• desensitization;
  • drug hypersensitivity;
  • graded challenge;
  • tolerance induction


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

To cite this article: Cernadas JR, Brockow K, Romano A, Aberer W, Torres MJ, Bircher A, Campi P, Sanz ML, Castells M, Demoly P, Pichler WJ, for the European Network of Drug Allergy and the EAACI interest group on drug hypersensitivity. General considerations on rapid desensitization for drug hypersensitivity – a consensus statement. Allergy 2010; 65: 1357–1366.


Drug hypersensitivity reactions can occur with most drugs, are unpredictable, may affect any organ or system, and range widely in clinical severity from mild pruritus to anaphylaxis. In most cases, the suspected drug is avoided in the future. However, for certain patients, the particular drug may be essential for optimal therapy. Under these circumstances, desensitization may be performed. Drug desensitization is defined as the induction of a temporary state of tolerance of a compound responsible for a hypersensitivity reaction. It is performed by administering increasing doses of the medication concerned over a short period of time (from several hours to a few days) until the total cumulative therapeutic dose is achieved and tolerated. It is a high-risk procedure used only in patients in whom alternatives are less effective or not available after a positive risk/benefit analysis. Desensitization protocols have been developed and are used in patients with allergic reactions to antibiotics (mainly penicillin), insulins, sulfonamides, chemotherapeutic and biologic agents, and many other drugs. Desensitization is mainly performed in IgE-mediated reactions, but also in reactions where drug-specific IgE have not been demonstrated. Desensitization induces a temporary tolerant state, which can only be maintained by continuous administration of the medication. Thus, for treatments like chemotherapy, which have an average interval of 4 weeks between cycles, the procedure must be repeated for every new course. In this paper, some background information on rapid desensitization procedures is provided. We define the drugs and drug reactions indicated for such procedures, describe the possible mechanism of action, and discuss the indications and contraindications. The data should serve as background information for a database (accessible via the EAACI-homepage) with standardized protocols for rapid desensitization for antibiotics, chemotherapeutic agents, monoclonal antibodies/fusion proteins, and other drugs.

Drug hypersensitivity accounts for more than 15% of all adverse drug reactions, affecting more than 7% of the general population and 10 to 20% of all hospitalized patients (1–3).

According to the nomenclature of the task force of the EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology) and the AAAAI (American Academy of Allergy Asthma and Immunology), drug hypersensitivity reactions are classified as allergic and nonallergic (4, 5). The latter are those in which an immunologic pathogenic mechanism is not demonstrated. Allergic hypersensitivity reactions can be classified as either IgE- or nonIgE mediated.

For practical reasons, drug hypersensitivity reactions are also classified as immediate and nonimmediate. The former are those occurring within 1 h after the last drug administration. Many immediate reactions are IgE mediated. The main clinical presentations of IgE-mediated reactions include cutaneous, respiratory, gastrointestinal and systemic (anaphylaxis) manifestations (6–8). NonIgE–mediated reactions can present the same symptoms as IgE-mediated ones (formerly called “anaphylactoid”). Nonimmediate reactions (9) are those occurring more than 1 h after the last drug intake; they include skin reactions, such as delayed-appearing urticaria, maculopapular exanthemas, fixed drug eruption, bullous exanthemas, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction (or rash) with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) or drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), symmetrical drug-related intertriginous flexural exanthema (SDRIFE), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) (10, 11). However, they are also manifested as interstitial nephritis, pancreatitis, pneumonitis, hepatitis, vasculitis, different forms of blood cell dyscrasias, and autoimmune reactions (12–14). In some of these manifestations, such as maculopapular exanthemas and AGEP, a T-cell-mediated pathogenic mechanism has been demonstrated (15–17).

When a physician has a patient who has had a hypersensitivity reaction to a medication and needs it again, there are two options to consider (18): (i) to administer an unrelated alternative medication; (ii) to administer the same drug by performing drug desensitization.

Although it is increasingly applied, drug desensitization is a controversial issue because of different definitions, various protocols, and lack of clearly defined indications and contraindications, as well as heterogeneous literature data.

This consensus paper aims to clarify uncertain and controversial issues and focuses mainly on drug desensitization in patients with immediate reactions.

However, some protocols of desensitization also include patients with anaphylactic symptoms occurring within 24 h after the last drug administration.

Because controlled studies are lacking, a formal evidence-based review is not possible. Thus, this document represents the collective opinion of the convened expert panel as a consensus statement (19). The expert panel considered their own European and American experience (in a combined European–American effort to standardize procedures), as well as literature data collected by searching the Medline database with the following key words: drug hypersensitivity, desensitization, tolerance induction, and graded challenge. They also took into account chapters in relevant books. The quality of these sources may vary.


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

The term desensitization has traditionally been used for type I allergic reactions only; other terms, such as tolerance induction, have been applied for nonallergic hypersensitivity reactions.

For practical reasons, in this paper, drug desensitization is defined as the induction of a state of unresponsiveness to a compound responsible for a hypersensitivity reaction.

Literature data indicate that most patients who had experienced hypersensitivity reactions within 24 h after the last drug administration achieve tolerance with rapid desensitization. This procedure allows full therapeutic doses to be reached in a relatively short time, typically between 4 and 12 h (20).

