A statement on cefazolin immediate hypersensitivity: data from a large database, and focus on the cross-reactivities

Are changes in antibiotic prophylaxis recommendations responsible for an increased risk of cefazolin allergy?

BACKGROUND

The first line of prevention of surgical site infection relies on the timely administration of antibiotic prophylaxis. First- and second-generation cephalosporins are the most recommended antibiotics in elective surgery. The incidence of cefazolin allergy has increased worldwide over the years. The sensitization mechanism of cefazolin is currently unknown, and data supporting cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins are lacking. Sensitization could occur through previous exposure either to cefazolin or to structurally related chemical agents. The objective of this study was to evaluate sensitization agents towards cefazolin.

METHODS

The OpenBabel chemoinformatics toolbox was used to search for similarities between cefazolin and other molecules in an extensive drug database. Using the pholcodine-rocuronium similarity score as a threshold, we selected drugs with the most similar structure to that of cefazolin. Exposure to those drugs and cefazolin was assessed in a cohort of patients with skin test-proven cefazolin allergy at a specialized allergy centre via a self-administered anonymous questionnaire.

RESULTS

Using the pholcodine-rocuronium similarity score as a threshold (score≥0.7), 42 molecules were found to be similar to cefazolin (all cephalosporins). Only 8 were marketed in France. None of the 14 cefazolin-allergic patients who answered the questionnaire (65% female, median age 56 years) reported exposure to any identified antibiotics. In contrast, 11 (78%) had at least one previous surgery requiring cefazolin before the index case.

CONCLUSION

Direct previous cefazolin exposure was identified in 78% of cefazolin-allergic patients. Cefazolin started to take a central place in antibiotic prophylaxis after 2010, when cefamandole usage decreased drastically. Changes in antibiotic prophylaxis over the past 14 years in France could have been the turning point for the increased incidence of cefazolin allergy.

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.

A case series of perioperative anaphylaxis to cefazolin during kidney transplant and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative anaphylaxis is a life threatening and multiorgan system hypersensitivity reaction that frequently leads to cessation of operations. Despite the incidence of Cefazolin allergy being on the rise, the cases of anaphylaxis to Cefazolin during surgeries and its management are seldom reported.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present two patients with no known beta-lactam allergy and end stage kidney disease who received perioperative intravenous Cefazolin for planned deceased kidney transplant surgery at our academic medical center. Both patients developed anaphylaxes approximately three minutes following the administration of the antibiotic and experienced severe, refractory hypotension that required the use of vasopressors. The severity of the anaphylactic reactions resulted in the cessation of the transplant operation and multiple days of intensive care unit admission.

CONCLUSION

Peri-or intraoperative anaphylaxis to Cefazolin is on the rise and its consequences in transplant candidates are even more dire given the pre-existing end organ failure, financial burden for health care system, potential loss of donor organs, and emotional burden for recipients and their families. These are the first two cases of reported Cefazolin-induced anaphylaxis that actually resulted in aborting the kidney transplant operation. In addition, cases of previously reported Type 1 hypersensitivity to Cefazolin as prophylaxis for operations were reviewed and the allergy workups were discussed.

Fat necrosis: A neglected side effect of intramuscular injections

Panniculitis has various etiologies. One of the less common causes is trauma and hence traumatic fat necrosis (FN). These soft tissue injuries usually appear on the shins, thighs, breasts, arms, and buttocks. FN is mainly caused by trauma and may be associated with other conditions such as pancreatic disease. FN arising after intramuscular injections is uncommon and usually appears as firm, encapsulated, mobile, nontender, and solitary or multiple subcutaneous nodules. We report an interesting case of FN caused by intramuscular injections of cefazolin and meglumine antimoniate (MA) in a 38-year-old female patient. MA is regarded as the first-line systemic treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). However, these drugs are not devoid of various potentially adverse reactions.

Cefazolin-induced hemolytic anemia: a case report and systematic review of literature

Background

Cefazolin is a first-generation cephalosporin commonly used for skin and soft tissue infections, abdominal and orthopedic surgery prophylaxis, and methicillin-sensitive staph aureus. Cephalosporins as a whole are known potential inducers of hemolytic anemia; however, mechanism of action is primarily autoimmune, and compared to other drugs, cefazolin is the least common.

