Who needs penicillin allergy testing?

Penicillin allergy management strategies relevant for clinical practice - a narrative review

Penicillin allergy is the most commonly reported drug allergy, with prevalence rates ranging from 6% to 31% across various populations and geographic areas. The penicillin allergy label is linked to higher mortality and morbidity rates, extended hospital stays, increased readmission rates, and a greater reliance on second-line antibiotics. Research indicates that nearly 99% of those labeled as penicillin-allergic can tolerate the drug. However, alternative antibiotics are often prescribed without confirming the allergy, largely due to legal concerns regarding re-exposure. Even when a negative challenge test is conducted, non-allergist providers may remain hesitant to reintroduce penicillin. To address the considerable gap between reported and actual penicillin allergies, as well as to ensure the prompt use of penicillins by non-allergists, various management strategies have emerged in recent years. Although several comprehensive reviews have examined these strategies, selecting and applying the most suitable for routine practice is difficult. This narrative review focuses on the most relevant data regarding the efficiency of key penicillin allergy risk assessment tools, particularly those of clinical significance, and discusses their readiness for implementation in non-allergist settings.

Patient Perceptions of Penicillin Allergy Testing in a Public Health System

BACKGROUND

Documented penicillin allergies are associated with increased morbidity, increased hospital stay, and an increase in resistant infections. Penicillin allergy evaluations using a direct oral challenge with or without skin testing has been recommended as a delabeling strategy for patients with penicillin reaction histories. Barriers for achieving equitable access, however, exist. Understanding patient perceptions regarding their penicillin allergy across diverse populations is crucial to mitigate potential obstacles to penicillin allergy testing (PAT) and the use of penicillin-like antibiotics after delabeling.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to gather perceptions of patients delabeled of their penicillin allergy after testing through a PAT program.

METHODS

Patients who underwent PAT and had a subsequent allergy removal due to a negative result were interviewed using closed and open-ended questions.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patient interviews were completed. Awareness of the risks associated with unnecessary penicillin avoidance and PAT was low. Initial concerns regarding PAT were common but were frequently alleviated with targeted education. Most patients undergoing testing reported a positive experience and would recommend PAT to others. A minority of patients continued to have discordant perceptions regarding their penicillin allergy label with mistrust in the negative result being a critical theme identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Future interventions increasing the awareness of penicillin allergy labels and the risks and benefits of PAT in the general population are needed and must consider health literacy levels, languages, and cultural contexts. Measures to offer PAT within a clinical setting that has built high levels of patient trust will likely achieve the greatest long-term success.

Stability of Antibiotics for Use in the Testing of Immediate Drug Allergy Reactions

BACKGROUND

Limited information is available regarding the physicochemical stability of penicillin-based preparations for skin testing purposes, and no information is currently available for other classes of antibiotics.

OBJECTIVE

To perform chemical and physical stability studies on 16 parenteral antibiotics for skin testing purposes, with an overall aim to provide practical recommendations to clinicians on suitable components, storage, and optimal shelf-life of such preparations.

METHODS

Chemical stability was assessed via validated stability-indicating high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection assays, while absence of precipitations or haziness, significant pH shift, and color change were used to determine physical stability.

RESULTS

Other than amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, all of the parenteral antibiotics were found to have adequate physicochemical stability between 2 and 7 days. Amoxicillin in water for injection BP retained more than 90% stability, whereas amoxicillin/clavulanic acid dropped to less than 80%. Ampicillin remained more than 90% stable for 2 days, and benzylpenicillin, flucloxacillin, and piperacillin/tazobactam were stable for 2 days or more at approximately 95%. Cephalosporins were stable for 2 days, except ceftazidime, which increased to more than 110%. Aztreonam, ciprofloxacin, and vancomycin retained more than 95% stability for 7 days, whereas meropenem was stable for 2 days. Sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim in plastic syringe lost 15% but stabilized at approximately 85% for 7 days. No precipitation occurred, but amoxicillin/clavulanic acid changed color by day 2. pH decreases of 1.0 unit or less were observed in penicillins, whereas cefepime dropped below acceptable pH limits by day 7. Absorbance shifts of more than 100 units were seen in several antibiotics by day 7.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has generated practical stability information for clinicians, allowing 15 parenteral antibiotics from 7 different classes to be aseptically prepared in advance for use in the testing of drug allergy reactions.

Group B Streptococcus and Intraamniotic Inflammation and Infection

Intraamniotic inflammation and infection complicate 2% to 5% of term deliveries. Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is a common cause of intraamniotic infection associated with invasive neonatal disease and maternal morbidity. Universal vaginal-rectal screening for GBS colonization is recommended between 36 and 37 weeks. Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended for individuals with positive GBS screens and other risk factors. Intravenous penicillin is the preferred antimicrobial agent. Individuals with penicillin allergies may receive cefazolin for low-risk allergies and either clindamycin or vancomycin for high-risk allergies, depending on their antimicrobial susceptibilities. Clinical trials are underway to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of maternal anti-GBS vaccine candidates.

Narrative review of recent developments and the future of penicillin allergy de-labelling by non-allergists

This article outlines recent developments in non-allergist delivered penicillin allergy de-labelling (PADL), discusses remaining controversies and uncertainties and explores the future for non-allergist delivered PADL. Recent developments include national guidelines for non-allergist delivered PADL and validation of penicillin allergy risk assessment tools. Controversies remain on which penicillin allergy features are low risk of genuine allergy. In the future genetic or immunological tests may facilitate PADL.

The Cost of Developing and Implementing an Antepartum Referral Program for Penicillin Allergy Evaluation at a Single Academic Tertiary Care Hospital

OBJECTIVE

Approximately 10% of pregnant individuals report a penicillin allergy, yet most are not truly allergic. Allergy verification during pregnancy is safe and recommended; however, many hospitals lack the infrastructure to execute testing. Our aim was to evaluate the cost of developing and implementing a penicillin allergy referral program for pregnant individuals at an academic institution and to compare costs of care between patients who were referred and not referred through the program.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted an economic analysis of our institution's antepartum penicillin allergy referral program. We prospectively collected detailed resource utilization data and conducted the analysis from the program's perspective, accounting for costs related to program development, allergy verification, antibiotic cost, and delivery hospitalization. Costs were compared between patients who were referred for evaluation versus patients who were not referred using bivariate tests as well as quantile regression adjusting for baseline differences. A sensitivity analysis was performed for allergy testing cost. All cost estimates were inflation adjusted to 2021 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

The startup cost of program development and educational initiatives was $19,920, or 86 per patient. The median allergy evaluation cost was $397 (interquartile range: $303-663). There was no significant difference in maternal (median: $13,579 vs. 13,999, p = 0.94) or neonatal (median: $3,565 vs. 3,577, p = 0.55) delivery hospitalization cost or antibiotic cost (median: $1.57 vs. 3.87, p = 0.10) between referred and nonreferred patients. Overall, the total cost per person did not differ significantly between study groups (median: $18,931 vs. 18,314, p = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

The cost of developing a penicillin allergy referral program in pregnancy was modest and did not significantly alter short-term cost of care with potential for long-term cost benefit. Verification of a reported penicillin allergy is an integral part of antibiotic stewardship, and the pregnancy period should be utilized as an important opportunity to perform this evaluation.

