Delayed Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions

Drug-induced adverse reactions are a major health problem (1-3). Most adverse effects, so-called type A reactions, are due to the pharmacologic action of a drug. Idiosyncratic and immune-mediated side effects, which are not predictable, are called type B reactions (4). Drug hypersensitivity reactions (drug allergy) account for about one seventh of adverse reactions and manifest themselves in many diseases, some of which are severe (5, 6). The most common allergic reactions occur in the skin and are observed in about 2% to 3% of hospitalized patients (7-9). To correlate the clinical symptoms with the underlying immune mechanism, drug hypersensitivity and other immune reactions are frequently classified into 4 categories described by Coombs and Gell (10). Type I reactions are due to IgE mediation and mainly cause urticaria, anaphylaxis, and asthma; type II reactions are based on immunoglobulin-mediated cytotoxic mechanisms, accounting mainly for blood cell dyscrasias; type III reactions are immune complexmediated (for example, vasculitis); and type IV reactions are mediated by T cells, causing so-called delayed hypersensitivity (Table 1). Table 1. Relationship of Clinical Symptoms to Drug Reactivity This classification system has proven to be helpful in clinical practice and can guide diagnostic decisions. However, the term delayed hypersensitivity reactions, originally coined to describe T-cell reactions to tuberculin, became an umbrella term for various T-cellmediated immune mechanisms leading to clinically distinct diseases. Indeed, T cells have been found to differ in the cytokines they produce, which result in distinct disorders. T-helper 1 T cells activate macrophages by secreting large amounts of interferon drive the production of complement-fixing antibody isotypes, and costimulate proinflammatory responses (tumor necrosis factor-, interleukin [IL]-12) and CD8+ T-cell responses. T-helper 2 T cells secrete the cytokines IL-4 and IL-5 (11), which promote B-cell production of IgE and IgG4, macrophage deactivation, and mast-cell and eosinophil responses. CD8+ T cells can produce similarly polarized patterns of cytokines. Newer immunology textbooks have recognized this heterogeneity of T-cell function and consequently subdivide delayed hypersensitivity reactions into type IVa, type IVb, and type IVc reactions, which correspond to T-helper 1, T-helper 2, and cytotoxic reactions (Table 1) (12). T cells recognize small peptide antigens but are also involved in immune reactions to small chemicals. Indeed, the original description of cellular immunity is based on immune responses to haptens (13). The role of T cells in contact dermatitis elicited by small chemicals has been extensively documented (14, 15), and animal models have been used to dissect the immunopathogenesis (16, 17). Understanding of allergies to orally or parentally administered drugs has, in contrast, only slowly evolved, since clinical manifestations are extremely heterogeneous and animal models do not exist for most side effects. Nevertheless, the observation of T-cell infiltrates in drug-related allergic reactions that affect the skin, liver, and kidney, as well as drug-specific reactions found in vitro or indicated in the results of skin tests (16-21), strongly suggested T-cellmediated pathogenesis. This review presents newer concepts of the role of T cells in drug hypersensitivity, which evolved from the study of drug-specific T cells in various drug-induced hypersensitivity diseases. On the basis of in vitro analysis of drug-specific T-cell clones, novel methods of drug presentation to T cells can be defined, extending the hapten concept (22-24). Moreover, functional analysis of T-cell clones from the peripheral blood as well as from the affected tissue, together with immunohistologic analysis, reveals that distinct types of T-cell reactions can lead to different clinical forms of drug hypersensitivity reactions (25-28). How Do T Cells Recognize Drugs? T cells recognize the antigen by their antigen receptors, which are heterodimers of 2 chains designated as either T-cell receptors (the majority of T cells) or T-cell receptors (about 5% of circulating T cells). An enormous variety (>107) of T-cell receptors can be generated with distinct specificities because of different recombinations of genes related to T-cell receptors and the addition of N-region nucleotide insertions. Each T cell displays thousands of identical T-cell receptors, which bind a bimolecular complex displayed at the surface of another cell called an antigen-presenting cell. This complex consists of a fragment of a protein antigen (peptide) bound in the groove of a major MHC molecule (Figure 1). Two classes of MHC molecules present peptides of different origin and stimulate different T cells. Peptides that are derived from proteins synthesized and degraded in the cytosol are presented by MHC class I molecules and activate CD8+ T cells. The reactive CD8+ T cells secrete cytokines and are able to kill cells displaying