Use and Interpretation of Acute and Baseline Tryptase in Perioperative Hypersensitivity and Anaphylaxis

Relationship between Tryptase and Hypotension in Anaphylaxis during Anesthesia

INTRODUCTION

Hypotension is a cardiovascular symptom that appears at the onset of anaphylaxis. It is considered an important factor as it affects the severity of anaphylaxis; however, its details remain to be elucidated. In this study, we investigated the characteristics of hypotension at the onset of anaphylaxis during anesthesia, along with the relationship between hypotension, tryptase and histamine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The minimum systolic blood pressures of patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis using the clinical diagnostic criteria of the World Allergy Organization guidelines were extracted from electronic anesthesia records. We analyzed changes in tryptase and histamine that were measured after the onset of anaphylaxis. We analyzed the relationship of tryptase and histamine with the minimum systolic blood pressure and the severity of anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

Of 55,996 patients, 25 were diagnosed with anaphylaxis during anesthesia (0.045%). Among these patients, the minimum systolic blood pressure was less than 90 mmHg. Furthermore, the minimum systolic blood pressure was inversely correlated with tryptase levels immediately to 1 hour, and 2 to 4 hours after the onset of anaphylaxis. The minimum systolic blood pressure was inversely correlated with the severity of anaphylaxis. The severity of anaphylaxis was positively correlated with tryptase levels immediately to 1 hour, and 2 to 4 hours after the onset of anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Hypotension tended to reflect the severity of anaphylaxis. Tryptase is an adjunct in the diagnosis of hypotension and may be a useful indicator of the severity of anaphylaxis. A larger-scale study is needed to validate these results.

Detecting Changes in Mast Cell Numbers Versus Activation in Human Disease: A Roadblock for Current Biomarkers?

The pathophysiology of mast cell (MC)-driven disorders is diverse, ranging from localized reactions to systemic disorders caused by abnormal accumulation and activation in multiorgan systems. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is critically important, both for informing treatment and objective assessment of treatment outcomes. As new therapeutics are being developed to deplete MCs or silence them (eg, by engaging inhibitory receptors that block activation), new biomarkers are needed that can distinguish between MC activation versus burden. Serum tryptase is the gold standard for assessing both MC burden and activation; however, commercial tryptase assays have limitations related to timing of release, lack of discernment between inactive (α) and active (β) forms of tryptase, and interpatient variability of baseline levels. Alternative approaches to measuring MC activation include urinary MC mediators, flow cytometry-based assays or gene expression profiling. Additional markers of MC activation are needed for use in clinical diagnostics, to help selection of treatment of MC diseases, and for assessing outcomes of therapy. We review the spectrum of disorders with known or suspected MC contribution, describe the utility and limitations of current MC markers and assays, and discuss the need for new markers that can differentiate between MC activation and burden.

A US-Based Multicenter Retrospective Report of Perioperative Anaphylaxis, 2010-2021

BACKGROUND

US-based perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) studies are limited to single-center experiences. A recent report found that a serum acute tryptase (sAT) >9.8 ng/mL or mast cell activation (MCA) can predict POA causal agent identification. Urinary mast cell mediator metabolites (uMC) have not been studied in POA.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the epidemiologic data of POA, to determine if sAT or MCA can predict suspected causal agent identification, and to evaluate uMC utility in POA.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective multicenter review of POA cases that were subcategorized by suspected causal agent identification status. sAT, MCA (defined as sAT >2 + 1.2 × serum baseline tryptase), and uMC (N-methylhistamine [N-MH], 11β-prostaglandin-F2α [11β-PGF2α], leukotriene E4 [LTE4]) were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 100 patients (mean age 52 [standard deviation 17] years, 94% adult, 50% female, 90% White, and 2% Hispanic) with POA, 73% had an sAT available, 41% had MCA, 16% had uMC available, and 50% had an identifiable suspected cause. POA cases with an identifiable suspected cause had a positive MCA status (100% vs 78%; P = .01) compared with POA with an unidentifiable cause. An elevated median sAT did not predict causal agent identification. Positive uMC were not associated with suspected causal agent identification during POA. Patients with positive uMC had a higher median sAT (30 vs 6.45 ng/mL; P = .001) and MCA status (96% vs 12%; P = .001) compared with negative uMC patients. Patients with POA had an elevated acute/baseline uMC ratios: 11β-PGF2α ratio > 1.6, N-MH ratio >1.7, and LTE4 ratio >1.8.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of MCA in POA is associated with suspected causal agent identification. Positive uMC possibly correlate with a higher sAT level and MCA status but require further study. The authors suggest applying an acute/baseline uMC ratio (11β-PGF2α ratio >1.6, N-MH ratio >1.7, and LTE4 ratio >1.87) in patients with POA for MCA when a tryptase level is inconclusive during POA evaluations.

