Skin eruptions in children: Drug hypersensitivity vs viral exanthema

How to manage drug-virus interplay underlying skin eruptions in children

The majority of viral rashes occurring during an antibiotic therapy are considered as a drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR). Differentiating a viral rash versus a DHR is difficult or even impossible. In delayed DHRs the interplay between viruses and drugs is summarized according to the recent literature. The question is if the same reaction will again occur in case of drug re-exposure in absence of the concomitant viral infection because of persistent immune reactivity. Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) and Human Herpes virus 6 (HHV-6) models are analyzed in case of maculopapular exanthemas (MPEs) and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) over a course of drug therapy. MPEs are the most common skin manifestation during a viral infection and a concomitant drug therapy. In type IVb reactions to drugs a hapten/pro-hapten mechanism and a pharmacological interaction (p-i mechanism) are described as the 2 major ways to make T cells response functional. Rarely the altered repertoire model is involved. The Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) predisposition is an additional essential factor that can facilitate DHR. In MPEs rarely a DHR is confirmed by allergy testing. Severity and duration of MPEs, the presence of eosinophilia and systemic symptoms make more reliable the persistent nature of the reaction. Research on this topic is needed in order to provide the clinicians with instruments to decide when to suspect future reactions upon drug re-exposure even in the absence of a viral infection, because those patients should be investigated by a complete drug allergy work up.

Record of strep throat infections in Italy: what is needed to know about penicillin allergy? The point of view from the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (SIAIP)

Notifications of invasive group A streptococcal (iGAS) infections have significantly increased in many European Countries compared to the previous season. In Italy, there has been an increase in streptococcal pharyngitis and scarlet fever cases since January 2023, which sparked concerns about a GAS epidemic in the pediatric population. This rise may be ascribed to the GAS infection season that began earlier than usual (off-season outbreak) and the increase in the spread of respiratory viruses and viral coinfections that raised the risk of iGAS disease. Moreover, this phenomenon was also facilitated by increased travel after reduced GAS circulation during the COVID-19 pandemic.The increase in cases of GAS disease has raised some critical issues regarding the potential reactions to administering amoxicillin, the first-line antibiotic therapy, many of which have been erroneously labeled as "allergy."For these reasons, the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology (SIAIP) intends to provide simple clinical indications to help pediatricians manage GAS pharyngitis, discerning the allergic from non-allergic drug hypersensitivity.

Safety of Direct Drug Provocation for the Evaluation of Penicillin Allergy in Low-Risk Adults

BACKGROUND

About 10% of patients have a penicillin allergy label, but less than 5% of them are actually allergic. Unnecessary penicillin avoidance is associated with serious medical consequences. Given the growing number of these labels, it is imperative that our diagnostic strategy for penicillin allergy be as efficient as possible. The validity of traditionally used skin tests (STs) has been questioned, whereas drug provocation testing (DPT), the criterion standard, without previous ST appears very safe in most cases.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of direct DPT without consideration for ST results and the validity of ST in the diagnosis of penicillin allergy.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study without a control group, we recruited patients consulting an allergist for penicillin allergy. Patients underwent ST followed by DPT regardless of ST results. Patients with anaphylaxis to penicillin within the past 5 years or a severe delayed reaction were excluded, as were those with significant cardiorespiratory comorbidity.

RESULTS

None of the 1002 recruited patients had a serious reaction to DPT. Ten (1.0%) had a mild immediate reaction, of whom only 1 (0.1%) was considered likely IgE-mediated. The positive and negative predictive values of ST for an immediate reaction were 3.6% and 99.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a low-risk adult population reporting penicillin allergy, ST has very poor positive predictive value. Direct DPT without ST is safe and appears to be an ideal diagnostic strategy to remove penicillin allergy labels that could be implemented in first-line practice.

Practical Approach to Hypersensitivity to Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) in Children

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the real-life prevalence, patient profile, and clinical presentation of drug hypersensitivity to NSAIDs in children after an incidence of an adverse event during treatment, verified by a drug challenge test.

METHODS

We included 56 children, aged 4-18 years, referred to our allergy clinic due to the incidence of adverse reaction during treatment. Skin prick tests and a drug provocation test were performed in all patients. Diagnostics for persistent urticaria were performed.

RESULTS

In 56 patients suspected of drug allergy, we proved NSAID hypersensitivity in 17 patients (30.1%). In 84.9% (n = 47) of patients, the clinical manifestations of hypersensitivity revealed angioedema and urticaria. The most common culprit drug among NSAIDs in children was ibuprofen. Thirty-one (55.4%) reactions were immediate, and 25 (44.6%) were delayed or late. Previous history of allergy was a risk factor for NSAID hypersensitivity (p = 0.001). Vitamin D deficiency in the blood serum was a risk factor for NASID hypersensitivity (OR = 5.76 (95% Cl: 1.42-23.41)).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypersensitivity to NSAIDs is a difficult diagnostic problem in pediatric allergy. The most common manifestation of hypersensitivity to ibuprofen in children is acute urticaria and angioedema. Two important problems in the differential diagnosis are cofactors such as vitamin D levels and viral infections, which require further research.

