The Value of In Vitro Tests to DiminishDrug Challenges

In vitro diagnostics of drug allergies

In vitro diagnostics for drug hypersensitivity reactions distinguish between serological and cellular-based tests. A serological test used for the diagnosis of immediate type reactions is the detection of specific IgE antibodies. The cellular tests include the basophil activation test for immediate type reactions and the lymphocyte transformation test, which is mainly used to detect delayed type hypersensitivity reactions. Further cellular-based tests are the CAST-ELISA and the mast cell activation test. None of the above-mentioned tests can definitively exclude an allergy if the result is negative. In addition, it is important to note that even a positive test result is not necessarily associated with an allergy but has to be interpreted in the clinical context.

Development and validation study of compact biophotonic platform for detection of serum biomarkers

The application of advances in personalized medicine requires the support of in vitro diagnostic techniques aimed at the accurate, fast, sensitive, and precise determination of selected biomarkers. Herein, a novel optical centrifugal microfluidic device is developed for clinical analysis and point-of-care diagnostics. Based on compact disc technology, the integrated biophotonic system enables multiple immunoassays in miniaturized mode. The disposable microfluidic discs are made in cyclic olefin copolymer (COP), containing arrays of immobilized probes. In the developed approach, up to six patient samples can each be tested simultaneously. A portable instrument (<2 kg) controls the assay and the high-sensitive reproducible optical detection in transmission mode. Also, the instrument incorporates specific functionalities for personalized telemedicine. The device (analytical method, disc platform, reader, and software) has been validated to diagnose IgE-mediated drug allergies, such as amoxicillin and penicillin G. The total and specific IgE to β-lactam antibiotics were determined in human serum from patients (25 μL). The excellent analytical performances (detection limit 0.24 ng/mL, standard deviation 7-20 %) demonstrated that the developed system could have the potential for a broader impact beyond the allergy field, as it applies to other IVD tests.

EAACI/ENDA position paper on drug provocation testing

In drug hypersensitivity, drug provocation testing (DPT), also called drug challenge, is the gold standard for investigation. In recent years, risk stratification has become an important tool for adjusting the diagnostic strategy to the perceived risk, whilst still maintaining a high level of safety for the patient. Skin tests are recommended before DPT but may be omitted in low-risk patients. The task force suggests a strict definition of such low-risk patients in children and adults. Based on experience and evidence from studies of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics, an algorithm on how to adjust DPT to the risk, and when to omit skin tests before DPT, is presented. For other antibiotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other drugs, skin tests are poorly validated and DPT is frequently necessary. We recommend performing DPT with chemotherapeutics and biologicals to avoid unnecessary desensitization procedures and DPT with skin tests negative contrast media. We suggest DPT with anesthetics only in highly specialized centers. Specifics of DPT to proton pump inhibitors, anticonvulsants and corticosteroids are discussed. This position paper provides general recommendations and guidance on optimizing use of DPT, whilst balancing benefits with patient safety and optimizing the use of the limited available resources.

Organ-specific immune-mediated reactions to polyethylene glycol and polysorbate excipients: three case reports

Drug-related acute pancreatitis (AP), acute interstitial nephritis (AIN) and drug-induced liver injury (DILI) are rare but serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that can have life-threatening consequences. Although the diagnosis of these ADRs can be challenging, causality algorithms and the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) can be employed to help with the diagnosis. In this report, we present 3 cases of drug-related AP, AIN and DILI. The first case involved a patient with AP to lacosamide and to the excipient polysorbate 80 in pantoprazole. The second case involved a patient with DILI secondary to polyethylene glycol (PEG) excipients and amoxicillin-clavulanate. In case 3, AIN was considered to be the result of sensitization to excipients. Diagnoses were made using causality algorithms and the LTT. The LTT is a useful tool for helping diagnose drug-related AP and DILI, and it can be used to identify the specific drug or excipient causing the ADR. These cases highlight the importance of considering PEG and polysorbate excipients in the causality diagnosis of ADRs.

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.

IFN-γ secretion of PBMC from non-drug-allergic control persons: Considerations for the validity of a positive lymphocyte transformation test

BACKGROUND

The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) is used for the in vitro detection of a drug sensitization in assumed drug allergic patients. It is based on the detection of antigen (drug)-specific activation of T cells indicated by e.g. proliferation or cytokine secretion. However, occasional stimulatory effects of the drug unrelated to specific drug-allergic mechanisms can only be detected if a larger number of non-drug allergic control persons are tested with this specific drug. In this respect, the overall specificity of the LTT with ELISA read-out is summarized in several review articles, but the impact of a specific drug on the specificity has not yet been analyzed in a larger set of control persons.

OBJECTIVE

Do amoxicillin, cefuroxime and clindamycin induce an interferon (IFN)-y or interleukin (IL)-5 secretion of PBMC from control persons using the LTT with ELISA read-out?

METHODS

We performed LTTs with amoxicillin, cefuroxime and clindamycin and determined drug-specific IFN-γ and IL-5 secretion measured by ELISA read-out. We included PBMC from 60 non-drug allergic control persons, who were unexposed to the tested drug at the time of blood donation.