Serum MRGPRX2 as a Long-term Biomarker for Iodinated Contrast Media-Induced Anaphylaxis

The diagnosis of anaphylaxis is based on the clinical history. The utility of tryptase measurements in clinical setting is limited. Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor-X2 (MRGPRX2) is expressed in mast cells and is involved in the degranulation of these cells. We evaluated the potential of MRGPRX2 as a diagnostic biomarker in patients with iodinated contrast media (ICM)-induced immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs). A total of 173 patients with documented ICM-induced IHR within 4 months from registration were enrolled and skin tests for the culprit ICM were performed. The time interval was evaluated as the duration between the onset of ICM-induced IHR and the measurement of serum MRGPRX2 levels. Serum MRGPRX2 concentration was determined using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit. Of the 173 patients, 33 and 140 were included in the anaphylaxis and non-anaphylaxis groups, respectively. Serum MRGPRX2 levels were significantly higher in the anaphylaxis than in the non-anaphylaxis group (29.9 ± 24.1 vs. 20.7±17.5, P = 0.044). Serum MRGPRX2 showed a moderate predictive ability for anaphylaxis, with an area under the curve of 0.61 (P = 0.058). When groups were classified based on the time interval, T1(0-2months) and T2 (2-4months), patients with anaphylaxis had higher MRGPRX2 levels compared to the non-anaphylaxis group in the T2 group (36.5±19.2 vs. 20.5±19.0, P = 0.035). This pilot study shows that serum MRGPRX2 is a potential long-term biomarker for predicting anaphylaxis, particularly ICM-induced anaphylaxis. Further studies are needed to determine the role of MRGPRX2 in anaphylaxis in a larger population of patients with various drug-induced IHRs.

Biomarkers of immediate drug hypersensitivity

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) are a burden for patients and the health systems. This problem increases when taking into account that only a small proportion of patients initially labelled as allergic are finally confirmed after an allergological workup. The diverse nature of drugs involved will imply different interactions with the immunological system. Therefore, IDHRs can be produced by a wide array of mechanisms mediated by the drug interaction with specific antibodies or directly on effector target cells. These heterogeneous mechanisms imply an enhanced complexity for an accurate diagnosis and the identification of the phenotype and endotype at early stages of the reaction is of vital importance. Currently, several endophenotypic categories (type I IgE/non-IgE, cytokine release, Mast-related G-protein coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) or Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition and their associated biomarkers have been proposed. A precise knowledge of endotypes will permit to discriminate patients within the same phenotype, which is crucial in order to personalise diagnosis, future treatment and prevention to improve the patient's quality of life.

Paediatric perioperative hypersensitivity: the performance of the current consensus formula and the effect of uneventful anaesthesia on serum tryptase

Background

Paired sampling of acute (aST) and basal (bST) serum tryptase has been recommended when investigating patients with a suspected perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) reaction. In the current consensus formula, an aST value exceeding (1.2×bST+2) confirms mast cell activation. The current consensus formula has been validated in adults but not in children.

Methods

We prospectively included 96 children who underwent uneventful anaesthesia and sampled serum tryptase at baseline and 60-90 min after induction. Tryptase changes were then compared with those in 94 children with suspected POH who were retrospectively included from four reference centres in Belgium, France, and Denmark.

Results

We observed a median decrease in serum tryptase during uneventful anaesthesia of 0.41 μg L-1 (-15.9%; P<0.001). The current consensus formula identified mast cell activation in 31.9% of paediatric POH patients. After generating receiver operating characteristic curves through 100 repeated five-fold cross-validation, aST>bST+0.71 was identified as the optimal cut-off point to identify mast cell activation. This new paediatric formula has higher sensitivity than the current consensus formula (53.2% vs 31.9%, P<0.001) with a specificity of 96.9%. Analysis in the subpopulation where a culprit was identified and in grade 3-4 reactions similarly yielded higher sensitivity for the new paediatric formula when compared with the current consensus formula (85.3% vs 61.8%; P=0.008 and 78.0% vs 48.8%; P<0.001, respectively). Internally cross-validated sensitivity and specificity were 53.3% and 93.3%, respectively.

Conclusions

This is the first study suggesting the need for an adjusted formula in children to identify perioperative mast cell activation as tryptase is significantly lowered during uneventful anaesthesia. We propose a new formula (aST>bST+0.71) which performs significantly better than the current consensus formula in our multicentric paediatric population.

Differential presentation of hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin: Phenotypes, endotypes, and management with desensitization

BACKGROUND

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to platinum-based drugs are heterogenous and restrict their access, and drug desensitization (DD) has provided a ground-breaking procedure for their re-introduction, although the response is heterogeneous. We aimed to identify the phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers of reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin and their response to DD.

