Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39139756›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in allergy2024

Efficacy of the PEN-FAST score in a French cohort of patients with reported allergy to penicillins.

Anatole Hanniet, Marc Puyraveau, Florence Castelain, Fabien Pelletier, François Aubin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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 · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Implementing PEN-FAST for penicillin allergy delabeling in a high-prevalence population.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anatole HannietAllergology Unit, Departement of Dermatology, University Hospital, Besançon, France.
Marc PuyraveauMethodology and Statistics Unit, University Hospital, Besançon, France.
Florence CastelainAllergology Unit, Departement of Dermatology, University Hospital, Besançon, France.
Fabien PelletierAllergology Unit, Departement of Dermatology, University Hospital, Besançon, France.
François AubinAllergology Unit, Departement of Dermatology, University Hospital, Besançon, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Various clinical decision-making tools for penicillin allergy have been developed to guide delabeling strategies. Objective: To evaluate the penicillin allergy PEN-FAST decision score in a retrospective cohort of patients, adults and children, with penicillin-reported allergy. Methods: This monocentric retrospective cohort included patients with penicillin-reported allergy. All patients underwent penicillin allergy testing using skin tests and/or drug challenge. The PEN-FAST score sensitivity, specificity, negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values, and the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) were calculated. Results: Two hundred and fourteen patients were included (64 children and 150 adults). Allergy was confirmed in 52 cases (24%). A PEN-FAST score <3 points showed a poor discrimination capacity for the whole population (AUC = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.58-0.75), while it demonstrated a better discrimination capacity in the adults group (AUC = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.63-0.80). The sensitivity to identify penicillin allergy using this cutoff of less than 3 points was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.52-0.80); specificity, 0.58 (95% CI: 0.48-0.68); PPV, 0.43 (95% CI: 0.32-0.55); and NPV, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.68-0.87). Conclusions: Although our data confirm a rather good discrimination value of a PEN-FAST score <3 points, its low negative predictive value (78%) did not advocate for its use as an accurate, simple and cost-effective clinical decision-making tool to effectively reduce the number of penicillin skin tests required before direct oral challenge. Further studies are required to improve the predictive capacity of the PEN-FAST score.

Indexed as

allergydelabelinghypersensitivityPEN-FASTpenicillin

Identifiers

PMID39139756
PMCPMC11319814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.