RESULTS

PBMC from 12 out of 23 control persons tested with amoxicillin gave a positive stimulation index (SI > 3.0) for IFN-γ resulting in a specificity of 47.8%. The corresponding specificity was 75% for cefuroxime (5/20 if SI > 3.0) and 58.8% for clindamycin (7/17, if SI > 2.0), respectively. In a next step, we calculated the Δ IFN-γ concentration by subtracting the background IFN-γ concentration in the unstimulated sample from the stimulated sample. After stimulation with amoxicillin, a mean concentration of 21.0 pg/mL IFN-γ was secreted. The less outlier prone median concentration was 7.4 pg/mL and much higher than for cefuroxime (1.7 pg/mL) and clindamycin (1.0 pg/mL). Remarkably, IL-5 concentrations were below the detection limit (< 1 pg/mL) for all drugs in all control persons who responded to TT.

CONCLUSION

Consideration of these observations may be helpful since a positive LTT result in a control patient may challenge the validity of a positive LTT result in the same experiment for a patient with assumed drug allergy.

Delabelling multiple antibiotic allergy: Practical issues

With the growing incidence of multi-drug resistant organisms, delabelling incorrect antibiotic allergies has become an integral part of antimicrobial stewardship worldwide. For example, around 90% of penicillin allergy labels are found to be inaccurate following a full allergy work-up, which deprive patients the use of effective first-line penicillin antibiotics and increase the risk of antimicrobial resistance with the use of other extended spectrum non-penicillin antimicrobials. Significant numbers of adult and paediatric patients over time are labelled with multiple penicillin and non-penicillin antibiotic allergies often during inappropriate antimicrobial use, resulting in a label of “multiple antibiotic allergy”. In contrast to delabelling penicillin allergy where oral direct provocation tests can be used for low-risk, mild reactions, and sensitivity/specificity/positive and negative predictive values of skin tests have been demonstrated, diagnostic tests for multiple antibiotic allergy often require the use of a combination of in-vivo and in-vitro tests across different antimicrobial classes for evaluation. Shared decision making with patients and informed consent are also needed when prioritising which drugs to delabel first, balancing the risks, benefits of testing vs. interim use of alternative antibiotics. Similar to delabelling penicillin allergy, the cost-effectiveness of delabelling multiple drug allergies is unknown.

A case of persistent IgE sensitisation almost two decades following ampicillin anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Although most immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated penicillin allergy wanes with time, sensitisation may occasionally persist for many years. Previous reports on the loss of penicillin-specific IgE sensitisation were based on non-anaphylaxis cases and, although uncommon, persistent sensitisation may still be possible in the minority of cases.

OBJECTIVE

This case highlights that irrespective of the elapsed duration since the index reaction, it is important to remain vigilant when approaching patients with a history of severe reactions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We described a case of persistent IgE sensitisation almost two decades following ampicillin anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

A 78-year-old male with a history of perioperative penicillin anaphylaxis in 2003 was referred for allergy workup in 2022 before his knee joint replacement surgery. The patient had strictly avoided all beta-lactams since the index reaction. However, his penicillin-specific sensitisation persisted, evidenced by positive skin tests (with generalised urticaria after intradermal testing) and basophil activation tests.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this was the first case of positive BAT tested around two decades following the index reaction. This case illustrates that a cautious approach may still be warranted in patients with a history of severe reaction to penicillin regardless of the duration since the reported index reaction.

Characterization of immunologically detectable T-cell sensitization, Immunohistochemical detection of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and clinical parameters of patients after allogeneic intraoral bone grafting procedures: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial in humans

BACKGROUND

The null hypotheses were tested that intraoral bone augmentation using two different allogeneic materials has no impact on the patient's blood levels of material-specific lymphocytes and on the immunohistochemical detection of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1α, IL1ß and TNF-α and T-cell markers CD4, CD8 in biopsies of the test groups.

METHODS

In this prospective RCT, 60 systemically healthy participants were randomly assigned to two allogeneic test groups (1: Maxgraft®, freeze-dried, multiple donors, and 2: Puros®, solvent-dehydrated, single donor) and an autologous control group (10 patients). Plasma samples were collected pre-(T1) and postoperatively (2 weeks (T2) and 4 months (T3)). The Lymphocyte Transformation Test (LTT) was used for analyzing levels of transformed lymphocytes for type IV immune reactions by 3H-thymidine activity. Bone biopsies were harvested at T3 and immunohistochemically analyzed for IL-1α, IL1ß, TNF-α, CD4, CD8 and correlated with the immunological and clinical findings.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference between the tested materials was observed for LTT measurements at T3 (p = 0.033). Furthermore, three groups were identified: Group A (LTT negative T1-T3, n = 48), group B (LTT positive T1-T3, n = 7), group C (developing positive LTT at T2, n = 5). A highly significant elevation of IL-1α, IL1ß, TNF-α in patients of group C (p = 0.0001) and a significant elevation of CD4+ cells in patients of group B (p = 0.005) was shown.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that following allogeneic bone grafting, local and systemic immunological reactions can be detected in some patients. These findings were statistically significant for the timepoint T3 between the tested materials as well as for the groups B and C correlated with group A for both tested materials. Therefore, the null hypotheses were rejected. A preoperative compatibility test for allogeneic materials in order to improve patient safety and the predictability of these materials would be desirable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Ethical commission of the Ärztekammer Hamburg, Germany (PV5211) as well as by the German Registry of Clinical Studies (DRKS00013010) on 30/07/2018 ( http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/ ).

