British Association of Dermatologists guidelines for the safe and effective prescribing of oral ciclosporin in dermatology 2018

Oral Psoriasis Therapies

Oral psoriasis therapies include both older traditional immunosuppressants, such as methotrexate, cyclosporine, and acitretin, as well as newer, more targeted agents, such as apremilast, deucravacitinib, and oral interleukin-23 receptor antagonists. Patients may prefer oral therapies to injectable therapies based on the route of administration. Both older and newer oral psoriasis therapies can be utilized effectively in the treatment of psoriasis. Here, we will review oral agents used in the treatment of psoriasis as well as provide commentary on their role in our current, evolving psoriasis treatment paradigm.

Basic Susceptibility of Patients with Psoriasis under Systemic Therapy for Respiratory Infections: Data from the German Psoriasis Registry PsoBest

Background: Patients with psoriasis under systemic treatments are in focus regarding their susceptibility to respiratory infections. To analyse real-world data for respiratory infections in patients with psoriasis under systemic treatments. Methods: We analysed data of the prospective, non-interventional German Psoriasis Registry PsoBest and compared rates for respiratory infections of 13,823 patients on systemic treatments for psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis in different therapy cohorts before the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: In total, 1415 respiratory infections were observed in 970 patients. Significant differences were observed between biologics and non-biologics, but not within these groups. The highest event rates (events/100 patient years) were identified for TNF-α inhibitors, 8.1, (CI 7.4-8.9), followed by 7.0 for IL-17 inhibitors (6.2-7.9), 5.7 for IL-12/23 and IL-23 inhibitors (5.1-6.5), 4.8 for methotrexate (4.3-5.4), 3.7 for small molecules (3.3-4.2), and 2.7 for retinoids (1.2-5.1). Conclusions: Overall, the susceptibility for respiratory infections in patients under systemic therapy for psoriasis is low compared to published study data and is sufficient as comparative data for COVID-19 studies.

European expert consensus statement on the systemic treatment of alopecia areata

Alopecia areata is an autoimmune form of non-scarring hair loss. It is usually characterized by limited areas of hair loss. However, the disease may progress to complete scalp and body hair loss (alopecia totalis, alopecia universalis). In patients with alopecia areata hair loss significantly impacts the quality of life. Children and adolescents with alopecia areata often experience bullying, including physical aggression. The disease severity evaluation tools used in clinical practice are: the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score and the Alopecia Areata Scale (AAS). A SALT score equal to or greater than 20 constitutes a commonly accepted indication for systemic therapy in alopecia areata. When using the AAS, moderate to severe alopecia areata should be considered a medical indication for systemic treatment. Currently, the only two EMA-approved medications for alopecia areata are baricitinib (JAK 1/2 inhibitor) for adults and ritlecitinib (JAK 3/TEC inhibitor) for individuals aged 12 and older. Both are EMA-approved for patients with severe alopecia areata. Other systemic medications used off-label in alopecia areata include glucocorticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate and azathioprine. Oral minoxidil is considered an adjuvant therapy with limited data confirming its possible efficacy. This consensus statement is to outline a systemic treatment algorithm for alopecia areata, indications for systemic treatment, available therapeutic options, their efficacy and safety, as well as the duration of the therapy.

Psoriasis comorbidity management in the COVID era: a pressing challenge

The global COVID-19 pandemic has presented a significant, ongoing challenge since its emergence in late 2019. Today, the Omicron strain, which is less lethal but more contagious than the original outbreak strain, continues to pose substantial health risks. In this background, the management of psoriatic comorbidities has become even more complex, particularly for patients with underlying inflammatory, metabolic, or cardiovascular diseases. This review aims to summarize current research on comorbid COVID-19 and psoriasis, and provide insights into the development of evidence-based management strategies. By providing appropriate patient instruction, implementing protective measures, and re-evaluating medication prescriptions based on each patient's unique situation, healthcare professionals can effectively address the challenges faced by patients with comorbid psoriasis in the COVID-19 era.

