A randomized trial of methotrexate versus azathioprine for severe atopic eczema

A systematic review investigating the proportion of clinical images shared in prospective randomized controlled trials involving patients with atopic dermatitis and systemic pharmacotherapy

For individuals with atopic dermatitis (AD), interpreting scientific papers that present clinical outcomes including the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and Investigators Global Assessment may be difficult. When compared to tabulated data and graphs, images from before and after treatment are often far more meaningful to these patients that ultimately will be candidates for the treatment. This systematic review focused on determining the frequency of clinical image sharing in AD research.

Conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, the review concentrated on randomized controlled trials that investigated predefined and available systemic treatments for AD. The search was performed in the MEDLINE database for studies published from the inception until 21 December 2023.

The review included 60 studies, encompassing 17,799 randomized patients. Across these studies, 16 images representing 6 patients were shared in the manuscripts, leading to a sharing rate of 0.3‰.

The almost missing inclusion of patient images in clinical trial publications hinders patient understanding. Adding images to scientific manuscripts could significantly improve patients' comprehension of potential treatment outcomes. This review highlights the need for authors, the pharmaceutical industry, study sponsors, and publishers to enhance and promote patient information through increased use of visual data.

The wide variety of methotrexate dosing regimens for the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a systematic review

Background:Methotrexate is an off-label therapy for atopic dermatitis. A lack of consensus on dosing regimens poses a risk of underdosing and ineffective treatment or overdosing and increased risk of side effects. This systematic review summarizes the available evidence on dosing regimens.Materials and methods:A literature search was conducted, screening all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and guidelines published up to 6 July 2023, in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases.Results:Five RCTs and 21 guidelines were included. RCTs compared methotrexate with other treatments rather than different methotrexate dosing regimens. The start and maintenance doses in RCTs varied between 7.5-15 mg/week and 14.5-25 mg/week, respectively. Despite varied dosing, all RCTs demonstrated efficacy in improving atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms. Guidelines exhibited substantial heterogeneity but predominantly proposed starting doses of 5-15 mg/week for adults and 10-15 mg/m2/week for children. Maintenance doses suggested were 7.5-25 mg/week for adults and 0.2-0.7 mg/kg/week for children. One guideline suggested a test dose and nearly half advised folic acid supplementation.Conclusion:This systematic review highlights the lack of methotrexate dosing guidelines for atopic dermatitis. It identifies commonly recommended and utilized dosing regimens, serving as a valuable resource for clinicians prescribing methotrexate off-label and providing input for an upcoming consensus study.

Systemic Immunomodulatory Treatments for Atopic Dermatitis: Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Update

Importance

There are multiple approved systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis. Lebrikizumab is a newly licensed biologic medication that has been compared to placebo in clinical trials but not to other systemic treatments.

Objective

To compare reported measures of efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab to other systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data Sources

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, and trial registries were searched from inception through November 3, 2023.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials evaluating 8 or more weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were abstracted in duplicate and random-effects bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. Minimal important differences were used to define important differences between medications. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The updated analysis was completed from December 13, 2023, to February 20, 2024.

Main Outcome Measures

Efficacy outcomes were the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scales (PP-NRS) and were compared using mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). Safety outcomes were serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Other outcomes included the proportion of participants with 50%, 75%, and 90% improvement in EASI (EASI-50, -75, -90) and the proportion with success on the Investigator Global Assessment compared using odds ratios with 95% CrI.

Results

The study sample included 97 eligible trials, with a total of 24 679 patients. Lebrikizumab was associated with no important difference in change in EASI (MD, -2.0; 95% CrI, -4.5 to 0.3; moderate certainty), POEM (MD, -1.1; 95% CrI -2.5 to 0.2; moderate certainty), DLQI (MD, -0.2; 95% CrI -2.1 to 1.6; moderate certainty), or PP-NRS (MD, 0.1; 95% CrI -0.4, 0.6; high certainty) compared to dupilumab among adults with atopic dermatitis who were treated for up to 16 weeks. Dupilumab was associated with higher odds of efficacy in binary outcomes compared with lebrikizumab. The relative efficacy of other approved systemic medications was similar to that found by previous updates of this living study, with high-dose upadacitinib and abrocitinib demonstrating numerically highest relative efficacy. For safety outcomes, low event rates limited useful comparisons.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this living systematic review and network meta-analysis, lebrikizumab was similarly effective to dupilumab for the short-term treatment of atopic dermatitis in adults. Clinicians and patients can use these comparative data to inform treatment decisions.

International consensus on methotrexate dosing for patients with atopic dermatitis: An eDelphi study

BACKGROUND

Despite the widespread off-label use of methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), there is limited high-quality evidence on dosing regimens and existing guidelines do not provide clear recommendations regarding dosing strategies.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to achieve international consensus among AD experts to standardize the dosing regimen for MTX treatment in adults and children with AD.

METHODS

An electronic Delphi (eDelphi) study was conducted from October 2021 to September 2022. Recruitment was conducted through dermatology societies and AD interest groups. Participation was open to dermatologists and dermatology residents experienced in treating AD patients with MTX. The study consisted of three online rounds. The first round was informed by a systematic review of relevant literature, and subsequent rounds were adjusted based on the results of the previous round. Participants voted on 19 proposals using a 9-point scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neither agree nor disagree, 7-9 agree). Consensus was achieved when at least 70% of participants agreed, and less than 15% disagreed. Proposals that did not reach consensus in the first three rounds were discussed in a consensus meeting, where consensus was defined as less than 30% disagreement.

RESULTS

In total, 152 participants completed Round 1, 104 (68%) completed all survey rounds, and 43 (28%) joined the consensus meeting. Consensus was achieved on 7 proposals in Round 1, 4 in Round 2 and 6 in Round 3. The final 2 proposals reached consensus during the consensus meeting. Consensus topics include test dose, start dose, maximum dose, administration route, dosing schedule, management of stopping treatment, treatment duration and folic acid supplementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This eDelphi study achieved consensus on 19 proposals related to MTX dosing for adults and children with AD. These results aim to guide prescribing decisions and encourage a standardized global approach to MTX use in AD.

Treatment of atopic dermatitis with upadacitinib: adcare single center experience

Introduction

The role of upadacitinib in the management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis seems promising, but more data on its efficacy and safety are needed. This study endeavors to assess the practical impact and safety of upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, focusing on analyzing patient responses to the treatment.

Methods

In this study, adult patients diagnosed with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis received upadacitinib at daily doses of 15 mg or 30 mg, as prescribed by their attending physicians. The therapeutic efficacy of upadacitinib was meticulously assessed using established clinical metrics. Simultaneously, a comprehensive safety assessment was conducted through monthly monitoring, including the evaluation of potential effects of upadacitinib intake on hepatic function, lipid profile, and hematopoiesis using the pertinent laboratory tests.

