Case Letter

To the Editor:

Acne fulminans (AF), the most severe form of acne, is a rare condition with an incidence of less than 1% of total acne cases.¹ Adolescent boys are the most susceptible group of patients.² Painful inflammatory pustules that transform into deep ulcerations covered by abundant hemorrhagic crust are typical of AF. Commonly affected areas include the face, back, neck, and chest. Additionally, fever and polyarthralgia may be present, and there often is myopathy due to rapid weight loss.^3,4 Less often, erythema nodosum and splenomegaly may be observed.⁵ Laboratory testing also may reveal markers of systemic inflammation such as leukocytosis with neutrophilia, elevated C-reactive protein levels, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and thrombocytosis. Anemia and elevated hepatic enzyme levels also may be present in AF.² It is suspected that AF may be induced by low doses of isotretinoin therapy with concomitant inherited susceptibility.⁶

We report the case of a 21-year-old man who was referred to the Department of Dermatology by his primary care physician for evaluation of severe hemorrhagic lesions on the trunk following use of oral isotretinoin (Figure 1). Prior to development of the lesions, the patient had started weekly intramuscular injections of testosterone 500 mg, which he purchased online without consulting a physician, to address muscle mass reduction associated with sudden weight loss from intense physical training. After 8 months of testosterone supplementation along with continued physical training, the patient presented to his primary care physician for treatment of acne vulgaris on the back and trunk of 2 months’ duration. Oral isotretinoin 20 mg once daily was initiated; however, the patient reported that the acne lesions showed progression after 1 month of treatment. Isotretinoin was increased to a more weight-appropriate dosage of 60 mg once daily 2 weeks before admission to our dermatology clinic.

Treatment initially included cessation of isotretinoin and administration of prednisone, omeprazole, clindamycin, and doxycycline. Prednisone was given at a dosage of 40 mg once daily for 1 week, then decreased by 5 mg every 7 days. Omeprazole was given concurrently as prophylaxis for the gastrointestinal tract side effects of long-term prednisone use. Clindamycin was given at a dosage of 300 mg 3 times daily. Doxycycline was given for 6 weeks at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily. Topical octenidine dihydrochloride also was given.

The clinical diagnosis in our patient also was supported by the hypothesis that heredity, overactive immune reactions, bacterial infections, and use of some drugs (eg, isotretinoin, tetracycline, testosterone) can trigger AF.⁸ The most well-known theory is that low doses of isotretinoin induce AF.⁶ The majority of cases are caused by doses of less than 20 mg/kg once daily, but there have been reports of patients using full doses and developing this condition.⁹ The fact that the use of low- and high-dose isotretinoin can provoke AF suggests an idiosyncratic reaction that is not clearly dose related. The most dangerous triggering factor of AF is concomitant usage of testosterone and isotretinoin.¹⁰ Our patient used testosterone injections to increase muscle mass and underwent treatment with isotretinoin for acne.

Treatment of AF is controversial, as there is no standard therapy. Currently, steroids and isotretinoin are the treatments of choice. Antibiotic use is controversial because of a lack of randomized trials.¹¹

In the first stage of treatment, prednisone 0.5 to 1 mg/kg once daily is recommended as an initial anti-inflammatory therapy, with gradual dose reduction. According to evidence-based recommendations, a low dose of isotretinoin can be introduced after crusted lesions have healed. The overlapping therapy with steroids and isotretinoin should be provided for at least 4 weeks. High-potency topical corticosteroids can be used on granulation tissue, which can shorten the systemic treatment with prednisone or can be an alternative treatment for patients with contraindications to systemic corticosteroids.¹¹

Additionally, local care of the lesions including compresses and topical emollients is crucial. There are some case reports in which there is introduction of high doses of isotretinoin, subsequently with systemic steroids.^7,8,12 Seukeran and Cunliffe⁵ proved that it is beneficial to give acne prophylaxis to prevent further episodes. Our patient was similarly treated with systemic steroids and isotretinoin. Treatment guidelines for AF do not recommend oral antibiotics,¹¹ but data are limited in the case of isotretinoin-induced AF. Our patient was given doxycycline concomitant with systemic steroids, which was necessary due to signs of secondary infection from a lesion culture. Doxycycline was stopped when isotretinoin treatment was initiated to prevent pseudotumor cerebri. The patient achieved good clinical improvement with no relapse.

Using isotretinoin to treat acne vulgaris has many benefits, despite the possibility of developing AF as an extremely rare complication. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of this complication to make the diagnosis and provide appropriate care, especially in young men. It is particularly important to consider the possibility of concomitant testosterone and isotretinoin when documenting the patient’s medical history.

To the Editor:

Acne fulminans (AF), the most severe form of acne, is a rare condition with an incidence of less than 1% of total acne cases.¹ Adolescent boys are the most susceptible group of patients.² Painful inflammatory pustules that transform into deep ulcerations covered by abundant hemorrhagic crust are typical of AF. Commonly affected areas include the face, back, neck, and chest. Additionally, fever and polyarthralgia may be present, and there often is myopathy due to rapid weight loss.^3,4 Less often, erythema nodosum and splenomegaly may be observed.⁵ Laboratory testing also may reveal markers of systemic inflammation such as leukocytosis with neutrophilia, elevated C-reactive protein levels, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and thrombocytosis. Anemia and elevated hepatic enzyme levels also may be present in AF.² It is suspected that AF may be induced by low doses of isotretinoin therapy with concomitant inherited susceptibility.⁶

We report the case of a 21-year-old man who was referred to the Department of Dermatology by his primary care physician for evaluation of severe hemorrhagic lesions on the trunk following use of oral isotretinoin (Figure 1). Prior to development of the lesions, the patient had started weekly intramuscular injections of testosterone 500 mg, which he purchased online without consulting a physician, to address muscle mass reduction associated with sudden weight loss from intense physical training. After 8 months of testosterone supplementation along with continued physical training, the patient presented to his primary care physician for treatment of acne vulgaris on the back and trunk of 2 months’ duration. Oral isotretinoin 20 mg once daily was initiated; however, the patient reported that the acne lesions showed progression after 1 month of treatment. Isotretinoin was increased to a more weight-appropriate dosage of 60 mg once daily 2 weeks before admission to our dermatology clinic.

Treatment initially included cessation of isotretinoin and administration of prednisone, omeprazole, clindamycin, and doxycycline. Prednisone was given at a dosage of 40 mg once daily for 1 week, then decreased by 5 mg every 7 days. Omeprazole was given concurrently as prophylaxis for the gastrointestinal tract side effects of long-term prednisone use. Clindamycin was given at a dosage of 300 mg 3 times daily. Doxycycline was given for 6 weeks at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily. Topical octenidine dihydrochloride also was given.

The clinical diagnosis in our patient also was supported by the hypothesis that heredity, overactive immune reactions, bacterial infections, and use of some drugs (eg, isotretinoin, tetracycline, testosterone) can trigger AF.⁸ The most well-known theory is that low doses of isotretinoin induce AF.⁶ The majority of cases are caused by doses of less than 20 mg/kg once daily, but there have been reports of patients using full doses and developing this condition.⁹ The fact that the use of low- and high-dose isotretinoin can provoke AF suggests an idiosyncratic reaction that is not clearly dose related. The most dangerous triggering factor of AF is concomitant usage of testosterone and isotretinoin.¹⁰ Our patient used testosterone injections to increase muscle mass and underwent treatment with isotretinoin for acne.

Treatment of AF is controversial, as there is no standard therapy. Currently, steroids and isotretinoin are the treatments of choice. Antibiotic use is controversial because of a lack of randomized trials.¹¹

In the first stage of treatment, prednisone 0.5 to 1 mg/kg once daily is recommended as an initial anti-inflammatory therapy, with gradual dose reduction. According to evidence-based recommendations, a low dose of isotretinoin can be introduced after crusted lesions have healed. The overlapping therapy with steroids and isotretinoin should be provided for at least 4 weeks. High-potency topical corticosteroids can be used on granulation tissue, which can shorten the systemic treatment with prednisone or can be an alternative treatment for patients with contraindications to systemic corticosteroids.¹¹

Additionally, local care of the lesions including compresses and topical emollients is crucial. There are some case reports in which there is introduction of high doses of isotretinoin, subsequently with systemic steroids.^7,8,12 Seukeran and Cunliffe⁵ proved that it is beneficial to give acne prophylaxis to prevent further episodes. Our patient was similarly treated with systemic steroids and isotretinoin. Treatment guidelines for AF do not recommend oral antibiotics,¹¹ but data are limited in the case of isotretinoin-induced AF. Our patient was given doxycycline concomitant with systemic steroids, which was necessary due to signs of secondary infection from a lesion culture. Doxycycline was stopped when isotretinoin treatment was initiated to prevent pseudotumor cerebri. The patient achieved good clinical improvement with no relapse.

Using isotretinoin to treat acne vulgaris has many benefits, despite the possibility of developing AF as an extremely rare complication. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of this complication to make the diagnosis and provide appropriate care, especially in young men. It is particularly important to consider the possibility of concomitant testosterone and isotretinoin when documenting the patient’s medical history.

To the Editor:

Acne fulminans (AF), the most severe form of acne, is a rare condition with an incidence of less than 1% of total acne cases.¹ Adolescent boys are the most susceptible group of patients.² Painful inflammatory pustules that transform into deep ulcerations covered by abundant hemorrhagic crust are typical of AF. Commonly affected areas include the face, back, neck, and chest. Additionally, fever and polyarthralgia may be present, and there often is myopathy due to rapid weight loss.^3,4 Less often, erythema nodosum and splenomegaly may be observed.⁵ Laboratory testing also may reveal markers of systemic inflammation such as leukocytosis with neutrophilia, elevated C-reactive protein levels, increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and thrombocytosis. Anemia and elevated hepatic enzyme levels also may be present in AF.² It is suspected that AF may be induced by low doses of isotretinoin therapy with concomitant inherited susceptibility.⁶

We report the case of a 21-year-old man who was referred to the Department of Dermatology by his primary care physician for evaluation of severe hemorrhagic lesions on the trunk following use of oral isotretinoin (Figure 1). Prior to development of the lesions, the patient had started weekly intramuscular injections of testosterone 500 mg, which he purchased online without consulting a physician, to address muscle mass reduction associated with sudden weight loss from intense physical training. After 8 months of testosterone supplementation along with continued physical training, the patient presented to his primary care physician for treatment of acne vulgaris on the back and trunk of 2 months’ duration. Oral isotretinoin 20 mg once daily was initiated; however, the patient reported that the acne lesions showed progression after 1 month of treatment. Isotretinoin was increased to a more weight-appropriate dosage of 60 mg once daily 2 weeks before admission to our dermatology clinic.

Treatment initially included cessation of isotretinoin and administration of prednisone, omeprazole, clindamycin, and doxycycline. Prednisone was given at a dosage of 40 mg once daily for 1 week, then decreased by 5 mg every 7 days. Omeprazole was given concurrently as prophylaxis for the gastrointestinal tract side effects of long-term prednisone use. Clindamycin was given at a dosage of 300 mg 3 times daily. Doxycycline was given for 6 weeks at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily. Topical octenidine dihydrochloride also was given.

The clinical diagnosis in our patient also was supported by the hypothesis that heredity, overactive immune reactions, bacterial infections, and use of some drugs (eg, isotretinoin, tetracycline, testosterone) can trigger AF.⁸ The most well-known theory is that low doses of isotretinoin induce AF.⁶ The majority of cases are caused by doses of less than 20 mg/kg once daily, but there have been reports of patients using full doses and developing this condition.⁹ The fact that the use of low- and high-dose isotretinoin can provoke AF suggests an idiosyncratic reaction that is not clearly dose related. The most dangerous triggering factor of AF is concomitant usage of testosterone and isotretinoin.¹⁰ Our patient used testosterone injections to increase muscle mass and underwent treatment with isotretinoin for acne.