Efficacy and Safety of Apremilast for the Treatment of Japanese Patients with Palmoplantar Pustulosis: Results from a Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) is a pruritic, painful, recurrent, and chronic dermatitis with limited therapeutic options.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of apremilast for the treatment of Japanese patients with PPP and inadequate response to topical treatment.

METHODS

This phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients with Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) total score ≥ 12 and moderate or severe pustules/vesicles on the palm or sole (PPPASI pustule/vesicle severity score ≥ 2) at screening and baseline with an inadequate response to topical treatment. Patients were randomized (1:1) to apremilast 30 mg twice daily or placebo for 16 weeks, followed by a 16-week extension phase during which all patients received apremilast. The primary endpoint was achievement of PPPASI-50 response (≥ 50% improvement from baseline in PPPASI). Key secondary endpoints included change from baseline in PPPASI total score, Palmoplantar Pustulosis Severity Index (PPSI), and patient's visual analog scale (VAS) for PPP symptoms (pruritus and discomfort/pain).

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients were randomized (apremilast: 46; placebo: 44). A significantly greater proportion of patients achieved PPPASI-50 at week 16 with apremilast versus placebo (P = 0.0003). Patients receiving apremilast showed greater improvement in PPPASI at week 16 versus placebo (nominal P = 0.0013), as well as PPSI and patient-reported pruritus and discomfort/pain (nominal P ≤ 0.001 for all). Improvements were sustained through week 32 with apremilast treatment. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea, abdominal discomfort, headache, and nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

Apremilast treatment demonstrated greater improvements in disease severity and patient-reported symptoms versus placebo at week 16 in Japanese patients with PPP with sustained improvements through week 32. No new safety signals were observed.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV: NCT04057937.

Breastfeeding by a mother taking cyclosporine for nephrotic syndrome

Background

Cyclosporine is widely used for immunosuppressive treatment of various systematic and local autoimmune diseases. Breastfeeding is conventionally contraindicated when treating with cyclosporine due to its excretion into breast milk, which may cause immune suppression of exposed infants and affect infants` growth. A few cases have tested cyclosporine levels in random breast milk samples and concluded the infants exposed to safe cyclosporine levels during breastfeeding. Since infants do not maintain a fixed feeding schedule, we monitored cyclosporine levels in breast milk at different times of the day to assess the safety of breast milk for infants throughout the day.

Case presentation

A 32-year-old dichorionic twin-pregnancy woman had nephrotic syndrome with renal biopsy confirmed type V lupus nephritis for over five years. She was treated only with prednisone 10 mg a day before pregnancy and during early pregnancy. Cyclosporine was added in her regimen from 22 weeks gestation and was adjusted to 225 mg a day from 28 weeks gestation. After parturition, she partially breastfed her twin infants while being treated with cyclosporine 3 mg/kg a day as well as prednisone and hydroxychloroquine sulfate. The cyclosporine level in maternal blood was determined, and several breast milk samples were collected for consecutive 48 h beginning on the ninth day after parturition. The concentration of cyclosporine in breast milk was measured and ranged from 0.443 to 5.307 mcg/L. Both infants grew and developed normally at the three-month follow-up, with no adverse effects observed. The study was conducted at West China Second University Hospital of Sichuan University, started in September 2021, with the consent of the participant and the approval of the ethics committee.

Conclusion

In this case, cyclosporine levels in breast milk were low at all times of the day. The growth and development of both infants were normal at three months postpartum. Thus, breastfeeding may still be an option for mothers with nephrotic syndrome who are treated with cyclosporine.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13006-022-00514-4.

Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP) - a systematic review of atopic dermatitis clinical practice guidelines: are they clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence based (CUTE)?

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential in delivering optimum health care, such as for atopic dermatitis (AD), a highly prevalent skin disease. Although many CPGs are available for AD, their quality has not been critically appraised.