Development and initial validation of a modified lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) assay in patients with DRESS and AGEP

Background

The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) is an in vitro assay used to diagnose drug induced hypersensitivity reactions by detecting the activation and expansion of drug-specific memory T cells to the suspected implicated drug. Traditionally radiolabelled thymidine (3H-thymidine) has been used but requires the handling and disposal of radioactive materials.

Objective

To examine safe alternatives to 3H-thymidine, test assay modifications for improved assay sensitivity and evaluate the modified LTT in patients with DRESS and AGEP.

Methods

Four proliferation detection assays (BRDU, CyQUANT™, MTT and XTT) were screened for LTT sensitivity. XTT the most sensitive and practical was selected for further evaluation Modifications like autologous serum (AS) and regulatory T cell depletion (T-REG) were tested for improved assay sensitivity. Finally, an initial evaluation of the XTT–LTT was performed in 8 patients with DRESS and 2 with AGEP including cytokine testing.

Results

Of the non-radioactive alternatives we tested, XTT a colorimetric assay was the most sensitive and practical to move to evaluation. The addition of AS increased background signal. Depletion of T-REGs improved sensitivity but cell sorting time and risk of contamination limited benefit.

Of eight patients diagnosed with DRESS and 2 with AGEP tested with XTT–LTT assay results showed our assay matched clinical findings of implicated drugs in 8/10 patients when using a stimulation index (SI) ≥ 2 and 8/10 with analysis by ANOVA. All ten patients were correctly diagnosed by either analysis.

Conclusion

XTT appears to be a safe, viable alternative to 3H-thymidine, with high sensitivity and allowing direct cytokine quantification on specific patient cells.

Lymphocyte Transformation Test for drug allergy detection: when does it work?

BACKGROUND

The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) is an in vitro test system for the detection of a sensitization in the context of allergies to drugs. Its reported sensitivity varies largely and seems to be affected by different parameters. In review articles, the average LTT performance was often calculated by combining overall mean sensitivities of various published studies, but without considering different patient characteristics or varying patient numbers per publication.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to investigate the impact of different patient-specific and methodical parameters on the sensitivity of the LTT based on data on the level of the individual patient extracted from single studies.

METHODS

We performed an advanced literature search in Pubmed and screened the identified publications according to previously defined inclusion criteria. In total, individual patient data from 721 patients were extracted from 30 studies. Random-effects meta-regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The analysis indicate that the ELISA-based read-out is more sensitive compared to the classical radioactivity method (ELISA: 80% vs. radioactivity: 66%;p=0.084). Interestingly, DRESS/DHISS is associated with a higher probability of a positive LTT test result compared to other investigated clinical phenotypes ("DRESS/DHISS" vs. "bullous reaction"; OR: 2.52;p-value=0.003). Our analysis also revealed an impact of the time to testing period after the occurrence of the allergic event ("<2 weeks" vs. "2 weeks-2 months"; OR: 2.12;p-value=0.034).

CONCLUSION

The read-out method and relevant clinical parameters affect the sensitivity of the LTT. These findings are based on a meta-analysis providing a higher level of evidence than a single study or previous reviews not considering individual patient data.

Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to intravenous drugs can be severe and might leave patients and doctors in a difficult position where an essential treatment or intervention has to be suspended. Even if virtually any intravenous medication can potentially trigger a life-threatening DHR, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and antibiotics are amongst the intravenous drugs most frequently involved in these reactions. Admittedly, suspending such treatments may negatively impact the survival outcomes or the quality of life of affected patients. Delabeling pathways and rapid drug desensitization (RDD) can help reactive patients stay on first-choice therapies instead of turning to less efficacious, less cost-effective, or more toxic alternatives. However, these are high-complexity and high-risk techniques, which usually need expert teams and allergy-specific techniques (skin testing, in vitro testing, drug provocation testing) to ensure safety, an accurate diagnosis, and personalized management. Unfortunately, there are significant inequalities within and among countries in access to allergy departments with the necessary expertise and resources to offer these techniques and tackle these DHRs optimally. The main objective of this consensus document is to create a great benefit for patients worldwide by aiding allergists to expand the scope of their practice and support them with evidence, data, and experience from leading groups from around the globe. This statement of the Drug Hypersensitivity Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) aims to be a comprehensive practical guide on the technical aspects of implementing acute-onset intravenous hypersensitivity delabeling and RDD for a wide range of drugs. Thus, the manuscript does not only focus on clinical pathways. Instead, it also provides guidance on topics usually left unaddressed, namely, internal validation, continuous quality improvement, creating a healthy multidisciplinary environment, and redesigning care (including a specific supplemental section on a real-life example of how to design a dedicated space that can combine basic and complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques in allergy).

Utility of Lymphocyte Transformation Test for Assisting Updated Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method in Drug-Induced Liver Injury: A Case-Control Study

Background: The Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) is a validated tool for assessing causality in cases of suspected drug-induced liver injury (DILI). However, RUCAM cannot discriminate between concomitant hepatotoxic drugs with the same temporal sequence.

Objective: To analyse the utility of the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) for assisting updated RUCAM in 45 patients and 40 controls with a clinical diagnosis of DILI.

Methods: Suspected DILI cases were detected through the Prospective Pharmacovigilance Program from Laboratory Signals in Hospital (PPLSH) or by consultations. The controls completed the drug therapy with no adverse reactions during the study period. A receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was performed to calculate the optimal cut-off value for the stimulation index (SI), corresponding to the largest sum for the specificity and sensitivity values of LTT for true DILI cases.

