Background Cutaneous reactions after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are poorly characterized. Objective To describe and classify cutaneous reactions after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Methods A nationwide Spanish cross-sectional study was conducted. We included patients with cutaneous reactions within 21 days of any dose of the approved vaccines at the time of the study. After a face-to-face visit with a dermatologist, information on cutaneous reactions was collected via an online professional

Background Since May 2022, a new outbreak of monkeypox has been reported in several countries, including Spain. The clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the cases in this outbreak may differ from those in earlier reports. Objectives To document the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of cases of monkeypox in the current outbreak. Methods We conducted a prospective cross‐sectional study in multiple medical facilities in Spain to describe the cases of monkeypox in the 2022 outbreak. Results In total, 185 patients were included. Most cases started with primarily localized homogeneous papules, not pustules, in the probable area of inoculation, which could be cutaneous or mucous, including single lesions. Generalized small pustules appeared later in some of them. Heterogeneous lesions occurred during this generalized phase. All patients had systemic symptoms. Less common lesions included mucosal ulcers (including pharyngeal ulcers and proctitis) and monkeypox whitlows. Four patients were hospitalized, none died. Smallpox vaccination and well‐controlled HIV disease were not associated with markers of severity. Contact during sex is the most likely mechanism of transmission. In this outbreak, cases have been described in men who have sex with men and are strongly associated with high‐risk sexual behaviours. Seventy‐six per cent of the patients had other sexually transmitted diseases upon screening. Conclusions The clinical findings in this outbreak differ from previous findings and highly suggest contact transmission and initiation at the entry site. The characterization of the epidemiology of this outbreak has implications for control. What is already known about this topic? Monkeypox eruption is described as consisting of pustules. The roles of HIV and previous smallpox vaccination in the prognosis are unknown. The transmission route was initially described as respiratory droplets and was later suggested to be via sexual contact. What does this study add? Initial lesions at the probable inoculation area were homogeneous and papular (pseudopustules). Generalized small pustules appeared later in some of them. Heterogeneous lesions occurred during this generalized phase. All patients had systemic symptoms. Less common signs included mucosal ulcers (including pharyngeal ulcers and proctitis) and monkeypox whitlows. Well‐controlled HIV and previous smallpox vaccination were not associated with severity. No patient died. The data support the hypothesis of transmission via contact during sex. Although this might change, the outbreak is currently limited mostly to men who have sex with men, with high‐risk factors for sexually transmitted diseases.

A B S T R A C T PurposePrimary care physicians (PCPs) constitute an appropriate target for new interventions and educational campaigns designed to increase skin cancer screening and prevention. The aim of this randomized study was to determine whether the adjunct of dermoscopy to the standard clinical examination improves the accuracy of PCPs to triage lesions suggestive of skin cancer. Patients and MethodsPCPs in Barcelona, Spain, and Naples, Italy, were given a 1-day training course in skin cancer detection and dermoscopic evaluation, and were randomly assigned to the dermoscopy evaluation arm or naked-eye evaluation arm. During a 16-month period, 73 physicians evaluated 2,522 patients with skin lesions who attended their clinics and scored individual lesions as benign or suggestive of skin cancer. All patients were re-evaluated by expert dermatologists at clinics for pigmented lesions. Referral accuracy of both PCP groups was calculated by their scores, which were compared to those tabulated for dermatologists. ResultsReferral sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 54.1%, 71.3%, 11.3%, and 95.8%, respectively, in the naked-eye arm, and 79.2%, 71.8%, 16.1%, and 98.1%, respectively, in the dermoscopy arm. Significant differences were found in terms of sensitivity and negative predictive value (P ϭ .002 and P ϭ .004, respectively). Histopathologic examination of equivocal lesions revealed 23 malignant skin tumors missed by PCPs performing naked-eye observation and only six by PCPs using dermoscopy (P ϭ .002). ConclusionThe use of dermoscopy improves the ability of PCPs to triage lesions suggestive of skin cancer without increasing the number of unnecessary expert consultations. J Clin Oncol 24:1877-1882. © 2006 by American Society of Clinical Oncology INTRODUCTIONSkin cancer is the most common malignancy in whites and accounts for about one third of all cancers diagnosed per year.1 Melanoma is often lethal but can usually be cured if diagnosed early. Nonmelanoma skin cancer (including basal cell carcinoma [BCC] and squamous cell carcinoma [SCC]) is seldom lethal, but if advanced, can cause severe disfigurement. Early detection and treatment, therefore, is the best strategy to reduce mortality and morbidity associated with melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancers, respectively.The clinical diagnosis of skin cancer is based on several morphologic features pertaining to the shape, elevation, surface, and color of the tumor. The simple morphologic features summarized by the asymmetry, border irregularity, color variegation, and diameter Ͼ 5 mm (ABCD) rule are currently widely used for diagnosing skin cancer, particularly melanoma.2 However, ABCD criteria achieve only 65% to 80% sensitivity. 3 The ABCD rule fails to recognize melanomas that are small (Ͻ 6 mm) 4 or that exhibit regular shape and homogeneous color. On the other hand, a variety of benign pigmented skin lesions mimic melanoma clinically, resulting in unnecessary excisions.For diagnosis of skin cancer, dermoscopy has be...

Information regarding the safety of biological drugs prescribed to psoriasis patients on daily and long-term bases is insufficient. We used data from the BIOBADADERM registry (Spanish Registry of Adverse Events for Biological Therapy in Dermatological Diseases) to generate crude rates of infection during therapy with systemic drugs, including biological drugs (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and ustekinumab) and nonbiological drugs (acitretin, cyclosporine, and methotrexate). We also calculated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) (with propensity score adjustment) of infection, serious infections, and recurrent infections of systemic therapies compared with methotrexate, using Poisson regression. Our study included records of 2,153 patients (7,867.5 person-years). The adjusted RR of overall infection was significantly increased in the groups treated with adalimumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-3.7), infliximab (adjusted RR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.1-2.65), cyclosporine (adjusted RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17-2.15), ustekinumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.08-2.25), and etanercept (adjusted RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02-1.76) compared with methotrexate alone. Cyclosporine had a significant risk of serious infection (adjusted RR = 3.12, 95% CI = 1.1-8.8), followed by adalimumab combined with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 3.28, 95% CI = 0.8-13.5). Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate had the highest risk of infection recurrence (adjusted RR = 4.33, 95% CI = 2.27-8.24).

No abstract

No abstract

Correa L-A, et al. Human papillomavirus viral load and HPV type in the clinical outcome of HIV-positive patients treated Interventions for anal canal intraepithelial neoplasia (Review)

Multicentric reticulohistiocytosis is a rare disorder of unknown etiology, characterized by skin and mucosal papulonodular eruptions and destructive polyarthritis. Histopathological study of these lesions shows a nodular infiltrate composed of histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells, with an eosinophilic, granular, ‘ground-glass’ cytoplasm. We report a case of multicentric reticulohistiocytosis with skin lesions mimicking dermatomyositis and we also review previously reported cases describing such a clinical situation. Our case further emphasizes that multicentric reticulohistiocytosis can mimic clinical features of dermatomyositis. A macular or patch-like erythema in a photodistributed fashion, in addition to other clinical manifestations, can be mistaken for dermatomyositis. However, skin biopsies from these areas may early differentiate both conditions with different treatment options and morbidity.