Pneumococcal seroconversion after vaccination for children with atopic dermatitis treated with tacrolimus ointment

Shedding light on key pharmacological knowledge and strategies for pediatric atopic dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory disease affecting over 20% of the pediatric population, with 85% of cases presenting before the age of five. Recently, therapeutic options in pediatric patients have evolved rapidly, following extensive development in adult treatments.

AREAS COVERED

This review will encompass relevant molecular drivers, along with an overlook on treatment modalities in pediatric AD, as well as a summary of pipeline treatments in clinical trials for pediatric patients from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov up to July 2022. Topical corticosteroids are the mainstay for AD flares in adults and children. Topical approved agents in pediatric AD are calcineurin inhibitors, crisaborolecrisaborole, and ruxolitinib. Dupilumab is the only FDA approved biologic for patients with AD from six months of age. A Janus kinase inhibitor, upadacitinib, is a systemic treatment approved for pediatric AD patients (age >12 years). Systemic immunosuppressants used in pediatric AD include methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporinecyclosporine, and mycophenolate mofetil.

EXPERT OPINION

Data regarding disease prevention are conflicting, however, an abundance of research has transpired regarding amelioration of symptoms and induction of disease clearance by targeting numerous pathological mechanisms. Understanding the pediatric AD phenotype will further advance the field and the development of improved therapeutics.

Cancer risk with topical calcineurin inhibitors, pimecrolimus and tacrolimus, for atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis is a prevalent condition in children and can be effectively managed with medications such as topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus or tacrolimus). A key unresolved safety concern is whether use of topical calcineurin inhibitors is associated with cancer. We systematically reviewed the risk of cancer in patients with atopic dermatitis exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors.

METHODS

As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters atopic dermatitis guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, the Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the US Food and Drug Administration database, the European Medicines Agency database, company registers, and relevant citations from inception to June 6, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials and comparative and non-comparative non-randomised studies in any language addressing cancer risk in patients with atopic dermatitis using topical calcineurin inhibitors. We excluded split-body studies and studies with less than 3 weeks of follow-up. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We used Bayesian models to estimate the probability for cancer due to topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure and the GRADE approach to determine the certainty of the evidence. Patients, advocacy groups, and care providers set a priori thresholds of important effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/v4bfc.

FINDINGS

We identified and analysed 110 unique studies (52 randomised controlled trials and 69 non-randomised studies [11 were non-randomised study extensions of randomised controlled trials]) including 3·4 million patients followed up for a mean of 11 months (range 0·7-120). The absolute risk of any cancer with topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure was not different from controls (absolute risk 4·70 per 1000 with topical calcineurin inhibitors vs 4·56 per 1000 without; odds ratio 1·03 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·11]; moderate certainty). For all age groups and using data from observational studies and randomised controlled trials, the use of pimecrolimus (OR 1·05 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·15]) or tacrolimus (0·99 [0·89-1·09]) is likely to have had little to no association with cancer compared with no topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure. For pimecrolimus versus tacrolimus, the finding was similar (0·95 [95% credible interval 0·83-1·07]). Findings were similar in infants, children, and adults, and robust to trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.

INTERPRETATION

Among individuals with atopic dermatitis, moderate-certainty evidence shows that topical calcineurin inhibitors do not increase the risk of cancer. These findings support the safe use of topical calcineurin inhibitors in the optimal treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis.

FUNDING

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology via the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters.

Safety of tacrolimus 0.03% and 0.1% ointments in young children with atopic dermatitis - a 36-month follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Topical tacrolimus is used off-label in young children, but data remains limited regarding children under 2 years of age and long-term treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To compare safety differences between tacrolimus 0.03% and 0.1% ointments with mild and moderate potency topical corticosteroids in young children with atopic dermatitis.

