PEN-FAST临床决策准则在非β -内酰胺类抗生素过敏评价中的应用

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 ALLERGY
Deniz Göcebe, Elham Khatamzas, Alexander Enk, Knut Schäkel
{"title":"PEN-FAST临床决策准则在非β -内酰胺类抗生素过敏评价中的应用","authors":"Deniz Göcebe, Elham Khatamzas, Alexander Enk, Knut Schäkel","doi":"10.1016/j.anai.2025.06.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>False antibiotic allergy labels lead to the unnecessary use of broad-spectrum agents, contributing to antimicrobial resistance and poorer clinical outcomes. Penicillin allergy delabeling initiatives have been supported by validated clinical decision rules such as PEN-FAST. However, there are currently no available standardized approaches for non-beta-lactam allergies, for which standardized and validated skin tests are also lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We first aimed to validate the safety and negative predictive value (NPV) of PEN-FAST for penicillin allergies. Next, we evaluated whether the performance of PEN-FAST could be replicated for non-beta-lactam antibiotic allergy labels.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective single-center comparative cohort study analyzed adult patients with penicillin or non-beta-lactam allergy labels referred to our allergy division at the Department of Dermatology, Heidelberg, Germany. Allergy assessment included skin tests and subsequent drug challenge. The performance of the previously published PEN-FAST criteria was evaluated for both cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>102 penicillin allergy and 191 non-beta-lactam labels were analyzed. Confirmed allergies were more prevalent among non-beta-lactams (50.3% vs. 37.3%). PEN-FAST demonstrated high sensitivity for both penicillin (97.4%) and non-beta-lactams (94.8%), with an NPV of 95.8% and 82.8%, respectively. Misclassifications were limited to mild cutaneous reactions. Excluding clindamycin labels increased the NPV for non-beta-lactams to 95%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite lower NPV for non-beta-lactam labels and varying performance across antibiotic classes, our results indicate that PEN-FAST may serve as a safe risk-stratification tool for non-beta-lactam allergy labels. Prospective studies with direct drug challenges are required to assess its utility in the delabeling of non-beta-lactam allergies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50773,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the PEN-FAST Clinical Decision Rule in Non-Beta-Lactam Antibiotic Allergy Assessment.\",\"authors\":\"Deniz Göcebe, Elham Khatamzas, Alexander Enk, Knut Schäkel\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.anai.2025.06.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>False antibiotic allergy labels lead to the unnecessary use of broad-spectrum agents, contributing to antimicrobial resistance and poorer clinical outcomes. Penicillin allergy delabeling initiatives have been supported by validated clinical decision rules such as PEN-FAST. However, there are currently no available standardized approaches for non-beta-lactam allergies, for which standardized and validated skin tests are also lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We first aimed to validate the safety and negative predictive value (NPV) of PEN-FAST for penicillin allergies. Next, we evaluated whether the performance of PEN-FAST could be replicated for non-beta-lactam antibiotic allergy labels.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective single-center comparative cohort study analyzed adult patients with penicillin or non-beta-lactam allergy labels referred to our allergy division at the Department of Dermatology, Heidelberg, Germany. Allergy assessment included skin tests and subsequent drug challenge. The performance of the previously published PEN-FAST criteria was evaluated for both cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>102 penicillin allergy and 191 non-beta-lactam labels were analyzed. Confirmed allergies were more prevalent among non-beta-lactams (50.3% vs. 37.3%). PEN-FAST demonstrated high sensitivity for both penicillin (97.4%) and non-beta-lactams (94.8%), with an NPV of 95.8% and 82.8%, respectively. Misclassifications were limited to mild cutaneous reactions. Excluding clindamycin labels increased the NPV for non-beta-lactams to 95%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite lower NPV for non-beta-lactam labels and varying performance across antibiotic classes, our results indicate that PEN-FAST may serve as a safe risk-stratification tool for non-beta-lactam allergy labels. Prospective studies with direct drug challenges are required to assess its utility in the delabeling of non-beta-lactam allergies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2025.06.019\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2025.06.019","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