Methods

A rare case report of cefazolin-induced hemolytic anemia “CIHA” and a systematic review of CIHA articles in English literature. Two authors performed review of publications and articles were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. A systematic search of the literature yielded 768 entries with five case reports on cefazolin-induced hemolytic anemia.

Case presentation/results

An 80-year-old female with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus “MSSA” endocarditis. The patient was started on intravenous “IV” cefazolin that that resulted in hemolytic anemia and eosinophilia. Switching to vancomycin improved hemoglobin level and resolved eosinophilia. Four cefazolin-induced hemolytic anemia case reports and one population-based article with a case reported were analyzed with respect to direct antiglobulin test “DAT” (also known as the direct Coombs test) results, prior penicillin sensitivity, and acute anemia causes exclusion.

Conclusions

CIHA is a rare cause of clinically significant anemia. The diagnosis of drug-induced anemia is one of exclusion. It is important to consider DAT results and prior penicillin sensitivity when evaluating a patient for cefazolin-induced hemolytic anemia. However, the frequency of cefazolin use and resultant anemia necessitates early recognition of hemolytic anemia and prompt discontinuation of cefazolin, especially with long-term use.

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.

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.

Drug Allergy Profile From a National Drug Allergy Registry

Background: Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are among the most frequent reasons for consultation in allergy departments and are becoming more common due to increasing prevalence and case complexity.

Objective: To describe the most common drugs associated with clinical reactions, diagnostic methods used, and outcomes of allergic evaluations of a national drug allergy registry over a 12-year period were used.

Methods: An observational, prospective, patient’s data registry-based study was conducted to analyze all referrals to the drug allergy outpatient clinics at Al-Rashed Allergy Center, Kuwait, between 2007 and 2019. Demographics, description of DHRs, and results of allergy tests to potential causative medications were reviewed. Diagnostic methods were focused mainly on skin tests (STs) and drug provocation test (DPT), when indicated.

Results: We evaluated 1,553 patients with reported DHRs. The mean age of the population was 41.52 ± 16.93 years, and the study population consisted of 63.7% female patients. Hypersensitivity was finally confirmed in 645 (41.5%) of patients, probable in 199 (12.8%), and not confirmed/nonallergic in 709 (45.6%) patients. Anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics contributed to 39.22% of all confirmed drug allergies, followed by antibiotics 38.1% (β-lactam antibiotics (BLs) constituted 73.98% of all antibiotics and 28.21% of all drugs), anesthetics 1.8%, and radio-contrast media 0.31%. The majority of reactions were non-immediate 51.44%. The most commonly presenting symptoms among confirmed patients were urticaria 57.80%, angioedema 42.50%, respiratory symptoms 47.60%, and erythema 33.60%. Symptoms of anaphylaxis/anaphylactic shock were reported by 284 patients (44.00%) among confirmed cases. The most common method of diagnosis was a positive clinical history (54.4% in BLs and 90.45% in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Among confirmed allergy to BLs, a positive ST was obtained in 31.9% of patients and positive DPT in 13.7%.

Conclusion: NSAIDs and antibiotics, mainly BLs, are the most commonly implicated in confirmed allergy. In both confirmed and not confirmed/nonallergic cases, BLs are the most frequently involved DHRs which are mainly immediate, and the most commonly presenting symptoms were urticaria, angioedema, and respiratory symptoms. Diagnosis was confirmed mainly by a positive clinical history and when indicated, by positive STs or a DPT.

Practical guide for evaluation and management of beta-lactam allergy: position statement from the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

The vast majority of individuals labelled as allergic are not deemed truly allergic upon appropriate assessment by an allergist. A label of beta-lactam allergy carries important risks for individual and public health. This article provides an overview of beta-lactam allergy, implications of erroneous beta-lactam allergy labels and the impact that can be provided by structured allergy assessment. We provide recommendations on how to stratify risk of beta-lactam allergy, beta lactam challenge protocols as well as management of patients at high risk of beta-lactam allergy.

