Search

Chronic ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure is the greatest risk factor for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) development, and compromised immunity accelerates this risk. Having previously identified that epidermal Langerhans cells (LC) facilitate the expansion of UV-induced mutant keratinocytes (KC), we sought to more fully elucidate the immune pathways critical to cutaneous carcinogenesis and to identify potential targets of intervention. Herein, we reveal that chronic UV induces and LC enhance a local immune shift toward RORγt+ interleukin (IL)-22/IL-17A-producing cells that occurs in the presence or absence of T cells while identifying a distinct RORγt+ Sca-1+ CD103+ ICOS+ CD2 +/- CCR6+ intracellular CD3+ cutaneous innate lymphoid cell type-3 (ILC3) population (uvILC3) that is associated with UV-induced mutant KC growth. We further show that mutant KC clone size is markedly reduced in the absence of RORγt+ lymphocytes or IL-22, both observed in association with expanding KC clones, and find that topical application of a RORγ/γt inhibitor during chronic UV exposure reduces local expression of IL-22 and IL-17A while markedly limiting mutant p53 KC clonal expansion. We implicate upstream Toll-like receptor signaling in driving this immune response to chronic UV exposure, as MyD88/Trif double-deficient mice also show substantially reduced p53 island number and size. These data elucidate key immune components of chronic UV-induced cutaneous carcinogenesis that might represent targets for skin cancer prevention., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest.

Recognizing the skin manifestations of metabolic and endocrine disorders, many of which may have potentially lethal complications, is important for dermatologists and other clinicians. The skin can be a window into a patient's internal health, and cutaneous manifestations can facilitate early diagnosis and intervention of potentially life-altering systemic disorders with associated morbidity and mortality. This contribution provides an overview of the diverse rashes associated with potentially lethal, acquired metabolic and endocrine disorders of the pituitary, thyroid, parathyroid, pancreas, adrenals, and blood, as well as neuroendocrine and nutritional disease., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Human skin is exposed to visible light (VL; 400-700 nm) and long-wavelength ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) radiation (370-400 nm) after the application of organic broad-spectrum sunscreens. The biologic effects of these wavelengths have been demonstrated; however, a dose-response has not been investigated. Ten subjects with Fitzpatrick skin phototype IV-VI were enrolled. Subjects were irradiated with 2 light sources (80-480 J cm -2 ): one comprising VL with less than 0.5% UVA1 (VL+UVA1) and the other pure VL. Skin responses were evaluated for 2 weeks using clinical and spectroscopic assessments. 4-mm punch biopsies were obtained from nonirradiated skin and sites irradiated with 480 J cm -2 of VL+UVA1 and pure VL 24 h after irradiation. Clinical and spectroscopic assessments demonstrated a robust response at VL+UVA1 sites compared with pure VL. Histology findings demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the marker of inflammation (P < 0.05) and proliferation (P < 0.05) at the irradiated sites compared with nonirradiated control. Threshold doses of VL+UVA1 resulting in biologic responses were calculated. Results indicate that approximately 2 h of sun exposure, which equates to VL+UVA1 dose (~400 J cm -2 ), is capable of inducing inflammation, immediate erythema and delayed tanning. These findings reinforce the need of photoprotection beyond the UV range., (© 2019 American Society for Photobiology.)

It is generally believed that ablative laser therapies result in prolonged healing and greater adverse events when compared with nonablative lasers for skin resurfacing. To evaluate the efficacy of ablative laser use for skin resurfacing and adverse events as a consequence of treatment in comparison to other modalities, a PRISMA‐compliant systematic review (Systematic Review Registration Number: 204016) of twelve electronic databases was conducted for the terms "ablative laser" and "skin resurfacing" from March 2002 until July 2020. Studies included meta‐analyses, randomized control trials, cohort studies, and case reports to facilitate evaluation of the data. All articles were evaluated for bias. The search strategy produced 34 studies. Of 1093 patients included in the studies of interest, adverse events were reported in a total of 106 patients (9.7%). Higher rates of adverse events were described in nonablative therapies (12.2% ± 2.19%, 31 events) when compared with ablative therapy (8.28% ± 2.46%, 81 events). 147 patients (13.4%) reported no side effects, 68 (6.22%) reported expected, transient self‐resolving events, and five (0.046%) presented with hypertrophic scarring. Excluding transient events, ablative lasers had fewer complications overall when compared with nonablative lasers (2.56% ± 2.19% vs 7.48% ± 3.29%). This systematic review suggests ablative laser use for skin resurfacing is a safe and effective modality to treat a range of pathologies from photodamage and acne scars to hidradenitis suppurativa and posttraumatic scarring from basal cell carcinoma excision. Further studies are needed, but these results suggest that ablative lasers are a superior, safe, and effective modality to treat damaged skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The skin can often be used to serve as a proxy for internal health and well-being. In a number of endocrine and exocrine disorders, but particularly those relating to the pancreas, understanding these cutaneous manifestations may help facilitate early diagnosis, confirm an existing medical evaluation, or predict a worsening condition. This paper is an overview for the primary care clinician. Pancreatic disorders considered include diabetes mellitus, cystic fibrosis, pancreatic cancer, islet cell tumor, enlarged pancreas, and congenital malformations--pancreas divisum as well as annular pancreas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This discussion is written for the primary care clinician to help update knowledge of the potential severe dermatological adverse effects to certain vaccines. It is organized first by disease-specific, then component-specific, and finally administration-specific reactions. Vaccines considered include varicella-zoster, tetanus-diphtheria- pertussis, smallpox, human papillomavirus, BCG vaccination, yellow fever, hepatitis B, measles-mumpsrubella, influenza, poliomyelitis, and others. Componentspecific agents include aluminum hydroxide, thimersal, and gelatin-egg protein. It is important for clinicians to be aware of dermatologic side effects to vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]