Recent Advances in Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Syndrome/Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms

Retrospective study on the association of human herpesvirus reactivation with severe DRESS: A description of blood and skin reactivations

BACKGROUND

Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) is a severe adverse event (mortality of 10%). Its pathophysiology involves herpesviruses, particularly HHV-6, but the exact mechanisms are still poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To describe severe cases of DRESS and especially their association with herpesvirus reactivation.

METHODS

This study was a multicentre case series conducted between 2007 and 2021 at five University Hospital Centres in France. The study included patients who had severe DRESS, which was defined as death, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU), or severe damage to internal organs. We excluded patients without blood PCR sample, without a drug formally attributed or with RegiSCAR score < 6. We collected data on severity, causative drug, associated visceral damage and results of viral blood PCRs. HHV-6 reactivation was studied in skin biopsies by detection of small non-coding transcripts (HHV-6 miR-aU14) and a late viral protein (GP82/105).

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were included (29 female, median age 62, interquartile range (IQR) [37;72]). Eight patients (15%) died, 13 (27%) were admitted to ICU. Most patients (n = 34; 65%) had multisystem involvement: most frequent was liver (n = 46; 88%), then renal failure (n = 24; 46%). Forty patients (77%) had at least one blood viral reactivation among HHV-6, EBV or CMV, of which 21 (53%) had at least two. Median time of blood HHV-6 reactivation was 24 days (IQR [20;35]). HHV-6 reactivation was demonstrated in 15 out of 20 skin biopsies, with a median time of 11 days [9;17].

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the high rate of HHV-6 reactivation in severe DRESS and demonstrated cutaneous HHV-6 reactivation using small non-coding transcripts (HHV-6 miR-aU14), which preceded viral PCR positivity in blood. These results suggest that HHV-6 reactivation during DRESS may start in skin. Furthermore, search for miR-aU14 in skin biopsy could become a useful diagnostic tool for early detection of HHV-6 reactivation.

Overview and Current Advances in Dapsone Hypersensitivity Syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As a sulfone antibacterial agent, dapsone has been widely used to treat leprosy. Moreover, dapsone is also used in many immune diseases such as herpetic dermatitis because of its anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects. However, dapsone can cause several adverse effects, the most serious being dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome. Dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome is characterized by a triad of eruptions, fever, and organ involvement, which limits the application of dapsone to some extent.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this article, we review current research about the interaction model between HLA-B*13:01, dapsone, and specific TCR in dapsone-induced drug hypersensitivity. In addition to the proposed mechanisms, we also discussed clinical features, treatment progress, prevalence, and prevention of dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome. These studies reveal the pathogenesis, clinical features, and prevalence from the perspectives of genetic susceptibility and innate and adaptive immunity in dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome, thereby guiding clinicians on how to diagnose, prevent, and treat dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome.

Unraveling the complexities of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): Insights into clinical, laboratory, and histopathologic features of a case series from an Italian tertiary center

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a severe and potentially life-threatening drug hypersensitivity reaction. The diagnosis and management of DRESS are complicated due to its heterogeneous clinical and pathologic presentations, delayed onset of signs and symptoms, and unpredictable outcome. This retrospective study aimed to analyze cases of DRESS from a single Italian referring tertiary hospital center (Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy) with a focus on clinical features, causative drugs, histopathologic findings, and treatment. We have included 18 of 32 patients with a probable or definite diagnosis of DRESS. The study observed a slight predominance of women, with antimicrobials and allopurinol identified as the main causative drugs. Clinical manifestations varied, with a monomorphic maculopapular eruption being the most common, whereas facial edema and mucosal involvement were less frequently observed. Multiple organs were commonly affected, with liver and kidney involvement being prominent. Cardiac involvement was associated with the severity of eosinophilia. Laboratory evaluations showed elevated eosinophil levels and increased eosinophil cationic protein levels, supporting the role of eosinophils in DRESS pathogenesis. Histopathologic analysis revealed various patterns often coexisting in the same biopsy in 83% of cases, with interface dermatitis being the most frequent, followed by the perivascular pattern and the spongiotic/eczematous pattern. We observed eosinophils in the biopsy samples in about 50% of patients, and the relationship between peripheral eosinophilia and eosinophils in skin biopsies was not significant. In addition to the RegiSCAR score, age may play a role in predicting disease severity, as older patients with lower scores had poorer outcomes. The prognosis of DRESS depended on early identification, discontinuation of the causative agent, and appropriate therapy. Systemic corticosteroids were the primary treatment option.

