VEXAS-Syndrome, a newly described autoinflammatory systemic disease with dermatologic manifestations.

VEXAS syndrome is a recently identified autoinflammatory systemic disease caused by an acquired somatic mutation of the X-linked UBA1 gene, the key enzyme of the first step of ubiquitylation. The acronym VEXAS stands for the characteristics Vacuoles, E1 enzyme, X-linked, autoinflammatory and somatic. The disease occurs in advanced adulthood preferentially in men and is characterized by hematological, rheumatological and dermatological symptoms. The latter include neutrophil-rich lesions reminiscent of Sweet's syndrome, erythema nodosum- and panniculitis-like skin manifestations and recurrent polychondritis of the nose and auricles. The presence of cytoplasmic vacuoles in myeloid and erythroid precursors in the bone marrow is characteristic. In up to half of the cases, VEXAS syndrome is associated with myelodysplastic syndrome. Dermatologists should be familiar with the clinical picture, as skin symptoms are often the first indicator of the disease. Molecular diagnostics are essential for confirming the diagnosis and risk stratification of affected patients. In this minireview we provide an overview of the pathophysiology, diagnosis and therapy of VEXAS syndrome and illustrate its clinical picture with two own cases.

Delayed-Type Heparin Allergy: Intravenous Tolerance Despite Inflammatory Skin Reaction After Subcutaneous Injection.

BACKGROUND: Heparin allergy most frequently manifests as delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) causing an itchy inflammatory skin reaction at the site of subcutaneous injection. An important differential diagnosis is circumscribed skin necrosis due to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. OBJECTIVES: An inflammatory skin reaction to subcutaneously injected heparin generally entails the quest for alternative anticoagulation; concerns may particularly arise in an emergency situation requiring intravenous heparin administration. METHODS: All heparin DTH cases seen in our department over the last 17 years underwent standardized allergy diagnostics including challenge testing, that is, subcutaneous injection of fondaparinux and intravenous administration of unfractionated heparin (UFH). RESULTS: Of a total of 50 patients with confirmed heparin allergy, DTH was found in 48 (96.0%), and immediate-type, presumably IgE-mediated hypersensitivity was diagnosed in only 2 (4.0%). In the 48 DTH cases, intradermal testing revealed broad cross-reactivity between UFH and low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWH) including nadroparin, dalteparin, and enoxaparin. Cross-reactivity with (or concomitant sensitization to) fondaparinux was seen in only 3 (6.3%) cases. Intravenous administration of UFH was tolerated by all 45 patients challenged, despite DTH to UFH and LMWH as demonstrated by intradermal testing. CONCLUSIONS: If an inflammatory skin reaction at the site of subcutaneously injected heparin is observed or reported without any evidence of skin necrosis or thrombocytopenia, intravenous administration of UFH seems to be sufficiently safe and may be considered without allergy testing if urgently indicated in an emergency situation. Fondaparinux is the most suitable alternative for subcutaneous application.

FcRn Antagonism Leads to a Decrease of Desmoglein-Specific B Cells: Secondary Analysis of a Phase 2 Study of Efgartigimod in Pemphigus Vulgaris and Pemphigus Foliaceus.

Background: Immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels are maintained by the IgG-recycling neonatal Fc-receptor (FcRn). Pemphigus vulgaris and pemphigus foliaceus are debilitating autoimmune disorders triggered by IgG autoantibodies against mucosal and epidermal desmogleins. Recently, a phase 2 clinical trial (NCT03334058; https://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT03334058) was completed in participants with pemphigus using efgartigimod, an FcRn inhibitor, in combination with prednisone. Efgartigimod demonstrated an early effect on diease activity and was well tolerated. In addition to the safety and efficacy assessment, clinical trials present an opportunity to gain more insights into the mechanism of disease, the mode of action of treatment, and potential for corticosteroid-sparing activity. Objective: The aim of our study was to assess the impact of FcRn antagonism by efgartigimod on immunological parameters known to be directly involved in pemphigus pathology, such as cellular and serological responses. Methods: We investigated total and antigen-specific IgG subclass level kinetics during and after treatment, assessed antigen-specific B-cell responses, followed T- and B-cell immunophenotypes, and analyzed how different immunophenotypes link to clinical response. Results: Treatment resulted in reduction of total IgG as well as autoreactive IgG antibody levels. Surprisingly, unlike total IgG and vaccine- or natural-infection-elicited IgG, which returned to baseline levels after stopping efgartigimod treatment, autoreactive antibody levels remained low in several study participants. Efgartigimod showed no effect on total leukocytes, neutrophils, monocytes, or lymphocytes in patients treated with extended efgartigimod therapy. Intriguingly, antigen-specific analyses revealed a loss of desmoglein-specific B cells in several participants responding to efgartigimod, in line with prolonged reduction of pathogenic IgG levels. Conclusions: Efgartigimod treatment of participants with pemphigus improved their conditions and exerted an immunomodulatory effect beyond the blockade of IgG recycling. Further studies in larger populations with an appropriate placebo control are needed to confirm these potentially important observations to establish long-term clinical responses in autoimmune diseases.

