1
|
Locke A, Hung L, Upton JEM, O'Mahony L, Hoang J, Eiwegger T. An update on recent developments and highlights in food allergy. Allergy 2023; 78:2344-2360. [PMID: 37087637 DOI: 10.1111/all.15749] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2023] [Revised: 04/06/2023] [Accepted: 04/19/2023] [Indexed: 04/24/2023]
Abstract
While both the incidence and general awareness of food allergies is increasing, the variety and clinical availability of therapeutics remain limited. Therefore, investigations into the potential factors contributing to the development of food allergy (FA) and the mechanisms of natural tolerance or induced desensitization are required. In addition, a detailed understanding of the pathophysiology of food allergies is needed to generate compelling, enduring, and safe treatment options. New findings regarding the contribution of barrier function, the effect of emollient interventions, mechanisms of allergen recognition, and the contributions of specific immune cell subsets through rodent models and human clinical studies provide novel insights. With the first approved treatment for peanut allergy, the clinical management of FA is evolving toward less intensive, alternative approaches involving fixed doses, lower maintenance dose targets, coadministration of biologicals, adjuvants, and tolerance-inducing formulations. The ultimate goal is to improve immunotherapy and develop precision-based medicine via risk phenotyping allowing optimal treatment for each food-allergic patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arielle Locke
- School of Medicine, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland
| | - Lisa Hung
- Translational Medicine Program, Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Immunology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Julia E M Upton
- Division of Immunology and Allergy, SickKids Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Program, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Paediatrics, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Liam O'Mahony
- Departments of Medicine and Microbiology, APC Microbiome Ireland, National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland
| | - Jennifer Hoang
- Translational Medicine Program, Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Thomas Eiwegger
- Translational Medicine Program, Research Institute, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Immunology, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria
- Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, University Hospital St. Pölten, St. Pölten, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kelleher MM, Phillips R, Brown SJ, Cro S, Cornelius V, Carlsen KCL, Skjerven HO, Rehbinder EM, Lowe AJ, Dissanayake E, Shimojo N, Yonezawa K, Ohya Y, Yamamoto-Hanada K, Morita K, Axon E, Cork M, Cooke A, Van Vogt E, Schmitt J, Weidinger S, McClanahan D, Simpson E, Duley L, Askie LM, Williams HC, Boyle RJ. Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 11:CD013534. [PMID: 36373988 PMCID: PMC9661877 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013534.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective for preventing eczema or food allergy. OBJECTIVES Primary objective To assess the effects of skin care interventions such as emollients for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants. Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy. SEARCH METHODS We performed an updated search of the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in September 2021. We searched two trials registers in July 2021. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews, and scanned conference proceedings to identify further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (≤ 12 months) without pre-existing eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition. Eligible comparisons were standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions could include moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured at the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen. MAIN RESULTS We identified 33 RCTs comprising 25,827 participants. Of these, 17 studies randomising 5823 participants reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review. We included 11 studies, randomising 5217 participants, in one or more meta-analyses (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis), with 10 of these studies providing IPD; the remaining 6 studies were included in the narrative results only. Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although the definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to three years. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported information on our prespecified outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. We assessed most of the evidence in the review as low certainty and had some concerns about risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. We assessed the evidence for the primary food allergy outcome as high risk of bias due to the inclusion of only one trial, where findings varied based on different assumptions about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change the risk of eczema by one to three years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; risk difference 5 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI 28 less to 47 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) or time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may increase the risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to three years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.49; low-certainty evidence; 976 participants, 1 trial) but may not change risk of allergic sensitisation to a food allergen by age one to three years (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; low-certainty evidence; 1794 participants, 3 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial); however, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to over-reporting of milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.75; risk difference 17 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI one more to 38 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase the risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) and stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although CIs for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions were wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses showed that the effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, filaggrin (FLG) mutation, chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434, or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and eczema or food allergy development. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection. Further study is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might prevent eczema or food allergy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maeve M Kelleher
- National Heart & Lung Institute, Section of Inflammation and Repair, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Rachel Phillips
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Sara J Brown
- Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Suzie Cro
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Karin C Lødrup Carlsen
- Division of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Håvard O Skjerven
- Division of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Eva M Rehbinder
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Dermatology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Adrian J Lowe
- Allergy and Lung Health Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Eishika Dissanayake
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Naoki Shimojo
- Center for Preventive Medical Sciences, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Kaori Yonezawa
- Department of Midwifery and Women's Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukihiro Ohya
- Allergy Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Kumiko Morita
- Department of Pediatrics, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Emma Axon
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Michael Cork
- Sheffield Dermatology Research, Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alison Cooke
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Eleanor Van Vogt
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Jochen Schmitt
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technischen Universität (TU) Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stephan Weidinger
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Scheswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Danielle McClanahan
- Department of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Eric Simpson
- Department of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Lisa M Askie
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia
| | - Hywel C Williams
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Robert J Boyle
- National Heart & Lung Institute, Section of Inflammation and Repair, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Cochrane Skin, Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Inuzuka Y, Yamamoto-Hanada K, Pak K, Miyoshi T, Kobayashi T, Ohya Y. Effective Primary Prevention of Atopic Dermatitis in High-Risk Neonates via Moisturizer Application: Protocol for a Randomized, Blinded, Parallel, Three-Group, Phase II Trial (PAF Study). FRONTIERS IN ALLERGY 2022; 3:862620. [PMID: 35769566 PMCID: PMC9234870 DOI: 10.3389/falgy.2022.862620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and inflammatory skin disease that causes health-related burdens associated with pruritus and poor quality of life. Our previous study demonstrated that moisturizer (2e) application has a primary preventive effect on AD. However, this effect was not observed in recent randomized control trials. Thus, the ideal moisturizer type and application frequency for preventing AD development in infants remains unclear. We hypothesize that twice daily application of moisturizer is more effective than once daily application. We predict that applying sufficient amounts of high-quality moisturizer may be effective for preventing AD development in neonates and infants. Here, we describe a protocol for comparing the efficacy of twice daily and once daily application of Fam's Baby™ moisturizer and once daily application of 2e moisturizer for preventing AD in neonates. Methods This study is a single-center, three-parallel group, assessor-blind, superiority, individually randomized, controlled, phase II trial. Sixty newborns with at least one parent or sibling who has had AD is randomly assigned to application of Fam's Baby twice daily, Fam's Baby once daily, or 2e once daily in a 1:1:1 ratio until 32 weeks old. The primary outcome is the time to the first onset of AD during administration of the moisturizer. Discussion This is the first phase II randomized, controlled trial in Japan to estimate how effective the twice daily or once daily application of Fam's Baby moisturizer is in preventing AD compared to the once daily application of 2e moisturizer. In this study, we will use 2e once daily as a control to confirm the efficacy for primary prevention of AD as found in our previous trial. Based on the results of this study, we hope to conduct a phase III study to determine the optimal method for preventing AD via moisturizer application. Evaluation of application of moisturizers for preventing AD in this study is expected to contribute to a reduction in the prevalence of AD and a reduction in health care costs. Trial registration Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT); ID: jRCTs031200070.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yusuke Inuzuka
- Allergy Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Kiwako Yamamoto-Hanada
- Allergy Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
- *Correspondence: Kiwako Yamamoto-Hanada
| | - Kyongsun Pak
- Division of Biostatistics, Clinical Research Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Takekazu Miyoshi
- Department of Clinical Research Promotion, Clinical Research Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Tohru Kobayashi
- Department of Data Science, Clinical Research Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukihiro Ohya
- Allergy Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kelleher MM, Cro S, Cornelius V, Lodrup Carlsen KC, Skjerven HO, Rehbinder EM, Lowe AJ, Dissanayake E, Shimojo N, Yonezawa K, Ohya Y, Yamamoto-Hanada K, Morita K, Axon E, Surber C, Cork M, Cooke A, Tran L, Van Vogt E, Schmitt J, Weidinger S, McClanahan D, Simpson E, Duley L, Askie LM, Chalmers JR, Williams HC, Boyle RJ. Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 2:CD013534. [PMID: 33545739 PMCID: PMC8094581 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013534.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur together in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective in preventing eczema or food allergy. OBJECTIVES Primary objective To assess effects of skin care interventions, such as emollients, for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases up to July 2020: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers and checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We contacted field experts to identify planned trials and to seek information about unpublished or incomplete trials. SELECTION CRITERIA RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (0 to 12 months) without pre-existing diagnosis of eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition were included. Comparison was standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions included moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured by the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen. MAIN RESULTS This review identified 33 RCTs, comprising 25,827 participants. A total of 17 studies, randomising 5823 participants, reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review. Eleven studies randomising 5217 participants, with 10 of these studies providing IPD, were included in one or more meta-analysis (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis). Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported our outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to two years. We assessed most of this review's evidence as low certainty or had some concerns of risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. Evidence for the primary food allergy outcome was rated as high risk of bias due to inclusion of only one trial where findings varied when different assumptions were made about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change risk of eczema by one to two years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) nor time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). It is unclear whether skin care interventions during infancy change risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to two years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.47; 996 participants, 1 trial) or allergic sensitisation to a food allergen at age one to two years (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.69; 1055 participants, 2 trials) due to very low-certainty evidence for these outcomes. Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial). However, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to significant over-reporting of cow's milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) or stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although confidence intervals for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions are wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses show that effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, FLG mutation, or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and risk of developing eczema or food allergy. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema, and probably increase risk of skin infection. Effects of skin care interventions on risk of food allergy are uncertain. Further work is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might promote or prevent eczema and to evaluate effects on food allergy based on robust outcome assessments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maeve M Kelleher
- National Heart & Lung Institute, Section of Inflammation and Repair, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Suzie Cro
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Karin C Lodrup Carlsen
- Division of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Håvard O Skjerven
- Division of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Eva M Rehbinder
- Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Dermatology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Adrian J Lowe
- Allergy and Lung Health Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Eishika Dissanayake
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
| | - Naoki Shimojo
- Center for Preventive Medical Sciences, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
| | - Kaori Yonezawa
- Department of Midwifery and Women's Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yukihiro Ohya
- Allergy Center, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | | | - Kumiko Morita
- Department of Pediatrics, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Emma Axon
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Christian Surber
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Michael Cork
- Sheffield Dermatology Research, Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Alison Cooke
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Lien Tran
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Eleanor Van Vogt
- Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Jochen Schmitt
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technischen Universität (TU) Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stephan Weidinger
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University Hospital Scheswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany
| | - Danielle McClanahan
- Department of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Eric Simpson
- Department of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Lelia Duley
- Nottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Lisa M Askie
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia
| | - Joanne R Chalmers
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Hywel C Williams
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Robert J Boyle
- National Heart & Lung Institute, Section of Inflammation and Repair, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|