Dermatological patients with itch report more stress, stigmatization experience, anxiety and depression compared to patients without itch: Results from a European multi-centre study

BACKGROUND

Itch as the most common symptom in dermatology has been shown to be related to psychological factors such as stress, anxiety and depression. Moreover, associations were found between perceived stigmatization and itch. However, studies investigating the differences between patients with dermatoses with and without itch regarding perceived stress, stigmatization, anxiety and depression are missing. Therefore, one of the aims of the second study of the European Society for Dermatology and Psychiatry (ESDaP study II) was to investigate these relationships in a large cohort of patients with different itchy dermatoses.

RESULTS

3399 patients with 14 different itchy dermatoses were recruited at 22 centres in 17 European countries. They filled in questionnaires to assess perceived stigmatization, stress, signs of clinically relevant anxiety or depression, itch-related quality of life, the overall health status, itch duration, frequency and intensity. The most significant association between the severity of itching and the perception of stress was observed among individuals with rosacea (correlation coefficient r = 0.314). Similarly, the strongest links between itch intensity and experiences of stigmatization, anxiety, and depression were found in patients with seborrheic dermatitis (correlation coefficients r = 0.317, r = 0.356, and r = 0.400, respectively). Utilizing a stepwise linear regression analysis, it was determined that within the entire patient cohort, 9.3% of the variation in itch intensity could be accounted for by factors including gender, levels of anxiety, depression, and perceived stigmatization. Females and individuals with elevated anxiety, depression, and perceived stigmatization scores reported more pronounced itch intensities compared to those with contrary attributes.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the connection between experiencing itch and its intensity and the psychological strain it places on individuals. Consequently, psychological interventions should encompass both addressing the itch itself and the interconnected psychological factors. In specific cases, it becomes imperative for dermatologists to direct individuals towards suitable healthcare resources to undergo further psychological assessment.

Quality of life measurement in teledermatology. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Teledermatology

Many events, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have accelerated the implementation of teledermatology pathways within dermatology departments and across healthcare organizations. Quality of Life (QoL) assessment in dermatology is also a rapidly developing field with a gradual shift from theory to practice. The purpose of this paper organized jointly by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on QoL and patient-oriented outcomes and the EADV TF on teledermatology is to present current knowledge about QoL assessment during the use of teledermatology approaches, including data on health-related (HR) QoL instruments used in teledermatology, comparison of influence of different treatment methods on HRQoL after face-to-face and teledermatology consultations and to make practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in teledermatology. The EADV TFs made the following position statements: HRQoL assessment may be an important part in most of teledermatology activities; HRQoL assessment may be easily and effectively performed during teledermatology consultations. It is especially important to monitor HRQoL of patients with chronic skin diseases during lockdowns or in areas where it is difficult to reach a hospital for face-to-face consultation; regular assessment of HRQoL of patients with skin diseases during teledermatology consultations may help to monitor therapy efficacy and visualize individual patient's needs; we recommend the use of the DLQI in teledermatology, including the use of the DLQI app which is available in seven languages; it is important to develop apps for dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments for use in children (for example the CDLQI and InToDermQoL) and for disease-specific instruments.

Quality of life measurement in rosacea. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa (ARHS) do not recommend the use of any generic instrument as a single method of Health Related (HR) QoL assessment in rosacea, except when comparing quimp (quality of life impairment) in rosacea patients with that in other non-dermatologic skin diseases and/or healthy controls. The EADV TFs on QoL and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and ARHS recommend the use of the dermatology-specific HRQoL instrument the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the rosacea-specific HRQoL instrument RosaQoL in rosacea patients. The DLQI minimal clinically important difference may be used as a marker of clinical efficacy of the treatment and DLQI score banding of 0 or 1 corresponding to no effect on patients' HRQoL could be an important treatment goal. This information may be added to consensuses and guidelines for rosacea.

Freedom from disease in psoriasis: a Delphi consensus definition by patients, nurses and physicians

Background

Physician‐reported clinical outcome and quality of life (QoL) measures are currently used to assess outcomes and direct treatment of plaque psoriasis. However, people with psoriasis may have different criteria for judging treatment success.

Objectives

To build a unified consensus on the definition of ‘freedom from disease’ from a European stakeholder group, including people with psoriasis, dermatologists and nurses.