METHODS

We conducted a 36-month follow-up study with 152 young children from one to three years of age with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Children were followed prospectively and data concerning infections, disease severity, growth parameters, vaccination responses, and other relevant laboratory tests were gathered.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the treatment groups in skin-related infections (p = 0.198), other infections (p = 0.498), growth parameters height (p = 0.601) and weight (p = 0.812), EASI scores (p = 0.187), vaccination responses (p = 0.620), serum cortisone levels (p = 0.228) and serum levels of IL-4, IL-10, IL-12, IL-31 and IFN gamma. EASI decreased significantly in both groups (p < 0.0001). In the tacrolimus group, nine patients (11.68%) had detectable tacrolimus blood concentrations at the 1-week visit. We observed no malignancies or severe infections during the study. Blood eosinophil counts were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical tacrolimus (0.03% and 0.1%) and topical corticosteroids (mild and moderate potency) are safe to use in young children with moderate-to severe-atopic dermatitis and have comparable efficacy and safety profiles.

Recommendations for dermatologists treating patients with atopic dermatitis during the Covid-19 pandemic: a look into the past for a conscious vaccination management

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that affects approximately 20% of children and 10% of adults. The implication of vaccines as a trigger for the de novo onset of AD in children or as a cause of exacerbation in individuals with a history of AD has long been debated. We present a brief review of the literature on AD and traditional vaccinations, proposing in addition the main recommendations for the management of patients with AD undergoing the vaccine against the SARS-COV-2 virus. Live attenuated vaccines seem to be associated with a relapse of AD and/or complications, such as eczema vaccinatum. For non-live vaccines, no adverse events are noted in atopic subjects. Since the Covid-19 vaccine is mRNA or viral vectored vaccine and there are no other currently used vaccines of this type, the same recommendations are applied as for all other non-live vaccines.

Contemporary Role of Topical Calcineurin Inhibitors: A Pediatric Dermatology Perspective

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common pediatric chronic inflammatory skin disease in North America, often involving complex treatment regimens and impairing the quality of life of affected children and their families. Two topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) have been available for the treatment of AD in pediatric patients for more than 15 years, and they continue to represent an important steroid-sparing option for the management of AD. Despite the large body of evidence and extensive clinical experience with these agents, there remain concerns among parents and clinicians regarding the long-term safety of this class of therapy, particularly with respect to the boxed warning about the potential risk of lymphoma and malignancy associated with TCIs. Concerns about burning or stinging with initial applications are also common. This review examines the literature on the clinical effectiveness of TCIs, with a focus on the pivotal research that supports the efficacy of these agents, and the reassuring body of evidence supporting their long-term safety in pediatric patients. Practical recommendations for maximizing the utility of TCIs in pediatric patients, including discussion points to address with parents, are offered.

What Is the Risk of Harm Associated With Topical Calcineurin Inhibitors?

The topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs), tacrolimus (Protopic) and pimecrolimus (Elidel), were approved in the early 2000s and were widely used as a nonsteroid treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD) in adult and pediatric populations. In 2005, the addition of a boxed warning was mandated for TCIs based on a potential risk of malignancy, and there was subsequently a substantial decline in their use. Since then, evidence has mounted to support the safety of this class of medications and suggests that the increased risk of malignancy remains theoretical. This review aims to dispel some of the common myths surrounding the safety of TCIs by evaluating the key evidence regarding their safety and tolerability in adult and pediatric populations. Four major themes are addressed in a practical question-and-answer format: the risk of harm associated with TCIs including common and serious adverse events; warnings and precautions for their use including the risk of systemic absorption, immunosuppression, and malignancy; the comparative safety of TCIs; and suggestions for counselling patients about the risk of harm with TCIs. Based on the available evidence, international professional dermatological organizations and regulatory authorities have concluded that the benefits of TCIs outweigh their potential risks when used in the appropriate patient populations for the recommended duration of time.

