2012 Update: World Allergy Organization Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis

Allergen immunotherapy-induced anaphylaxis: Data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry

BACKGROUND

Data on anaphylaxis due to allergen immunotherapy (AIT) are limited. This study assessed AIT-induced anaphylaxis using data from the European Anaphylaxis Registry.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the characteristics, symptoms, severity, and emergency management of AIT-induced anaphylactic reactions across age groups and the administered allergenic source.

METHODS

Data were obtained from 54 allergy centers across 10 European countries from 2007 to 2023. Anaphylactic reactions involving at least 2 organ systems were analyzed for symptoms, severity, associated diseases, administration routes, and emergency treatment. Statistical methods included χ2 and Fisher's exact tests.

RESULTS

AIT accounted for 1.1% of the cases in the anaphylaxis registry (173/15,748), of which 1.8% were pediatric and 0.7% were adults. Respiratory symptoms were more frequent in children/adolescents (92%) than in adults (66%) among AIT-related anaphylaxis, whereas cardiovascular and gastrointestinal symptoms were more common in adults (40% vs 78% and 20% vs 42%, respectively). Only a few sublingual immunotherapy-related cases were documented, including 2 grade III reactions, with no fatalities (sublingual immunotherapy [n = 8] vs subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) [n = 153]). One fatality due to SCIT was reported (grass pollen). Delayed reactions (>30 minutes) were reported in 22 cases, predominantly after SCIT. All delayed grade III reactions that occurred more than 120 minutes were reported in children. Adrenaline was underused in emergency management and administered in 30% of grade II and 50% of grade III reactions.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the importance of age-specific monitoring and appropriate emergency treatment to enhance patient safety during AIT.

10 practical priorities to prevent and manage serious allergic reactions: GA2LEN ANACare and EFA Anaphylaxis Manifesto

This Anaphylaxis Manifesto calls on communities to prioritise 10 practical actions to improve the lives of people at risk of serious allergic reactions. The Global Allergy and Asthma European Network and the European Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients' Associations (EFA) compiled patient-centric priorities. We used qualitative consensus methods, research evidence and feedback from over 200 patient groups, stakeholder organisations and healthcare professionals. We encourage healthcare, education and food organisations to collaborate with people at risk of serious allergic reactions to tackle safety, anxiety and financial burdens for individuals and societies. Key priorities for prevention include awareness-raising campaigns for the public and professionals, school and workplace initiatives and mandatory precautionary allergen labels on food. Priorities for improving immediate and long-term management include educating healthcare professionals, patients and schools about when and how to use adrenaline, funding two approved adrenaline devices for everyone at risk, and facilitating access to allergy specialists. Integrated care pathways should include clinical and non-clinical management options such as individualised risk assessment and quality of life assessment, self-management plans, dietetic and psychosocial support and peer support. Organisations around the world are committing to work together towards these priorities.

Fish and shellfish allergy: Presentation and management differences in the UK and US-analysis of 945 patients

Background

Seafood allergy (SA), including allergy to shellfish (crustacean and mollusks) and fish, is among the 4 most common food allergies causing anaphylaxis, but there are limited data showing SA clinical management in different countries.

Objective

We sought to characterize a large cohort of patients with fish and shellfish allergy and to facilitate standardization of future care for this increasingly common allergic disease.

Methods

We performed a retrospective, observational, noninterventional study from 945 patients from 2015 to 2019 in 7 hospitals in the United States and the United Kingdom to evaluate SA. A chi-square test was used to detect differences in family history, medical history, and current symptoms between patients in 2 countries.

Results

Underdiagnosed anaphylaxis in patients with SA was associated with underuse of epinephrine (adrenaline) autoinjectors in both countries. Oral food challenge was used only when skin or serologic test results were negative. Asthma and allergic rhinitis were more common in the US patients with SA, but eczema was more common in UK patients with SA (P < .001). Respiratory, gastrointestinal, and neurological symptoms were higher in UK patients with SA than in US patients with SA (P < .001).

Conclusions

In international multicenter cohorts of patients with fish and shellfish allergy, there are opportunities for improvement in management. Physician identification of anaphylaxis, use of diagnostic oral food challenges, and anaphylaxis treatment with epinephrine are areas with significant knowledge gaps in need of improvement in the United Kingdom and the United States. There is an opportunity for the development of unified, standardized diagnostic protocols for SA with distribution for allergists and trainees.

Revaccination outcomes among adolescents and adults with suspected hypersensitivity reactions following COVID-19 vaccination: A Canadian immunization research network study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with anaphylaxis and hypersensitivity reactions. Infectious disease physicians and allergists in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) Network developed guidance for evaluating patients with adverse events following immunization (AEFI) including suspected hypersensitivity. This study evaluated management and adverse event recurrence following subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations.

METHODS

Individuals aged 12 years and older enrolled at participating SICs before February 28, 2023 who were referred for suspected or diagnosed hypersensitivity reaction following COVID-19 vaccination, or for prevaccination assessment of suspected allergy to a COVID-19 vaccine component were included. De-identified clinical assessments and revaccination data, captured in a centralized database, were analyzed. The Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) for anaphylaxis (2023 version) was applied.

RESULTS

The analysis included 206 participants from 13 sites: 26 participants referred for pre-vaccination assessment and 180 participants referred for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination (15/180 [8.3%] with BCCD confirmed anaphylaxis, 84 [46.7%] with immediate hypersensitivity symptoms not meeting BCCD, 33 [18.3%] with other diagnosed hypersensitivity reactions, and 48 [26.7%] participants with a final diagnosis of non-hypersensitivity AEFI). Among participants referred for AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination, 166/180 (92.2%) were recommended for COVID-19 revaccination after risk assessment, of whom 158/166 (95.2%) were revaccinated (all with a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine). After revaccination, 1/15 (6.7%) participants with prior anaphylaxis, 1/77 (1.3%) with immediate hypersensitivity not meeting criteria for anaphylaxis and 1/24 (4.2%) with other physician diagnosed hypersensitivity developed recurrent AEFI symptoms that met the BCCD for anaphylaxis. All 26 participants referred pre-vaccination, including 9 (34.6%) with history of polyethylene glycol-asparaginase reactions, were vaccinated without occurrence of immediate hypersensitivity symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Most individuals in this national cohort who experienced a hypersensitivity event following COVID-19 vaccination and were referred for specialist review were revaccinated without AEFI recurrence, suggesting that specialist evaluation can facilitate safe revaccination.

School Teachers' Knowledge and Attitudes Related to Anaphylactic Reactions: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction marked by a sudden onset of symptoms affecting multiple bodily systems, and if not addressed promptly, it can lead to fatal outcomes. The primary clinical manifestations often involve skin rash, respiratory distress, and cardiovascular symptoms. Identifying these signs early is crucial for timely intervention, including the administration of epinephrine, aiming to prevent loss of life. This study aims to assess the awareness of symptoms and management of anaphylactic reactions among teachers in Jeddah/Makkah, Saudi Arabia.

