Alpha-Gal Syndrome in Children: Peculiarities of a “Tick-Borne” Allergic Disease

The alpha-gal syndrome is an allergic syndrome that comprises two clinical pictures: an immediate hypersensitivity to drugs containing alpha-gal and a delayed hypersensitivity to the ingestion of red mammalian meat. This allergic syndrome is often under-recognized, and patients are mislabeled with diagnosis as spontaneous urticaria or idiopathic anaphylaxis. Even though less frequently, children could also be of interest, especially in tick-endemic areas. In most cases, a positive anamnesis for tick bites months before the onset of symptoms is recorded. The clinical manifestations could range from asymptomatic cases to severe anaphylaxis. The most frequently used diagnostic test is the determination of specific IgE for alpha-gal. Oral provocation test is usually reserved to unclear cases or to verify tolerance after diet. No long-term follow-up studies have been published, although an elimination diet could lead to a decrease of specific IgE for alpha-gal and a possible reintroduction of some avoided foods. This paper provides a literature review, focused on pediatric age, and an evaluation of available diagnostic tests. We analyze the correlation between tick bites and symptom onset and unfold the different clinical pictures to help clinicians to promptly recognized this syndrome. Lastly, we address unmet needs in this specific allergy.

Resources Assessment for Penicillin Allergy Testing Performed by Pharmacists at the Patient’s Bedside

Background: False penicillin allergies lead to increased antimicrobial resistance, adverse effects, and health care costs by promoting the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics. The Infectious Diseases Society of America recommends the implementation of allergy testing. Objectives: The primary objective of this research was to estimate the number of pharmacist full-time equivalents (FTEs) required for an intervention aimed at determining penicillin allergy in hospitalized patients. Acceptance of pharmacists’ suggestions on antibiotic therapy are described. Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a 712-bed university hospital involving hospitalized patients with a suspected penicillin allergy and an infection treatable with penicillin. The time required for the intervention, which included a questionnaire, penicillin allergy testing (skin-prick test, intradermal injection, and oral provocation test), and recommendations on antibiotic therapy were measured to calculate the number of pharmacist FTEs. Results: A total of 55 patients were included. Scarification allergy testing was performed on 37, intradermal allergy test on 33, and oral provocation test on 26 patients. The intervention ruled out penicillin allergy in 26 patients, with no serious adverse effects. The intervention was associated with a median weekly pharmacist FTE of 0.15 (interquartile range = 0.12-0.25). The acceptance of pharmacists’ suggestions was high and led to 9 patients being switched to an antibiotic with a narrower spectrum of activity. Conclusions and Relevance: This study describes penicillin allergy testing and the number of median weekly hospital pharmacist FTEs required, which was approximately 0.15. These data may aid in the implementation of this safe intervention that promotes narrower-spectrum antibiotherapy.