Advertisement

Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 313–330 | Cite as

In Vitro Testing for the Diagnosis of Anticonvulsant Hypersensitivity Syndrome

A Systematic Review
  • Abdelbaset A. Elzagallaai
  • Sandra R. Knowles
  • Michael J. Rieder
  • John R. Bend
  • Neil H. Shear
  • Gideon Koren
Review Article

Abstract

Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome (AHS) is a rare and potentially fatal reaction that develops in susceptible patients following exposure to certain drugs, including aromatic anticonvulsants. Because of its ill-defined clinical picture and resemblance to other diseases, the diagnosis of AHS is often difficult and requires a safe and reliable diagnostic test. Other than systemic rechallenge, which is not always ethically permissible and has its own limitations, no reliable diagnostic test is available for this type of disorder. This systematic review attempts to evaluate the usefulness of the available in vitro tests in the diagnosis of AHS — namely, the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) and the lymphocyte toxicity assay (LTA) — and to examine the different technical aspects of these tests that may contribute to their performance. We included studies in which aromatic anticonvulsant drugs were the likely causes of the hypersensitivity reaction and either the LTT or the LTA was used to aid the diagnosis of AHS. Analysis of original publications from 1950 to the last week of March 2009 and cited in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE has revealed that there are numerous factors affecting the final result of the test, including the following: the timing of the test after exposure; the clinical manifestation of the reactions; the specific drug; and the test procedure and read-out system. In vitro diagnostic tests have the advantage over in vivo tests of being safe to use; however, in vitro tests for the diagnosis of AHS are not well standardized and their sensitivity and specificity are not yet determined. From the reviewed literature, the sensitivity of the LTT and the LTA seem to be around 70% and 90%, respectively, and the positive and negative predictive values of the tests in highly imputable cases are quite high. However, the lack of a gold-standard diagnostic test to prove drug culpability, along with the paucity of large-scale studies, precludes accurate determination of the epidemiological characteristics of these tests. It appears that without further understanding of the mechanisms underlying the pathophysiology of AHS, and how specific drugs and metabolites differentially affect these mechanisms, the development of more reliable tools for AHS diagnosis will be compromised. Consequently, in the absence of further research, the predictability of these tests will remain questionable and they are unlikely to be utilized on a large scale.

Keywords

Carbamazepine Patch Test Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Zonisamide Stimulation Index 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Shear NH, Spielberg SP. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: in vitro assessment of risk. J Clin Invest 1988 Dec; 82(6): 1826–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zaccara G, Franciotta D, Perucca E. Idiosyncratic adverse reactions to antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsia 2007 Jul; 48(7): 1223–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peyriere H, Dereure O, Breton H, et al. Variability in the clinical pattern of cutaneous side-effects of drugs with systemic symptoms: does a DRESS syndrome really exist? Br J Dermatol 2006 Aug; 155(2): 422–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shapiro LE, Shear NH. Mechanisms of drug reactions: the metabolic track. Semin Cutan Med Surg 1996 Dec; 15(4): 217–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spielberg SP, Gordon GB, Blake DA, et al. Anticonvulsant toxicity in vitro: possible role of arene oxides. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1981 May; 217(2): 386–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tennis P, Stern RS. Risk of serious cutaneous disorders after initiation of use of phenytoin, carbamazepine, or sodium valproate: a record linkage study. Neurology 1997 Aug; 49(2): 542–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Primeau MN, Adkinson Jr NF. Recent advances in the diagnosis of drug allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2001 Aug; 1(4): 337–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Romano A, Demoly P. Recent advances in the diagnosis of drug allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2007 Aug; 7(4): 299–303PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pourpak Z, Fazlollahi MR, Fattahi F. Understanding adverse drug reactions and drug allergies: principles, diagnosis and treatment aspects. Recent Pat Inflamm Allergy Drug Discov 2008; 2(1): 24–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elzagallaai AA, Knowles SR, Rieder MJ, et al. Patch testing for the diagnosis of anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: a systematic review. Drug Saf 2009; 32(5): 391–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naranjo CA, Shear NH, Lanctot KL. Advances in the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions. J Clin Pharmacol 1992 Oct; 32(10): 897–904PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beeler A, Pichler WJ. In vitro tests of T-cell-mediated drug hypersensitivity. In: Pichler WJ, editor. Drug hypersensitivity. Basel: Karger, 2007: 380–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lan CC, Wu CS, Tsai PC, et al. Diagnostic role of soluble fas ligand secretion by peripheral blood mononuclear cells from patients with previous drug-induced blistering disease: a pilot study. Acta Derm Venereol 2006; 86(3): 215–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wu Y, Sanderson JP, Farrell J, et al. Activation of T cells by carbamazepine and carbamazepine metabolites. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006 Jul; 118(1): 233–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beeler A, Engler O, Gerber BO, et al. Long-lasting reactivity and high frequency of drug-specific T cells after severe systemic drug hypersensitivity reactions. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006 Feb; 117(2): 455–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pentycross CR. Technique for lymphocyte transformation. J Clin Pathol 1968 Mar; 21(2): 175–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Böyum A. Isolation of leucocytes from human blood: further observations. Methylcellulose, dextran, and Ficoll as erythrocyte aggregating agents. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl 1968; 97: 31–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rigas DA, Osgood EE. Purification and properties of the phytohemagglutinin of Phaseolus vulgaris. J Biol Chem 1955 Feb; 212(2): 607–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Minor AH, Burnett L. A method for obtaining living leukocytes from human peripheral blood by acceleration of erythrocyte sedimentation. Blood 1948 Jul; 3(7): 799–802PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Li JG, Osgood EE. A method for the rapid separation of leukocytes and nucleated erythrocytes from blood of marrow with a phytohemagglutinin from red beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Blood 1949 May; 4(5): 670–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nowell PC. Phytohemagglutinin: an initiator of mitosis in cultures of normal human leukocytes. Cancer Res 1960 May; 20: 462–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pearmain G, Lycette RR, Fitzgerald PH. Tuberculin-induced mitosis in peripheral blood leucocytes. Lancet 1963 Mar 23; 1(7282): 637–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holland P, Mauer AM. Drug-induced in-vitro stimulation of peripheral lymphocytes. Lancet 1964 Jun 20; 1(7347): 1368–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Caron GA, Sarkany I. Lymphoblast transformation in sulphonamide sensitivity. Br J Dermatol 1965 Nov; 77(11): 556–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vischer TL. Lymphocyte cultures in drug hypersensitivity. Lancet 1966 Aug 27; 2(7461): 467–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Leguit Jr P, Meinesz A, Zeijlemaker WP, et al. Immunological studies in burn patients: I. Lymphocyte transformation in vitro. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1973; 44(1): 101–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schellekens PT, Eijsvoogel VP. Lymphocyte transformation in vitro: I. Tissue culture conditions and quantitative measurements. Clin Exp Immunol 1968 Jul; 3(6): 571–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schellekens PT, Eijsvoogel VP. Lymphocyte transformation in vitro: III. Mechanism of stimulation in the mixed lymphocyte culture. Clin Exp Immunol 1970 Aug; 7(2): 229–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schellekens PT, Eijsvoogel VP. Lymphocyte transformation in vitro: IV. Recruitment in antigen-stimulated cultures. Clin Exp Immunol 1971 Feb; 8(2): 187–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schellekens PT, Vriesendorp B, Eijsvoogel VP, et al. Lymphocyte transformation in vitro: II. Mixed lymphocyte culture in relation to leucocyte antigens. Clin Exp Immunol 1970 Feb; 6(2): 241–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pichler WJ, Tilch J. The lymphocyte transformation test in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity. Allergy 2004 Aug; 59(8): 809–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sachs