Beta-lactam hypersensitivity in children: Frequency and risk factors

AIMS

To determine the frequency of an authentic β-lactam (BL) hypersensitivity (HS) amongst a large number of children and to identify clinical risk factors that predict this hypersensitivity.

METHODS

All children with suspected BL allergy were evaluated by skin tests (ST) with the suspected BL. A 1-day oral provocation test (OPT) was performed in children with negative ST. We defined an authentic BL-HS case if the child exhibited a positive ST or a positive OPT. Risk factors associated with BL-HS were assessed using a univariate analysis. Covariates showing a P-value <.2 were included in the multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine independent predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 354 patients reporting 368 suspected BL reactions were included. The diagnosis of BL-HS was established in 24 children (6.7%). All these children had a positive ST. OPT was performed in 30 patients and was negative in all of them. In 110 children with a negative ST, BL was tolerated. In the risk factors analysis, 164 children were included. Older age (>5 years) at the reaction (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.22; P = .02) and BL administered (odds ratio = 7.7; 95% confidence interval, 2.76-21.8; P < .001) were significantly associated with authentic BL-HS.

CONCLUSION

BL-HS should be evaluated with an appropriate allergy work-up before strict prohibition is made. In addition, age of patient and BL involved can be used as predictive factors of developing BL-HS in this population.

Drug reintroduction testing and beta-lactam hypersensitivity in children: Protocols and results, a 12-year experience

Introduction: Oral provocation test (OPT) to beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) is a gold standard in allergology investigation. We aimed to demonstrate the contribution of OPT in BL hypersensitivity (HS) indicated as a first step in diagnosis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study from 2007 to 2019, in a single Tunisian tertiary care academic center. It concerned children with presumed non-severe allergic manifestations to BL, with a reaction that has occurred at least 6 months before the OPT. Results: We identified 35 children for inclusion. After the first OPT, a second OPT with a different BL was performed in case of a positive result of the first one. In 12 cases (34.2%), the OPT elicited a reaction. In eight cases the allergy was to penicillin and in two cases to cephalosporins (cefixim). Cross-reactivity was noted in two cases. Conclusion: An OPT to BL indicated in the first instance in non-severe reaction in children will allow a rapid diagnosis in case of suspicion of HS to BL.

Diagnostic Value of Oral Provocation Tests in Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions Induced by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Paracetamol

Oral drug provocation tests (DPT) are the basic diagnostic tool for the detection of hypersensitivity to non-opioid analgesics and for selecting a safe alternative for a patient. They are of great practical importance due to their common use, but the data on the follow-up of patients after negative DPT are still very scarce. We examined the further fate of 164 such adult patients after negative NSAID or paracetamol tests and analyzed which excipients in the studied drugs they could be exposed to after the diagnostic workup. A structured medical interview was performed 32.9 months (mean) after the provocation tests. Of the 164 patients, 131 (79.9%) retook the tested drug and 12 developed another hypersensitivity reaction, giving the estimated negative predictive value of 90.8%. These reactions were induced by acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, meloxicam, and diclofenac, and were clinically similar to the initial ones (most commonly urticaria and angioedema). There are 93 generics of these drugs on the local market, containing a total of 33 excipients for which hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. All available generics contain such excipients. Thirty-one patients (20.1%) did not take the previously tested drug again, most often because it was not needed or because they were afraid of another reaction. DPT with analgesics has a high diagnostic performance. A minority of patients had relapsed after reexposure. One of the underestimated reasons for this may be drug excipients provoking a reaction, so it is advisable to use exactly the same medical product that has been negatively tested. Many patients avoid reexposure to a given drug, despite negative tests, therefore very reliable patient education in connection with DPT is highly needed.

Antibiotic oral provocation challenge in children

AIM

The main objective of this study was to see how many of the children, with a suspected antibiotic allergy, developed an allergic or adverse reaction to a drug provocation test.

METHODS

Data on children that had undergone a drug provocation test for a suspected antibiotic allergy were compiled retrospectively for the period from 2007-2018. The median age at the first provocation was 2.25 years (1.5-5.7). Standardised questionnaires, the children's parents had answered before the provocation, were used to evaluate the originally suspected allergic reaction, previous health, atopic diseases and family history.

RESULTS

Ninety-two (6.4%) of the 1440 children showed a possible mild allergic reaction. Sixty-four of the 92 children underwent a second drug provocation test 1-2 years later. At that time, only eleven developed a positive- or a possible-delayed reaction.

CONCLUSION

An immediate moderate or severe allergic reaction was excluded in all cases of suspected antibiotic allergy in this study. Our study indicates that an oral drug provocation test is safe. It may be appropriate to wait for 6 months or more after the initial event of ADR before these tests are performed. A second oral provocation 1-2 years after the first one shows that ADRs are outgrown in most children.

Clarithromycin hypersensitivity in children: Is there a link with β-lactam hypersensitivity?

BACKGROUND

Clarithromycin hypersensitivity is reported as the most common cause of non-β-lactam antibiotic allergy in children. Clarithromycin is frequently prescribed in cases of suspected β-lactam hypersensitivity. Oral provocation tests stand as the gold standard to confirm drug hypersensitivity as diagnostic value of skin tests is variable. We analyzed the frequency of true clarithromycin hypersensitivity ratio and its relationship with β-lactam allergy among children with suspected clarithromycin hypersensitivity and evaluated the diagnostic value of skin tests.