METHODS

Seventy-nine patients presenting with DHRs to oxaliplatin (N = 46) and carboplatin (N = 33) were evaluated at the Allergy Departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Spain. Patient symptoms, skin testing, biomarkers, and outcomes of 267 DDs were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Oxaliplatin-reactive patients presented with type I (74%), cytokine release reaction (CRR) (11%), and mixed (Mx) (15%) phenotypes. In contrast, carboplatin reactive patients presented with predominantly type I (85%) and Mx (15%) but no CRRs. Out of 267 DDs, breakthrough reactions (BTRs) to oxaliplatin occurred twice as frequently as carboplatin (32% vs. 15%; p < .05). Phenotype switching from type I to another phenotype was observed in 46% of oxaliplatin DDs compared to 21% of carboplatin DDs. Tryptase was elevated in type I and Mx reactions, and IL-6 in CRR and Mx, indicating different mechanisms and endotypes.

CONCLUSION

Carboplatin and oxaliplatin induced three different types of reactions with defined phenotypes and endotypes amendable to DD. Although most of the initial reactions for both were type I, oxaliplatin presented with unique CRR reactions. During DD, carboplatin reactive patients presented mostly type I BTR, while oxaliplatin-reactive patients frequently switched from type I to CRR, providing a critical difference and the need for personalized DD protocols.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Anaphylaxis mortality in the perioperative setting: Epidemiology, elicitors, risk factors and knowledge gaps

Perioperative anaphylaxis (PA) is a severe condition that can be fatal, but data on PA mortality are scarce. The aim of this article is to review the epidemiology, elicitors and risk factors for PA mortality and identify knowledge gaps and areas for improvement regarding the management of severe PA. PA affects about 100 cases per million procedures. Mortality is rare, estimated at 3 to 5 cases per million procedures, but the PA mortality rate is higher than for other anaphylaxis aetiologies, at 1.4% to 4.8%. However, the data are incomplete. Published data mention neuromuscular blocking agents and antibiotics, mainly penicillin and cefazolin, as the main causes of fatal PA. Reported risk factors for fatal PA vary in different countries. Most frequently occurring comorbidities are obesity, male gender, cardiovascular diseases and ongoing treatment with beta-blockers. However, there are no clues about how these factors interact and the impact of individual risk factors. The pathophysiology of fatal PA is still not completely known. Genetic factors such as deficiency in PAF-acetyl hydrolase and hereditary alpha-tryptasemia, have been reported as modulators of severe anaphylaxis and possible targets for specific treatments. Our review underlines unmet needs in the field of fatal PA. Although we confirmed the need for timely administration of an adequate dose of adrenaline and the proper infusion of fluids, there is no evidence-based data on the proper dose of intravenous titrated adrenaline and which clinical manifestations would flag the need for fluid therapy. There are no large clinical studies supporting the administration of alternative vasopressors, such as glucagon and methylene blue. Further research on pathophysiological mechanisms of PA and its severity may address these issues and help clinicians to define new therapeutic approaches.

Diagnostic Significance of Tryptase for Suspected Mast Cell Disorders

Tryptase has proven to be a very useful and specific marker to demonstrate mast cell activation and degranulation when an acute (i.e., within 4 h after the event) and baseline value (i.e., at least 24 h after the event) are compared and meet the consensus formula (i.e., an increase of 20% + 2). The upper limit of normal determined by the manufacturer is 11.4 ng/mL; however, this boundary has been the subject of debate. According to ECNM and AIM experts, the normal range of baseline tryptase should be 1 to 15 ng/mL. A genetic trait, hereditary alpha tryptasemia, characterized by an increased alpha coding TPSAB1 copy number is associated with a baseline value above 8 ng/mL. Elevated tryptase can also be found in chronic kidney disease, obesity, and hematological neoplasms. A tryptase > 20 ng/mL serves as a minor criterion to diagnose systemic mastocytosis and an increase in tryptase > 20% + 2 during an acute event is a required criterion in the diagnosis of mast cell activation syndrome. The goal of this review is to demonstrate the (in)significance of tryptase using some clinical vignettes and to provide a practical guide on how to manage and interpret an elevated tryptase level.

Interleukin-6 as a biomarker of hypersensitivity reactions in chemotherapeutics and monoclonal antibodies

BACKGROUND

In recent years, a new type of immediate hypersensitivity reaction known as cytokine release began to emerge, and within this phenotype of reactions, interleukin-6 is the most frequently associated with the presence during drug administration. Chemotherapeutic agents (QT) and monoclonal antibodies.

OBJECTIVE

Determine interleukin-6 levels in hypersensitivity reactions to QT and monoclonal antibodies.

