A rare case of meloxicam-induced pseudoporphyria.

Drug-induced pseudoporphyria is commonly linked to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as naproxen, oxaprozin, ketoprofen, and ibuprofen. The NSAID meloxicam is not a commonly reported inciting agent. We report a case of meloxicam-induced pseudoporphyria in a 55-year-old woman with a past medical history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and osteoarthritis. She presented to the clinic with tense and denuded bullae on her dorsal feet, which was diagnosed as pseudoporphyria after further workup. Upon evaluating the patient's medication history, meloxicam was identified as the most likely inciting agent. The patient's condition resolved with the discontinuation of this medication. Our findings can help dermatologists effectively diagnose and treat meloxicam-induced pseudoporphyria in patients with similar cases.

Effectiveness and safety of oral terbinafine for dermatophyte distal subungual onychomycosis.

INTRODUCTION: Terbinafine has been a cornerstone in dermatophyte infection treatment. Despite its global efficacy, the emergence of terbinafine resistance raises concerns, requiring ongoing vigilance. AREAS COVERED: This paper focuses on evaluating the efficacy and safety of terbinafine in treating dermatophyte toenail infections. Continuous and pulse therapies, with a 24-week continuous regimen and a higher dosage of 500 mg/day have demonstrated superior efficacy to the FDA approved regimen of 250 mg/day x 12 weeks. Pulse therapies, though showing comparable effectiveness, present debates with regards to their efficacy as conflicting findings have been reported. Safety concerns encompass hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal, cutaneous, neurologic, hematologic and immune adverse-effects, and possible drug interactions, suggesting the need for ongoing monitoring. EXPERT OPINION: Terbinafine efficacy depends on dosage, duration, and resistance patterns. Continuous therapy for 24 weeks and a dosage of 500 mg/day may enhance outcomes, but safety considerations and resistance necessitate individualized approaches. Alternatives, including topical agents and alternative antifungals, are to be considered for resistant cases. Understanding the interplay between treatment parameters, adverse effects, and resistance mechanisms is critical for optimizing therapeutic efficacy while mitigating resistance risks. Patient education and adherence are vital for early detection and management of adverse effects and resistance, contributing to tailored and effective treatments.

Patch test results in patients with suspected contact allergy to shoes: Retrospective IVDK data analysis 2009-2018.

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis caused by shoes is common and new relevant allergens have been identified. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the pattern of type IV sensitization in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis of the feet related to shoes as a presumed culprit trigger. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2009-2018. RESULTS: Six hundred twenty-five patients with presumed shoe dermatitis were identified in a cohort of 119 417 patients. Compared to patients with suspected contact sensitization from other allergen sources (n = 118 792), study group patients were more frequently sensitized to potassium dichromate (10.8% vs 3.5%), colophony (7.2% vs 3.7%), mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT; 4.0% vs 0.6%), mercapto mix (4.6% vs 0.6%), and p-tert-butylphenol formaldehyde resin (1.6% vs 0.5%). Sensitizations to urea formaldehyde resin, melamine formaldehyde resin, glutaraldehyde, tricresyl phosphate, and phenyl glycidylether were rare. Moreover, reactions to compounds in the leather or textile dyes test series were scarce. CONCLUSION: A distinct sensitization pattern was observed in patients with suspected allergy to shoe materials. Although substances with low sensitization rates should be removed from the leather and shoe patch test series, novel potential allergens should be added.

Contact Dermatitis Caused by Efinaconazole and Luliconazole.

We report a case of contact dermatitis caused by both efinaconazole, a topical triazole antifungal drug, and luliconazole, a topical imidazole antifungal drug. Positive patch test reactions were observed with efinaconazole and luliconazole. A patch test with lanoconazole also elicited a positive reaction. We hypothesized that structural similarity between luliconazole and lanoconazole led to cross-reaction, and that the dithiolane ring common to both drugs or the structure of the vinyl imidazole with a dithiolane ring could be the antigenic determinant. Since efinaconazole and luliconazole have no common structures, patients could be sensitized to both drugs separately. The antigenic determinant of efinaconazole is unknown. However, the chemical formula of ravuconazole, an oral triazole antifungal drug, is similar to that of efinaconazole. Clinicians should carefully consider potential cross-reactivity between these drugs.

Hand-foot skin reaction with primarily dorsal involvement in a patient with metastatic renal cell carcinoma on cabozantinib.

A 61-year-old man with metastatic renal cell carcinoma on cabozantinib developed hand-foot skin reaction with predominantly dorsal involvement including painful violaceous plaques over the joints and keratotic yellow plaques on the palmar fingers. The medication was discontinued with resolution of the plaques and later reinitiated at a lower dose uneventfully.

Trend of relevant contact allergens of the feet in Spain over a period of 10 years.

INTRODUCTION: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) of the feet accounts for approximately 10% of all patch tested patients. OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical profile of patients with feet dermatitis and relevant contact allergens in Spain over a 10-year period. METHODS: Retrospective observational study of patients with suspected ACD from the GEIDAC (Spanish Research Group on Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy) baseline series from eight hospitals in Spain between 2004 and 2014. The clinical data collected from each patient were age, sex, occupation, history of atopic dermatitis, and eczema location. RESULTS: A total of 450 cases clinically presented dermatitis affecting the feet; of these, 41% of were males and 5.6% were suspected to be of occupational origin. As much as 47% were diagnosed with ACD, 20% with atopic dermatitis/dyshidrotic eczema, and 5% with psoriasis. The "feet group" included statistically significantly more females in the age range of 21 to 60 years. The most frequent relevant contact allergens were potassium dichromate, cobalt(II) chloride, p-tert-butylphenol formaldehyde resin, mercapto mix, and mercaptobenzothiazole. CONCLUSIONS: ACD is the most frequent clinical diagnosis of feet dermatitis in our series. The most frequent allergens are similar to those published in other series of foot ACD in Europe and the trend has not changed in the studied decade.

Eruptive palmoplantar lesions induced by capecitabine: report of a case evaluated with dermoscopy.

Capecitabine is a prodrug used primarily as a chemotherapeutic agent. Despite its good tolerance, it has several adverse effects, including the appearance of eruptive nevi. We present the case of a patient, with a history of EC IV breast adenocarcinoma and superficial extension melanoma, which developed 2 weeks after the start of therapy with capecitabine multiple eruptive palmoplantar pigmented lesions, with diverse benign dermatoscopic patterns. With the increasing incidence of solid tumors, these agents are being more used. It is important that the treating physician knows its adverse effects and apply non-invasive diagnostic tools like dermoscopy to avoid unnecessary biopsies.

La capecitabina es un profármaco utilizado sobre todo como medicamento quimioterapéutico. A pesar de su buena tolerancia, produce diversos efectos adversos como la aparición de nevos eruptivos. Se presenta el caso de una paciente, con antecedentes de adenocarcinoma de mama (EC IV) y melanoma de extensión superficial, que desarrolló dos semanas posteriores al inicio del tratamiento con capecitabina múltiples lesiones eruptivas pigmentadas palmoplantares, con patrones variados benignos a la dermatoscopia. Con el incremento de las neoplasias sólidas, estos agentes se utilizan cada vez más. Es importante que el médico tratante conozca sus efectos adversos y aplique herramientas diagnósticas no invasivas como la dermatoscopia para evitar biopsias innecesarias.