Long-acting insulin allergy in a diabetic child.

Insulin allergy has been uncommon since the introduction of human recombinant insulin preparations; the prevalence is 2.4%. Insulin injection could elicit immediate reactions, which are usually induced by an IgE-mediated mechanism, within the first hour after drug administration. In the present study, we describe the case of a child who experienced immediate urticaria after long-acting insulin injection. A 9-year-old girl affected by type I diabetes mellitus referred a history of three episodes of urticaria 30 min after insulin subcutaneous injection. During the first week of insulin therapy, she developed generalized immediate urticaria twice after long-acting insulin glargine first and then once after insulin degludec administration. Symptoms resolved within a few hours after treatment with oral antihistamine. She tolerated rapid insulin lispro. Her personal allergological history was negative. Skin prick tests with degludec, glargine and detemir were performed, showing negative results. Intradermal 1:100000-diluted tests were immediately positive for both degludec and glargine but not for detemir. In light of these findings, detemir was administered without any reaction. Our results show that detemir is tolerated by patients with clinical hypersensitivity reactions to degludec and glargine. Although reactions could be attributable to additives allergy, such as zinc or metacresol, this was excluded since all three preparations contain the same components. So, insulin itself acted as offending allergen. Detemir differs from degludec and glargine in a few aminoacids. Therefore, it is possible that the conformational rather than the linear epitope may be responsible for the reaction. This result suggests integrating intradermal tests in the diagnostic flowchart for insulin allergy. Insulin allergy should always be suspected in patients with immediate symptoms after drug injection. As allergologic work-up, prick by prick test and intradermal test to insulin preparations should be performed. In case of negative results of cutaneous tests, insulin analogs may be administered.

Diagnostic accuracy of patch test in children with food allergy.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard test for confirming whether a child has clinical hypersensitivity reactions to foods is the oral food challenge. Therefore, there is increasing interest in simpler diagnostic markers of food allergy, especially in children, to avoid oral food challenge. The goal of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of atopy patch test in comparison with oral food challenge. METHODS: We investigated 243 children (mean age, 51 months) referred for evaluation of suspected egg or cow's milk allergy. Skin prick test and atopy patch test were carried out, and after a 2 weeks elimination diet, oral food challenge was performed. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-three children underwent OFC to the suspected food. We found clinically relevant food allergies in 40 (65%) children to egg and in 22 (35%) to cow's milk. The sensitivity of skin prick test for both milk and egg was 92%, specificity 91%, positive predictive value 35%, and negative predictive value of 93%. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of atopy patch test for both milk and egg were 21%, 73%, 20%, and 74%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that there is insufficient evidence for the routine use of atopy patch test for the evaluation of egg and cow's milk allergy. OFC remains gold standard for the diagnosis of egg and milk allergy even in the presence of high costs in terms of both time and risks during application.