Use of Rapid Drug Desensitization in Delayed Hypersensitivity Reactions to Chemotherapy and Monoclonal Antibodies

Background:Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) allows first-line therapies in patients with immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHR) to chemotherapeutic drugs (ChD) and monoclonal antibodies (mAb). Desensitization in delayed drug reactions has traditionally used slow protocols extending up to several weeks; RDD protocols have been scarcely reported.Patients and Method:We retrospectively analyzed the patients referred to the Allergy Department, who had experienced a delayed DHR (> 6 h) related to a ChD or mAb and underwent an RDD protocol. The rate of successful administration of the offending drug and the presence of adverse reactions were evaluated.Results:A total of 93 RDDs were performed in 11 patients (including 6 men and 5 women, with a median age of 61 years). The primary DHR were maculopapular exanthema (MPE) (8), generalized delayed urticaria (1), MPE with pustulosis and facial edema (1), and facial edema with desquamative eczema (1). The meantime for the onset of symptoms was 3 days (range 1–16 days). RDD was performed using a protocol involving 8–13 steps, with temozolomide (25), bendamustine (4), rituximab (9), infliximab (24), gemcitabine (23), and docetaxel (8), within 4.6–6.5 h. Sixteen breakthrough reactions were reported during the RDD (17.2 %) in 5 patients; all were mild reactions including 11 delayed and 5 immediate reactions. All patients completed their treatment.Conclusions:RDD is a potentially safe and effective procedure in patients suffering from delayed reactions to ChD and mAb. It allows them to receive full treatment in a short period, thereby reducing time and hospital visits.

Association between the HLA-B*1502 gene and mild maculopapular exanthema induced by antiepileptic drugs in Northwest China

Background The relationship between the HLA-B*1502 gene and maculopapular exanthema (MPE) induced by antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) has not yet been elucidated. In this study, we investigated the association between AED-induced MPE (AED-MPE) and the HLA-B*1502 gene in patients in Northwest China. Methods We enrolled 165 subjects including nine patients with AED-MPE and 156 AED-tolerant patients as controls. HLA-B*1502 gene polymorphism was detected using digital fluorescence molecular hybridization (DFMH). The results of HLA genotyping were expressed as positive or negative for the HLA-B*1502 allele. An analysis of AED-MPE risk factors was performed using binary logistic regression, and differences in genotype frequencies between groups were assessed with the continuity correction chi-square test. Results We found that the HLA-B*1502 gene was a risk factor for AED-MPE (P = 0.028). The incidence of MPE induced by the two types of AEDs was different, and the incidence of aromatic AEDs use was higher that of non-aromatic AEDs use (P = 0.025). The comparison of the gene frequencies of the HLA-B*1502 allele between the two groups taking aromatic AEDs was also statistically significant (P = 0.045). However, there were no significant differences in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, or region in patients with MPE induced by AEDs. In addition, no association between the HLA-B1502 allele and CBZ- or OXC-induced MPE was found. Conclusions In northwestern China, the HLA-B*1502 allele was associated with aromatic AED-MPE. Since MPE can develop into Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS) or toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), the HLA-B*1502 gene should be evaluated before administering AEDs.

