Michaela Lucas, Britta S von Ungern-Sternberg, Annabelle Arnold, Michelle Trevenen, Susan Herrmann, Laure Braconnier, Syed Ali, Catherine Jepp, David Sommerfield, Kevin Murray, Kristina Rueter
{"title":"Comparing Skin and Serum Testing to Direct Challenge Outcomes in Children With β-Lactam Allergies.","authors":"Michaela Lucas, Britta S von Ungern-Sternberg, Annabelle Arnold, Michelle Trevenen, Susan Herrmann, Laure Braconnier, Syed Ali, Catherine Jepp, David Sommerfield, Kevin Murray, Kristina Rueter","doi":"10.1016/j.jaip.2024.08.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum specific IgE, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported β-lactam allergies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum specific IgE in children with β-lactam allergies, with immediate and nonimmediate historic reactions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four hundred children with parent-reported β-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or severe cutaneous adverse reactions were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of 3 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>True allergy in children was uncommon; 8.3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within 1 year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing were 12.5%, 98.8%, and 20.0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4.76%, 99.0%, and 25.0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6.9%, 99.0%, and 40.0% for both challenges combined, respectively. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5.7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2.7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15%, with the relabeing being unfounded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Genuine β-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum specific IgE testing did not aid the diagnosis of β-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2024.08.023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: There is a scarcity of prospective studies investigating the relative roles of skin prick and intradermal testing, serum specific IgE, and extended oral challenges in diagnosing children with reported β-lactam allergies.
Objective: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of skin testing and serum specific IgE in children with β-lactam allergies, with immediate and nonimmediate historic reactions.
Methods: Four hundred children with parent-reported β-lactam allergies were recruited into an open-label prospective study. Detailed allergy histories were collected. Those with medically observed and documented histories of anaphylaxis, requiring epinephrine, or severe cutaneous adverse reactions were excluded. In total, 380 children underwent all testing modalities and a direct provocation test. Each child was followed up for a minimum of 3 years.
Results: True allergy in children was uncommon; 8.3% reacted to the direct provocation challenge or the 5-day extended oral provocation challenge. Children reporting cephalosporin allergy or a reaction within 1 year were more likely to react to direct provocation testing. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of skin testing were 12.5%, 98.8%, and 20.0% for direct challenge outcomes, 4.76%, 99.0%, and 25.0% for extended challenge outcomes, and 6.9%, 99.0%, and 40.0% for both challenges combined, respectively. Follow-up investigations revealed that 5.7% of children had a mild repeat reaction and 2.7% continued to avoid the culprit despite successful delabeling. The relabeling rate for children readmitted to hospital was 15%, with the relabeing being unfounded.
Conclusions: Genuine β-lactam allergies were rare, with over 90% of children effectively delabeled. Skin and serum specific IgE testing did not aid the diagnosis of β-lactam antibiotic allergy in children, regardless of medical history. Extended oral challenges proved valuable in confirming allergies and boosted parental confidence.
期刊介绍:
JACI: In Practice is an official publication of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI). It is a companion title to The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and it aims to provide timely clinical papers, case reports, and management recommendations to clinical allergists and other physicians dealing with allergic and immunologic diseases in their practice. The mission of JACI: In Practice is to offer valid and impactful information that supports evidence-based clinical decisions in the diagnosis and management of asthma, allergies, immunologic conditions, and related diseases.
This journal publishes articles on various conditions treated by allergist-immunologists, including food allergy, respiratory disorders (such as asthma, rhinitis, nasal polyps, sinusitis, cough, ABPA, and hypersensitivity pneumonitis), drug allergy, insect sting allergy, anaphylaxis, dermatologic disorders (such as atopic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, urticaria, angioedema, and HAE), immunodeficiency, autoinflammatory syndromes, eosinophilic disorders, and mast cell disorders.
The focus of the journal is on providing cutting-edge clinical information that practitioners can use in their everyday practice or to acquire new knowledge and skills for the benefit of their patients. However, mechanistic or translational studies without immediate or near future clinical relevance, as well as animal studies, are not within the scope of the journal.