KEY POINTS

· The cost of developing and implementing an antepartum penicillin allergy referral program is modest.. · Program cost did not significantly alter short-term cost with a potential for long-term cost benefit.. · Penicillin allergy verification is an important part of antibiotic stewardship and should be expanded..

Randomized Multicenter Trial for the Validation of an Easy-to-Administer Algorithm to Define Penicillin Allergy Status in Sexually Transmitted Infection Clinic Outpatients

BACKGROUND

Approximately 15% of patients in sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics report penicillin allergies, complicating treatment for syphilis and gonorrhea. Nonetheless, >90% do not have a penicillin allergy when evaluated. We developed and validated an algorithm to define which patients reporting penicillin allergy can be safely treated at STI clinics with these drugs.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial to assess feasibility and safety of penicillin allergy evaluations in STI clinics. Participants with reported penicillin allergy answered an expert-developed questionnaire to stratify risk. Low-risk participants underwent penicillin skin testing (PST) followed by amoxicillin 250 mg challenge or a graded oral challenge (GOC)-amoxicillin 25 mg followed by 250 mg. Reactions were recorded, and participant/provider surveys were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 284 participants, 72 (25.3%) were deemed high risk and were excluded. Of 206 low-risk participants, 102 (49.5%) underwent PST without reactions and 3 (3%) had mild reactions during the oral challenge. Of 104 (50.5%) participants in the GOC, 95 (91.3%) completed challenges without reaction, 4 (4.2%) had mild symptoms after 25 mg, and 4 (4.2%) after 250-mg doses. Overall, 195 participants (94.7%) successfully completed the study and 11 (5.3%) experienced mild symptoms. Of 14 providers, 12 (85.7%) completed surveys and 11 (93%) agreed on the safety/effectiveness of penicillin allergy assessment in STI clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

An easy-to-administer risk-assessment questionnaire can safely identify patients for penicillin allergy evaluation in STI clinics by PST or GOC, with GOC showing operational feasibility. Using this approach, 67% of participants with reported penicillin allergy could safely receive first-line treatments for gonorrhea or syphilis. Clinical Trials Registration. Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04620746).

Predicting Penicillin Allergy: A United States Multicenter Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Using the reaction history in logistic regression and machine learning (ML) models to predict penicillin allergy has been reported based on non-US data.

OBJECTIVE

We developed ML positive penicillin allergy testing prediction models from multisite US data.

METHODS

Retrospective data from 4 US-based hospitals were grouped into 4 datasets: enriched training (1:3 case-control matched cohort), enriched testing, nonenriched internal testing, and nonenriched external testing. ML algorithms were used for model development. We determined area under the curve (AUC) and applied the Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) framework to interpret risk drivers.

RESULTS

Of 4777 patients (mean age 60 [standard deviation: 17] years; 68% women, 91% White, and 86% non-Hispanic) evaluated for penicillin allergy labels, 513 (11%) had positive penicillin allergy testing. Model input variables were frequently missing: immediate or delayed onset (71%), signs or symptoms (13%), and treatment (31%). The gradient-boosted model was the strongest model with an AUC of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.77), which improved to 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1) when only cases with complete data were used. Top SHAP drivers for positive testing were reactions within the last year and reactions requiring medical attention; female sex and reaction of hives/urticaria were also positive drivers.

CONCLUSIONS

An ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy skin testing using US-based retrospective data did not achieve performance strong enough for acceptance and adoption. The optimal ML prediction model for positive penicillin allergy testing was driven by time since reaction, seek medical attention, female sex, and hives/urticaria.

Beta-lactam antibiotics administration among adult inpatients with a beta-lactam allergy label: incidence, predictors, and outcomes

Background

A beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) allergy label is common, resulting in disadvantageous outcomes due to the usage of second-line antimicrobial agents. Noncontrolled case-series analyses report low rates of hypersensitivity reactions, following intentional/non-intentional BLA challenges among labeled inpatients. The study aims were to explore predictors and outcomes associated with hypersensitivity reactions following BLA challenge among BLA-allergic labeled inpatients.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study (2019-2020) of adult (≥18 years) inpatients (Shamir Medical Center, Israel), labeled as allergic to ≥1 BLA, who received ≥1 dose/s of BLA during their stay. Independent predictors to develop allergic reactions and the independent associations of allergic reactions with clinical outcomes were queried by logistic and Cox regressions.

Results

Of 9,670 inpatients (14,088 hospitalizations), 3,570 (37%) were labeled as allergic to ≥1 BLA. Of those, 1,171 (33%) patients received ≥1 BLA. The majority were women (67%), and the mean age was 69.3 ± 19.4 years. Only 30 patients (2.6%) developed a reaction, all mild. Independent predictors to develop an allergic reaction were documented reactions in the past, atopic background, antihistamines administration prior to the BLA challenge, and high risk for cross-reactivity, based on the BLA side chains, between the labeled and the challenged agents. Reaction upon the BLA challenge was not independently associated with any worse outcome.

Conclusions

Despite the commonality of allergy labeling, and the commonality of BLA administration to labeled inpatients, hypersensitivity reactions were mild and rare. Interventional stewardship strategies for active BLA de-labeling among low-risk patients should be promoted, to improve patients' and institutional health and fiscal outcomes.

Penicillin Allergy Testing and Delabeling for Patients Who Are Prescribed Penicillin: A Systematic Review for a World Health Organization Guideline

Secondary prevention with penicillin aims to prevent further episodes of acute rheumatic fever and subsequent development of rheumatic heart disease (RHD). Penicillin allergy, self-reported by 10% of the population, can affect secondary prevention programs. We aimed to assess the role for (i) routine penicillin allergy testing and the (ii) safety of penicillin allergy delabeling approaches in this context. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, ISRCTN, and CPCI-S to identify the relevant reports. We found 2419 records, but no studies addressed our initial question. Following advice from the WHO-Guideline committee and experts, we identified 6 manuscripts on allergy testing focusing on other populations showing that the prevalence of allergy confirmed by testing was low and the incidence of life-threatening reactions to BPG was very low (< 1-3/1000 individuals treated). A subsequent search addressed penicillin allergy delabeling. This found 516 records, and 5 studies addressing the safety of direct oral drug challenge vs. skin testing followed by drug administration in patients with suspected penicillin allergy. Immediate allergic reactions of minor severity were observed for a minority of patients and occurred less frequently in the direct drug challenge group: 2.3% vs. 11.5%; RR = 0.25, 95%CI 0.15-0.45, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0%. No anaphylaxis or deaths were observed. Severe allergic reactions to penicillin are extremely rare and can be recognized and dealt by trained healthcare workers. Confirmation of penicillin allergy diagnosis or delabeling using direct oral drug challenge or penicillin skin testing seems to be safe and is associated with a low rate of adverse reactions.

