DRUG REACTIONS AND DESENSITIZATION IN AIDS

Protocols for drug allergy desensitization in children

Introduction: When a drug hypersensitivity reaction is proven, desensitization protocols allow the reintroduction of the molecule in patients for whom such therapy is essential. Through drug desensitization (DDS), a temporary immune tolerance is maintained for the single course of a specific therapy. In pediatrics, indications for such a procedure include children with chronic diseases, severe infectious diseases and/or malignancies, who have a proven drug hypersensitivity.Areas covered: We ran a search on PubMed and Web of Science for papers on DDS and on DDS in children. Most protocols and recommendations on DDS focus on adults and have been adapted for children. The best candidates for desensitization are children with a history of immediate, IgE-mediated drug allergy, but this therapy may be applied also in nonallergic hypersensitivities and in non-immediate reactions. Most protocols in literature focus on antibiotics, especially beta-lactams, on chemotherapeutic agents, and on monoclonal antibodies.Expert opinion: Pediatric allergists should cooperate with specialists in infectious diseases and onco-hematology to provide DDS to children in need. Standardized protocols and international guidelines are still needed to optimize such treatment and to implement it in clinical daily practice.

General considerations on rapid desensitization for drug hypersensitivity - a consensus statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions can occur with most drugs, are unpredictable, may affect any organ or system, and range widely in clinical severity from mild pruritus to anaphylaxis. In most cases, the suspected drug is avoided in the future. However, for certain patients, the particular drug may be essential for optimal therapy. Under these circumstances, desensitization may be performed. Drug desensitization is defined as the induction of a temporary state of tolerance of a compound responsible for a hypersensitivity reaction. It is performed by administering increasing doses of the medication concerned over a short period of time (from several hours to a few days) until the total cumulative therapeutic dose is achieved and tolerated. It is a high-risk procedure used only in patients in whom alternatives are less effective or not available after a positive risk/benefit analysis. Desensitization protocols have been developed and are used in patients with allergic reactions to antibiotics (mainly penicillin), insulins, sulfonamides, chemotherapeutic and biologic agents, and many other drugs. Desensitization is mainly performed in IgE-mediated reactions, but also in reactions where drug-specific IgE have not been demonstrated. Desensitization induces a temporary tolerant state, which can only be maintained by continuous administration of the medication. Thus, for treatments like chemotherapy, which have an average interval of 4 weeks between cycles, the procedure must be repeated for every new course. In this paper, some background information on rapid desensitization procedures is provided. We define the drugs and drug reactions indicated for such procedures, describe the possible mechanism of action, and discuss the indications and contraindications. The data should serve as background information for a database (accessible via the EAACI-homepage) with standardized protocols for rapid desensitization for antibiotics, chemotherapeutic agents, monoclonal antibodies/fusion proteins, and other drugs.

Maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma with particular emphasis on thalidomide

Treatment standards are changing as a result of new findings in the therapy of multiple myeloma. So far, prednisone, dexamethasone and interferon-a have mainly been used as maintenance therapy after achieving remission or stable disease. At present, thalidomide is being considered as a new therapeutic option in several studies investigating maintenance therapy. As a result of the dose dependence of adverse effects such as neuropathy, constipation, sedation/vertigo and bradycardia, individual adjustment of the thalidomide dose is recommended. Only isolated cases of thrombosis occurred in the maintenance phase of therapy, and discontinuation of therapy is generally not necessary. While important study results on the efficacy of thalidomide following conventional chemotherapy are still awaited, it is the best documented drug so far for maintenance therapy following autologous stem cell transplantation. An upgrade of the response was seen in 22-73% of patients, as well as a significant prolongation of progression-free survival. For the first time, maintenance therapy with thalidomide showed a significant improvement in overall survival in a phase III study published recently. The tolerability of thalidomide could be further improved by including the option of intermittent administration of the drug.

Immediate Hypersensitivity to Rifampicin in 3 Patients: Diagnostic Procedures and Induction of Clinical Tolerance

BACKGROUND

Desensitization with drugs may be indicated in some clinical situations. Apart from large experiences with beta-lactam antibiotics and cotrimoxazole in HIV infection, experience with other drugs is limited. Rifampicin may elicit exanthema and urticaria, and their pathomechanisms are not known in detail. Since therapy with rifampicin may be indispensable in mycobacterial infections or against multiresistant Staphylococcus aureus, desensitization may be indicated in some patients.

OBJECTIVE

Report of immediate hypersensitivity to rifampicin and description of diagnostic and desensitization procedures.

METHODS

We report 3 patients with immediate urticarial reactions to rifampicin. Diagnostic procedures included skin and in vitro tests (specific IgE, lymphocyte transformation test, LTT, and CAST). The non-irritant cutoff concentration was evaluated in 24 volunteers. A 7-day desensitization procedure was used.

RESULTS

Only intradermal tests at a dilution of at least 1:10,000 (concentration of rifampicin approximately 0.006 mg/ml) were true positive, whereas in vitro tests (IgE, LTT and CAST) did not correctly identify hypersensitive patients. Two patients had positive accidental reexposure. All patients were successfully desensitized with rifampicin according to a slow 7-day protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Rifampicin rarely elicits immediate hypersensitivity symptoms which may be diagnosed by intradermal skin tests. In vitro tests did not contribute to the diagnosis. Therefore, an IgE-mediated mechanism remains to be proven. Desensitization with rifampicin using different protocols has been reported. In our 3 cases, clinical tolerance to rifampicin was achieved using a 7-day protocol.

Thalomid (Thalidomide) capsules: a review of the first 18 months of spontaneous postmarketing adverse event surveillance, including off-label prescribing

The sedative/hypnotic thalidomide was withdrawn from the worldwide market nearly 40 years ago, because of its teratogenic and neurotoxic effects. Thalidomide was later found to very effectively suppress erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Thalomid (thalidomide) capsules for the acute treatment of the cutaneous manifestations of moderate to severe ENL. Thalidomide is currently under investigation for the treatment of a wide variety of diseases, including conditions thought to have an inflammatory or immune basis, malignancies and complications of infection with HIV. Interest in the potential anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory and anti- angiogenic effects of thalidomide has resulted in off-label use of prescription thalidomide. During the first 18 months of spontaneous postmarketing adverse event surveillance for Thalomid, 1210 spontaneous postmarketing adverse event reports were received for patients treated with prescription thalidomide for all therapeutic indications, including off-label use. The most common adverse events spontaneously reported would have been expected on the basis of the current Thalomid labelling/product information. The current labelling/product information reflects what was known about the risks associated with thalidomide therapy in limited patient populations at the time of the approval of Thalomid. With the postmarketing use of thalidomide in populations other than patients with ENL, it becomes increasingly important to identify patient groups that may be particularly susceptible to specific adverse drug effects and to identify conditions under which specific adverse events may be more likely to occur. Oncology patients may represent a patient population with increased susceptibility to thalidomide-associated adverse effects, including thromboembolic events. Consideration of the spontaneous postmarketing safety surveillance data may help to identify and characterise factors associated with increased risk in this and other patient groups. Serious unexpected adverse events reported with sufficient frequency to signal previously undetected product-event associations for which there may potentially be plausible evidence to suggest a causal relationship have included seizures and Stevens-Johnson syndrome. The potential effects of thalidomide on wound healing are also being closely monitored. Premarketing human clinical trials of drug products are inherently limited in their ability to detect adverse events. Broader postmarketing experience with thalidomide in more varied patient populations and more experience in the setting of long term thalidomide use will increase our ability to detect rare adverse events and to identify signals that may need to be evaluated in more controlled settings.