Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms. Part II diagnosis and management.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome, also known as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, is a severe cutaneous adverse reaction characterized by an exanthem, fever, and hematologic and visceral organ involvement. The differential diagnosis includes other cutaneous adverse reactions, infections, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, and neoplastic disorders. Three sets of diagnostic criteria have been proposed; however, consensus is lacking. The cornerstone of management is immediate discontinuation of the suspected drug culprit. Systemic corticosteroids remain first-line therapy, but the literature on steroid-sparing agents is expanding. Longitudinal evaluation for sequelae is recommended. Adjunctive tests for risk stratification and drug culprit identification remain under investigation. Part II of this continuing medical education activity begins by exploring the differential diagnosis and diagnosis of drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms and concludes with an evidence-based overview of evaluation and treatment.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms. Part I. Epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinicopathological features, and prognosis.

Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DiHS), also known as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), is a severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR) characterized by an exanthem, fever, and hematologic and visceral organ involvement. Anticonvulsants, antibiotics, and allopurinol are the most common triggers. The pathogenesis involves a complex interplay between drugs, viruses, and the immune system primarily mediated by T-cells. DiHS/DRESS typically presents with a morbilliform eruption 2-6 weeks after drug exposure, and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and risk of relapse. Long-term sequelae primarily relate to organ dysfunction and autoimmune diseases. Part I of this continuing medical education activity on DiHS/DRESS provides an update on epidemiology, novel insights into pathogenesis, and a description of clinicopathological features and prognosis.

Patient Perspectives on Hidradenitis Suppurativa and Infertility: A Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is an inflammatory skin condition which predominantly affects women of childbearing age in the USA. There is a lack of research on the association between HS and fertility. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to understand the perspectives of females with HS regarding the impact of their disease on reproductive health, the impact of fertility treatments on HS, and the impact of HS treatments on fertility. METHODS: An anonymous, online survey was disseminated through HS support groups from June to July 2022. Respondents aged 18-50 who were assigned female sex at birth were eligible for participation. Comparative statistics were performed using t tests/χ2 tests to assess associations between respondents' demographics and survey responses. RESULTS: Among the 312 respondents (80.8% White, mean age 35.7 ± 7.4 [range 18-50]), two-thirds of respondents (66.6%, 207/311) had been pregnant before and 79.5% (248/312) had ever tried to conceive. 41.5% (103/248) had unsuccessfully tried to conceive for 12 months or more. Of the 59 respondents who had never attempted to conceive, 39% reported that HS had impacted this decision. Amongst respondents who experienced fertility challenges but did not pursue fertility treatments, top barriers to fertility treatments include concerns about financial support/insurance coverage (47.5%, 29/61) and fertility treatments worsening HS (21.3%, 13/61). Most respondents who used fertility treatments reported either no change (73.7%, 28/38 or 77.8%, 14/18) or improvement (15.8%, 6/38 or 11.1%, 2/18) in their HS symptoms with oral or injectable medications. Respondents were most concerned about the effects of oral antibiotics (44.9%, 140/312), followed by hormonal medications (38.8%, 121/312) and biologics (35.9%, 112/312) on fertility. CONCLUSION: Females with HS reported high rates of infertility compared to the general population. The majority reported no change in HS symptoms with fertility treatments, and clinicians can use this finding to help counsel patients during family planning discussions. Further research in the field of HS and fertility is needed.

Delayed diagnosis of DRESS syndrome in a patient with skin of color.

We describe a particularly severe case of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome with hemodynamic instability, erythroderma, profound eosinophilia, and severe organ dysfunction. We attribute the severity in part to a delay in diagnosis due to patient's skin of color, as the erythroderma was not noticed until a dermatologist was consulted. This case highlights how even severe skin disease can present less conspicuously in patients with darker skin types. We outline several strategies that can help clinicians to recognize DRESS and other skin disease phenotypes in patients of color, thereby avoiding delays in diagnosis as seen in this case.

Factors associated with treatment satisfaction in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa: results from the Global VOICE project.