A Systematic Scoping Literature Review of Publications Supporting Treatment Guidelines for Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis in Contrast to Clinical Practice Patterns

INTRODUCTION

Treatment guidelines endorse a variety of strategies for atopic dermatitis (AD) which may vary from published data and clinical practice patterns. The objective of this review was to quantify the volume of available medical literature supporting pediatric AD treatments and compare these patterns to those recommended by published guidelines and/or clinical practice patterns.

METHODS

Searches of Embase (2005-2016) and abstracts from selected meetings (2014-2016) related to AD treatment in patients younger than 17 years of age yielded references that were assessed by study design, primary treatment, age groups, and AD severity.

RESULTS

Published literature partially supports clinical guidelines, with emollients and topical medications being the most investigated. There were disproportionately more publications for topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) compared with topical corticosteroids (TCS); however, the search interval may have biased the results toward treatments approved near the beginning of the time frame. In contrast, publications documenting clinical practice patterns reflect greater use of emollients and TCS (over TCI), as well as systemic corticosteroids. Data is relatively limited for long-term and combination treatment, treatment of severe AD, and patients younger than 2 years of age, and completely lacking for systemic corticosteroids.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review demonstrates that available medical literature largely supports published guidelines for topical therapy; however, clinical practice patterns are less aligned. There is a lack of data for older, more frequently used generic treatments, including oral antihistamines, oral antibiotics, and systemic corticosteroids. Overall, literature is lacking for long-term treatment, treatment for patients younger than 2 years of age, and for systemic treatment for severe disease.

FUNDING

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Association Between Malignancy and Topical Use of Pimecrolimus

IMPORTANCE

A black box warning describes a potential risk of malignancy associated with topical use of pimecrolimus to treat atopic dermatitis due to its similarity to oral calcineurin inhibitors used in solid-organ transplantation and spontaneous reporting of malignancies, including lymphomas and cutaneous malignancies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk of malignancy in a postmarketing study of children exposed to pimecrolimus.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A longitudinal cohort study among a nationwide ongoing long-term cohort of children enrolled in the Pediatric Eczema Elective Registry (PEER) who had a history of atopic dermatitis and pimecrolimus use with data available up through May 2014.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Reports of malignancy among those in the PEER compared with expected rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program.

RESULTS

Overall, 7457 children were enrolled in the PEER, for a total of 26,792 person-years. Children used a mean (SD) of 793 (1356) g of pimecrolimus when enrolled in the study. As of May 2014, five malignancies had been reported. These include 2 leukemias, 1 osteosarcoma, and 2 lymphomas. No skin cancers were reported. The standardized incidence ratio for all malignancies (primary outcome) based on the age-standardized SEER population was 1.2 (95% CI, 0.5-2.8). As secondary analyses, the standardized incidence ratios (based on 2 cases for each) were 2.9 (95% CI, 0.7-11.7) for lymphoma and 2.0 (95% CI, 0.5-8.2) for leukemia. None of these findings were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Based on more than 25,000 person-years of follow-up, it seems unlikely that topical pimecrolimus as it was used in the PEER cohort to treat atopic dermatitis is associated with an increased risk of malignancy.