Unlike specific immunotherapy with common peptide allergens, such as inhalant allergens and insect venoms, drug desensitization leads only to a temporary state of tolerance. In effect, if the drug concerned is discontinued, the tolerance state is lost within a period of time that can vary from a few hours to a few days.

Drug desensitization must be clearly differentiated from a graded drug challenge, also called incremental test dosing or provocation test, which is a diagnostic tool (21, 22). Graded challenges are performed only for diagnosis, aiming to prove or disprove a suspected hypersensitivity. Moreover, in this procedure, the physician usually starts with low doses to avoid severe reactions, but dose increments are rapid and not aimed at inducing tolerance (Table 1). On the other hand, desensitization protocols are used only for therapeutic purposes in patients with proven or highly suspected hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., in subjects with aspirin hypersensitivity reactions and an acute coronary syndrome, in whom a diagnostic challenge is not feasible).

Table 1.   Drug provocation test vs desensitization
 Drug provocation testDesensitization
PurposeConfirm or disprove hypersensitivityProduce temporary tolerance
Effect on immune systemNoneTolerance
Risk of allergic reactionsPresentPresent
Initial dose1/100–1/10 of therapeutic dose1/1000 000–1/10 000 of therapeutic dose
Number of stepsNormally 3–5Normally > 10
Time interval between dosesAccording to reaction15 min to 2 h
Action after an objective reactionDiscontinue test, treat patientStop administration, treat when needed, continue procedure after symptoms resolve, consider modification of protocol


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

As far as immediate reactions are concerned, in the majority of patients who reacted to beta-lactams and platinum salts, an IgE-mediated pathogenic mechanism has been demonstrated on the basis of positive responses to skin tests and/or serum-specific IgE assays (23–25). On the other hand, such pathogenic mechanism has not been demonstrated in most patients with immediate reactions to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), many antibiotics other than beta-lactams, and some antineoplastic drugs, such as taxenes. In fact, most of these patients display negative results in allergologic tests (26–29).

Despite its clinical success, little is known about the mechanisms and molecular targets of drug desensitization.

Mast cells and basophils seem to be targets in the process since mediators from these cells are released during hypersensitivity reactions to drugs, as well as during desensitization procedures.

Some authors have shown that tissue mast cells become nonreactive to the implicated drug after desensitization has been achieved (30–32). The consecutive administration of suboptimal doses of antigen prior to the optimal dose seems to render these cells unresponsive to the drug compound but not to other stimuli.

One possible explanation implies that increasing sub-therapeutic doses can provide a sufficient amount of antigenic determinants to bind to IgE anchored to the surface FcɛRI receptors, but not to cross-link such IgE. Alternatively, the antigen may be able to induce rapid internalization of cross-linked antigen receptors, which depletes the cell surface of these receptors, making the cell unresponsive to the antigen (32).

Interestingly, in vitro rapid desensitization of human mast cells decreases the levels of signal transducing molecules, such as Syk and Lyn. This may be because of the degradation of such molecules or other, yet unknown mechanisms (33, 34).

Literature data showed the importance of different signal-transduction pathways for desensitization. Naturally occurring Syk-deficient basophils do not degranulate, and STAT-6-deficient mast cells, although responsive to antigens and releasing beta-hexosaminidase, cannot be desensitized (35–39).

In nonallergic hypersensitivity reactions, the mechanism of rapid desensitization to aspirin and other NSAIDs is thought to be based on a decreased production of leukotrienes and tryptase (40).

Rapid desensitization is also possible for other nonIgE-mediated reactions caused by chemotherapeutic and biologic agents, sulfonamides, as well as non-beta-lactam antibiotics. However, mechanisms are still unknown (41–43).

Indications and contraindications

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References


Drug desensitization is indicated when:

  • 1
     the drug concerned is irreplaceable (e.g., penicillin in pregnant women with syphilis and platinum salts in patients with platin-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer);
  • 2
     the drug concerned is more effective than the alternatives (e.g., a specific antibiotic in cystic fibrosis or tuberculosis, cotrimoxazole in HIV-positive patients for Pneumocystis jirovecii prevention, aspirin in patients with cardiovascular complications), or it has a unique mechanism of action (e.g., aspirin in aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease – AERD or nasal polyps).


Desensitization to culprit drugs should generally not be performed in patients at increased risk because of a co-morbidity, such as those with uncontrolled asthma (FEV1 < 70% of their normal value), hemodynamically unstable ones, or those with uncontrolled cardiac diseases. In patients treated with beta-blockers and subjects who have experienced severe anaphylaxis, as well as in patients with hepatic, renal, or other diseases, in whom exposure might provoke a potentially harmful complication, desensitization should also only be considered after a careful individual risk/benefit evaluation. Desensitization is absolutely contraindicated in patients who have experienced severe, life-threatening immunocytotoxic reactions, vasculitis, or bullous skin diseases like SJS/TEN, and DIHS/DRESS (5, 18, 20, 22, 44, 45).

General rules

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

Before performing any desensitization procedure, an individual risk-benefit evaluation has to be performed, and the benefits must outweigh the risks. Caution and surveillance are mandatory in all cases. Desensitization is associated with the risk of acute hypersensitivity reactions and should be performed in an adequately controlled setting under the supervision of a well-trained physician who is familiar with the procedures and with the treatment of anaphylaxis.

