Predictive factors of amoxicillin immediate hypersensitivity and validation of PEN-FAST clinical decision rule

Predictive models and applicability of artificial intelligence-based approaches in drug allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Drug allergy is responsible for a huge burden on public healthcare systems, representing in some instances a threat for patient's life. Diagnosis is complex due to the heterogeneity of clinical phenotypes and mechanisms involved, the limitations of in vitro tests, and the associated risk to in vivo tests. Predictive models, including those using recent advances in artificial intelligence, may circumvent these drawbacks, leading to an appropriate classification of patients and improving their management in clinical settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Scores and predictive models to assess drug allergy development, including patient risk stratification, are scarce and usually apply logistic regression analysis. Over recent years, different methods encompassed under the general umbrella of artificial intelligence, including machine and deep learning, and artificial neural networks, are emerging as powerful tools to provide reliable and optimal models for clinical diagnosis, prediction, and precision medicine in different types of drug allergy.

SUMMARY

This review provides general concepts and current evidence supporting the potential utility of predictive models and artificial intelligence branches in drug allergy diagnosis.

Safe Penicillin Allergy Delabeling in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Ten percent of the population is labeled as allergic to penicillin(s), when in fact 90% of these labels are inappropriate. Recent studies have shown that inpatient delabeling by a direct drug challenge (dDC) is safe in low-risk patients. However, there is a need for outpatient and nonallergist delabeling.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety of delabeling low-risk adults by means of dDC in primary care.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to March 15, 2022 (updated June 5, 2023) for studies performing dDC in adults in primary care or other outpatient settings. Two researchers independently screened studies for eligibility. The data extraction and critical appraisal were performed by 1 reviewer, and we pooled the results in a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of 2138 results, 12 studies (1070 participants) were eligible for inclusion. Three studies evaluated delabeling in primary care and 9 studies in an outpatient hospital setting. There were no critical adverse events during dDC. No reaction occurred in 97.13% of the 1070 patients, who previously labeled as penicillin-allergic, and were safely delabeled. Ten patients (<1%) developed an immediate reaction: 3 had self-limiting reactions and 7 needed antihistaminics, steroids, epinephrine, and/or salbutamol.

CONCLUSIONS

No serious allergic reactions are observed during direct amoxicillin challenge in adults in an outpatient setting. However, with the exception of 1 recent report, these studies are of low to moderate quality. Nonspecialist delabeling is promising, but further research is required on correct risk stratification and safety assessment in large cohort studies evaluating dDC in primary care.

How to Define and Manage Low-Risk Drug Allergy Labels

Risk stratification in drug allergy implies that specific risk categories (eg, low, moderate, and high) classify historical drug hypersensitivity reactions. These risk categories can be based on reaction phenotypic characteristics, the timing of the reaction and evaluation, the required reaction management, and individual characteristics. Although a multitude of frameworks have been described in the literature, particularly for penicillin allergy labels, there has yet to be a global consensus, and approaches continue to vary between allergy centers. Immune-mediated drug allergies can sometimes be confirmed using skin testing, but a negative drug challenge is required to demonstrate tolerance and remove the allergy from the electronic health record ("delabel" the allergy). Even for quintessential IgE-mediated drug allergy, penicillin allergy, recent data reveal that a direct oral challenge, without prior skin testing, is an appropriate diagnostic strategy in those who are considered low-risk. Drug allergy pathogenesis and clinical manifestations may vary depending on the culprit drug, and as such, the optimal approach should be based on risk stratification that considers individual patient and reaction characteristics, the likely hypersensitivity reaction phenotype, the drug class, and the patient's clinical needs. This article will describe low-risk drug allergy labels, focusing on β-lactam and sulfonamide antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, iodinated contrast media, and common chemotherapeutics. This review will also address practical management approaches using currently available risk stratification and clinical decision tools.