Results

Sixteen participants were enrolled in the study. At 1month follow-up, there was a significant reduction in the mean Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score to 18.8 points, which further increased to 24 points at the 4-month mark. Additionally, 9 participants (56%) demonstrated an EASI-50 response after 1 month of treatment, with this response increasing to 9 participants (90%) after 4 months. Furthermore, enhanced therapeutic responses were observed at 4 months, with 6 patients (38%) achieving an EASI-75 response at 1month and 8 patients (80%) achieving this milestone at the 4-month follow-up. This study highlights the potential of upadacitinib as an effective treatment option for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. While it demonstrates improved symptom management, close monitoring for potential adverse events, particularly infections and the known risks of Janus kinase inhibitors, is essential. Further research is essential to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib.

Methotrexate therapy for adult and paediatric moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of data from daily practice

Of the 15 eligible studies identified via electronic searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL in November 2022 for methotrexate therapy of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, 12 were non-randomized controlled trial (non-RCT) studies with data from 437 patients (235 adults and 202 children). The response rates for short-term therapy were 77% [95% CI 55-99] (four studies; adults) - comparable to 81% [54-100] of RCTs (two studies; adults) (p = 0.63) - and 61% [43-79] (two studies; children), and for medium/long-term therapy were 88.9% [74.3-100.0] (four studies; adults) and 77.7% [61.5-94.0] (three studies; children). Children had a markedly lower rate of treatment discontinuation due to side effects [2.0% (five studies; children) vs. 14.9% (six studies; adults)], but were more likely to experience gastrointestinal disorders {relative risk (RR) 2.0 [1.44-2.71]}, fatigue (RR 2.3 [1.35-3.72]), headache (RR 2.8 [1.23-5.61]), and infections (RR 2.9 [2.18-3.58]). Other adverse events (children vs. adults) included hepatic disorders (32/176 vs. 35/305) and blood and lymphatic system/bone marrow disorders (25/148 vs. 19/184). Four serious adverse events were reported (children). Evidence from daily practice was limited by bias in the selection of participants in the study.

Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis in adults with phototherapy and systemic therapies

BACKGROUND

For people with atopic dermatitis (AD) refractory to topical therapies, treatment with phototherapy and systemic therapies can be considered. Multiple biologic therapies and Janus kinase (JAK)inhibitors have been approved since 2014 to treat AD. These guidelines update the 2014 recommendations for management of AD with phototherapy and systemic therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD in adults.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a systematic review and applied the GRADE approach for assessing the certainty of evidence and formulating and grading recommendations.

RESULTS

The workgroup developed 11 recommendations on the management of AD in adults with phototherapy and systemic agents, including biologics, oral JAK inhibitors, and other immunomodulatory medications.

LIMITATIONS

Most randomized controlled trials of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD are of short duration with subsequent extension studies, limiting comparative long-term efficacy and safety conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

We make strong recommendations for the use of dupilumab, tralokinumab, abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib. We make conditional recommendations in favor of using phototherapy, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate, and against the use of systemic corticosteroids.

Methotrexate for refractory adult atopic dermatitis leads to alterations in cutaneous IL-31 and IL-31RA expression

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate (MTX) is an alternative treatment for patients with moderate/severe atopic dermatitis (AD).

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the effect of MTX on the cutaneous expression of cytokines and chemokines that are involved in the inflammatory response in adult AD patients who received treatment with methotrexate for 24 weeks.

METHODS

The authors conducted a prospective single-institution cohort study with 12 adults with moderate/severe AD who received oral MTX (15 mg/wk for 24 wks) and 10 non-atopic matched controls. The comparison was made of skin biopsies of lesional and non-lesional skin, pre- and post MTX treatment. The authors analyzed mean epidermal thickness and expression of IL-31, IL-31RA, OSMR, TSLP, Ki67, IL-4 mRNA, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α, IFN-γ, TARC, and CCL-22.

RESULTS

There was a reduction in mean epidermal thickness (p = 0.021), an increase in IL-31RA expression (immunohistochemistry) in the epidermis (p = 0.016) and a decrease in IL-31 gene expression (p = 0.019) on lesional AD skin post-MTX treatment. No significant changes in the cutaneous expression of the other evaluated markers were identified.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Small sample size and limited length of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with MTX in adults with moderate/severe AD reduced epidermal hyperplasia and changed the cutaneous expression of inflammatory cytokines and receptors that are mainly related to pruritus, including IL-31 and IL-31RA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03327116.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna).

RESULTS

The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

A single-centre prospective study comparing efficacy and safety of apremilast with cyclosporine in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Apremilast regulates several pro-inflammatory signals involved in atopic dermatitis (AD).

METHODS

A randomized, open-labelled study was conducted at a tertiary care centre in India. Fifty patients with AD of >1 year duration were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either apremilast (30 mg twice daily after initial titration) or cyclosporine (5 mg/kg/day) for 24 weeks, followed by a 12-week follow-up period. Primary outcome was mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) from baseline to week 24. Secondary outcome measures were proportion of patients achieving EASI 75, EASI 90, ≥2-point improvement in Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) 75 at week 24 and percentage of patients experiencing ≥1 adverse effect (AEs).

RESULTS

Mean percentage change in EASI (standard deviation) was -67.79% [22.44] in the apremilast treatment group and -83.06% [21.20] in the cyclosporine treatment group (p < 0.05). At week 24, 52.38% of patients in the apremilast group and 78.26% in the cyclosporine group achieved EASI 75 (p < 0.05); 14.29% in the apremilast group and 52.17% in the cyclosporine group achieved EASI 90 (p < 0.05) and 80.95% in the apremilast group and 82.60% patients achieved ≥2 point reduction in IGA (p > 0.05). 57.14% of patients achieved SCORAD 75 in the apremilast group and 69.56% in the cyclosporine group (p > 0.05). Mean time taken to achieve EASI 75 in the apremilast group was 4.50 ± 4.62 weeks, while it was 3.96 ± 3.43 weeks in the cyclosporine group (p > 0.05). Incidence of AEs was 28.57% in the apremilast group and 21.74%) in the cyclosporine group.

CONCLUSIONS

Apremilast demonstrated lesser efficacy in comparison to cyclosporine; it has the advantage of a favourable safety profile and requires no laboratory monitoring.

Kappa opioid agonists in the treatment of itch: just scratching the surface?

Chronic pruritus is a debilitating condition affecting 23-44 million Americans. Recently, kappa opioid agonists (KOAs) have emerged as a novel class of potent antipruritic agents. In 2021, the Food and Drug Administration approved difelikefalin (Korsuva) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe pruritus associated with chronic kidney disease in adults undergoing hemodialysis. Difelikefalin is a potent, peripherally restricted KOA that is intravenously available. Although promising, difelikefalin is currently available as an intravenous composition only, limiting the scope of use. Oral formulations of difelikefalin did not meet the primary endpoint criteria in recent phase 2 clinical trials; however, additional clinical studies are ongoing. The future for KOAs in the treatment of pruritus is encouraging. Orally active pathway-biased KOAs, such as triazole 1.1, may serve as viable alternatives with broader applications. Extended-release compositions, such as the TP-2021 ProNeura subdermal implant, may circumvent the pharmacokinetic issues associated with peptide-based KOAs. Lastly, dual-acting kappa opioid receptor agonist/mu opioid receptor antagonists are orally bioavailable and may be useful in the treatment of various forms of chronic itch. In this review, we summarize the results of KOAs in clinical and preclinical trials and discuss future directions of drug development.

