When drug reactions resembling allergy occur, they are called drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) before showing the evidence of either drug-specific antibodies or T cells. DHRs may be allergic or nonallergic in nature, with drug allergies being immunologically mediated DHRs. These reactions are typically unpredictable. They can be life-threatening, may require or prolong hospitalization, and may necessitate changes in subsequent therapy. Both underdiagnosis (due to under-reporting) and overdiagnosis (due to an overuse of the term 'allergy') are common. A definitive diagnosis of such reactions is required in order to institute adequate treatment options and proper preventive measures. Misclassification based solely on the DHR history without further testing may affect treatment options, result in adverse consequences, and lead to the use of more-expensive or less-effective drugs, in contrast to patients who had undergone a complete drug allergy workup. Several guidelines and/or consensus documents on general or specific drug class-induced DHRs are available to support the medical decision process. The use of standardized systematic approaches for the diagnosis and management of DHRs carries the potential to improve outcomes and should thus be disseminated and implemented. Consequently, the International Collaboration in Asthma, Allergy and Immunology (iCAALL), formed by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI), the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI), and the World Allergy Organization (WAO), has decided to issue an International CONsensus (ICON) on drug allergy. The purpose of this document is to highlight the key messages that are common to many of the existing guidelines, while critically reviewing and commenting on any differences and deficiencies of evidence, thus providing a comprehensive reference document for the diagnosis and management of DHRs.Allergy 69 (2014) 420-437

No abstract

BACKGROUND Carbamazepine causes various forms of hypersensitivity reactions, ranging from maculopapular exanthema to severe blistering reactions. The HLA-B★1502 allele has been shown to be strongly correlated with carbamazepine-induced Stevens–Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS–TEN) in the Han Chinese and other Asian populations but not in European populations. METHODS We performed a genomewide association study of samples obtained from 22 subjects with carbamazepine-induced hypersensitivity syndrome, 43 subjects with carbamazepine-induced maculopapular exanthema, and 3987 control subjects, all of European descent. We tested for an association between disease and HLA alleles through proxy single-nucleotide polymorphisms and imputation, confirming associations by high-resolution sequence-based HLA typing. We replicated the associations in samples from 145 subjects with carbamazepine-induced hypersensitivity reactions. RESULTS The HLA-A★3101 allele, which has a prevalence of 2 to 5% in Northern European populations, was significantly associated with the hypersensitivity syndrome (P = 3.5×10−8). An independent genomewide association study of samples from subjects with maculopapular exanthema also showed an association with the HLA-A★3101 allele (P = 1.1×10−6). Follow-up genotyping confirmed the variant as a risk factor for the hypersensitivity syndrome (odds ratio, 12.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27 to 121.03), maculopapular exanthema (odds ratio, 8.33; 95% CI, 3.59 to 19.36), and SJS–TEN (odds ratio, 25.93; 95% CI, 4.93 to 116.18). CONCLUSIONS The presence of the HLA-A★3101 allele was associated with carbamazepine-induced hypersensitivity reactions among subjects of Northern European ancestry. The presence of the allele increased the risk from 5.0% to 26.0%, whereas its absence reduced the risk from 5.0% to 3.8%. (Funded by the U.K. Department of Health and others.)

No abstract

Diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity is difficult, as an enormous amount of different drugs can elicit various immune‐mediated diseases with distinct pathomechanism. The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) measures the proliferation of T cells to a drug in vitro– from which one concludes to a previous in vivo reaction due to a sensitization. This concept of the LTT has been confirmed by the generation of drug‐specific T‐cell clones and the finding that drugs can directly interact with the T‐cell receptor, without previous metabolism or need to bind to proteins. In this review, technical aspects and usefulness of this test for the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity are discussed. The main advantage of this test is its applicability with many different drugs in different immune reactions, as drug‐specific T cell are almost always involved in drug hypersensitivity reactions. Its main disadvantages are that an in vitro proliferation of T cells to a drug is difficult to transfer to the clinical situation and that the test per se is rather cumbersome and technically demanding. In addition, its sensitivity is limited (for β‐lactam allergy it is in the range of 60–70%), – although at least in our hands – it is higher than of other tests for drug hypersensitivity diagnosis. Consequently, drug hypersensitivity diagnosis needs to rely on a combination of history and different tests, as none of the single tests available has per se a sufficiently good sensitivity. Within this setting, the LTT has proven to be a useful test for the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions and helped to better understand these reactions. Further work on the simplification of this test and systematic evaluation of its sensitivity and specificity in some main groups of drugs are necessary to make this test more widely available.

No abstract

Nonimmediate manifestations (i.e. occurring more than 1 h after drug administration), particularly maculopapular and urticarial eruptions, are common during β‐lactam treatment. The mechanisms involved in most nonimmediate reactions seem to be heterogeneous and are not yet completely understood. However, clinical and immunohistological studies, as well as analysis of drug‐specific T‐cell clones obtained from the circulating blood and the skin, suggest that a type‐IV (cell‐mediated) pathogenic mechanism may be involved in some nonimmediate reactions such as maculopapular or bullous rashes and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. In the diagnostic work‐up, the patient's history is fundamental; patch testing is useful, together with delayed‐reading intradermal testing. The latter appears to be somewhat more sensitive than patch testing, but also less specific. In case of negative allergologic tests, consideration should be given to provocation tests, and the careful administration of the suspect agents. With regard to in vitro tests, the lymphocyte transformation test may contribute to the identification of the responsible drug.Under the aegis of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) interest group on drug hypersensitivity and the European Network for Drug Allergy (ENDA), in this review we describe the general guidelines for evaluating subjects with nonimmediate reactions to β‐lactams.

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.