Global Burden of Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis Associated With 33 Classes of Antibiotics (1968-2024): A Pharmacovigilance Analysis.

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 ALLERGY
Jaehyeong Cho, Jeongseon Oh, Jaeyu Park, Hyesu Jo, Tae Hyeon Kim, Hyunjee Kim, Yesol Yim, Seoyoung Park, Kyeongeun Kim, Ho Geol Woo, Yerin Hwang, Michael Miligkos, Dong Keon Yon, Nikolaos G Papadopoulos
{"title":"Global Burden of Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis Associated With 33 Classes of Antibiotics (1968-2024): A Pharmacovigilance Analysis.","authors":"Jaehyeong Cho, Jeongseon Oh, Jaeyu Park, Hyesu Jo, Tae Hyeon Kim, Hyunjee Kim, Yesol Yim, Seoyoung Park, Kyeongeun Kim, Ho Geol Woo, Yerin Hwang, Michael Miligkos, Dong Keon Yon, Nikolaos G Papadopoulos","doi":"10.1111/cea.70121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite antibiotic-induced anaphylaxis being a severe allergic reaction requiring immediate care, large-scale studies examining all antibiotic subtypes remain limited. This study addresses this gap by analysing 33 antibiotic classes, along with epidemiological and regional variations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study utilised the world's largest pharmacovigilance database, with over 35 million individual case safety reports from 140 countries. The study employed a two-step approach: first, the antibiotics were grouped into 10 categories according to their third-level ATC codes and their frequencies were collectively analysed. These categories comprised tetracyclines (J01A), amphenicols (J01B), beta-lactam antibacterial penicillins (J01C), other beta-lactam antibacterials (J01D), sulfonamides and trimethoprim (J01E), macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramins (J01F), aminoglycoside antibacterials (J01G), quinolone antibacterials (J01M), combinations of antibacterials (J01R) and other antibacterials (J01X). Second, a more detailed analysis was performed at the fourth level of the ATC codes for the antibiotics categorised at the third level, focusing on 33 individual antibiotics. For statistical analysis, disproportionality metrics, including the information component (IC) with IC<sub>025</sub> and reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% CI, were used to classify and analyse the risk of anaphylaxis related to these drugs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 144,820 reports were identified as antibiotic-induced anaphylaxis. All antibiotics showed significant signal detection for anaphylaxis (ROR, 20.50 [95% CI, 20.37-20.63]; IC, 3.77 [IC<sub>025</sub>, 3.76]) across all age groups and sexes. The following three antibiotics took the most proportion of the reports: penicillins (39,696/144,820 [27.4%]; ROR, 18.82 [95% CI, 18.62-19.01]; IC, 4.04 [IC<sub>025</sub>, 4.02]), other beta-lactam antibiotics (63,644/144,820 [43.9%]; 27.59 [27.35-27.83]; 4.48 [4.46]) and quinolones (20,303/144,820 [14.0%]; 13.40 [13.21-13.60]; 3.63 [3.61]). The median time-to-onset was 1 day (interquantile range, 1-1), with most r recovered (96.09%) and the fatality rate accounting for 1.23%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although our findings do not permit causal inference, the analysis highlights the need for standardised grading systems, patient-specific risk factors and long-term outcome studies to improve prevention and management.</p>","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.70121","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite antibiotic-induced anaphylaxis being a severe allergic reaction requiring immediate care, large-scale studies examining all antibiotic subtypes remain limited. This study addresses this gap by analysing 33 antibiotic classes, along with epidemiological and regional variations.

Methods: This study utilised the world's largest pharmacovigilance database, with over 35 million individual case safety reports from 140 countries. The study employed a two-step approach: first, the antibiotics were grouped into 10 categories according to their third-level ATC codes and their frequencies were collectively analysed. These categories comprised tetracyclines (J01A), amphenicols (J01B), beta-lactam antibacterial penicillins (J01C), other beta-lactam antibacterials (J01D), sulfonamides and trimethoprim (J01E), macrolides, lincosamides and streptogramins (J01F), aminoglycoside antibacterials (J01G), quinolone antibacterials (J01M), combinations of antibacterials (J01R) and other antibacterials (J01X). Second, a more detailed analysis was performed at the fourth level of the ATC codes for the antibiotics categorised at the third level, focusing on 33 individual antibiotics. For statistical analysis, disproportionality metrics, including the information component (IC) with IC025 and reporting odds ratio (ROR) with 95% CI, were used to classify and analyse the risk of anaphylaxis related to these drugs.

