Drug- and Virus- or Bacteria-induced Exanthems: The Role of Immunohistochemical Staining for Cytokines in Differential Diagnosis

Cytokine/Chemokine assessment as a complementary diagnostic tool for inflammatory skin diseases

Inflammatory skin conditions are the 4th leading cause of non-fatal health burden in the general population worldwide. The diagnosis of skin lesions due to systemic drug reactions, viral or bacterial exanthems, or in patients with psoriasis, atopic dermatitis or contact dermatitis is often difficult and relies heavily upon conventional histopathologic examination. Conversely, it is widely accepted that the cutaneous profile of inflammatory markers, or 'inflammatory signature', is differentially expressed in various skin conditions. In this pilot study, we investigated the possibility of inflammatory skin disease diagnosis from an immunological perspective in small punch biopsies. We collected lesional and perilesional punch biopsies from 139 patients suffering from a variety of inflammatory skin conditions and attending the Dermatology Department at the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Using bead-based immunoassays we were able to measure 13 out of 17 inflammatory markers from a pre-selected multi-analyte panel and to detect significant differences between lesional and perilesional biopsies from each individual patient. Hierarchical and unbiased clustering methods based on inflammatory signatures grouped psoriasis and atopic dermatitis lesions into individual clusters in contrast to other skin conditions, highlighting the potential of inflammatory signatures to be used as diagnostic differentiators and to inform alternative targets in anti-inflammatory treatment strategies.

Drug-Induced vs. Viral Maculopapular Exanthem—Resolving the Dilemma

Maculopapular exanthem is a commonly encountered presentation in routine clinical practice, and differentiation between its two most common etiologies, i.e., viral- and drug-induced, often poses a diagnostic dilemma. Clinical, hematological and biochemical investigations are seldom reliable in distinguishing between a drug reaction and a viral exanthem. Certain key histopathological features such as the presence of a moderate degree of spongiosis, extensive basal cell damage with multiple necrotic keratinocytes and dermal infiltrate rich in eosinophils or lymphocytes and histiocytes may favor a drug exanthem, while distinctive epidermal cytopathic changes and lymphocytic vasculitis point towards a viral etiology. Similarly, notable immunohistochemical markers such as IL-5, eotaxin and FAS ligand may support a diagnosis of a drug-induced maculopapular eruption. Histopathological and immunohistochemical evaluations may help in distinguishing between the two etiologies when faced with a clinical overlap, especially in patients on multiple essential drugs when drug withdrawal and rechallenge is not feasible.

Histopathologic Features of Maculopapular Drug Eruption

Background: Cutaneous adverse drug reaction (CADR) is common in both inpatient and outpatient clinical settings and has been associated with a large variety of medications. Drug reactions represent a significant burden to the healthcare system due to increased hospital stay durations and associated costs. Moreover, some of these reactions may be life-threatening. The most common clinical manifestation of a CADR is a maculopapular drug eruption (MDE). Due to its many clinical mimics and associations with a variety of histopathologic patterns, maculopapular drug eruption is difficult to definitively diagnose from both a clinical and histopathological perspective. Summary: We reviewed the clinical and histopathologic features of 327 cases of MDE from several studies in the literature and summarized characteristic histopathologic findings and their frequencies of occurrence. We found that the most common and suggestive histopathologic features of MDE were epidermal spongiosis, lymphocytic infiltrate, and occasional necrotic keratinocytes; interface change at the DEJ; superficial perivascular and interstitial lymphocytic infiltrate with or without eosinophils and neutrophils in the mid-to-deep dermis and mild papillary dermal edema; and dilation of superficial vessels. The presence of multiple histopathologic patterns within the same tissue specimen is also suggestive of MDE. This review and analysis suggest that a biopsy may improve the diagnostic accuracy by both establishing common and uncommon features associated with MDE and reviewing features that help to exclude other causes of maculopapular eruption. Key Message: Histopathologic criteria for the diagnosis of MDE, while not entirely specific, may aid in establishing a differential that includes a drug eruption. Thus, a biopsy can be a helpful diagnostic tool when MDE is suspected by demonstrating findings suggestive of MDE or by ruling out clinical mimics. However, biopsy results cannot be used in isolation as clinical-pathologic correlation is paramount in MDE.

