Xolair-induced recurrent anaphylaxis through sensitization to the excipient polysorbate

Rare causes of pediatric anaphylaxis due to obscure allergens

This review provides a comprehensive overview of rare causes of pediatric anaphylaxis related to obscure allergens. Anaphylaxis, a severe hypersensitivity reaction, can occur without typical symptoms, posing diagnostic challenges, especially in children. Idiopathic anaphylaxis, where no trigger is identified despite thorough evaluation, is notably challenging in this population. This review synthesizes current literature, highlighting obscure triggers such as food additives, spices like fenugreek, and cross-reactive allergens, including lupine and gelatin. These allergens are often overlooked and can lead to misdiagnosis of idiopathic cases. Understanding these uncommon triggers is crucial for clinicians to ensure accurate diagnosis and effective management of pediatric anaphylaxis, emphasizing the need for heightened clinical awareness and further research. This review raises awareness among health care providers about these lesser-known causes, aiming to improve outcomes and quality of life for pediatric patients at risk of anaphylactic reactions.

Allergy to Omalizumab: Lessons from a Reaction to the Coronavirus 2019 Vaccine

Omalizumab can cause hypersensitivity reactions. We herein report the first case of an 18-year-old woman with refractory cough-predominant asthma that correlated with allergic reactions caused by omalizumab and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. The patient developed angioedema after taking omalizumab. She had previously experienced intense coughing immediately after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine. A skin prick test was positive for polysorbate 20, which was probably the cause of the allergic reactions to omalizumab and the COVID-19 vaccine. Clinicians should check for an allergic reaction, irrespective of its intensity, triggered by polysorbate and be careful when prescribing biologics to patients in order to avoid allergic reactions.

Utilizing Biologics in Drug Desensitization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this literature review was to review the latest advancements with biologics in rapid drug desensitization. Our methodology was to highlight both desensitization to biologics themselves and the use of biologics in desensitization to both biologic and nonbiologic drugs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Biologics are a vast category of drugs that include monoclonal antibodies, nanobodies, modern vaccinations, and even hormones. Desensitization to biologics can be safely performed through standardized procedure. Biomarkers are used both in vitro and in vivo to help identify and classify hypersensitivity reactions. Hypersensitivity reactions to the mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 present their own unique challenges to management. There are specific excipients in monoclonal antibodies that are thought to be responsible for many of their hypersensitivity reactions. Certain biologics can even be used to assist in desensitization to other drugs. Rapid drug desensitization is a standardized procedure that may be able to help many patients who have experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biologics and would best be treated with them to continue to receive them. Biologic drugs have opened a new era in medicine for the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases, cancer, and inflammatory diseases. Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics are quite common. This literature review presents the latest advancements in our understanding of hypersensitivity reactions to biologics, how rapid drug desensitization can be used to continue therapy despite history of hypersensitivity, and how biologics themselves can be used to aid in desensitization itself.

Serum polyethylene glycol-specific IgE and IgG in patients with hypersensitivity to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines

BACKGROUND

The mechanism of allergic reactions to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines has not been clarified. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a potential antigen in the components of vaccines. However, there is little evidence that allergy after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination is related to PEG. Furthermore, the role of polysorbate (PS) as an antigen has also not been clarified. The objective of this study was to investigate whether PEG and PS allergies are reasonable causes of allergic symptoms after vaccination by detecting PEG-specific and PS-specific antibodies.

METHODS

Fourteen patients who developed immediate allergic reactions to BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines and nineteen healthy controls who did not present allergic symptoms were recruited. Serum PEG-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) and PS-specific IgE and IgG were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Skin tests using PEG-2000 and PS-80 were applied to five patients and three controls.

