A multi-centre, parallel group superiority trial of silk therapeutic clothing compared to standard care for the management of eczema in children (CLOTHES Trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Therapeutic textiles: A promising approach for human skin dysbiosis?

The close interaction between skin and clothing has become an attractive cornerstone for the development of therapeutic textiles able to alleviate skin disorders, namely those correlated to microbiota dysregulation. Skin microbiota imbalance is known in several skin diseases, including atopic dermatitis (AD), psoriasis, seborrheic dermatitis, rosacea, acne and hidradenitis suppurative (HS). Such microbiota dysregulation is usually correlated with inflammation, discomfort and pruritus. Although conventional treatments, that is, the administration of steroids and antibiotics, have shown some efficacy in treating and alleviating these symptoms, there are still disadvantages that need to be overcome. These include their long-term usage with side effects negatively impacting resident microbiota members, antibiotic resistance and the elevated rate of recurrence. Remarkably, therapeutic textiles as a non-pharmacological measure have emerged as a promising strategy to treat, alleviate the symptoms and control the severity of many skin diseases. This systematic review showcases for the first time the effects of therapeutic textiles on patients with skin dysbiosis, focusing on efficacy, safety, adverse effects and antimicrobial, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. The main inclusion criteria were clinical trials performed in patients with skin dysbiosis who received treatment involving the use of therapeutic textiles. Although there are promising outcomes regarding clinical parameters, safety and adverse effects, there is still a lack of information about the impact of therapeutic textiles on the skin microbiota of such patients. Intensive investigation and corroboration with clinical trials are needed to strengthen, define and drive the real benefit and the ideal biomedical application of therapeutic textiles.

Biomedical applications of silkworm (Bombyx Mori) proteins in regenerative medicine (a narrative review)

Silk worm (Bombyx Mori) protein, have been considered as potential materials for a variety of advanced engineering and biomedical applications for decades. Recently, silkworm silk has gained significant importance in research attention mainly because of its remarkable and exceptional mechanical properties. Silk has already been shown to have unique interactions with cells in tissues through bio-recognition units. The natural silk contains fibroin and sericin and has been used in various tissues of the human body (skin, bone, nerve, and so on). Besides, silk also still has anti-cancer, anti-tyrosinase, anti-coagulant, anti-oxidant, anti-bacterial, and anti-diabetic properties. This article is supposed to describe the diverse biomedical capabilities of B. Mori silk as the appropriate biomaterial among the assorted natural and artificial polymers that are presently accessible, and ideal for usage in regenerative medicine fields.

Efficacy and safety of Run Zao Zhi Yang capsule on chronic eczema: a multiple-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study

Background: Run Zao Zhi Yang capsule (RZZYC) has been widely applied for eczema treatment as a traditional Chinese medicine, while its efficacy has not been scientifically investigated. Objective: We conducted this multiple-centers, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to investigate the effectiveness and safety of RZZYC on the treatment of patients with mild to moderate chronic eczema. Methods: 240 patients were randomly assigned into the experimental group and the placebo group. The primary efficacy indicator was the Eczama Area and Severity Index (EASI) score at week 4. The patient with an EASI score that decreases more than 95% from baseline (EASI 95) was judged as cured. The cured patients were followed up for another 8 weeks. The differences on EASI, Visual Analogue Score (VAS), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score were compared. Results: The proportions of EASI 95 and EASI 60 in the experimental group were significantly higher than those of the control group at week4 (p = .002 and p < .001, respectively), the VAS score decreased more significantly in the experimental group at week 4. After 8 weeks follow-up, no difference on recurrence rate and adverse event rate between the two groups was observed. Conclusion: RZZYC provides a good effect on the treatment of mild-to-moderate chronic eczema with a low recurrence and tolerable adverse events, and is a potential treatment that may be implemented in clinical practice.

Measuring long-term disease control in patients with atopic dermatitis: A validation study of well-controlled weeks

BACKGROUND

Because atopic dermatitis (AD) is a relapsing remitting disease, assessing long-term control is important. Well-controlled weeks (WCWs) have been used to assess asthma long-term control but have never been validated for AD.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the feasibility, validity, and interpretability of WCWs in patients with AD.

