ArticleThe World Allergy Organization journal2025
The role of penicillin major and minor determinants in skin testing for suspected penicillin hypersensitivity.
Article in The World Allergy Organization journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effectiveness and safety of algorithm for treating pregnant women with syphilis and history of immediate allergy to penicillin.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the evaluation of patient-reported penicillin allergy labels (PALs), the utility of skin testing to the penicillin major determinant, known as penicilloyl polylysine (PPL), and to the minor determinant mixture (MDM), has been questioned. Methods: A review of a clinical antibiotic allergy database from April 2015 to December 2023 at Austin Health (Melbourne, Australia) was performed. Patients with PALs who underwent skin prick testing (SPT) and intradermal testing (IDT) to a previously-published standardised beta-lactam panel were selected. Those with positive SPT or IDT to PPL and/or MDM were identified. Results: A total of 1316 individuals were included in our analysis. Positive skin testing to any reagent was recorded for 168/1316 (12.77%). Positive results to PPL and/or MDM were recorded for 26/1316 (1.98%), including 6 with isolated positive results to PPL and/or MDM, and 20 with additional positive skin testing to at least 1 native penicillin. The number needed to test to confirm 1 additional penicillin allergy with the use of PPL and MDM was calculated at 217.39. Immediate hypersensitivities were reported by all 6 individuals testing positive to the penicillin determinants alone, including 4 with anaphylaxis. Conclusion: These results suggest limited yield in the routine inclusion of PPL and MDM in skin testing panels, particularly in evaluating delayed hypersensitivities. Restricting their use to select cohorts, such as those with anaphylaxis, may prove more efficient and cost-effective.
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.