Dermatitis Research - Contact-, Seborrheic-, Atopic-, Allergic-Dermatitis, Treatment

Dermatitis Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Dermatitis, including details on contact-, seborrheic-, atopic-, allergic-dermatitis, treatment.


Dermatitis Research Today

Home

View Latest Issue

Information About Dermatitis

Books on Dermatitis

Advertising in Research Today

View Other Research Today Publications



Clinical application of static fluorescence-based cytometry, Cellscan, in cutaneous adverse drug reaction.

Salameh F, Kravitz MS, Barzilai A, Baum S, Shoenfeld Y, Schiffenbauer Y, Trubniykov E, Trau H

Department of Dermatology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. faressalameh@hotmail.com

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Cellscan in identifying culprit drugs causing cutaneous adverse drug reaction. It was a prospective study with 3 months follow up conducted at the Departments of Dermatology, Internal Medicine and Dermatology Outpatient Clinic, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel. The study included 36 patients with cutaneous reaction suspected to be secondary to drugs, treated with a total number of 148 drugs. All patients and drugs were classified to three probability groups according to accepted clinical criteria. The effectiveness of the Cellscan test in identifying the culprit drug was addressed according to the clinical probability for cutaneous drug reaction, the drug class and the type of rash. Data analysis according to the clinical probability for cutaneous drug reaction revealed that patients in the moderate and high probability groups had a high test sensitivity of 77.7% and 83.3% with specificity of 71% and 63%, respectively, in identifying the culprit drug. Classifying the data according to drug classes, revealed that for the antibiotic and cardiovascular drug classes the sensitivity of the test was 100% and 92% with specificity of 83.3% and 55.5%, respectively, in identifying the culprit drug. Finally, the classification of patients according to the type of rash revealed a high evaluating accuracy for culprit drugs in maculopapular rashes with sensitivity and specificity of 90% and 60.4%, respectively. The results of this study imply that the Cellscan test is it a good practical tool for identifying the culprit drug in cutaneous adverse drug reaction.

Published 26 April 2011 in J Dermatol, 38(5): 447-55.
Full-text of this article is available online (may require subscription).

Place a permanent text-link or advertisement here.

© 2004-2013 Dermatitis Research Today. All Rights Reserved.



Dermatitis Research Today Archive:

Volume 1 (2004)
  Issue 1 (September)
  Issue 2 (October)
  Issue 3 (November)
  Issue 4 (December)

Volume 2 (2005)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 3 (2006)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 4 (2007)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 5 (2008)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 6 (2009)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 7 (2010)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 8 (2011)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 9 (2012)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 10 (2013)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)



Dermatitis Books

Textbook of Atopic Dermatitis

Textbook of Atopic Dermatitis