Cornelia S Seitz1, Christian Rose2, Andreas Kerstan3, Axel Trautmann3. 1. Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. Electronic address: cseitz@med.uni-goettingen.de. 2. Dermatopathology Laboratory, Lübeck, Germany. 3. Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Skin biopsies are commonly performed to confirm drug-induced exanthem (DIE). However, the relevance of histologic examination in discriminating between DIE and non-DIE (NDIE) is controversial. OBJECTIVE: A retrospective analysis was performed to evaluate the reliability of histologic diagnosis of DIE. METHODS: In all, 91 patients with a skin biopsy specimen of an acute exanthem temporally related to a single identifiable drug underwent complete allergy testing. Their biopsy specimens were retrospectively re-evaluated by 2 dermatopathologists blinded to the original reports to test for discrimination between DIE versus NDIE. RESULTS: In 35 patients, non-IgE-mediated drug allergy was confirmed by allergy testing, whereas in 56 patients drug hypersensitivity could be excluded. Sensitivity of pathology reports for diagnosis of DIE reached 62.9% with a positive predictive value of 40.7%. Specificity was 41.1% with a negative predictive value of 69.7%. No significant difference in tissue eosinophilia was detected between DIE and NDIE. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatopathologic evaluation of skin biopsy specimens is of limited use in differentiating between DIE and NDIE. All efforts should be made to subject these patients to thorough allergy testing for definitely confirming or ruling out drug hypersensitivity.
BACKGROUND: Skin biopsies are commonly performed to confirm drug-induced exanthem (DIE). However, the relevance of histologic examination in discriminating between DIE and non-DIE (NDIE) is controversial. OBJECTIVE: A retrospective analysis was performed to evaluate the reliability of histologic diagnosis of DIE. METHODS: In all, 91 patients with a skin biopsy specimen of an acute exanthem temporally related to a single identifiable drug underwent complete allergy testing. Their biopsy specimens were retrospectively re-evaluated by 2 dermatopathologists blinded to the original reports to test for discrimination between DIE versus NDIE. RESULTS: In 35 patients, non-IgE-mediated drug allergy was confirmed by allergy testing, whereas in 56 patients drug hypersensitivity could be excluded. Sensitivity of pathology reports for diagnosis of DIE reached 62.9% with a positive predictive value of 40.7%. Specificity was 41.1% with a negative predictive value of 69.7%. No significant difference in tissue eosinophilia was detected between DIE and NDIE. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatopathologic evaluation of skin biopsy specimens is of limited use in differentiating between DIE and NDIE. All efforts should be made to subject these patients to thorough allergy testing for definitely confirming or ruling out drug hypersensitivity.
Authors: Erika Mae Summers; Nicholas Ray Blickenstaff; Garrett Curtis Coman; Thomas Bernd Martins; Harry Raymond Hill; Richard Dennis Sontheimer Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2017-10