Submental fat (SMF) accumulation within the subcutaneous (preplatysmal) or subplatysmal fat compartment of the cervical anatomy results in an obtuse cervicomental angle and loss of mandibular and cervical contours. It is a common cosmetic concern due to its aesthetic association with weight gain and aging.¹ Minimally invasive or noninvasive submental lipolytic agents and techniques are sought for patients who are not candidates for surgery or prefer more conservative cosmetic treatments. These methods typically are only effective in addressing preplatysmal SMF, as subplatysmal SMF requires more surgical methods due to its less-accessible location. The pathology of SMF should initially be assessed by clinical examination or ultrasonography. In this article, we review the most relevant clinical and safety data on minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF, including laser-assisted lipolysis (LAL), radiofrequency (RF)–assisted lipolysis, deoxycholic acid (DCA), and cryolipolysis.

MINIMALLY INVASIVE MODALITIES

Traditional, or tumescent, liposuction is still widely considered the most effective method for removal of large masses of adiposity. Laser- and RF-assisted adjuncts have been more recently developed to improve patient side effects and recovery time and reduce the manual effort of surgeons. Of note, these adjuncts, with some exceptions, still require the same invasiveness as traditional liposuction, involving submental stab incisions of up to 2.4 mm.

Laser-Assisted Lipolysis

Laser-assisted lipolysis produces a similar effect as suction-assisted lipoplasty by focusing pulses of laser energy through a 1-mm wide fiber optic cannula and inducing thermally mediated adipolysis. The directed laser results in adipocyte rupturing with added benefits of skin retraction and small vessel coagulation, thus lessening intraoperative blood loss.² This technique typically requires smaller incisions than traditional liposuction. The most common laser lipolysis systems used in cosmetic dermatology are the 920- to 980-nm diode lasers and 1064- to 1440-nm Nd:YAG lasers. The 924-nm diode, 1064-nm Nd:YAG, and 1064/1320-nm Nd:YAG have been best characterized in clinical trials, as reviewed by Fakhouri et al,³ with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SMF density.

The first randomized prospective trial comparing LAL (using 1064-nm Nd:YAG) and traditional liposuction in various anatomical areas on 25 patients showed no difference in cosmetic results, ecchymoses, edema, or retraction, and significantly lower postoperative pain ratings (P<.0001) in LAL.⁴ A more recent prospective randomized comparison of LAL (980-nm diode laser; 6–8 W) and traditional liposuction of the submental area in 40 female patients showed greater reduction in SMF thickness in the LAL group compared to the liposuction group at 2-month follow-up (6.2 vs 8.22 unspecified units; P<.001) with significant improvement from baseline in both groups (P<.001).⁵ However, the cosmetic benefit of LAL over traditional liposuction remains controversial and has not been unequivocally established in the literature.

Common adverse events (AEs) are postoperative swelling, ecchymoses, and pain, and complications of interest are nodularity, skin infections, burns, and nerve damage.⁶ In one retrospective investigation (N=537), these complications occurred at a rate of less than 1% (4 burns and 1 skin infection).⁶ Patients treated with LAL may report fewer AEs, especially pain and bleeding, compared to liposuction-treated patients.³

RF-Assisted Lipolysis

Radiofrequency-assisted lipolysis is one of the newest technologies in lipocontouring. NeckTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions) is effective for treatment of preplatysmal adiposity and cervicomental lipocontouring; a 2.4-mm bipolar probe that is inserted into the subdermal space and connected with an external electrode emits RF energy and simultaneously coagulates and aspirates adipose tissue. NeckTite also may be used in conjunction with FaceTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions), which promotes fibroseptal network remodeling and dermal contraction.²

In the first published investigation of the efficacy and safety of NeckTite, 47 of 55 patients received treatment of slight to moderate SMF (average body mass index [BMI], 25 kg/m²) with NeckTite and FaceTite or NeckTite alone.⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 87% (48/55) of patients subjectively rated treatment efficacy as satisfactory, and 2 independent physicians rated the improvement between before-and-after frontal and lateral photographs of the submental area as moderate to excellent in 95% (52/55) of all cases. Reported complications in this study were full-thickness burns resulting in minor scarring (2/55 [4%]), neck tissue hardness that resolved with daily massage after 3 months (5/55 [9%]), and transient facial nerve paresis of the mandibular branch that resolved after 2 months (1/55 [2%]).⁷

NONINVASIVE MODALITIES

RF-Assisted Contouring

Another exciting development in RF technology is truSculpt (Cutera), a noninvasive contouring device that is placed over the epidermis and emits RF energy that preferentially heats fat more than other tissue types. In a single-center prospective trial of efficacy and safety in the treatment of SMF, 17 patients received 2 treatments with truSculpt administered 1 month apart.⁸ At 1- and 6-month follow-up, 82.3% (14/17) and 52.9% (9/17) of patients showed improvement on physician assessment. Submental circumference and ultrasonographic fat thickness reductions at 1-month follow-up were 1.4 cm (5.7% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and 5.4 mm (9.7% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.005]), respectively. At further longer-term follow-up to 6 months, submental circumference was 0.9 cm (3.8% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and ultrasonographic fat reduction was 6.8 mm (10.5% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.006]). Commonly reported AEs were pain (rate not given), erythema (8/17 [47%]), edema (1/17 [6%]), and vesicle formation (1/17 [6%]); all were self-resolving. Erythema usually subsided within 6 hours posttreatment. No other AEs or complications were reported.⁸

Deoxycholic Acid

Deoxycholic acid (DCA)(formerly ATX-101) is an injectable liquid formulation of synthetic DCA that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 for moderate to severe SMF. Deoxycholic acid exists endogenously as a bile salt emulsifier and has been shown to cause dose-dependent adipocyte lysis, necrosis, disruption and dissolution of fat architecture, and inflammatory targeting of adipocytes by immune cells.^9,10 Thus, DCA causes targeted adipocytolysis and is a novel medical agent in the treatment of SMF. Supplied in 2-mL vials, clinicians may inject 10 mL at each treatment for up to 6 treatments administered 1 month apart.¹¹

Efficacy

REFINE-1, a pivotal North American–based phase 3 trial, investigated the efficacy and safety of DCA.¹² A total of 506 participants with scores of 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe) on the Clinician-Reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (CR-SMFRS) and a mean BMI of 29 kg/m² were randomized to receive preplatysmal fat injections of 2 mg/cm² of DCA (n=256) or placebo (n=250). Participants received up to 10 mL of product (mean total of 25 mL of DCA across all visits) at each treatment session for up to 6 sessions depending on individual efficacy, with approximately 28 days between sessions. Sixty-four percent of the treatment group received all 6 treatments. At 12-week follow-up after the last treatment session, 70% of DCA-treated participants versus 18.6% of placebo-treated participants (P<.001) improved by 1 grade or more on the CR-SMFRS and 13.4% versus 0% (P<.001) improved by 2 grades or more. Skin laxity was unchanged or improved in 92.7% of the DCA group and 87.6% of the placebo group.¹²

REFINE-2, the second of the North American phase 3 trials, had parallel inclusionary criteria and study design and established efficacy of 2 mg/cm² DCA over placebo in 516 participants (randomized 1:1).¹³ At 12 weeks posttreatment, 66.5% of DCA-treated participants versus 22.2% of placebo-treated participants improved by 1 grade or more according to the CR-SMFRS (P<.001) and 18.6% versus 3% improved by 2 grades or more in SMF (P<.001). Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of participants in the DCA (n=113) and placebo groups (n=112) showed that 40.2% versus 5.2% (P<.001) exhibited 10% or more reduction in submental volume, with similar comparative rates of SMF thickness reduction via caliper measurements.¹³
 

Safety

Safety data from REFINE-1 showed higher rates of treatment-related AEs in DCA-treated participants compared to placebo, including hematoma (70% vs 67.3%), anesthesia (66.9% vs 4.4%), pain (65.4% vs 23.4%), edema (52.9% vs 21.8%), induration (18.3% vs 1.6%), paresthesia (12.8% vs 3.2%), nodule formation (12.5% vs 0.8%), and pruritus (8.6% vs 3.6%).¹² In this trial, 11 of 258 cases (4.3%) of marginal mandibular nerve paresis and asymmetric smile occurred, all in DCA-treated participants and with a median duration of 31 days. Dysphagia resolving in a median duration of 4 days occurred in 1.6% (4/258) of DCA-treated participants.¹² REFINE-2 exhibited similar rates of common AEs. Complications of note were 14 cases of marginal mandibular nerve paresis (11 in DCA group, 3 in placebo group) attributed to injection technique, 1 case of skin ulceration possibly related to accidental injection into dermis, and 6 cases of dysphagia in DCA participants attributed to higher volume treatment sessions and postinjection swelling. Dysphagia lasted a median of 2.5 days and resolved without sequelae.¹³

Overall, DCA demonstrated high rates of minor injection-site AEs that resolved without sequelae and could be mitigated by comfort therapies (eg, lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) as well as understanding the anatomy of the submental region. Adverse effects of particular interest included marginal mandibular nerve palsy, skin ulceration, and dysphagia.^12,13

Cryolipolysis

Cryolipolysis is an advancement that utilizes the application of noninvasive cooling temperatures to the skin’s surface to destroy underlying adipocytes based on the concept that lipid-filled cells are more susceptible to cold-induced injury than water-filled cells. Thus, cryolipolysis selectively targets adipose tissue, leading to cell death without harm to surrounding cells and without the need for surgery or injections.¹⁴

Cryolipolysis typically is delivered via a vacuum applicator (CoolMini, Zeltiq Aesthetics Inc), which applies temperatures of –10°C (14°F) to the skin in cycles of 60 minutes each. Initially approved by the FDA for treatment of flank adiposity in 2010, cryolipolysis has since been approved for treatment of the abdomen, thighs, and submental area.¹⁴ An advantage of cryolipolysis is that it does not require frequent treatment sessions for maximal efficacy.

Efficacy

The efficacy of cryolipolysis in the treatment of SMF was established in a multicenter device investigation resulting in its FDA approval for the submental region.¹⁵ Sixty participants with a mean BMI of 31.8 kg/m² received 1 (1/60) or 2 (59/60) treatment sessions of the submental area administered 6 weeks apart. Primary efficacy assessments included analysis by 3 blinded reviewers who viewed photographs of each participant at baseline, immediately posttreatment, 6 weeks posttreatment, and 12 weeks posttreatment; ultrasonographic measurements of SMF thickness; and a 12-point patient satisfaction questionnaire. Blinded reviewers correctly identified baseline images in 91.4% (55/60) of cases. Ultrasonography confirmed a mean reduction in SMF of 2 mm (P<.0001) or 20% of fat thickness at 12 weeks posttreatment. On subjective patient satisfaction surveys, 83% (50/60) of participants were satisfied with the procedure and 77% (46/60) reported a visible reduction in fat and perceived an improvement in appearance.¹⁵

Safety

The most common immediate posttreatment AEs were erythema/purpura (100%), numbness (90%), edema (62%), tingling (30%), blanching (25%), and bruising (3%) at the site of cryolipolysis with resolution within 1 week posttreatment, except for numbness.¹⁵ At 6-week follow-up, all AEs had resolved, except continued numbness in 4 participants that resolved by 12-week follow-up. A further event of note was fullness in the throat in 1 participant that was attributed to swelling and resolved at 40 days posttreatment without incident. No serious AEs were reported in this trial.¹⁵

A particularly concerning but rare complication that is increasing in awareness is paradoxical adipose hyperplasia following cryolipolysis. Patients may develop firm painless areas of soft tissue enlargements in the area of cryolipolysis typically 3 to 6 months posttreatment.¹⁶ The largest published report recorded an incidence rate of 0.46% (n=2, all males) at a single-center institution of 422 cryolipolysis treatments.¹⁶ Other incidence rates reported are 0.0051% and 0.78%.¹⁷ Causes and associations are not known, though male gender is speculated to increase risk.

Conclusion

This article highlights the available information on advances in minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF accumulation. The efficacy and safety trials varied in quality and in different methods of end point analysis of SMF reduction. Further, few trials have featured head-to-head comparisons of treatments.

Although liposuction and adjuncts remain the gold standard in large-mass lipid removal, these procedures are invasive and exhibit typical risks of surgery. Given its sensitive location, the submental area may require the use of more delicate therapeutic methods, including completely noninvasive devices such as truSculpt and cryolipolysis. Regardless of the chosen treatment, the most important factors in yielding patient satisfaction and SMF improvement are proper patient selection and an understanding of the anatomical source of adiposity to be addressed with the therapeutic modalities.

[polldaddy:9711250]

Submental fat (SMF) accumulation within the subcutaneous (preplatysmal) or subplatysmal fat compartment of the cervical anatomy results in an obtuse cervicomental angle and loss of mandibular and cervical contours. It is a common cosmetic concern due to its aesthetic association with weight gain and aging.¹ Minimally invasive or noninvasive submental lipolytic agents and techniques are sought for patients who are not candidates for surgery or prefer more conservative cosmetic treatments. These methods typically are only effective in addressing preplatysmal SMF, as subplatysmal SMF requires more surgical methods due to its less-accessible location. The pathology of SMF should initially be assessed by clinical examination or ultrasonography. In this article, we review the most relevant clinical and safety data on minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF, including laser-assisted lipolysis (LAL), radiofrequency (RF)–assisted lipolysis, deoxycholic acid (DCA), and cryolipolysis.

MINIMALLY INVASIVE MODALITIES

Traditional, or tumescent, liposuction is still widely considered the most effective method for removal of large masses of adiposity. Laser- and RF-assisted adjuncts have been more recently developed to improve patient side effects and recovery time and reduce the manual effort of surgeons. Of note, these adjuncts, with some exceptions, still require the same invasiveness as traditional liposuction, involving submental stab incisions of up to 2.4 mm.

Laser-Assisted Lipolysis

Laser-assisted lipolysis produces a similar effect as suction-assisted lipoplasty by focusing pulses of laser energy through a 1-mm wide fiber optic cannula and inducing thermally mediated adipolysis. The directed laser results in adipocyte rupturing with added benefits of skin retraction and small vessel coagulation, thus lessening intraoperative blood loss.² This technique typically requires smaller incisions than traditional liposuction. The most common laser lipolysis systems used in cosmetic dermatology are the 920- to 980-nm diode lasers and 1064- to 1440-nm Nd:YAG lasers. The 924-nm diode, 1064-nm Nd:YAG, and 1064/1320-nm Nd:YAG have been best characterized in clinical trials, as reviewed by Fakhouri et al,³ with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SMF density.

The first randomized prospective trial comparing LAL (using 1064-nm Nd:YAG) and traditional liposuction in various anatomical areas on 25 patients showed no difference in cosmetic results, ecchymoses, edema, or retraction, and significantly lower postoperative pain ratings (P<.0001) in LAL.⁴ A more recent prospective randomized comparison of LAL (980-nm diode laser; 6–8 W) and traditional liposuction of the submental area in 40 female patients showed greater reduction in SMF thickness in the LAL group compared to the liposuction group at 2-month follow-up (6.2 vs 8.22 unspecified units; P<.001) with significant improvement from baseline in both groups (P<.001).⁵ However, the cosmetic benefit of LAL over traditional liposuction remains controversial and has not been unequivocally established in the literature.

