Pharmacological prevention of serious anaphylactic reactions due to iodinated contrast media: systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy of pharmacological prevention of serious reactions to iodinated contrast media. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search (multiple databases, bibliographies, all languages, to October 2005) for randomised comparisons of pretreatment with placebo or no treatment (control) in patients receiving iodinated contrast media. Review methods Trial quality was assessed by all investigators. Information on trial design, population, interventions, and outcomes was abstracted by one investigator and cross checked by the others. Data were combined by using Peto odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Nine trials (1975-96, 10 011 adults) tested H1 antihistamines, corticosteroids, and an H1-H2 combination. No trial included exclusively patients with a history of allergic reactions. Many outcomes were not allergy related, and only a few were potentially life threatening. No reports on death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, irreversible neurological deficit, or prolonged hospital stays were found. In two trials, 3/778 (0.4%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg or intravenous prednisolone 250 mg had laryngeal oedema compared with 11/769 (1.4%) controls (odds ratio 0.31, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.88). In two trials, 7/3093 (0.2%) patients who received oral methylprednisolone 2x32 mg had a composite outcome (including shock, bronchospasm, and laryngospasm) compared with 20/2178 (0.9%) controls (odds ratio 0.28, 0.13 to 0.60). In one trial, 1/196 (0.5%) patients who received intravenous clemastine 0.03 mg/kg and cimetidine 2-5 mg/kg had angio-oedema compared with 8/194 (4.1%) controls (odds ratio 0.20, 0.05 to 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Life threatening anaphylactic reactions due to iodinated contrast media are rare. In unselected patients, the usefulness of premedication is doubtful, as a large number of patients need to receive premedication to prevent one potentially serious reaction. Data supporting the use of premedication in patients with a history of allergic reactions are lacking. Physicians who are dealing with these patients should not rely on the efficacy of premedication.

Maculopapular drug eruptions

Maculopapular (exanthematous) reactions are the most common adverse drug eruptions affecting the skin. Several studies indicate that immunological mechanisms including cytotoxic T cells (CD4+ > CD8+), both type 1 (e.g. IFN- γ ) and type 2 (e.g. IL-5) cytokines and various chemokines are critically involved in the pathogenesis of these eruptions. While maculopapular exanthems can virtually be elicited by any drug, antimicrobials (e.g. Β -lactam antibiotic, sulfonamides), anticonvulsants, allopurinol, and NSAIDs are most frequently involved. Clinical manifestations are variable and range from faint macules to widespread erythematous and maculopapular lesions, which usually begin on the trunk, neck and upper extremities and subsequently spread downwards in a symmetrical fashion. Although the clinical course is often relatively mild, these exanthems may sometimes progress to erythroderma or represent the beginning of even more severe drug reactions like Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis or a drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms. In most cases, management includes early withdrawal of the offending drug and usually supportive treatment with emollients, topical corticosteroids and systemic antihistamines depending on the severity of the eruption. Allergological work-up is recommended to provide the patient with appropriate information about the causative drug and possible alternatives for future use.

Clinical and immunologic effects of H1 antihistamine preventive medication during honeybee venom immunotherapy

BACKGROUND: H1 antihistamines increase safety during allergen-specific immunotherapy and might influence the outcome because of immunoregulatory effects. OBJECTIVE: We sought to analyze the influence of 5 mg of levocetirizine (LC) on the safety, efficacy, and immunologic effects of ultrarush honeybee venom immunotherapy (BVIT). METHOD: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study 54 patients with honeybee venom allergy received LC or placebo from 2 days before BVIT to day 21. Side effects during dose increase and systemic allergic reactions (SARs) to a sting challenge after 120 days were analyzed. Allergen-specific immune response was investigated in skin, serum, and allergen-stimulated T-cell cultures. RESULTS: Side effects were significantly more frequent in patients receiving placebo. Four patients receiving placebo dropped out because of side effects. SARs to the sting challenge occurred in 8 patients (6 in the LC group and 2 in the placebo group). Seven SARs were only cutaneous, and 1 in the placebo group was also respiratory. Difference of SARs caused by the sting challenge was insignificant. Specific IgG levels increased significantly in both groups. Major allergen phospholipase A(2)-stimulated T cells from both groups showed a slightly decreased proliferation. The decrease in IFN-gamma and IL-13 levels with placebo was not prominent with LC, whereas IL-10 levels showed a significant increase in the LC group only. Decreased histamine receptor (HR)1/HR2 ratio in allergen-specific T cells on day 21 in the placebo group was prevented by LC. CONCLUSIONS: LC reduces side effects during dose increase without influencing the efficacy of BVIT. LC modulates the natural course of allergen-specific immune response and affects the expression of HRs and cytokine production by allergen-specific T cells.

