Érythème pigmenté fixe : épidémiologie, physiopathologie, clinique, diagnostic différentiel et modalités de prise en charge

Patch tests in non-immediate cutaneous adverse drug reactions: Late readings on Day 4 is more sensitive than on Day 3

BACKGROUND

Patch tests (PTs) are recommended to identify the culprit drug in non-immediate cutaneous adverse drug reactions (NICADRs). We recently reported that, in patients with NICADRs, a unique reading of PTs at day (D)2 compared with an additional second late reading at D4 missed almost half (45.3%) of the positive PTs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the change in sensitivity of the PT reading on D4 compared with the reading on D3.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective (July 2020-June 2023) monocentric study of patients who had PTs with two readings for a NICADR. We compared reading on D3 and the second reading on D4 for the suspected drug (primary outcome) and for the related drugs tested simultaneously (secondary outcome).

RESULTS

During the study period, 249 patients underwent patch testing with D3 and D4 readings. Regarding the primary outcome, the first reading at D3 was positive for 13.7% of patients, and the reading at D4 for 24.9% of patients (p < 0.0001). Regarding the secondary outcome, only 9.6% of patients had all their positive PT at D3 compared with 24.9% of patients at D4 (p < 0.0001). Considering the evaluated drug classes, no statistical difference was observed. However, we highlight that D3 reading detected all positive carbamazepine PTs (n = 3) while positive clindamycin PTs (n = 4) were identified only with the help of the second reading on D4.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that, an additional D4 reading compared with a single D3 reading enhanced the sensitivity of PTs to identify culprit drugs and related. Further studies should replicate these findings and evaluate the medico-economic balance and safety of a single reading of PTs on D4.

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a heterogeneous field including various clinical patterns without specific features suggesting drug causality. Maculopapular exanthema and urticaria are the most common types of cutaneous ADR. Serious cutaneous ADRs, which may cause permanent sequelae or have fatal outcome, may represent 2% of all cutaneous ADR and must be quickly identified to guide their management. These serious reactions include bullous manifestations (epidermal necrolysis i.e. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP). Some risk factors for developing cutaneous ADRs have been identified, including immunosuppression, autoimmunity or genetic variants. All drugs can cause cutaneous ADRs, the most commonly implicated being antibiotics (especially aminopenicillins and sulfonamides), anticonvulsants, allopurinol, antineoplastic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and iodinated contrast media. Pathophysiology is related to immediate or delayed "idiosyncratic" immunologic mechanisms, i.e., usually not related to dose, and pharmacologic/toxic mechanisms, commonly dose-dependent and/or time-dependent. If an immuno-allergic mechanism is suspected, allergological explorations (including epicutaneous patch testing and/or intradermal test) are often possible to clarify drug causality, however these have a variable sensitivity according to the drug and to the ADR type. No in vivo or in vitro test can consistently confirm the drug causality. To determine the origin of a rash, a logical approach based on clinical characteristics, chronologic factors and elimination of differential diagnosis (especially infectious etiologies) is required, completed with a literature search. Reporting to pharmacovigilance system is therefore essential both to analyze drug causality at individual level, and to contribute to knowledge of the drug at population level, especially for serious cutaneous ADRs or in cases involving newly marketed drugs.