Search

Background: Hypersensitivity to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) constitutes a serious problem for subjects with coronary artery disease. In such subjects, physicians have to choose the more appropriate procedure between challenge and desensitization. As the literature on this issue is sparse, this study aimed to establish in these subjects clinical criteria for eligibility for an ASA challenge and/or desensitization., Methods: Collection and analysis of data on ASA challenges and desensitizations from 10 allergy centers, as well as consensus among the related physicians and an expert panel., Results: Altogether, 310 subjects were assessed; 217 had histories of urticaria/angioedema, 50 of anaphylaxis, 26 of nonimmediate cutaneous eruptions, and 17 of bronchospasm related to ASA/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) intake. Specifically, 119 subjects had index reactions to ASA doses lower than 300 mg. Of the 310 subjects, 138 had an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), 101 of whom underwent desensitizations, whereas 172 suffered from a chronic ischemic heart disease (CIHD), 126 of whom underwent challenges. Overall, 163 subjects underwent challenges and 147 subjects underwent desensitizations; 86 of the latter had index reactions to ASA doses of 300 mg or less. Ten subjects reacted to challenges, seven at doses up to 500 mg, three at a cumulative dose of 110 mg. The desensitization failure rate was 1.4%., Conclusions: In patients with stable CIHD and histories of nonsevere hypersensitivity reactions to ASA/NSAIDs, an ASA challenge is advisable. Patients with an ACS and histories of hypersensitivity reactions to ASA, especially following doses lower than 100 mg, should directly undergo desensitization., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: There are no country-based data focused on aspirin (ASA)-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD) in Turkey., Objective: To assess the prevalence of AERD in adult patients with asthma., Methods: A structured questionnaire was administered via face-to-face interview by a specialist in pulmonology/allergy at seven centres across Turkey., Results: A total of 1344 asthma patients (F/M: 1081/263: 80.5%/19.5%, mean age: 45.7 ± 14.2 years) were enrolled. Atopy rate was 47%. Prevalence of allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis, and nasal polyposis (NP) were 49%, 69% and 20%, respectively. Of 270 patients with NP, 171 (63.3%) reported previous nasal polypectomy and 40 (25%) had a history of more than three nasal polypectomies. Aspirin hypersensitivity was diagnosed in 180 (13.6%) asthmatic patients, with a reliable history in 145 (80.5%), and oral ASA provocation test in 35 (19.5%) patients. Clinical presentations of ASA hypersensitivity were respiratory in 76% (n=137), respiratory/cutaneous in 15% (n=27), and systemic in 9% (n=16) of the patients. Multivariate analysis indicated that a family history of ASA hypersensitivity (p: 0.001, OR: 3.746, 95% CI: 1.769-7.929), history of chronic rhinosinusitis/rhinitis (p: 0.025, OR: 1.713, 95% CI: 1.069-2.746) and presence of NP (p<0.001, OR: 7.036, 95% CI: 4.831-10.247) were independent predictors for AERD., Conclusion: This cross-sectional survey showed that AERD is highly prevalent among adult asthmatics and its prevalence seems to be affected by family history of ASA hypersensitivity, history of rhinosinusitis and presence of NP., (Copyright © 2011 SEICAP. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