Results: Out of 45 patients diagnosed with DILI, 42 cases were detected by the PPLSH, two cases by consultation and one case by both methods. Most DILI cases (64.4%) arose during hospitalization. According to the biochemical parameters, 24 cases (53.3%) had the hepatocellular phenotype, 14 (31.1%) had the cholestatic phenotype, and 7 cases (15.6%) had the mixed phenotype. Considering the severity criteria, 7 (15.5%) cases were classified as moderate DILI, and 4 (8.9%) were severe DILI; there were no fatal cases. A total of 149 drugs (median/case, 3; IQR, 2–5) were suspected to be involved in the DILI cases (RUCAM score ≥3). In 8 cases, only one drug was suspected, and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs) was identified in 29% of the cases. Of all DILI cases, 46 (30.9%) of the 149 suspected drugs produced positive LTT results, and the LTT was positive in 34 (75.5%) of the 45 patients. No exposed controls produced positive LTT results. The optimal cut-off of 1.95 for the SI was obtained with a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 100% (area under the curve, 0.91; 95% asymptotic confidence interval 0.84–0.97; p < 0.001). The sensitivity of the hepatocellular phenotype was 92%.

Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that LTT is an add on strengthening causality in cases of suspected idiosyncratic DILI, especially for patients with several suspected drugs and a hepatocellular phenotype.

Mast cell activation tests by flow cytometry: A new diagnostic asset?

Since the late nineties, evidence has accumulated that flow-assisted basophil activation test (BAT) might be an accessible and reliable method to explore the mechanisms governing basophil degranulation and diagnostic allowing correct prediction of the clinical outcome following exposure to the offending allergen(s) and cross-reactive structures for different IgE-dependent allergies and particular forms of autoimmune urticaria. Although the BAT offers many advantages over mediator release tests, it is left with some weaknesses that hinder a wider application. It is preferable to perform the BAT analysis within 4 h of collection, and the technique does not advance diagnosis in patients with non-responsive cells. Besides, the BAT is difficult to standardize mainly because of the difficulty to perform large batch analyses that might span over several days. This article reviews the status of flow cytometric mast cell activation test (MAT) using passively sensitized mast cells (MCs) with patients' sera or plasma (henceforth indicated as passive MAT; pMAT) using both MC lines and cultured MCs in the diagnosis of IgE-dependent allergies. In addition, this paper provides guidance for generating human MCs from peripheral blood CD34⁺ progenitor cells (PBCMCs) and correct interpretation of flow cytometric analyses of activated and/or degranulating cells. With the recent recognition of the mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) occupation as a putative mechanism of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs), we also speculate how direct activation of MCs (dMAT)-that is direct activation by MRGPRX2 agonists without prior passive sensitization-could advance paradigms for this novel endotype of IDHRs.

Dendritic cells inclusion and cell-subset assessment improve flow-cytometry-based proliferation test in non-immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions

BACKGROUND

Lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has been widely used to evaluate non-immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (NIDHRs). However, the lack of standardization and the low sensitivity have limited its routine diagnostic use. The drug presentation by dendritic cells (DCs) and the assessment of proliferation on effector cells have shown promising results. Flow-cytometry-based methods can help apply these improvements. We aimed to assess the added value of using drug-primed-DCs and the determination of the proliferative response of different lymphocyte subpopulations in NIDHRs.

METHODS

Patients with confirmed NIDHR were evaluated by both conventional (C-LTT) and with drug-primed-DCs LTT (dDC-LTT)analysing the proliferative response in T cells and other effector cell subpopulations by using the fluorescent molecule, carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester (CFSE).

RESULTS

The C-LTT showed a significantly lower sensitivity (29.4%) compared with dDC-LTT (61.8%), which was confirmed analysing each particular clinical entity: SJS-TEN (62.5% vs 87.5%), MPE (15% vs 47.4%) and AGEP (33% vs 80%). When including the effector cell subpopulations involved in each clinical entity, CD3⁺ +CD4⁺ T_h 1 or CD3⁺ +NK cells in SJS-TEN, CD3⁺ +CD4⁺ T_h 1+NK cells in MPE and CD3⁺ +NK cells in AGEP, we could significantly increase the sensitivity of the in vitro test to 100%, 68.4% and 100%, respectively, with an overall sensitivity of 87% and 85% of specificity in NIDHR.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a flow-cytometry-based test, DCs as drug presenting cells, and focusing on effector cell subpopulations for each clinical entity significantly improved the drug-specific proliferative response in NIDHRs with a unique cellular in vitro test.

