Cargando…

In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations

BACKGROUND: For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated I...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Decuyper, I. I., Mangodt, E. A., Van Gasse, A. L., Claesen, K., Uyttebroek, A., Faber, M., Sabato, V., Bridts, C. H., Mertens, C., Hagendorens, M. M., De Clerck, L. S., Ebo, Didier G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28258478
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40268-017-0176-x
_version_ 1783235586442657792
author Decuyper, I. I.
Mangodt, E. A.
Van Gasse, A. L.
Claesen, K.
Uyttebroek, A.
Faber, M.
Sabato, V.
Bridts, C. H.
Mertens, C.
Hagendorens, M. M.
De Clerck, L. S.
Ebo, Didier G.
author_facet Decuyper, I. I.
Mangodt, E. A.
Van Gasse, A. L.
Claesen, K.
Uyttebroek, A.
Faber, M.
Sabato, V.
Bridts, C. H.
Mertens, C.
Hagendorens, M. M.
De Clerck, L. S.
Ebo, Didier G.
author_sort Decuyper, I. I.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHR and impossible for non-IgE-mediated IDHR that result from alternative routes of basophil and mast cell activation. In these difficult cases, diagnosis might benefit from cellular tests such as basophil activation tests (BAT). AIM: The aim was to review the potential and limitations of quantification of sIgE and BAT in diagnosing IDHR. The utility of quantification of serum tryptase is discussed. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the key words allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors’ own experience. RESULTS: The drugs that have been most studied with both techniques are β-lactam antibiotics and curarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). For sIgE morphine, data are available on the value of this test as a biomarker for sensitization to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA, especially rocuronium and suxamethonium. For the BAT, there are also data on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. For β-lactam antibiotics, sensitivity and specificity of sIgE varies between 0 and 85% and 52 and 100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varies between 38.5 and 92% and 85.7 and 100%, respectively. Specific IgE to morphine should not be used in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates. For the BAT, sensitivity generally varies between 50 and 60%, whereas specificity attains 80%, except for quinolones and NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Although drug-sIgE assays and BAT can provide useful information in the diagnosis of IDHR, their predictive value is not absolute. Large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory to harmonize and optimize test protocols and to establish drug-specific decision thresholds.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5427047
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54270472017-05-25 In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations Decuyper, I. I. Mangodt, E. A. Van Gasse, A. L. Claesen, K. Uyttebroek, A. Faber, M. Sabato, V. Bridts, C. H. Mertens, C. Hagendorens, M. M. De Clerck, L. S. Ebo, Didier G. Drugs R D Review Article BACKGROUND: For most physicians, quantification of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (drug-sIgE) antibodies constitutes the primary in vitro measure to document immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (IDHR). Unfortunately, this is often insufficient to correctly identify patients with IgE-mediated IDHR and impossible for non-IgE-mediated IDHR that result from alternative routes of basophil and mast cell activation. In these difficult cases, diagnosis might benefit from cellular tests such as basophil activation tests (BAT). AIM: The aim was to review the potential and limitations of quantification of sIgE and BAT in diagnosing IDHR. The utility of quantification of serum tryptase is discussed. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the key words allergy, basophil activation, CD63, CD203c, diagnosis, drugs, hypersensitivity, flow cytometry, specific IgE antibodies; this was complemented by the authors’ own experience. RESULTS: The drugs that have been most studied with both techniques are β-lactam antibiotics and curarizing neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA). For sIgE morphine, data are available on the value of this test as a biomarker for sensitization to substituted ammonium structures that constitute the major epitope of NMBA, especially rocuronium and suxamethonium. For the BAT, there are also data on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and iodinated radiocontrast media. For β-lactam antibiotics, sensitivity and specificity of sIgE varies between 0 and 85% and 52 and 100%, respectively. For NMBA, sensitivity and specificity varies between 38.5 and 92% and 85.7 and 100%, respectively. Specific IgE to morphine should not be used in isolation to diagnose IDHR to NMBA nor opiates. For the BAT, sensitivity generally varies between 50 and 60%, whereas specificity attains 80%, except for quinolones and NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Although drug-sIgE assays and BAT can provide useful information in the diagnosis of IDHR, their predictive value is not absolute. Large-scale collaborative studies are mandatory to harmonize and optimize test protocols and to establish drug-specific decision thresholds. Springer International Publishing 2017-03-04 2017-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5427047/ /pubmed/28258478 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40268-017-0176-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review Article
Decuyper, I. I.
Mangodt, E. A.
Van Gasse, A. L.
Claesen, K.
Uyttebroek, A.
Faber, M.
Sabato, V.
Bridts, C. H.
Mertens, C.
Hagendorens, M. M.
De Clerck, L. S.
Ebo, Didier G.
In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title_full In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title_fullStr In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title_full_unstemmed In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title_short In Vitro Diagnosis of Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Anno 2017: Potentials and Limitations
title_sort in vitro diagnosis of immediate drug hypersensitivity anno 2017: potentials and limitations
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5427047/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28258478
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40268-017-0176-x
work_keys_str_mv AT decuyperii invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT mangodtea invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT vangasseal invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT claesenk invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT uyttebroeka invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT faberm invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT sabatov invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT bridtsch invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT mertensc invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT hagendorensmm invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT declerckls invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations
AT ebodidierg invitrodiagnosisofimmediatedrughypersensitivityanno2017potentialsandlimitations