Allergic rhinitis in patients with asthma: the Swiss LARA (Link Allergic Rhinitis in Asthma) survey

OBJECTIVE: To determine the characteristics of asthma (A) and allergic rhinitis (AR) among asthma patients in primary care practice. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Primary care physicians, pulmonologists, and allergologists were asked to recruit consecutive asthma patients with or without allergic rhinitis from their daily practice. Cross-sectional data on symptoms, severity, treatment and impact on quality of life of A and AR were recorded and examined using descriptive statistics. Patients with and without AR were then compared. RESULTS: 1244 asthma patients were included by 211 physicians. Asthma was controlled in 19%, partially controlled in 27% and not controlled in 54%. Asthma treatment was generally based on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with or without long acting beta 2 agonists (78%). A leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) was used by 46% of the patients. Overall, 950 (76%) asthma patients had AR (A + AR) and 294 (24%) did not (A - AR). Compared to patients with A - AR, A + AR patients were generally younger (mean age +/- standard deviation: 42 +/- 16 vs. 50 +/- 19 years, p < 0.001) and fewer used ICS (75% vs. 88%, p < 0.001). LTRA usage was similar in both groups (46% vs. 48%). Asthma was uncontrolled in 53% of A + AR and 57% of A - AR patients. Allergic rhinitis was treated with a mean of 1.9 specific AR medications: antihistamines (77%), nasal steroids (66%) and/or vasoconstrictors (38%), and/or LTRA (42%). Rhinorrhoea, nasal obstruction, or nasal itching were the most frequently reported AR symptoms and the greatest reported degree of impairment was in daily activities/sports (55%). CONCLUSIONS: Allergic rhinitis was more common among younger asthma patients, increased the burden of symptoms and the need for additional medication but was associated with improved asthma control. However, most asthma patients remained suboptimally controlled regardl-ess of concomitant AR.

Difficult to control atopic dermatitis

Difficult to control atopic dermatitis (AD) presents a therapeutic challenge and often requires combinations of topical and systemic treatment. Anti-inflammatory treatment of severe AD most commonly includes topical glucocorticosteroids and topical calcineurin antagonists used for exacerbation management and more recently for proactive therapy in selected cases. Topical corticosteroids remain the mainstay of therapy, the topical calcineurin inhibitors tacrolimus and pimecrolimus are preferred in certain locations. Systemic anti-inflammatory treatment is an option for severe refractory cases. Microbial colonization and superinfection contribute to disease exacerbation and thus justify additional antimicrobial / antiseptic treatment. Systemic antihistamines (H1) may relieve pruritus but do not have sufficient effect on eczema. Adjuvant therapy includes UV irradiation preferably of UVA1 wavelength. "Eczema school" educational programs have been proven to be helpful.

Urgent consultations at the dermatology department of Basel University Hospital, Switzerland: characterisation of patients and setting - a 12-month study with 2,222 patients data and review of the literature.