METHODOLOGY

This cross-sectional study included 742 teachers from both governmental and private schools in Jeddah/Makkah, Saudi Arabia. Only those schools who agreed and facilitated the process of distributing the questionnaire were included in which an electronic structured questionnaire was utilized and distributed among participants. Statistical analysis was done using JMP Pro 15 software (JMP Statistical Discovery LLC, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

Most participants (n = 501, 67.5%) were female, and 374 (50.4%) were between 40 and 50 years old. Most participants believed that skin and eye manifestations were the most common clinical presentation. When inquired about anaphylaxis treatment, the majority of teachers (57%) opted for antihistamines as the preferred emergency treatment. Surprisingly, 407 of the 742 (54.9%) participants have never heard of epinephrine injections.

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that the knowledge of anaphylactic reactions among teachers in Saudi Arabia is limited. Therefore, educational campaigns and programs about anaphylaxis and the management of allergic reactions are recommended to elevate awareness within the teaching community, contributing to a more informed and prepared educational environment.

Healthcare Providers' knowledge, attitudes and practice in relation to drug hypersensitivity reactions at King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh

Background

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are immune-mediated responses triggered by exposure to a drug. DHRs are responsible for serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and are considered the fifth leading cause of death. This study aims to assess and evaluate the knowledge, practice, and attitudes of healthcare providers (HCPs) towards DHRs.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted at King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Healthcare providers, including pharmacists, physicians, and nurses, were recruited using a convenience sampling method to complete the survey. The survey comprised three domains: knowledge (14 items), attitudes (5 items), and practices (6 items), utilizing a standardized self-administered questionnaire.

Results

The survey was completed by 373 healthcare providers. The respondents were predominantly female (72.1 %) with a mean age of 33.8 ± 7.8 years. Of the respondents, 64 % were nurses, 25 % pharmacists, and 11.3 % physicians. Educational levels varied, with 53 % holding a bachelor's degree, 22 % an associate degree, and 25 % a master's degree or higher. The median knowledge score was 48. Female healthcare providers, those with advanced levels of education, and physicians had higher knowledge scores compared to male and nurse participants (p < 0.05). One-third of the respondents (33 %) were satisfied with their knowledge of DHRs, and 42 % believed HCPs should receive more advanced training in DHR management. Less than a quarter of HCPs reported inquiring about patients' histories of hypersensitivity reactions.

Conclusions

The study revealed that healthcare workers had a relatively low level of knowledge about drug hypersensitivity reactions and lacked a consensus on DHR management. While displaying a positive attitude towards DHRs, they often did not translate this attitude into consistent clinical practice.

Clinical variables and genetic variants associated with perioperative anaphylaxis in Chinese Han population: A pilot study

Background

Perioperative anaphylaxis (POA) can lead to severe consequences. Identifying clinical risk factors and genetic loci associated with POA through pre-prescription screening may help reduce its incidence.

Methods

Using univariate regression and covariate-adjusted multivariate regression, we retrospectively analyzed the association between clinical characteristics and POA in 72 POA patients and 72 non-POA individuals. The discovery study of whole-exome association relied on whole-exome sequencing of 73 POA cases and 1339 healthy individuals. A replication study involving an independent set of 16 POA cases and 1339 healthy individuals confirmed this association. The accurate typing of human leucocyte antigen through exome sequencing (ATHLATES) algorithm and the whole-exome sequencing data were used for genotyping the human leucocyte antigen G (HLA-G) of 73 POA patients. The HLA-G of 16 POA cases and 122 non-POA patients were genotyped through Sanger sequencing. We used Fisher's exact probability method to compare the allele and carrier frequencies between POA patients and healthy individuals or non-POA patients. A Pc (P/Bonferroni correction coefficient) < 0.05 represents statistical significance.

Results

Regression analysis identified female sex, an unconfirmed food allergy label, and a history of prior surgery as clinical variables associated with POA. The whole-exome association discovery study identified a strong signal in the major histocompatibility complex region on chromosome 6, with the rs1130356 being the most significant locus (P = 1.5E-10, OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 2.4-4.9). The replication study verified the association between the rs1130356-T allele and POA cases (P = 1.0E-6, OR = 6.3, 95% CI = 3.1-12.7). Compared with non-POA patients, HLA-G∗01:01 (Pc = 2.4E-4, OR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.6-3.6) was significantly enriched, while HLA-G∗01:04 (Pc = 1.2E-6, OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.2-0.5) was lessened in POA patients.

Conclusion

Our study suggested an association between POA and the risk factors of female sex, an unconfirmed food allergy label, and prior surgery. HLA-G, located in the human leucocyte antigen (HLA) region, may act as a surrogate genetic marker for POA. This suggests a causal relationship between this specific genomic region and POA. Our findings shed light on the contribution of human exome genetic variants to the susceptibility to POA.

The B Cell Response and Formation of Allergenic and Anti-Allergenic Antibodies in Food Allergy

Food allergies are a growing public health concern worldwide, especially in children and young adults. Allergen-specific IgE plays a central role in the pathogenesis of food allergies, but their titers poorly correlate with allergy development. Host immune systems yield allergen-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)A, IgE and IgG subclasses with low or high affinities and differential Fc N-glycosylation patterns that can affect the allergic reaction to food in multiple ways. High-affinity IgE is required to induce strong mast cell activation eventually leading to allergic anaphylaxis, while low-affinity IgE can even inhibit the development of clinically relevant allergic symptoms. IgA and IgG antibodies can inhibit IgE-mediated mast cell activation through various mechanisms, thereby protecting IgE-positive individuals from allergy development. The production of IgE and IgG with differential allergenic potential seems to be affected by the signaling strength of individual B cell receptors, and by cytokines from T cells. This review provides an overview of the diversity of the B cell response and the diverse roles of antibodies in food allergy.

Management of Anaphylaxis During Peanut Oral Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Peanut oral immunotherapy (POIT) has emerged as an active management option for peanut allergy, with an FDA-approved product now available for therapy. Allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, can occur during therapy and their management is key in optimizing this treatment and patient outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this manuscript, we will review the rates of allergic reactions and anaphylaxis in seminal peanut oral immunotherapy research studies. We will examine factors that can alter the risk of anaphylaxis and describe various strategies, including adjunct therapies, that have the potential to mitigate anaphylaxis risk based on published evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rates of anaphylaxis and epinephrine administration vary in different research studies, but there is consensus that most POIT-related allergic reactions are mild or moderate and not severe. Certain external factors (for example, tiredness, exercise, viral illness) as well as uncontrolled allergic co-morbidities (asthma, allergic rhinitis) have been shown to increase the risk of anaphylaxis during OIT. The search of biomarkers who may predict who is at risk for severe allergic reactions is ongoing. Adjunct therapies have shown promise, but further studies are required to optimize their use alongside POIT. Our understanding of anaphylaxis during POIT has increased in recent years, resulting in better management strategies. However, future plans will need to involve all stakeholders, including physicians, patients and families, researchers, public health authorities, and the food, hospitality, and catering industries.