METHODS

Observational and prospective study that was carried out from March 1, 2021 to March 1, 2022 in a university hospital in northeastern Mexico. Symptoms, severity, interleukin-6 levels, and skin tests of hypersensitivity reaction were evaluated at QT and monoclonal antibodies.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients with oncological disease were included, the most frequent being ovarian cancer. Symptoms as initial hypersensitivity reaction were neuromuscular in taxanes and cutaneous in Platinums.41.5% presented elevation of interleukin-6, and it was found more frequently in presence of metastases. Positive skin tests were found more frequently in the carboplatin and doxorubicin groups. The most frequently presented phenotype was type I in paclitaxel, carboplatin, and doxorubicin, and mixed-reaction (type I and cytokine release) in oxaliplatin.

CONCLUSION

With the increasing prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions to biologic and antineoplastic therapies, interleukin-6 should be recognized as a biomarker in immediate hypersensitivity reactions to QT and monoclonal antibodies.

Serum tryptase and drug hypersensitivity: why, how and what? A systematic review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Serum tryptase, a mast cell marker, provides clues for the mechanism, severity, and management of drug hypersensitivity induced by immunoglobulin E dependent or independent mast cell activation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The interpretation of serum tryptase levels has been challenged during the last 2 years by major advances in tryptase genetics and their rapid incorporation into clinical practice. On the contrary, new pathophysiological insight into nonmast cell-dependent immediate hypersensitivity has been gained.

SUMMARY

This review provides up-to-date information on the pathophysiology and recommended use and interpretation of tryptase in the context of drug hypersensitivity reactions as a function of their endotype.

Perioperative anaphylaxis: when the allergological work-up goes negative

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) is rare but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Patients are referred to the allergist to identify the mechanism of the reaction, the causative agent and make recommendations regarding subsequent anaesthesia. Despite a well conducted allergological evaluation, the causative agent is not found in 30-60% of these reactions, leaving patients without a well established diagnosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several mechanisms can induce POA. In addition to the well known IgE-mediated reactions, IgG-mediated reaction, MRGPR-X2-related reaction or nonspecific histamine release may be involved. These situations are not easily assessed by the allergological workup.

SUMMARY

When the allergological workup is negative, the situation should be reassessed with the team present at the time of the reaction to confirm the reality of the hypersensitivity reaction and to search for a possible differential diagnosis. If POA is confirmed, the allergological evaluation should be repeated, ensuring proper execution according to current guidelines and including the search for hidden allergens. Specific IgE assays or basophil activation tests may be of interest. In case of negative results, a closely monitored drug challenge test, in coordination with the anaesthesia teams, may be useful to avoid the exclusion of any drug injected during the reaction.

Identifying and Managing Those at Risk for Vaccine-Related Allergy and Anaphylaxis

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to vaccines, the most severe of which is anaphylaxis, are uncommon events occurring in fewer than 1 in a million doses administered. These reactions are infrequently immunoglobulin E-mediated. Because they are unlikely to recur, a reaction to a single dose of a vaccine is rarely a contraindication to redosing. This narrative review article contextualizes the recent knowledge we have gained from the coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rollout of the new mRNA platform with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines within the much broader context of what is known about immediate reactions to other vaccinations of routine and global importance. We focus on what is known about evidence-based approaches to diagnosis and management and what is new in our understanding of mechanisms of immediate vaccine reactions. Specifically, we review the epidemiology of immediate hypersensitivity vaccine reactions, differential diagnosis for immune-mediated and nonimmune reaction clinical phenotypes, including how to recognize immunization stress-related responses. In addition, we highlight what is known about mechanisms and review the rare but important contribution of excipient allergies and specifically when to consider testing for them as well as other key features that contribute to safe evaluation and management.

Suspected perioperative anaphylaxis: are we making the correct diagnosis?

We provide a commentary on aspects of a prospective study of the epidemiology of perioperative anaphylaxis in Japan (Japanese Epidemiologic Study for Perioperative Anaphylaxis [JESPA]). Accurate diagnosis of perioperative anaphylaxis is important for research but essential for clinical safety. We evaluate the diagnostic approach used in the JESPA study and caution against over-reliance on diagnostic tests that lack sensitivity and specificity when clinical data suggest an immediate perioperative hypersensitivity reaction is likely.

