Desensitization in delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions – an <scp>EAACI</scp> position paper of the Drug Allergy Interest Group

Scherer, Kathrin; Brockow, Knut; Aberer, Werner; Gooi, Jhc; Demoly, Pascal; Romano, Antonino; Schnyder, Benno; Whitaker, Paul; Cernadas, J R; Bircher, A. J.

doi:10.1111/all.12161

Cited by 191 publications

(189 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

173

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A position paper on desensitization in non-immediate hypersensitivity has been published with protocols for antibiotics including beta-lactams attached [223]. • If there is a history of penicillin allergy, patients requiring a cephalosporin should undergo skin testing to both penicillin and to the specific cephalosporin.…”

Section: Desensitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta‐lactams

Mirakian

Leech

Krishna

et al. 2015

Clin Experimental Allergy

228

229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and an expert panel have prepared this guidance for the management of immediate and non-immediate allergic reactions to penicillins and other beta-lactams. The guideline is intended for UK specialists in both adult and paediatric allergy and for other clinicians practising allergy in secondary and tertiary care. The recommendations are evidence based, but where evidence is lacking, the panel reached consensus. During the development of the guideline, all BSACI members were consulted using a Web-based process and all comments carefully considered. Included in the guideline are epidemiology of allergic reactions to beta-lactams, molecular structure, formulations available in the UK and a description of known beta-lactam antigenic determinants. Sections on the value and limitations of clinical history, skin testing and laboratory investigations for both penicillins and cephalosporins are included. Cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins is discussed in detail. Recommendations on oral provocation and desensitization procedures have been made. Guidance for beta-lactam allergy in children is given in a separate section. An algorithm to help the clinician in the diagnosis of patients with a history of penicillin allergy has also been included.Keywords allergy, anaphylaxis, beta-lactam, BSACI, carbapenem, cephalosporin, children, cross-reactivity, desensitization, drug provocation test, epidemiology, hypersensitivity, monobactam, oral challenges, paediatrics, penicillin, serum-specific IgE, skin tests, Standards of Care Committee • This guideline addresses immediate and non-immediate allergic reactions to beta-lactams.• Up to 20% of drug-related anaphylaxis deaths in • Individuals with a positive skin test to an aminopenicillin but negative skin tests to penicillin determinants are likely to be sensitized to the aminopenicillin side chain. (B) In this situation, a cautious challenge to benzyl or phenoxymethyl penicillin can be considered to ascertain whether the patient has a selective penicillin allergy. (D) • If a cephalosporin is required in a patient with a clinical history of penicillin allergy and positive skin tests -the patient should undergo skin testing using a cephalosporin with a different side chain and, if negative, provocation testing should be undertaken to exclude allergy to the specific cephalosporin. (D)• If penicillin is required in a patient with a clinical history of cephalosporin allergy, skin testing should be undertaken with penicillins and, if negative, provocation testing to exclude allergy to penicillin. (B) If skin tests are positive, then penicillin avoidance or desensitization can be considered. (B)• If a cephalosporin is required by a patient with a previous reaction, skin testing to penicillins and the required cephalosporin should be carried out to establish whether sensitization is to the beta-lactam core or side chain. (B) This should be followed by either provo...

show abstract

Section: Desensitizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta‐lactams

Mirakian

Leech

Krishna

et al. 2015

Clin Experimental Allergy

228

229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most published literature on drug desensitization pertains to immediate hypersensitivity reactions [1,2]. In the absence of controlled studies or an evidence-based review of desensitization in delayed hypersensitivity reactions (defined as onset more than 1 h after drug administration), experts have summarized their experience with regard to indications, selection criteria, contraindications, procedures, risks, and complications of desensitization for these reactions [86]. The definition of delayed used in this important paper might require further discussion.…”

Section: Long-term Management: Prevention Of Recurrencementioning

confidence: 99%

World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Guidelines: 2013 Update of the Evidence Base

Simons

Ardusso

Dimov

et al. 2013

Int Arch Allergy Immunol

247

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis are a widely disseminated and used resource for information about anaphylaxis. They focus on patients at risk, triggers, clinical diagnosis, treatment in health care settings, self-treatment in the community, and prevention of recurrences. Their unique strengths include a global perspective informed by prior research on the global availability of essentials for anaphylaxis assessment and management and a global agenda for anaphylaxis research. Additionally, detailed colored illustrations are linked to key concepts in the text [Simons et al.: J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011;127:593.e1-e22]. The recommendations in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines for management of anaphylaxis in health care settings and community settings were based on evidence published in peer-reviewed, indexed medical journals to the end of 2010. These recommendations remain unchanged and clinically relevant. An update of the evidence base was published in 2012 [Simons et al.: Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2012;12:389-399]. In 2012 and early 2013, major advances were reported in the following areas: further characterization of patient phenotypes; development of in vitro tests (for some allergens) that help distinguish clinical risk of anaphylaxis from asymptomatic sensitization; epinephrine (adrenaline) research, including studies of a new epinephrine auto-injector for use in community settings, and randomized controlled trials of immunotherapy to prevent food-induced anaphylaxis. Despite these advances, the need for additional prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials of interventions in anaphylaxis is increasingly apparent. This 2013 Update highlights publications from 2012 and 2013 that further contribute to the evidence base for the recommendations made in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines. Ideally, it should be used in conjunction with these Guidelines and with the 2012 Guidelines Update.

show abstract

“…Desensitization has been a reliable alternative to discontinuation of first-line drugs and different desensitization protocols have been developed [5,6,7,8,9,12,13,14,16,17]. Rapid desensitization was performed with rituximab because it was the most effective option for our patients with hematologic malignancies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Drug Desensitization with Biologics: A Single-Center Experience with Four Biologics

Bavbek

Kendirlinan²,

Çerçi³

et al. 2016

Int Arch Allergy Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) induces a temporary tolerance to biologics which induce hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). Data are limited regarding the use of RDD outside the USA. Our purpose was to report our data on RDD to rituximab, infliximab, cetuximab, and trastuzumab. Methods: The study was conducted as a retrospective chart review of patients with symptoms of HSRs to biologics. HSRs were classified as grades I, II, and III, based on their severity. Skin-prick tests/intradermal tests (IDTs) were performed with the implicated biologics. The 12-step RDD protocol was used. Results: The study group comprised 11 women and 6 men (mean age: 47 ± 11.7 years). Fourteen patients experienced HSRs to rituximab; 3 had HSRs to cetuximab, infliximab, and trastuzumab, respectively. HSRs to cetuximab, infliximab, and trastuzumab occurred during the first infusion and were all grade III. Twelve of the 14 patients with rituximab hypersensitivity had a reaction during the first infusion; 10 patients had grade II reactions and 4 had grade III reactions. Respiratory symptoms were the most frequent presentation of HSR. Skin tests with rituximab were performed on 10 patients; only 3 resulted in positive IDTs (with 1:100 dilutions) and the other tests were negative as were those performed with the other biologics. Of 96 RDDs, 89 desensitizations were performed with rituximab, 5 with cetuximab, 1 with infliximab, and 1 with trastuzumab. There were 12 (13.5%) breakthrough reactions, all of which were associated with rituximab and were less severe than the initial reactions. Conclusion: RDD was found to be safe and effective in the largest case series of RDDs with biologics in our country, Turkey.

show abstract

Desensitization in delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions – an EAACI position paper of the Drug Allergy Interest Group

Cited by 191 publications

References 53 publications

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta‐lactams

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta‐lactams

World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Guidelines: 2013 Update of the Evidence Base

Rapid Drug Desensitization with Biologics: A Single-Center Experience with Four Biologics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About