SynthesisMolecular diagnosis & therapy2009
In vitro testing for the diagnosis of anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vesiculopustular drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms induced by levetiracetam.Skin health and disease · 2024Article
- Tools for Etiologic Diagnosis of Drug-Induced Allergic Conditions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis: Potential Value of the Lymphocyte Toxicity Assay to Assess Risk.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2023Article
- Bridging the gap between bench and clinic: the importance of understanding the mechanism of iodinated contrast media hypersensitivity.The British journal of radiology · 2023Review
- The role ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Model Based Evaluation of Hypersensitivity Adverse Drug Reactions to Antimicrobial Agents in Children.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Recent advances in the understanding of severe cutaneous adverse reactions.The British journal of dermatology · 2017Review
- In vitro testing for diagnosis of idiosyncratic adverse drug reactions: Implications for pathophysiology.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Review
- Predictive value of the lymphocyte toxicity assay in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity syndrome.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome (AHS) is a rare and potentially fatal reaction that develops in susceptible patients following exposure to certain drugs, including aromatic anticonvulsants. Because of its ill-defined clinical picture and resemblance to other diseases, the diagnosis of AHS is often difficult and requires a safe and reliable diagnostic test. Other than systemic rechallenge, which is not always ethically permissible and has its own limitations, no reliable diagnostic test is available for this type of disorder. This systematic review attempts to evaluate the usefulness of the available in vitro tests in the diagnosis of AHS - namely, the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) and the lymphocyte toxicity assay (LTA) - and to examine the different technical aspects of these tests that may contribute to their performance. We included studies in which aromatic anticonvulsant drugs were the likely causes of the hypersensitivity reaction and either the LTT or the LTA was used to aid the diagnosis of AHS. Analysis of original publications from 1950 to the last week of March 2009 and cited in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE has revealed that there are numerous factors affecting the final result of the test, including the following: the timing of the test after exposure; the clinical manifestation of the reactions; the specific drug; and the test procedure and read-out system. In vitro diagnostic tests have the advantage over in vivo tests of being safe to use; however, in vitro tests for the diagnosis of AHS are not well standardized and their sensitivity and specificity are not yet determined. From the reviewed literature, the sensitivity of the LTT and the LTA seem to be around 70% and 90%, respectively, and the positive and negative predictive values of the tests in highly imputable cases are quite high. However, the lack of a gold-standard diagnostic test to prove drug culpability, along with the paucity of large-scale studies, precludes accurate determination of the epidemiological characteristics of these tests. It appears that without further understanding of the mechanisms underlying the pathophysiology of AHS, and how specific drugs and metabolites differentially affect these mechanisms, the development of more reliable tools for AHS diagnosis will be compromised. Consequently, in the absence of further research, the predictability of these tests will remain questionable and they are unlikely to be utilized on a large scale.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.