), singly or in combination were commonest features. Three reactions, one epidermal necrolysis and two liver derangements, were CTCAE grade 4 (life-threatening) events. No predictors of multiple drug-reactivity were identified, but multiple reactors were hospitalised significantly longer, 125(100-134) versus 60(45-80) days. CONCLUSIONS: SADC optimises FLTD reinitiation. However, timing, clinical presentation and severity of SADC-associated reactions following FLTD-associated DRESS is markedly heterogenous. Additionally, multiple drug-reactors are a complex group requiring longer hospitalisation, and without routine biomarkers to differentiate true multiple drug hypersensitivity from non-specific flare-ups and guide long-term drug avoidance strategies.

[Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): a hypersensitivity reaction with various symptoms]. / "Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms" (DRESS): eine Überempfindlichkeitsreaktion mit vielfältiger Symptomatik.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is an illness which is difficult to diagnose because of its various symptoms. In our case, a patient with small spotted exanthema with nearly erythroderma and eosinophilia presented to the emergency room. Systemic steroid therapy was started on suspicion of a drug reaction. Over the course of time, the patient's general condition deteriorated significantly and the patient developed cholecystitis, Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia, pneumonitis and cytomegalovirus reactivation. With this case report, we want to show that DRESS is a disease that is difficult to treat and can develop after a long delay.

Evaluation of accompanying allergic disease in children with proven drug allergies.

Background/aim: Data on the prevalence of allergic diseases in children with proven drug allergies are limited. We aim to evaluate the frequency of allergic comorbidity in children with proven common drug allergies. Materials and methods: Children with drug hypersensitivity confirmed by diagnostic allergy tests at our center between January 2010 and December 2020 were screened retrospectively. Patients with the most common drug allergies (due to antibiotics, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs [NSAIDs], and antiepileptic drugs) were selected for analysis. Age, sex, the culprit drug, initial reaction characteristics, diagnostic test results, and the study physician who diagnosed concomitant allergic diseases were noted. Results: A total of 168 patients (boys, 51.2%) with a median age of 12 years (IQR = 8-16.3) were included in the study. The culprit drug was an antibiotic in 63% (n = 106), NSAID in 25% (n = 42) and anticonvulsant in 11.9 % (n = 20) of the patients. Drug hypersensitivity reactions were immediate in 74.4 % (n = 125) and delayed in 25.6 % (n = 43) of the patients. Seventy-five patients (44.6 %) had at least one allergic disease, most commonly rhinitis (27.3 %, n = 46) or asthma (25 %, n = 42). Fifty-five patients underwent skin prick tests with aeroallergens, producing a positive result in 60% (n = 31). The prevalence of allergic disease was not differing according to the culprit drug. The frequency of developing at least one concomitant allergic disease was 47.2% (n = 50/106) for antibiotic hypersensitivity, 52.4% (n = 22/42) for NSAID hypersensitivity, and 15% (n = 3/20) for anticonvulsant hypersensitivity (p < 0.00).Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions were more frequent in children who had allergic diseases (80 % vs. 64.5 %; p = 0.027). Conclusion: Nearly half (44.6%) of the children with proven drug hypersensitivity had concomitant allergic diseases and immediate reactions were more common in this group. Children evaluated for drug hypersensitivity should be assessed for other allergic diseases.

Alternative Drug Safety in Children with Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Hypersensitivity.

