Cited by 138Drug-Induced Adverse ReactionsContact Dermatitis and AllergiesT-cell and B-cell Immunology

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Characterization of lidocaine-specific T cells

Abstract

To investigate the cellular immune response to the drug lidocaine, we generated T cell lines and clones from the peripheral blood of four patients with proven allergy to lidocaine. The patients had contact dermatitis after topical application of lidocaine, and local swelling or generalized erythema exudativum multiforme after submucosal/subcutaneous injection of lidocaine. Two of three lidocaine-specific T cell lines were oligoclonal and one even became monoclonal, while the simultaneously analyzed immune response to tetanus toxoid was polyclonal. The lidocaine-specific T cell lines cross-reacted to mepivacaine, but not to other local anesthetics (bupivacaine, procaine, oxybuprocaine, and tetracaine). The majority of reactive T cells belonged to the CD4 cell lineage and were MHC class II restricted, but cloning also revealed some MHC class I-restricted CD8+ clones. A total of 2 of 56 lidocaine-specific T cell clones were CD4-CD8- and expressed TCR-gammadelta. The majority of 13 analyzed CD4 clones produced a rather polarized cytokine pattern, with a dominance of Th2-like cytokines showing a high IL-5 production. In addition, three CD4+ and all CD8+ (n = 7) clones secreted high IFN-gamma and low levels of IL-5/IL-4 (Th1-like). The data illustrate that a drug that sensitizes via the skin elicits a heterogeneous T cell response. The high IL-5 production and the participation of specific CD4+CD8+ and even gammadelta+ T cells appear to be distinguishing features of this hapten-specific immune response.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4049/jimmunol.158.3.1139

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Zanni, M. P., Mauri-Hellweg, D., Brander, C., Wendland, T., Schnyder, B., Frei, E., von Greyerz, S., Bircher, A., & Pichler, W. J.
Affiliations
University Hospital of Bern (CH)
Venue
The Journal of Immunology
Published
1997-02-01
Volume
158
Issue
3
Pages
1139-1148
ISSN
  • 0022-1767 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-6606
OpenAlex
W1516728281
Cited by
138
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
9.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › T-cell and B-cell Immunology
Keywords
drug hypersensitivity, T cell clones, contact dermatitis, erythema multiforme, local anesthetics, CD4+ T cells, CD8+ T cells, γδ T cells, MHC class II restriction, MHC class I restriction, IL-5, interferon-gamma, T cell clonality
MeSH terms
Adult, Cells, Cultured, Clone Cells, Cross Reactions, Dermatitis, Contact, HLA Antigens, Humans, Interferon-gamma, Lidocaine, Lymphocyte Activation, Male, Mepivacaine, CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes, Interleukin-4, Interleukin-5, T-Lymphocyte Subsets, Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell, gamma-delta, Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell, alpha-beta, CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes

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