Christopher Chang

Diagnostic criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus: A critical review

Systemic lupus erythematosus is a multi-organ system autoimmune disease with clinical and serological heterogeneity. The formulation of initial criteria for SLE was first proposed by the American College of Rheumatology and appeared in 1971. Although the original purpose of the criteria was to classify the disease, it became widely used as a diagnostic criteria in clinical situations. Since then the ACR criteria have undergone at least two changes (in 1982 and 1997). Clinical manifestations that can differentiate SLE patients from healthy people such as skin lesions, arthritis, renal disorder, neurologic disorder, hematologic changes and others are included in these criteria. Serum anti-nuclear antibody, anti-ds-DNA antibody and anti-Sm antibody are important biomarkers of SLE patients. In 2012, the Systemic Lupus Collaborating Clinics proposed the SLICC criteria for SLE in view of new knowledge of autoantibodies and the importance of low complement. Future biomarkers may be useful in distinguishing SLE from other diseases and in monitoring of disease activity.

Drug-Induced Lupus Erythematosus : Incidence, Management and Prevention

The generation of autoantibodies and autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus has been associated with the use of certain drugs in humans. Early reports suggested that procainamide and hydralazine were associated with the highest risk of developing lupus, quinidine with a moderate risk and all other drugs were considered low or very low risk. More recently, drug-induced lupus has been associated with the use of the newer biological modulators such as tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors and interferons. The clinical features and laboratory findings of TNFα inhibitor-induced lupus are different from that of traditional drug-induced lupus or idiopathic lupus, and standardized criteria for the diagnosis of drug-induced lupus have not been established. The mechanism(s) responsible for the development of drug-induced lupus may vary depending on the drug or even on the patient. Besides lupus, other autoimmune diseases have been associated with drugs or toxins. Diagnosis of drug-induced lupus requires identification of a temporal relationship between drug administration and symptom development, and in traditional drug-induced lupus there must be no pre-existing lupus. Resolution of symptoms generally occurs after cessation of the drug.In this review, we will discuss those drugs that are more commonly associated with drug-induced lupus, with an emphasis on the new biologicals and the difficulty of making the diagnosis of drug-induced lupus against a backdrop of the autoimmune diseases that these drugs are used to treat. Stimulation of the immune system by these drugs to cause autoimmunity may in fact be associated with an increased effectiveness in treating the pathology for which they are prescribed, leading to the dilemma of deciding which is worse, the original disease or the adverse effect of the drug. Optimistically, one must hope that ongoing research in drug development and in pharmacogenetics will help to treat patients with the maximum effectiveness while minimizing side effects. Vigilance and early diagnosis are critical. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most recent developments in our understanding of the incidence, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced lupus.

Diagnostic criteria for sarcoidosis

Sarcoidosis is a multiorgan system disease that often presents insidiously. The diagnosis is often made fortuitously upon routine chest radiography or that done for other reasons. Blacks are more commonly affected than whites and age of onset is typically adolescents to young adults. Lung involvement is common and symptoms may include cough, dyspnea and chest pain. Extrapulmonary symptoms may include the skin, joint and eye findings. Bilateral hilar adenopathy is the classic finding on chest radiograph. Anemia or other cell line deficiencies, elevated liver enzymes, hypercalciuria, and EKG abnormalities may also be present. Angiotensin converting enzyme levels may be elevated but are not diagnostic. Histopathological confirmation of noncaseating granulomas is essential for diagnosis. It is generally performed through a biopsy of the most peripheral site possible, although transbronchial biopsy is commonly required. Finally, other possible etiologies must be evaluated and differentiated with a particular emphasis on tuberculosis due to the multiple overlapping symptoms and findings. Newer techniques such as proteomics and transcriptional gene signatures may contribute to the understanding of the pathophysiology of sarcoidosis, and may even serve as diagnostic tools in the future.

