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

Tools for Etiologic Diagnosis of Drug-Induced Allergic Conditions

Drug hypersensitivity reactions are a serious concern in clinical practice because they can be severe and result in lifelong sequelae. An accurate diagnosis and identification of the culprit drug is essential to prevent future reactions as well as for the identification of safe treatment alternatives. Nonetheless, the diagnosis can be challenging. In vivo and in vitro tests can be helpful, although none are conclusive; therefore, the tests are not usually performed in isolation but as part of a diagnostic algorithm. In addition, some in vitro tests are only available in research laboratories, and standardization has not been fully accomplished. Collaborating research is needed to improve drug hypersensitivity reaction diagnosis. In this review, we update the current available in vivo and in vitro tools with their pros and cons and propose an algorithm to integrate them into clinical practice.

Drug fever: a narrative review

Drug fever is an adverse drug reaction accompanied by a febrile response and is a common problem among clinicians, hence an updated knowledge of drug fever is important. A consensus regarding the definition of drug fever is lacking. Thus, descriptions of drug fever in previous literature are often inconsistent. In this narrative review, we summarized various features of drug fever, including its definition, epidemiology, risk factors, clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis, based on the earliest literature. Recent advances in information technology have encouraged researchers to use pharmacovigilance databases for clinical and pharmacological research. We outlined how a pharmacovigilance database, along with recently developed research methods, could be used to research drug fever.

'Practical management of suspected hypersensitivity reactions to anti-tuberculosis drugs.'

Tuberculosis (TB) is the commonest cause of death by a single infectious agent globally and ranks amongst the top ten causes of global mortality. The incidence of TB is highest in Low-Middle Income countries (LMICs). Prompt institution of, and compliance with, therapy are cornerstones for a favourable outcome in TB and to mitigate the risk of multiple drug resistant (MDR)-TB, which is challenging to treat. There is some evidence that adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to anti-TB drugs occur in over 60% and 3-4% of patients respectively. Both ADRs and HSRs represent significant barriers to treatment adherence and are recognised risk factors for MDR-TB. HSRs to anti-TB drugs are usually cutaneous and benign, occur within few weeks after commencement of therapy and are likely to be T-cell mediated. Severe and systemic T-cell mediated HSRs and IgE mediated anaphylaxis to anti-TB drugs are relatively rare, but important to recognise and treat promptly. T-cell mediated HSRs are more frequent amongst patients with co-existing HIV infection. Some patients develop multiple sensitisation to anti-TB drugs. Whilst skin tests, patch tests and in vitro diagnostics have been used in the investigation of HSRs to anti-TB drugs, their predictive value is not established, they are onerous, require specialist input of an allergist and are resource-dependent. This is compounded by the global, unmet demand for allergy specialists, particularly in low income countries (LICs) / LMICs and now the challenging circumstances of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This narrative review provides a critical analysis of the limited published evidence on this topic and proposes a cautious and pragmatic approach to optimise and standardise the management of HSRs to anti-TB drugs. This includes clinical risk stratification and a dual strategy involving sequential re-challenge and rapid drug desensitisation. Furthermore, a concerted international effort is needed to generate real-time data on ADRs, HSRs, safety and clinical outcomes of these interventions.

Lymphocyte transformation test and cytokine detection assays: Determination of read out parameters for delayed-type drug hypersensitivity reactions

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) occur in certain people and are often not predictable. DHRs can be classified as immediate and delayed reactions regarding to onset of clinical manifestations. Both reactions are considered to be an important public health problem because they can lead to life-threatening conditions; however, this review article will focus on delayed DHRs. The most important points for diagnosis of delayed DHRs are the recognition of drug hypersensitivity characteristics and culprit drug identification. While it is usually difficult to identify a culprit drug; clinical evaluation using the causality assessment method, a non-invasive process, can identify the culprit drug without the need for intensive investigation. Delayed DHRs can cause life-threatening conditions; therefore, in vivo skin tests, as well as drug provocation tests, have to be cautiously performed by a drug allergist and have not been recommended in uncontrolled conditions. ENDA/EAACI has recommended that in vitro tests (if available) be performed prior to any in vivo tests. Therefore, in vitro diagnostic tests can be alternative methods to identify a culprit drug for delayed DHR diagnosis as there is no or very low risk for patients under investigation. There are many testing approaches to identify causative agents for delayed DHRs such as: the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), cytokine/mediator detection assays (i.e. ELISA and flow cytometry-based bead assays), multiplex bead-based immunoassay and ELISpot. The LTT is the most standardized method whereas it has been available in medical schools affiliated with university hospitals. Other in vitro tests, like cytokine detection assays, have also been used, even though they are still being evaluated. They could supplement LTT results that would provide drug allergist's with documentary evidence and prevent risk to patients by avoiding in vivo or drug provocation testing. Hence, the in vitro tests have been promising tests contributing to the management of the delayed DHR work-up process in clinical practice.