Management and treatment outcome of DRESS patients in Europe: An international multicentre retrospective study of 141 cases

BACKGROUND

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare but potentially fatal drug hypersensitivity reaction.

OBJECTIVE

To explore treatment approaches across Europe and their impact on the disease course, as well as prognostic factors and culprit drugs.

METHODS

In this retrospective European multicentric study, we included patients with probable or certain DRESS (RegiSCAR score ≥ 4) between January 2016 and December 2020. Independent associations between clinical parameters and the risk of intensive care unit admission and mortality at three months were assessed using a multivariable-adjusted logistic regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 141 patients from 8 tertiary centres were included. Morbilliform exanthem was the most frequent cutaneous manifestation (78.0%). The mean affected body surface area (BSA) was 67%, 42% of the patients presented with erythroderma, and 24.8% had mucosal involvement. Based on systemic involvement, 31.9% of the patients had a severe DRESS. Anticonvulsants (24.1%) and sulphonamides (22.0%) were the most frequent causative agents. In all, 73% of the patients were treated with systemic glucocorticoids, and 25.5% received topical corticosteroids as monotherapy. Few patients received antiviral drugs or anti-IL5. No patients received intravenous immunoglobulins. The overall mortality was 7.1%. Independent predictors of mortality were older age (≥57.0 years; fully adjusted OR, 9.80; 95% CI, 1.20-79.93; p = 0.033), kidney involvement (fully adjusted OR, 4.70; 95% CI, 1.00-24.12; p = 0.049), and admission in intensive care unit (fully adjusted OR, 8.12; 95% CI, 1.90-34.67; p = 0.005). Relapse of DRESS and delayed autoimmune sequelae occurred in 8.5% and 12.1% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study underlines the need for diagnostic and prognostic scores/markers as well as for prospective clinical trials of drugs with the potential to reduce mortality and complications of DRESS.

Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): Focus on the Pathophysiological and Diagnostic Role of Viruses

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a heterogeneous, multiorgan and potentially life-threatening drug-hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) that occurs several days or weeks after drug initiation or discontinuation. DHRs constitute an emerging issue for public health, due to population aging, growing multi-organ morbidity, and subsequent enhanced drug prescriptions. DRESS has more consistently been associated with anticonvulsants, allopurinol and antibiotics, such as sulphonamides and vancomycin, although new drugs are increasingly reported as culprit agents. Reactivation of latent infectious agents such as viruses (especially Herpesviridae) plays a key role in prompting and sustaining aberrant T-cell and eosinophil responses to drugs and pathogens, ultimately causing organ damage. However, the boundaries of the impact of viral agents in the pathophysiology of DRESS are still ill-defined. Along with growing awareness of the multifaceted aspects of immune perturbation caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during the ongoing SARS-CoV-2-related disease (COVID-19) pandemic, novel interest has been sparked towards DRESS and the potential interactions among antiviral and anti-drug inflammatory responses. In this review, we summarised the most recent evidence on pathophysiological mechanisms, diagnostic approaches, and clinical management of DRESS with the aim of increasing awareness on this syndrome and possibly suggesting clues for future research in this field.

Incidence of Allergic Drug Eruption due to Cotrimoxazole in HIV-Positive Individuals with CD4 ≤200 Cells/ul

Allergic drug eruptions (ADE) remain a challenge in people living with HIV (PLWH), requiring more studies to guide clinical approaches. While cotrimoxazole is widely used as prophylaxis in PLWH, relationship between client characteristics toward the occurrence of cotrimoxazole ADEs is still poorly understood.A retrospective cohort study followed PLWH initiated with antiretroviral therapy (ART) in St. Carolus Hospital between January 2009 to December 2021. ADE occurrence due to cotrimoxazole were tested for significance using Pearson's Chi-square and Fisher's Exact Test (significant outcome measured as p < 0.05) against CD4 levels at very low (0-100 cells/ul) and low (101-200 cells/ul) groups, comorbidities, and retention status.Cotrimoxazole-related ADEs occurred in 258 (14%) of 1789 subjects with CD4 levels ≤200 cells/ul. Comorbidities of Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, and M. tuberculosis infections were found in 11, 4, and 95 subjects respectively. 151 (59%) of ADE group had very low CD4 levels (p value > 0.05). No significant difference was found in ADE incidence between age groups, genders, CD4 levels, comorbidities, and ART retention.Cotrimoxazole-induced ADE is unrelated to CD4 levels, and ART retention was not affected. ADE severity ranges from mild to serious manifestations, and close monitoring is crucial to ensure ADEs are treated ART are well-maintained.

