Clinical standards for the management of adverse effects during treatment for TB

BACKGROUND: Adverse effects (AE) to TB treatment cause morbidity, mortality and treatment interruption. The aim of these clinical standards is to encourage best practise for the diagnosis and management of AE.METHODS: 65/81 invited experts participated in a Delphi process using a 5-point Likert scale to score draft standards.RESULTS: We identified eight clinical standards. Each person commencing treatment for TB should: Standard 1, be counselled regarding AE before and during treatment; Standard 2, be evaluated for factors that might increase AE risk with regular review to actively identify and manage these; Standard 3, when AE occur, carefully assessed and possible allergic or hypersensitivity reactions considered; Standard 4, receive appropriate care to minimise morbidity and mortality associated with AE; Standard 5, be restarted on TB drugs after a serious AE according to a standardised protocol that includes active drug safety monitoring. In addition: Standard 6, healthcare workers should be trained on AE including how to counsel people undertaking TB treatment, as well as active AE monitoring and management; Standard 7, there should be active AE monitoring and reporting for all new TB drugs and regimens; and Standard 8, knowledge gaps identified from active AE monitoring should be systematically addressed through clinical research.CONCLUSION: These standards provide a person-centred, consensus-based approach to minimise the impact of AE during TB treatment.

Taking the challenge: A protocolized approach to optimize Pneumocystis pneumonia prophylaxis in renal transplant recipients

While trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole is considered first-line therapy for Pneumocystis pneumonia prevention in renal transplant recipients, reported adverse drug reactions may limit use and increase reliance on costly and less effective alternatives, often aerosolized pentamidine. We report our experience implementing a protocolized approach to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole adverse drug reaction assessment and rechallenge to optimize prophylaxis in this patient cohort. We retrospectively reviewed 119 patients receiving Pneumocystis pneumonia prophylaxis prior to and after protocol implementation. Forty-two patients (35%) had 48 trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole adverse drug reactions documented either at baseline or during the prophylaxis period, of which 83% were non-immune-mediated and 17% were immune-mediated. Significantly more patients underwent trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole rechallenge after protocol implementation (4/22 vs 23/27; P = .0001), with no recurrence of adverse drug reactions in 74%. In those who experienced a new or recurrent reaction (26%), all were mild and self-limiting with only 1 recurrence of an immune-mediated reaction. After protocol implementation, aerosolized pentamidine-associated costs were reduced. The introduction of a standard approach to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole rechallenge in the context of both prior immune and non-immune-mediated reactions was safe and successful in improving the uptake of first-line Pneumocystis pneumonia prophylaxis in renal transplant recipients.

Recent advances in the understanding of severe cutaneous adverse reactions

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

The revolving door: antibiotic allergy labelling in a tertiary care centre

BACKGROUND

Patients frequently report antibiotic allergies; however, only 10% of labelled patients have a true allergy.

AIM

We investigated the documentation of antibiotic 'allergy' labels (AAL) and the effect of labelling on clinical outcomes, in a West Australian adult tertiary hospital.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients captured in the 2013 and 2014 National Antimicrobial Prescribing Surveys was carried out. Data were collected on documented antibiotic adverse drug reactions, antibiotic cost, prescribing appropriateness, prevalence of multi-drug resistant organisms, length of stay, intensive care admission and readmissions.

RESULTS

Of the 687 patients surveyed, 278 (40%) were aged 70 or above, 365 (53%) were male and 279 (41%) were prescribed antibiotics. AAL were recorded in 122 (18%) patients and the majority were penicillin labels (n = 87; 71%). Details of AAL were documented for 80 of 141 (57%) individual allergy labels, with 61 describing allergic symptoms. Patients with beta-lactam allergy labels received fewer penicillins (P = 0.0002) and more aminoglycosides (P = 0.043) and metronidazole (P = 0.021) than patients without beta-lactam labels. Five patients received an antibiotic that was contraindicated according to their allergy status. Patients with AAL had significantly more hospital readmissions within 4 weeks (P = 0.001) and 6 months (P = 0.025) of discharge, compared with unlabelled patients. The majority (81%) of readmitted labelled patients had major infections.

CONCLUSIONS

AAL are common, but poorly documented in hospital records. Patients with AAL are significantly more likely to require alternative antibiotics and hospital readmissions. There may be a role for antibiotic allergy delabelling to mitigate the clinical and economic burdens for patients with invalid allergy labels.