Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Case Series
Full Version
Single Dose of Etanercept Injection: A Game Changer in Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: A Case Series
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Lavanya Kavimani,
Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy (DVL), Rajiv Gandhi Hospital, Parktown, Chennai-03, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: lavanyakavimani94@gmail.com
Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) is a rare hypersensitivity reaction to drugs, characterised by widespread erythema, full-thickness epidermal necrosis with mucosal involvement, and extensive apoptosis. It is a dermatological emergency and can be lethal if not promptly treated. The use of steroids in managing TEN is controversial since no gold standard therapy exists. However, a single dose of subcutaneous injection of Etanercept (a Tumour Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-α) inhibitor) at a dosage of 50 mg has shown promise in preventing mortality and reducing hospital stay. The authors present a case series of six TEN patients, out of which three received a single dose of Etanercept injection. All patients who received Etanercept showed a positive response, achieving complete re-epithelialisation with a median healing time of nine days. In conclusion, injection of Etanercept, a TNF-α inhibitor, effectively inhibits Fas-Fas ligand activation, thus preventing apoptosis and extensive necrosis.
Adverse drug reaction, Apoptosis, Repithelialisation, Tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors
Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) is a rare hypersensitivity reaction to drugs, considered a dermatological emergency. It is clinically characterised by widespread erythema, full-thickness epidermal necrosis with mucosal involvement, and extensive apoptosis. The pathogenesis of TEN remains unclear. However, several observations support a role for T-cell mediated immune responses in its development: faster and more severe recurrence of TEN upon re-exposure to the same offending drug, presence of drug-specific T-cells in the skin of TEN patients, and increased risk of developing TEN in individuals with specific Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) haplotypes when exposed to certain drugs (1),(2). Etanercept, a TNF-α inhibitor, has a shorter half-life compared to infliximab and adalimumab. In this case series, the authors describe six TEN patients, of whom three received a single dose of Etanercept injection.
Case 1
A 27-year-old female with no co-morbidities presented at the Department of Dermatology with a 2-day history of fever and diffuse painful erythematous rashes all over her body. Thirteen days prior to the symptoms, the patient had taken Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) over the counter for joint pain. At the time of presentation, the patient was afebrile but tachycardic, with a pulse rate of 120/min and a blood pressure of 110/70 mm Hg. Physical examination revealed multiple areas of tender, poorly demarcated erythematous to dusky macules, blisters, and extensive skin detachment involving 70% of the Body Surface Area (Table/Fig 1). The oral cavity showed painful erosions and crusting (Table/Fig 1). The Pseudo Nikolsky sign was positive. A Tzanck smear was performed, which showed necrotic basal cells. Laboratory studies were within normal limits. As TEN is a clinical diagnosis, the SCORTEN value was calculated and found to be three. The patient was started on intramuscular injection of Dexamethasone 2 cc and continued on a maintenance dose of oral steroids, gradually tapering by 5 mg every week. On the second day of admission, the patient developed steroid-induced hyperglycaemia. After adequate titration with insulin and obtaining consent, a single subcutaneous dose of injection Etanercept 50 mg was administered. The patient responded well to the treatment, achieving complete re-epithelialisation on day 8 (Table/Fig 2). There were no major complications or side effects post-injection. The patient is currently under follow-up.
Case 2
A 45-year-old female, a known case of systemic hypertension, presented with multiple hypopigmented patches, and after appropriate investigations (positive Slit skin smear with confirmatory histopathological findings), she was diagnosed with Hansen’s disease. She was initiated on Multi Bacillary Multi Drug Therapy (MB-MDT). On the second day of treatment with MB-MDT, the patient developed a painful rash that started on her upper back and spread to cover her entire trunk. Dermatological examination revealed tenderness, an erythematous to dusky macular eruption with multiple erosions and skin peeling, exhibiting a bizarre shape with a positive pseudo -Nikolsky sign on the upper back (Table/Fig 3). The detachment affected 40% of the Body Surface Area (BSA). Laboratory investigations were within normal limits, except for a white cell count of 21,000/cm3 and elevated Liver Function Test (LFT) levels. The diagnosis of Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) was made, with a SCORTEN value of three. On the third day of admission, the patient received a single subcutaneous dose of injection Etanercept 50 mg, and she responded well to the treatment. She is currently under regular follow-up.
Case 3
A 30-year-old female, known to have epilepsy, switched her medication from levetiracetam to phenytoin. She subsequently developed erythema, a rash, and skin peeling affecting 90% of the Body Surface Area (BSA) (Table/Fig 4). Laboratory investigations revealed elevated levels of C-Reactive Protein (CRP) (110), LDH (1056), and liver enzymes (SGOT 1067, SGPT 789). The SCORTEN value was 2. On the third day of admission, the patient received a single subcutaneous dose of injection Etanercept 50 mg. After seven days, the patient recovered, and on follow-up (Table/Fig 5).