Impact of penicillin allergy labels among pneumonia admissions at an academic children's center

Background: Pneumonia is the most common reason for pediatric hospitalizations. The impact of penicillin allergy labels among children with pneumonia has not been well studied. Objective: This study assessed the prevalence and impact of penicillin allergy labels among children admitted with pneumonia over a 3-year period at a large academic children's center. Methods: Inpatient charts of pneumonia admissions with a documented allergy to a type of penicillin from January to March in 2017, 2018, and 2019 were reviewed and compared with pneumonia admissions without the label over the same time with regard to days of antimicrobial treatment, route of antimicrobial therapy, and days of hospitalization. Results: There were 470 admissions for pneumonia during this time period, of which 48 patients (10.2%) carried a penicillin allergy label. Hives and/or swelling comprised 20.8% of the allergy labels. Other labels included nonpruritic rashes, gastrointestinal GI symptoms, unknown/undocumented reactions, or other reasons. There were no significant differences between those with a penicillin allergy label to those without regarding days of antimicrobial treatment (inpatient and outpatient), route of antimicrobial therapy, and days of hospitalization. Those with a penicillin allergy label were less likely to be prescribed a penicillin product (p < 0.002). Of the 48 patients who were allergy labeled, 23% (11/48) were given a penicillin medication without adverse reaction. Conclusion: Ten percent of pediatric admissions for pneumonia had a label of penicillin allergy, similar to the overall population. The hospital course and clinical outcome were not significantly affected by the penicillin allergy label. The majority of documented reactions were of low risk for immediate allergic reactions.

Tools to improve the diagnosis and management of T-cell mediated adverse drug reactions

Delayed drug T-cell immune-mediated hypersensitivity reactions have a large clinical heterogeneity varying from mild maculopapular exanthema (MPE) to severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) such as acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and severe skin necrosis and blistering as seen in Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Given the knowledge gaps related to the immunopathogenesis of these conditions, the absence of validated diagnostic tools and the significant associated morbidity and mortality, patients with SCARs often have limited drug choices. We performed a comprehensive review aiming to evaluate in vivo diagnostic tools such as delayed intradermal skin and patch testing and ex vivo/in vitro research assays such as the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) and the enzyme-linked ImmunoSpot (ELISpot) assay. We searched through PubMed using the terms “drug allergy,” “in vivo” and “ex vivo” for original papers in the last 10 years. A detailed meticulous approach adapted to the various clinical phenotypes is recommended for the diagnostic and management of delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. This review highlights the current diagnostic tools for the delayed drug hypersensitivity phenotypes.

Kleine Ursache – große Wirkung: Spättyp-Hauttests mit Medikamenten als Auslöser von disseminierten Rezidivexanthemen

Es werden zwei Patienten vorgestellt, die wegen eines streuenden allergischen Kontakt- bzw. Arzneimittelexanthems auf Budesonid bzw. Antibiotika abgeklärt wurden. Bei beiden trat innerhalb einiger Stunden nach Anlegen eines Epikutantests mit Budesonid bzw. Intradermaltesten mit Amoxicillin eine stark positive Hauttestreaktion sowie ein Exanthem auf. Beim ersten Patienten lag eine Sensibilisierung auf die kreuzreagierenden Moleküle Budesonid und Amcinonid, bei der zweiten Patientin eine ausgeprägte Überempfindlichkeit auf Aminopenizilline vor. Aufflammphänomene (Flare-ups) sind v. a. aus der Kontaktallergologie bekannt, können aber auch bei der Abklärung von allergischen Arzneimittelexanthemen auftreten. Systemische Reaktionen vom verzögerten Typ auf Spättyp-Hauttests mit Medikamenten sind relativ selten, können aber eine erhebliche Morbidität bewirken. Verschiedene Formen von Aufflammphänomenen in der Allergologie werden diskutiert.

Exanthematous reactions to drugs in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The true exanthematous reactions to drugs in children are rare and overdiagnosed. Drugs may cause exanthema either due to inducing an immune response or because of their interaction with viruses, if drugs are taken in the course of a viral infection. Also, viral infections are very often in children and they can provoke an exanthema which is difficult to differentiate from exanthematous reactions to drugs. Consequently, the majority of children are incorrectly labeled as 'allergic'.

RECENT FINDINGS

The correct diagnosis of exanthematous drug reactions in children is still an important and hot topic. Most information about the approach and management of drug hypersensitivity in children is applied from available guidelines and consensus statement for adults. Recently, a systematic clinical approach for timely differential diagnosis and management of rashes in children who present a cutaneous exanthema while receiving a drug, is proposed.

SUMMARY

It is important to consider the detailed clinical history of appearing and developing exanthematous drug reaction, as well as physical examination which includes the description and the distribution of exanthema and at the end making the appropriate diagnosis. Thus, it could reduce overdiagnosis and promote appropriate procedures, that will prevent the overlabeling of drug hypersensitivity in children.