RESULTS

Serum levels of PEG-specific IgE and IgG in patients with immediate allergic reactions to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine were higher than those in the control group. Serum levels of PS-specific IgE in patients with allergy to the vaccine were higher than those in patients of the control group. Intradermal tests using PEG verified the results for PEG-specific IgE and IgG.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that PEG is one of the antigens in the allergy to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Cross-reactivity between PEG and PS might be crucial for allergy to the vaccines. PEG-specific IgE and IgG may be useful in diagnosing allergy to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

Detection of innate immune response modulating impurities (IIRMI) in therapeutic peptides and proteins: Impact of excipients

Unintended immunogenicity can affect the safety and efficacy of therapeutic proteins and peptides, so accurate assessments of immunogenicity risk can aid in the selection, development, and regulation of biologics. Product- and process- related impurities can act as adjuvants that activate the local or systemic innate immune response increasing the likelihood of product immunogenicity. Thus, assessing whether products have innate immune response modulating impurities (IIRMI) is a key component of immunogenicity risk assessments. Identifying trace levels of individual IIRMI can be difficult and testing individually for all potential impurities is not feasible. Therefore, to mitigate the risk, cell-based assays that use human blood cells or monocyte-macrophage reporter cell lines are being developed to detect minute quantities of impurities capable of eliciting innate immune activation. As these are cell-based assays, there is concern that excipients could blunt the cell responses, masking the presence of immunogenic IIRMI. Here, we explore the impact of frequently used excipients (non-ionic detergents, sugars, amino acids, bulking agents) on the sensitivity of reporter cell lines (THP-1- and RAW-Blue cells) and fresh human blood cells to detect purified TLR agonists as model IIRMI. We show that while excipients do not modulate the innate immune response elicited by TLR agonists in vivo, they can impact on the sensitivity of cell-based IIRMI assays. Reduced sensitivity to detect LPS, FSL-1, and other model IIRMI was also evident when testing 3 different recombinant drug products, product A (a representative mAb), B (a representative growth factor), C (a representative peptide), and their corresponding formulations. These results indicate that product formulations need to be considered when developing and validating cell-based assays for assessing clinically relevant levels of IIRMI in therapeutic proteins. Optimization of reporter cells, culture conditions and drug product concentration appear to be critical to minimize the impact of excipients and attain sensitive and reproducible assays.

Allergies and COVID-19 vaccines: An ENDA/EAACI Position paper

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis, which is rare, has been reported after COVID-19 vaccination, but its management is not standardized.

METHOD

Members of the European Network for Drug Allergy and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology interested in drug allergy participated in an online questionnaire on pre-vaccination screening and management of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, and literature was analysed.

RESULTS

No death due to anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines has been confirmed in scientific literature. Potential allergens, polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate and tromethamine are excipients. The authors propose allergy evaluation of persons with the following histories: 1-anaphylaxis to injectable drug or vaccine containing PEG or derivatives; 2-anaphylaxis to oral/topical PEG containing products; 3-recurrent anaphylaxis of unknown cause; 4-suspected or confirmed allergy to any mRNA vaccine; and 5-confirmed allergy to PEG or derivatives. We recommend a prick-to-prick skin test with the left-over solution in the suspected vaccine vial to avoid waste. Prick test panel should include PEG 4000 or 3500, PEG 2000 and polysorbate 80. The value of in vitro test is arguable.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations will lead to a better knowledge of the management and mechanisms involved in anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines and enable more people with history of allergy to be vaccinated.

New Challenges in Drug Allergy: the Resurgence of Excipients

Purpose of Review

Allergy to excipients is a cause of multidrug allergy and if it is not taken into account, it can lead to unexpected severe reactions. If an excipient allergy is suspected, an accurate examination followed by algorithms is very important for a correct diagnosis and to give patients detailed information in order to avoid future reactions.