Versatile TLC-Densitometric Methods for the Synchronous Estimation of Cinnarizine and Acefylline Heptaminol in The Presence of Potential Impurity and Their Reported Degradation Products

From evolution, thin-layer chromatography (TLC) attracts attention as a versatile technique for efficient separation and identification of many drug substances and chemicals. Owing to its simplicity and other outstanding advantages, TLC is extensively used by chromatographers in quantification and purity profiling objectives. In the present study two TLC-Densitometric methods are established and validated for the synchronous estimation of Cinnarizine (Cinn) and Acefyline Heptaminol (Acef) in the presence of Cinn/Acef reported degradation products and Thoephylline (Theo) as Acef potential impurity. The proposed methods are based on densitometric measurements of the spots of Cinn and Acef after separation from their degradation products. Separation is attained on silica gel sheet with dichloromethane: methanol: formic acid as a developing system in ratio: (15, 1, 0.5, by volume) and (15, 0.75, 0.4, by volume) for Cinn (method 1) and Acef (method 2) degradation, consecutively. Quantification is done at 254 nm over concentration ranges of 0.2-1.8 and 2-18 μg/spot for Cinn and Acef; respectively, with mean percentage recoveries of 99.18 ± 0.60/99.84 ± 0.53 and 99.19 ± 0.93/99.66 ± 0.58 for method 1 and method 2; consecutively. The two methods are fully validated and proven to be selective, robust and retained their accuracy in up to 50% of Cinn/Acef reported degradation products and Theo. Moreover, the two methods are applied to a coformulated drug product comprising Cinn and Acef showing satisfactory results. Comparison of the obtained results by the proposed methods with that of the reference ones statistically shows no significant differences.

Drug-Induced Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: Insights Into Clinical Presentation, Immunopathogenesis, Diagnostic Methods, Treatment, and Pharmacogenomics

SCARs are rare and life-threatening hypersensitivity reactions. In general, the increased duration of hospital stays and the associated cost burden are common issues, and in the worst-case scenario, they can result in mortality. SCARs are delayed T cell-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. Recovery can take from 2 weeks to many months after dechallenging the culprit drugs. Genetic polymorphism of the HLA genes may change the selection and presentation of antigens, allowing toxic drug metabolites to initiate immunological reactions. However, each SCARs has a different onset latency period, clinical features, or morphological pattern. This explains that, other than HLA mutations, other immuno-pathogenesis may be involved in drug-induced severe cutaneous reactions. This review will discuss the clinical morphology of various SCARs, various immune pathogenesis models, diagnostic criteria, treatments, the association of various drug-induced reactions and susceptible alleles in different populations, and the successful implementation of pharmacogenomics in Thailand for the prevention of SCARs.

Drug-Induced Hypersensitivity Syndrome (DIHS)/Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): Clinical Features and Pathogenesis

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DIHS/DRESS) is one example of a severe delayed T-cell-mediated adverse drug reaction. DIHS/DRESS presents with fever, widespread rash and facial edema, organ involvement, and hematological abnormalities, including eosinophilia and atypical lymphocytosis. DIHS/DRESS is associated with relapse 2 to 4 weeks after acute symptoms, often coinciding with reactivation of prevalent chronic persistent human herpesviruses such as human herpesvirus 6, EBV, and cytomegalovirus. The mortality of DIHS/DRESS is up to 10% and often related to unrecognized myocarditis and cytomegalovirus complications, with longer-term consequences that contribute to morbidity including autoimmune diseases such as thyroiditis. It is essential that all potential drug causes, including all new drugs introduced within the 8 weeks preceding onset of DIHS/DRESS symptoms, are identified. All potential drug culprits, as well as drugs that are closely related structurally to the culprit drug, should be avoided in the future. Systemic corticosteroids have remained the mainstay for the treatment of DIHS/DRESS with internal organ involvement. Steroid-sparing agents, such as cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, and monthly intravenous immune globulin, have been successfully used for treatment, and careful follow-up for cytomegalovirus reactivation is recommended. Strong associations between HLA class I alleles and DIHS/DRESS predisposition include HLA-B∗13:01 and dapsone, HLA-B∗58:01 and allopurinol, and HLA-B∗32:01 and vancomycin. These have opened a pathway for prevention, risk stratification, and earlier diagnosis. Single-cell sequencing and other studies of immunopathogenesis promise to identify targeted treatment approaches.

