ArticleClinical and translational allergy2026
Performance of PEN-FAST and CEPH-FAST for Cephalosporin Allergy Delabeling.
Article in Clinical and translational allergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundUnverified antibiotic allergy labels lead to suboptimal antimicrobial prescribing and increased antibiotic resistance. Cephalosporins are among the most frequently administered antibiotics and cephalosporin allergy labels increasingly limit optimal therapy. Clinical decision rules that enable delabeling of low-risk patients by non-allergists are emerging as important tools. The PEN-FAST score is a validated rule for identifying low-risk penicillin allergy labels suitable for direct drug challenge. CEPH-FAST is a recently proposed adaptation for cephalosporin allergy. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of PEN-FAST and CEPH-FAST for cephalosporin allergy.
methodsIn this single-center retrospective cohort study, 100 adults with reported cephalosporin allergy labels underwent allergy assessment including skin testing and drug provocation testing at a tertiary allergy clinic in Heidelberg, Germany. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of confirmed allergy. Diagnostic performance of PEN-FAST and CEPH-FAST scores was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and area under the receiver operating curve (AU-ROC).
resultsCephalosporin allergy was confirmed in 48 of 100 patients. PEN-FAST categorized 20 patients at low risk, of whom one had a positive skin test (NPV 95.0%, sensitivity 97.9%, AU-ROC 0.769). CEPH-FAST classified 42 patients low-risk, but 12 had confirmed allergies (NPV 71.4%, sensitivity 75.0%, AU-ROC 0.667). Higher PEN-FAST and CEPH-FAST scores were significantly associated with confirmed allergy.
conclusionPEN-FAST demonstrated high sensitivity and negative predictive value for identifying low-risk cephalosporin allergy and may support safe delabeling strategies. In contrast, CEPH-FAST showed reduced diagnostic performance in this cohort, highlighting the need for further validation before routine clinical implementation.
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.