METHODS

Three studies of patients with moderate-to-severe AD, including 4 to 6 months of daily/weekly symptom and treatment use data, were evaluated (study A, n = 336; study B, n = 60; and study C, n = 224). WCWs were defined by worsening symptoms and increased medication use. Feasibility, construct validity, and interpretability of WCWs were determined by assessing missing data, association with validated AD outcomes, and floor and ceiling effects. Analysis used linear and logistic regression.

RESULTS

WCWs were feasible to collect: 95.2% (study A) and 94.7% (study B) contributed data for at least half of the weekly data points, and 93.2% and 88.7% contributed to all data points up to 4 months. WCWs were significantly associated with validated AD severity instruments, including patient-orientated outcome measures and objective signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index, Three Item Severity Score, and Six Signs, Six Areas Atopic Dermatitis Scale). The odds of experiencing a WCW if AD severity was clear/mild was 5.8 (95% CI, 3.5-9.7), 1.9 (95% CI, 0.8-4.4), and 8.1 (95% CI, 4.5-14.6) in studies A, B, and C, respectively. WCWs were associated with ceiling effects: 31.6% (study A) and 37.5% (study B) of participants had no WCWs more than 90% of the time.

CONCLUSIONS

WCWs are valid and feasible for measuring long-term control in AD trials. However, ceiling effects and burden of data collection can limit use.

Randomised controlled trial of silk therapeutic garments for the management of atopic eczema in children: the CLOTHES trial

BACKGROUND

Atopic eczema (AE) is a chronic, itchy, inflammatory skin condition that affects the quality of life of children and their families. The role of specialist clothing in the management of AE is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of silk garments for the management of AE in children with moderate to severe disease.

DESIGN

Parallel-group, observer-blind, randomised controlled trial of 6 months' duration, followed by a 2-month observational period. A nested qualitative study evaluated the beliefs of trial participants, health-care professionals and health-care commissioners about the use of silk garments for AE.

SETTING

Secondary care and the community in five UK centres.

PARTICIPANTS

Children aged 1-15 years with moderate or severe AE.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised (1 : 1 using online randomisation) to standard care or standard care plus 100% silk garments made from antimicrobially protected knitted sericin-free silk [DermaSilk^TM (AlPreTec Srl, San Donà di Piave, Italy) or DreamSkin^TM (DreamSkin Health Ltd, Hatfield, UK)]. Three sets of garments were supplied per participant, to be worn for up to 6 months (day and night). At 6 months the standard care group received the garments to use for the remaining 2-month observational period.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome - AE severity using the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) assessed at 2, 4 and 6 months, by nurses blinded to treatment allocation. EASI scores were log-transformed for analysis. Secondary outcomes - patient-reported eczema symptoms (Patient Oriented Eczema Measure); global assessment of severity (Investigator Global Assessment); quality of life of the child (Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life, Child Health Utility - 9 Dimensions), family (Dermatitis Family Impact Questionnaire) and main carer (EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-3 Levels); use of standard eczema treatments (e.g. emollients, topical corticosteroids); and cost-effectiveness. The acceptability and durability of the clothing, and adherence to wearing the garments, were assessed by parental/carer self-report. Safety outcomes - number of skin infections and hospitalisations for AE.

RESULTS

A total of 300 children were randomised (26 November 2013 to 5 May 2015): 42% female, 79% white, mean age 5 years. The primary analysis included 282 out of 300 (94%) children (n = 141 in each group). Garments were worn for at least 50% of the time by 82% of participants. Geometric mean EASI scores at baseline, 2, 4 and 6 months were 8.4, 6.6, 6.0, 5.4 for standard care and 9.2, 6.4, 5.8, 5.4 for silk clothing, respectively. There was no evidence of difference between the groups in EASI score averaged over all follow-up visits adjusted for baseline EASI score, age and centre (ratio of geometric means 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 1.07; p = 0.43). This confidence interval is equivalent to a difference of -1.5 to 0.5 in the original EASI scale units. Skin infections occurred in 39 out of 141 (28%) and 36 out of 142 (25%) participants for standard care and silk clothing groups, respectively. The incremental cost per QALY of silk garments for children with moderate to severe eczema was £56,811 from a NHS perspective in the base case. Sensitivity analyses supported the finding that silk garments do not appear to be cost-effective within currently accepted thresholds.

