Absence of cross-reactivity to carbapenems in patients with delayed hypersensitivity to penicillins

Meropenem allergy testing performed at the bedside of hospitalized patients labelled with a penicillin allergy

BACKGROUND

Meropenem is a widely prescribed beta-lactam for hospitalized patients. There are few data on meropenem allergy assessments in inpatients with a reported history of penicillin allergy who require a treatment with meropenem. This can lead to the use of less effective second-line antibiotics that may increase antibiotic resistances. We aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a meropenem allergy assessment in admitted patients with a reported history of penicillin allergy that required meropenem for the treatment of an acute infection.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 182 inpatients labelled with a penicillin-allergy who received meropenem after an allergy assessment. The allergy study was performed bedside if meropenem was required urgently. The study included skin prick tests (SPTs) followed by an intradermal skin test (IDT) to meropenem, and a meropenem drug challenge test (DCT). If a non-immediate reaction to a beta-lactam was suspected, it was initiated with patch tests.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 59.7 years (range 28-95) and 80 (44%) were women. A total of 196 sets of diagnostic workups were performed, with 189 (96.4%) of them being tolerated. Only two patients had a positive meropenem IV DCT, both presenting a non-severe cutaneous reaction that completely resolved after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study evidenced that a bedside meropenem allergy assessment of hospitalized patients labelled with a 'penicillin allergy' who require a broad-spectrum antibiotic for empiric coverage is a safe and effective procedure, avoiding the use of second-line antimicrobial agents.

Diagnosis and selection of alternative antibiotics in beta-lactams hypersensitivity reactions: Current recommendations and challenges

Beta-lactam (BLM) antibiotics, including amino-penicillin and cephalosporins, are typically the first-choice treatment for bacterial infections. However, adverse reactions to these antibiotics are frequently reported, causing non-allergist physicians to select alternative broad-spectrum antibiotics that can have harmful consequences. Patients with unclear histories of hypersensitivity reactions to BLMs should undergo an allergy workup to establish a firm diagnosis, particularly when different drugs are prescribed simultaneously. However, finding the safest, most precise, and cost-effective methods for confirming BLMs hypersensitivity and selecting the most appropriate alternative BLM is uncertain, particularly in severe delayed reactions. This review aims to provide data and recommendations on the availability and validity of skin tests (STs), drug provocation test (DPT) protocols, based on the latest published literature and guideline. To make the process more practical, we focused on cross-reactivity between BLMs and diagnostic tests. There are two main novel aspects of this document: 1) For T-cell-mediated reactions, patient stratification into high, moderate, and low-risk groups based on the mortality and morbidity of adverse drug reactions. 2) For IgE-mediated reactions, stratification of individuals with isolated limited urticarial without anaphylaxis in a low-risk group and removal of the extensive limitation.

Tools to improve the diagnosis and management of T-cell mediated adverse drug reactions

Delayed drug T-cell immune-mediated hypersensitivity reactions have a large clinical heterogeneity varying from mild maculopapular exanthema (MPE) to severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) such as acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and severe skin necrosis and blistering as seen in Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Given the knowledge gaps related to the immunopathogenesis of these conditions, the absence of validated diagnostic tools and the significant associated morbidity and mortality, patients with SCARs often have limited drug choices. We performed a comprehensive review aiming to evaluate in vivo diagnostic tools such as delayed intradermal skin and patch testing and ex vivo/in vitro research assays such as the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) and the enzyme-linked ImmunoSpot (ELISpot) assay. We searched through PubMed using the terms “drug allergy,” “in vivo” and “ex vivo” for original papers in the last 10 years. A detailed meticulous approach adapted to the various clinical phenotypes is recommended for the diagnostic and management of delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. This review highlights the current diagnostic tools for the delayed drug hypersensitivity phenotypes.