Treatment of AF is controversial, as there is no standard therapy. Currently, steroids and isotretinoin are the treatments of choice. Antibiotic use is controversial because of a lack of randomized trials.¹¹

In the first stage of treatment, prednisone 0.5 to 1 mg/kg once daily is recommended as an initial anti-inflammatory therapy, with gradual dose reduction. According to evidence-based recommendations, a low dose of isotretinoin can be introduced after crusted lesions have healed. The overlapping therapy with steroids and isotretinoin should be provided for at least 4 weeks. High-potency topical corticosteroids can be used on granulation tissue, which can shorten the systemic treatment with prednisone or can be an alternative treatment for patients with contraindications to systemic corticosteroids.¹¹

Additionally, local care of the lesions including compresses and topical emollients is crucial. There are some case reports in which there is introduction of high doses of isotretinoin, subsequently with systemic steroids.^7,8,12 Seukeran and Cunliffe⁵ proved that it is beneficial to give acne prophylaxis to prevent further episodes. Our patient was similarly treated with systemic steroids and isotretinoin. Treatment guidelines for AF do not recommend oral antibiotics,¹¹ but data are limited in the case of isotretinoin-induced AF. Our patient was given doxycycline concomitant with systemic steroids, which was necessary due to signs of secondary infection from a lesion culture. Doxycycline was stopped when isotretinoin treatment was initiated to prevent pseudotumor cerebri. The patient achieved good clinical improvement with no relapse.

Using isotretinoin to treat acne vulgaris has many benefits, despite the possibility of developing AF as an extremely rare complication. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of this complication to make the diagnosis and provide appropriate care, especially in young men. It is particularly important to consider the possibility of concomitant testosterone and isotretinoin when documenting the patient’s medical history.

To the Editor:

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction against antigens to which the skin’s immune system was previously sensitized. The initial sensitization requires penetration of the antigen through the stratum corneum. Thus, the ability of a particle to cause ACD is related to its molecular structure and size, lipophilicity, and protein-binding affinity, as well as the dose and duration of exposure.¹ Psoriasis typically presents as well-demarcated areas of skin that may be erythematous, indurated, and scaly to variable degrees. Histologically, psoriasis plaques are characterized by epidermal hyperplasia in the presence of a T-cell infiltrate and neutrophilic microabscesses. We report a case of a patient with plaque-type psoriasis who experienced ACD with sparing of exposed psoriatic plaques.

A 45-year-old man with a 5-year history of generalized moderate to severe psoriasis undergoing therapy with ustekinumab 45 mg subcutaneously once every 12 weeks presented to the emergency department with intensely erythematous, pruritic, vesicular lesions on the trunk, arms, and legs within 24 hours of exposure to poison oak while hiking. The patient reported pruritus, pain, and swelling of the affected areas. On physical examination, he was afebrile. Widespread erythematous vesicular lesions were noted on the face, trunk, arms, and legs, sparing the well-demarcated scaly psoriatic plaques on the arms and legs (Figure). The patient was given intravenous fluids and intravenous diphenhydramine. After responding to initial treatment, the patient was discharged with ibuprofen and a tapering dose of oral prednisone from 60 mg 5 times daily, to 40 mg 5 times daily, to 20 mg 5 times daily over 15 days.

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated, inflammatory disease that presents clinically as erythematous well-demarcated plaques with a micaceous scale. The immunologic environment of psoriasis plaques is characterized by infiltration of CD4⁺ T_H17 cells and elevated levels of IL-17, IL-23, tumor necrosis factor α, and IL-1β, which induce keratinocyte hyperproliferation through a complex mechanism resulting in hyperkeratosis composed of orthokeratosis and parakeratosis, a neutrophilic infiltrate, and Munro microabscesses.⁵

The predominant effector cells and the final effects on keratinocyte survival are divergent in psoriasis and ACD. The possibly antagonistic relationship between these immunologic processes is further supported by epidemiologic studies demonstrating a decreased incidence of ACD in patients with psoriasis.^6,7

Our patient demonstrated a typical ACD reaction in response to exposure to urushiol, the allergen present in poison oak, in areas unaffected by psoriasis plaques. Interestingly, the patient displayed this response even while undergoing therapy with ustekinumab, a fully humanized antibody that binds IL-12 and IL-23 and ultimately downregulates T_H17 cell-mediated release of IL-17 in the treatment of psoriasis. Although IL-17 also has been implicated in ACD, the lack of inhibition of ACD with ustekinumab treatment was previously demonstrated in a small retrospective study, indicating a potentially different source of IL-17 in ACD.⁸

Our patient did not demonstrate a typical ACD response in areas of active psoriasis plaques. This phenomenon was of great interest to us. It is possible that the presence of hyperkeratosis, manifested clinically as scaling, served as a mechanical barrier preventing the diffusion and exposure of cutaneous immune cells to urushiol. On the other hand, it is possible that the immunologic environment of the active psoriasis plaque was altered in such a way that it did not demonstrate the typical response to allergen exposure.

We hypothesize that the lack of a typical ACD response at sites of psoriatic plaques in our patient may be attributed to the intensity and duration of exposure to the allergen. Quaranta et al⁹ reported a typical ACD clinical response and a mixed immunohistologic response to nickel patch testing at sites of active plaques in nickel-sensitized psoriasis patients. Patch testing involves 48 hours of direct contact with an allergen, while our patient experienced an estimated 8 to 10 hours of exposure to the allergen prior to removal via washing. Supporting this line of reasoning, a proportion of patients who are responsive to nickel patch testing do not exhibit clinical symptoms in response to casual nickel exposure.¹⁰ Although a physical barrier effect due to hyperkeratosis may have contributed to the lack of ACD response in sites of psoriasis plaques in our patient, it remains possible that a more limited duration of exposure to the allergen is not sufficient to overcome the native immunologic milieu of the psoriasis plaque and induce the immunologic cascade resulting in ACD. Further research into the potentially antagonistic relationship of psoriasis and ACD should be performed to elucidate the interaction between these two common conditions.

To the Editor:

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction against antigens to which the skin’s immune system was previously sensitized. The initial sensitization requires penetration of the antigen through the stratum corneum. Thus, the ability of a particle to cause ACD is related to its molecular structure and size, lipophilicity, and protein-binding affinity, as well as the dose and duration of exposure.¹ Psoriasis typically presents as well-demarcated areas of skin that may be erythematous, indurated, and scaly to variable degrees. Histologically, psoriasis plaques are characterized by epidermal hyperplasia in the presence of a T-cell infiltrate and neutrophilic microabscesses. We report a case of a patient with plaque-type psoriasis who experienced ACD with sparing of exposed psoriatic plaques.

A 45-year-old man with a 5-year history of generalized moderate to severe psoriasis undergoing therapy with ustekinumab 45 mg subcutaneously once every 12 weeks presented to the emergency department with intensely erythematous, pruritic, vesicular lesions on the trunk, arms, and legs within 24 hours of exposure to poison oak while hiking. The patient reported pruritus, pain, and swelling of the affected areas. On physical examination, he was afebrile. Widespread erythematous vesicular lesions were noted on the face, trunk, arms, and legs, sparing the well-demarcated scaly psoriatic plaques on the arms and legs (Figure). The patient was given intravenous fluids and intravenous diphenhydramine. After responding to initial treatment, the patient was discharged with ibuprofen and a tapering dose of oral prednisone from 60 mg 5 times daily, to 40 mg 5 times daily, to 20 mg 5 times daily over 15 days.

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated, inflammatory disease that presents clinically as erythematous well-demarcated plaques with a micaceous scale. The immunologic environment of psoriasis plaques is characterized by infiltration of CD4⁺ T_H17 cells and elevated levels of IL-17, IL-23, tumor necrosis factor α, and IL-1β, which induce keratinocyte hyperproliferation through a complex mechanism resulting in hyperkeratosis composed of orthokeratosis and parakeratosis, a neutrophilic infiltrate, and Munro microabscesses.⁵

The predominant effector cells and the final effects on keratinocyte survival are divergent in psoriasis and ACD. The possibly antagonistic relationship between these immunologic processes is further supported by epidemiologic studies demonstrating a decreased incidence of ACD in patients with psoriasis.^6,7

Our patient demonstrated a typical ACD reaction in response to exposure to urushiol, the allergen present in poison oak, in areas unaffected by psoriasis plaques. Interestingly, the patient displayed this response even while undergoing therapy with ustekinumab, a fully humanized antibody that binds IL-12 and IL-23 and ultimately downregulates T_H17 cell-mediated release of IL-17 in the treatment of psoriasis. Although IL-17 also has been implicated in ACD, the lack of inhibition of ACD with ustekinumab treatment was previously demonstrated in a small retrospective study, indicating a potentially different source of IL-17 in ACD.⁸

Our patient did not demonstrate a typical ACD response in areas of active psoriasis plaques. This phenomenon was of great interest to us. It is possible that the presence of hyperkeratosis, manifested clinically as scaling, served as a mechanical barrier preventing the diffusion and exposure of cutaneous immune cells to urushiol. On the other hand, it is possible that the immunologic environment of the active psoriasis plaque was altered in such a way that it did not demonstrate the typical response to allergen exposure.

We hypothesize that the lack of a typical ACD response at sites of psoriatic plaques in our patient may be attributed to the intensity and duration of exposure to the allergen. Quaranta et al⁹ reported a typical ACD clinical response and a mixed immunohistologic response to nickel patch testing at sites of active plaques in nickel-sensitized psoriasis patients. Patch testing involves 48 hours of direct contact with an allergen, while our patient experienced an estimated 8 to 10 hours of exposure to the allergen prior to removal via washing. Supporting this line of reasoning, a proportion of patients who are responsive to nickel patch testing do not exhibit clinical symptoms in response to casual nickel exposure.¹⁰ Although a physical barrier effect due to hyperkeratosis may have contributed to the lack of ACD response in sites of psoriasis plaques in our patient, it remains possible that a more limited duration of exposure to the allergen is not sufficient to overcome the native immunologic milieu of the psoriasis plaque and induce the immunologic cascade resulting in ACD. Further research into the potentially antagonistic relationship of psoriasis and ACD should be performed to elucidate the interaction between these two common conditions.

To the Editor:

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction against antigens to which the skin’s immune system was previously sensitized. The initial sensitization requires penetration of the antigen through the stratum corneum. Thus, the ability of a particle to cause ACD is related to its molecular structure and size, lipophilicity, and protein-binding affinity, as well as the dose and duration of exposure.¹ Psoriasis typically presents as well-demarcated areas of skin that may be erythematous, indurated, and scaly to variable degrees. Histologically, psoriasis plaques are characterized by epidermal hyperplasia in the presence of a T-cell infiltrate and neutrophilic microabscesses. We report a case of a patient with plaque-type psoriasis who experienced ACD with sparing of exposed psoriatic plaques.

A 45-year-old man with a 5-year history of generalized moderate to severe psoriasis undergoing therapy with ustekinumab 45 mg subcutaneously once every 12 weeks presented to the emergency department with intensely erythematous, pruritic, vesicular lesions on the trunk, arms, and legs within 24 hours of exposure to poison oak while hiking. The patient reported pruritus, pain, and swelling of the affected areas. On physical examination, he was afebrile. Widespread erythematous vesicular lesions were noted on the face, trunk, arms, and legs, sparing the well-demarcated scaly psoriatic plaques on the arms and legs (Figure). The patient was given intravenous fluids and intravenous diphenhydramine. After responding to initial treatment, the patient was discharged with ibuprofen and a tapering dose of oral prednisone from 60 mg 5 times daily, to 40 mg 5 times daily, to 20 mg 5 times daily over 15 days.

