No abstract

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are a matter of great concern, both for outpatient and in hospital care. The evaluation of these patients is complex, because in vivo tests have a suboptimal sensitivity and can be time-consuming, expensive and potentially risky, especially drug provocation tests. There are several currently available in vitro methods that can be classified into two main groups: those that help to characterize the active phase of the reaction and those that help to identify the culprit drug. The utility of these in vitro methods depends on the mechanisms involved, meaning that they cannot be used for the evaluation of all types of DHRs. Moreover, their effectiveness has not been defined by a consensus agreement between experts in the field. Thus, the European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has organized a task force to provide data and recommendations regarding the available in vitro methods for DHR diagnosis. We have found that although there are many in vitro tests, few of them can be given a recommendation of grade B or above mainly because there is a lack of well-controlled studies, most information comes from small studies with few subjects and results are not always confirmed in later studies. Therefore, it is necessary to validate the currently available in vitro tests in a large series of well-characterized patients with DHR and to develop new tests for diagnosis.

Skin testing in patients with hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media -a European multicenter study Iodinated contrast media (CM) are highly concentrated solutions of iodinated benzene derivatives, used to enhance X-ray procedures (1). Although these products are regarded as relatively safe, they are known to cause both immediate ( £ 1 h) and nonimmediate (>1 h) hypersensitivity reactions in susceptible individuals (2).Background: Iodinated contrast media cause both immediate and nonimmediate hypersensitivity reactions. The aim of this prospective study was to determine the specificity and sensitivity of skin tests in patients who have experienced such reactions. Methods: Skin prick, intradermal and patch tests with a series of contrast media were conducted in 220 patients with either immediate or nonimmediate reaction. Positive skin tests were defined according to internationally accepted guidelines. Seventy-one never-exposed subjects and 11 subjects who had tolerated contrast medium exposure, served as negative controls. Results: Skin test specificity was 96-100%. For tests conducted within the time period from 2 to 6 months after the reaction, up to 50% of immediate reactors and up to 47% of nonimmediate reactors were skin test positive. For immediate reactors, the intradermal tests were the most sensitive, whereas delayed intradermal tests in combination with patch tests were needed for optimal sensitivity in nonimmediate reactors. Contrast medium cross-reactivity was more common in the nonimmediate than in the immediate group. Interestingly, 49% of immediate and 52% of nonimmediate symptoms occurred in previously unexposed patients. Many of these patients were skin test positive, indicating that they were already sensitized at the time of first contrast medium exposure. Conclusions: These data suggest that at least 50% of hypersensitivity reactions to contrast media are caused by an immunological mechanism. Skin testing appears to be a useful tool for diagnosis of contrast medium allergy and may play an important role in selection of a safe product in previous reactors.

No abstract

Mast cell activation (MCA) accompanies diverse physiologic and pathologic processes and is one of the more frequently encountered conditions in medicine. MCA-related symptoms are usually mild and often transient. In such cases, histamine receptor blockers and other mediator-targeting drugs can usually control MCA. In severe cases, a MCA syndrome (MCAS) may be diagnosed. However, overt MCAS is an unusual condition, and many patients referred because of suspected MCAS are diagnosed with other diseases (autoimmune, neoplastic, infectious) unrelated to MCA or suffer from MCA-related (e.g., allergic) disorders and/or co-morbidities without fulfilling criteria of an overt MCAS. These considerations are important as more and more patients are informed they may have MCA or even MCAS without completing a thorough medical evaluation. In fact, in several instances, symptoms are misinterpreted as MCA/MCAS, and other, clinically relevant conditions are not thoroughly pursued. The number of such referrals is increasing. In order to avoid such unnecessary referrals and to prevent misdiagnoses, we here propose a diagnostic algorithm through which a clinically relevant (systemic) MCA can be suspected and MCAS can subsequently be documented or excluded. In addition, the algorithm proposed should help guide the investigating care providers to consider the two principle diagnoses that may underlie MCAS, namely severe allergy and systemic mastocytosis accompanied by severe MCA. Although validation is required, we anticipate that this algorithm will facilitate the management of patients with suspected MCAS.

Mastocytosis is a hematologic neoplasm characterized by expansion and focal accumulation of neoplastic mast cells (MC) in diverse organs, including the skin, bone marrow (BM), spleen, liver, and gastrointestinal tract. The World Health Organization classification divides the disease into prognostically distinct variants of cutaneous mastocytosis (CM) and systemic mastocytosis (SM). Although this classification remains valid, recent developments in the field and the advent of new diagnostic and prognostic parameters created a need to update and refine definitions and diagnostic criteria in MC neoplasms. In addition, MC activation syndromes (MCAS) and genetic features predisposing to SM and MCAS have been identified. To discuss these developments and refinements in the classification, we organized a Working Conference comprised of experts from Europe and the United States in August 2020. This article reports on outcomes from this conference. Of particular note, we propose adjustments in the classification of CM and SM, refinements in diagnostic criteria of SM variants, including smoldering SM and BM mastocytosis (BMM), and updated criteria for MCAS and other conditions involving MC. CD30 expression in MC now qualifies as a minor SM criterion, and BMM is now defined by SM criteria, absence of skin lesions and absence of B-and C-findings. A basal serum tryptase level exceeding 20 ng/mL remains a minor SM criterion, with recognition that hereditary alpha-tryptasemia and various myeloid neoplasms may also cause elevations in tryptase. Our updated proposal will support diagnostic evaluations and prognostication in daily practice and the conduct of clinical trials in MC disorders.

No abstract

Background-The WHO classification separates mastocytosis into distinct variants, but prognostication remains a clinical challenge. The aim of this study was to improve prognostication for patients with mastocytosis. Methods-We analysed data of the registry of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis including 1639 patients (age 17-90 years) diagnosed with mastocytosis according to Sperr et al.