Immediate and Delayed Hypersensitivity Reactions to Beta-Lactam Antibiotics

Beta-lactam antibiotics are the most commonly reported drug allergy in adults and children. More than 95% of those with reported allergy labels to beta lactams are not confirmed when subjected to allergy testing. Beta lactam antibiotics are associated with a wide spectrum of immediate and delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. The latency period to symptoms and clinical presentation aids in the causality assessment. Risk stratification based on diagnosis and timing then allows for appropriate management and evaluation. Skin prick testing, intradermal testing and oral challenge are well established for evaluation of immediate reactions. Delayed intradermal testing, patch testing and oral challenge can also be considered for evaluation of mild to moderate delayed reactions. Cross-reactivity between beta-lactams appears to be driven most commonly by a shared R1 side-chain. Standardized algorithms, protocols and pathways are needed for widespread implementation of a pragmatic and effective approach to patients reporting beta lactam allergy.

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.

Piperacillin-Tazobactam Hypersensitivity: A Large, Multicenter Analysis

BACKGROUND

Piperacillin/tazobactam is a broad-spectrum penicillin. Hypersensitivity reactions are less commonly reported than with other penicillins except in patients with cystic fibrosis.

OBJECTIVE

Detailed clinical characterization of a patient cohort referred with suspected piperacillin-tazobactam hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, investigation, and management of 87 patients presenting to 5 European allergy centers. Patients underwent skin prick and intradermal testing with piperacillin/tazobactam, major (penicilloyl-polylysine) and minor (sodium penilloate) determinants, amoxicillin, benzylpenicillin, flucloxacillin, co-amoxiclav, clavulanic acid, and meropenem with immediate and, where appropriate, delayed reading of tests. Skin test-negative patients underwent drug provocation to piperacillin/tazobactam and/or other penicillins. A multistep protocol was used, depending on risk assessment.

RESULTS

Forty-eight of 87 (55%) patients were diagnosed with hypersensitivity to piperacillin/tazobactam with either positive skin or drug provocation test results, of whom 10 (21%) had a diagnosis of cystic fibrosis. Twenty-six (54%) patients presented with immediate and 22 (45%) with nonimmediate hypersensitivity. Patients with cystic fibrosis predominantly presented with nonimmediate hypersensitivity (70%). Reactions were severe in 52% of immediate reactors (Brown's anaphylaxis grade 3) and moderately severe (systemic involvement) in 75% of nonimmediate reactors. The number of patients with negative skin test results tolerating reintroduction was comparable in immediate (80%) and nonimmediate (88%) hypersensitivity. One-third of patients were cross-sensitized to other penicillins. The cross-sensitization pattern raised the possibility of tazobactam allergy in 3 patients. In 21 patients selectively sensitized to piperacillin/tazobactam (12 immediate, 9 nonimmediate), tolerance to other beta-lactams was demonstrated by drug provocation testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Piperacillin-tazobactam caused immediate and nonimmediate hypersensitivity with similar frequency. Most patients were selectively sensitized and tolerated other penicillins. Some patients may be allergic to the beta-lactamase inhibitor only.

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.

Penicillin allergy: a practical approach to assessment and prescribing

Penicillin allergies are not always lifelong. Approximately 50% are lost over five years

A reaction to penicillin during a childhood infection is unlikely to be a true allergy

Only 1–2% of patients with a confirmed penicillin allergy have an allergy to cephalosporins. In patients with a low risk of severe allergic reactions, cephalosporins are a relatively safe treatment option

Patients with a history of delayed non-severe reactions, such as mild childhood rashes that occurred over 10 years ago, may be suitable for an oral rechallenge with low-dose penicillin. This should be done in a supervised hospital environment

In many cases, with appropriate assessment and allergy testing, it may be possible to remove the penicillin allergy label

Cross-reactivity in beta-lactams after a non-immediate cutaneous adverse reaction: experience of a reference centre for toxic bullous diseases and severe cutaneous adverse reactions

BACKGROUND

Cross-reactivity among beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) is essentially reported in immediate hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate cross-reactivity beyond BLs in patients with non-immediate cutaneous adverse drug reaction (non-immediate CADR) managed in a dermatology reference centre of toxic bullous and severe CADRs.

