Hypersensitivity reactions to proton pump inhibitors. An EAACI position paper.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are invaluable therapeutic options in a variety of dyspeptic diseases. In addition to their well-known risk profile, PPI consumption is related to food and environmental allergies, dysbiosis, osteoporosis, as well as immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). The latter, although a rare event, around 1%-3%, due to the extraordinarily high rate of prescription and consumption of PPIs are related to a substantial risk. In this Position Paper, we provide clinicians with practical evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of HSRs to PPIs. Furthermore, the unmet needs proposed in the document aim to stimulate more in-depth investigations in the topic.

EAACI/ENDA position paper on drug provocation testing.

In drug hypersensitivity, drug provocation testing (DPT), also called drug challenge, is the gold standard for investigation. In recent years, risk stratification has become an important tool for adjusting the diagnostic strategy to the perceived risk, whilst still maintaining a high level of safety for the patient. Skin tests are recommended before DPT but may be omitted in low-risk patients. The task force suggests a strict definition of such low-risk patients in children and adults. Based on experience and evidence from studies of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics, an algorithm on how to adjust DPT to the risk, and when to omit skin tests before DPT, is presented. For other antibiotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other drugs, skin tests are poorly validated and DPT is frequently necessary. We recommend performing DPT with chemotherapeutics and biologicals to avoid unnecessary desensitization procedures and DPT with skin tests negative contrast media. We suggest DPT with anesthetics only in highly specialized centers. Specifics of DPT to proton pump inhibitors, anticonvulsants and corticosteroids are discussed. This position paper provides general recommendations and guidance on optimizing use of DPT, whilst balancing benefits with patient safety and optimizing the use of the limited available resources.

Comparison of patients with isolated cutaneous lupus erythematosus versus systemic lupus erythematosus with cutaneous lupus erythematosus as the sole clinical feature: A monocentric study of 149 patients.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) may present as an isolated entity or be classified as Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by the presence of laboratory abnormalities, including cytopenia, low complement levels, and/or autoantibodies (CLE with laboratory SLE). OBJECTIVE: To compare isolated CLE and CLE with laboratory SLE and to validate an existing 3-item score with age < 25 years (1 point), phototypes V to VI (1 point), antinuclear antibodies ≥ 1:320 (5 points) to predict the risk of progression from CLE to severe SLE (sSLE). METHODS: Monocentric cohort study including consecutive patients with CLE. CLE with laboratory SLE was defined by 2019 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for SLE score of ≥10 points at baseline with CLE as the sole clinical feature. RESULTS: Of the 149 patients with CLE, 20 had CLE with laboratory SLE. The median follow-up duration was 11.3 years (IQR: 5.1-20.5). Ten patients (7%) had sSLE developed. In survival analysis, the risk of progression to sSLE was higher among CLE with laboratory SLE (hazard ratio = 6.69; 95% CI: 1.93-23.14, P < .001) compared to isolated CLE. In both groups, none of the patients with a risk score ≤ 2 had sSLE developed. LIMITATIONS: Monocentric study with a limited number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: CLE with laboratory patients with SLE have a higher risk of progression to sSLE than isolated CLE.