Outcome of a de-labelling algorithm compared with results of penicillin (ß-lactam) allergy testing.

BACKGROUND: Penicillin allergy labels frequently impede guideline-directed treatment with a penicillin or other ß-lactam antibiotics. Despite presumed allergy, targeted questioning may indicate a low probability of sensitization and permit reasonably safe administration of the antibiotic in question. In this study, we evaluated a standardized algorithm aiming to differentiate non-allergic patients from those with true allergic ß-lactam hypersensitivity. METHODS: We retrospectively applied a de-labelling algorithm in 800 consecutive patients with suspected ß-lactam hypersensitivity. All had undergone complete allergy work-up permitting to definitely exclude or diagnose ß-lactam allergy between 2009 and 2019. RESULTS: In 595 (74.4%) out of 800 cases evaluated, ß-lactam allergy could be excluded by negative challenge testing. IgE-mediated anaphylaxis was diagnosed in 70 (8.7%) patients, delayed-type hypersensitivity in 135 (16.9%). In 62 (88.6%) anaphylaxis cases, the algorithm correctly advised to use an alternative antibiotic. Accuracy was higher in patients with moderate to severe anaphylaxis (97.7%) compared to those with a history of mild reactions (73.1%). The algorithm correctly identified 122 (90.4%) patients with proven delayed-type hypersensitivity. It permitted de-labelling in 330 (55.5%) out of 595 patients with diagnostic exclusion of penicillin hypersensitivity, but failed to identify the remaining 265 (44.5%) as low-risk cases. CONCLUSIONS: The algorithm detected 89.8% of cases with penicillin (ß-lactam) allergy, sensitivity was optimal for moderate to severe anaphylaxis. Study data justify the implementation of a standardized de-labelling algorithm under close supervision in order to permit guideline-directed treatment and reduce the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics as part of an antibiotic stewardship program.

Disease-related burden and long-term outcome in orofacial granulomatosis: observations from a large single-centre cohort.

There is a lack of standardized treatment recommendations for orofacial granulomatosis, a chronic inflammatory condition aetiologically related to Crohn disease. To assess clinical baseline parameters and treatment strategies, we retrospectively analysed 61 consecutive cases from our institutional database. Disease-related functional/psychological impairment and long-term outcomes were descriptively evaluated using a standardized self-reporting questionnaire. The median age of patients was 45 (7-77) years. Oral steroids were given in 41.0% of cases, but only produced short-term disease control, while response to steroid-sparing agents was inconsistent. Only a minority of patients reported relevant disease-related functional impairment in eating (21.7%) or speaking (4.3%), but the majority perceived psychological distress due to the cosmetic aspects of the disease (69.6%), comments from others (65.2%) and/or general anxiety/insecurity (73.9%). Regardless of the initial treatment, long-term outcomes after 71 months (range 7-304 months) were beneficial, with most patients being in complete remission (52.2%) or reporting only mild residual swelling (43.5%).

Metastatic Crohn's disease: an underestimated entity.

Cutaneous metastatic Crohn's disease (MCD) is a rare but challenging dermatologic manifestation of Crohn's disease. It is histologically defined as the presence of non-caseating granulomas at skin sites separated from and non-contiguous to the gastrointestinal tract. Cutaneous metastatic Crohn's disease should be distinguished from the much more frequent contiguous cutaneous manifestations of Crohn's disease that present at perianal or, less common, peristomal sites with direct extension from the intestine to the adjacent skin. Versatile clinical presentation and the fact that occurrence can predate the initial diagnosis of Crohn's disease may lead to misdiagnosis, delayed treatment and underreporting. As case numbers are small and randomized controlled studies on management are lacking, the therapeutic approach remains challenging and is often unsatisfactory. We here performed a systematic literature search identifying 264 published pediatric and adult cases of MCD and additionally report three of our own cases. Our review summarizes clinical characteristics, putative etiopathology, histologic findings, differential diagnoses and treatment options for MCD.

ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors are not a risk factor for severe systemic sting reactions and adverse events during venom immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: There is controversy whether taking ß-blockers or ACE inhibitors (ACEI) is a risk factor for more severe systemic insect sting reactions (SSR) and whether it increases the number or severity of adverse events (AE) during venom immunotherapy (VIT). METHODS: In this open, prospective, observational, multicenter trial, we recruited patients with a history of a SSR and indication for VIT. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate whether patients taking ß-blockers or ACEI show more systemic AE during VIT compared to patients without such treatment. RESULTS: In total, 1,425 patients were enrolled and VIT was performed in 1,342 patients. Of all patients included, 388 (27.2%) took antihypertensive (AHT) drugs (10.4% took ß-blockers, 11.9% ACEI, 5.0% ß-blockers and ACEI). Only 5.6% of patients under AHT treatment experienced systemic AE during VIT as compared with 7.4% of patients without these drugs (OR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.43-1.22, p = 0.25). The severity of the initial sting reaction was not affected by the intake of ß-blockers or ACEI (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.89-1.46, p = 0.29). In total, 210 (17.7%) patients were re-stung during VIT and 191 (91.0%) tolerated the sting without systemic symptoms. Of the 19 patients with VIT treatment failure, 4 took ß-blockers, none an ACEI. CONCLUSIONS: This trial provides robust evidence that taking ß-blockers or ACEI does neither increase the frequency of systemic AE during VIT nor aggravate SSR. Moreover, results suggest that these drugs do not impair effectiveness of VIT. (Funded by Medical University of Graz, Austria; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT04269629).