An intravenous line and continuous monitoring are obligatory. There is still debate whether desensitization must be performed in an intensive care unit (18, 20, 46–48). Many experienced centers do it on an outpatient basis. In any case, for patients who have completed the first procedure with minimal or no symptoms, subsequent procedures can be performed in the outpatient clinic. In both inpatient and outpatient clinics, all nurses should be trained to recognize symptoms of hypersensitivity reactions. At the same time, patients are taught to recognize early signs and to notify the nurse or doctor.

To provide maximal safety to patients, physicians should be available for immediate consultation, if needed. Equipment to treat allergic reactions and for cardio-pulmonary resuscitation must be easily accessible and include all drugs necessary to treat anaphylaxis.

Desensitization procedures should take into account available protocols (Table 2).

Table 2.   Successful protocols for drug desensitizations described in the literature
Type of drugDrugsReferences
AntibioticsPenicillins(18, 23, 49, 50, 56, 57, 59, 64, 74)
Cephalosporins(49, 52)
Vancomycin(54, 62)
Anti-tuberculous agents(80, 81)
Sulfonamides(42, 51, 82–87)
Other agentsAspirin, Lysine- acetylsalicylate (LAS), NSAIDS(26–28, 75, 95–97)
Chemotherapeutics(29, 41, 48, 55, 70, 71, 73, 77, 78, 88, 89, 98)
Tetanus toxoid(91, 92)
Insulin(60, 61)
Monoclonal antibodies(41, 55, 63, 99)

As a general rule, it is preferable to use protocols applied in samples larger than 10 patients (e.g., subjects sensitive to penicillins and antineoplastic agents) (29, 48–55).

Both oral and parenteral routes can be used in the procedure and it seems that both can be equally effective (18, 50, 56). For drugs that can be administered both orally and parenterally, the oral route seems to be safer (50, 57), easier, and less expensive; however, it is not always advisable or feasible (18, 50, 56–59). There are protocols that combine oral and parental routes of administration (50) (Table 3).

Table 3.   Combined oral-subcutaneous-intramuscular penicillin desensitization protocol
  1. P.O., oral; S.C., subcutaneous; I.M., intramuscular.

  2. *The interval between doses is 15 min (ref. 50).

 812 800P.O.
 925 000P.O.
1050 000P.O.
11100 000P.O.
12200 000P.O.
13400 000P.O.
14200 000S.C.
15400 000S.C.
16800 000S.C.
171000 000I.M.

Specific protocols for parenteral routes have been developed and have been widely used for many drugs, including beta-lactams, insulins, chemotherapeutic agents, and monoclonal antibodies (52–55, 60–63).

Starting dose and dose increments

In published protocols, the starting dose ranges from 1/10 000 to 1/100 of the full therapeutic one (23, 49, 50, 55, 56, 64, 65). The starting dose should be determined by taking into account the severity of reaction: in patients with histories of severe anaphylaxis (such as hypotension with loss of consciousness or severe bronchospasm), the initial dose should be between 1/1 000 000 and 1/10 000 of the full therapeutic one. In patients with a positive skin test to a nonirritating concentration of a drug, the starting dose can be determined on the basis of the endpoint titration. For example, the starting dose of a desensitization protocol to gentamycin, in a patient with a positive skin test, can be determined on the basis of the lowest nonirritative concentration (mg/ml), which elicits the positive intradermal test, and the injected volume for such test (e.g., gentamycin 4 mg/ml × 0.03 ml = 0.12 mg) (66).

The endpoint titration is only applicable in patients with positive skin tests performed according to the available guidelines (67, 68) and using the recommended concentrations (68). In patients with a very low endpoint titration value and/or severe reactions, it is advisable to modify the protocol (e.g., by reducing the initial dose, decreasing the rate of infusion, increasing the time interval between doses in oral-route administration, and/or increasing the number of steps).

Classical protocols for oral and intravenous desensitization to penicillin (Tables 3–5) start at 1/10 000 to 1/100 of the target dose; doubled doses are administered every 15–20 min over the course of several hours until the therapeutic dose is reached (49, 53, 54, 64, 65, 69). The oral route seems to be safer because it is less prone to expose patients to multivalent penicillin conjugates, which are thought to have an important role in IgE-mediated reactions (22).

Table 4.   Oral penicillin desensitization protocol
StepPenicillin (mg/ml)Amount (ml)Dose (mg)Cumulative dose (mg)
  1. Observe patient for 30 min, then give full therapeutic dose by the desired route.

  2. *The interval between doses is 15 min (ref. 59).
Table 5.   Intravenous penicillin desensitization protocol using a continuous infusion pump
StepPenicillin (mg/ml)Flow rate (ml/h)Dose (mg)Cumulative dose (mg)
  1. Observe patient for 30 min, then give full therapeutic dose by the desired route.

  2. *The interval between doses is 15 min (ref. 22).


Most protocols increase doses by doubling. Exceptions are sometimes made in the initial (slower increase) or final steps. In protocols developed by Castells et al. for chemotherapeutic agents and monoclonal antibodies (20, 29, 41, 46, 48, 55, 70) (Table 6), the final step entails both a much larger dose and a much longer time of administration.

