Induction of Hypersensitivity to a Previously Tolerated Antiepileptic Drug by a Second Antiepileptic Drug
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the induction of hypersensitivity to one antiepileptic drug (AED) by a second AED. METHODS: Case report and review of the relevant literature. RESULTS: A patient is reported who was treated with phenytoin (PHT) for 6 months without adverse effect, but developed a hypersensitivity reaction with rash, fever, elevated liver enzymes, lymphadenopathy, and colitis 6 weeks after the introduction of carbamazepine (CBZ). PHT and CBZ were discontinued. Seizures continued despite treatment with valproic acid and clobazam. A decision was made to cautiously reintroduce PHT. Diffuse skin rash and pharyngitis appeared after two doses of PHT. CONCLUSIONS: The AED hypersensitivity syndrome has been thought to occur as a consequence of preexisting pharmacogenetic and immunologic abnormalities. Our case demonstrates induction of hypersensitivity to an AED that had been formerly well tolerated, after a hypersensitivity reaction to another AED. This is distinct from simple cross-reactivity between one or more drugs. Such induction of hypersensitivity with AEDs has not been previously described.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".