Basophil responsiveness and clinical picture of acetylsalicylic acid intolerance

What happens to basophils and tryptase, LXA4 and CysLTs during aspirin desensitization?

INTRODUCTION

Aspirin desensitization (AD) is an effective treatment in patients with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID)-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD) by providing inhibitory effect on symptoms and polyp recurrence. However, limited data is available on how AD works. We aimed to study comprehensively the mechanisms underlying AD by examining basophil activation (CD203c upregulation), mediator-releases of tryptase, CysLT, and LXA₄, and LTB₄ receptor expression for the first 3 months of AD.

METHODS

The study was conducted in patients with NERD who underwent AD (group 1: n = 23), patients with NERD who received no desensitization (group 2: n = 22), and healthy volunteers (group 3, n = 13). All participants provided blood samples for flow cytometry studies (CD203c and LTB₄ receptor), and mediator releases (CysLT, LXA_4, and tryptase) for the relevant time points determined.

RESULTS

All baseline parameters of CD203c and LTB₄ receptor expressions, tryptase, CysLT, and LXA₄ releases were similar in each group (p > 0.05). In group 1, CD203c started to be upregulated at the time of reactions during AD, and continued to be high for 3 months when compared to controls. All other study parameters were comparable with baseline and at the other time points in each group (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although basophils are active during the first 3 months of AD, no releases of CysLT, tryptase or LXA₄ exist. Therefore, our results suggest that despite active basophils, inhibition of mediators can at least partly explain underlying the mechanism in the first three months of AD.

Clinical value of in vitro tests for the management of severe drug hypersensitivity reactions

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) occasionally present with severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) which result in a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Although SCARs are rare, the occurrence could lead to a significant increase in healthcare and economic burden, especially when more than one possible culprit drug is implicated. Therefore, the accurate identification of the culprit drug(s) is important for correct labeling and subsequent patient education and avoidance. To date, clinical evaluation using causality assessment has limitations because the assessment may be inaccurate due to the overlapping timelines when multiple drugs are initiated/continued. Moreover, drug provocation tests (DPTs) which is the gold standard in diagnosis, are contraindicated, and in vivo skin tests may also be associated with risks of triggering SCAR. The European Network for Drug Allergy recommended that in vitro tests, if available, should be performed before any in vivo tests. Basophil activation tests and lymphocyte transformation tests, could serve as reliable in vitro tests for both immediate and delayed-type DHR. Many academic medical centers with affiliated laboratory services offer these tests in the diagnostic evaluation of SCARs in clinical practice. This not only complements identification of the culprit drug(s), but may also be used to test for potentially non cross-reactive alternatives, hence avoiding DPTs. In this review, we summarize the roles of in vitro tests in identifying the culprit drug(s) in SCARs, issues with utilization and interpretation of test results, and our experience in clinical practice.

Basophil activation testing in occupational respiratory allergy to low molecular weight compounds

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There is an unmet need for better immunological tests in cases of suspected occupational asthma to many workplace chemicals; here we consider the basophil activation test (BAT), a potential alternative to the detection of specific IgE antibodies.

RECENT FINDINGS

BAT is fairly widely used in general allergy services; and there is increasing experience of its use in the diagnosis of occupational allergy to low molecular weight agents and chemicals including wood dusts, persulphates, antibiotics and latex.

SUMMARY

There is potential for BAT to become a useful tool in the clinical consideration of occupational asthma and of its mechanisms, and even to take a place in a Bayesian-based diagnostic algorithm. Further development will only occur if specialist centres with appropriate facilities, and preferably in collaboration, contemplate its use.

BAT in the Diagnosis of Drug Allergy: a Novel Tool in Clinical Daily Practice?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study is to critically review the relevant literature published on basophil activation test, presenting the current knowledge and future perspectives.

RECENT FINDINGS

Basophil activation test (BAT) results varied accordingly to the class of the drug studied, and have promising results in immediate hypersensitivity reactions to pyrazolone (selective reactors), neuromuscular blockers, beta-lactams, and platinum compounds, all examples of classical IgE-mediated hypersensitivity drug reactions. Currently, BAT is applied in research settings, but based in the results of our review, the test can be considered as a diagnostic tool for daily practice for selected patients and selected drugs, when the test is available, particularly for patients who experienced severe reactions and when diagnosis cannot be stablished by serum-specific IgE and skin testing, in order to avoid unnecessary drug provocations tests.

