Davis, Mark D. P.

AbstractVulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) confers approximately 3% risk of malignant transformation to vulvar squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). We used unbiased proteomic methods to identify differentially expressed proteins in tissue of patients with VLS who developed VSCC compared to those who did not. We used laser capture microdissection‐ and nanoLC‐tandem mass spectrometry to assess protein expression in individuals in normal vulvar tissue (NVT, n = 4), indolent VLS (no VSCC after at least 5 years follow‐up, n = 5) or transforming VSCC (preceding VSCC, n = 5). Interferon‐γ and antigen‐presenting pathways are overexpressed in indolent and transforming VLS compared to NVT. There was differential expression of malignancy‐related proteins in transforming VLS compared to indolent VLS (CAV1 overexpression, AKAP12 underexpression), particularly in the EIF2 translation pathway, which has been previously implicated in carcinogenesis. Results of this study provide additional molecular evidence supporting the concept that VLS is a risk factor for VSCC and highlights possible future biomarkers and/or therapeutic targets.

Introduction Dermatologic complaints are a common reason for emergency department visits. Methods Retrospective chart review from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2019. Patients in the Mayo Clinic Emergency Department receiving dermatology consultation were included. Results Dermatitis (24.7%, n = 113), infection (20.4%, n = 93), and drug reaction (10.3%, n = 47) accounted for the majority of diagnoses. Emergency department providers often provide no diagnosis (38%) or a differential diagnosis (22%), and dermatology consultation frequently alters diagnosis (46%) and treatment (83%). Patients receiving in-person consultations are admitted more frequently than those receiving teledermatology consultations (40% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). Primary diagnostic concordance with subsequent dermatology evaluation is high for in-person (94%) and teledermatology (88%) consultations. Discussion This is the largest study of emergency department dermatology consultations in the United States and the first to compare in-person and teledermatology emergency department consultation utilization in clinical practice. These modalities are utilized in a complementary fashion at our institution, with severe dermatologic diagnoses seen in-person. The valuable role of emergency department dermatologists is highlighted by frequent changes to diagnosis and treatment plans that result from dermatology consultation. Furthermore, our data suggest that teledermatology is an effective modality with the potential to expand access to dermatologic expertise in the emergency department setting.

AbstractBackgroundHospitalized patients with hematologic malignancies are medically complex and commonly affected by dermatologic conditions.MethodsRetrospective chart review from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, at Rochester Methodist Hospital (Rochester, Minnesota, USA). Patients hospitalized on hematology and BMT services receiving dermatology consultation were included.ResultsIn all, 578 consultations (63% male, median age 61 years) were reviewed. Drug reactions (22%), infection (17%), and malignant neoplasm (10%) accounted for nearly half of diagnoses. Exanthematous drug reaction (10%), graft‐versus‐host disease (7%), and lymphoma or leukemia cutis (6%) were the commonest individual diagnoses. There were significantly more drug reactions in severe neutropenia (33.2% vs. 15.0%), neutrophilic dermatoses in myeloid neoplasm (5.2% vs. 0.3%), and viral infection in lymphoid neoplasm (8.3% vs. 1.2%). Consultation frequently altered treatment (68%), diagnostic workup (63%), and the primary service’s initial diagnostic impression (53%). Biopsies were performed in 52% of consultations and helped secure a diagnosis 73% of the time. A total of 16.4% of consultations did not receive a definitive final diagnosis, and 18.5% were resolved in one visit.ConclusionThis is the largest study to date of hospital dermatology consultation in hematology patients. Biopsies are utilized frequently and are diagnostically useful. The complexity of this patient population is evidenced by the fact that a final diagnosis remains elusive in a number of cases despite the multiple visits required for the vast majority of consultations. Nevertheless, dermatology consultation alters diagnosis and treatment in the majority of patients, highlighting the critical role dermatologists have in the care of these patients.

AbstractBackgroundFew large studies have assessed spironolactone treatment of adult female acne.ObjectivesTo explore the role of spironolactone in the treatment of adult female acne.MethodsWe performed a retrospective case series assessing the efficacy of spironolactone treatment of a cohort of women evaluated at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from 2007 through 2017.ResultsIn total, 395 patients (median age, 32 years) received a median spironolactone dose of 100 mg daily. Approximately two‐thirds of patients (66.1%) had a complete response; 85.1% had a complete response or a partial response greater than 50%. Median times to initial response and maximum response were 3 and 5 months. Efficacy was observed across all severity subtypes of acne, including those with papulopustular and nodulocystic acne. Patients received long‐term treatment with spironolactone (median duration, 13 months) and had few adverse effects.ConclusionsSpironolactone is a safe and effective treatment of acne for women.

