Penicillin Allergy Assessment in Pregnancy: Safety and Impact on Antibiotic Use

BACKGROUND

Penicillin and other beta-lactam antibiotics are recommended for group B Streptococcus and cesarean section prophylaxis, but approximately 10% of pregnant patients report a penicillin allergy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and impact of penicillin allergy evaluation in pregnant patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective study of obstetrician-ordered Allergy/Immunology (AI) electronic consultations (e-consults) from September 20, 2017 through December 31, 2019, we reviewed the electronic health record for e-consult recommendation; patient demographic, obstetric, and allergy histories; and peripartum antibiotic utilization with indication. For patients whose electronic consultation recommended an in-person AI evaluation, testing outcomes were determined, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to compare antibiotic use between patients who did and did not receive an in-person AI evaluation.

RESULTS

Of 389 obstetrician-ordered e-consults, 363 (93%) recommended an in-person AI evaluation; of these, 222 (61%) patients received an in-person AI evaluation. Of 220 (99%) patients skin tested, 209 (95%) had their penicillin allergy label safely removed. Compared with patients who did not receive an in-person AI evaluation despite it being recommended (n = 141), patients with in-person AI evaluation (n = 222) had reduced peripartum vancomycin (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.33), clindamycin (aOR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.08-0.34), and gentamicin (aOR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19-0.78) use and increased penicillin (aOR, 18.0; 95% CI, 6.30-51.2) use. The fully AI evaluated patients had increased first-line antibiotic prophylaxis for group B Streptococcus (aOR, 26.9; 95% CI, 6.32-114) and cesarean section (aOR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.06-3.52).

CONCLUSIONS

In a sample of 220 pregnant patients with penicillin allergy histories and in-person AI evaluation, penicillin allergy testing was safe and associated with significantly reduced broad-spectrum antibiotic use and increased first-line beta-lactam antibiotic use.

Indications, protocols, and outcomes of drug desensitizations for chemotherapy and monoclonal antibodies in adults and children

Advances in the understanding of various malignancies and chronic inflammatory diseases has led to the development of better treatment options for prolonging patient survival and minimizing morbidity. The recognition of "first-line" chemotherapy and monoclonal agents for these conditions has given more urgency to the need to re-administer these drugs in cases of drug hypersensitivity reactions. Therefore, in these cases, not only is desensitization considered when there is no alternative therapy available but also when alternative treatments are considered therapeutically inferior and/or more toxic. In this article, we describe the steps involved in the evaluation of these patients, factors to consider before making a decision to desensitize, the implementation of desensitization protocols, and the outcomes of such procedures.

Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to intravenous drugs can be severe and might leave patients and doctors in a difficult position where an essential treatment or intervention has to be suspended. Even if virtually any intravenous medication can potentially trigger a life-threatening DHR, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and antibiotics are amongst the intravenous drugs most frequently involved in these reactions. Admittedly, suspending such treatments may negatively impact the survival outcomes or the quality of life of affected patients. Delabeling pathways and rapid drug desensitization (RDD) can help reactive patients stay on first-choice therapies instead of turning to less efficacious, less cost-effective, or more toxic alternatives. However, these are high-complexity and high-risk techniques, which usually need expert teams and allergy-specific techniques (skin testing, in vitro testing, drug provocation testing) to ensure safety, an accurate diagnosis, and personalized management. Unfortunately, there are significant inequalities within and among countries in access to allergy departments with the necessary expertise and resources to offer these techniques and tackle these DHRs optimally. The main objective of this consensus document is to create a great benefit for patients worldwide by aiding allergists to expand the scope of their practice and support them with evidence, data, and experience from leading groups from around the globe. This statement of the Drug Hypersensitivity Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) aims to be a comprehensive practical guide on the technical aspects of implementing acute-onset intravenous hypersensitivity delabeling and RDD for a wide range of drugs. Thus, the manuscript does not only focus on clinical pathways. Instead, it also provides guidance on topics usually left unaddressed, namely, internal validation, continuous quality improvement, creating a healthy multidisciplinary environment, and redesigning care (including a specific supplemental section on a real-life example of how to design a dedicated space that can combine basic and complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques in allergy).

