@article{PanayotovaDimitrovaFeoktistovaPloesseretal.2013,
  author    = {Panayotova-Dimitrova, Diana and Feoktistova, Maria and Ploesser, Michaela and Kellert, Beate and Hupe, Mike and Horn, Sebastian and Makarov, Roman and Jensen, Federico and Porubsky, Stefan and Schmieder, Astrid and Zenclussen, Ana Claudia and Marx, Alexander and Kerstan, Andreas and Geserick, Peter and He, You-Wen and Leverkus, Martin},
  title     = {cFLIP Regulates Skin Homeostasis and Protects against TNF-Induced Keratinocyte Apoptosis},
  series = {Cell Reports},
  volume    = {5},
  journal   = {Cell Reports},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.celrep.2013.09.035},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122155},
  pages     = {397-408},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {FADD, caspase-8, and cFLIP regulate the outcome of cell death signaling. Mice that constitutively lack these molecules die at an early embryonic age, whereas tissue-specific constitutive deletion of FADD or caspase-8 results in inflammatory skin disease caused by increased necroptosis. The function of cFLIP in the skin in vivo is unknown. In contrast to tissue-specific caspase-8 knockout, we show that mice constitutively lacking cFLIP in the epidermis die around embryonic days 10 and 11. When cFLIP expression was abrogated in adult skin of cFLIP(fl/fl)-K14CreER(tam) mice, severe inflammation of the skin with concomitant caspase activation and apoptotic, but not necroptotic, cell death developed. Apoptosis was dependent of autocrine tumor necrosis factor production triggered by loss of cFLIP. In addition, epidermal cFLIP protein was lost in patients with severe drug reactions associated with epidermal apoptosis. Our data demonstrate the importance of cFLIP for the integrity of the epidermis and for silencing of spontaneous skin inflammation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{StoevesandtHofmannHainetal.2013,
  author    = {Stoevesandt, Johanna and Hofmann, Bernd and Hain, Johannes and Kerstan, Andreas and Trautmann, Axel},
  title     = {Single venom-based immunotherapy effectively protects patients with double positive tests to honey bee and Vespula venom},
  series = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  journal   = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  doi       = {10.1186/1710-1492-9-33},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-96808},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Background Referring to individuals with reactivity to honey bee and Vespula venom in diagnostic tests, the umbrella terms "double sensitization" or "double positivity" cover patients with true clinical double allergy and those allergic to a single venom with asymptomatic sensitization to the other. There is no international consensus on whether immunotherapy regimens should generally include both venoms in double sensitized patients. Objective We investigated the long-term outcome of single venom-based immunotherapy with regard to potential risk factors for treatment failure and specifically compared the risk of relapse in mono sensitized and double sensitized patients. Methods Re-sting data were obtained from 635 patients who had completed at least 3 years of immunotherapy between 1988 and 2008. The adequate venom for immunotherapy was selected using an algorithm based on clinical details and the results of diagnostic tests. Results Of 635 patients, 351 (55.3\%) were double sensitized to both venoms. The overall re-exposure rate to Hymenoptera stings during and after immunotherapy was 62.4\%; the relapse rate was 7.1\% (6.0\% in mono sensitized, 7.8\% in double sensitized patients). Recurring anaphylaxis was statistically less severe than the index sting reaction (P = 0.004). Double sensitization was not significantly related to relapsing anaphylaxis (P = 0.56), but there was a tendency towards an increased risk of relapse in a subgroup of patients with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests (P = 0.15). Conclusions Single venom-based immunotherapy over 3 to 5 years effectively and long-lastingly protects the vast majority of both mono sensitized and double sensitized Hymenoptera venom allergic patients. Double venom immunotherapy is indicated in clinically double allergic patients reporting systemic reactions to stings of both Hymenoptera and in those with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests who have not reliably identified the culprit stinging insect.},
  language  = {en}
}