A case of hypersensitivity syndrome to both vancomycin and teicoplanin

A rare case of infant eosinophilia induced by oral vancomycin: a case report and literature review

Oral vancomycin is mainly used to treat and prevent active Clostridium difficile infection. Because it is widely believed that there is a very low absorption rate via the gastrointestinal tract, reports of adverse reactions following oral vancomycin administration are rare. This case report describes for the first time a case of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in a 2-month-old infant treated with oral vancomycin. After oral vancomycin treatment, the number of eosinophils increased significantly and the levels gradually recovered after drug withdrawal. A review and analysis of the previously reported adverse reactions caused by oral vancomycin and eosinophilia caused by vancomycin confirm the need for physicians to pay close attention to vancomycin-related adverse reactions, to monitor the required concentration and to measure eosinophil counts in patients with rash-related adverse reactions. Patients with concomitant diseases and children should be monitored for adverse events as it is possible that they have increased gastrointestinal absorption of vancomycin following oral administration. When vancomycin causes eosinophilia, fever and rash, physicians should be alert to the possibility of organ damage.

Associations of HLA-A and HLA-B with vancomycin-induced drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms in the Han-Chinese population

Vancomycin is a commonly used antibiotic; however, it can cause life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reactions, such as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). A previous study has reported a strong association between HLA-A*32:01 and vancomycin-induced DRESS in European ethnicity. Herein, we aim to investigate the genetic predisposition of vancomycin-induced DRESS in the Han-Chinese population. In this study, we enrolled a total of 26 patients with vancomycin-induced DRESS, 1,616 general population controls, and 51 subjects tolerant to vancomycin. In vitro granulysin-based lymphocyte activation tests (LAT) were conducted among 6 vancomycin-induced DRESS patients who were concomitantly receiving other medicines. HLA-A and HLA-B genotypes were determined by sequencing-based typing. Our results found that vancomycin-induced DRESS was associated with HLA-A*32:01 [odds ratio (OR) = 7.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.7-35.8; p-value = 0.035], HLA-B*07:05 (OR = 32.3, 95% CI = 2.8-367.7; p-value = 0.047), HLA-B*40:06 (OR = 4.7, 95% CI = 1.3-16.1; p-value = 0.036) and HLA-B*67:01 (OR = 44.8, 95% CI = 7.2-280.4; p-value = 0.002) when comparing the vancomycin-induced DRESS patients with the general population controls. LAT results showed that granulysin significantly increased in the vancomycin-induced DRESS patients upon vancomycin stimulation (4.7 ± 3.7 fold increased), but not upon other co-medicines. This study identified that, in addition to HLA-A*32:01, HLA-B*07:05, HLA-B*40:06, and HLA-B*67:01 were also genetic markers for vancomycin-induced DRESS in the Han-Chinese population. Associations of ethnic variances in HLA with vancomycin-DRESS were observed.

Patch testing in Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): a literature review

The literature on positive patch test results in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is reviewed. 105 drugs were identified that have together caused 536 positive patch tests in 437 patients suffering from DRESS. By far most reactions (n=145) were caused by carbamazepine, followed by amoxicillin, isoniazid, phenytoin, ethambutol, fluindione, phenobarbital, rifampicin, and ceftriaxone; 43 drugs each caused a single case only. The drug classes causing the highest number of reactions are anticonvulsants (39%), beta-lactam antibiotics (20%), antituberculosis agents (11%), non-beta-lactam antibiotics (6%) and iodinated contrast media (5%). The sensitivity of patch testing (percentage of positive reactions) is high for anticonvulsants (notably carbamazepine), beta-lactam antibiotics (notably amoxicillin) and possibly iodinated contrast media. Allopurinol and sulfasalazine frequently cause DRESS, but never give positive patch tests. Patch testing in DRESS appears to be safe, although mild recurrence of DRESS symptoms, mostly skin reactions, may not be rare. Multiple drug hypersensitivity was found to occur in 16% of all patients, but it is argued that the true frequency is (far) higher. Clinical aspects of DRESS, including diagnosing the disease and identifying culprit drugs (patch tests, intradermal tests, in vitro tests, challenge tests) are also provided, emphasizing the role of patch testing. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Characterization of Teicoplanin-Specific T-Cells from Drug Naïve Donors Expressing HLA-A*32:01