Plaque psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated, inflammatory disease that presents clinically as erythematous well-demarcated plaques with a micaceous scale. The immunologic environment of psoriasis plaques is characterized by infiltration of CD4⁺ T_H17 cells and elevated levels of IL-17, IL-23, tumor necrosis factor α, and IL-1β, which induce keratinocyte hyperproliferation through a complex mechanism resulting in hyperkeratosis composed of orthokeratosis and parakeratosis, a neutrophilic infiltrate, and Munro microabscesses.⁵

The predominant effector cells and the final effects on keratinocyte survival are divergent in psoriasis and ACD. The possibly antagonistic relationship between these immunologic processes is further supported by epidemiologic studies demonstrating a decreased incidence of ACD in patients with psoriasis.^6,7

Our patient demonstrated a typical ACD reaction in response to exposure to urushiol, the allergen present in poison oak, in areas unaffected by psoriasis plaques. Interestingly, the patient displayed this response even while undergoing therapy with ustekinumab, a fully humanized antibody that binds IL-12 and IL-23 and ultimately downregulates T_H17 cell-mediated release of IL-17 in the treatment of psoriasis. Although IL-17 also has been implicated in ACD, the lack of inhibition of ACD with ustekinumab treatment was previously demonstrated in a small retrospective study, indicating a potentially different source of IL-17 in ACD.⁸

Our patient did not demonstrate a typical ACD response in areas of active psoriasis plaques. This phenomenon was of great interest to us. It is possible that the presence of hyperkeratosis, manifested clinically as scaling, served as a mechanical barrier preventing the diffusion and exposure of cutaneous immune cells to urushiol. On the other hand, it is possible that the immunologic environment of the active psoriasis plaque was altered in such a way that it did not demonstrate the typical response to allergen exposure.

We hypothesize that the lack of a typical ACD response at sites of psoriatic plaques in our patient may be attributed to the intensity and duration of exposure to the allergen. Quaranta et al⁹ reported a typical ACD clinical response and a mixed immunohistologic response to nickel patch testing at sites of active plaques in nickel-sensitized psoriasis patients. Patch testing involves 48 hours of direct contact with an allergen, while our patient experienced an estimated 8 to 10 hours of exposure to the allergen prior to removal via washing. Supporting this line of reasoning, a proportion of patients who are responsive to nickel patch testing do not exhibit clinical symptoms in response to casual nickel exposure.¹⁰ Although a physical barrier effect due to hyperkeratosis may have contributed to the lack of ACD response in sites of psoriasis plaques in our patient, it remains possible that a more limited duration of exposure to the allergen is not sufficient to overcome the native immunologic milieu of the psoriasis plaque and induce the immunologic cascade resulting in ACD. Further research into the potentially antagonistic relationship of psoriasis and ACD should be performed to elucidate the interaction between these two common conditions.

To the Editor:

Granuloma annulare (GA) is a common dermatosis that usually presents with dermal papules and annular plaques in a symmetric distribution.¹ The etiology is unknown, but a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction is the favored pathogenesis. Several systemic associations have been reported with generalized GA including diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, autoimmune thyroiditis, rheumatoid arthritis, and lymphoproliferative malignancies, as well as other malignancies and viral infections such as human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C. Localized GA often is self-limiting, but generalized disease can be chronic and progressive. Although asymptomatic in most cases, the lesions can be cosmetically bothersome, and many patients desire treatment. There are few well-controlled studies of treatment, and most are limited to case reports and series. A review of GA treatment noted only 3 randomized studies: 2 relating to photodynamic therapy and 1 to cryosurgery. Well-accepted therapies, such as topical and intralesional corticosteroids, antimalarials, immunosuppressants, antibiotics, and phototherapy, are substantiated by lesser-quality evidence.¹ Phototherapy has been studied for the treatment of GA and other disorders with altered dermal matrix deposition for which there are limited effective treatment options. UV irradiation promotes degradation of structural components of the dermis and inhibition of collagen production.² Granuloma annulare generally is resistant to therapy. We report a case of generalized GA of long duration that responded well to phototherapy with narrowband UVB (NB-UVB).

A 60-year-old woman presented with generalized GA of 4 years’ duration that was confirmed on biopsy on 2 occasions (Figure 1). The lesions were asymptomatic but disfiguring and consisted of extensive pink, thin, annular plaques and papules on the torso, arms, and legs (Figure 2A). Apart from mild depression for which she was being treated with paroxetine and trazodone, she was otherwise healthy without evidence of thyroid disease, hyperlipidemia, or diabetes mellitus. Prior treatments for GA had included tapering courses of prednisone (up to 30 mg/d, tapered by 5 mg every 4 days) and betamethasone dipropionate cream 0.05%. She was started on NB-UVB therapy 5 times weekly in incremental doses with no adjuvant therapy. After 100 treatments, there was notable improvement with lesions becoming paler and flatter, with some involuting completely (Figure 2B). The frequency of treatment was reduced to 3 times weekly with continued improvement. An NB-UVB device was used containing 48 TL 100W/01-FS72 lamps with a mean irradiance of 2.9 mW/cm². Her starting dose was 90 mJ/cm². The cumulative dose after 100 treatments was 35,600 mJ/cm². Apart from occasional mild erythema, there were no adverse effects.

To the Editor:

Granuloma annulare (GA) is a common dermatosis that usually presents with dermal papules and annular plaques in a symmetric distribution.¹ The etiology is unknown, but a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction is the favored pathogenesis. Several systemic associations have been reported with generalized GA including diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, autoimmune thyroiditis, rheumatoid arthritis, and lymphoproliferative malignancies, as well as other malignancies and viral infections such as human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C. Localized GA often is self-limiting, but generalized disease can be chronic and progressive. Although asymptomatic in most cases, the lesions can be cosmetically bothersome, and many patients desire treatment. There are few well-controlled studies of treatment, and most are limited to case reports and series. A review of GA treatment noted only 3 randomized studies: 2 relating to photodynamic therapy and 1 to cryosurgery. Well-accepted therapies, such as topical and intralesional corticosteroids, antimalarials, immunosuppressants, antibiotics, and phototherapy, are substantiated by lesser-quality evidence.¹ Phototherapy has been studied for the treatment of GA and other disorders with altered dermal matrix deposition for which there are limited effective treatment options. UV irradiation promotes degradation of structural components of the dermis and inhibition of collagen production.² Granuloma annulare generally is resistant to therapy. We report a case of generalized GA of long duration that responded well to phototherapy with narrowband UVB (NB-UVB).

A 60-year-old woman presented with generalized GA of 4 years’ duration that was confirmed on biopsy on 2 occasions (Figure 1). The lesions were asymptomatic but disfiguring and consisted of extensive pink, thin, annular plaques and papules on the torso, arms, and legs (Figure 2A). Apart from mild depression for which she was being treated with paroxetine and trazodone, she was otherwise healthy without evidence of thyroid disease, hyperlipidemia, or diabetes mellitus. Prior treatments for GA had included tapering courses of prednisone (up to 30 mg/d, tapered by 5 mg every 4 days) and betamethasone dipropionate cream 0.05%. She was started on NB-UVB therapy 5 times weekly in incremental doses with no adjuvant therapy. After 100 treatments, there was notable improvement with lesions becoming paler and flatter, with some involuting completely (Figure 2B). The frequency of treatment was reduced to 3 times weekly with continued improvement. An NB-UVB device was used containing 48 TL 100W/01-FS72 lamps with a mean irradiance of 2.9 mW/cm². Her starting dose was 90 mJ/cm². The cumulative dose after 100 treatments was 35,600 mJ/cm². Apart from occasional mild erythema, there were no adverse effects.

To the Editor:

Granuloma annulare (GA) is a common dermatosis that usually presents with dermal papules and annular plaques in a symmetric distribution.¹ The etiology is unknown, but a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction is the favored pathogenesis. Several systemic associations have been reported with generalized GA including diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, autoimmune thyroiditis, rheumatoid arthritis, and lymphoproliferative malignancies, as well as other malignancies and viral infections such as human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C. Localized GA often is self-limiting, but generalized disease can be chronic and progressive. Although asymptomatic in most cases, the lesions can be cosmetically bothersome, and many patients desire treatment. There are few well-controlled studies of treatment, and most are limited to case reports and series. A review of GA treatment noted only 3 randomized studies: 2 relating to photodynamic therapy and 1 to cryosurgery. Well-accepted therapies, such as topical and intralesional corticosteroids, antimalarials, immunosuppressants, antibiotics, and phototherapy, are substantiated by lesser-quality evidence.¹ Phototherapy has been studied for the treatment of GA and other disorders with altered dermal matrix deposition for which there are limited effective treatment options. UV irradiation promotes degradation of structural components of the dermis and inhibition of collagen production.² Granuloma annulare generally is resistant to therapy. We report a case of generalized GA of long duration that responded well to phototherapy with narrowband UVB (NB-UVB).

A 60-year-old woman presented with generalized GA of 4 years’ duration that was confirmed on biopsy on 2 occasions (Figure 1). The lesions were asymptomatic but disfiguring and consisted of extensive pink, thin, annular plaques and papules on the torso, arms, and legs (Figure 2A). Apart from mild depression for which she was being treated with paroxetine and trazodone, she was otherwise healthy without evidence of thyroid disease, hyperlipidemia, or diabetes mellitus. Prior treatments for GA had included tapering courses of prednisone (up to 30 mg/d, tapered by 5 mg every 4 days) and betamethasone dipropionate cream 0.05%. She was started on NB-UVB therapy 5 times weekly in incremental doses with no adjuvant therapy. After 100 treatments, there was notable improvement with lesions becoming paler and flatter, with some involuting completely (Figure 2B). The frequency of treatment was reduced to 3 times weekly with continued improvement. An NB-UVB device was used containing 48 TL 100W/01-FS72 lamps with a mean irradiance of 2.9 mW/cm². Her starting dose was 90 mJ/cm². The cumulative dose after 100 treatments was 35,600 mJ/cm². Apart from occasional mild erythema, there were no adverse effects.

To the Editor:

A 17-year-old adolescent girl presented to the dermatology clinic with a tender pruritic rash on the left wrist that was spreading to the bilateral arms and legs of several years’ duration. An area of a prior biopsy on the left wrist was healing well with use of petroleum jelly and halcinonide cream. The patient denied any constitutional symptoms.

Physical examination revealed numerous erythematous papules coalescing into plaques on the bilateral anterior and posterior arms and legs, including some erythematous macules and papules on the palms and soles. The original area of involvement on the left dorsal medial wrist demonstrated a background of erythema with overlying peripheral scaling and resolving violaceous to erythematous papules with signs of serosanguineous crusting (Figure 1). Scattered perifollicular erythema was present on the posterior aspects of the bilateral thighs and arms (Figure 2). Baseline complete blood cell count and complete metabolic panel were within reference range.

To the Editor:

A 17-year-old adolescent girl presented to the dermatology clinic with a tender pruritic rash on the left wrist that was spreading to the bilateral arms and legs of several years’ duration. An area of a prior biopsy on the left wrist was healing well with use of petroleum jelly and halcinonide cream. The patient denied any constitutional symptoms.

Physical examination revealed numerous erythematous papules coalescing into plaques on the bilateral anterior and posterior arms and legs, including some erythematous macules and papules on the palms and soles. The original area of involvement on the left dorsal medial wrist demonstrated a background of erythema with overlying peripheral scaling and resolving violaceous to erythematous papules with signs of serosanguineous crusting (Figure 1). Scattered perifollicular erythema was present on the posterior aspects of the bilateral thighs and arms (Figure 2). Baseline complete blood cell count and complete metabolic panel were within reference range.

