8 research outputs found

    Diagnostic Approach of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Cefazolin in a Large Prospective Cohort.

    No full text
    *Bogas G and Doña I should be considered joint first author. *Moreno E, Laguna JJ and Torres MJ should be considered joint senior author.https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/sharing#2-preprint: "Authors can share their preprint anywhere at any time."Introduction: Cefazolin is a common trigger of perioperative anaphylaxis. The diagnostic approach is controversial as the optimal concentration for skin testing is uncertain, drug provocation tests (DPTs) are contraindicated in severe reactions, and in vitro tests are not thoroughly validated. We aimed to characterise a large number of patients reporting cefazolin allergic reactions, and to analyse in vivo and in vitro tests’ diagnostic role. Methods: We prospectively evaluated patients with suspicion of allergic reactions to cefazolin by clinical history, skin tests (STs), and, if negative, DPT. In a subgroup of patients (both allergic and non-allergic), basophil activation test (BAT) and radioallergosorbent test (RAST) were also done. Results: From 184 evaluated patients, 41.3% were confirmed as allergic, 48.9% as non-allergic, and in 9.8% diagnosis was not confirmed. All reactions were immediate, besides, all cases reporting anaphylactic shock and most patients reporting anaphylaxis were confirmed as allergic (p<0.001); 52.6% of allergic cases were confirmed by STs, 28.9% by DPT, and 18.4% by clinical history. All subjects manifesting exanthemas and generalised pruritus were non-allergic. BAT sensitivity was 66.7% when combining CD63 and CD203c as activation markers. Six out of eight patients with negative STs and positive DPT had a positive BAT. Conclusions: Allergic patients to cefazolin often reported severe immediate-type reactions. STs allowed diagnosing half of patients. Unfortunately, DPT could not be performed in all cases due to reaction severity, being BAT a promising diagnostic tool. Further researches are needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms, especially in patients with severe reactions

    Basophil activation test positivity decreases with time in immediate allergic reactions to proton pump inhibitors

    No full text
    Omeprazole is a widely prescribed proton pump inhibitor [1], with 1%–3% of adverse reactions being reported. Up to 86% of these reactions are IgE mediated [2] and half of them anaphylaxis [1]. An accurate diagnosis is essential, with skin testing (STs) showing high specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) (100%), but lower sensitivity (60%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (70%–90%) [2]. As stated in a recent position paper of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the basophil activation test (BAT) is a reliable option in the diagnosis of immediate hypersensitivity to proton pump inhibitors [3]. In fact, previous research from our group reported that BAT has a higher sensitivity than STs (73.8%) and similar specificity, PPV (100%) and NPV (66.7%) [1]. Interestingly, the combination of STs and BAT can increase sensitivity up to 85.7%, being BAT positive in 57.1% of patients with negative STs [1].Funding for open access charge: Universidad de Málaga/CBUA This work was supported by Institute of Health ‘Carlos III’ (ISCIII) of the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO), grants co-funded by European Regional Development Fund: PI15/01206, PI17/01237, PI18/00095, PI20/01734, PI21/0329, PI21/00969, RETICS ARADYAL RD16/0006/0001, RD16/0006/0033, RICORS Red de Enfermedades Inflamatorias (REI) RD21/0002/0008; Andalusian Regional Ministry of Health: grants PI-0241-2016, PE-0172-2018, PI-0127-2020; Grants from SEAIC, Luis Alvarez 2022 IDIPAZ Fundation and the XV Call for Research Project Development Grants from the Alfonso X el Sabio University Foundation. Funding for open access charge: Universidad de Málaga/CBUA. CM (RC-0004-2021) and AA (C1-0007-2023) holds a ‘Nicolas Monardes’ research contract from the Andalusian Regional Ministry of Health

    Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) implies a more severe disease with more damage accrual and higher mortality