Cutaneous vasculitis occurring in the setting of systemic lupus erythematosus: a multicentre cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical and pathological features of biopsy-proven cutaneous vasculitis (CV) associated with SLE, focusing on diagnosis classification and impact on overall SLE activity. METHODS: Retrospective multicentric cohort study including SLE patients with biopsy-proven CV identified by (i) data from pathology departments of three university hospitals and (ii) a national call for cases. SLE was defined according to 1997 revised ACR and/or 2019 ACR/EULAR criteria. CV diagnosis was confirmed histologically and classified by using the dermatological addendum of the Chapel Hill classification. SLE activity and flare severity at the time of CV diagnosis were assessed independently of vasculitis items with the SELENA-SLEDAI and SELENA-SLEDAI Flare Index. RESULTS: Overall, 39 patients were included; 35 (90%) were female. Cutaneous manifestations included mostly palpable purpura (n = 21; 54%) and urticarial lesions (n = 18; 46%); lower limbs were the most common location (n = 33; 85%). Eleven (28%) patients exhibited extracutaneous vasculitis. A higher prevalence of Sjögren's syndrome (51%) was found compared with SLE patients without CV from the French referral centre group (12%, P < 0.0001) and the Swiss SLE Cohort (11%, P < 0.0001). CV was mostly classified as urticarial vasculitis (n = 14, 36%) and cryoglobulinaemia (n = 13, 33%). Only 2 (5%) patients had no other cause than SLE to explain the CV. Sixty-one percent of patients had inactive SLE. CONCLUSION: SLE-related vasculitis seems very rare and other causes of vasculitis should be ruled out before considering this diagnosis. Moreover, in more than half of patients, CV was not associated with another sign of active SLE.

Allergic contact dermatitis from essential oil in consumer products: Mode of uses and value of patch tests with an essential oil series. Results of a French study of the DAG (Dermato-Allergology group of the French Society of Dermatology).

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the clinical characteristics and sensitivity of an essential oil patch test series (EOS) in patients sensitized to their own essential oils (EOs). METHOD: We analysed the clinical data and patch test results obtained with the European baseline series (BSE) and an EOS, as well as the mode of use of EOs, through a questionnaire included in the patient file. RESULTS: The study included 42 patients (79% women, average age 50 years) with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), 8 patients required hospitalization. All patients were sensitized to the EO they used, primarily lavender (Lavandula augustifolia, 8000-28-0), tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia leaf oil, 68647-73-4), ravintsara (Cinnamomum camphora oil, 92201-50-8), and 2 cases were attributed to helichrysum (helichrysum italicum flower absolute, 90045-56-0). 71% had positive patch tests to fragrance mix I or II, 9 only to the EOS and 4 only with their personal EO. Interestingly, 40% of patients did not spontaneously mention the use of EOs, and only 33% received advice on their use at the time of purchase. CONCLUSION: Patch tests with the BSE, limonene and linalool HP, and oxidized tea tree oil is sufficient to detect most EO-sensitized patients. The most important is to test the patient's own used EOs.

Hand eczema in glove-wearing patients.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis to gloves is mostly induced by rubber accelerators. The European baseline series (EBS) appears insufficient to detect glove allergy. Since 2017, it is recommended to use the European rubber series (ERS) and to test the patients' own gloves. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical profile of glove-wearing patients with hand eczema (HE) and to evaluate their sensitisation profile to glove allergens and the value of testing the patients' own gloves. METHODS: We conducted a French multicentre study of patients evaluated for HE between 2018 and 2020 and tested with the EBS, the ERS and their own gloves in patch tests and semi-open (SO) tests. RESULTS: A total of 279 patients were included; 32.6% of patients had positive tests to their own gloves or to glove allergens. Almost 45% of the sensitisations to glove allergens were detected only by the ERS. Among the patients tested both in patch tests and SO tests with their own gloves with positive results, 28% had positive SO tests only. Polyvinylchloride (PVC) gloves were positive in four patients. CONCLUSION: Our series confirms the need to test the ERS. All the patients' gloves must also be tested including PVC gloves. SO tests with gloves are useful as a complement to patch tests.