LIMITATIONS

Knowledge of treatment allocation may have affected behaviour and outcome reporting for some of the patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of silk garments to standard AE care is unlikely to improve AE severity, or to be cost-effective compared with standard care alone, for children with moderate or severe AE. This trial adds to the evidence base to guide clinical decision-making.

FUTURE WORK

Non-pharmacological interventions for the management of AE remain a research priority among patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN77261365.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 16. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Silk garments plus standard care compared with standard care for treating eczema in children: A randomised, controlled, observer-blind, pragmatic trial (CLOTHES Trial)

BACKGROUND

The role of clothing in the management of eczema (also called atopic dermatitis or atopic eczema) is poorly understood. This trial evaluated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of silk garments (in addition to standard care) for the management of eczema in children with moderate to severe disease.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This was a parallel-group, randomised, controlled, observer-blind trial. Children aged 1 to 15 y with moderate to severe eczema were recruited from secondary care and the community at five UK medical centres. Participants were allocated using online randomisation (1:1) to standard care or to standard care plus silk garments, stratified by age and recruiting centre. Silk garments were worn for 6 mo. Primary outcome (eczema severity) was assessed at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 mo, by nurses blinded to treatment allocation, using the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), which was log-transformed for analysis (intention-to-treat analysis). A safety outcome was number of skin infections. Three hundred children were randomised (26 November 2013 to 5 May 2015): 42% girls, 79% white, mean age 5 y. Primary analysis included 282/300 (94%) children (n = 141 in each group). The garments were worn more often at night than in the day (median of 81% of nights [25th to 75th centile 57% to 96%] and 34% of days [25th to 75th centile 10% to 76%]). Geometric mean EASI scores at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 mo were, respectively, 9.2, 6.4, 5.8, and 5.4 for silk clothing and 8.4, 6.6, 6.0, and 5.4 for standard care. There was no evidence of any difference between the groups in EASI score averaged over all follow-up visits adjusted for baseline EASI score, age, and centre: adjusted ratio of geometric means 0.95, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07, (p = 0.43). This confidence interval is equivalent to a difference of -1.5 to 0.5 in the original EASI units, which is not clinically important. Skin infections occurred in 36/142 (25%) and 39/141 (28%) of children in the silk clothing and standard care groups, respectively. Even if the small observed treatment effect was genuine, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year was £56,811 in the base case analysis from a National Health Service perspective, suggesting that silk garments are unlikely to be cost-effective using currently accepted thresholds. The main limitation of the study is that use of an objective primary outcome, whilst minimising detection bias, may have underestimated treatment effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Silk clothing is unlikely to provide additional benefit over standard care in children with moderate to severe eczema.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN77261365.

A programme of research to set priorities and reduce uncertainties for the prevention and treatment of skin disease

Background

Skin diseases are very common and can have a large impact on the quality of life of patients and caregivers. This programme addressed four diseases: (1) eczema, (2) vitiligo, (3) squamous cell skin cancer (SCC) and (4) pyoderma gangrenosum (PG).

Objective

To set priorities and reduce uncertainties for the treatment and prevention of skin disease in our four chosen diseases.

Design

Mixed methods including eight systematic reviews, three prioritisation exercises, two pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs), three feasibility studies, two core outcome initiatives, four funding proposals for national RCTs and one completed national RCT.

Setting

Secondary care, primary care and the general population.

Participants

Patients (and their caregivers) with eczema, vitiligo, SCC and PG, plus health-care professionals with an interest in skin disease.

Interventions

Our three intervention studies included (1) barrier enhancement using emollients from birth to prevent eczema (pilot RCT); (2) handheld narrowband ultraviolet light B therapy for treating vitiligo (pilot RCT); and (3) oral ciclosporin (Neoral®, Novartis Pharmaceuticals) compared with oral prednisolone for managing PG (pragmatic national RCT).