Lymphocyte transformation test and cytokine detection assays: Determination of read out parameters for delayed-type drug hypersensitivity reactions

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) occur in certain people and are often not predictable. DHRs can be classified as immediate and delayed reactions regarding to onset of clinical manifestations. Both reactions are considered to be an important public health problem because they can lead to life-threatening conditions; however, this review article will focus on delayed DHRs. The most important points for diagnosis of delayed DHRs are the recognition of drug hypersensitivity characteristics and culprit drug identification. While it is usually difficult to identify a culprit drug; clinical evaluation using the causality assessment method, a non-invasive process, can identify the culprit drug without the need for intensive investigation. Delayed DHRs can cause life-threatening conditions; therefore, in vivo skin tests, as well as drug provocation tests, have to be cautiously performed by a drug allergist and have not been recommended in uncontrolled conditions. ENDA/EAACI has recommended that in vitro tests (if available) be performed prior to any in vivo tests. Therefore, in vitro diagnostic tests can be alternative methods to identify a culprit drug for delayed DHR diagnosis as there is no or very low risk for patients under investigation. There are many testing approaches to identify causative agents for delayed DHRs such as: the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), cytokine/mediator detection assays (i.e. ELISA and flow cytometry-based bead assays), multiplex bead-based immunoassay and ELISpot. The LTT is the most standardized method whereas it has been available in medical schools affiliated with university hospitals. Other in vitro tests, like cytokine detection assays, have also been used, even though they are still being evaluated. They could supplement LTT results that would provide drug allergist's with documentary evidence and prevent risk to patients by avoiding in vivo or drug provocation testing. Hence, the in vitro tests have been promising tests contributing to the management of the delayed DHR work-up process in clinical practice.

Future perspectives on in-vitro diagnosis of drug allergy by the lymphocyte transformation test

This article aims to envisage future perspectives of the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT). We describe the select innovative techniques, which can be integrated at different stages of the LTT to potentially improve the sensitivity, specificity, or practicability of the LTT. We first focus upon the cell sorting techniques comprising immunomagnetic cell separation and flow cytometry, which can be implemented prior and after the LTT culturing step to concentrate and quantify specific immune cell types. Further, we elaborate upon three important omics techniques such as transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, which can be integrated downstream of the LTT to analyze molecular changes in specific immune cells following drug induced activation and proliferation. We also develop visions, how state of the art techniques used in other scientific fields, can be transferred and applied in the context of in-vitro detection of drug allergy.

Basophil and mast cell activation tests by flow cytometry in immediate drug hypersensitivity: Diagnosis and beyond

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) constitute a significant health issue with serious consequences of diagnostic error. The primary diagnostics to document IDHRs usually consists of quantification of drug-specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies and skin tests. Unfortunately, the positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of these tests are not absolutely, which leaves room for new tests. Over the last two decades, the basophil activation test (BAT), in which ex vivo activation of individual basophils is quantified by flow cytometry, has emerged as a reliable complementary diagnostic to document IDHRs, to explore allergenic recognition, to study cross-reactivity and to monitor therapy. However, the BAT is technically challenging requiring specialized personnel and equipment, fresh samples and the technique is lost as a diagnostic in patients showing a non-responder status of their cells. By consequence, the BAT has still not entered mainstream application. In contrast, mast cell activation tests (MATs) use serum samples that can be frozen, stored, and shipped to a recognized reference centre experienced in mast cell (MC) lines and/or cultures and capable of offering batch testing with necessary quality controls. This review does not only highlight the use of the BAT and MAT as diagnostics in IDHRs, but also outlines the potential of both techniques in further exploring and unveiling the mechanisms that govern drug-induced basophil and MC activation and degranulation.

Drug-specific history, skin and in vitro tests can reduce the need for drug provocation tests in betalactam-hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Many patients report questionable drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) to betalactam antibiotics. A workup is required for objectivation. Direct drug provocation tests (DPTs) omitting a prior allergy workup are increasingly recommended as the primary diagnostic approach. However, apart from the risk of severe side effects, DPTs often are a scarce resource in overloaded healthcare-systems. We investigated how many cases can be solved by drug-specific history, drug-specific IgE, and skin tests obviating the need for DPT.

METHODS

We conducted a chart review in a retrospective cohort of 932 patients in an allergy outpatient centre from 2016 to 2017. Patients had been submitted to drug-specific history and specific IgE-, skin prick-, intradermal- and patch-tests with early and late readings with a series of penicillins and cephalosporins but DPTs were no option.

RESULTS

Overall, positive in vitro and/or skin tests were found in 96/932 (10.3%) patients. Drug-specific IgE was detected in 40/932 (4.3%) patients, 61/787 (7.8%) patients had positive skin tests. In vitro tests to Pencillin V showed the highest rate of positivity 24/479 (5.0%) and early readings of ampicillin the highest amongst the skin tests (3/49, 6.1%). Immediate skin tests were more often positive than delayed ones (75:45). The combination of all parameters including drug-specific history solved 346/932 (37.1%) cases while 586/932 (62.9%) remained unresolved. Self-reported DHR could be less often confirmed in females and young children (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Testing with betalactams applying simple, cheap, and safe skin and blood tests can solve a third of DHR-cases on a high throughput scale.

Lymphocyte transformation test: History and current approaches

Drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions encompass a variety of different clinical phenotypes ranging from harmless rashes to fatal reactions. They can be classified into allergic (i.e. drug allergy) and non-allergic reactions (i.e. non-allergic hypersensitivity). Drug allergies in turn can either be antibody (e.g. IgE) or T cell-mediated. One of the diagnostic tools for the in vitro detection of drug allergy is the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) which is based on the activation and expansion of the drug-specific memory T cells following co-incubation of the patient's peripheral mononuclear cells (PMBC) with the suspected drug in vitro. The read-out parameter in the classical LTT is T cell proliferation which can be measured as counts per minute following the addition of radiolabeled thymidine to the cell culture. However, in the course of time different modifications of the classical LTT with regard to the read-out parameters and methods have been proposed. Likewise, variations of the LTT platform itself have been described in the literature. This review article describes the development of the classical LTT and its use in the context of drug allergy detection and summarizes the modifications which have been published over time.