Table 6.   Desensitization protocol for rituximab I.V. (851 mg): Solution preparation
Total dose851 mgSolution concentrationTotal dose in each solution (mg)
Solution 1250 ml0.034 mg/ml8.150 mg
Solution 2250 ml0.340 mg/ml85.100 mg
Solution 3250 ml3.377 mg/ml844.303 mg
StepSolutionRate (ml/h)Time (min)Administered dose (mg)Cumulative dose (mg)
  1. Total time = 351 min (5.85 h).

  2. From ref. 55, with permission from the author.


Other protocols with tenfold increments do exist, but appear to be associated with more side-effects. In theory, the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics of the drug have to be considered to establish the time interval between doses (e.g., of aspirin), as well as to prevent overdosing (e.g., of insulins).

Recent studies support the importance of defining the starting dose and time interval between doses. Using a murine model, Morales et al. (38) showed that the process was both dose and time dependent since statistically significant differences were seen in mediator release when dose delivering times were different. When doses are too high and delivered too fast, the state of unresponsiveness may be delayed; this can explain breakthrough reactions during desensitization. In effect, a certain time interval between doses of the drug antigen is needed to achieve maximum tolerance of the therapeutic dose (38).

Concomitant medications and pretreatments

Before beginning any desensitization procedure, patients should be in a stable clinical condition (e.g., FEV1 ≥ 70% of the normal value for asthmatics, controlled cardiac insufficiency). Any concomitant medication used for treating underlying diseases must be continued. However, drugs such as beta-blockers, which can interfere with the treatment of a severe hypersensitivity reaction, should be discontinued whenever possible. Indications should be strictly observed, e.g., sudden withdrawal of beta-blocker therapy in patients with arrhythmia may be life threatening.

For most drugs, pretreatment with systemic steroids and antihistamines is not necessary and may mask early signs of a hypersensitivity reaction (22, 71, 72). It is also unclear whether anti-histamines may actually interfere with rapid desensitization. However, many chemotherapy regimens already include medication with corticosteroids, antihistamines, and proton-pump inhibitors for other reasons (41, 46, 55, 70, 73).

Breakthrough reactions

Breakthrough reactions are drug hypersensitivity reactions that occur despite the desensitization procedure. They most often occur during the first course of desensitization. In subsequent procedures, reactions are usually less severe (46, 48, 55). Breakthrough reactions seem to be dose dependent as they often appear when a substantial increment in the dose is attempted. Breakthrough reactions have to be treated immediately. Stopping the infusion or oral intake is considered mandatory, and over 90% of the reactions resolve without further treatment (46, 48, 55).

Although, there is no common approach concerning further management, some authors choose to treat through reactions without modifying the protocol. Others interrupt the procedure, treat the reactions, and then modify the desensitization protocol by introducing intermediate dosing steps, going back one or two steps, or re-starting at the stopping point with a lower dose (41, 45, 46, 48, 55, 70, 71).

There are some data suggesting that decelerating the dose escalation by duplicating problematic doses reduces the incidence of reactions and improves tolerability (41, 48, 55, 56). In patients with near fatal reactions or clinical syndromes, such as serum sickness and blood cell dyscrasias, the desensitization has to be definitely stopped.

Outcomes of desensitization

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

Complete successful desensitization is achieved when the patient reaches the full therapeutic dose and tolerates repeated administrations of such dose until the therapeutic course is completed.

It must be remembered that desensitization is dose and drug dependent; it is also an active and quickly reversible process, dependent on the continuous administration and presence of the drug. When the drug is discontinued, tolerance is lost over hours or days. Therefore, for further treatments, repeating desensitization with the drug is mandatory. It is possible to sustain a state of ongoing tolerance by daily administration of the drug, such as penicillin in patients with recurrent infections (57, 74) or aspirin in patients with AERDs (26–28, 75).

In both adults and children, the efficacy of therapy with chemotherapeutic agents administered after desensitization has been shown to be the same as without a prior desensitization (41, 55).

Desensitization procedures are high-risk procedures that can induce anaphylaxis.

Side-effects occurring during desensitization are usually mild-to-moderate and easily treated. Mild reactions were reported in 30–80% in some series of penicillin-allergic patients undergoing desensitization (64, 69, 76). To avoid repeating desensitization, physicians should consider treating through selected mild-to-moderate reactions (e.g., urticaria) (55) and continue the procedure.

In a recent study by Castells et al. (55), the rate of adverse reactions during 413 rapid desensitizations to chemotherapeutic agents was: 26.9% (111 of 413) were mild and only 5.8% (24 of 413) were severe anaphylactic reactions. The vast majority (75%) of reactions occurred in the final steps of desensitization procedures. Most procedures (67%) were tolerated without any symptoms.

A desensitization procedure fails when the target therapeutic dose cannot be achieved and has to be stopped because of systemic allergic reactions (e.g., severe life-threatening reactions to carboplatin). If the recommended precautions are followed, fatal outcomes should be extremely unlikely. Specifically, no deaths have been reported because of desensitization for cancer therapy or chronic inflammatory diseases in the last 10 years (41, 55, 77, 78).

Desensitizations have been successfully performed in large samples of patients with hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactams and chemotherapeutic agents (20, 23, 29, 41, 46, 48, 55, 64, 69). As far as drugs other than beta-lactams, taxenes, and platinum salts are concerned, there are only reports of single cases or case series with less than 10 patients.