OBJECTIVE

To identify CPGs on AD worldwide and assess with validated instruments if those CPGs are clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence based (CUTE).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier for CPGs on AD published between 1 April 2016 and 1 April 2021. Additionally we hand searched prespecified guideline resources. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of eligible guidelines were independently carried out by two authors. Instruments used for quality assessment were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Reporting Checklist, the U.S. Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness and Lenzer's Red Flags.

RESULTS

Forty CPGs were included, mostly from countries with a high socio-demographic index. The reported quality varied enormously. Three CPGs scored 'Excellent' on all AGREEII-domains: Columbia, the Netherlands and United Kingdom (UK; antimicrobials). Three CPGs scored 'Poor' on all domains: Poland (phototherapy), Romania and Serbia. We found no association between AGREEII-scores and a country's gross domestic product. One CPG fully met all nine IOM criteria (Malaysia) and two fully met eight (European dupilumab and UK antimicrobials). Three CPGs had no red flags: Malaysia, South Korea and UK antimicrobials. 'Applicability' and 'Rigour of development' were the lowest scoring AGREEII domains; 'Lack of external review', 'Updating procedures' and 'Rating strength of recommendations' met the least IOM criteria; and most red flags were for 'Limited or no involvement of methodological expertise' and 'No external review'. Management of conflict of interests (COI) appeared challenging. When constructs of the instruments overlapped, they showed high concordance, strengthening our conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, many CPGs are not clear, unbiased, trustworthy or evidence based (CUTE) enough and lack applicability. Therefore improvement is warranted, for which using the AGREEII instrument is recommended. Some improvements can be easily accomplished through robust reporting. Others, such as transparency, applicability, evidence foundation and managing COI, might require more effort.

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

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

Biologics for severe, chronic plaque psoriasis: An Australian cost-utility analysis

Background

Biologics are a good therapeutic option for severe, chronic plaque psoriasis; however, they come with significant cost to the health care system.

Objective

To conduct a cost-utility analysis of outpatient biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, guselkumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab) available to adults with severe, chronic plaque psoriasis from the perspective of the Australian health care system.

Methods

A Markov cohort model was constructed to estimate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs accrued for treatment pathways commencing with different first-line biologics, over a 96-week time horizon. The model adhered to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme eligibility criteria and guidelines.

Results

A biologic treatment pathway commencing on tildrakizumab was the most cost-effective first-line treatment (Australian dollar 39,930; total utility of 1.57 QALYs over 96 weeks). First-line secukinumab and risankizumab had incremental cost-utility ratios of Australian dollar 194,524/QALY and Australian dollar 479,834/QALY, respectively, when compared with first-line tildrakizumab.

Limitations

The efficacy and utility input parameters were derived from international randomized control trials and patients from the United Kingdom, respectively. Findings from this study cannot be generalized beyond Australia.

Conclusion

Tildrakizumab may be considered as first-line treatment for adult patients with severe, chronic plaque psoriasis embarking on biologic therapy, from the economic perspective of the Australian health care system.

A comprehensive review on possibilities of treating psoriasis using dermal cyclosporine

Psoriasis is an autoimmune, chronic proliferative, inflammatory skin disease with high comorbidity. Psoriasis is not a curable disease; it can only be managed. Cyclosporine A (CyA) is one of the FDA-approved immunosuppressant drug used in severe Psoriasis. Till date only oral route is used for its administration. Administration of CyA by this route causes serious side effects such as hypertension and renal toxicity. Due to these side effects, a number of researches have been done and taking place in the current times for the dermal delivery of CyA for the management of psoriasis. Dermal delivery of CyA is not an easy task because of its physiochemical properties like high molecular weight, lipophilicity and resistance offered by stratum corneum (SC). Because of the above problems in the dermal delivery a number of new approaches such as nanolipid carriers, microemulsion, liposomes, niosomes etc. are explored. To those deep findings for psoriasis management with dermal delivery of CyA have not been discussed. This comprehensive review includes all the studies, advancements and their critical findings which took place in the recent times for the dermal delivery of CyA and along with the suitable modification needed for the efficient dermal delivery of CyA are also suggested.

