Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP): a scoping review of dermatology clinical practice guidelines

Targeted therapy for immune mediated skin diseases. What should a dermatologist know?

BACKGROUND

Molecularly targeted therapies, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis), have emerged as essential tools in the treatment of dermatological diseases. These therapies modulate the immune system through specific signaling pathways, providing effective alternatives to traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents. This review aims to provide an updated summary of targeted immune therapies for inflammatory skin diseases, considering their pathophysiology, efficacy, dosage, and safety profiles.

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed over the past 10 years, focusing on randomized clinical trials, case reports, and case series related to targeted immune therapies in dermatology. Eligibility criteria were applied, and data were extracted from each study, including citation data, study design, and results.

RESULTS

We identified 1360 non-duplicate articles with the initial search strategy. Title and abstract review excluded 1150, while a full-text review excluded an additional 50 articles. The review included 143 studies published between 2012 and 2022, highlighting 39 drugs currently under investigation or in use for managing inflammatory skin diseases.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The heterogeneity of summarized information limits this review. Some recommendations originated from data from clinical trials, while others relied on retrospective analyses and small case series. Recommendations will likely be updated as new results emerge.

CONCLUSION

Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment of chronic skin diseases, offering new options for patients unresponsive to standard treatments. Paradoxical reactions are rarely observed. Further studies are needed to fully understand the mechanisms and nature of these therapies. Overall, targeted immune therapies in dermatology represent a promising development, significantly improving the quality of life for patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP)-A systematic review of the methodological quality of contact dermatitis clinical practice guidelines

The Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP) assesses the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for high-burden skin diseases. This review focuses on contact dermatitis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier for CPGs published between 1 November 2018 and 1 November 2023. Prespecified guideline resources were hand searched. Two authors independently undertook screening, data extraction and quality assessments. Instruments used were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Reporting Checklist, the U.S. Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness, The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) Instrument and Lenzer's Red Flags. Twenty five CPGs were included, exhibiting heterogeneity in both the topics they addressed and their methodological quality. Whereas the CPGs on management of hand eczema from Denmark, Europe and the Netherlands scored best, most CPGs fell short of being clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence-based. Disclosure of conflicts of interest scored well, and areas needing improvement include 'strength and wording of recommendations', 'applicability', 'updating' and 'external review'. Adhering to AGREE II and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) enhances methodological quality.

Skin health of community-living older people: a scoping review

The population of older people is steadily increasing and the majority live at home. Although the home and community are the largest care settings worldwide, most of the evidence on dermatological care relates to secondary and tertiary care. The overall aims were to map the available evidence regarding the epidemiology and burden of the most frequent skin conditions and regarding effects of screening, risk assessment, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of the most frequent skin conditions in older people living in the community. A scoping review was conducted. MEDLINE, Embase and Epistemonikos were systematically searched for clinical practice guidelines, reviews and primary studies, as well as Grey Matters and EASY for grey literature published between January 2010 and March 2023. Records were screened and data of included studies extracted by two reviewers, independently. Results were summarised descriptively. In total, 97 publications were included. The vast majority described prevalence or incidence estimates. Ranges of age groups varied widely and unclear reporting was frequent. Sun-exposure and age-related skin conditions such as actinic keratoses, xerosis cutis, neoplasms and inflammatory diseases were the most frequent dermatoses identified, although melanoma and/or non-melanoma skin cancer were the skin conditions investigated most frequently. Evidence regarding the burden of skin conditions included self-reported skin symptoms and concerns, mortality, burden on the health system, and impact on quality of life. A minority of articles reported effects of screening, risk assessment, diagnosis, prevention and treatment, mainly regarding skin cancer. A high number of skin conditions and diseases affect older people living at home and in the community but evidence about the burden and effective prevention and treatment strategies is weak. Best practices of how to improve dermatological care in older people remain to be determined and there is a particular need for interventional studies to support and to improve skin health at home.

Selection of Quality Indicators for the Certification of Psoriasis Units: The CUDERMA Project Delphi Consensus Study

Defining quality indicators is a key strategy for ensuring the quality and standardization of health care. The CUDERMA project, an initiative of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venerology (AEDV), was undertaken to define quality indicators for the certification of specialized units in dermatology; the first 2 areas selected were psoriasis and dermato-oncology. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus on what should be assessed by the indicators used to certify psoriasis units. The structured process used to do this comprised a literature review to identify potential indicators, the selection of an initial set of indicators to be evaluated by a multidisciplinary group of experts and, finally, a Delphi consensus study. A panel of 39 dermatologists evaluated the selected indicators and classified them as either "essential" or "of excellence". Consensus was finally reached on 67 indicators, which will be standardized and used to develop the certification standard for psoriasis units.