Common adverse events (AEs) are postoperative swelling, ecchymoses, and pain, and complications of interest are nodularity, skin infections, burns, and nerve damage.⁶ In one retrospective investigation (N=537), these complications occurred at a rate of less than 1% (4 burns and 1 skin infection).⁶ Patients treated with LAL may report fewer AEs, especially pain and bleeding, compared to liposuction-treated patients.³

RF-Assisted Lipolysis

Radiofrequency-assisted lipolysis is one of the newest technologies in lipocontouring. NeckTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions) is effective for treatment of preplatysmal adiposity and cervicomental lipocontouring; a 2.4-mm bipolar probe that is inserted into the subdermal space and connected with an external electrode emits RF energy and simultaneously coagulates and aspirates adipose tissue. NeckTite also may be used in conjunction with FaceTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions), which promotes fibroseptal network remodeling and dermal contraction.²

In the first published investigation of the efficacy and safety of NeckTite, 47 of 55 patients received treatment of slight to moderate SMF (average body mass index [BMI], 25 kg/m²) with NeckTite and FaceTite or NeckTite alone.⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 87% (48/55) of patients subjectively rated treatment efficacy as satisfactory, and 2 independent physicians rated the improvement between before-and-after frontal and lateral photographs of the submental area as moderate to excellent in 95% (52/55) of all cases. Reported complications in this study were full-thickness burns resulting in minor scarring (2/55 [4%]), neck tissue hardness that resolved with daily massage after 3 months (5/55 [9%]), and transient facial nerve paresis of the mandibular branch that resolved after 2 months (1/55 [2%]).⁷

NONINVASIVE MODALITIES

RF-Assisted Contouring

Another exciting development in RF technology is truSculpt (Cutera), a noninvasive contouring device that is placed over the epidermis and emits RF energy that preferentially heats fat more than other tissue types. In a single-center prospective trial of efficacy and safety in the treatment of SMF, 17 patients received 2 treatments with truSculpt administered 1 month apart.⁸ At 1- and 6-month follow-up, 82.3% (14/17) and 52.9% (9/17) of patients showed improvement on physician assessment. Submental circumference and ultrasonographic fat thickness reductions at 1-month follow-up were 1.4 cm (5.7% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and 5.4 mm (9.7% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.005]), respectively. At further longer-term follow-up to 6 months, submental circumference was 0.9 cm (3.8% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and ultrasonographic fat reduction was 6.8 mm (10.5% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.006]). Commonly reported AEs were pain (rate not given), erythema (8/17 [47%]), edema (1/17 [6%]), and vesicle formation (1/17 [6%]); all were self-resolving. Erythema usually subsided within 6 hours posttreatment. No other AEs or complications were reported.⁸

Deoxycholic Acid

Deoxycholic acid (DCA)(formerly ATX-101) is an injectable liquid formulation of synthetic DCA that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 for moderate to severe SMF. Deoxycholic acid exists endogenously as a bile salt emulsifier and has been shown to cause dose-dependent adipocyte lysis, necrosis, disruption and dissolution of fat architecture, and inflammatory targeting of adipocytes by immune cells.^9,10 Thus, DCA causes targeted adipocytolysis and is a novel medical agent in the treatment of SMF. Supplied in 2-mL vials, clinicians may inject 10 mL at each treatment for up to 6 treatments administered 1 month apart.¹¹

Efficacy

REFINE-1, a pivotal North American–based phase 3 trial, investigated the efficacy and safety of DCA.¹² A total of 506 participants with scores of 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe) on the Clinician-Reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (CR-SMFRS) and a mean BMI of 29 kg/m² were randomized to receive preplatysmal fat injections of 2 mg/cm² of DCA (n=256) or placebo (n=250). Participants received up to 10 mL of product (mean total of 25 mL of DCA across all visits) at each treatment session for up to 6 sessions depending on individual efficacy, with approximately 28 days between sessions. Sixty-four percent of the treatment group received all 6 treatments. At 12-week follow-up after the last treatment session, 70% of DCA-treated participants versus 18.6% of placebo-treated participants (P<.001) improved by 1 grade or more on the CR-SMFRS and 13.4% versus 0% (P<.001) improved by 2 grades or more. Skin laxity was unchanged or improved in 92.7% of the DCA group and 87.6% of the placebo group.¹²

REFINE-2, the second of the North American phase 3 trials, had parallel inclusionary criteria and study design and established efficacy of 2 mg/cm² DCA over placebo in 516 participants (randomized 1:1).¹³ At 12 weeks posttreatment, 66.5% of DCA-treated participants versus 22.2% of placebo-treated participants improved by 1 grade or more according to the CR-SMFRS (P<.001) and 18.6% versus 3% improved by 2 grades or more in SMF (P<.001). Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of participants in the DCA (n=113) and placebo groups (n=112) showed that 40.2% versus 5.2% (P<.001) exhibited 10% or more reduction in submental volume, with similar comparative rates of SMF thickness reduction via caliper measurements.¹³
 

Safety

Safety data from REFINE-1 showed higher rates of treatment-related AEs in DCA-treated participants compared to placebo, including hematoma (70% vs 67.3%), anesthesia (66.9% vs 4.4%), pain (65.4% vs 23.4%), edema (52.9% vs 21.8%), induration (18.3% vs 1.6%), paresthesia (12.8% vs 3.2%), nodule formation (12.5% vs 0.8%), and pruritus (8.6% vs 3.6%).¹² In this trial, 11 of 258 cases (4.3%) of marginal mandibular nerve paresis and asymmetric smile occurred, all in DCA-treated participants and with a median duration of 31 days. Dysphagia resolving in a median duration of 4 days occurred in 1.6% (4/258) of DCA-treated participants.¹² REFINE-2 exhibited similar rates of common AEs. Complications of note were 14 cases of marginal mandibular nerve paresis (11 in DCA group, 3 in placebo group) attributed to injection technique, 1 case of skin ulceration possibly related to accidental injection into dermis, and 6 cases of dysphagia in DCA participants attributed to higher volume treatment sessions and postinjection swelling. Dysphagia lasted a median of 2.5 days and resolved without sequelae.¹³

Overall, DCA demonstrated high rates of minor injection-site AEs that resolved without sequelae and could be mitigated by comfort therapies (eg, lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) as well as understanding the anatomy of the submental region. Adverse effects of particular interest included marginal mandibular nerve palsy, skin ulceration, and dysphagia.^12,13

Cryolipolysis

Cryolipolysis is an advancement that utilizes the application of noninvasive cooling temperatures to the skin’s surface to destroy underlying adipocytes based on the concept that lipid-filled cells are more susceptible to cold-induced injury than water-filled cells. Thus, cryolipolysis selectively targets adipose tissue, leading to cell death without harm to surrounding cells and without the need for surgery or injections.¹⁴

Cryolipolysis typically is delivered via a vacuum applicator (CoolMini, Zeltiq Aesthetics Inc), which applies temperatures of –10°C (14°F) to the skin in cycles of 60 minutes each. Initially approved by the FDA for treatment of flank adiposity in 2010, cryolipolysis has since been approved for treatment of the abdomen, thighs, and submental area.¹⁴ An advantage of cryolipolysis is that it does not require frequent treatment sessions for maximal efficacy.

Efficacy

The efficacy of cryolipolysis in the treatment of SMF was established in a multicenter device investigation resulting in its FDA approval for the submental region.¹⁵ Sixty participants with a mean BMI of 31.8 kg/m² received 1 (1/60) or 2 (59/60) treatment sessions of the submental area administered 6 weeks apart. Primary efficacy assessments included analysis by 3 blinded reviewers who viewed photographs of each participant at baseline, immediately posttreatment, 6 weeks posttreatment, and 12 weeks posttreatment; ultrasonographic measurements of SMF thickness; and a 12-point patient satisfaction questionnaire. Blinded reviewers correctly identified baseline images in 91.4% (55/60) of cases. Ultrasonography confirmed a mean reduction in SMF of 2 mm (P<.0001) or 20% of fat thickness at 12 weeks posttreatment. On subjective patient satisfaction surveys, 83% (50/60) of participants were satisfied with the procedure and 77% (46/60) reported a visible reduction in fat and perceived an improvement in appearance.¹⁵

Safety

The most common immediate posttreatment AEs were erythema/purpura (100%), numbness (90%), edema (62%), tingling (30%), blanching (25%), and bruising (3%) at the site of cryolipolysis with resolution within 1 week posttreatment, except for numbness.¹⁵ At 6-week follow-up, all AEs had resolved, except continued numbness in 4 participants that resolved by 12-week follow-up. A further event of note was fullness in the throat in 1 participant that was attributed to swelling and resolved at 40 days posttreatment without incident. No serious AEs were reported in this trial.¹⁵

A particularly concerning but rare complication that is increasing in awareness is paradoxical adipose hyperplasia following cryolipolysis. Patients may develop firm painless areas of soft tissue enlargements in the area of cryolipolysis typically 3 to 6 months posttreatment.¹⁶ The largest published report recorded an incidence rate of 0.46% (n=2, all males) at a single-center institution of 422 cryolipolysis treatments.¹⁶ Other incidence rates reported are 0.0051% and 0.78%.¹⁷ Causes and associations are not known, though male gender is speculated to increase risk.

Conclusion

This article highlights the available information on advances in minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF accumulation. The efficacy and safety trials varied in quality and in different methods of end point analysis of SMF reduction. Further, few trials have featured head-to-head comparisons of treatments.

Although liposuction and adjuncts remain the gold standard in large-mass lipid removal, these procedures are invasive and exhibit typical risks of surgery. Given its sensitive location, the submental area may require the use of more delicate therapeutic methods, including completely noninvasive devices such as truSculpt and cryolipolysis. Regardless of the chosen treatment, the most important factors in yielding patient satisfaction and SMF improvement are proper patient selection and an understanding of the anatomical source of adiposity to be addressed with the therapeutic modalities.

[polldaddy:9711250]

Submental fat (SMF) accumulation within the subcutaneous (preplatysmal) or subplatysmal fat compartment of the cervical anatomy results in an obtuse cervicomental angle and loss of mandibular and cervical contours. It is a common cosmetic concern due to its aesthetic association with weight gain and aging.¹ Minimally invasive or noninvasive submental lipolytic agents and techniques are sought for patients who are not candidates for surgery or prefer more conservative cosmetic treatments. These methods typically are only effective in addressing preplatysmal SMF, as subplatysmal SMF requires more surgical methods due to its less-accessible location. The pathology of SMF should initially be assessed by clinical examination or ultrasonography. In this article, we review the most relevant clinical and safety data on minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF, including laser-assisted lipolysis (LAL), radiofrequency (RF)–assisted lipolysis, deoxycholic acid (DCA), and cryolipolysis.

MINIMALLY INVASIVE MODALITIES

Traditional, or tumescent, liposuction is still widely considered the most effective method for removal of large masses of adiposity. Laser- and RF-assisted adjuncts have been more recently developed to improve patient side effects and recovery time and reduce the manual effort of surgeons. Of note, these adjuncts, with some exceptions, still require the same invasiveness as traditional liposuction, involving submental stab incisions of up to 2.4 mm.

Laser-Assisted Lipolysis

Laser-assisted lipolysis produces a similar effect as suction-assisted lipoplasty by focusing pulses of laser energy through a 1-mm wide fiber optic cannula and inducing thermally mediated adipolysis. The directed laser results in adipocyte rupturing with added benefits of skin retraction and small vessel coagulation, thus lessening intraoperative blood loss.² This technique typically requires smaller incisions than traditional liposuction. The most common laser lipolysis systems used in cosmetic dermatology are the 920- to 980-nm diode lasers and 1064- to 1440-nm Nd:YAG lasers. The 924-nm diode, 1064-nm Nd:YAG, and 1064/1320-nm Nd:YAG have been best characterized in clinical trials, as reviewed by Fakhouri et al,³ with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SMF density.

The first randomized prospective trial comparing LAL (using 1064-nm Nd:YAG) and traditional liposuction in various anatomical areas on 25 patients showed no difference in cosmetic results, ecchymoses, edema, or retraction, and significantly lower postoperative pain ratings (P<.0001) in LAL.⁴ A more recent prospective randomized comparison of LAL (980-nm diode laser; 6–8 W) and traditional liposuction of the submental area in 40 female patients showed greater reduction in SMF thickness in the LAL group compared to the liposuction group at 2-month follow-up (6.2 vs 8.22 unspecified units; P<.001) with significant improvement from baseline in both groups (P<.001).⁵ However, the cosmetic benefit of LAL over traditional liposuction remains controversial and has not been unequivocally established in the literature.

Common adverse events (AEs) are postoperative swelling, ecchymoses, and pain, and complications of interest are nodularity, skin infections, burns, and nerve damage.⁶ In one retrospective investigation (N=537), these complications occurred at a rate of less than 1% (4 burns and 1 skin infection).⁶ Patients treated with LAL may report fewer AEs, especially pain and bleeding, compared to liposuction-treated patients.³

RF-Assisted Lipolysis

Radiofrequency-assisted lipolysis is one of the newest technologies in lipocontouring. NeckTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions) is effective for treatment of preplatysmal adiposity and cervicomental lipocontouring; a 2.4-mm bipolar probe that is inserted into the subdermal space and connected with an external electrode emits RF energy and simultaneously coagulates and aspirates adipose tissue. NeckTite also may be used in conjunction with FaceTite (Invasix Aesthetic Solutions), which promotes fibroseptal network remodeling and dermal contraction.²

In the first published investigation of the efficacy and safety of NeckTite, 47 of 55 patients received treatment of slight to moderate SMF (average body mass index [BMI], 25 kg/m²) with NeckTite and FaceTite or NeckTite alone.⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 87% (48/55) of patients subjectively rated treatment efficacy as satisfactory, and 2 independent physicians rated the improvement between before-and-after frontal and lateral photographs of the submental area as moderate to excellent in 95% (52/55) of all cases. Reported complications in this study were full-thickness burns resulting in minor scarring (2/55 [4%]), neck tissue hardness that resolved with daily massage after 3 months (5/55 [9%]), and transient facial nerve paresis of the mandibular branch that resolved after 2 months (1/55 [2%]).⁷

NONINVASIVE MODALITIES

RF-Assisted Contouring

Another exciting development in RF technology is truSculpt (Cutera), a noninvasive contouring device that is placed over the epidermis and emits RF energy that preferentially heats fat more than other tissue types. In a single-center prospective trial of efficacy and safety in the treatment of SMF, 17 patients received 2 treatments with truSculpt administered 1 month apart.⁸ At 1- and 6-month follow-up, 82.3% (14/17) and 52.9% (9/17) of patients showed improvement on physician assessment. Submental circumference and ultrasonographic fat thickness reductions at 1-month follow-up were 1.4 cm (5.7% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and 5.4 mm (9.7% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.005]), respectively. At further longer-term follow-up to 6 months, submental circumference was 0.9 cm (3.8% of pretreatment circumference [P<.001]) and ultrasonographic fat reduction was 6.8 mm (10.5% of pretreatment fat thickness [P=.006]). Commonly reported AEs were pain (rate not given), erythema (8/17 [47%]), edema (1/17 [6%]), and vesicle formation (1/17 [6%]); all were self-resolving. Erythema usually subsided within 6 hours posttreatment. No other AEs or complications were reported.⁸