Teicoplanin is a glycopeptide antibiotic deployed to combat Gram-positive bacterial infection and has recently been associated with development of adverse drug reactions, particularly following previous exposure to vancomycin. In this study, we generated teicoplanin-specific monoclonal T-cell populations from healthy volunteers expressing HLA-A*32:01 and defined pathways of T-cell activation and HLA allele restriction. Teicoplanin-responsive T-cells were CD8+, HLA class I-restricted, and cross-reacted with the lipoglycopeptide daptomycin in proliferation and cytokine/cytolytic molecule (granzyme B, Perforin, and FasL) release assays. These data show that teicoplanin activates T-cells, which may play a role in the pathogenesis of teicoplanin-induced adverse events, in HLA-A*32:01 positive donors.

Vancomycin-Induced Organizing Pneumonia: A Case Report and Literature Review

The long-term administration of vancomycin has increased; however, the pulmonary adverse reactions of long-term vancomycin treatment remain under-studied. A 75-year-old male patient with vertebral osteomyelitis receiving long-term vancomycin therapy developed a fever. High resolution computed tomography showed irregular ground glass opacity and consolidation in the right upper lung. The patient developed organizing pneumonia. This occurred without peripheral eosinophilia or adverse reactions in the skin and liver. The administration of vancomycin was discontinued. He recovered from organizing pneumonia after four weeks of steroid therapy. Solitary organizing pneumonia can develop during treatment with vancomycin. When pulmonary inflammation occurs and other causes of pneumonia are excluded, vancomycin therapy should be discontinued.

Antibacterial antibiotic-induced drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome: a literature review

Background

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome (DRESS) is a delayed infrequent potentially life-threatening idiosyncratic drug reaction. Aromatic anticonvulsants and allopurinol are the most frequent causative agents. However, various reports of antibiotic-induced DRESS are available. In this review, we try to summarize reports of antibacterial antibiotic-induced DRESS focusing on characteristics of DRESS induced by each antibiotic group.

Methods

The data were collected by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and ScienceDirect. The keywords used as search terms were “DRESS syndrome,” “drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS),” “antibiotics,” “antimicrobial,” and names of various antimicrobial groups. Finally, 254 relevant cases with a definite or probable diagnosis of DRESS based on RegiSCAR criteria were found until 30 May 2020 and reviewed.

Results and conclusion

Totally, 254 cases of antibacterial antibiotic-induced DRESS are reported. Most of them are related to antituberculosis drugs, vancomycin, and sulfonamides, respectively. Rash and fever were most frequent clinical findings. Eosinophilia and liver injury were the most reported hematologic and visceral organ involvement, respectively. Most of the patients are managed with systemic corticosteroids. The death occurred in 16 patients which most of them experienced liver or lung involvement. The reactivation of various viruses especially HHV-6 is reported in 33 cases. The mean latency period was 29 days. It is necessary to perform thorough epidemiological, genetic, and immunological studies, also systematic case review and causality assessment, as well as well-designed clinical trials for better management of antibiotic-induced DRESS.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00228-020-03005-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Adverse reactions to vancomycin and cross-reactivity with other antibiotics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Glycopeptide antibiotics such as vancomycin are frequently utilized to treat resistant Gram-positive infections such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The current literature on glycopeptide and lipoglycopeptide structure, hypersensitivity and potential cross-reactivity was reviewed, highlighting implications for safe prescribing.