Predominant patterns of ß-lactam hypersensitivity in a single German Allergy Center: exanthem induced by aminopenicillins, anaphylaxis by cephalosporins.

BACKGROUND: Penicillins and other ß-lactam antibiotics are the most common elicitors of allergic drug reaction. However, data on the pattern of clinical reaction types elicited by specific ß-lactams are scarce and inconsistent. We aimed to determine patterns of ß-latam allergy, i.e. the association of a clinical reaction type with a specific ß-lactam antibiotic. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated data from 800 consecutive patients with suspected ß-lactam hypersensitivity over a period of 11 years in a single German Allergy Center. RESULTS: ß-lactam hypersensitivity was definitely excluded in 595 patients, immediate-type (presumably IgE-mediated) hypersensitivity was diagnosed in 70 and delayed-type hypersensitivity in 135 cases. Most (59 out of 70, 84.3%) immediate-type anaphylactic reactions were induced by a limited number of cephalosporins. Delayed reactions were regularly caused by an aminopenicillin (127 out of 135, 94.1%) and usually manifested as a measles-like exanthem (117 out of 135, 86.7%). Intradermal testing proved to be the most useful method for diagnosing ß-lactam allergy, but prick testing was already positive in 24 out of 70 patients with immediate-type hypersensitivity (34.3%). Patch testing in addition to intradermal testing did not provide additional information for the diagnosis of delayed-type hypersensitivity. Almost all ß-lactam allergic patients tolerated at least one, usually several alternative substances out of the ß-lactam group. CONCLUSIONS: We identified two patterns of ß-lactam hypersensitivity: aminopenicillin-induced exanthem and anaphylaxis triggered by certain cephalosporins. Intradermal skin testing was the most useful method to detect both IgE-mediated and delayed-type ß-lactam hypersensitivity.

Neutropenia resulting from high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in dermatological patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current guidelines recommend high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) as a rescue therapy to treat severe cutaneous autoimmune disorders. Data on IVIG-induced hematological adverse events are limited in dermatological patients. We assessed the incidence and clinical implications of IVIG-induced neutropenia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received one or several cycles of IVIG between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. IVIG was given according to standardized infusion protocols. Daily differential blood counts were performed. Information on clinical baseline data, dermatological diagnosis, immunosuppressive pre-treatment, and IVIG-related adverse events was retrieved from patient files. RESULTS: Seventeen patients received 106 IVIG treatment cycles. Neutrophil counts below 1,500/µL were documented during 36 (34.0 %) cycles, and neutrophils fell below 1,000/µL in 14 (13.2 %) cases. The average drop of neutrophils from day one (pre-dose) to days 2 and 3 of IVIG therapy was statistically significant (p = 0.006, and p = 0.002, respectively) despite correction for hemodilution, and so was a slight decrease of thrombocytes (p = 0.029, and p = 0.011, respectively). Four patients developed seven episodes of bacterial infections during or immediately after IVIG therapy. CONCLUSIONS: IVIG-induced neutropenia is frequent in dermatological patients. A risk of secondary bacterial infections cannot be excluded.

Immunizations in immunocompromised patients: a guide for dermatologists.

The increasingly frequent use of immunomodulatory agents in dermatology requires the observance of specific recommendations for immunization. These recommendations are developed and regularly updated by the German Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO), an independent advisory group at the Robert Koch Institute. Dermatological patients on immunosuppressive treatment should ideally receive all vaccinations included in the standard immunization schedule. Additionally, it is recommended that they also undergo vaccination against the seasonal flu, pneumococci, and herpes zoster (inactivated herpes zoster subunit vaccine for patients ≥ 50 years). Additional immunizations against Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B and meningococci may be indicated depending on individual comorbidities and exposure risk. Limitations of use, specific contraindications and intervals to be observed between vaccination and immunosuppression depend on the immunosuppressive agent used and its dosing. Only under certain conditions may live-attenuated vaccines be administered in patients on immunosuppressive therapy. Given its strong suppressive effect on the humoral immune response, no vaccines - except for flu shots - should be given within six months after rituximab therapy. This CME article presents current recommendations on immunization in immunocompromised individuals, with a special focus on dermatological patients. Its goal is to enable readers to provide competent counseling and to initiate necessary immunizations in this vulnerable patient group.