Skin eruptions in children: Drug hypersensitivity vs viral exanthema

Childhood rashes or exanthemas are common and are usually relatively benign. There are many causes of rash in children, including mainly viruses, and less often bacterial toxins, drugs, allergens and other diseases. Viral exanthema often appears while children are taking a medication in the course of a viral infection; it can mimic drug exanthema and is perceived as a drug allergy in 10% of cases. In the vast majority of cases, the distinction between virus-induced and drug-induced skin eruption during the acute phase is not possible. The drugs most commonly implicated are beta-lactams (BL) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Viruses, commonly Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), human herpesvirus 6 (HHV6) and cytomegalovirus (CMV), and the bacterium, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, may cause exanthema either from the infection itself (active or latent) or because of interaction with drugs that are taken simultaneously. Determination of the exact diagnosis requires a careful clinical history and thorough physical examination. Haematological and biochemical investigations and histology are not always helpful in differentiating between the two types of exanthema. Serological and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays can be helpful, although a concomitant acute infection does not exclude drug hypersensitivity. A drug provocation test (DPT) is although considered the gold standard for the diagnosis and is not preferred by the patients. Skin tests are not well tolerated, and in vitro tests, such as the basophil activation test and lymphocyte transformation, are of low sensitivity and specificity and their relevance is debatable. Based on current evidence, we propose a systematic clinical approach for timely differential diagnosis and management of rashes in children who present a cutaneous eruption while receiving a drug.

Viral Infections and Cutaneous Drug-Related Eruptions

In the general population, up to 10% of children treated by antibiotics have cutaneous adverse drug reaction, but allergy is confirmed in less than 20% of patients. Most of the non-allergic reactions are probably due to virus, such as enterovirus acute infection or Ebstein-Barr Virus (EBV) acute infection or reactivation. Especially in children, viruses have the propensity to induce skin lesions (maculopapular rash, urticaria) due to their skin infiltration or immunologic response. In drug-related skin eruptions, a virus can participate by activating an immune predisposition. The culprit antibiotic is then the trigger for reacting. Even in severe drug-induced reactions, such as Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, viruses take part in immune phenomena, especially herpes viruses. Understanding the mechanisms of both virus- and drug-induced skin reaction is important to develop our clinical reflection and give an adaptive care to the patient. Our aim is to review current knowledge on the different aspects and potential roles of viruses in the different type of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR). Although major advances have been made those past year, further studies are needed for a better understanding of the link between viruses and DHR, to improve management of those patients.

Serum soluble Fas ligand levels and peripheral blood lymphocyte subsets in patients with drug-induced maculopapular rashes, dress, and viral exanthemas

BACKGROUND

Fatty acid synthetase (Fas)/Fas ligand (FasL)-dependent apoptotic pathways have been reported as being involved in the pathogenesis of drug-induced maculopapular rashes.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated serum soluble FasL (sFasL) levels and peripheral blood lymphocyte subtypes to discriminate maculopapular drug eruptions (MPDE) from viral exanthema (VE).

PATIENTS/METHODS

Children with confirmed MPDE (group I), VE (group II), and drug rashes with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) or drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS) (group III) were included. Serum sFasL levels and peripheral blood lymphocyte subtypes were analyzed in groups I-III on admission, and repeated twice (only once for group IV - controls).

RESULTS

There were no significant serum soluble FasL level differences among the groups for all the samples. In the initial samples, CD19⁺ cell numbers in group II were significantly higher than in group IV, and the CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio was higher than groups I and IV. In the second samples, CD4⁺ and CD19⁺ cell numbers were significantly higher in group II than group I. In the final samples, CD4⁺ cell numbers in group II were significantly higher than group I and group III. CD19⁺ cells numbers in group III were significantly lower than the other groups for all samples.

CONCLUSION

Serum sFasL levels were not found to be useful in discriminating viral exanthemas from other drug rashes. The significant differences between MPDE, VE, and DRESS were high CD4⁺ and CD19⁺ cell-count numbers in VE but low B-cell numbers in DRESS. This might be important for discriminating VE from DRESS, and the low B-cell count in early symptoms might be a useful predictor of DRESS development.

Acute exanthemas: a prospective study of 98 adult patients with an emphasis on cytokinic and metagenomic investigation

BACKGROUND

Acute exanthemas (AEs) are frequently seen; they can be caused by drugs or viruses but often the cause is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the clinical, virological and histological aspects of AEs and explore their cytokinic and metagenomic profiles.

METHODS

This prospective study examined 98 patients with AE, from February to July 2014. Clinical data were recorded in a standardized chart. Virological investigation and skin biopsies were performed. In addition, blood and skin samples were analysed for cytokines and then by a shotgun metagenomic approach. We identified five groups of patients: those with maculopapular exanthemas (MPEs) that were virally induced (group 1); those with drug-induced MPEs (group 2), those with MPEs that were both viral and drug induced (group 3), those with idiopathic MPEs (group 4) and those with pityriasis rosea (group 5).