摘要

背景:虚假的抗生素过敏标签导致不必要地使用广谱药物,导致抗菌素耐药性和较差的临床结果。青霉素过敏去标签倡议得到了诸如PEN-FAST等有效临床决策规则的支持。然而,目前尚无针对非-内酰胺过敏的标准化方法,也缺乏标准化和有效的皮肤试验。目的:首先验证PEN-FAST对青霉素过敏的安全性和阴性预测值(NPV)。接下来,我们评估了PEN-FAST的性能是否可以复制用于非β -内酰胺类抗生素过敏标签。方法:这项回顾性单中心比较队列研究分析了在德国海德堡皮肤科过敏科就诊的青霉素或非β -内酰胺过敏标签的成年患者。过敏评估包括皮肤试验和随后的药物挑战。之前公布的PEN-FAST标准的表现对两个队列进行了评估。结果:青霉素过敏102例,非内酰胺标签191例。证实的过敏在非-内酰胺类人群中更为普遍(50.3%对37.3%)。PEN-FAST对青霉素(97.4%)和非β -内酰胺类(94.8%)均具有较高的敏感性,NPV分别为95.8%和82.8%。错误分类仅限于轻微的皮肤反应。排除克林霉素标签后,非内酰胺类药物的净现值增加至95%。结论:尽管非β -内酰胺标签的NPV较低,并且不同抗生素类别的表现不同,但我们的研究结果表明,PEN-FAST可以作为非β -内酰胺过敏标签的安全风险分层工具。需要前瞻性研究与直接药物挑战,以评估其在非-内酰胺过敏去标签的效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the PEN-FAST Clinical Decision Rule in Non-Beta-Lactam Antibiotic Allergy Assessment.

Background: False antibiotic allergy labels lead to the unnecessary use of broad-spectrum agents, contributing to antimicrobial resistance and poorer clinical outcomes. Penicillin allergy delabeling initiatives have been supported by validated clinical decision rules such as PEN-FAST. However, there are currently no available standardized approaches for non-beta-lactam allergies, for which standardized and validated skin tests are also lacking.

Objective: We first aimed to validate the safety and negative predictive value (NPV) of PEN-FAST for penicillin allergies. Next, we evaluated whether the performance of PEN-FAST could be replicated for non-beta-lactam antibiotic allergy labels.

Methods: This retrospective single-center comparative cohort study analyzed adult patients with penicillin or non-beta-lactam allergy labels referred to our allergy division at the Department of Dermatology, Heidelberg, Germany. Allergy assessment included skin tests and subsequent drug challenge. The performance of the previously published PEN-FAST criteria was evaluated for both cohorts.

Results: 102 penicillin allergy and 191 non-beta-lactam labels were analyzed. Confirmed allergies were more prevalent among non-beta-lactams (50.3% vs. 37.3%). PEN-FAST demonstrated high sensitivity for both penicillin (97.4%) and non-beta-lactams (94.8%), with an NPV of 95.8% and 82.8%, respectively. Misclassifications were limited to mild cutaneous reactions. Excluding clindamycin labels increased the NPV for non-beta-lactams to 95%.

Conclusion: Despite lower NPV for non-beta-lactam labels and varying performance across antibiotic classes, our results indicate that PEN-FAST may serve as a safe risk-stratification tool for non-beta-lactam allergy labels. Prospective studies with direct drug challenges are required to assess its utility in the delabeling of non-beta-lactam allergies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.80%
发文量
437
审稿时长
33 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology is a scholarly medical journal published monthly by the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The purpose of Annals is to serve as an objective evidence-based forum for the allergy/immunology specialist to keep up to date on current clinical science (both research and practice-based) in the fields of allergy, asthma, and immunology. The emphasis of the journal will be to provide clinical and research information that is readily applicable to both the clinician and the researcher. Each issue of the Annals shall also provide opportunities to participate in accredited continuing medical education activities to enhance overall clinical proficiency.
×
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