B, Erdmann S, Malte Baron J, et al. Determination of interleukin-5 secretion from drug-specific activated ex vivo peripheral blood mononuclear cells as a test system for the in vitro detection of drug sensitization. Clin Exp Allergy 2002 May; 32(5): 736–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Turcanu V, Maleki SJ, Lack G. Characterization of lymphocyte responses to peanuts in normal children, peanut-allergic children, and allergic children who acquired tolerance to peanuts. J Clin Invest 2003 Apr; 111(7): 1065–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Okumura A, Tsuge I, Kubota T, et al. Phenytoin desensitization monitored by antigen specific T cell response using carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester dilution assay. Eur J Paediatr Neurol 2007 Nov; 11(6): 385–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lyons AB. Analysing cell division in vivo and in vitro using flow cytometric measurement of CFSE dye dilution. J Immunol Methods 2000 Sep 21; 243(1–2): 147–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fulcher D, Wong S. Carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester-based pro-liferative assays for assessment of T cell function in the diagnostic laboratory. Immunol Cell Biol 1999 Dec; 77(6): 559–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Nyfeler B, Pichler WJ. The lymphocyte transformation test for the diagnosis of drug allergy: sensitivity and specificity. Clin Exp Allergy 1997 Feb; 27(2): 175–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Spielberg SP. In vitro assessment of pharmacogenetic susceptibility to toxic drug metabolites in humans. Fed Proc 1984 May 15; 43(8): 2308–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Spielberg SP. In vitro analysis of idiosyncratic drug reactions. Clin Biochem 1986 Apr; 19(2): 142–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Spielberg SP, Gordon GB, Blake DA, et al. Predisposition to phenytoin hepatotoxicity assessed in vitro. N Engl J Med 1981 Sep 24; 305(13): 722–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Spielberg SP. Acetaminophen toxicity in human lymphocytes in vitro. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1980 May; 213(2): 395–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Knowles SR, Uetrecht J, Shear NH. Idiosyncratic drug reactions: the reactive metabolite syndromes. Lancet 2000 Nov 4; 356(9241): 1587–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Uetrecht J. Idiosyncratic drug reactions: current understanding. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2007; 47: 513–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Uetrecht J. Idiosyncratic drug reactions: past, present, and future. Chem Res Toxicol 2008 Jan; 21 (1): 84-92Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kupfer A, Brilis GM, Watson JT, et al. A major pathway of mephenytoin metabolism in man: aromatic hydroxylation to p-hydroxymephenytoin. Drug Metab Dispos 1980 Jan-Feb; 8(1): 1–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lertratanangkoon K, Horning MG. Metabolism of carbamazepine. Drug Metab Dispos 1982 Jan–Feb; 10(1): 1–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Karande S, Gogtay NJ, Kanchan S, et al. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome to lamotrigine confirmed by lymphocyte stimulation in vitro. Indian J Med Sci 2006 Feb; 60(2): 59–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Aberer W. Drug hypersensitivities: the need for standardization. Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol 2005 Jun; 37(6): 219–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wolkenstein P, Charue D, Laurent P, et al. Metabolic predisposition to cutaneous adverse drug reactions: role in toxic epidermal necrolysis caused by sulfonamides and anticonvulsants. Arch Dermatol 1995 May; 131(5): 544–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hari Y, Frutig-Schnyder K, Hurni M, et al. T cell involvement in cutaneous drug eruptions. Clin Exp Allergy 2001 Sep; 31(9): 1398–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Naisbitt DJ, Farrell J, Wong G, et al. Characterization of drug-specific T cells in lamotrigine hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2003 Jun; 111(6): 1393–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Farrell J, Naisbitt DJ, Drummond NS, et al. Characterization of sulfamethoxazole and sulfamethoxazole metabolite-specific T-cell responses in animals and humans. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2003 Jul; 306(1): 229–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Naisbitt DJ, Britschgi M, Wong G, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to carbamazepine: characterization of the specificity, phenotype, and cytokine profile of drug-specific T cell clones. Mol Pharmacol 2003 Mar; 63(3): 732–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Berg PA, Becker EW. The lymphocyte transformation test: a debated method for the evaluation of drug allergic hepatic injury. J Hepatol 1995 Jan; 22(1): 115–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Beeler A, Zaccaria L, Kawabata T, et al. CD69 upregulation on T cells as an in vitro marker for delayed-type drug hypersensitivity. Allergy 2008 Feb; 63(2): 181–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kano Y, Hirahara K, Mitsuyama Y, et al. Utility of the lymphocyte transformation test in the diagnosis of drug sensitivity: dependence on its timing and the type of drug eruption. Allergy 2007 Dec; 62(12): 1439–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Tsuge I, Okumura A, Kondo Y, et al. Allergen-specific T-cell response in patients with phenytoin hypersensitivity: simultaneous analysis of proliferation and cytokine production by carboxyfluorescein succinimidyl ester (CFSE) dilution assay. Allergol Int 2007 Jun; 56(2): 149–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Romano A, Pettinato R, Andriolo M, et al. Hypersensitivity to aromatic anticonvulsants: in vivo and in vitro cross-reactivity studies. Curr Pharm Des 2006; 12(26): 3373–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gex-Collet C, Helbling A, Pichler WJ. Multiple drug hypersensitivity: proof of multiple drug hypersensitivity by patch and lymphocyte transformation tests. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 2005; 15(4): 293–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Aihara Y, Ito SI, Kobayashi Y, et al. Carbamazepine-induced hypersensitivity syndrome associated with transient hypogammaglobulinaemia and reactivation of human herpesvirus 6 infection demonstrated by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Br J Dermatol 2003 Jul; 149(1): 165–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Neukomm CB, Yawalkar N, Helbling A, et al. T-cell reactions to drugs in distinct clinical manifestations of drug allergy. J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol 2001; 11(4): 275–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mutoh K, Hidaka Y, Hirose Y, et al. Possible induction of systemic lupus erythematosus by zonisamide. Pediatr Neurol 2001 Oct; 25(4): 340–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Troger U, Brandt W, Rose W. Development of a pulmonary phenytoin-associated hypersensitivity reaction despite concomitant dexamethasone and prednisolone administration. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2000 Sep; 38(9): 452–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Troger U, Brandt W, Rose W. A very early onset of respiratory failure due to phenytoin-associated hypersensitivity syndrome and concomitant glucocorticoid administration [letter]. Intensive Care Med 2000 Feb; 26(2): 258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Chinen J, Piecuch S. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome versus Kawasaki disease: a challenging clinical diagnosis with therapeutic implications. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2000 Feb; 39(2): 109–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Schaub N, Bircher AJ. Severe hypersensitivity syndrome to lamotrigine confirmed by lymphocyte stimulation in vitro. Allergy 2000 Feb; 55(2): 191–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Brown KL, Henderson DC, Nadel S, et al. Carbamazepine hypersensitivity and the use of lymphocyte proliferation responses. Dev Med Child Neurol 1999 Apr; 41(4): 267–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sachs B, Ronnau AC, von Schmiedeberg S, et al. Lamotrigine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome: demonstration of specific lymphocyte reactivity in vitro. Dermatology 1997; 195(1): 60–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Troost RJ, Van Parys JA, Hooijkaas H, et al. Allergy to carbamazepine: parallel in vivo and in vitro detection. Epilepsia 1996 Nov; 37(11): 1093–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Okuyama R, Ichinohasama R, Tagami H. Carbamazepine induced erythroderma with systemic lymphadenopathy. J Dermatol 1996 Jul; 23(7): 489–94PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mauri-Hellweg D, Bettens F, Mauri D, et al. Activation of drug-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in individuals allergic to sulfonamides, phenytoin, and carbamazepine. J Immunol 1995 Jul 1; 155(1): 462–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kimura M, Yoshino K, Maeoka Y, et al. Carbamazepine-induced throm-bocytopenia and carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide: a case report. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 1995 Mar; 49(1): 69–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Friedmann PS, Strickland I, Pirmohamed M, et al. Investigation of mechanisms in toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by carbamazepine. Arch Dermatol 1994 May; 130(5): 598–604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Maria VA, Pinto L, Victorino RM. Lymphocyte reactivity to ex-vivo drug antigens in drug-induced hepatitis. J Hepatol 1994 Aug; 21(2): 151–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Takahashi N, Aizawa H, Takata S, et al. Acute interstitial pneumonitis induced by carbamazepine. Eur Respir J 1993 Oct; 6(9): 1409–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Danno K, Kume M, Ohta M, et al. Erythroderma with generalized lymphadenopathy induced by phenytoin. J Dermatol 1989 Oct; 16(5): 392–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Zakrzewska JM, Ivanyi L. In vitro lymphocyte proliferation by carbamazepine, carbamazepine-10, 11-epoxide, and oxcarbazepine in the diagnosis of drug-induced hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1988 Jul; 82(1): 110–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    De Swert LF, Ceuppens JL, Teuwen D, et al. Acute interstitial pneumonitis and carbamazepine therapy. Acta Paediatr Scand 1984 Mar; 73(2): 285–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Houwerzijl J, De Gast GC, Nater JP, et al. Lymphocyte-stimulation tests and patch tests to carbamazepine hypersensitivity. Clin Exp Immunol 1977 Aug; 29(2): 272–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Cullinan SA, Bower GC. Acute pulmonary hypersensitivity to carbamazepine. Chest 1975 Oct; 68(4): 580–1PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Virolainen M. Blast transformation in vivo and in vitro in carbamazepin hypersensitivity. Clin Exp Immunol 1971 Sep; 9(3): 429–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Luque I, Leyva L, Jose Torres M, et al. In vitro T-cell responses to beta-lactam drugs in immediate and nonimmediate allergic reactions. Allergy 2001 Jul; 56(7): 611–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Shepherd GM. Hypersensitivity reactions to drugs: evaluation and management. Mt Sinai J Med 2003 Mar; 70(2): 113–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Sharma VK, Vatve M, Sawhney IM, et al. Clinical spectrum of drug rashes due to antiepileptics. J Assoc Physicians India 1998 Jul; 46(7): 595–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Kuechler PC, Britschgi M, Schmid S, et al. Cytotoxic mechanisms in different forms of T-cell-mediated drug allergies. Allergy 2004 Jun; 59(6): 613–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Posadas SJ, Pichler WJ. Delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions-new concepts. Clin Exp Allergy 2007 Jul; 37(7): 989–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Pichler WJ, Beeler A, Keller M, et al. Pharmacological interaction of drugs with immune receptors: the p-i concept. Allergol Int 2006 Mar; 55(1): 17–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Gerber BO, Pichler WJ. Noncovalent interactions of drugs with immune receptors may mediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions. AAPS J 2006; 8(1): E160–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Gerber BO, Pichler WJ. The p-i concept: evidence and implications. In: Pichler WJ, editor. Drug hypersensitivity. Basel: Karger, 2007: 66–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Hashizume H, Takigawa M, Tokura Y. Characterization of drug-specific T cells in phenobarbital-induced eruption. J Immunol 2002 May 15; 168(10): 5359–68PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Naisbitt DJ, Pirmohamed M, Park BK. Immunological principles of T-cell-mediated adverse drug reactions in skin. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2007 Mar; 6(2): 109–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Pichler WJ. Delayed drug hypersensitivity reactions. Ann Intern Med 2003 Oct 21; 139(8): 683–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Matsuno O, Okubo T, Hiroshige S, et al. Drug-induced lymphocyte stimulation test is not useful for the diagnosis of drug-induced pneumonia. Tohoku J Exp Med 2007 May; 212(1): 49–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Mantani N, Kogure T, Tamura J, et al. Lymphocyte transformation test for medicinal herbs yields false-positive results for first-visit patients. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 2003 May; 10(3): 479–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Ono E, Miyazaki E, Matsuno O, et al. Minocycline-induced acute eosino-philic pneumonia: controversial results of lymphocyte stimulation test and re-challenge test. Intern Med 2007; 46(9): 593–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Wu Y, Farrell J, Pirmohamed M, et al. Generation and characterization of antigen-specific CD4+, CD8+, and CD4+CD8+ T-cell clones from patients with carbamazepine hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007 Apr; 119(4): 973–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Sachs B, Erdmann S, Al-Masaoudi T, et al. In vitro drug allergy detection system incorporating human liver microsomes in chlorazepate-induced skin rash: drug-specific proliferation associated with interleukin-5 secretion. Br J Dermatol 2001 Feb; 144(2): 316–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Merk HF. Diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity: lymphocyte transformation test and cytokines. Toxicology 2005 Apr 15; 209(2): 217–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Abe R, Shimizu T, Shibaki A, et al. Toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome are induced by soluble Fas ligand. Am J Pathol 2003 May; 162(5): 1515–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Krensky AM, Clayberger C. Granulysin: a novel host defense molecule. Am J Transplant 2005 Aug; 5(8): 1789–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Chung WH, Hung SI, Yang JY, et al. Granulysin is a key mediator for disseminated keratinocyte death in Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Nat Med 2008 Dec; 14(12): 1343–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Neuman MG, Malkiewicz IM, Shear NH. A novel lymphocyte toxicity assay to assess drug hypersensitivity syndromes. Clin Biochem 2000 Oct; 33(7): 517–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Neuman MG, Shear NH, Malkiewicz IM, et al. Predicting possible zonisamide hypersensitivity syndrome. Exp Dermatol 2008 Dec; 17(12): 1045–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Naranjo CA, Kwok MC, Lanctot KL, et al. Enhanced differential diagnosis of anticonvulsant hypersensitivity reactions by an integrated Bayesian and biochemical approach. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994 Nov; 56(5): 564–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Dwivedi R, Gogtay N, Kharkar V, et al. In-vitro lymphocyte toxicity to a phenytoin metabolite in phenytoin induced cutaneous adverse drug eruptions. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2004 Jul–Aug; 70(4): 217–20PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Bavdekar SB, Muranjan MN, Gogtay NJ, et al. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: lymphocyte toxicity assay for the confirmation of diagnosis and risk assessment. Ann Pharmacother 2004 Oct; 38(10): 1648–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Gennis MA, Vemuri R, Burns EA, et al. Familial occurrence of hypersensitivity to phenytoin. Am J Med 1991 Dec; 91(6): 631–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Pirmohamed M, Graham A, Roberts P, et al. Carbamazepine-hypersensitivity: assessment of clinical and in vitro chemical cross-reactivity with phenytoin and oxcarbazepine. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1991 Dec; 32(6): 741–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Hewitt CW, Sawyer S, Beck PA, et al. A simple method for the isolation of platelet-free lymphocyte suspensions from rat whole blood. J Immunol Methods 1980; 36(3–4): 227–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Rueda F, Marti F, Pinol G, et al. Artefactual low lymphocyte activity caused by platelet contamination in the mononuclear cell preparations. Am J Hematol 1989 Jun; 31(2): 126–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Casale TB, Kaliner M. A rapid method for isolation of human mononuclear cells free of significant platelet contamination. J Immunol Methods 1982 Dec 30; 55(3): 347–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Hurwitz RL, Schreinemachers D, Kersey JH. Elimination of platelets from mononuclear cell preparations using heat-killed yeast. Exp Hematol 1979 Feb; 7(2): 81–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Lad PM, Easton J, Niedzin H, et al. A method for the preparation of mononuclear cells devoid of platelet contamination and its application to the evaluation of putative alpha-receptors in normal and asthmatic subjects. J Immunol Methods 1988 Jun 13; 110(2): 193–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Shibusawa Y, Suzuki K, Kinoshita H, et al. Selective separation of human peripheral platelets, granulocytes and lymphocytes by surface affinity chromatography. J Chromatogr B Biomed Appl 1995 Apr 21; 666(2): 233–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Martignoni M, Groothuis GM, de Kanter R. Species differences between mouse, rat, dog, monkey and human CYP-mediated drug metabolism, inhibition and induction. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2006 Dec; 2(6): 875–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Park BK, Pirmohamed M, Kitteringham NR. The role of cytochrome P450 enzymes in hepatic and extrahepatic human drug toxicity. Pharmacol Ther 1995; 68(3): 385–424PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Rieder MJ, Uetrecht J, Shear NH, et al. Diagnosis of sulfonamide hypersensitivity reactions by in-vitro “rechallenge” with hydroxylamine metabolites. Ann Intern Med 1989 Feb 15; 110(4): 286–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Ting TY. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: identification and management. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2007 Jul; 9(4): 243–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Krauss G. Current understanding of delayed anticonvulsant hypersensitivity reactions. Epilepsy Curr 2006 Mar–Apr; 6(2): 33–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Gogtay NJ, Bavdekar SB, Kshirsagar NA. Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: a review. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2005 May; 4(3): 571–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Bessmertny O, Pham T. Antiepileptic hypersensitivity syndrome: clinicians beware and be aware. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2002 Jan; 2(1): 34–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Quinones MD, Valero C, Salcedo M, et al. Phenytoin hypersensitivity syndrome with fatal evolution. Allergy 1999 Jan; 54(1): 83–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Huang LY, Liao WC, Chiou CC, et al. Fatal toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by carbamazepine treatment in a patient who previously had carbamazepine-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome. J Formos Med Assoc 2007 Dec; 106(12): 1032–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Kwan P, Brodie MJ. Effectiveness of first antiepileptic drug. Epilepsia 2001 Oct;42(10): 1255–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Toledano R, Gil-Nagel A. Adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs. Semin Neurol 2008 Jul; 28(3): 317–27PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Devi K, George S, Criton S, et al. Carbamazepine: the commonest cause of toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome. A study of 7 years. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2005 Sep–Oct; 71(5): 325–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Mathews KP. Clinical spectrum of allergic and pseudoallergic drug reactions. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1984 Oct; 74 (4 Pt 2): 558–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Leeder JS. Mechanisms of idiosyncratic hypersensitivity reactions to antiepileptic drugs. Epilepsia 1998; 39Suppl. 7: S8–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Shear NH, Spielberg SP, Grant DM, et al. Differences in metabolism of sulfonamides predisposing to idiosyncratic toxicity. Ann Intern Med 1986 Aug; 105(2): 179–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Lanctot KL, Ghajar BM, Shear NH, et al. Improving the diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions associated with sulfonamides. J Clin Pharmacol 1994 Dec; 34(12): 1228–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Neuman MG, Shear NH, Malkiewicz IM, et al. Immunopathogenesis of hypersensitivity syndrome reactions to sulfonamides. Transl Res 2007 May; 149(5): 243–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Tabatabaei AR, Thies RL, Abbott FS. Assessing the mechanism of metabolism-dependent valproic acid-induced in vitro cytotoxicity. Chem Res Toxicol 1999 Apr; 12(4): 323–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdelbaset A. Elzagallaai
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sandra R. Knowles
    • 4
  • Michael J. Rieder
    • 1
    • 2
    • 5
    • 6
  • John R. Bend
    • 2
    • 7
    • 8
  • Neil H. Shear
    • 4
    • 9
  • Gideon Koren
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 5
    • 6
  1. 1.Ivey Chair in Molecular Toxicology, Schulich School of Medicine and DentistryUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Schulich School of Medicine and DentistryUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  3. 3.Department of MedicineUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  4. 4.Department of Pharmacy and Drug SafetySunnybrook Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Department of PediatricsChildren’s Hospital of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  6. 6.Department of PediatricsUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  7. 7.Department of PathologyUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  8. 8.Siebens-Drake Medical Research InstituteUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  9. 9.Department of DermatologyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations