IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to cephalosporins: cross-reactivity and tolerability of penicillins, monobactams, and carbapenems

"Antibiotic hypersensitivity reactions in Cystic Fibrosis: A thorough inspection on a stumbling block in patient care"

One hurdle in the management of CF, a disease characterized by progressive endobronchial infection, is the presence of hypersensitivity reactions to antimicrobials due to prolonged and repetitive treatment courses. The aim of this review is to compile existing data and provide insight to medical professionals on a long-debated topic for optimum patient care. Clinical studies were inducted from the last 15 years and filtered based on their relativity to drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), antibiotics and CF. After completing the selection process, 10 clinical studies were thoroughly examined. The most frequent antibiotic group related to DHRs were beta-lactams. Frequency of the most common overall type of reaction (immediate or nonimmediate) differed among clinical studies. Although severe reactions seem rare comparatively, they do occur during and even after completion of treatment regimens. The prevalence of true drug allergies should be confirmed using a variety of tests available, however, should not be confused with overall DHR rates. Genetic mutations, gender and lifetime antibiotic dose were not related with an increased risk for DHR development. On the contrary, the most important factor according to most studies was the cumulative antimicrobial dose in a given period of time, especially when delivered parenterally. DHRs are an indisputable problem in the management of CF patients. Understanding possible risk factors and increased awareness is vital in both hospital and outpatient settings as early detection can decrease the severity of the reactions.

The state and consideration for skin test of β-lactam antibiotics in pediatrics

β-lactam antibiotics are the most frequently used drugs and the most common drugs that cause allergic reactions in pediatrics. The occurrence of some allergic reactions can be predicted by skin testing, especially severe adverse reactions such as anaphylactic shock. Thus, penicillin and cephalosporin skin tests are widely used to predict allergic reactions before medication in pediatrics. However, false-positive results from skin tests were more often encountered in pediatrics than in adults. In fact, many children labeled as allergic to β-lactam are not allergic to the antibiotic, leading to the use of alternative antibiotics, which are less effective and more toxic, and the increase of antibiotic resistance. There has been controversy over whether β-lactam antibiotics should be tested for skin allergies before application in children. Based on the great controversy in the implementation of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests, especially the controversial cephalosporin skin tests in pediatrics, the mechanism and reasons of anaphylaxis to β-lactam antibiotics, the significance of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests, the current state of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests at home and abroad, and the problems of domestic and international skin tests were analyzed to determine a unified standard of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests in pediatrics to prevent and decrease adverse drug reactions, avoid waste of drugs, and a large amount of manpower and material resource consumption.

The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) guideline for the approach to suspected antibiotic allergy

OBJECTIVES

Prudent handling of reported antibiotic allergy is an important aspect of antibiotic stewardship. The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendations for bedside decision making in antibiotic therapy in patients that report an antibiotic allergy.

METHODS

The guideline committee generated 12 key questions, most of which were population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) questions relevant for both children and adults with suspected antibiotic allergy. For each question a systematic literature search was performed and reviewed for the best available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Quality of evidence was graded from very low to high and recommendations were formulated in structured discussions as strong or weak.

RESULTS

Sixty recommendations were provided for suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) and non-beta-lactam antibiotics (NBLA). Due to the absence of randomized controlled trials in this field, the underlying evidence was predominantly graded as low or very low. Available data supports that a detailed allergy history should always be performed and critically appraised. When cross-allergy between BLA groups is not to be expected due to absence of molecular similarity of the side chains, the patient can be safely exposed to the alternative BLA. An exception to this rule are severe delayed type reactions, in which reexposure to a BLA should only be considered after consultation of a multidisciplinary team.

CONCLUSIONS

Accumulated scientific data now supports a more liberal approach that better balances benefits of treatment with first choice and usually smaller spectrum antibiotics with appropriate avoidance of antibiotics in case of a truly high risk of a (severe) allergic reaction. In the Netherlands, a formal guideline was developed that provides recommendations for the approach towards suspected allergy to BLA and frequently used NBLA, thereby strongly supporting antimicrobial stewardship.

Clavulanic Acid Is a Leading Culprit Beta-Lactam in Immediate Allergic Reactions to Penicillins

PURPOSE

Clavulanate, a beta-lactam associated with amoxicillin, is frequently prescribed in patients at all ages. Recent data implicate amoxicillin-clavulanate in up to 80% of beta-lactam allergy cases. We assessed clavulanate's role in inducing allergic reactions to this combination treatment, with a focus on selective immediate reactions.

METHODS

Adults (≥ 16 years) reporting a history of immediate reactions to amoxicillin-clavulanate were evaluated through a beta-lactam allergological workup, using modified European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines. Patients first underwent skin testing, and if negative, drug provocation tests. Expected outcomes were: Group A, subjects with immediate reaction to classical penicillin group determinants (penicilloyl polylysine, minor determinants mixture, and/or penicillin G); Group B, subjects with selective immediate reaction to amoxicillin; Group C, subjects with selective immediate reaction to clavulanate and Group D, those immediate reactions with co-sensitization to clavulanate plus penicillin group determinants or amoxicillin.

RESULTS

Of 1,170 included patients, 104 had immediate reactions: 36.5% to penicillin group determinants (Group A), 26.9% to amoxicillin (Group B), 32.7% to clavulanate (Group C), and 3.8% to clavulanate plus penicillin determinants or amoxicillin (Group D). Diagnosis was made by skin testing in 79%, 75% and 47% of the patients, respectively, in the first 3 groups (P < 0.001). Drug provocation tests were necessary to establish most other diagnoses. Anaphylaxis predominated over urticaria/angioedema in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective immediate reactions to clavulanate accounted for over a third of cases with confirmed reactions after amoxicillin-clavulanate intake, with more than half experiencing anaphylaxis. Within this group, skin test sensitivity was below 50%. People taking amoxicillin-clavulanate may also be co-sensitized to both drugs.

