The patient who reports a drug allergy

Management of penicillin allergy in primary care: a qualitative study with patients and primary care physicians

Background

Six percent of patients are allergic to penicillin according to their medical records. While this designation protects a small number of truly allergic patients from serious reactions, those who are incorrectly labelled may be denied access to recommended first line treatment for many infections. Removal of incorrect penicillin allergy may have positive health consequences for the individual and the general population.

We aimed to explore primary care physicians’ (PCPs) and patients’ views and understanding of penicillin allergy with a focus on clinical management of infections in the face of a penicillin allergy record.

Methods

We conducted an interview study with 31 patients with a penicillin allergy record, and 19 PCPs in the North of England. Data were analysed thematically.

Results

Patients made sense of their allergy status by considering the timing and severity of symptoms. Diagnosis of penicillin allergy was reported to be ‘imperfect’ with PCPs relying on patient reports and incomplete medical records. PCPs and patients often suspected that an allergy record was incorrect, but PCPs were reluctant to change records. PCPs had limited knowledge of allergy services. PCPs often prescribed alternative antibiotics which were easy to identify. Both patients and PCPs differed in the extent to which they were aware of the negative consequences of incorrect penicillin allergy records, their relevance and importance to their lives, and management of penicillin allergy.

Conclusions

PCPs and patients appear insufficiently aware of potential harms associated with incorrect penicillin allergy records. Some of the problems experienced by PCPs could be reduced by ensuring the details of newly diagnosed reactions to antibiotics are clearly documented. In order for PCPs to overturn more incorrect penicillin records through appropriate use of allergy services, more information and training about these services will be needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01465-1.

Systematic Analysis of Protein Targets Associated with Adverse Events of Drugs from Clinical Trials and Postmarketing Reports

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are undesired effects of medicines that can harm patients and are a significant source of attrition in drug development. ADRs are anticipated by routinely screening drugs against secondary pharmacology protein panels. However, there is still a lack of quantitative information on the links between these off-target proteins and the reporting of ADRs in humans. Here, we present a systematic analysis of associations between measured and predicted in vitro bioactivities of drugs and adverse events (AEs) in humans from two sources of data: the Side Effect Resource, derived from clinical trials, and the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System, derived from postmarketing surveillance. The ratio of a drug's therapeutic unbound plasma concentration over the drug's in vitro potency against a given protein was used to select proteins most likely to be relevant to in vivo effects. In examining individual target bioactivities as predictors of AEs, we found a trade-off between the positive predictive value and the fraction of drugs with AEs that can be detected. However, considering sets of multiple targets for the same AE can help identify a greater fraction of AE-associated drugs. Of the 45 targets with statistically significant associations to AEs, 30 are included on existing safety target panels. The remaining 15 targets include 9 carbonic anhydrases, of which CA5B is significantly associated with cholestatic jaundice. We include the full quantitative data on associations between measured and predicted in vitro bioactivities and AEs in humans in this work, which can be used to make a more informed selection of safety profiling targets.