Drug reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Tertiary Care Center Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare, drug-induced severe adverse reaction that usually occurs 3-6 weeks after initial exposure to certain drugs. It affects mainly adults and children to a lesser extent. Clinical features include fever, facial edema, generalized skin rash, lymphadenopathy, hematologic abnormalities, and internal organ involvement.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the clinical and laboratory features of patients with DRESS in our center.

METHODS

We retrospectively describe and analyze 19 cases of DRESS whose diagnosis was based on the RegiSCAR criteria (≥ 6 points) that occurred from January 2009 to December 2019.

RESULTS

Patients ages ranged from 4-76 years(4 children/15 adults); 10 were female (52.3%). The most common culprit drugs were antibiotics (74%) and anticonvulsants (21%). The most common comorbidities were epilepsy (26%) and hypertension (26%). All patients developed cutaneous manifestations and of those, 58% presented facial edema. LFTs, urea/creatinine and troponin elevation were present in 74%, 32% and 42%, respectively. The median time to develop the skin rash after the drug exposure was 3.7 weeks (IQR2.4-4.2 weeks). Eosinophilia (≥ 0.7 x 10^9/L) was present in 95% of the patients and peaked around 10 days after the skin manifestations. Leukocytosis and reactive lymphocytes were reported in 84% and 26% of all patients respectively. Treatment with systemic steroids was reported in 16 patients. The mean recovery time was 2 weeks (IQR 2-3.5 weeks) and mortality was 5%.

CONCLUSIONS

DRESS is a serious condition with significant morbidity and mortality, which requires more research for a better understanding.

Patch testing in Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): a literature review

The literature on positive patch test results in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is reviewed. 105 drugs were identified that have together caused 536 positive patch tests in 437 patients suffering from DRESS. By far most reactions (n=145) were caused by carbamazepine, followed by amoxicillin, isoniazid, phenytoin, ethambutol, fluindione, phenobarbital, rifampicin, and ceftriaxone; 43 drugs each caused a single case only. The drug classes causing the highest number of reactions are anticonvulsants (39%), beta-lactam antibiotics (20%), antituberculosis agents (11%), non-beta-lactam antibiotics (6%) and iodinated contrast media (5%). The sensitivity of patch testing (percentage of positive reactions) is high for anticonvulsants (notably carbamazepine), beta-lactam antibiotics (notably amoxicillin) and possibly iodinated contrast media. Allopurinol and sulfasalazine frequently cause DRESS, but never give positive patch tests. Patch testing in DRESS appears to be safe, although mild recurrence of DRESS symptoms, mostly skin reactions, may not be rare. Multiple drug hypersensitivity was found to occur in 16% of all patients, but it is argued that the true frequency is (far) higher. Clinical aspects of DRESS, including diagnosing the disease and identifying culprit drugs (patch tests, intradermal tests, in vitro tests, challenge tests) are also provided, emphasizing the role of patch testing. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Diagnosis of Hypersensitivity Induced by Antituberculosis Drugs

Objective

To explore the clinical value of the specific plasma cell detection and specific T lymphocyte detection test in diagnosing hypersensitivity caused by antituberculosis drugs.

Methods

A total of 266 patients with pulmonary tuberculosis who developed hypersensitivity during the treatment of primary pulmonary tuberculosis in our hospital and 266 patients without hypersensitivity during the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis in our hospital were selected as the control group. The admission time is from January 2013 to June 2020. The specific plasma cell test and specific T lymphocyte test were used as the criteria to determine which drugs induced hypersensitivity, and the diagnostic value of these two methods in the diagnosis of hypersensitivity induced by four first-line antituberculosis drugs (isoniazid (INH), ethambutol (EMB), rifampicin (RFP), and pyrazinamide (PZA)) was analyzed.