Recent Findings

In recent times, due to allergy COVID vaccine reactions, interest in excipients as polyethylene glycol derivatives (PEGs) has increased as a possible cause of drug and vaccine hypersensivity. In addition to PEGs many other excipients as gelatin, alpha-gal, protamine, benzalkonium chloride, and benzyl alcohol have been described as a cause of allergy to drugs and vaccines. For most excipients, the dilutions used for skin testing (ST) are not standardized and proper algorithms to reach a diagnosis are not available.

Summary

The purpose of this article is to review the excipients that may produce inmediate hypersensitivity drugs and vaccine reactions and update diagnostic procedures to reach an accurate diagnosis. We highlight the in vivo and in vitro diagnostic tests used in published reports and detail the dilution used for each excipient to perform ST in order to confirm this vital pathology and to prevent new reactions.

Anaphylaxis to drug excipients

In addition to the therapeutic agent, drugs contain excipients such as stabilizers, preservatives, solubilizers, or dyes, some of which are identical to additives in foods. Anaphylaxis to these excipients is probably an underestimated problem. After the first descriptions of anaphylactic reactions to drug excipients appeared more than 30 years ago, the number of corresponding reports has increased significantly over the years. However, a diagnostic gap exists in the clarification of drug allergic reactions when the index product is not known and/or is not available for testing. In the present work, individual excipients are presented as examples for which publications on anaphylaxis are available. Furthermore, the options of allergological testing both in vivo and in vitro are discussed. The pathogenesis of such reactions is still unresolved in many cases, and current concepts are briefly presented in the conclusion. With increasing knowledge about anaphylaxis to drug excipients, it is assumed that these can then be recognized more often and diagnostically clarified.

Anaphylaxie auf Hilfsstoffe in Arzneimitteln

Neben dem therapeutischen Agens enthalten Arzneimittel Hilfsstoffe als beispielsweise Stabilisatoren, Konservierungsstoffe, Löslichkeitsvermittler oder Farbstoffe, die teilweise identisch mit Zusatzstoffen in Nahrungsmitteln sind. Anaphylaxien auf diese Hilfsstoffe sind ein vermutlich unterschätztes Problem. Nachdem erste Beschreibungen anaphylaktischer Reaktionen auf Arzneimittelhilfsstoffe bereits vor über 30 Jahren auftauchten, hat die Zahl entsprechender Berichte in den letzten Jahren deutlich zugenommen. Eine diagnostische Lücke besteht allerdings in der Abklärung arzneimittelallergischer Reaktionen, wenn das Indexpräparat nicht bekannt ist und/oder nicht als Originalpräparat für Testungen zur Verfügung steht. In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden einzelne Hilfsstoffe exemplarisch vorgestellt, für die Publikationen zu Anaphylaxien vorliegen. Des Weiteren werden die Optionen allergologischer Testungen sowohl in vivo als auch in vitro besprochen. Die Pathogenese derartiger Reaktionen ist vielfach noch unklar, hier werden abschließend aktuelle Konzepte kurz vorgestellt. Mit zunehmendem Wissen über Anaphylaxien auf Arzneimittelhilfsstoffe ist davon auszugehen, dass diese auch vermehrt wahrgenommen und diagnostisch aufgeklärt werden können.

Zitierweise: Pfützner W. Anaphylaxis to drug excipients. Allergo J Int 2022;31:137-40

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40629-022-00214-9

Emerging Challenges and Innovations in Surfactant-mediated Stabilization of Biologic Formulations

Biologics may be subjected to various destabilizing conditions during manufacturing, transportation, storage, and use. Therefore, biologics must be appropriately formulated to meet their desired quality target product profiles. In the formulations of protein-based biologics, one critical component is surfactant. Polysorbate 80 and Polysorbate 20 remain the most commonly used surfactants. Surfactants can stabilize proteins through different mechanisms and help the proteins withstand destabilization stresses. However, the challenges associated with surfactants, for instance, impurities, degradation, and potential triggering of adverse immune responses, have been encountered. Therefore, there are continued efforts to develop novel surfactants to overcome these challenges associated with traditional surfactants. Meanwhile, surfactants have also found their use in formulations of newer and novel modalities, namely, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific antibodies, and adeno-associated viruses (AAV). This review provides an updated in-depth discussion of surfactants in the above-mentioned areas, namely mechanism of action of surfactants, a critical review of challenges with surfactants and current mitigation approaches, and emerging technologies to develop novel surfactants. In addition, gaps, current mitigations, and future directions have been presented to trigger further discussion and research to facilitate the use and development of novel surfactants.