A Review of Existing and New Treatments for the Management of Hand Eczema

Hand eczema is a chronic condition that affects an estimated 14.5% of the general population. It has severe quality of life ramifications in those that struggle with it, including days missed from work or school, productivity loss and impaired work functioning. For years, the standard of care included topical moisturizing creams, topical steroids and more recently systemic agents. As new therapeutic targets emerge and recent advances are being developed, it is now more possible than ever that hand eczema can be managed via the underlying mechanisms. A review of the literature was conducted to identify current treatment options for hand eczema and chronic hand eczema. The terms 'hand eczema', 'hand dermatitis' were used to search PubMed, CENTRAL and Embase. To identify new therapies still undergoing investigation, we used the terms 'hand eczema', 'hand dermatitis', 'atopic dermatitis', and 'vesicular eczema of hands and/or feet' to search Clinicaltrials.gov for all studies until December 2022. There were 56 ongoing clinical trials identified for pharmacological treatments for hand eczema on Clinicaltrials.gov from 2000 - 2022, with 16 that are new or ongoing. These included studies for dupilumab, ruxolitinib, delgocitinib (LEO124249), gusacitinib (ASN002), AFX 5931, and roflumilast (ARQ-252). Two major classes of drugs emerging for the treatment of hand eczema include IL-4/IL-13 inhibitors and JAK inhibitors. With the increase in efficacy seen with these new drugs, we are also noting improved adverse effect profiles, making them attractive options to add to a clinician's management toolbox for patients with hand eczema.

Oxyresveratrol Attenuates Inflammation in Human Keratinocyte via Regulating NF-kB Signaling and Ameliorates Eczematous Lesion in DNCB-Induced Dermatitis Mice

Oxyresveratrol (ORV) is one of the novel antioxidants having been extensively studied in recent years. One of the main sources of ORV is Artocarpus lakoocha, which has been used in traditional medicine in Thailand for decades. However, the role of ORV in skin inflammation has not been clearly demonstrated. Therefore, we investigated the anti-inflammatory effects of ORV on dermatitis model. The effect of ORV was examined on human immortalized and primary skin cells exposed to bacterial components including peptidoglycan (PGN) and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and 2,4-Dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB)-induced dermatitis mouse model. PGN and LPS were used to induce inflammation on immortalized keratinocytes (HaCaT) and human epidermal keratinocytes (HEKa). We then performed MTT assay, Annexin V and PI assay, cell cycle analysis, real-time PCR, ELISA and Western blot in these in vitro models. H&E staining, immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining with CD3, CD4 and CD8 markers were used to evaluate the effects of ORV in in vivo model of skin inflammation using BALB/c mice. Pretreatment of HaCaT and HEKa cells with ORV inhibited pro-inflammatory cytokine production through inhibition of NF-κB pathway. In DNCB-induced dermatitis mouse model, ORV treatment reduced lesion severity, and skin thickness and numbers of CD3, CD4 and CD8 T cells in the sensitized skin of mice. In conclusion, it has been demonstrated that ORV treatment can ameliorate inflammation in the in vitro models of skin inflammation and in vivo models of dermatitis, suggesting a therapeutic potential of ORV for treatment of skin diseases particularly eczema.

The Impact of Immune-Modulating Treatments for Dermatological Diseases on the Risk of Infection with SARS-CoV-2 and Outcomes Associated with COVID-19 Illness

Purpose of Review

Immune-modulating treatments are used in dermatology for a variety of conditions. The authors aim to review the data regarding the safety of these treatments during the COVID-19 pandemic, namely the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and the outcomes associated with COVID-19-related illness.

Recent Findings

Several large-scale studies found no increased risk of COVID-19 infection for patients on TNF-α inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, IL-23 inhibitors, dupilumab, and methotrexate. They also found that these patients did not have worse outcomes when infected with COVID-19. The data regarding JAK inhibitors, rituximab, prednisone, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, and azathioprine are more mixed.

Summary

Based on current research and guidelines from the American Academy of Dermatology and the National Psoriasis Foundation, dermatology patients on immune-modulating therapies can continue treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic when they are not infected with SARS-CoV-2. For patients who have COVID-19, guidelines encourage individualized assessment of the benefits and risks of continuing or temporarily withholding treatment.

Treatment options for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis

Background: The treatment of chronic refractory moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has traditionally relied on broad-spectrum systemic anti-inflammatory agents. With the introduction of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors (Jakinib), the step management of moderate-to-severe AD is rapidly changing; however, guidelines have yet to provide formal recommendations for how to best incorporate these agents into the treatment plan. Objective: To summarize the updated evidence-based medical treatment for AD, including a proposed position for biologics and Jakinibs in the treatment algorithm. Methods: A literature search of several medical literature data bases for guidelines, position papers, systematic reviews, and clinical trials from 2012 to 2022 on the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD was conducted to prepare this narrative review. Results: Emollients and topical corticosteroids are the mainstay for treating acute flares and for maintaining chronic control. Second-line topical agents include calcineurin inhibitors, e.g., tacrolimus and pimecrolimus; crisaborole; and ruxolitinib. For acute flares, cyclosporine is preferred over systemic corticosteroids. For chronic treatment, phototherapy should be considered before systemic anti-inflammatory agents. Of the traditional anti-inflammatory agents, cyclosporine is the first-line choice, with methotrexate and azathioprine equal secondary choices. Although abrocitinib may have better efficacy then dupilumab based on indirect comparisons, abrocitinib requires closer monitoring for adverse events. Based on package labeling, Jakinibs, e.g., abrocitinib and upadacitinib, should be used only after failure with other systemic agents, including biologics (e.g., dupilumab and tralokinumab). Biologics and Jakinibs should be considered before the traditional systemic anti-inflammatory agents. Conclusion: Clinicians should consider a modified step management for AD as they await the development of national and international guideline recommendations for how best to position the biologics and Jakinibs into the AD treatment algorithm.

European guideline (EuroGuiDerm) on atopic eczema: part I - systemic therapy

The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This first part of the guideline includes general information on its scope and purpose, the health questions covered, target users and a methods section. It also provides guidance on which patients should be treated with systemic therapies, as well as recommendations and detailed information on each systemic drug. The systemic treatment options discussed in the guideline comprise conventional immunosuppressive drugs (azathioprine, ciclosporin, glucocorticosteroids, methotrexate and mycophenolate mofetil), biologics (dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, omalizumab and tralokinumab) and janus kinase inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib). Part two of the guideline will address avoidance of provocation factors, dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine, educational interventions, occupational and psychodermatological aspects, patient perspective and considerations for paediatric, adolescent, pregnant and breastfeeding patients.