Topical tacrolimus for atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) (or atopic eczema) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that affects children and adults and has an important impact on quality of life. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are the first-line therapy for this condition; however, they can be associated with significant adverse effects when used chronically. Tacrolimus ointment (in its 2 manufactured strengths of 0.1% and 0.03%) might be an alternative treatment. Tacrolimus, together with pimecrolimus, are drugs called topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topical tacrolimus for moderate and severe atopic dermatitis compared with other active treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 3 June 2015: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library (Issue 5, 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), LILACS (from 1982), and the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT database). We searched six trials registers and checked the bibliographies of included studies for further references to relevant trials. We contacted specialists in the field for unpublished data.A separate search for adverse effects of topical tacrolimus was undertaken in MEDLINE and EMBASE on 30 July 2013. We also scrutinised the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) websites for adverse effects information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (both children and adults) using topical tacrolimus at any dose, course duration, and follow-up time compared with other active treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened and examined the full text of selected studies for compliance with eligibility criteria, risk of bias, and data extraction. Our three prespecified primary outcomes were physician's assessment, participant's self-assessment of improvement, and adverse effects. Our secondary outcomes included assessment of improvement of the disease by validated or objective measures, such as SCORAD (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis), the EASI (Eczema Area and Severity Index), and BSA (Body Surface Area) scores.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies, with 5885 participants. The variability of drug doses, outcomes, and follow-up periods made it difficult to carry out meta-analyses.A single trial showed that tacrolimus 0.1% was better than low-potency TCS by the physician's assessment (risk ratio (RR) 3.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.14 to 4.45, 1 study, n = 371, moderate-quality evidence). It was also marginally better than low-potency TCS on face and neck areas and moderate-potency TCS on the trunk and extremities by the physician's assessment (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.49, 1 study, n = 972, moderate level of evidence) and for some of the secondary outcomes. Compared with pimecrolimus 1%, people treated with tacrolimus were almost twice as likely to improve by the physician's assessment (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.42, 2 studies, n = 506, moderate quality of evidence). Compared with the lower concentration of 0.03%, the tacrolimus 0.1% formulation reduced the risk of not having an improvement by 18% as evaluated by the physician's assessment (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.92, 6 studies, n = 1640, high-quality evidence). Tacrolimus 0.1% compared with moderate-to-potent TCS showed no difference by the physician's assessment, and 2 secondary outcomes (1 study, 377 participants) and a marginal benefit favouring tacrolimus 0.1% was found by the participant's assessment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.29, 1 study, n = 974, low quality of evidence) and SCORAD.Based on data from 2 trials, tacrolimus 0.03% was superior to mild TCS for the physician's assessment (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.96 to 3.38, 2 studies, n = 790, moderate-quality evidence) and the participant's self-assessment (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.90, 1 study, n = 416, moderate quality of evidence). One trial showed moderate benefit of tacrolimus 0.03% compared with pimecrolimus 1% on the physician's assessment (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.98, 1 study, n = 139, low-quality evidence), but the effects were equivocal when evaluating BSA. In the comparison of tacrolimus 0.03% with moderate-to-potent corticosteroids, no difference was found in most of the outcomes measured (including physician's and participant's assessment and also for the secondary outcomes), but in two studies, a marginal benefit favouring the corticosteroid group was found for the EASI and BSA scores.Burning was more frequent in those using calcineurin inhibitors than those using corticosteroid tacrolimus 0.03% (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.96 to 3.14, 5 studies, 1883 participants, high-quality evidence), but no difference was found for skin infections. Symptoms observed were mild and transient. The comparison between the two calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus and tacrolimus) showed the same overall incidence of adverse events, but with a small difference in the frequency of local effects.Serious adverse events were rare; occurred in both the tacrolimus and corticosteroid groups; and in most cases, were considered to be unrelated to the treatment. No cases of lymphoma were noted in the included studies nor in the non-comparative studies. Cases were only noted in spontaneous reports, cohorts, and case-control studies. Systemic absorption was rarely detectable, only in low levels, and this decreased with time. Exception is made for diseases with severe barrier defects, such as Netherton's syndrome, lamellar ichthyosis, and a few others, with case reports of a higher absorption. We evaluated clinical trials; case reports; and in vivo, in vitro, and animal studies; and didn't find any evidence that topical tacrolimus could cause skin atrophy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus 0.1% was better than low-potency corticosteroids, pimecrolimus 1%, and tacrolimus 0.03%. Results were equivocal when comparing both dose formulations to moderate-to-potent corticosteroids. Tacrolimus 0.03% was superior to mild corticosteroids and pimecrolimus. Both tacrolimus formulations seemed to be safe, and no evidence was found to support the possible increased risk of malignancies or skin atrophy with their use. The reliability and strength of the evidence was limited by the lack of data; thus, findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. We did not evaluate costs.

Pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccination in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving tacrolimus

Introduction

In rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving immunosuppressive treatments, vaccination against Streptococcus pneumoniae is recommended. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of tacrolimus (TAC) on immune response following administration of a 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) in patients with established RA.

Methods

Patients with RA (n = 133) were vaccinated with PPSV23. Patients were classified into TAC (n = 29), methotrexate (MTX) (n = 55), control (n = 35), and TAC/MTX (n = 14) treatment groups. We measured the concentrations of pneumococcal serotypes 6B and 23F by using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and determined antibody functionality by using a multiplexed opsonophagocytic killing assay, reported as the opsonization index (OI), before and 4 to 6 weeks after vaccination. A positive antibody response was defined as at least a twofold increase in the IgG concentration or as at least a 10-fold increase in the OI.

Results

IgG concentrations and OIs were significantly increased in all treatment groups after PPSV23 vaccination. The TAC treatment group appears to respond in a manner similar to that of the RA control group in terms of 6B and 23F serotype concentration and function. In contrast, the MTX group had the lowest immune response. Patients who received a combination of TAC and MTX (TAC/MTX) also had a diminished immune response compared with those who received TAC alone.

Conclusions

TAC monotherapy does not appear to impair PPSV23 immunogenicity in patients with RA, whereas antibody production and function may be reduced when TAC is used with MTX. Thus, PPSV23 administration during ongoing TAC treatment should be encouraged for infection-prone TAC-treated patients with rheumatic diseases.

Trial registration

University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry: UMIN000009566. Registered 12 December 2012.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0662-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Calcineurin inhibitors in pediatric atopic dermatitis: a review of current evidence

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic inflammatory dermatosis with a prevalence of 7-21% in school-aged children. Childhood AD has a profound impact on the social, personal, emotional, and financial perspectives of families. For the last half-century, topical corticosteroids of different potencies have been the mainstay of topical therapy. In recent years, two topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs), tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, have become available for the treatment of AD. Both tacrolimus and pimecrolimus have been extensively evaluated in the management of pediatric AD. Trials comparing them with placebo, topical corticosteroids, and each other have shown them to be effective and safe for continuous short-term use, and for noncontinuous use for up to 4 years. Long-term safety of TCIs is not known as they have been in clinical use for less than a decade.

The safety and efficacy of tacrolimus ointment in pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common skin disease in children, and its prevalence is increasing. It is a chronic disorder, characterized by intermittent flares and phases of remission. Treatment regimens often require multiple therapies. These can vary between patients, and in an individual patient, depending on the state of disease. The traditional treatment for AD flares is topical corticosteroids, which are fast acting and effective for relief of symptoms, but may cause adverse effects, including those resulting from systemic absorption, particularly in children. Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) are alternative treatments for AD. Tacrolimus ointment, a TCI, is approved for patients aged 2 years and older. Multiple studies have shown that tacrolimus is effective for short-term relief of symptoms in pediatric patients with AD. Long-term trials have demonstrated that the effectiveness of tacrolimus is maintained for up to 4 years in children. Additional studies have revealed that long-term intermittent use of tacrolimus as part of maintenance therapy can prevent AD flares. Tacrolimus has a low potential for systemic accumulation, and analysis of long-term studies indicates that it has a good safety profile. Treatment with tacrolimus, alone or in combination with topical corticosteroids for acute flares, may be a useful option for long-term management of AD in pediatric patients.

[Safety information for tacrolimus: present and future]

In this article there were regarded the most frequent side effects that appear in the patients who have been treated with topical tacrolimus, and the association between topical tacrolimus and the development of tumors is unfolded. The irritation in the site of application of the tacrolimus can manifiest as pruritus, sensation of burning and/or eritema located to the area of the application. It is the most frequent side effect, independently of the duration of the study. The cutaneous infections, especially the viral ones, tend to be more numerous in patients with atopic dermatitis that receive topic tacrolimus. After reviewing the medical literature one concludes that nowadays there doesn t exist scientific evidence of an increase of skin cancer, lymphomas or systemic immunosuppression in those patients that use or have used topical tacrolimus. Nevertheless, it is not possible to exclude the possibility that there appear cutaneous and/or systemic long-term side effects.