Deoxycholic Acid

Deoxycholic acid (DCA)(formerly ATX-101) is an injectable liquid formulation of synthetic DCA that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 for moderate to severe SMF. Deoxycholic acid exists endogenously as a bile salt emulsifier and has been shown to cause dose-dependent adipocyte lysis, necrosis, disruption and dissolution of fat architecture, and inflammatory targeting of adipocytes by immune cells.^9,10 Thus, DCA causes targeted adipocytolysis and is a novel medical agent in the treatment of SMF. Supplied in 2-mL vials, clinicians may inject 10 mL at each treatment for up to 6 treatments administered 1 month apart.¹¹

Efficacy

REFINE-1, a pivotal North American–based phase 3 trial, investigated the efficacy and safety of DCA.¹² A total of 506 participants with scores of 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe) on the Clinician-Reported Submental Fat Rating Scale (CR-SMFRS) and a mean BMI of 29 kg/m² were randomized to receive preplatysmal fat injections of 2 mg/cm² of DCA (n=256) or placebo (n=250). Participants received up to 10 mL of product (mean total of 25 mL of DCA across all visits) at each treatment session for up to 6 sessions depending on individual efficacy, with approximately 28 days between sessions. Sixty-four percent of the treatment group received all 6 treatments. At 12-week follow-up after the last treatment session, 70% of DCA-treated participants versus 18.6% of placebo-treated participants (P<.001) improved by 1 grade or more on the CR-SMFRS and 13.4% versus 0% (P<.001) improved by 2 grades or more. Skin laxity was unchanged or improved in 92.7% of the DCA group and 87.6% of the placebo group.¹²

REFINE-2, the second of the North American phase 3 trials, had parallel inclusionary criteria and study design and established efficacy of 2 mg/cm² DCA over placebo in 516 participants (randomized 1:1).¹³ At 12 weeks posttreatment, 66.5% of DCA-treated participants versus 22.2% of placebo-treated participants improved by 1 grade or more according to the CR-SMFRS (P<.001) and 18.6% versus 3% improved by 2 grades or more in SMF (P<.001). Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of participants in the DCA (n=113) and placebo groups (n=112) showed that 40.2% versus 5.2% (P<.001) exhibited 10% or more reduction in submental volume, with similar comparative rates of SMF thickness reduction via caliper measurements.¹³
 

Safety

Safety data from REFINE-1 showed higher rates of treatment-related AEs in DCA-treated participants compared to placebo, including hematoma (70% vs 67.3%), anesthesia (66.9% vs 4.4%), pain (65.4% vs 23.4%), edema (52.9% vs 21.8%), induration (18.3% vs 1.6%), paresthesia (12.8% vs 3.2%), nodule formation (12.5% vs 0.8%), and pruritus (8.6% vs 3.6%).¹² In this trial, 11 of 258 cases (4.3%) of marginal mandibular nerve paresis and asymmetric smile occurred, all in DCA-treated participants and with a median duration of 31 days. Dysphagia resolving in a median duration of 4 days occurred in 1.6% (4/258) of DCA-treated participants.¹² REFINE-2 exhibited similar rates of common AEs. Complications of note were 14 cases of marginal mandibular nerve paresis (11 in DCA group, 3 in placebo group) attributed to injection technique, 1 case of skin ulceration possibly related to accidental injection into dermis, and 6 cases of dysphagia in DCA participants attributed to higher volume treatment sessions and postinjection swelling. Dysphagia lasted a median of 2.5 days and resolved without sequelae.¹³

Overall, DCA demonstrated high rates of minor injection-site AEs that resolved without sequelae and could be mitigated by comfort therapies (eg, lidocaine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) as well as understanding the anatomy of the submental region. Adverse effects of particular interest included marginal mandibular nerve palsy, skin ulceration, and dysphagia.^12,13

Cryolipolysis

Cryolipolysis is an advancement that utilizes the application of noninvasive cooling temperatures to the skin’s surface to destroy underlying adipocytes based on the concept that lipid-filled cells are more susceptible to cold-induced injury than water-filled cells. Thus, cryolipolysis selectively targets adipose tissue, leading to cell death without harm to surrounding cells and without the need for surgery or injections.¹⁴

Cryolipolysis typically is delivered via a vacuum applicator (CoolMini, Zeltiq Aesthetics Inc), which applies temperatures of –10°C (14°F) to the skin in cycles of 60 minutes each. Initially approved by the FDA for treatment of flank adiposity in 2010, cryolipolysis has since been approved for treatment of the abdomen, thighs, and submental area.¹⁴ An advantage of cryolipolysis is that it does not require frequent treatment sessions for maximal efficacy.

Efficacy

The efficacy of cryolipolysis in the treatment of SMF was established in a multicenter device investigation resulting in its FDA approval for the submental region.¹⁵ Sixty participants with a mean BMI of 31.8 kg/m² received 1 (1/60) or 2 (59/60) treatment sessions of the submental area administered 6 weeks apart. Primary efficacy assessments included analysis by 3 blinded reviewers who viewed photographs of each participant at baseline, immediately posttreatment, 6 weeks posttreatment, and 12 weeks posttreatment; ultrasonographic measurements of SMF thickness; and a 12-point patient satisfaction questionnaire. Blinded reviewers correctly identified baseline images in 91.4% (55/60) of cases. Ultrasonography confirmed a mean reduction in SMF of 2 mm (P<.0001) or 20% of fat thickness at 12 weeks posttreatment. On subjective patient satisfaction surveys, 83% (50/60) of participants were satisfied with the procedure and 77% (46/60) reported a visible reduction in fat and perceived an improvement in appearance.¹⁵

Safety

The most common immediate posttreatment AEs were erythema/purpura (100%), numbness (90%), edema (62%), tingling (30%), blanching (25%), and bruising (3%) at the site of cryolipolysis with resolution within 1 week posttreatment, except for numbness.¹⁵ At 6-week follow-up, all AEs had resolved, except continued numbness in 4 participants that resolved by 12-week follow-up. A further event of note was fullness in the throat in 1 participant that was attributed to swelling and resolved at 40 days posttreatment without incident. No serious AEs were reported in this trial.¹⁵

A particularly concerning but rare complication that is increasing in awareness is paradoxical adipose hyperplasia following cryolipolysis. Patients may develop firm painless areas of soft tissue enlargements in the area of cryolipolysis typically 3 to 6 months posttreatment.¹⁶ The largest published report recorded an incidence rate of 0.46% (n=2, all males) at a single-center institution of 422 cryolipolysis treatments.¹⁶ Other incidence rates reported are 0.0051% and 0.78%.¹⁷ Causes and associations are not known, though male gender is speculated to increase risk.

Conclusion

This article highlights the available information on advances in minimally invasive and noninvasive treatments for SMF accumulation. The efficacy and safety trials varied in quality and in different methods of end point analysis of SMF reduction. Further, few trials have featured head-to-head comparisons of treatments.

Although liposuction and adjuncts remain the gold standard in large-mass lipid removal, these procedures are invasive and exhibit typical risks of surgery. Given its sensitive location, the submental area may require the use of more delicate therapeutic methods, including completely noninvasive devices such as truSculpt and cryolipolysis. Regardless of the chosen treatment, the most important factors in yielding patient satisfaction and SMF improvement are proper patient selection and an understanding of the anatomical source of adiposity to be addressed with the therapeutic modalities.

[polldaddy:9711250]

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most prevalent malignancy in white individuals and its incidence is rapidly increasing. Despite its low mortality rate, BCC can cause severe morbidity and remains a serious health problem with a high economic burden for health care systems. The incidence of BCC is higher in individuals who have red or blonde hair, light eye color, and/or Fitzpatrick skin types I and II. The risk for developing BCC also increases with age, and men are more frequently affected than women.^1,2 Although several factors have been implicated in the etiology of this condition, such as exposure to ionizing radiation, trauma, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, predisposing syndromes, and host factors (eg, traits that affect susceptibility to disease),^3-5 exposure to UV radiation is considered to be a major risk factor, with most BCCs presenting in sun-exposed areas of the body (eg, face, neck). Prolongate suberythrodermal UV doses, which do not burn the skin but cause erythema in the histological level, can lead to formation of pyrimidine dimers in the dermal and epidermal tissues and cause DNA mutation with potential carcinogenic effects. Due to a large number of outdoor occupations, it is likely that outdoor workers (OWs) with a history of UV exposure may develop BCCs with different features than those seen in indoor workers (IWs). However, there has been debate about the relevance of occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC development.^6,7 The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and histological features of BCCs in OWs versus IWs at a referral hospital in southern Spain.

Methods

Using the electronic pathology records at a referral hospital in southern Spain, we identified medical records between May 1, 2010, and May 1, 2011, of specimens containing the term skin in the specimen box and basal cell carcinoma in the diagnosis box. We excluded patients with a history of or concomitant squamous cell carcinoma. Reexcision of incompletely excised lesions; punch, shave or incisional biopsies; and palliative excisions also were excluded. The specimens were reviewed and classified according to the differentiation pattern of BCC (ie, nodular, superficial, morpheic, micronodular). Basal cell carcinomas with mixed features were classified according to the most predominant subtype.

We also gathered information regarding the patients’ work history (ie, any job held during their lifetime with a minimum duration of 6 months). Patients were asked about the type of work and start/end dates. In patients who performed OW, we evaluated hours per day and months as well as the type of clothing worn (eg, head covering, socks/stockings during work in the summer months).

Each patient was classified as an OW or IW based on his/her stated occupation. The OWs included those who performed all or most of their work (≥6 hours per day for at least 6 months) outdoors in direct sunlight. Most patients in this group included farmers and fishermen. Indoor workers were those who performed most of their work in an indoor environment (eg, shop, factory, office, hospital, library, bank, school, laboratory). Most patients in this group included mechanics and shop assistants. A small group of individuals could not be classified as OWs or IWs and therefore were excluded from the study. Individuals with a history of exposure to ionizing radiation, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, or predisposing syndromes also were excluded.

We included variables that could be considered independent risk factors for BCC, including age, sex, eye color, natural hair color, Fitzpatrick skin type, history of sunburns, and family history. All data were collected via a personal interview performed by a single dermatologist (H.H-E.) during the follow-up with the patients conducted after obtaining all medical records and contacting eligible patients; none of the patients were lost on follow-up.

The study was approved by the hospital’s ethics committee and written consent was obtained from all recruited patients for analyzing the data acquired and accessing the relevant diagnostic documents (eg, pathology reports).

The cohorts were compared by a χ² test and Student t test, which were performed using the SPSS software version 15. Statistical significance was determined using α=.05, and all tests were 2-sided.

Results

A total of 308 patients were included in the study, comprising 178 (58%) OWs and 130 (42%) IWs. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of each cohort with the statistical outcomes.

The mean age (SD) of the OWs was significantly higher than the IWs (75.17 [10.74] vs 69.73 [9.98] years; P<.001). The sex distribution among the 2 cohorts was significantly different (P=.002); the OW group featured a slightly higher proportion of men than women (92 [52%] vs 86 [48%]), whereas women were clearly more prevalent in the IW group than men (85 [65%] vs 45 [35%]).

No significant differences regarding eye color (blue/gray vs brown/black) between the 2 cohorts were found (P>.05). In the same way, the 2 cohorts did not show differences in the natural hair color (red/blonde vs brown/black)(P>.05).

Fitzpatrick skin type II was the most common between both cohorts (82 [46%] OWs and 75 [58%] IWs), but no statistical differences regarding the proportions of each skin type were found (P>.05).

History of sunburns (>2 episodes) was significantly different between the 2 cohorts. The incidence of second-degree sunburns in childhood was higher in IWs (P<.00001), while the incidence of second-degree sunburns in adulthood was higher in OWs (P=.002).

Most OWs had a positive family history of BCC (101 [57%]), while the majority of IWs had a negative family history of BCC (90 [69%]). This difference was statistically significant (P=.03).

Table 2 shows the distribution of anatomic sites of BCCs in OWs and IWs. The nose was the most frequently affected area in OWs (35 cases [20%]), while the cheek was the most common location (23 [18%]) in IWs. Comparison of the frequency of BCC incidence for each anatomic location revealed that only the rate for truncal BCC was significantly different; IWs had a higher incidence of truncal BCCs than OWs (P=.0035). Although the differences between groups were not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a higher incidence of BCCs on the forehead in OW (P=.06).

In both cohorts, the most prevalent histologic subtype was nodular BCC (133 [75%] OWs and 88 [68%] IWs), followed by superficial BCC (17 [10%] OWs and 27 [21%] IWs). The incidence rate of nodular BCCs was statistically different between the 2 cohorts, with OWs showing a higher incidence compared to IWs (P=.024). Regarding the superficial subtype, the opposite was observed: IWs had significantly increased risk compared to OWs (P=.05). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of morpheic BCCs in OWs than IWs, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.07).

Comment

Skin cancer due to occupational UV exposure is more common than is generally recognized,^6,7 but occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing debate. In this study, we analyzed the different clinical and histological features of BCC in OWs versus IWs.

The geographic area where this study was performed is characterized by a subtropical Mediterranean climate with irregular rainfall; a short, cool to mild winter; and long, dry, hot summers. Summer temperatures usually are hot and regularly exceed 35°C (95°F). UV index (UVI) is a measure of the amount of skin-damaging UV radiation expected to reach the earth’s surface when the sun is highest in the sky (around midday) and ranges from 1 (low risk) to 10 (maximum risk). In southern Spain, the mean UVI is approximately 6 and can reach up to 9 or sometimes 10 in the summer months. Although Fitzpatrick skin types II and III are most common, the elevated UVI indicates that the general population in southern Spain is at a high risk for developing skin cancer.

In our study the mean age of IWs was lower than OWs, which suggests that IWs may develop BCC at a younger age than OWs. This finding is consistent with studies showing that cumulative occupational UV exposure has been associated with development of BCCs in older age groups, while acute intermittent recreational sun exposure, particularly sustained in childhood and adolescence, is linked with BCC in younger patients.⁶

The role of sex as a risk factor for BCC remains unclear. Some reports show that BCC is more common in men than in women.^8-10 In our study, sex distribution was statistically significant (P=.002); there were more women in the IW cohort and more men in the OW cohort. These differences may be explained by cultural and lifestyle patterns, as women who are IWs tend to have office jobs in urban settings and wear modern fashion clothes at work and for recreation. In rural settings, women have agricultural jobs and tend to wear more traditional clothes that offer sun protection.

Positive family history has been suggested to be a constitutional risk factor for BCC development.^8,11,12 In our study, we observed that positive family history was more common in OWs, while most IWs had a negative family history. These differences were significant (P=.03), and OWs had a 2.6-fold increased likelihood of having a positive family history of BCC compared to IWs. Cultural and lifestyle patterns may partially explain this finding. In rural settings, workers tend to have the same job as their parents as a traditional way of life and therefore have similar patterns of UV exposure; in urban settings, individuals may have different jobs than their parents and therefore the pattern of UV exposure may be different. However, a genetic predisposition for developing BCC cannot be excluded. In addition, we have to consider that the information on family history of BCC in the patients was self-reported and not validated, which may limit the results.

The difference in history of second-degree sunburn in childhood was significantly higher in IWs than in OWs (P<.00001). The OW group had a significant rate of sunburns in adulthood (P=.002). The relationship between UV radiation and BCC is complex, and the patterns of sun exposure and their occurrence in different periods of lifetime (ie, childhood vs adulthood) remain controversial.¹³ The overall history of severe sunburns seems to be more important than simply the tendency to burn or tan,^14,15 and a history of sunburns in childhood and adolescence has been associated with early-onset BCC.⁶ Our findings were consistent in that the age of onset of BCCs was lower in IWs who had a history of sunburns in childhood. Basal cell carcinomas developed at older ages in OWs who had a higher incidence of sunburns in adulthood. However, we have to consider that the retrospective nature of the data collection on sunburns in childhood and adulthood was potentially limited, as the information was based on the patients’ memory. Additionally, other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not analyzed.