It must be stressed that immediate desensitization is not known to prevent the occurrence of non-IgE-mediated reactions, like MPEs or severe cutaneous bullous reactions (SJS or TEN). Serum-sickness-like reactions and hemolytic anemia have been reported in patients who were otherwise successfully desensitized (18, 55, 56, 79).

Research needs

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

The need for general recommendations to perform such procedures has increased in recent years, but many questions remain to be answered. Research is needed to uncover the cellular and molecular mechanisms that might explain why drug desensitization is an active, rapid, often successful, but temporary and reversible phenomenon. The duration of tolerance for different drugs is unknown. Moreover, open questions remain regarding the starting dose, additional value of endpoint titration, dose increments, number of subsequent doses, the time interval between doses, and the total duration of the procedure. In addition, the role of any co-medications and/or drugs used in premedication, including anti-IgE, in breakthrough symptoms, as well as the possible influence of such drugs on the efficacy of desensitization should be studied. It is unclear if drug-specific protocols are needed or if general rules can be applied. The efficacy of treatment of underlying diseases should also be studied.

Because of the limited number of patients in each centre, only multicentre studies can answer these questions, improving outcomes and establishing common, effective standardized protocols.

Concluding remarks

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

Drug desensitization is the induction of a temporary state of tolerance of a compound responsible for a hypersensitivity reaction. This is achieved by the administration of increasing doses of the offending drug over a short period of time until the full therapeutic dose is reached (Fig. 1). A high success rate has been reported in series of patients sensitive to beta-lactams or platinum salts but failures and life-threatening anaphylaxis have also been described. Thus, it is a high-risk procedure and should be used only by well-trained doctors in selected patients in whom alternatives are less effective or not available and after establishing a risk/benefit analysis.


Figure 1.  General algorithm for drug desensitization. (Correction added after online publication 23/09/10 : Text is now “Drug avoidance”, “Refer to other center”.)

Download figure to PowerPoint

At present, it is advisable to use successful desensitization protocols applied in large samples (more than ten patients).

The selection of candidates for desensitization by allergy and immunology specialists, the stabilization of concomitant diseases, the training of personnel (doctors and nurses), the treatment of breakthrough reactions, and the availability of validated protocols are crucial for the success of this procedure. To further improve desensitization, the desensitization database of the EAACI allergy should help in collecting more data and in exchanging experiences.

Conflict of interest

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References

There is no conflict of interest for any member of the consensus group. The desensitization task force was financially supported by EAACI.


  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Definitions
  4. Mechanisms
  5. Indications and contraindications
  6. General rules
  7. Outcomes of desensitization
  8. Research needs
  9. Concluding remarks
  10. Conflict of interest
  11. References
  • 1
    Demoly P, Bousquet J. Epidemiology of drug allergy. Curr Opinion Allergy Clin Immunol 2001;1:305310.
  • 2
    Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. A meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 1998;279:12001205.
  • 3
    Gomes ER, Demoly P. Epidemiology of hypersensitivity drug reactions. Curr Opinion Allergy Clin Immunol 2005;5:309316.
  • 4
    Johansson SGO, Hourihane JO’B, Bousquet J, Bruijnzeel-Koomen C, Dreborg S, Haahtela T et al. Position paper. A revised nomenclature for allergy. An EAACI position statement from the EAACI nomenclature task force. Allergy 2001;56:813824.
  • 5
    Executive summary of disease management of drug hypersensitivity: a practice parameter. Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1999;83 (6 pt 3):665700.
  • 6
    Drain KL, Volcheck GW. Preventing and managing drug-induced anaphylaxis. Drug Saf 2001;24:843853.
  • 7
    Van Der Klauw M, Wilson J, Stricker B. Drug-associated anaphylaxis: 20 years of reporting in the Netherlands 1974–1994 and review of the literature. Clin Exp Allergy 1996;26:13551363.
  • 8
    Torres MJ, Mayorca C, Blanca M. Drug Hypersensitivity. In: PichlerW, editor. Urticaria and anaphylaxis due to Betalactams (Penicillins and Cephalosporins). Bern: Karger Verlag, 2007: 190203.
  • 9
    Neukomm C, Yawalkar N, Helbling A, Pichler WJ. T-cell reactions to drugs in distinct clinical manifestations of drug allergy. J Invest Allergy Clin Immunol 2001;11:275284.
  • 10
    Mockenhaupt M. Dermatology and Venerology. In: BurgdorfWHC, PlewigG, WolffHH, LandthalerM, Braun-Falco’s , editors. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin Verlag, 2008:473484.
  • 11
    Allanore L, Roujeau J-C. Drug Hypersensitivity. In: PichlerW, editor. Clinic and pathogenesis of Severe Bullous Skin Reactions: Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis. Bern: Karger Verlag, 2007:267277.
  • 12
    Straumann A, Bauer M, Pichler WJ, Pirovino M. Acute pancreatitis due to pyritynol. Gastroenterology 1998;115:452454.
  • 13
    Maria VA, Victorino RM. Diagnostic value of specific T-cell reactivity to drugs in 95 cases of drug induced liver injury. Gut 1997;41:534540.
  • 14
    Naisbitt DJ, Gordon SF, Pirmohamed M, Park BK. Immunological principles of adverse drug reactions: the initiation and propagation of immune responses elicited by drug treatment. Drug Saf 2000;23:483507.
  • 15
    Pichler WJ, Yawalkar N, Britschgi M, Depta J, Strasser I, Schmid S et al. Cellular and molecular pathophysiology of cutaneous drug reactions. Am J Clin Dermatol 2002;3:229238.
  • 16
    Pichler WJ, Yawalkar N, Schmid S, Helbling A. Pathogenesis of drug induced exanthems. Allergy 2002;57:884893.
  • 17
    Britschgi M, Steiner U, Schmid S, Depta JP, Senti G, Bircher A et al. T-cell involvement in drug-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. J Clin Invest 2001;11:14331441.
  • 18
    Adkinson NF Jr. Allergy, Principles and Practice. In: MiddletonEJr, AdkinsonNFJr, YungingerJW, BusseWW, BochnerBS, HolgateST, SimonsER, editors. Drug allergy. New York: Mosby Co, 2003:16791694
  • 19
    Bousquet J, Bieber T, Fokkens W, Humbert M, Kowalski ML, Niggemann B et al. Consensus statements, evidence-based medicine and guidelines in allergic diseases. Allergy 2008;63:14.
  • 20
    Castells M. Desensitization for drug allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;6:476481.
  • 21
    Solensky R. Drug hypersensitivity. Med Clin North Am 2006;90:233260.
  • 22
    Solensky R. Drug desensitization. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 2004;24:425443.
  • 23
    Turvey SE, Cronin B, Arnold AD, Dioun AF. Antibiotic desensitization for the allergic patient: 5 years of experience and practice. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2004;92:426432.
  • 24
    Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K, Elson P, Peterson G, Kulp B et al. Clinical features of hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:11411145.
  • 25
    Zanotti KM, Rybicki LA, Kennedy AW, Belinson JL, Webster KD, Kulp B et al. Carboplatin skin testing: a skin-testing protocol for predicting hypersensitivity to carboplatin chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:31263129.
  • 26
    Berges-Gimeno MP, Stevenson DD. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug induced reactions and desensitization. J Asthma 2004;41:375384.
  • 27
    Berges-Gimeno MP, Simon RA, Stevenson DD. Long-term treatment with aspirin desensitization in asthmatic patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003;111:180186.
  • 28
    Berges-Gimeno MP, Simon RA, Stevenson DD. Early effects of aspirin desensitization treatment in asthmatic patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2003;90:338341.
  • 29
    Feldweg AM, Lee CW, Matulonis UA, Castells M. Rapid desensitization for hypersensitivity reactions to paclitaxel and docetaxel: a new standard protocol used in 77 successful treatments. Gynecol Oncol 2005;96:824829.
  • 30
    Sobotka A, Dembo M, Goldstein B, Lichtenstein L. Antigen specific desensitization of human basophils. J Immunol 1979;122:511517.
  • 31
    Shalit M, Levi-Schaffer F. Challenge of mast cells with increasing amounts of antigen induces desensitization. Clin Exp Allergy 1995;25:896902.
  • 32
    Steinman RM, Mellman IS, Muller MA, Cohen ZA. Endocytosis and recycling of plasma membrane. J Cell Biol 1983;96:127.
  • 33
    Kepley CL. Antigen-induced reduction in mast cell and basophil functional responses due to reduced Syk protein levels. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2005;138:2939.
  • 34
    Odom S, Gomez G, Kovarova M, Furumoto Y, Ryan JJ, Wright HV et al. Negative regulation of immunoglobulin E-dependent allergic responses by Lyn kinase. J Exp Med 2004;199:14911502.
  • 35
    Malaviya R, Uckum FM. Role of STAT6 in IgE receptor/FcepsilonRI-mediated late phase allergic responses of mast cell. J Immunol 2002;168:421426.
  • 36
