Two single doses of 750 mg mepolizumab did not result in clinical success in patients with AD, despite a significant decrease in peripheral blood eosinophils.

Besides topical and systemic therapy, UVA1 radiation is a good option of treatment in various skin diseases. It is one of the first-line treatments for several sclerotic diseases and it often improves pruritus considerably.

Contact allergy to methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN), often combined with phenoxyethanol (PE) (e.g., Euxyl K 400), increased throughout the 1990s in Europe. Consequently, in 2003, the European Commission banned its use in leave-on products, where its use concentration was considered too high and the non-sensitizing use concentration as yet unknown. The 2 objectives of the study are (a) to find a maximum non-eliciting concentration in a leave-on product in MDBGN/PE-sensitized patients, which could possibly also be considered safe regarding induction and (b) to find the best patch test concentration for MDBGN. We, therefore, performed a use-related test (ROAT) in patients sensitized to MDBGN/PE (n = 39) with 3 concentrations of MDBGN/PE (50, 100 and 250 p.p.m. MDBGN, respectively). A subset of these patients (n = 24) was later patch-tested with various concentrations (0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.5% MDBGN, respectively). 15 patients (38%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 23-55%) had a negative and 24 (62%; 95% CI = 45-77%) a positive overall repeated open application test (ROAT) result. 13 reacted to the lowest (50 p.p.m.), 8 to the middle (100 p.p.m.) and 3 to the highest concentration (250 p.p.m.) only. In those 13 reacting to the lowest ROAT concentration, dermatitis developed within a few days (1-7). The strength of the initial and the confirmatory patch test result, respectively, and the outcome of the ROAT were positively associated. Of the 24 patients with a use and confirmatory patch test, 15 reacted to 0.1% MDBGN, 16 to 0.2%, 17 to 0.3% and 22 to 0.5%. With the patch test concentration of 0.5%, the number of ROAT-negative patients but patch-test-positive patients increases considerably, particularly due to + reactions. A maximum sensitivity of 94% (95% CI = 70-100%) is reached with a patch test concentration of 0.2%, and is not further improved by increasing the concentration. However, the specificity decreases dramatically from 88 (95% CI = 47-100%) with 0.2% to a mere 12.5% (95% CI = 0-53%) with 0.5%. It can be concluded (a) that for MDBGN 0.2% is very likely the best patch test concentration and (b) that 50 p.p.m. in a leave-on product can elicit contact dermatitis in sensitized persons. We were, therefore, unable to find a safe, still microbicidal, concentration for leave-on products. By contrast, with other contact allergens, dose-response use tests may be able to identify a non-eliciting concentration, which could give valuable clues to a non-inducing (i.e., safe) concentration in products.

Acneiform skin eruptions are the most common side effect of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors. The National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria allow for quick severity estimation of a patient, but are not suitable for monitoring the severity of the skin lesions over time, as needed for treatment studies. Here we present our scoring tool for acneiform skin eruptions, which is calculated from body involvement, facial involvement and clinical grading of the skin items erythema, papulation, pustulation and scaling ⁄ crusts. The final score is a number between 0 and 100.

Background: The atopy patch test (APT) is an in vivo model to study the induction of eczema by inhalant allergens in atopic dermatitis (AD) patients. Mepolizumab is a monoclonal antibody to interleukin-5, which reduces peripheral blood eosinophils. Previously, we reported that mepolizumab treatment did not result in clinical improvement in AD. The current study investigates the effect of mepolizumab therapy on the APT in the same patients. Methods: Mepolizumab treatment was given at days 0 and 7 in a double-blind placebo-controlled design. The APT was applied at days –2, 0, 14 and 28. Clinical evaluation of each APT was conducted 48 h after application at days 0, 2, 16 and 30. Skin biopsies were taken at days 0, 2 and 16 for eosinophil counts. Results: The mepolizumab-treated group showed no significant reduction in macroscopic outcome of the APT. Tissue eosinophils were reduced in the mepolizumab-treated group at day 16 compared with placebo; however, this was not significant. Conclusion: Mepolizumab therapy cannot prevent the eczematous reaction induced by the APT. Furthermore, the influx of tissue eosinophil numbers in the APT is not significantly inhibited after mepolizumab treatment compared with placebo, despite a significant reduction in peripheral blood eosinophils.