Allergies and COVID-19 vaccines: An ENDA/EAACI Position paper.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis, which is rare, has been reported after COVID-19 vaccination, but its management is not standardized. METHOD: Members of the European Network for Drug Allergy and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology interested in drug allergy participated in an online questionnaire on pre-vaccination screening and management of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines, and literature was analysed. RESULTS: No death due to anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines has been confirmed in scientific literature. Potential allergens, polyethylene glycol (PEG), polysorbate and tromethamine are excipients. The authors propose allergy evaluation of persons with the following histories: 1-anaphylaxis to injectable drug or vaccine containing PEG or derivatives; 2-anaphylaxis to oral/topical PEG containing products; 3-recurrent anaphylaxis of unknown cause; 4-suspected or confirmed allergy to any mRNA vaccine; and 5-confirmed allergy to PEG or derivatives. We recommend a prick-to-prick skin test with the left-over solution in the suspected vaccine vial to avoid waste. Prick test panel should include PEG 4000 or 3500, PEG 2000 and polysorbate 80. The value of in vitro test is arguable. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will lead to a better knowledge of the management and mechanisms involved in anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines and enable more people with history of allergy to be vaccinated.

Sweet-like syndrome and multiple COVID arm syndrome following COVID-19 vaccines: 'specific' patterns in a series of 192 patients.

The two clinico-pathological patterns are 'Sweet-like syndrome' and 'Multiple COVID-Arm'. 'Sweet-like syndrome' presents clinically as erythematous and oedematous papules or plaques, sometimes developing vesiculation or bullae. Histology shows classical Sweet syndrome with a diffuse dermal neutrophilic infiltrate, or an infiltrate of histiocyte-like immature myeloid cells consistent with a histiocytoid Sweet syndrome. 'Multiple COVID-arm' is characterized by multiple large inflammatory plaques with histological analyses showing a perivascular and interstitial inflammatory infiltrate with eosinophils.

Prevalence and factors associated with long-term remission in cutaneous lupus: A longitudinal cohort study of 141 cases.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence and factors associated with long-term remission in cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE). OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence, the factors associated with remission, and the long-term remission with and without treatment during CLE. METHODS: Longitudinal cohort study including biopsy-proven patients with CLE seen between November 1, 2019 and April 30, 2021, with at least 6 months of follow-up after diagnosis. Demographic data, CLE subtypes, remission status, and treatments were recorded. Remission was defined by a Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Disease Area and Severity Index activity score of 0. Long-term remission was defined by remission >3 years. RESULTS: Among 141 patients included (81% of women), 93 (66%) were in remission at last follow-up with a median duration since diagnosis of 11.4 years (interquartile range, 4.2-24.7). Long-term remission was observed in 22 (19%) of 114 patients with at least 3 years of follow-up, including 5 (4.4%) with no systemic treatment. Active smoking (odds ratio, 0.22 [95%CI: 0.05-0.97]; P = .04) and discoid CLE lesions (odds ratio, 0.14 [95%CI, 0.04-0.48]; P = .004) were associated with a lower risk of long-term remission. LIMITATIONS: Partial retrospective data collection and tertiary center population. CONCLUSION: Long-term remission is rare in CLE and negatively associated with active smoking and discoid CLE.

Skin tests in the work-up of cutaneous adverse drug reactions: A review and update.

Skin tests, including patch tests (PTs), prick tests, and intradermal tests (IDTs), are useful in identifying the culprits of cutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs), and determining safer, alternative drugs. PTs have a low sensitivity but are valuable in investigating maculopapular exanthema (MPE), as well as severe CADR, including toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), and in particular, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS). To ensure their specificity, at least 10 control tests should be performed. Prick tests are mainly used in the evaluation of immediate-type hypersensitivity and can be performed with all drugs, except opiates. IDTs can be used to explore immediate and delayed-type hypersensitivity, if an injectable form of the drug exists. Except for SJS/TEN, IDTs should be performed by injecting 0.02 mL of the drug. We here provide a practical, up-to-date review on the use of these skin tests in the work-up of CADRs. Numerous negative controls for drug PTs, as well as criteria for the immediate and delayed positivity of prick tests and IDT, are included. It should be emphasized that a negative result never excludes the potential responsibility of a drug in a CADR.