foreign peptides derived from cytosolic pathogens, such as viruses. In contrast, MHC class II molecules present peptides derived from proteins degraded in endocytic vesicles. These structures interact with CD4+ T cells, which activate other immune effector cells as dictated by their cytokines (for example, macrophages, B cells, and CD8+ T cells) (11, 12). CD4+ T cells can also be cytotoxic (34). Figure 1. The hapten and prohapten concept and the noncovalent drug presentation to T cells. APC NO TCR The recognition of small molecules (such as drugs) by B cells and T cells is usually explained by the hapten concept. Haptens are small molecules (mostly <1000 Da) that are chemically reactive and thus able to undergo stable, covalent binding to a larger protein or peptide (13, 29, 30-33, 35, 36). This modification of a protein or peptide makes it immunogenic (Figure 1): Cell-bound or soluble immunoglobulins can recognize it directly, while T cells recognize a haptenpeptide fragment that is generated by intracellular processing of the haptenprotein complex and is presented to T cells by MHC molecules (Figure 1). Penicillin G is a typical hapten that tends to bind covalently to lysine groups within soluble or cell-bound proteins, thereby modifying them and eliciting B-cell and T-cell reactions (36). It is also possible that the hapten may bind directly to the immunogenic peptide presented by the MHC molecule itself or alter the MHC molecule directly. In this case, no processing is required (26, 37-39) (Figure 1). Alternatively, if the drug is not chemically reactive itself, it may represent a prohapten, which becomes reactive during metabolism (26-28, 34) (Figure 1). Sulfamethoxazole has been proposed as a typical example of a prohapten,since it is not chemically reactive but gains immunogenicity by intracellular metabolism. Cytochrome P450dependent metabolism can lead to sulfamethoxazolehydroxylamine, which becomes sulfamethoxazole-nitroso after oxidation, a chemically reactive compound that is able to bind covalently to proteins and peptides (Figure 1) (31, 37-40). The finding that keratinocytes might also process sulfamethoxazole to sulfamethoxazolehydroxylamine supports this concept and may explain the manifestation of drug allergy in the skin (38). Recently, a third possibility has been considered, namely a pharmacologic interaction of drugs with immune receptors (the pi concept) (Figure 1) (41-46). Chemically inert drugs, unable to covalently bind to peptides or proteins, may still activate certain T cells that happen to bear T-cell receptors that can interact with the drug. This model has been expanded by in vitro studies using T-cell clones specific for such drugs as sulfamethoxazole, lidocaine, mepivacaine, celecoxib, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, and p-phenylenediamine (41-43, 47-49). It relies on the following findings: Glutaraldehyde-fixed antigen-presenting cells, unable to process, can still present the drug and stimulate specific T cells (41); inhibited generation of reactive metabolites actually enhances the reactivity of T cells, suggesting that the inert drug but not the reactive metabolite is recognized (50); the drug is bound in a labile way since it can be washed away from the cell surface, in contrast to covalently bound drugs, which cannot (41, 42); and a drug-reactive T-cell clone reacts to the drug within seconds, before metabolism and processing can take place (42). This stimulation by inert drugs is MHC dependent, implying that for full stimulation of the T cell, the T-cell receptor needs to interact with the drug and the MHC molecule. This new concept has a major impact on our understanding of drug hypersensitivity and its distinct clinical manifestations (Figure 1, Table 1). Haptens are primarily immunogenic because of their chemical reactivity. They modify peptides and make them more or newly immunogenic. In contrast, chemical inert drugs are immunogenic only because of their structural features, which enable them to interact with immune receptors (certain T-cell receptors and possibly MHC). These structural features have never been considered in drug development but may account for a substantial portion of unforeseen side effects (51). The clinical symptoms elicited by drugs that are immunogenic because of their chemical or structural features may well differ. A hapten-like drug (for example, amoxicillin) is able to alter many different proteins, either soluble or cell-bound, and can even modify different MHC molecules and their embedded peptides directly (Figure 1). These distinct antigenic determinants can stimulate T cells and B cells and elicit more or less all types of immune reactions. Indeed, penicillins are reported to cause different antibody-mediated diseases, such as anaphylaxis or hemolytic anemia, but also various T-cellmediated reactions, such as maculopapular exanthema, drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome, acute generalized

[1]  C. Brander,et al.  Characterization of lidocaine-specific T cells. , 1997, Journal of immunology.