Penicillin Allergy Impact and Management

There is international evidence that penicillin allergies are associated with inferior prescribing and patient outcomes. A host of tools now exist from assessment (risk assessment tools, clinical decision rules) to delabeling (the removal of a beta-lactam allergy via testing or medical reconciliation) to reduce the impact of these "labels" in the hospital and community setting, as a primary antimicrobial stewardship intervention.

Approach for delabeling beta-lactam allergy in children

A considerable number of pediatric patients treated with beta-lactam (BL) antibiotics develop delayed onset of skin rashes during the course of treatment. Although the most frequent cause of these symptoms is infectious, many cases are labeled as allergic reactions to these drugs. BL allergy labels could have a negative impact, as they imply avoidance of this group of drugs and the use of second-line antibiotics, leading to a potential increase in adverse effects and the utilization of less effective therapies. This constitutes a major public health concern and economic burden, as the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics can result in multidrug-resistant organisms and prolonged hospital stays. Therefore, it is crucial to delabel patients during childhood to avoid false labeling in adult life. Although the label of BL allergy is among the most frequent causes of allergy referral, its management remains controversial, and new diagnostic perspectives are changing the paradigm of managing BL allergies in children. Traditionally, drug provocation testing (DPT) was exclusively performed in patients who had previously obtained negative results from skin tests (STs). However, the sensitivity of STs is low, and the role of in vitro testing in the pediatric population is not well defined. Recent studies have demonstrated the safety of direct DPT without prior ST or serum tests for pediatric patients who report a low-risk reaction to BLs, which is cost-effective. However, there is still a debate on the optimal allergic workup to be performed in children with a benign immediate reaction and the management of children with severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions. In this review, we will discuss the impact of the label of BL allergy and the role of the different tools currently available to efficiently address BL allergy delabeling in children.

Assessing delayed penicillin hypersensitivity using the PENFAST+ score

Introduction

Approximately 10% of individuals report a suspected allergy to penicillin, but according to allergy work-ups, only 10%-15% of them are truly allergic. A clinical decision score, the PEN-FAST, was developed and validated to identify adults with low-risk penicillin allergy.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to improve the performance of the PEN-FAST score, particularly for those with delayed hypersensitivity (HS), by improving the negative predictive value.

Methods

STEP 1: Retrospective evaluation of the PEN-FAST score in patients with proven immediate and delayed penicillin allergy. STEP 2: Identification of additional criteria among Step 1 patients misclassified by PEN-FAST score. Development of the PEN-FAST+ score using multivariable logistic regression in a prospective cohort of patients with a suspicion of HS to penicillin. STEP 3: Comparison of diagnostic performances of PEN-FAST and PEN-FAST+ scores.

Results

The PEN-FAST score showed limitations in predicting the relapse of immediate skin HS or delayed maculopapular exanthema, with 28.6% and 38.4% of patients misclassified, respectively. We identified two potential additional criteria: skin rash lasting more than 7 days and immediate reaction occurring in less than 1 h (generalized or localized on palmoplantar area or scalp itching/heat feeling). A total of 32/252 (12.7%) patients were confirmed to be allergic to penicillin. With PEN-FAST, 37% of patients (n = 10) with delayed allergic penicillin HS were misclassified. With PEN-FAST+, 3 patients with delayed HS confirmed by a ST (11.1%) were misclassified. The AUC was significantly higher for PEN-FAST+ than PEN-FAST (85% vs. 72%, p = 0.03).

Qualitative analysis of healthcare provider perspectives to evaluating beta-lactam allergies

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of understanding of the barriers reported by healthcare providers when evaluating beta-lactam allergies, but knowledge of these barriers is required for practical and effective implementation interventions.

METHODS

Twenty-five healthcare providers, consisting of physicians, nurses and pharmacists practicing in the areas of intensive care, emergency medicine, infectious disease and general hospital practice, were interviewed between September 2021 and July 2023. Twenty-three of these providers were practising in the USA. A semi-structured interview guide grounded in the Theoretical Domain Framework was used for the interviews. Deductive and inductive analysis was performed on the interview transcripts, and translated into intervention recommendations using the Behaviour Change Wheel.