Calcineurin inhibitors for the treatment of atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic disease characterized by periods of remission and relapse. Therapeutic objectives for AD should be to quickly reduce disease symptoms by targeting pathophysiological pathways, and to provide long-term management by reducing recurrences.

OBJECTIVE

Calcineurin inhibitors currently appear to be one of the most promising alternative systemic and topical compounds to treat AD. This review focuses on new developments of topical calcineurin inhibitors, therapeutic regimens including long-term management, and prophylaxis of AD.

METHODS

The published clinical studies that present data on treatment of AD with calcineurin inhibitors were assessed.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

Topical calcineurin inhibitors such as tacrolimus and pimecrolimus provide an effective treatment for AD. They are useful for long-term management and prophylaxis of AD. Safety concerns with regard to increased risk for lymphomas or skin cancer could not be confirmed but will remain under careful observation.

Topical calcineurin inhibitors in pediatric atopic dermatitis: a critical analysis of current issues

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common disease in children. Despite good skin care and trigger avoidance, many children with AD require pharmacologic treatment to manage their disease. In recent years, topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) have been used as an alternative to topical corticosteroids to treat some children with AD. However, revisions to the US labeling for TCIs (i.e. a boxed warning and a medication guide) have generated concern among pediatricians regarding TCI safety and raised questions about the appropriate use of TCIs in the pediatric population. Data from several well designed studies support the efficacy of TCIs in the treatment of AD. Safety concerns arise from a small number of reported malignancies, animal toxicology studies, and the potential adverse effects (including immunosuppression and risk of lymphoma) observed in patients who received systemically administered calcineurin inhibitors for suppression of solid-organ transplant rejection. Several factors indicate that these effects do not occur with topical administration: (i) systemic levels following topical administration are at least 10-fold lower than with oral administration; (ii) the small number of lymphomas reported to date in persons exposed to TCI use are not consistent with the types seen in transplant patients or other immunosuppressed patients; and (iii) no adverse effects on the immune system (as assessed by measures including vaccination response and skin delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction) have been observed in clinical trials of TCIs in children with AD. Overall, TCIs have an established safety and efficacy profile as long-term maintenance therapy in children with AD.

The safety of tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a review

Tacrolimus ointment is a topical calcineurin inhibitor (TCI) that was developed specifically for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). It is one of the most extensively tested dermatological products, with more than 19 000 patients (including approximately 7600 children) having participated in the tacrolimus ointment clinical development programme. Recent regulatory reviews have focused on the potential risk of malignancy with TCIs, based on their mode of action and the effects of systemic tacrolimus when given to transplant recipients. Studies have shown, however, that the systemic absorption of tacrolimus when applied topically is very low, with blood concentrations being below the level of quantification in most patients. Moreover, TCIs are not associated with a decrease in immunocompetence in the skin and there is no increase in the incidence of infections with long-term treatment. More than 5.4 million prescriptions for tacrolimus ointment have been issued worldwide, with no evidence of an increased risk of malignancy in adults or children compared with the general population. Similarly, epidemiological studies have failed to demonstrate an increased incidence of skin cancer in patients using TCIs. The most common adverse events (AEs) that occur with tacrolimus ointment treatment are transient application-site reactions, such as burning or pruritus. These complications are related to disease severity, and decrease in frequency over time as AD improves. The incidence of nonapplication-site AEs does not increase with long-term treatment, and most such events occurring in clinical trials were considered to be unrelated to therapy. Although it is important that clinicians are aware of the recent changes in product labelling, extensive clinical trials continue to show that tacrolimus ointment is well tolerated, and is generally an effective therapy for suitable patients with AD.

