ArticleAllergy2023
Resensitization in suspected penicillin allergy.
Article in Allergy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Sex and Gender in Immediate β-Lactam Antibiotic Allergy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Pooled it
- Penicillin Allergy Testing and Delabeling for Patients Who Are Prescribed Penicillin: A Systematic Review for a World Health Organization Guideline.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2024Pooled it
- Risk of Self-Reported Penicillin Allergy Despite Removal of Penicillin Allergy Label: Secondary Analysis of the PALACE Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2024Trial
- Article
- Direct single dose mass delabelling of antibiotic allergy in pediatrics.Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2026Article
- Patients' experiences of penicillin allergy evaluation: a qualitative study.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Article
- Unveiling the Uncommon: A Rare IgE-Mediated Presentation of Multiple Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome.Cureus · 2026Article
- Anaphylaxis to Penicillin: Harvesting Insights From the Food and Drug Administration's Adverse Event Reporting System.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Article
- Delayed hypersensitivity reaction to penicillin can be lost (and gained): Skin test resensitization following prolonged oral provocation test.Asia Pacific allergy · 2025Article
- Resensitization-Should Repeat Testing Be Performed in Patients Undergoing Penicillin Allergy Evaluations? A Pro-Con Debate.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Review
- Alleviating penicillin-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae‑induced lung epithelial cell injury: mechanistic insights into effects of the optimized combination of main components from Yinhuapinggan granules.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Delabelling beta-lactam allergy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- A new pathway for penicillin delabeling in Norway.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2023Article
- Approach for delabeling beta-lactam allergy in children.Frontiers in allergy · 2023Review
- Resensitization in suspected penicillin allergy.Allergy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of allergic reactions to penicillins (AR-PEN) is very complex as there is a loss of sensitization over time, which leads to negative skin tests (STs) and specific IgE in serum, and even to tolerance to the drug involved. However, STs may become positive after subsequent exposure to the culprit drug (resensitization), with the risk of inducing potentially severe reactions. The exact rate of resensitization to penicillins is unknown, ranging from 0% to 27.9% in published studies.
objectivesTo analyze the rate of resensitization in patients with suggestive AR-PEN by repeating STs (retest) after an initial evaluation (IE). MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients with suspected AR-PEN were prospectively evaluated between 2017 and 2020. They underwent STs, and a randomized group also underwent a drug provocation test (DPT) with the culprit. Only patients with negative STs and/or DPT were included. All included cases were retested by STs at 2-8 weeks.
resultsA total of 545 patients were included: 296 reporting immediate reactions (IRs) and 249 non-immediate reactions (NIRs). Eighty (14.7%) cases had positive results in retest (RT+): 63 (21.3%) IRs and 17 (6.8%) NIRs (p < 0.0001). The rate of RT+ was higher in anaphylaxis compared with all other reactions (45.8% vs 9.1%, p < 0.0001). The risk of RT+ was higher from the fifth week after IE (OR: 4.64, CI: 2.1-11.6; p < 0.001) and increased with the patient's age (OR: 1.02; CI: 1.01-1.04; p = 0.009).
conclusionsDue to the high rate of resensitization, retest should be included in the diagnostic algorithm of IRs to penicillins after an initial negative study, especially in anaphylaxis, to avoid potentially severe reactions after subsequent prescriptions of these drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.