The Limited Value of Prolonged Drug Challenges in Nonimmediate Amoxicillin (Clavulanic Acid) Hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Misdiagnosis of amoxicillin (clavulanic acid) (AX(/CL)) hypersensitivity has serious consequences. A drug challenge (DC) is the final diagnostic to affirm or infirm AX(/CL) hypersensitivity. However, uncertainties remain whether a prolonged drug challenge (pDC) should benefit the diagnosis of a nonimmediate AX(/CL) hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the added value of a standardized 7-day pDC in the diagnosis of nonimmediate or unclear penicillin hypersensitivity.

METHODS

A total of 132 patients with a history of a nonimmediate hypersensitivity reaction or an unclear reaction to AX(/CL) or an undefined penicillin with a negative diagnostic workup including a single-day DC (DC) with AX(/CL) were selected. In all these patients, an additional pDC with AX(/CL) was planned. Thirteen patients started the pDC immediately after the DC. To ensure that hypersensitivity symptoms manifesting during the pDC course do not result from the DC, in the remaining 119 patients, the pDC was scheduled after a washout of 1 week.

RESULTS

A total of 128 patients (12 without washout, 116 with washout) completed the pDC. Three patients reacted with a mild maculopapular exanthema. However, the value of a pDC was evidenced in only 1 patient who reacted during her pDC after an uneventful washout. In 2 patients pDC was cancelled because they reacted during the washout.

CONCLUSIONS

A pDC is of limited added value to the diagnostic algorithms of nonimmediate hypersensitivity reaction or unclear hypersensitivity reactions to AX(/CL). In our hands, the traditionally recommended diagnostic algorithm that offers a 1-day DC as a final diagnostic in patients with negative workup for AX(/CL) is appropriate.

Delabeling Delayed Drug Hypersensitivity: How Far Can You Safely Go?

Delayed immune-mediated adverse drug reactions (IM-ADRs) are defined as reactions occurring more than 6 hours after dosing. They include heterogeneous clinical phenotypes that are typically T-cell-mediated reactions with distinct mechanisms across a wide spectrum of severity from benign exanthems through to life-threatening cutaneous or organ-specific diseases. For mild reactions such as benign exanthem, considerations for delabeling are similar to immediate reactions and may include a graded or single-dose drug challenge with or without preceding skin or patch testing. Evaluation of challenging cases such as the patient who is on multiple drugs at the time a severe delayed IM-ADR occurs should prioritize clinical ascertainment of the most likely phenotype and implicated drug(s). Although not widely available and validated, procedures such as patch testing, delayed intradermal skin testing, and laboratory-based functional drug assays or genetic (human leukocyte antigen) testing may provide valuable information to further help risk stratify patients and identify the likely implicated and/or cross-reactive drug(s). The decision to use a drug challenge as a diagnostic or delabeling tool in a patient with a severe delayed IM-ADR should weigh the risk-benefit ratio, balancing the severity and priority for the treatment of the underlying, and the availability of alternative efficacious and safe treatments.

Direct Challenges for the Evaluation of Beta-Lactam Allergy: Evidence and Conditions for Not Performing Skin Testing

In the western world, up to 10% of the general population and more than 15% of hospitalized patients report penicillin allergy. After a comprehensive evaluation, more than 95% of patients who report a penicillin allergy can subsequently tolerate this antibiotic. Traditionally, the most widely accepted protocol to evaluate beta-lactam (BL) allergy consisted of skin testing (ST) followed by a drug provocation test (DPT) in ST-negative patients. DPT is the gold standard for proving or excluding BL allergy and is considered the final and definitive step in the evaluation. Recently, studies have been published that support the use of direct DPTs without preceding ST for both pediatric and adult patients who report a low-risk historical reaction to BLs. However, these studies use various risk-stratification criteria to determine eligibility for a direct DPT. A standardized protocol for DPT is also lacking. In this review, we assess the current literature and evidence for performing direct DPT in the pediatric and adult populations. On the basis of this evidence, we also present risk-based algorithms for the evaluation of BL allergy in pediatric and adult populations based on a description of the historical reaction.