RESULTS

Widely held beliefs included a lack of clear policy for the evaluation of allergies, confusing or missing documentation of allergy information, confidence in their own and their colleagues' ability to evaluate allergies when information is available, and pharmacists as the provider most equipped to evaluate beta-lactam allergies.

CONCLUSIONS

Health systems should adopt and disseminate policies for the evaluation of beta-lactam allergies, and promote the use of pharmacists in the evaluation of drug allergies when possible. Allergy sections of electronic health records should be reworked to encourage unambiguous documentation of allergy reactions and support using previously tolerated beta-lactam antibiotics.

Efficacy of a Clinical Decision Rule to Enable Direct Oral Challenge in Patients With Low-Risk Penicillin Allergy: The PALACE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Fewer than 5% of patients labeled with a penicillin allergy are truly allergic. The standard of care to remove the penicillin allergy label in adults is specialized testing involving prick and intradermal skin testing followed by an oral challenge with penicillin. Skin testing is resource intensive, limits practice to specialist-trained physicians, and restricts the global population who could undergo penicillin allergy delabeling.

Objective

To determine whether a direct oral penicillin challenge is noninferior to the standard of care of penicillin skin testing followed by an oral challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This parallel, 2-arm, noninferiority, open-label, multicenter, international randomized clinical trial occurred in 6 specialized centers, 3 in North America (US and Canada) and 3 in Australia, from June 18, 2021, to December 2, 2022. Eligible adults had a PEN-FAST score lower than 3. PEN-FAST is a prospectively derived and internationally validated clinical decision rule that enables point-of-care risk assessment for adults reporting penicillin allergies.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned to either direct oral challenge with penicillin (intervention arm) or a standard-of-care arm of penicillin skin testing followed by oral challenge with penicillin (control arm).

Main Outcome and Measure

The primary outcome was a physician-verified positive immune-mediated oral penicillin challenge within 1 hour postintervention in the intention-to-treat population. Noninferiority was achieved if a 1-sided 95% CI of the risk difference (RD) did not exceed 5 percentage points (pp).

Results

A total of 382 adults were randomized, with 377 patients (median [IQR] age, 51 [35-65] years; 247 [65.5%] female) included in the analysis: 187 in the intervention group and 190 in the control group. Most patients had a PEN-FAST score of 0 or 1. The primary outcome occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the intervention group and 1 patient (0.5%) in the control group, with an RD of 0.0084 pp (90% CI, -1.22 to 1.24 pp). The 1-sided 95% CI was below the noninferiority margin of 5 pp. In the 5 days following the oral penicillin challenge, 9 immune-mediated adverse events were recorded in the intervention group and 10 in the control group (RD, -0.45 pp; 95% CI, -4.87 to 3.96 pp). No serious adverse events occurred.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, direct oral penicillin challenge in patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy was noninferior compared with standard-of-care skin testing followed by oral challenge. In patients with a low-risk history, direct oral penicillin challenge is a safe procedure to facilitate the removal of a penicillin allergy label.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04454229.

Evaluating the PEN-FAST Clinical Decision-making Tool to Enhance Penicillin Allergy Delabeling

This cohort study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of PEN-FAST as a clinical decision-making tool to enhance penicillin allergy evaluation.

Use of a beta-lactam graded challenge process for inpatients with self-reported penicillin allergies at an academic medical center

Background

The Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP) at Nebraska Medicine collaborated with a board-certified allergist to develop a penicillin allergy guidance document for treating inpatients with self-reported allergy. This guidance contains an algorithm for evaluating and safely challenging penicillin-allergic patients with beta-lactams without inpatient allergy consults being available.

Methods

Following multi-disciplinary review, an order set for beta-lactam graded challenges (GC) was implemented in 2018. This contains recommended monitoring and detailed medication orders to challenge patients with various beta-lactam agents. Inpatient orders for GC from 3/2018-6/2022 were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate ordering characteristics, outcomes of the challenge, and whether documentation of the allergy history was updated. All beta-lactam challenges administered to inpatients were included, and descriptive statistics were performed.