    Shimoda K, Van DeursenJ, Sangster MY, Sarawar SR, Carson RT, Tripp RA et al. Lack of IL-4 induced Th2 response and IgE class switching in mice with disrupted STAT6 gene. Nature 1996;380:630633.
  • 37
    Takeda K, Tanaka T, Shi W, Matsumoto M, Minami M, Kashiwamura S et al. Essential role of STAT6 in IL-4 signaling. Nature 1996;380:627630.
  • 38
    Morales AR, Shah N, Castells M. Antigen-IgE desensitization in signal transducer and activator of transcription 6–deficient mast cells by suboptimal doses of antigen. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005;94:575580.
  • 39
    Woo HY, Kim YS, Kang NI, Chung WC, Song CH, Choi IW et al. Mechanism for acute oral desensitization to antibiotics. Allergy 2006;61:954958.
  • 40
    Farooque S, Lee T. Mechanisms of aspirin-sensitive respiratory disease-a two-compartment model. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2007;142:5963.
  • 41
    Castells M. Drug Hypersensitivity. In: PichlerW, editor. Drug desensitization in oncology: chemotherapy agents and monoclonal antibodies. Bern: Karger Verlag, 2007:413425.
  • 42
    Bonfanti P, Pusterla L, Parazzini F, Libanore M, Cgni AE, Franzetti M et al. The effectiveness of desensitization versus rechallenge treatment in HIV-positive patients with previous hypersensitivity to TMP-SMX: a randomized multicentric study. Biomed Pharmacother 2000;54:5659.
  • 43
    Gorman SK, Zed PJ, Dhingra VK, Ronco JJ. Rapid imipenem/cilastatin desensitization for multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter pneumonia. Ann Pharmacother 2003;37:513516.
  • 44
    Shiohara T, Takahashi R, Kano Y. Drug Hypersensitivity. In: PichlerW, editor. Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndromes and viral reactivation. Bern: Karger Verlag, 2007:251266.
  • 45
    Gruchalla R. Acute drug desensitization. Clin Exp Allergy 1998;28:6364.
  • 46
    Lee CW, Matulonis UA, Castells MC. Carboplatin hypersensitivity: a 6-h 12-step protocol effective in 35 desensitizations in patients with gynecological malignancies and mast cell/IgE-mediated reactions. Gynecol Oncol 2004;95:370376.
  • 47
    Boguniewicz M, Leung DY. Management of patients with allergic reactions to antibiotics. Pediatr Pulmunol 1987;80:314319.
  • 48
    Lee CW, Matulonis UA, Castells MC. Rapid inpatient/outpatient desensitization for chemotherapy hypersensitivity: standard protocol effective in 57 patients for 255 courses. Gynecol Oncol 2005;99:393399.
  • 49
    Borish L, Tamir R, Rosenwasser LJ. Intravenous desensitization to beta-lactam antibiotics. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1987;80:314319.
  • 50
    Sullivan TJ, Yecies LD, Shatz GS, Parker CW, Wedner HJ. Desensitization of patients allergic to penicillin using orally administered beta-lactam antibiotics. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1982;69:275282.
  • 51
    Demoly P, Messaad D, Sahla H, Fabre J, Faucherre V, Andre P et al. Six-hour trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole graded challenge in HIV-infected patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;102:10331036.
  • 52
    Ghosal S, Taylor CJ. Intravenous desensitization to ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997;39:556557.
  • 53
    Earl HS, Sullivan TJ. Acute desensitization of a patient with cystic fibrosis allergic to both betalactam and aminoglycoside antibiotics. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1987;79:477483.
  • 54
    Chopra N, Oppenheimer J, Derimanov GS, Fine PL. Vancomycin anaphylaxis and successful desensitization in a patient with end stage renal disease on hemodialysis by maintaining steady antibiotic levels. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2000;84:633635.
  • 55
    Castells M, Tennant NM, Sloane DE, Hsu FI, Barrett NA, Hong DI et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy: outcomes and safety of rapid desensitization in 413 cases. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;122:574580.
  • 56
    Solensky R. Drug Hypersensitivity. In: PichlerW, editor. Desensitization with antibiotics. Bern: Karger Verlag, 2007:404412.
  • 57
    Stark BJ, Earl HS, Gross GN, Lumry WR, Goodman EL, Sullivan TJ. Acute and chronic desensitization of penicillin allergic patients using oral penicillin. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1987;79:523532.
  • 58
    Herman R, Jick H. Cutaneous reaction rates to penicillins: oral versus parental. Cutis 1979;24:232234.
  • 59
    Sullivan TJ. Allergy, Principles and Practice. In: MiddletonEJr, ReedCE, EllisEF, AdkinsonNF, YungingerJW, editors. Drug allergy. St. Louis: Mosby Co 1993:17261746.
  • 60
    Moyes V, Driver R, Croom A, Mirakian R, Chowdhury TA. Insulin allergy in a patient with Type 2 diabetes successfully treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Diabet Med 2006;23:204206.
  • 61
    Radermecker RP, Scheen AJ. Allergy reactions to insulin: effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and insulin analogues. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2007;23:348355.
  • 62
    Wong JT, Ripple RE, MacLean JA, Marks DR, Bloch KJ. Vancomycin hypersensitivity: synergism with narcotics and “desensitization” by a rapid continuous intravenous protocol. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994;94:189194.
  • 63
    Sehn LH, Donaldson J, Filewich A, Fitzgerald C, Gill KK, Runzer N et al. Rapid infusion rituximab in combination with corticosteroid-containing chemotherapy or as maintenance therapy is well tolerated and can safely be delivered in the community setting. Blood 2007;109:41714173.
  • 64
    Wendel GD Jr, Stark BJ, Jamison RB, Molina RD, Sullivan TJ. Penicillin allergy and desensitization in serious infections during pregnancy. N Engl J Med 1985;312:12291232.
  • 65
    Madaan A, Li JT. Cephalosporin allergy. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 2004;24:463476.
  • 66
    Empedrad R, Darter AL, Earl HS, Gruchalla RS. Nonirritating intradermal skin test concentrations for commonly prescribed antibiotics. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003;112:629630.
  • 67
    Brockow K, Romano A, Blanca M, Ring J, Pichler W, Demoly P. General considerations for skin test procedures in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity. Allergy 2002;57:4551.
  • 68