To the Editor:

A 17-year-old adolescent girl presented to the dermatology clinic with a tender pruritic rash on the left wrist that was spreading to the bilateral arms and legs of several years’ duration. An area of a prior biopsy on the left wrist was healing well with use of petroleum jelly and halcinonide cream. The patient denied any constitutional symptoms.

Physical examination revealed numerous erythematous papules coalescing into plaques on the bilateral anterior and posterior arms and legs, including some erythematous macules and papules on the palms and soles. The original area of involvement on the left dorsal medial wrist demonstrated a background of erythema with overlying peripheral scaling and resolving violaceous to erythematous papules with signs of serosanguineous crusting (Figure 1). Scattered perifollicular erythema was present on the posterior aspects of the bilateral thighs and arms (Figure 2). Baseline complete blood cell count and complete metabolic panel were within reference range.

To the Editor:

Solid-organ transplant recipients can develop a range of dermatologic consequences due to chronic immunosuppression, including frequent skin infections and malignancies. Atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis are relatively rare in this population because many immunosuppressive therapies, such as mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus, also are used to treat inflammatory dermatoses.¹ In a large renal transplant population, the prevalence of AD was 1.3%.² The pathogenesis of posttransplantation AD is poorly understood, and standard treatment regimens have not been defined. Dupilumab is a novel biologic medication that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of AD.³ Reports of dupilumab use for AD management in solid-organ transplant recipients are limited in the literature.

A 29-year-old woman with a history of a heart transplant 4 years prior presented to our dermatology clinic with an itchy rash over the entire body. Since the transplant, she had been on long-term immunosuppression with prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. The rash appeared after she switched from brand-name to generic versions of the medications. Physical examination revealed erythematous scaly plaques on the lateral face, back, chest, arms, and legs covering approximately 10% of the body surface area. The patient’s total serum IgE level was elevated at 711,500 µg/L (reference range, 0–1500 µg/L). Outside biopsies revealed changes consistent with spongiotic dermatitis, and patch testing performed by an outside physician was positive for sensitivity to the preservative bronopol.

The patient was switched back to brand-name tacrolimus, but the rash did not improve. Topical steroids, phototherapy, and omalizumab were ineffective. The itching was primarily managed with desoximetasone spray, mometasone cream, and loratidine. With approval from the patient’s transplant team outside of our hospital system, she was started on dupilumab 300 mg once every 14 days. Complete clearance of the rash was noted within 3 months of treatment. Besides bilateral conjunctivitis, which was treated with ophthalmic prednisolone and moxifloxacin solutions, dupilumab was well tolerated. No issues related to immunosuppressant levels or graft-related issues, including rejection, were reported at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up visits.

Atopic dermatitis is characterized by activation of type 2 immune responses, skin barrier defects, and increased Staphylococcus aureus colonization.⁴ A potential mechanism for the development of AD in transplant recipients relates to their use of tacrolimus for chronic immunosuppression. Tacrolimus increases intestinal permeability and therefore allows greater absorption of allergens. This influx of allergens promotes hypersensitivity reactions, resulting in elevated IgE levels and eosinophilia. Tacrolimus also facilitates predominance of helper T cells (T_H2 cytokines) through selective inhibition of the T_H1 cytokine IL-2.⁵

Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-4 and IL-13, which are key drivers of T_H2-mediated inflammation. In addition to downregulation of inflammatory mediators, dupilumab also increases production of epidermal barrier proteins, resulting in skin repair. It has demonstrated rapid, dose-dependent efficacy in patients with moderate to severe AD.⁶ Dupilumab boasts a good safety profile with no increase in risk for skin infections compared to placebo⁶; however, its safety has not yet been verified in transplant recipients.

Our case is notable for the severity of the patient’s AD despite considerable immunosuppression with transplant medications. Development of AD was associated with a switch from brand-name to generic drugs, which is not commonly reported. Her condition was refractory to a litany of treatments prior to a trial of dupilumab. The rapid clearance observed with this novel biologic medication highlights its potential to provide relief to patients who have particularly tenacious cases of AD. Prior to starting dupilumab, we do recommend more extensive laboratory testing in immunosuppressed patients including transplant recipients and patients with human immunodeficiency virus. We illustrate that a history of solid-organ transplant need not exclude patients from consideration for dupilumab therapy.

To the Editor:

Solid-organ transplant recipients can develop a range of dermatologic consequences due to chronic immunosuppression, including frequent skin infections and malignancies. Atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis are relatively rare in this population because many immunosuppressive therapies, such as mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus, also are used to treat inflammatory dermatoses.¹ In a large renal transplant population, the prevalence of AD was 1.3%.² The pathogenesis of posttransplantation AD is poorly understood, and standard treatment regimens have not been defined. Dupilumab is a novel biologic medication that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of AD.³ Reports of dupilumab use for AD management in solid-organ transplant recipients are limited in the literature.

A 29-year-old woman with a history of a heart transplant 4 years prior presented to our dermatology clinic with an itchy rash over the entire body. Since the transplant, she had been on long-term immunosuppression with prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. The rash appeared after she switched from brand-name to generic versions of the medications. Physical examination revealed erythematous scaly plaques on the lateral face, back, chest, arms, and legs covering approximately 10% of the body surface area. The patient’s total serum IgE level was elevated at 711,500 µg/L (reference range, 0–1500 µg/L). Outside biopsies revealed changes consistent with spongiotic dermatitis, and patch testing performed by an outside physician was positive for sensitivity to the preservative bronopol.

The patient was switched back to brand-name tacrolimus, but the rash did not improve. Topical steroids, phototherapy, and omalizumab were ineffective. The itching was primarily managed with desoximetasone spray, mometasone cream, and loratidine. With approval from the patient’s transplant team outside of our hospital system, she was started on dupilumab 300 mg once every 14 days. Complete clearance of the rash was noted within 3 months of treatment. Besides bilateral conjunctivitis, which was treated with ophthalmic prednisolone and moxifloxacin solutions, dupilumab was well tolerated. No issues related to immunosuppressant levels or graft-related issues, including rejection, were reported at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up visits.

Atopic dermatitis is characterized by activation of type 2 immune responses, skin barrier defects, and increased Staphylococcus aureus colonization.⁴ A potential mechanism for the development of AD in transplant recipients relates to their use of tacrolimus for chronic immunosuppression. Tacrolimus increases intestinal permeability and therefore allows greater absorption of allergens. This influx of allergens promotes hypersensitivity reactions, resulting in elevated IgE levels and eosinophilia. Tacrolimus also facilitates predominance of helper T cells (T_H2 cytokines) through selective inhibition of the T_H1 cytokine IL-2.⁵

Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-4 and IL-13, which are key drivers of T_H2-mediated inflammation. In addition to downregulation of inflammatory mediators, dupilumab also increases production of epidermal barrier proteins, resulting in skin repair. It has demonstrated rapid, dose-dependent efficacy in patients with moderate to severe AD.⁶ Dupilumab boasts a good safety profile with no increase in risk for skin infections compared to placebo⁶; however, its safety has not yet been verified in transplant recipients.

Our case is notable for the severity of the patient’s AD despite considerable immunosuppression with transplant medications. Development of AD was associated with a switch from brand-name to generic drugs, which is not commonly reported. Her condition was refractory to a litany of treatments prior to a trial of dupilumab. The rapid clearance observed with this novel biologic medication highlights its potential to provide relief to patients who have particularly tenacious cases of AD. Prior to starting dupilumab, we do recommend more extensive laboratory testing in immunosuppressed patients including transplant recipients and patients with human immunodeficiency virus. We illustrate that a history of solid-organ transplant need not exclude patients from consideration for dupilumab therapy.

To the Editor:

Solid-organ transplant recipients can develop a range of dermatologic consequences due to chronic immunosuppression, including frequent skin infections and malignancies. Atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis are relatively rare in this population because many immunosuppressive therapies, such as mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus, also are used to treat inflammatory dermatoses.¹ In a large renal transplant population, the prevalence of AD was 1.3%.² The pathogenesis of posttransplantation AD is poorly understood, and standard treatment regimens have not been defined. Dupilumab is a novel biologic medication that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of AD.³ Reports of dupilumab use for AD management in solid-organ transplant recipients are limited in the literature.

A 29-year-old woman with a history of a heart transplant 4 years prior presented to our dermatology clinic with an itchy rash over the entire body. Since the transplant, she had been on long-term immunosuppression with prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil, and tacrolimus. The rash appeared after she switched from brand-name to generic versions of the medications. Physical examination revealed erythematous scaly plaques on the lateral face, back, chest, arms, and legs covering approximately 10% of the body surface area. The patient’s total serum IgE level was elevated at 711,500 µg/L (reference range, 0–1500 µg/L). Outside biopsies revealed changes consistent with spongiotic dermatitis, and patch testing performed by an outside physician was positive for sensitivity to the preservative bronopol.

The patient was switched back to brand-name tacrolimus, but the rash did not improve. Topical steroids, phototherapy, and omalizumab were ineffective. The itching was primarily managed with desoximetasone spray, mometasone cream, and loratidine. With approval from the patient’s transplant team outside of our hospital system, she was started on dupilumab 300 mg once every 14 days. Complete clearance of the rash was noted within 3 months of treatment. Besides bilateral conjunctivitis, which was treated with ophthalmic prednisolone and moxifloxacin solutions, dupilumab was well tolerated. No issues related to immunosuppressant levels or graft-related issues, including rejection, were reported at 6-, 12-, and 18-month follow-up visits.

Atopic dermatitis is characterized by activation of type 2 immune responses, skin barrier defects, and increased Staphylococcus aureus colonization.⁴ A potential mechanism for the development of AD in transplant recipients relates to their use of tacrolimus for chronic immunosuppression. Tacrolimus increases intestinal permeability and therefore allows greater absorption of allergens. This influx of allergens promotes hypersensitivity reactions, resulting in elevated IgE levels and eosinophilia. Tacrolimus also facilitates predominance of helper T cells (T_H2 cytokines) through selective inhibition of the T_H1 cytokine IL-2.⁵

Dupilumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-4 and IL-13, which are key drivers of T_H2-mediated inflammation. In addition to downregulation of inflammatory mediators, dupilumab also increases production of epidermal barrier proteins, resulting in skin repair. It has demonstrated rapid, dose-dependent efficacy in patients with moderate to severe AD.⁶ Dupilumab boasts a good safety profile with no increase in risk for skin infections compared to placebo⁶; however, its safety has not yet been verified in transplant recipients.

Our case is notable for the severity of the patient’s AD despite considerable immunosuppression with transplant medications. Development of AD was associated with a switch from brand-name to generic drugs, which is not commonly reported. Her condition was refractory to a litany of treatments prior to a trial of dupilumab. The rapid clearance observed with this novel biologic medication highlights its potential to provide relief to patients who have particularly tenacious cases of AD. Prior to starting dupilumab, we do recommend more extensive laboratory testing in immunosuppressed patients including transplant recipients and patients with human immunodeficiency virus. We illustrate that a history of solid-organ transplant need not exclude patients from consideration for dupilumab therapy.

To the Editor:

A 56-year-old white woman with a history of melanoma and hypertension presented for evaluation of progressive hair loss of more than 1 year’s duration with associated pruritis. Scalp examination revealed diffuse erythema and scarring alopecia of the bilateral parietal and temporal regions. Physical examination also revealed nonscarring alopecia of the bilateral axillae, with associated thinning of the pubic hair, eyebrows, and eyelashes, as well as keratosis pilaris on the upper arms. Biopsy of the parietal scalp revealed mild scarring alopecia with isthmic fibroplasia consistent with early lichen planopilaris (LPP)(Figure). These histologic features combined with the patient’s clinical presentation were consistent with a diagnosis of Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome (GLPL).