What is the optimal duration for a ROAT? The experience of the French Dermatology and Allergology group (DAG).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The repeated open application test (ROAT) is an adjuvant investigation measure to patch testing in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. ESCD recommends a 15 days duration but its overall duration varies according to publications and patients hardly adhere to prolonged ROAT duration beyond 1 week. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Dermatology and Allergy Group of the French Society of Dermatology performed a prospective study with the aim of determining the best duration for the ROAT. RESULTS: A total of 328 ROAT results were collected for topical products, including cosmetics (60%) and topical medications (31.1%). Fifty-nine (18%) ROATs were positive, and 16 (5%) were doubtful. All the positive ROATs occurred within 10 days, with a median time to positivity of 3 days. CONCLUSION: According to our results, a minimum duration of 10 days is necessary to achieve a positive ROAT to a topical product.

Multiple cases of sensitization to an antiseptic containing chlorhexidine digluconate/benzalkonium chloride/benzyl alcohol with different profiles of sensitization in adults and children.

BACKGROUND: An aqueous antiseptic containing "chlorhexidine digluconate/benzalkonium chloride/benzyl alcohol" (CBB) is widely used in France. The only previous documented study dealing with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to this antiseptic is one small case series in children. The French Vigilance Network for Dermatology and Allergy (REVIDAL-GERDA) has collected many cases in the last few years. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical and sensitization profiles of patients diagnosed with ACD to CBB. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with contact dermatitis to CBB and positive tests to CBB and/or at least one of its components. All patients had to be tested with all components of CBB. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients (71 adults and 31 children) were included. The lesions were extensive in 63% of patients and 55% had delayed time to diagnosis. CBB patch tests were positive in 93.8% of cases. The allergen was identified in 97% of patients, mainly benzyl alcohol in adults (81.7%) and chlorhexidine digluconate in children (54.8%). About 32.4% of the patients were sensitized to several components. CONCLUSION: CBB is a cause of ACD at all ages. The components of the antiseptic should be tested. The sensitization profile seems to be different between adults and children.

Practice parameters for diagnosing and managing iodinated contrast media hypersensitivity.

Immediate and nonimmediate hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) have been reported to occur in a frequency of about 0.5%-3% of patients receiving nonionic ICM. The diagnosis and management of these patients vary among guidelines published by various national and international scientific societies, with recommendations ranging from avoidance or premedication to drug provocation test. This position paper aims to give recommendations for the management of patients with ICM hypersensitivity reactions and analyze controversies in this area. Skin tests are recommended as the initial step for diagnosing patients with immediate and nonimmediate hypersensitivity reactions; besides, they may also help guide on tolerability of alternatives. Re-exposition or drug provocation test should only be done with skin test-negative ICMs. The decision for performing either re-exposition or drug provocation test needs to be taken based on a risk-benefit analysis. The role of in vitro tests for diagnosis and pretreatment for preventing reactions remains controversial.

Management of anaphylaxis due to COVID-19 vaccines in the elderly.

Older adults, especially men and/or those with diabetes, hypertension, and/or obesity, are prone to severe COVID-19. In some countries, older adults, particularly those residing in nursing homes, have been prioritized to receive COVID-19 vaccines due to high risk of death. In very rare instances, the COVID-19 vaccines can induce anaphylaxis, and the management of anaphylaxis in older people should be considered carefully. An ARIA-EAACI-EuGMS (Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma, European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and European Geriatric Medicine Society) Working Group has proposed some recommendations for older adults receiving the COVID-19 vaccines. Anaphylaxis to COVID-19 vaccines is extremely rare (from 1 per 100,000 to 5 per million injections). Symptoms are similar in younger and older adults but they tend to be more severe in the older patients. Adrenaline is the mainstay treatment and should be readily available. A flowchart is proposed to manage anaphylaxis in the older patients.

Nailfold capillaroscopy findings in cutaneous lupus erythematosus patients with or without digital lesions and comparison with dermatomyositis patients: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Differential diagnosis between cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) and dermatomyositis (DM) may be challenging if digital lesions occur. OBJECTIVES: To compare nailfold capillaroscopy (NFC) findings in CLE patients with or without digital involvement, and to compare capillaroscopic findings between CLE patients with digital lesions and DM patients. METHODS: Prospective monocentric study including CLE and DM patients. NFC was performed and standardized items were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-one CLE patients and 10 DM patients with digital lesions were included. A scleroderma pattern was found in 6 patients (12%): in 5 out of 17 patients with digital lesions, compared with only 1 out of 34 patients without digital lesions (p = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, CLE digital lesions and digital ulcerations were statistically associated with scleroderma pattern. CLE digital lesions were significantly associated with architectural disorganization (p = 0.0003) and capillary rarefaction (p = 0.0038). A scleroderma pattern was significantly more frequent in DM patients (80%) than in CLE patients with digital lesions (30%, p = 0.018). Capillaroscopic findings were not significantly different between CLE patients with digital lesions and DM patients. CONCLUSION: Although scleroderma pattern is more frequent in DM patients than in CLE patients with digital lesions, NFC cannot formally distinguish CLE from DM.

Cutaneous Kikuchi disease-like inflammatory pattern without lymph node involvement is associated with systemic disease and severe features in lupus erythematous: A case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Kikuchi-Fujimoto disease (KFD) is a self-limited histiocytic necrotizing lymphadenitis sometimes affecting the skin. "Kikuchi disease-like inflammatory pattern" (KLIP) has been described in cutaneous lesions as similar pathological features in patients without lymph node involvement and as a potential clue for the diagnosis of lupus. We aimed to describe KLIP-associated clinical and immunological features in lupus patients with a retrospective case-control study. METHODS: Thirteen cases of KLIP were included as well as thirty-nine age- and sex-matched control lupus patients without KLIP. At the time of KLIP diagnosis, 4/13 patients (31%) had isolated cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) and 9/13 had (69%) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) including 6 (46%) with severe haematological, lung, cardiac or renal disease. KLIP features were observed in skin biopsies of different clinical presentations. RESULTS: Compared with our control group, KLIP patients more frequently had SLE 9/13 (69%) versus 8/39 (21%) (OR 12.9; IC95% [2.86-58.2]; p = 0.0004) and more frequently severe SLE. Two out of four CLE exhibiting KLIP lesions (50%) developed severe SLE with cardiac or renal involvement after 12 and 24 months, respectively.Treatment with thalidomide 100 mg/day allowed rapid and complete clearance of cutaneous lesions in 6/6 KLIP patients. The need to use thalidomide tended to be more frequent in KLIP patients than in controls. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that KLIP features in lupus skin lesions are associated with SLE and severe systemic features. Despite a limited number of isolated CLE patients with KLIP features in the skin, this observation may warrant closer follow-up on patients with a higher risk of developing SLE.

Diagnosis and management of the drug hypersensitivity reactions in Coronavirus disease 19: An EAACI Position Paper.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a respiratory tract infection caused by a novel human coronavirus, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, leads to a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic cases to patients with mild and severe symptoms, with or without pneumonia. Given the huge influence caused by the overwhelming COVID-19 pandemic affecting over three million people worldwide, a wide spectrum of drugs is considered for the treatment in the concept of repurposing and off-label use. There is no knowledge about the diagnosis and clinical management of the drug hypersensitivity reactions that can potentially occur during the disease. This review brings together all the published information about the diagnosis and management of drug hypersensitivity reactions due to current and candidate off-label drugs and highlights relevant recommendations. Furthermore, it gathers all the dermatologic manifestations reported during the disease for guiding the clinicians to establish a better differential diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity reactions in the course of the disease.

Genetic variants associated with T cell-mediated cutaneous adverse drug reactions: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review-An EAACI position paper.

