Experienced Hypersensitivity Reactions Research Articles

Successful desensitization to etoposide in a patient after cardiac arrest.

Etoposide phosphate is a chemotherapeutic agent used to treat various malignant neoplasms. Hypersensitivity reactions may occur with its use, and in rare cases, an anaphylactic reaction can manifest. Available options for patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions include premedication, changing treatment, or undergoing desensitization. Various pediatric desensitization protocols have been described, ranging from six to fifteen steps, while published adult cases are rare. We report the case of a 61-year-old woman with small-cell lung cancer and brain metastases. In November 2019, she underwent the second cycle of cisplatin and etoposide phosphate treatment. While receiving etoposide phosphate, she experienced dyspnea and suffered a cardiorespiratory arrest, leading to cardiopulmonary resuscitation and subsequent admission to the Intensive Care Unit. Her acute tryptase levels were notably elevated at 18 µg/L (compared to a baseline tryptase level of 6,6 µg/L) during the reaction. We implemented a 16-step desensitization protocol (without premedication) under close monitoring in an intermediate care unit. The protocol was successfully executed over three cycles until tumor progression mandated a modification in systemic treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first documented case of successful desensitization to etoposide phosphate in a patient who experienced cardiac arrest during a hypersensitivity reaction. Although protocols of varying lengths have been published, we emphasize the importance of individualizing each protocol to fit the severity of the reaction and the resources and experience of each unit.

Incidence and Outcomes of COVID-19 Vaccine Hypersensitivity Reactions and Success of COVID-19 Vaccine Provocation Tests Post Previous COVID-19 Vaccine Hypersensitivity.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high mortality rates. There have been reports of hypersensitivity reactions with mild to severe symptoms. The COVID-19 vaccine provocation test is a vaccination protocol for individuals with a history of hypersensitivity. This study aims to determine the benefits of COVID-19 vaccine provocation tests in patients with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and its influencing factors. Objective: To determine the incidence, severity, outcome of hypersensitivity reactions, and success of the COVID-19 vaccine provocation test. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted, using subjects taken from medical record data at the RSCM who had received COVID-19 vaccination with a history of hypersensitivity. Data was taken from the COVID-19 vaccination records at the RSCM, BPJS Health Primary Care application. Results: From a total of 29,036 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, 44 patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions. As many as 38.64% did not continue vaccination, 2.27% experienced mild hypersensitivity, and 59.44% were successfully vaccinated. Conclusions: People with a history of hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines can still receive subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations at healthcare facilities equipped with anaphylaxis kits and immunology allergists.

Hepatotoxicity of newer antiseizure medications in children: an overview and disproportionality analysis of VigiBase

ABSTRACT Background We aimed to characterize newer antiseizure medications (ASMs)-induced hepatotoxicity in children and identify signals of disproportionate reporting of hepatotoxicity-related adverse drug events (ADEs). Research Design and Methods Case reports reported to VigiBase were accessed using Empirica™ Signal software. To summarize characteristics of the retrieved cases, descriptive statistics were used. A disproportionality analysis was conducted using the Multi-item Gamma Poisson Shrinker algorithm, which calculates Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean value and its lower and upper 95% confidence limits (EB05 and EB95, respectively). EB05 > 2, N > 0 was considered a signal. Results Based on 870 analyzed cases, a higher proportion of cases was reported in girls than in boys and in patients aged 2–11 years than in other age groups. Most cases were serious. In 25 cases, hepatotoxicity resulted in death. A high proportion of patients (n = 275, 31.61%) experienced hypersensitivity reactions, mostly due to lamotrigine. The disproportionality analysis yielded 17 signals concerning felbamate, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, stiripentol, and topiramate. Four signals were for severe liver injury and concerned felbamate, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate. Gender-biased reporting frequency was detected for four ASM-ADE combinations. Conclusion Our results should serve to raise clinicians’ awareness about the potential association between several newer ASMs and drug-induced liver injury in children.

Desensitization using pegaspargase in the era of commercially available Erwinia: A single-institution report on efficacy, cost, and resource utilization.

