Different strategies for using topical corticosteroids in people with eczema

Applications of topical immunomodulators enhance clinical signs of vernal keratoconjunctivitis (VKC) and atopic keratoconjunctivitis (AKC): a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis aimed to review the safety and efficacy of topical cyclosporine A (CsA) and topical tacrolimus in allergic eye disease.

METHODS

A systematic search identified thirteen studies and a total of 445 patients for inclusion, making this the largest meta-analysis published on the subject. The current review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized control trials were included in the meta-analysis. Eleven studies used CsA as the treatment, and two used Tacrolimus. In total, 445 participants were included, of whom 76.6% were male. The mean age of participants across the included studies was 14 years. All studies reported clinical signs as evaluated by an examining clinician. Signs were usually assessed by anatomical region, with the most common regions being the conjunctiva and the cornea, and the most common signs assessed were hyperemia and papillae. Three studies accounted for more than 50% of the meta-analysis's weight. Effect size (d) ranged from - 2.37 to - 0.03, negative values favoring immunomodulators. Fixed Effect Meta-Analysis returned an SMD of - 0.81 (95% CI [- 0.98, - 0.65]). However, there was significant heterogeneity (I2 = 61%, Qw = 30.76) in the outcome measure (P = 0.0021); therefore, a random-effect meta-analysis was also completed in which the pooled SMD was - 0.98 (95% CI [- 1.26, - 0.69], τ2 = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

This study affirms the current scientific community's stance that immunomodulators effectively treat clinical signs, including blepharitis, conjunctival hyperemia, edema, papillae, and corneal damage in severe ocular allergic disease.

Strategies for using topical corticosteroids in children and adults with eczema

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common skin condition. Although topical corticosteroids have been a first-line treatment for eczema for decades, there are uncertainties over their optimal use.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the effectiveness and safety of different ways of using topical corticosteroids for treating eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases to January 2021 (Cochrane Skin Specialised Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; GREAT) and five clinical trials registers. We checked bibliographies from included trials to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in adults and children with eczema that compared at least two strategies of topical corticosteroid use. We excluded placebo comparisons, other than for trials that evaluated proactive versus reactive treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods, with GRADE certainty of evidence for key findings. Primary outcomes were changes in clinician-reported signs and relevant local adverse events. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported symptoms and relevant systemic adverse events. For local adverse events, we prioritised abnormal skin thinning as a key area of concern for healthcare professionals and patients.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 104 trials (8443 participants). Most trials were conducted in high-income countries (81/104), most likely in outpatient or other hospital settings. We judged only one trial to be low risk of bias across all domains. Fifty-five trials had high risk of bias in at least one domain, mostly due to lack of blinding or missing outcome data. Stronger-potency versus weaker-potency topical corticosteroids Sixty-three trials compared different potencies of topical corticosteroids: 12 moderate versus mild, 22 potent versus mild, 25 potent versus moderate, and 6 very potent versus potent. Trials were usually in children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, lasting one to five weeks. The most reported outcome was Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of clinician-reported signs of eczema. We pooled four trials that compared moderate- versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (420 participants). Moderate-potency topical corticosteroids probably result in more participants achieving treatment success, defined as cleared or marked improvement on IGA (52% versus 34%; odds ratio (OR) 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.04; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled nine trials that compared potent versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (392 participants). Potent topical corticosteroids probably result in a large increase in number achieving treatment success (70% versus 39%; OR 3.71, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.72; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled 15 trials that compared potent versus moderate-potency topical corticosteroids (1053 participants). There was insufficient evidence of a benefit of potent topical corticosteroids compared to moderate topical corticosteroids (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.89; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled three trials that compared very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids (216 participants). The evidence is uncertain with a wide confidence interval (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence). Twice daily or more versus once daily application We pooled 15 of 25 trials in this comparison (1821 participants, all reported IGA). The trials usually assessed adults and children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, using potent topical corticosteroids, lasting two to six weeks. Applying potent topical corticosteroids only once a day probably does not decrease the number achieving treatment success compared to twice daily application (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.38; 15 trials, 1821 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events Within the trials that tested 'treating eczema flare-up' strategies, we identified only 26 cases of abnormal skin thinning from 2266 participants (1% across 22 trials). Most cases were from the use of higher-potency topical corticosteroids (16 with very potent, 6 with potent, 2 with moderate and 2 with mild). We assessed this evidence as low certainty, except for very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids, which was very low-certainty evidence.  Longer versus shorter-term duration of application for induction of remission No trials were identified. Twice weekly application (weekend, or 'proactive therapy') to prevent relapse (flare-ups) versus no topical corticosteroids/reactive application Nine trials assessed this comparison, generally lasting 16 to 20 weeks. We pooled seven trials that compared weekend (proactive) topical corticosteroids therapy versus no topical corticosteroids (1179 participants, children and adults with a range of eczema severities, though mainly moderate or severe). Weekend (proactive) therapy probably results in a large decrease in likelihood of a relapse from 58% to 25% (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57; 7 trials, 1149 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events We did not identify any cases of abnormal skin thinning in seven trials that assessed skin thinning (1050 participants) at the end of treatment. We assessed this evidence as low certainty. Other comparisons  Other comparisons included newer versus older preparations of topical corticosteroids (15 trials), cream versus ointment (7 trials), topical corticosteroids with wet wrap versus no wet wrap (6 trials), number of days per week applied (4 trials), different concentrations of the same topical corticosteroids (2 trials), time of day applied (2 trials), topical corticosteroids alternating with topical calcineurin inhibitors versus topical corticosteroids alone (1 trial), application to wet versus dry skin (1 trial) and application before versus after emollient (1 trial). No trials compared branded versus generic topical corticosteroids and time between application of emollient and topical corticosteroids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Potent and moderate topical corticosteroids are probably more effective than mild topical corticosteroids, primarily in moderate or severe eczema; however, there is uncertain evidence to support any advantage of very potent over potent topical corticosteroids. Effectiveness is similar between once daily and twice daily (or more) frequent use of potent topical corticosteroids to treat eczema flare-ups, and topical corticosteroids weekend (proactive) therapy is probably better than no topical corticosteroids/reactive use to prevent eczema relapse (flare-ups). Adverse events were not well reported and came largely from low- or very low-certainty, short-term trials. In trials that reported abnormal skin thinning, frequency was low overall and increased with increasing potency. We found no trials on the optimum duration of treatment of a flare, branded versus generic topical corticosteroids, and time to leave between application of topical corticosteroids and emollient. There is a need for longer-term trials, in people with mild eczema.

"His first word was 'cream'." The burden of treatment in pediatric atopic dermatitis-A mixed methods study

The burden of treatment (BOT) is the workload of health care experienced by patients with chronic conditions and consequences on well-being. This study aimed to assess the BOT of atopic dermatitis (AD) on children and caregivers using mixed methods. The quantitative component of this mixed methods study involved the Treatment Burden Questionnaire. The qualitative component involved interviews with parents of children with moderate-severe AD. The questionnaire was completed by 168 parents; 32.1% had mild AD, 39.9% had moderate AD, and 28% had severe AD. The average burden score was 3.5 (out of 10). Average burden scores were low in mild AD (1.0 out of 10) and were proportionally higher in moderate (3.9 out of 10) and severe (5.8 out of 10) AD (p < 0.001). Increased frequency of therapy had increased perceived burden. In moderate-severe AD, oral therapy was rated as less burdensome than topical therapies. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 parents of children with moderate-severe AD. Thematic analysis grouped experiences into health care burden, treatment burden, and financial burden. Insights from health care burden analysis included "mixed messages," "treatment futility," and "expectant resolution." Insights from treatment burden included treatment routine, schooling impact, and "topical-sparing" with systemic treatment. Factors of financial burden included topical treatments, clothing, and health care visits. Moderate-severe AD is associated with high BOT, particularly related to topical therapies, which may be reduced by systemic treatment. All physicians treating children with AD should avoid potentially damaging communication regarding mixed messages, treatment futility, and expectant resolution.

From Emollients to Biologicals: Targeting Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common chronic inflammatory skin disease and significantly impacts patients' lives, particularly in its severe forms. AD clinical presentation varies over the course of the disease, throughout different age groups, and across ethnicities. AD is characterized by a spectrum of clinical phenotypes as well as endotypes. Starting from the current description of AD pathogenesis, this review explores the rationale of approved AD therapies from emollients to biologicals and introduces novel promising drugs.

Safety of topical corticosteroids in atopic eczema: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVE

An umbrella review summarising all safety data from systematic reviews of topical corticosteroids (TCS) in adults and children with atopic eczema.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology map of eczema systematic reviews were searched until 7 November 2018 and Epistemonikos until 2 March 2021. Reviews were included if they assessed the safety of TCS in atopic eczema and searched >1 database using a reproducible search strategy. Review quality was assessed using version 2 of 'A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR 2 tool).

RESULTS

38 systematic reviews included, 34 low/critically low quality. Treatment and follow-up were usually short (2-4 weeks).

KEY FINDINGS

TCS versus emollient/vehicle: No meta-analyses identified for skin-thinning. Two 2-week randomised controlled trials (RCTs) found no significant increased risk with very potent TCS (0/196 TCS vs 0/33 vehicle in children and 6/109 TCS vs 2/50 vehicle, age unknown). Biochemical adrenal suppression (cortisol) was 3.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 5.8%) in a meta-analysis of 11 uncontrolled observational studies (any potency TCS, 522 children). Effects reversed when treatment ceased.TCS versus topical calcineurin inhibitors: Meta-analysis showed higher relative risk of skin thinning with TCS (4.86, 95% CI 1.06 to 22.28, n=4128, four RCTs, including one 5-year RCT). Eight cases in 2068 participants, 7 using potent TCS. No evidence of growth suppression.Once daily versus more frequent TCS: No meta-analyses identified. No skin-thinning in one RCT (3 weeks potent TCS, n=94) or biochemical adrenal suppression in two RCTs (up to 2 weeks very potent/moderate TCS, n=129).TCS twice/week to prevent flares ('weekend therapy') versus vehicle: No meta-analyses identified. No evidence of skin thinning in five RCTs. One RCT found biochemical adrenal suppression (2/44 children, potent TCS).

CONCLUSIONS

W e found no evidence of harm when TCS were used intermittently 'as required' to treat flares or 'weekend therapy' to prevent flares. However, long-term safety data were limited.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018079409.