Nonallergic Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions

Background: Nonallergic drug hypersensitivities, also referred to as pseudoallergic or anaphylactoid reactions, have clinical manifestations that are often indistinguishable from allergic reactions. Methods: We performed a PubMed search using the terms ‘drug allergy, drug hypersensitivity, pseudoallergies, anaphylaxis and nonallergic drug reactions’ and reviewed 511 publications dated between 1970 and 2012. A total of 160 papers that were relevant to the most common nonallergic drug hypersensitivity reactions were selected for discussion. Results: Nonallergic drug hypersensitivities do not involve either IgE-mediated (type 1) or delayed (type 4) hypersensitivity. Nonallergic hypersensitivities are commonly referred to as pseudoallergic or idiosyncratic reactions. The common nonallergic drug hypersensitivities are secondary to chemotherapeutic drugs, radiocontrast agents, vancomycin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, local anesthetic reactions and opiates. Protocols for skin testing of radiocontrast, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, local anesthetics and chemotherapeutic agents have been developed, though most have not been validated or standardized. Other diagnostic tests include in vitro-specific IgE tests, and the current ‘gold’ standard is usually an oral challenge or bronchoprovocation test. In the case of aspirin, even though it is not believed to be IgE-mediated, a ‘desensitization’ protocol has been developed and utilized successfully, although the mechanism of this desensitization is unclear. Conclusions: Diagnostic methods exist to distinguish allergic from nonallergic drug hypersensitivity reactions. The best option in nonallergic drug hypersensitivity is avoidance. If that is not possible, premedication protocols have been developed, although the success of premedication varies amongst drugs and patients.

Pathogenic Intracellular and Autoimmune Mechanisms in Urticaria and Angioedema

Urticaria and angioedema are common disorders. Chronic urticaria is defined as lasting longer than 6xa0weeks. Causes of chronic urticaria fall into the following categories: physical, allergic, hereditary, autoimmune, and idiopathic. Basophils and mast cells are the primary effector cells responsible for clinical symptoms and signs. These cells produce and secrete a variety of mediators including histamine, leukotrienes, prostaglandins, cytokines, chemokines, and other pro-inflammatory mediators. This leads to vasodilation, fluid exudation, increased vascular permeability, and accumulation of additional secondary inflammatory cells. Two mechanisms have been investigated as possibly contributing to the pathogenesis of chronic urticaria. One is the development of autoantibodies to FcεRI or IgE on mast cells and basophils. This appears to be responsible for 30–50xa0% of cases. The other is dysregulation of intracellular signaling pathways involving Syk, SHIP-1, or SHIP-2 in basophils and mast cells. The primary treatment for chronic urticaria is to treat the underlying pathology, if any can be identified. Otherwise, in idiopathic cases, H1 antihistamines, H2 antihistamines, antileukotrienes, and corticosteroids constitute the main pharmacologic treatment modalities. In severe and recalcitrant cases of chronic and autoimmune urticaria, immunosuppressive drugs have been used, most commonly cyclosporin. More recent experimental studies have also suggested that omalizumab, an anti-IgE therapy, may be of benefit. Currently, inhibitors of Syk are also being developed and tested in the laboratory and in animal models. As our understanding of the pathogenesis of idiopathic urticaria increases, development of additional drugs targeting these pathways may provide relief for the significant physical and psychological morbidity experienced by patients with this disorder.

Diagnostic criteria of acute rheumatic fever.

Acute rheumatic fever is an inflammatory sequela of Group A Streptococcal pharyngitis that affects multiple organ systems. The incidence of acute rheumatic fever has been declining even before the use of antibiotics became widespread, however the disease remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in children, particularly in developing countries and has been estimated to affect 19 per 100,000 children worldwide. Acute rheumatic fever is a clinical diagnosis, and therefore subject to the judgment of the clinician. Because of the variable presentation, the Jones criteria were first developed in 1944 to aid clinicians in the diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever. The Jones criteria have been modified throughout the years, most recently in 1992 to aid clinicians in the diagnosis of initial attacks of acute rheumatic fever and to minimize overdiagnosis of the disease. Diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever is based on the presence of documented preceding Group A Streptococcal infection, in addition to the presence of two major manifestations or one major and two minor manifestations of the Jones criteria. Without documentation of antecedent Group A Streptococcal infection, the diagnosis is much less likely except in a few rare scenarios. Carditis, polyarthritis and Sydenhams chorea are the most common major manifestations of acute rheumatic fever. However, despite the predominance of these major manifestations of acute rheumatic fever, there can be significant overlap with other disorders such as Lyme disease, serum sickness, drug reactions, and post-Streptococcal reactive arthritis. This overlap between disease processes has led to continued investigation of the pathophysiology as well as development of new biomarkers and laboratory studies to aid in the diagnosis of acute rheumatic fever and distinction from other disease processes.