Beta-Lactam Allergy De-labeling in a Pediatric Hospital

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability to de-label pediatric patients of their beta-lactam allergy by using a newly implemented institutional protocol and to identify potential barriers to the de-labeling process.

METHODS

All patients with reported allergies to prespecified beta-lactam antibiotics were eligible for a -beta-lactam allergy interview. Following the interview, patients were grouped into 4 risk categories-no risk, low risk, moderate risk, and high risk-and assessed for intervention eligibility. Potential interventions included de-labeling based on the interview alone or proceeding to an oral amoxicillin challenge with or without penicillin allergy skin testing.

RESULTS

Of the 62 patients eligible for beta-lactam allergy interviews, 40% (n = 25) were de-labeled. Among de-labeled patients, 60% (n = 15) were de-labeled on the basis of the interview alone. Additionally, no failures were documented in patients who underwent an oral amoxicillin challenge or penicillin skin testing. Barriers to performing oral amoxicillin challenges or penicillin skin testing included concomitant systemic steroid or antihistamine use, refusal of intervention, and insufficient resources to perform penicillin skin testing.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high frequency of patients de-labeled of their beta-lactam allergies in this study. Increased education to patients, parents, and providers on the de-labeling process, as well as increased personnel available to coordinate and perform de-labeling interventions, may result in more beta-lactam allergy de-labeling.

The importance of clinical history in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity in children

BACKGROUND

In case of suspected hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to drugs, a challenging area for pediatricians is detecting relevant elements in the parent-reported history, in order to reach a definite diagnosis. We analyzed the concordance between the description of the HR and the medical reports documented at the time of the event. Furthermore, we studied any correlation between clinical history variables and the prediction of true allergy.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 50 charts of children referred to our Allergy Unit, after a previous access to the Emergency Department. We compared the description of the HR at acute phase to the history told by parents. Type and timing of the HR and culprit drug were classified as "known" or "unknown." The diagnosis was confirmed or excluded at the end of the investigations. Logistic regression analysis was performed to find any significant association.

RESULTS

The type of the HR was known in 74%, the timing in 28%, and the culprit drug in 98%. We showed that having had a severe HR had an increased odds of remembering the timing; being older >6 years and having had an immediate HR had an increased odds of remembering the type; time to diagnostic was lower in patients whose parents remembered the type of HR.

CONCLUSION

Our paper underlines the importance of an accurate anamnesis at the time of the event. Providing the physicians with a standardized Case Report Form could be a useful tool to simplify the diagnostic work-up and minimize mistakes due to lack of memory.

Facilitators and Barriers to Verifying Penicillin Allergies in a Veteran Nursing Home Population

BACKGROUND

Unconfirmed penicillin allergies are common and may contribute to adverse outcomes, especially in frail older patients. Evidence-based clinical pathways for evaluating penicillin allergies have been effectively and safely applied in selected settings, but not in nursing home populations.

OBJECTIVE

To identify potential facilitators and barriers to implementing a strategy to verify penicillin allergies in Veterans Health Administration nursing homes, known as Community Living Centers (CLCs).

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with staff, patients, and family members at 1 CLC to assess their understanding of penicillin allergies and receptiveness to verifying the allergy. We also asked staff about the proposed allergy assessment strategy, including willingness to delabel by history and feasibility of performing oral challenges or skin testing on their unit.

RESULTS

From 24 interviews (11 front-line staff, 4 leadership, 3 patients, 6 family members), we identified several facilitators or barriers. Staff recognized the importance of allergy verification and were willing to support and assist in implementing verification strategies. The CLC residents were willing to have their allergy status verified. However, some family members expressed reluctance to verifying their relative's allergy status owing to safety concerns. Front-line staff also expressed concern over having the necessary resources, including time and expertise, to implement the strategy. Staff suggested involving clinical pharmacists and educating staff, patients, and family members as ways to overcome these barriers.

CONCLUSIONS

Concerns about safety and staff resources are important potential barriers to implementing verification strategies. Involvement of pharmacists and education of both staff and patients and family members will be important components of any successful intervention.

The state and consideration for skin test of β-lactam antibiotics in pediatrics

β-lactam antibiotics are the most frequently used drugs and the most common drugs that cause allergic reactions in pediatrics. The occurrence of some allergic reactions can be predicted by skin testing, especially severe adverse reactions such as anaphylactic shock. Thus, penicillin and cephalosporin skin tests are widely used to predict allergic reactions before medication in pediatrics. However, false-positive results from skin tests were more often encountered in pediatrics than in adults. In fact, many children labeled as allergic to β-lactam are not allergic to the antibiotic, leading to the use of alternative antibiotics, which are less effective and more toxic, and the increase of antibiotic resistance. There has been controversy over whether β-lactam antibiotics should be tested for skin allergies before application in children. Based on the great controversy in the implementation of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests, especially the controversial cephalosporin skin tests in pediatrics, the mechanism and reasons of anaphylaxis to β-lactam antibiotics, the significance of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests, the current state of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests at home and abroad, and the problems of domestic and international skin tests were analyzed to determine a unified standard of β-lactam antibiotic skin tests in pediatrics to prevent and decrease adverse drug reactions, avoid waste of drugs, and a large amount of manpower and material resource consumption.

[Drug allergy: Fundamental aspects in diagnosis and treatment.]

BACKGROUND

Any substance used as a treatment for any disease can produce harmful or unpleasant events called adverse drug reactions (ADRs). They are due to inherent biological effects of the drug and are caused by immunological and non-immunological mechanisms.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the immunological mechanisms of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to drugs, their epidemiology, risk factors, classification, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis.

METHODS

A review of the most current literature in English and Spanish was carried out, in the main databases, related to the HSR of various drug groups.

RESULTS

This study describes the terms used to define ADRs and HSRs, their classification and clinical manifestations, current diagnostic tools, treatment algorithms and prognosis of the most frequently used medications and with the highest prevalence of reported adverse events.

CONCLUSION

ADRs are a challenging entity, with a complex pathophysiology that has not been fully understood. Its approach requires a careful consideration since not all drugs have validated tests for their diagnosis nor a specific treatment. When indicating the use of any drug, the severity of the disease, the availability of other treatments and the potential risks of developing future adverse events should always be taken into consideration.

The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) guideline for the approach to suspected antibiotic allergy

OBJECTIVES

Prudent handling of reported antibiotic allergy is an important aspect of antibiotic stewardship. The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy (SWAB) constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendations for bedside decision making in antibiotic therapy in patients that report an antibiotic allergy.

METHODS

The guideline committee generated 12 key questions, most of which were population, intervention, comparison and outcome (PICO) questions relevant for both children and adults with suspected antibiotic allergy. For each question a systematic literature search was performed and reviewed for the best available evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Quality of evidence was graded from very low to high and recommendations were formulated in structured discussions as strong or weak.