Open-field PET: Simultaneous brain functional imaging and behavioural response measurements in freely moving small animals

A comprehensive understanding of how the brain responds to a changing environment requires techniques capable of recording functional outputs at the whole-brain level in response to external stimuli. Positron emission tomography (PET) is an exquisitely sensitive technique for imaging brain function but the need for anaesthesia to avoid motion artefacts precludes concurrent behavioural response studies. Here, we report a technique that combines motion-compensated PET with a robotically-controlled animal enclosure to enable simultaneous brain imaging and behavioural recordings in unrestrained small animals. The technique was used to measure in vivo displacement of [¹¹C]raclopride from dopamine D2 receptors (D2R) concurrently with changes in the behaviour of awake, freely moving rats following administration of unlabelled raclopride or amphetamine. The timing and magnitude of [¹¹C]raclopride displacement from D2R were reliably estimated and, in the case of amphetamine, these changes coincided with a marked increase in stereotyped behaviours and hyper-locomotion. The technique, therefore, allows simultaneous measurement of changes in brain function and behavioural responses to external stimuli in conscious unrestrained animals, giving rise to important applications in behavioural neuroscience.

Antimicrobial stewardship intervention: optimizing antibiotic treatment in hospitalized patients with reported antibiotic allergy

BACKGROUND

Reported antibiotic allergy in hospitalized patients seems to be related to more adverse events, the use of reserve antibiotics and longer hospitalization. Most patients reporting an antibiotic allergy can be de-labelled; as such, an antimicrobial stewardship intervention was set up.

AIM

To determine the impact of reported antibiotic allergy on the antibiotic treatment of hospitalized patients, and prevent unnecessary deviation from the preferred antibiotic treatment by a proactive antimicrobial stewardship intervention.

METHODS

Hospitalized patients reporting an antibiotic allergy were included in an intervention study at a teaching hospital in the Netherlands between March and May 2019. Physicians received training and were provided with a recommendation in the electronic medical record in case the preferred antibiotic treatment was unnecessarily avoided due to the allergy label and the patient was eligible for a drug challenge.

FINDINGS

In total, 492 patients reporting an antibiotic allergy were identified, accounting for 558 hospital admissions. In 93 cases, the antibiotic allergy label interfered with the preferred antibiotic treatment. Sixty-eight of these patients were eligible for a drug challenge, and 42 patients were challenged. In 40 (95%) of these patients, no allergic reaction was observed, and the preferred antibiotic treatment was given. Two (5%) patients developed a non-severe skin reaction after a drug challenge and continued an alternative antibiotic regimen.

CONCLUSION

This antimicrobial stewardship intervention can be used to provide patients with reported antibiotic allergy labels with the preferred antibiotic treatment, and to de-label them after uneventful re-exposure to the antibiotic agent.

Safety, Outcomes, and Recommendations for Two-Step Outpatient Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Challenges

BACKGROUND

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) outpatient challenge protocols are not standardized. They vary in clinical practice and can be time- and resource-intensive to perform.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and outcomes of two-step outpatient NSAID challenges to evaluate patients with non-aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD)-related NSAID hypersensitivity.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients with a history of NSAID allergy who underwent outpatient NSAID challenges under allergist supervision. Individuals with AERD were excluded. Patient demographics, NSAID reaction history, and drug challenge details and outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 249 patients (mean age, 51.6 years; 63.5% female) underwent 262 NSAID challenges. Of these, 224 challenges were negative (85.5%). Thirty challenges resulted in an immediate reaction during the challenge procedure (11.5%) and eight resulted in delayed reactions (3.1%). Three individuals with immediate reactions required treatment with intramuscular epinephrine. Factors associated with a positive NSAID challenge included a prior reaction occurring within 5 years of drug challenge (odds ratio [OR] = 3.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.67-8.44), a prior immediate reaction within 3 hours of NSAID ingestion (OR = 2.45; 95% CI, 1.12-5.57), a history of cross-reactive NSAID hypersensitivity to multiple NSAIDs (OR = 2.97; 95% CI, 1.23-6.91), and the presence of comorbid chronic spontaneous urticaria (OR = 2.95; 95% CI, 1.35-6.41).

CONCLUSIONS

More than 85% of two-step non-AERD NSAID drug challenges were negative for an immediate or delayed reaction, which allowed patients to use at least one clinically indicated NSAID. Challenge reactions were generally mild. Two-step NSAID challenge protocols can be safely performed in the outpatient setting.

D2 receptor blockade eliminates exercise-induced changes in cortical inhibition and excitation

BACKGROUND

Although cardiorespiratory exercise is known to affect cortical excitatory and inhibitory activity, the neurochemical mechanisms driving this effect are poorly understood. Animal models of Parkinson's disease identify dopamine D2 receptor expression as a candidate mechanism, but the link between the D2 receptor and exercise-induced changes in cortical activity in humans is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Here, we examined the effect of a selective dopamine D2 receptor antagonist, sulpiride, on exercise-induced changes in cortical activity.