The majority of BCCs developed in sun-exposed areas of the head and neck in both cohorts, and only 35 (20%) and 28 (22%) BCCs were located on the trunk, arms, or legs in OWs and IWs, respectively. In our study, the rate of BCCs on the trunk was significantly lower in OWs than in IWs (P=.0035). Basal cell carcinomas on the trunk have been suggested to be linked to genetic susceptibility^16,17 and reduced DNA repair capacity¹⁸ rather than sun exposure. Our findings support this hypothesis and suggest that occupational sun exposure has no direct relation with truncal BCC. This outcome is consistent with the result of a case-control study conducted by Pelucchi et al¹⁹ (N=1040). The authors concluded that occupational UV exposure was not associated with truncal BCC development but with head/neck BCC, indicating that there may be different etiological mechanisms between truncal and head/neck BCC.¹⁹ In the largest BCC case series published in the literature with 13,457 specimens, the authors stated that tumors on the trunk may represent a particular variant of BCC, in which the theory of chronic versus intermittent UV exposure cannot be simply extrapolated as it is for the rest of BCC sites. Other factors such as genetic predisposition could be involved in the development of truncal BCC.²⁰ Similarly, Ramos et al²¹ suggested that nonmelanoma skin cancers in sun-protected anatomic sites may occur in individuals with impairment in the DNA repair process.

The classification of histological subtypes of BCC helps to predict tumor behavior,²² which can impact the prognosis. In our study, nodular BCC was the most common subtype in both cohorts, followed by superficial BCC. The nodular subtype was increased in OWs compared to IWs, while the superficial subtype was most common in IWs. Bastiaens et al²³ and McCormack et al²⁴ have suggested that the most frequent subtypes of BCC (nodular and superficial) may represent different tumors with distinct causal factors. According to these authors, nodular subtypes are associated with cumulative UV exposure, while superficial subtypes are associated with more intense and intermittent UV exposure. The results of the current study support this hypothesis, as the OW cohort with cumulative UV exposure showed more incidence of nodular BCC than IWs, while the patients with intense and intermittent sun exposure (the IWs) showed more risk of superficial BCC.

The importance of occupational UV exposure in OWs as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing discussion. Our data show that occupational UV exposure may be considered an etiological factor for BCC according to histological subtype and anatomic site. Our study is limited by the retrospective nature of the data collection regarding occupation and childhood sunburns, which were based on the patients’ memory and therefore potentially biased. Data regarding family history of BCC also was self-reported and not validated. Another limiting factor was that other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not considered. The limited sample size also may have impacted the study results. Among the strengths of the study are the complete response rate, the similar catchment area of OWs and IWs, the common hospital setting of the 2 cohorts, and the similar attention to medical history. All patients were obtained from the practice of a single referral dermatologist and are felt to be representative of our working area. The use of a single dermatologist reduces provider-associated variability.

Conclusion

According to the results of this study, OWs are more likely to develop nodular BCCs with no increased risk for superficial BCCs. The age of onset in OWs is older than in IWs. Some anatomical sites such as the trunk are more commonly affected in IWs. Truncal BCCs may have etiological factors other than UV exposure, such as a genetic predisposition. This study is useful to occupational safety representatives and physicians to stimulate the implementation of prevention strategies for this easily preventable malignancy and may encourage further research.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most prevalent malignancy in white individuals and its incidence is rapidly increasing. Despite its low mortality rate, BCC can cause severe morbidity and remains a serious health problem with a high economic burden for health care systems. The incidence of BCC is higher in individuals who have red or blonde hair, light eye color, and/or Fitzpatrick skin types I and II. The risk for developing BCC also increases with age, and men are more frequently affected than women.^1,2 Although several factors have been implicated in the etiology of this condition, such as exposure to ionizing radiation, trauma, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, predisposing syndromes, and host factors (eg, traits that affect susceptibility to disease),^3-5 exposure to UV radiation is considered to be a major risk factor, with most BCCs presenting in sun-exposed areas of the body (eg, face, neck). Prolongate suberythrodermal UV doses, which do not burn the skin but cause erythema in the histological level, can lead to formation of pyrimidine dimers in the dermal and epidermal tissues and cause DNA mutation with potential carcinogenic effects. Due to a large number of outdoor occupations, it is likely that outdoor workers (OWs) with a history of UV exposure may develop BCCs with different features than those seen in indoor workers (IWs). However, there has been debate about the relevance of occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC development.^6,7 The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and histological features of BCCs in OWs versus IWs at a referral hospital in southern Spain.

Methods

Using the electronic pathology records at a referral hospital in southern Spain, we identified medical records between May 1, 2010, and May 1, 2011, of specimens containing the term skin in the specimen box and basal cell carcinoma in the diagnosis box. We excluded patients with a history of or concomitant squamous cell carcinoma. Reexcision of incompletely excised lesions; punch, shave or incisional biopsies; and palliative excisions also were excluded. The specimens were reviewed and classified according to the differentiation pattern of BCC (ie, nodular, superficial, morpheic, micronodular). Basal cell carcinomas with mixed features were classified according to the most predominant subtype.

We also gathered information regarding the patients’ work history (ie, any job held during their lifetime with a minimum duration of 6 months). Patients were asked about the type of work and start/end dates. In patients who performed OW, we evaluated hours per day and months as well as the type of clothing worn (eg, head covering, socks/stockings during work in the summer months).

Each patient was classified as an OW or IW based on his/her stated occupation. The OWs included those who performed all or most of their work (≥6 hours per day for at least 6 months) outdoors in direct sunlight. Most patients in this group included farmers and fishermen. Indoor workers were those who performed most of their work in an indoor environment (eg, shop, factory, office, hospital, library, bank, school, laboratory). Most patients in this group included mechanics and shop assistants. A small group of individuals could not be classified as OWs or IWs and therefore were excluded from the study. Individuals with a history of exposure to ionizing radiation, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, or predisposing syndromes also were excluded.

We included variables that could be considered independent risk factors for BCC, including age, sex, eye color, natural hair color, Fitzpatrick skin type, history of sunburns, and family history. All data were collected via a personal interview performed by a single dermatologist (H.H-E.) during the follow-up with the patients conducted after obtaining all medical records and contacting eligible patients; none of the patients were lost on follow-up.

The study was approved by the hospital’s ethics committee and written consent was obtained from all recruited patients for analyzing the data acquired and accessing the relevant diagnostic documents (eg, pathology reports).

The cohorts were compared by a χ² test and Student t test, which were performed using the SPSS software version 15. Statistical significance was determined using α=.05, and all tests were 2-sided.

Results

A total of 308 patients were included in the study, comprising 178 (58%) OWs and 130 (42%) IWs. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of each cohort with the statistical outcomes.

The mean age (SD) of the OWs was significantly higher than the IWs (75.17 [10.74] vs 69.73 [9.98] years; P<.001). The sex distribution among the 2 cohorts was significantly different (P=.002); the OW group featured a slightly higher proportion of men than women (92 [52%] vs 86 [48%]), whereas women were clearly more prevalent in the IW group than men (85 [65%] vs 45 [35%]).

No significant differences regarding eye color (blue/gray vs brown/black) between the 2 cohorts were found (P>.05). In the same way, the 2 cohorts did not show differences in the natural hair color (red/blonde vs brown/black)(P>.05).

Fitzpatrick skin type II was the most common between both cohorts (82 [46%] OWs and 75 [58%] IWs), but no statistical differences regarding the proportions of each skin type were found (P>.05).

History of sunburns (>2 episodes) was significantly different between the 2 cohorts. The incidence of second-degree sunburns in childhood was higher in IWs (P<.00001), while the incidence of second-degree sunburns in adulthood was higher in OWs (P=.002).

Most OWs had a positive family history of BCC (101 [57%]), while the majority of IWs had a negative family history of BCC (90 [69%]). This difference was statistically significant (P=.03).

Table 2 shows the distribution of anatomic sites of BCCs in OWs and IWs. The nose was the most frequently affected area in OWs (35 cases [20%]), while the cheek was the most common location (23 [18%]) in IWs. Comparison of the frequency of BCC incidence for each anatomic location revealed that only the rate for truncal BCC was significantly different; IWs had a higher incidence of truncal BCCs than OWs (P=.0035). Although the differences between groups were not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a higher incidence of BCCs on the forehead in OW (P=.06).

In both cohorts, the most prevalent histologic subtype was nodular BCC (133 [75%] OWs and 88 [68%] IWs), followed by superficial BCC (17 [10%] OWs and 27 [21%] IWs). The incidence rate of nodular BCCs was statistically different between the 2 cohorts, with OWs showing a higher incidence compared to IWs (P=.024). Regarding the superficial subtype, the opposite was observed: IWs had significantly increased risk compared to OWs (P=.05). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of morpheic BCCs in OWs than IWs, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.07).

Comment

Skin cancer due to occupational UV exposure is more common than is generally recognized,^6,7 but occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing debate. In this study, we analyzed the different clinical and histological features of BCC in OWs versus IWs.

The geographic area where this study was performed is characterized by a subtropical Mediterranean climate with irregular rainfall; a short, cool to mild winter; and long, dry, hot summers. Summer temperatures usually are hot and regularly exceed 35°C (95°F). UV index (UVI) is a measure of the amount of skin-damaging UV radiation expected to reach the earth’s surface when the sun is highest in the sky (around midday) and ranges from 1 (low risk) to 10 (maximum risk). In southern Spain, the mean UVI is approximately 6 and can reach up to 9 or sometimes 10 in the summer months. Although Fitzpatrick skin types II and III are most common, the elevated UVI indicates that the general population in southern Spain is at a high risk for developing skin cancer.

In our study the mean age of IWs was lower than OWs, which suggests that IWs may develop BCC at a younger age than OWs. This finding is consistent with studies showing that cumulative occupational UV exposure has been associated with development of BCCs in older age groups, while acute intermittent recreational sun exposure, particularly sustained in childhood and adolescence, is linked with BCC in younger patients.⁶

The role of sex as a risk factor for BCC remains unclear. Some reports show that BCC is more common in men than in women.^8-10 In our study, sex distribution was statistically significant (P=.002); there were more women in the IW cohort and more men in the OW cohort. These differences may be explained by cultural and lifestyle patterns, as women who are IWs tend to have office jobs in urban settings and wear modern fashion clothes at work and for recreation. In rural settings, women have agricultural jobs and tend to wear more traditional clothes that offer sun protection.

Positive family history has been suggested to be a constitutional risk factor for BCC development.^8,11,12 In our study, we observed that positive family history was more common in OWs, while most IWs had a negative family history. These differences were significant (P=.03), and OWs had a 2.6-fold increased likelihood of having a positive family history of BCC compared to IWs. Cultural and lifestyle patterns may partially explain this finding. In rural settings, workers tend to have the same job as their parents as a traditional way of life and therefore have similar patterns of UV exposure; in urban settings, individuals may have different jobs than their parents and therefore the pattern of UV exposure may be different. However, a genetic predisposition for developing BCC cannot be excluded. In addition, we have to consider that the information on family history of BCC in the patients was self-reported and not validated, which may limit the results.

The difference in history of second-degree sunburn in childhood was significantly higher in IWs than in OWs (P<.00001). The OW group had a significant rate of sunburns in adulthood (P=.002). The relationship between UV radiation and BCC is complex, and the patterns of sun exposure and their occurrence in different periods of lifetime (ie, childhood vs adulthood) remain controversial.¹³ The overall history of severe sunburns seems to be more important than simply the tendency to burn or tan,^14,15 and a history of sunburns in childhood and adolescence has been associated with early-onset BCC.⁶ Our findings were consistent in that the age of onset of BCCs was lower in IWs who had a history of sunburns in childhood. Basal cell carcinomas developed at older ages in OWs who had a higher incidence of sunburns in adulthood. However, we have to consider that the retrospective nature of the data collection on sunburns in childhood and adulthood was potentially limited, as the information was based on the patients’ memory. Additionally, other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not analyzed.

The majority of BCCs developed in sun-exposed areas of the head and neck in both cohorts, and only 35 (20%) and 28 (22%) BCCs were located on the trunk, arms, or legs in OWs and IWs, respectively. In our study, the rate of BCCs on the trunk was significantly lower in OWs than in IWs (P=.0035). Basal cell carcinomas on the trunk have been suggested to be linked to genetic susceptibility^16,17 and reduced DNA repair capacity¹⁸ rather than sun exposure. Our findings support this hypothesis and suggest that occupational sun exposure has no direct relation with truncal BCC. This outcome is consistent with the result of a case-control study conducted by Pelucchi et al¹⁹ (N=1040). The authors concluded that occupational UV exposure was not associated with truncal BCC development but with head/neck BCC, indicating that there may be different etiological mechanisms between truncal and head/neck BCC.¹⁹ In the largest BCC case series published in the literature with 13,457 specimens, the authors stated that tumors on the trunk may represent a particular variant of BCC, in which the theory of chronic versus intermittent UV exposure cannot be simply extrapolated as it is for the rest of BCC sites. Other factors such as genetic predisposition could be involved in the development of truncal BCC.²⁰ Similarly, Ramos et al²¹ suggested that nonmelanoma skin cancers in sun-protected anatomic sites may occur in individuals with impairment in the DNA repair process.

The classification of histological subtypes of BCC helps to predict tumor behavior,²² which can impact the prognosis. In our study, nodular BCC was the most common subtype in both cohorts, followed by superficial BCC. The nodular subtype was increased in OWs compared to IWs, while the superficial subtype was most common in IWs. Bastiaens et al²³ and McCormack et al²⁴ have suggested that the most frequent subtypes of BCC (nodular and superficial) may represent different tumors with distinct causal factors. According to these authors, nodular subtypes are associated with cumulative UV exposure, while superficial subtypes are associated with more intense and intermittent UV exposure. The results of the current study support this hypothesis, as the OW cohort with cumulative UV exposure showed more incidence of nodular BCC than IWs, while the patients with intense and intermittent sun exposure (the IWs) showed more risk of superficial BCC.

The importance of occupational UV exposure in OWs as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing discussion. Our data show that occupational UV exposure may be considered an etiological factor for BCC according to histological subtype and anatomic site. Our study is limited by the retrospective nature of the data collection regarding occupation and childhood sunburns, which were based on the patients’ memory and therefore potentially biased. Data regarding family history of BCC also was self-reported and not validated. Another limiting factor was that other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not considered. The limited sample size also may have impacted the study results. Among the strengths of the study are the complete response rate, the similar catchment area of OWs and IWs, the common hospital setting of the 2 cohorts, and the similar attention to medical history. All patients were obtained from the practice of a single referral dermatologist and are felt to be representative of our working area. The use of a single dermatologist reduces provider-associated variability.

Conclusion

According to the results of this study, OWs are more likely to develop nodular BCCs with no increased risk for superficial BCCs. The age of onset in OWs is older than in IWs. Some anatomical sites such as the trunk are more commonly affected in IWs. Truncal BCCs may have etiological factors other than UV exposure, such as a genetic predisposition. This study is useful to occupational safety representatives and physicians to stimulate the implementation of prevention strategies for this easily preventable malignancy and may encourage further research.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most prevalent malignancy in white individuals and its incidence is rapidly increasing. Despite its low mortality rate, BCC can cause severe morbidity and remains a serious health problem with a high economic burden for health care systems. The incidence of BCC is higher in individuals who have red or blonde hair, light eye color, and/or Fitzpatrick skin types I and II. The risk for developing BCC also increases with age, and men are more frequently affected than women.^1,2 Although several factors have been implicated in the etiology of this condition, such as exposure to ionizing radiation, trauma, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, predisposing syndromes, and host factors (eg, traits that affect susceptibility to disease),^3-5 exposure to UV radiation is considered to be a major risk factor, with most BCCs presenting in sun-exposed areas of the body (eg, face, neck). Prolongate suberythrodermal UV doses, which do not burn the skin but cause erythema in the histological level, can lead to formation of pyrimidine dimers in the dermal and epidermal tissues and cause DNA mutation with potential carcinogenic effects. Due to a large number of outdoor occupations, it is likely that outdoor workers (OWs) with a history of UV exposure may develop BCCs with different features than those seen in indoor workers (IWs). However, there has been debate about the relevance of occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC development.^6,7 The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and histological features of BCCs in OWs versus IWs at a referral hospital in southern Spain.

Methods

Using the electronic pathology records at a referral hospital in southern Spain, we identified medical records between May 1, 2010, and May 1, 2011, of specimens containing the term skin in the specimen box and basal cell carcinoma in the diagnosis box. We excluded patients with a history of or concomitant squamous cell carcinoma. Reexcision of incompletely excised lesions; punch, shave or incisional biopsies; and palliative excisions also were excluded. The specimens were reviewed and classified according to the differentiation pattern of BCC (ie, nodular, superficial, morpheic, micronodular). Basal cell carcinomas with mixed features were classified according to the most predominant subtype.

We also gathered information regarding the patients’ work history (ie, any job held during their lifetime with a minimum duration of 6 months). Patients were asked about the type of work and start/end dates. In patients who performed OW, we evaluated hours per day and months as well as the type of clothing worn (eg, head covering, socks/stockings during work in the summer months).

Each patient was classified as an OW or IW based on his/her stated occupation. The OWs included those who performed all or most of their work (≥6 hours per day for at least 6 months) outdoors in direct sunlight. Most patients in this group included farmers and fishermen. Indoor workers were those who performed most of their work in an indoor environment (eg, shop, factory, office, hospital, library, bank, school, laboratory). Most patients in this group included mechanics and shop assistants. A small group of individuals could not be classified as OWs or IWs and therefore were excluded from the study. Individuals with a history of exposure to ionizing radiation, chemical carcinogenesis, immunosuppression, or predisposing syndromes also were excluded.

We included variables that could be considered independent risk factors for BCC, including age, sex, eye color, natural hair color, Fitzpatrick skin type, history of sunburns, and family history. All data were collected via a personal interview performed by a single dermatologist (H.H-E.) during the follow-up with the patients conducted after obtaining all medical records and contacting eligible patients; none of the patients were lost on follow-up.

The study was approved by the hospital’s ethics committee and written consent was obtained from all recruited patients for analyzing the data acquired and accessing the relevant diagnostic documents (eg, pathology reports).

The cohorts were compared by a χ² test and Student t test, which were performed using the SPSS software version 15. Statistical significance was determined using α=.05, and all tests were 2-sided.

Results

A total of 308 patients were included in the study, comprising 178 (58%) OWs and 130 (42%) IWs. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of each cohort with the statistical outcomes.

The mean age (SD) of the OWs was significantly higher than the IWs (75.17 [10.74] vs 69.73 [9.98] years; P<.001). The sex distribution among the 2 cohorts was significantly different (P=.002); the OW group featured a slightly higher proportion of men than women (92 [52%] vs 86 [48%]), whereas women were clearly more prevalent in the IW group than men (85 [65%] vs 45 [35%]).

No significant differences regarding eye color (blue/gray vs brown/black) between the 2 cohorts were found (P>.05). In the same way, the 2 cohorts did not show differences in the natural hair color (red/blonde vs brown/black)(P>.05).

Fitzpatrick skin type II was the most common between both cohorts (82 [46%] OWs and 75 [58%] IWs), but no statistical differences regarding the proportions of each skin type were found (P>.05).

History of sunburns (>2 episodes) was significantly different between the 2 cohorts. The incidence of second-degree sunburns in childhood was higher in IWs (P<.00001), while the incidence of second-degree sunburns in adulthood was higher in OWs (P=.002).

Most OWs had a positive family history of BCC (101 [57%]), while the majority of IWs had a negative family history of BCC (90 [69%]). This difference was statistically significant (P=.03).

Table 2 shows the distribution of anatomic sites of BCCs in OWs and IWs. The nose was the most frequently affected area in OWs (35 cases [20%]), while the cheek was the most common location (23 [18%]) in IWs. Comparison of the frequency of BCC incidence for each anatomic location revealed that only the rate for truncal BCC was significantly different; IWs had a higher incidence of truncal BCCs than OWs (P=.0035). Although the differences between groups were not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a higher incidence of BCCs on the forehead in OW (P=.06).

In both cohorts, the most prevalent histologic subtype was nodular BCC (133 [75%] OWs and 88 [68%] IWs), followed by superficial BCC (17 [10%] OWs and 27 [21%] IWs). The incidence rate of nodular BCCs was statistically different between the 2 cohorts, with OWs showing a higher incidence compared to IWs (P=.024). Regarding the superficial subtype, the opposite was observed: IWs had significantly increased risk compared to OWs (P=.05). There was a trend toward a higher incidence of morpheic BCCs in OWs than IWs, but the difference was not statistically significant (P=.07).

Comment

Skin cancer due to occupational UV exposure is more common than is generally recognized,^6,7 but occupational UV exposure as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing debate. In this study, we analyzed the different clinical and histological features of BCC in OWs versus IWs.

The geographic area where this study was performed is characterized by a subtropical Mediterranean climate with irregular rainfall; a short, cool to mild winter; and long, dry, hot summers. Summer temperatures usually are hot and regularly exceed 35°C (95°F). UV index (UVI) is a measure of the amount of skin-damaging UV radiation expected to reach the earth’s surface when the sun is highest in the sky (around midday) and ranges from 1 (low risk) to 10 (maximum risk). In southern Spain, the mean UVI is approximately 6 and can reach up to 9 or sometimes 10 in the summer months. Although Fitzpatrick skin types II and III are most common, the elevated UVI indicates that the general population in southern Spain is at a high risk for developing skin cancer.

In our study the mean age of IWs was lower than OWs, which suggests that IWs may develop BCC at a younger age than OWs. This finding is consistent with studies showing that cumulative occupational UV exposure has been associated with development of BCCs in older age groups, while acute intermittent recreational sun exposure, particularly sustained in childhood and adolescence, is linked with BCC in younger patients.⁶

The role of sex as a risk factor for BCC remains unclear. Some reports show that BCC is more common in men than in women.^8-10 In our study, sex distribution was statistically significant (P=.002); there were more women in the IW cohort and more men in the OW cohort. These differences may be explained by cultural and lifestyle patterns, as women who are IWs tend to have office jobs in urban settings and wear modern fashion clothes at work and for recreation. In rural settings, women have agricultural jobs and tend to wear more traditional clothes that offer sun protection.

Positive family history has been suggested to be a constitutional risk factor for BCC development.^8,11,12 In our study, we observed that positive family history was more common in OWs, while most IWs had a negative family history. These differences were significant (P=.03), and OWs had a 2.6-fold increased likelihood of having a positive family history of BCC compared to IWs. Cultural and lifestyle patterns may partially explain this finding. In rural settings, workers tend to have the same job as their parents as a traditional way of life and therefore have similar patterns of UV exposure; in urban settings, individuals may have different jobs than their parents and therefore the pattern of UV exposure may be different. However, a genetic predisposition for developing BCC cannot be excluded. In addition, we have to consider that the information on family history of BCC in the patients was self-reported and not validated, which may limit the results.

The difference in history of second-degree sunburn in childhood was significantly higher in IWs than in OWs (P<.00001). The OW group had a significant rate of sunburns in adulthood (P=.002). The relationship between UV radiation and BCC is complex, and the patterns of sun exposure and their occurrence in different periods of lifetime (ie, childhood vs adulthood) remain controversial.¹³ The overall history of severe sunburns seems to be more important than simply the tendency to burn or tan,^14,15 and a history of sunburns in childhood and adolescence has been associated with early-onset BCC.⁶ Our findings were consistent in that the age of onset of BCCs was lower in IWs who had a history of sunburns in childhood. Basal cell carcinomas developed at older ages in OWs who had a higher incidence of sunburns in adulthood. However, we have to consider that the retrospective nature of the data collection on sunburns in childhood and adulthood was potentially limited, as the information was based on the patients’ memory. Additionally, other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not analyzed.

The majority of BCCs developed in sun-exposed areas of the head and neck in both cohorts, and only 35 (20%) and 28 (22%) BCCs were located on the trunk, arms, or legs in OWs and IWs, respectively. In our study, the rate of BCCs on the trunk was significantly lower in OWs than in IWs (P=.0035). Basal cell carcinomas on the trunk have been suggested to be linked to genetic susceptibility^16,17 and reduced DNA repair capacity¹⁸ rather than sun exposure. Our findings support this hypothesis and suggest that occupational sun exposure has no direct relation with truncal BCC. This outcome is consistent with the result of a case-control study conducted by Pelucchi et al¹⁹ (N=1040). The authors concluded that occupational UV exposure was not associated with truncal BCC development but with head/neck BCC, indicating that there may be different etiological mechanisms between truncal and head/neck BCC.¹⁹ In the largest BCC case series published in the literature with 13,457 specimens, the authors stated that tumors on the trunk may represent a particular variant of BCC, in which the theory of chronic versus intermittent UV exposure cannot be simply extrapolated as it is for the rest of BCC sites. Other factors such as genetic predisposition could be involved in the development of truncal BCC.²⁰ Similarly, Ramos et al²¹ suggested that nonmelanoma skin cancers in sun-protected anatomic sites may occur in individuals with impairment in the DNA repair process.

The classification of histological subtypes of BCC helps to predict tumor behavior,²² which can impact the prognosis. In our study, nodular BCC was the most common subtype in both cohorts, followed by superficial BCC. The nodular subtype was increased in OWs compared to IWs, while the superficial subtype was most common in IWs. Bastiaens et al²³ and McCormack et al²⁴ have suggested that the most frequent subtypes of BCC (nodular and superficial) may represent different tumors with distinct causal factors. According to these authors, nodular subtypes are associated with cumulative UV exposure, while superficial subtypes are associated with more intense and intermittent UV exposure. The results of the current study support this hypothesis, as the OW cohort with cumulative UV exposure showed more incidence of nodular BCC than IWs, while the patients with intense and intermittent sun exposure (the IWs) showed more risk of superficial BCC.

The importance of occupational UV exposure in OWs as a risk factor for BCC is still an ongoing discussion. Our data show that occupational UV exposure may be considered an etiological factor for BCC according to histological subtype and anatomic site. Our study is limited by the retrospective nature of the data collection regarding occupation and childhood sunburns, which were based on the patients’ memory and therefore potentially biased. Data regarding family history of BCC also was self-reported and not validated. Another limiting factor was that other non-UV risk factors for BCC, such as ionizing radiation exposure, were not considered. The limited sample size also may have impacted the study results. Among the strengths of the study are the complete response rate, the similar catchment area of OWs and IWs, the common hospital setting of the 2 cohorts, and the similar attention to medical history. All patients were obtained from the practice of a single referral dermatologist and are felt to be representative of our working area. The use of a single dermatologist reduces provider-associated variability.

Conclusion

According to the results of this study, OWs are more likely to develop nodular BCCs with no increased risk for superficial BCCs. The age of onset in OWs is older than in IWs. Some anatomical sites such as the trunk are more commonly affected in IWs. Truncal BCCs may have etiological factors other than UV exposure, such as a genetic predisposition. This study is useful to occupational safety representatives and physicians to stimulate the implementation of prevention strategies for this easily preventable malignancy and may encourage further research.

Has this ever happened to you? You are an adult neurologist who has been asked to take on the care of a pediatric neurology patient. The patient who comes to your clinic is a 20-year-old young woman with a history of moderate developmental delay and intractable epilepsy. She is on numerous medications including valproic acid with a previous trial of the ketogenic diet. You receive a report that she has focal epilepsy and is having frequent seizures and last had an MRI at age 2 years. Prior notes talk about her summer vacations but not much about the future plans for her epilepsy. You see the patient in clinic, and the family is not happy to be in the adult clinic. They are disappointed that you don’t spend more time with them or fill out myriad forms. You find out that they have not obtained legal guardianship for their daughter and have no plan for work placement after school. She also has various other medical comorbidities that were previously addressed by the pediatric neurologist.

Dr. Felton is an epilepsy specialist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Dr. Kelley is director of the Pediatric Epilepsy Monitoring Unit at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. This editorial reflects the content of a presentation given by Dr. Felton and Dr. Kelley at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society in Houston. The authors report no conflict of interest.

Has this ever happened to you? You are an adult neurologist who has been asked to take on the care of a pediatric neurology patient. The patient who comes to your clinic is a 20-year-old young woman with a history of moderate developmental delay and intractable epilepsy. She is on numerous medications including valproic acid with a previous trial of the ketogenic diet. You receive a report that she has focal epilepsy and is having frequent seizures and last had an MRI at age 2 years. Prior notes talk about her summer vacations but not much about the future plans for her epilepsy. You see the patient in clinic, and the family is not happy to be in the adult clinic. They are disappointed that you don’t spend more time with them or fill out myriad forms. You find out that they have not obtained legal guardianship for their daughter and have no plan for work placement after school. She also has various other medical comorbidities that were previously addressed by the pediatric neurologist.

Dr. Felton is an epilepsy specialist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Dr. Kelley is director of the Pediatric Epilepsy Monitoring Unit at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. This editorial reflects the content of a presentation given by Dr. Felton and Dr. Kelley at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society in Houston. The authors report no conflict of interest.

Has this ever happened to you? You are an adult neurologist who has been asked to take on the care of a pediatric neurology patient. The patient who comes to your clinic is a 20-year-old young woman with a history of moderate developmental delay and intractable epilepsy. She is on numerous medications including valproic acid with a previous trial of the ketogenic diet. You receive a report that she has focal epilepsy and is having frequent seizures and last had an MRI at age 2 years. Prior notes talk about her summer vacations but not much about the future plans for her epilepsy. You see the patient in clinic, and the family is not happy to be in the adult clinic. They are disappointed that you don’t spend more time with them or fill out myriad forms. You find out that they have not obtained legal guardianship for their daughter and have no plan for work placement after school. She also has various other medical comorbidities that were previously addressed by the pediatric neurologist.

Dr. Felton is an epilepsy specialist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Dr. Kelley is director of the Pediatric Epilepsy Monitoring Unit at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. This editorial reflects the content of a presentation given by Dr. Felton and Dr. Kelley at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society in Houston. The authors report no conflict of interest.

HOUSTON – Patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures who stick with evidence-based treatment have significantly fewer seizures and have less associated disability than do those who don’t make it to therapy and psychiatry visits, a study showed.

Reporting preliminary data from 59 patients in a 123-patient study, Benjamin Tolchin, MD, and his colleagues said that patients who adhered to their treatment plans were significantly more likely to experience a reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50%, compared with nonadherent patients (P = .018). Treatment dropout was positively associated with having a prior psychogenic nonepileptic seizure (PNES) diagnosis and with having less concern about the illness.

[email protected]

On Twitter @karioakes

HOUSTON – Patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures who stick with evidence-based treatment have significantly fewer seizures and have less associated disability than do those who don’t make it to therapy and psychiatry visits, a study showed.

Reporting preliminary data from 59 patients in a 123-patient study, Benjamin Tolchin, MD, and his colleagues said that patients who adhered to their treatment plans were significantly more likely to experience a reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50%, compared with nonadherent patients (P = .018). Treatment dropout was positively associated with having a prior psychogenic nonepileptic seizure (PNES) diagnosis and with having less concern about the illness.

[email protected]

On Twitter @karioakes

HOUSTON – Patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures who stick with evidence-based treatment have significantly fewer seizures and have less associated disability than do those who don’t make it to therapy and psychiatry visits, a study showed.

Reporting preliminary data from 59 patients in a 123-patient study, Benjamin Tolchin, MD, and his colleagues said that patients who adhered to their treatment plans were significantly more likely to experience a reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50%, compared with nonadherent patients (P = .018). Treatment dropout was positively associated with having a prior psychogenic nonepileptic seizure (PNES) diagnosis and with having less concern about the illness.

[email protected]

On Twitter @karioakes

The diagnosis

The radiographic and pathologic findings and the patient’s clinical presentation were most consistent with autoimmune pancreatitis and IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis, which are manifestations of IgG4-related disease. IgG4-related disease is a fibroinflammatory condition that has been described in almost every organ system. Elevated serum IgG4 levels suggest this diagnosis, but many times remain normal.1,2 Therefore, a strong clinical suspicion should prompt a biopsy of the affected tissue, which will show a dense lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate organized in a matted and irregularly whorled pattern.2,3 Making a diagnosis requires immunohistochemical confirmation with IgG4 immunostaining of plasma cells.

The patient was started on prednisone followed by azathioprine and experienced a rapid and sustained clinical and biochemical response even after stopping immunosuppressive therapy. After treatment, repeat imaging studies were performed, which showed dramatic improvement in the above-mentioned abnormalities. Abdominal CT showed a decrease in size of the pancreatic head (Figure C) and repeat cholangiogram showed resolution of biliary stenoses (Figure D).

References

1. Oseini, A.M., Chaiteerakij, R., Shire, A.M., et al. Utility of serum immunoglobulin G4 in distinguishing immunoglobulin G4-associated cholangitis from cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2011;54:940-8.

2. Takuma, K., Kamisawa, T., Gopalakrishna, R., et al. Strategy to differentiate autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreas cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:1015-20.

3. Stone, J.H., Zen, Y., Deshpande, V. IgG4-related disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:539-51.

The diagnosis

The radiographic and pathologic findings and the patient’s clinical presentation were most consistent with autoimmune pancreatitis and IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis, which are manifestations of IgG4-related disease. IgG4-related disease is a fibroinflammatory condition that has been described in almost every organ system. Elevated serum IgG4 levels suggest this diagnosis, but many times remain normal.1,2 Therefore, a strong clinical suspicion should prompt a biopsy of the affected tissue, which will show a dense lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate organized in a matted and irregularly whorled pattern.2,3 Making a diagnosis requires immunohistochemical confirmation with IgG4 immunostaining of plasma cells.

The patient was started on prednisone followed by azathioprine and experienced a rapid and sustained clinical and biochemical response even after stopping immunosuppressive therapy. After treatment, repeat imaging studies were performed, which showed dramatic improvement in the above-mentioned abnormalities. Abdominal CT showed a decrease in size of the pancreatic head (Figure C) and repeat cholangiogram showed resolution of biliary stenoses (Figure D).

References

1. Oseini, A.M., Chaiteerakij, R., Shire, A.M., et al. Utility of serum immunoglobulin G4 in distinguishing immunoglobulin G4-associated cholangitis from cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2011;54:940-8.

2. Takuma, K., Kamisawa, T., Gopalakrishna, R., et al. Strategy to differentiate autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreas cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:1015-20.

3. Stone, J.H., Zen, Y., Deshpande, V. IgG4-related disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:539-51.

The diagnosis

The radiographic and pathologic findings and the patient’s clinical presentation were most consistent with autoimmune pancreatitis and IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis, which are manifestations of IgG4-related disease. IgG4-related disease is a fibroinflammatory condition that has been described in almost every organ system. Elevated serum IgG4 levels suggest this diagnosis, but many times remain normal.1,2 Therefore, a strong clinical suspicion should prompt a biopsy of the affected tissue, which will show a dense lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate organized in a matted and irregularly whorled pattern.2,3 Making a diagnosis requires immunohistochemical confirmation with IgG4 immunostaining of plasma cells.

The patient was started on prednisone followed by azathioprine and experienced a rapid and sustained clinical and biochemical response even after stopping immunosuppressive therapy. After treatment, repeat imaging studies were performed, which showed dramatic improvement in the above-mentioned abnormalities. Abdominal CT showed a decrease in size of the pancreatic head (Figure C) and repeat cholangiogram showed resolution of biliary stenoses (Figure D).

References

1. Oseini, A.M., Chaiteerakij, R., Shire, A.M., et al. Utility of serum immunoglobulin G4 in distinguishing immunoglobulin G4-associated cholangitis from cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatology. 2011;54:940-8.

2. Takuma, K., Kamisawa, T., Gopalakrishna, R., et al. Strategy to differentiate autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreas cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18:1015-20.

3. Stone, J.H., Zen, Y., Deshpande, V. IgG4-related disease. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:539-51.

Adverse drug reactions account for 3% to 6% of hospital admissions in the United States and occur in 10% to 15% of hospitalized patients.^1,2 The most common culprits are antibiotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).^3-12 In most cases, diagnoses are made clinically without diagnostic testing. To identify drug allergies associated with diagnostic testing, one center selected patients with suspected cutaneous drug reactions (2006-2010) for further evaluation.¹³ Of 612 patients who were evaluated, 141 had a high suspicion of drug allergy and were included in the analysis. The excluded patients had pseudoallergic reactions, reactive exanthemas due to infection, histopathologic exclusion of drug allergy, angioedema, or other dermatological conditions such as contact dermatitis and eczema. Of the included patients, 107 were diagnosed with drug reactions, while the remainder had non–drug-related exanthemas or unknown etiology after testing. Identified culprit drugs were predominantly antibiotics (39.8%) and NSAIDs (21.2%); contrast media, anticoagulants, anticonvulsants, antimalarials, antifungals, glucocorticoids, antihypertensives, and proton pump inhibitors also were implicated. They were identified with skin prick, intradermal, and patch tests (62.6%); lymphocyte transformation test (17.7%); oral rechallenge (5.6%); or without skin testing (6.5%). One quarter of patients with a high suspicion for drug allergy did not have a confirmed drug eruption in this study. Another study found that 10% to 20% of patients with reported penicillin allergy had confirmation via skin prick testing.¹⁴ These findings suggest that confirmation of suspected drug allergy may require more than one diagnostic test.

Tests for Adverse Drug Reactions

The following tests have been shown to aid in the identification of cutaneous drug eruptions: (1) patch tests^15-21; (2) intradermal tests^14,15,19,20; (3) drug provocation tests^15,20; and (4) lymphocyte transformation tests.²⁰ Intradermal or skin prick tests are most useful in urticarial eruptions but can be considered in nonurticarial eruptions with delayed inspection of test sites up to 1 week after testing. Drug provocation tests are considered the gold standard but involve patient risk. Lymphocyte transformation tests use the principle that T lymphocytes proliferate in the presence of drugs to which the patient is sensitized. Patch tests will be discussed in greater detail below. Immunohistochemistry can determine immunologic mechanisms of eruptions but cannot identify causative agents.^16,17,22

A retrospective study of patients referred for evaluation of adverse drug reactions between 1996 and 2006 found the collective negative predictive value (NPV)—the percentage of truly negative skin tests based on provocation or substitution testing—of cutaneous drug tests including patch, prick, and intradermal tests to be 89.6% (95% confidence interval, 85.9%-93.3%).²³ The NPVs of each test were not reported. Patients with negative cutaneous tests had subsequent oral rechallenge or substitution testing with medication from the same drug class.²³ Another study¹⁶ found the NPV of patch testing to be at least 79% after review of data from other studies using patch and provocation testing.^16,24 These studies suggest that cutaneous testing can be useful, albeit imperfect, in the evaluation and diagnosis of drug allergy.

Review of the Patch Test

Patch tests can be helpful in diagnosis of delayed hypersensitivities.¹⁸ Patch testing is most commonly and effectively used to diagnose allergic contact dermatitis, but its utility in other applications, such as diagnosis of cutaneous drug eruptions, has not been extensively studied.

The development of patch tests to diagnose systemic drug allergies is inhibited by the uncertainty of percutaneous drug penetration, a dearth of studies to determine the best test concentrations of active drug in the patch test, and the potential for nonimmunologic contact urticaria upon skin exposure. Furthermore, cutaneous metabolism of many antigens is well documented, but correlation to systemic metabolism often is unknown, which can confound patch test results and lead to false-negative results when the skin’s metabolic capacity does not match the body’s capacity to generate antigens capable of eliciting immunogenic responses.²¹ Additionally, the method used to suspend and disperse drugs in patch test vehicles is unfamiliar to most pharmacists, and standardized concentrations and vehicles are available only for some medications.²⁵ Studies sufficient to obtain US Food and Drug Administration approval of patch tests for systemic drug eruptions would be costly and therefore prohibitive to investigators. The majority of the literature consists of case reports and data extrapolated from reviews. Patch test results of many drugs have been reported in the literature, with the highest frequencies of positive results associated with anticonvulsants,²⁶ antibiotics, corticosteroids, calcium channel blockers, and benzodiazepines.²¹

Patch test placement affects the diagnostic value of the test. Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of fixed drug eruptions improves yield over placement on uninvolved skin.²⁷ Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of other drug eruptions such as toxic epidermal necrolysis also may aid in diagnosis, though the literature is sparse.^25,26,28

Patch Testing in Drug Eruptions

Morbilliform eruptions account for 48% to 91% of patients with adverse drug reactions.^4-6 Other drug eruptions include urticarial eruptions, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, lichenoid drug eruption, symmetric drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE), erythema multiforme (EM), and systemic contact dermatitis. The Table summarizes reports of positive patch tests with various medications for these drug eruptions.

In general, antimicrobials and NSAIDs were the most implicated drugs with positive patch test results in AGEP, DRESS syndrome, EM, fixed drug eruptions, and morbilliform eruptions. In AGEP, positive results also were reported for other drugs, including terbinafine and morphine.^29-38 In fixed drug eruptions, patch testing on involved skin showed positive results to NSAIDs, analgesics, platelet inhibitors, and antimicrobials.^27,52-55 Patch testing in DRESS syndrome has shown many positive reactions to antiepileptics and antipsychotics.^39-43 One study used patch tests in SDRIFE, reporting positive results with antimicrobials, antineoplastics, decongestants, and glucocorticoids.⁶¹ Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antimicrobials, calcium channel blockers, and histamine antagonists were implicated in EM.^47-51 Positive patch tests were seen in morbilliform eruptions with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antiepileptics/benzodiazepines, NSAIDs, and antimicrobials.^28,57-60 In toxic epidermal necrolysis, diagnosis with patch testing was made using patches placed on previously involved skin with sulfamethoxazole.⁶²

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Drugs historically recognized as causing allergic contact dermatitis (eg, topical gentamycin) can cause systemic contact dermatitis, which can be patch tested. In these situations, systemic contact dermatitis may be due to either the active drug or excipients in the medication formulation. Excipients are inactive ingredients in medications that provide a suitable consistency, appearance, or form. Often overlooked as culprits of drug hypersensitivity because they are theoretically inert, excipients are increasingly implicated in drug allergy. Swerlick and Campbell⁶³ described 11 cases in which chronic unexplained pruritus responded to medication changes to avoid coloring agents. The most common culprits were FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Blue No. 2. Patch testing for allergies to dyes can be clinically useful, though a lack of commercially available patch tests makes diagnosis difficult.⁶⁴

Other excipients can cause cutaneous reactions. Propylene glycol, commonly implicated in allergic contact dermatitis, also can cause cutaneous eruptions upon systemic exposure.⁶⁵ Corticosteroid-induced systemic contact dermatitis has been reported, though it is less prevalent than allergic contact dermatitis.⁶⁶ These reactions usually are due to nonmethylated and nonhalogenated corticosteroids including budesonide, cortisone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone, and methylprednisolone.^67,68 Patch testing in these situations is complicated by the possibility of false-negative results due to the anti-inflammatory effects of the corticosteroids. Therefore, patch testing should be performed using standardized and not treatment concentrations.

In our clinic, we have anecdotally observed several patients with chronic dermatitis and suspected NSAID allergies have positive patch test results with propylene glycol and not the suspected drug. Excipients encountered in multiple drugs and foods are more likely to present as chronic dermatitis, while active drug ingredients started in hospital settings more often present as acute dermatitis.

Our Experience

We have patch tested a handful of patients with suspected drug eruptions (University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center institutional review board #07-12-27). Medications, excipients, and their concentrations (in % weight per weight) and vehicles that were tested include ibuprofen (10% petrolatum), aspirin (10% petrolatum), hydrochlorothiazide (10% petrolatum), captopril (5% petrolatum), and propylene glycol (30% water or 5% petrolatum). Patch tests were read at 48 and 72 hours and scored according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group patch test scoring guidelines.⁶⁹ Two patients tested for ibuprofen reacted positively only to propylene glycol; the 3 other patients did not react to aspirin, hydrochlorothiazide, and captopril. Overall, we observed no positive patch tests to medications and 2 positive tests to propylene glycol in 5 patients tested (unpublished data).

Areas of Uncertainty

Although tests for immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions to drugs exist as skin prick tests, diagnostic testing for the majority of drug reactions does not exist. Drug allergy diagnosis is made with history and temporality, potentially resulting in unnecessary avoidance of helpful medications. Ideal patch test concentrations and vehicles as well as the sensitivity and specificity of these tests are unknown.

Guidelines From Professional Societies

Drug allergy testing guidelines are available from the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology⁷⁰ and American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.⁷¹ The guidelines recommend diagnosis by history and temporality, and it is stated that patch testing is potentially useful in maculopapular rashes, AGEP, fixed drug eruptions, and DRESS syndrome.

Conclusion

Case reports in the literature suggest the utility of patch testing in some drug allergies. We suggest testing excipients such as propylene glycol and benzoic acid to rule out systemic contact dermatitis when patch testing with active drugs to confirm cause of suspected adverse cutaneous reactions to medications.

Adverse drug reactions account for 3% to 6% of hospital admissions in the United States and occur in 10% to 15% of hospitalized patients.^1,2 The most common culprits are antibiotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).^3-12 In most cases, diagnoses are made clinically without diagnostic testing. To identify drug allergies associated with diagnostic testing, one center selected patients with suspected cutaneous drug reactions (2006-2010) for further evaluation.¹³ Of 612 patients who were evaluated, 141 had a high suspicion of drug allergy and were included in the analysis. The excluded patients had pseudoallergic reactions, reactive exanthemas due to infection, histopathologic exclusion of drug allergy, angioedema, or other dermatological conditions such as contact dermatitis and eczema. Of the included patients, 107 were diagnosed with drug reactions, while the remainder had non–drug-related exanthemas or unknown etiology after testing. Identified culprit drugs were predominantly antibiotics (39.8%) and NSAIDs (21.2%); contrast media, anticoagulants, anticonvulsants, antimalarials, antifungals, glucocorticoids, antihypertensives, and proton pump inhibitors also were implicated. They were identified with skin prick, intradermal, and patch tests (62.6%); lymphocyte transformation test (17.7%); oral rechallenge (5.6%); or without skin testing (6.5%). One quarter of patients with a high suspicion for drug allergy did not have a confirmed drug eruption in this study. Another study found that 10% to 20% of patients with reported penicillin allergy had confirmation via skin prick testing.¹⁴ These findings suggest that confirmation of suspected drug allergy may require more than one diagnostic test.

Tests for Adverse Drug Reactions

The following tests have been shown to aid in the identification of cutaneous drug eruptions: (1) patch tests^15-21; (2) intradermal tests^14,15,19,20; (3) drug provocation tests^15,20; and (4) lymphocyte transformation tests.²⁰ Intradermal or skin prick tests are most useful in urticarial eruptions but can be considered in nonurticarial eruptions with delayed inspection of test sites up to 1 week after testing. Drug provocation tests are considered the gold standard but involve patient risk. Lymphocyte transformation tests use the principle that T lymphocytes proliferate in the presence of drugs to which the patient is sensitized. Patch tests will be discussed in greater detail below. Immunohistochemistry can determine immunologic mechanisms of eruptions but cannot identify causative agents.^16,17,22

A retrospective study of patients referred for evaluation of adverse drug reactions between 1996 and 2006 found the collective negative predictive value (NPV)—the percentage of truly negative skin tests based on provocation or substitution testing—of cutaneous drug tests including patch, prick, and intradermal tests to be 89.6% (95% confidence interval, 85.9%-93.3%).²³ The NPVs of each test were not reported. Patients with negative cutaneous tests had subsequent oral rechallenge or substitution testing with medication from the same drug class.²³ Another study¹⁶ found the NPV of patch testing to be at least 79% after review of data from other studies using patch and provocation testing.^16,24 These studies suggest that cutaneous testing can be useful, albeit imperfect, in the evaluation and diagnosis of drug allergy.

Review of the Patch Test

Patch tests can be helpful in diagnosis of delayed hypersensitivities.¹⁸ Patch testing is most commonly and effectively used to diagnose allergic contact dermatitis, but its utility in other applications, such as diagnosis of cutaneous drug eruptions, has not been extensively studied.

The development of patch tests to diagnose systemic drug allergies is inhibited by the uncertainty of percutaneous drug penetration, a dearth of studies to determine the best test concentrations of active drug in the patch test, and the potential for nonimmunologic contact urticaria upon skin exposure. Furthermore, cutaneous metabolism of many antigens is well documented, but correlation to systemic metabolism often is unknown, which can confound patch test results and lead to false-negative results when the skin’s metabolic capacity does not match the body’s capacity to generate antigens capable of eliciting immunogenic responses.²¹ Additionally, the method used to suspend and disperse drugs in patch test vehicles is unfamiliar to most pharmacists, and standardized concentrations and vehicles are available only for some medications.²⁵ Studies sufficient to obtain US Food and Drug Administration approval of patch tests for systemic drug eruptions would be costly and therefore prohibitive to investigators. The majority of the literature consists of case reports and data extrapolated from reviews. Patch test results of many drugs have been reported in the literature, with the highest frequencies of positive results associated with anticonvulsants,²⁶ antibiotics, corticosteroids, calcium channel blockers, and benzodiazepines.²¹

Patch test placement affects the diagnostic value of the test. Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of fixed drug eruptions improves yield over placement on uninvolved skin.²⁷ Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of other drug eruptions such as toxic epidermal necrolysis also may aid in diagnosis, though the literature is sparse.^25,26,28

Patch Testing in Drug Eruptions

Morbilliform eruptions account for 48% to 91% of patients with adverse drug reactions.^4-6 Other drug eruptions include urticarial eruptions, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, lichenoid drug eruption, symmetric drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE), erythema multiforme (EM), and systemic contact dermatitis. The Table summarizes reports of positive patch tests with various medications for these drug eruptions.

In general, antimicrobials and NSAIDs were the most implicated drugs with positive patch test results in AGEP, DRESS syndrome, EM, fixed drug eruptions, and morbilliform eruptions. In AGEP, positive results also were reported for other drugs, including terbinafine and morphine.^29-38 In fixed drug eruptions, patch testing on involved skin showed positive results to NSAIDs, analgesics, platelet inhibitors, and antimicrobials.^27,52-55 Patch testing in DRESS syndrome has shown many positive reactions to antiepileptics and antipsychotics.^39-43 One study used patch tests in SDRIFE, reporting positive results with antimicrobials, antineoplastics, decongestants, and glucocorticoids.⁶¹ Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antimicrobials, calcium channel blockers, and histamine antagonists were implicated in EM.^47-51 Positive patch tests were seen in morbilliform eruptions with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antiepileptics/benzodiazepines, NSAIDs, and antimicrobials.^28,57-60 In toxic epidermal necrolysis, diagnosis with patch testing was made using patches placed on previously involved skin with sulfamethoxazole.⁶²

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Drugs historically recognized as causing allergic contact dermatitis (eg, topical gentamycin) can cause systemic contact dermatitis, which can be patch tested. In these situations, systemic contact dermatitis may be due to either the active drug or excipients in the medication formulation. Excipients are inactive ingredients in medications that provide a suitable consistency, appearance, or form. Often overlooked as culprits of drug hypersensitivity because they are theoretically inert, excipients are increasingly implicated in drug allergy. Swerlick and Campbell⁶³ described 11 cases in which chronic unexplained pruritus responded to medication changes to avoid coloring agents. The most common culprits were FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Blue No. 2. Patch testing for allergies to dyes can be clinically useful, though a lack of commercially available patch tests makes diagnosis difficult.⁶⁴

Other excipients can cause cutaneous reactions. Propylene glycol, commonly implicated in allergic contact dermatitis, also can cause cutaneous eruptions upon systemic exposure.⁶⁵ Corticosteroid-induced systemic contact dermatitis has been reported, though it is less prevalent than allergic contact dermatitis.⁶⁶ These reactions usually are due to nonmethylated and nonhalogenated corticosteroids including budesonide, cortisone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone, and methylprednisolone.^67,68 Patch testing in these situations is complicated by the possibility of false-negative results due to the anti-inflammatory effects of the corticosteroids. Therefore, patch testing should be performed using standardized and not treatment concentrations.

In our clinic, we have anecdotally observed several patients with chronic dermatitis and suspected NSAID allergies have positive patch test results with propylene glycol and not the suspected drug. Excipients encountered in multiple drugs and foods are more likely to present as chronic dermatitis, while active drug ingredients started in hospital settings more often present as acute dermatitis.

Our Experience

We have patch tested a handful of patients with suspected drug eruptions (University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center institutional review board #07-12-27). Medications, excipients, and their concentrations (in % weight per weight) and vehicles that were tested include ibuprofen (10% petrolatum), aspirin (10% petrolatum), hydrochlorothiazide (10% petrolatum), captopril (5% petrolatum), and propylene glycol (30% water or 5% petrolatum). Patch tests were read at 48 and 72 hours and scored according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group patch test scoring guidelines.⁶⁹ Two patients tested for ibuprofen reacted positively only to propylene glycol; the 3 other patients did not react to aspirin, hydrochlorothiazide, and captopril. Overall, we observed no positive patch tests to medications and 2 positive tests to propylene glycol in 5 patients tested (unpublished data).

Areas of Uncertainty

Although tests for immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions to drugs exist as skin prick tests, diagnostic testing for the majority of drug reactions does not exist. Drug allergy diagnosis is made with history and temporality, potentially resulting in unnecessary avoidance of helpful medications. Ideal patch test concentrations and vehicles as well as the sensitivity and specificity of these tests are unknown.

Guidelines From Professional Societies

Drug allergy testing guidelines are available from the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology⁷⁰ and American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.⁷¹ The guidelines recommend diagnosis by history and temporality, and it is stated that patch testing is potentially useful in maculopapular rashes, AGEP, fixed drug eruptions, and DRESS syndrome.

Conclusion

Case reports in the literature suggest the utility of patch testing in some drug allergies. We suggest testing excipients such as propylene glycol and benzoic acid to rule out systemic contact dermatitis when patch testing with active drugs to confirm cause of suspected adverse cutaneous reactions to medications.

Adverse drug reactions account for 3% to 6% of hospital admissions in the United States and occur in 10% to 15% of hospitalized patients.^1,2 The most common culprits are antibiotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).^3-12 In most cases, diagnoses are made clinically without diagnostic testing. To identify drug allergies associated with diagnostic testing, one center selected patients with suspected cutaneous drug reactions (2006-2010) for further evaluation.¹³ Of 612 patients who were evaluated, 141 had a high suspicion of drug allergy and were included in the analysis. The excluded patients had pseudoallergic reactions, reactive exanthemas due to infection, histopathologic exclusion of drug allergy, angioedema, or other dermatological conditions such as contact dermatitis and eczema. Of the included patients, 107 were diagnosed with drug reactions, while the remainder had non–drug-related exanthemas or unknown etiology after testing. Identified culprit drugs were predominantly antibiotics (39.8%) and NSAIDs (21.2%); contrast media, anticoagulants, anticonvulsants, antimalarials, antifungals, glucocorticoids, antihypertensives, and proton pump inhibitors also were implicated. They were identified with skin prick, intradermal, and patch tests (62.6%); lymphocyte transformation test (17.7%); oral rechallenge (5.6%); or without skin testing (6.5%). One quarter of patients with a high suspicion for drug allergy did not have a confirmed drug eruption in this study. Another study found that 10% to 20% of patients with reported penicillin allergy had confirmation via skin prick testing.¹⁴ These findings suggest that confirmation of suspected drug allergy may require more than one diagnostic test.

Tests for Adverse Drug Reactions

The following tests have been shown to aid in the identification of cutaneous drug eruptions: (1) patch tests^15-21; (2) intradermal tests^14,15,19,20; (3) drug provocation tests^15,20; and (4) lymphocyte transformation tests.²⁰ Intradermal or skin prick tests are most useful in urticarial eruptions but can be considered in nonurticarial eruptions with delayed inspection of test sites up to 1 week after testing. Drug provocation tests are considered the gold standard but involve patient risk. Lymphocyte transformation tests use the principle that T lymphocytes proliferate in the presence of drugs to which the patient is sensitized. Patch tests will be discussed in greater detail below. Immunohistochemistry can determine immunologic mechanisms of eruptions but cannot identify causative agents.^16,17,22

A retrospective study of patients referred for evaluation of adverse drug reactions between 1996 and 2006 found the collective negative predictive value (NPV)—the percentage of truly negative skin tests based on provocation or substitution testing—of cutaneous drug tests including patch, prick, and intradermal tests to be 89.6% (95% confidence interval, 85.9%-93.3%).²³ The NPVs of each test were not reported. Patients with negative cutaneous tests had subsequent oral rechallenge or substitution testing with medication from the same drug class.²³ Another study¹⁶ found the NPV of patch testing to be at least 79% after review of data from other studies using patch and provocation testing.^16,24 These studies suggest that cutaneous testing can be useful, albeit imperfect, in the evaluation and diagnosis of drug allergy.

Review of the Patch Test

Patch tests can be helpful in diagnosis of delayed hypersensitivities.¹⁸ Patch testing is most commonly and effectively used to diagnose allergic contact dermatitis, but its utility in other applications, such as diagnosis of cutaneous drug eruptions, has not been extensively studied.

The development of patch tests to diagnose systemic drug allergies is inhibited by the uncertainty of percutaneous drug penetration, a dearth of studies to determine the best test concentrations of active drug in the patch test, and the potential for nonimmunologic contact urticaria upon skin exposure. Furthermore, cutaneous metabolism of many antigens is well documented, but correlation to systemic metabolism often is unknown, which can confound patch test results and lead to false-negative results when the skin’s metabolic capacity does not match the body’s capacity to generate antigens capable of eliciting immunogenic responses.²¹ Additionally, the method used to suspend and disperse drugs in patch test vehicles is unfamiliar to most pharmacists, and standardized concentrations and vehicles are available only for some medications.²⁵ Studies sufficient to obtain US Food and Drug Administration approval of patch tests for systemic drug eruptions would be costly and therefore prohibitive to investigators. The majority of the literature consists of case reports and data extrapolated from reviews. Patch test results of many drugs have been reported in the literature, with the highest frequencies of positive results associated with anticonvulsants,²⁶ antibiotics, corticosteroids, calcium channel blockers, and benzodiazepines.²¹

Patch test placement affects the diagnostic value of the test. Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of fixed drug eruptions improves yield over placement on uninvolved skin.²⁷ Placing patch tests on previously involved sites of other drug eruptions such as toxic epidermal necrolysis also may aid in diagnosis, though the literature is sparse.^25,26,28

Patch Testing in Drug Eruptions

Morbilliform eruptions account for 48% to 91% of patients with adverse drug reactions.^4-6 Other drug eruptions include urticarial eruptions, acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, lichenoid drug eruption, symmetric drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE), erythema multiforme (EM), and systemic contact dermatitis. The Table summarizes reports of positive patch tests with various medications for these drug eruptions.

In general, antimicrobials and NSAIDs were the most implicated drugs with positive patch test results in AGEP, DRESS syndrome, EM, fixed drug eruptions, and morbilliform eruptions. In AGEP, positive results also were reported for other drugs, including terbinafine and morphine.^29-38 In fixed drug eruptions, patch testing on involved skin showed positive results to NSAIDs, analgesics, platelet inhibitors, and antimicrobials.^27,52-55 Patch testing in DRESS syndrome has shown many positive reactions to antiepileptics and antipsychotics.^39-43 One study used patch tests in SDRIFE, reporting positive results with antimicrobials, antineoplastics, decongestants, and glucocorticoids.⁶¹ Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antimicrobials, calcium channel blockers, and histamine antagonists were implicated in EM.^47-51 Positive patch tests were seen in morbilliform eruptions with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antiepileptics/benzodiazepines, NSAIDs, and antimicrobials.^28,57-60 In toxic epidermal necrolysis, diagnosis with patch testing was made using patches placed on previously involved skin with sulfamethoxazole.⁶²

Systemic Contact Dermatitis

Drugs historically recognized as causing allergic contact dermatitis (eg, topical gentamycin) can cause systemic contact dermatitis, which can be patch tested. In these situations, systemic contact dermatitis may be due to either the active drug or excipients in the medication formulation. Excipients are inactive ingredients in medications that provide a suitable consistency, appearance, or form. Often overlooked as culprits of drug hypersensitivity because they are theoretically inert, excipients are increasingly implicated in drug allergy. Swerlick and Campbell⁶³ described 11 cases in which chronic unexplained pruritus responded to medication changes to avoid coloring agents. The most common culprits were FD&C Blue No. 1 and FD&C Blue No. 2. Patch testing for allergies to dyes can be clinically useful, though a lack of commercially available patch tests makes diagnosis difficult.⁶⁴

Other excipients can cause cutaneous reactions. Propylene glycol, commonly implicated in allergic contact dermatitis, also can cause cutaneous eruptions upon systemic exposure.⁶⁵ Corticosteroid-induced systemic contact dermatitis has been reported, though it is less prevalent than allergic contact dermatitis.⁶⁶ These reactions usually are due to nonmethylated and nonhalogenated corticosteroids including budesonide, cortisone, hydrocortisone, prednisolone, and methylprednisolone.^67,68 Patch testing in these situations is complicated by the possibility of false-negative results due to the anti-inflammatory effects of the corticosteroids. Therefore, patch testing should be performed using standardized and not treatment concentrations.

In our clinic, we have anecdotally observed several patients with chronic dermatitis and suspected NSAID allergies have positive patch test results with propylene glycol and not the suspected drug. Excipients encountered in multiple drugs and foods are more likely to present as chronic dermatitis, while active drug ingredients started in hospital settings more often present as acute dermatitis.

Our Experience

We have patch tested a handful of patients with suspected drug eruptions (University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center institutional review board #07-12-27). Medications, excipients, and their concentrations (in % weight per weight) and vehicles that were tested include ibuprofen (10% petrolatum), aspirin (10% petrolatum), hydrochlorothiazide (10% petrolatum), captopril (5% petrolatum), and propylene glycol (30% water or 5% petrolatum). Patch tests were read at 48 and 72 hours and scored according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group patch test scoring guidelines.⁶⁹ Two patients tested for ibuprofen reacted positively only to propylene glycol; the 3 other patients did not react to aspirin, hydrochlorothiazide, and captopril. Overall, we observed no positive patch tests to medications and 2 positive tests to propylene glycol in 5 patients tested (unpublished data).

Areas of Uncertainty

Although tests for immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions to drugs exist as skin prick tests, diagnostic testing for the majority of drug reactions does not exist. Drug allergy diagnosis is made with history and temporality, potentially resulting in unnecessary avoidance of helpful medications. Ideal patch test concentrations and vehicles as well as the sensitivity and specificity of these tests are unknown.

Guidelines From Professional Societies

Drug allergy testing guidelines are available from the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology⁷⁰ and American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.⁷¹ The guidelines recommend diagnosis by history and temporality, and it is stated that patch testing is potentially useful in maculopapular rashes, AGEP, fixed drug eruptions, and DRESS syndrome.

Conclusion

Case reports in the literature suggest the utility of patch testing in some drug allergies. We suggest testing excipients such as propylene glycol and benzoic acid to rule out systemic contact dermatitis when patch testing with active drugs to confirm cause of suspected adverse cutaneous reactions to medications.

HOUSTON—Children with infantile spasms commonly endure substantial delays in diagnosis and treatment, according to research presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “A simple lack of awareness of infantile spasms among healthcare providers may be responsible for potentially catastrophic delays in diagnosis and treatment,” said Shaun Hussain, MD, Director of the University of California, Los Angeles Infantile Spasms Program, and colleagues. “There is a desperate need for effective interventions to increase basic familiarity with infantile spasms among healthcare providers.”

Dr. Hussain and his colleagues performed a study to measure delays in diagnosis and treatment of infantile spasms and identify barriers to optimal care. The researchers retrospectively identified children with video-EEG-confirmed infantile spasms in a clinical database.

When the children’s parents presented for follow-up, they were surveyed about their experiences with diagnosis and treatment. The investigators asked about medical and sociodemographic factors that could affect the care of infantile spasms. Specifically, the researchers determined the dates of infantile spasms onset, first visit with any healthcare provider, first visit with any neurologist, and first visit with an effective provider. Dr. Hussain and colleagues defined an effective provider as a healthcare provider who identified infantile spasms and prescribed a first-line treatment (ie, ACTH, corticosteroids, vigabatrin, or surgical resection). The investigators reviewed medical records to corroborate parents’ survey responses. They calculated the time to first effective provider using Cox proportional hazards regression.

The parents of 100 children with previous or ongoing infantile spasms were included in the study. Approximately 29% of patients were seen by an effective provider within one week of spasms onset. The median time from spasms onset to the first visit with an effective provider was 24.5 days. In sequential univariate analyses, parental sociodemographic attributes (eg, race, ethnicity, religion, household income, education level, type of healthcare insurance, and distance from patients’ home to the tertiary center) did not predict time to first effective provider. In open-ended discussions, numerous parents reported that their suspicions that “something was wrong” often had been discounted by pediatricians, emergency room physicians, and neurologists. In a qualitative analysis, many parents reported self-diagnosis using Internet resources and self-referral after various diagnostic difficulties and false reassurance by health care providers.

HOUSTON—Children with infantile spasms commonly endure substantial delays in diagnosis and treatment, according to research presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “A simple lack of awareness of infantile spasms among healthcare providers may be responsible for potentially catastrophic delays in diagnosis and treatment,” said Shaun Hussain, MD, Director of the University of California, Los Angeles Infantile Spasms Program, and colleagues. “There is a desperate need for effective interventions to increase basic familiarity with infantile spasms among healthcare providers.”

Dr. Hussain and his colleagues performed a study to measure delays in diagnosis and treatment of infantile spasms and identify barriers to optimal care. The researchers retrospectively identified children with video-EEG-confirmed infantile spasms in a clinical database.

When the children’s parents presented for follow-up, they were surveyed about their experiences with diagnosis and treatment. The investigators asked about medical and sociodemographic factors that could affect the care of infantile spasms. Specifically, the researchers determined the dates of infantile spasms onset, first visit with any healthcare provider, first visit with any neurologist, and first visit with an effective provider. Dr. Hussain and colleagues defined an effective provider as a healthcare provider who identified infantile spasms and prescribed a first-line treatment (ie, ACTH, corticosteroids, vigabatrin, or surgical resection). The investigators reviewed medical records to corroborate parents’ survey responses. They calculated the time to first effective provider using Cox proportional hazards regression.

The parents of 100 children with previous or ongoing infantile spasms were included in the study. Approximately 29% of patients were seen by an effective provider within one week of spasms onset. The median time from spasms onset to the first visit with an effective provider was 24.5 days. In sequential univariate analyses, parental sociodemographic attributes (eg, race, ethnicity, religion, household income, education level, type of healthcare insurance, and distance from patients’ home to the tertiary center) did not predict time to first effective provider. In open-ended discussions, numerous parents reported that their suspicions that “something was wrong” often had been discounted by pediatricians, emergency room physicians, and neurologists. In a qualitative analysis, many parents reported self-diagnosis using Internet resources and self-referral after various diagnostic difficulties and false reassurance by health care providers.

HOUSTON—Children with infantile spasms commonly endure substantial delays in diagnosis and treatment, according to research presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “A simple lack of awareness of infantile spasms among healthcare providers may be responsible for potentially catastrophic delays in diagnosis and treatment,” said Shaun Hussain, MD, Director of the University of California, Los Angeles Infantile Spasms Program, and colleagues. “There is a desperate need for effective interventions to increase basic familiarity with infantile spasms among healthcare providers.”

Dr. Hussain and his colleagues performed a study to measure delays in diagnosis and treatment of infantile spasms and identify barriers to optimal care. The researchers retrospectively identified children with video-EEG-confirmed infantile spasms in a clinical database.

When the children’s parents presented for follow-up, they were surveyed about their experiences with diagnosis and treatment. The investigators asked about medical and sociodemographic factors that could affect the care of infantile spasms. Specifically, the researchers determined the dates of infantile spasms onset, first visit with any healthcare provider, first visit with any neurologist, and first visit with an effective provider. Dr. Hussain and colleagues defined an effective provider as a healthcare provider who identified infantile spasms and prescribed a first-line treatment (ie, ACTH, corticosteroids, vigabatrin, or surgical resection). The investigators reviewed medical records to corroborate parents’ survey responses. They calculated the time to first effective provider using Cox proportional hazards regression.

The parents of 100 children with previous or ongoing infantile spasms were included in the study. Approximately 29% of patients were seen by an effective provider within one week of spasms onset. The median time from spasms onset to the first visit with an effective provider was 24.5 days. In sequential univariate analyses, parental sociodemographic attributes (eg, race, ethnicity, religion, household income, education level, type of healthcare insurance, and distance from patients’ home to the tertiary center) did not predict time to first effective provider. In open-ended discussions, numerous parents reported that their suspicions that “something was wrong” often had been discounted by pediatricians, emergency room physicians, and neurologists. In a qualitative analysis, many parents reported self-diagnosis using Internet resources and self-referral after various diagnostic difficulties and false reassurance by health care providers.

Q2: Answer: E

Objective: Recall that the major risk to pregnant patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a flare of IBD.

Rationale: The most important factor in a successful pregnancy is the maintenance of IBD in a quiescent state. Most of the medications typically used to treat IBD are considered relatively safe in pregnancy. In fact, the risk of a flare of disease during pregnancy usually outweighs the risk of these medications.

Endoscopic procedures are generally well tolerated when proper precautions are taken, but should be deferred until the second trimester if possible, and performed only when there is a strong indication. The decision to proceed with endoscopy should be made in consultation with an obstetrician, regardless of gestational age.

References

1. Schulze H., Esters P., Dignass A. Review article: The management of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis during pregnancy and lactation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014;40:991-1008.

2. ASGE Standard of Practice Committee. Shergill A.K., Ben-Menachem T., Chandrasekhara V., et al. Guidelines for endoscopy in pregnant and lactating women. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012:76:18-24.

Q2: Answer: E

Objective: Recall that the major risk to pregnant patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a flare of IBD.

Rationale: The most important factor in a successful pregnancy is the maintenance of IBD in a quiescent state. Most of the medications typically used to treat IBD are considered relatively safe in pregnancy. In fact, the risk of a flare of disease during pregnancy usually outweighs the risk of these medications.

Endoscopic procedures are generally well tolerated when proper precautions are taken, but should be deferred until the second trimester if possible, and performed only when there is a strong indication. The decision to proceed with endoscopy should be made in consultation with an obstetrician, regardless of gestational age.

References

1. Schulze H., Esters P., Dignass A. Review article: The management of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis during pregnancy and lactation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014;40:991-1008.

2. ASGE Standard of Practice Committee. Shergill A.K., Ben-Menachem T., Chandrasekhara V., et al. Guidelines for endoscopy in pregnant and lactating women. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012:76:18-24.

Q2: Answer: E

Objective: Recall that the major risk to pregnant patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a flare of IBD.

Rationale: The most important factor in a successful pregnancy is the maintenance of IBD in a quiescent state. Most of the medications typically used to treat IBD are considered relatively safe in pregnancy. In fact, the risk of a flare of disease during pregnancy usually outweighs the risk of these medications.

Endoscopic procedures are generally well tolerated when proper precautions are taken, but should be deferred until the second trimester if possible, and performed only when there is a strong indication. The decision to proceed with endoscopy should be made in consultation with an obstetrician, regardless of gestational age.

References

1. Schulze H., Esters P., Dignass A. Review article: The management of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis during pregnancy and lactation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2014;40:991-1008.

2. ASGE Standard of Practice Committee. Shergill A.K., Ben-Menachem T., Chandrasekhara V., et al. Guidelines for endoscopy in pregnant and lactating women. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012:76:18-24.

Q1: Answer: B

Rationale: Although copper deficiency could be a complication of extensive enteropathy from conditions such as Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, short gut syndrome, or HIV enteropathy, it is more commonly recognized as a complication of gastric bypass surgeries. Copper absorption is thought to be primarily in the stomach and proximal small intestine. Copper is partially excreted in the bile, and patients with chronic external biliary drains may also develop copper deficiency. Deficiency in copper has also been recognized as a complication of zinc toxicity from deliberate chronic ingestion of zinc or unintentional industrial overexposure to zinc, and can also be a complication of chronic total parenteral nutrition in the absence of routine micronutrient supplementation. Complaints of muscle weakness and gait disturbance with copper deficiency are secondary to a myeloneuropathy similar to vitamin B12 deficiency. Copper deficiency may present as a microcytic anemia and neutropenia and, in advanced cases, may mimic a myelodysplastic syndrome. The microcytic anemia of copper deficiency is worsened by iron supplementation, which can reduce copper absorption.

Riboflavin deficiency may manifest with photophobia, burning mouth sensation, and glossitis. Zinc deficiency may manifest as diarrhea, altered taste sensation (dysgeusia), night blindness, and a characteristic acrodermatitis. Iron deficiency principally manifests as a microcytic anemia. Vitamin B12 deficiency is associated with gastric bypass surgery, as well as resection of the ileum, and may result in myeloneuropathy, but characteristically is associated with a megaloblastic, macrocytic anemia.

Q1: Answer: B

Rationale: Although copper deficiency could be a complication of extensive enteropathy from conditions such as Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, short gut syndrome, or HIV enteropathy, it is more commonly recognized as a complication of gastric bypass surgeries. Copper absorption is thought to be primarily in the stomach and proximal small intestine. Copper is partially excreted in the bile, and patients with chronic external biliary drains may also develop copper deficiency. Deficiency in copper has also been recognized as a complication of zinc toxicity from deliberate chronic ingestion of zinc or unintentional industrial overexposure to zinc, and can also be a complication of chronic total parenteral nutrition in the absence of routine micronutrient supplementation. Complaints of muscle weakness and gait disturbance with copper deficiency are secondary to a myeloneuropathy similar to vitamin B12 deficiency. Copper deficiency may present as a microcytic anemia and neutropenia and, in advanced cases, may mimic a myelodysplastic syndrome. The microcytic anemia of copper deficiency is worsened by iron supplementation, which can reduce copper absorption.

Riboflavin deficiency may manifest with photophobia, burning mouth sensation, and glossitis. Zinc deficiency may manifest as diarrhea, altered taste sensation (dysgeusia), night blindness, and a characteristic acrodermatitis. Iron deficiency principally manifests as a microcytic anemia. Vitamin B12 deficiency is associated with gastric bypass surgery, as well as resection of the ileum, and may result in myeloneuropathy, but characteristically is associated with a megaloblastic, macrocytic anemia.

Q1: Answer: B

Rationale: Although copper deficiency could be a complication of extensive enteropathy from conditions such as Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, short gut syndrome, or HIV enteropathy, it is more commonly recognized as a complication of gastric bypass surgeries. Copper absorption is thought to be primarily in the stomach and proximal small intestine. Copper is partially excreted in the bile, and patients with chronic external biliary drains may also develop copper deficiency. Deficiency in copper has also been recognized as a complication of zinc toxicity from deliberate chronic ingestion of zinc or unintentional industrial overexposure to zinc, and can also be a complication of chronic total parenteral nutrition in the absence of routine micronutrient supplementation. Complaints of muscle weakness and gait disturbance with copper deficiency are secondary to a myeloneuropathy similar to vitamin B12 deficiency. Copper deficiency may present as a microcytic anemia and neutropenia and, in advanced cases, may mimic a myelodysplastic syndrome. The microcytic anemia of copper deficiency is worsened by iron supplementation, which can reduce copper absorption.

Riboflavin deficiency may manifest with photophobia, burning mouth sensation, and glossitis. Zinc deficiency may manifest as diarrhea, altered taste sensation (dysgeusia), night blindness, and a characteristic acrodermatitis. Iron deficiency principally manifests as a microcytic anemia. Vitamin B12 deficiency is associated with gastric bypass surgery, as well as resection of the ileum, and may result in myeloneuropathy, but characteristically is associated with a megaloblastic, macrocytic anemia.