Results

The sensitivity of the specific plasma cell test in the diagnosis of hypersensitivity induced by INH, EMB, RFP, and PZA was 63.42%, 51.20%, 47.81%, and 56.37%, respectively, and the specificity was 95.33%, 99.87%, 96.52%, and 99.99%, respectively. The sensitivity of the specific T lymphocyte test in the diagnosis of hypersensitivity induced by INH, EMB, RFP, and PZA was 66.47%, 52.88%, 49.91%, and 58.54%, respectively, and the specificity was 97.28%, 99.99%, 98.38%, and 100.00%, respectively.

Conclusion

The specific plasma cell test and specific T lymphocyte test have high specificity in the diagnosis of hypersensitivity caused by antituberculosis drugs, and the specific T lymphocyte test is better than the specific plasma cell test. It is of great significance to guide the clinical application of antituberculosis drugs.

Is steroid pulse therapy a suitable treatment for drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms? A systematic review of case reports in patients treated with corticosteroids in Japan

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms is a life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reaction, characterized by multiple organ involvement and reactivation of herpes viruses. Although the mainstay of treatment is a high dosage of corticosteroids delivered by pulse therapy or conventional oral administration, it remains debatable which mode is better. To clarify this issue, we reviewed publications in Japan of 299 cases of drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms treated with corticosteroids, to evaluate safety concerns with regards to these two modes of treatment. As a result, we found that patients treated with pulse therapy more frequently suffered cytomegalovirus reactivation, persistency, and high mortality but less frequently experienced herpesvirus 6 reactivation or type 1 diabetes compared with those undergoing conventional treatment, suggesting that the administration mode may differentially modulate inflammatory responses toward distinct consequences. This is the first statistical analysis revealing that steroid pulse therapy frequently resulted in severe sequelae with high mortality. In terms of the risk of serious consequences, we consider that steroid pulse therapy should be eschewed for the treatment of drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms.

What does elevated TARC/CCL17 expression tell us about eosinophilic disorders?

Eosinophilic disorders encompass a large spectrum of heterogeneous diseases sharing the presence of elevated numbers of eosinophils in blood and/or tissues. Among these disorders, the role of eosinophils can vary widely, ranging from a modest participation in the disease process to the predominant perpetrator of tissue damage. In many cases, eosinophilic expansion is polyclonal, driven by enhanced production of interleukin-5, mainly by type 2 helper cells (Th2 cells) with a possible contribution of type 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s). Among the key steps implicated in the establishment of type 2 immune responses, leukocyte recruitment toward inflamed tissues is particularly relevant. Herein, the contribution of the chemo-attractant molecule thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC/CCL17) to type 2 immunity will be reviewed. The clinical relevance of this chemokine and its target, C-C chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4), will be illustrated in the setting of various eosinophilic disorders. Special emphasis will be put on the potential diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications related to activation of the TARC/CCL17-CCR4 axis.

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.

Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms: A Complex Interplay between Drug, T Cells, and Herpesviridae

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, also known as drug induced hypersensitivity (DiHS) syndrome is a severe delayed hypersensitivity reaction with potentially fatal consequences. Whilst recognised as T cell-mediated, our understanding of the immunopathogenesis of this syndrome remains incomplete. Here, we discuss models of DRESS, including the role of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) and how observations derived from new molecular techniques adopted in key studies have informed our mechanism-based understanding of the central role of Herpesviridae reactivation and heterologous immunity in these disorders.

Chemokines during anaphylaxis: the importance of CCL2 and CCL2-dependent chemotactic activity for basophils

Background

The role of chemokines in anaphylaxis is unclear.

Methods

We prospectively recruited 49 patients presenting to the emergency department with an acute episode of anaphylaxis and 28 healthy subjects. We measured serum levels of the chemokines CCL2, CCL5, CCL7, CCL8, CCL11, CCL13, CCL17, CCL21, CCL22, CCL24, and CCL26, tryptase, the absolute number of circulating basophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, and PMNs, and whole blood FCER1A, CPA3 and HDC gene expression at two time points: during the anaphylactic episode and in convalescent samples collected approximately 3 months later. We then investigated the in vitro chemotactic activity of chemokines induced during anaphylaxis for the in vitro migration of the corresponding cells.