RESULTS

Sixty recommendations were provided for suspected allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) and non-beta-lactam antibiotics (NBLA). Due to the absence of randomized controlled trials in this field, the underlying evidence was predominantly graded as low or very low. Available data supports that a detailed allergy history should always be performed and critically appraised. When cross-allergy between BLA groups is not to be expected due to absence of molecular similarity of the side chains, the patient can be safely exposed to the alternative BLA. An exception to this rule are severe delayed type reactions, in which reexposure to a BLA should only be considered after consultation of a multidisciplinary team.

CONCLUSIONS

Accumulated scientific data now supports a more liberal approach that better balances benefits of treatment with first choice and usually smaller spectrum antibiotics with appropriate avoidance of antibiotics in case of a truly high risk of a (severe) allergic reaction. In the Netherlands, a formal guideline was developed that provides recommendations for the approach towards suspected allergy to BLA and frequently used NBLA, thereby strongly supporting antimicrobial stewardship.

Group B Streptococcus in Pregnancy

To decrease risk of early-onset neonatal sepsis from group B streptococcus (GBS), pregnant patients should undergo screening between 36 0/7 and 37 6/7 weeks' gestation. Patients with a positive vaginal-rectal culture, GBS bacteriuria , or history of newborn with GBS disease should receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) with an agent targeting GBS. If GBS status is unknown at time of labor, IAP should be administered in cases of preterm birth, rupture of membranes for >18 hours, or intrapartum fever. The antibiotic of choice is intravenous penicillin; alternatives should be considered in cases of penicillin allergy depending on allergy severity.

Antibiotics in Labor and Delivery

Infections are common in obstetric care and often require specific antibiotics, depending on the infection site and prevailing organisms. Summaries of antibiotic recommendations and treatment algorithms are provided for the following conditions: routine labor, group B streptococcus prophylaxis, preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, operative vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, obstetric anal sphincter lacerations, chorioamnionitis, postpartum endometritis, infections of the urinary tract, and bacterial endocarditis prophylaxis.

Penilloic acid is the chief culprit involved in non-IgE mediated, immediate penicillin-induced hypersensitivity reactions in mice

Metabolites/impurities (MIs) of penicillin are normally considered to be the main substances inducing immediate hypersensitivity reactions in penicillin treatment. Our previous research found that penicillin can cause non-allergic hypersensitivity reactions (NAHRs) by directly triggering vascular hyperpermeability and exudative inflammation. However, the chief culprits and underlying mechanisms involved in penicillin-induced NAHRs have not yet been fully elucidated. In this study, we used a combination of approaches including a mouse non-allergic hypersensitivity reaction model, UPLC-MS/MS analyses of arachidonic acid metabolites (AAMs), immunoblotting technique, and molecular docking, etc to investigate the culprits involved in penicillin-induced hypersensitivity reactions. We found penilloic acid, one of the main MIs of penicillin, could trigger NAHRs via inducing increased vascular permeability, while the other MIs did no exhibit similar effect. Penilloic acid-induced reactions were not IgE-dependent. Significantly increased arachidonic acids and cascade metabolites in lungs, and activation of RhoA/ROCK signaling pathway in the ears and lungs of mice were noticed after once administration of penilloic acid. This study revealed that penilloic acid was the chief culprit involved in penicillin-induced immediate NAHRs in mice, which mainly associated with direct stimulation of vascular hyperpermeability and exudative inflammation. The activations of AAMs and RhoA/ROCK signaling pathway played important roles in these reactions.

Amoxicillin hypersensitivity: patient outcomes in a seven-year retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The beta-lactam antibiotic amoxicillin and the beta-lactamase inhibitor clavulanic acid in combination with amoxicillin are known to both cause immediate and non-immediate type hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize a large cohort of patients with a history of amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of demographics, presentation, investigation, and management of 331 patients presenting to one allergy center with a history of hypersensitivity to amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid.

RESULTS

Hypersensitivity was confirmed in 37/221 (17%) patients who took amoxicillin and 47/110 (43%) patients who took amoxicillin-clavulanic acid as the index drug. In immediate hypersensitivity, skin testing confirmed the diagnosis in 66/139 (47%) patients. Penicillin cross-reactivity was observed in 16/36 (44%). 13/16 (81%) cross-reactive patients reacted to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid as the index drug. All skin test negative patients (73/139) underwent drug provocation. The negative predictive value of skin tests was 89%. In non-immediate hypersensitivity, delayed intradermal tests confirmed diagnosis in 12/170 (7%). 8/12 (67%) skin test positive patients presented with DRESS. All skin test negative patients (158/170) underwent drug provocation. The negative predictive value of skin tests was 95%. Penicillin cross-reactivity was observed in 3/12 (25%). Ten patients were diagnosed with hypersensitivity to clavulanic acid.

CONCLUSION

The negative predictive value of skin tests in both immediate and non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions is excellent and excludes severe allergy. Non-immediate hypersensitivity is rare. Confirmed hypersensitivity is more likely if amoxicillin-clavulanic acid is the index drug. Cross-reactivity was more common in patients presenting with immediate hypersensitivity, most commonly involving benzylpenicillin. A minority of patients were allergic to clavulanic acid.

New diagnostıc perspectives in the management of pediatrıc beta-lactam allergy

Since overdiagnosis of beta-lactam (BL) allergy is common in the pediatric population, delabeling is a critical part of antimicrobial stewardship. Undesirable consequences of inaccurate BL allergy labeling can be handled by incorporating traditional delabeling or newer risk-based strategies into antibiotic stewardship programs. Conventional assessment of BL allergy relies upon a stepwise algorithm including a clinical history with skin testing followed by drug provocation tests (DPTs). However, a growing number of studies highlighted the suboptimal diagnostic value of skin testing in children. Recently, there has been a paradigm shift in the practice of BL allergy assessment due to recent challenging data which emphasize the safety and accuracy of direct DPTs in children with a suspicion of non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions such as maculopapular eruption, delayed urticaria, and possibly also for benign immediate reactions such as urticaria/angioedema. Identifying low-risk BL allergy patients, in whom skin tests can be skipped and proceeding directly to DPTs could be safe, has become a hot topic in recent years. New risk stratification and predictive modeling studies that have the potential to better predict BL allergy risk status have recently been introduced into the field of drug allergy, particularly in adults. However, in contrast to adults, risk assessment studies in children are rare, and optimal risk definitions are controversial. In the coming years, promising potential methods to elucidate the predictors of BL allergy in children will require multidimensional approaches that may include predictive analytics, artificial intelligence techniques, and point-of-care clinical decision tools.

Role of clinical history in beta-lactam hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Understand how the clinical history has been used to risk stratify patients reporting a beta-lactam allergy, both in clinical care pathways and predictive models.

RECENT FINDINGS

Drug allergy clinical care pathways have emerged as a safe and effective method of stratifying patients with a reported beta-lactam allergy into risk categories, with 'low-risk' patients able to proceed straight to direct challenges or test doses. These methods have streamlined antibiotic stewardship policies and penicillin allergy de-labeling. However, how to define 'low-risk' has been subject to much debate. New research has developed predictive models that utilize the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy.

