Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review

Determination of culprit drug in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is crucial. Skin tests have been used, although it remains unclear how sensitive these are. To determine the value of skin tests in the assessment of drug causality in DRESS. A systematic literature search...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA) MA), 2023-02, Vol.11 (2), p.481-491.e5
Hauptverfasser: Teo, Ying Xin, Friedmann, Peter Simon, Polak, Marta Ewa, Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 491.e5
container_issue 2
container_start_page 481
container_title The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA)
container_volume 11
creator Teo, Ying Xin
Friedmann, Peter Simon
Polak, Marta Ewa
Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger
description Determination of culprit drug in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is crucial. Skin tests have been used, although it remains unclear how sensitive these are. To determine the value of skin tests in the assessment of drug causality in DRESS. A systematic literature search was conducted for publications from 1996 onward of skin tests (skin prick test = SPT, patch test = PT, intradermal test = IDT) performed in clearly defined DRESS cases. Outcomes of testing, drug culpability assessments, and challenge test data were extracted. A total of 17 articles met inclusion criteria. In 290 patients with DRESS, patch testing was most frequent (PT = 97.2% [n = 282], IDT = 12.4% [n = 36], SPT = 3.1% [n = 9]). Positive results were noted in 58.4% (n = 160 of 282) of PTs, 66.5% of IDTs, and 25% of SPTs. When confidence of drug causality was high (n = 73 of 194), testing did not correlate well with clinical suspicion: PTs, 37.6%; IDTs, 36.5%. Direct comparison of skin testing with provocation testing (n = 12) showed 83.3% correlation. Positive IDT results were reported in 8 negative PT cases. Skin tests, particularly PTs and IDTs, have been reported as tools for diagnosis of causal drugs in DRESS. Heterogeneity in methodology, results analysis, and reporting of cohorts make meta-analysis to determine sensitivity and specificity of published literature impossible and highlight weaknesses in the field. We propose that international collaboration is essential to harmonize the methodology and reporting measures from hypersensitivity testing studies in larger cohorts.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.09.011
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2718632550</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2213219822009461</els_id><sourcerecordid>2718632550</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-d3f96b5b0aeeb2f6d6cbcb63680867865a83cb54e1f0d1a662de940e7f3a797f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMtuwjAQtKpWBVF-oIfKR3ogtR3iJFUvCOhDQqrEQz1ajrMppiROY0PF39cI6LF72B1pZ0aaQeiWkoASyh_WwVrqOmCEsYCkAaH0ArUZo2GfMUIvz5imSQt1rV0TPwmNyYBco1bIaTRI0riNdkunN9rtsaxyPJcFeGgKPP_SFV6AdRZ7MG62n3gGUjltKvyh3QpPjNWVqVdeLI_avXVQauVBWTtTWtwbzybz-f0jHp6e0vn3DHYafm7QVSE3Frqn20HL58li9Nqfvr-8jYbTvgoj7vp5WKQ8izIiATJW8JyrTGU85AlJeJzwSCahyqIB0ILkVHLOckgHBOIilHHqdwf1jr51Y763Po8otVWw2cgKzNYKFtOEhyyKiKeyI1U1xtoGClE3upTNXlAiDpWLtThULg6VC5IKX7kX3Z38t1kJ-Z_kXLAnPB0J4FP65I2wSkOlINcNKCdyo__z_wWvoZIT</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2718632550</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Teo, Ying Xin ; Friedmann, Peter Simon ; Polak, Marta Ewa ; Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</creator><creatorcontrib>Teo, Ying Xin ; Friedmann, Peter Simon ; Polak, Marta Ewa ; Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</creatorcontrib><description>Determination of culprit drug in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is crucial. Skin tests have been used, although it remains unclear how sensitive these are. To determine the value of skin tests in the assessment of drug causality in DRESS. A systematic literature search was conducted for publications from 1996 onward of skin tests (skin prick test = SPT, patch test = PT, intradermal test = IDT) performed in clearly defined DRESS cases. Outcomes of testing, drug culpability assessments, and challenge test data were extracted. A total of 17 articles met inclusion criteria. In 290 patients with DRESS, patch testing was most frequent (PT = 97.2% [n = 282], IDT = 12.4% [n = 36], SPT = 3.1% [n = 9]). Positive results were noted in 58.4% (n = 160 of 282) of PTs, 66.5% of IDTs, and 25% of SPTs. When confidence of drug causality was high (n = 73 of 194), testing did not correlate well with clinical suspicion: PTs, 37.6%; IDTs, 36.5%. Direct comparison of skin testing with provocation testing (n = 12) showed 83.3% correlation. Positive IDT results were reported in 8 negative PT cases. Skin tests, particularly PTs and IDTs, have been reported as tools for diagnosis of causal drugs in DRESS. Heterogeneity in methodology, results analysis, and reporting of cohorts make meta-analysis to determine sensitivity and specificity of published literature impossible and highlight weaknesses in the field. We propose that international collaboration is essential to harmonize the methodology and reporting measures from hypersensitivity testing studies in larger cohorts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2213-2198</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2213-2201</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.09.