Results

Overall, 157 GC were administered; 13 with oral amoxicillin and 144 with intravenous (IV) beta-lactams. Ceftriaxone accounted for the most challenges (43%). All oral challenges were recommended by an Infectious Diseases consult service, as were a majority of IV challenges (60%). Less than one in five were administered in an ICU (19%). Almost all (n = 150, 96%) were tolerated without any adverse event. There was one reaction (1%) of hives and six (4%) involving a rash, none of which had persistent effects. Allergy information was updated in the electronic health record after 92% of the challenges.

Conclusion

Both intravenous and oral beta-lactam graded challenges were implemented successfully in a hospital without a regular inpatient allergy consult service. They were well-tolerated, administered primarily in non-ICU settings, and were often ordered by non-specialist services. In patients with a self-reported penicillin allergy, these results demonstrate the utility and safety of a broadly adopted beta-lactam GC process.

The effect of applied force and device design on skin prick test performance

BACKGROUND

Skin prick tests (SPTs) are difficult to standardize, and SPT performance mainly relies on the clinician's expertise. So far, the effect of various factors such as device types, shape, variety of material type, and applied force on the performance of SPT has not been extensively investigated.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of various factors, including type or shape of devices, material type, and applied force, on the performance of SPT.

METHODS

Four SPT devices with different shapes and materials were applied on 12 subjects under 3 different applied forces (30, 45, and 60 g). The results were compared with standard method using an ALK lancet pricked by an experienced clinician.

RESULTS

A total of 480 pricks were conducted on 12 subjects. The wheal sizes and sensitivities of all devices increased with higher applied forces. The thinner lancets with a long sharp tip had relatively higher analytical sensitivities and provided 100% sensitivity at applied forces of 45 g and above. The pain scores of all devices at applied forces of 30 to 60 g ranged from 1.00 to 1.81 with minimal incidences of bleeding (0%-4.17%), whereas the pain score of the standard method by the ALK lancet was 2.08 with much higher incidences of bleeding at 27.08%.

CONCLUSION

The type/shape of the SPT device and applied force are the essential factors affecting the performance of SPT. The study result could pave the way toward higher performance and standardized SPT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Thai Clinical Trials Registry identification number: TCTR20220627004 (https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20220627004).

Self-reported beta-lactam allergy in government and private hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa

BACKGROUND

Up to a quarter of inpatients in high-income countries (HICs) self-report beta-lactam allergy (BLA), which if incorrect,increases the use of alternative antibiotics, worsening individual health outcomes and driving bacterial resistance. In HICs, up to 95% ofself-reported BLAs are incorrect. The epidemiology of BLA in low- and middle-income African countries is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the epidemiology and de-labelling outcomes of self-reported BLA in hospitalised South African (SA) patients.

METHODS

Point-prevalence surveys were conducted at seven hospitals (adult, paediatric, government and privately funded, district andtertiary level) in Cape Town, SA, between April 2019 and June 2021. Ward prescription records and in-person interviews were conductedto identify and risk-stratify BLA patients using the validated PEN-FAST tool. De-labelling was attempted at the tertiary allergy clinic atGroote Schuur Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 1 486 hospital inpatients were surveyed (1 166 adults and 320 children). Only 48 patients (3.2%) self-reported a BLA,with a higher rate in private than in government-funded hospitals (6.3% v. 2.8%; p=0.014). Using the PEN-FAST tool, only 10.4% (n=5/48)of self-reported BLA patients were classified as high risk for true penicillin hypersensitivity. Antibiotics were prescribed to 70.8% (n=34/48)of self-reported BLA patients, with 64.7% (n=22/34) receiving a beta-lactam. Despite three attempts to contact patients for de-labelling atthe allergy clinic, only 3/36 underwent in vivo testing, with no positive results, and 1 patient proceeded to a negative oral challenge.