Cephalosporins' Cross-Reactivity and the High Degree of Required Knowledge. Case Report and Review of the Literature

Antibiotic cross-reactivity represents a phenomenon of considerable interest as well as antibiotic resistance. Immediate reactions to cephalosporins are reported in the literature with a prevalence of only 1%-3% of the population, while anaphylactic reactions are rarely described (approximately 0.0001%-0.1%) as well as fatalities. Allergic reaction to cephalosporins may occur because of sensitization to unique cephalosporin haptens or to determinants shared with penicillins. Cross-reactivity between cephalosporins represents, in fact, a well-known threatening event involving cephalosporins with similar or identical R1- or R2-side chains. The present report describes the case of a 79-year-old man who suddenly died after intramuscular administration of ceftriaxone. Serum dosage of mast cell tryptase from a femoral blood sample at 3 and 24 hours detected values of 87.7μg/L and 93.5μg/L, respectively (cut-off value 44.3 μg/L); the serum-specific IgE for penicillins, amoxicillin, cephaclor and also for the most common allergens were also determined. A complete post-mortem examination was performed, including gross, histological and immunohistochemical examination, with an anti-tryptase antibody. The cause of death was identified as anaphylactic shock: past administrations of cefepime sensitized the subject to cephalosporins and a fatal cross-reactivity of ceftriaxone with cefepime occurred due to the identical seven-position side chain structure in both molecules. The reported case offers food for thought regarding the study of cross-reactivity and the need to clarify the predictability and preventability of the phenomenon in fatal events.

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.

SIAIP position paper: provocation challenge to antibiotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in children

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) in childhood are mainly caused by betalactam or non-betalactam antibiotics, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Laboratory tests for identifying children who are allergic to drugs have low diagnostic accuracy and predictive value. The gold standard to diagnose DHR is represented by the drug provocation test (DPT), that aims of ascertaining the causative role of an allergen and evaluating the tolerance to the suspected drug. Different protocols through the administration of divided increasing doses have been postulated according to the type of drug and the onset of the reaction (immediate or non immediate reactions). DPT protocols differ in doses and time interval between doses. In this position paper, the Italian Pediatric Society for Allergy and Immunology provides a practical guide for provocation test to antibiotics and NSAIDs in children and adolescents.

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.

Cross-reactivity in β-Lactam Allergy

β-Lactam drugs (penicillins, amoxicillin, and cephalosporins) account for 42.6% of all severe drug-induced anaphylaxis. In this review, we focus on clinically significant immunologic cross-reactivity in patients with confirmed penicillin allergy to cephalosporins, and the structural involvement of the R₁ and R₂ chemical side chains of the cephalosporins causing IgE-mediated cross-reactivity with penicillin and other cephalosporins. Skin tests predict IgE-mediated reactions and showed cross-reactivity between penicillins and early generation cephalosporins that shared side chains, but confirmatory challenge data are lacking. Later-generation cephalosporins, which have distinct side chains, do not have any skin test cross-reactivity with penicillin/amoxicillin. There is debate as to the involvement of R₂ side chains as the antigenic determinants that cause IgE-mediated hypersensitivity with various cephalosporins. Avoidance of cephalosporins, when they are the drug of choice in a penicillin-allergic individual, results in significant morbidity that outweighs the low risk of anaphylaxis. We conclude that there is ample evidence to allow the safe use of cephalosporins in patients with isolated confirmed penicillin or amoxicillin allergy.

Registries as useful tools in characterization of allergic manifestations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Registries are useful to discover the applicability of data generated from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) into daily practice, and to search for real-life data usually not covered by them.

RECENT FINDINGS

In allergy, registry research brought clues to important epidemiological and clinical problems hardly accessible with other methods. The increase in the asthma prevalence in Sweden in contrast with stabilization in Denmark; the association of the prevalence of asthma and environmental factors; the knowledge of existing rhinitis international guidelines, but the poorly complacence of some of their recommendations; the low epinephrine use in anaphylaxis and the difference among European and Latin American elicitors; the predominance of β lactams or NSAIDs as drug hypersensitivity reactions inducers in different regions; the fact that most of the hereditary angioedema patients were receiving long-term prophylaxis with attenuated androgens; all the mentioned are clear examples of relevant and important data provided by current registries.

