Unpacking Oral Challenge Protocols: A Descriptive Epidemiologic Study of Reactions, Predictors, and Practices for Delabeling Low-Risk Penicillin Allergies Leveraging Data from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 0.8 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Mira Maximos, Ryan Pelletier, Sameer Elsayed, Colleen J Maxwell, Sherilyn K D Houle, Brie McConnell, John-Michael Gamble
{"title":"Unpacking Oral Challenge Protocols: A Descriptive Epidemiologic Study of Reactions, Predictors, and Practices for Delabeling Low-Risk Penicillin Allergies Leveraging Data from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mira Maximos, Ryan Pelletier, Sameer Elsayed, Colleen J Maxwell, Sherilyn K D Houle, Brie McConnell, John-Michael Gamble","doi":"10.1177/00185787251337626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Oral challenges with amoxicillin or other penicillins are safe and effective for delabeling low-risk penicillin allergy histories. While approximately 90% of reported penicillin allergies can be safely delabeled, detailed data on reaction frequency, types, and timing during and after delabeling interventions remain limited. Such data are crucial to optimizing protocols and integrating oral challenges into routine practice. This study aims to characterize the interventions commonly used for oral challenge, classify reported reactions, and identify reported predictors of hypersensitivity reactions in randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies involving an oral challenge for patients with low-risk penicillin allergies. <b>Methods:</b> This study leverages data from a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of oral challenge interventions in patients with low-risk penicillin allergies. This descriptive analysis summarizes the adverse reactions experienced among patients in published studies who received oral challenge. Participant demographics, intervention protocols, frequency, type, and timing of post-challenge adverse reactions are reported. Reactions are categorized as immediate, delayed, or other, with frequencies summarized using descriptive statistics. A random effects meta-analysis quantifies a pooled adverse reaction rate. Predictors of hypersensitivity reactions were synthesized narratively. <b>Results:</b> Across 26 studies (2 randomized trials, 24 quasi-experimental studies) evaluating an oral challenge for patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy, the average participant age was 56 years, with a predominance of females (61%) and limited ethnic diversity with 88% reported or identifying as White. Amoxicillin was the most frequenty used oral challenge agent, typically administered as a single 250 mg oral dose. The incidence of reaction or non-delabeling was 4% (95% Confidence Interval 3%, 6%), <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> = 43%, <i>P</i> = .0001. Cutaneous manifestations, such as rashes, were the most frequent reactions. Delayed reactions, primarily mild maculopapular rashes, were uncommon and managed with antihistamines or topical steroids. Risk factors for oral challenge reactions included higher baseline allergy burden and shorter intervals to oral challenge since the index reaction. <b>Conclusion:</b> Oral challenge strategies to delabel low-risk penicillin allergies can involve single doses of amoxicillin or other penicillins with monitoring protocols that can be managed in ambulatory settings. However, although these delabeling strategies are becoming more prevalent, continued study of standardized protocols and follow-up are essential for effective and replicable delabeling strategies. Future research should prioritize diverse populations and equity-driven frameworks to improve generalizability to all individuals and to resource limited settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":13002,"journal":{"name":"Hospital Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":"00185787251337626"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12061909/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00185787251337626","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Oral challenges with amoxicillin or other penicillins are safe and effective for delabeling low-risk penicillin allergy histories. While approximately 