Adverse cutaneous drug reactions are recognized as being major health problems worldwide causing considerable costs for health care systems. Most adverse cutaneous drug reactions follow a benign course; however, up to 2% of all adverse cutaneous drug eruptions are severe and life-threatening. These include acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Physicians should be aware of specific red flags to rapidly identify these severe cutaneous drug eruptions and initiate appropriate treatment. Besides significant progress in clinical classification and treatment, recent studies have greatly enhanced our understanding in the pathophysiology of adverse cutaneous drug reactions. Genetic susceptibilities to certain drugs have been identified in SJS/TEN patients, viral reactivation in DRESS has been elucidated, and the discovery of tissue resident memory T cells helps to better understand the recurrent site-specific inflammation in patients with fixed drug eruption.

In today’s clinical practice patients’ skin is used as screening organ for diagnosing type 1 allergy. According to European guidelines skin prick testing with a panel of 18 allergen extracts is recommended, in the US between 10 to 50 allergens are used. The specificity and sensitivity of skin testing is individually highly variable depending on age, body mass, and skin barrier status. In atopic inflammation skin testing gives more false positive results. Smaller skin area and strain limits prick testing in small children. Although the risk for systemic reactions in skin prick testing is very small, emergency medications must be available. Considering the fact that IgE is the only reliable biomarker for type I allergy, upfront IgE screening with ISAC, followed by fewer skin tests to approve positive sensitizations, is proposed. It is time to arrive in the age of molecular allergy diagnosis in daily patient care.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that acute psychological stress, induced by the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) paradigm, affects salivary cortisol secretion and self-reported stress measures including anxiety. Allergy has been related to altered cortisol responsiveness and increased stress vulnerability. Here, we investigated acute stress responses and emotion regulation strategies in cohorts of allergic and healthy individuals. Groups of allergics and healthy individuals were subjected to the TSST and experienced levels of stress and anxiety, as well as emotion regulation strategies, were assessed. Cortisol and oxytocin concentrations were measured in saliva or plasma. The present findings confirm earlier results of altered stress responsiveness in allergic individuals. Acute stress by the TSST evoked higher physiological arousal in allergics by means of salivary cortisol secretion. Allergics also scored higher on emotion suppression. However, individuals who were more likely to use reappraisal recovered more efficiently from the cortisol increase. No such effect for reappraisal was found in the healthy population. No differences in self-reported anxiety and stress emerged between the groups. Plasma oxytocin levels prior to the TSST were significantly higher in allergics. Our data corroborate earlier findings on altered stress susceptibility in allergics. Moreover, we identified differences in emotion regulation and oxytocin secretion which should be further explored. Accounting for the emerging global prevalence of allergy, more in-depth research into the experience of stress, coping strategies and stress-related molecules in allergic people is warranted.

BackgroundClassical allergy diagnostic workup “from symptoms to molecules” comprises 1) clinical investigation, 2) skin prick- and IgE- testing, and recently, 3) molecular allergy testing. We aimed to examine the diagnostic fidelity of the alternative approach “from molecules to symptoms”, which was recently suggested in the EAACI Molecular Allergology User’s Guide, in a retrospective clinical study.MethodsRecords from 202 patients with clinically suspected allergic sensitizations were extracted from files at two sites applying either the “ISAC-first” workup with IgE-testing by immuno-solid phase allergen chip ISAC112 followed by selected skin prick tests (SPT) or the “SPT-first” starting with SPT followed by the microarray test.ResultsIn the ISAC-first procedure significantly less SPTs were performed during allergy diagnosis (median 4 vs. 14). By SPT in 19% of patients in the ISAC-first group and in 34% in the SPT-first group additional respiratory allergens (p = 0.014) were detected not positive in ISAC microarray. By ISAC microarray test 18% additional sensitizations were found in the ISAC-first, and 32% in SPT-first cohort (p = 0.016). For food allergens 13 and 12% additional sensitizations were detected by the microarray not detected by SPT in the two groups (p = 0.800). No additional food allergen was found by SPT in the ISAC-first group, while in 6% of the cases in the SPT-first group detected sensitizations were negative in the microarray.DiscussionThe ISAC-first approach followed by (fewer) SPTs meets the demands for a patient’s tailored diagnostic work-up and therefore can be considered equivalent to the conventional way using the skin prick test as first screening tool, followed by IgE diagnosis.ConclusionsFor the diagnostic verification of clinically suspected allergy, the novel concept “from molecules to clinic” offers a reliable diagnostic workup in shorter time. Due to lower skin test numbers it is especially applicable for young children and seniors, in atopic patients, and whenever skin tests get difficult or unreliable.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40413-018-0199-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Sex hormone allergy as a clinical syndrome has been known for almost a century. Due to the diversity of clinical presentation regarding symptoms and disease patterns, the optimal patient care represents an enormous interdisciplinary challenge. Frequently, hypersensitivity reactions affect more than one sex hormone and double positive tests for estrogen and progesterone have been described. Since the menstrual cycle dependent symptoms range from skin afflictions, gynecological problems to non-specific reactions, different pathophysiological mechanisms seem likely.Various desensitization protocols are described as causal treatment options, but are rarely applied in clinical routine. Consequently, major research efforts with a quick translation of therapeutic interventions into clinical practice will be crucial to help affected patients in the future.