Methods

The modified Delphi consensus methodology was used to define ‘freedom from disease’, with a consensus group consisting of people with psoriasis, nurses and dermatologists. This methodology involved people with psoriasis during the entire process and consisted of a 15‐member Facilitating Consensus Panel to drive the programme content and a larger Voting Consensus Panel to vote on defining ‘freedom from disease’. The Facilitating Panel agreed on disease domains, and aspects of each domain were put forward to the Voting Consensus Panel to establish relative importance. Following two voting rounds, a meeting was held to agree on a final consensus statement.

Results

The Facilitating Panel consisted of six patient advocacy group representatives, three specialist nurses and six dermatologists. Voting rounds 1 and 2 were completed by 166 and 130 respondents from the Voting Consensus Panel, respectively. The outputs from both rounds of voting were similar, focusing on normality of living, symptom control, and a relationship of mutual respect and trust between the individual with psoriasis and their healthcare professional. The consensus statement emphasizes that ‘freedom from disease’ is multifaceted and includes the following domains ‘management of clinical symptoms’, ‘psychosocial elements’, ‘QoL and well‐being’, ‘treatment’ and ‘healthcare team support’. ‘Freedom from disease’ means all aspects are addressed.

Conclusions

Freedom from disease in psoriasis is a multicomponent concept including five main domains. This diverse and multifaceted patient perspective will help us to improve understanding of the outcomes of treatment interventions in people with psoriasis.

British Association of Dermatologists guidelines for the management of people with chronic urticaria 2021

The overall objective of the guideline is to provide up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for the management of urticaria. The document aims to: offer an appraisal of all relevant literature up to March 2020, focusing on any key developments address important, practical clinical questions relating to the primary guideline objective provide guideline recommendations and if appropriate research recommendations The guideline is presented as a detailed review with highlighted recommendations for practical use in primary, secondary and tertiary care, in addition to an updated Patient Information Leaflet (PIL; available on the BAD Skin Health Information website, https://www.skinhealthinfo.org.uk/a-z-conditions-treatments/).

Quality of life assessment in core outcome sets: A position statement of the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

Core outcome sets (COSs) are an agreed standardized collection of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific clinical condition. Tsekhe aim of our position paper by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes was to identify the challenges and Patient Oriented Outcomes advantages in the development of COSs within dermatological QoL research. Twelve EADV Task Force multidisciplinary team members presented a total of 101 items (51 advantages and 50 disadvantages). All participants considered that COS are beneficial for comparison between different studies, treatments, dermatological diseases, geographical location and ethnicities. In conclusion, the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes has recognized the primacy of advantages of COS and deliberated that the disadvantages in COS are related to development process and use of COS.

Identifying the best predictive diagnostic criteria for psoriasis in children (< 18 years): a UK multicentre case-control diagnostic accuracy study (DIPSOC study)

BACKGROUND

In children, psoriasis can be challenging to diagnose. Difficulties arise from differences in the clinical presentation compared with adults.

OBJECTIVES

To test the diagnostic accuracy of previously agreed consensus criteria and to develop a shortlist of the best predictive diagnostic criteria for childhood psoriasis.

METHODS

A case-control diagnostic accuracy study in 12 UK dermatology departments (2017-2019) assessed 18 clinical criteria using blinded trained investigators. Children (< 18 years) with dermatologist-diagnosed psoriasis (cases, N = 170) or a different scaly inflammatory rash (controls, N = 160) were recruited. The best predictive criteria were identified using backward logistic regression, and internal validation was conducted using bootstrapping.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of the consensus-agreed criteria and consensus scoring algorithm was 84·6%, the specificity was 65·1% and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0·75. The seven diagnostic criteria that performed best were: (i) scale and erythema in the scalp involving the hairline, (ii) scaly erythema inside the external auditory meatus, (iii) persistent well-demarcated erythematous rash anywhere on the body, (iv) persistent erythema in the umbilicus, (v) scaly erythematous plaques on the extensor surfaces of the elbows and/or knees, (vi) well-demarcated erythematous rash in the napkin area involving the crural fold and (vii) family history of psoriasis. The sensitivity of the best predictive model was 76·8%, with specificity 72·7% and AUC 0·84. The c-statistic optimism-adjusted shrinkage factor was 0·012.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides examination- and history-based data on the clinical features of psoriasis in children and proposes seven diagnostic criteria with good discriminatory ability in secondary-care patients. External validation is now needed.

Analysis of misses in imaging of head and neck pathology by attending neuroradiologists at a single tertiary academic medical centre

AIM

To analyse errors in head and neck (H&N) pathology made by attending neuroradiologists at a single tertiary-care centre.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A neuroradiology quality assurance (QA) database of radiological errors was searched for attending physician errors in H&N pathology from 2014-2020. Data were limited to computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports. Data were collected on missed pathologies and study types. Misses were grouped into three categories: central neck (thyroid gland, aerodigestive tract), lateral neck (salivary glands, lymph nodes, soft tissues), and face/orbits (orbits, sinuses, masticator space).

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 283,248 CT and MRI neuroradiology examinations were interpreted (all indications). Seventy-four H&N misses were identified comprising 85.1% perceptual and 14.9% interpretive errors. The distribution of errors was face/orbits (37.8%), central neck (36.5%), and lateral neck (25.7%). Clinically significant errors were found most commonly in the aerodigestive tract (21%), orbits (17.7%), masticator space, and parotid glands (14.5% each). The majority (67.6%) of the misses were detected on examinations that were not performed for a primary H&N indication; MRI brain was the most common examination (27%). Clearly malignant or potentially malignant masses accounted for 48.6% of all misses.

CONCLUSION

The majority of H&N misses were perceptual and were detected on examinations not performed for a H&N indication. Clearly malignant or potentially malignant masses represented half of all misses.

Patients with nodular prurigo commonly have pre-existing psychological disease which requires treatment concomitant with cutaneous treatments

Nodular Prurigo (NP) is a condition of the skin and mind, characterised as multiple localised or generalised itchy nodules that become excoriated as a result of intractable pruritis. It is also referred to as pruritis-related prurigo following a consensus by the EADV Task Force Pruritis in 2017¹ . In 2018, the European Prurigo Project (EPP) revised the terminology yet again to chronic prurigo (CPG) to encompass all clinical subtypes including NP² . NP has an unclear aetiology and the diagnosis is based on three core criteria: (1) the presence of multiple localised or generalised pruritic lesions, (2) chronicity of pruritis defined as itch lasting more than 6 weeks, (3) history or clinical evidence of a prolonged behaviour of scratching¹ . No therapy is approved for CPG as of yet.

Quality of life measurement in alopecia areata. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

New treatment options may lead to an increased interest in using reliable and sensitive instruments to assess health-related quality of life in people with alopecia areata (AA). The purpose of this paper is to present current knowledge about quality of life assessment in AA. The dermatology-specific Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was the most widely reported health-related quality of life instrument used in AA. Three AA-specific (Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale, Alopecia Areata Quality of Life Index and Alopecia Areata Patients' Quality of Life) and three hair disease-specific instruments (Hairdex, Scalpdex and 'hair-specific Skindex-29') were identified with a range of content and validation characteristics: there is little evidence yet of the actual use of these measures in AA. Scalpdex is the best-validated hair disease-specific instrument. Further extensive validation is needed for all of the AA-specific instruments. The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes recommends the use of the dermatology-specific DLQI questionnaire, hair disease-specific Scalpdex and the alopecia areata-specific instruments the Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale or Alopecia Areata Quality of Life Index, despite the limited experience of their use. We hope that new treatment methods will be able to improve both clinical signs and health-related quality of life in patients with AA. In order to assess the outcomes of trials on these new treatment methods, it would be helpful when further development and validation of AA-specific instruments is being encouraged and also conducted.

UK psychodermatology services in 2019: service provision has improved but is still very poor nationally

BACKGROUND

Psychodermatology is an emerging subspeciality of dermatology. Psychodermatology clinics use a multidisciplinary approach to deal with psychological or psychiatric elements related to skin disease. Two previous studies in 2004 and 2012 highlighted the deficiency of psychodermatology services in the UK, despite the evidence that these services have high demand and are cost-effective.

AIMS

To reassess psychodermatology service provision in the UK and outline the developments that have been made.

METHODS

In conjunction with BBC Radio 5 Live, a survey questionnaire was distributed via email to the UK membership of the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) and Psychodermatology UK. The survey consisted of 13 questions asking about the availability of psychodermatology services.

RESULTS

Basic percentages were used to analyse quantitative data, and content analysis was used for qualitative data. Our results showed that less than a quarter of the respondents (24%) have access to a nearby dedicated psychodermatology service. Additionally, the psychodermatology units do not have a unified configuration and clinical provision model differs nationally. Only around 5% of the clinicians have access to a clinic that provides psychology-dermatology-oncology service, and even fewer have access to a paediatric psychodermatology (4.8%). Engagement in psychodermatology research was reported by around 12% of the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The psychocutaneous services in the UK have improved to some extent over the past decade; the service has become more widely available nationally, and the investment in research is promising. However, it is still insufficient and unable to fulfil patient demand, especially for vulnerable individuals such as children and dermato-oncology patients.

Randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo: results of the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the effectiveness of vitiligo treatments is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband UVB (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of potent topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB, compared with TCS alone, for localized vitiligo.

METHODS

A pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial (9-month treatment, 12-month follow-up). Adults and children, recruited from secondary care and the community, aged ≥ 5 years and with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin, were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to receive TCS (mometasone furoate 0·1% ointment + dummy NB-UVB), NB-UVB (NB-UVB + placebo TCS) or a combination (TCS + NB-UVB). TCS was applied once daily on alternating weeks; NB-UVB was administered on alternate days in escalating doses, adjusted for erythema. The primary outcome was treatment success at 9 months at a target patch assessed using the participant-reported Vitiligo Noticeability Scale, with multiple imputation for missing data. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015.

RESULTS

In total 517 participants were randomized to TCS (n = 173), NB-UVB (n = 169) and combination (n = 175). Primary outcome data were available for 370 (72%) participants. The proportions with target patch treatment success were 17% (TCS), 22% (NB-UVB) and 27% (combination). Combination treatment was superior to TCS: adjusted between-group difference 10·9% (95% confidence interval 1·0%-20·9%; P = 0·032; number needed to treat = 10). NB-UVB alone was not superior to TCS: adjusted between-group difference 5·2% (95% CI - 4·4% to 14·9%; P = 0·29; number needed to treat = 19). Participants using interventions with ≥ 75% expected adherence were more likely to achieve treatment success, but the effects were lost once treatment stopped. Localized grade 3 or 4 erythema was reported in 62 (12%) participants (including three with dummy light). Skin thinning was reported in 13 (2·5%) participants (including one with placebo ointment).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination treatment with home-based handheld NB-UVB plus TCS is likely to be superior to TCS alone for treatment of localized vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated but was successful in only around one-quarter of participants.

An economic evaluation of the randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo (the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial)

BACKGROUND

Economic evidence for vitiligo treatments is absent.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the cost-effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB compared with TCS alone for localized vitiligo.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial with 9 months' treatment. In total 517 adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin were recruited from secondary care and the community and were randomized 1: 1: 1 to receive TCS, NB-UVB or both. Cost per successful treatment (measured on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale) was estimated. Secondary cost-utility analyses measured quality-adjusted life-years using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels for those aged ≥ 11 years and the Child Health Utility 9D for those aged 5 to < 18 years. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015.

RESULTS

The mean ± SD cost per participant was £775 ± 83·7 for NB-UVB, £813 ± 111.4 for combination treatment and £600 ± 96·2 for TCS. In analyses adjusted for age and target patch location, the incremental difference in cost for combination treatment compared with TCS was £211 (95% confidence interval 188-235), corresponding to a risk difference of 10·9% (number needed to treat = 9). The incremental cost was £1932 per successful treatment. The incremental difference in cost for NB-UVB compared with TCS was £173 (95% confidence interval 151-196), with a risk difference of 5·2% (number needed to treat = 19). The incremental cost was £3336 per successful treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination treatment, compared with TCS alone, has a lower incremental cost per additional successful treatment than NB-UVB only. Combination treatment would be considered cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay £1932 per additional treatment success.