National surgical antibiotic prophylaxis guideline in Singapore

Introduction: Institutional surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) guidelines are in place at all public hospitals in Singapore, but variations exist and adherence to guidelines is not tracked consistently. A national point prevalence survey carried out in 2020 showed that about 60% of surgical prophylactic antibiotics were administered for more than 24 hours. This guideline aims to align best practices nationally and provides a framework for audit and surveillance. Method: This guideline was developed by the National Antimicrobial Stewardship Expert Panel’s National Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis Guideline Development Workgroup Panel, which comprises infectious diseases physicians, pharmacists, surgeons and anaesthesiologists. The Workgroup adopted the ADAPTE methodology framework with modifications for the development of the guideline. The recommended duration of antibiotic prophylaxis was graded according to the strength of consolidated evidence based on the scoring system of the Singapore Ministry of Health Clinical Practice Guidelines. Results: This National SAP Guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the rational use of antibiotic prophylaxis. These include recommended agents, dose, timing and duration for patients undergoing common surgeries based on surgical disciplines. The Workgroup also provides antibiotic recommendations for special patient population groups (such as patients with β-lactam allergy and patients colonised with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), as well as for monitoring and surveillance of SAP. Conclusion: This evidence-based National SAP Guideline for hospitals in Singapore aims to align practices and optimise the use of antibiotics for surgical prophylaxis for the prevention of surgical site infections while reducing adverse events from prolonged durations of SAP. Keywords: Antibiotic prophylaxis duration, antimicrobial resistance, antimicrobial stewardship, hospital-acquired infection, surgical site infections

Antibiotic Allergy De-Labeling: A Pathway against Antibiotic Resistance

Antibiotics are one of the most frequently prescribed drugs. Unfortunately, they also are the most common cause for self-reported drug allergy, limiting the use of effective therapies. However, evidence shows that more than 90% of patients labeled as allergic to antibiotics are not allergic. Importantly, the label of antibiotic allergy, whether real or not, constitutes a major public health problem as it directly impacts antimicrobial stewardship: it has been associated with broad-spectrum antibiotic use, often resulting in the emergence of bacterial resistance. Therefore, an accurate diagnosis is crucial for de-labeling patients who claim to be allergic but are not really allergic. This review presents allergy methods for achieving successful antibiotic allergy de-labeling. Patient clinical history is often inaccurately reported, thus not being able to de-label most patients. In vitro testing offers a complementary approach but it shows limitations. Immunoassay for quantifying specific IgE is the most used one, although it gives low sensitivity and is limited to few betalactams. Basophil activation test is not validated and not available in all centers. Therefore, true de-labeling still relies on in vivo tests including drug provocation and/or skin tests, which are not risk-exempt and require specialized healthcare professionals for results interpretation and patient management. Moreover, differences on the pattern of antibiotic consumption cause differences in the diagnostic approach among different countries. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended to reduce the risks associated with the reported penicillin allergy label.

Management of Beta-Lactam Antibiotics Allergy: A Real-Life Study

Beta-lactam allergy is a common problem in everyday medical practice and is recognized as a major public health issue. Carrying this label frequently leads to the avoidance of all beta-lactam antibiotics, favoring the use of other less preferred classes of antibiotics, that are more expensive and associated with more side effects and increased antimicrobial resistance. Therefore, delabeling a beta-lactam allergy is part of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Herein, we retrospectively examined the clinical records of 576 patients who were referred to our center for a label of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics and were systematically investigated following a standardized algorithm. Our main aim was to evaluate the frequency of confirmed immediate- and delayed-type allergy to commonly prescribed subclasses of beta-lactam antibiotics (penicillin and cephalosporin), as well as the negative predictive value (NPV) and the sensitivity of skin tests. Our secondary aims were to examine the safety of beta-lactam skin testing and drug challenge. We identified that 260 patients reported a history of immediate reactions, 131 of delayed reactions, and 114 of unknown timing or mechanism of reactions. Following assessment and testing, 86 (18.3%) patients had a confirmed allergy to any beta-lactam antibiotics; 63 (13.4%) with an immediate- and 23 (4.9%) with a delayed-type reaction. Most frequently identified confirmed allergy was to penicillins (65 patients), followed by cephalosporins (21 patients). When immediate-type reactions were examined, NPV of skin tests were 96.3% and 100% for penicillins and cephalosporins, respectively. When delayed reactions were considered, NPV were 91.9 and 87.5% for penicillins and cephalosporins, respectively. Evaluation of the safety of skin tests according to the standardized procedure showed that systemic allergic reactions occurred in only 0.7% of skin tests and in 3.1% of drug challenges. Overall, our data indicate that only 18.3% of patients with a beta-lactam allergy label have a confirmed allergy and non-allergic patients can be safely delabeled through allergic workup based on skin tests and drug challenge. This approach supports the policy of saving second-line antibiotics through a standardized allergy workup.

Diagnostic Approach of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Cefazolin in a Large Prospective Cohort

BACKGROUND

Cefazolin is a common trigger of perioperative anaphylaxis. The diagnostic approach is controversial because the optimal concentration for skin testing is uncertain, drug provocation tests (DPTs) are contraindicated in severe reactions, and in vitro tests are not thoroughly validated.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to characterize a large number of patients reporting cefazolin allergic reactions and to analyze the diagnostic role of in vivo and in vitro tests.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated patients with suspicion for allergic reactions to cefazolin by clinical history, skin tests (STs), and, if negative, DPT. In a subgroup of patients, basophil activation test (BAT) and radioallergosorbent test were done before allergologic workup was performed and the final diagnosis was achieved.