RECENT FINDINGS

Structurally similar, glycopeptides could theoretically cross-react. Immediate reactions to vancomycin include non-IgE-mediated reactions (e.g. red man syndrome) and IgE-mediated hypersensitivity (e.g. anaphylaxis), sharing clinical features. Vancomycin can activate mast cells via MAS-related G-protein-coupled receptor X2, an IgE-independent receptor implicated in non-IgE reactions. In-vivo and in-vitro testing for suspected IgE-mediated reactions to glycopeptides remain ill-defined. Vancomycin is increasingly recognized to cause severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR), with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) predominantly reported. Vancomycin DRESS has been associated with HLA-A32:-01, with a number needed to prevent of 1 in 74. Data demonstrating cross-reactivity amongst glycopeptides and lipoglycopeptides is limited to case reports/series.

SUMMARY

Further studies and in-vivo/in-vitro diagnostics are required for better differentiation between IgE and non-IgE glycopeptide reactions. Despite its association with vanomycin DRESS, utility of pharmacogenomic screening for HLA-A32: 01 is ill-defined. Although HLA-A32:01 has been associated with vancomycin DRESS, its utility for pharmacogenomic screening is ill defined. Further clinical and immunological cross-reactivity data for glycopeptide/lipoglycopeptide antibiotics is required.

Incidence of teicoplanin adverse drug reactions among patients with vancomycin-associated adverse drug reactions and its risk factors

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Teicoplanin can be used as an alternative to vancomycin when treating beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive bacterial infections. Both vancomycin and teicoplanin are associated with relatively high rates of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including hypersensitivity reactions. There is limited data on teicoplanin-vancomycin cross-reactivity. This study examined the incidence of teicoplanin ADRs and risk factors for cross-reactivity between vancomycin and teicoplanin.

METHODS

We analyzed the incidence of teicoplanin ADRs in a retrospective study of 304 newly teicoplanin-exposed, immunocompetent, hospitalized patients at a single Korean Medical Center between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

Among 304 patients, 238 (78.3%) experienced vancomycin-associated ADRs prior to their teicoplanin exposure and 58 (19.1%) experienced teicoplanin- associated ADRs, which were mostly hypersensitivity reactions without acute kidney injury. The incidence of teicoplanin ADRs was higher in patients who previously experienced vancomycin-related ADRs (23.1% vs. 5.3%, p < 0.001). History of drug allergy was a statistically significant risk factor of teicoplanin ADRs. The incidence of teicoplanin ADRs significantly increased in patients with multiple organ involvement in vancomycin hypersensitivity reactions.

CONCLUSION

Teicoplanin should be administered with caution and clinicians must consider the risk factors of cross-reaction when prescribing teicoplanin to individuals with a history of vancomycin hypersensitivity.

Variation of clinical manifestations according to culprit drugs in DRESS syndrome

PURPOSE

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a rare but serious condition that systematically damages various internal organs through T-cell-mediated immunological drug reactions. We aimed to investigate whether clinical manifestations of DRESS syndrome differ according to culprit drugs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 123 patients with probable/definite DRESS syndrome based on the RegiSCAR criteria (January 2011 to July 2016). The data were obtained from the Korean Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reaction Registry. Causality was assessed using the World Health Organization-Uppsala Monitoring Centre criteria. The culprit drugs were categorized as allopurinol, carbamazepine, anti-tuberculosis drug, vancomycin, cephalosporins, dapsone, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

RESULTS

Differences were observed among culprit drugs regarding the frequencies of hepatitis (P < 0.01), renal dysfunction (P < 0.0001), lymphadenopathy (P < 0.01), and atypical lymphocyte (P < 0.01). Latency period differed among culprit drugs (P < 0.0001), being shorter in vancomycin and cephalosporin. In terms of clinical severity, admission duration (P < 0.01) and treatment duration (P < 0.05) differed among culprit drugs, being longer in vancomycin and anti-tuberculosis drugs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings, clinical manifestations, including latency period and clinical severity, may differ according to culprit drugs in DRESS syndrome.