Cofactors, age at onset, allergic comorbidities and gender are different in patients sensitized to omega-5 gliadin and Pru p 3

Aim of this study is to clarify the impact of cofactors on allergic reactions in patients sensitized to LTP and ω-5-gliadin. We retrospectively examined the charts of our outpatients from January 2015 to July 2019 and identified 157 patients seen for urticaria/angioedema or anaphylaxis after a meal, in presence or absence of cofactors and sensitized to LTPs (Pru p 3 and/or Tri a 14) and/or ω-5-gliadin (Tri a 19). we compared LTPs-positive patients and those sensitized to Tri a 19 in order to assess the difference in cofactors involved and in frequency of clinical presentation. Our data show that exercise is the most frequent cofactor in FDEIAn and the involvement of exercise, alcohol and multiple cofactors was more frequently found in males than in females. We found that exercise, pollen counts peaks and multiple cofactors were more often related to anaphylaxis than mild reactions. Finally, we performed a comparison between patients LTPs+ and Tri a 19+ that showed in the latter group a lower frequency of allergic comorbidities, a higher median age at the onset of symptoms and frequency of alcohol exposure. Our data show that the search for possible cofactors involved in food allergy is essential not only for diagnostic purposes, but also for risk assessment strategies.

Effects of Exercise and Sleep Deprivation on Reaction Severity During Oral Peanut Challenge: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The severity of allergic reactions to foods can vary markedly. Little is known of variations in reaction severity within or between individuals or the effects of cofactors.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effects of sleep deprivation and exercise and repeat challenges on the severity and patterns of allergic reactions to peanut.

METHODS

In a randomized crossover study, adults with peanut allergy underwent 3 open peanut challenges in random order: with exercise after each dose, with sleep deprivation preceding challenge, and with no intervention. The primary outcome was eliciting dose, reported elsewhere. Reaction severity was a secondary outcome, evaluated using a weighted log-transformed numerical severity score. Analyses estimated the difference in severity between nonintervention challenge and challenges with exercise or sleep deprivation, adjusting for challenge order and using the highest dose tolerated by each individual across all their challenges. Symptom pattern reproducibility was assessed by comparing symptom sequences using pairwise sequence alignment to obtain a percentage match in symptom pattern.

RESULTS

Eighty-one participants (mean age 25 y) completed at least 1 postbaseline challenge. Sleep deprivation, but not exercise, significantly increased severity score by 48% (95% CI 12%-84%; P = .009) compared with no intervention. A 38% increase in severity was observed between the first and the last postbaseline challenge (95% CI 1%-75%; P = .044). The average pairwise match of symptoms within individuals was 82.4% and across individuals was 78.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel severity score demonstrates that sleep deprivation and repeated challenges increase reaction severity. Understanding factors affecting severity is essential for effective risk management. We also show that symptom patterns in repeat peanut challenges are similar within and between individuals.

Prehospital Epinephrine Use in Pediatric Anaphylaxis by Emergency Medical Services

OBJECTIVES

Anaphylaxis requires prompt assessment and management with epinephrine to reduce its morbidity and mortality. This study examined the prehospital management of pediatric anaphylactic reactions in Northeast Ohio.

METHODS

This is a retrospective chart review using emergency medical service (EMS) run charts of patients 18 years and younger from February 2015 to April 2019. Patient charts with the diagnosis of "anaphylaxis" or "allergic reaction" were reviewed and confirmed that symptoms met anaphylaxis criteria. Information regarding epinephrine administration before EMS arrival and medications given by EMS providers was collected. Analysis was performed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

From 646 allergic/anaphylactic reaction EMS run charts, 150 (23%) met the guideline criteria for anaphylaxis. The median patient age was 12 years. Only 57% (86/150) of these patients received intramuscular epinephrine, and the majority received it before EMS arrival. Epinephrine was administered by EMS to 32% (30/94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 22.7% to 42.3%) of patients who had not already received epinephrine. The odds of receiving prehospital epinephrine were significantly lower for patients 5 years and younger (risk difference [RD], -0.23; 95% CI, -0.43 to -0.04), those with no history of allergic reaction (RD, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03), those who presented with lethargy (RD, -0.43; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.06), and those whose trigger was a medication or environmental allergen (RD, -0.47; 95% CI, -0.72 to -0.23 for each).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency medical service providers in this region demonstrated similar use of epinephrine as reported elsewhere. However, 43% (64/150) of pediatric patients meeting anaphylaxis criteria did not receive prehospital epinephrine, and 10% (15/150) received no treatment whatsoever. Efforts to improve EMS provider recognition and prompt epinephrine administration in pediatric cases of anaphylaxis seem necessary.

Anaphylaxis among elderly emergency department patients in a large health system in New York

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis in the elderly is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate demographic, clinical, and management characteristics of older adults presenting to emergency departments (EDs) with National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis vs milder, non-anaphylactic acute allergic reactions (AARs).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of ED patients more than or equal to 65 years was conducted, using anaphylaxis International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes or ICD-9-based algorithms incorporating the NIAID diagnostic criteria. Descriptive statistics were generated, and the abovementioned characteristics were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 164 eligible visits, 71 (43.3%), 90 (54.9%), and 3 (1.8%) cases were identified by ICD-9 codes, the algorithms, or both, respectively. Only half fulfilled NIAID diagnostic criteria. Compared with the non-anaphylactic AAR group, criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis group had lower drug allergy rates (43.9% vs 61.0%, P = .03) but higher food allergy rates (26.8% vs 12.2%, P = .02). For the criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis group, presenting signs and symptoms in descending frequency were mucocutaneous, respiratory, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal. Criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis group had higher rates of prior anaphylaxis (13.4% vs 2.4%, P = .009), pre-ED (12.2% vs 0.0%, P = .001) or ED (72.0% vs 4.9%, P < .001) epinephrine administration, and allergy referral (17.1% vs 2.4%, P = .002). Tryptase levels were rarely ordered, occurring once in the criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis group and never in the non-anaphylactic AAR group. Despite low mortality (n = 1), 64.6% of the criteria-confirmed anaphylaxis cohort required hospitalization, with 23.2% admitted to intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosis of elderly ED patients with anaphylaxis remains suboptimal. Identifying NIAID criteria-confirmed cases remain challenging, using the existing methods. Management of these patients poorly adheres to current guidelines.

A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020)

Background: For anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, the incidence rate was presented to have increased from the beginning of the 21st century. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of anaphylaxis are public health concerns. Objective: This guideline aimed to provide high-quality and evidence-based recommendations for the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Method: The panel of health professionals from fifteen medical areas selected twenty-five clinical questions and formulated the recommendations with the supervision of four methodologists. We collected evidence by conducting systematic literature retrieval and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: This guideline made twenty-five recommendations that covered the diagnosis, preparation, emergency treatment, and post-emergency management of anaphylaxis. We recommended the use of a set of adapted diagnostic criteria from the American National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN), and developed a severity grading system that classified anaphylaxis into four grades. We recommended epinephrine as the first-line treatment, with specific doses and routes of administration for different severity of anaphylaxis or different conditions. Proper dosage is critical in the administration of epinephrine, and the monitor is important in the IV administration. Though there was only very low or low-quality evidence supported the use of glucocorticoids and H1 antagonists, we still weakly recommended them as second-line medications. We could not make a well-directed recommendation regarding premedication for preventing anaphylaxis since it is difficult to weigh the concerns and potential effects. Conclusion: For the emergency management of anaphylaxis we conclude that: • NIAID/FAAN diagnostic criteria and the four-tier grading system should be used for the diagnosis • Prompt and proper administration of epinephrine is critical.