90% of reported penicillin allergies can be safely delabeled, detailed data on reaction frequency, types, and timing during and after delabeling interventions remain limited. Such data are crucial to optimizing protocols and integrating oral challenges into routine practice. This study aims to characterize the interventions commonly used for oral challenge, classify reported reactions, and identify reported predictors of hypersensitivity reactions in randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies involving an oral challenge for patients with low-risk penicillin allergies. Methods: This study leverages data from a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of oral challenge interventions in patients with low-risk penicillin allergies. This descriptive analysis summarizes the adverse reactions experienced among patients in published studies who received oral challenge. Participant demographics, intervention protocols, frequency, type, and timing of post-challenge adverse reactions are reported. Reactions are categorized as immediate, delayed, or other, with frequencies summarized using descriptive statistics. A random effects meta-analysis quantifies a pooled adverse reaction rate. Predictors of hypersensitivity reactions were synthesized narratively. Results: Across 26 studies (2 randomized trials, 24 quasi-experimental studies) evaluating an oral challenge for patients with a low-risk penicillin allergy, the average participant age was 56 years, with a predominance of females (61%) and limited ethnic diversity with 88% reported or identifying as White. Amoxicillin was the most frequenty used oral challenge agent, typically administered as a single 250 mg oral dose. The incidence of reaction or non-delabeling was 4% (95% Confidence Interval 3%, 6%), I 2 = 43%, P = .0001. Cutaneous manifestations, such as rashes, were the most frequent reactions. Delayed reactions, primarily mild maculopapular rashes, were uncommon and managed with antihistamines or topical steroids. Risk factors for oral challenge reactions included higher baseline allergy burden and shorter intervals to oral challenge since the index reaction. Conclusion: Oral challenge strategies to delabel low-risk penicillin allergies can involve single doses of amoxicillin or other penicillins with monitoring protocols that can be managed in ambulatory settings. However, although these delabeling strategies are becoming more prevalent, continued study of standardized protocols and follow-up are essential for effective and replicable delabeling strategies. Future research should prioritize diverse populations and equity-driven frameworks to improve generalizability to all individuals and to resource limited settings.

通过系统回顾和荟萃分析的数据,对低风险青霉素过敏的反应、预测因素和实践进行描述性流行病学研究。
背景:口服阿莫西林或其他青霉素类药物对低风险青霉素过敏史的去标签化是安全有效的。虽然大约90%的青霉素过敏报告可以安全地去除标签,但在去除标签干预期间和之后,有关反应频率、类型和时间的详细数据仍然有限。这些数据对于优化方案和将口腔挑战纳入日常实践至关重要。本研究的目的是在随机对照试验和准实验研究中,对低风险青霉素过敏患者进行口腔刺激的干预措施进行特征描述,对报告的反应进行分类,并确定报告的超敏反应预测因素。方法:本研究利用来自系统回顾和荟萃分析的数据,评估口服刺激干预对低风险青霉素过敏患者的有效性。这一描述性分析总结了在已发表的研究中接受口腔挑战的患者所经历的不良反应。报告了参与者的人口统计,干预方案,频率,类型和挑战后不良反应的时间。反应分为即时、延迟或其他,并使用描述性统计汇总频率。随机效应荟萃分析量化汇总不良反应率。对超敏反应的预测因子进行叙述性合成。结果:在26项研究(2项随机试验,24项准实验研究)中,评估了低风险青霉素过敏患者的口服刺激,参与者的平均年龄为56岁,以女性为主(61%),种族多样性有限(88%报告或确定为白人)。阿莫西林是最常用的口服攻毒剂,通常为单次口服250毫克。反应或未去标签的发生率为4%(95%可信区间3%,6%),i2 = 43%, P = 0.0001。皮肤表现,如皮疹,是最常见的反应。延迟反应,主要是轻度黄斑丘疹,不常见,用抗组胺药或局部类固醇治疗。口腔刺激反应的危险因素包括较高的基线过敏负担和自指数反应以来较短的口腔刺激间隔。结论:口服刺激策略可以消除低风险青霉素过敏,包括单剂量阿莫西林或其他青霉素,并有监测方案,可以在门诊环境中管理。然而,尽管这些去标签策略正变得越来越普遍,但对于有效和可复制的去标签策略来说,继续研究标准化协议和后续行动至关重要。未来的研究应优先考虑不同的人群和公平驱动的框架,以提高对所有个人和资源有限环境的普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hospital Pharmacy
Hospital Pharmacy PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: Hospital Pharmacy is a monthly peer-reviewed journal that is read by pharmacists and other providers practicing in the inpatient and outpatient setting within hospitals, long-term care facilities, home care, and other health-system settings The Hospital Pharmacy Assistant Editor, Michael R. Cohen, RPh, MS, DSc, FASHP, is author of a Medication Error Report Analysis and founder of The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP), a nonprofit organization that provides education about adverse drug events and their prevention.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信