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36154897</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - diagnosis ; Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - etiology ; Drug patch tests ; Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms ; Eosinophilia - complications ; Eosinophilia - diagnosis ; Humans ; Intradermal test ; Intradermal Tests - methods ; Patch Tests - methods ; Skin prick test ; Skin Tests - methods</subject><ispartof>The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA), 2023-02, Vol.11 (2), p.481-491.e5</ispartof><rights>2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma &amp; Immunology</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma &amp; Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-d3f96b5b0aeeb2f6d6cbcb63680867865a83cb54e1f0d1a662de940e7f3a797f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-d3f96b5b0aeeb2f6d6cbcb63680867865a83cb54e1f0d1a662de940e7f3a797f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36154897$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Teo, Ying Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friedmann, Peter Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polak, Marta Ewa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</creatorcontrib><title>Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review</title><title>The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA)</title><addtitle>J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract</addtitle><description>Determination of culprit drug in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is crucial. Skin tests have been used, although it remains unclear how sensitive these are. To determine the value of skin tests in the assessment of drug causality in DRESS. A systematic literature search was conducted for publications from 1996 onward of skin tests (skin prick test = SPT, patch test = PT, intradermal test = IDT) performed in clearly defined DRESS cases. Outcomes of testing, drug culpability assessments, and challenge test data were extracted. A total of 17 articles met inclusion criteria. In 290 patients with DRESS, patch testing was most frequent (PT = 97.2% [n = 282], IDT = 12.4% [n = 36], SPT = 3.1% [n = 9]). Positive results were noted in 58.4% (n = 160 of 282) of PTs, 66.5% of IDTs, and 25% of SPTs. When confidence of drug causality was high (n = 73 of 194), testing did not correlate well with clinical suspicion: PTs, 37.6%; IDTs, 36.5%. Direct comparison of skin testing with provocation testing (n = 12) showed 83.3% correlation. Positive IDT results were reported in 8 negative PT cases. Skin tests, particularly PTs and IDTs, have been reported as tools for diagnosis of causal drugs in DRESS. Heterogeneity in methodology, results analysis, and reporting of cohorts make meta-analysis to determine sensitivity and specificity of published literature impossible and highlight weaknesses in the field. We propose that international collaboration is essential to harmonize the methodology and reporting measures from hypersensitivity testing studies in larger cohorts.</description><subject>Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - diagnosis</subject><subject>Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - etiology</subject><subject>Drug patch tests</subject><subject>Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms</subject><subject>Eosinophilia - complications</subject><subject>Eosinophilia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intradermal test</subject><subject>Intradermal Tests - methods</subject><subject>Patch Tests - methods</subject><subject>Skin prick test</subject><subject>Skin Tests - methods</subject><issn>2213-2198</issn><issn>2213-2201</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UMtuwjAQtKpWBVF-oIfKR3ogtR3iJFUvCOhDQqrEQz1ajrMppiROY0PF39cI6LF72B1pZ0aaQeiWkoASyh_WwVrqOmCEsYCkAaH0ArUZo2GfMUIvz5imSQt1rV0TPwmNyYBco1bIaTRI0riNdkunN9rtsaxyPJcFeGgKPP_SFV6AdRZ7MG62n3gGUjltKvyh3QpPjNWVqVdeLI_avXVQauVBWTtTWtwbzybz-f0jHp6e0vn3DHYafm7QVSE3Frqn20HL58li9Nqfvr-8jYbTvgoj7vp5WKQ8izIiATJW8JyrTGU85AlJeJzwSCahyqIB0ILkVHLOckgHBOIilHHqdwf1jr51Y763Po8otVWw2cgKzNYKFtOEhyyKiKeyI1U1xtoGClE3upTNXlAiDpWLtThULg6VC5IKX7kX3Z38t1kJ-Z_kXLAnPB0J4FP65I2wSkOlINcNKCdyo__z_wWvoZIT</recordid><startdate>202302</startdate><enddate>202302</enddate><creator>Teo, Ying Xin</creator><creator>Friedmann, Peter Simon</creator><creator>Polak, Marta