Ami P Belmont, Roland Solensky, Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, María José Torres
{"title":"再致敏——在接受青霉素过敏评估的患者中是否应该进行重复测试?一场支持反对者的辩论。","authors":"Ami P Belmont, Roland Solensky, Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, María José Torres","doi":"10.1016/j.jaip.2024.12.043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Evaluating penicillin allergy labels and expanding access to preferred treatment options safely is of critical public health importance. Most patients with penicillin allergy labels are not allergic, and even in those with verified allergy, sensitization wanes over time. However, sensitization is complex and while a patient may have a negative penicillin allergy evaluation (including a drug challenge), resensitization can occur, raising a risk of a subsequent reaction upon exposure. In this pro/con debate we deliberate on whether patients who have had negative penicillin allergy evaluations should undergo retesting for sensitization prior to subsequent administrations. The pro position is presented by Drs. Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, and María Torres, while the con position is described by Drs. Ami Belmont and Roland Solensky.</p>","PeriodicalId":51323,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resensitization - Should repeat testing be performed in patients undergoing penicillin allergy evaluations? A Pro-Con Debate.\",\"authors\":\"Ami P Belmont, Roland Solensky, Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, María José Torres\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaip.2024.12.043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Evaluating penicillin allergy labels and expanding access to preferred treatment options safely is of critical public health importance. Most patients with penicillin allergy labels are not allergic, and even in those with verified allergy, sensitization wanes over time. However, sensitization is complex and while a patient may have a negative penicillin allergy evaluation (including a drug challenge), resensitization can occur, raising a risk of a subsequent reaction upon exposure. In this pro/con debate we deliberate on whether patients who have had negative penicillin allergy evaluations should undergo retesting for sensitization prior to subsequent administrations. The pro position is presented by Drs. Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, and María Torres, while the con position is described by Drs. Ami Belmont and Roland Solensky.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51323,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-16\",\"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.2024.12.043\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology-In Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2024.12.043","RegionNum":1,"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
摘要
评估青霉素过敏标签和扩大安全获得首选治疗方案对公共卫生至关重要。大多数有青霉素过敏标签的患者并不过敏,即使在那些证实过敏的患者中,敏化也会随着时间的推移而减弱。然而,致敏是复杂的,当患者可能有阴性青霉素过敏评估(包括药物挑战)时,可发生再致敏,增加暴露后后续反应的风险。在这个赞成/反对的辩论中,我们讨论了青霉素过敏评价阴性的患者是否应该在随后的给药前重新进行致敏试验。辩方由dr。Inmaculada Doña, María Salas和María Torres,而这种情况是由dr。Ami Belmont和Roland Solensky。
Resensitization - Should repeat testing be performed in patients undergoing penicillin allergy evaluations? A Pro-Con Debate.
Evaluating penicillin allergy labels and expanding access to preferred treatment options safely is of critical public health importance. Most patients with penicillin allergy labels are not allergic, and even in those with verified allergy, sensitization wanes over time. However, sensitization is complex and while a patient may have a negative penicillin allergy evaluation (including a drug challenge), resensitization can occur, raising a risk of a subsequent reaction upon exposure. In this pro/con debate we deliberate on whether patients who have had negative penicillin allergy evaluations should undergo retesting for sensitization prior to subsequent administrations. The pro position is presented by Drs. Inmaculada Doña, María Salas, and María Torres, while the con position is described by Drs. Ami Belmont and Roland Solensky.
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.