[2]  H. Merk,et al.  CD8+ dermal T cells from a sulphamethoxazole‐induced bullous exanthem proliferate in response to drug‐modified liver microsomes , 1995, The British journal of dermatology.

[3]  A. Kappeler,et al.  T cell involvement in cutaneous drug eruptions , 2001, Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

[4]  S. Pillai,et al.  Innate immunity. , 1996, Current opinion in immunology.

[5]  C. Brander,et al.  Heterogeneous T cell responses to beta-lactam-modified self-structures are observed in penicillin-allergic individuals. , 1995, Journal of immunology.

[6]  J. Roujeau,et al.  Blister fluid T lymphocytes during toxic epidermal necrolysis are functional cytotoxic cells which express human natural killer (NK) inhibitory receptors , 2000, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[7]  A. D. de Weck,et al.  A new chemical spect of penicillin allergy: the direct reaction of penicillin with epsilon-amino-groups. , 1965, Nature.

[8]  M. Fellner,et al.  Morbilliform Eruptions Caused by Penicillin , 1970 .

[9]  W. Pichler,et al.  High IL-5 production by human drug-specific T cell clones. , 1997, International archives of allergy and immunology.

[10]  J. Roujeau,et al.  Increased levels of interleukin 5 are associated with the generation of eosinophilia in drug‐induced hypersensitivity syndrome , 1998, The British journal of dermatology.

[11]  M. Béné,et al.  Role of delayed cellular hypersensitivity and adhesion molecules in amoxicillin-induced morbilliform rashes. , 1997, Archives of dermatology.

[12]  K. Landsteiner,et al.  STUDIES ON THE SENSITIZATION OF ANIMALS WITH SIMPLE CHEMICAL COMPOUNDS , 1935, The Journal of experimental medicine.

[13]  M. Béné,et al.  Immunocompetent cells and adhesion molecules in 14 cases of cutaneous drug reactions induced with the use of antibiotics. , 1998, Archives of dermatology.

[14]  M Pirmohamed,et al.  Role of drug disposition in drug hypersensitivity: a chemical, molecular, and clinical perspective. , 1998, Chemical research in toxicology.

[15]  H. Merk,et al.  Delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction to paraphenylenediamine is mediated by 2 different pathways of antigen recognition by specific αβ+ human T-cell clones , 2002 .

[16]  Y. Kakuto,et al.  Allopurinol hypersensitivity syndrome associated with systemic cytomegalovirus infection and systemic bacteremia. , 2001, Internal medicine.

[17]  R. Victorino,et al.  Diagnostic value of specific T cell reactivity to drugs in 95 cases of drug induced liver injury , 1997, Gut.

[18]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Characterization of drug-specific T cells in lamotrigine hypersensitivity. , 2003, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[19]  T R Einarson,et al.  Drug-Related Hospital Admissions , 1993, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[20]  B. Sachs,et al.  Allergic and autoimmune reactions to xenobiotics: how do they arise? , 1998, Immunology today.

[21]  W. Pichler,et al.  Direct, MHC-dependent presentation of the drug sulfamethoxazole to human alphabeta T cell clones. , 1997, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[22]  S. Romagnani,et al.  The Th1/Th2 paradigm. , 1997, Immunology today.

[23]  W. Pichler,et al.  Evidence for a role for IL-5 and eotaxin in activating and recruiting eosinophils in drug-induced cutaneous eruptions. , 2000, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[24]  C. Moore,et al.  Association between presence of HLA-B*5701, HLA-DR7, and HLA-DQ3 and hypersensitivity to HIV-1 reverse-transcriptase inhibitor abacavir , 2002, The Lancet.

