MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2335590668 · doi:10.1097/01206501-200512000-00006

An Alarming Complication of Candida albicans Antigen Treatment of Recalcitrant Warts

2005· article· en· W2335590668 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anthony A. Gaspari

Notice bibliographique

RevueDermatitis · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCandida albicansMedicineAntigenDelayed hypersensitivityImmunologyDermatologyHypersensitivity reactionImmune systemMicrobiologyBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Response To the Editor: I thank Dr. Signore for his interest in our study and insightful comments related to our case report. In response, note the following comments: While I agree that it is important to consider the concentration of the Candida albicans antigen, it is, in my opinion, more important to consider the patient's immune response (delayed-type hypersensitivity [DTH]) with the associated inflammatory reaction) to this injected antigen. It is our standard of practice to administer a 0.1 mL intradermal injection of a 1:10 dilution of the stock solution of Candida albicans antigen solution on the volar forearm prior to the intralesional administration into the base of the wart, which was performed in the patient described in our case report.1 The size of the subsequent local inflammatory response to this test antigen dose will dictate whether this or a more dilute preparation is injected into patients' warts. Our patient exhibited a normal DTH response to the diluted antigen.1 Based on her normal DTH response to this dose of antigen, there was no reason to anticipate the type of response that she subsequently encountered. Our clinical experience with this working dilution of Candida albicans antigen has not resulted in any “rapid tissue sloughing” (presumably tissue necrosis) in any of the 10 patients we have treated, as has been cited by Dr. Signore.2 Even the patient we describe with the “painful purple digit” did not develop tissue necrosis although this was our initial concern. Additionally, we treated more than one subungual wart in this patient and observed the complication in only one of the two treated digits. Dr. Signore noted that he had encountered a patient with a painful reaction to a 1:1,000 dilution of Candida antigen into a subungual wart, which he no longer treats. The patient described in our case report experienced a painful reaction, also in the subungual area. This suggests that it is not the concentration of the antigen but the patient's reaction to the antigen, as well as the anatomic location, that presents a risk for this potential complication. The correspondent's reluctance to use this treatment modality in the subungual area raises an important point. If it is not feasible to use Candida albicans antigen in the treatment of warts located in difficult-to-treat areas (such as subungual warts and plantar warts), then what is the utility of such a treatment? First- and second-line therapies such as salicylic acid plasters and cryotherapy are likely to be as successful in common warts outside of these difficult-to-treat areas, without the use of injected materials. It also raises the question that the high reported success rates of intradermal injections of Candida albicans antigen into warts may be related to the exclusion of warts located in these problematic areas. In our case report, we utilized a 1:10 dilution of the stock solution and based this dose on the patient's immune response to a prior skin test reaction (see item 1, above), as we do with every patient. We titrate the dilution and antigen volume on the basis of the prior DTH response. Because some patients react very vigorously to this antigen, we indeed dilute the antigen well beyond the 1:10 initial working dilution. In this regard, I disagree with the author's recommendation to start with a dilute solution directly administered to the warts. It is essential to titrate the antigen dose injected into the warts in accordance with the patient's DTH skin test response; one size (ie, the 1:500 dilution recommended by Dr. Signore) does not fit all! It is more likely that the compartment-like syndrome that occurred in our patient was related more to the anatomic compartment (fingertip) than to the concentration of the antigen. Regarding the use of systemic corticosteroids, this is a reasonable consideration as a treatment to potentially avoid surgery. If systemic corticosteroids are utilized to treat such a syndrome, they should be given very early in the course of the evolution of signs and symptoms, and a rapidly acting preparation should be administered (by oral or intravenous route) because tissue necrosis can ensue rapidly in true compartment syndromes. Anthony Gaspari MD Department of Dermatology University of Maryland Baltimore, MD

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Étude de cas · Signal consensuel: Étude de cas
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,011

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0020,003
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,013
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,359
Écart entre enseignants0,319 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeÉtude de cas
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDermatitisMême sujetCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchTravaux en français237 207