Pruritus bei atopischer Dermatitis – vergleichende Bewertung neuer Therapieansätze

Chronischer Pruritus (Dauer ≥ 6 Wochen) betrifft ca. 91 % der Patienten mit atopischer Dermatitis (AD). Neben reinem Jucken werden häufig Begleitsensationen wie Schmerzen, Brennen, Stechen und Hitzegefühl berichtet. Der Leidensdruck betroffener Patienten ist dadurch hoch; Schlaf und Lebensqualität können stark beeinträchtigt sein. Im Fokus der Behandlung der AD steht daher auch die suffiziente Kontrolle des Pruritus. Neben einer intensiven rückfettenden Basispflege können topisch Kortikosteroide und Calcineurininhibitoren angewendet werden. Bei ausgeprägtem Hautbefund kann Phototherapie zur Abheilung von Ekzemen und Linderung des atopischen Pruritus beitragen. Im Hinblick auf Systemtherapien stehen mehrere zugelassene Biologika (Dupilumab, Tralokinumab) und Januskinase-Inhibitoren (Baricitinib, Upadacitinib, Abrocitinib) zur Verfügung, die über die Interferenz mit der Signaltransduktion proinflammatorischer Zytokine zu einer raschen Pruritusreduktion führen. Während Januskinase-Inhibitoren zu einer initial schnelleren Prurituslinderung führen, scheinen sich Biologika und Januskinase-Inhibitoren mit zunehmender Therapiedauer hinsichtlich ihrer antipruritischen Wirksamkeit anzugleichen.

The Use of Azathioprine in Atopic Dermatitis. A Review

Most patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have a good response to topical treatment. However, some need systemic therapy in order to satisfactorily control the disease. Azathioprine is an accessible drug for patients in many countries, including underdeveloped countries, and therefore it's used by many dermatologists in moderate and severe AD. It is important to have a deep knowledge and understanding about this drug since it is an alternative therapy as a steroid-sparing agent and an affordable one. However, when it comes to systemic therapy for AD, it's not always clear its indications and it is necessary to have a closer follow-up of the patient. In this paper we describe thoroughly it's indications in AD, the mechanism of action of the drug, as well as the interactions, adverse effects, adequate monitoring, and precautions in special population that must be considered when prescribing azathioprine. This review will help dermatologists prescribe it safely to all patients who require it. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Narrative review on the management of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis in pediatric age of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP), of the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP) and of the Italian Society of Pediatrics (SIP)

Currently, there are a few detailed guidelines on the overall management of children and adolescents with moderate-severe atopic dermatitis. AD ​​is a complex disease presenting with different clinical phenotypes, which require an individualized and multidisciplinary approach. Therefore, appropriate interaction between primary care pediatricians, pediatric allergists, and pediatric dermatologists is crucial to finding the best management strategy. In this manuscript, members of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP), the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP), and the Italian Society of Pediatrics (SIP) with expertise in the management of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis have reviewed the latest scientific evidence in the field. This narrative review aims to define a pathway to appropriately managing children and adolescents with moderate-severe atopic dermatitis.

Old drugs, new tricks: Emerging role of drug repurposing in the management of atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic recurring pruritic inflammatory skin disease manifested by increased pro-inflammatory mediators which lead to dry, thickened, cracked, scaly skin. The current treatment options for atopic dermatitis management comprise drawbacks and leave unmet effective clinical needs. So, the approach for repurposing existing drugs for atopic dermatitis management may potentially overcome these unmet needs. Diseases that share the common pathophysiological pathways with atopic dermatitis can serve as a foundation for the repurposing of drugs. Drugs used in the management of cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, and other immune-mediated diseases such as psoriasis are under investigation to know the potential in atopic dermatitis management by utilizing repurposing strategies for a novel therapeutic indication. This review mainly envisages the probable repurposing of drugs for the management of atopic dermatitis disease; the barriers and regulatory aspects involved in the repurposing of existing drugs.

Break on through: The role of innate immunity and barrier defence in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis

The human skin can be affected by a multitude of diseases including inflammatory conditions such as atopic dermatitis and psoriasis. Here, we describe how skin barrier integrity and immunity become dysregulated during these two most common inflammatory skin conditions. We summarise recent advances made in the field of the skin innate immune system and its interaction with adaptive immunity. We review gene variants associated with atopic dermatitis and psoriasis that affect innate immune mechanisms and skin barrier integrity. Finally, we discuss how current and future therapies may affect innate immune responses and skin barrier integrity in a generalized or more targeted approach in order to ameliorate disease in patients.

International eDelphi Study to Reach Consensus on the Methotrexate Dosing Regimen in Patients With Psoriasis

Importance

A clear dosing regimen for methotrexate in psoriasis is lacking, and this might lead to a suboptimal treatment. Because methotrexate is affordable and globally available, a uniform dosing regimen could potentially optimize the treatment of patients with psoriasis worldwide.

Objective

To reach international consensus among psoriasis experts on a uniform dosing regimen for treatment with methotrexate in adult and pediatric patients with psoriasis and identify potential future research topics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Between September 2020 and March 2021, a survey study with a modified eDelphi procedure that was developed and distributed by the Amsterdam University Medical Center and completed by 180 participants worldwide (55 [30.6%] resided in non-Western countries) was conducted in 3 rounds. The proposals on which no consensus was reached were discussed in a conference meeting (June 2021). Participants voted on 21 proposals with a 9-point scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neither agree nor disagree, 7-9 agree) and were recruited through the Skin Inflammation and Psoriasis International Network and European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology in June 2020. Apart from being a dermatologist/dermatology resident, there were no specific criteria for participation in the survey. The participants worked mainly at a university hospital (97 [53.9%]) and were experienced in treating patients with psoriasis with methotrexate (163 [91.6%] had more than 10 years of experience).

Main Outcomes and Measures

In a survey with eDelphi procedure, we tried to reach consensus on 21 proposals. Consensus was defined as less than 15% voting disagree (1-3). For the consensus meeting, consensus was defined as less than 30% voting disagree.

Results

Of 251 participants, 180 (71.7%) completed all 3 survey rounds, and 58 participants (23.1%) joined the conference meeting. Consensus was achieved on 11 proposals in round 1, 3 proposals in round 2, and 2 proposals in round 3. In the consensus meeting, consensus was achieved on 4 proposals. More research is needed, especially for the proposals on folic acid and the dosing of methotrexate for treating subpopulations such as children and vulnerable patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this eDelphi consensus study, consensus was reached on 20 of 21 proposals involving methotrexate dosing in patients with psoriasis. This consensus may potentially be used to harmonize the treatment with methotrexate in patients with psoriasis.

Systemic Immunomodulatory Treatments for Atopic Dermatitis: Update of a Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Importance

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis are being evaluated primarily in placebo-controlled trials; network meta-analysis can provide relative efficacy and safety estimates for treatments that have not been compared head to head.