INTRODUCTION: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are frequently used in the pediatric age group as pain relievers, antipyretics and anti-inflammatory drugs. Since NSAIDs are used in many medical conditions, there is a need for alternative NSAIDs to be used safely in people with hypersensitivity reactions. Selective and partially selective COX-2 inhibitors and weak COX-1 inhibitors are generally used as safe alternative drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate safe NSAIDs determined by oral provocation tests (OPTs) according to phenotypes in children with NSAID hypersensitivity reactions. METHODS: The results of the oral provocation test performed with alternative NSAIDs (paracetamol, meloxicam, nimesulide, celecoxib) in patients followed up with the diagnosis of NSAID hypersensitivity reaction in the Pediatric Immunology and Allergy Department between January 2015 and February 2023 were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: During the study period, 91 patients underwent OPTs with 109 alternative drugs 48 (52.7%) of whom were girls, with a median age of 15 years. 91 patients had a history of reactions to 117 drugs. As an alternative NSAID; OPT was performed with paracetamol in 58 patients, meloxicam in 44 patients, nimesulide in 5 patients, and celecoxib in 2 patients. Since 15 patients used paracetamol safely at home, no tests were performed with paracetamol. Reactions were observed in 3 of the 73 patients (4.1%) who underwent OPT with paracetamol and in 2 of the 44 (4.5%) who underwent OPT with meloxicam. Reactions to nimesulide were also observed in the latter 2 patients (2/5, 40%), but they appeared to tolerate celecoxib. No reaction was observed in the 2 patients who were tested with celecoxib. CONCLUSION: Paracetamol, meloxicam, and nimesulide can be used as safe alternative drugs in most children with NSAID hypersensitivity. Selective COX-2 inhibitors should be tried as an alternative in patients who cannot tolerate them.

Perioperative Anaphylaxis in Japanese Secondary Care Institutions: Incidence, Causes, and the Imperative for Improved Diagnostic Practices.

Background This research investigates the incidence, suspected causes, and diagnostic procedures for perioperative anaphylaxis (POA), a potentially severe complication, in secondary care hospitals across Japan. Methodology We surveyed Saiseikai hospitals and gathered data on surgical procedures, POA occurrences, potential triggers, and diagnostic methods. Results Among 70,523 surgeries, seven were associated with POA, resulting in an approximate incidence rate of 0.01%. Rocuronium was the most commonly suspected trigger, followed by sugammadex, latex, and angiography contrast agents. Despite the importance of skin tests as the most basic and crucial diagnostic method, they were conducted in only three instances. No in vitro tests for drug identification were conducted, and in four cases, the cause was determined merely based on the timing of drug administration, indicating significant diagnostic limitations. Conclusions The study underscores the critical situation in Japan regarding insufficient diagnostic practices and difficulties in identifying triggering drugs rather than the consistent prevalence of POA in secondary care facilities. The findings emphasize the need for improved diagnostic proficiency and more rigorous drug identification practices to ensure prompt and accurate POA diagnosis. It is essential to conduct further research and interventions to increase patient safety during the perioperative period in secondary care settings.

Balancing Benefits and Risks: A Literature Review on Hypersensitivity Reactions to Human G-CSF (Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor).

Human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is a granulopoietic growth factor used in the treatment of neutropenia following chemotherapy, myeloablative treatment, or healthy donors preparing for allogeneic transplantation. Few hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) have been reported, and its true prevalence is unknown. We aimed to systematically characterize G-CSF-induced HRs while including a comprehensive list of adverse reactions. We reviewed articles published before January 2024 by searching in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases using a combination of the keywords listed, selected the ones needed, and extracted relevant data. The search resulted in 68 entries, 17 relevant to our study and 7 others found from manually searching bibliographic sources. A total of 40 cases of G-CSF-induced HR were described and classified as immediate (29) or delayed (11). Immediate ones were mostly caused by filgrastim (13 minimum), with at least 9 being grade 5 on the WAO anaphylaxis scale. Delayed reactions were mostly maculopapular exanthemas and allowed for the continuation of G-CSF. Reactions after first exposure frequently appeared and were present in at least 11 of the 40 cases. Only five desensitization protocols have been found concerning the topic at hand in the analyzed data. We believe this study brings to light the research interest in this topic that could benefit from further exploration, and propose regular updating to include the most recently published evidence.

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.

First Case Report of Deferiprone-Induced Anaphylactic Reaction.