Background: Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid [ASA]) hypersensitivity is frequent in patients with nasal polyps (NPs) and is called aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, previously known as Samter's syndrome. However, studies evaluating the prevalence of ASA hypersensitivity in patients with NPs using the oral aspirin provocation test (APT) are quite limited. This study was designed to determine the prevalence of ASA hypersensitivity and factors associated with ASA hypersensitivity in patients with NPs., Methods: Sixty-eight patients with NPs with or without asthma were recruited. Extension of NPs was evaluated by endoscopic examination/paranasal CT. A 2-day, single-blind placebo-controlled APT was used to detect ASA hypersensitivity., Results: APT was performed in 53 (21 women/ 32 men) patients (mean age, 39.34 ± 1.76 years). APT resulted positive in 12 patients (22.6%) of whom 3 (25%) had no history of ASA hypersensitivity. Of the positive APTs, three were isolated rhinitis and nine had classic responses. APT was negative in 41 patients (77.4%) although three (7.3%) had a history of ASA hypersensitivity. History of ASA hypersensitivity and prolonged duration of NPs were associated with positive APT (p < 0.05). Advanced NP with multiple operations was also correlated with APT positivity but was not statistically significant. Presence of asthma was associated with age, female gender, NP duration, and ASA hypersensitivity history (p < 0.05), but not with smoking, atopy, NP extension, and positive APT., Conclusion: ASA hypersensitivity is quite common in patients with NP. Patients with extensive and long-term NP with multiple polyp operations require evaluation for the presence of ASA hypersensitivity in terms of chronic management and future risks of the disease.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are responsible for 21-25% of reported adverse drug events which include immunological and nonimmunological hypersensitivity reactions. This study presents up-to-date information on pathomechanisms, clinical spectrum, diagnostic tools and management of hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs. Clinically, NSAID hypersensitivity is particularly manifested by bronchial asthma, rhinosinusitis, anaphylaxis or urticaria and variety of late cutaneous and organ-specific reactions. Diagnosis of hypersensitivity to a NSAID includes understanding of the underlying mechanism and is necessary for prevention and management. A stepwise approach to the diagnosis of hypersensitivity to NSAIDs is proposed, including clinical history, in vitro testing and/or provocation test with a culprit or alternative drug depending on the type of the reaction. The diagnostic process should result in providing the patient with written information both on forbidden and on alternative drugs., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

It has been proposed that aspirin (ASA) and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced urticaria (UR)/angioedema (AE) are mediated through inhibition of cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) enzymes. Therefore, drugs with COX-2 selectivity may be well tolerated in such patients. We investigated the safety of preferential COX-2 inhibitor meloxicam in subjects with UR or AE type intolerance reaction to classical ASA/NSAIDs. Subjects with reliable or documented history of UR/AE due to classical ASA/NSAIDs underwent a single-blinded, placebo-controlled oral challenge with a cumulative dose of 7.5 mg meloxicam on 2 separate days. One-quarter and three-quarter divided doses of placebo and the active drug were given at 1-h intervals. A total of 116 patients (86 women and 30 men, mean age 39.6 ± 12.7 years) were enrolled to the study. The rate of atopy was 25.9%. Mean duration of drug reaction was 87.4 ± 110.8 (1-720) months. Almost half of the patients were multi-reactors. The most comorbid disease was asthma and the two most frequent NSAIDs inducing UR/AE were paracetamol (19. 6%) and ASA (19%). No reaction to placebo was observed. Ten out of 116 patients (8.6%) developed mild UR/AE, or only erythema and pruritus at a one-quarter or cumulative dose of 7.5 mg of meloxicam. The remaining subjects (91.4%) tolerated perfectly meloxicam challenge. This study indicates that 7.5 mg meloxicam is a safe alternative for ASA/NSAID-intolerant UR/AE patients. Intolerance reactions to meloxicam are much milder forms of the patients' historical ASA/NSAID-induced cutaneous reactions., (© 2010 Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Background: The aspirin provocation test, considered to be the gold standard in the diagnosis of aspirin sensitivity, may be associated with severe adverse reactions; thus, alternative