Case 4
A 68-year-old male was brought to the casualty department in an unresponsive state, exhibiting severe peeling of the skin involving the entire body with mucosal involvement. The patient had fever two days prior and received an injection of ceftriaxone at a nearby hospital. Eight hours after receiving the injection, the patient developed erythema and skin peeling, starting on the face and progressing to involve more than 70% of the Body Surface Area (BSA). The diagnosis was severe cutaneous adverse drug reaction to ceftriaxone (Table/Fig 6). The SCORTEN value was 3. The patient was initiated on intramuscular injection of Dexamethasone 8 mg. Unfortunately, the patient went into cardiac arrest due to sepsis before receiving injection Etanercept.
Case 5
An 11-year-old female child developed Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) with involvement of more than 90% of the Body Surface Area (BSA) on the third day of starting Phenytoin, which was given for febrile seizures (Table/Fig 7). The SCORTEN value was 3. The patient was treated with a single injection of Dexamethasone 8 mg as the only available treatment option. Unfortunately, Injection Etanercept could not be given due to its non-availability. On the twelfth day, the child succumbed to cardiac arrest.
Case 6
A seven-year-old female child developed Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS)/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) in response to Cefixime/Gentamicin, which were administered for fever and abdominal pain at a local hospital. Four hours after receiving the injection, the child developed erythema and skin peeling, involving 100% of the Body Surface Area (BSA) (Table/Fig 8). The SCORTEN value was four. The patient was treated with intramuscular injection of Dexamethasone 8 mg, along with intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG) calculated at 2 g/kg. Unfortunately, despite the treatment, the child could not be revived.
In summary, injection Etanercept was found to be a life-saving drug, reducing the time for re-epithelialisation to less than a week and resulting in a shorter hospital stay (Table/Fig 9),(Table/Fig 10),(Table/Fig 11).
In this case series of six patients with Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN), three patients were treated with a single dose of injection Etanercept 50 mg. These patients showed healing and faster re-epithelialisation without severe side effects (Table/Fig 12),(Table/Fig 13). Previous findings reporting increased levels of TNF-alpha in skin biopsy specimens (1) or in blister fluid and serum (2) of TEN patients have supported the use of biologic therapy with anti-TNF-alpha monoclonal antibodies (infliximab) or soluble fusion proteins binding to human TNF-alpha (etanercept). The present case series further confirms the reported effectiveness of anti-TNF-alpha drugs (1),(3),(4).
It is important to note that these case reports do not constitute randomised controlled studies, and the overall number of patients is still small. Nonetheless, the outcomes are more favourable compared to “standard” approaches. The pathogenesis of TEN is still not fully understood. However, observations such as faster and more severe the increased risk of developing TEN in patients with certain HLA haplotypes when exposed to certain drugs indicate a role for T-cell mediated immune responses in its pathogenesis (5),(6).
The immune cell infiltration, including cytotoxic T-cells, found in the skin of TEN patients seems insufficient to induce massive keratinocyte apoptosis, suggesting that some cytotoxic proteins and/or cytokines may amplify the process. Upregulation of FasL expression on the surface of keratinocytes from TEN patients has been shown to induce keratinocyte apoptosis through engagement with constitutively expressed Fas (6),(7). According to the proposed mechanism, an inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase (iNOS)/nitric oxide/FasL pathway may link immune activation and widespread keratinocyte apoptosis in TEN. Activated T-cells secrete TNF-alpha recurrence of TEN upon re-exposure to the same offending drug, the presence of drug-specific T-cells in the skin of TEN patients, and and interferon-gamma, which can induce iNOS expression and nitric oxide production by keratinocytes, leading to FasL upregulation and Fas-mediated keratinocyte apoptosis. Etanercept therapy acts by blocking this inflammatory pathway through TNF-alpha inhibition.
It is worth noting that in addition to TNF-alpha, etanercept also blocks lymphotoxin alpha (LFT-alpha), which has been reported to play a role in the pathogenesis of graft-versus-host disease, a condition that shares clinical, histologic, and pathogenetic similarities with TEN. This suggests that TNF-alpha could play a role in TEN pathogenesis, and its blockage, along with that of LFT-alpha, may contribute to the robust and rapid therapeutic effect of etanercept observed in the patients of this study. Paradisi A et al., published a case series of 10 cases of TEN treated with a single dose of etanercept, reporting that all patients responded to treatment with complete re-epithelialisation achieved without side effects, with a median time to heal of 8.5 days (8). Wang CW et al., concluded that TNF-alpha inhibitors are effective for the treatment of Cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions (SCARs) (9).
As TNF-alpha has been demonstrated within the blister fluid, serum, and on the keratinocyte cell surface, and TNF-alpha upregulates iNOS in keratinocytes, consequently leading to FasL-mediated cell death through the perforin-granzyme B pathway as the final terminal event, the authors found that the duration of hospital stay was reduced, and steroid-related complications were eliminated with the use of injection Etanercept. Morbidity and mortality related to adverse drug reactions were greatly reduced, and the treatment outcomes were impressive. Etanercept is a wonderful tool in the dermatologist’s armamentarium to minimise deaths and promote faster re-epithelialisation with minimal side-effects.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/62912.18615
Date of Submission: Jan 15, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Feb 25, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Jul 07, 2023
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2023
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 17, 2023
• Manual Googling: Mar 17, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Jul 05, 2023 (10%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
EMENDATIONS: 8
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com