A 56-year-old Thai male, known for allergies to penicillin, sulfa, and lincosamide, presented with hyperferritinemia. Upon initiating deferiprone therapy, the patient experienced recurrent episodes of dyspnea, culminating in anaphylactic shock. Treatment included subcutaneous epinephrine, intravenous chlorpheniramine, and hydrocortisone, which led to symptom resolution. This case constitutes the first case report of deferiprone-associated anaphylactic reactions.

Clinical characteristics and genetic HLA marker for patients with oxaliplatin-induced adverse drug reactions.

BACKGROUND: Oxaliplatin is commonly used to treat gastrointestinal malignancies. However, its applications are limited due to potential adverse drug reactions (ADRs), particularly severe anaphylactic shock. There is no method to predict or prevent ADRs caused by oxaliplatin. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the genetic HLA predisposition and immune mechanism of oxaliplatin-induced ADRs. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for 154 patients with ADRs induced by oxaliplatin during 2016-2021 recorded in our ADR notification system. HLA genotyping was conducted for 47 patients with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs, 1100 general population controls, and 34 oxaliplatin-tolerant controls in 2019-2023. The in vitro basophil activation test (BAT) was performed and oxaliplatin-specific IgE levels were determined. RESULTS: The incidence of oxaliplatin-induced ADRs and anaphylactic shock in our cohort was 7.1% and 0.15%, respectively. Of the 154 patients, 67.5% suffered rash/eruption; 26.0% of the patients who could not undergo oxaliplatin rechallenge were considered to show oxaliplatin-induced immune-mediated hypersensitivity reactions (HRs). The genetic study found that the HLA-DRB∗12:01 allele was associated with oxaliplatin-induced HRs compared to the general population controls (sensitivity = 42.9%; odds ratio [OR] = 3.4; 95% CI = 1.4-8.2; P = 0.008) and tolerant controls (OR = 12; 95% CI = 2.3-63.7; P = 0.001). The in vitro BAT showed higher activation of CD63+ basophils in patients with oxaliplatin-induced HRs compared to the tolerant controls (P < 0.05). Only four patients (8.5%) with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs were positive for oxaliplatin-specific IgE. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that 26.0% of patients with oxaliplatin-induced ADRs could not undergo oxaliplatin rechallenge. HLA-DRB∗12:01 is regarded as a genetic marker for oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity.

Cross-reactivity among and between macrolides, lincosamides, and streptogramins: Study on the French pharmacovigilance database.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) are reported for the macrolides, lincosamides, and streptogramins (MLS) antibiotic family. Data about cross-reactivity among and between MLS remain scarce or controversial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of hypersensitivity cross-reactions among MLSs based on data extracted from the French National Pharmacovigilance Database (FPVD). METHODS: Cases of HSR to MLSs reported between January 1985 and December 2019 were extracted from the FPVD using standardized MedDRA queries (SMQ). Cases including an allergological test involving multiple MLSs and giving at least one positive result were included. RESULTS: Of the 8394 cases reviewed, 149 were included. HSR mainly involved pristinamycin (n = 83; 53.2%) and spiramycin (n = 31; 19.9%). HSR to MLS was immediate in 54 cases and delayed in 94 cases. Skin tests represented the majority of the allergological tests performed (n = 728; 84.7%), followed by reintroduction tests (n = 79; 9.2%). Eighty-six cross-reactivities among MLS were identified in 62 cases (41.6%). All the 25 explorations performed for streptogramins showed cross-reactivities, but only 30/253 among macrolides (11.9%). Cross-reactivities between the three MLS were observed in 31/322 (9.6%) of the allergological explorations. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the possibility of cross-reactivity among and between MLSs. Dermatologists and allergologists managing patients with HSR to MLSs should be aware of a risk of cross-reactivity among the macrolides and between the different classes of MLS and to perform MLSs allergological testing before recommending an alternative antibiotic, especially in severe drug hypersensitivity from the MLS family.