Applying lessons learned from nanomedicines to understand rare hypersensitivity reactions to mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines

After over a billion of vaccinations with messenger RNA-lipid nanoparticle (mRNA-LNP) based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, anaphylaxis and other manifestations of hypersensitivity can be considered as very rare adverse events. Although current recommendations include avoiding a second dose in those with first-dose anaphylaxis, the underlying mechanisms are unknown; therefore, the risk of a future reaction cannot be predicted. Given how important new mRNA constructs will be to address the emergence of new viral variants and viruses, there is an urgent need for clinical approaches that would allow a safe repeated immunization of high-risk individuals and for reliable predictive tools of adverse reactions to mRNA vaccines. In many aspects, anaphylaxis symptoms experienced by the affected vaccine recipients resemble those of infusion reactions to nanomedicines. Here we share lessons learned over a decade of nanomedicine research and discuss the current knowledge about several factors that individually or collectively contribute to infusion reactions to nanomedicines. We aim to use this knowledge to inform the SARS-CoV-2 lipid-nanoparticle-based mRNA vaccine field.

Anaphylactic Rare Saponins Separated from Panax notoginseng Saponin and a Proteomic Approach to Their Anaphylactic Mechanism

In recent years, many traditional Chinese medicine injections based on Panax notoginseng saponin (PNS) have been reported to cause anaphylaxis. Previous studies on the anaphylactic saponins of PNS and their mechanism are inadequate. In this study, potential anaphylactic saponins were obtained by the separation of PNS and preparation of each individual component through comprehensive techniques, such as liquid chromatography, preparative chromatography, HPLC, NMR, and MS. The anaphylactic abilities of these saponins were tested using RBL-2H3 cells via a β-hexosaminidase release rate test. The results for the mechanism of anaphylaxis were obtained by a proteomic analysis using RBL-2H3 cells. The results indicate that, among all the saponins prepared, gypenoside LXXV and notoginsenoside T5 showed strong anaphylactic abilities and notoginsenoside ST-4 and ginsenoside Rk3 showed weak anaphylactic abilities. These 4 saponins can induce anaphylaxis via direct stimulation of effector cells. The gene oncology enrichment analysis results showed that, among these saponins, only gypenoside LXXV was related to organelles of the endoplasmic reticulum and Golgi apparatus and biological processes in response to organic cyclic compounds. Four proteins in RBL-2H3 cells with the accession numbers A0A0G2JWQ0, D3ZL85, D4A5G8, and Q8K3F0 were identified as crucial proteins in the anaphylactic process. This research will help traditional Chinese medicine injection manufacturers strengthen their quality control and ensure the safety of anaphylactic saponins.

EAACI guidelines: Anaphylaxis (2021 update)

Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency which all healthcare professionals need to be able to recognize and manage. The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Anaphylaxis multidisciplinary Task Force has updated the 2014 guideline. The guideline was developed using the AGREE II framework and the GRADE approach. The evidence was systematically reviewed and recommendations were created by weighing up benefits and harms. The guideline was peer-reviewed by external experts and reviewed in a public consultation. The use of clinical criteria to identify anaphylaxis is suggested with blood sampling for the later measurement of tryptase. The prompt use of intramuscular adrenaline as first-line management is recommended with the availability of adrenaline autoinjectors to patients in the community. Pharmacokinetic data should be provided for adrenaline autoinjector devices. Structured, comprehensive training for people at risk of anaphylaxis is recommended. Simulation training and visual prompts for healthcare professionals are suggested to improve the management of anaphylaxis. It is suggested that school policies reflect anaphylaxis guidelines. The evidence for the management of anaphylaxis remains mostly at a very low level. There is an urgent need to prioritize clinical trials with the potential to improve the management of patients at risk of anaphylaxis.

Fatal Food Anaphylaxis: Distinguishing Fact From Fiction

Although there is a general perception that the prevalence of food allergy is increasing, data supporting this are limited. Food is the least common cause of fatal anaphylaxis, and fortunately, it is a very rare event; however, it is also unpredictable. There is widespread consensus that severe reactions cannot be predicted in a clinically meaningful way. Certain food triggers are more frequently associated with fatal anaphylaxis than others. In observational studies, peanut and tree nuts account for at least 30% to 50% of fatalities, with seafood and cow's milk also associated with fatal reactions. Fatal food-induced anaphylaxis is most likely to occur during adolescence and young adulthood, although the reasons for this are unclear. International guidelines agree that intramuscular (IM) epinephrine is the treatment of choice for managing food-triggered anaphylaxis and has a good safety profile when given by the IM route. However, fatalities still occur despite the timely administration of epinephrine. Food-allergic individuals must navigate a world that requires daily vigilance for allergens and preparedness for allergic reactions. Although the actual risk of fatal reactions is minimal, it is not zero, and severe reactions are unpredictable. Clinicians need to help patients better understand the very low but real risk of fatal reaction and enable them to lead as normal a life as possible through appropriate education, safety netting, and risk reduction.

Clinical Management of Infant Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a condition that is likely increasing in prevalence and commonly treated by allergists as well as other first responders and emergency room providers. Although a relatively rare event, anaphylaxis can occur in infants, with the most common cause attributed to foods. Infant anaphylaxis can present with unique diagnostic challenges and treatment considerations. While infants can present with classic signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis (eg, urticaria, angioedema, dyspnea, wheeze, and vomiting) they can also present with non-classical signs. Non-classical signs of infant anaphylaxis can include ear pulling, tongue thrusting, fussiness, and increase clinginess to the caregiver. These non-classic signs of infant anaphylaxis can often mimic normal infant behavior further complicating the diagnosis. Additionally, when treating infant anaphylaxis, there are special considerations regarding the use of epinephrine. These include determining appropriate needle length, dosages appropriate to administer depending on the weight of the infant, and the availability of different epinephrine auto-injectors. In this article, we aim to review the clinical management of infant anaphylaxis including diagnosis, recognition, treatment, strategies for follow-up and special considerations regarding epinephrine administration in this demographics.