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are associated with high global morbidity and mortality. Cutaneous T cell-mediated reactions classically occur more than 6 hours after drug administration and include life-threatening conditions such as toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and hypersensitivity syndrome. Over the last 20 years, significant advances have been made in our understanding of the pathogenesis of DHRs with the identification of human leukocyte antigens as predisposing factors. This has led to the development of pharmacogenetic screening tests, such as HLA-B*57:01 in abacavir therapy, which has successfully reduced the incidence of abacavir hypersensitivity reactions. We have completed a PRISMA-compliant systematic review to identify genetic associations that have been reported in DHRs. In total, 105 studies (5554 cases and 123 548 controls) have been included in the review reporting genetic associations with carbamazepine (n = 31), other aromatic antiepileptic drugs (n = 24), abacavir (n = 11), nevirapine (n = 14), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (n = 11), dapsone (n = 4), allopurinol (n = 10), and other drugs (n = 5). The most commonly reported genetic variants associated with DHRs are located in human leukocyte antigen genes and genes involved in drug metabolism pathways. Increasing our understanding of genetic variants that contribute to DHRs will allow us to improve diagnosis, develop new treatments, and predict and prevent DHRs in the future.

Towards a more precise diagnosis of hypersensitivity to beta-lactams - an EAACI position paper.

A recent survey of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Drug Allergy Interest Group (DAIG) on how European allergy specialists deal with beta-lactam (BL) hypersensitivity demonstrated a significant heterogeneity in current practice, suggesting the need to review and update existing EAACI guidelines in order to make the diagnostic procedures as safe and accurate, but also as cost-effective, as possible. For this purpose, a bibliographic search on large studies regarding BL hypersensitivity diagnosis was performed by an EAACI task force, which reviewed and evaluated the literature data using the GRADE system for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation. The updated guidelines provide a risk stratification in BL hypersensitivity according to index reaction(s), as well as an algorithmic approach, based on cross-reactivity studies, in patients with a suspicion of BL hypersensitivity and an immediate need for antibiotic therapy, when referral to an allergist is not feasible. Furthermore, the update addresses availability and concentrations of skin test (ST) reagents, ST and drug provocation test (DPT) protocols, and diagnostic algorithms and administration of alternative BL in allergic subjects. Specifically, distinct diagnostic algorithms are suggested depending on risk stratification of the patient into high and low risk based on the morphology and chronology of the reaction, immediate (ie, occurring within 1-6 hours after the last administered dose) or nonimmediate (ie, occurring more than 1 hour after the initial drug administration), and the reaction severity. Regarding the allergy workup, the main novelty of this document is the fact that in some low-risk nonimmediate reactions ST are not mandatory, especially in children. For DPT, further studies are necessary to provide data supporting the standardization of protocols, especially of those regarding nonimmediate reactions, for which there is currently no consensus.

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms may occur within 2 weeks of drug exposure: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is challenging. Some clinicians reject this diagnosis when the delay of onset is less than 15 days after drug intake. OBJECTIVES: To assess the delay of DRESS occurrence and culprit drugs. METHODS: All patients hospitalized in 3 dermatology departments with a first occurrence of DRESS for which a drug was highly suspected were included in this retrospective study. Based on the delay in DRESS occurrence, cases were classified into 2 groups: a rapid-onset group (≤15 days after exposure) and a delayed-onset group (>15 days). RESULTS: A total of 41 patients with DRESS were included: 14 in the rapid-onset and 27 in delayed-onset groups. In the rapid-onset group, antibiotics (n = 6/14) and iodinated contrast media (n = 5/5) were the predominant culprits. Carbamazepine (n = 4/4), lamotrigine (n = 6/6), allopurinol (n = 8/8), and sulfasalazine (n = 2/2) were exclusively found in the delayed-onset group. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature, limited number of participants, and lack of detailed information on previous exposure to sensitizing drugs in some instances. CONCLUSIONS: DRESS is frequently related to drugs introduced 15 or fewer days before the occurrence of cutaneous adverse reactions. The time of onset of DRESS may differ depending on the medications involved.