Pegaspargase is a therapeutic enzyme that is utilized in treatment regimens targeting pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. However, many patients experience hypersensitivity reactions, requiring discontinuation of the therapy. Historically, this necessitated switching to an alternative form of the drug, most commonly asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi; however, in recent years this was difficult due to drug shortages and eventually commercial discontinuation. We report here our experience performing pegaspargase desensitizations in patients with prior hypersensitivity reactions. Patients with a clinical hypersensitivity reaction to pegaspargase were identified. When due for their next dose, patients were admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit, bone marrow transplant unit, or oncology unit, and underwent desensitization utilizing a rigorous premedication and multistep dilution-based protocol. Serum asparaginase activity levels were drawn after desensitization to assess for therapeutic levels of enzyme activity. We identified 11 patients who underwent a total of 33 desensitizations to pegaspargase and calaspargase pegol-mknl. No patients experienced clinically significant hypersensitivity reactions necessitating stopping the infusion, nor administration of rescue medications. All serum asparaginase activity levels collected demonstrated enzyme activity levels above predefined therapeutic thresholds. Cost analysis revealed substantial savings when patients received asparaginase desensitization over the now commercially available asparaginase E. chrysanthemi (recombinant) rywn. Performing desensitization to pegaspargase in the pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia population is feasible, safe, and effective. It is financially advantageous over available alternative approaches, and requires fewer injections and presentations to care.

Continuous PEGasparaginase Dosing Reduces Hypersensitivity Reactions in Pediatric ALL: A Dutch Childhood Oncology Group ALL11 Randomized Trial.

The primary objective of this randomized study was to determine whether a continuous dosing schedule (without the asparaginase-free interval) would result in less hypersensitivity reactions to PEGasparaginase (PEGasp) compared with the standard noncontinuous dosing schedule. Eight hundred eighteen patients (age 1-18 years) with ALL were enrolled in the Dutch Childhood Oncology Group-ALL11 protocol and received PEGasp. Three hundred twelve patients stratified in the medium-risk arm were randomly assigned to receive 14 individualized PEGasp doses once every two weeks in either a noncontinuous or continuous schedule after the first three doses in induction (EudraCT: 2012-000067-25). Hypersensitivity reactions were defined as allergies, allergic-like reactions, and silent inactivation. Secondary end points were other asparaginase-related toxicities, asparaginase activity and antibody levels, and outcome. During induction, 27 of 818 patients (3.3%) experienced hypersensitivity reactions. After random assignment, 4 of 155 (2.6%) in the continuous treatment arm versus 17 of 157 (10.8%) patients in the noncontinuous treatment arm had hypersensitivity reactions (P < .01), of which two (1.3%) versus 13 (8.3%) were inactivating reactions (P < .01). The occurrence of inactivating hypersensitivity reactions was seven times lower in the continuous arm (odds ratio, 0.15 [0.032-0.653]). In addition, antibody levels were significantly lower in the continuous arm (P < .01). With exception of a lower incidence of increased amylase in the continuous arm, there were no significant differences in total number of asparaginase-associated toxicities between arms. However, the timing of the toxicities was associated with the timing of the asparaginase administrations. No difference in 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse, death, or disease-free survival was found between both treatment arms. A continuous dosing schedule of PEGasp is an effective approach to prevent antibody formation and inactivating hypersensitivity reactions. The continuous PEGasp schedule did not increase toxicity and did not affect the efficacy of the therapy.

Managing Severe Adverse Reactions to Biologicals in Severe Asthma.

The use of biological agents in the treatment of various inflammatory and malignancy conditions has expanded rapidly. However, these agents can induce hypersensitivity reactions, posing significant clinical challenges. We conducted a retrospective study that included nine patients with severe asthma who experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab). Hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals in severe asthma were observed in 9 of 68 patients treated. In five cases, treatment was stopped or changed to another available biological, and for four patients administered under close surveillance, titrated provocation or desensitization was applied. Successful desensitization was achieved in three of the patients, allowing them to continue therapy without adverse reactions. Improvements in asthma control were observed post-desensitization, leading to the reduced need for systemic steroid treatments and an increase in quality of life. This study highlights the importance of recognizing hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals to have an appropriate approach for patients with severe asthma. As an effective approach for patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents, desensitization allows treatment continuation.