BACKGROUND: Nearly half of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) report dissatisfaction with their treatment. However, factors related to treatment satisfaction have not been explored. OBJECTIVES: To measure associations between treatment satisfaction and clinical and treatment-related characteristics among patients with HS. METHODS: Treatment satisfaction was evaluated utilizing data from a cross-sectional global survey of patients with HS recruited from 27 institutions, mainly HS referral centres, in 14 different countries from October 2017 to July 2018. The primary outcome was patients' self-reported overall satisfaction with their current treatments for HS, rated on a five-point scale from 'very dissatisfied' to 'very satisfied'. RESULTS: The final analysis cohort comprised 1418 patients with HS, most of whom were European (55%, 780 of 1418) or North American (38%, 542 of 1418), and female (85%, 1210 of 1418). Overall, 45% (640 of 1418) of participants were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their current medical treatment. In adjusted analysis, patients primarily treated by a dermatologist for HS had 1·99 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1·62-2·44, P < 0·001] times the odds of being satisfied with current treatment than participants not primarily treated by a dermatologist. Treatment with biologics was associated with higher satisfaction [odds ratio (OR) 2·36, 95% CI 1·74-3·19, P < 0·001] relative to treatment with nonbiologic systemic medications. Factors associated with lower treatment satisfaction included smoking (OR 0·78, 95% CI 0·62-0·99; active vs. never), depression (OR 0·69, 95% CI 0·54-0·87), increasing number of comorbidities (OR 0·88 per comorbidity, 95% CI 0·81-0·96) and increasing flare frequency. CONCLUSIONS: There are several factors that appear to positively influence satisfaction with treatment among patients with HS, including treatment by a dermatologist and treatment with a biologic medication. Factors that appear to lower treatment satisfaction include active smoking, depression, accumulation of comorbid conditions and increasing flare frequency. Awareness of these factors may support partnered decision making with the goal of improving treatment outcomes. What is already known about this topic? Nearly half of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa report dissatisfaction with their treatments. What does this study add? Satisfaction with treatment is increased by receiving care from a dermatologist and treatment with biologics. Satisfaction with treatment is decreased by tobacco smoking, accumulation of comorbid conditions including depression, and higher flare frequency. What are the clinical implications of this work? Awareness of the identified factors associated with poor treatment satisfaction may support partnered decision making and improve treatment outcomes.

Calciphylaxis: Treatment and outlook-CME part II.

Calciphylaxis is a rare and devastating condition with important systemic ramifications. This second-part of our CME aims to educate the practicing dermatologist on the current standard of care once a diagnosis of calciphylaxis is confirmed or highly suspected. The key pathologic findings, as well as the role and limitations of biopsy, are reviewed. We aim to guide readers through the complex hospitalization and posthospitalization management of these medically vulnerable patients. Collaboration with other specialists will be discussed. Experimental and developing treatments are discussed, and the outlook of the condition is reported.

Calciphylaxis: Part I. Diagnosis and pathology.

Calciphylaxis is an uncommon but devastating disorder characterized by vascular calcification and subsequent cutaneous tissue necrosis. This results in exquisitely painful and slow healing wounds that portend exceptionally high morbidity and mortality. The diagnosis of this condition can be complicated because there are no conclusive serologic, radiographic or visual signs that this disease is manifesting. The differential of tissue necrosis is broad, and identifying calciphylaxis requires an adroit understanding of the risk factors and physical signs that should raise suspicion of this condition. Reviews on this subject are uncommon and lack directed commentary from disease experts on the best diagnostic approach for patients suffering from this disease. The goal of this article is to update practicing dermatologists on the current standard of care for calciphylaxis.

Comorbidity screening in hidradenitis suppurativa: Evidence-based recommendations from the US and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is associated with comorbidities that contribute to poor health, impaired life quality, and mortality risk. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based screening recommendations for comorbidities linked to HS. METHODS: Systematic reviews were performed to summarize evidence on the prevalence and incidence of 30 comorbidities in patients with HS relative to the general population. The screening recommendation for each comorbidity was informed by the consistency and quality of existing studies, disease prevalence, and magnitude of association, as well as benefits, harms, and feasibility of screening. The level of evidence and strength of corresponding screening recommendation were graded by using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) criteria. RESULTS: Screening is recommended for the following comorbidities: acne, dissecting cellulitis of the scalp, pilonidal disease, pyoderma gangrenosum, depression, generalized anxiety disorder, suicide, smoking, substance use disorder, polycystic ovary syndrome, obesity, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, inflammatory bowel disease, spondyloarthritis, and sexual dysfunction. It is also recommended to screen patients with Down syndrome for HS. The decision to screen for specific comorbidities may vary with patient risk factors. The role of the dermatologist in screening varies according to comorbidity. LIMITATIONS: Screening recommendations represent one component of a comprehensive care strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatologists should support screening efforts to identify comorbid conditions in HS.

Dermatologic support for oncology: Quantifying the consultative services received by hospitalized oncology patients.

Hospitalized oncology patients often require multidisciplinary care. Inpatient consultative dermatologists can provide expertise in the management of cutaneous complications that patients with cancer may experience. The goal of this study was to quantify the types of consults received by hospitalized oncology patients to better understand the utilization of dermatology consults in this population. Hospital billing codes were used to identify inpatient oncology patients and the types of consults they received at a single quaternary care hospital center. Between July 1, 2015, and January 31, 2020, 14,175 patients were admitted to an oncology service for more than 24 hours, and 5,243 (37%) of these patients received at least 1 consultation during their hospital admission. These patients received a total of 10,492 consults from 101 different services. Dermatology had the fifth-highest number of consults (n = 623; 5.9%). Among patients receiving consults, 608 (11.6%) received inpatient dermatology consults. Infectious disease was the service with the most consults (n = 1,485; 14.2%) and was also the service most commonly co-consulted with dermatology (n = 262; 42.1%). The inpatient consultative dermatology service is highly utilized among hospitalized oncology patients, suggesting that expertise in dermatologic care is valued by oncology teams.

Use of teledermatology by dermatology hospitalists is effective in the diagnosis and management of inpatient disease.

BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes are improved when dermatologists provide inpatient consultations. Inpatient access to dermatologists is limited, illustrating an opportunity to use teledermatology. Little is known about the ability of dermatologists to accurately diagnose disease and manage inpatients with teledermatology, particularly when using nondermatologist-generated clinical data. METHODS: This prospective study assessed the ability of teledermatology to diagnose disease and manage 41 dermatology consultations from a large urban tertiary care center, using internal medicine referral documentation and photographs. Twenty-seven dermatology hospitalists were surveyed. Interrater agreement was assessed by the κ statistic. RESULTS: There was substantial agreement between in-person and teledermatology assessment of the diagnosis with differential diagnosis (median κ = 0.83), substantial agreement in laboratory evaluation decisions (median κ = 0.67), almost perfect agreement in imaging decisions (median κ = 1.0), and moderate agreement in biopsy decisions (median κ = 0.43). There was almost perfect agreement in treatment (median κ = 1.0), but no agreement in follow-up planning (median κ = 0.0). There was no association between raw photograph quality and the primary plus differential diagnosis or primary diagnosis alone. LIMITATIONS: Selection bias and single-center nature. CONCLUSIONS: Teledermatology may be effective in the inpatient setting, with concordant diagnosis, evaluation, and management decisions.

High-dose, high-frequency infliximab: A novel treatment paradigm for hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: The permanent disfigurement associated with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) necessitates early aggressive disease intervention. Although limited data support the use of infliximab (IFX) in HS, the efficacy of high-dose, high-frequency IFX has yet to be defined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of IFX 7.5 to 10 mg/kg, with a maintenance frequency every 4 weeks. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 42 patients initiating IFX 7.5 mg/kg every 4 weeks (IFX 7.5) and 16 patients receiving dose escalation to IFX 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks (IFX 10) between March 1, 2018, and February 28, 2019. The primary outcome measure (clinical response) was the proportion of patients with Physician Global Assessment of clear, minimal, or mild (score of 0-2) HS with at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline scores. RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving a clinical response after initiating IFX 7.5 was 20 of 42 (47.6%) at week 4 and 17 of 24 (70.8%) at week 12. For patients receiving dose escalation to IFX 10 because of incomplete initial response, 6 of 16 (37.5%) achieved clinical response at week 4 and 6 of 12 (50%) at week 12. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of IFX 7.5 every 4 weeks, with possible dose escalation to IFX 10, if needed, provides optimal mitigation of HS-related disease activity.