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome was first described by Piccardi in 1913.A second case was then described by Graham-Little in 1915 in a patient referred by Lassueur, resulting in the name it bears today.^1,2 The condition presents most commonly in middle-aged white women and is characterized by a triad of cicatricial alopecia of the scalp, nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and/or groin, and a rough follicular eruption on the body and/or scalp. Symptoms may not be present simultaneously. In GLPL, scarring alopecia of the scalp often precedes follicular eruptions of the trunk, arms, and legs by as much as years,² and the inverse also has been reported.¹ The inflammatory lesions of the scalp eventually resolve spontaneously, but the hair loss is by definition irreversible.

This rare condition is considered one of the 3 clinical variants of LPP. Other variants include classic LPP, also known as follicular lichen planus, and frontal fibrosing alopecia.³ More recently, fibrosing alopecia in a pattern distribution has gained some popularity as a fourth variant of LPP.⁴ All variants of LPP, including GLPL, result in a scarring alopecia. The classic scalp finding is an erythematous to violaceous, perifollicular, hyperkeratotic scale at the base of the terminal hairs. The population of inflamed follicles spreads outward, leaving behind a round to oval, central, atrophic scar that often is devoid of follicles. Few hairs may persist within zones of alopecia at presentation; however, these hairs are affected by inflammation and also will likely shed. A hair pull test will be positive at the margins during active disease, consisting of mostly anagen hairs on trichogram examination.^1,5 Patients may develop only a single foci of hair loss, but much more commonly, a patchy multifocal alopecia is noted.⁶ Sites often will coalesce. Onset of scalp alopecia may be insidious or fulminant.

The nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and groin may be described as subtle thinning to complete hair loss with no signs of atrophy or inflammation. Although not commonly reported, a case of nonscarring alopecia located on the shoulders has been seen.⁷

The follicular eruption that can be present on the trunk, arms, or legs in GLPL is most often but not limited to keratosis pilaris, as was seen in our patient. One reported case also described lichen spinulosus as a potential variant.⁸ Lichen planopilaris is separate from lichen planus (LP) because of its selective follicular involvement vs the nonselective mucocutaneous distribution of LP. The 2 processes also are histologically distinct; however, estimations have shown that more than 50% of patients with GLPL experience at least 1 episode of mucosal or cutaneous LP in their lifetime.⁹ Rarely, coexistence of GLPL and LP lesions has been described. One reported case of GLPL and concomitant hypertrophic LP could represent a severe form of the disease.⁹ Additionally, lichen planus pigmentosus, an uncommon variant of LP characterized by hyperpigmented brown macules in sun-exposed areas and flexural folds, was identified in a case report of an Asian woman with GLPL.¹⁰

As a general rule, the variants of LPP most commonly are seen in postmenopausal women aged 40 to 60 years; however, rare cases in a child and a teenager have been reported.¹¹ The GLPL variant of LPP is reported up to 4 times more frequently in females.⁵ Pruritus and pain are inconsistent findings, and there are no systemic signs of illness. A case of androgen insensitivity syndrome associated with GLPL suggested a potential influence of hormones in LPP.¹² Stress, vitamin A deficiency, and autoimmunity also have been proposed as triggers of GLPL.¹³ Furthermore, familial GLPL was described in a mother and daughter, though the association was uncertain.¹⁴ Our patient had no relevant family history.

Workups to reveal the etiology of GLPL have been inconclusive. Reports of laboratory testing including complete blood cell count, basic metabolic panel, liver function tests, testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone levels, and chest radiograph have been normal.² Additional workup for viral triggers also has been negative.¹⁵ A case series of 29 patients with LPP and its variants, including GLPL, revealed positive antinuclear antibodies in 10% of patients and a thyroid disorder in 24% of patients, with Hashimoto thyroiditis being the most prevalent in 7% of cases.¹⁶ There may be a strong association between the comorbidities of thyroid dysfunction and GLPL, as documented in other studies.^10,17 A case-control study by Mesinkovska et al¹⁷ revealed a considerable increase in the prevalence of thyroid gland disease among patients with LPP vs controls. Human leukocyte antigen DR1 was found in a familial case of GLPL,⁴ and a case of GLPL following hepatitis B vaccination also has been described.¹⁸

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome most likely is a T-cell mediated autoimmune condition associated with one or multiple unknown keratinocyte antigens. Autoantibodies to the inner centromere protein were identified in a case that was positive on direct immunofluorescence, which may provide more insight into the disease pathophysiology.¹³ Interestingly, a study comparing the concentrations of inflammatory cells in LPP and traction alopecia found an elevation in the ratio of Langerhans cells to T lymphocytes within the follicular inflammatory infiltrate of LPP.¹⁹

Because the number of patients with GLPL is so few, therapy should mirror advances being made in treatments for other variants of LPP. More recent studies of LPP treatment with hydroxychloroquine showed opposing results, though the safety profile of this agent makes it an enticing treatment option.^22,23 Tetracyclines showed improvement in 4 of 15 (26.7%) patients in a retrospective study by Spencer et al.²⁴ Another retrospective study showed promising results with the potent 5-alpha reductase inhibitor dutasteride with 7 of 10 (70%) postmenopausal patients reporting stabilization over a mean duration of 28 months with no reported side effects.²⁵ Antimalarial medications also have been implemented as adjunct therapies with mixed results.⁵ A case of a 26-year-old man with GLPL from South India showed systemic disease improvement following treatment with pulsed systemic steroids, isotretinoin, and anxiolytics.⁷ Chloroquine phosphate at a daily dose of 150 mg for 3 to 9 months yielded a transient response in one postmenopausal patient with frontal fibrosing alopecia.⁶ Stabilization of hair loss was achieved with a combination of hydroxychloroquine and doxycycline in a woman with GLPL who was previously unresponsive to tacrolimus ointment.¹⁰ Thalidomide showed early promise in an isolated report claiming successful treatment of LPP,²⁶ but there is contradictory evidence, as thalidomide showed no benefit in a series of 4 patients with LPP.²⁷

Peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ), a transcription factor that regulates genes, is downregulated in LPP.²⁸ Deletion of PPAR-γ within follicular stem cells in mice results in a phenotype similar to cicatricial alopecia. Data have supported the role of PPAR-γ in maintaining the pilosebaceous unit. A case report of pioglitazone (PPAR-γ agonist) therapy used at 15 mg daily for 8 months was successful in treating a patient with LPP.²⁸ Further investigation must be conducted to evaluate these treatments since early attenuation of the disease process is crucial to the reduction of permanent hair loss.

Advances in the early recognition and successful treatment of GLPL are dependent on continued research in all variants of LPP. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to establish standard of care. Further studies should target the association of GLPL and other autoimmune phenomena. Moreover, research into the etiology will provide direction in understanding disease progression and outcome.

To the Editor:

A 56-year-old white woman with a history of melanoma and hypertension presented for evaluation of progressive hair loss of more than 1 year’s duration with associated pruritis. Scalp examination revealed diffuse erythema and scarring alopecia of the bilateral parietal and temporal regions. Physical examination also revealed nonscarring alopecia of the bilateral axillae, with associated thinning of the pubic hair, eyebrows, and eyelashes, as well as keratosis pilaris on the upper arms. Biopsy of the parietal scalp revealed mild scarring alopecia with isthmic fibroplasia consistent with early lichen planopilaris (LPP)(Figure). These histologic features combined with the patient’s clinical presentation were consistent with a diagnosis of Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome (GLPL).

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome was first described by Piccardi in 1913.A second case was then described by Graham-Little in 1915 in a patient referred by Lassueur, resulting in the name it bears today.^1,2 The condition presents most commonly in middle-aged white women and is characterized by a triad of cicatricial alopecia of the scalp, nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and/or groin, and a rough follicular eruption on the body and/or scalp. Symptoms may not be present simultaneously. In GLPL, scarring alopecia of the scalp often precedes follicular eruptions of the trunk, arms, and legs by as much as years,² and the inverse also has been reported.¹ The inflammatory lesions of the scalp eventually resolve spontaneously, but the hair loss is by definition irreversible.

This rare condition is considered one of the 3 clinical variants of LPP. Other variants include classic LPP, also known as follicular lichen planus, and frontal fibrosing alopecia.³ More recently, fibrosing alopecia in a pattern distribution has gained some popularity as a fourth variant of LPP.⁴ All variants of LPP, including GLPL, result in a scarring alopecia. The classic scalp finding is an erythematous to violaceous, perifollicular, hyperkeratotic scale at the base of the terminal hairs. The population of inflamed follicles spreads outward, leaving behind a round to oval, central, atrophic scar that often is devoid of follicles. Few hairs may persist within zones of alopecia at presentation; however, these hairs are affected by inflammation and also will likely shed. A hair pull test will be positive at the margins during active disease, consisting of mostly anagen hairs on trichogram examination.^1,5 Patients may develop only a single foci of hair loss, but much more commonly, a patchy multifocal alopecia is noted.⁶ Sites often will coalesce. Onset of scalp alopecia may be insidious or fulminant.

The nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and groin may be described as subtle thinning to complete hair loss with no signs of atrophy or inflammation. Although not commonly reported, a case of nonscarring alopecia located on the shoulders has been seen.⁷

The follicular eruption that can be present on the trunk, arms, or legs in GLPL is most often but not limited to keratosis pilaris, as was seen in our patient. One reported case also described lichen spinulosus as a potential variant.⁸ Lichen planopilaris is separate from lichen planus (LP) because of its selective follicular involvement vs the nonselective mucocutaneous distribution of LP. The 2 processes also are histologically distinct; however, estimations have shown that more than 50% of patients with GLPL experience at least 1 episode of mucosal or cutaneous LP in their lifetime.⁹ Rarely, coexistence of GLPL and LP lesions has been described. One reported case of GLPL and concomitant hypertrophic LP could represent a severe form of the disease.⁹ Additionally, lichen planus pigmentosus, an uncommon variant of LP characterized by hyperpigmented brown macules in sun-exposed areas and flexural folds, was identified in a case report of an Asian woman with GLPL.¹⁰

As a general rule, the variants of LPP most commonly are seen in postmenopausal women aged 40 to 60 years; however, rare cases in a child and a teenager have been reported.¹¹ The GLPL variant of LPP is reported up to 4 times more frequently in females.⁵ Pruritus and pain are inconsistent findings, and there are no systemic signs of illness. A case of androgen insensitivity syndrome associated with GLPL suggested a potential influence of hormones in LPP.¹² Stress, vitamin A deficiency, and autoimmunity also have been proposed as triggers of GLPL.¹³ Furthermore, familial GLPL was described in a mother and daughter, though the association was uncertain.¹⁴ Our patient had no relevant family history.

Workups to reveal the etiology of GLPL have been inconclusive. Reports of laboratory testing including complete blood cell count, basic metabolic panel, liver function tests, testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone levels, and chest radiograph have been normal.² Additional workup for viral triggers also has been negative.¹⁵ A case series of 29 patients with LPP and its variants, including GLPL, revealed positive antinuclear antibodies in 10% of patients and a thyroid disorder in 24% of patients, with Hashimoto thyroiditis being the most prevalent in 7% of cases.¹⁶ There may be a strong association between the comorbidities of thyroid dysfunction and GLPL, as documented in other studies.^10,17 A case-control study by Mesinkovska et al¹⁷ revealed a considerable increase in the prevalence of thyroid gland disease among patients with LPP vs controls. Human leukocyte antigen DR1 was found in a familial case of GLPL,⁴ and a case of GLPL following hepatitis B vaccination also has been described.¹⁸

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome most likely is a T-cell mediated autoimmune condition associated with one or multiple unknown keratinocyte antigens. Autoantibodies to the inner centromere protein were identified in a case that was positive on direct immunofluorescence, which may provide more insight into the disease pathophysiology.¹³ Interestingly, a study comparing the concentrations of inflammatory cells in LPP and traction alopecia found an elevation in the ratio of Langerhans cells to T lymphocytes within the follicular inflammatory infiltrate of LPP.¹⁹

Because the number of patients with GLPL is so few, therapy should mirror advances being made in treatments for other variants of LPP. More recent studies of LPP treatment with hydroxychloroquine showed opposing results, though the safety profile of this agent makes it an enticing treatment option.^22,23 Tetracyclines showed improvement in 4 of 15 (26.7%) patients in a retrospective study by Spencer et al.²⁴ Another retrospective study showed promising results with the potent 5-alpha reductase inhibitor dutasteride with 7 of 10 (70%) postmenopausal patients reporting stabilization over a mean duration of 28 months with no reported side effects.²⁵ Antimalarial medications also have been implemented as adjunct therapies with mixed results.⁵ A case of a 26-year-old man with GLPL from South India showed systemic disease improvement following treatment with pulsed systemic steroids, isotretinoin, and anxiolytics.⁷ Chloroquine phosphate at a daily dose of 150 mg for 3 to 9 months yielded a transient response in one postmenopausal patient with frontal fibrosing alopecia.⁶ Stabilization of hair loss was achieved with a combination of hydroxychloroquine and doxycycline in a woman with GLPL who was previously unresponsive to tacrolimus ointment.¹⁰ Thalidomide showed early promise in an isolated report claiming successful treatment of LPP,²⁶ but there is contradictory evidence, as thalidomide showed no benefit in a series of 4 patients with LPP.²⁷

Peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ), a transcription factor that regulates genes, is downregulated in LPP.²⁸ Deletion of PPAR-γ within follicular stem cells in mice results in a phenotype similar to cicatricial alopecia. Data have supported the role of PPAR-γ in maintaining the pilosebaceous unit. A case report of pioglitazone (PPAR-γ agonist) therapy used at 15 mg daily for 8 months was successful in treating a patient with LPP.²⁸ Further investigation must be conducted to evaluate these treatments since early attenuation of the disease process is crucial to the reduction of permanent hair loss.

Advances in the early recognition and successful treatment of GLPL are dependent on continued research in all variants of LPP. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to establish standard of care. Further studies should target the association of GLPL and other autoimmune phenomena. Moreover, research into the etiology will provide direction in understanding disease progression and outcome.

To the Editor:

A 56-year-old white woman with a history of melanoma and hypertension presented for evaluation of progressive hair loss of more than 1 year’s duration with associated pruritis. Scalp examination revealed diffuse erythema and scarring alopecia of the bilateral parietal and temporal regions. Physical examination also revealed nonscarring alopecia of the bilateral axillae, with associated thinning of the pubic hair, eyebrows, and eyelashes, as well as keratosis pilaris on the upper arms. Biopsy of the parietal scalp revealed mild scarring alopecia with isthmic fibroplasia consistent with early lichen planopilaris (LPP)(Figure). These histologic features combined with the patient’s clinical presentation were consistent with a diagnosis of Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome (GLPL).

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome was first described by Piccardi in 1913.A second case was then described by Graham-Little in 1915 in a patient referred by Lassueur, resulting in the name it bears today.^1,2 The condition presents most commonly in middle-aged white women and is characterized by a triad of cicatricial alopecia of the scalp, nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and/or groin, and a rough follicular eruption on the body and/or scalp. Symptoms may not be present simultaneously. In GLPL, scarring alopecia of the scalp often precedes follicular eruptions of the trunk, arms, and legs by as much as years,² and the inverse also has been reported.¹ The inflammatory lesions of the scalp eventually resolve spontaneously, but the hair loss is by definition irreversible.

This rare condition is considered one of the 3 clinical variants of LPP. Other variants include classic LPP, also known as follicular lichen planus, and frontal fibrosing alopecia.³ More recently, fibrosing alopecia in a pattern distribution has gained some popularity as a fourth variant of LPP.⁴ All variants of LPP, including GLPL, result in a scarring alopecia. The classic scalp finding is an erythematous to violaceous, perifollicular, hyperkeratotic scale at the base of the terminal hairs. The population of inflamed follicles spreads outward, leaving behind a round to oval, central, atrophic scar that often is devoid of follicles. Few hairs may persist within zones of alopecia at presentation; however, these hairs are affected by inflammation and also will likely shed. A hair pull test will be positive at the margins during active disease, consisting of mostly anagen hairs on trichogram examination.^1,5 Patients may develop only a single foci of hair loss, but much more commonly, a patchy multifocal alopecia is noted.⁶ Sites often will coalesce. Onset of scalp alopecia may be insidious or fulminant.

The nonscarring alopecia of the axillae and groin may be described as subtle thinning to complete hair loss with no signs of atrophy or inflammation. Although not commonly reported, a case of nonscarring alopecia located on the shoulders has been seen.⁷

The follicular eruption that can be present on the trunk, arms, or legs in GLPL is most often but not limited to keratosis pilaris, as was seen in our patient. One reported case also described lichen spinulosus as a potential variant.⁸ Lichen planopilaris is separate from lichen planus (LP) because of its selective follicular involvement vs the nonselective mucocutaneous distribution of LP. The 2 processes also are histologically distinct; however, estimations have shown that more than 50% of patients with GLPL experience at least 1 episode of mucosal or cutaneous LP in their lifetime.⁹ Rarely, coexistence of GLPL and LP lesions has been described. One reported case of GLPL and concomitant hypertrophic LP could represent a severe form of the disease.⁹ Additionally, lichen planus pigmentosus, an uncommon variant of LP characterized by hyperpigmented brown macules in sun-exposed areas and flexural folds, was identified in a case report of an Asian woman with GLPL.¹⁰

As a general rule, the variants of LPP most commonly are seen in postmenopausal women aged 40 to 60 years; however, rare cases in a child and a teenager have been reported.¹¹ The GLPL variant of LPP is reported up to 4 times more frequently in females.⁵ Pruritus and pain are inconsistent findings, and there are no systemic signs of illness. A case of androgen insensitivity syndrome associated with GLPL suggested a potential influence of hormones in LPP.¹² Stress, vitamin A deficiency, and autoimmunity also have been proposed as triggers of GLPL.¹³ Furthermore, familial GLPL was described in a mother and daughter, though the association was uncertain.¹⁴ Our patient had no relevant family history.

Workups to reveal the etiology of GLPL have been inconclusive. Reports of laboratory testing including complete blood cell count, basic metabolic panel, liver function tests, testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone levels, and chest radiograph have been normal.² Additional workup for viral triggers also has been negative.¹⁵ A case series of 29 patients with LPP and its variants, including GLPL, revealed positive antinuclear antibodies in 10% of patients and a thyroid disorder in 24% of patients, with Hashimoto thyroiditis being the most prevalent in 7% of cases.¹⁶ There may be a strong association between the comorbidities of thyroid dysfunction and GLPL, as documented in other studies.^10,17 A case-control study by Mesinkovska et al¹⁷ revealed a considerable increase in the prevalence of thyroid gland disease among patients with LPP vs controls. Human leukocyte antigen DR1 was found in a familial case of GLPL,⁴ and a case of GLPL following hepatitis B vaccination also has been described.¹⁸

Graham-Little-Piccardi-Lassueur syndrome most likely is a T-cell mediated autoimmune condition associated with one or multiple unknown keratinocyte antigens. Autoantibodies to the inner centromere protein were identified in a case that was positive on direct immunofluorescence, which may provide more insight into the disease pathophysiology.¹³ Interestingly, a study comparing the concentrations of inflammatory cells in LPP and traction alopecia found an elevation in the ratio of Langerhans cells to T lymphocytes within the follicular inflammatory infiltrate of LPP.¹⁹

Because the number of patients with GLPL is so few, therapy should mirror advances being made in treatments for other variants of LPP. More recent studies of LPP treatment with hydroxychloroquine showed opposing results, though the safety profile of this agent makes it an enticing treatment option.^22,23 Tetracyclines showed improvement in 4 of 15 (26.7%) patients in a retrospective study by Spencer et al.²⁴ Another retrospective study showed promising results with the potent 5-alpha reductase inhibitor dutasteride with 7 of 10 (70%) postmenopausal patients reporting stabilization over a mean duration of 28 months with no reported side effects.²⁵ Antimalarial medications also have been implemented as adjunct therapies with mixed results.⁵ A case of a 26-year-old man with GLPL from South India showed systemic disease improvement following treatment with pulsed systemic steroids, isotretinoin, and anxiolytics.⁷ Chloroquine phosphate at a daily dose of 150 mg for 3 to 9 months yielded a transient response in one postmenopausal patient with frontal fibrosing alopecia.⁶ Stabilization of hair loss was achieved with a combination of hydroxychloroquine and doxycycline in a woman with GLPL who was previously unresponsive to tacrolimus ointment.¹⁰ Thalidomide showed early promise in an isolated report claiming successful treatment of LPP,²⁶ but there is contradictory evidence, as thalidomide showed no benefit in a series of 4 patients with LPP.²⁷

Peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ), a transcription factor that regulates genes, is downregulated in LPP.²⁸ Deletion of PPAR-γ within follicular stem cells in mice results in a phenotype similar to cicatricial alopecia. Data have supported the role of PPAR-γ in maintaining the pilosebaceous unit. A case report of pioglitazone (PPAR-γ agonist) therapy used at 15 mg daily for 8 months was successful in treating a patient with LPP.²⁸ Further investigation must be conducted to evaluate these treatments since early attenuation of the disease process is crucial to the reduction of permanent hair loss.

Advances in the early recognition and successful treatment of GLPL are dependent on continued research in all variants of LPP. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to establish standard of care. Further studies should target the association of GLPL and other autoimmune phenomena. Moreover, research into the etiology will provide direction in understanding disease progression and outcome.

To the Editor:

A 30-year-old man with no notable medical history presented to the dermatology clinic with multiple subcutaneous nodules on the forehead of 5 years’ duration. He reported no history of forehead trauma or manipulation of the lesions, and there was no accompanying pruritis, pain, erythema, or purulent discharge. There was no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors. On physical examination, the patient had 5 firm, flesh-colored to yellow nodules measuring approximately 0.2 to 1.5 cm in diameter without central punctae scattered over the central forehead (Figure 1). Due to cosmetic concerns, the patient elected to pursue surgical excision of the lesions, which occurred over several office visits. During surgical excision, the lesions were found to be smooth, encapsulated, and mobile, and they were excised without surgical complication. Histopathologic examination showed subcutaneous cysts lined by squamous epithelium with associated sebaceous glands (Figure 2A) and hair follicles in the cyst lumen (Figure 2B). These findings confirmed the diagnosis of multiple subcutaneous dermoid cysts.

