Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 208

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A systematic review of drug-induced subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus: Systematic review of drug-induced SCLE

Lowe, G., Henderson, C.L., Grau, R.H., Hansen, C.B., Sontheimer, R.D.·2011·British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract

The initial appearance of subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE) skin lesions in conjunction with Ro/SS-A autoantibodies occurring as an adverse reaction to hydrochlorothiazide [i.e. drug-induced SCLE (DI-SCLE)] was first reported in 1985. Over the past decade an increasing number of drugs in different classes has been implicated as triggers for DI-SCLE. The management of DI-SCLE can be especially challenging in patients taking multiple medications capable of triggering DI-SCLE. Our objectives were to review the published English language literature on DI-SCLE and use the resulting summary data pool to address questions surrounding drug-induced SCLE and to develop guidelines that might be of value to clinicians in the diagnosis and management of DI-SCLE. A systematic review of the Medline/PubMed-cited literature on DI-SCLE up to August 2009 was performed. Our data collection and analysis strategies were prospectively designed to answer a series of questions related to the clinical, prognostic and pathogenetic significance of DI-SCLE. One hundred and seventeen cases of DI-SCLE were identified and reviewed. White women made up the large majority of cases, and the mean overall age was 58·0 years. Triggering drugs fell into a number of different classes, highlighted by antihypertensives and antifungals. Time intervals ('incubation period') between drug exposure and appearance of DI-SCLE varied greatly and were drug class dependent. Most cases of DI-SCLE spontaneously resolved within weeks of drug withdrawal. Ro/SS-A autoantibodies were present in 80% of the cases in which such data were reported and most remained positive after resolution of SCLE skin disease activity. No significant differences in the clinical, histopathological or immunopathological features between DI-SCLE and idiopathic SCLE were detected. There is now adequate published experience to suggest that DI-SCLE does not differ clinically, histopathologically or immunologically from idiopathic SCLE. It should be recognized as a distinct clinical constellation differing clinically and immunologically from the classical form of drug-induced systemic lupus erythematosus.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.10110.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Lowe, G., Henderson, C. L., Grau, R. H., Hansen, C. B., & Sontheimer, R. D.
Venue
British Journal of Dermatology
Published
2011-02
Volume
164
Issue
3
Pages
no-no
ISSN
0007-0963 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2108457947
Cited by
208
References
0
FWCI
1.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review of drug-induced subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus: Systematic review of drug-induced SCLE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.10110.x
The paper
Lowe, G., Henderson, C. L., Grau, R. H., Hansen, C. B., & Sontheimer, R. D. (2011). A systematic review of drug-induced subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus: Systematic review of drug-induced SCLE. British Journal of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.10110.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.