Results

Only CCL2 chemokine levels were significantly increased in anaphylaxis samples (median 514 pg/ml) compared to convalescent samples (284 pg/ml, P < 0.0001) and healthy subjects (279 pg/ml, P < 0.0001); there was no significant difference in any of the other chemokines. There was a significant positive correlation between the rates of increase of serum CCL2 (median [range]: 106.0% [− 44.7% to 557.4%]) and tryptase (133.8% [− 6.6% to 893.4%]; r = 0.68, P < 0.0001) and between the acute concentration of serum CCL2 and the acute concentration of serum tryptase (r = 0.77, P < 0.0001). The number of circulating basophils, but not other blood cells, significantly decreased during anaphylaxis (median 5.0 vs. 19.1 cells/µl in convalescent samples; P < 0.0001); a decrease in whole-blood gene expression of basophil markers (P ≤ 0.0018) confirmed these changes. Anaphylactic serum enhances the in vitro migration of basophils via CCL2-dependent chemotactic activity; in contrast, no CCL2-dependent chemotactic activity was observed for convalescent samples.

Conclusions

Our findings imply an important and specific role for CCL2-mediated chemotactic activity in the pathophysiology of human anaphylaxis.

Dermatological Manifestations in the Intensive Care Unit: A Practical Approach

Dermatological problems are not usually related to intensive medicine because they are considered to have a low impact on the evolution of critical patients. Despite this, dermatological manifestations (DMs) are relatively frequent in critically ill patients. In rare cases, DMs will be the main diagnosis and will require intensive treatment due to acute skin failure. In contrast, DMs can be a reflection of underlying systemic diseases, and their identification may be key to their diagnosis. On other occasions, DMs are lesions that appear in the evolution of critical patients and are due to factors derived from the stay or intensive treatment. Lastly, DMs can accompany patients and must be taken into account in the comprehensive pathology management. Several factors must be considered when addressing DMs: on the one hand, the moment of appearance, morphology, location, and associated treatment and, on the other hand, aetiopathogenesis and classification of the cutaneous lesion. DMs can be classified into 4 groups: life-threatening DMs (uncommon but compromise the patient's life); DMs associated with systemic diseases where skin lesions accompany the pathology that requires admission to the intensive care unit (ICU); DMs secondary to the management of the critical patient that considers the cutaneous manifestations that appear in the evolution mainly of infectious or allergic origin; and DMs previously present in the patient and unrelated to the critical process. This review provides a characterization of DMs in ICU patients to establish a better identification and classification and to understand their interrelation with critical illnesses.

Clozapine-associated severe eosinophilia following lithium rebound neutropenia: A case report

Background

Clozapine use is complicated by an increased risk of hematological adverse effects such as neutropenia and, rarely, eosinophilia.

Case presentation

We present the case of a 48‐year‐old man with treatment‐resistant schizophrenia. On day 12 after clozapine initiation, he had a cough with a temperature of 39.8°C. On day 16, his leukocyte count had increased to 9320 cells/mm³ (neutrophils 7550 cells/mm³ and eosinophils 680 cells/mm³). We discontinued lithium because of neutrophilia and damage to renal function on day 20. His eosinophil count increased until day 29, reaching 6750 cells/mm³. We suspected a drug‐induced reaction and discontinued clozapine on day 30. His eosinophil count gradually decreased, reaching the normal range by day 40. However, his leukocyte and neutrophil counts also gradually decreased to below than the normal range by day 40. His leukocytes and neutrophil counts had recovered by day 55.

Conclusion

We concluded that this patient had clozapine‐associated severe eosinophilia following lithium rebound neutropenia.

The eosinophil count increased reaching 6750 cells/mm³ with bronchitis and hepatitis during clozapine treatment. The leukocyte and neutrophil counts gradually decreased to below than the normal range by day 40 after discontinuation of lithium.