METHODS

The study included 160 children referred with suspected clarithromycin hypersensitivity. Clinical history and allergy workups including skin tests or/and oral provocation tests were retrieved from medical records.

RESULTS

Oral provocation test confirmed clarithromycin hypersensitivity rate was 5.6% (n = 9/160). Skin tests with clarithromycin showed positivity in 32.6% (n = 29/89) of the tested patients. The sensitivity of clarithromycin skin tests was negligible, and specificity was 73.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.7-81.8). Eighty-eight of the patients (55%) reported that they had previously tolerated a β-lactam antibiotic. β-lactam hypersensitivity was suspected in 40% (n = 64/160) of the patients (simultaneous [n = 10], sequential [n = 19], distant form [n = 35]) in relation with clarithromycin usage. β-lactam hypersensitivity (95% CI, 2.1-70.6, p = .005) and sequential usage of clarithromycin after the development of a rash with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (95% CI, 2.0-96.4, p = .007) were found as risk factors for confirmed clarithromycin hypersensitivity.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of confirmed clarithromycin hypersensitivity was found low among suspected patients. Oral provocation test is crucial for definite diagnosis. Confirmed β-lactam allergy may be attributed as a risk factor for clarithromycin hypersensitivity, particularly clarithromycin treatment after a developing rash with amoxicillin-clavulanic acid in sequential usage.

The first case of tegoprazan-induced urticaria

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Tegoprazan induces adverse drug reactions during clinical trials; however, tegoprazan-induced urticaria has not been reported. Here, we describe the first case of this.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 55-year-old woman presented with acute urticaria with pruritus after taking the gastro-oesophageal reflux disease medication, tegoprazan. Urticaria disappeared after tegoprazan discontinuation. In an oral provocation test, after taking 10% of tegoprazan, she developed pruritus, and after taking 30%, she developed urticaria on her back.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This is the first case of urticaria induced by tegoprazan. Physicians should understand the possibility of a tegoprazan-induced hypersensitivity reactions.

Direct oral provocation tests in non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions related to beta-lactam antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Skin testing has a limited role in the diagnosis of non-immediate beta-lactam hypersensitivity in children. The aim of this study was to report the results of oral provocation tests performed without skin tests in children with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms caused by beta-lactam antibiotics.

METHODS

Oral provocation tests with suspected antibiotics were performed to patients with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms caused by beta-lactam antibiotics. Skin tests were not performed before provocation tests. A total of five doses were administered with half-an-hour intervals in increasing doses. Provocation was continued for 5 days.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients with a median age of 4.3 (IQR: 2-7.5) years, of whom 58% were males, were included in the study. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was the most frequently responsible agent in 87 (73.1%) patients, and most common type of rash was maculopapular in 74 (62.2%) patients. Four patients (3.4%) had an urticarial reaction during the provocation test.

CONCLUSION

We did not experience any severe reactions during oral provocation test without previous skin tests performed to children with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms. Omitting skin tests before oral provocation test in this group of children can help decreasing the burden of allergy clinics and alleviating the discomfort of children.

Fixed drug eruption due to clarithromycin

Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is an unusual adverse effect of any drug, especially antibiotics like clarithromycin. Herein we report a case of clarithromycin induced FDE in a 30-year-old man who presented with recurrent erythematous and pruritic cutaneous lesions on the lower lip, right hand and left thigh. The lesions were initially misdiagnosed as lichen planus and treated with topical steroids. Each recurrence was at the same site and the lesions faded within 2 weeks leaving behind violacceous pigmentation. All the cutaneous lesions were reproduced following an oral provocation test thus confirming the diagnosis of clarithromycin induced FDE, which is a rare occurrence. When it does occur, it is often misdiagnosed, so physicians should be aware of this condition in order to prevent future recurrences as it causes a lot of cosmetic and physical discomfort to the patient.

Oral muscle relaxant may induce immediate allergic reactions

Eperisone and afloqualone act by relaxing both skeletal and vascular smooth muscles to improve circulation and suppress pain reflex. These drugs are typically prescribed with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as painkillers. However, there have been no reports on serious adverse reactions to oral muscle relaxants; and this is the first report to describe three allergic reactions caused by eperisone and afloqualone. All three patients had histories of allergic reactions after oral intake of multiple painkillers, including oral muscle relaxants and NSAIDs, for chronic muscle pain. An open-label oral challenge test was performed with each drug to confirm which drugs caused the systemic reactions. All patients experienced the same reactions within one hour after oral intake of eperisone or afloqualone. The severity of these reactions ranged from laryngeal edema to hypotension. To confirm that the systemic reaction was caused by eperisone or afloqualone, skin prick testing and intradermal skin tests were performed with eperisone or afloqualone extract in vivo, and basophil activity tests were performed after stimulation with these drugs in vitro. In one patient with laryngeal edema, the intradermal test with afloqualone extract had a positive result, and CD63 expression levels on basophils increased in a dose-dependent manner by stimulation with afloqualone. We report three allergic reactions caused by oral muscle relaxants that might be mediated by non-immunoglobulin E-mediated responses. Since oral muscle relaxants such as eperisone and afloqualone are commonly prescribed for chronic muscle pain and can induce severe allergic reactions, we should prescribe them carefully.