[25]  A. Cribb,et al.  Sulfamethoxazole is metabolized to the hydroxylamine in humans , 1992, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[26]  K. Arndt,et al.  Drug-induced cutaneous reactions. A report from the Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance Program on 15,438 consecutive inpatients, 1975 to 1982. , 1986, JAMA.

[27]  J. Devogelaer,et al.  Fever, hepatitis and acute interstitial nephritis in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis. Concurrent manifestations of azathioprine hypersensitivity. , 1992, The Journal of rheumatology.

[28]  D. Sauder,et al.  Insights into molecular mechanisms of contact hypersensitivity gained from gene knockout studies , 2001, Journal of leukocyte biology.

[29]  D. Zehnder,et al.  Comprehensive hospital drug monitoring (CHDM): adverse skin reactions, a 20‐year survey , 1997, Allergy.

[30]  P. Corey,et al.  Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients , 2012 .

[31]  W. Pichler,et al.  A comparative study of the expression of cytotoxic proteins in allergic contact dermatitis and psoriasis: spongiotic skin lesions in allergic contact dermatitis are highly infiltrated by T cells expressing perforin and granzyme B. , 2001, The American journal of pathology.

[32]  M. Blanca The contribution of the side chain of penicillins in the induction of allergic reactions. , 1994, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

[33]  J. Johnson,et al.  Cutaneous disease and drug reactions in HIV infection. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[34]  F. Haramburu,et al.  Admissions to hospital caused by adverse drug reactions: cross sectional incidence study , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[35]  S. Valitutti,et al.  HLA-restricted, processing- and metabolism-independent pathway of drug recognition by human alpha beta T lymphocytes. , 1998, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[36]  J. Geisel,et al.  Selective generation of CD8+ T‐cell clones from the peripheral blood of patients with cutaneous reactions to beta‐lactam antibiotics , 1993, The British journal of dermatology.

[37]  M. Tohyama,et al.  Human herpesvirus 6 and drug allergy , 2003, Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology.

[38]  K. Frutig,et al.  Interaction of sulfonamide derivatives with the TCR of sulfamethoxazole-specific human alpha beta+ T cell clones. , 1999, Journal of immunology.

[39]  M Pirmohamed,et al.  Genetic susceptibility to adverse drug reactions. , 2001, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[40]  R. Stern,et al.  Severe adverse cutaneous reactions to drugs. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  H. Heller Adverse cutaneous drug reactions in patients with human immunodeficiency virus-1 infection. , 2000, Clinical Dermatology.

[42]  M. Fellner,et al.  Morbilliform eruptions caused by penicillin. A study by electron microscopy and immunologic tests. , 1970, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[43]  N A Mitchison,et al.  Tolerance and Autoimmunity , 2001 .

[44]  F. Annunziato,et al.  Highly Th2-skewed cytokine profile of beta-lactam-specific T cells from nonatopic subjects with adverse drug reactions. , 1999, Journal of immunology.

[45]  H. Krous,et al.  Diphenylhydantoin-induced hypersensitivity reaction with interstitial nephritis. , 1985, Human pathology.

[46]  J. Tschopp,et al.  Inhibition of toxic epidermal necrolysis by blockade of CD95 with human intravenous immunoglobulin. , 1998, Science.

[47]  J. Uetrecht,et al.  Is it possible to more accurately predict which drug candidates will cause idiosyncratic drug reactions? , 2000, Current drug metabolism.

[48]  W. Pichler,et al.  Distinct Serum Cytokine Levels in Drug– and Measles–Induced Exanthema , 1999, International Archives of Allergy and Immunology.

[49]  W. Pichler,et al.  Molecular Basis of Drug Recognition by Specific T–Cell Receptors , 1999, International Archives of Allergy and Immunology.

[50]  M. Britschgi,et al.  Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis: role of cytotoxic T cells in pustule formation. , 2002, The American journal of pathology.

[51]  D. Basketter,et al.  Contact allergy, irritancy and ‘danger’ , 2000, Contact dermatitis.