Objective

To compare reported measures of efficacy and assessments of safety in clinical trials of systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data Sources

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database, Global Resource of EczemA Trials database, and trial registries were searched through June 15, 2021.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials examining 8 or more weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were included after screening titles, abstracts, and papers in duplicate.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were abstracted in duplicate. Bayesian network meta-analyses and assessed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation certainty of evidence were performed. The updated analysis was completed from June to December 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes include change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scales (PP-NRS).

Results

Since October 2019, 21 new studies were added, for a total of 60 trials with 16 579 patients. Up to 16 weeks of treatment in adults, abrocitinib, 200 mg daily (mean difference [MD], 2.2; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.2-4.0; high certainty) and upadacitinib, 30 mg daily (MD, 2.7; 95% CrI, 0.6-4.7; high certainty) were associated with reduced EASI slightly more than dupilumab, 600 mg then 300 mg every 2 weeks. Abrocitinib, 100 mg daily (MD, -2.1; 95% CrI, -4.1 to -0.3; high certainty), baricitinib, 4 mg daily (MD, -3.2; 95% CrI, -5.7 to -0.8; high certainty), baricitinib, 2 mg daily (MD, -5.2; 95% CrI, -7.5 to -2.9; high certainty) and tralokinumab, 600 mg then 300 mg every 2 weeks (MD, -3.5; 95% CrI, -5.8 to -1.3; high certainty) were associated with reduced EASI slightly less than dupilumab. There was little or no difference between upadacitinib, 15 mg daily, and dupilumab (MD, 0.2; 95% CrI, -1.9 to 2.2; high certainty). The pattern of results was similar for POEM, DLQI, and PP-NRS.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, abrocitinib, 200 mg; and upadacitinib, 30 mg daily, were associated with slightly better scores than dupilumab, and upadacitinib, 15 mg daily, was associated with similar scores to dupilumab. Abrocitinib, 100 mg daily, baricitinib, 4 mg and 2 mg daily, and tralokinumab, 300 mg, every 2 weeks were associated with slightly worse scores.

Safety of conventional immunosuppressive therapies for patients with dermatological conditions and coronavirus disease 2019: A review of current evidence

The effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on patients receiving conventional immunosuppressive (IS) therapy has yet to be fully determined; however, research on using IS therapy for treating COVID-19 in acutely ill patients is increasing. While some believe that IS therapy may be protective, others argue that these agents may make patients more susceptible to COVID-19 infection and morbidity and advocate for a more cautious, individualized approach to determining continuation, reduction, or discontinuation of therapy. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of COVID-19 risk in dermatological patients who are receiving conventional IS therapies, including mycophenolate mofetil, methotrexate, cyclosporine, azathioprine, apremilast, JAK inhibitors, and systemic steroids. Additionally, we provide recommendations for management of these medications for dermatological patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Treatment of dermatological disease during the COVID-19 pandemic should involve shared decision-making between the patient and provider, with consideration of each patient's comorbidities and the severity of the patient's dermatological disease.

Consensus Update for Systemic Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

Background

In 2015, the Korean Atopic Dermatitis Association (KADA) working group published consensus guidelines for treating atopic dermatitis (AD).

Objective

We aimed to provide updated consensus recommendations for systemic treatment of AD in South Korea based on recent evidence and experience.

Methods

We compiled a database of references from relevant systematic reviews and guidelines on the systemic management of AD. Evidence for each statement was graded and classified based on thestrength of the recommendation. Forty-two council members from the KADA participated in three rounds of voting to establish a consensus on expert recommendations.

Results

We do not recommend long-term treatment with systemic steroids forpatients with moderate-to-severe AD due to the risk of adverse effects. We recommend treatment with cyclosporine or dupilumab and selective treatment with methotrexate or azathioprine for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We suggest treatment with antihistamines as an option for alleviating clinical symptoms of AD. We recommend selective treatment with narrowband ultraviolet B for patients with chronic moderate-to-severe AD. We do not recommend treatment with oral antibiotics for patients with moderate-to-severe AD but who have no signs of infection. We did not reach a consensus on recommendations for treatment with allergen-specific immunotherapy, probiotics, evening primrose oil, orvitamin D for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. We also recommend educational interventions and counselling for patients with AD and caregivers to improve the treatment success rate.

Conclusion

We look forward to implementing a new and updated consensus of systemic therapy in controlling patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

An update to the 2013-2014 American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) guidelines for the pharmacological management of atopic dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis is a common dermatologic condition that affects millions of people worldwide, and a standardized approach to treatment was published by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) in 2013-14. Since 2014, new FDA-approved treatment options such as dupilumab and crisaborole have changed the landscape of AD management, and future therapies such as JAK inhibitors and anti-interleukin 13 and 31 antibodies appear effective, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review to give clinicians an updated toolbox to aid in pharmacologic management.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors explore the updated efficacy and safety data on established therapeutic options for AD including topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, cyclosporine, azathioprine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil. In addition, the authors also explore trial data and studies on dupilumab, crisaborole, omalizumab, tofacitinib, ruxolinitib, abrocitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, delgocitinib, nemoliuzumab, and tralokinumab.

EXPERT OPINION

The AAD guidelines must be updated in the future to include several new treatment modalities that have revolutionized the pharmacologic management of patients with AD, including dupilumab and crisaborole. The future of AD treatment is also extremely bright, as JAK inhibitors and Il-13/31 antibodies have shown convincing results in the improvement of AD patients' lives in various trials and studies that have been examined in this paper.

Transcriptomic profiling of recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa wounded skin highlights drug repurposing opportunities to improve wound healing

Chronic wounds present a major disease burden in people with recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (RDEB), an inherited blistering skin disorder caused by mutations in COL7A1 encoding type VII collagen, the major component of anchoring fibrils at the dermal-epidermal junction. Treatment of RDEB wounds is mostly symptomatic, and there is considerable unmet need in trying to improve and accelerate wound healing. In this study, we defined transcriptomic profiles and gene pathways in RDEB wounds and compared these to intact skin in RDEB and healthy control subjects. We then used a reverse transcriptomics approach to discover drugs or compounds, which might restore RDEB wound profiles towards intact skin. Differential expression analysis identified >2000 differences between RDEB wounds and intact skin, with RDEB wounds displaying aberrant cytokine-cytokine interactions, Toll-like receptor signalling, and JAK-STAT signalling pathways. In-silico prediction for compounds that reverse gene expression signatures highlighted methotrexate as a leading candidate. Overall, this study provides insight into the molecular profiles of RDEB wounds and underscores the possible clinical value of reverse transcriptomics data analysis in RDEB, and the potential of this approach in discovering or repurposing drugs for other diseases.

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.

Do patient characteristics matter when calculating sample size for eczema clinical trials?

Background

The Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) is the core outcome instrument recommended for measuring patient‐reported atopic eczema symptoms in clinical trials. To ensure that the statistical significance of clinical trial results is meaningful, trials are often designed by specifying the target difference in the primary outcome as part of the sample size calculation. One method used to specify the target difference is a score that corresponds to a standardized effect size.