COVID-19 and the Use of Immunomodulatory Agents in Ophthalmology

Immunomodulatory agents are often used in the systemic treatment of non-infectious uveitis. These drugs consist of corticosteroids, conventional immunosuppressives, and biological agents. As it is known that they suppress the immune system, the most important concern associated with immunomodulatory therapy (IMT) is the increased risk of infection. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11 March 2020. Although severe acute respiratory distress syndrome secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection may develop in all people, patients who receive IMT may be at higher risk in terms of both the transmission of the infection and more severe disease course. Therefore, guidelines on the management of patients receiving IMT due to uveitis during the pandemic are needed. In this review, we examined the immunomodulatory drugs used in the treatment of uveitis in terms of infectious complications and the data of patients who received IMT during the COVID-19 pandemic and discussed recommendations for the use of these drugs. According to the latest information, patients who receive IMT may continue their treatment as long as there are no disruptions in regular complete blood count (especially white blood cell count >4,000/μL) and liver and kidney function tests. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 should be managed with a multidisciplinary approach.

Successful treatment of corticosteroid-dependent drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms with cyclosporine

BACKGROUND

Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is an intractable drug hypersensitivity disease with high mortality. The current standard treatment requires high-dose and long-term systemic corticosteroids, which may lead to adverse effects and intolerability of patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cyclosporine in patients with corticosteroid-dependent DRESS or intolerance to systemic corticosteroids.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 8 patients with corticosteroid-dependent DRESS who were treated with cyclosporine as an alternative treatment owing to suboptimal response to regular doses of systemic corticosteroids for at least 3 weeks, flare-ups when tapering corticosteroids, or experiencing intolerable adverse effects of corticosteroids.

RESULTS

In all 8 patients (4 women and 4 men; age range, 15-75 years), either intractable skin eruptions, persistent eosinophilia, or elevated liver function was noted after at least 3 weeks of treatment with systemic corticosteroids. The patients had marked cutaneous improvement and normalization of liver function and eosinophil count after adding cyclosporine, and the systemic corticosteroid treatment was smoothly tapered down. The mean dosage of cyclosporine was 1.68 ± 0.73 mg/kg/d, and the mean duration of cyclosporine treatment was 76.13 ± 35.64 days. Their serum eosinophil counts, serum alanine aminotransferase levels, and serum thymus and activation-regulated chemokine levels were all elevated at baseline and then significantly decreased during the recovery stage after cyclosporine therapy (P < .05). No adverse events were reported after adding cyclosporine.

CONCLUSION

Cyclosporine is an effective and safe therapeutic alternative as a steroid-sparing agent for corticosteroid-dependent DRESS. Further prospective randomized controlled studies are required to confirm these preliminary results.

COVID-19 Outbreak: Pathogenesis, Current Therapies, and Potentials for Future Management

At the end of 2019, a novel coronavirus (CoV) was found at the seafood market of Hubei province in Wuhan, China, and this virus was officially named coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) by World Health Organization (WHO). COVID-19 is mainly characterized by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV2) and creates public health concerns as well as significant threats to the economy around the world. Unfortunately, the pathogenesis of COVID-19 is unclear and there is no effective treatment of this newly life-threatening and devastating virus. Therefore, it is crucial to search for alternative methods that alleviate or inhibit the spread of COVID-19. In this review, we try to find out the etiology, epidemiology, symptoms as well as transmissions of this novel virus. We also summarize therapeutic interventions and suggest antiviral treatments, immune-enhancing candidates, general supplements, and CoV specific treatments that control replication and reproduction of SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV).