SUMMARY

Registries in allergy enlighten knowledge in areas not covered by classical investigational methods. As the number and importance of registries is growing, its contribution to the knowledge and management of allergic diseases will increase in the near future.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in cataract surgery in the setting of penicillin allergy: A decision-making algorithm

Cataract surgery is the most commonly performed surgical procedure in many developed countries. Postoperative endophthalmitis is a rare complication with potentially devastating visual outcomes. Currently, there is no global consensus regarding antibiotic prophylaxis in cataract surgery despite growing evidence of the benefits of prophylactic intracameral cefuroxime at the conclusion of surgery. The decision about which antibiotic regimen to use is further complicated in patients reporting penicillin allergy. Historic statistics suggesting crossreactivity of penicillins and cephalosporins have persisted into modern surgery. It is important for ophthalmologists to consider all available antibiotic options and have an up-to-date knowledge of antibiotic crossreactivity when faced with the dilemma of choosing appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing cataract surgery with a history of penicillin allergy. Each option carries risks, and the choice may have medicolegal implications in the event of an adverse outcome. We assess the options for antibiotic prophylaxis in cataract surgery in the setting of penicillin allergy and provide an algorithm to assist decision-making for individual patients.

Penicillin and beta-lactam allergy: epidemiology and diagnosis

Penicillin is the most common beta-lactam antibiotic allergy and the most common drug class allergy, reported in about 8% of individuals using health care in the USA. Only about 1% of individuals using health care in the USA have a cephalosporin allergy noted in their medical record, and other specific non-penicillin, non-cephalosporin beta-lactam allergies are even rarer. Most reported penicillin allergy is not associated with clinically significant IgE-mediated reactions after penicillin rechallenge. Un-verified penicillin allergy is a significant and growing public health problem. Clinically significant IgE-mediated penicillin allergy can be safely confirmed or refuted using skin testing with penicilloyl-poly-lysine and native penicillin G and, if skin test is negative, an oral amoxicillin challenge. Acute tolerance of an oral therapeutic dose of a penicillin class antibiotic is the current gold standard test for a lack of clinically significant IgE-mediated penicillin allergy. Cephalosporins and other non-penicillin beta-lactams are widely, safely, and appropriately used in individuals, even with confirmed penicillin allergy. There is little, if any, clinically significant immunologic cross-reactivity between penicillins and other beta-lactams. Routine cephalosporin skin testing should be restricted to research settings. It is rarely needed clinically to safely manage patients and has unclear predictive value at this time. The use of alternative cephalosporins, with different side chains, is acceptable in the setting of a specific cephalosporin allergy. Carbapenems and monobactams are also safely used in individuals with confirmed penicillin allergy. A certain predictable, but low, rate of adverse reactions will occur with all beta-lactam antibiotic use both pre- and post-beta-lactam allergy evaluations.

Diagnosis and management of immediate hypersensitivity reactions to cephalosporins

Cephalosporins can cause a range of hypersensitivity reactions, including IgE-mediated, immediate reactions. Cephalosporin allergy has been reported with use of a specific cephalosporin, as a cross-reaction between different cephalosporins or as a cross-reaction to other β-lactam antibiotics. Unlike penicillins, the exact allergenic determinants of cephalosporins are less well understood and thus, standardized diagnostic skin testing is not available. Nevertheless, skin testing with diluted solutions of cephalosporins can be valuable in confirming IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. In vitro tests are in development using recent technological advances and can be used as complementary tests. However, they are not commonly used because of their reduced sensitivity and limited availability. In selected cases of inconclusive results in both skin tests and IgE assays, a graded challenge or induction of drug tolerance with the implicated cephalosporin should be performed.