procedures with a higher safety profile are highly desirable. Although the cellular antigen stimulation test (CAST) has been proposed to be such an alternative, there is limited information about its clinical usefulness., Objective: It was the aim of our study to evaluate the clinical usefulness of CAST in the diagnosis of aspirin sensitivity., Material and Methods: Patients with aspirin-sensitive asthma and/or nasal polyps (n = 40), patients with aspirin-tolerant asthma and/or nasal polyps (n = 13) and healthy volunteers (n = 26) were included. A 2-day, single-blind placebo-controlled oral aspirin provocation test was performed. In vitro release of cysteinyl leukotrienes (Cys-LTs) by peripheral blood leukocytes was measured after stimulation with both stimulation buffer and lysine aspirin (2.5 mg/ml) by CAST., Results: Baseline Cys-LT levels were similar among the 3 groups. After lysine aspirin stimulation, the net increase in Cys-LTs was significantly higher in patients with aspirin sensitivity (median 91 pg/ml, interquartile range 22-206) compared with aspirin-tolerant patients (20 pg/ml, range 0-46) and healthy controls (23 pg/ml, range 0-71; p = 0.004). The assay had a sensitivity of 25%, a specificity of 92.3%, and positive and negative predictive values of 28.7 and 90.7%, respectively., Conclusion: Although the leukocytes of patients with aspirin sensitivity produce higher amounts of Cys-LTs as measured by CAST, the low sensitivity and predictive values limit the clinical usefulness of this test in the diagnosis of aspirin sensitivity., (2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: The anti-inflammatory actions of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA)/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are thought to be due to inhibition of COX-2, whereas the side effects such as gastric damage and aspirin-induced asthma are mediated through inhibition of COX-1. Therefore, a new class of drugs with COX-2 selectivity may be well tolerated by patients with ASA/NSAIDs hypersensitivity., Objective: We investigated whether subjects with asthma and/or nasal polyps (NP) and analgesic intolerance proven by oral ASA provocation test tolerated the selective COX-2 inhibitor, meloxicam., Methods: All subjects were first challenged with ASA using a 2-day, single-blind, placebo-controlled oral provocation test. Thereafter, the subjects showing positive response to ASA provocation underwent a single-blind, placebo-controlled challenge with a cumulative dose of 7.5 mg of meloxicam on 2 separate days. One and three fourths of the divided doses of placebo and the active drug were given at 1-hour intervals. Clinical symptoms, lung function, and blood pressure were monitored during these challenge protocols., Results: Twenty-one patients with asthma and/or NP (10 males and 11 females; mean age: 38.4 +/- 2.9 years) who reacted to ASA challenges were enrolled in the study. Response to ASA provocation was rhinitis + bronchospasm in 13, and extrabronchial reactions in 8 (isolated rhinitis in 3) patients. Mean PD(20) was 163.4 +/- 39.9 mg ASA among patients who reacted with bronchospasm to ASA. Only 1 patient reacted to meloxicam challenge at a cumulative dose of 7.5 mg., Conclusion: This study indicates that 7.5 mg of meloxicam is a safe alternative treatment for ASA-hypersensitive asthma and/or NP patients with proven hypersensitivity via oral ASA challenges., (Copyright 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Intolerance to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is a crucial problem in medical practice. There is therefore a need for safer NSAIDs in analgesic-intolerant patients., Objective: To assess the safety of rofecoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, in ASA/NSAID-intolerant patients., Methods: A single blind, placebo-controlled oral challenge procedure was applied to 94 adult patients (M/F: 30/64, mean age: 39.2 +/- 11.9 yrs) with a reliable history of ASA/NSAID intolerance. 1/4 and 3/4 divided doses of placebo and rofecoxib were given with 2-hour intervals on consecutive days. During the challenge procedure, blood pressure, heart rate, nasoocular, pulmonary and cutaneous symptoms were monitored. Erythema, pruritus accompanied by erythema, urticaria/angioedema, rhinorrea, nasal obstruction, sneezing, dyspnea or cough associated with a decrease of at least 20% in the FEV1, and hypotension were considered as positive reactions., Results: None of the patients reacted to placebo. Only one patient (1.1%) presented urticarial-type cutaneous reaction to rofecoxib challenge. The remaining patients (98.9%) perfectly tolerated the drug challenge., Conclusion: Rofecoxib can be used as a safe alternative drug for ASA/NSAID intolerant patients.