    Torres MJ, Blanca M, Fernandez J, Romano A, De Weck A, Aberer W et al. Diagnosis of immediate allergic reactions to beta-lactam antibiotics. Allergy 2003;58:961972.
  • 69
    Burrows JA, Toon M, Bell SC. Antibiotic desensitization in adults with cystic fibrosis. Respirology 2003;8:359364.
  • 70
    Castells M. Rapid desensitization for hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy agents. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;6:271277.
  • 71
    Morgan JS, Adams M, Mason MD. Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin given to patients with relapsed ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 1994;30:12051206.
  • 72
    White AA, Stevenson DD, Simon RA. The blocking effect of essential controller medications during aspirin challenges in patients with aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005;95:330335.
  • 73
    Morgan M, Bowers DC, Gruchalla RS, Khan DA. Safety and efficacy of repeated monthly carboplatin desensitization. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;114:974975.
  • 74
    Brown LA, Goldberg ND, Shearer WT. Long-term ticarcillin desensitization by the continuous oral administration of penicillin. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1982;69:5154.
  • 75
    Pfaar O, Klimek L. Aspirin desensitization in aspirin intolerance: update on current standards and recent improvements. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;6:161166.
  • 76
    Graybill JR, Sande MA, Reinarz JA, Shapiro RS. Controlled penicillin anaphylaxis leading to desensitization. South Med J 1974;67:6264.
  • 77
    Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K, Kulp P, Peterson G, Belinson J. Paclitaxel-associated hypersensitivity reactions: experience of the gynaecologic oncology program of the Cleveland Clinic Cancer Center. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:102105.
  • 78
    Ogle SK, Rose MM, Wildes CT. Development and implementation of a carboplatin desensitization protocol for children with neurofrimomatosis, type I, and hypersensitivity reactions in an outpatient oncology clinic. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 2002;19:122126.
  • 79
    Naclerio R, Mizrahi EA, Adkinson NF Jr. Immunologic observations during desensitization and maintenance of clinical tolerance to penicillin. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1983;71:294301.
  • 80
    Rodrigues J, Moreira A, Fonseca J, Vaz M. Oral desensitization to izoniazid. R Port Alergologia 2007;9:263264.
  • 81
    Buergin S, Scherer K, Hausermann P, Bircher AJ. Immediate hypersensitivity to rifampicin in 3 patients: diagnostic procedures and induction of clinical tolerance. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2006;140:2026.
  • 82
    Straatmann A, Bahia F, Pedral-Sampaio D, Brites C. A randomized, pilot trial comparing full versus escalating dose regimens for the desensitization of AIDS patients allergic to sulfonamides. Braz J Infect Dis 2002;6:276280.
  • 83
    Yoshizawa S, Yasuoka A, Kikuchi Y, Honda M, Gatanaga H, Tachikawa N et al. A 5-day course of oral desensitization to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (T/S) in patients with human immunodeficiency virus type-1 infection who were previously intolerant to T/S. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2000;85:241244.
  • 84
    Theodore CM, Holmes D, Rodgers M, McLean KA. Co-trimoxazole desensitization in HIV-seropositive patients. Int J STD AIDS 1998;9:158161.
  • 85
    Palusci VJ, Kaul A, Lawrence RM, Haines KA, Kwittken PL. Rapid oral desensitization to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole in infants and children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996;15:456460.
  • 86
    Amedeo J, Chichmanian RM, Reboulot B, Vinti H, Rosenthal E, Pesce A et al. Desensitization in HIV seropositive patients with cotrimoxazole hypersensitivity. A series of 18 cases. Therapie 1994;49:463465.
  • 87
    Beall G, Sanwo M, Hussain H. Drug reactions and desensitization in AIDS. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 1997;17:319338.
  • 88
    Olson JK, Sood AK, Sorosky JI, Anderson B, Buller RE. Taxol hypersensitivity: rapid retreatment is safe and cost effective. Gynecol Oncol 1998;68:2528.
  • 89
    Rose PG, Fusco N, Smrekar M, Mossbruger K, Rodriguez M. Successful administration of carboplatin in patients with clinically documented carboplatin hypersensitivity. Gynecol Oncol 2003;89:429433.
  • 90
    Somech R, Seaban-Adel K, Atkinson A, Kirby-Allen M. Evaluation and management of pediatric patients with anaphylactoid reactions to deferoxamine mesylate. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2007;99:575576.
  • 91
    Atanasković-Marković M, Nestorović B. Desensitization to diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine. Srp Arh Celok Lek 2003;131:427431.
  • 92
    Williams AN, Kabuubi JB, Owen JP, Wells J. Tetanus immunisation in hypersensitive individuals. J R Army Med Corps 2002;148:148150.
  • 93
    Hsu HL, Huang FC, Ni YH, Chang MH. Steroids used to desensitize penicillamine allergy in Wilson disease. Acta Paediatr Taiwan 1999;40:448450.
  • 94
    Parekh K, Burkhart HM, Hatab A, Ross A, Muller BA. Heparin allergy: successful desensitization for cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;130:14551456.
  • 95
    Lee JY, Simon RA, Stevenson DD. Selection of aspirin dosages for aspirin desensitization treatment in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;119:157164.
  • 96
    Gollapudi RR, Teirstein PS, Stevenson DD, Simon RA. Aspirin sensitivity: implications for patients with coronary artery disease. JAMA 2004;292:30173023.
  • 97
    Hope AP, Woessner KA, Simon RA, Stevenson DD. Rational approach to aspirin dosing during oral challenges and desensitization of patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;123:406410.
  • 98
    Syrigou EI, Karapanagiotou EM, Alamara CV, Boura PG, Saif MW, Syrigos KN. Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin: a retrospective study and the development of a desensitization protocol. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2009;8:106109.
  • 99
    Jerath MR, Kwan M, Kannarkat M, Mirakhur B, Carey L, Valgus J et al. A desensitization protocol for the mAb cetuximab. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;123:260262.