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.

A dermatologic assessment of 101 mpox (monkeypox) cases from 13 countries during the 2022 outbreak: Skin lesion morphology, clinical course, and scarring.

BACKGROUND: In the 2022 mpox (monkeypox) outbreak, 79,000 global cases have been reported. Yet, limited dermatologic data have been published regarding lesion morphology and progression. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize skin lesion morphology, symptomatology, and outcomes of mpox infection over time. METHODS: The American Academy of Dermatology/International League of Dermatological Societies Dermatology COVID-19, Mpox, and Emerging Infections Registry captured deidentified patient cases of mpox entered by health care professionals. RESULTS: From August 4 to November 13, 2022, 101 cases from 13 countries were entered, primarily by dermatologists (92%). Thirty-nine percent had fewer than 5 lesions. In 54% of cases, skin lesions were the first sign of infection. In the first 1-5 days of infection, papules (36%), vesicles (17%), and pustules (20%) predominated. By days 6-10, pustules (36%) were most common, followed by erosions/ulcers (27%) and crusts/scabs (24%). Crusts/scabs were the predominant morphology after day 11. Ten cases of morbilliform rash were reported. Scarring occurred in 13% of the cases. LIMITATIONS: Registry-reported data cannot address incidence. There is a potential reporting bias from the predilection to report cases with greater clinical severity. DISCUSSION: These findings highlight differences in skin findings compared to historical outbreaks, notably the presence of skin lesions prior to systemic symptoms and low overall lesion counts. Scarring emerged as a major possible sequela.

Clinical and pathologic correlation of cutaneous COVID-19 vaccine reactions including V-REPP: A registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous reactions after COVID-19 vaccination have been commonly reported; however, histopathologic features and clinical correlations have not been well characterized. METHODS: We evaluated for a history of skin biopsy all reports of reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccination identified in an international registry. When histopathology reports were available, we categorized them by reaction patterns. RESULTS: Of 803 vaccine reactions reported, 58 (7%) cases had biopsy reports available for review. The most common histopathologic reaction pattern was spongiotic dermatitis, which clinically ranged from robust papules with overlying crust, to pityriasis rosea-like eruptions, to pink papules with fine scale. We propose the acronym "V-REPP" (vaccine-related eruption of papules and plaques) for this spectrum. Other clinical patterns included bullous pemphigoid-like (n = 12), dermal hypersensitivity (n = 4), herpes zoster (n = 4), lichen planus-like (n = 4), pernio (n = 3), urticarial (n = 2), neutrophilic dermatosis (n = 2), leukocytoclastic vasculitis (n = 2), morbilliform (n = 2), delayed large local reactions (n = 2), erythromelalgia (n = 1), and other (n = 5). LIMITATIONS: Cases in which histopathology was available represented a minority of registry entries. Analysis of registry data cannot measure incidence. CONCLUSION: Clinical and histopathologic correlation allowed for categorization of cutaneous reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine. We propose defining a subset of vaccine-related eruption of papules and plaques, as well as 12 other patterns, following COVID-19 vaccination.

Clinical Patterns and Morphology of COVID-19 Dermatology.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an emergent disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has rapidly spread throughout the globe since its discovery in December 2019. Although first appreciated to cause pneumonia, numerous organ systems are now known to be involved. The objective of this article is to review the broad spectrum of cutaneous manifestations reported in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most commonly reported cutaneous manifestations associated with COVID-19 infection include pernio (chilblain)-like acral lesions, morbilliform (exanthematous) rash, urticaria, vesicular (varicella-like) eruptions, and vaso-occlusive lesions (livedo racemosa, retiform purpura). It is important to consider SARS-CoV-2 infection in the differential diagnosis of a patient presenting with these lesions in the appropriate clinical context, as cutaneous manifestations may be present in otherwise asymptomatic individuals, or present before developing other symptoms of infection. With increased access to diagnostic testing, we are beginning to understand the utility and limitations of currently available assays.

Cutaneous reactions reported after Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination: A registry-based study of 414 cases.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous reactions after messenger RNA (mRNA)-based COVID-19 vaccines have been reported but are not well characterized. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the morphology and timing of cutaneous reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: A provider-facing registry-based study collected cases of cutaneous manifestations after COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: From December 2020 to February 2021, we recorded 414 cutaneous reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Moderna (83%) and Pfizer (17%). Delayed large local reactions were most common, followed by local injection site reactions, urticarial eruptions, and morbilliform eruptions. Forty-three percent of patients with first-dose reactions experienced second-dose recurrence. Additional less common reactions included pernio/chilblains, cosmetic filler reactions, zoster, herpes simplex flares, and pityriasis rosea-like reactions. LIMITATIONS: Registry analysis does not measure incidence. Morphologic misclassification is possible. CONCLUSIONS: We report a spectrum of cutaneous reactions after mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We observed some dermatologic reactions to Moderna and Pfizer vaccines that mimicked SARS-CoV-2 infection itself, such as pernio/chilblains. Most patients with first-dose reactions did not have a second-dose reaction and serious adverse events did not develop in any of the patients in the registry after the first or second dose. Our data support that cutaneous reactions to COVID-19 vaccination are generally minor and self-limited, and should not discourage vaccination.