PATIENTS/MATERIALS/METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-centre study in consecutive patients consulting between 2010 and 2018 with an active BL-suspected non-immediate CADR and explored by cutaneous tests [patch tests (PT) and intradermal tests (P-IDR)] for at least three penicillin's subclasses and amino- and non-amino-cephalosporins (at least one aminocephalosporin). Cross-reactivity among subclasses was investigated for patients with positive tests.

RESULTS

We included 56 patients, among whom 46 amoxicillin-suspected were and seven cephalosporin-suspected. Twenty-nine had severe CADR, and 27 had non-immediate maculopapular exanthema (MPE). Twenty-two had positive tests (18 for AS and four for CS). Among the 18 positive amoxicillin-suspected, 10 (55.6%) showed cross-reactivity with one or more other BL: 9 (50%) with another penicillin and 3 (16.5%) with a non-aminocephalosporin. No amoxicillin- or cephalosporin-suspected patient showed cross-reactivity with aztreonam or carbapenems. P-IDR showed cross-reactivity only once.

CONCLUSION

After a suspected BL-induced non-immediate CADR, a large allergologic exploration is needed to confirm the diagnosis and evaluate cross-reactivity. In our population including cases of severe CADRs and MPE with late delay of onset, cross-reactivity was frequent and PT was sufficient to this purpose. The frequent cross-reactivity among penicillins encourages stopping this whole family and to test cephalosporins, aztreonam and carbapenems for which cross-allergies are rarer.

Meropenem-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in a patient with known type IV penicillin hypersensitivity

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are considered variants of a disease continuum that results in a life-threatening exfoliative mucocutaneous disease. These are categorised as type IV cell-mediated delayed hypersensitivity reactions, and antibiotics are often implicated as a cause. Penicillins and other beta-lactam antibiotics are known to cause both immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions. While immediate IgE-mediated cross-reactivity between penicillins and carbapenems is well studied, less information on the risk of type IV delayed cell-mediated cross-reactivity between the two is available. We present a case of meropenem-induced SJS in a patient with documented history of SJS from amoxicillin. There are few cases of cross-reactivity with carbapenems reported in the literature, but based on the potential for life-threatening reaction, it is likely prudent to avoid the use of any beta-lactams in a patient with a history of SJS, TEN or any other severe cutaneous adverse reactions to another beta-lactam antibiotic.

Cross-Reactivity to Cephalosporins and Carbapenems in Penicillin-Allergic Patients: Two Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND

There is no recent systematic review on the risk of cross-reactivity to cephalosporins and carbapenems in penicillin-allergic patients despite many new studies on the subject. All past reviews have several limitations such as not including any patient with a T-cell-mediated penicillin allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk of cross-reactivity to cephalosporins and carbapenems in patients with a proven IgE- or T-cell-mediated penicillin allergy. To measure the association between R1 side chain similarity on cephalosporins and penicillins and the risk of cross-reactivity.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from January 1980 to March 2019. Studies had to include at least 10 penicillin-allergic subjects whose allergy had been confirmed by a positive skin test (ST) or drug provocation test (DPT) result. Cross-reactivity had to be assessed to at least 1 cephalosporin or carbapenem through ST or DPT. Both random-effects and fixed-effect models were used to combine data. A bioinformatic model was used to quantify the similarity between R1 side chains.

