ArticleAnnals of dermatology2019
Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: A Single-Center Retrospective Study of 173 Patients in China.
Article in Annals of dermatology, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- An international scoping review of epidemiologic studies on severe cutaneous adverse reactions.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- Case Report: A case of toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by serplulimab: integrated Chinese and Western nursing care.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions at a Tertiary Care Center in Saudi Arabia.Dermatology research and practice · 2023Article
- Pembrolizumab-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome in advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the lung: A case report and review of literature.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSevere cutaneous adverse reactions (SCAR) to drugs are a crucial public health issue and the use of systemic corticosteroids in SCAR has been controversial.
objectiveTo analyze clinical features, causative drugs, treatment, outcomes, and prognostic factors of SCAR in the case-series of 173 patients, and add more information to the debate of using systemic corticosteroids in SCAR management.
methodsA retrospective study of 173 SCAR patients diagnosed with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS)/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) or acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) at a tertiary care institution in China between January 2014 and December 2017 was conducted.
resultsOf 173 patients, allopurinol, carbamazepine, and antibiotics are the most frequently implicated drugs for DRESS (40.4%), SJS/TEN (26.0%), and AGEP (40.0%) respectively. Moreover, there is a strongly negative correlation between early corticosteroids use and the progression (
conclusionPrompt short-course systemic corticosteroids use is associated with early-stage skin lesions remission without influencing the disease mortality. Lymphadenopathy and eosinophilia were the independent poor prognostic factors of SCAR.
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.