[Translated article] Selection of Quality Indicators for the Certification of Psoriasis Units: The CUDERMA Project Delphi Consensus Study

Defining quality indicators is a key strategy for ensuring the quality and standardization of health care. The CUDERMA project, an initiative of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venerology (AEDV), was undertaken to define quality indicators for the certification of specialized units in dermatology; the first 2 areas selected were psoriasis and dermato-oncology. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus on what should be assessed by the indicators used to certify psoriasis units. The structured process used to do this comprised a literature review to identify potential indicators, the selection of an initial set of indicators to be evaluated by a multidisciplinary group of experts and, finally, a Delphi consensus study. A panel of 39 dermatologists evaluated the selected indicators and classified them as either "essential" or "of excellence". Consensus was finally reached on 67 indicators, which will be standardized and used to develop the certification standard for psoriasis units.

Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Urticaria Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP)

BACKGROUND

Management of urticaria can be optimized with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, the quality of recent urticaria CPGs remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To identify and appraise urticaria CPGs worldwide published in the last 5 years.

METHODS

A search for relevant urticaria CPGs was conducted between January 1, 2017, and May 31, 2022, using the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Evidence Search, Guidelines International Network, ECRI Guidelines Trust, Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines, Trip Medical Database, and DynaMed. The included CPGs were critically appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, Lenzer et al's red flags, and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness.

RESULTS

We included 21 urticaria CPGs. Most guidelines reviewed treatment recommendations of chronic spontaneous urticaria. The majority of guidelines were from European and Asian countries with high and high-middle sociodemographic index, written in English, and openly accessible. Seventeen guidelines (81%) had at least 1 AGREE II domain rated poor quality. Applicability, rigor of development, and stakeholder involvement were the 3 AGREE II domains that scored the lowest across guidelines. Appraisal with Lenzer et al's red flags showed that 18 guidelines (86%) raised at least 1 red flag indicating potential bias. The top 3 domains raising red flags were: no inclusion of nonphysician experts/patient representative/community stakeholders, no or limited involvement of a methodologist in the evaluation of evidence, and lack of external review. Based on IOM's criteria of trustworthiness, 20 guidelines (95%) had 1 or more criteria that did not meet best practice standards. The 3 domains with the highest number of best practice standards not met were updating procedures, rating strength of recommendations, and external review. Guidelines scored highest for the AGREE II domains of defining scope and purpose and clarity of presentation, and had the most fully met IOM's best practice standard for articulation of recommendations. However, only 1 urticaria CPG by NICE was identified as rigorously developed across all 3 appraisal tools.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of urticaria CPGs in the last 5 years varied widely. Only the NICE urticaria guideline consistently demonstrated excellent quality, high trustworthiness, and low risk of bias. Use of a rigorous framework to rate certainty of evidence and grade strength of recommendation, involvement of methodologists, stakeholder engagement with external review, and clear guidance for updating can help improve the quality of future CPGs.

Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP): a systematic review of alopecia areata clinical practice guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Alopecia areata (AA) is a nonscarring alopecia with an estimated global prevalence of 2% and limited data on the efficacy of current treatment. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) provide recommendations based on best available evidence. It is unclear how many AA CPGs are available globally.

AIM

To systematically search for and identify CPGs on AA and to critically appraise their quality using validated tools.

METHODS

We performed a literature search to identify CPGs published between October 2014 and April 2021, using the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Guidelines International Network, Emergency Care Research Institute guidelines trust, Australian CPGs, Turning Research Into Practice database and DynaMed. The systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework. Three critical appraisal tools were used: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, Lenzer's red flags and United States Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness.

RESULTS

In total, six AA CPGs from seven manuscripts (one CPG was in two parts published in separate papers) were included. The majority (four of six) of the CPGs focused on treatment. Four CPGs (total of five papers) were in English and two CPGs were only available in the original language (one Russian and one Japanese). All AA CPGs demonstrated low quality in several domains in the AGREE II appraisal, including stakeholder involvement and applicability, with the latter being deemed the worst domain for all CPGs, with an average of 29%. The mean (SD) number of Lenzer's red flags for the included CPGs was 3.4 (1.5) out of a total of 8 possible red flags, while the IOM criteria showed 1.6 (0.8) 'fully met' criteria and 3.1 (1.2) 'not met' out of a total of 9 criteria.

CONCLUSION

We found a limited number of AA CPGs, all of which had significant methodological deficiencies. We encourage guideline development groups to use validated checklists/tools to develop reliable and trustworthy CPGs.

Artificial Intelligence in Dermatology Image Analysis: Current Developments and Future Trends

BACKGROUND

Thanks to the rapid development of computer-based systems and deep-learning-based algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI) has long been integrated into the healthcare field. AI is also particularly helpful in image recognition, surgical assistance and basic research. Due to the unique nature of dermatology, AI-aided dermatological diagnosis based on image recognition has become a modern focus and future trend. Key scientific concepts of review: The use of 3D imaging systems allows clinicians to screen and label skin pigmented lesions and distributed disorders, which can provide an objective assessment and image documentation of lesion sites. Dermatoscopes combined with intelligent software help the dermatologist to easily correlate each close-up image with the corresponding marked lesion in the 3D body map. In addition, AI in the field of prosthetics can assist in the rehabilitation of patients and help to restore limb function after amputation in patients with skin tumors.

THE AIM OF THE STUDY

For the benefit of patients, dermatologists have an obligation to explore the opportunities, risks and limitations of AI applications. This study focuses on the application of emerging AI in dermatology to aid clinical diagnosis and treatment, analyzes the current state of the field and summarizes its future trends and prospects so as to help dermatologists realize the impact of new technological innovations on traditional practices so that they can embrace and use AI-based medical approaches more quickly.

ACCORD guideline for reporting consensus-based methods in biomedical research and clinical practice: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to support clinical decision making in areas of uncertainty. They are widely used in biomedical research, in particular where disease characteristics or resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting of methods used to reach a consensus - for example, not clearly explaining the definition of consensus, or not stating how consensus group panellists were selected - can potentially undermine confidence in this type of research and hinder reproducibility. Our objective is therefore to systematically develop a reporting guideline to help the biomedical research and clinical practice community describe the methods or techniques used to reach consensus in a complete, transparent, and consistent manner.

METHODS

The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) project will take place in five stages and follow the EQUATOR Network guidance for the development of reporting guidelines. In Stage 1, a multidisciplinary Steering Committee has been established to lead and coordinate the guideline development process. In Stage 2, a systematic literature review will identify evidence on the quality of the reporting of consensus methodology, to obtain potential items for a reporting checklist. In Stage 3, Delphi methodology will be used to reach consensus regarding the checklist items, first among the Steering Committee, and then among a broader Delphi panel comprising participants with a range of expertise, including patient representatives. In Stage 4, the reporting guideline will be finalised in a consensus meeting, along with the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. In Stage 5, we plan to publish the reporting guideline and E&E document in open-access journals, supported by presentations at appropriate events. Dissemination of the reporting guideline, including a website linked to social media channels, is crucial for the document to be implemented in practice.

DISCUSSION

The ACCORD reporting guideline will provide a set of minimum items that should be reported about methods used to achieve consensus, including approaches ranging from simple unstructured opinion gatherings to highly structured processes.

Patient and Public Involvement in Dermatology Research: A Review

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is defined as research being carried out 'with' or 'by' members of the public, patients, and carers, on both an individual and a group level, rather than simply 'about', or 'for' them. Within dermatology, PPI is increasingly recognised as a vital component of research as it helps to ensure that research remains relevant to the populations we intend to serve. Dermatology scholarship, with its rich psychosocial implications due to the stigma, physical disability, and mental health burdens these conditions may incur, is in a unique position to benefit from PPI to unlock previously inaccessible patient lived experiences or therapeutic consequences. Throughout the rapid growth of PPI, it has been infused throughout the research lifecycle, from design to dissemination and beyond. After first explaining the principles of PPI, we examine the existing evidence base at each research stage to explore whether our specialty has effectively harnessed this approach and to identify any subsequent impact of PPI. Finally, we scrutinise the challenges faced by those implementing PPI in dermatology research.

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.