RESULTS

Twenty-one observational studies on cephalosporin cross-reactivity involving 1269 penicillin-allergic patients showed that the risk of cross-reactivity varied with the degree of similarity between R1 side chains: 16.45% (95% CI, 11.07-23.75) for aminocephalosporins, which share an identical side chain with a penicillin (similarity score = 1), 5.60% (95% CI, 3.46-8.95) for a few cephalosporins with an intermediate similarity score (range, 0.563-0.714), and 2.11% (95% CI, 0.98-4.46) for all those with low similarity scores (below 0.4), irrespective of cephalosporin generation. The higher risk associated with aminocephalosporins was observed whether penicillin allergy was IgE- or T-cell-mediated. Eleven observational studies on carbapenem cross-reactivity involving 1127 penicillin-allergic patients showed that the risk of cross-reactivity to any carbapenem was 0.87% (95% CI, 0.32-2.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Although it remains possible that these meta-analyses overestimated the risk of cross-reactivity, clinicians should consider the increased risk of cross-reactivity associated with aminocephalosporins, and to a lesser extent with intermediate-similarity-score cephalosporins, compared with the very low risk associated with low-similarity-score cephalosporins and all carbapenems when using beta-lactams in patients with a suspected or proven penicillin allergy.

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.

Recent advances in the understanding of severe cutaneous adverse reactions

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) encompass a heterogeneous group of delayed hypersensitivity reactions, which are most frequently caused by drugs. Our understanding of several aspects of SCAR syndromes has evolved considerably over the last decade. This review explores evolving knowledge of the immunopathogenic mechanisms, pharmacogenomic associations, in vivo and ex vivo diagnostics for causality assessment, and medication cross-reactivity data related to SCAR syndromes. Given the rarity and severity of these diseases, multidisciplinary collaboration through large international, national and/or multicentre networks to collect prospective data on patients with SCAR syndromes should be prioritized. This will further enhance a systematized framework for translating epidemiological, clinical and immunopathogenetic advances into preventive efforts and improved outcomes for patients.

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.

Non-immediate Cutaneous Reactions to Beta-Lactams: Approach to Diagnosis

Non-immediate cutaneous reactions (i.e., occurring at least 1 h after the initial drug administration), particularly maculopapular exanthemas and urticarial eruptions, are common during beta-lactam treatments. A T cell-mediated pathogenic mechanism has been demonstrated in some cutaneous reactions, such as maculopapular exanthema, fixed drug eruption, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome. In the diagnostic work-up, patch testing is useful, together with delayed-reading intradermal testing. Patch tests are a simple and safe diagnostic tool, which in the case of severe reactions should be used as the first line of investigation. However, patch tests are less sensitive than intradermal tests, which are preferable in subjects with mild reactions. Lymphocyte transformation or activation tests and enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assays can be used as complementary tests. In selected cases of mild or moderate reactions, displaying negative results in the aforesaid allergy tests, a graded challenge with the implicated beta-lactam can be performed.

Old dog begging for new tricks: current practices and future directions in the diagnosis of delayed antimicrobial hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Antimicrobials are a leading cause of severe T cell-mediated adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The purpose of this review is to address the current understanding of antimicrobial cross-reactivity and the ready availability of and evidence for in-vitro, in-vivo, and ex-vivo diagnostics for T cell-mediated ADRs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has evaluated the efficacy of traditional antibiotic allergy management, including patch testing, skin prick testing, intradermal testing, and oral challenge. Although patch and intradermal testing are specific for the diagnosis of immune-mediated ADRs, they suffer from drug-specific limitations in sensitivity. The use of ex-vivo diagnostics, especially enzyme-linked immunospot, has been highlighted as a promising new approach to assigning causality. Knowledge of true rates of antimicrobial cross-reactivity aids empirical antibiotic choice in the setting of previous immune-mediated ADRs.

SUMMARY

In an era of increasing antimicrobial resistance and use of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy, ensuring patients are assigned the correct 'allergy label' is essential. Re-exposure to implicated antimicrobials, especially in the setting of severe adverse cutaneous reaction, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The process through which an antibiotic label gets assigned, acted on and maintained is still imprecise. Predicting T cell-mediated ADRs via personalized approaches, including human leukocyte antigen-typing, may pave future pathways to safer antimicrobial prescribing guidelines.

Skin testing and drug challenge outcomes in antibiotic-allergic patients with immediate-type hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of antibiotic immediate-type hypersensitivity is intricate because of nonstandardized skin testing and challenge method variability.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety outcomes and risk factors for antibiotic challenge reactions in patients reporting a history of antibiotic immediate-type hypersensitivity.

METHODS

A 5-year retrospective review of patients evaluated for immediate-type antibiotic allergy was conducted. Data analyzed included patient demographics, index reaction details, and outcomes of skin testing and challenges, classified as single-step or multistep.

RESULTS

Antibiotic hypersensitivity history was identified in 211 patients: 78% to penicillins, 10% to fluoroquinolones, 7.6% to cephalosporins, and 3.8% to carbapenems. In total, 179 patients completed the challenges (median age 67 years, range 50-76 years, 56% women), and compared with nonchallenged patients, they reported nonanaphylactic (P < .001) and remote index (P = .003) reactions. Sixteen patients (8.9%) experienced challenge reactions (5 of 28 for single-step challenge, 11 of 151 for multistep challenge), and 11 of these patients had negative skin testing results before the challenge. Challenge-reactive patients were significantly younger (P = .007), more often women (P = .036), and had additional reported antibiotic allergies (P = .005). No correlation was detected between the reported index and observed challenge reaction severities (κ = -0.05, 95% confidence interval -0.34 to 0.24). Anaphylactic rates were similar during single-step and multistep challenges (3.6% vs 3.3%).

CONCLUSION

In the present population, younger women with multiple reported antibiotic allergies were at greatest risk for challenge reactions. Negative skin testing results did not exclude reactions, and index severity was not predictive of challenge outcome. The multistep and full-dose methods demonstrated a comparable reaction risk for anaphylaxis.

Return to sender: the need to re-address patient antibiotic allergy labels in Australia and New Zealand

BACKGROUND/AIM

Antibiotic allergies are frequently reported and have significant impacts upon appropriate prescribing and clinical outcomes. We surveyed infectious diseases physicians, allergists, clinical immunologists and hospital pharmacists to evaluate antibiotic allergy knowledge and service delivery in Australia and New Zealand.

METHODS

An online multi-choice questionnaire was developed and endorsed by representatives of the Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA) and the Australasian Society of Infectious Diseases (ASID). The 37-item survey was distributed in April 2015 to members of ASCIA, ASID, the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians.

RESULTS

Of 277 respondents, 94% currently use or would utilise antibiotic allergy testing (AAT) and reported seeing up to 10 patients/week labelled as antibiotic-allergic. Forty-two per cent were not aware of or did not have AAT available. Most felt that AAT would aid antibiotic selection, antibiotic appropriateness and antimicrobial stewardship (79, 69 and 61% respectively). Patients with the histories of immediate hypersensitivity were more likely to be referred than those with delayed hypersensitivities (76 vs 41%, P = 0.0001). Lack of specialist physicians (20%) and personal experience (17%) were barriers to service delivery. A multidisciplinary approach was a preferred AAT model (53%). Knowledge gaps were identified, with the majority overestimating rates of penicillin/cephalosporin (78%), penicillin/carbapenem (57%) and penicillin/monobactam (39%) cross-reactivity.

CONCLUSIONS

A high burden of antibiotic allergy labelling and demand for AAT is complicated by a relative lack availability or awareness of AAT services in Australia and New Zealand. Antibiotic allergy education and deployment of AAT, accessible to community and hospital-based clinicians, may improve clinical decisions and reduce antibiotic allergy impacts. A collaborative approach involving infectious diseases physicians, pharmacists and allergists/immunologists is required.

Cross-Reactivity among Beta-Lactams

Penicillins and cephalosporins are the major classes of beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics in use today and one of the most frequent causes of hypersensitivity reactions to drugs. Monobactams, carbapenems, oxacephems, and beta-lactamase inhibitors constitute the four minor classes of BLs. This review takes into account mainly the prospective studies which evaluated cross-reactivity among BLs in subjects with a well-demonstrated hypersensitivity to a certain class of BLs by performing allergy tests with alternative BLs and, in case of negative results, administering them. In subjects with either IgE-mediated or T-cell-mediated hypersensitivity, cross-reactivity among BLs, particularly among penicillins and among cephalosporins, as well as between penicillins and cephalosporins, seems to be mainly related to structural similarities among their side-chain determinants. Specifically, in penicillin-allergic subjects, cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins may exceed 30% when they are administered cephalosporins with identical side chains to those of responsible penicillins. In these subjects, a few prospective studies have demonstrated a rate of cross-reactivity between penicillins and both carbapenems and aztreonam lower than 1%. With regard to subjects with an IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to cephalosporins, in a single study, about 25% of the 98 subjects with such hypersensitivity had positive results to penicillins, 3% to aztreonam, 2% to imipenem/cilastatin, and 1% to meropenem. The cross-reactivity related to the selective recognition of the BL ring by IgE or T lymphocytes, which entails positive responses to all BLs tested, appears to be exceptional. Some studies concerning cross-reactivity among BLs have found patterns of allergy-test positivity which cannot be explained by either the common BL ring or by similar or identical side chains, thus indicating the possibility of coexisting sensitivities to different BLs because of prior exposures to them.

A Comparative Analysis Between Antibiotic- and Nonantibiotic-Associated Delayed Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions

BACKGROUND

The difference in clinical presentation, causality assessments, and outcomes of patients with delayed antibiotic-associated cutaneous adverse drug reactions (AA-cADR) and nonantibiotic-associated (NA)-cADR is ill defined.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the etiology of AA-cADR, with regard to the type of antibiotic exposure, allergy labeling, and patient outcomes, in comparison with NA-cADR.

METHODS

A retrospective observational inpatient cohort study of cADR was performed from January 2004 to August 2014. Patients were divided into AA-cADR and NA-cADR groups for analysis. cADR was defined as erythema multiforme, fixed drug eruption, acute generalized erythematous pustulosis, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), drug-associated linear IgA disease, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis.

RESULTS

Of the 84 patients with cADR, 48% were AA-cADR. Male sex (60% vs 32%, P = .004), median length of stay (14.5 vs 11 days, P = .05), median Charlson comorbidity index (3 vs 1, P = .03), and inpatient mortality (20% vs 5%, P = .04) were higher in AA-cADR compared with NA-cADR. The median drug latency was lower in AA-cADR (6 vs 20 days, P = .001). Sulfonamide antibiotics and glycopeptides were implicated in 20% of AA-cADR. DRESS was more frequently reported in AA-cADR. After cADR diagnosis, further antibiotic therapy was administered in 64% of patients, higher in AA-cADR (75%, 30 of 40) compared with NA-cADR (55%, 24 of 44) (P = .06). Fluoroquinolones (53% vs 21%, P = .02), glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin; 70% vs 38%, P = .05), and carbapenems (33% vs 13%, P = .11) were used more commonly in AA-cADR.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotics were the cause of cADR requiring hospital admission in 48% of episodes, and were associated with longer length of stay, higher age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, shorter drug latency, and mortality. In AA-cADR, glycopeptide and sulfonamide antibiotic exposure predominated.

Cross-reactivity and tolerability of aztreonam and cephalosporins in subjects with a T cell-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins

BACKGROUND

The few studies performed in adults with T cell-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins have found a rate of cross-reactivity with cephalosporins ranging from 2.8% to 31.2% and an absence of cross-reactivity with aztreonam.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the possibility of using cephalosporins and aztreonam in subjects with documented delayed hypersensitivity to penicillins who especially require them.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study of 214 consecutive subjects who had 307 nonimmediate reactions to penicillins (almost exclusively aminopenicillins) and had positive patch test and/or delayed-reading skin test responses to at least 1 penicillin reagent. To assess cross-reactivity with cephalosporins and aztreonam and the tolerability of such alternative β-lactams, all subjects underwent skin tests with cephalexin, cefaclor, cefadroxil, cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, and aztreonam. Subjects with negative responses were challenged with the alternative β-lactams concerned.

RESULTS

All subjects had negative skin test results to cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, and aztreonam and tolerated challenges. Forty (18.7%) of the 214 subjects had positive skin test responses to at least 1 aminocephalosporin. Of the 174 subjects with negative responses, 170 underwent challenges; 1 reacted to cefaclor.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate a rate of cross-reactivity between aminopenicillins and aminocephalosporins (ie, cephalexin, cefaclor, and cefadroxil) of around 20%, as well as the absence of cross-reactivity between penicillins and cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, and aztreonam in all subjects with T cell-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins, almost exclusively aminopenicillins. Therefore these subjects could be treated with cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, and aztreonam. In those who especially require cephalosporin or aztreonam treatment, however, we recommend pretreatment skin tests because negative responses indicate tolerability.

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta-lactams

The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and an expert panel have prepared this guidance for the management of immediate and non-immediate allergic reactions to penicillins and other beta-lactams. The guideline is intended for UK specialists in both adult and paediatric allergy and for other clinicians practising allergy in secondary and tertiary care. The recommendations are evidence based, but where evidence is lacking, the panel reached consensus. During the development of the guideline, all BSACI members were consulted using a Web-based process and all comments carefully considered. Included in the guideline are epidemiology of allergic reactions to beta-lactams, molecular structure, formulations available in the UK and a description of known beta-lactam antigenic determinants. Sections on the value and limitations of clinical history, skin testing and laboratory investigations for both penicillins and cephalosporins are included. Cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins is discussed in detail. Recommendations on oral provocation and desensitization procedures have been made. Guidance for beta-lactam allergy in children is given in a separate section. An algorithm to help the clinician in the diagnosis of patients with a history of penicillin allergy has also been included.

Update on skin allergy

Skin diseases with an allergic background such as atopic dermatitis, allergic contact dermatitis, and urticaria are very common. Moreover, diseases arising from a dysfunction of immune cells and/or their products often manifest with skin symptoms. This review aims to summarize recently published articles in order to highlight novel research findings, clinical trial results, and current guidelines on disease management. In recent years, an immense progress has been made in understanding the link between skin barrier dysfunction and allergic sensitization initiating the atopic march. In consequence, new strategies for treatment and prevention have been developed. Novel pathogenic insights, for example, into urticaria, angioedema, mastocytosis, led to the development of new therapeutic approaches and their implementation in daily patient care. By understanding distinct pathomechanisms, for example, the role of IL-1, novel entities such as autoinflammatory diseases have been described. Considerable effort has been made to improve and harmonize patient management as documented in several guidelines and position papers.

Tolerability of aztreonam and carbapenems in patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins

BACKGROUND

Studies performed on samples larger than 100 subjects with a documented IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins have demonstrated a cross-reactivity rate of approximately 1% between penicillins and both imipenem and meropenem, whereas a single study found a cross-reactivity rate of 6.2% with aztreonam in 16 such subjects.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cross-reactivity and tolerability of aztreonam and 3 carbapenems (imipenem-cilastatin, meropenem, and ertapenem) in patients with documented IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to penicillins.

METHODS

A total of 212 consecutive subjects with immediate reactions to penicillins and positive results on skin tests to at least 1 penicillin reagent underwent skin tests with aztreonam and carbapenems; subjects with negative results were challenged with escalating doses of aztreonam and carbapenems.

RESULTS

All subjects displayed negative skin test results to both aztreonam and carbapenems; 211 accepted challenges and tolerated them. Challenges were not followed by full therapeutic courses.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate the tolerability of both aztreonam and carbapenems in penicillin-allergic subjects. In those who especially require these alternative β-lactams, however, we recommend pretreatment skin tests, both because rare cases of cross-reactivity have been reported and because negative results indicate tolerability.