METHODS

We acquired measures of excitatory and inhibitory activity of the primary motor cortex using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) from 23 healthy adults, both before and after a 20-min bout of high-intensity interval cycling exercise. We examined the effect of D2 receptor blockade (800 mg sulpiride) on these measures within a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover design.

RESULTS

Sulpiride abolished exercise-induced modulation of the cortical excitation:inhibition balance relative to placebo (P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.76). Sulpiride blocked both the increase in glutamatergic excitation and reduction in gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) inhibition that was observed following exercise in the placebo condition.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide causal evidence that D2 receptor blockade eliminates exercise-induced changes in excitatory and inhibitory cortical networks, and have implications for how exercise should be prescribed in diseases of dopaminergic dysfunction.

Tackling the Patient with Multiple Drug "Allergies": Multiple Drug Intolerance Syndrome

As populations age, the prevalence of reported drug "allergy" increases, often leading to suboptimal care and increased morbidity because of unnecessary avoidance of safe and effective medications. Evaluation by a drug allergy specialist is often warranted when a patient has more than 2 unrelated drug "allergies" listed in the medical record. In this commentary, we clarify and propose standard terminology to use when evaluating patients with multiple drug allergy labels including and more specifically when diagnosing multiple drug intolerance syndrome and the much rarer multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome. We review epidemiology and key features of multiple drug intolerance syndrome and multiple drug hypersensitivity syndrome. We summarize the methodologic and practical diagnostic workup and management of individuals with MDIS to assist with the accurate delabeling of drug "allergies" in the electronic health record.

Pediatric Drug Hypersensitivity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pediatric drug hypersensitivity is a rapidly evolving field. The purpose of this paper is to review the current state of pediatric drug hypersensitivity and highlight new developments in diagnosis and management.

RECENT FINDINGS

This paper will discuss the safety and use of risk stratification to proceed directly to oral challenge without prior skin testing for β-lactam reactions. We review unique aspects of pediatric drug challenges and desensitizations. It is important to accurately diagnose pediatric drug hypersensitivity reactions through a detailed history, physical examination, and available diagnostic testing. Understanding of the underlying mechanism leads to appropriate classification which is necessary to direct management. The decision to perform drug challenge, desensitization, or recommend avoidance of a medication can have a significant impact on a patient's treatment. Utilization of weight-based dose and infusion rate adjustments for current drug challenge and desensitization protocols optimize success.

Advantages and disadvantages of drug challenge during electrophysiological study in patients with new left bundle branch block after transaortic valve implantation

AIMS

Electrophysiological study (EPS) is recommended in case of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) after transaortic valve implantation (TAVI) to identify patients at high risk of delayed atrioventricular block (D-AVB). We evaluated the added value of drug challenge, after normal baseline EPS, to predict D-AVB in such patients.

METHODS

We conducted a comparative single-centre study of two successive periods, during which we used baseline EPS alone (first period) or drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS (second period), for patients with NOP-LBBB after TAVI. The primary endpoint was a composite of pacemaker use, documented D-AVB, cardiac syncope, sudden death, or delayed pacemaker implantation.

RESULTS

Among 736 patients with TAVI implantation between January 2016 and September 2019, 64 with NOP-LBBB were included. During the first period, 4/22 (18.2%) presented with a positive baseline EPS. After a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 15.6 (8.3) months, 7/22 (31.8%) reached the primary endpoint. During the second period, 19/42 (45.2%) presented with a positive EPS. After a mean (SD) of 12.8 (3.5) months, 8/42 (19.0%) reached the primary endpoint. There was a tendency to increased sensitivity (42.9-87.5%; P = 0.12) and negative predictive value (77.8-95.7%; P = 0.15) of the EPS, respectively during the first to the second period. However, the specificity decreased (93.3-64.7%; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic yield improved with drug challenge in case of normal baseline EPS. However, the decrease in specificity led to a high rate of unnecessary pacemaker implantation.

In Situ Patch Test and Repeated Open Application Test for Fixed Drug Eruption: A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated allergy workup in fixed drug eruption (FDE) in a large population.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the sensitivity of a standardized allergy workup for diagnosing the cause of FDE, with a focus on in situ repeated open application tests (ROATs).