Hidden Dangers: Recognizing Excipients as Potential Causes of Drug and Vaccine Hypersensitivity Reactions

Excipients are necessary as a support to the active ingredients in drugs, vaccines, and other products, and they contribute to their stability, preservation, pharmacokinetics, bioavailability, appearance, and acceptability. For both drugs and vaccines, these are rare reactions; however, for vaccines, they are the primary cause of immediate hypersensitivity. Suspicion for these "hidden dangers" should be high, in particular, when anaphylaxis has occurred in association with multiple chemically distinct drugs. Common excipients implicated include gelatin, carboxymethylcellulose, polyethylene glycols, and products related to polyethylene glycols in immediate hypersensitivity reactions and propylene glycol in delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Complete evaluation of a suspected excipient reaction requires detailed information from the product monograph and package insert to identify all ingredients that are present and to understand the function and structure for these chemicals. This knowledge helps develop a management plan that may include allergy testing to identify the implicated component and to give patients detailed information for future avoidance of relevant foods, drugs, and vaccines. Excipient reactions should be particularly considered for specific classes of drugs where they have been commonly found to be the culprit (eg, corticosteroids, injectable hormones, immunotherapies, monoclonal antibodies, and vaccines). We provide a review of the evidence-based literature outlining epidemiology and mechanisms of excipient reactions and provide strategies for heightened recognition and allergy testing.

Adverse rare events to vaccines for COVID-19: From hypersensitivity reactions to thrombosis and thrombocytopenia

Vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) started to be developed since the initiation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Up to now, four vaccines have been authorized by international agencies such as European Medicines Agency (EMA). Two are DNA vaccines (ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S) and two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). The administration of the vaccines has been associated with a strong decrease in the infections by SARS-CoV-2 and deaths associated with it. However, in parallel to these results, some rare adverse events have also been described. In that sense, events of thrombosis, thrombocytopenia, and hemorrhage have been described in close temporal proximity to the administration of the DNA vaccines ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and Ad26.COV2.S, but also mRNA vaccines. Recent scientific reports have been released with updated information on the possible association of thrombotic thrombocytopenia and COVID-19 vaccines. On the other hand, since the initiation of the vaccination campaigns, adverse hypersensitivity reactions have been described after mRNA and DNA vaccines administration for COVID-19. Although globally these adverse events are rare, a high proportion of the world population will be exposed to these vaccines. For that reason, their safety and tolerance should be carefully considered. In this review, we provide an updated review of the last scientific findings that can explain the rare side effects that the vaccines for COVID-19 can produce.

Allergy to COVID-19 vaccines: A current update

Adverse allergic reactions due to the administration of the vaccines developed for the protection of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported since the initiation of the vaccination campaigns. Current analyses provided by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States have estimated the rates of anaphylactic reactions in 2.5 and 11.1 per million of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines administered, respectively. Although rather low, such rates could have importance due to the uncommon fact that a large majority of the world population will be subjected to vaccination with the aforementioned vaccines in the following months and vaccination will most likely be necessary every season as for influenza vaccines. Health regulators have advised that any subject with a previous history of allergy to drugs or any component of the vaccines should not be vaccinated, however, certain misunderstanding exists since allergy to specific excipients in drugs and vaccines are in occasions misdiagnosed due to an absence of suspicion to specific excipients as allergenic triggers or due to inaccurate labeling or nomenclature. In this review, we provide an updated revision of the most current data regarding the anaphylactic reactions described for BNT162b2 vaccine, mRNA-1273 vaccine, and AZD1222 vaccine. We extensively describe the different excipients in the vaccines with the potential to elicit systemic allergic reactions such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbates, tromethamine/trometamol, and others and the possible immunological mechanisms involved.