Vancomycin-Induced Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) Syndrome Masquerading as Elusive Sepsis

We present a unique case of vancomycin-induced drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome masquerading as elusive endocarditis. A 37-year-old female actively using intravenous drugs presented with worsening right upper extremity pain, fever, and chills. Workup revealed methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia and multiple right-sided septic pulmonary emboli. Echocardiogram was negative for vegetation. Vancomycin was initiated for bacteremia management suspected secondary to right upper extremity abscesses. However, despite resolution of abscesses, fevers persisted, raising suspicion for endocarditis not detected by echocardiogram. On hospital day 25, the patient began showing signs of DRESS syndrome, ultimately manifesting as transaminitis, eosinophilia, and a diffuse, maculopapular rash. Vancomycin was switched to Linezolid and she improved on high dose steroids. The persistent fevers throughout this hospital course were thought to be an elusive endocarditis before DRESS syndrome fully manifested. Although Vancomycin-induced DRESS is uncommon, this case highlights the importance of identifying early signs of significant adverse effects.

Teicoplanin-Induced Anaphylactic Reaction in Children: A Case Report

Teicoplanin is now increasingly used as a first-line prophylactic therapy for major surgical procedures, treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections and for those with reported penicillin allergy. Teicoplanin is rarely associated with anaphylaxis and there is limited information on the prevalence of teicoplanin-induced perioperative anaphylaxis. Here, we describe a case of a 12-year-old child with teicoplanin-induced anaphylaxis peri-operatively.

Case report: atypical presentation of vancomycin induced DRESS syndrome: a case report and review of the literature

Background

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a severe hypersensitivity drug reaction involving the skin and multiple internal organ systems. The symptoms typically present with fever and skin rash, and rapidly progress to multiple organ failures. Vancomycin is a rare drug to cause DRESS syndrome with 23 cases reported to date.

Case presentation

We described a case of a 39 year-old man who was treated with vancomycin for osteomyelitis of the foot. The patient subsequently developed acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) followed by rash and acute interstitial nephritis. These symptoms were improved by withdrawal of vancomycin and a pulsed corticosteroid regimen. According to the European Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reaction Criteria (RegiSCAR) (Kardaun et al, British Journal of Dermatology, 169:1071-1080, 2013), the probability of vancomycin induced DRESS syndrome was scored as “Definite”. A literature search of vancomycin induced DRESS syndrome was also performed and the overall pulmonary involvement was estimated as 5%. To our knowledge, this was the first case reported with pulmonary involvement as the initial symptom.

Conclusion

This is the first case to report pulmonary manifestation as the initial symptom in vancomycin induced DRESS syndrome. Prompt recognition of this entity can expedite proper treatment and hasten recovery.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12890-017-0564-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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.

DRESS Syndrome Caused by Cross-reactivity Between Vancomycin and Subsequent Teicoplanin Administration: A Case Report

BACKGROUND Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a potentially life-threatening syndrome comprising severe skin eruption, fever, eosinophilia, lymphadenopathy, and involvement of internal organs. Here, we describe a case of DRESS syndrome caused by cross-reactivity between vancomycin and subsequent teicoplanin administration. CASE REPORT A 79-year-old male was admitted to our hospital for the treatment of injuries incurred in a traffic accident. Eosinophilia and lung dysfunction appeared after vancomycin administration. These symptoms were improved temporarily by withdrawal of vancomycin and administration of corticosteroid, but exacerbated by subsequent teicoplanin administration. These symptoms disappeared after discontinuation of teicoplanin. Based on comprehensive assessment of the overall clinical course, we judged that DRESS syndrome was induced by cross-reactivity between vancomycin and subsequent teicoplanin administration. Using the European Registry of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (RegiSCAR) scoring system, we categorized DRESS syndrome related to vancomycin and teicoplanin as "probable." We describe, for the first time, DRESS syndrome (defined using the RegiSCAR scoring system) caused by cross-reactivity between vancomycin and subsequent teicoplanin administration. CONCLUSIONS Clinicians should be aware that DRESS syndrome can be induced by cross-reactivity between vancomycin and teicoplanin.

Immunoglobulin E-mediated hypersensitivity reaction after intraperitoneal administration of vancomycin

Intraperitoneal (IP) vancomycin is widely used to treat Gram-positive peritonitis associated with peritoneal dialysis. There have been two cases of red man syndrome (RMS), a vancomycin-specific nonimmunologic reaction, associated with IP vancomycin. However, immune-mediated hypersensitivity reaction to IP vancomycin has not yet been reported. A 49 year old woman on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis developed her first peritonitis episode. The patient was treated with IP vancomycin once/wk for 4 weeks. She experienced mild itching and flushing throughout her body for 1 day after the second treatment. Whenever vancomycin was administered, generalized urticaria and a prickling sensation developed, and the intensity increased gradually; however, these symptoms improved after vancomycin was discontinued. An allergic skin test was performed 6 weeks after the previous urticarial episode, and an intradermal skin test revealed a positive response to vancomycin. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of immunoglobulin E-mediated hypersensitivity reaction to IP vancomycin administration.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome induced by the cross-reactivity between teicoplanin and vancomycin

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The glycopeptide antibiotics, vancomycin and teicoplanin, are the mainstay of therapy for severe gram-positive organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. We report a case of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) induced by sequential therapy with teicoplanin and vancomycin, in a patient with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

CASE SUMMARY

A 74-year-old Han Chinese with 1-year history of COPD was admitted for treatment of infective endocarditis. After teicoplanin therapy for 12 days, he developed pruritus and maculopapular over his trunk and limbs. His rash spread rapidly to most parts of the body surface area, 7 days after his anti-infection therapy was switched to vancomycin. This was stopped, but he developed SJS when teicoplanin was re-introduced. This patient recovered from his drug eruptions when both teicoplanin and vancomycin were stopped. Pharmacogenetic analyses revealed he was heterozygous with respect to two variants (rs2844682 of MUC21 and rs750332 of BAG6).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Cross-reactivity between vancomycin and teicoplanin is rare. SJS attributable to sequential treatment with these two antibiotics has not been reported previously. Care should be taken when prescribing vancomycin in patients with a previous documented skin eruption to teicoplanin, especially in those who carry any susceptibility alleles to SJS/TEN.

Teicoplanin-induced neutropenic sepsis mimicking endocarditis

Teicoplanin is a less toxic replacement for vancomycin in most situations where resistant organisms are encountered, and is therefore the drug of choice. As a commonly used drug in cardiac surgery, we treated a case of presumptive endocarditis with teicoplanin that caused neutropenic sepsis, unmasked on withdrawal of treatment.

DRESS with delayed onset acute interstitial nephritis and profound refractory eosinophilia secondary to Vancomycin

Background

Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) is a relatively rare clinical entity; even more so in response to vancomycin.

Methods

Case report.

Results

We present a severe case of vancomycin-induced DRESS syndrome, which on presentation included only skin, hematological and mild liver involvement. The patient further developed severe acute interstitial nephritis, eosinophilic pneumonitis, central nervous system (CNS) involvement and worsening hematological abnormalities despite immediate discontinuation of vancomycin and parenteral corticosteroids. High-dose corticosteroids for a prolonged period were necessary and tapering of steroids a challenge due to rebound-eosinophilia and skin involvement.

Conclusion

Patients with DRESS who are relatively resistant to corticosteroids with delayed onset of certain organ involvement should be treated with a more prolonged corticosteroid tapering schedule. Vancomycin is increasingly being recognized as a culprit agent in this syndrome.

Hypersensitivity reactions to metallic implants - diagnostic algorithm and suggested patch test series for clinical use

Cutaneous and systemic hypersensitivity reactions to implanted metals are challenging to evaluate and treat. Although they are uncommon, they do exist, and require appropriate and complete evaluation. This review summarizes the evidence regarding evaluation tools, especially patch and lymphocyte transformation tests, for hypersensitivity reactions to implanted metal devices. Patch test evaluation is the gold standard for metal hypersensitivity, although the results may be subjective. Regarding pre-implant testing, those patients with a reported history of metal dermatitis should be evaluated by patch testing. Those without a history of dermatitis should not be tested unless considerable concern exists. Regarding post-implant testing, a subset of patients with metal hypersensitivity may develop cutaneous or systemic reactions to implanted metals following implant. For symptomatic patients, a diagnostic algorithm to guide the selection of screening allergen series for patch testing is provided. At a minimum, an extended baseline screening series and metal screening is necessary. Static and dynamic orthopaedic implants, intravascular stent devices, implanted defibrillators and dental and gynaecological devices are considered. Basic management suggestions are provided. Our goal is to provide a comprehensive reference for use by those evaluating suspected cutaneous and systemic metal hypersensitivity reactions.

Vancomycin-associated spontaneous cutaneous adverse drug reactions

Purpose

With the increase in vancomycin use, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with vancomycin have been reported increasingly more often. However, the characteristics of cutaneous ADRs with and without systemic reactions (SRs) have not been described. This study investigated the characteristics of spontaneously reported and assessed ADRs associated with vancomycin by a pharmacovigilance center.

Methods

ADRs (n=121) associated with vancomycin in 96 patients were collected from 2008 to 2009. Records from physician- and nurse-reported suspected cases of vancomycin ADRs, ADR type, latent period, and laboratory results were compared between cutaneous ADRs with and without SRs.

Results

The main vancomycin-related ADRs were skin rashes (47.9%), hematologic abnormalities (17.36%), fever (12.4%), and elevated serum creatinine (12.4%). Significant differences were observed in latent period (days) and the mean change in eosinophils (%) between cutaneous (9.21±9.71 and 1.4±3.4, respectively) and other ADRs (14.03±11.71 and -0.5±3.5, respectively). Twelve cases of cutaneous ADRs with SRs had been initially reported as cutaneous ADRs only. Mean changes in the eosinophil count were significantly higher for cutaneous ADRs with SRs compared to those without SRs.

Conclusions

Skin rashes accompanied by peripheral eosinophilia, representing suspected immune-mediated delayed hypersensitivity reactions, are a common vancomycin ADR. For the early and exact detection of ADRs associated with vancomycin administration, close monitoring of laboratory tests, including complete blood counts with differential analysis, is recommended.

Update on the management of antibiotic allergy

Drug allergy to antibiotics may occur in the form of immediate or non-immediate (delayed) hypersensitivity reactions. Immediate reactions are usually IgE-mediated whereas non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions are usually non-IgE or T-cell mediated. The clinical manifestations of antibiotic allergy may be cutaneous, organ-specific (e.g., blood dyscracias, hepatitis, interstitial nephritis), systemic (e.g., anaphylaxis, drug induced hypersensitivity syndrome) or various combinations of these. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions manifesting as Stevens Johnson syndrome or toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) may be potentially life-threatening. The management of antibiotic allergy begins with the identification of the putative antibiotic from a detailed and accurate drug history, complemented by validated in-vivo and in-vitro allergological tests. This will facilitate avoidance of the putative antibiotic through patient education, use of drug alert cards, and electronic medical records with in-built drug allergy/adverse drug reaction prescription and dispensing checks. Knowledge of the evidence for specific antibiotic cross-reactivities is also important in patient education. Apart from withdrawal of the putative antibiotic, immunomodulatory agents like high-dose intravenous immunoglobulins may have a role in TEN. Drug desensitization where the benefits outweigh the risks, and where no alternative antibiotics can be used for various reasons, may be considered in certain situations. Allergological issues pertaining to electronic drug allergy alerts, computerized physician prescriptions and decision support systems, and antibiotic de-escalation in antimicrobial stewardship programmes are also discussed.

[Glycopeptide-induced cutaneous adverse reaction: results of an immunoallergic investigation in eight patients]

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin (V) and teicoplanin (T) are glycopeptides used in severe infections and can induce different kinds of cutaneous adverse reactions (CAR).

AIMS

To determine the value of immunoallergic investigations in CAR in which glycopeptides are suspected.

METHODS

Retrospective study (2000-2007) in eight patients with CAR suspected of being caused by glycopeptides. Six weeks after abatement of the reaction, in accordance with ESCD's guideline for drug testing, immunoallergic skin tests investigations were carried out (drug patch-tests, prick-tests and intradermal tests) in succession for all the drugs taken during the CAR. If negative, a glycopeptide challenge was proposed.

RESULTS

The study included eight patients (five women, three men; mean age=53); three patients presented a reaction to vancomycin, four reacted to teicoplanin and one reacted to both drugs. CARs consisted of six maculopapular rashes, one case of DRESS and one of urticaria. Skin tests confirmed involvement of glycopeptides in four of eight cases with cross-reactivity between V and T in two patients. Four patients exhibited good tolerance to rechallenge tests with glycopeptides.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that skin tests may be useful in glycopeptide-induced CAR in determining the responsible drug and also in the event of rechallenge. Allergic cross-reactivity (V and T), observed in two of our patients, although already been reported in the literature, but does not occur systematically.

Tolerability of teicoplanin in 117 hospitalized adults with previous vancomycin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia: a retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin has reliable antibacterial activity against many gram-positive pathogens but is associated with many adverse events. Teicoplanin, another glycopeptide, is associated with fewer adverse events, but its use in patients with previous vancomycin-induced adverse reactions remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this work were to evaluate the clinical characteristics of hospitalized patients with vancomycin-induced fever (ie, drug fever), rash, or neutropenia and to examine the tolerability of teicoplanin in these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of the medical charts of patients aged >or=18 years who were hospitalized between January 2002 and October 2007 at National Cheng Kung University Hospital in Tainan, Taiwan. Patients were included if they experienced drug-induced fever (ie, "drug fever"), rash, or neutropenia during vancomycin treatment. Their antimicrobial therapy was subsequently switched to teicoplanin. Clinical information and the development of drug fever, rash, or neutropenia with teicoplanin were determined from the charts.

RESULTS

Antibiotic therapy was switched to teicoplanin in 117 patients with vancomycin-induced fever alone (n = 24), rash alone (n = 77), both drug fever and rash (n = 8), or neutropenia (n = 8). The mean (SD) age of these patients was 53.1 (22.8) years, and 65 (56%) were male. The major clinical indications for vancomycin therapy among these patients were wound infections (21%), respiratory tract infections (14%), and bacteremia (13%). The dosages for vancomycin ranged from 1 g every 5 days to 1 g BID, and for teicoplanin ranged from 400 mg daily to 400 mg q72h, adjusted by the degree of renal dysfunction. Overall, 12 patients with vancomycin-induced fever (n = 2), rash (n = 6), or neutropenia (n = 4) subsequently developed teicoplanin-induced fever (n = 3), rash (n = 3), or neutropenia (n = 6). Specifically, of 8 patients with vancomycin-induced neutropenia, 4 (50%) subsequently developed neutropenia after switching to teicoplanin. Vancomycin- and teicoplanin-induced neutropenia was often noted after 1 week of treatment. Among patients with vancomycin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia, there were no differences between patients with or without teicoplanin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia in terms of age, sex, weight, dosage or duration of vancomycin therapy, dosage of teicoplanin, or underlying disease. There was no difference in mortality rates between patients with or without teicoplanin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia. The cause of all deaths was progression of infectious or underlying disease, unrelated to vancomycin or teicoplanin use.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this retrospective chart review of hospitalized patients with vancomycin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia, only 10% experienced subsequent teicoplanin-induced fever, rash, or neutropenia. However, it should be noted that half of the patients with vancomycin-induced neutropenia developed teicoplanin-induced neutropenia.