Investigating the optimal diagnostic value of histamine for diagnosing perioperative hypersensitivity: a prospective, observational study

Although several guidelines recommend measuring blood tryptase and histamine concentrations to diagnose perioperative anaphylaxis (POA), tryptase measurement is more common. The appropriate timing of blood collection and the diagnostic threshold for histamine measurement are still controversial. To address these issues, histamine concentrations in patients with anaphylaxis and those with anaphylaxis-uncertain were compared in our previous study, the Japanese Epidemiologic Study for Perioperative Anaphylaxis (JESPA). However, because we could not rule out the possibility that the anaphylactic-uncertain group included anaphylactic patients, histamine concentrations were measured in patients who underwent general anesthesia with no complications as controls in the present study. Histamine levels were measured at anesthesia induction (baseline), 30 min (first point), and 2 h (second point) after the start of surgery in 30 control patients. Histamine concentrations in controls were lower than in patients with POA in JESPA at the first and second points. At the first point, a threshold of 1.5 ng/ml resulted in sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 100%. A threshold of 1.1 ng/ml at the second point resulted in sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 87%. Measurement of histamine concentrations within two hours after symptom onset might help diagnose POA.

Anaphylaxis: Revision of the Brighton collaboration case definition

The Brighton Collaboration (BC) has formulated a number of case definitions which have primarily been applied to adverse events of special interest in the context of vaccine safety surveillance. This is a revision of the 2007 BC case definition for anaphylaxis. Recently, the BC definition has been widely used for evaluating reports of suspected anaphylaxis following COVID-19 vaccination. This has led to debate about the performance of the BC definition in comparison with those from the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease/Food Allergy Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO). BC convened an expert working group to revise the case definition based on their usual process of literature review and expert consensus. This manuscript presents the outcome of this process and proposes a revised case definition for anaphylaxis. Major and minor criteria have been re-evaluated with an emphasis on the reporting of observable clinical signs, rather than subjective symptoms, and a clearer approach to the ascertainment of levels of certainty is provided. The BC case definition has also been aligned with other contemporary and international case definitions for anaphylaxis.

The Japanese Epidemiologic Study for Perioperative Anaphylaxis, a prospective nationwide study: allergen exposure, epidemiology, and diagnosis of anaphylaxis during general anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of perioperative anaphylaxis is often challenging. This study describes the utility of a newly developed tool for identifying patients with a high possibility of anaphylaxis, and aimed to investigate the frequency of anaphylaxis with each drug during the perioperative period in Japan.

METHODS

This study included patients with anaphylaxis of Grade 2 or higher severity during general anaesthesia at 42 facilities across Japan in 2019 and 2020. We developed and adopted a unique objective evaluation tool yielding a composite score for diagnosing anaphylaxis, which includes the results of skin tests and basophil activation tests, and clinical scores for perioperative anaphylaxis. The number of cases using each drug and the total number of anaphylaxis cases were investigated to calculate the frequency of anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

General anaesthesia was performed in 218 936 cases, which included 55 patients with suspected perioperative anaphylaxis. The developed composite score diagnosed 43 of them with a high probability of anaphylaxis. The causative agent was identified in 32 cases. Plasma histamine levels showed high diagnostic accuracy for anaphylaxis. The top causative agents were rocuronium (10 cases in 210 852 patients, 0.005%), sugammadex (7 cases in 150 629 patients, 0.005%), and cefazolin (7 cases in 106 005 patients, 0.007%).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a composite tool to diagnose anaphylaxis, and found that the combination of tryptase levels, skin testing, and basophil activation testing results and clinical score improved the certainty of anaphylaxis diagnosis. The incidence of perioperative anaphylaxis in our study was 1 in about 5000 general anaesthesia cases.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000035350.

A quarter of a century fundamental and translational research in perioperative hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis at the Antwerp university hospital, a Belgian Centre of Excellence of the World Allergy Organization

Perioperative hypersensitivity constitutes an important health issue, with potential dramatic consequences of diagnostic mistakes. However, safe and correct diagnosis is not always straightforward, mainly because of the application of incorrect nomenclature, absence of easy accessible in-vitro/ex-vivo tests and uncertainties associated with the non-irritating skin test concentrations. In this editorial we summarize the time line, seminal findings, and major realizations of 25 years of research on the mechanisms, diagnosis, and management of perioperative hypersensitivity.

Ten-year outcomes of Perioperative Anaphylaxis Workup Study in Hong Kong (PAWS-HK): Performance of diagnostic modalities

BACKGROUND

Studies on perioperative anaphylaxis (PA) in Asia are lacking. Furthermore, allergy workup for PA has largely been limited to the "silver standard" of skin tests (ST). Using in vitro tests as an adjunct to ST may improve and overcome these diagnostic challenges.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical characteristics and diagnostic tests of patients with suspected PA through the Perioperative Anaphylaxis Workup Study in Hong Kong cohort.

METHODS

Patients with a diagnosis of PA over a 10-year period were recruited into the Perioperative Anaphylaxis Workup Study in Hong Kong. We reviewed the medical records, tryptase elevation, and diagnostic tests including ST, specific immunoglobulin E, and basophil activation tests (BAT).

