			Home About us Contact

Discoid LE (discoid + le)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Scarring alopecia and the dermatopathologist

JOURNAL OF CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY, Issue 7 2001
Leonard C. Sperling
Background: The evaluation of patients with cicatricial alopecia is particularly challenging, and dermatopathologists receive little training in the interpretation of scalp biopsy specimens. Accurate interpretation of specimens from patients with hair disease requires both qualitative (morphology of follicles, inflammation, fibrosis, etc.) and quantitative (size, number, follicular phase) information. Much of this data can only be obtained from transverse sections. In most cases, good clinical/pathologic correlation is required, and so clinicians should be expected to provide demographic information as well as a brief description of the pattern of hair loss and a clinical differential diagnosis. Results: The criteria used to classify the various forms of cicatricial alopecia are relatively imprecise, and so classification is controversial and in a state of evolution. There are five fairly distinctive forms of cicatricial alopecia: 1) chronic, cutaneous lupus erythematosus (discoid LE); 2) lichen planopilaris; 3) dissecting cellulitis (perifolliculitis abscedens et suffodiens); 4) acne keloidalis; and 5) central, centrifugal scarring alopecia (follicular degeneration syndrome, folliculitis decalvans, pseudopelade). Not all patients with cicatricial alopecia can be confidently assigned to one of these five entities, and "cicatricial alopecia, unclassified" would be an appropriate label for such cases. Conclusion: The histologic features of five forms of cicatricial alopecia are reviewed. Dermatopathologists can utilize a "checklist" to catalog the diagnostic features of scalp biopsy specimens. In many, but not all, cases the information thus acquired will "match" the clinical and histologic characteristics of a form of cicatricial alopecia. However, because of histologic and clinical overlap between the forms of cicatricial alopecia, a definitive diagnosis cannot always be rendered. [source]

The cutaneous pathology of lupus erythematosus: a review

JOURNAL OF CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY, Issue 1 2001
A. Neil Crowson
The presentation of lupus erythematosus (LE) ranges from a skin rash unaccompanied by extracutaneous stigmata to a rapidly progressive lethal multiorgan disease. The diagnosis and subclassification is traditionally based on the correlation of serological and clinical findings. The latter include a photoinduced skin rash, arthralgia, arthritis, fever, Raynaud's phenomenon, anemia, leukopenia, serositis, nephritis and central nervous sysdtem disease. The conventional classification scheme includes systemic, subacute cutaneous and discoid LE. Recent advances in our understanding of the cutaneous histopathology which correlates with the traditional forms of LE, along with certain novel LE subtypes, are the focus of this review. In addition to the main subtypes of LE, we will discuss associated vasculopathic lesions and the contribution of immunofluorescence microscopy to the diagnosis of LE and related connective tissue disease syndromes. Consideration will be given to unusual variants of LE such as anti-Ro/SSA-positive systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), bullous SLE, lymphomatoid LE, lupus erythematosus profundus, drug induced LE, linear cutaneous LE, chiblains LE and parvovirus B19-associated LE. [source]

The use of topical calcineurin inhibitors in lupus erythematosus: an overview

JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY & VENEREOLOGY, Issue 1 2008
U Wollina
Abstract Lupus erythematosus (LE) shows a broad range of cutaneous symptoms, including acute, subacute and chronic lesions. The gold standard of established topical treatment consists of medium- to high-potency corticosteroids. Because face and neck are often involved, adverse effects of prolonged corticosteroid use are not uncommon. There is a need of steroid-free topical treatment in LE. With the development of topical calcineurin inhibitors, tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, there is an alternative available. The present study reviews the literature data on topical tacrolimus and pimecrolimus for malar rash, subacute lesions and discoid chronic lesions among others. The present data argue for an efficacy of these compounds in acute and subacute cutaneous LE manifestations with a rapid response and only minor side-effects when used as an adjunct to systemic treatment. In chronic discoid LE, hypertrophic plaques do not well respond because of limited penetration. The primary target seems to be the decrease or blocking of cytokine production by activated T lymphocytes. [source]

The expression pattern of interferon-inducible proteins reflects the characteristic histological distribution of infiltrating immune cells in different cutaneous lupus erythematosus subsets