Dermoid cysts are relatively uncommon, benign tumors consisting of tissue derived from ectodermal and mesodermal germ cell layers. Dermoid cysts may be distinguished from teratomas, which may contain tissues derived from all 3 germ cell layers and typically consist of types of tissues foreign to the site of origin, such as dental, thyroid, gastrointestinal, or neural tissue.^1,2 The majority of dermoid cysts are congenitally developed along the lines of embryologic fusion due to an error in the division of the ectoderm and mesoderm^3,4; however, some dermoid cysts may be acquired from epidermal elements being traumatically implanted into the dermis.⁵

Our patient’s presentation with multiple dermoid cysts was atypical, as dermoid cysts are almost always solitary tumors. A similar case was reported in a 41-year-old man who developed multiple dermoid cysts on the forehead over a 20-year period.This patient also was otherwise healthy, denied prior trauma to the forehead, and reported no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors.⁵

Another unusual feature in our case was the location of the dermoid cysts on the central forehead. The most common location for dermoid cysts is the lateral third of the eyebrows (47%–70% of cases).^1,4,6-10 These cysts occur because of sequestration of the surface ectoderm during fusion along the naso-optic groove.² Dermoid cysts also have been noted in other anatomical areas such as the scalp, nose, anterior neck, and trunk.⁶

Dermoid cysts tend to be small, round, smooth, and slowly growing until sudden enlargement prompts surgical evaluation.^4,6 During surgical excision, they often are fixed to the underlying bone but also may be freely mobile, as in our patient.⁶ Histopathologic examination reveals a stratified squamous epithelium with associated adnexal structures such as sebaceous glands or hair follicles.¹ Smooth muscle fibers, prominent vascular stroma, small nerves, and collagen and elastic fibers also may be found within the lumen of dermoid cysts.²

In some cases, dermoid cysts may be invasive and carry the risk of bony erosion, intracranial extension, osteomyelitis, meningitis, or cerebral abscess. Imaging studies sometimes are needed to rule out intracranial or intraspinal extension, particularly for midline dermoid cysts.⁶ The standard of treatment for dermoid cysts is surgical excision and complete enucleation without disruption of the cyst wall; however, invasive dermoid cysts may require endoscopic excision, orbitotomy, or craniotomy.^4,6

To the Editor:

A 30-year-old man with no notable medical history presented to the dermatology clinic with multiple subcutaneous nodules on the forehead of 5 years’ duration. He reported no history of forehead trauma or manipulation of the lesions, and there was no accompanying pruritis, pain, erythema, or purulent discharge. There was no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors. On physical examination, the patient had 5 firm, flesh-colored to yellow nodules measuring approximately 0.2 to 1.5 cm in diameter without central punctae scattered over the central forehead (Figure 1). Due to cosmetic concerns, the patient elected to pursue surgical excision of the lesions, which occurred over several office visits. During surgical excision, the lesions were found to be smooth, encapsulated, and mobile, and they were excised without surgical complication. Histopathologic examination showed subcutaneous cysts lined by squamous epithelium with associated sebaceous glands (Figure 2A) and hair follicles in the cyst lumen (Figure 2B). These findings confirmed the diagnosis of multiple subcutaneous dermoid cysts.

Dermoid cysts are relatively uncommon, benign tumors consisting of tissue derived from ectodermal and mesodermal germ cell layers. Dermoid cysts may be distinguished from teratomas, which may contain tissues derived from all 3 germ cell layers and typically consist of types of tissues foreign to the site of origin, such as dental, thyroid, gastrointestinal, or neural tissue.^1,2 The majority of dermoid cysts are congenitally developed along the lines of embryologic fusion due to an error in the division of the ectoderm and mesoderm^3,4; however, some dermoid cysts may be acquired from epidermal elements being traumatically implanted into the dermis.⁵

Our patient’s presentation with multiple dermoid cysts was atypical, as dermoid cysts are almost always solitary tumors. A similar case was reported in a 41-year-old man who developed multiple dermoid cysts on the forehead over a 20-year period.This patient also was otherwise healthy, denied prior trauma to the forehead, and reported no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors.⁵

Another unusual feature in our case was the location of the dermoid cysts on the central forehead. The most common location for dermoid cysts is the lateral third of the eyebrows (47%–70% of cases).^1,4,6-10 These cysts occur because of sequestration of the surface ectoderm during fusion along the naso-optic groove.² Dermoid cysts also have been noted in other anatomical areas such as the scalp, nose, anterior neck, and trunk.⁶

Dermoid cysts tend to be small, round, smooth, and slowly growing until sudden enlargement prompts surgical evaluation.^4,6 During surgical excision, they often are fixed to the underlying bone but also may be freely mobile, as in our patient.⁶ Histopathologic examination reveals a stratified squamous epithelium with associated adnexal structures such as sebaceous glands or hair follicles.¹ Smooth muscle fibers, prominent vascular stroma, small nerves, and collagen and elastic fibers also may be found within the lumen of dermoid cysts.²

In some cases, dermoid cysts may be invasive and carry the risk of bony erosion, intracranial extension, osteomyelitis, meningitis, or cerebral abscess. Imaging studies sometimes are needed to rule out intracranial or intraspinal extension, particularly for midline dermoid cysts.⁶ The standard of treatment for dermoid cysts is surgical excision and complete enucleation without disruption of the cyst wall; however, invasive dermoid cysts may require endoscopic excision, orbitotomy, or craniotomy.^4,6

To the Editor:

A 30-year-old man with no notable medical history presented to the dermatology clinic with multiple subcutaneous nodules on the forehead of 5 years’ duration. He reported no history of forehead trauma or manipulation of the lesions, and there was no accompanying pruritis, pain, erythema, or purulent discharge. There was no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors. On physical examination, the patient had 5 firm, flesh-colored to yellow nodules measuring approximately 0.2 to 1.5 cm in diameter without central punctae scattered over the central forehead (Figure 1). Due to cosmetic concerns, the patient elected to pursue surgical excision of the lesions, which occurred over several office visits. During surgical excision, the lesions were found to be smooth, encapsulated, and mobile, and they were excised without surgical complication. Histopathologic examination showed subcutaneous cysts lined by squamous epithelium with associated sebaceous glands (Figure 2A) and hair follicles in the cyst lumen (Figure 2B). These findings confirmed the diagnosis of multiple subcutaneous dermoid cysts.

Dermoid cysts are relatively uncommon, benign tumors consisting of tissue derived from ectodermal and mesodermal germ cell layers. Dermoid cysts may be distinguished from teratomas, which may contain tissues derived from all 3 germ cell layers and typically consist of types of tissues foreign to the site of origin, such as dental, thyroid, gastrointestinal, or neural tissue.^1,2 The majority of dermoid cysts are congenitally developed along the lines of embryologic fusion due to an error in the division of the ectoderm and mesoderm^3,4; however, some dermoid cysts may be acquired from epidermal elements being traumatically implanted into the dermis.⁵

Our patient’s presentation with multiple dermoid cysts was atypical, as dermoid cysts are almost always solitary tumors. A similar case was reported in a 41-year-old man who developed multiple dermoid cysts on the forehead over a 20-year period.This patient also was otherwise healthy, denied prior trauma to the forehead, and reported no family history of skin or gastrointestinal tract tumors.⁵

Another unusual feature in our case was the location of the dermoid cysts on the central forehead. The most common location for dermoid cysts is the lateral third of the eyebrows (47%–70% of cases).^1,4,6-10 These cysts occur because of sequestration of the surface ectoderm during fusion along the naso-optic groove.² Dermoid cysts also have been noted in other anatomical areas such as the scalp, nose, anterior neck, and trunk.⁶

Dermoid cysts tend to be small, round, smooth, and slowly growing until sudden enlargement prompts surgical evaluation.^4,6 During surgical excision, they often are fixed to the underlying bone but also may be freely mobile, as in our patient.⁶ Histopathologic examination reveals a stratified squamous epithelium with associated adnexal structures such as sebaceous glands or hair follicles.¹ Smooth muscle fibers, prominent vascular stroma, small nerves, and collagen and elastic fibers also may be found within the lumen of dermoid cysts.²

In some cases, dermoid cysts may be invasive and carry the risk of bony erosion, intracranial extension, osteomyelitis, meningitis, or cerebral abscess. Imaging studies sometimes are needed to rule out intracranial or intraspinal extension, particularly for midline dermoid cysts.⁶ The standard of treatment for dermoid cysts is surgical excision and complete enucleation without disruption of the cyst wall; however, invasive dermoid cysts may require endoscopic excision, orbitotomy, or craniotomy.^4,6

To the Editor:

Syringomas are small, benign, asymptomatic eccrine or apocrine tumors that present as multiple discrete flesh-colored papules. They are more common in females than males.¹ The etiology of eruptive syringomas is unclear, though an inflammatory process has been implicated in the abnormal proliferation of sweat glands.² However, a minority of tumors have been known to have an autosomal-dominant mode of transmission. Multiple or eruptive syringomas are associated with Down syndrome, Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and Blau syndrome.³ The clear cell variant has been found to be associated with diabetes mellitus.⁴ Syringomas most commonly appear on the lower eyelids, upper cheeks, neck, and upper chest; presentation on the penis is rare.⁵ We report a case of multiple eruptive syringomas located exclusively on the penis mimicking a sexually transmitted condition.

A 53-year-old man who was otherwise healthy presented with multiple flesh-colored papules on the penis that initially began to develop 30 years prior, but increased crops of lesions appeared 4 to 6 weeks prior to presentation. The patient described the lesions as rashlike, nonpruritic, and sensitive to the touch. He denied any discharge, oozing, crusting, or bleeding from the lesions. He did not report any high-risk sexual behaviors and stated that he was in a monogamous relationship with his wife. He had a medical history of molluscum contagiosum that was diagnosed and treated with cryotherapy 30 years prior; however, he did not have a history of any other sexually transmitted diseases. He also did not have a history of diabetes mellitus or thyroid disease.

Physical examination revealed multiple pink papules on the dorsal and ventral shaft of the penis, measuring 2 to 4 mm in diameter, with koebnerization (Figure 1). Based on clinical examination, the differential included condyloma, inflamed seborrheic keratosis, bowenoid papulosis, atypical molluscum contagiosum, or lichen planus. Consequently, a punch biopsy of the penile shaft was performed and histopathologic examination revealed proliferation of ducts focally that were tadpole shaped and embedded in a sclerotic stroma. The lining of the ducts was composed of cuboidal cells, some with clear cell change. The microscopic findings were consistent with penile syringomas (Figure 2). Laboratory results revealed the patient was negative for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and syphilis. The patient was given topical hydrocortisone butyrate and tacrolimus for symptomatic treatment. He declined further aggressive treatment.

To prevent misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment, it is important to have syringomas as part of the differential diagnosis when patients present with multiple small flesh-colored papules on the penis. The lesions should be biopsied for accurate diagnosis and to provide reassurance to patients who usually come in for evaluation for fear of having acquired a sexually transmitted disease.

To the Editor:

Syringomas are small, benign, asymptomatic eccrine or apocrine tumors that present as multiple discrete flesh-colored papules. They are more common in females than males.¹ The etiology of eruptive syringomas is unclear, though an inflammatory process has been implicated in the abnormal proliferation of sweat glands.² However, a minority of tumors have been known to have an autosomal-dominant mode of transmission. Multiple or eruptive syringomas are associated with Down syndrome, Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and Blau syndrome.³ The clear cell variant has been found to be associated with diabetes mellitus.⁴ Syringomas most commonly appear on the lower eyelids, upper cheeks, neck, and upper chest; presentation on the penis is rare.⁵ We report a case of multiple eruptive syringomas located exclusively on the penis mimicking a sexually transmitted condition.

A 53-year-old man who was otherwise healthy presented with multiple flesh-colored papules on the penis that initially began to develop 30 years prior, but increased crops of lesions appeared 4 to 6 weeks prior to presentation. The patient described the lesions as rashlike, nonpruritic, and sensitive to the touch. He denied any discharge, oozing, crusting, or bleeding from the lesions. He did not report any high-risk sexual behaviors and stated that he was in a monogamous relationship with his wife. He had a medical history of molluscum contagiosum that was diagnosed and treated with cryotherapy 30 years prior; however, he did not have a history of any other sexually transmitted diseases. He also did not have a history of diabetes mellitus or thyroid disease.

Physical examination revealed multiple pink papules on the dorsal and ventral shaft of the penis, measuring 2 to 4 mm in diameter, with koebnerization (Figure 1). Based on clinical examination, the differential included condyloma, inflamed seborrheic keratosis, bowenoid papulosis, atypical molluscum contagiosum, or lichen planus. Consequently, a punch biopsy of the penile shaft was performed and histopathologic examination revealed proliferation of ducts focally that were tadpole shaped and embedded in a sclerotic stroma. The lining of the ducts was composed of cuboidal cells, some with clear cell change. The microscopic findings were consistent with penile syringomas (Figure 2). Laboratory results revealed the patient was negative for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and syphilis. The patient was given topical hydrocortisone butyrate and tacrolimus for symptomatic treatment. He declined further aggressive treatment.