RESULTS

In 151 patients with PA, diagnosis was reached in three-fourths of the cases (113/151, 74.8%). The most common culprits identified were neuromuscular blocking agents (25.8%), β lactams (17.2%) and chlorhexidine (13.9%). Severe anaphylaxis was associated with female sex, older age, elevated acute tryptase levels, and more cardiovascular manifestations during induction. Skin tests remained the most sensitive diagnostic modality overall (66.2%). BAT showed better performance for chlorhexidine and gelofusine anaphylaxis, with sensitivity of 80.0% and 79.6%, respectively. Specific Immunoglobulin E indicated even higher sensitivity (95.2%) than did ST (85.0%) and BAT (80.0%) for chlorhexidine anaphylaxis but performed poorly for other drugs.

CONCLUSION

Neuromuscular blocking agents remain the most common culprit in PA. There was a higher prevalence of gelofusine anaphylaxis in our cohort than was seen in the literature. Skin tests remain the most sensitive testing modality. In vitro tests for chlorhexidine and gelofusine showed promising results, but more studies to further elucidate its use are warranted.

Interleukin-6 and cytokine release syndrome: A new understanding in drug hypersensitivity reactions

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are historically thought to be because of immunoglobulin E (IgE) cross-linking, causing mast cell degranulation and release of mediators like tryptase and histamine. With the increasing use of monoclonal antibodies, it has become apparent that some patients present atypical features during immediate DHRs, including occurrence in initial exposure, a lack of urticaria and angioedema, and the presence of fever, chills, rigors and musculoskeletal pain as the predominant symptoms. This observation led to the recognition of a novel phenotype of immediate DHRs called cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Other types of immediate DHRs include infusion-related reactions (which present similarly to CRS), and mixed reactions (which share overlapping features of both type 1 reactions and CRS). Desensitization to culprit drugs can be a lifesaving option in patients who develop immediate DHRs to first-line treatment. Whereas robust data are supporting the safety and efficacy of drug desensitization, breakthrough reactions can still occur and CRS seems to be a more common cause than type 1 reactions. Tryptase has been the only available biomarker for immediate DHRs and is associated with type 1 reactions. Emerging evidence consistently found the association between increased serum interleukin 6 level and DHR-related CRS, suggesting that interleukin 6 can be a novel biomarker, in addition to tryptase, to distinguish various types of DHRs. In the era of precision medicine, phenotyping and endotyping hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies using validated biomarkers should be part of routine drug allergy care.

Tryptase in type I hypersensitivity

Tryptase is currently the main mast cell biomarker available in medical practice. Tryptase determination is a quantitative test performed in serum or plasma for the diagnosis, stratification, and follow-up of mast cell-related conditions. The continuous secretion of monomeric α and β protryptases forms the baseline tryptase level. Transient, activation-induced release of tryptase is known as acute tryptase. Because mast cells are tissue-resident cells, the detection of an acute tryptase release in the bloodstream is protracted, with a delay of 15 to 20 minutes after the onset of symptoms and a peak at approximately 1 hour. Constitutive release of tryptase is a marker of mast cell number and activity status, whereas transient release of mature tryptase is a marker of mast cell degranulation. Although consensual as a concept, the application of this statement in clinical practice has only been clarified since 2020. For baseline tryptase to be used as a biomarker, reference values need to be established. In contrast, defining a transient increase using acute tryptase can only be achieved as a function of the baseline status.

Allergenic and Mas-Related G Protein-Coupled Receptor X2-Activating Properties of Drugs: Resolving the Two

Since the seminal description implicating occupation of the Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) in mast cell (MC) degranulation by drugs, many investigations have been undertaken into this potential new endotype of immediate drug hypersensitivity reaction. However, current evidence for this mechanism predominantly comes from (mutant) animal models or in vitro studies, and irrefutable clinical evidence in humans is still missing. Moreover, translation of these preclinical findings into clinical relevance in humans is difficult and should be critically interpreted. Starting from our clinical priorities and experience with flow-assisted functional analyses of basophils and cultured human MCs, the objectives of this rostrum are to identify some of these difficulties, emphasize the obstacles that might hamper translation from preclinical observations into the clinics, and highlight differences between IgE- and MRPGRX2-mediated reactions. Inevitably, as with any subject still beset by many questions, alternative interpretations, hypotheses, or explanations expressed here may not find universal acceptance. Nevertheless, we believe that for the time being, many questions remain unanswered. Finally, a theoretical mechanistic algorithm is proposed that might advance discrimination between MC degranulation from MRGPRX2 activation and cross-linking of membrane-bound drug-reactive IgE antibodies.

