ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2021
Dermoscopic Aspects of Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions.
Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction of antibiotic-associated cutaneous adverse drug reactions using electronic health record foundation models.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Atypical Presentation of Rapidly Progressive Cutaneous Metastases of Clear Cell Renal Carcinoma: A Case Report.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Utility of Dermoscopy in the Diagnosis of Erythroderma: A Cross-Sectional Study.Indian dermatology online journalArticle
- A Single Centre Cross-Sectional Observational Study on Dermatoscopy of Oral Mucosal Disorders and Histopathological Correlation in Tertiary Care Centre from Central India.Indian journal of dermatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the dermoscopic evaluation of cutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs).
objectivesTo evaluate the dermoscopic patterns of CADRs and identify those associated with severe cutaneous adverse reactions to drugs (SCARDs). PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients included in this study from May 2015 to April 2016 had presented with CADRs. CADR presentation and classification were based on standard criteria. SCARDs included Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), overlap SJS/TEN, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP). The dermoscopic features of CADRs were described and compared according to the severity of the reactions.
resultsSixty-nine patients were included. Sixteen patients (23.2%) presented SCARDs. The main dermoscopic findings in SJS, overlap SJS/TEN and TEN were black dots or necrotic areas (100%). Erosion [respectively, 4/6 (66.7%), 3/3 (100%) and 1/1 (100%)], necrotic borders [respectively, 4/6 (66.7%), 3/3 (100%) and 1/1, (100%)] and epidermal detachment [respectively, 5/6 (83.3%); 2/3 (66.7%) and 1/1 (100%)] were also common among these reactions. Erythema and purpuric dots were the main dermoscopic findings [respectively, 5/6 (83.3%) and 4/6 (66.7%)] in DRESS. In non-severe reactions, the most prevalent structures were erythema and purpura in exanthema [respectively, 31/33 (93.9%) and 24/33 (72.7%)] and erythema and vascular structures in urticarial reactions [respectively, 6/6 (100%) and 3/6 (50%)]. Black dots or necrotic areas, epidermal detachment, necrotic borders and erosion were highly associated with SCARDs (P < 0.001).
conclusionsDermoscopy improves clinical recognition of SCARDs.
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.