ArticleDermatology research and practice2024
Absence of Epidermal Antibodies in Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Patients but Beware of Single Positive Results.
Article in Dermatology research and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are rare and potentially life-threatening mucocutaneous blistering diseases that clinically can resemble autoimmune bullous diseases. Moreover, it has been shown that autoantibodies against epidermal proteins are present in SJS/TEN. Objectives: To establish the presence of antibodies against desmosomal and hemidesmosomal proteins in confirmed SJS/TEN patients. Methods: Serum of SJS/TEN patients diagnosed based on clinical criteria, e.g., epidermal detachment with erosions and severe mucosal lesions, (suspicion of) a culprit drug, and matching histologic results was evaluated by various techniques, e.g., indirect immunofluorescence on monkey esophagus, salt split skin and rat bladder, immunoblotting (IB) and immunoprecipitation (IP), ELISAs against desmogleins and BP180, keratinocyte footprint assay, and keratinocyte binding assay. Results: A total of 28 patients were included in this study, 15 men and 13 women with a mean age of 56 years. In most patients, none of the serological tests were positive. In two patients, an elevated DSG3 titer was found suspicious for pemphigus vulgaris. Three patients had elevated NC16a titers, suggesting bullous pemphigoid. However, in all these patients, no other tests were positive and in these patients, the biopsy for direct immunofluorescence showed no evidence for an autoimmune bullous disease. Three patients showed reactivity against rat bladder rat bladder; these were, however, completely negative for A2ML1, envoplakin, and periplakin in the IB as well as the IP. Conclusions: Serological analysis for desmosomal and hemidesmosomal antibodies is reliable to rule an autoimmune bullous disease in patients with suspected SJS/TEN. However, one should not rely on one single test method since false positive results can occur. Moreover, this study also makes it less plausible that antibodies against desmosomal and/or hemidesmosomal components are involved in the pathogenesis of SJS/TEN.
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.