Allergy to Polyethilenglicole of Anti-SARS CoV2 Vaccine Recipient: A Case Report of Young Adult Recipient and the Management of Future Exposure to SARS-CoV2

The main contraindication to the anti-SARS CoV2 vaccine is an anaphylactic reaction to a vaccine component. The need to vaccinate allergic people who are at higher risk can be of public health interest and this report shows a case of an allergic reaction to PEG of a HCW who had received the first dose of anti-SARS CoV2 vaccine. For 5 h after the administration of the vaccine, she had the appearance of erythematous spots on the face and neck, and a feeling of a slurred mouth and hoarseness. In order to treat the event, she was administered 8 mg intravenous dexamethasone, 1 vial intravenous chlorphenamine maleate, 250 mL intravenous 0.9% NaCl, and conventional oxygen therapy (2 L/min) with complete resolution of the suspected adverse drug reaction. According to the contraindication to the cutaneous test for this patient, BAT was used for further investigations. The patient who suffered the adverse reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine and other five allergic patients who did not report any adverse reaction after the vaccination were tested. There was a significant activation of the vaccine-reactive patient’s basophils with 14.79 CD203chigh% at the concentration of 0.2 mg/mL, while other patients were negative. People who have a confirmed reaction to a vaccine component should undergo further investigation to discover other possible cross-reactions and select the right vaccine to immunize them.

The Diagnosis and Management of Allergic Reactions Caused by Chinese Materia Medica

Traditional Chinese medicines (TCM) have been used in China for thousands of years. Although TCM has been generally perceived to be safe, adverse reactions to Chinese materia medica (CMM) have been reported. Most of the adverse reactions are allergic in nature, but other mechanisms may play a role. This review focuses on the mechanism and clinical presentation of these allergic reactions. Allergic reactions can occur as a result of the active and inactive ingredients of CMM. Impurities and chemicals generated during the production process can also lead to allergic or adverse reactions. Environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and light can cause changes in the allergenicity of drugs. Human error in formulating CMM drugs also contributes to adverse drug reactions. The management of allergic reactions to CMM includes taking a good history, avoidance of medications in the same class as those which caused prior reactions, the proper training of staff, adherence to manufacturer guidelines and expiration dates, evaluation of benefit and risk balance, and the formulation of a risk management strategy for the use of CMM. A small test dose of a considered drug before using, improvements in drug purification technology, and proper storage and clinical administration help reduce allergic reactions due to CMM.

Case Report: Mastocytosis: The Long Road to Diagnosis

Mastocytosis is a heterogeneous group of disorders characterized by expansion and accumulation of clonal mast cells. Patients mainly present with either cutaneous lesions, anaphylaxis, or both. Its low prevalence and unusual features often hinder its diagnosis for several years. We report the case of an 18-year-old male who was referred to our department with a long-standing history of atypical skin lesions, allergic rhinitis, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and what was believed to be food-related flushing and anaphylaxis, that was later diagnosed with mastocytosis. This case illustrates the need to consider investigating for mastocytosis when recurrent anaphylaxis is present, especially in the presence of atypical skin lesions, even if normal serum basal tryptase levels and allergic sensitization are present.

Practical recommendations for the allergological risk assessment of the COVID-19 vaccination - a harmonized statement of allergy centers in Germany

Severe allergic reactions to vaccines are very rare. Single severe reactions have occurred worldwide after vaccination with the new mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. PEG2000 is discussed as a possible trigger. We provide guidance on risk assessment regarding COVID-19 vaccination in patients with allergic diseases and suggest a standardized, resource-oriented diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. Reports of severe allergic reactions in the context of COVID-19 vaccination can be made via www.anaphylaxie.net using an online questionnaire.