    No full text
    Introduction: Antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) have been associated with organ damage and certain features in systemic lupus erythematosus(SLE) patients. Our aim was to investigate the differences between SLE patients according to the presence of aPL and/or clinical antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). Materials and methods: Patients from the RELESSER-T registry were included. RELESSER-T is a Spanish multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective, SLE registry. Results: We included 2398 SLE patients, 1372 of whom were positive for aPL. Overall 1026 patients were classified as SLE, 555 as SLE-APS and817 as SLE-aPL. Regarding cardiovascular risk factors, SLE-APS patients had higher rates of hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes than those with SLE-aPL and SLE (p < 0.001). SLE-APS patients showed higher rates of neuropsychiatric, cardiac, pulmonary, renal and ophthalmological manifestations than the other groups (p < 0.001). SLE-APS patients presented greater damage accrual with higher SLICC values (1.9 ± 2.2 in SLE-APS, 0.9 ± 1.4 in SLE-aPL and 1.1 ± 1.6 in SLE, p < 0.001) and more severe disease as defined by the Katz index (3 ± 1.8 in SLE-APS, 2.7 ± 1.7 in SLE-aPL and 2.6 ± 1.6 in SLE, p < 0.001). SLE-APS patients showed higher mortality rates (p < 0.001). Conclusions: SLE-APS patients exhibited more severe clinical profiles with higher frequencies of major organ involvement, greater damage accrual and higher mortality than SLE-aPL and SLE patients.Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: FIS Grant PI11/02857 (Instituto Carlos III, Fondos FEDER) has supported this work. The RELESSER Registry was funded by grants from GSK, Roche, UCB, Lilly and Novartis. The board of Doctor Negrın University Hospital of Gran Canaria approved the protocol. RD 1720. Acknowledgements: Spanish Society of Rheumatology for their contribution in manuscript language editing

    Relevance of gastrointestinal manifestations in a large Spanish cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: what do we know?

    No full text
    SLE can affect any part of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. GI symptoms are reported to occur in >50% of SLE patients. To describe the GI manifestations of SLE in the RELESSER (Registry of SLE Patients of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology) cohort and to determine whether these are associated with a more severe disease, damage accrual and a worse prognosis. METHODS: We conducted a nationwide, retrospective, multicentre, cross-sectional cohort study of 3658 SLE patients who fulfil =4 ACR-97 criteria. Data on demographics, disease characteristics, activity (SLEDAI-2K or BILAG), damage (SLICC/ACR/DI) and therapies were collected. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between lupus patients with and without GI damage to establish whether GI damage is associated with a more severe disease. RESULTS: From 3654 lupus patients, 3.7% developed GI damage. Patients in this group (group 1) were older, they had longer disease duration, and were more likely to have vasculitis, renal disease and serositis than patients without GI damage (group 2). Hospitalizations and mortality were significantly higher in group 1. Patients in group 1 had higher modified SDI (SLICC Damage Index). The presence of oral ulcers reduced the risk of developing damage in 33% of patients. CONCLUSION: Having GI damage is associated with a worse prognosis. Patients on a high dose of glucocorticoids are at higher risk of developing GI damage which reinforces the strategy of minimizing glucocorticoids. Oral ulcers appear to decrease the risk of GI damage. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology

    Opportunistic infections in immunosuppressed patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Analysis by the Pharmachild Safety Adjudication Committee

    No full text
    Background: To derive a list of opportunistic infections (OI) through the analysis of the juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients in the Pharmachild registry by an independent Safety Adjudication Committee (SAC). Methods: The SAC (3 pediatric rheumatologists and 2 pediatric infectious disease specialists) elaborated and approved by consensus a provisional list of OI for use in JIA. Through a 5 step-procedure, all the severe and serious infections, classified as per MedDRA dictionary and retrieved in the Pharmachild registry, were evaluated by the SAC by answering six questions and adjudicated with the agreement of 3/5 specialists. A final evidence-based list of OI resulted by matching the adjudicated infections with the provisional list of OI. Results: A total of 772 infectious events in 572 eligible patients, of which 335 serious/severe/very severe non-OI and 437 OI (any intensity/severity), according to the provisional list, were retrieved. Six hundred eighty-two of 772 (88.3%) were adjudicated as infections, of them 603/682 (88.4%) as common and 119/682 (17.4%) as OI by the SAC. Matching these 119 opportunistic events with the provisional list, 106 were confirmed by the SAC as OI, and among them infections by herpes viruses were the most frequent (68%), followed by tuberculosis (27.4%). The remaining events were divided in the groups of non-OI and possible/patient and/or pathogen-related OI. Conclusions: We found a significant number of OI in JIA patients on immunosuppressive therapy. The proposed list of OI, created by consensus and validated in the Pharmachild cohort, could facilitate comparison among future pharmacovigilance studies. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 01399281; ENCePP seal: awarded on 25 November 2011. © 2020 The Author(s)
    corecore