Objectives

to assess how the standardized effect size of POEM scores vary across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity.

Methods

This study combined data from five UK‐based randomized clinical trials of eczema treatments in order to assess differences in self‐reported eczema symptoms (POEM) corresponding to a standardized effect size (0.5 SD of baseline POEM scores) across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity.

Results

POEM scores corresponding to 0.5 SD_(baseline) were remarkably consistent across participants of varying ages, gender, ethnicity and disease severity from datasets of five UK trials in children (range 2.99–3.45).

Conclusions

This study provides information that can support those designing clinical trials to determine their sample size and can aid individuals interpreting trial results. Further exploration of differences in populations beyond the United Kingdom is needed.

On which evidence can we rely when prescribing off-label methotrexate in dermatological practice? - a systematic review with GRADE approach

If an authorized drug is prescribed for a use that is not described in the Summary of Product Characteristics, this is defined as 'off-label use.' Methotrexate is often used off-label for dermatological indications. Off-label use is permitted if physicians can justify the treatment based on scientific evidence available to them. Our objective here was therefore to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the dermatological off-label use of methotrexate in a systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for studies for evidence on the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the off-label use of methotrexate in dermatological indications up to November 2019. We used the GRADE system to rate the quality of the evidence. The search retrieved 34,583 hits of which 3566 were selected after the title and abstract screening. After the full-text screening, 143 studies were included, which involved 3688 patients in total. We found low-quality evidence for the effectiveness, efficacy, and safety of the off-label use of methotrexate in 31 dermatological diseases. To optimize the quality of evidence to support off-label use, we need high-quality studies in which well-characterized patients are treated with standardized treatments regimens using well-validated outcomes relevant to patients and physicians.

Oral Pulse Betamethasone, Methotrexate, and Combination Therapy to Treat Severe Alopecia Areata: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Clinical Trial

The purpose of this study is to compare oral betamethasone pulse therapy, methotrexate therapy and a combination of the two for patients with Alopecia Areata (AA) as an autoimmune disorder. In this study, 36 patients with severe AA were selected and classified into three groups of 12: 1- Oral betamethasone therapy (3 mg, once a week) with placebo; 2- Oral methotrexate (15 mg, once a week) with placebo; and 3- A combination of methotrexate (15 mg, once a week) and betamethasone (3 mg, once a week). The Severity Alopecia Tool (SALT) was used to measure improvements in the lesions through photographs, and the patients also rated their condition on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Assessments were performed, and the results were compared at baseline and then at intervals of three months for nine months. The demographics and SALT score were similar in the three groups (P > 0.05). All the groups showed improvements in SALT, VAS and photographic scores three months after beginning the treatment (P < 0.001). Betamethasone therapy (P = 0.006) and combination therapy (P < 0.001) provided greater SALT improvement than methotrexate, and combination therapy led to a greater improvement in VAS and photographic findings compared to the two other groups (P < 0.05). Oral steroid, methotrexate and combination pulse therapy were effective treatments for AA, while oral steroid pulse therapy and combination therapy were superior to methotrexate.

Current Clinical Options for the Management of Itch in Atopic Dermatitis

Pruritus is the most burdensome and prevalent symptom in patients suffering from atopic dermatitis. Treating atopic itch has historically been a challenge due to multiple underlying mechanisms within its pathogenesis and an incomplete understanding of them. In recent years, our understanding of these mechanisms have increased tremendously and subsequently, new treatments have reached the market that target the pathophysiology of atopic itch from different angles. In addition, there are several promising new treatments currently in development and trials. In the current article, we discuss these currently available treatment options, their available evidence and efficacy, and highlight some of the more recent advancements in the field.

Current Perspectives on the Systemic Management of Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common disease of childhood, and some patients experience a prolonged clinical course into adolescence and adulthood. Systemic management is required when AD is not adequately controlled with topical medications. Our aim is to provide a comprehensive review of commonly used systemic immunomodulating agents in childhood and adult AD, including cyclosporine A (CsA), azathioprine (AZA), methotrexate (MTX) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), which are prescribed off-label in the United States, as well as dupilumab, an FDA-approved biologic. We will also provide a brief overview of emerging systemic therapies currently under investigation.

[Recommendations when switching therapy from immunosuppressive drugs to dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis]

Based on new insights into the molecular pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis, a targeted anti-inflammatory therapy-dupilumab-has recently been approved as treatment alongside glucocorticoids and ciclosporin. Due to their pharmacology, neither glucocorticoids nor ciclosporin nor the off label used substances methotrexate, azathioprine and mycophenolic acid derivatives are suitable for long-term therapy. When switching therapy from small molecular substances to dupilumab, various factors should be considered. Both the specific cause of the change (ineffectiveness, adverse effects or contraindications) as well as the pharmacological conditions should be taken into account. Since there have been no specific clinical studies on this subject so far, the authors relied mainly on a literature search to draw up recommendations for practical everyday use.

Systemic treatments in the management of atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As an evidence resource for the currently planned European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) clinical practice guideline "systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD)," we critically appraised evidence on systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the safety and efficacy of systemic treatments for AD up to February 2020. Primary efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, AD symptoms and health-related quality of life. Primary safety outcomes included cumulative incidence rates for (serious) adverse events. Trial quality was assessed applying the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Meta-analyses were conducted where appropriate.

RESULTS

50 RCTs totalling 6681 patients were included. Trial evidence was identified for apremilast, azathioprine (AZA), baricitinib, ciclosporin A (CSA), corticosteroids, dupilumab, interferon-gamma, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), mepolizumab, methotrexate (MTX), omalizumab, upadacitinib and ustekinumab. Meta-analyses were indicated for the efficacy of baricitinib [EASI75 RD 0.16, 95% CI (0.10;0.23)] and dupilumab [EASI75, RD 0.37, 95% CI (0.32;0.42)] indicating short-term (ie 16-week treatment) superiority over placebo. Furthermore, efficacy analyses of AZA and CSA indicated short-term superiority over placebo; however, nonvalidated scores were used and can therefore not be compared to EASI.

CONCLUSION

The most robust, replicated high-quality trial evidence is present for the efficacy and safety of dupilumab for up to 1 year in adults. Robust trial evidence was further revealed for AZA, baricitinib and CSA. Methodological restrictions led to limited evidence-based conclusions for all other systemic treatments. Head-to-head trials with novel systemic treatments are required to clarify the future role of conventional therapies.

Update "Systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis" of the S2k-guideline on atopic dermatitis

This guideline is an update from August 2020 the S2k-guideline "Atopic dermatitis" published in 2015. The reason for updating this chapter of the guideline were the current developments in the field of systemic therapy of atopic dermatitis. The agreed recommendations for systemic treatment in atopic dermatitis of the present guideline are based on current scientific data. Due to the approval of dupilumab for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, which cannot be treated sufficiently with topical drugs alone, this part of the guideline has now been adapted and newly consented. The indication for systemic therapy and the therapeutic response to topical and systemic treatment should be recorded and documented in a suitable form in clinic and practice. A standardized documentation of the indication for system therapy in atopic dermatitis can be recommended and is also part of the updated chapter of this guideline.