[52]  G. D. de Gast,et al.  Lymphocyte-stimulation tests and patch tests to carbamazepine hypersensitivity. , 1977, Clinical and experimental immunology.

[53]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Recognition of Sulfamethoxazole and Its Reactive Metabolites by Drug-Specific CD4+ T Cells from Allergic Individuals1 , 2000, The Journal of Immunology.

[54]  C. Brander,et al.  Cross-reactivity of T cell lines and clones to beta-lactam antibiotics. , 1996, Journal of immunology.

[55]  W. Pichler,et al.  T-cell reactions to drugs in distinct clinical manifestations of drug allergy. , 2001, Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology.

[56]  W. Pichler,et al.  Allele-unrestricted presentation of lidocaine by HLA-DR molecules to specific alphabeta+ T cell clones. , 1998, International immunology.

[57]  E. Padovan,et al.  T cell immune responses to haptens. Structural models for allergic and autoimmune reactions. , 1996, Toxicology.

[58]  N. Esterly,et al.  Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome in pediatric patients. , 2001, Pediatrics.

[59]  C. Mackay,et al.  Functional expression of the eotaxin receptor CCR3 in T lymphocytes co-localizing with eosinophils , 1997, Current Biology.

[60]  H. Merk,et al.  Predominance of epidermal CD8+ T lymphocytes in bullous cutaneous reactions caused by beta-lactam antibiotics. , 1993, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[61]  Martine Bagot,et al.  Drug specific cytotoxic T-cells in the skin lesions of a patient with toxic epidermal necrolysis. , 2002, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[62]  Munir Pirmohamed,et al.  The Role of Active Metabolites in Drug Toxicity , 1994, Drug safety.

[63]  Pichler,et al.  T‐cell‐mediated cytotoxicity against keratinocytes in sulfamethoxazol‐induced skin reaction , 1998, Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

[64]  R. Siliciano,et al.  Induction of CD4+ human cytolytic T cells specific for HIV-infected cells by a gp160 subunit vaccine. , 1990, Science.

[65]  P. Matzinger,et al.  Danger signals: SOS to the immune system. , 2001, Current opinion in immunology.

[66]  S. Knowles,et al.  Anticonvulsant Hypersensitivity Syndrome , 1999, Drug safety.

[67]  G. de Saint Basile,et al.  Perforin: more than just an effector molecule. , 2000, Immunology today.

[68]  J. Roujeau,et al.  Patch testing in severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions, including Stevens‐Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis , 1996, Contact dermatitis.

[69]  K. Frutig,et al.  T Cells Isolated from Positive Epicutaneous Test Reactions to Amoxicillin and Ceftriaxone are Drug Specific and Cytotoxic , 2000 .

[70]  R. Inagi,et al.  Human herpesvirus 6 infection as a risk factor for the development of severe drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome. , 1998, Archives of dermatology.

[71]  W. Pichler,et al.  Recognition of local anesthetics by alphabeta+ T cells. , 1999, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[72]  S. Knowles,et al.  Idiosyncratic drug reactions: the reactive metabolite syndromes , 2000, The Lancet.

[73]  B. Hoen,et al.  DRESS (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms) syndrome associated with nevirapine therapy. , 1998, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[74]  G. Swanbeck,et al.  Cutaneous drug reactions , 1992, Archives of Dermatological Research.

[75]  W. Pichler,et al.  Predictive drug allergy testing: an alternative viewpoint. , 2001, Toxicology.

[76]  A. Pasternack,et al.  Adverse drug reactions in Sjögren's syndrome. Frequent allergic reactions and a specific trimethoprim-associated systemic reaction. , 1999, Scandinavian journal of rheumatology.

[77]  M. Doutre,et al.  [Acute generalized exanthematic pustuloses (four cases) (author's transl)]. , 1980, Annales de dermatologie et de venereologie.

[78]  J. Austyn Death, destruction, danger and dendritic cells , 1999, Nature Medicine.

[79]  W. Pichler,et al.  Allele-unrestricted presentation of lidocaine by HLA-DR molecules to specific αβ F T cell clones , 1998 .