Results: A total of 144,820 reports were identified as antibiotic-induced anaphylaxis. All antibiotics showed significant signal detection for anaphylaxis (ROR, 20.50 [95% CI, 20.37-20.63]; IC, 3.77 [IC025, 3.76]) across all age groups and sexes. The following three antibiotics took the most proportion of the reports: penicillins (39,696/144,820 [27.4%]; ROR, 18.82 [95% CI, 18.62-19.01]; IC, 4.04 [IC025, 4.02]), other beta-lactam antibiotics (63,644/144,820 [43.9%]; 27.59 [27.35-27.83]; 4.48 [4.46]) and quinolones (20,303/144,820 [14.0%]; 13.40 [13.21-13.60]; 3.63 [3.61]). The median time-to-onset was 1 day (interquantile range, 1-1), with most r recovered (96.09%) and the fatality rate accounting for 1.23%.

Conclusion: Although our findings do not permit causal inference, the analysis highlights the need for standardised grading systems, patient-specific risk factors and long-term outcome studies to improve prevention and management.

与33种抗生素相关的全球药物性过敏反应负担(1968-2024):药物警戒分析。
背景:尽管抗生素引起的过敏反应是一种需要立即治疗的严重过敏反应,但检查所有抗生素亚型的大规模研究仍然有限。本研究通过分析33种抗生素类别以及流行病学和区域差异来解决这一差距。方法:本研究利用了世界上最大的药物警戒数据库,其中包含来自140个国家的3500多万例个体安全报告。该研究采用了两步方法:首先,根据抗生素的三级ATC代码将抗生素分为10类,并对其频率进行集体分析。这些类别包括四环素类(J01A)、氨霉素类(J01B)、内酰胺类抗菌青霉素类(J01C)、其他内酰胺类抗菌药物(J01D)、磺胺类和甲氧苄啶类(J01E)、大环内酯类、林肯胺类和链霉素类(J01F)、氨基糖苷类抗菌药物(J01G)、喹诺酮类抗菌药物(J01M)、抗菌药物(J01R)和其他抗菌药物(J01X)。其次,在ATC代码的第四级对第三级分类的抗生素进行了更详细的分析,重点分析了33种抗生素。为了进行统计分析,使用歧化指标,包括IC025的信息成分(IC)和95% CI的报告优势比(ROR),对这些药物相关的过敏反应风险进行分类和分析。结果:共有144820例报告被确定为抗生素引起的过敏反应。所有抗生素均显示出显著的过敏反应信号检测(ROR, 20.50 [95% CI, 20.37-20.63];IC, 3.77 [IC025, 3.76])。以下三种抗生素的报告占比最大:青霉素类(39696 / 144820 [27.4%]);Ror, 18.82 [95% ci, 18.62-19.01];IC, 4.04 [IC025, 4.02]),其他β -内酰胺类抗生素(63,644/144,820 [43.9%];27.59 (27.35 - -27.83);4.48[4.46])和喹诺酮类药物(20,303/144,820 [14.0%];13.40 (13.21 - -13.60);3.63[3.61])。中位发病时间为1 d(分位数间差为1-1),大多数患者痊愈(96.09%),病死率为1.23%。结论:虽然我们的研究结果不允许因果推理,但分析强调了标准化分级系统、患者特定风险因素和长期结果研究的必要性,以改善预防和管理。
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
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
9.80%
发文量
189
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical & Experimental Allergy strikes an excellent balance between clinical and scientific articles and carries regular reviews and editorials written by leading authorities in their field. In response to the increasing number of quality submissions, since 1996 the journals size has increased by over 30%. Clinical & Experimental Allergy is essential reading for allergy practitioners and research scientists with an interest in allergic diseases and mechanisms. Truly international in appeal, Clinical & Experimental Allergy publishes clinical and experimental observations in disease in all fields of medicine in which allergic hypersensitivity plays a part.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信