Tirzepatide Immunogenicity on Pharmacokinetics, Efficacy, and Safety: Analysis of Data From Phase 3 Studies.

Antidrug antibodies (ADA) can potentially affect drug pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy. This work aimed to evaluate treatment-emergent (TE) ADA in tirzepatide (TZP)-treated participants across 7 phase 3 trials and their potential effect on pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety. ADA were assessed at baseline and throughout the study until end point, defined as week 40 (SURPASS-1, -2, and -5) or week 52 (SURPASS-3, -4, Japan-Mono, and Japan-Combo). Samples for ADA characterization were collected at SURPASS trial sites. Participants included ADA-evaluable TZP-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (N = 5025). Interventions included TZP 5, 10, or 15 mg. ADA were detected and characterized for their ability to cross-react with native glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (nGIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (nGLP-1), neutralize tirzepatide activity on GIP and GLP-1 receptors, and neutralize nGIP and nGLP-1. TE ADA developed in 51.1% of tirzepatide-treated patients. Proportions were similar across dose groups. Maximum ADA titers ranged from 1:20 to 1: 81 920 among TE ADA+ patients. Neutralizing antibodies (NAb) against TZP activity on GIP and GLP-1 receptors were observed in 1.9% and 2.1% of patients, respectively. Less than 1.0% of patients had cross-reactive NAb against nGIP or nGLP-1. TE ADA status, ADA titer, and NAb status had no effect on the pharmacokinetics or efficacy of TZP. More TE ADA+ patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions or injection site reactions than TE ADA- patients. The majority of hypersensitivity and injection site reactions were nonserious and nonsevere, and most events occurred and/or resolved irrespective of TE ADA status or titer. Immunogenicity did not affect TZP pharmacokinetics or efficacy. The majority of hypersensitivity or injection site reactions experienced by TE ADA+ patients were mild to moderate in severity.

#5215 OFATUMUMAB AS A RESCUE THERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH MEMBRANOUS NEPHROPATHY

Abstract Background and Aims Rituximab is the first-line treatment for patients with primary membranous nephropathy (MN) and nephrotic syndrome (NS) at high risk of progression to end-stage kidney disease. However, this drug is effective only in approximately two thirds of treated patients, and repeated rituximab infusions may be complicated by hypersensitivity reactions, which contraindicate retreatment. Ofatumumab, a fully human anti-CD20 antibody, could overcome these limitations. Method We retrospectively evaluated the response to a single 50–300 mg dose of intravenous ofatumumab in 17 MN patients referred to our institution who either experienced hypersensitivity reactions (rituximab-intolerant, n = 5) or failed to achieve NS remission after rituximab infusion (rituximab-resistant, n = 12). Results Over a median [IQR] follow-up of 5.0 [3.0-9.8] months, ten (58.8%) patients—five rituximab-resistant (41.7%) and all five rituximab-intolerant—achieved complete or partial NS remission, defined as proteinuria &amp;lt;0.3 g/day or proteinuria &amp;lt;3.5 g/day with ≥50% reduction from baseline, respectively. Ofatumumab infusion induced a progressive reduction in 24-hour urinary protein and IgG excretion, and a sharp increase in serum albumin and IgG levels. Peripheral B cells were depleted in all patients and started reconstituting by 3 months from baseline. Seven of the 12 subjects with PLA2R-related disease (i.e. with baseline anti-PLA2R antibody levels &amp;gt;2.7 RU/mL by ELISA) achieved antibody depletion during the follow-up (half of rituximab-resistant and all rituximab-intolerant). There were 14 non-serious infusion-related adverse events in nine patients, all of which completely resolved with temporary interruption of ofatumumab infusion. Conclusion Ofatumumab may be an effective and safe treatment option for all rituximab-intolerant and a substantial proportion of rituximab-resistant MN patients.

Inhaled mRNA therapy for treatment of cystic fibrosis: Interim results of a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase 1/2 clinical study

BackgroundMRT5005, a codon-optimized CFTR mRNA, delivered by aerosol in lipid nanoparticles, was designed as a genotype-agnostic treatment for CF lung disease. MethodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1/2 study performed in the US. Adults with 2 severe class I and/or II CFTR mutations and baseline ppFEV1 values between 50 and 90% were randomized 3:1 (MRT5005: placebo). Six dose levels of MRT5005 (4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 mg) or placebo (0.9% Sodium Chloride) were administered by nebulization. The single ascending dose cohort was treated over a range from 8 to 24 mg; the multiple ascending dose cohort received five weekly doses (range 8–20 mg); and the daily dosing cohort received five daily doses (4 mg). ResultsA total of 42 subjects were assigned to MRT5005 [31] or placebo [11]. A total of 14 febrile reactions were observed in 10 MRT5005-treated participants, which were mild [3] or moderate [11] in severity; two subjects discontinued related to these events. Additionally, two MRT5005-treated patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions, which were managed conservatively. The most common treatment emergent adverse events were cough and headache. No consistent effects on FEV1 were noted. ConclusionsMRT5005 was generally safe and well tolerated through 28 days of follow-up after the last dose, though febrile and hypersensitivity reactions were noted. The majority of these reactions resolved within 1–2 days with supportive care allowing continued treatment with MRT5005 and careful monitoring. In this small first-in-human study, FEV1 remained stable after treatment, but no beneficial effects on FEV1 were observed.

Canada’s First Joint Oncology-Allergy Clinic: Successful Desensitization to Trastuzumab Following Severe Anaphylactic Reaction in Which Epinephrine Was Inappropriately Withheld

Recognition of anaphylaxis and differentiation from other infusion reactions in an oncology setting is imperative; epinephrine is the recommended treatment for anaphylaxis and should be administered immediately to patients in whom anaphylaxis is suspected. Trastuzumab has a potentially tremendous oncological benefit, and when hypersensitivity reactions occur, rechallenge with desensitization protocols has become more common. Oncology presents a unique situation in which repeat drug exposure after a serious adverse reaction is often warranted due to the mortality risk of untreated cancer-allergists can assist with both symptom assessment and risk mitigation. This case showcases successful desensitization in a 43-year-old female with locally advanced HER2-positive breast cancer following a severe anaphylactic reaction to trastuzumab, in which epinephrine was not administered. We report the establishment of the Medical Oncology and Allergy Clinic: Canada's first multidisciplinary clinic aimed at expediting the assessment and management of oncology patients with adverse drug reactions (including chemotherapy, contrast media, antimicrobials) and those with primary and acquired immunodeficiency. We propose this multidisciplinary clinic model as a treatment framework moving forward, with the goal of continuing first-line therapies in cancer patients who develop drug-hypersensitivity (i.e., through desensitization). This case highlights the unmet need for a multidisciplinary approach to the management of oncology patients who experience hypersensitivity reactions.

Rechallenge After Oxaliplatin-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

This cohort study assesses the outcome of oxaliplatin desensitization for patients with gastrointestinal cancers who experienced hypersensitivity reactions after oxaliplatin infusion.

Utilizing Biologics in Drug Desensitization.

The purpose of this literature review was to review the latest advancements with biologics in rapid drug desensitization. Our methodology was to highlight both desensitization to biologics themselves and the use of biologics in desensitization to both biologic and nonbiologic drugs. Biologics are a vast category of drugs that include monoclonal antibodies, nanobodies, modern vaccinations, and even hormones. Desensitization to biologics can be safely performed through standardized procedure. Biomarkers are used both in vitro and in vivo to help identify and classify hypersensitivity reactions. Hypersensitivity reactions to the mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 present their own unique challenges to management. There are specific excipients in monoclonal antibodies that are thought to be responsible for many of their hypersensitivity reactions. Certain biologics can even be used to assist in desensitization to other drugs. Rapid drug desensitization is a standardized procedure that may be able to help many patients who have experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biologics and would best be treated with them to continue to receive them. Biologic drugs have opened a new era in medicine for the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases, cancer, and inflammatory diseases. Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics are quite common. This literature review presents the latest advancements in our understanding of hypersensitivity reactions to biologics, how rapid drug desensitization can be used to continue therapy despite history of hypersensitivity, and how biologics themselves can be used to aid in desensitization itself.