Evaluation of the frequency and characteristics of drug hypersensitivity reactions in hospitalized children: Real life-cohort study.

Introduction: There are limited data regarding the characteristics and management of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) in hospitalized children. This study aims to determine the prevalence, clinical features, and management of DHRs in pediatric inpatients. Methods: Children who had pediatric allergy consultation for suspected DHR during hospitalization in Ankara Bilkent City Hospital between August 1, 2020, and July 30, 2021, were included. Patient and reaction characteristics, culprit drugs, and management strategies were recorded. When possible, diagnostic tests (skin or provocation tests) were performed after discharge. Results: Among the 14,090 hospitalized children, 165 (72% male, median age: 106 months) underwent consultation for 192 suspected DHRs with 246 drugs. Cutaneous eruptions were the most common (94.3%). There was anaphylaxis in 40 patients and severe cutaneous adverse drug reaction in 4 patients (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms in 3, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis in 1). Antimicrobials were the leading cause (78.4%, n = 193/246). In 48 reactions, 60 (24%) culprit drugs could be readministered with close follow-up or desensitization (n = 12). In total, 186 suspected drugs were discontinued, and 115 were replaced with alternative drugs. After discharge, 38 provocation tests (2 positives) and 36 skin tests (1 positive prick test, 1 positive intradermal test, and 1 positive patch test) were performed. Discussion/conclusions: The incidence of suspected DHR among pediatric inpatients was approximately 1.1%. Skin symptoms were the most common manifestation. Twenty-four percent of suspected drugs could be continued during hospitalization. Patients with DHR during hospitalization should be evaluated with a drug allergy work-up unless there are contraindications to testing.

Basophil activation test in the diagnostic workup of perioperative anaphylaxis due to neuromuscular blocking agents: A case series and implications for practice.

In Australia, neuromuscular blocking agents are the leading cause of perioperative anaphylaxis. Current investigation of suspected anaphylaxis includes tryptase levels, serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels, and skin testing, including intradermal testing and skin prick testing. The gold standard for the diagnosis of a hypersensitivity reaction is a challenge test, but this poses a risk to patient safety. An alternative test, known as the basophil activation test (BAT) is a form of cellular in vitro testing using flow cytometry to measure the degree of basophil degranulation within a sample of blood following exposure to an allergen. This acts as a surrogate marker for mast cell and basophil activation, thereby identifying IgE-mediated allergy. It is most commonly used to supplement equivocal findings from initial in vitro testing to assist in confirming the diagnosis of a hypersensitivity reaction and identify the causative agent. We present a case series in which five patients with suspected anaphylaxis underwent a BAT, demonstrating its role and limitations in allergy testing within Australia.

Prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions in various forms of mastocytosis: A pilot study of 2485 adult patients with mastocytosis collected in the ECNM registry.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity reactions (HR) are common in mastocytosis. However, little is known about triggers and risk factors. The registry of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) enables reliable studies in a larger cohort of mastocytosis patients. We assessed prevalence, triggers and risk factors of HR in adults with mastocytosis in the ECNM registry. METHODS: Data were collected in 27 ECNM centers. We analyzed potential triggers (Hymenoptera venoms, food, drug, inhalant and others) and risk factors at diagnosis and during follow-up. The study group consisted of 2485 adults with mastocytosis, 1379 women (55.5%) and 1106 men (44.5%). Median age was 48.2 years (range 18-91 years). RESULTS: Nine hundred and forty eight patients (38.1%) reported one or more HR`. Most common triggers were Hymenoptera venoms in cutaneous mastocytosis (CM) and indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM), whereas in advanced SM (advSM), most common elicitors were drugs, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and penicillin. In multivariate analyses, tryptase level < 90 ng/mL, <15% infiltration by mast cells in bone marrow biopsy-sections, and diagnosis of ISM were identified as independent risk factors for HR. For drug-induced HR, prominent risk factors were advSM and high tryptase levels. New reactions were observed in 4.8% of all patients during 4 years follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: HR are mainly triggered by Hymenoptera venoms in patients with CM and ISM and by drugs in patients with advSM. Tryptase levels <90 ng/mL, mast cell bone marrow infiltration <15%, and WHO category ISM are predictors of HR. New HR occur in 4.8% of all patients within 4 years.

