Severe skin reactions are scary. Conditions like Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis can happen when the body attacks its own skin. This review gathers information about many different medicines to see which ones might trigger these problems. It covers antibiotics, antiepileptics, allopurinol, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. It also looks at proton pump inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, novel antiandrogens, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and antivirals. The goal is to help healthcare providers make safer choices for their patients. Understanding these links is vital for preventing harm before it starts. Because this is a narrative review, it summarizes existing reports rather than testing new drugs in a clinical trial. The authors carefully note that the evidence comes from various sources and does not always prove a direct cause and effect. Readers should know that not every person taking these medicines will have a reaction. However, being aware of the potential risks allows for better monitoring and earlier intervention if symptoms appear. This knowledge empowers patients to ask questions and doctors to prescribe with confidence.
Narrative review discusses Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis risks from various medicationsA review explains which drugs may cause severe skin reactions like Stevens-Johnson Syndrome
AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work
This narrative review addresses the association between Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis and a broad range of medications. The scope includes antibiotics, antiepileptics, allopurinol, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, proton pump inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, novel antiandrogens, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, and antivirals. The authors synthesize existing knowledge regarding these potential adverse reactions without providing specific incidence rates or statistical analyses. The review does not report sample sizes, follow-up durations, or detailed safety data for the listed drug classes. Consequently, the conclusions remain qualitative and descriptive rather than quantitative. The authors note that specific adverse event rates and tolerability data were not reported in the source material. This lack of numerical detail limits the ability to assess the magnitude of risk for individual drugs. Clinicians should interpret these associations with caution given the absence of rigorous statistical evidence in this narrative format. The review serves to highlight potential safety concerns rather than to establish definitive causal links or provide precise risk estimates for clinical decision-making.