Results

Systematic reviews included two overarching systematic reviews of RCTs of treatments for eczema and vitiligo, an umbrella review of systematic reviews of interventions for the prevention of eczema, two reviews of treatments for SCC (one included RCTs and the second included observational studies), and three reviews of outcome measures and outcome reporting. Three prioritisation partnership exercises identified 26 priority areas for future research in eczema, vitiligo and SCC. Two international consensus initiatives identified four core domains for future eczema trials and seven core domains for vitiligo trials. Two pilot RCTs and three feasibility studies critically informed development of four trial proposals for external funding, three of which are now funded and one is pending consideration by funders. Our pragmatic RCT tested the two commonly used systemic treatments for PG (prednisolone vs. ciclosporin) and found no difference in their clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. Both drugs showed limited benefit. Only half of the participants’ ulcers had healed by 6 months. For those with healed ulcers, recurrence was common (30%). Different side effect profiles were noted for each drug, which can inform clinical decisions on an individual patient basis. Three researchers were trained to PhD level and a dermatology patient panel was established to ensure patient involvement in all aspects of the programme.

Conclusions

Findings from this programme of work have already informed clinical guidelines and patient information resources. Feasibility studies have ensured that large national pragmatic trials will now be conducted on important areas of treatment uncertainty that address the needs of patients and the NHS. There is scope for considerable improvement in terms of trial design, conduct and reporting for RCTs of skin disease, which can be improved through wider collaboration, registration of trial protocols and complete reporting and international consensus over core outcome sets. Three national trials have now been funded as a result of this work. Two international initiatives to establish how best to measure the core outcome domains for eczema and vitiligo are ongoing.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials Barrier Enhancement for Eczema Prevention (BEEP) (ISRCTN84854178 and NCT01142999), Study of Treatments fOr Pyoderma GAngrenosum Patients (STOP GAP) (ISRCTN35898459) and Hand Held NB-UVB for Early or Focal Vitiligo at Home (HI-Light Pilot Trial) (NCT01478945).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 4, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Scoping systematic review of treatments for eczema

Background

Eczema is a very common chronic inflammatory skin condition.

Objectives

To update the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) systematic review of treatments for atopic eczema, published in 2000, and to inform health-care professionals, commissioners and patients about key treatment developments and research gaps.

Data sources

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched from the end of 2000 to 31 August 2013. Retrieved articles were used to identify further randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Review methods

Studies were filtered according to inclusion criteria and agreed by consensus in cases of uncertainty. Abstracts were excluded and non-English-language papers were screened by international colleagues and data were extracted. Only RCTs of treatments for eczema were included, as other forms of evidence are associated with higher risks of bias. Inclusion criteria for studies included availability of data relevant to the therapeutic management of eczema; mention of randomisation; comparison of two or more treatments; and prospective data collection. Participants of all ages were included. Eczema diagnosis was determined by a clinician or according to published diagnostic criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. We used a standardised approach to summarising the data and the assessment of risk of bias and we made a clear distinction between what the studies found and our own interpretation of study findings.

Results

Of 7198 references screened, 287 new trials were identified spanning 92 treatments. Trial reporting was generally poor (randomisation method: 2% high, 36% low, 62% unclear risk of bias; allocation concealment: 3% high, 15% low, 82% unclear risk of bias; blinding of the intervention: 15% high, 28% low, 57% unclear risk of bias). Only 22 (8%) trials were considered to be at low risk of bias for all three criteria. There was reasonable evidence of benefit for the topical medications tacrolimus, pimecrolimus and various corticosteroids (with tacrolimus superior to pimecrolimus and corticosteroids) for both treatment and flare prevention; oral ciclosporin; oral azathioprine; narrow band ultraviolet B (UVB) light; Atopiclair™ and education. There was reasonable evidence to suggest no clinically useful benefit for twice-daily compared with once-daily topical corticosteroids; corticosteroids containing antibiotics for non-infected eczema; probiotics; evening primrose and borage oil; ion-exchange water softeners; protease inhibitor SRD441 (Serentis Ltd); furfuryl palmitate in emollient; cipamfylline cream; andMycobacterium vaccaevaccine. Additional research evidence is needed for emollients, bath additives, antibacterials, specialist clothing and complementary and alternative therapies. There was no RCT evidence for topical corticosteroid dilution, impregnated bandages, soap avoidance, bathing frequency or allergy testing.

Limitations

The large scope of the review coupled with the heterogeneity of outcomes precluded formal meta-analyses. Our conclusions are still limited by a profusion of small, poorly reported studies.

Conclusions

Although the evidence base of RCTs has increased considerably since the last NIHR HTA systematic review, the field is still severely hampered by poor design and reporting problems including failure to register trials and declare primary outcomes, small sample size, short follow-up duration and poor reporting of risk of bias. Key areas for further research identified by the review include the optimum use of emollients, bathing frequency, wash products, allergy testing and antiseptic treatments. Perhaps the greatest benefit identified is the use of twice weekly anti-inflammatory treatment to maintain disease remission. More studies need to be conducted in a primary care setting where most people with eczema are seen in the UK. Future studies need to use the same core set of outcomes that capture patient symptoms, clinical signs, quality of life and the chronic nature of the disease.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

A randomised placebo-controlled trial of oral and topical antibiotics for children with clinically infected eczema in the community: the ChildRen with Eczema, Antibiotic Management (CREAM) study

BACKGROUND

Secondary skin infection is common during eczema exacerbations and many children are treated with antibiotics when this is suspected, although there is little high-quality evidence to justify this practice.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical effectiveness of oral and topical antibiotics, in addition to standard treatment with emollients and topical corticosteroids, in children with clinically infected eczema.

DESIGN

Multicentre randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

General practices and dermatology clinics in England, Wales and Scotland.

PARTICIPANTS

Children (aged 3 months to < 8 years) with a diagnosis of eczema (according to U.K. Working Party definition) and clinical suspicion of infection.

INTERVENTIONS

(1) Oral flucloxacillin and topical placebo; (2) topical fusidic acid (Fucidin(®), Leo Laboratories Limited) and oral placebo; and (3) oral and topical placebos, all for 1 week.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient-Orientated Eczema Measure (POEM) at 2 weeks (assessing subjective severity in the week following treatment).

RESULTS

We randomised 113 children (36 to oral antibiotic, 37 to topical antibiotic and 40 to placebo), which was fewer than our revised target sample size of 282. A total of 103 (92.0%) children had one or more clinical features suggestive of infection and 78 (69.6%) children had Staphylococcus aureus cultured from a skin swab. Oral and topical antibiotics resulted in a 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.35 to 4.40] and 1.49 (95% CI -1.55 to 4.53) increase (worse subjective severity) in POEM score at 2 weeks, relative to placebo and controlling for baseline POEM score. Eczema Area and Severity Index (objective severity) scores were also higher (worse) in the intervention groups, at 0.20 (95% CI -0.12 to 0.52) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.75) for oral and topical antibiotics, respectively, at 2 weeks. Analyses of impact on the family, quality of life, daily symptom scores, and longer-term outcomes were all consistent with the finding of no or limited difference and a trend towards worse outcomes in the intervention groups. Sensitivity analyses, including adjusting for compliance and imputation for missing data, were consistent with the main findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that oral and topical antibiotics have no effect, or a harmful effect, on subjective eczema severity in children with clinically infected eczema in the community. The CIs around our estimates exclude a meaningful beneficial effect (published minimal clinically important difference for POEM is 3.4). Although most patients in this trial had features suggestive of infection and S. aureus on their skin, participants primarily had mild-moderate eczema and those with signs of more severe infection were often excluded. Clinicians should consider avoiding oral and topical antibiotic use in children with suspected infected eczema in the community who do not have signs of 'severe infection'. Further research should seek to understand how best to encourage the use of topical steroids and limit use of antibiotics in those with eczema flares without signs of severe infection, as well as developing tools to better phenotype eczema flares, in order to better define a population that may benefit from antibiotic treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) number 2011-003591-37 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN96705420.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.