Immediate Hypersensitivity to Moxifloxacin with Tolerance to Ciprofloxacin: Report of Three Cases and Review of the Literature

Ciprofloxacin-Induced Anaphylactic Reaction Followed by Negative Provocation Test in Response to Levofloxacin: A Case Report

Fluoroquinolones are a commonly prescribed class of antibiotics due to their broad spectrum of antimicrobial activity, favorable pharmacokinetic properties, ability to switch from parenteral to oral administration, and global availability. After beta-lactams, they are the second most common antibiotic class associated with drug allergies. The mechanism of fluoroquinolone-induced hypersensitivity reactions has not yet been fully understood, so the true incidence of hypersensitivity reactions remains unknown. Cross-reactivity between fluoroquinolones has been the subject of conflicting and limited clinical research. Due to their similar chemical structure, some argue for close cross-reactivity within the group. However, recent studies have produced contradictory results. We present the case of a young patient who had an anaphylactic reaction to ciprofloxacin but was tolerant to levofloxacin, as determined via a skin prick test followed by a drug provocation test. Our findings support the notion that there is little cross-reactivity between fluoroquinolones. Consequently, exposure to another fluoroquinolone in a hospital setting may be beneficial, particularly for patients who lack adequate antibiotic alternatives. However, additional research on this subject is required.

Clinical Characterization and Diagnostic Approaches for Patients Reporting Hypersensitivity Reactions to Quinolones

BACKGROUND

Quinolones are the second most frequent cause of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to antibiotics. A marked increase in the number of patients with HSRs to quinolones has been detected.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical characteristics of patients with HSRs to quinolones and present methods for their diagnosis.

METHODS

Patients attending the allergy unit due to reactions suggestive of HSRs to quinolones were prospectively evaluated between 2005 and 2018. Diagnosis was achieved using clinical history, skin tests (STs), basophil activation tests (BATs), and drug provocation tests (DPTs) if ST and BAT results were negative.

RESULTS

We included 128 subjects confirmed as having HSRs to quinolones and 42 found to be tolerant. Anaphylaxis was the most frequent entity in immediate HSRs and was most commonly induced by moxifloxacin. Patients were evaluated a median of 150 days (interquartile range, 60-365 days) after the reaction. Of patients who underwent ST and BAT, 40.7% and 70%, respectively, were positive. DPT with a quinolone was performed in 48 cases, giving results depending on the culprit drug: when moxifloxacin was involved, 62.5% of patients gave a positive DPT result to ciprofloxacin, whereas none reacted to levofloxacin. The risk of HSR was 96 times higher in subjects who reported moxifloxacin-induced anaphylaxis and 18 times higher in those reporting immediate reactions compared with clinical entities induced by quinolones other than moxifloxacin and nonimmediate reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of HSR to quinolones is complex. The use of clinical history is essential as a first step. BAT shows higher sensitivity than STs. DPTs can be useful for finding safe alternative quinolones.

Quinolone Allergy

Quinolones are the second most common antibiotic class associated with drug-induced allergic reactions, but data on quinolone allergy are scarce. This review article discusses the available evidence on quinolone allergy, including prevalence, risk factors, diagnosis, clinical manifestations, cross-reactivity, and management of allergic reactions. Although the incidence of quinolone allergy is still lower than beta-lactams, it has been increasingly reported in recent decades, most likely from its expanded use and the introduction of moxifloxacin. Thorough patient history remains essential in the evaluation of quinolone allergy. Many diagnostic tools have been investigated, but skin tests can yield false-positive results and in vitro tests have not been validated. The drug provocation test is considered the test of choice to confirm a quinolone allergy but is not without risk. Evidence regarding cross-reactivity among the quinolones is limited and conflicting. Quinolone allergy can be manifested either as an immediate or delayed reaction, but is not uniform across the class, with moxifloxacin posing the highest risk of anaphylaxis. Quinolone should be discontinued when an allergic reaction occurs and avoided in future scenarios, but desensitization may be warranted if no alternatives are available.

Update on Quinolone Allergy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Quinolones are a group of synthetic antibiotics widely use as first-line treatment for many infections. There has been an increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones in recent years, likely due to increased prescription. The purpose of this review is to summarize the clinical pictures, the methods used for diagnosing and the management of allergic reactions to quinolones.

RECENT FINDINGS

Allergic reactions to quinolones can be immediate or delayed, being anaphylaxis and maculopapular exanthema respectively the most frequent clinical entities. A precise diagnosis is particularly difficult since clinical history is often unreliable, skin tests can induce false-positive results, and commercial in vitro test are not well validated. Therefore, drug provocation testing is considered the gold standard to establish diagnosis, which is not a risk-free procedure. Cross-reactivity between quinolones is difficult to predict due to the small number of patients included in the few published studies. Moreover, hypersensitivity to quinolones has also been associated with beta-lactam and neuromuscular blocking agent allergies, although further studies are needed to understand the underlying mechanisms. Avoidance of the culprit quinolone is indicated in patients with a diagnosis of hypersensitivity to these drugs. When quinolone treatment is the only therapeutic option available, desensitization is necessary. This review summarizes the complex diagnostic approach and management of allergic reactions to quinolones.

Usefulness of In Vivo and In Vitro Diagnostic Tests in the Diagnosis of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Quinolones and in the Evaluation of Cross-Reactivity: A Comprehensive Study Including the Latest Quinolone Gemifloxacin

Purpose

Reports evaluating diagnosis and cross reactivity of quinolone hypersensitivity have revealed contradictory results. Furthermore, there are no reports investigating the cross-reactivity between gemifloxacin (GFX) and the others. We aimed to detect the usefulness of diagnostic tests of hypersensitivity reactions to quinolones and to evaluate the cross reactivity between different quinolones including the latest quinolone GFX.

Methods

We studied 54 patients (mean age 42.31±10.39 years; 47 female) with 57 hypersensitivity reactions due to different quinolones and 10 nonatopic quinolone tolerable control subjects. A detailed clinical history, skin test (ST), and single-blind placebo-controlled drug provocation test (SBPCDPT), as well as basophil activation test (BAT) and lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) were performed with the culprit and alternative quinolones including ciprofloxacin (CFX), moxifloxacin (MFX), levofloxacin (LFX), ofloxacin (OFX), and GFX.

Results

The majority (75.9%) of the patients reported immediate type reactions to various quinolones. The most common culprit drug was CFX (52.6%) and the most common reaction type was urticaria (26.3%). A quarter of the patients (24.1%) reacted to SBPCDPTs, although their STs were negative; while false ST positivity was 3.5% and ST/SBPCDPTs concordance was only 1.8%. Both BAT and LTT were not found useful in quinolone hypersensitivity. Cross-reactivity was primarily observed between LFX and OFX (50.0%), whereas it was the least between MFX and the others, and in GFX hypersensitive patients the degree of cross-reactivity to the other quinolones was 16.7%.

Conclusions

These results suggest that STs, BAT, and LTT are not supportive in the diagnosis of a hypersensitivity reaction to quinolone as well as in the prediction of cross-reactivity. Drug provocation tests (DPTs) are necessary to identify both culprit and alternative quinolones.

Old dog begging for new tricks: current practices and future directions in the diagnosis of delayed antimicrobial hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Antimicrobials are a leading cause of severe T cell-mediated adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The purpose of this review is to address the current understanding of antimicrobial cross-reactivity and the ready availability of and evidence for in-vitro, in-vivo, and ex-vivo diagnostics for T cell-mediated ADRs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has evaluated the efficacy of traditional antibiotic allergy management, including patch testing, skin prick testing, intradermal testing, and oral challenge. Although patch and intradermal testing are specific for the diagnosis of immune-mediated ADRs, they suffer from drug-specific limitations in sensitivity. The use of ex-vivo diagnostics, especially enzyme-linked immunospot, has been highlighted as a promising new approach to assigning causality. Knowledge of true rates of antimicrobial cross-reactivity aids empirical antibiotic choice in the setting of previous immune-mediated ADRs.

SUMMARY

In an era of increasing antimicrobial resistance and use of broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy, ensuring patients are assigned the correct 'allergy label' is essential. Re-exposure to implicated antimicrobials, especially in the setting of severe adverse cutaneous reaction, is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The process through which an antibiotic label gets assigned, acted on and maintained is still imprecise. Predicting T cell-mediated ADRs via personalized approaches, including human leukocyte antigen-typing, may pave future pathways to safer antimicrobial prescribing guidelines.

Antimicrobial stewardship's new weapon? A review of antibiotic allergy and pathways to 'de-labeling'

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The continued emergence of multiresistant pathogens and widespread antimicrobial use has led to a greater emphasis on antimicrobial stewardship programs. Concurrently, an increased awareness of the rising number of antibiotic allergy labels and impact on antimicrobial use has surfaced. The integration of antibiotic allergy de-labeling and antimicrobial stewardship programs may be a pathway worthy of further focus and investigation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has evaluated the efficacy of antibiotic allergy management (historical de-labeling, in-vitro testing, skin prick testing, intradermal testing, and oral challenges) and impact of antibiotic allergy labels on patient outcome. The importance of true and perceived antibiotic allergy cross-reactivity in the setting of β-lactam allergies has been highlighted. The impact of dedicated antibiotic allergy de-labeling clinics, inpatient antibiotic allergy testing, and integrated antimicrobial stewardship programs has been recently appraised.

SUMMARY

More recent literature supports that appropriate antibiotic allergy in-vitro and in-vivo testing and subsequent antibiotic allergy de-labeling, particularly in regard to β-lactams, can decrease broad-spectrum antibiotic use, costs, patient length of stay, and mortality. Integration of antibiotic allergy management into the decision support systems of inpatient and outpatient antimicrobial stewardship programs represents an important opportunity to further improve measured outcomes from antibiotic utilization.

US-based emergency department visits for fluoroquinolone-associated hypersensitivity reactions

PURPOSE

To estimate the rate of hypersensitivity reactions per 100,000 prescription dispensings of fluoroquinolones based on care rendered in a nationally representative sample of US hospital emergency departments (ED).

METHODS

We analyzed the frequency of fluoroquinolone-associated hypersensitivity reactions using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System-Cooperative Adverse Drug Event Surveillance system (2004-2010) in conjunction with US retail outpatient prescription data from IMS Health (2004-2010). We further categorized reaction severity into three subgroups (mild, moderate, and severe).

RESULTS

Based on 1422 cases of fluoroquinolone-associated hypersensitivity reactions and national drug utilization projections, we estimated risk of hypersensitivity reactions for moxifloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin. The absolute risk of a fluoroquinolone-related hypersensitivity reaction of any severity was low (44.0 (95% CI 34.8-53.3) ED visits/100,000 prescriptions); however, we identified a statistically significant difference in the relative risk (rate ratios) of seeking care in an ED attributed to moxifloxacin hypersensitivity compared to either levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin. For all reaction severities, the estimated ED visits/100,000 prescriptions were 141.3 (95% CI 99.9-182.7) for moxifloxacin, 40.8 (95% CI 31.5-50.0) for levofloxacin, and 26.3 (95% CI 20.8-31.9) for ciprofloxacin. When the rates were stratified by reaction severity category (mild or moderate-severe), moxifloxacin continued to be implicated in more ED visits per 100,000 prescriptions dispensed than either levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin.

CONCLUSION

Fluoroquinolones may cause hypersensitivity reactions requiring care in an ED, and relative to use, the rate of moxifloxacin-related hypersensitivity reactions is higher compared to levofloxacin or ciprofloxacin.