When the final patch test reading is barely discernable, it is termed a doubtful, macular erythema , “?+,” or “+/−” reaction (hereby referred to as doubtful reaction ). Information is conflicting about how to interpret doubtful reactions. Many guidelines do not comment on how to approach doubtful reactions; others state that further evaluation can (not should) be performed. In clinical reports, some investigators regard them as positive allergic reactions; some, as positive under certain circumstances; and many, as negative. Indeed, 16 (84%) of 19 recent reports of patch test reactions to standard/baseline series considered doubtful reactions negative for purposes of the report and did not include the number of these reactions. The problem is that these reactions are common and are not infrequently relevant. We recommend that researchers include frequency of doubtful reactions in reports and that doubtful reactions be assessed with the same scrutiny as stronger allergic reactions in the clinical setting.

AbstractAimEosinophilic fasciitis (EF) is a rare, fibrosing disorder of skin and subcutaneous tissue. This study was undertaken to describe its clinical and laboratory features and identify prognostic factors associated with outcome.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective review of all EF patients evaluated at our institution from 1 January1997 to 30 December 2016. Kaplan‐Meier methods were used to determine treatment response rates over time. Potential associations between baseline characteristics and complete response were examined using Cox models adjusted for age and sex. Time‐dependent covariates were used to examine treatment effects.ResultsWe identified 89 EF patients, with a female‐to‐male ratio of 1:1. Clinical features included groove sign in 26 (29%), peau d'orange/dimpling in 22 (25%), inflammatory arthritis in 9 (10%) and muscle weakness in 9 (10%). Aldolase was elevated in 11/36 (31%). Complete response rate was 60% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 35‐75) at 3 years. Diagnostic delay was inversely associated with treatment response (hazards ratio: 0.84 per 1 month increase; 95% CI: 0.73‐0.98). No baseline characteristics correlated with treatment response, but a trend toward positive association of elevated aldolase, hypergammaglobulinemia and presence of hematologic disorders was noted. Methotrexate was the most commonly used immunosuppressant in 79%, hydroxychloroquine in 45%, mycophenolate mofetil in 18% and azathioprine in 8%. No single immunosuppressant agent was associated with a superior response during treatment.ConclusionsEF is characterized by relatively high response rates. Consensus diagnostic criteria, standardized management algorithms, and large prospective multi‐center cohorts are needed to develop an evidence‐directed approach to this challenging condition.

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis from rubber chemicals is increasingly recognized. Objective: To review the results of patch testing with rubber allergens from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2007. Methods: Patients who underwent patch testing with a specialized series of rubber allergens were identified. Results: In total, 773 patients (64.2% female; mean age, 48.6 years) were patch-tested with a rubber series (27 allergens), and 739 (95.6%) were concomitantly patch-tested with a standard allergen series. Commonly affected sites of dermatitis were the hand (49.7%), foot (15.9%), leg (12.0%), and arm (10.9%). The most common occupations were health care worker (16.3%) and homemaker (6.5%); 11.3% were retired. The rate of allergic reaction to at least one rubber allergen was 245 of 773 (31.7%). The allergens that most commonly yielded positive reactions were 4,4-dithiodimorpholine 1% (28/286 [9.8%]), thiuram mix (56/739 [7.6%]), and diphenylguanidine 1% (57/759 [7.5%]). Conclusion: Rubber is a frequent cause of allergic contact dermatitis. Patch testing with a rubber series improved the ability to diagnose allergic contact dermatitis caused by rubber.

Background: Delayed hypersensitivity reactions to natural rubber latex (NRL) have been recognized. These reactions may contribute to allergic contact dermatitis. We therefore have undertaken patch testing of patients with NRL if they are suspected to have allergic contact dermatitis to rubber. Objective: To review results of patch testing with NRL (January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2007). Methods: Patients suspected of having allergic contact dermatitis from rubber who underwent patch testing with NRL were identified retrospectively. For safety reasons, patients with immediate hypersensitivity to NRL were excluded from patch testing. Results: Of 148 patients patch-tested with NRL, 3 (2.0%) had an allergic patch-test reaction. Conclusions: NRL is as common a cause of allergic contact dermatitis as many of the other allergens included in a specialized rubber allergen series. Patients suspected to be allergic to rubber should be patch-tested with NRL (provided they do not have type 1 hypersensitivity to NRL).