Safety of topical calcineurin inhibitors for the treatment of atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, highly pruritic, and frequently recurring inflammatory skin disease that can be burdensome to affected individuals as well as to their family members, the health care system, and society as a whole. Immunomodulatory agents, such as topical corticosteroids and topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs), target the underlying immunopathology of atopic dermatitis and are the foundation of pharmacologic treatment for disease exacerbations. Recent recommendations from the United States Food and Drug Administration prompted the addition of a black-box warning and medication guide for tacrolimus ointment and pimecrolimus cream (both TCIs). The recommendations were based on a theoretical risk of malignancy derived from safety profiles, animal data, and reported cases of malignancy from clinical trials and postmarketing safety surveillance of oral calcineurin inhibitors. We know of no data that suggest that TCI use increases the risk of malignancy. Several dermatologic associations have issued statements supporting the safety of TCIs, and independent oncology experts have concluded that reported lymphomas were not related to TCI use. The black-box warning added to the TCI prescribing information also states that no causal link has been established. Effective treatment of atopic dermatitis can help alleviate the burden this disease imposes, and TCIs remain important treatment options.

A systematic review of the safety of topical therapies for atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

The safety of topical therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD), a common and morbid disease, has recently been the focus of increased scrutiny, adding confusion as how best to manage these patients.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of these systematic reviews was to determine the safety of topical therapies for AD.

METHODS

Databases searched included: OVID Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. In addition to the articles identified by this search, investigators were also referred to a list of links (most recently updated 25 September 2005) to recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) studies, reports and meetings regarding the topical calcineurin inhibitors for further potential references. Only fully published papers available in English and data obtained from FDA sites were included. Furthermore, the criteria for inclusion and exclusion for each systematic review were further evaluated at a meeting of all of the content and evidence-based medicine experts participating in this process and alteration of the inclusion criteria was done at that time when it was felt necessary to avoid inclusion of lower-quality data in the review. Qualitative review of the abstracted data was performed and reviewed at a meeting of all of the content and evidence-based medicine experts.

RESULTS

While systemic exposure to these topical agents does occur, physiological changes appear to be uncommon and systemic complications rare and have only been found with use of topical corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data that are available the overall safety of AD therapies appears to be good with the only documented systemic side-effects of therapy those occasionally seen with use of topical corticosteroids.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of 0.1% tacrolimus ointment with topical corticosteroids in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: review of randomised, double-blind clinical studies conducted in Japan

Tacrolimus (FK506) ointment is widely used in the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis. The drug exerts its action by down-regulating antigen-specific T-cell activities and associated proinflammatory cytokine production. A number of clinical studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of 0.1% tacrolimus ointment compared with vehicle or topical corticosteroids in adult patients with atopic dermatitis. These studies have suggested that topical tacrolimus has a rapid onset of action and exerts sustained therapeutic effects, with an efficacy similar to that of moderate to potent topical corticosteroids, but without causing skin atrophy. Two phase III randomised, controlled clinical trials have been conducted in Japanese adult patients with atopic dermatitis to compare the efficacy and safety of topical 0.1% tacrolimus with topical corticosteroid ointments. In the first study, patients with moderate or severe atopic dermatitis on the trunk and extremities were randomised to 3 weeks of treatment with topical 0.1% tacrolimus or the mid-potency topical corticosteroid 0.12% betamethasone valerate. Over 90% of the patients in each study group experienced at least a moderate improvement at the end of the study. In the second study, patients with moderate or severe atopic dermatitis on the head or neck were randomised to 1 week of treatment with 0.1% tacrolimus or the mild-potency corticosteroid 0.1% alclometasone dipropionate. Significantly greater improvements in individual symptom scores were observed with topical tacrolimus compared with alclometasone dipropionate, with overall global improvement at 1 week being statistically superior with tacrolimus. Furthermore, in a long-term open-label study involving 568 patients, at least a moderate global improvement in symptoms was observed in 85% of patients at 6 weeks, increasing to 91% at both 26 weeks and 52 weeks; this rate was maintained throughout the 2-year duration of the study. 0.1% tacrolimus ointment was considered to be safe in the majority of patients. The most prevalent adverse reactions were local application site irritations, which generally resolved with continued therapy. In summary, these findings suggest that 0.1% tacrolimus ointment is an effective and safe nonsteroidal alternative therapy for adult patients with atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is an especially common and frustrating condition, and the prevalence is increasing. The disease can adversely affect the quality of life of patients and caregivers. Significant advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis have led to improvements in therapy. Patient and caregiver education, avoidance of potential triggering factors, optimal skin care, and pharmacotherapy offer the potential for good control for most patients.

Safety of topical calcineurin inhibitors in atopic dermatitis: evaluation of the evidence

Topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus, Elidel, East Hanover, NJ; and tacrolimus, Protopic, Tokyo, Japan) have been approved for the use in atopic dermatitis since the year 2000. These compounds represent a relatively safe class of topical anti-inflammatory, nonsteroidal therapy. However, in January of 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on these compounds about possible concerns of increased long-term malignancy risk due to systemic immunosuppression. To date, studies from clinical trials, systemic absorption, and post-marketing surveillance show no evidence for this systemic immunosuppression or increased risk for any malignancy.

Tacrolimus ointment does not affect the immediate response to vaccination, the generation of immune memory, or humoral and cell-mediated immunity in children

BACKGROUND

Concern exists that the prolonged application of immunomodulators to treat atopic dermatitis may cause systemic immunosuppression.

AIMS

In a 7-month, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial, we investigated the equivalence of response to vaccination against meningococcal serogroup C disease with a protein-conjugate vaccine in children (2-11 years) with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, by applying either 0.03% tacrolimus ointment (TAC-O; n = 121[corrected]) or a hydrocortisone ointment regimen (HC-O; n = 111).

METHODS

TAC-O was applied twice daily (bid) for 3 weeks, and thereafter daily until clearance. 1% hydrocortisone acetate (HA) for head/neck and 0.1% hydrocortisone butyrate ointment for trunk/limbs was applied bid for 2 weeks; thereafter HA was applied bid to all affected areas. At week 1, patients were vaccinated with protein-conjugate vaccine against meningococcal serogroup C, and challenged at month 6 with low dose meningococcal polysaccharide vaccine. The control group (44 non-atopic dermatitis children) received the primary vaccination and challenge dose. Assessments were made at baseline, weeks 1 and 5, and months 6 and 7. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with a serum bactericidal antibody (SBA) titre > or = 8 at the week 5 visit.

RESULTS

The response rate (patients with SBA titre > or = 8) was 97.5% (confidence interval (CI) approximately 97.3 to 100), 99.1% (94.8 to 100) and 97.7% (93.3 to 100) in the TAC-O, HC-O and control groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The immune response to vaccination against meningococcal serogroup C in children with atopic dermatitis applying either 0.03% TAC-O or HC is equivalent. Ointment application does not affect the immediate response to vaccination, generation of immune memory or humoral and cell-mediated immunity.

The efficacy and safety of tacrolimus ointment: a clinical review

Topical tacrolimus ointment was approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis in Japan in 1999, the United States in 2000, and Europe in 2001. The safety and efficacy of tacrolimus ointment was established in vehicle-controlled, randomized, 12-week clinical trials; 1-year open-label trials; and comparative studies with topical steroids. Although an extensive database exists on the safety and efficacy of tacrolimus ointment based on the global development program, clinicians desire additional information on the long-term safety and efficacy of this novel agent. In this supplement, additional studies are reported that extend the safety and efficacy profile of tacrolimus ointment in patients with atopic dermatitis, including long-term safety studies for up to 4 years. The studies presented in this supplement address important questions regarding the selection and use of tacrolimus ointment in the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis.