Mast cell activation test: A new asset in the investigation of the chlorhexidine cross-sensitization profile

Non-IgE-Mediated Immediate Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

Immediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions (IDHSRs) have conventionally been attributed to an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated mechanism. Nevertheless, it has now been acknowledged that IDHSRs can also occur independently of IgE involvement. Non-IgE-mediated IDHSRs encompass the activation of effector cells, both mast cell-dependent and -independent and the initiation of inflammatory pathways through immunogenic and nonimmunogenic mechanisms. The IDHSRs involve inflammatory mediators beyond histamine, including the platelet-activating factor, which activates multiple cell types, including smooth muscle, endothelium, and MC, and evidence supports its importance in IgE-mediated reactions in humans. Clinically, distinguishing IgE from non-IgE mechanisms is crucial for future treatment strategies, including drug(s) restriction, readministration approaches, and pretreatment considerations. However, this presents significant challenges because certain drugs can trigger both mechanisms, and their presentations can appear similarly, ranging from mild to life-threatening symptoms. Thus, history alone is often inadequate for differentiation, and skin tests lack a standardized approach. Moreover, drug-specific IgE immunoassays have favorable specificity but low sensitivity, and the usefulness of the basophil activation test remains debatable. Lastly, no biomarker reliably differentiates between both mechanisms. Whereas non-IgE-mediated mechanisms likely predominate in IDHSRs, reclassifying most drug-related IDHSRs as non-IgE-mediated, with suggested prevention through dose administration adjustments, is premature and risky. Therefore, continued research and validated diagnostic tests are crucial to improving our capacity to distinguish between these mechanisms, ultimately enhancing patient care.

Mast cell versus basophil activation test in allergy: Current status

In the past two decades, we witnessed the evolution of the basophil activation test (BAT) from mainly research applications to a potential complementary diagnostic tool to document IgE-dependent allergies. However, BAT presents some technical weaknesses. Around 10%-15% of tested patients are non-responders, BAT can be negative immediately post-reaction and the use of fresh basophils, ideally analysed within 4 h of collection, restricts the number of tests that can be performed per sample. The need for fresh basophils is especially limiting when conducting batch analyses and interlaboratory comparisons to harmonize BAT methodology. These limitations significantly hinder the wider application of BAT and urge the development of alternative testing, such as the mast cell activation test (MAT). The essential difference between BAT and MAT is the heterogeneity of the starting material used to perform the assays. Mast cells are tissue-resident, so cannot be easily accessed. Current alternative sources for functional studies are generating primary human mast cells, differentiated from donor progenitor cells, or using immortalized mast cell lines. Hence, the methodological approaches for MAT are not only vastly different from BAT, but also different among MAT protocols. This review summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of BAT and MAT assays, dedicating special attention to elucidating the key differences between the cellular sources used and provides an overview of studies hitherto performed comparing BAT and MAT in the diagnosis of IgE-mediated food and drug allergies.

Comparison of the passive mast cell activation test with the basophil activation test for diagnosis of perioperative rocuronium hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Rocuronium is a major cause of perioperative hypersensitivity (POH). Skin tests (STs) and quantification of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies (sIgEs) can yield incongruent results. In such difficult cases, the basophil activation test (BAT) can be helpful. Here, we evaluated the passive mast cell activation test (pMAT) as a substitute of BAT as part of the diagnostic tests for rocuronium allergy.

METHODS

Sera from patients with a suspected POH reaction potentially related to rocuronium were included. All patients had a complete diagnostic investigation, including STs, quantification of sIgEs to morphine and rocuronium, and BAT. For execution of pMAT, human mast cells were generated from healthy donor peripheral blood CD34+ progenitor cells and sensitised overnight with patient sera.

RESULTS

In total, 90 sera were studied: 41 from ST+sIgE+ patients, 13 from ST-sIgE- patients, 20 from ST+sIgE- patients, and 16 from ST-sIgE+ patients. According to BAT results, patients were further allocated into subgroups. Of the 38 BAT+ patients, 25 (66%) showed a positive pMAT as well. Of the 44 BAT- patients, 43 (98%) also showed a negative pMAT. Mast cells that were not passively sensitised did not respond to rocuronium.

CONCLUSIONS

We show that the pMAT, in many cases, can substitute for BAT in the diagnosis of rocuronium hypersensitivity and advance diagnosis in difficult cases with uncertain ST or sIgE results when BAT is not locally available.

Perioperative anaphylaxis: when the allergological work-up goes negative

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) is rare but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Patients are referred to the allergist to identify the mechanism of the reaction, the causative agent and make recommendations regarding subsequent anaesthesia. Despite a well conducted allergological evaluation, the causative agent is not found in 30-60% of these reactions, leaving patients without a well established diagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several mechanisms can induce POA. In addition to the well known IgE-mediated reactions, IgG-mediated reaction, MRGPR-X2-related reaction or nonspecific histamine release may be involved. These situations are not easily assessed by the allergological workup.

SUMMARY

When the allergological workup is negative, the situation should be reassessed with the team present at the time of the reaction to confirm the reality of the hypersensitivity reaction and to search for a possible differential diagnosis. If POA is confirmed, the allergological evaluation should be repeated, ensuring proper execution according to current guidelines and including the search for hidden allergens. Specific IgE assays or basophil activation tests may be of interest. In case of negative results, a closely monitored drug challenge test, in coordination with the anaesthesia teams, may be useful to avoid the exclusion of any drug injected during the reaction.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents - A practical guide for the oncologist

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) to antineoplastic agents occur frequently, and every oncologist will encounter these reactions in their clinical practice at some point. The clinical signature of IHRs can range from mild to life-threatening, and their occurrence can substantially impede the treatment course of patients with cancer. Yet, clear guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management are scarce, especially from an oncologic point of view. Therefore, herein, we review the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis and management of IHRs to chemotherapeutic agents and monoclonal antibodies. First, we focus on defining the specific entities that comprise IHRs and discuss their underlying mechanisms. Then, we summarize the epidemiology for the antineoplastic agents that represent the most common causes of IHRs, i.e., platinum compounds, taxanes and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Next, we describe the possible clinical pictures and the comprehensive diagnostic work-up that should be executed to identify the culprit and safe alternatives for the future. Finally, we finish with reviewing the treatment options in both the acute phase and after recovery, with the aim to improve the oncologic care of patients with cancer.

A quarter of a century fundamental and translational research in perioperative hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis at the Antwerp university hospital, a Belgian Centre of Excellence of the World Allergy Organization

Perioperative hypersensitivity constitutes an important health issue, with potential dramatic consequences of diagnostic mistakes. However, safe and correct diagnosis is not always straightforward, mainly because of the application of incorrect nomenclature, absence of easy accessible in-vitro/ex-vivo tests and uncertainties associated with the non-irritating skin test concentrations. In this editorial we summarize the time line, seminal findings, and major realizations of 25 years of research on the mechanisms, diagnosis, and management of perioperative hypersensitivity.

Allergenic and Mas-Related G Protein-Coupled Receptor X2-Activating Properties of Drugs: Resolving the Two

Since the seminal description implicating occupation of the Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) in mast cell (MC) degranulation by drugs, many investigations have been undertaken into this potential new endotype of immediate drug hypersensitivity reaction. However, current evidence for this mechanism predominantly comes from (mutant) animal models or in vitro studies, and irrefutable clinical evidence in humans is still missing. Moreover, translation of these preclinical findings into clinical relevance in humans is difficult and should be critically interpreted. Starting from our clinical priorities and experience with flow-assisted functional analyses of basophils and cultured human MCs, the objectives of this rostrum are to identify some of these difficulties, emphasize the obstacles that might hamper translation from preclinical observations into the clinics, and highlight differences between IgE- and MRPGRX2-mediated reactions. Inevitably, as with any subject still beset by many questions, alternative interpretations, hypotheses, or explanations expressed here may not find universal acceptance. Nevertheless, we believe that for the time being, many questions remain unanswered. Finally, a theoretical mechanistic algorithm is proposed that might advance discrimination between MC degranulation from MRGPRX2 activation and cross-linking of membrane-bound drug-reactive IgE antibodies.

Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor MRGPRX2 in human basophils: Expression and functional studies

Background

Occupancy of MRGPRX2 heralds a new era in our understandings of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs), but a constitutive expression of this receptor by basophils is debated.

Objective

To explore the expression and functionality of MRGPRX2 in and on basophils.

Methods

Basophils from patients with birch pollen allergy, IDHRs to moxifloxacin, and healthy controls were studied in different conditions, that is, in rest, after stimulation with anti-IgE, recombinant major birch pollen allergen (rBet v 1), moxifloxacin, fMLP, substance P (SP), or other potential basophil secretagogues. In a separate set of experiments, basophils were studied after purification and resuspension in different media.

Results

Resting whole blood basophils barely express MRGPRX2 on their surface and are unresponsive to SP or moxifloxacin. However, surface MRGPRX2 is quickly upregulated upon incubation with anti-IgE or fMLP. Pre-stimulation with anti-IgE can induce a synergic effect on basophil degranulation in IgE-responsive subjects after incubation with SP or moxifloxacin, provided that basophils have been obtained from patients who experienced an IDHR to moxifloxacin. Cell purification can trigger a "spontaneous" and functional upregulation of MRGPRX2 on basophils, not seen in whole blood cells, and its surface density can be influenced by distinct culture media.

Conclusion

Basophils barely express MRGPRX2 in resting conditions. However, the receptor can be quickly upregulated after stimulation with anti-IgE, fMLP, or after purification, making cells responsive to MRGPRX2 occupation. We anticipate that such "conditioned" basophils constitute a model to explore MRGPRX2 agonism or antagonism, including IDHRs originating from the occupation of this receptor.

Inhibition of MRGPRX2 but not FcεRI or MrgprB2-mediated mast cell degranulation by a small molecule inverse receptor agonist

Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor-X2 (MRGPRX2) expressed on mast cells (MCs) contributes to hypersensitivity reactions to cationic US-Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs such as the neuromuscular blocking agent, rocuronium. In addition, activation of MRGPRX2 by the neuropeptide substance P (SP) and the pro-adrenomedullin peptide (PAMP-12) is associated with a variety of cutaneous conditions such as neurogenic inflammation, pain, atopic dermatitis, urticaria, and itch. Thus, small molecules aimed at blocking MRGPRX2 constitute potential options for modulating IgE-independent MC-mediated disorders. Two inverse MRGPRX2 agonists, named C9 and C9-6, have recently been identified, which inhibit basal G protein activation and agonist-induced calcium mobilization in transfected HEK293 cells. Substance P serves as a balanced agonist for MRGPRX2 whereby it activates both G protein-mediated degranulation and β-arrestin-mediated receptor internalization. The purpose of this study was to determine if C9 blocks MRGPRX2's G protein and β-arrestin-mediated signaling and to determine its specificity. We found that C9, but not its inactive analog C7, inhibited degranulation in RBL-2H3 cells stably expressing MRGPRX2 in response to SP, PAMP-12 and rocuronium with an IC50 value of ~300 nM. C9 also inhibited degranulation as measured by cell surface expression of CD63, CD107a and β-hexosaminidase release in LAD2 cells and human skin-derived MCs in response to SP but not the anaphylatoxin, C3a or FcϵRI-aggregation. Furthermore, C9 inhibited β-arrestin recruitment and MRGPRX2 internalization in response to SP and PAMP-12. We found that a G protein-coupling defective missense MRGPRX2 variant (V282M) displays constitutive activity for β-arrestin recruitment, and that this response was significantly inhibited by C9. Rocuronium, SP and PAMP-12 caused degranulation in mouse peritoneal MCs and these responses were abolished in the absence of MrgprB2 or cells treated with pertussis toxin but C9 had no effect. These findings suggest that C9 could provide an important framework for developing novel therapeutic approaches for the treatment of IgE-independent MC-mediated drug hypersensitivity and cutaneous disorders.

Establishing diagnostic strategies for cannabis allergy

INTRODUCTION

Cannabis is the most widely consumed illicit drug in the world and carries a risk of severe IgE-mediated allergic reactions, requiring appropriate diagnostic management. Currently available diagnostics are still relatively limited and require careful interpretation of results to avoid harmful over- and underdiagnosis.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the most up-to-date understandings of cannabis allergy diagnosis, starting with the main clinical features of the disease and the allergenic characteristics of Cannabis sativa, and then providing insights into in vivo, in vitro, and ex vivo diagnostic tests.

EXPERT OPINION

At present, the diagnosis of IgE-mediated cannabis allergy is based on a three-step approach that starts with accurate history taking and ends with a confirmation of sensitization to the whole extract and, finally, molecular components. Although much has been discovered since its first description in 1971, the diagnosis of cannabis allergy still has many unmet needs. The lack of commercial standardized and validated extracts and in vitro assays makes a harmonized workup of cannabis allergy difficult. Furthermore, the epidemiological characteristics, and clinical implications of sensitization to different molecular components are not yet fully known. Future research will complete the picture and likely result in an individualized and standardized approach.