Prueba de activación de basófilos: aspectos técnicos, metodológicos y su utilidad clínica

Introducción. La prueba de activación de basófilos (PAB) se considera una técnica confiable y segura para el diagnóstico de problemas alérgicos.Objetivo. Profundizar en el estado del arte de la PAB y su utilidad clínica.Materiales y métodos. Se realizó una revisión narrativa de la literatura mediante la búsqueda electrónica en las bases de datos y metabuscadores Ovid Medline, Google Scholar y PubMed, sin limitar la búsqueda por fecha, idioma o tipo de artículo. Se buscaron artículos sobre los detalles técnicos de la PAB y su utilidad clínica en el manejo de las enfermedades alérgicas.Resultados. De los marcadores de activación, CD63 ha sido el más estudiado y es el que mejor representa un evento de degranulación anafiláctica, mientras que CD203c es representativo de varias formas de degranulación. La superioridad de uno sobre otro como prueba diagnóstica depende del problema alérgico estudiado. En cuanto a los métodos de detección de basófilos, su selección con un único marcador, CCR3, se propone como una opción con buena relación de costo-efectividad.Conclusiones. La PAB es una herramienta prometedora para evaluar en clínica las reacciones alérgicas de forma segura. Es necesario una mayor estandarización de protocolos para obtener resultados más reproducibles.

In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations

Background

For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHR and impossible for non-IgE-mediated IDHR that result from alternative routes of basophil and mast cell activation. In these difficult cases, diagnosis might benefit from cellular tests such as basophil activation tests (BAT).

Aim

The aim was to review the potential and limitations of quantification of sIgE and BAT in diagnosing IDHR. The utility of quantification of serum tryptase is discussed.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using the key words allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors’ own experience.

Results

The drugs that have been most studied with both techniques are β-lactam antibiotics and curarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). For sIgE morphine, data are available on the value of this test as a biomarker for sensitization to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA, especially rocuronium and suxamethonium. For the BAT, there are also data on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. For β-lactam antibiotics, sensitivity and specificity of sIgE varies between 0 and 85% and 52 and 100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varies between 38.5 and 92% and 85.7 and 100%, respectively. Specific IgE to morphine should not be used in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates. For the BAT, sensitivity generally varies between 50 and 60%, whereas specificity attains 80%, except for quinolones and NSAIDs.

Conclusions

Although drug-sIgE assays and BAT can provide useful information in the diagnosis of IDHR, their predictive value is not absolute. Large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory to harmonize and optimize test protocols and to establish drug-specific decision thresholds.

Bioactive food chemicals and gastrointestinal symptoms: a focus of salicylates

Bioactive food chemicals are substances present in food that are capable of interacting with living cells causing changes in physiological functions. Salicylic acid (SA), a plant hormone involved in plant immune response, is one such bioactive food chemical. Aspirin, a commercially available SA, might play beneficial roles in cardiovascular health and colon cancer. It may also cause urticaria, angioedema, asthma, and gastrointestinal symptoms in SA-sensitive individuals. Dietary SA might exert similar beneficial effects and/or may induce similar symptoms in hypersensitive individuals. Food-related SA sensitivity in relation to gastrointestinal symptoms is not well documented besides a few self-reported questionnaires and the knowledge that low doses of aspirin (equivalent of high dietary intake) can cause gastrointestinal injury. The only direct evidence that suggests benefits of reducing dietary SA was reported in asthmatic individuals. Although SA sensitivity in relation to gut symptoms in susceptible individuals is accepted by clinicians, the detection of this disease remains a challenge because of the complicated nature of dietary challenges and the risk of oral aspirin provocation tests in patients with severe hypersensitivity reactions. Given the non-IgE mediated nature of the disease, in vitro assays like basophil activation may have failed to produce reliable results. However, given the simplicity of this assay, further studies need to be formulated to firmly establish its reliability. Formulation of proper dietary strategies for symptom control is also impossible given the controversial and scant nature of the data on SA content of food. This issue needs to be resolved to formulate proper dietary strategies for effective symptom control.