Intolerance reactions to acetyl salicylic acid (ASA) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are common and caused by inhibition of COX-1 enzyme. Therefore, drugs that selectively inhibit COX-2 enzyme may be safe in these subjects. In this study, we evaluated the tolerability of celecoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, in patients with analgesic intolerance. The eligible study population consisted of patients with a history of urticaria/angioedema, naso-ocular symptoms, bronchospasm, and/or anaphylactoid reaction induced by ASA and/or NSAIDs. A single-blind, placebo-controlled oral challenge test was performed in the hospital setting. On 2 separate days, 1/4 and 3/4 divided doses of placebo and celecoxib (Celebrex 200 mg, Pfizer, Turkey) were given with 2-hour intervals. Seventy-five subjects (mean age: 38.2 +/- 1.4 years; F:M: 55:20) were included in the study. Twenty-one subjects had asthma. No reaction was observed with placebo or celecoxib provocation. Although celecoxib seems to be a safe alternative drug in our study group, considering its serious adverse events reported in the literature, the drug should be recommended for patients with analgesic intolerance only after being tested by an experienced allergist.

Background: The decrease in prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) release due to aspirin (ASA)-induced cyclooxygenase inhibition and the increment in cysteinyl leukotriene (Cys-LT) release secondary to the removal of the inhibitory effect of PGE(2) on Cys-LT release have been suggested in the pathogenesis of aspirin-induced asthma (AIA)., Objective: In this study, we aimed to investigate the in vitro release of Cys-LT and to determine the effect of PGE(2) on Cys-LT release from peripheral blood leucocytes of patients with AIA after stimulation by ASA., Patients and Methods: Patients with AIA (n = 13), patients with ASA-tolerant asthma (ATA) (n = 12) and healthy volunteers as controls (n = 13) were included to the study. ASA and PGE2 at three different concentrations were applied to the peripheral blood leucocytes of the study group, and Cys-LT levels following stimulants were assessed by enzyme immunoassay method., Results: There was no difference in baseline Cys-LT levels between groups (AIA 353.4 +/- 55.5 pg/mL, ATA 354.7 +/- 40.3 pg/mL, and control group 368.5 +/- 30.2 pg/mL; P > 0.05). Though not present in other groups, the Cys-LT level of 453.6 +/- 70.0 pg/mL following ASA stimulation was higher than baseline in patients with AIA (P = 0.04). When PGE(2) was added to the ASA-stimulated samples of patients with AIA, Cys-LT levels were measured as 298.7 +/- 78.6 pg/mL, 279.8 +/- 79.9 pg/mL, and 243.4 +/- 51.3 pg/mL at PGE(2) 10(-7) m, 10(-6) m and 10(-5) m concentrations, respectively. These levels were lower than the ASA-stimulated Cys-LT values (P = 0.03, P = 0.01 and P = 0.01, respectively). The inhibitory effect of different PGE(2) concentrations on Cys-LT release was also present in patients with ATA and in controls., Conclusion: The increase in Cys-LT levels following ASA stimulation seems to be unique to AIA, which was not present in patients with ATA and in healthy controls. The inhibitory effect of PGE(2) on stimulated Cys-LT levels is another important finding to elucidate the role of PGE(2) in the pathogenesis of AIA.

Intolerance or idiosyncrasy to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is a crucial problem because these drugs are frequently used in medical treatment. In this study, we tested whether nimesulide, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, might be a valid alternative for patients with histories of adverse reaction to ASA or NSAIDs. A single-blind, placebo-controlled oral challenge procedure was applied to 60 adult patients (19 male, 41 female; with a mean age of 40.31 +/- 10.44 years, range 20-68 years) with a reliable history of ASA/NSAIDs-intolerance. According to history, the clinical presentations of intolerance were urticaria/angioedema in 32 patients, anaphylactoid reaction in 2 patients, respiratory reaction in 19 patients, and respiratory and cutaneous reaction in 7 patients. Atopy was confirmed by means of skin prick test with inhalant allergens. Oral challenge protocol was started with 25 mg of nimesulide and the remaining 75 mg was given 1 hr later. During the challenge procedure, blood pressure, pulse, nasoocular, pulmonary, and cutaneous symptoms were monitored. Of the 60 patients tested, 55 (91.7%) tolerated the drug with no adverse reaction. Only five (8.3%) patients demonstrated a positive response to oral challenge. The clinical presentations of intolerance to nimesulide were urticaria/angioedema in three patients, mild rhinitis in one patient, and mild dyspnea in one patient. The atopy prevalence was higher, with a ratio of 41.7%, in patients with ASA/NSAIDs intolerance than that of the healthy adult population in Turkey (p < 0.05). We believe that nimesulide can be used as an alternative drug for patients with ASA/NSAIDs intolerance.

Hypersensitivity reactions to aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ( NSAIDs) constitute only a subset of all adverse reactions to these drugs, but due to their severity pose a significant burden to patients and are a challenge to the allergist. In susceptible individuals, NSAIDs induce a wide spectrum of hypersensitivity reactions with various timing, organ manifestations, and severity, involving either immunological (allergic) or nonimmunological mechanisms. Proper classification of reactions based on clinical manifestations and suspected mechanism is a prerequisite for the implementation of rational diagnostic procedures and adequate patient management. This document, prepared by a panel of experts from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Task Force on NSAIDs Hypersensitivity, aims at reviewing the current knowledge in the field and proposes uniform definitions and clinically useful classification of hypersensitivity reactions to NSAIDs. The document proposes also practical algorithms for the diagnosis of specific types of NSAIDs hypersensitivity (which include drug provocations, skin testing and in vitro testing) and provides, when data are available, evidence-based recommendations for the management of hypersensitive patients, including drug avoidance and drug desensitization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]