[Risk factors associated to adverse drug events in hospitalized patients]. / Factores de riesgo asociados con eventos adversos a medicamentos en pacientes hospitalizados.

OBJECTIVE: To determine prevalence, causes and risk factors of ADE in hospitalized patients. METHODS: Analytical, observational, case-control study of patients with ADE. For statistical analysis, the following were calculated: percentages, frequencies, averages; odds ratio, χ2 test and multiple binary logistic regression. Data analysis was carried out with the Statistical Package, for the Social Sciences 23 program. RESULTS: A 132 patients were registered: 66 cases (26 EM and 40 RAM) and 66 controls; with average age of 35 years (SD 17.41). The prevalence of adverse drug events was 3.6%. The most frequently reported medications: antibiotics and anti-inflammatories. The frequency of adverse events by gender was: 39.3% men and 60.7% women. The services with the greatest patient care: emergencies, surgery; the most frequent route of administration: intravenous (32.3%). The main symptoms: skin. (32.3%) frequent symptoms: cutaneous. Associated symptoms RAM: type A pruritus (OR: 8.5; p = 0.001; IC95%: 0.035-0.393), type B pruritus (OR: 11; p = 0.001; CI95%: 0.021-0.368) urticaria (OR: 19; p = 0.005; IC95%: 0.007-0.412). Risk factors Associated EAM: female (OR: 2.6; p = 0.05; CI95%: 1.33-5.43), history of allergy (OR: 3.4; p = 0.033; CI95%: 1.04-8.40), prolonged hospital stays (OR: 5.4; p = 0.023; IC95%: 3.82-6.74). CONCLUSIONS: Patient safety is a priority when prescribing any drug, which represents a key point in prevention.

OBJETIVO: Determinar la prevalencia, causas y factores de riesgo asociados con eventos adversos a medicamentos en pacientes hospitalizados. MÉTODOS: Estudio de casos y controles, observacional, analítico, llevado a cabo en pacientes con eventos adversos a medicamentos. Para el análisis estadístico se calcularon: porcentajes, frecuencias, promedios; razón de momios, prueba de χ2 y regresión logística binaria múltiple. El análisis de los datos se efectuó con el programa Statistical Package, for the Social Sciencies 23. RESULTADOS: Se registraron 132 pacientes: 66 casos (26 EM y 40 RAM) y 66 controles, con edad promedio de 35 años (DS 17.41). La prevalencia de eventos adversos a medicamentos fue del 3.6%. Los medicamentos reportados con mayor frecuencia: antibióticos y antiinflamatorios. La frecuencia de eventos adversos por género fue: 39.3% hombres y 60.7% mujeres. Los servicios con mayor atención de pacientes: urgencias y cirugía; vía de administración más frecuente: intravenosa (32.3%). Los principales síntomas fueron los cutáneos. Los síntomas asociados con reacción adversa a medicamentos: prurito tipo A (RM: 8.5; p = 0.001; IC95%: 0.035-0.393), prurito tipo B (RM: 11; p = 0.001; IC95%: 0.021-0.368) urticaria (RM: 19; p = 0.005; IC95%: 0.007-0.412). Los factores de riesgo asociados con eventos adversos a medicamentos: mujer (RM: 2.6; p = 0.05; IC95%: 1.33-5.43), antecedente de alergia (RM: 3.4 p = 0.033; (IC95%: 1.04-8.40) y estancia hospitalaria prolongada (RM: 5.4; p = 0.023; IC95%: 3.82-6.74). CONCLUSIONES: La seguridad de los pacientes es una prioridad al momento de prescribir cualquier fármaco, lo que representa un punto clave en la prevención.