Diagnosis and classification of drug-induced autoimmunity (DIA)

Since sulfadiazine associated lupus-like symptoms were first described in 1945, certain drugs have been reported to interfere with the immune system and induce a series of autoimmune diseases (named drug-induced autoimmunity, DIA), exemplified by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Among the drugs, procainamide and hydralazine are considered to be associated with the highest risk for developing lupus, while quinidine has a moderate risk, and all other drugs have low or very low risk. More recently, drug-induced lupus has been associated with the use of newer biological modulators, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha inhibitors and cytokines. In addition to lupus, other major autoimmune diseases, including vasculitis and arthritis, have also been associated with drugs. Because resolution of symptoms generally occurs after cessation of the offending drugs, early diagnosis is crucial for treatment strategy and improvement of prognosis. Unfortunately, it is difficult to establish standardized criteria for DIA diagnosis. Diagnosis of DIA requires identification of a temporal relationship between drug administration and the onset of symptoms, but the relative risk with respect to dose and duration for each drug has rarely been determined. DIA is affected by multiple genetic and environmental factors, leading to difficulties in establishing a list of global clinical features that are characteristic of most or all DIA patients. Moreover, the distinction between authentic DIA and unmasking of a latent autoimmune disease also poses challenges. In this review, we summarize the highly variable clinical features and laboratory findings of DIA, with an emphasis on the diagnostic criteria.

Overview of Penicillin Allergy

Allergy to penicillin is the most commonly reported antibiotic allergy. However, most patients who report a positive history of a prior reaction to penicillin are not found to be allergic to penicillin upon skin testing. Often, this history is vague or based on a parent’s recollection of an event that occurred in the distant past. Avoidance of penicillin based on self-reported allergic history alone often leads to the use of an alternate antibiotic with greater cost or side effect profile. Patients with a negative skin test to both major and minor determinants may generally be given penicillin, with a statistical risk of developing an allergic reaction similar to that observed in the general population. A more cautious approach in these cases where the degree of suspicion is low, an allergic etiology is unproven, or there is a negative skin test, is to do a graded challenge. If the skin test is positive, an alternate antibiotic should be used. If, however, an alternate antibiotic is not available, then desensitization may be performed, but there are limitations to desensitization as well, and tolerance is not permanent. Avoidance of cephalosporins may be recommended in cases of penicillin allergy, but newer generation cephalosporins have demonstrate less cross-reactivity to penicillin than earlier generation ones. Desensitization protocols for cephalosporins are available but not standardized. The mechanisms of antibiotic sensitization are not clearly understood.

Molecular Biology of Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with specific genetic and immunological mechanisms. The rapid development of new techniques in molecular biology had ushered in new discoveries on the role of cytokines, chemokines, and immune cells in the pathogenesis of AD. New polymorphisms of AD are continually being reported in different populations. The physical and immunological barrier of normal intact skin is an important part of the innate immune system that protects the host against microbials and allergens that are associated with AD. Defects in the filaggrin gene FLG may play a role in facilitating exposure to allergens and microbial pathogens, which may induce Th2 polarization. Meanwhile, Th22 cells also play roles in skin barrier impairment through IL-22, and AD is often considered to be a Th2/Th22-dominant allergic disease. Mast cells and eosinophils are also involved in the inflammation via Th2 cytokines. Release of pruritogenic substances by mast cells induces scratching that further disrupts the skin barrier. Th1 and Th17 cells are mainly involved in chronic phase of AD. Keratinocytes also produce proinflammatory cytokines such as thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP), which can further affect Th cells balance. The immunological characteristics of AD may differ for various endotypes and phenotypes. Due to the heterogeneity of the disease, and the redundancies of these mechanisms, our knowledge of the pathophysiology of the disease is still incomplete, which is reflected by the absence of a cure for the disease.

Alteration of Regulatory T Cells in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Comprehensive Review

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a T cell-mediated autoimmune disease characterized by the destruction of pancreatic β cells. Numerous studies have demonstrated the key role of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells (Tregs) in the development of T1DM. However, the changes in Treg expression and function as well as the regulation of these activities are not clearly elucidated. Most studies on the role of Tregs in T1DM were performed on peripheral blood rather than pancreas or pancreatic lymph nodes. Tissue-based studies are more difficult to perform, and there is a lack of histological data to support the role of Tregs in T1DM. In spite of this, strategies to increase Treg cell number and/or function have been viewed as potential therapeutic approaches in treating T1DM, and several clinical trials using these strategies have already emerged. Notably, many trials fail to demonstrate clinical response even when Treg treatment successfully boosts Tregs. In view of this, whether a failure of Tregs does exist and contribute to the development of T1DM and whether more Tregs would be clinically beneficial to patients should be carefully taken into consideration before applying Tregs as treatments in T1DM.