Perioperative Hypersensitivity Evaluation and Management: A Practical Approach

Perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) is an uncommon, potentially life-threatening event. Identification of POH can be difficult given the lack of familiarity, physiological effects of anesthesia, draping of the patient during surgery, and potential nonimmunological factors contributing to signs and symptoms. Given the unique nature and large number of medications administered in the perioperative setting, evaluation of POH can be challenging. In this paper, we present a practical approach to management with an emphasis on understanding what happens in the operating room, the overlap of signs and symptoms between nonimmunological and immunological reactions, acute management, and subsequent evaluation. In addition, we provide a strategy for further review of an initially negative evaluation and emphasize the importance of establishing management plans for the patient as well as providing recommendations to the medical, anesthesia, and surgical teams for future surgeries. A critical factor for successful management at all points in the process is a close collaboration between the anesthesia and the allergy teams.

Utilizing Biologics in Drug Desensitization

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

Perioperative Anaphylaxis

Anesthesiologists routinely manage patients receiving drugs and agents, all of which have the potential for anaphylaxis, the life-threatening presentation of an allergic reaction. Clinicians must be ready to diagnose and manage the acute cardiopulmonary dysfunction that occurs.

Pathophysiological, Cellular, and Molecular Events of the Vascular System in Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a systemic hypersensitivity reaction that can be life threatening. Mechanistically, it results from the immune activation and release of a variety of mediators that give rise to the signs and symptoms of this pathological event. For years, most of the research in anaphylaxis has focused on the contribution of the immune component. However, approaches that shed light on the participation of other cellular and molecular agents are necessary. Among them, the vascular niche receives the various signals (e.g., histamine) that elicit the range of anaphylactic events. Cardiovascular manifestations such as increased vascular permeability, vasodilation, hypotension, vasoconstriction, and cardiac alterations are crucial in the pathophysiology of anaphylaxis and are highly involved to the development of the most severe cases. Specifically, the endothelium, vascular smooth muscle cells, and their molecular signaling outcomes play an essential role downstream of the immune reaction. Therefore, in this review, we synthesized the vascular changes observed during anaphylaxis as well as its cellular and molecular components. As the risk of anaphylaxis exists both in clinical procedures and in routine life, increasing our knowledge of the vascular physiology and their molecular mechanism will enable us to improve the clinical management and how to treat or prevent anaphylaxis.

Key Message

Anaphylaxis, the most severe allergic reaction, involves a variety of immune and non-immune molecular signals that give rise to its pathophysiological manifestations. Importantly, the vascular system is engaged in processes relevant to anaphylactic events such as increased vascular permeability, vasodilation, hypotension, vasoconstriction, and decreased cardiac output. The novelty of this review focuses on the fact that new studies will greatly improve the understanding of anaphylaxis when viewed from a vascular molecular angle and specifically from the endothelium. This knowledge will improve therapeutic options to treat or prevent anaphylaxis.

Selected recent advances in understanding the role of human mast cells in health and disease

Mast cells are highly granular tissue-resident cells and key drivers of inflammation, particularly in allergies as well as in other inflammatory diseases. Most mast cell research was initially conducted in rodents but has increasingly shifted to the human system, with the advancement of research technologies and methodologies. Today we can analyze primary human cells including rare subpopulations, we can produce and maintain mast cells isolated from human tissues, and there are several human mast cell lines. These tools have substantially facilitated our understanding of their role and function in different organs in both health and disease. We can now define more clearly where human mast cells originate from, how they develop, which mediators they store, produce de novo, and release, how they are activated and by which receptors, and which neighbouring cells they interact with and by which mechanisms. Considerable progress has also been made regarding the potential contribution of mast cells to disease, which, in turn, has led to the development of novel approaches for preventing key pathogenic effects of mast cells, heralding the era of mast cell-targeted therapeutics. In this review, we present and discuss a selection of some of the most significant advancements and remaining gaps in our understanding of human mast cells during the last 25 years, with a focus on clinical relevance.

Intraoperative Anaphylaxis to the Bovine Flowable Gelatin Matrix: A Report of 2 Cases

CASE

We present 2 cases of life-threatening intraoperative anaphylaxis to the bovine flowable gelatin matrix during pediatric spinal deformity surgery for kyphoscoliosis. Both patients had no known bovine or gelatin allergies. Anaphylaxis occurred shortly after pressurized injection into the first cannulated pedicle tract and was successfully treated with epinephrine, diphenhydramine, and methylprednisolone infusion. The allergic reaction was confirmed with tryptase levels and serum-specific immunoglobulin E for beef, pork, bovine collagen, and porcine collagen.

CONCLUSION

In patients with beef, pork, or gelatin intolerance, a significant atopic history or childhood vaccine reaction, preoperative allergy consultation, and testing should be performed to prevent this life-threatening complication.