Evaluation of MONOFER-induced hypersensitive reactions: A retrospective cohort study.

Iron deficiency is the most common cause of anaemia. Over the years, various IV preparations of iron have been developed, including Monofer® (Iron isomaltoside 1000), that showed a remarkable reduction in the occurance of hypersensitivity reactions. The main aim of the study was to evaluate the severity and extent to which hypersensitivity reactions occur after the administration of IV iron isomaltoside 1000 in an Asian population. Multistage sampling was adopted for this study. The overall sample size was 864. The mean age of the participants was 55.29 ±18.44 years. The results depicted that 63 (7.29%) of the entire participants faced hypersensitivity reactions after IV administration. A total of 43 (68.25%) participants who experienced hypersensitivity reactions showed clinical symptoms within one hour, 11(17.46%) showed reaction in 1-3 hours and 9 (14.29%) showed in > 3 Hours. The majority of the studied population showed significant improvement only after the administration of Pheniramine maleate, while only a few of them received Hydrocortisone.

Hypersensitivity Reaction to Ustekinumab in Pediatric and Young Adult Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: A Case Series.

Ustekinumab (UST) is a human IgG1K monoclonal antibody that binds to the p40 receptor subunit bound by cytokines IL-12 and IL-23. It is indicated in both Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis as a second-line agent. The safety and efficacy of UST in children and young adults has not been thoroughly studied. We report a case series of six pediatric patients and young adults who developed hypersensitivity reactions during intravenous infusion with UST. These reactions ranged from mild allergic reactions to anaphylaxis, with no detectable antibodies if tested. We hypothesize the reaction could be secondary to ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, which is present solely in the intravenous preparation. Patients who experience hypersensitivity reactions during their UST infusion may safely receive subcutaneous preparations of UST, as demonstrated by some patients who received it based on physician discretion. Further investigation is required to establish the etiology of infusion reactions.

Hypersensitivity reactions to iodinate contrast media in Italy: a retrospective study. Characteristics of patients and risk factors.

Objective. The purpose of the study was to describe the characteristics of patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to iodinated contrast media (ICM) in a large Italian population and to investigate potential risks factors in order to obtain a risk stratification, helpful in the management of these patients. Methods. Data of 407 patients investigated in 9 Italian Allergy Centers for suspected HRs to ICM were analyzed and compared with a control group of 152 subjects that tolerated one or more ICM-enhanced examinations. The univariate and multivariate logistic regression model was used to evaluate associated factors. Results. The mean age of reactive patients was 61 years and 60% were female; 67% of patients reported immediate reactions and 35% experienced the reaction, more frequently with immediate onset, at the first examination in life. Iomeprol, iopromide and iodixanol were the most frequent culprit agents and 20% of patients showed a positive skin test result. Previous adverse reactions to ICM were reported by 15.6% of patients, whereas 35% of subjects experienced the reaction, more frequently immediate, after the first ICM-enhanced examination in their life. The multivariate analysis showed that male gender and age > 65 were associated with ICM reactions as protective factors [ORadja = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.33-0.77 and ORadja = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.39-0.92 respectively]. Cardio-vascular disease [ORadja = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.22-3.50)], respiratory allergy [ORadja = 2.30; 95% CI: 1.09-4.83)] and adverse drug reactions [ORadja = 1.99; 95% CI: 1.05-3.77)] were identified as risk factors for ICM reactions. Food allergy was not significantly associated with reactions [ORadja = 1.51; 5% CI: 0.41-5.56]. Conclusions. This is the largest study on Italian patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions to ICM. Most results are in line with other studies, showing some association with factors that could influence the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions but not allowing an easy risk stratification.

Management of Psychiatric Disorders in Patients with Hepatic and Gastrointestinal Diseases.

Management of Psychiatric Disorders in Patients with Hepatic and Gastrointestinal Diseases.

MRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with previous immediate hypersensitivity to pegaspargase

mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with previous immediate hypersensitivity to pegaspargase

The Efficacy and Safety of Infliximab in Refractory Noninfectious Uveitis: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

Background: Although infliximab has been recommended for the second-line treatment of seronegative spondyloarthropathy- or juvenile idiopathic arthritis-related uveitis, the issue of its systemic efficacy and safety in a broader diversity of refractory noninfectious uveitis is debatable. To assess the short-term and relatively long-term efficacy of infliximab in refractory noninfectious uveitis, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Wanfang Med Online were systematically searched from January 2005 to March 2020. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data were independently collected by two investigators. The pooled proportions were estimated with patients for intraocular inflammation control and improvement of visual acuity. Pooled proportions with 95% credible intervals were computed. Study homogeneity was investigated using I 2 statistics to quantify the percentage of variation across studies. To pool the results, the Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effects or random-effects models were used.Results: Of 2316 studies identified, 16 unique studies with 509 unique participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled proportions of intraocular inflammation control reached 92% (95% CI: 87%–98%; I 2: 1%; p=0.42) and 95% (95% CI: 93%–97%; I 2: 0%; p=0.91) in groups of ≤6- and ≥12-month follow-up durations. During the relatively long follow-up period, the pooled proportions of maintaining visual acuity stable or increasing at least one line reached 99% (95% CI: 96%–100%; I 2: 0%; p=0.54) in the involved eyes. The corticosteroid-sparing effect of infliximab was also well demonstrated, with the proportion of corticosteroid-sparing success reaching 85.5% (112/131). Besides, about serious adverse events, 2.6% (13/500) of patients experienced hypersensitivity reactions, 2.4% (12/500) of patients experienced serious infections, 1.8% (9/500) of patients experienced autoimmune diseases, and 0.6% (3/500) of patients experienced neoplasia.Conclusions: This meta-analysis provided evidence that infliximab might be a promising choice in controlling inflammatory activity, gaining visual acuity, and sparing corticosteroid use with relatively few side effects when applied in treating refractory noninfectious uveitis.Systematic Review Registration: [website], identifier [registration number]

Birch Pollen Related Pear Allergy: A Single-Blind Oral Challenge TRIAL with 2 Pear Cultivars.

Approximately 70% of birch pollen allergic patients in Europe experience hypersensitivity reactions to Immunoglobulin E (IgE) cross-reactive food sources. This so-called pollen-food syndrome (PFS) is defined by allergic symptoms elicited promptly by the ingestion of fruits, nuts, or vegetables in these patients. So far, in the literature, less attention has been given to Bet v 1 cross-reactive symptoms caused by pear (Pyrus communis). In the Netherlands, pears are widely consumed. The primary objective of this study was to measure the type and severity of allergic symptoms during pear challenges in birch pollen allergic patients, with a positive history of pear allergy, using two different pear varieties. Fifteen patients were included, skin prick test (SPT), prick-to-prick test (PTP), specific Immunoglobulin E (sIgE), and single-blind oral challenges were performed with two pear (Pyrus communis) varieties: the ‘Cepuna’ (brand name Migo®) and the ‘Conference’ pears. All patients were sensitized to one or both pear varieties. A total of 12 out of 15 participants developed symptoms during the ‘Cepuna’ food challenge and 14/15 reacted during the ‘Conference’ challenge. Challenges with the ‘Cepuna’ pears resulted in less objective symptoms (n = 2) in comparison with challenges with ‘Conference’ pears (n = 7). Although we did not find significance between both varieties in our study, we found a high likelihood of fewer and less severe symptoms during the ‘Cepuna’ challenges. Consequently selected pear sensitized patients can try to consume small doses of the ‘Cepuna’ pear outside the birch pollen season.

Drug desensitization in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic era: Local success to widespread potential

Drug desensitization in the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic era: Local success to widespread potential