Proteomic and Biological Analysis of an In Vitro Human Endothelial System in Response to Drug Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening systemic hypersensitivity reaction. During anaphylaxis, mediator release by effector cells causes endothelial barrier breakdown, increasing vascular permeability and leakage of fluids, which may lead to tissue edema. Although endothelial cells (ECs) are key players in this context, scant attention has been paid to the molecular analysis of the vascular system, and further analyses of this cell type are necessary, especially in humans. The protein expression pattern of human microvascular ECs was analyzed in response to sera from anaphylactic patients (EC-anaphylaxis) and sera from non-allergic subjects (EC-control) after 2 hours of contact. Firstly, a differential quantitative proteomic analysis of the protein extracts was performed by mass spectrometry using an isobaric labeling method. Second, the coordinated behavior of the identified proteins was analyzed using systems biology analysis (SBA). The proteome of the EC-anaphylaxis system showed 7,707 proteins, of which 1,069 were found to be significantly altered between the EC-control and EC-anaphylaxis groups (p-value < 0.05). Among them, a subproteome of 47 proteins presented a high rate of change (|ΔZq| ≥ 3). This panel offers an endothelial snapshot of the anaphylactic reaction. Those proteins with the highest individual changes in abundance were hemoglobin subunits and structural support proteins. The interacting network analysis of this altered subproteome revealed that the coagulation and complement systems are the main biological processes altered in the EC-anaphylactic system. The comprehensive SBA resulted in 5,512 functional subcategories (biological processes), 57 of which were significantly altered between EC-control and EC-anaphylaxis. The complement system, once again, was observed as the main process altered in the EC system created with serum from anaphylactic patients. Findings of the current study further our understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms operating in anaphylactic reactions. New target proteins and relevant signaling pathways operating in the in vitro endothelial-serum system have been identified. Interestingly, our results offer a protein overview of the micro-EC-anaphylaxis environment. The relevance of the coagulation, fibrinolytic, contact and complement systems in human anaphylaxis is described. Additionally, the untargeted high-throughput analysis used here is a novel approach that reveals new pathways in the study of the endothelial niche in anaphylaxis.

Addressing Common Misconceptions in Food Allergy: A Review

Background: Food allergies are common, affecting 1 in 13 school children in the United States and their prevalence is increasing. Many misconceptions exist with regards to food allergy prevention, diagnosis and management. Objective: The main objective of this review is to address misconceptions with regards to food allergies and discuss the optimal, evidence-based approach for patients who carry this diagnosis. Observations: Common misconceptions in terms of food allergy prevention include beliefs that breastfeeding and delayed introduction of allergenic foods prevent the development of food allergies. In terms of diagnosis, statements such as ‘larger skin prick tests or/and higher levels of food-specific IgE can predict the severity of food-induced allergic reactions’, or ‘Tryptase is always elevated in food-induced anaphylaxis’ are inaccurate. Additionally, egg allergy is not a contraindication for receiving the influenza vaccine, food-allergy related fatalities are rare and peanut oral immunotherapy, despite reported benefits, is not a cure for food allergies. Finally, not all infants with eczema will develop food allergies and epinephrine auto-injectors may unfortunately be both unavailable and underused in food-triggered anaphylaxis. Conclusions and relevance: Healthcare professionals must be familiar with recent evidence in the food allergy field and avoid common misunderstandings that may negatively affect prevention, diagnosis and management of this chronic disease.

Evidence update for the treatment of anaphylaxis

The Resuscitation Council UK has updated its Guideline for healthcare providers on the Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. As part of this process, an evidence review was undertaken by the Guideline Working Group, using an internationally-accepted approach for adoption, adaptation, and de novo guideline development based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework, referred to as GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. A number of significant changes have been made, which will be reflected in the updated Guideline. These include: emphasis on repeating intramuscular adrenaline doses after 5 min if symptoms of anaphylaxis do not resolve; corticosteroids (e.g. hydrocortisone) no longer being routinely recommended for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis; interventions for reactions which are refractory to initial treatment with adrenaline; a recommendation against the use of antihistamines for the acute management of anaphylaxis; and guidance relating to the duration of observation following anaphylaxis, and timing of discharge.

PD-L1 Blockade During Allergen Sensitization Inhibits the Synthesis of Specific Antibodies and Decreases Mast Cell Activation in a Murine Model of Active Cutaneous Anaphylaxis

Programmed cell death ligand 1(PDL-1) is known for its inhibitory effect on the cellular immune response. Even though it is expressed on the surface of mast cells, its role in allergic diseases is unknown. We analyzed the effects of PD-L1 blockade in a murine model of active cutaneous anaphylaxis (ACA). C57BL/6 mice were sensitized and challenged with ovalbumin (OVA). Blood samples were collected to measure specific immunoglobulins. The mice were divided into six groups that underwent the active cutaneous anaphylaxis procedure. Group 1 (negative control) received 50 μl of phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) subcutaneously, and the other five groups were sensitized with 50 μg of OVA subcutaneously. Group 2 was the positive control, and the others received the anti-PD-L1 antibody or its isotype during sensitization (groups 3 and 4) or during the challenge (groups 5 and 6). All animals that underwent ACA on the ears with OVA and PBS were sacrificed, and the reaction was evaluated by extravasation of Evans blue (measured by spectrophotometry) and histological analysis of the collected fragments. Anti-PD-L1 blockade during the sensitization phase led to a reduction in specific IgE and IgG1 levels, allergic reaction intensity at the ACA site, and mast cell degranulation in the tissue. There was no significant biological effect of anti-PD-L1 administration on the challenge phase. PD-L1 blockade during allergen sensitization inhibited the synthesis of specific IgE and IgG1 and decreased mast cell activation in this murine model of anaphylaxis.

Association between in-line filtration and Type I hypersensitivity reactions in pediatric oncology patients receiving intravenous etoposide

The objective of this study was to describe hypersensitivity reactions with and without the use of in-line filters during intravenous etoposide therapy in pediatric oncology patients. This was a retrospective review of all patients treated in the Division of Oncology/Hematology/Bone Marrow Transplant at British Columbia Children's Hospital with intravenous etoposide between December 1, 2013 and February 1, 2018. Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis associated with etoposide infusions were compared over time, including 12 months prior to, 27 months during the use of, and for 12 months after the discontinuation of in-line filtration. There were 192 patients (median age 6.0 (IQR 2.8-13.0) years treated with etoposide and 486 etoposide infusions including 137 (28%) before, 261 (54%) during and 88 (18%) after use of in-line filters at our center. Twenty-six of 486 (5%) and 13/486 (3%) of infusions resulted in a type I hypersensitivity reaction and anaphylaxis, respectively. There were 2/137 (1%), 36/261 (14%) and 1/88 (1%) infusion reactions prior to, during and after in-line filter use, respectively. Infusion reactions during the in-line filter period were higher than during the pre-filter (Z = 3.978; p < 0.001) and post-filter (Z = 3.335; p < 0.001) periods of the study. These data suggest that the use of in-line filtration may be associated with increased frequency of hypersensitivity reactions to etoposide in pediatric cancer patients.

The effect of high-dose intramuscular epinephrine on the recovery of spontaneous circulation in an asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest rat model

BACKGROUND

Obtaining vascular access can be challenging during resuscitation following cardiac arrest, and it is particularly difficult and time-consuming in paediatric patients. We aimed to compare the efficacy of high-dose intramuscular (IM) versus intravascular (IV) epinephrine administration with regard to the return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) in an asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest rat model.