RESULTS

We evaluated 184 patients, 76 of whom were confirmed as allergic (41.3%), 90 were nonallergic (48.9%), and 18 were nonconfirmed (9.8%). All patients reporting anaphylactic shock and most reporting anaphylaxis were confirmed to be allergic (P < .001). Forty allergic patients (52.6%) were confirmed by STs, 22 by DPT (28.9%), and 14 by clinical history (18.4%). All subjects manifesting exanthemas and pruritus were nonallergic. The BAT sensitivity was 66.7% when CD63 and CD203c were combined as activation markers. Six of 8 patients with negative STs and positive DPT had a positive BAT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients allergic to cefazolin often reported severe immediate-type reactions. Skin tests enabled a diagnosis in half of patients when using cefazolin at 20 mg/mL. Unfortunately, DPT could not be performed in all patients owing to reaction severity, which makes BAT a promising diagnostic tool. Further research is needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms, especially in severe reactions.

Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021

These guidelines for the treatment of persons who have or are at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were updated by CDC after consultation with professionals knowledgeable in the field of STIs who met in Atlanta, Georgia, June 11–14, 2019. The information in this report updates the 2015 guidelines. These guidelines discuss 1) updated recommendations for treatment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Trichomonas vaginalis; 2) addition of metronidazole to the recommended treatment regimen for pelvic inflammatory disease; 3) alternative treatment options for bacterial vaginosis; 4) management of Mycoplasma genitalium; 5) human papillomavirus vaccine recommendations and counseling messages; 6) expanded risk factors for syphilis testing among pregnant women; 7) one-time testing for hepatitis C infection; 8) evaluation of men who have sex with men after sexual assault; and 9) two-step testing for serologic diagnosis of genital herpes simplex virus. Physicians and other health care providers can use these guidelines to assist in prevention and treatment of STIs.

Assessment of the Frequency of Dual Allergy to Penicillins and Cefazolin: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Cefazolin is the preoperative antibiotic of choice because it is safer and more efficacious than second-line alternatives. Surgical patients labeled as having penicillin allergy are less likely to prophylactically receive cefazolin and more likely to receive clindamycin or vancomycin, which results in higher rates of surgical site infections.

Objective

To examine the incidence of dual allergy to cefazolin and natural penicillins.

Data Sources

MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched without language restrictions for relevant articles published from database inception until July 31, 2020.

Study Selection

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase was performed for articles published from database inception to July 31, 2020, for studies that included patients who had index allergies to a natural penicillin and were tested for tolerability to cefazolin or that included patients who had index allergies to cefazolin and were tested for tolerability to a natural penicillin. A total of 3228 studies were identified and 2911 were screened for inclusion.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were independently extracted by 2 authors. Bayesian meta-analysis was used to estimate the frequency of allergic reactions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Dual allergy to cefazolin and a natural penicillin.

Results

Seventy-seven unique studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding 6147 patients. Cefazolin allergy was identified in 44 participants with a history of penicillin allergy, resulting in a dual allergy meta-analytical frequency of 0.7% (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.1%-1.7%; I2 = 74.9%). Such frequency was lower for participants with unconfirmed (0.6%; 95% CrI, 0.1%-1.3%; I2 = 54.3%) than for those with confirmed penicillin allergy (3.0%; 95% CrI, 0.01%-17.0%; I2 = 88.2%). Thirteen studies exclusively assessed surgical patients (n = 3884), among whom 0.7% (95% CrI, 0%-3.3%; I2 = 85.5%) had confirmed allergy to cefazolin. Low heterogeneity was observed for studies of patients with unconfirmed penicillin allergy who had been exposed to perioperative cefazolin (0.1%; 95% CrI, 0.1%-0.3%; I2 = 13.1%). Penicillin allergy was confirmed in 16 participants with a history of cefazolin allergy, resulting in a meta-analytical frequency of 3.7% (95% CrI, 0.03%-13.3%; I2 = 64.4%). The frequency of penicillin allergy was 4.4% (95% CrI, 0%-23.0%; I2 = 75%) for the 8 studies that exclusively assessed surgical patients allergic to cefazolin.

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that most patients with a penicillin allergy history may safely receive cefazolin. The exception is patients with confirmed penicillin allergy in whom additional care is warranted.

β-Lactam Allergy and Cross-Reactivity: A Clinician's Guide to Selecting an Alternative Antibiotic

β-Lactams which include penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, and monobactams are the most common antibiotic classes reported to cause allergic reactions to drugs. This review is mainly about published studies assessing the cross-reactivity among β-lactams in penicillin- or cephalosporin-allergic subjects by carrying out diagnostic tests with alternative β-lactams and, if appropriate, graded challenges. Several studies demonstrated that cross-reactivity connected with the β-lactam ring, causing positive responses to allergy tests with all β-lactams, is infrequent in subjects with an IgE-mediated allergy and anecdotal in those with a T-cell-mediated allergy. Identities or similarities of β-lactam side-chain structures are mainly responsible for cross-reactivity among these antibiotics. For example, in aminopenicillin-allergic subjects, cross-reactivity with aminocephalosporins could possibly be over 30%. On the other hand, in a few prospective studies of penicillin-allergic individuals, less than 1% of cases show a cross-reactivity between penicillins and both aztreonam and carbapenems. Particular patterns of allergy-test positivity observed in some studies that assessed cross-reactivity among β-lactams seem to indicate that prior exposures may be responsible for coexisting sensitivities. Therefore, pre-treatment skin tests with the related β-lactams are suggested before administering them via graded challenges to β-lactam-allergic patients who need alternative β-lactams.