Navigating immunosuppression in a pandemic: A guide for the dermatologist from the COVID Task Force of the Medical Dermatology Society and Society of Dermatology Hospitalists.

Dermatologists treating immune-mediated skin disease must now contend with the uncertainties associated with immunosuppressive use in the context of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. Although the risk of infection with many commonly used immunosuppressive agents remains low, direct data evaluating the safety of such agents in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are scarce. This article reviews and offers guidance based on currently available safety data and the most recent COVID-19 outcome data in patients with immune-mediated dermatologic disease. The interdisciplinary panel of experts emphasizes a stepwise, shared decision-making approach in the management of immunosuppressive therapy. The goal of this article is to help providers minimize the risk of disease flares while simultaneously minimizing the risk of iatrogenic harm during an evolving pandemic.

Society of Dermatology Hospitalists supportive care guidelines for the management of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in adults.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are life-threatening conditions with high morbidity and mortality. Supportive care management of SJS/TEN is highly variable. A systematic review of the literature was performed by dermatologists, ophthalmologists, intensivists, and gynecologists with expertise in SJS/TEN to generate statements for supportive care guideline development. Members of the Society of Dermatology Hospitalists with expertise in SJS/TEN were invited to participate in a modified, online Delphi-consensus. Participants were administered 9-point Likert scale questionnaires regarding 135 statements. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to evaluate and select proposed statements for guideline inclusion; statements with median ratings of 6.5 to 9 and a disagreement index of ≤1 were included in the guideline. For the final round, the guidelines were appraised by all of the participants. Included are an evidence-based discussion and recommendations for hospital setting and care team, wound care, ocular care, oral care, urogenital care, pain management, infection surveillance, fluid and electrolyte management, nutrition and stress ulcer prophylaxis, airway management, and anticoagulation in adult patients with SJS/TEN.

Evaluating patients' unmet needs in hidradenitis suppurativa: Results from the Global Survey Of Impact and Healthcare Needs (VOICE) Project.

BACKGROUND: A needs assessment for patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) will support advancements in multidisciplinary care, treatment, research, advocacy, and philanthropy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate unmet needs from the perspective of HS patients. METHODS: Prospective multinational survey of patients between October 2017 and July 2018. RESULTS: Before receiving a formal HS diagnosis, 63.7% (n = 827) of patients visited a physician ≥5 times. Mean delay in diagnosis was 10.2 ± 8.9 years. Patients experienced flare daily, weekly, or monthly in 23.0%, 29.8%, and 31.1%, respectively. Most (61.4% [n = 798]) rated recent HS-related pain as moderate or higher, and 4.5% described recent pain to be the worst possible. Access to dermatology was rated as difficult by 37.0% (n = 481). Patients reported visiting the emergency department and hospital ≥5 times for symptoms in 18.3% and 12.5%, respectively. An extreme impact on life was reported by 43.3% (n = 563), and 14.5% were disabled due to disease. Patients reported a high frequency of comorbidities, most commonly mood disorders. Patients were dissatisfied with medical or procedural treatments in 45.9% and 34.6%, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Data were self-reported. Patients with more severe disease may have been selected. CONCLUSION: HS patients have identified several critical unmet needs that will require stakeholder collaboration to meaningfully address.

Retrospective review of drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis cases at a pediatric tertiary care institution.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis represent important sources of potential mortality and morbidity in children. There is a need for more clinical data in this population to determine whether specific treatments preferentially improve outcomes. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective review of children admitted with drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis or Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis overlap at a tertiary care pediatric institution in North America from 2008 to 2018. Patients without a dermatology assessment and diagnosis were excluded. Demographic, clinical, and treatment information were abstracted and reviewed for all included patients. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were identified, 43% female (7/16), with a mean age at presentation of 10.4 ± 5.2 years. Antibiotics were implicated in 56.3% of patients (9/16) and anticonvulsants in 31.3% (5/16). Sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim was the triggering antibiotic in 31.3% of patients. The majority of patients were treated with intravenous immunoglobulin alone (50%, 8/16) or intravenous immunoglobulin with steroids (25%, 4/16). Etanercept was added to intravenous immunoglobulin and corticosteroid in a 2-year-old patient, resulting in clinical stabilization and halting of epidermolysis. No patients died. Clinical sequelae were noted in five patients, including ocular complications (n = 4), labial adhesions (n = 1), and persistent skin dyspigmentation (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight that sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim is an important cause of Stevens-Johnson syndrome-toxic epidermal necrolysis in children. Mortality was reassuringly low, but ocular sequelae were an important cause of morbidity. More data are needed to help determine whether specific treatments including etanercept may provide mortality or morbidity benefit in pediatric populations.

Proceeding report of the Second Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurativa Advances (SHSA) 2017.

The 2nd Annual Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurativa Advances (SHSA) took place on 03-05 November 2017 in Detroit, Michigan, USA. This symposium was a joint meeting of the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation (HSF Inc.) founded in the USA, and the Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation (CHSF). This was the second annual meeting of the SHSA with experts from different disciplines arriving from North America, Europe and Australia, in a joint aim to discuss most recent innovations, practical challenges and potential solutions to issues related in the management and care of Hidradenitis Suppurativa patients. The last session involved clinicians, patients and their families in an effort to educate them more about the disease.

North American clinical management guidelines for hidradenitis suppurativa: A publication from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations: Part II: Topical, intralesional, and systemic medical management.

Hidradenitis suppurativa is a severe and debilitating dermatologic disease. Clinical management is challenging and consists of both medical and surgical approaches, which must often be combined for best outcomes. Therapeutic approaches have evolved rapidly in the last decade and include the use of topical therapies, systemic antibiotics, hormonal therapies, and a wide range of immunomodulating medications. An evidence-based guideline is presented to support health care practitioners as they select optimal medical management strategies and is reviewed in this second part of the management guidelines. A therapeutic algorithm informed by the evidence available at the time of the review is provided.

North American clinical management guidelines for hidradenitis suppurativa: A publication from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations: Part I: Diagnosis, evaluation, and the use of complementary and procedural management.

Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic inflammatory disorder affecting hair follicles, with profoundly negative impact on patient quality of life. Evidence informing ideal evaluation and management of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa is still sparse in many areas, but it has grown substantially in the last decade. Part I of this evidence-based guideline is presented to support health care practitioners as they select optimal management strategies, including diagnostic testing, comorbidity screening, and both complementary and procedural treatment options. Recommendations and evidence grading based on the evidence available at the time of the review are provided.

Adverse drug reaction causality assessment tools for drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: room for improvement.

PURPOSE: Establishment of causality between drug exposure and adverse drug reactions (ADR) is challenging even for serious ADRs such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN). Several causality assessment tools (CAT) exist, but the reliability and validity of such tools is variable. The objective of this study was to compare the reliability and validity of existing ADR CATs on SJS/TEN cases. METHODS: Seven investigators completed three CAT (ALDEN, Naranjo, Liverpool) for 10 SJS/TEN cases. Each CAT categorized the causality of 30 potential drugs as definite/very probable, probable, possible, or doubtful/unlikely. An additional reviewer provided expert opinion by designating the implicated drug(s) for each case. A Kappa score was generated to compare CAT responses both by method (reliability of all 7 reviewers, by CATs) and by reviewer (reliability of the 3 CAT, by reviewer). A c statistic was calculated to assess validity. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability by CAT was poor to fair: ALDEN 0.22, Naranjo 0.11, and Liverpool 0.12. Reliability was highest when causality classification was definite/very probable (0.16-0.41). Similarly, intra-rater reliability by reviewer was poor. When comparing the validity of the overall CAT to expert reviewer, area under the curve was highest for ALDEN (c statistic 0.65) as compared to Liverpool (0.55) or Naranjo (0.54). CONCLUSION: Available CAT have poor reliability and validity for drug-induced SJS/TEN. Due to the importance of determining ADR causality for research, industry, and regulatory purposes, development of an enhanced tool that can incorporate data from immunological testing and pharmacogenetic results may strengthen CAT usefulness and applicability for drug-induced SJS/TEN.

Correction to: Adverse drug reaction causality assessment tools for drug-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: room for improvement.

The correct name of the 9th Author is David J. Margolis. The original article was corrected.