RESULTS

A virus was identified in 29 cases (human herpesvirus 6, 72%). Cytokinic analysis of the skin (n = 23 MPEs) showed higher levels of interferon-γ and interleukin-1 receptor-α in viral MPEs, higher interleukin-33 levels in idiopathic MPEs, and higher macrophage inflammatory protein 1α levels in drug-induced MPEs. By metagenomics analysis (n = 10 MPEs), viruses identified with routine practice methods were not found in group 1 (n = 4 MPEs). However, Enterovirus A was detected in two cases, especially in a group 1 patient for whom metagenomic analysis rectified the diagnosis of the culprit agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Human herpesvirus 6 was the virus most frequently identified, and histology did not discriminate MPEs. In addition, the level of interleukin-33 seen in idiopathic MPEs suggests that an environmental factor may be the trigger for these. The results bring into question the utility of routine polymerase chain reaction analysis and viral serology for determining cause in AE. What's already known about this topic? Acute exanthemas, especially maculopapular exanthemas, are a frequent reason for patients consulting emergency and dermatology departments. It is difficult to evaluate the aetiology of acute exanthema based on the clinical aspects. Few data are available on the investigations needed in routine practice, and no prospective series have been published. What does this study add? Our study provides a global and prospective description of acute exanthemas. Cytokine analysis could help to investigate the pathophysiology of idiopathic eruptions. Metagenomic analysis provides new insights about the value of routine practice virological investigations. We show for the first time the feasibility of metagenomics analysis in the skin, which results question the interest of routine PCR and viral sérologies for the exploration of such acute exanthemas.

Pathway cross-talk network analysis identifies critical pathways in neonatal sepsis

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in neonatal care, sepsis remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in neonates worldwide. Pathway cross-talk analysis might contribute to the inference of the driving forces in bacterial sepsis and facilitate a better understanding of underlying pathogenesis of neonatal sepsis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore the critical pathways associated with the progression of neonatal sepsis by the pathway cross-talk analysis.

METHODS

By integrating neonatal transcriptome data with known pathway data and protein-protein interaction data, we systematically uncovered the disease pathway cross-talks and constructed a disease pathway cross-talk network for neonatal sepsis. Then, attract method was employed to explore the dysregulated pathways associated with neonatal sepsis. To determine the critical pathways in neonatal sepsis, rank product (RP) algorithm, centrality analysis and impact factor (IF) were introduced sequentially, which synthetically considered the differential expression of genes and pathways, pathways cross-talks and pathway parameters in the network. The dysregulated pathways with the highest IF values as well as RP<0.01 were defined as critical pathways in neonatal sepsis.

RESULTS

By integrating three kinds of data, only 6919 common genes were included to perform the pathway cross-talk analysis. By statistic analysis, a total of 1249 significant pathway cross-talks were selected to construct the pathway cross-talk network. Moreover, 47 dys-regulated pathways were identified via attract method, 20 pathways were identified under RP<0.01, and the top 10 pathways with the highest IF were also screened from the pathway cross-talk network. Among them, we selected 8 common pathways, i.e. critical pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we systematically tracked 8 critical pathways involved in neonatal sepsis by integrating attract method and pathway cross-talk network. These pathways might be responsible for the host response in infection, and of great value for advancing diagnosis and therapy of neonatal sepsis.

Direct oral provocation tests in non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions related to beta-lactam antibiotics

BACKGROUND

Skin testing has a limited role in the diagnosis of non-immediate beta-lactam hypersensitivity in children. The aim of this study was to report the results of oral provocation tests performed without skin tests in children with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms caused by beta-lactam antibiotics.

METHODS

Oral provocation tests with suspected antibiotics were performed to patients with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms caused by beta-lactam antibiotics. Skin tests were not performed before provocation tests. A total of five doses were administered with half-an-hour intervals in increasing doses. Provocation was continued for 5 days.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients with a median age of 4.3 (IQR: 2-7.5) years, of whom 58% were males, were included in the study. Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid was the most frequently responsible agent in 87 (73.1%) patients, and most common type of rash was maculopapular in 74 (62.2%) patients. Four patients (3.4%) had an urticarial reaction during the provocation test.

CONCLUSION

We did not experience any severe reactions during oral provocation test without previous skin tests performed to children with non-immediate mild cutaneous reactions without systemic symptoms. Omitting skin tests before oral provocation test in this group of children can help decreasing the burden of allergy clinics and alleviating the discomfort of children.