Background review for the '2020 European guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea in adults'

Gonorrhoea is a major public health concern globally. Increasing incidence and sporadic ceftriaxone-resistant cases, including treatment failures, are growing concerns. The 2020 European gonorrhoea guideline provides up-to-date evidence-based guidance regarding the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea. The updates and recommendations emphasize significantly increasing gonorrhoea incidence; broad indications for increased testing with validated and quality-assured nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and culture; dual antimicrobial therapy including high-dose ceftriaxone and azithromycin (ceftriaxone 1 g plus azithromycin 2 g) OR ceftriaxone 1 g monotherapy (ONLY in well-controlled settings, see guideline for details) for uncomplicated gonorrhoea when the antimicrobial susceptibility is unknown; recommendation of test of cure (TOC) in all gonorrhoea cases to ensure eradication of infection and identify resistance; and enhanced surveillance of treatment failures when recommended treatment regimens have been used. Improvements in access to appropriate testing, test performance, diagnostics, antimicrobial susceptibility surveillance and treatment, and follow-up of gonorrhoea patients are essential in controlling gonorrhoea and to mitigate the emergence and/or spread of ceftriaxone resistance and multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant gonorrhoea. This review provides the detailed background, evidence base and discussions, for the 2020 European guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea in adults (Unemo M, et al. Int J STD AIDS. 2020).

2020 European guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea in adults

Gonorrhoea is a major public health concern globally. Increasing incidence and sporadic ceftriaxone-resistant cases, including treatment failures, are growing concerns. The 2020 European gonorrhoea guideline provides up-to-date evidence-based guidance regarding the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea. The updates and recommendations emphasize significantly increasing gonorrhoea incidence; broad indications for increased testing with validated and quality-assured nucleic acid amplification tests and culture; dual antimicrobial therapy including high-dose ceftriaxone and azithromycin (ceftriaxone 1 g plus azithromycin 2 g) OR ceftriaxone 1 g monotherapy (ONLY in well-controlled settings, see guideline for details) for uncomplicated gonorrhoea when the antimicrobial susceptibility is unknown; recommendation of test of cure (TOC) in all gonorrhoea cases to ensure eradication of infection and identify resistance; and enhanced surveillance of treatment failures when recommended treatment regimens have been used. Improvements in access to appropriate testing, test performance, diagnostics, antimicrobial susceptibility surveillance and treatment, and follow-up of gonorrhoea patients are essential in controlling gonorrhoea and to mitigate the emergence and/or spread of ceftriaxone resistance and multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant gonorrhoea. For detailed background, evidence base and discussions, see the background review for the present 2020 European guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of gonorrhoea in adults (Unemo M, et al. Int J STD AIDS. 2020).

Antibiotic allergy labels and optimal antimicrobial stewardship

BACKGROUND

Although common, antimicrobial allergy labels (AAL) rarely reflect immunologically-mediated hypersensitivity and can lead to poorer outcomes from alternative antimicrobial agents. Antimicrobial stewardship programs are ideally placed to assess AAL early as a means of improving antimicrobial use.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the prevalence of AAL in patients referred for antimicrobial stewardship review and assess their impact on antibiotic prescribing, patient mortality, hospital length of stay, readmission, and rates of multidrug-resistant infections.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of adult patients referred for inpatient antimicrobial prospective audit and feedback rounds (PAFR) via an electronic referral system (eReferrals) over a 12-month period in 2015. Outcome data was collected for a period of 36 months following the initial review.

RESULTS

Of the 639 patient records reviewed, 630 met inclusion criteria; 103 (16%) had an AAL, of which 82 (13%) had reported allergies to β-lactam antibiotics. Those with AAL were significantly less likely to be receiving guideline-recommended antimicrobial therapy (50% versus 64%, p=0.0311), however there were no significant difference in mortality, hospital length of stay, readmission or increased incidence of multidrug-resistant infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Our cohort demonstrated that AAL was associated with reduced adherence to antibiotic guidelines. The lack of association with adverse outcomes may reflect limitations within the study including retrospective cohort study numbers and observational nature, further skewed by high rates of poor documentation. A clear opportunity exists for antimicrobial stewardship programs to incorporate allergy assessment, delabelling, challenge and referral into these rounds. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

General characteristics, economic burden, causative drugs and medical errors associated with medical damage litigation involving severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions in China

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

To investigate the general characteristics, economic burden, causative drugs and medical errors associated with litigation involving severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCADRs) in China, with the aims of improving rational medication use and reducing the extent of damage from SCADRs.

METHODS

This study analysed 150 lawsuit judgements involving SCADRs from 2005 to 2019, collected from China Judgments Online.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In total, 50% of lawsuits stemmed from SCADRs occurring in general hospitals. The average time elapsed from the date of occurrence of the SCADRs to the end of litigation procedures was 1055 days. Of the patients involved, 51% were female and more than two thirds (69%) were under 60 years old. The most common outcome of SCADRs was death (39%), followed by disabilities (30%). The average responsibility of the medical provider was 48 ± 29%. The average amount of compensation was $43 424. Of the cases studied, 51% of SCADRs were Stevens-Johnson syndrome or toxic epidermal necrolysis, which together accounted for 75% of cases with known clinical subtype. The overall average economic burden of SCADRs was $99 178, of which indirect costs made up the largest proportion (more than 60%). The most common causative drug groups were antimicrobial drugs (49%), Chinese patent medicine and Chinese herbal medicine (17%), and antipyretic analgesics (16%). Finally, 61% of medical errors were found to stem from violation of duty of care, 20% from violation of informed consent and 18% from violations related to the medical record writing and management system.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions not only severely affect patient survival and quality of life, but also impose a heavy economic burden in terms of health care and societal costs. Medical providers should be better educated on strategies to reduce risk to patients and establish mechanisms of risk sharing and management.

