Clinicopathological Differences between Acquired Reactive Perforating Collagenosis and Prurigo Nodularis

M. Kawamura, Madoka Inoue, K. Matsuyama, Y. Mizutani, E. Shu, T. Miyazaki, M. Seishima
{"title":"Clinicopathological Differences between Acquired Reactive Perforating Collagenosis and Prurigo Nodularis","authors":"M. Kawamura, Madoka Inoue, K. Matsuyama, Y. Mizutani, E. Shu, T. Miyazaki, M. Seishima","doi":"10.35248/2155-9554.21.S8.550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Acquired reactive perforating collagenosis (ARPC) is a skin disease characterized by multiple itchy nodules, which is notably similar to the skin eruptions of prurigo nodularis (PN). The aim of this study was to prove the clinicopathological differences between ARPC and PN. Methods: We examined 22 patients with ARPC (6 males and 16 females) and 38 patients with PN (27 males and 11 females), diagnosed clinically and histologically. Transepidermal elimination of collagen which is characteristic histological findings for ARPC was found in all ARPC patients, but not in PN patients even in a serial section. Clinical findings, laboratory data, histological findings, immunohistochemical results, and efficacy of the therapies were compared between the two groups. Results: On evaluation of laboratory data, thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC) levels and peripheral eosinophil counts were lower in ARPC than in PN. Histologically, we observed greater infiltration of neutrophils, histiocytes, and lymphocytes and more extensive capillaries in ARPC than in PN. Upon immunohistochemical analysis, CD163+ macrophages were found to be more abundant in the upper-to-deep dermis of ARPC, and both CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells were significantly increased in the mid-to-deep dermis of ARPC. The efficacies of topical steroid and antihistamines were improved by the addition of emollients in ARPC. Conclusion: This is the first report to show the histological differences in cell infiltration between the lesions of ARPC and PN. It is likely that inflammation mediated by neutrophils and M2 macrophages may be involved in the formation of ARPC lesions, as against PN lesions mediated by epidermal changes such as spongiosis. It is suggested that the addition of emollients can increase the efficacy of treatments for ARPC. However, further studies are necessary to define the precise pathomechanisms of ARPC and the effects of emollients on ARPC.","PeriodicalId":15448,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical & experimental dermatology research","volume":"41 1","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical & experimental dermatology research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35248/2155-9554.21.S8.550","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Acquired reactive perforating collagenosis (ARPC) is a skin disease characterized by multiple itchy nodules, which is notably similar to the skin eruptions of prurigo nodularis (PN). The aim of this study was to prove the clinicopathological differences between ARPC and PN. Methods: We examined 22 patients with ARPC (6 males and 16 females) and 38 patients with PN (27 males and 11 females), diagnosed clinically and histologically. Transepidermal elimination of collagen which is characteristic histological findings for ARPC was found in all ARPC patients, but not in PN patients even in a serial section. Clinical findings, laboratory data, histological findings, immunohistochemical results, and efficacy of the therapies were compared between the two groups. Results: On evaluation of laboratory data, thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC) levels and peripheral eosinophil counts were lower in ARPC than in PN. Histologically, we observed greater infiltration of neutrophils, histiocytes, and lymphocytes and more extensive capillaries in ARPC than in PN. Upon immunohistochemical analysis, CD163+ macrophages were found to be more abundant in the upper-to-deep dermis of ARPC, and both CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells were significantly increased in the mid-to-deep dermis of ARPC. The efficacies of topical steroid and antihistamines were improved by the addition of emollients in ARPC. Conclusion: This is the first report to show the histological differences in cell infiltration between the lesions of ARPC and PN. It is likely that inflammation mediated by neutrophils and M2 macrophages may be involved in the formation of ARPC lesions, as against PN lesions mediated by epidermal changes such as spongiosis. It is suggested that the addition of emollients can increase the efficacy of treatments for ARPC. However, further studies are necessary to define the precise pathomechanisms of ARPC and the effects of emollients on ARPC.
获得性反应性穿孔性胶原病与结节性痒疹的临床病理差异
背景:获得性反应性穿孔性胶原病(ARPC)是一种以多发发痒结节为特征的皮肤病,与结节性痒疹(PN)的皮肤疹明显相似。本研究的目的是证明ARPC和PN之间的临床病理差异。方法:对22例ARPC患者(男6例,女16例)和38例PN患者(男27例,女11例)进行临床和组织学诊断。经皮胶原消除是ARPC的特征性组织学表现,在所有ARPC患者中均发现,但即使在连续切片中也未在PN患者中发现。比较两组患者的临床表现、实验室资料、组织学表现、免疫组化结果及治疗效果。结果:根据实验室数据评估,ARPC患者胸腺和活化调节趋化因子(TARC)水平和外周嗜酸性粒细胞计数低于PN患者。组织学上,我们观察到ARPC比PN有更多的中性粒细胞、组织细胞和淋巴细胞的浸润以及更广泛的毛细血管。免疫组化分析发现,ARPC真皮上至深部CD163+巨噬细胞更为丰富,ARPC真皮中至深部CD4+ T细胞和CD8+ T细胞均显著增加。在ARPC中添加润肤剂可改善局部类固醇和抗组胺药的疗效。结论:本文首次报道了ARPC和PN病变细胞浸润的组织学差异。与海绵状病等表皮变化介导的PN病变不同,中性粒细胞和M2巨噬细胞介导的炎症可能参与了ARPC病变的形成。提示润肤剂的加入可提高ARPC的治疗效果。然而,需要进一步的研究来明确ARPC的确切病理机制以及润肤剂对ARPC的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信