Overlap between hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis and drug reaction and eosinophilia with systemic symptoms: a review

Drug reaction and eosinophilia with systemic symptoms (DRESS), also known as drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), shares features with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH), most notably fever, rash, and internal organ involvement. However, there is increasing recognition of drug-induced (secondary) HLH and biopsy-proven hemophagocytosis in DRESS, suggesting that HLH and DRESS not only overlap but also may be diseases on the same spectrum of immune dysfunction. To characterize existing literature on HLH/DRESS overlap, we queried the PubMed/MEDLINE database for 23 cases of HLH-DRESS codiagnosis. Average time-to-onset of rash after exposure to inciting drug was 2.7 weeks. Fourteen cases (61%) clinically worsened despite initial therapy, prompting a workup with diagnosis of HLH on average 2.3 weeks after diagnosing DRESS. Nine cases met HLH diagnostic criteria and had a RegiSCAR score ≥4. Nine cases met one set of criteria with a presentation suggestive of the other. Five cases met neither criteria. A patient presenting with fever, generalized rash, bicytopenia, and internal organ involvement after drug exposure was most predictive of meeting diagnostic criteria for both HLH and DRESS. Treatment was highly variable, although most initiated systemic corticosteroids with/without IVIG, plasmapheresis, or etoposide. Patients with poor outcomes in this review were treated using steroid monotherapy and had viral reactivation. Dermatologists should consider the possibility of HLH in any patient presenting with fever, rash, internal organ involvement, and cytopenia. Additional studies will be necessary to further characterize HLH and DRESS overlap and determine optimal management.

Fulminant type 1 diabetes: A comprehensive review of an autoimmune condition

Fulminant type 1 diabetes (FT1D) is a subset of type 1 diabetes characterized by extremely rapid pancreatic β-cell destruction with aggressive progression of hyperglycaemia and ketoacidosis. It was initially classified as idiopathic type 1 diabetes due to the absence of autoimmune markers. However, subsequent studies provide evidences supporting the involvement of autoimmunity in rapid β-cell loss in FT1D pathogenesis, which are crucial for FT1D being an autoimmune disease. This article highlights the role of immunological aspects in FT1D according to the autoimmune-associated genetic background, viral infection, innate immunity, adaptive immunity, and pancreas histology.

Eosinophilic Dermatoses: Recognition and Management

Eosinophilic dermatoses encompass a broad spectrum of diseases of different etiologies hallmarked by eosinophilic infiltration of the skin and/or mucous membranes, with or without associated blood eosinophilia. The wide range of dermatological manifestations of this spectrum, including nodules and plaques, pustules, blisters, ulcers, and urticarial lesions, is reflected in a non-univocal classification system. We identified six groups of eosinophilic dermatoses based on the predominant anatomic level of involvement: (1) epidermal; (2) of the dermal-epidermal junction; (3) dermal; (4) of the hypodermis and muscle fascia; (5) of the pilosebaceous unit; and (6) vascular/perivascular. We review clinicopathologic features and management of diseases belonging to each group, particularly: (1) pemphigus herpetiformis and atopic dermatitis as prototypes of the epidermal group; (2) bullous pemphigoid as prototypic eosinophilic dermatosis of the dermal-epidermal junction; (3) eosinophilic cellulitis (Wells syndrome), hypereosinophilic syndromes, Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, eosinophilic dermatosis of hematologic malignancy and chronic spontaneous urticaria as paradigmatic dermal eosinophilic dermatoses; (4) eosinophilic fasciitis as an eosinophilic dermatosis with predominant involvement of the hypodermis and muscle fascia; (5) eosinophilic pustular folliculitis as a model of the pilosebaceous unit involvement; and (6) granuloma faciale, angiolymphoid hyperplasia with eosinophilia, and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, belonging to the vascular/perivascular group.

Understanding Idiosyncratic Toxicity: Lessons Learned from Drug-Induced Liver Injury

Idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions (IADRs) encompass a diverse group of toxicities that can vary by drug and patient. The complex and unpredictable nature of IADRs combined with the fact that they are rare makes them particularly difficult to predict, diagnose, and treat. Common clinical characteristics, the identification of human leukocyte antigen risk alleles, and drug-induced proliferation of lymphocytes isolated from patients support a role for the adaptive immune system in the pathogenesis of IADRs. Significant evidence also suggests a requirement for direct, drug-induced stress, neoantigen formation, and stimulation of an innate response, which can be influenced by properties intrinsic to both the drug and the patient. This Perspective will provide an overview of the clinical profile, mechanisms, and risk factors underlying IADRs as well as new approaches to study these reactions, focusing on idiosyncratic drug-induced liver injury.