In vitro tests for drug hypersensitivity reactions: an ENDA/EAACI Drug Allergy Interest Group position paper

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are a matter of great concern, both for outpatient and in hospital care. The evaluation of these patients is complex, because in vivo tests have a suboptimal sensitivity and can be time-consuming, expensive and potentially risky, especially drug provocation tests. There are several currently available in vitro methods that can be classified into two main groups: those that help to characterize the active phase of the reaction and those that help to identify the culprit drug. The utility of these in vitro methods depends on the mechanisms involved, meaning that they cannot be used for the evaluation of all types of DHRs. Moreover, their effectiveness has not been defined by a consensus agreement between experts in the field. Thus, the European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has organized a task force to provide data and recommendations regarding the available in vitro methods for DHR diagnosis. We have found that although there are many in vitro tests, few of them can be given a recommendation of grade B or above mainly because there is a lack of well-controlled studies, most information comes from small studies with few subjects and results are not always confirmed in later studies. Therefore, it is necessary to validate the currently available in vitro tests in a large series of well-characterized patients with DHR and to develop new tests for diagnosis.

Basophil Reactivity as Biomarker in Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions-Potential and Limitations

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) resemble typical immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated symptoms. Clinical manifestations range from local skin reactions, gastrointestinal and/or respiratory symptoms to severe systemic involvement with potential fatal outcome. Depending on the substance group of the eliciting drug the correct diagnosis is a major challenge. Skin testing and in vitro diagnostics are often unreliable and not reproducible. The involvement of drug-specific IgE is questionable in many cases. The culprit substance (parent drug or metabolite) and potential cross-reacting compounds are difficult to identify, patient history and drug provocation testing often remain the only means for diagnosis. Hence, several groups proposed basophil activation test (BAT) for the diagnosis of immediate DHRs as basophils are well-known effector cells in allergic reactions. However, the usefulness of BAT in immediate DHRs is highly variable and dependent on the drug itself plus its capacity to spontaneously conjugate to serum proteins. Stimulation with pure solutions of the parent drug or metabolites thereof vs. drug-protein conjugates may influence sensitivity and specificity of the test. We thus, reviewed the available literature about the use of BAT for diagnosing immediate DHRs against drug classes such as antibiotics, radio contrast media, neuromuscular blocking agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and biologicals. Influencing factors like the selection of stimulants or of the identification and activation markers, the stimulation protocol, gating strategies, and cut-off definition are addressed in this overview on BAT performance. The overall aim is to evaluate the suitability of BAT as biomarker for the diagnosis of immediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions.

Aspirin-Exacerbated Diseases: Advances in Asthma with Nasal Polyposis, Urticaria, Angioedema, and Anaphylaxis

Aspirin-exacerbated diseases are important examples of drug hypersensitivities and include aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD), aspirin- or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced urticaria/angioedema, and aspirin- or NSAID-induced anaphylaxis. While each disease subtype may be distinguished by unique clinical features, the underlying mechanisms that contribute to these phenotypes are not fully understood. However, the inhibition of the cyclooxygenase-1 enzyme is thought to play a significant role. Additionally, eosinophils, mast cells, and their products, prostaglandins and leukotrienes, have been identified in the pathogenesis of AERD. Current diagnostic and treatment strategies for aspirin-exacerbated diseases remain limited, and continued research focusing on each of the unique hypersensitivity reactions to aspirin is essential. This will not only advance the understanding of these disease processes, but also lead to the subsequent development of novel therapeutics that patients who suffer from aspirin-induced reactions desperately need.

In vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity: Should We Go with the Flow

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHRs) is based upon history taking, skin prick or intradermal tests and quantification of specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies. Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHRs and is impossible in the case of non-IgE-mediated IDHRs. Drug provocation tests (DPT) are considered the 'gold standard' diagnostic but are not always possible, for ethical and practical reasons. Therefore, the validation of new cellular tests such as basophil activation testing (BAT) was necessary. This review focuses on the applications of BAT in IDHRs.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted, using the words basophil, flow cytometry, immediate drug allergy and drugs; this was complemented by the authors' own expertise.

RESULTS

BAT/HistaFlow® is a useful diagnostic tool in IDHRs, mainly used to diagnose allergy to neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), antibiotics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. Its sensitivity varies between 50 and 60%, and specificity attains 80%, except for with quinolones and NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic utility of BAT (and to lesser extent HistaFlow) has been demonstrated and is mostly applied in IDHRs. However, larger-scale collaborative studies are necessary to optimize test protocols and validate the entry of BAT as a diagnostic instrument in drug allergy.

Pharmacogenetic tests to predict the efficacy of aspirin desensitization in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory diseases; HLA-DQB302

This study is aimed at investigating the association of HLA-DRB1, HLA-DQA1, and HLA-DQB1 variability with the response to aspirin desensitization (AD). A total of 16 patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory diseases (AERD, 81.3% were female) with median age of 29 ± 4.3 years were included in this study. Following 6 months, Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22), medication, symptom scores, and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) (all p < 0.001) improved significantly. However, only seven patients (43.7%) had clinically significant improvement in all of the medication and symptom scores and FEV1, who were considered responders to AD. Responders to AD had significantly higher symptom scores compared with non-responders at baseline (20 ± 1.18 vs 10 ± 1.27; p = 0.003). HLADQB1*0302 was significantly lower in non-responders than in responders to AD (0.12 [0.02-0.76]; p = 0.022). Sensitivity and specificity of HLA-DQB1*0302 to predict response to AD was 71.4% (95% CI: 35.8-91.7) and 81.8% (95% CI: 52.3-94.8). This study introduces HLA-DQB1*0302 as a genetic marker for favorable response to AD.

Recent applications of basophil activation tests in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity

Immediate-type drug hypersensitivity is an increasingly significant clinical issue; however, the diagnosis is frequently hindered due to lack of safe and precise diagnostic tests. Flow cytometry-assisted basophil activation test is a safe in vitro diagnostic tool for assessing basophil activation upon allergen stimulation. In this review, we have summarized current literature on the diagnostic utilities, new indications, and methodological aspects of the basophil activation test for the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity.

Mast cells and basophils are essential for allergies: mechanisms of allergic inflammation and a proposed procedure for diagnosis

The current definition of allergy is a group of IgE-mediated diseases. However, a large portion of patients with clinical manifestations of allergies do not exhibit elevated serum levels of IgE (sIgEs). In this article, three key factors, ie soluble allergens, sIgEs and mast cells or basophils, representing the causative factors, messengers and primary effector cells in allergic inflammation, respectively, were discussed. Based on current knowledge on allergic diseases, we propose that allergic diseases are a group of diseases mediated through activated mast cells and/or basophils in sensitive individuals, and allergic diseases include four subgroups: (1) IgE dependent; (2) other immunoglobulin dependent; (3) non-immunoglobulin mediated; (4) mixture of the first three subgroups. According to our proposed definition, pseudo-allergic-reactions, in which mast cell or basophil activation is not mediated via IgE, or to a lesser extent via IgG or IgM, should be non-IgE-mediated allergic diseases. Specific allergen challenge tests (SACTs) are gold standard tests for diagnosing allergies in vivo, but risky. The identification of surface membrane activation markers of mast cells and basophils (CD203c, CCR3, CD63, etc) has led to development of the basophil activation test (BAT), an in vitro specific allergen challenge test (SACT). Based on currently available laboratory allergy tests, we here propose a laboratory examination procedure for allergy.

Update on the performance and application of basophil activation tests

The basophil activation test (BAT) is a flow-cytometry-based functional assay that assesses the degree of cell activation after exposure to a stimuli. Though no standardized technique currently exists, recent advances have improved the performance of this assay, including identification of new basophil-specific markers and comparisons of the expression of CD63 to CD203c during activation. The basophil activation test has also been validated for many IgE-mediated disease conditions, which have been extensively reviewed elsewhere. This review focuses on the most recent applications of this test to the diagnosis of allergy to drugs, foods, venoms, and pollens, and the evolving role of the BAT in monitoring immunotherapy.