The Impact of Product and Process Related Critical Quality Attributes on Immunogenicity and Adverse Immunological Effects of Biotherapeutics

The pharmaceutical industry has experienced great successes with protein therapeutics in the last two decades and with novel modalities, including cell therapies and gene therapies, more recently. Biotherapeutics are complex in structure and present challenges for discovery, development, regulatory, and life cycle management. Biotherapeutics can interact with the immune system that may lead to undesired immunological responses, including immunogenicity, hypersensitivity reactions (HSR), injection site reactions (ISR), and others. Many product and process related critical quality attributes (CQAs) have the potential to trigger or augment such immunological responses to the product. Tremendous efforts, both clinically and preclinically, have been invested to understand the impact of product and process related CQAs on adverse immunological effects. The information and knowledge are critical for the implementation of Quality by Design (QbD), which requires risk assessment and establishment of specifications and control strategies for CQAs. A quality target product profile (QTPP) that identifies the key CQAs through process development can help assign severity scores based on safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the molecule. Gaps and future directions related to biotherapeutics and emerging novel modalities are presented.

Biologics and anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of biologicals as therapeutic agents in oncology and other inflammatory diseases has dramatically increased during the last years. Due to their biological nature and inherent immunological activity, they are able to induce important adverse events, such as cytokine release reactions (rapid release of proinflammatory cytokines), serum sickness disease, and immediate or delayed hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis. The aim of the current article is to review the state of the art of anaphylaxis because of biological agents.

RECENT FINDINGS

Different phenotypes, and potential underlying endotypes, have been described in anaphylactic reactions to biologicals. There seems to be a spectrum from type 1 reactions (IgE or non-IgE-mediated) to cytokine release reactions, with some reactions falling in between both. Management should be directed according to such phenotypes.

SUMMARY

There is ongoing research to further define immediate adverse reactions to biologicals and to find relevant biomarkers to aid in their diagnosis. Such information will serve in defining their immediate and long term management.

Biologic excipients: Importance of clinical awareness of inactive ingredients

Due to the complexity and fragility of biological drug products, several challenges exist in their formulation development. Excipients are added to increase product stability, maintain tonicity, and facilitate drug delivery. The potential implications of these additive substances merit clinical consideration. We assessed the safety risk of excipients on the basis of their type and variability through an assessment framework, which quantifies excipient complexity in 230 biological formulations, and identifies excipient-related adverse events through published case reports. A biologic on average contained 4.45 excipients, half of that found in oral medications. The frequency distribution was heavily skewed towards the most commonly occurring excipients: water (40.4%), sodium chloride (38.3%), polysorbate 80 (28.7%), sucrose (24.4%), and mannitol (20.9%), with 44.4% of formulations not listing the concentration of the most commonly occurring inactive ingredients. A literature search revealed only 17 case reports of excipient-related adverse events, suggesting the need for more clarity for clinicians on the safety of chemical additives. These cases included injection site reactions, anaphylaxis, hyperglycemia, and acute renal failure. With the expansion of the biopharmaceutical market, it is important to consider the safety data of biologic excipients, so that therapy can be tailored appropriately for a specific patient.

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Biologicals: from Bench to Bedside

Purpose of Review

Biologic agents are new treatment options for chronic inflammatory diseases and cancers. As a result of their unique mechanism of action, they are more effective and less toxic treatment option and their clinical usage is increasing. While they are more commonly used, various adverse effects have been observed including life-threatening ones, including anaphylaxis. The aim of this review is to distinguish the anaphylaxis from other hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) and provide a management algorithm for the anaphylactic reactions induced by biological agents.

Recent Findings

Many case reports and series have been published regarding anaphylaxis and other hypersensitivity reactions (concerning cytokine release syndrome, acute infusion–related reactions) due to biologic agents. Although acute treatment of HSR varies according to the clinical presentation, desensitization with the drug is the major management option for subsequent administrations in the case of anaphylactic reactions.

Summary

Anaphylaxis and other immediate onset hypersensitivity reactions are occasionally difficult to differentiate from each other, and mixed-type reactions may be observed. Immediate management of anaphylaxis includes discontinuation of infusion, immediate administration of adrenaline, antihistamines, corticosteroids, and other treatment options depending on the symptoms. After 30–120 min of the reaction, a blood sample for serum tryptase levels should be obtained and after 4–6 weeks skin testing with the culprit drug should be performed for decision of long-term management via either graded challenge or desensitization.

Hypersensitivity to monoclonal antibodies used for cancer and inflammatory or connective tissue diseases

OBJECTIVE

To review the medical literature on hypersensitivity reactions to therapeutic monoclonal antibodies for patients with malignant tumors and chronic inflammatory or connective tissues diseases.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the PubMed database using the terms monoclonal antibody, hypersensitivity, and allergy.

STUDY SELECTIONS

We selected case reports and cohort studies of patients with hypersensitivity reactions to monoclonal antibodies. We included selected review articles to glean expert opinion on issues for which high-quality data are available. We sought specific information on the incidence, clinical description, pathobiology, and treatment of reactions.

RESULTS

Hypersensitivity reactions to therapeutic monoclonal antibodies can be classic type I (mast cell mediated, perhaps IgE dependent) reactions, cytokine release reactions, or type IV cell-mediated reactions. There are limited data on the frequency of such reactions, and because new agents are added to the set at a relatively high rate, it is difficult to determine precisely the incidence of reactions to this class of drugs as a whole. The classification of a specific hypersensitivity reaction depends mainly on the medical history. Skin testing may be available but often is not validated and may be prohibitively expensive. Avoidance of the culpable agent is ideal, but if treatment with the responsible drug is necessary, rapid drug desensitization is an option for type I reactions. Desensitization is less likely to be effective for cytokine release reactions and is contraindicated for type IV reactions.

CONCLUSION

Hypersensitivity reactions to therapeutic monoclonal antibodies are heterogeneous. Management depends on accurate identification and thoughtful consideration of the pathobiologic features of the reaction.

Hypersensitivity reaction to certolizumab pegol in a patient affected by psoriatic arthritis

The pathogenic mechanism of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to monoclonal antibodies is not fully understood. HSRs can occur after the first exposure or multiple exposures and include acute infusion reactions induced by cytokine release, besides Type I, Type III, and Type IV reactions.). We reported a case of anaphylactic reaction to certolizumab pegol in a patient affected by psoriatic arthritis and a possible management of this condition.

Are Injection Site Reactions in Monoclonal Antibody Therapies Caused by Polysorbate Excipient Degradants?

Injection site reactions (ISRs) and other adverse side effects are commonly observed during therapy with biologics. These hypersensitivity-related side effects can vary from simple rash to life-threatening anaphylactic reaction and may be linked to the immunogenicity of the drug including formation of antidrug antibodies. Reactions can also occur as a consequence of excipients in the product. We report the case of a patient who developed erythematous ISRs to both commercial PCSK9i formulations and had to go off therapy even though efficacy was not impacted. Skin testing showed that the patient was reacting to the polysorbates. Polysorbates are added to stabilize the biotherapeutic. Polysorbates can also activate complement and lead to a range of acute hypersensitivity and systemic immunostimulation reactions. Oxidative degradation products can function as haptens by reacting with proteins at the injection site. Reactive degradation products may even form adducts with the biologic itself, creating a potential neoantigen. Further research is needed to understand the fundamental causes of ISRs. It is critical that only the highest quality raw material is used, and proper storage conditions are employed to minimize degradation of polysorbates in the product. Although complete elimination of ISRs is unlikely, all efforts must be made to minimize them.