To prevent misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment, it is important to have syringomas as part of the differential diagnosis when patients present with multiple small flesh-colored papules on the penis. The lesions should be biopsied for accurate diagnosis and to provide reassurance to patients who usually come in for evaluation for fear of having acquired a sexually transmitted disease.

To the Editor:

Syringomas are small, benign, asymptomatic eccrine or apocrine tumors that present as multiple discrete flesh-colored papules. They are more common in females than males.¹ The etiology of eruptive syringomas is unclear, though an inflammatory process has been implicated in the abnormal proliferation of sweat glands.² However, a minority of tumors have been known to have an autosomal-dominant mode of transmission. Multiple or eruptive syringomas are associated with Down syndrome, Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and Blau syndrome.³ The clear cell variant has been found to be associated with diabetes mellitus.⁴ Syringomas most commonly appear on the lower eyelids, upper cheeks, neck, and upper chest; presentation on the penis is rare.⁵ We report a case of multiple eruptive syringomas located exclusively on the penis mimicking a sexually transmitted condition.

A 53-year-old man who was otherwise healthy presented with multiple flesh-colored papules on the penis that initially began to develop 30 years prior, but increased crops of lesions appeared 4 to 6 weeks prior to presentation. The patient described the lesions as rashlike, nonpruritic, and sensitive to the touch. He denied any discharge, oozing, crusting, or bleeding from the lesions. He did not report any high-risk sexual behaviors and stated that he was in a monogamous relationship with his wife. He had a medical history of molluscum contagiosum that was diagnosed and treated with cryotherapy 30 years prior; however, he did not have a history of any other sexually transmitted diseases. He also did not have a history of diabetes mellitus or thyroid disease.

Physical examination revealed multiple pink papules on the dorsal and ventral shaft of the penis, measuring 2 to 4 mm in diameter, with koebnerization (Figure 1). Based on clinical examination, the differential included condyloma, inflamed seborrheic keratosis, bowenoid papulosis, atypical molluscum contagiosum, or lichen planus. Consequently, a punch biopsy of the penile shaft was performed and histopathologic examination revealed proliferation of ducts focally that were tadpole shaped and embedded in a sclerotic stroma. The lining of the ducts was composed of cuboidal cells, some with clear cell change. The microscopic findings were consistent with penile syringomas (Figure 2). Laboratory results revealed the patient was negative for human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and syphilis. The patient was given topical hydrocortisone butyrate and tacrolimus for symptomatic treatment. He declined further aggressive treatment.

To prevent misdiagnosis and unnecessary treatment, it is important to have syringomas as part of the differential diagnosis when patients present with multiple small flesh-colored papules on the penis. The lesions should be biopsied for accurate diagnosis and to provide reassurance to patients who usually come in for evaluation for fear of having acquired a sexually transmitted disease.

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

To the Editor:

Netherton syndrome (NS) is a rare autosomal-recessive ichthyosiform disease.¹ The incidence is estimated to be 1 in 200,000 individuals.² Netherton syndrome presents with generalized erythroderma and scaling, characteristic hair shaft abnormalities, and dysregulation of the immune system. Treatment is largely symptomatic and includes fragrance-free emollients, keratolytics, tretinoin, and corticosteroids, either alone or in combination. We report a case of NS in a man with congenital erythroderma, pili torti, and elevated IgE levels.

A 23-year-old man presented with generalized scaly skin that was present since birth. He was the first child born of nonconsanguineous parents. His medical history was suggestive of atopic diatheses such as allergic rhinitis and recurrent urticaria. The patient was of thin build and had widespread erythematous, annular, and polycyclic scaly lesions (Figure 1A), some with characteristic double-edged scale (Figure 1B). The skin was dry due to anhidrosis that was present since birth. Flexural lichenification was present at the cubital fossa of both arms. Scalp hairs were easily pluckable and had generalized thinning of hair density. Hair mount examination showed characteristic features of both trichorrhexis invaginata (Figure 2A) and pili torti (Figure 2B).

Netherton syndrome is caused by mutation of the SPINK5 gene, serine protease inhibitor Kazal type 5; the corresponding gene is located on the long arm of chromosome 5.³ The gene encodes a serine protease inhibitor proprotein LEKTI (lymphoepithelial Kazal type inhibitor).⁴ The product of the gene is thought to be necessary for epidermal cell growth and differentiation. The classic clinical triad of NS includes ichthyosiform dermatosis with double-edged scale, hair shaft abnormalities, and atopy or elevated IgE levels.⁵ Generalized (congenital) erythroderma usually becomes evident at birth or shortly thereafter. Half of patients develop lesions of ILC on the trunk and limbs during childhood.⁶ A typical ILC lesion is characterized by an erythematous scaly patch that may be annular or polycyclic with double-edged scale at the advancing border. The ability to sweat is impaired, which may cause episodes of hyperpyrexia, especially during humid weather. Patients with hyperpyrexia may be incorrectly diagnosed with bacterial infection and treated with antipyretic drugs or a prolonged course of antibiotics. Trichorrhexis invaginata, also referred to as bamboo hair or ball-and-socket defect, is the pathognomonic hair shaft abnormality seen in NS.⁷ Other hair shaft abnormalities in this syndrome include trichorrhexis nodosa and pili torti.⁸ Our patient had hair shaft abnormalities of trichorrhexis invaginata and pili torti, which are rare findings. The third component of this syndrome is atopy, which generally manifests as angioedema, urticaria, allergic rhinitis, peripheral eosinophilia, atopic dermatitis–like skin lesions, asthma, and elevated IgE levels.⁹

Treatment with emollients, topical steroids, tacrolimus, and psoralen plus UVA does not elicit a satisfactory response. The Table highlights the clinical features and management of NS.

To the Editor:

Netherton syndrome (NS) is a rare autosomal-recessive ichthyosiform disease.¹ The incidence is estimated to be 1 in 200,000 individuals.² Netherton syndrome presents with generalized erythroderma and scaling, characteristic hair shaft abnormalities, and dysregulation of the immune system. Treatment is largely symptomatic and includes fragrance-free emollients, keratolytics, tretinoin, and corticosteroids, either alone or in combination. We report a case of NS in a man with congenital erythroderma, pili torti, and elevated IgE levels.

A 23-year-old man presented with generalized scaly skin that was present since birth. He was the first child born of nonconsanguineous parents. His medical history was suggestive of atopic diatheses such as allergic rhinitis and recurrent urticaria. The patient was of thin build and had widespread erythematous, annular, and polycyclic scaly lesions (Figure 1A), some with characteristic double-edged scale (Figure 1B). The skin was dry due to anhidrosis that was present since birth. Flexural lichenification was present at the cubital fossa of both arms. Scalp hairs were easily pluckable and had generalized thinning of hair density. Hair mount examination showed characteristic features of both trichorrhexis invaginata (Figure 2A) and pili torti (Figure 2B).

Netherton syndrome is caused by mutation of the SPINK5 gene, serine protease inhibitor Kazal type 5; the corresponding gene is located on the long arm of chromosome 5.³ The gene encodes a serine protease inhibitor proprotein LEKTI (lymphoepithelial Kazal type inhibitor).⁴ The product of the gene is thought to be necessary for epidermal cell growth and differentiation. The classic clinical triad of NS includes ichthyosiform dermatosis with double-edged scale, hair shaft abnormalities, and atopy or elevated IgE levels.⁵ Generalized (congenital) erythroderma usually becomes evident at birth or shortly thereafter. Half of patients develop lesions of ILC on the trunk and limbs during childhood.⁶ A typical ILC lesion is characterized by an erythematous scaly patch that may be annular or polycyclic with double-edged scale at the advancing border. The ability to sweat is impaired, which may cause episodes of hyperpyrexia, especially during humid weather. Patients with hyperpyrexia may be incorrectly diagnosed with bacterial infection and treated with antipyretic drugs or a prolonged course of antibiotics. Trichorrhexis invaginata, also referred to as bamboo hair or ball-and-socket defect, is the pathognomonic hair shaft abnormality seen in NS.⁷ Other hair shaft abnormalities in this syndrome include trichorrhexis nodosa and pili torti.⁸ Our patient had hair shaft abnormalities of trichorrhexis invaginata and pili torti, which are rare findings. The third component of this syndrome is atopy, which generally manifests as angioedema, urticaria, allergic rhinitis, peripheral eosinophilia, atopic dermatitis–like skin lesions, asthma, and elevated IgE levels.⁹

Treatment with emollients, topical steroids, tacrolimus, and psoralen plus UVA does not elicit a satisfactory response. The Table highlights the clinical features and management of NS.

To the Editor:

Netherton syndrome (NS) is a rare autosomal-recessive ichthyosiform disease.¹ The incidence is estimated to be 1 in 200,000 individuals.² Netherton syndrome presents with generalized erythroderma and scaling, characteristic hair shaft abnormalities, and dysregulation of the immune system. Treatment is largely symptomatic and includes fragrance-free emollients, keratolytics, tretinoin, and corticosteroids, either alone or in combination. We report a case of NS in a man with congenital erythroderma, pili torti, and elevated IgE levels.

A 23-year-old man presented with generalized scaly skin that was present since birth. He was the first child born of nonconsanguineous parents. His medical history was suggestive of atopic diatheses such as allergic rhinitis and recurrent urticaria. The patient was of thin build and had widespread erythematous, annular, and polycyclic scaly lesions (Figure 1A), some with characteristic double-edged scale (Figure 1B). The skin was dry due to anhidrosis that was present since birth. Flexural lichenification was present at the cubital fossa of both arms. Scalp hairs were easily pluckable and had generalized thinning of hair density. Hair mount examination showed characteristic features of both trichorrhexis invaginata (Figure 2A) and pili torti (Figure 2B).

Netherton syndrome is caused by mutation of the SPINK5 gene, serine protease inhibitor Kazal type 5; the corresponding gene is located on the long arm of chromosome 5.³ The gene encodes a serine protease inhibitor proprotein LEKTI (lymphoepithelial Kazal type inhibitor).⁴ The product of the gene is thought to be necessary for epidermal cell growth and differentiation. The classic clinical triad of NS includes ichthyosiform dermatosis with double-edged scale, hair shaft abnormalities, and atopy or elevated IgE levels.⁵ Generalized (congenital) erythroderma usually becomes evident at birth or shortly thereafter. Half of patients develop lesions of ILC on the trunk and limbs during childhood.⁶ A typical ILC lesion is characterized by an erythematous scaly patch that may be annular or polycyclic with double-edged scale at the advancing border. The ability to sweat is impaired, which may cause episodes of hyperpyrexia, especially during humid weather. Patients with hyperpyrexia may be incorrectly diagnosed with bacterial infection and treated with antipyretic drugs or a prolonged course of antibiotics. Trichorrhexis invaginata, also referred to as bamboo hair or ball-and-socket defect, is the pathognomonic hair shaft abnormality seen in NS.⁷ Other hair shaft abnormalities in this syndrome include trichorrhexis nodosa and pili torti.⁸ Our patient had hair shaft abnormalities of trichorrhexis invaginata and pili torti, which are rare findings. The third component of this syndrome is atopy, which generally manifests as angioedema, urticaria, allergic rhinitis, peripheral eosinophilia, atopic dermatitis–like skin lesions, asthma, and elevated IgE levels.⁹

Treatment with emollients, topical steroids, tacrolimus, and psoralen plus UVA does not elicit a satisfactory response. The Table highlights the clinical features and management of NS.