Converter Phenotype: A New Profile That Is Not Exclusive to Taxanes

Introduction: Phenotype I hypersensitivity reactions are the most commonly reported drug reactions; however, precision medicine has made it possible to characterize new phenotypes. A recent communication proposed the existence of a “converter phenotype,” which would affect patients who present non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions and in subsequent exposures develop immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of converter phenotype reactions and their evolution during desensitization to chemotherapeutic drugs and monoclonal antibodies.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our database of patients undergoing desensitization to chemotherapy or biological agents and selected those with a converter phenotype. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients, the results of skin tests, tryptase and IL-6 levels, and desensitization outcomes were assessed.

Results: Of 116 patients evaluated, 12 (10.3%) were identified as having a converter phenotype. The median interval between drug exposure and reaction was 90.6 h (range 8-288 h). After the conversion, phenotype I was the most frequent (58.3%), followed by cytokine release reactions (33.3%). Fifty-one desensitizations were undertaken and all treatments completed, with 10 (19.6%) breakthrough reactions. No new changes in the phenotype were detected.

Conclusions: The symptoms of non-immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions may indicate the need for an early allergological evaluation to assess the risk of future immediate drug reactions. Clinical characteristics, skin test results, and biomarkers can help predict responses to rapid drug desensitization, guiding clinicians on how to optimize therapy delivery while maintaining patient safety.

Recent update on the management of anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening systemic allergic reaction presenting various clinical manifestations. Its prevalence has increased in almost all age groups and both sexes. Food, venom, and drugs are major causes in both children and adults; a higher prevalence of food-induced anaphylaxis is noted in children, while a higher prevalence of drug-induced anaphylaxis is noted in adults. The pathogenic mechanism is mediated by immunologic and nonimmunologic mechanisms, where mast cells and basophils are key cells that release mediators. A diagnosis of anaphylaxis is mainly based on clinical symptoms and physical findings; however, an increased serum tryptase level is a useful biomarker. Epinephrine is the first-line drug to treat acute symptoms, and an epinephrine auto-injector should be prescribed for each patient. Antihistamines and systemic corticosteroids are used to relieve symptoms. This review updates current issues in the management of anaphylaxis as well as the new guidelines for proper diagnosis and treatment.

Anaphylaxis viewed by experts: unmet needs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of the review is to identify unmet needs in the management of anaphylaxis, covering aspects such as epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

Redefinition of clinical diagnostic criteria may allow a better identification of anaphylaxis. International diagnostic coding system improvement will be major step for future policies and epidemiological studies. Digital health can aid in managing anaphylaxis.

SUMMARY

Anaphylaxis is a medical emergency; current data show that frequently identification of the reaction, acute and long-term management, are not optimal. Therefore, there is a need to implement strategies to improve the situation. This review has identified unmet needs in anaphylaxis regarding aspects such as epidemiology, severity scoring, definition and diagnostic criteria, anaphylaxis in infants and toddlers, cofactors, biomarkers, long-term management, undertreatment and availability of epinephrine autoinjectors. Strategies focused on education, legislation, digital health and research are proposed.

Mast cell activation syndrome: is anaphylaxis part of the phenotype? A systematic review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) and anaphylaxis are the result of a spontaneous or triggered pathological degranulation of mast cells (MCs) and might have as substrate normal or pathological MCs (increased burden, aberrant MCs or both).

RECENT FINDINGS

This review summarizes the most recent evidence on immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated and non IgE-mediated mechanisms underlying MC activation and degranulation and highlights the importance of standardized diagnostic criteria for MCAS. Application of these criteria implies that in most cases the clinical presentation of MCAS meets the diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis.

SUMMARY

Integrating clinical parameters and diagnostic test recognition and underlying clonal MC disease are of utmost importance for a patient-tailored approach. Hereditary alpha-tryptasemia can be encountered in context of anaphylaxis, MCAS and primary MC disorders.

Vaccine allergy: evidence to consider for COVID-19 vaccines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has changed our lives worldwide, we hope that vaccination can combat the disease. We propose how to evaluate suspected severe allergic reactions to the vaccines so that as many as possible may be safely vaccinated.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rare cases of severe allergic reactions after COVID-19 vaccination have been observed, seemingly at a higher frequency than for other vaccines. Few excipients are likely to have caused these reactions. IgE-mediated reactions to polyethylene glycol (PEG) and its derivatives are the most suspected, albeit hitherto unproven, causes. We suggest to make a diagnosis based on skin tests with PEG and PEG derivatives and that these be considered in relation to the decisions required before the first and the second vaccine dose. A vaccine without these excipients is available, but published data about its side effects are limited.

SUMMARY

The underlying immunological mechanisms of the rare severe allergic reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines are poorly understood and need to be clarified. Identifying those who have an undiagnosed allergy to PEG and PEG derivatives is crucial before vaccination, and these substances are found in laxatives, cosmetics and in 30% of all our medications today.