Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Clindamycin skin testing has limited diagnostic potential.

Melissa J Notman1, Elizabeth J Phillips, Sandra R Knowles

  • 1Drug Safety Clinic, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Contact Dermatitis
|December 21, 2005
PubMed
Summary

Clindamycin skin testing is not reliable for diagnosing allergies. Oral provocation tests may identify clindamycin hypersensitivity but carry risks, requiring careful consideration of benefits versus potential adverse reactions.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluation of anaphylactic reactions involving carboplatin and paclitaxel reported to the FDA from 1970 to 2023.

Gynecologic oncology reports·2026
Same author

Machine Learning Estimation of Gestational Age at Delivery Using Linked Mother-Infant Electronic Health Records Across Two Health Systems.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026
Same author

Clonal cytotoxic CD8<sup>+</sup> T-cell expansion and HLA-B44 supertype association in bupropion-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions.

The Journal of investigative dermatology·2026
Same author

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Checkpoint Inhibitor Adverse Reactions.

The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice·2026
Same author

Institutional Trends in Penicillin Allergy: A New Era of Active Penicillin Allergy Delabeling.

Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology·2026
Same author

irAE-GPT: leveraging large language models to identify immune-related adverse events in electronic health records and clinical trial datasets.

EBioMedicine·2026

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Immunology
  • Pharmacology
  • Dermatology

Background:

  • Limited data exists on the efficacy of clindamycin prick and intradermal skin testing for diagnosing allergic reactions.
  • Immunologic reactions to clindamycin necessitate reliable diagnostic methods for patient safety.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of clindamycin prick and intradermal skin testing in patients with suspected hypersensitivity.
  • To assess the safety and utility of oral clindamycin provocation following negative skin tests.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective chart review of 31 patients referred to a Drug Safety Clinic for clindamycin-associated immunologic reactions.
  • Patients underwent clindamycin prick and intradermal skin testing.
  • Negative skin tests were followed by a 150 mg oral clindamycin challenge.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Prick and intradermal skin testing showed limited sensitivity in identifying patients with previous clindamycin allergic reactions.
  • 32% (10/31) of patients experienced significant reactions upon oral clindamycin provocation.
  • Two patients reported delayed reactions at intradermal test sites.

Conclusions:

  • Clindamycin prick and intradermal skin testing are inadequate for ruling out previous allergic reactions.
  • Oral clindamycin provocation can be a useful tool for diagnosing hypersensitivity but must be administered cautiously on a risk-benefit basis.