METHODS

Forty-five male Sprague-Dawley rats were used for these experiments. Cardiac arrest was induced by asphyxia, and defined as a decline in mean arterial pressure (MAP) to 20 mmHg. After asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest, the rats were randomly allocated into one of 3 groups (control saline group, IV epinephrine group, and IM epinephrine group). After 540 s of cardiac arrest, cardiopulmonary resuscitation was performed, and IV saline (0.01 cc/kg), IV (0.01 mg/kg, 1:100,000) epinephrine or IM (0.05 mg/kg, 1:100,000) epinephrine was administered. ROSC was defined as the achievement of an MAP above 40 mmHg for more than 1 minute. Rates of ROSC, haemodynamics, and arterial blood gas analysis were serially observed.

RESULTS

The ROSC rate (61.5%) of the IM epinephrine group was less than that in the IV epinephrine group (100%) but was higher than that of the control saline group (15.4%) (log-rank test). There were no differences in MAP between the two groups, but HR in the IM epinephrine group (beta coefficient = 1.02) decreased to a lesser extent than that in the IV epinephrine group with time.

CONCLUSIONS

IM epinephrine induced better ROSC rates compared to the control saline group in asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest, but not compared to IV epinephrine. The IM route of epinephrine administration may be a promising option in an asphyxia-induced cardiac arrest.

Risk comparison of beta-lactam-induced anaphylaxis: Therapeutic stratification analysis in a Vietnamese pharmacovigilance database

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

There is limited data on the specific risks of anaphylaxis induced by beta-lactam drugs. The aim of this study was to compare the risks of reporting beta-lactam-induced anaphylaxis using the national pharmacovigilance database of Vietnam (NPDV).

METHODS

The multivariate generalised linear regression model was applied for signal generation and comparison of beta-lactams.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2016, there were 2,921 reports of anaphylaxis (19.93%) from 14,655 spontaneous reports of beta-lactam use in the NDPV. Anaphylaxis signal generation was also found for the subgroup J01D (cephalosporins and carbapenems) (ROR = 1.27 [1.16-1.39]) and beta-lactamase-sensitive penicillins (ROR = 1.74 [1.27-2.35]). In the third generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were identified for the following combinations of beta-lactams: 1) cefotaxime with cefoperazone+sulbactam; 2) cefixime/cefpodoxime/cefdinir with cefoperazone+sulbactam or ceftizoxime/cefoperazone/ceftazidime/ceftriaxone/cefotaxime. For the second generation cephalosporin subgroup, different risks were found for cefotiam compared to cefmetazole, cefaclor, cefamandole and cefuroxime.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

These findings identified and highlighted the different anaphylactic risks caused by various beta-lactams in the main subgroups.

Anaphylaxis: Five Years' Experience in the Emergency Rooms of Five University Hospitals in Korea

Background: Anaphylaxis is an allergic disease that requires special handling due to its potential fatality. Recent epidemiological data indicate that the incidence of anaphylaxis is rising. However, actual data on the prevalence or causes of anaphylaxis in Korea are limited. Methods: The emergency room attendees diagnosed with anaphylaxis between 2011 and 2015 in five university hospitals were included. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Results: During the 5 years, a total of 505 subjects were diagnosed with anaphylaxis. Respiratory presentations were more common in children than in adults, while adults presented more frequently with cardiovascular symptoms. Intraoral angioedema was more often observed in the countryside than in the city. Insect stings/bites were more common in the countryside than in the city. Drugs were much more common in adults than in children. In the countryside, the frequency of anaphylaxis was higher in summer and autumn than in spring and winter. The use of corticosteroids was less common in children than in adults, while children more frequently got treatment with inhaled beta 2 agonist. Conclusions: The principal causes of anaphylaxis in Korean patients were food, drugs, and stings/bites. The cause, clinical features and management of anaphylaxis were significantly different depending on age and region. These real-world data on anaphylaxis could be helpful to deepen that understanding of this condition for physicians and patients.

Food-induced anaphylaxis in infants, as compared to toddlers and preschool children in Turkey

BACKGROUND

The literature includes scarce data on infants with food-induced anaphylaxis (FIA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medical records of the patients diagnosed with FIA aged 0-6 years between 2015 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 451 instances of FIA in 314 patients, of which 175 (38.8%) occurred in 160 infants (50.9%). The median (IQR) age of infants was 7 months (6-9 months) with a male predominance (67.5%), of which 7.5% had multiple instances (≥2) and 60% atopic dermatitis. The most common triggers were cow's milk (51.4%), tree nuts (16.6%), and hen's egg (15.4%), whereas tree nut was the most common trigger in toddlers (35.8%) and preschool children (35.2%). Skin and neurologic symptoms, and nausea-vomiting occurred more frequently (P = .003, P ≤ .001, and P = .003, respectively), whereas respiratory symptoms occurred less commonly in infants compared to toddlers and preschool children (P ≤ .001). In infants, 65 (37.1%) mild, 92 (52.6 %) moderate, and 18 (10.3%) severe episodes of anaphylaxis were detected. History of recurrent wheezing (OR: 6.837 [95% CI: 1.940-24.097], P = .003) and tree nut allergy (OR: 2.849 [95% CI: 1.056-7.688], P = .039) were found to be independent risk factors for moderate-to-severe anaphylactic reactions. 40.6% of the infants received adrenaline, which was lower than the toddlers (49.7%) and preschool children (57.6%) (P = .005).

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that food-induced anaphylaxis is a medical emergency, specifically in young children. Pediatricians should be aware of the distinct features of infant anaphylaxis, particularly gastrointestinal and neurologic symptoms to provide effective treatment as soon as possible.

World allergy organization anaphylaxis guidance 2020

Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions. The occurrence of anaphylaxis has increased in recent years, and subsequently, there is a need to continue disseminating knowledge on the diagnosis and management, so every healthcare professional is prepared to deal with such emergencies. The rationale of this updated position document is the need to keep guidance aligned with the current state of the art of knowledge in anaphylaxis management. The World Allergy Organization (WAO) anaphylaxis guidelines were published in 2011, and the current guidance adopts their major indications, incorporating some novel changes. Intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) continues to be the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. Nevertheless, its use remains suboptimal. After an anaphylaxis occurrence, patients should be referred to a specialist to assess the potential cause and to be educated on prevention of recurrences and self-management. The limited availability of epinephrine auto-injectors remains a major problem in many countries, as well as their affordability for some patients.

Diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may be life threatening. An informal review of the literature was performed in a nonsystematic way for this article. Key published work was identified and included. The incidence and prevalence of anaphylaxis have increased over time. Anaphylaxis is unpredictable and can be the result of various allergic triggers, including food, insect venom, and medication. In children, the most frequent trigger is food. The diagnosis is based on clinical criteria. After confirmation of the relevant allergen trigger, prevention occurs through strict avoidance of the allergen and optimal management of existing comorbidities. Patients with anaphylaxis require immediate assessment and treatment. The management of a patient with anaphylaxis should start with the removal of exposure to the known or suspected trigger, followed by the assessment of the patient's circulation, airway patency, breathing, and mental status. The administration of epinephrine at a dose of 0.01 mg/kg (1:1000) intramuscularly is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, and there are no absolute contraindications to this treatment. The maximum single dose of epinephrine is 0.5 mg and may be repeated after 5-10 minutes if needed. After administration of epinephrine, patients with anaphylaxis should be placed supine with their lower limbs elevated. They should not be placed in the upright position. Studies of fatal and near-fatal allergic reactions identified potential risk factors for fatalities such as asthma, peanuts and/or tree nuts, and delayed epinephrine use, and provided important information that may help minimize the future risk. Patients and their families need to be well educated on how to manage potential anaphylactic reactions with training in the use of epinephrine autoinjectors and personalized emergency management plans. Health care professionals must be familiar with this clinical emergency and able to respond to anaphylaxis in a timely and appropriate manner.

[Selecting and defining the clinical questions and outcomes of Guideline for the Emergency Treatment of Anaphylaxis]

OBJECTIVE

To select and define the clinical questions and outcomes of Guideline for the Emergency Treatment of Anaphylaxis.

METHODS

A draft including clinical questions, which could be divided into foreground questions and background questions, and outcomes was drawn and revised by the secretary group for the guideline referring to the present guidelines with the guidance of a panel consisting of 7 experienced clinical medicine, pharmacy and nursing experts. Foreground questions and outcomes of the draft were voted into a final version after three rounds of counsels of 22 experienced medicine, pharmacy and nursing clinical experts using Delphi method including 3 rounds of inquiry. And the background questions were directly included in the guideline after the 22 experts' thorough revising. The research was carried out under the supervision of method ologists. Active coefficient, coefficient of variation and the frequencies of each score were calculated for quality control.

RESULTS

The draft of 34 foreground questions, 6 background questions and 6 outcomes was finally drawn up after thorough selecting and consulting. The 6 background questions revised by the clinical experts were all included. After three rounds of Delphi method, 28 pivotal clinical questions covering the diagnosis, preparation for the treatment, treatment and administration after the treatment, and 6 outcomes were defined and included for the guideline. The rest of the foreground questions, 4 of which were recognized as essential and 2 as important, were excluded from the guideline and left for further revising or updating. As for the outcomes, 4 of them were recognized as critical and the rest as important. The experts contributing to the research were active as the active coefficient reached 100%, and the degree of consensus was fine as the frequencies of the feedback scoring equal to or greater than 4 for all the 28 foreground questions included were greater than 75% and the result was settled in the first round. And 2 outcomes, fatality rate and severity, reached a higher degree of consensus with coefficient of variation less than 15%.

CONCLUSION

After thorough and rigorous selecting, the clinical questions and outcomes to be included in the Guideline for the Emergency Treatment of Anaphylaxis were finally selected and defined via Delphi method, guiding the future development of the guidelines.

Recent advances in mechanisms of food allergy and anaphylaxis

Food allergens are innocuous proteins that promote tolerogenic adaptive immune responses in healthy individuals yet in other individuals induce an allergic adaptive immune response characterized by the presence of antigen-specific immunoglobulin E and type-2 immune cells. The cellular and molecular processes that determine a tolerogenic versus non-tolerogenic immune response to dietary antigens are not fully elucidated. Recently, there have been advances in the identification of roles for microbial communities and anatomical sites of dietary antigen exposure and presentation that have provided new insights into the key regulatory steps in the tolerogenic versus non-tolerogenic decision-making processes. Herein, we will review and discuss recent findings in cellular and molecular processes underlying food sensitization and tolerance, immunological processes underlying severity of food-induced anaphylaxis, and insights obtained from immunotherapy trials.

New York State cases of anaphylaxis in elderly patients from 2000 to 2010

BACKGROUND

Limited information is available on the effect of anaphylaxis, a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction, in the elderly population.

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the frequency of anaphylaxis and the demographic characteristics of elderly patients admitted to New York hospitals from 2000 to 2010.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of hospitalized patients aged 65 years and older in New York from 2000 to 2010 was conducted using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, a statewide administrative database. Cases were identified using anaphylaxis International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes or an ICD-9-based diagnostic algorithm incorporating the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease diagnostic criteria. The χ² test was used to measure the association between demographic characteristics and group membership. Regression was used to model group and age as a function of hospital rates.

RESULTS

A total of 3673 hospitalizations were analyzed. Anaphylaxis ICD-9 codes identified 1790 cases (48.7%), the algorithms identified 1701 cases (46.3.%), and 182 cases (5.0%) were identified by both. Hospitalization rates increased significantly during this period (P < .001). Women comprised 61.5% and people of white race comprised 69.8% of the sample. Distribution by age differed by ascertainment method (ICD-9 vs algorithm) among the early-old group (65-74 years of age; 53.8% vs 41.8%) and among the late-old group (≥85 years of age; 11.2% vs 19.3%).

CONCLUSION

Hospitalization rates and anaphylaxis cases increased during the study period among the hospitalized elderly population of New York. Relying on anaphylaxis ICD-9 codes alone missed approximately half of possible cases. The identification and possibly the effect of anaphylaxis among the elderly population may differ, depending on age, race, payer, New York County, and disposition.

Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis: An Update on Epidemiology and Risk Factors

Drug hypersensitivity is one of the most frequent causes of anaphylaxis, particularly in adults and in hospitalized patients. Drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) is also associated with more severe outcomes than other anaphylaxis triggers, and drugs are responsible for the majority of deaths due to anaphylaxis. We here review the current knowledge on the incidence, prevalence, drugs involved, mortality, and mortality risk factors for DIA. The incidence of both anaphylaxis and DIA seems to be increasing worldwide. Antibiotics and analgesics are the most frequently reported triggers of DIA. However, the importance of other drug groups should be taken into account, especially in particular settings (e.g., peri-operative and oncology). The identification of risk factors, geographical variables, and drugs associated with higher risk for DIA may improve the outcomes of this entity.

Pediatric Patients with Previous Anaphylactic Reactions to General Anesthesia: a Review of Literature, Case Report, and Anesthetic Considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It is rare to see pediatric patients with previous perioperative anaphylaxis receiving future anesthesia, but it is critical to understand how to choose assessments, interpret the results, and develop a future anesthetic plan.

RECENT FINDINGS

Analysis of the results revealed that patients, at any age, regardless of sex and nationality, and the number of surgeries, have the risk of perioperative anaphylaxis while the risk of allergy increases as patients present multiple surgical events or have a previous history of atopy. 94.7% of pediatric patients with allergy testing after perioperative anaphylaxis tolerated subsequent general anesthesia without complications. Specific IgE tests, basophil activation tests, and skin tests are not available and suitable for all culprits. The early skin test could be considered a supplement for later testing. Drug challenge test is the golden standard but can only be used as the last resort. If general anesthesia is inevitable, avoidance of the culprit and use of alternative agents can help the patients prevent another potential recurrence. Full use of inhalation anesthesia without unnecessary neuromuscular blockade agents and avoidance of latex is recommended when the surgery is urgent or skin tests for children cannot be performed in time. This review summarizes characteristics of perioperative pediatric anaphylaxis, main tests for various drugs, and their sensitivities and specificities as well as recommendations as to how to implement safe anesthesia in the future.

How guideline can shape clinical practice globally: the diagnosis and rationale for action against cow's milk allergy experience

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergic diseases are increasing worldwide and are considered an important public health problem causing severe and even life-threatening reactions. The creation of guidelines aims to help clinicians improving the quality of diagnosis and management of such diseases. Clinical practice guidelines alone are not sufficient and there is a need for implementation strategies for their introduction into daily practice. We report here the main international allergy guidelines with a more focused look on the Diagnosis and Rationale for Action against Cow's Milk Allergy (DRACMA) guidelines and their effect on clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

DRACMA guidelines have clearly modified the approach to cow's milk allergy (CMA) from its diagnosis to treatment tailoring the choices for each patient. Although they strongly recommend oral food challenge for diagnosing CMA, they also indicate that it may not be necessary in many cases with the introduction of the pretest probability of CMA. Studies on the implementation of DRACMA guidelines show how they influenced the formula market, making appropriate treatments more affordable.

SUMMARY

DRACMA reconciled international differences in the diagnosis and management of CMA. They introduced the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology in the field of food allergy and highlighted the importance for meta-analyses to be able to adapt recommendations to the local context.

A WAO - ARIA - GA2LEN consensus document on molecular-based allergy diagnosis (PAMD@): Update 2020

Precision allergy molecular diagnostic applications (PAMD@) is increasingly entering routine care. Currently, more than 130 allergenic molecules from more than 50 allergy sources are commercially available for in vitro specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE) testing. Since the last publication of this consensus document, a great deal of new information has become available regarding this topic, with over 100 publications in the last year alone. It thus seems quite reasonable to publish an update. It is imperative that clinicians and immunologists specifically trained in allergology keep abreast of the new and rapidly evolving evidence available for PAMD@.

PAMD@ may initially appear complex to interpret; however, with increasing experience, the information gained provides relevant information for the allergist. This is especially true for food allergy, Hymenoptera allergy, and for the selection of allergen immunotherapy. Nevertheless, all sIgE tests, including PAMD@, should be evaluated within the framework of a patient's clinical history, because allergen sensitization does not necessarily imply clinical relevant allergies.

Approach to Patients with Stinging Insect Allergy

Stinging insect allergy is uncommon but can be life threatening. Diagnosis requires clinical history and confirmative skin or blood testing by an allergist. Baseline serum tryptase level can be used to stratify risk. Treatment is supportive for all reactions except for anaphylaxis, which is treated with intramuscular epinephrine, recumbent posture, and adjunct measures such as IV fluids, and oxygen. Venom immunotherapy is most effective for long-term management in patients with a history of anaphylaxis. Venom immunotherapy rapidly reduces the risk of sting anaphylaxis by up to 98% and maintenance treatment can be stopped after 5 years in most cases.

Improvement of the Elevated Tryptase Criterion to Discriminate IgE- From Non-IgE-Mediated Allergic Reactions

BACKGROUND

Differentiating between immunoglobulin E (IgE)-dependent and IgE-independent hypersensitivity reactions may improve the etiologic orientation and clinical management of patients with allergic reactions in the anesthesia setting. Serum tryptase levels may be useful to discriminate the immune mechanism of allergic reactions, but the diagnostic accuracy and optimal cutpoint remain unclear.We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of tryptase during reaction (TDR) alone and the TDR/basal tryptase (TDR/BT) ratio for discriminating IgE- from non-IgE-mediated allergic reactions, and to estimate the best cut point for these indicators.

METHODS

We included 111 patients (45% men; aged 3-99 years) who had experienced an allergic reaction, even though the allergic reaction could be nonanaphylactic. Allergy tests were performed to classify the reaction as an IgE- or non-IgE-mediated one. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to estimate the discriminative ability of TDR and TDR/BT ratio.

RESULTS

An IgE-mediated reaction was diagnosed in 49.5% of patients, and 56% of patients met anaphylaxis criteria. The median (quartiles) TDR for the IgE-mediated reactions was 8.0 (4.9-19.6) and 5.1 (3.5-8.1) for the non-IgE-mediated (P = .022). The median (quartiles) TDR/BT ratio was 2.7 (1.7-4.5) in IgE-mediated and 1.1 (1.0-1.6) in non-IgE-mediated reactions (P < .001). The TDR/BT ratio showed the greatest ability to discriminate IgE- from non-IgE-mediated reactions compared to TDR (AUC TDR/BT = 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.88] and AUC TDR = 0.66 [95% CI, 0.56-0.76]; P = .001). The optimal cut point for TDR/BT (maximization of the sum of the sensitivity and specificity) was 1.66 (95% CI, 1.1-2.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The TDR/BT ratio showed a significantly better discriminative ability than TDR to discriminate IgE- from non-IgE-mediated allergic reactions. An optimal TDR/BT ratio threshold of approximately 1.66 may be useful in clinical practice to classify allergic reactions as IgE- or non-IgE-mediated.

Evaluation of Prehospital Management in a Canadian Emergency Department Anaphylaxis Cohort

BACKGROUND

Studies assessing the use of antihistamines and corticosteroids for the treatment of anaphylaxis have not supported a conclusive effect.

OBJECTIVE

To assess prehospital management of anaphylaxis by measuring the effect of epinephrine use compared with antihistamines and corticosteroids on negative outcomes of anaphylaxis (intensive care unit/hospital ward admission, multiple doses of epinephrine in the emergency department [ED], and intravenous fluids given in the ED).

METHODS

The Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis Registry is a cohort study that enrolls anaphylaxis cases presenting to EDs in 5 Canadian provinces over a 6-year period. Participants were recruited prospectively and retrospectively and were excluded if the case did not meet the definition of anaphylaxis.

RESULTS

A total of 3498 cases of anaphylaxis, of which 80.3% were children, presented to 9 EDs across Canada. Prehospital treatment with epinephrine was administered in 31% of cases, whereas antihistamines and corticosteroids were used in 46% and 2% of cases, respectively. Admission to the intensive care unit/hospital ward was associated with prehospital treatment with corticosteroids (adjusted odds ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.55, 6.97) while adjusting for severity, treatment with epinephrine and antihistamines, asthma, sex, and age. Prehospital treatment with epinephrine (adjusted odds ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.14, 0.38) and antihistamines (adjusted odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44, 0.85) decreased the likelihood of receiving multiple doses of epinephrine in the ED, while adjusting for severity, treatment with corticosteroids, asthma, sex, and age.

CONCLUSIONS

Prompt epinephrine treatment is crucial. Use of antihistamines in conjunction with epinephrine may reduce the risk of uncontrolled reactions (administration of 2 or more doses of epinephrine in the ED), although our findings do not support the use of corticosteroids.

Epinephrine in Neonatal Resuscitation

Epinephrine is the only medication recommended by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation for use in newborn resuscitation. Strong evidence from large clinical trials is lacking owing to the infrequent use of epinephrine during neonatal resuscitation. Current recommendations are weak as they are extrapolated from animal models or pediatric and adult studies that do not adequately depict the transitioning circulation and fluid-filled lungs of the newborn in the delivery room. Many gaps in knowledge including the optimal dosing, best route and timing of epinephrine administration warrant further studies. Experiments on a well-established ovine model of perinatal asphyxial cardiac arrest closely mimicking the newborn infant provide important information that can guide future clinical trials.