Ewa</creator><creator>Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202302</creationdate><title>Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review</title><author>Teo, Ying Xin ; Friedmann, Peter Simon ; Polak, Marta Ewa ; Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-d3f96b5b0aeeb2f6d6cbcb63680867865a83cb54e1f0d1a662de940e7f3a797f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - diagnosis</topic><topic>Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - etiology</topic><topic>Drug patch tests</topic><topic>Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms</topic><topic>Eosinophilia - complications</topic><topic>Eosinophilia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intradermal test</topic><topic>Intradermal Tests - methods</topic><topic>Patch Tests - methods</topic><topic>Skin prick test</topic><topic>Skin Tests - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Teo, Ying Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Friedmann, Peter Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polak, Marta Ewa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Teo, Ying Xin</au><au>Friedmann, Peter Simon</au><au>Polak, Marta Ewa</au><au>Ardern-Jones, Michael Roger</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review</atitle><jtitle>The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA)</jtitle><addtitle>J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract</addtitle><date>2023-02</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>481</spage><epage>491.e5</epage><pages>481-491.e5</pages><issn>2213-2198</issn><eissn>2213-2201</eissn><abstract>Determination of culprit drug in drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is crucial. Skin tests have been used, although it remains unclear how sensitive these are. To determine the value of skin tests in the assessment of drug causality in DRESS. A systematic literature search was conducted for publications from 1996 onward of skin tests (skin prick test = SPT, patch test = PT, intradermal test = IDT) performed in clearly defined DRESS cases. Outcomes of testing, drug culpability assessments, and challenge test data were extracted. A total of 17 articles met inclusion criteria. In 290 patients with DRESS, patch testing was most frequent (PT = 97.2% [n = 282], IDT = 12.4% [n = 36], SPT = 3.1% [n = 9]). Positive results were noted in 58.4% (n = 160 of 282) of PTs, 66.5% of IDTs, and 25% of SPTs. When confidence of drug causality was high (n = 73 of 194), testing did not correlate well with clinical suspicion: PTs, 37.6%; IDTs, 36.5%. Direct comparison of skin testing with provocation testing (n = 12) showed 83.3% correlation. Positive IDT results were reported in 8 negative PT cases. Skin tests, particularly PTs and IDTs, have been reported as tools for diagnosis of causal drugs in DRESS. Heterogeneity in methodology, results analysis, and reporting of cohorts make meta-analysis to determine sensitivity and specificity of published literature impossible and highlight weaknesses in the field. We propose that international collaboration is essential to harmonize the methodology and reporting measures from hypersensitivity testing studies in larger cohorts.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36154897</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jaip.2022.09.011</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2213-2198
ispartof The journal of allergy and clinical immunology in practice (Cambridge, MA), 2023-02, Vol.11 (2), p.481-491.e5
issn 2213-2198
2213-2201
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2718632550
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - diagnosis
Drug Hypersensitivity Syndrome - etiology
Drug patch tests
Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms
Eosinophilia - complications
Eosinophilia - diagnosis
Humans
Intradermal test
Intradermal Tests - methods
Patch Tests - methods
Skin prick test
Skin Tests - methods
title Utility and Safety of Skin Tests in Drug Reaction With Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS): A Systematic Review
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T05%3A45%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Utility%20and%20Safety%20of%20Skin%20Tests%20in%20Drug%20Reaction%20With%20Eosinophilia%20and%20Systemic%20Symptoms%20(DRESS):%20A%20Systematic%20Review&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20allergy%20and%20clinical%20immunology%20in%20practice%20(Cambridge,%20MA)&rft.au=Teo,%20Ying%20Xin&rft.date=2023-02&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=481&rft.epage=491.e5&rft.pages=481-491.e5&rft.issn=2213-2198&rft.eissn=2213-2201&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jaip.2022.09.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2718632550%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2718632550&rft_id=info:pmid/36154897&rft_els_id=S2213219822009461&rfr_iscdi=true