CONCLUSION

Unlike HICs, self-reported BLA is low among inpatients in SA. The majority of those who self-reported BLA were low risk fortype 1 hypersensitivity, but outpatient de-labelling efforts were largely unsuccessful.

Advances in the Understanding of Drug Hypersensitivity: 2012 Through 2022

Over the last decade there have been key advances in understanding mechanisms, risk, and consequences of both true immunological drug hypersensitivity and unverified drug allergy labels that have changed clinical practice. This has been facilitated by the widespread adoption of electronic health records (EHRs). The vast majority of EHR drug allergy labels are unverified and cause significant morbidity from unnecessary avoidance of optimal drug therapy. There has also been significant movement in our understanding of mechanisms of drug hypersensitivity that, in addition to advancing our understanding of the pathogenesis of immediate and delayed reactions, have guided preventive efforts, diagnostic procedures, and clinical management. More widespread adoption, including scale-up of "allergy" delabeling and appropriate management, specifically for antibiotics, opiates, radiocontrast, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, will be necessary to improve patient outcomes over the next decade. This will require further engagement and collaboration between primary care health care providers, allergists, and other specialists.

Advances in immunoglobulin E mediated antibiotic allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to identify recent advances in our understanding and management of immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated antibiotic allergy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Antibiotics remain a leading cause of fatal anaphylaxis reported to the FDA. However, recent advances have defined the features of adult and pediatric patients without true IgE-mediated allergy or any mechanism of anaphylaxis when tested. This has created opportunities to use direct challenges to disprove these allergies at the point-of-care and improves antibiotic stewardship. Additional advances have highlighted cross-reactive structural considerations within classes of drugs, in particular the R1 side-chain of cephalosporins, that appear to drive true immune-mediated cross-reactivity. Further advances in risk-based approaches to skin testing, phenotyping, and re-exposure challenges are needed to standardize antibiotic allergy evaluation.

SUMMARY

Recent advances in defining true IgE-mediated drug allergy have helped to identify patients unlikely to be skin-test positive. In turn, this has identified patients who can skip skin testing and proceed to direct ingestion challenge using history risk-based approaches. The ability to identify the small number of patients with true IgE-mediated allergy and study their natural history over time, as well as the vast majority without true allergy will facilitate important and novel mechanistic discoveries.

Improving antimicrobial stewardship with penicillin allergy testing: a review of current practices and unmet needs

Penicillin allergy, the most frequently reported drug allergy, has been associated with suboptimal antibiotic therapy, increased antimicrobial resistance, increased rates of Clostridioides difficile colonization and infection, as well as extended hospital length of stay and increased cost. Although up to 10% of all patients may report penicillin allergy, most penicillin allergies are not confirmed. As such, most patients with a penicillin allergy can still safely use penicillin and related drugs following a more precise assessment. Herein, we review the current practices and unmet needs in penicillin allergy testing. The diagnostic algorithm is mostly based on a clinical history assessment followed by in vivo testing, i.e. skin test and/or drug challenge. As these tests are labour and resource intensive, there is increased interest in point-of-care penicillin allergy de-labelling solutions incorporated into Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes including digital assessment tools. These can be locally parameterized on the basis of characteristics of target populations, incidence of specific allergies and local antibiotic usage to perform clinical risk stratification. Safely ruling out any residual risk remains essential and in vivo drug challenge and/or skin testing should be systematically encouraged. Gradual understanding and convergence of the risk stratification of the clinical presentation of penicillin allergy is enabling a wider implementation of this essential aspect of antimicrobial stewardship through digitalized decision tools and in vivo testing. More research is needed to deliver point of care in vitro diagnostic tools to democratize this de-labelling practice, which would be highly beneficial to patient care. This progress, together with better education of patients and clinicians about the availability, efficacy and safety of penicillin allergy testing, will increase the dissemination of penicillin allergy assessment as an important component of Antimicrobial Stewardship Programmes.