Diagnostic workup including CD203c-based basophil activation test in immediate hypersensitivity due to metronidazole and ornidazole and evaluation of cross-reactivity in between

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the diagnostic approaches for immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) due to 5-nitroimidazole antibiotics. The aim was to evaluate the usefulness of in vivo tests and basophil activation test (BAT) for the diagnosis of IHRs due to metronidazole and ornidazole and to determine possible cross-reactivity in between.

METHODS

Forty-nine patients with a clear history of IHRs due to these drugs and 20 healthy subjects who were known to tolerate these drugs were included. Skin tests (STs) and single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation tests (SBPCDPTs) were performed with both drugs whereas BAT was applied only with the culprit drug.

RESULTS

The most and least common reaction types were urticaria/angioedema (34.7%) and anaphylaxis (14.3%), respectively. SBPCDPTs were positive in 15 out of 47 patients, and only 7 had positive STs. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of STs for metronidazole/ornidazole were 33.3%/16.6%, 94.2%/97.3%, 60%/50%, and 84.6%/88.1%, respectively. BAT was positive in 12 out of 15 patients and negative in 10 control subjects, giving a sensitivity rate of 71.4% (CI, 29.0%-96.3%) for metronidazole and 83.3% (CI, 35.8%-99.5%) for ornidazole. The optimal concentration of both drugs for BAT was determined as 5 mg/mL. No cross-reactivity among two drugs was observed according to in vivo tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that SBPCDPT and BAT are both useful diagnostic tools for IHRs due to 5-nitroimidazole antibiotics and can be used as supplementary to each other. No cross-reactivity between metronidazole and ornidazole in IHRs exists.

Minimal agreement between basophil activation test and immunoassay in diagnosis of penicillin allergy

INTRODUCTION

Basophil activation test (BAT) and immunoassays are the most widely used in vitro tests to diagnose IgE-mediated allergic reactions to penicillin. However, studies to determine if one test is interdependent from another are limited.

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to measure the agreement between BAT and immunoassay in diagnosis of penicillin allergy.

METHOD

BAT was performed using penicillin G (Pen G), penicillin V (Pen V), penicilloyl-polylysine (PPL), minor determinant mix (MDM), amoxicillin (Amx) and ampicillin (Amp) in 25 patients. Immunoassay of total IgE (tIgE) and specific IgE (sIgE) antibodies to Pen G, Pen V, Amx and Amp were quantified. Skin prick test (SPT) using PPL-MDM, Amx, Amp and Clavulanic acid were also performed.

RESULTS

Minimal agreement was observed between BAT and immunoassay (k=0.25). Of two BAT-positive patients, one patient is positive to Amx (59.27%, SI=59) and Amp (82.32%, SI=82) but sIgE-negative to all drug tested. This patient is also SPT-positive to both drugs. Another patient is BAT-positive to Pen G (10.18%, SI=40), Pen V (25.07%, SI=100) and Amp (19.52%, SI=79). In sIgE immunoassay, four patients were sIgE-positive to at least one of the drugs tested. The sIgE level of three patients was between low and moderate and they were BAT-negative. One BAT-positive patient had a high level of sIgE antibodies (3.50-17.5kU/L) along with relatively high specific to total IgE ratio ≥0.002 (0.004-0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The agreement between BAT and immunoassay is minimal. Performing both tests provides little increase in the sensitivity of allergy diagnosis work-up for immediate reactions to penicillin.

Clinical value of in vitro tests for the management of severe drug hypersensitivity reactions

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) occasionally present with severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) which result in a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Although SCARs are rare, the occurrence could lead to a significant increase in healthcare and economic burden, especially when more than one possible culprit drug is implicated. Therefore, the accurate identification of the culprit drug(s) is important for correct labeling and subsequent patient education and avoidance. To date, clinical evaluation using causality assessment has limitations because the assessment may be inaccurate due to the overlapping timelines when multiple drugs are initiated/continued. Moreover, drug provocation tests (DPTs) which is the gold standard in diagnosis, are contraindicated, and in vivo skin tests may also be associated with risks of triggering SCAR. The European Network for Drug Allergy recommended that in vitro tests, if available, should be performed before any in vivo tests. Basophil activation tests and lymphocyte transformation tests, could serve as reliable in vitro tests for both immediate and delayed-type DHR. Many academic medical centers with affiliated laboratory services offer these tests in the diagnostic evaluation of SCARs in clinical practice. This not only complements identification of the culprit drug(s), but may also be used to test for potentially non cross-reactive alternatives, hence avoiding DPTs. In this review, we summarize the roles of in vitro tests in identifying the culprit drug(s) in SCARs, issues with utilization and interpretation of test results, and our experience in clinical practice.