SUMMARY

The clinical history has long been an essential part of drug allergy evaluation and has proven invaluable within the past decade in the development of drug allergy clinical pathways. Evidence-based predictive models that use the clinical history to assess a patient's true risk of beta-lactam allergy offer tremendous promise, but differ in crucial areas such as the populations they study, the predictor variables they use, and the ultimate accuracy they attain. These models highlight key aspects of the drug allergy history and pave the way for future large-scale research.

Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021

These guidelines for the treatment of persons who have or are at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) were updated by CDC after consultation with professionals knowledgeable in the field of STIs who met in Atlanta, Georgia, June 11-14, 2019. The information in this report updates the 2015 guidelines. These guidelines discuss 1) updated recommendations for treatment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Trichomonas vaginalis; 2) addition of metronidazole to the recommended treatment regimen for pelvic inflammatory disease; 3) alternative treatment options for bacterial vaginosis; 4) management of Mycoplasma genitalium; 5) human papillomavirus vaccine recommendations and counseling messages; 6) expanded risk factors for syphilis testing among pregnant women; 7) one-time testing for hepatitis C infection; 8) evaluation of men who have sex with men after sexual assault; and 9) two-step testing for serologic diagnosis of genital herpes simplex virus. Physicians and other health care providers can use these guidelines to assist in prevention and treatment of STIs.

Frequency of severe reactions following penicillin drug provocation tests: A Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with a penicillin allergy label tend to have worse clinical outcomes and increased healthcare use. Drug provocation tests (DPT) are the gold-standard in the diagnostic workup of penicillin allergy, but safety concerns may hinder their performance. We aimed to assess the frequency of severe reactions following a DPT in patients with reported allergy to penicillins or other β-lactams.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, searching MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. We included primary studies assessing participants with a penicillin allergy label who underwent a DPT. We performed a Bayesian meta-analysis to estimate the pooled frequency of severe reactions to penicillin DPTs. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup and metaregression analyses.

RESULTS

We included 112 primary studies which included a total of 26,595 participants. The pooled frequency of severe reactions was estimated at 0.06% (95% credible interval [95% CrI] = 0.01%-0.13%; I2  = 57.9%). Most severe reactions (80/93; 86.0%) consisted of anaphylaxis. Compared to studies where the index reaction was immediate, we observed a lower frequency of severe reactions for studies assessing non-immediate index reactions (OR = 0.05; 95% CrI = 0-0.31). Patients reporting anaphylaxis as their index reaction were found to be at increased risk of developing severe reactions (OR = 13.5; 95% CrI = 7.7-21.5; I2  = 0.3%). Performance of direct DPTs in low-risk patients or testing with the suspected culprit drug were not associated with clinically relevant increased risk of severe reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with a penicillin allergy label, severe reactions resulting from DPTs are rare. Therefore, except for patients with potentially life-threatening index reactions or patients with positive skin tests-who were mostly not assessed in this analysis -, the safety of DPTs supports their performance in the diagnostic assessment of penicillin allergy.

A Multidisciplinary Quality Improvement Initiative to Facilitate Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Among Hospitalized Pediatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Penicillin allergy is reported in up to 10% of the general population; however, >90% of patients reporting an allergy are tolerant. Patients labeled as penicillin allergic have longer hospital stays, increased exposure to suboptimal antibiotics, and an increased risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridioides difficile. The primary aim with our quality improvement initiative was to increase penicillin allergy delabeling to at least 10% among all hospitalized pediatric patients reporting a penicillin allergy with efforts directed toward patients determined to be low risk for true allergic reaction.

METHODS

Our quality improvement project included several interventions: the development of a multidisciplinary clinical care pathway to identify eligible patients, workflow optimization to support delabeling, an educational intervention, and participation in our institution's quality improvement incentive program. Our interventions were targeted to facilitate appropriate delabeling by the primary hospital medicine team. Statistical process control charts were used to assess the impact of this intervention pre- and postpathway implementation.

RESULTS

After implementation of the clinical pathway, the percentage of patients admitted to hospital medicine delabeled of their penicillin allergy by discharge increased to 11.7%. More than one-half of those delabeled (51.2%) received a penicillin-based antimicrobial at time of discharge. There have been no adverse events or allergic reactions requiring emergency medication administration since pathway implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our quality improvement initiative successfully increased the rate of penicillin allergy delabeling among low-risk hospitalized pediatric patients, allowing for increased use of optimal antibiotics.

Penicillin Allergy Testing Is Cost-Saving: An Economic Evaluation Study

BACKGROUND

Having a penicillin allergy label is associated with the use of less appropriate and more expensive antibiotics and increased healthcare utilization. Penicillin allergy testing results in delabeling most allergy claimants and may be cost-saving. This study aimed to project whether penicillin allergy testing in patients reporting a penicillin allergy is cost-saving.

METHODS

In this economic evaluation study, we built decision models to project the economic impact of 2 strategies for a patient with a penicillin allergy label: (1) perform diagnostic testing (drug challenges, with or without skin tests); and (2) do not perform diagnostic testing. The health service perspective was adopted, considering costs with penicillin allergy tests, and with hospital bed-days/outpatient visits, antibiotic use, and diagnostic testing. Twenty-four base case decision models were built, accounting for differences in the diagnostic workup, setting (inpatient vs outpatient) and geographic region. Uncertainty was explored via probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Penicillin allergy testing was cost-saving in all decision models built. For models assessing the performance of both skin tests and drug challenges, allergy testing resulted in average savings (in United States [US] dollars) of $657 for inpatients (US: $1444; Europe: $489) and $2746 for outpatients (US: $256; Europe: $6045). 75% of simulations obtained through probabilistic sensitivity analysis identified testing as the less costly option.

CONCLUSIONS

Penicillin allergy testing was projected to be cost-saving across different scenarios. These results are devised to inform guidelines, supporting the adoption of policies promoting widespread testing of patients with a penicillin allergy label.

What is new in beta-lactam allergy in children?

This review highlights the novelties in understanding the underlying immunologic mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) with special reference to beta-lactams (BLs) in the pediatric population, as well as tiny changes in clinical classification and diagnosis of DHRs, in the last couple of years. BLs are still the most commonly prescribed and used antibiotics in children. Viral infections are very often in children, and they can provoke skin rashes which are difficult to differentiate from DHRs. The majority of children are incorrectly labeled as "allergic." Therefore, allergy to BLs in children is overdiagnosed. These children often receive suboptimal treatment with second-line broad-spectrum antibiotics, which are less effective, more costly, and associated with an increased risk of antibiotic-resistant infections. This prolongs hospitalization and thus more uses health care. The correct diagnosis of BL allergy in children is still an important and hot topic. This review has outlined the need for correct diagnosis of BL allergy in children and all the controversies encountered by pediatricians and pediatric allergists. It is also necessary to change the paradigm.

Safety and efficacy of de-labelling penicillin allergy in adults using direct oral challenge: a systematic review

Background

Approximately 10% of people have an unverified penicillin allergy, with multiple personal and public health consequences.

Objectives

To assess the efficacy and safety of direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, in this population.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched from inception to 28 June 2020 (updated November 2020) to find published and unpublished studies that reported direct oral challenge for the purpose of removal of penicillin allergy labels. Population weighted mean was used to calculate the proportion of patients who developed an immediate or delayed reaction to direct oral challenge across the studies.

Results

Thirteen studies were included in the review, with a sample size of 1202 (range 7–328). Studies included inpatient and outpatient cohorts assessed as low risk for true allergy. In pooled analysis of all 13 studies there were 41/1202 (3.41%) mild immediate or delayed reactions to direct oral challenge. The population-weighted mean incidence of immediate or delayed reaction to an oral challenge across studies was also 3.41% (95% CI: 2.38%–4.43%). There were no reports of serious adverse reactions, 96.5% of patients could be de-labelled and many were subsequently successfully treated with penicillin.

Conclusions

Direct oral challenge is safe and effective for de-labelling patients assessed as low risk for true allergy. Non-specialist clinicians competent in using an assessment algorithm can offer evaluation of penicillin allergy labels using direct oral challenge in appropriate patients. These measures will facilitate optimal infection treatment for patients, support antimicrobial stewardship, and minimize antimicrobial resistance.

Penicillin Allergy Assessment in Pregnancy: Safety and Impact on Antibiotic Use

BACKGROUND

Penicillin and other beta-lactam antibiotics are recommended for group B Streptococcus and cesarean section prophylaxis, but approximately 10% of pregnant patients report a penicillin allergy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and impact of penicillin allergy evaluation in pregnant patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective study of obstetrician-ordered Allergy/Immunology (AI) electronic consultations (e-consults) from September 20, 2017 through December 31, 2019, we reviewed the electronic health record for e-consult recommendation; patient demographic, obstetric, and allergy histories; and peripartum antibiotic utilization with indication. For patients whose electronic consultation recommended an in-person AI evaluation, testing outcomes were determined, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare antibiotic use between patients who did and did not receive an in-person AI evaluation.

RESULTS

Of 389 obstetrician-ordered e-consults, 363 (93%) recommended an in-person AI evaluation; of these, 222 (61%) patients received an in-person AI evaluation. Of 220 (99%) patients skin tested, 209 (95%) had their penicillin allergy label safely removed. Compared with patients who did not receive an in-person AI evaluation despite it being recommended (n = 141), patients with in-person AI evaluation (n = 222) had reduced peripartum vancomycin (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.33), clindamycin (aOR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.08-0.34), and gentamicin (aOR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19-0.78) use and increased penicillin (aOR, 18.0; 95% CI, 6.30-51.2) use. The fully AI evaluated patients had increased first-line antibiotic prophylaxis for group B Streptococcus (aOR, 26.9; 95% CI, 6.32-114) and cesarean section (aOR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.06-3.52).

CONCLUSIONS

In a sample of 220 pregnant patients with penicillin allergy histories and in-person AI evaluation, penicillin allergy testing was safe and associated with significantly reduced broad-spectrum antibiotic use and increased first-line beta-lactam antibiotic use.

A Comprehensive Methodology to Systematically Identify Drug Hypersensitivity and Anaphylactic Reactions in Clinical Trial Databases

BACKGROUND

The incidence of drug hypersensitivity or anaphylactic reactions in clinical trial databases is thought to be underestimated due to variable clinical presentations and lack of clear definitions.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to develop a more comprehensive, systematic methodology for retrospectively identifying potential hypersensitivity or anaphylactic reactions reported in patients treated with investigational drugs in clinical trials and to accurately assess and characterise the risk.

METHODS

A three-step approach was developed to identify hypersensitivity or anaphylactic reactions: clinical trial database search, medical review, and adjudication to confirm or rule out cases. The database search strategy consisted of the narrow search for Standardized MedDRA Query (SMQ) Hypersensitivity, a modified MedDRA query based on SMQ Anaphylactic reaction, and pyrexia-related MedDRA Preferred Terms. The cases identified from the search were further medically reviewed taking into consideration the temporal relationship, seriousness, severity, course, and management of the events, action taken, and outcomes of adverse events. Those cases deemed to have potentially drug-related hypersensitivity were then adjudicated to be confirmed or ruled out.

RESULTS

The method was applied to a clinical trial database containing safety data for 421 patients treated with an investigational drug. Application of the methodology led to 19 hypersensitivity cases being identified. Of these, 12 were classified as immediate reactions and 7 as non-immediate reactions.

CONCLUSION

This three-step method provided a thorough and robust way to identify hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis, in a clinical trial database. This method could be applied to investigational drugs to improve early detection and monitoring of potential safety concerns, subsequent patient safety management strategies, and potentially programme-wide drug development decisions. Algorithmic tools and narrow and/or broad SMQs should be considered when evaluating safety concerns. The authors also recommend a revision of the MedDRA SMQ of Anaphylactic reaction.

Antibiotic Skin Testing in the Intensive Care Unit: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Recent research has shown that a large majority of patients with a history of penicillin allergy are acutely tolerant of penicillins and that there is no clinically significant immunologic cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins or other β-lactams. The standard test to confirm acute tolerance is challenge with a therapeutic dose. Skin testing is useful only when the culprit antibiotic can haptenate serum proteins and induce an immunoglobulin E-mediated reaction and the clinical history demonstrates such high risk that a direct oral challenge may result in anaphylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

To review and evaluate the current practice of skin testing for antibiotics (other than penicillin) in critically ill patients by means of a systematic literature review.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Several electronic databases were searched using the following terms: antibiotics, skin test (tests, testing), intensive care, intensive care unit, ICU, critical care, critical care unit.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles were identified for inclusion in this review. The results indicate a lack of standardized skin testing for all antibiotics in critical care settings. Oral challenge with nonirritating concentrations of antibiotics can be helpful in determining allergy to these drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Critical care providers should evaluate antibiotic allergy using nonirritating concentrations before administering antibiotics to patients. Introduction of a standardized skin test for all antibiotics in intensive care unit patients to help select the most appropriate antibiotic treatment regimen might help save lives and reduce costs.

AllergoOncology: ultra-low IgE, a potential novel biomarker in cancer-a Position Paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)

Elevated serum IgE levels are associated with allergic disorders, parasitosis and specific immunologic abnormalities. In addition, epidemiological and mechanistic evidence indicates an association between IgE-mediated immune surveillance and protection from tumour growth. Intriguingly, recent studies reveal a correlation between IgE deficiency and increased malignancy risk. This is the first review discussing IgE levels and links to pathological conditions, with special focus on the potential clinical significance of ultra-low serum IgE levels and risk of malignancy. In this Position Paper we discuss: (a) the utility of measuring total IgE levels in the management of allergies, parasitosis, and immunodeficiencies, (b) factors that may influence serum IgE levels, (c) IgE as a marker of different disorders, and d) the relationship between ultra-low IgE levels and malignancy susceptibility. While elevated serum IgE is generally associated with allergic/atopic conditions, very low or absent IgE may hamper anti-tumour surveillance, indicating the importance of a balanced IgE-mediated immune function. Ultra-low IgE may prove to be an unexpected biomarker for cancer risk. Nevertheless, given the early stage of investigations conducted mostly in patients with diseases that influence IgE levels, in-depth mechanistic studies and stratification of malignancy risk based on associated demographic, immunological and clinical co-factors are warranted.

Health and Economic Outcomes of Home Maintenance Allergen Immunotherapy in Select Patients with High Health Literacy during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis During Exceptional Times

BACKGROUND

Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) is safe and effective but is typically administered under strict clinic observation to mitigate the risk of a systemic reaction to immunotherapy (SRIT). However, in the setting of the global coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, alternative care models should be explored.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of home immunotherapy self-administration (HITSA) in a highly idealized circumstance for provision of maintenance AIT in a shelter-in-place or other scenarios of unforeseen reduction in nonessential medical services.

METHODS

Markov modeling was used to compare in-office clinic AIT in selected patients using cohort analysis and microsimulation from the societal and health care perspectives.

RESULTS

Assuming similar SRIT rates, HITSA was found to be a cost-effective option with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $44,554/quality-adjusted life-year when considering both incremental epinephrine autoinjector costs and coronavirus disease 2019 risks. Excluding epinephrine autoinjector costs, HISTA dominated other options. However, outside of pandemic considerations, HITSA was not cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $198,877,286) at annual epinephrine autoinjector costs above $287. As the incremental HITSA SRIT rate increased above 15%, clinic AIT was the most cost-effective strategy. Excluding both pandemic risks and risk of motor vehicle accident fatality from round-trip clinic transit, clinic AIT dominated other strategies. Clinic AIT was the more cost-effective option at very high fatality relative risk for HITSA or at very low annual risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

Under idealized assumptions HITSA can be a safe and cost-effective option during a global pandemic in appropriately selected patients provided home rates of SRIT remain stable.

Penicillin Allergy in Pregnancy: Moving From "Rash" Decisions to Accurate Diagnosis

The emergence of beta-lactam-resistant pathogenic organisms has resulted in limitation or even elimination of drugs such as penicillin and ampicillin from available antibiotic choices for treating common infections in obstetrics and gynecology. In clinical situations for which penicillins and cephalosporins are appropriate or recommended first-line agents, the problem of patient-reported penicillin allergies has led to routine use of alternative but potentially less effective agents. The use of broader-spectrum and potentially suboptimal alternative antibiotic regimens for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis against group B streptococcus or for surgical prophylaxis for cesarean delivery in women with a reported penicillin allergy may affect these women during labor and birth. Most individuals who report a penicillin allergy are neither truly allergic nor at risk of developing a hypersensitivity reaction after exposure to penicillin. The available evidence suggests that there are important roles for both targeted history-taking, to determine the nature of drug allergies and penicillin allergy testing in pregnant women, to optimize their antibiotic-related treatment both during pregnancy and for their lifetimes. Wider consideration and adoption of penicillin allergy testing in pregnant women specifically, as well as the general population of women cared for by providers of obstetrics and gynecology, is recommended.

Accuracy of penicillin allergy diagnostic tests: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Having a penicillin allergy label associates with a higher risk for antibiotic resistance and increased health care use.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the accuracy of skin tests and specific IgE quantification in the diagnostic evaluation of patients reporting a penicillin/β-lactam allergy.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis, searching on MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science. We included studies conducted in patients reporting a penicillin allergy and in whom skin tests and/or specific IgE quantification were performed and compared with drug challenge results. We quantitatively assessed the accuracy of diagnostic tests with bivariate random-effects meta-analyses. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to explore causes of heterogeneity. Studies' quality was evaluated using QUADAS-2 criteria.

RESULTS

We included 105 primary studies, assessing 31,761 participants. Twenty-seven studies were assessed by bivariate meta-analysis. Skin tests had a summary sensitivity of 30.7% (95% CI, 18.9%-45.9%) and a specificity of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.2%-98.3%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.686 (I² = 38.2%). Similar results were observed for subanalyses restricted to patients reporting nonimmediate maculopapular exanthema or urticaria/angioedema. Specific IgE had a summary sensitivity of 19.3% (95% CI, 12.0%-29.4%) and a specificity of 97.4% (95% CI, 95.2%-98.6%), with a partial area under the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.420 (I² = 8.5%). Projected predictive values mainly reflect the low frequency of true penicillin allergy.

CONCLUSIONS

Skin tests and specific IgE quantification appear to have low sensitivity and high specificity. Because current evidence is insufficient for assessing the role of these tests in stratifying patients for delabeling, we identified key requirements needed for future studies.

Achieving the Quadruple Aim to deliver value-based allergy care in an ever-evolving health care system

OBJECTIVE

To define the concept of value-based care in allergy, and to review challenges and opportunities in value-based health care delivery for allergists and immunologists.

DATA SOURCES

Articles describing practice variation, health care financing and reimbursement, shared decision-making, cost-effective health care delivery, patient-reported outcome measures, social determinants of health, and screening.

STUDY SELECTIONS

A narrative review detailing concepts and approaches to improve value-based health care in the context of the Quadruple Aim to address the patient and physician experience, cost, and population health.

RESULTS

Efforts to improve cost-effective care can be informed by understanding unwarranted geographic practice variation and benchmarking best practices. Although evidence suggests that shared decision-making and addressing social determinants of health have critical roles in high-quality care, some practices such as routine laboratory screening for urticaria, premedication to prevent recurrent low- or iso-osmolar contrast reactions, extended observation of resolved anaphylaxis, food allergy screening, and penicillin allergy overdiagnosis have high costs in relation to overall societal benefit. Food allergy prevention, newborn screening for severe combined immune deficiency, and penicillin delabeling are examples of population-based opportunities in which allergists and immunologists can assist in creating health care value. Although efforts to incentivize value-based care have emerged in recent years, the degree to which process measures improve patient-important outcomes remain uncertain. Clinician wellness must be made a priority for continued effective practice.

CONCLUSION

As health care systems continue to evolve, allergists and immunologists will play a key role in optimizing value by translating emerging evidence into practice and communicating novel approaches to prevent and treat allergic diseases.

Update on penicillin allergy delabeling

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review phenotyping and risk classification of penicillin allergy and provide an update on penicillin allergy delabeling strategies for primary care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Beta-lactams are considered the treatment of choice for a wide range of bacterial pathogens; however, many patients receive second-line agents due to being labeled as having an allergy to penicillin. This approach can lead to antibiotic resistance and inferior health outcomes. While 10% of the population is labeled as penicillin allergic, penicillin anaphylaxis occurs in less than 1% of patients. For patients with delayed benign skin rashes (e.g., urticaria or maculopapular exanthem >1 h after administration) attributable to beta-lactam administration occurring more than 12 months ago, direct oral challenge (rechallenge with antibiotic in the clinical setting) can be a safe and effective strategy, with immediate reactions occurring in less than 5% of such low-risk patients and delayed reactions appearing infrequently. In patients with penicillin-associated immediate urticaria, other IgE-mediated features, or anaphylaxis, further allergy evaluation and penicillin skin testing is warranted. Any severe idiosyncratic cutaneous adverse reaction is rare, but can be dangerous so prompt removal of the inciting agent is required.

SUMMARY

Penicillin allergy delabeling is a high-value service that can be effectively delivered through a multidisciplinary collaborative approach.

Children with reported penicillin allergy: Public health impact and safety of delabeling

OBJECTIVE

To review the relevant literature related to children with reported penicillin allergy and highlight the different ways in which children could be delabeled and to evaluate the public health impact that a penicillin allergy has for children.

DATA SOURCES

Data for this review were obtained via PubMed searches and then retrieval of articles from their respective journals for further review.

STUDY SELECTIONS

Studies regarding the safety of different ways to evaluate penicillin allergy in children were identified via PubMed searches. Any study that reported different ways of testing (3-tier, direct oral challenge, 5-day oral challenges) were included. This same format was used when selecting relevant articg:les related to the costs, prescription patterns, and stewardship trends associated with a penicillin allergy label.

RESULTS

This review found that penicillin allergy testing is a safe and effective way to delabel those with reported allergy. In children with low-risk allergy symptoms, a direct oral challenge approach may be optimal. In those children with a history of high-risk allergy symptoms, a 3-tiered approach is ideal. The review also found that there is a significant cost associated with reported penicillin allergy and that there are increased negative health benefits to those children with reported allergy.

CONCLUSION

Penicillin allergy is overdiagnosed, often incorrectly, and the label is frequently first applied during childhood. Targeting children for the removal of the incorrect penicillin allergy label provides a mechanism to reduce the use of broader-spectrum and less effective antibiotics.

Engaging patient partners in state-of-the-art allergy care: Finding balance when discussing risk

OBJECTIVE

To review risk communication in the context of shared decision making.

DATA SOURCES

Articles describing risk communication, shared decision making, and cost-effective healthcare delivery.

STUDY SELECTIONS

A narrative review detailing approaches to improve risk communication and shared decision making to optimize patient-centered cost-effective practice.

RESULTS

Risk communication must occur on a foundation of mutual trust and can be improved by keeping risk in perspective of everyday hazards, such as using pictograms when possible, providing numeric likelihoods of risks and benefits, and discussing absolute risks. Variability in patient-perceived quality of life for allergic and nonallergic health states may affect the health and economic outcomes of many allergy therapies. Shared decision making improves patient knowledge and risk perception, engagement, and adherence. Patient decision aids can be time-consuming to develop and validate, but their use is associated with a more accurate understanding of patient-oriented outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Communicating risk is complex, and validated patient decision aids using visual aids, presenting essential information, using knowledge checks, and incorporating values clarification can reduce decisional conflict and improve decisional self-efficacy.

Sustaining and spreading penicillin allergy delabelling: A narrative review of the challenges for service delivery and patient safety

Many patients report allergies to penicillin, although in over 90% of these the label of penicillin allergy is shown to be incorrect following comprehensive testing. Inappropriate and inaccurate penicillin allergy labelling is a barrier to antimicrobial stewardship and can lead to patient harm. This review assesses an emergent evidence base and trend favouring delabelling using direct oral penicillin challenges following a stratified risk assessment of the likelihood and existence of true penicillin allergy, to identify and make recommendations for key components for implementation in standard practice. Research to date has focussed on the feasibility and clinical and financial outcomes of these direct delabelling strategies. There is a paucity of studies exploring the views and engagement of patients and healthcare professionals, and a gap in the evidence for prerequisites to safely deliver, sustain and spread the implementation of such services across health systems.

Antimicrobial stewardship intervention: optimizing antibiotic treatment in hospitalized patients with reported antibiotic allergy

BACKGROUND

Reported antibiotic allergy in hospitalized patients seems to be related to more adverse events, the use of reserve antibiotics and longer hospitalization. Most patients reporting an antibiotic allergy can be de-labelled; as such, an antimicrobial stewardship intervention was set up.

AIM

To determine the impact of reported antibiotic allergy on the antibiotic treatment of hospitalized patients, and prevent unnecessary deviation from the preferred antibiotic treatment by a proactive antimicrobial stewardship intervention.

METHODS

Hospitalized patients reporting an antibiotic allergy were included in an intervention study at a teaching hospital in the Netherlands between March and May 2019. Physicians received training and were provided with a recommendation in the electronic medical record in case the preferred antibiotic treatment was unnecessarily avoided due to the allergy label and the patient was eligible for a drug challenge.

FINDINGS

In total, 492 patients reporting an antibiotic allergy were identified, accounting for 558 hospital admissions. In 93 cases, the antibiotic allergy label interfered with the preferred antibiotic treatment. Sixty-eight of these patients were eligible for a drug challenge, and 42 patients were challenged. In 40 (95%) of these patients, no allergic reaction was observed, and the preferred antibiotic treatment was given. Two (5%) patients developed a non-severe skin reaction after a drug challenge and continued an alternative antibiotic regimen.

CONCLUSION

This antimicrobial stewardship intervention can be used to provide patients with reported antibiotic allergy labels with the preferred antibiotic treatment, and to de-label them after uneventful re-exposure to the antibiotic agent.

Prevention of Group B Streptococcal Early-Onset Disease in Newborns: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 782

Group B streptococcus (GBS) is the leading cause of newborn infection. The primary risk factor for neonatal GBS early-onset disease (EOD) is maternal colonization of the genitourinary and gastrointestinal tracts. Approximately 50% of women who are colonized with GBS will transmit the bacteria to their newborns. Vertical transmission usually occurs during labor or after rupture of membranes. In the absence of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, 1-2% of those newborns will develop GBS EOD. Other risk factors include gestational age of less than 37 weeks, very low birth weight, prolonged rupture of membranes, intraamniotic infection, young maternal age, and maternal black race. The key obstetric measures necessary for effective prevention of GBS EOD continue to include universal prenatal screening by vaginal-rectal culture, correct specimen collection and processing, appropriate implementation of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, and coordination with pediatric care providers. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists now recommends performing universal GBS screening between 36 0/7 and 37 6/7 weeks of gestation. All women whose vaginal-rectal cultures at 36 0/7-37 6/7 weeks of gestation are positive for GBS should receive appropriate intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis unless a prelabor cesarean birth is performed in the setting of intact membranes. Although a shorter duration of recommended intrapartum antibiotics is less effective than 4 or more hours of prophylaxis, 2 hours of antibiotic exposure has been shown to reduce GBS vaginal colony counts and decrease the frequency of a clinical neonatal sepsis diagnosis. Obstetric interventions, when necessary, should not be delayed solely to provide 4 hours of antibiotic administration before birth. This Committee Opinion, including , , and , updates and replaces the obstetric components of the CDC 2010 guidelines, "Prevention of Perinatal Group B Streptococcal Disease: Revised Guidelines From CDC, 2010."