Infection risk in sarcoidosis patients treated with methotrexate compared to azathioprine: A retrospective 'target trial' emulated with Swedish real-world data

The 6‐month infection risk was 43% lower in patients with sarcoidosis who initiated methotrexate compared to those who started azathioprine. Our findings suggest that unless contraindications exist, methotrexate should be preferred over azathioprine as the primary steroid‐sparing choice in individuals with sarcoidosis.

Background and objective

No clinical trial has examined the risk of infection associated methotrexate and azathioprine, two advocated treatments for sarcoidosis. We aimed to compare the 6‐month risk of infection after the initiation of methotrexate or azathioprine.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective target trial emulation using Swedish pre‐existing data. We searched for eligible participants who were dispensed methotrexate or azathioprine in the Prescribed Drug Register (PDR) every day between January 2007 and June 2013. Adults were eligible if they had ≥2 ICD‐coded visits for sarcoidosis in the National Patient Register (NPR) and were dispensed ≥1 systemic corticosteroid but no methotrexate or azathioprine in the past 6 months (PDR). Within 6 months of methotrexate or azathioprine initiation, diagnosis of infectious disease was identified (visit in the NPR where infectious disease was the primary diagnosis). We estimated RR and risk differences comparing methotrexate (n = 667) to azathioprine initiations (n = 259) using targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) adjusting for demographic factors, comorbidity and sarcoidosis severity proxies.

Results

There were 43 infections in the methotrexate group (adjusted 6‐month risk 6.8%) and 29 infections in the azathioprine group (12.0%). The RR for infectious disease at 6 months associated with methotrexate compared to azathioprine initiation was 0.57 (95% CI: 0.39, 0.82) and the risk difference was −5.2% (95% CI: −8.5%, −1.8%). The RR at 9 months was attenuated to 0.77 (95% CI: 0.52, 1.14).

Conclusion

Methotrexate appears to be associated with a lower risk of infection in sarcoidosis than azathioprine, but randomized trials should confirm this finding.

Drugs for the Treatment of Chronic Hand Eczema: Successes and Key Challenges

Chronic hand eczema (CHE) is a common and burdensome inflammatory skin condition seen in up to 10% of the population, more often in high-risk occupational workers. Topical therapeutics comprise the standard of care, but up to 65% of cases do not resolve after treatment, and moderate-to-severe cases are often resistant to topical therapeutics and require systemic options instead. To date, there are no systemic therapeutics approved to treat CHE in the United States, but several drugs are under investigation as potential treatments for CHE. The primary focus of this review is on the novel therapeutics, topical and systemic, that are under investigation in recently completed or currently ongoing trials. This review also briefly outlines the existing treatments utilized for CHE, often with limited success or extensive adverse effects. CHE represents a major challenge for physicians and patients alike, and efforts to improve the minimally invasive diagnostic tools and treatment paradigms are ongoing. In the near future, CHE patients may benefit from new topical and systemic therapeutics that specifically target abnormally expressed immune markers.

Atopic dermatitis epidemiology and unmet need in the United Kingdom

Atopic dermatitis (AD), also known as atopic eczema, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition associated with a significant health-related and socioeconomic burden, and is characterized by intense itch, disruption of the skin barrier, and upregulation of type 2-mediated immune responses. The United Kingdom (UK) has a high prevalence of AD, affecting 11-20% of children and 5-10% of adults. Approximately 2% of all cases of childhood AD in the UK are severe. Despite this, most AD treatments are performed at home, with little contact with healthcare providers or services. Here, we discuss the course of AD, treatment practices, and unmet need in the UK. Although the underlying etiology of the disease is still emerging, AD is currently attributed to skin barrier dysfunction and altered inflammatory responses. Management of AD focuses on avoiding triggers, improving skin hydration, managing exacerbating factors, and reducing inflammation through topical and systemic immunosuppressants. However, there is a significant unmet need to improve the overall management of AD and help patients gain control of their disease through safe and effective treatments. Approaches that target individual inflammatory pathways (e.g. dupilumab, anti-interleukin (IL)-4 receptor α) are emerging and likely to provide further therapeutic opportunities for patient benefit.

Systemic treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common and chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin disorder. It seriously impacts quality of life and economic outcomes, especially for those with moderate to severe eczema. Various treatments allow sustained control of the disease; however, their relative benefit remains unclear due to the limited number of trials directly comparing treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different types of systemic immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe eczema using NMA and to generate rankings of available systemic immunosuppressive treatments for eczema according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to August 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic immunosuppressive agents for moderate to severe atopic eczema when compared against placebo or any other eligible eczema treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We synthesised data using pair-wise analysis and NMA to compare treatments and rank them according to their effectiveness. Effectiveness was assessed primarily by determining the proportion of participants who achieved at least 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75) and improvement in the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). Safety was evaluated primarily by considering the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) and infection. We deemed short-term follow-up as ≤ 16 weeks and long-term follow-up as > 16 weeks. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for these primary outcomes using six domains of CiNEMA grading.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 74 studies, with 8177 randomised participants. Approximately 55% of participants were male, with average age of 32 years (range 2 to 84 years), although age and gender were unreported for 419 and 902 participants, respectively. Most of the included trials were placebo controlled (65%), 34% were head-to-head studies (15% assessed the effects of different doses of the same drug), and 1% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. All trials included participants with moderate to severe eczema, but 62% of studies did not separate data by severity; 38% of studies assessed only severe eczema. The total duration of included trials ranged from 2 weeks to 60 months, whereas treatment duration varied from a single dose (CIM331, KPL-716) to 60 months (methotrexate (MTX)). Seventy studies were available for quantitative synthesis; this review assessed 29 immunosuppressive agents from three classes of interventions. These included (1) conventional treatments, with ciclosporin assessed most commonly; (2) small molecule treatments, including phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors; and (3) biological treatments, including anti-CD31 receptors, anti-interleukin (IL)-22, anti-IL-31, anti-IL-13, anti-IL-12/23p40, anti-OX40, anti-TSLP, anti-CRTH2, and anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibodies, but most commonly dupilumab. Most trials (73) assessed outcomes at a short-term duration ranging from 2 to 16 weeks, whereas 33 trials assessed long-term outcomes, with duration ranging from 5 to 60 months. All participants were from a hospital setting. Fifty-two studies declared a source of funding, and of these, pharmaceutical companies funded 88%. We rated 37 studies as high risk; 21, unclear risk, and 16, low risk of bias, with studies most commonly at high risk of attrition bias. Network meta-analysis suggests that dupilumab ranks first for effectiveness when compared with other biological treatments. Dupilumab is more effective than placebo in achieving EASI75 (risk ratio (RR) 3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.51 to 3.69) and improvement in POEM score (mean difference 7.30, 95% CI 6.61 to 8.00) at short-term follow-up (high-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain of the effects of dupilumab when compared with placebo, in terms of the proportion of participants who achieve EASI75 (RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.60) at longer-term follow-up. Low-certainty evidence indicates that tralokinumab may be more effective than placebo in achieving short-term EASI75 (RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.34), but there was no evidence for tralokinumab to allow us to assess short-term follow-up of POEM or long-term follow-up of EASI75. We are uncertain of the effect of ustekinumab compared with placebo in achieving EASI75 (long-term follow-up: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.45; short-term follow-up: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.97; both very low certainty). We found no evidence on ustekinumab for the POEM outcome. We are uncertain whether other immunosuppressive agents that targeted our key outcomes influence the achievement of short-term EASI75 compared with placebo due to low- or very low-certainty evidence. Dupilumab and ustekinumab were the only immunosuppressive agents evaluated for longer-term EASI75. Dupilumab was the only agent evaluated for improvement in POEM during short-term follow-up. Low- to moderate-certainty evidence indicates a lower proportion of participants with SAEs after treatment with QAW039 and dupilumab compared to placebo during short-term follow-up, but low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in SAEs during short-term follow-up of other immunosuppressive agents compared to placebo. Evidence for effects of immunosuppressive agents on risk of any infection during short-term follow-up and SAEs during long-term follow-up compared with placebo was of low or very low certainty but did not indicate a difference. We did not identify differences in other adverse events (AEs), but dupilumab is associated with specific AEs, including eye inflammation and eosinophilia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that dupilumab is the most effective biological treatment for eczema. Compared to placebo, dupilumab reduces eczema signs and symptoms in the short term for people with moderate to severe atopic eczema. Short-term safety outcomes from clinical trials did not reveal new safety concerns with dupilumab. Overall, evidence for the efficacy of most other immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe atopic eczema is of low or very low certainty. Given the lack of data comparing conventional with newer biological treatments for the primary outcomes, there remains high uncertainty for ranking the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments such as ciclosporin and biological treatments such as dupilumab. Most studies were placebo-controlled and assessed only short-term efficacy of immunosuppressive agents. Further adequately powered head-to-head RCTs should evaluate comparative long-term efficacy and safety of available treatments for moderate to severe eczema.

Atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a common inflammatory skin disorder characterised by recurrent eczematous lesions and intense itch. The disorder affects people of all ages and ethnicities, has a substantial psychosocial impact on patients and relatives, and is the leading cause of the global burden from skin disease. Atopic dermatitis is associated with increased risk of multiple comorbidities, including food allergy, asthma, allergic rhinitis, and mental health disorders. The pathophysiology is complex and involves a strong genetic predisposition, epidermal dysfunction, and T-cell driven inflammation. Although type-2 mechanisms are dominant, there is increasing evidence that the disorder involves multiple immune pathways. Currently, there is no cure, but increasing numbers of innovative and targeted therapies hold promise for achieving disease control, including in patients with recalcitrant disease. We summarise and discuss advances in our understanding of the disease and their implications for prevention, management, and future research.

Infection risk of dermatologic therapeutics during the COVID-19 pandemic: an evidence-based recalibration

Recommendations were made recently to limit or stop the use of oral and systemic immunotherapies for skin diseases due to potential risks to the patients during the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we attempt to identify potentially safe immunotherapies that may be used in the treatment of cutaneous diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a literature review to approximate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including available data on the roles of relevant cytokines, cell subsets, and their mediators in eliciting an optimal immune response against respiratory viruses in murine gene deletion models and humans with congenital deficiencies were reviewed for viral infections risk and if possible coronaviruses specifically. Furthermore, reported risk of infections of biologic and non-biologic therapeutics for skin diseases from clinical trials and drug data registries were evaluated. Many of the immunotherapies used in dermatology have data to support their safe use during the COVID-19 pandemic including the biologics that target IgE, IL-4/13, TNF-α, IL-17, IL-12, and IL-23. Furthermore, we provide evidence to show that oral immunosuppressive medications such as methotrexate and cyclosporine do not significantly increase the risk to patients. Most biologic and conventional immunotherapies, based on doses and indications in dermatology, do not appear to increase risk of viral susceptibility and are most likely safe for use during the COVID-19 pandemic. The limitation of this study is availability of data on COVID-19.

Topical methotrexate in dermatology: a review of the literature

Background: Systemic methotrexate (MTX) is a useful treatment for many dermatologic conditions, however, the risk of adverse events prevents its use in patients with minimal or localized disease. Topical application of MTX may be an option to avoid the systemic adverse effects of oral MTX.Objective: To assess what is known about the efficacy and safety of topical methotrexate.Methods: A search on Pubmed was conducted. There were no limits on publication date.Results: A total of 963 articles were discovered. Using our exclusion criteria, 916 articles were excluded; 47 articles were used for full text assessment. Topical MTX has been used primarily in psoriasis but also in mycosis fungoides, lymphomatoid papulosis, and oral precancerous lesions. Optimal delivery system and formulation for adequate penetration is still under investigation.Conclusion: The quality of evidence for the utility of topical methotrexate in psoriasis is good, however, for other dermatologic diseases, the quality is poor. Topical MTX with improved delivery methods may be a viable tool against certain localized dermatologic conditions for patients who do not tolerate oral MTX. Further double-blinded randomized controled studies are needed to substantiate the utility of topical methotrexate.

Pharmacological management of atopic dermatitis in the elderly

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in geriatric populations of industrialized countries is currently estimated at 3-4% and continues to increase. AD is associated with significant morbidity, increased susceptibility to infection, and symptoms of pruritus and pain. Treatments may negatively affect elderly patients; thus, plans should be optimized for this population.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes treatment options for AD in the elderly. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the key terms atopic dermatitis, elderly, geriatric, systemic therapy, therapy, and topical therapy in PubMed. Searches yielded articles on skincare management and topical and systemic pharmacotherapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Proper use of moisturizer is crucial in all patients with AD. Topical corticosteroids are commonly prescribed; however, they carry an increased risk of adverse events such as skin atrophy. Systemic corticosteroids should be avoided in elderly patients due to questionable efficacy and increased adverse events. Topical calcineurin inhibitors and crisaborole are similarly efficacious with an excellent safety profile. Cyclosporine, azathioprine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil are systemic agents available for the treatment of refractory AD; however, insufficient data exist to indicate the superiority of any one agent. Dupilumab is a safe and efficacious injectable therapy in elderly patients.

Atopic dermatitis. Interdisciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of the Polish Dermatological Society, Polish Society of Allergology, Polish Pediatric Society and Polish Society of Family Medicine. Part II. Systemic treatment and new therapeutic methods

The treatment goal in atopic dermatitis is eliminating clinical symptoms of the disease, preventing exacerbations and complications, as well as improving patients’ quality of life. In cases of severe atopic dermatitis and lack of response it is recommended to introduce systemic therapy. Patients ofter require multi-specialist consultations, and occasionally hospitalization. It is not recommended to use acupuncture, acupressure, bioresonance, homeopathy, or Chinese herbs in the treatment of atopic dermatitis.