Towards a more precise diagnosis of hypersensitivity to beta-lactams - an EAACI position paper

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.

Guideline on diagnostic procedures for suspected hypersensitivity to beta-lactam antibiotics: Guideline of the German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the German Society of Allergology (AeDA), German Society for Pediatric Allergology and Environmental Medicine (GPA), the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG), the Austrian Society for Allergology and Immunology (ÖGAI), and the Paul-Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy (PEG)

This guideline on diagnostic procedures for suspected beta-lactam antibiotic (BLA) hypersensitivity was written by the German and Austrian professional associations for allergology, and the Paul-Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy in a consensus procedure according to the criteria of the German Association of Scientific Medical Societies. BLA such as penicillins and cephalosporins represent the drug group that most frequently triggers drug allergies. However, the frequency of reports of suspected allergy in patient histories clearly exceeds the number of confirmed cases. The large number of suspected BLA allergies has a significant impact on, e.g., the quality of treatment received by the individual patient and the costs to society as a whole. Allergies to BLA are based on different immunological mechanisms and often manifest as maculopapular exanthema, as well as anaphylaxis; and there are also a number of less frequent special clinical manifestations of drug allergic reactions. All BLA have a beta-lactam ring. BLA are categorized into different classes: penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, monobactams, and beta-lactamase inhibitors with different chemical structures. Knowledge of possible cross-reactivity is of considerable clinical significance. Whereas allergy to the common beta-lactam ring occurs in only a small percentage of all BLA allergic patients, cross-reactivity due to side chain similarities, such as aminopenicillins and aminocephalosporins, and even methoxyimino cephalosporins, are more common. However, the overall picture is complex and its elucidation may require further research. Diagnostic procedures used in BLA allergy are usually made up of four components: patient history, laboratory diagnostics, skin testing (which is particularly important), and drug provocation testing. The diagnostic approach - even in cases where the need to administer a BLA is acute - is guided by patient history and risk - benefit ratio in the individual case. Here again, further studies are required to extend the present state of knowledge. Performing allergy testing for suspected BLA hypersensitivity is urgently recommended not only in the interests of providing the patient with good medical care, but also due to the immense impact of putative BLA allergies on society as a whole.

Immediate cephalosporin allergy

BACKGROUND

Patients who suffer from acute IgE-mediated allergy to a cephalosporin antibiotic are frequently assumed to be at high risk of allergy to other cephalosporins and penicillins.

AIM

To define cross-reactivity patterns in patients with confirmed allergy to a cephalosporin.

METHODS

Subjects presenting with a history of immediate allergy to a cephalosporin-family antibiotic between March 2009 and July 2017 were investigated with specific IgE testing to penicillin, amoxycillin and cefaclor, followed by skin prick testing, intradermal testing and drug provocation testing with a panel of penicillins and cephalosporins.

RESULTS

Out of 564 subjects with a reported beta-lactam allergy, 90 identified a cephalosporin as their index drug. Fifty-five (61.1%) of the 90 subjects tested had a history consistent with an IgE-mediated reaction, of whom 24 (43.6%) were proven to be allergic to their index cephalosporin. Twenty (83.3%) of the 24 were allergic only to their index cephalosporin. Of the four remaining subjects, two were co-sensitised to another beta-lactam with a similar side chain, while the other two had no specific cross-reactivity pattern. Major and minor penicillin determinants were negative for all cephalosporin-allergic individuals.

CONCLUSION

In our cohort, cephalosporin allergy does not appear to be a class effect, with most cases found allergic only to their index cephalosporin. Co-sensitisation to other cephalosporins or penicillins was uncommon, and when it occurred, was usually consistent with side chain cross-reactivity.

A Practical Guide for Managing Antibiotic Allergies in the Emergency Department

Up to 30% of patients report at least one antibiotic allergy, but oftentimes these antibiotic allergies are misdiagnosed. In fact, of the 10% of patients reporting penicillin allergies, 90%-98% are not truly allergic. In an era of increasing antibiotic resistance coupled with a limited number of new antibiotics, evaluating antibiotic allergies is critical in providing optimal patient care. Differentiating adverse drug reactions from antibiotic allergies may seem like a daunting task for clinicians and providers, especially in the emergency department, where decisions are made quickly. However, a systemic approach, including medical record review coupled with patient and/or family interview, is vital in managing patients with antibiotic allergies. Inappropriate, alternative antibiotics are frequently chosen due to patient allergies, and data suggest higher rates of broad-spectrum antibiotic use, antibiotic resistance, and poor outcomes as a result. Herein, we review antibiotic selection in patients reporting antibiotic allergies in the emergency department.

Monobactams: A Unique Natural Scaffold of Four-Membered Ring Skeleton, Recent Development to Clinically Overcome Infections by Multidrug- Resistant Microbes

Background:

Monobactam antibiotics have been testified to demonstrate significant antibacterial activity especially the treatment of infections by superbug microbes. Recently, research has been focused on the structural modifications, and new generation of this privileged natural scaffold.

Objective:

Efforts have been made to discover the structure-antibacterial relationship of monbactams in order to avoid the aimless work involving the ongoing generated analogues. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge and development of monobactams as a broad-spectrum antibacterial scaffolds. The recent structural modifications that expand the activity, especially in the infections by resistant-strains, combinational therapies and dosing, as well as the possibility of crosshypersensitivity/ reactivity/tolerability with penicillins and cephalosporins will also be summarized and inferred. Different approaches will be covered with emphasis on chemical methods and Structure- Activity Relationship (SAR), in addition to the proposed mechanisms of action. Clinical investigation of monobactams tackling various aspects will not be missed in this review.

Conclusion:

The conclusion includes the novels approaches, that could be followed to design new research projects and reduce the pitfalls in the future development of monobactams.

Aztreonam and Vancomycin for Initial Treatment of Febrile Neutropenia in Penicillin-Allergic Patients During Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Most patients who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation develop neutropenic fever and are at high risk for developing potentially life-threatening infections. β-lactam antibiotics remain the cornerstone for initial empiric treatment of neutropenic fever. In cancer patients with allergy or intolerance to β-lactams, guidelines recommend using aztreonam with vancomycin (AV) for neutropenic fever treatment. To date, the efficacy of AV for the treatment of neutropenic fever during stem cell transplantation is unknown. A retrospective study was conducted to identify hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients who were initially treated with concomitant AV for neutropenic fever between 2007 and 2013. Febrile neutropenia was classified as neutropenia with unexplained fever, neutropenic fever with a local source of infection, or neutropenic fever with a microbiologically documented infection. Seventy-six patients were identified who received AV as initial treatment for neutropenic fever over the study period. Responses to AV for neutropenia with unexplained fever (n = 41), febrile neutropenia with local site of infection (n = 11 [pneumonia = 9, other = 2]), and neutropenic fever with microbiologically documented infection (n = 34) were 75%, 55% (45% pneumonia), and 46% respectively. Infection-related mortality was 5%. Aztreonam with vancomycin was effective in treating neutropenia with unexplained fever. For patients with neutropenic fever and local source or microbiologically documented infection, alternative antibiotic treatments should be considered.

Overview and Insights into Carbapenem Allergy

Understanding antibiotic allergies and the risk of cross-sensitivity between and within antibiotic classes can have a substantial impact on patient care. The purpose of this review article is to provide insight into carbapenem allergies, describing the overall incidence, risk factors, and in-class cross-sensitivity. A PubMed search was conducted using the following search terms: carbapenem, allergy, cross-sensitivity, incidence, imipenem/cilastatin, meropenem, ertapenem, and doripenem. Article bibliographies and relevant drug monographs were also reviewed. The overall reported incidence of carbapenem allergy is 0.3%–3.7%. Risk of cross-sensitivity between penicillins and carbapenems is less than 1% in patients with a positive penicillin skin test. Data on cross-sensitivity between cephalosporins and carbapenems are limited; however, the risk appears to also be low. No clinical studies have described cross-sensitivity between the carbapenem agents thus far. The limited data available from case reports demonstrates a lack of cross-sensitivity between the individual carbapenems, suggesting that an alternative carbapenem may cautiously be used in patients with a reported carbapenem allergy.

A EAACI drug allergy interest group survey on how European allergy specialists deal with β-lactam allergy

An accurate diagnosis of β-lactam (BL) allergy can reduce patient morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to investigate the availability of BL reagents, their use and test procedures in different parts of Europe, as well as any differences in the diagnostic workups for evaluating subjects with BL hypersensitivity. A survey was emailed to all members of the EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group (DAIG) between February and April 2016, and the questionnaire was meant to study the management of suspected BL hypersensitivity. The questionnaire was emailed to 82 DAIG centres and answered by 57. Amoxicillin alone or combined to clavulanic acid were the most commonly involved BL except in the Danish centre, where penicillin V was the most frequently suspected BL. All centres performed an allergy workup in subjects with histories of hypersensitivity to BL: 53 centres (93%) followed DAIG guidelines, two national guidelines and two local guidelines. However, there were deviations from DAIG recommendations concerning allergy tests, especially drug provocation tests. A significant heterogeneity exists in current practice not only among countries, but also among centres within the same country. This suggests the need to re-evaluate, update and standardize protocols on the management of patients with suspected BL allergy.

Presumed β-Lactam Allergy and Cross-reactivity in the Operating Theater: A Practical Approach

A β-lactam allergy is the most common suspected in-hospital drug allergy. This article aims to provide a practical approach to a patient with presumed β-lactam allergy in the perioperative setting.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Cephalosporin Allergy: Current Understanding and Future Challenges

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.

Meropenem-induced liver injury and beta-lactam cross-reactivity

A 63-year-old man admitted to hospital for the management of a frontal lobe abscess developed elevated liver enzymes within 48 hours of receiving meropenem. Liver enzymes reached a maximum at 5 days postadministration of meropenem, with alanine aminotransferase 1160 U/L, aspartate aminotransferase 787 U/L, alkaline phosphatase 297 U/L and gamma-glutamyltransferase 252 U/L. Meropenem was ceased and liver function normalised. Meropenem was administered for a second time later in the patient's admission and again the patient developed rapidly increasing liver enzymes, with a mixed hepatocellular/cholestatic pattern. Other possible causes of liver injury were excluded following extensive investigations, and the patient's liver enzymes continued to normalise following meropenem discontinuation. The patient was asymptomatic during the admission and was transferred to a rehabilitation facility. This case demonstrates that meropenem can cause severe liver injury and that early recognition of drug-induced liver injury is important.

Controversies in Drug Allergy: Beta-Lactam Hypersensitivity Testing

All beta-lactam use is associated with a certain rate of adverse reactions. Many of these adverse reactions result in an allergy to the beta-lactam being entered into the patient's medical record. Unfortunately, only a small minority of these recorded allergies are clinically significant immunologically mediated drug hypersensitivity. An unconfirmed allergy to beta-lactams is a significant public health risk, because patients so labeled typically do not receive narrow-spectrum penicillins and cephalosporins when clinically indicated. The alternative antibiotics they receive result in poorer clinical outcomes, increased incidence of serious antibiotic-resistant infections, prolonged hospitalizations, and greater health care utilization. There is a wide variation in beta-lactam allergy incidence and prevalence around the world, based in part on the specific beta-lactams used and overused. There is a wide variation in specific protocols used to confirm current tolerance of beta-lactams and remove these inaccurate allergy reports. Harmonizing testing protocols, when possible, may lead to more widespread use of narrow-spectrum beta-lactams, when clinically indicated, and improve patient safety worldwide. Further research is needed to better understand the regional differences in reporting beta-lactam allergy as this relates to regional differences in beta-lactam use and overuse, the frequency of clinically significant immunologically mediated beta-lactam hypersensitivity, and the optimal testing strategies to confirm current tolerance, based on presenting clinical symptoms.

Drug allergy

Drug allergy encompasses a spectrum of immunologically-mediated hypersensitivity reactions with varying mechanisms and clinical presentations. This type of adverse drug reaction not only affects patient quality of life, but may also lead to delayed treatment, unnecessary investigations, and even mortality. Given the myriad of symptoms associated with the condition, diagnosis is often challenging. Therefore, referral to an allergist experienced in the identification, diagnosis and management of drug allergy is recommended if a drug-induced allergic reaction is suspected. Diagnosis relies on a careful history and physical examination and, in some instances, skin testing and graded challenges. Induction of drug tolerance procedures may also be required. The most effective strategy for the management of drug allergy is avoidance or discontinuation of the offending drug. When available, alternative medications with unrelated chemical structures should be substituted. Cross-reactivity among drugs should be taken into consideration when choosing alternative agents. Additional therapy for drug hypersensitivity reactions is largely supportive and may include topical corticosteroids, oral antihistamines and, in severe cases, systemic corticosteroids. In the event of anaphylaxis, the treatment of choice is injectable epinephrine. If a particular drug to which the patient is allergic is indicated and there is no suitable alternative, induction of drug tolerance procedures may be considered to induce temporary tolerance to the drug. This article provides a background on drug allergy and strategies for the diagnosis and management of some of the most common drug-induced allergic reactions, such as penicillin, sulfonamides, cephalosporins, radiocontrast media, local anesthetics, general anesthetics, acetylsalicylic acid and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and therapeutic monoclonal antibodies.

Perioperative Anaphylaxis Including Kounis Syndrome due to Selective Cefazolin Allergy

BACKGROUND

Perioperative use of cefazolin has been associated with severe allergic reactions, and patients are usually labelled as allergic to penicillin afterwards. The aim of our study was to describe a group of patients with immediate reactions to cefazolin, with proven selective hypersensitivity reactions.

METHODS

Systematic review of all patients followed at our drug centre with cefazolin-related reactions, between January 2012 and December 2016. All patients were investigated according to the European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA) recommendations through skin testing (major and minor penicillin determinants, penicillin, amoxicillin, cefazolin, cefuroxime and ceftriaxone) and oral challenges tests.

RESULTS

We included 7 patients (median age 40 years) with perioperative anaphylactic reactions immediately after cefazolin injection, 4 with hypotension and 1 with Kounis syndrome (KS) type I. The presence of a selective IgE-mediated hypersensitivity through positive skin tests to cefazoline has been proven in all patients. Two patients experienced systemic reactions during skin testing. All patients were successfully challenged with amoxicillin, and they tolerated cefuroxime.

CONCLUSIONS

Cefazolin can be responsible for immediate severe allergic reactions in perioperative setting, including KS. Allergological workup is essential for an accurate diagnosis and to explore cross-reactivity between cefazolin and other beta-lactams. Our experience confirmed that patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to cefazolin can tolerate other beta-lactams. This selective pattern of clinical reactivity may be explained by its particular chemical structure, whose R1 side-chain is different from other beta-lactams.

An EAACI task force report: recognising the potential of the primary care physician in the diagnosis and management of drug hypersensitivity

Adverse drug reactions include drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs), which can be immunologically mediated (allergy) or non-immunologically mediated. The high number of DHRs that are unconfirmed and often self-reported is a frequent problem in daily clinical practice, with considerable impact on future prescription choices and patient health. It is important to distinguish between hypersensitivity and non-hypersensitivity reactions by adopting a structured diagnostic approach to confirm or discard the suspected drug, not only to avoid life-threatening reactions, but also to reduce the frequent over-diagnosis of DHRs. Primary care physicians are often the first point of contact for the sufferer of a reaction, as such they have a key role in deciding whether to discard the diagnosis or send the patient for further investigation. In this review, we highlight the importance of diagnosing DHRs, analysing in detail the role of primary care physicians. We describe the common patterns of DHRs and signs of its progression, as well as the indications and contraindications for referring the patient to an allergist. The diagnostic process is described and the possible tests are discussed, which often depend on the drug involved and the type of DHR suspected. We also describe recommendations regarding the avoidance of medication suspected to have caused the reaction and the use of alternatives.

Antibiotic Allergy in Pediatrics

The overlabeling of pediatric antibiotic allergy represents a huge burden in society. Given that up to 10% of the US population is labeled as penicillin allergic, it can be estimated that at least 5 million children in this country are labeled with penicillin allergy. We now understand that most of the cutaneous symptoms that are interpreted as drug allergy are likely viral induced or due to a drug-virus interaction, and they usually do not represent a long-lasting, drug-specific, adaptive immune response to the antibiotic that a child received. Because most antibiotic allergy labels acquired in childhood are carried into adulthood, the overlabeling of antibiotic allergy is a liability that leads to unnecessary long-term health care risks, costs, and antibiotic resistance. Fortunately, awareness of this growing burden is increasing and leading to more emphasis on antibiotic allergy delabeling strategies in the adult population. There is growing literature that is used to support the safe and efficacious use of tools such as skin testing and drug challenge to evaluate and manage children with antibiotic allergy labels. In addition, there is an increasing understanding of antibiotic reactivity within classes and side-chain reactions. In summary, a better overall understanding of the current tools available for the diagnosis and management of adverse drug reactions is likely to change how pediatric primary care providers evaluate and treat patients with such diagnoses and prevent the unnecessary avoidance of antibiotics, particularly penicillins.

Cross-Reactivity and Tolerability of Cephalosporins in Patients with IgE-Mediated Hypersensitivity to Penicillins

BACKGROUND

Studies performed since 1990 on samples of at least 30 subjects with a documented IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins have found a rate of positive responses to allergy tests with cephalosporins ranging from 0% to 27%.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the cross-reactivity with cephalosporins and evaluate the possibility of using cephalosporins in penicillin-allergic subjects.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study of 252 consecutive subjects who had suffered 319 immediate reactions (mostly anaphylaxis) to penicillins and had positive skin tests to at least 1 penicillin reagent. All patients underwent serum specific IgE assays for cefaclor, as well as skin tests with 3 aminocephalosporins (cephalexin, cefaclor, and cefadroxil), cefamandole, cefuroxime, ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, and cefepime. Patients with negative results for the last 5 cephalosporins were challenged with cefuroxime axetil and ceftriaxone; those with negative results for aminocephalosporins were also challenged with cefaclor and cefadroxil.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine participants (39.3%) had positive allergy tests for cephalosporins. Specifically, 95 (37.7%) were positive to aminocephalosporins and/or cefamandole, which share similar or identical side chains with penicillins. All 244 subjects who underwent challenges with cefuroxime axetil and ceftriaxone tolerated them. Of the 170 patients who underwent aminocephalosporin challenges, 3 reacted to cefaclor and 4 to cefadroxil.

CONCLUSIONS

Cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins seems to be mainly related to side chain similarity or identity. Subjects with an IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins could be treated with cephalosporins such as cefuroxime and ceftriaxone that have side-chain determinants different from those of penicillins and are negative in pretreatment skin testing.

Evaluation and Management of Penicillin Allergy

Penicillin allergy is the most commonly reported drug allergy in the United States. Although penicillin allergy is widely reported, 80% to 90% of individuals with self-reported penicillin allergy are actually able to tolerate penicillins after undergoing evaluation for penicillin allergy. Because most patients with self-reported penicillin allergy will have subsequent negative allergy testing results and tolerate penicillins, they may be unnecessarily exposed to broader-spectrum antibiotics. Use of such antibiotics leads to increased risks of developing antibiotic-resistant microorganisms and incur higher health care utilization costs. In this article, we provide an overview of penicillin allergy and its clinical manifestations as well as an approach for the evaluation and management of penicillin allergy.

The 3 Cs of Antibiotic Allergy-Classification, Cross-Reactivity, and Collaboration

Antibiotic allergy labeling is highly prevalent and negatively impacts patient outcomes and antibiotic appropriateness. Reducing the prevalence and burden of antibiotic allergies requires the engagement of key stakeholders such as allergists, immunologists, pharmacists, and infectious diseases physicians. To help address this burden of antibiotic allergy overlabeling, we review 3 key antibiotic allergy domains: (1) antibiotic allergy classification, (2) antibiotic cross-reactivity, and (3) multidisciplinary collaboration. We review the available evidence and research gaps of currently used adverse drug reaction classification systems, antibiotic allergy cross-reactivity, and current and future models of antibiotic allergy care.

[Hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics]

Allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics is a common condition and about 10% of patients report being allergic to penicillin. However, this diagnosis is largely overestimated. Two types of allergy should be distinguished and include immediate hypersensitivity that can lead to anaphylactic shock and delayed hypersensitivity, ranging from the most common maculopapular exanthema to severe bullous toxidermia or life-threatening DRESS. Allergy challenge with oriented skin tests according to the clinical features, supplemented with oral challenge in the absence of contraindication, will confirm or invalidate the diagnosis of beta-lactam allergy and will help to identify if necessary safe alternatives to beta-lactams.

Pro and Contra: Provocation Tests in Drug Hypersensitivity

Drug provocation test (DPT) is the controlled administration of a drug to diagnose immune- or non-immune-mediated drug hypersensitivity and the last step for accurate recognition of drug hypersensitivity reactions when the previous diagnostic evaluations are negative or unavailable. A DPT is performed only if other conventional tests fail to yield conclusive results. In each clinical presentation, "to provoke or not to provoke" a patient should be decided after careful assessment of the risk-benefit ratio. Well-defined benefits of DPT include confirmative exclusion of diagnoses of drug hypersensitivity and provision of safe alternatives. However, disadvantages such as safety, difficulty in interpretations of results, lack of objective biomarkers, risks of resensitization, efficiency in daily practice, and lack of standardized protocols, are poorly debated. This review summarizes the current published research concerning DPT, with particular emphasis on the advantages and disadvantages of DPT in an evidence-based manner.