Heparin-induced DRESS syndrome in a paediatric patient and successful anaesthetic management in cardiovascular bypass surgery: case report.

BACKGROUND: Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) Syndrome is a severe adverse drug reaction marked by delayed hypersensitivity reactions causing skin and systemic complications. DRESS diagnosis is challenging due to the variety of clinical presentations and symptom overlap with other conditions. The perioperative period in these patients requires precise pharmacological strategies to prevent complications associated with this syndrome. The treatment of DRESS induced by unfractionated heparin during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) surgery presents some challenges that must be considered when selecting an anticoagulant to avoid side effects. In this case, bivalirudin, a direct thrombin inhibitor, is indicated as an alternative to heparin in patients undergoing CPB. However, in contrast to heparin/protamine, there is no direct reversal agent for bivalirudin. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of an 11-year-old male diagnosed with native aortic valve endocarditis and thrombosis in his left lower extremity. During valvular replacement surgery, systemic unfractionated heparin was administered. Postoperatively, the patient developed fever, eosinophilia and pruritic rash. Warm shock and elevated alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate transaminase (AST) levels followed, leading to the diagnosis of DRESS syndrome. Treatment with methylprednisolone resulted in complete resolution of symptoms. Seven years later, the patient was readmitted due to insufficient anticoagulation and a thrombus in the prosthetic aortic valve, presenting a recurrent DRESS episode due to the administration of unfractionated heparin, which was later replaced with low-molecular-weight heparin during hospitalization. Treatment with corticosteroids and antihistamines was initiated, resulting in the resolution of this episode. Ultimately, the patient required the Ross procedure. During this intervention the anticoagulation strategy was modified, unfractionated heparin was replaced with bivalirudin during the procedure and fondaparinux was administered during the postoperative period. This resulted in stable transaminases levels and no eosinophilia. CONCLUSION: The severity of DRESS Syndrome underscores the importance of early recognition, heightened monitoring, and a comprehensive approach tailored to each patient's needs. This particular case highlights the significance of this approach and may have a substantial clinical impact since it provides alternatives to heparin, such as bivalirudin and fondaparinux, in the anticoagulation strategy of CPB for patients who have a hypersensibility reaction to this medication; thus, enhancing clinical outcomes by minimizing risks linked to adverse drug reactions.

HLA-DRB1 is associated with cefaclor-induced immediate hypersensitivity.

Background: Drug-induced hypersensitivity such as anaphylaxis is an important cause of drug-related morbidity and mortality. Cefaclor is a leading cause of drug induced type I hypersensitivity in Korea, but little is yet known about genetic biomarkers to predict this hypersensitivity reaction. We aimed to evaluate the possible involvement of genes in cefaclor induced type I hypersensitivity. Methods: Whole exome sequencing (WES) and HLA genotyping were performed in 43 patients with cefaclor induced type I hypersensitivity. In addition, homology modeling was performed to identify the binding forms of cefaclor to HLA site. Results: Anaphylaxis was the most common phenotype of cefaclor hypersensitivity (90.69%). WES results show that rs62242177 and rs62242178 located in LIMD1 region were genome-wide significant at the 5 × 10-8 significance level. Cefaclor induced type I hypersensitivity was significantly associated with HLA-DRB1∗04:03 (OR 4.61 [95% CI 1.51-14.09], P < 0.002) and HLA-DRB1∗14:54 (OR 3.86 [95% CI 1.09-13.67], P < 0.002). Conclusion: LIMD1, HLA-DRB1∗04:03 and HLA-DRB1∗14:54 may affect susceptibility to cefaclor induced type I hypersensitivity. Further confirmative studies with a larger patient population should be performed to ascertain the role of HLA-DRB1 and LIMD1 in the development of cefaclor induced hypersensitivity.