METHODS

In a retrospective multicenter study, we analyzed the practice of conducting a complete allergy workup for the etiological diagnosis of FDE. It consisted of 3 steps: in situ patch tests (PTs) for all cases except pure mucosal involvement, followed by in situ ROAT if in situ PT results were negative, and finally a drug challenge (DC). The in situ ROAT involved daily application of the suspected drug on a previously affected FDE site for 7 days.

RESULTS

Of 98 suspected FDE cases, 61 patients (median age 61 y; male-to-female ratio 1.8) with a complete allergy workup were included. In 4 cases, even the DC yielded negative results. Among the remaining 57 patients with a positive workup, implicated drugs included paracetamol (12 cases), β-lactams (11 cases), imidazoles (9 cases, including 5 with metronidazole), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (8 cases), iodinated contrast media (4 cases), cotrimoxazole (3 cases), and various other drugs in 10 patients. The diagnosis was confirmed by in situ PT in 17 of 54 cases (31.5%), in situ ROAT in 14 of 40 cases (35%) (with 4 cases showing remote reactivation of FDE sites), and DC in 26 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential allergy workup involving successively in situ PT, in situ ROAT, and DC is a reliable and safe method for diagnosing the cause of FDE. In situ tests exhibited a sensitivity of over 50%.

A Guide to Pediatric Antibiotic Allergy Testing: A Report From the US Drug Allergy Registry

Pediatric antibiotic labels are common, and unnecessary antibiotic avoidance is associated with negative personal and public health outcomes; as a result, there is an increasing emphasis on the importance of pediatric antibiotic allergy evaluations. Different testing strategies have been advised, including skin testing and challenge testing with varied doses and duration. Established consensus testing protocols are lacking. The US Drug Allergy Registry Pediatrics (USDAR-Peds) is a multisite prospective study designed for epidemiology and outcome evaluations of pediatric drug hypersensitivity reactions. Interpretation of multisite data requires a uniform clinical approach, and the USDAR-Peds standardized protocols were developed in response to this need. This rostrum aims to provide a rationale and framework for standardization for pediatric antibiotic allergy protocols and assessment of positive reactions through a pediatric-specific adaptation of the USDAR immediate reaction grading scale to create consistency for multisite research collaboration efforts such as USDAR-Peds.

Evaluation and Updated Classification of Acute Hypersensitivity Reactions to Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs): NSAID-Exacerbated or -Induced Food Allergy

BACKGROUND

There are hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to foods in which nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) act as aggravating factors (NSAID-exacerbated food allergy [NEFA]) or cofactors (NSAID-induced food allergy [NIFA]), often misdiagnosed as HRs to NSAIDs. Urticarial/angioedematous and/or anaphylactic reactions to two or more chemically unrelated NSAIDs do not meet current classification criteria. However, they may be considered part of a cross-reactive type of acute HR, which is NSAID-induced urticaria/angioedema with or without respiratory or systemic symptoms of anaphylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patients reporting acute HRs to NSAIDs and classify them according to updated criteria.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 414 patients with suspected HRs to NSAIDs. For all whom met these criteria, NEFA/NIFA was diagnosed: (1) mild reactions to (NEFA) or tolerance of (NIFA) the suspected foods without taking NSAIDs; (2) cutaneous and/or anaphylactic reactions to the combination foods plus NSAIDs; (3) positive allergy tests to the suspected foods; and (4) negative drug challenges (DCs) with the NSAIDs involved.

RESULTS

A total of 252 patients were given the diagnosis of NSAID hypersensitivity (60.9%), 108 of whom had NSAID-induced urticaria/angioedema with or without respiratory or systemic symptoms of anaphylaxis. We excluded NSAID hypersensitivity in 162 patients (39.1%) who tolerated DCs with the suspected NSAIDs, nine of whom received a diagnosis of NEFA, and 66 of NIFA. Pru p 3 was implicated in 67 of those 75 patients who received a diagnosis of NEFA or NIFA.

CONCLUSIONS

NEFA and NIFA account for about 18% of patients reporting HRs to NSAIDs, in which Pru p 3 is the main responsible food allergen. Therefore, patients with cutaneous and/or anaphylactic reactions to NSAIDs should be carefully questioned about all foods ingested within 4 hours before or after NSAID exposure, and targeted food allergy tests should be considered in the diagnostic workup of these patients. If testing is positive, DCs with the suspected NSAIDs should also be considered.

