Idiosyncratic drug reactions are difficult to study in humans due to their unpredictability. Unfortunately, this characteristic also hinders the development of animal models needed for mechanistic studies. Nevirapine, used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections, results in a severe idiosyncratic skin rash in some patients. We found that nevirapine can also cause a significant rash in some strains of rats. At a dose of 150 mg/kg/day, the incidence in female Sprague-Dawley rats was 6/28 (21%), in female Brown Norway rats 32/32 (100%), and in female Lewis rats 0/6 (0%) while no male Sprague-Dawley or Brown Norway rats developed a rash. Female SJL mice 0/7 also did not develop nevirapine-induced skin lesions. The first sign of a reaction in Brown Norway rats was red ears at days 7-10 followed by a rash with scabbing mainly on the back; this was a shorter time to onset than in Sprague-Dawley rats. Light microscopy of the skin revealed a primarily mononuclear inflammatory infiltrate and lesions typical of self-trauma. Immunohistochemistry results suggest that the infiltrate was composed of CD4 and CD8 T cells as well as macrophages. A lower dose of either 40 or 75 mg/kg/day did not lead to a rash and, in fact, 2 weeks of the lower doses induced tolerance to the 150 mg/kg/day dose in female Brown Norway rats. A dose of 100 mg/kg/day resulted in rash in 2/4 (50%) of female Brown Norway rats. Rechallenge of Brown Norway rats that had been allowed to recuperate after a nevirapine-induced rash led to red ears in less than 24 h followed by hair loss and occasional skin lesions. Although the skin rash was less evident on rechallenge, microscopically, the cellular infiltrate was more prominent, especially surrounding the hair follicles. Moreover, there were lesions of interface dermatitis with apoptosis and satellitosis, indicative of a cell-mediated immune attack on the epidermis. While systemic signs of illness did not accompany the rash on primary exposure, on rechallenge, the animals appeared generally unwell and this forced sacrifice after 2 weeks or less of treatment. Importantly, splenocytes isolated from rechallenged animals were able to transfer susceptibility to nevirapine-induced skin rash to naïve female Brown Norway recipients, which was illustrated by a faster time to onset of rash in the recipients. The characteristics of this adverse reaction are similar to that seen in humans; that is, it is idiosyncratic in that it only occurs in some strains of animals, is delayed in onset, is more common in females, is dose-dependent, and appears to be immune-mediated. Therefore, it may represent a good animal model for the study of idiosyncratic drug reactions.

Pathology peer review verifies and improves the accuracy and quality of pathology diagnoses and interpretations. Pathology peer review is recommended when important risk assessment or business decisions are based on nonclinical studies. For pathology peer review conducted before study completion, the peer-review pathologist reviews sufficient slides and pathology data to assist the study pathologist in refining pathology diagnoses and interpretations. Materials to be reviewed are selected by the peer-review pathologist. Consultations with additional experts or a formal (documented) pathology working group may be used to resolve discrepancies. The study pathologist is solely responsible for the content of the final pathology data and report, makes changes resulting from peer-review discussions, initiates the audit trail for microscopic observations after all changes resulting from peer-review have been made, and signs the final pathologist's report. The peer-review pathologist creates a signed peerreview memo describing the peer-review process and confirming that the study pathologist's report accurately and appropriately reflects the pathology data. The study pathologist also may sign a statement of consensus. It is not necessary to archive working notes created during the peer-review process.

No abstract