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, Issue 4 2007
J. Wenzel
Summary Background, Plasmacytoid dendritic cells and type I interferons (IFNs) are supposed to play a central proinflammatory role in the pathogenesis of cutaneous lupus erythematosus (LE). The IFN-inducible chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 are involved in recruiting CXCR3+ effector lymphocytes from the peripheral blood into skin lesions of LE. We hypothesized that the expression pattern of IFN-inducible proteins reflects the characteristic distribution of the inflammatory infiltrate in different subsets of cutaneous LE. Objectives, To test this hypothesis in patients with LE. Methods, Lesional skin biopsies taken from patients with different subsets of LE [chronic discoid LE (CDLE), n = 12; subacute cutaneous LE (SCLE), n = 5; LE tumidus (LET), n = 4; LE profundus (LEP), n = 6] were investigated by immunohistochemistry using monoclonal antibodies to the lymphocyte surface markers CD3, CD4, CD8, CD20 and CD68, the cytotoxic proteins Tia1 and granzyme B, the chemokine receptor CXCR3, the specifically type I IFN-inducible protein myxovirus protein A (MxA) and the chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10. Results, The expression pattern of MxA followed the distribution of the inflammatory infiltrate typically seen in the investigated cutaneous LE subsets. In CDLE and SCLE, expression was focused in the epidermis and upper dermis, while in LET a perivascular and in LEP a subcutaneous pattern was found. Similar findings were obtained for CXCL9 and CXCL10. Conclusions, Our results demonstrate a close morphological association between the expression pattern of IFN-inducible proteins and the distribution of CXCR3+ CD3+ lymphocytes in all investigated subsets of cutaneous LE. This supports the importance of an IFN-driven inflammation in this condition. Infiltrating lymphocytes carrying CXCL10 in their granules might amplify the lesional inflammation and be responsible for the chronic course of this disease. [source]

Photosensitivity in patients with lupus erythematosus: a clinical and photobiological study of 100 patients using a prolonged phototest protocol

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, Issue 1 2003
C.J.G. Sanders
SummaryBackground There is a clear relationship between ultraviolet (UV) radiation (UVR) and the clinical manifestations of patients with lupus erythematosus (LE). Cutaneous lesions are induced or exacerbated by exposure to UVR. Of patients with LE, 24,83% are reported to be photosensitive to UVR. LE tumidus appears to be the most photosensitive subtype of LE, followed by subacute cutaneous LE (SCLE). In general, the history of patients with LE correlates poorly with the presence or absence of photosensitivity, due to a delayed time interval between UV exposure and exacerbation of skin lesions. Phototesting using artificial UVR and visible light is a reliable way of diagnosing photosensitivity. Objectives To investigate the photoreactivity of patients with various subtypes of LE using an individualized phototest protocol. The results of phototests were correlated with the history of photosensitivity, the subtype of LE, the presence of autoantibodies and the use of anti-inflammatory medication by these patients. Methods Phototesting with UVA, UVB and visible light was performed in 100 patients with LE. The diagnosis of LE was established both on clinical examination and skin histology. Serological studies were also performed in all patients. The phototests were performed on large skin areas of the forearm or trunk; the first dose was twice the minimal erythema dose and the dosage was increased according to the individual reactions of the patients at the test sites. Follow-up of skin reactions at the test sites was performed for up to 2 months. Histological examination of the photoprovoked skin lesions was carried out in 57 patients. Results Of the 100 patients included (81 women and 19 men; mean age 41 years, range 17,79), 46 had chronic discoid LE, 30 SCLE and 24 systemic LE. An abnormal reaction to UVR and visible light was found in 93% of our patients with LE. No clinical or histological evidence at the phototest sites of polymorphic light eruption was found. There was no correlation between photosensitivity and LE subtype, presence of autoantibodies or medical history. Concomitant use of anti-inflammatory medication seemed to exert only minimal influence on the results of phototesting. Conclusions When using an extended phototesting protocol, almost all patients with LE in this study showed clinical and histological evidence of aberrant photosensitivity. Therefore, patients with LE should receive thorough advice and instruction on photoprotective measures, regardless of their history, LE subtype or presence of autoantibodies. [source]