Penicillin Allergy: Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Management

Allergy to penicillin can occur via any of the 4 types of Gel-Coombs hypersensitivity reactions, producing distinct clinical histories and physical examination findings. Treatments include penicillin discontinuation, and depending on the type of reaction, epinephrine, antihistamines, and/or glucocorticoids. Most beta-lactams may be safely used in penicillin-allergic patients, with the possible exception of first-generation and second-generation cephalosporins. Penicillin testing includes skin testing, patch testing, and graded challenge. The selection of the type of testing depends on the clinical setting, equipment availability, and type of hypersensitivity reaction. Desensitization may be used in some cases where treatment with penicillins is essential.

New Approaches to Chemotherapeutic Drug Allergy: From Drug Challenge to Desensitization

This review explores the latest clinical advances in the evaluation and management of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapeutic agents. There is a critical need for standardized terminology and classification systems, and we discuss improved diagnostic tools and risk-management strategies that enhance the choice of using drug challenge or drug desensitization protocols. In addition, we examine established organizational models that promote patient safety and ensure continuity of care in oncology settings. By synthesizing current knowledge and practices, this review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the state-of-the-art clinical approaches to managing HSRs to chemotherapeutic agents, ultimately contributing to better patient outcomes and quality of care. The insights presented here underscore the importance of ongoing research and collaboration among health care professionals to refine classification systems for drug HSRs and enhance the overall management of HSRs in oncology patients.

Nonallergist Delabeling-Should Penicillin Allergy Delabeling Only Be Performed by Allergists?

Penicillin allergy labels (PAL) are common but rarely correspond with a patient's likelihood to tolerate penicillin. This results in unnecessary penicillin avoidance in many patients, driving numerous negative health outcomes. Evaluation strategies for a PAL are driven by risk stratification and include a spectrum of modalities such as delabeling without any testing, direct oral challenge, and skin testing followed by challenge testing. Historically, PAL delabeling has primarily been the domain of the allergist, but this has resulted in significant limitations in access to testing for many patients globally and in the United States. Novel strategies to increase access to penicillin allergy evaluations are urgently needed, and nonallergist delabeling has been proposed as one strategy to help address this. Using a pro/con format, we review the evidence for nonallergist PAL delabeling in children and adults, focusing on direct challenge testing and highlighting considerations to guide nonallergist implementation of penicillin allergy evaluations.

First-Line Antituberculosis Drug Challenge Reactions in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms Syndrome in an HIV Endemic Setting

BACKGROUND

In high HIV prevalence settings, first-line antituberculosis drug (FLTD)-associated drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) poses therapeutic challenges. A sequential and additive drug challenge (SADC) of FLTDs best identifies offending drug(s), avoids unnecessary exclusions, and optimizes reinitiation of nonoffending drugs. However, SADC-associated reaction complexities limit its utility.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with FLTD-associated DRESS, their treatment-limiting SADC reactions, and related outcomes.

METHODS

Patients hospitalized with FLTD-associated DRESS from 2013 to 2023 in a South African tertiary hospital and enrolled (retrospectively or prospectively) in an existing registry were eligible.

RESULTS

SADC was undertaken in 41 patients. Overall, 47 classifiable reactions occurred. 34/47 (72%) reactions in 29/41 (71%) patients were treatment-limiting and 12 of 41(29%) patients reinitiated FLTDs uneventfully. Fifteen single and 8 multiple drug reactors were identified. Rifampicin in 13 of 23(57%) reactors was the most common individual offender. Ethambutol was most frequently involved in multiple drug reactors. The median (interquartile range) time to a detectable reaction was 24(12-120) hours, 6 of 34(18%) being immediate (<6 hours). Itch (65%), eosinophilia (56%), fever (41%), atypical lymphocytosis (41%), rash (38%), transaminitis (32%), and facial edema (18%) singly or in combination were the most common features. Three reactions, 1 epidermal necrolysis and 2 liver derangements, were Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 4 (life-threatening) events. No predictors of multiple drug reactivity were identified, but multiple reactors were hospitalized significantly longer, 125(100-134) days versus 60(45-80) days.

CONCLUSIONS

SADC optimizes FLTD reinitiation. However, timing, clinical presentation, and severity of SADC-associated reactions after FLTD-associated DRESS are markedly heterogeneous. Additionally, multiple drug reactors are a complex group that require longer hospitalization. There are no routine biomarkers available to distinguish true multiple drug hypersensitivity from nonspecific flare-ups and to guide long-term drug avoidance strategies.