Cyclosporin in dermatology: A practical compendium

Cyclosporine A (CYA) belongs to calcineurin inhibitor family, which has the ability to selectively suppress T cells. Owing to its immune-modulatory effects, it had been in use for graft vs host diseases and organ transplant rejection for many years, but in dermatology, it was first approved for use in 1997 in the treatment of psoriasis. Other off-label indications for skin diseases include atopic dermatitis, chronic spontaneous urticaria, lichen planus, pyoderma gangrenosum, alopecia areata, granuloma annulare, and several others. A thorough search of Medline-PubMed database, Google Scholar, and Uptodate was performed for evidence-based and peer-reviewed information. We have summarized the use of cyclosporine in dermatological diseases with respect to its, dosage, safety considerations, and monitoring guidelines. Furthermore, brief overview of its pharmacology, drug interactions, use in pregnancy, and lactation has been discussed. Despite of its common adverse effects like nephrotoxicity and hypertension, cyclosporine offers good safety profile when used in skin diseases. Decision to start cyclosporine therapy is individualized and it should be based on analysis of risk vs benefit. Nevertheless, CYA is preferred over other immunosuppressants in dermatology because of early therapeutic response and less myelosupression. This article offers concise but detailed summary of this beneficial immune-suppressive agent in skin diseases.

Immunosuppressive and immunomodulator therapy for rare or uncommon skin disorders in pandemic days

Immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies are important in dermatology, but indications are influenced by SARS-CoV-2. We will focus on skin disorders such as autoimmune connective tissue disorders, neutrophilic dermatoses, and vasculitis. Immunomodulators such as colchicine and antimalarials can easily be preferred taking their beneficial effects on COVID-19 into consideration and also given their wide spectrum of action. Among the conventional therapies, methotrexate, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil increase the risk of infection, and thus their use is recommended only when necessary and at low doses. On the other hand, use of cyclosporine is also not recommended as it increases the risk of hypertension, which is susceptible to COVID-19. Anti-TNF agents from among the biological therapies appear to be slightly risky in terms of susceptibility to infection. However, there are ongoing studies which suggest that some biological treatments may reduce cytokine storm impeding the COVID-19 progression as a result, in spite of their susceptibilities to COVID-19. Patients, who will be started on immunosuppressive therapy, should be tested for COVID-19 prior to the therapy, and in the event that COVID-19 is suspected, the therapy should be discontinued.

Consensus statement of the Italian society of pediatric allergy and immunology for the pragmatic management of children and adolescents with allergic or immunological diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has surprised the entire population. The world has had to face an unprecedented pandemic. Only, Spanish flu had similar disastrous consequences. As a result, drastic measures (lockdown) have been adopted worldwide. Healthcare service has been overwhelmed by the extraordinary influx of patients, often requiring high intensity of care. Mortality has been associated with severe comorbidities, including chronic diseases. Patients with frailty were, therefore, the victim of the SARS-COV-2 infection. Allergy and asthma are the most prevalent chronic disorders in children and adolescents, so they need careful attention and, if necessary, an adaptation of their regular treatment plans. Fortunately, at present, young people are less suffering from COVID-19, both as incidence and severity. However, any age, including infancy, could be affected by the pandemic.Based on this background, the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology has felt it necessary to provide a Consensus Statement. This expert panel consensus document offers a rationale to help guide decision-making in the management of children and adolescents with allergic or immunologic diseases.

Cyclosporine With and Without Systemic Corticosteroids in Treatment of Alopecia Areata: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Cyclosporine is commonly used in treatment for alopecia areata. It can be administered as a monotherapy or in combination with systemic corticosteroids, with various outcomes.

METHODS

Efficacy of cyclosporine with and without systemic corticosteroids for alopecia areata was evaluated by a systematic review. Cochrane, EBSCOhost, Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched. Only studies published before January 2020 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 2104 studies were initially examined, of which 14 were eligible for the systematic review. Among 340 reported cases, 213 had focal, multifocal or ophiasis form of alopecia areata, 60 were diagnosed with alopecia totalis and 67 with alopecia universalis. The mean response rate in the whole group of patients at the end of treatment was 65.00% (221/340; range 25-100%). Hair regrowth rate was higher in the group with cases of alopecia areata limited to scalp (124/165; mean 75.15%; range 40-100%) than in the cases with alopecia totalis (30/46; mean 65.22%; range 25-100%) or alopecia universalis (24/52; mean 46.15%; range 25-100%). The combined therapy with systemic corticosteroids was superior to the monotherapy (152/219; mean 69.41%; 0-80% vs. 69/121; mean 57.02%; range 6.67-100%) and had a lower recurrence rate (39/108; mean 36.11% vs. 34/46; mean 73.91%, respectively). The combined treatment with methylprednisolone was significantly more effective when compared to the cyclosporine monotherapy (124/183; mean 67.76%; range 0-80% vs. 69/121; mean 57.02%; range 6.67-100%). The mean time of treatment was 6.75 months (range 2-36).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of our study were the retrospective character of included studies, differences in doses of prescribed drugs, and duration of the treatment and follow-up times.

CONCLUSION

Cyclosporine in combination with oral systemic corticosteroids is more effective than in monotherapy for severe alopecia areata.

COVID-19 and the use of immunomodulatory and biologic agents for severe cutaneous disease: An Australian/New Zealand consensus statement

Patients on immunomodulators, including biologic agents and new small molecular inhibitors, for cutaneous disease, represent a potentially vulnerable population during the COVID‐19 pandemic. There is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether patients on systemic immunomodulators are at increased risk of developing COVID‐19 disease or more likely to have severe disease. As such, clinicians need to assess the benefit‐to‐risk ratio on a case‐by‐case basis. In patients with suspected or confirmed COVID‐19 disease, all immunomodulators used for skin diseases should be immediately withheld, with the possible exception of systemic corticosteroid therapy, which needs to be weaned. In patients who develop symptoms or signs of an upper respiratory tract infection, but COVID‐19 is not yet confirmed, consider dose reduction or temporarily cessation for 1–2 weeks. In otherwise well patients, immunomodulators and biologics should be continued. In all patients, and their immediate close contacts, the importance of preventative measures to minimise human‐to‐human transmission cannot be overemphasised.

Practical compendium for psoriasis management

Psoriasis management is complex and challenging. It should be tailored for each patient. Treatment strategy differs according to patient's age, sex, disease type, disease severity, burden on patient's quality of life, comorbidities, involvement of specific sites, and pregnancy. The choice of the appropriate therapeutic must take into consideration the availability, the price, and the patient's preferences. It is very important that the chosen treatment is not more unpleasant, intolerable, or dangerous than the disease itself. According to the disease type, severity, and effect on patient's quality of life, dermatologist chooses whether to start with topical therapy, phototherapy or systemic therapy, or a combination of two or more of them. Under each category, there are different types of therapies that can be the first line therapeutics, second line, or even contraindicated. In this compendium, we provide dermatologists with different treatment plans considering all the mentioned variables so that a dermatologist can choose the optimum plan for the patient.

Double trouble: ciclosporin-simvastatin coinduced rhabdomyolysis

A 73-year-old woman presented with an acute exacerbation of her long-standing psoriasis. Ciclosporin was commenced due to the severity of her symptoms resulting in remission within 2 weeks. Full blood count, urea and electrolytes following initiation of treatment were unremarkable, although she complained of muscle aches, which was attributed to her known multiple sclerosis. Three weeks later she was admitted to the hospital with diarrhoea and vomiting. Repeat blood tests revealed raised creatinine (528 μmol/L (normal range (NR) n=45-84 μmol/L)), urea (32.6 mmol/L (NR 2.5-7.8 mmol/L)) and creatine kinase (6792 IU/L (NR 25-200 IU/L)) levels and reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate of 7. A diagnosis of acute kidney injury secondary to rhabdomyolysis was made due to an interaction between ciclosporin and simvastatin, precipitated by the dehydration from gastroenteritis. Haemofiltration was required to stabilise her renal function and she made a complete recovery.