Basophil Activation as Marker of Clinically Relevant Allergy and Therapy Outcome

For some years now the basophil activation test (BAT) using flow cytometry has emerged as a powerful tool and sensitive marker that can be used to detect clinically relevant allergies, provide information on the severity of an allergic reaction, and monitor therapies. Compared to other in vitro diagnostic tests, BAT seems to have a better informative value in terms of clinical relevance. In general, the BAT can be used for the diagnosis of the most common forms of IgE-mediated allergy such as hymenoptera venom allergy, inhalant allergy, food allergy, and drug allergy. Various basophil markers and parameters have been established which, depending on the trigger of the respective allergy, can provide information on the clinical relevance of sensitization, on the development of natural tolerance, on trigger thresholds, and on the severity of the allergic reaction. The BAT also serves as a suitable follow-up instrument for various therapeutic approaches such as specific immunotherapy, desensitization protocols, or use of anti-IgE-antibodies for the various diseases. Quality controls for routine use, standardization, and automatization are expected to expand the range of applications for the above-mentioned indications.

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.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions in Asia: regional issues and challenges

There are geographical, regional, and ethnic differences in the phenotypes and endotypes of patients with drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) in different parts of the world. In Asia, aspects of drug hypersensitivity of regional importance include IgE-mediated allergies and T-cell-mediated reactions, including severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), to beta-lactam antibiotics, antituberculous drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and radiocontrast agents. Delabeling of low-risk penicillin allergy using direct oral provocation tests without skin tests have been found to be useful where the drug plausibility of the index reaction is low. Genetic risk associations of relevance to Asia include human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-B*1502 with carbamazepine SCAR, and HLA-B*5801 with allopurinol SCAR in some Asian ethnic groups. There remains a lack of safe and accurate diagnostic tests for antituberculous drug allergy, other than relatively high-risk desensitization regimes to first-line antituberculous therapy. NSAID hypersensitivity is common among both adults and children in Asia, with regional differences in phenotype especially among adults. Low dose aspirin desensitization is an important therapeutic modality in individuals with cross-reactive NSAID hypersensitivity and coronary artery disease following percutaneous coronary intervention. Skin testing allows patients with radiocontrast media hypersensitivity to confirm the suspected agent and test for alternatives, especially when contrasted scans are needed for future monitoring of disease relapse or progression, especially cancers.

Basophil Activation Experiments in Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity: More Than a Diagnostic Aid

BACKGROUND

Correct diagnosis of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) can pose a significant challenge, mainly because of the absence of reliable in vitro tests, uncertainties associated with skin testing, and incomplete understanding of the underlying mechanisms.

AIM

To summarize and hypothesize on the potential of basophil activation test (BAT) as a safe aid to explore the mechanistic endotypes of IDHR, to identify antibody recognition sites, and to monitor drug desensitization.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the keywords "allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry"; this was complemented by the authors' own expertise.

RESULTS

At present BAT has mainly been employed as a diagnostic aid. However, evidence is emerging that the technique might also deepen our insights in immune (allergic) and nonimmune (nonallergic) mechanistic processes of IDHR. It is anticipated that BAT might also benefit the identification of antibody recognition sites and benefit our understandings of desensitization strategies.

CONCLUSION

Although the nondiagnostic application of BAT in IDHR is still in its infancy, with increasing employment, we can expect the technique to become a valuable asset to study many domains of IDHR that remain poorly understood.

Recent developments and highlights in drug hypersensitivity

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are nowadays the third cause of allergy after rhinitis and asthma with a significant increase in prevalence in both adults and paediatric population with new drugs included as culprit. For this, DHRs represent not only a health problem but also a significant financial burden for affected individuals and health systems. Mislabelling DHRs is showing to be a relevant problem for both, false label of drug allergic and false label of nonallergic. All this reinforces the need to improve accurate diagnostic approaches that allow an appropriate management. Moreover, there is a need for training both, nonallergist stakeholders and patients to improve the reaction identification and therefore decrease the mislabelling. The use of allergy cards has shown to be relevant to avoid the induction of DHRs due to the prescription of wrong medication. Recent developments over the last 2 years and highlights about risk factors, diagnostic approaches, mechanisms involved as well as prevention actions, and management have been reviewed. In these papers, it has been outlined the need for correct diagnosis and de-labelling of patients previously false-reported as allergic, which will improve the management and treatment of patients with DHRs.

Short and extended provocation tests have similar negative predictive value in non-immediate hypersensitivity to beta-lactams in children

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Drug provocation tests (DPTs) are the gold-standard method to diagnose non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions (NIHSR) to beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) in children. Our aim was to compare the negative predictive value (NPV) of one-day (short) DPT versus 3-7 days (extended) DPT for the diagnosis of NIHSR to BL in paediatric age. A secondary aim was to compare confidence on drug re-exposure after short and extended negative DPTs.

METHODS

The occurrence of HSR on drug re-exposure and drug refusal after negative diagnostic DPTs were evaluated in children/adolescents with a history of NIHSR to BL using a questionnaire performed six months to ten years after DPT. Patients were divided into two groups according to the protocol performed: short DPT vs. extended DPT.

RESULTS

We enrolled 212 children and adolescents (86 females, 126 males, mean age at DPT 5.52 years, p25=3 years, p75=7.25 years): 69 tested with short DPT, and 143 with extended DPT. The NPV of both types of DPT together was 95.2%. The NPV of short DPT was 97.5% and the NPV of extended DPT was 93.8% (p=0.419). After negative DPT, beta-lactams were refused by carers in 14.75% of the children requiring subsequent treatment, 6.98% in the short DPT group and 18.99% in the extended DPT group (p=0.074).

CONCLUSIONS

In our paediatric sample, prolonging drug administration did not increase the NPV of diagnostic DPT for NIHSR to BL or reduce drug refusal. Altogether, the data here reported suggest that, however intuitive, prolonging DPT is not beneficial in the parameters analysed.

Controversies in Drug Allergy: Beta-Lactam Hypersensitivity Testing

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

An Updated Review of the Molecular Mechanisms in Drug Hypersensitivity

Drug hypersensitivity may manifest ranging from milder skin reactions (e.g., maculopapular exanthema and urticaria) to severe systemic reactions, such as anaphylaxis, drug reactions with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS)/drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), or Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS)/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Current pharmacogenomic studies have made important strides in the prevention of some drug hypersensitivity through the identification of relevant genetic variants, particularly for genes encoding drug-metabolizing enzymes and human leukocyte antigens (HLAs). The associations identified by these studies are usually drug, phenotype, and ethnic specific. The drug presentation models that explain how small drug antigens might interact with HLA and T cell receptor (TCR) molecules in drug hypersensitivity include the hapten theory, the p-i concept, the altered peptide repertoire model, and the altered TCR repertoire model. The broad spectrum of clinical manifestations of drug hypersensitivity involving different drugs, as well as the various pathomechanisms involved, makes the diagnosis and management of it more challenging. This review highlights recent advances in our understanding of the predisposing factors, immune mechanisms, pathogenesis, diagnostic tools, and therapeutic approaches for drug hypersensitivity.

Tools to investigate and avoid drug-hypersensitivity in drug development

INTRODUCTION

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are common adverse effects of pharmaceuticals that clinically resemble allergies, and which are becoming an important burden to healthcare systems. Alongside accurate diagnostic techniques, tools which can predict potential drug-inducing hypersensitivity reactions in the pre-clinical phase are critical. Despite the important adverse reactions linked to immune-mediated hypersensitivity, at present, there are no validated or required in vivo or in vitro methods to screen the sensitizing potential of drugs and their metabolites in the pre-clinical phase. Areas covered: Enhanced prediction in preclinical safety evaluation is extremely important. The purpose of this review is to assess the state of the art of tools available to assess the allergenic potential of drugs and to highlight our current understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying inappropriate immune activation. Expert opinion: The knowledge that allergenic drugs share common mechanisms of immune cell activation with chemical allergens, and of the definition of the mechanistic pathway to adverse outcomes, can enhance targeting toxicity testing in drug development and hazard assessment of hypersensitivity. Additional efforts and extensive resources are necessary to improve preclinical testing methodologies, including optimization, better design and interpretation of data.

Generalized Fixed Drug Eruption Induced by Fluconazole Without Cross-Reactivity to Itraconazole: Lymphocyte Transformation Test Confirms the Diagnosis

We present a rare case of generalized fixed drug eruption caused by fluconazole. A 45-year-old female patient was referred to our outpatient clinic because of suspicious drug eruptions that occurred 5 months earlier and resolved within a month. The patient had sequela of hyperpigmentation on her arms, legs, back, and abdomen after oral administration of the fourth dose of 150 mg of fluconazole once daily because of vaginal candidiasis. Patch tests with the culprit drug applied both on unaffected skin areas and over one of the lesions were negative. A lymphocyte transformation test was performed and in response to fluconazole, CD4⁺ T cells significantly proliferated. Because the patient needed a safe antifungal drug for her recurrent vaginal candidiasis symptoms, a single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation test was performed with itraconazole and was negative. Accordingly, 200 mg of itraconazole once daily was given for 10 days safely.

Diagnosing and managing patients with drug hypersensitivity

INTRODUCTION

Diagnosing and managing drug hypersensitivity is challenging because there are no clear limits between different types of drug reactions. Distinguishing between type A (predictable) and type B (hypersensitivity) reactions when a drug is introduced on the market is not easy. When many people use a drug, adverse reactions can occur, conditioned by diverse genetic profiles, viral infections or concomitant therapy. Occasionally the only tool clinicians have on which to base the diagnosis is the clinical history. Skins tests or in vitro tests sometimes have low sensitivity or are unavailable, and drug provocation tests may be dangerous or strictly forbidden in case of severe cutaneous reactions. Areas covered: This paper reviews the diagnosis and management of the two main types of immunological reactions: IgE-mediated immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) and non-immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (NIDHRs). Expert commentary: Although Europe and the United States use different diagnostic methods, patients with history of drug hypersensitivity must avoid the suspicious drug, and clinicians must assess tolerance to safe alternatives under medical surveillance. Sometimes desensitization may be required. There is a consensus about the need to perform genetic testing for specific drugs and give patients proper documentation to prevent future exposure to culprit drugs.

Delayed-type hypersensitivity to oral and parenteral drugs

Adverse drug reactions of the delayed type rank among the most common dermatoses and are predominantly characterized by exanthematous macular or maculopapular eruptions. However, approximately 2 % of affected individuals develop severe or even life-threatening systemic immune reactions associated with organ involvement, requiring immediate diagnosis and treatment. Numerous drugs are capable of eliciting delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions, with antibiotics, anticonvulsant drugs, and the xanthine oxidase inhibitor allopurinol being the most common. Apart from genetic susceptibility, predisposing factors for the development of drug hypersensitivity reactions include high drug doses, polypharmacy, long treatment duration, female gender, as well as acute or chronic infections.