BACKGROUND Urgent consultations for skin disorders are commonly done in different settings. Scarce data exist about the characteristics of these patients. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to analyse specific characteristics of patients receiving an urgent consultation at a dermatology department in a university hospital. METHODS We prospectively recorded the data of all patients having had an urgent consultation during a period of 12 months. RESULTS We registered 2,222 urgent consultations. The most frequent diagnoses were eczemas (24.8%), dermatomycoses (5.1%) and dermatitis not otherwise specified (4.8%). The most frequent treatments were topical steroids, emollients, topical antibiotics, systemic antihistamines, antibiotics and virostatics. 2.2% of patients were hospitalized, 78.8% asked for a consultation for a disease lasting less than 4 weeks, and 6.9% presented the same day as the skin disease appeared. CONCLUSIONS This study shows the characteristics of patients receiving an urgent dermatologic consultation. It underlines the need for collaboration between dermatologists, other physicians, general practitioners and nurses.

Oral hygiene products, medications and drugs - hidden aetiological factors for dental erosion.

Acidic or EDTA-containing oral hygiene products and acidic medicines have the potential to soften dental hard tissues. The low pH of oral care products increases the chemical stability of some fluoride compounds and favours the incorporation of fluoride ions in the lattice of hydroxyapatite and the precipitation of calcium fluoride on the tooth surface. This layer has some protective effect against an erosive attack. However, when the pH is too low or when no fluoride is present these protecting effects are replaced by direct softening of the tooth surface. Oral dryness can occur as a consequence of medication such as tranquilizers, antihistamines, antiemetics and antiparkinsonian medicaments or of salivary gland dysfunction. Above all, patients should be aware of the potential demineralization effects of oral hygiene products with low pH. Acetyl salicylic acid taken regularly in the form of multiple chewable tablets or in the form of headache powder, as well as chewing hydrochloric acids tablets for the treatment of stomach disorders, can cause erosion. There is most probably no direct association between asthmatic drugs and erosion on the population level. Consumers and health professionals should be aware of the potential of tooth damage not only by oral hygiene products and salivary substitutes but also by chewable and effervescent tablets. Several paediatric medications show a direct erosive potential in vitro. Clinical proof of the occurrence of erosion after use of these medicaments is still lacking. However, regular and prolonged use of these medicaments might bear the risk of causing erosion. Additionally, it can be assumed that patients suffering from xerostomia should be aware of the potential effects of oral hygiene products with low pH and high titratable acidity.

The expanding role of immunopharmacology: IUPHAR Review 16

Drugs targeting the immune system such as corticosteroids, antihistamines and immunosuppressants have been widely exploited in the treatment of inflammatory, allergic and autoimmune disorders during the second half of the 20th century. The recent advances in immunopharmacological research have made available new classes of clinically relevant drugs. These comprise protein kinase inhibitors and biologics, such as monoclonal antibodies, that selectively modulate the immune response not only in cancer and autoimmunity but also in a number of other human pathologies. Likewise, more effective vaccines utilizing novel antigens and adjuvants are valuable tools for the prevention of transmissible infectious diseases and for allergen-specific immunotherapy. Consequently, immunopharmacology is presently considered as one of the expanding fields of pharmacology. Immunopharmacology addresses the selective regulation of immune responses and aims to uncover and exploit beneficial therapeutic options for typical and non-typical immune system-driven unmet clinical needs. While in the near future a number of new agents will be introduced, improving the effectiveness and safety of those currently in use is imperative for all researchers and clinicians working in the fields of immunology, pharmacology and drug discovery. The newly formed ImmuPhar (http://iuphar.us/index.php/sections-subcoms/immunopharmacology) is the Immunopharmacology Section of the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology (IUPHAR, http://iuphar.us/). ImmuPhar provides a unique international expert-lead platform that aims to dissect and promote the growing understanding of immune (patho)physiology. Moreover, it challenges the identification and validation of drug targets and lead candidates for the treatment of many forms of debilitating disorders, including, among others, cancer, allergies, autoimmune and metabolic diseases.

[The overheated lunch].

We report about three patients consulting a general practitioner with acute onset of allergy-like clinical signs after having consumed tuna fish salad in the same restaurant. The treatment with antihistamines and steroids was effective and induced a quick regression of the symptoms. We look at considerations regarding the differential diagnosis and explain the pathophysiologic and the biochemical mechanisms of scombrotoxicosis.