[80]  W. Pichler Pharmacological interaction of drugs with antigen-specific immune receptors: the p-i concept , 2002, Current opinion in allergy and clinical immunology.

[81]  W. Pichler,et al.  Degeneracy and additional alloreactivity of drug-specific human αβ+ T cell clones , 2001 .

[82]  H. Tsutsui,et al.  Drug-specific T cells derived from patients with drug-induced allergic hepatitis. , 1992, Journal of immunology.

[83]  S. Valitutti,et al.  HLA-restricted , Processing-and Metabolism-independent Pathway of Drug Recognition by Human ab T Lymphocytes , 1998 .

[84]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Immunological Principles of Adverse Drug Reactions , 2000, Drug safety.

[85]  B. Crickx,et al.  Association of human herpesvirus 6 infection with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms. , 2001, Archives of dermatology.

[86]  W. Pichler,et al.  Role of T cells in drug allergies , 1998, Allergy.

[87]  Hari,et al.  Infiltration of cytotoxic T cells in drug‐induced cutaneous eruptions , 2000, Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

[88]  M. Hahne,et al.  Cytotoxicity Is Mandatory for CD8+ T Cell–mediated Contact Hypersensitivity , 1999, The Journal of experimental medicine.

[89]  F. Halter,et al.  Classification of ADRs: a proposal for harmonization and differentiation based on the experience of the Comprehensive Hospital Drug Monitoring Bern/St. Gallen, 1974–1993 , 2002, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[90]  C. Albanesi,et al.  T-cell subpopulations in the development of atopic and contact allergy. , 2001, Current opinion in immunology.

[91]  D. Scott,et al.  Death the Fas way: regulation and pathophysiology of CD95 and its ligand. , 2000, Pharmacology & therapeutics.

[92]  M. Britschgi,et al.  T-cell involvement in drug-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. , 2001, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[93]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Antigenicity and immunogenicity of sulphamethoxazole: demonstration of metabolism‐dependent haptenation and T‐cell proliferation in vivo , 2001, British journal of pharmacology.

[94]  T. Bauer,et al.  Penicilloyl peptides are recognized as T cell antigenic determinants in penicillin allergy , 1997, European journal of immunology.

[95]  M. Blanca,et al.  Subjects with allergic reactions to drugs show in vivo polarized patterns of cytokine expression depending on the chronology of the clinical reaction. , 2000, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[96]  A. Bircher,et al.  Severe hypersensitivity syndrome to lamotrigine confirmed by lymphocyte stimulation in vitro , 2000, Allergy.

[97]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Hypersensitivity reactions to carbamazepine: characterization of the specificity, phenotype, and cytokine profile of drug-specific T cell clones. , 2003, Molecular pharmacology.

[98]  B. Bonnekoh,et al.  Up-regulated perforin expression of CD8+ blood lymphocytes in generalized non-anaphylactic drug eruptions and exacerbated psoriasis. , 2000, European journal of dermatology : EJD.

[99]  P. Woster,et al.  A role for bioactivation and covalent binding within epidermal keratinocytes in sulfonamide-induced cutaneous drug reactions. , 2000, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[100]  G. Danan,et al.  Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. Analysis of 63 cases. , 1991, Archives of dermatology.

[101]  W. Pichler,et al.  Immunohistology of drug-induced exanthema: clues to pathogenesis. , 2001, Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology.

[102]  M. Britschgi,et al.  Cellular and Molecular Pathophysiology of Cutaneous Drug Reactions , 2002, American journal of clinical dermatology.

[103]  K. Alanko,et al.  Patch testing in cutaneous reactions caused by carbamazepine , 1993, Contact dermatitis.

[104]  C. Brander,et al.  Activation of drug-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in individuals allergic to sulfonamides, phenytoin, and carbamazepine. , 1995, Journal of immunology.

[105]  M. Britschgi,et al.  Influence of reduced glutathione on the proliferative response of sulfamethoxazole‐specific and sulfamethoxazole‐metabolite‐specific human CD4+ T‐cells , 2001, British journal of pharmacology.