ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global2022
Blister fluid as a cellular input for
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- In vitro diagnostics of drug hypersensitivity reactions.Allergologie select · 2026Review
- Utility of IFN-γ Enzyme-Linked Immunospot as Adjunctive Diagnostic for Severe T Cell-Mediated Reactions to Cotrimoxazole in High HIV and Tuberculosis Settings.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025Article
- Cephalosporin Allergy: Updates on Diagnostic Testing.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2024Review
- Updates on the immunopathology and genomics of severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2023Review
- Sutton's law and severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions: Is the money in the blister?The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErrata.2023
Authors and funding
15 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Drug-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) are presumed T-cell-mediated hypersensitivities associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Traditional Objective: We sought to improve Methods: ELISpot and flow cytometry analyses of IFN-γ release were performed on donor-matched PBMC and BFC samples from 4 patients with SCARs with distinct drug hypersensitivity. Results: Immune responses to suspected drugs were detected in both the PBMC and BFC samples of 2 donors (donor patient 1 in response to ceftriaxone and case patient 4 in response to oxypurinol), with BFCs eliciting stronger responses. For the other 2 donors, only BFC samples showed a response to meloxicam (case patient 2) or sulfamethoxazole and its 4-nitro metabolite (case patient 3). Consistently, flow cytometry revealed a greater proportion of IFN-γ-secreting cells in the BFCs than in the PBMCs. The BFCs from case patient 3 were also enriched for memory, activation, and/or tissue recruitment markers over the PBMCs. Conclusion: Analysis of BFC samples for drug hypersensitivity diagnostics offers a higher sensitivity for detecting positive responses than does analysis of PBMC samples. This is consistent with recruitment (and enrichment) of cytokine-secreting cells with a memory/activated phenotype into blisters.
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.