Natural evolution of skin-test sensitivity in patients with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to cephalosporins

There are studies demonstrating that skin-test sensitivity to penicillins can decrease over time and that allergic patients may lose sensitivity if the responsible compounds are avoided. With regard to subjects with IgE-mediated hypersensitivity to cephalosporins, however, such studies are lacking. We evaluated prospectively in a 5-year follow-up 72 cephalosporin-allergic patients. After the first evaluation, patients were classified into two groups according to their patterns of allergologic-test positivity: to both penicillins and cephalosporins (group A), or only to cephalosporins (group B). Skin tests and serum-specific IgE assays were repeated 1 year later and, in case of persistent positivity, 3 and 5 years after the first allergologic examination. Seven (43.7%) of the 16 subjects of group A and 38 (67.8%) of the 56 patients of group B became negative; one was lost to follow-up. Patients of group B became negative sooner and more frequently than group A subjects.

Antimicrobial stewardship's new weapon? A review of antibiotic allergy and pathways to 'de-labeling'

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The continued emergence of multiresistant pathogens and widespread antimicrobial use has led to a greater emphasis on antimicrobial stewardship programs. Concurrently, an increased awareness of the rising number of antibiotic allergy labels and impact on antimicrobial use has surfaced. The integration of antibiotic allergy de-labeling and antimicrobial stewardship programs may be a pathway worthy of further focus and investigation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has evaluated the efficacy of antibiotic allergy management (historical de-labeling, in-vitro testing, skin prick testing, intradermal testing, and oral challenges) and impact of antibiotic allergy labels on patient outcome. The importance of true and perceived antibiotic allergy cross-reactivity in the setting of β-lactam allergies has been highlighted. The impact of dedicated antibiotic allergy de-labeling clinics, inpatient antibiotic allergy testing, and integrated antimicrobial stewardship programs has been recently appraised.

SUMMARY

More recent literature supports that appropriate antibiotic allergy in-vitro and in-vivo testing and subsequent antibiotic allergy de-labeling, particularly in regard to β-lactams, can decrease broad-spectrum antibiotic use, costs, patient length of stay, and mortality. Integration of antibiotic allergy management into the decision support systems of inpatient and outpatient antimicrobial stewardship programs represents an important opportunity to further improve measured outcomes from antibiotic utilization.

Developments in the field of allergy in 2011 through the eyes of Clinical and Experimental Allergy

As in previous years, we felt it would be of value to our readership to summarize the new information provided by the authors who have published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy in 2011 and set this in the context of recent advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis and management of allergic disease in all its many manifestations. In 2011, about 210 articles were published in Clinical and Experimental Allergy including editorials, reviews, opinion articles, guidelines, letters, book reviews and of course at the heart of the journal, papers containing original data. As before, this review is divided into sections based on the way the journal is structured, although this year we have grouped together all the papers dealing with mechanisms of allergic disease, whether they involve patients (clinical mechanisms), pure in vitro studies (basic mechanisms) or animal models (experimental models), as we felt this was a more coherent way to deal with the subject. In the field of asthma and rhinitis, the relationship between airway inflammation and airway dysfunction was of perennial interest to investigators, as were phenotypes and biomarkers. Aspirin hypersensitivity appeared in studies in several papers and there was new interest in asthma in the elderly. The mechanisms involved in allergic disease describe advances in our understanding of T cell responses, the relationship between inflammation and disease, mast cell and basophil activation, steroid resistance and novel therapies. In the section dealing with epidemiology, studies seeking to identify risk factors for allergic disease including vitamin D are prominent, as once again are studies investigating gene-environment interactions. The clinical allergy section focuses on drug allergy, food allergy and immunotherapy. The area of oral immunotherapy for food allergy is well covered and we were grateful to Stephen Durham for guest editing an outstanding special issue on immunotherapy in the centenary year of Leonard Noon's pioneering work. Lastly, in the field of allergens, the interest in component-resolved diagnosis continues to grow and there are also articles describing important novel cultivars and the effect of food processing on the allergenic properties of foods. Another terrific year, full of important and high-quality work,which the journal has been proud to bring to the allergy community.