OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify criteria able to distinguish between Jessner's lymphocytic infiltration of the skin (JLIS) and lupus erythematosus tumidus (LET). METHODS: The following characteristics were recorded in a retrospective, multicenter analysis of patients with JLIS and LET: clinical features (number, size, type, and localization of lesions; photosensitivity; extracutaneous signs), histologic findings, phototesting, lupus serology, treatment, and outcome. Available histologic slides were reviewed blinded to the initial diagnosis using a pre-established grid. RESULTS: Univariate analysis of data from patients with JLIS (15 women, 17 men; mean age: 35 years) and LET (13 women, one man; mean age: 31 years) showed the following significant (P < .05) differences: more frequent back involvement and annular lesions in JLIS, as opposed to female predominance, more frequent face involvement, and plaques in LET. Phototesting, especially ultraviolet B, induced lesions in 18 of 26 patients with JLIS and all 4 with LET. The blinded histologic review (33 samples) only found slight epidermal atrophy and focal thickened dermoepidermal junction more frequent and perivascular lymphocyte infiltrations less dense in LET. The two groups of patients reclassified according histopathologic features (18 LET and 11 JLIS) showed only slight clinical differences (more frequent nasal bridge lesions in LET and annular lesions in JLIS). LIMITATION: The retrospective nature of the study is a limitation. CONCLUSION: JLIS and LET in this population showed more similarities than differences, supporting a continuous spectrum covering these two entities.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify criteria able to distinguish between Jessner's lymphocytic infiltration of the skin (JLIS) and lupus erythematosus tumidus (LET). METHODS: The following characteristics were recorded in a retrospective, multicenter analysis of patients with JLIS and LET: clinical features (number, size, type, and localization of lesions; photosensitivity; extracutaneous signs), histologic findings, phototesting, lupus serology, treatment, and outcome. Available histologic slides were reviewed blinded to the initial diagnosis using a pre-established grid. RESULTS: Univariate analysis of data from patients with JLIS (15 women, 17 men; mean age: 35 years) and LET (13 women, one man; mean age: 31 years) showed the following significant (P < .05) differences: more frequent back involvement and annular lesions in JLIS, as opposed to female predominance, more frequent face involvement, and plaques in LET. Phototesting, especially ultraviolet B, induced lesions in 18 of 26 patients with JLIS and all 4 with LET. The blinded histologic review (33 samples) only found slight epidermal atrophy and focal thickened dermoepidermal junction more frequent and perivascular lymphocyte infiltrations less dense in LET. The two groups of patients reclassified according histopathologic features (18 LET and 11 JLIS) showed only slight clinical differences (more frequent nasal bridge lesions in LET and annular lesions in JLIS). LIMITATION: The retrospective nature of the study is a limitation. CONCLUSION: JLIS and LET in this population showed more similarities than differences, supporting a continuous spectrum covering these two entities.