HLA Risk Alleles in Aromatic Antiepileptic Drug-Induced Maculopapular Exanthema

To characterize human leukocyte antigen (HLA) loci as risk factors in aromatic antiepileptic drug-induced maculopapular exanthema (AED-MPE). A case-control study was performed to investigate HLA loci involved in AED-MPE in a southern Han Chinese population. Between January 2007 and June 2019, 267 patients with carbamazepine (CBZ), oxcarbazepine (OXC), or lamotrigine (LTG) associated MPE and 387 matched drug-tolerant controls from six centers were enrolled. HLA-A/B/C/DRB1 genotypes were determined using sequence-based typing. Potential risk alleles were validated by meta-analysis using data from different populations and in silico analysis of protein-drug interactions. HLA-DRB1*04:06 was significantly associated with OXC-MPE (p = 0.002, pc = 0.04). HLA-B*38:02 was associated with CBZ-MPE (p = 0.03). When pooled, HLA-A*24:02, HLA-A*30:01, and HLA-B*35:01 additionally revealed significant association with AED-MPE. Logistic regression analysis showed a multiplicative interaction between HLA-A*24:02 and HLA-B*38:02 in CBZ-MPE. Meta-analysis of data from different populations revealed that HLA-24*:02 and HLA-A*30:01 were associated with AED-MPE (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively). In silico analysis of protein-drug interaction demonstrated that HLA-A*24:02 and HLA-A*30:01 had higher affinities with the three aromatic AEDs than the risk-free HLA-A allele. HLA-DRB1*04:06 showed relatively specific high affinity with S-monohydroxy derivative of OXC. HLA-DRB1*04:06 is a specific risk allele for OXC-induced MPE in the Southern Han Chinese. HLA-A*24:02, possibly HLA-A*30:01, are common risk factors for AED-MPE. The multiplicative risk potential between HLA-A*24:02 and HLA-B*38:02 suggests that patients with two risk alleles are at greater risk than those with one risk allele. Inclusion of these HLA alleles in pre-treatment screening would help estimating the risk of AED-MPE.

SARS CoV-2 Organotropism Associated Pathogenic Relationship of Gut-Brain Axis and Illness

COVID-19 has resulted in a pandemic after its first appearance in a pneumonia patient in China in early December 2019. As per WHO, this global outbreak of novel COVID-19 has resulted in 28,329,790 laboratory-confirmed cases and 911,877 deaths which have been reported from 210 countries as on 12th Sep 2020. The major symptoms at the beginning of COVID-19 are fever (98%), tussis (76%), sore throat (17%), rhinorrhea (2%), chest pain (2%), and myalgia or fatigue (44%). Furthermore, acute respiratory distress syndrome (61.1%), cardiac dysrhythmia (44.4%), shock (30.6%), hemoptysis (5%), stroke (5%), acute cardiac injury (12%), acute kidney injury (36.6%), dermatological symptoms with maculopapular exanthema (36.1%), and death can occur in severe cases. Even though human coronavirus (CoV) is mainly responsible for the infections of the respiratory tract, some studies have shown CoV (in case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, SARS and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, MERS) to possess potential to spread to extra-pulmonary organs including the nervous system as well as gastrointestinal tract (GIT). Patients infected with COVID-19 have also shown symptoms associated with neurological and enteric infection like disorders related to smell/taste, loss of appetite, nausea, emesis, diarrhea, and pain in the abdomen. In the present review, we attempt to evaluate the understanding of basic mechanisms involved in clinical manifestations of COVID-19, mainly focusing on interaction of COVID-19 with gut-brain axis. This review combines both biological characteristics of the virus and its clinical manifestations in order to comprehend an insight into the fundamental potential mechanisms of COVID-19 virus infection, and thus endorse in the advancement of prophylactic and treatment strategies.

Dermatologic manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

The cutaneous manifestations associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are frequent and varied. Knowing these manifestations facilitates the diagnosis of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases, contributing to reduce the spread of the virus. There are 5 main presentation patterns: acral areas of erythema-oedema with vesicles or pustules (pseudo-perniosis), other vesicular eruptions, urticarial lesions, maculopapular eruptions and livedo or necrosis. Most patterns can be further subdivided. The prognosis depends on the age of the patient and the severity of the respiratory clinic, not on the skin manifestation itself. Pseudo-chilblain lesions and vesicular eruptions are considered suggestive of COVID-19, while the rest of manifestations are unspecific and could occur in the context of other diseases. The physiopathological mechanisms involved in the appearance of skin lesions have yet to be categorized. There are 3 main hypotheses: hyperactive immune response, activation of the complement pathway and alterations in the coagulation cascade. Different alterations in each pathway would justify the great variety in the way that the different skin manifestations are presented. The causal relationship between some of the skin manifestations and COVID-19 is not yet fully demonstrated, since there are other factors such as drugs or fever that could be confounding factors. The presence of viral particles has been demonstrated by immunohistochemical techniques in pseudo-chilblain lesions, purpuric maculopapular exanthema and erythema multiforme. However, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) techniques from the skin samples have been negative in every conducted study.