A 21-Year-Old Woman with Joint Pain and Skin Ulceration

The illness started with pain and stiffness in her bilateral hands and wrists four months prior, with progression to bilateral elbows, knees, and ankles. The pain and stiffness were worse in the morning and limited her ability to use her hands or walk comfortably. She also noted swelling of her hands, knees, and ankles. The pain and swelling improved slightly with ibuprofen. She also noted increased fatigue, alopecia, decreased appetite, and nausea. She went to urgent care one month earlier and a physician prescribed ibuprofen and obtained initial serologies.

Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DReSS): How Far Have We Come?

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DReSS), also known as drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DiHS), is an uncommon severe adverse reaction to medications. It is important to recognize it as it is potentially fatal and can cause significant morbidity. From the first reports of drug reactions related to certain anticonvulsants characterized by fever, liver enzyme elevation, and skin changes, our continuously growing understanding of this entity has allowed us to describe its physiopathology and clinical features even further. The relationship of genetic factors, viral activation, and specific drug exposure is now known to play a role in this disease. There is still not a widely accepted marker for DReSS/DiHS, but the spectrum of clinical and laboratory features has now been better outlined. The mainstay of treatment is the use of systemic corticosteroids, but other options such as intravenous immunoglobulin, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, rituximab, and cyclophosphamide have been described. We present a comprehensive review of the literature on DReSS/DiHS, focusing on its history, etiopathogenesis, diagnosis, therapeutic approach, and outcome.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms due to lamotrigine differs from that due to other drugs

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), also referred to as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), is a multi-organ systemic drug reaction characterized by hematological abnormalities and reactivation of human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6). DIHS/DRESS is typically associated with a limited number of drugs, such as the anticonvulsants. Our group has treated 12 patients for DIHS/DRESS due to lamotrigine (LTG), but their presentation differed from that of patients with DIHS/DRESS caused by other drugs. The aim of the present study was to identify significant differences between DIHS/DRESS caused by LTG versus other drugs. We retrospectively reviewed data of 12 patients with DIHS/DRESS caused by LTG and 32 patients with DIHS/DRESS due to other drugs. The increase in alanine aminotransferase level was significantly milder in the LTG group than the DIHS/DRESS group due to other drugs. The percentage of atypical lymphocytes in the blood during DIHS/DRESS was lower in the LTG group. Serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase and thymus and activation-regulated chemokine were also lower in the LTG group. There were fewer DIHS/DRESS patients with HHV-6 reactivation in the LTG group than in the group treated with other drugs. Lymphocyte transformation after DIHS/DRESS onset was faster in the LTG group. The two groups did not differ with respect to the interval from first drug intake to rash, white blood cell count, blood eosinophilia or DRESS score. There were no significant histopathological differences between the two groups. The features of LTG-associated DIHS/DRESS and DIHS/DRESS due to other drugs differ.

Eosinophilia and Kidney Disease: More than Just an Incidental Finding?

Peripheral blood eosinophilia (PBE), defined as 500 eosinophils or above per microliter (µL) blood, is a condition that is not uncommon but often neglected in the management of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), acute kidney injury (AKI), or patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT). The nature of PBE in the context of kidney diseases is predominantly secondary or reactive and has to be distinguished from primary eosinophilic disorders. Nonetheless, the finding of persistent PBE can be a useful clue for the differential diagnosis of underdiagnosed entities and overlapping syndromes, such as eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA), IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD), acute interstitial nephritis (AIN), or the hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). For patients on RRT, PBE may be an indicator for bio-incompatibility of the dialysis material, acute allograft rejection, or Strongyloides hyperinfection. In a subset of patients with EGPA, eosinophils might even be the driving force in disease pathogenesis. This improved understanding is already being used to facilitate novel therapeutic options. Mepolizumab has been licensed for the management of EGPA and is applied with the aim to abrogate the underlying immunologic process by blocking interleukin-5. The current article provides an overview of different renal pathologies that are associated with PBE. Further scientific effort is required to understand the exact role and function of eosinophils in these disorders which may pave the way to improved interdisciplinary management of such patients.