Methods to improve quality of life, beyond medicines. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

The pharmaceutical approach to skin disease has been hugely successful, but despite effective drugs being available and used, there are still vast numbers of people who continue to have some level of persisting skin disease and continue to experience quality of life (QoL) impairment. So the question that needs to be answered, while we await further advances in our drug-based armamentarium, is how can we improve patients' QoL, beyond drugs? A working group was formed from members of the EADV Task Force on QoL and Patient Oriented Outcomes. Participants were asked to suggest all the ways in which they considered patients' QoL may be improved beyond medicines. Four groups of management approaches that may improve QoL in dermatology were identified: interventions within the dermatology service (hospitalization, multidisciplinary teams, patch testing and establishing relevant allergens and education), external services (corrective make-up, climatotherapy and balneotherapy), psychological (psychological intervention, cognitive therapy, hypnosis), lifestyle (lifestyle behavioural changes, religion and spirituality and music). The ultimate aim of therapy is to eradicate a disease in an individual and return the person's life to normal. But until the day comes when this has been achieved for every skin disease and for every patient there will be a need to support and assist many patients in additional non-pharmaceutical ways. These 'adjuvant' approaches receive too little attention while dermatologists and researchers strive for better pharmacological therapy. The different ways in which patients may benefit have been reviewed in our paper, but the reality is that most have a very poor evidence base. The research challenges that we have to meet are to identify those approaches that might be of value and to provide evidence for their optimal use. In the meantime, clinicians should consider the use of these approaches where QoL remains impaired despite optimal use of standard therapy.

Quality of life measurement in occupational skin diseases. Position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Occupational Skin Disease

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) has started the 'Healthy Skin @ Work' campaign aimed to raise awareness among the public and EU authorities on the frequency and impact of occupational skin diseases (OSDs). The EADV Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes (QoL/PO) and on OSD present their mutual position statement on QoL assessment in OSDs. The EADV TFs recommend the use of the DLQI as a dermatology-specific instrument and SF-36 as a generic instrument in health-related (HR) QoL studies on OSDs. The OSD-specific questionnaire, LIOD, is not recommended for general use in its present form because of its three months recall period. The EADV TFs discourage the use of non-validated and of non-validated modifications of previously validated HRQoL instruments. The EADV TFs wish to encourage research into: the HRQoL impact of OSDs other than occupational contact dermatitis and hand eczema; comparisons between the effects of different treatments and other interventions on HRQoL in OSDs; and into the HRQoL impairment of patients with OSDs from different countries, and with different provoking factors, to predict if the results of successful therapeutic and educational interventions may be generalized across countries and between occupations.

Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes on quality of life issues in dermatologic patients during the COVID-19 pandemic

The pandemic of COVID‐19 is a global challenge for health care, and dermatologists are not standing apart from trying to meet this challenge. The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) has collected recommendations from its Task Forces (TFs) related to COVID‐19. The Journal of the EADV has established a COVID‐19 Special Forum giving free access to related articles. The psychosocial effects of the pandemic, an increase in contact dermatitis and several other skin diseases because of stress, disinfectants and protective equipment use, especially in healthcare workers, the temporary limited access to dermatologic care, the dilemma whether or not to pause immunosuppressive therapy, and, finally, the occurrence of skin lesions in patients infected by COVID‐19 all contribute to significant quality of life (QoL) impairment. Here, we present detailed recommendations of the EADV TF on QoL and patient‐oriented outcomes on how to improve QoL in dermatologic patients during the COVID‐19 pandemic for several different groups of patients and for the general population.

A multinational, prospective, observational study to estimate complete skin clearance in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque PSOriasis treated with BIOlogics in a REAL world setting (PSO-BIO-REAL)

Background

Anti‐tumour necrosis factor (TNF) and anti‐interleukin (IL)‐12/23 biologics revolutionized plaque psoriasis treatment by enabling ≥75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) in clinical trials. Modern biologics are now reported to achieve PASI 100 (complete skin clearance) in clinical trials. However, real‐world evidence of skin clearance rates with biologics is limited. PSO‐BIO‐REAL was conducted to understand the real‐world burden of plaque psoriasis.

Objective

The primary objective of this observational study was to estimate the proportion of patients who achieved complete skin clearance at 6 months. Secondary objectives included maintenance of response and evaluation of complete skin clearance at 12 months.

Methods

PSO‐BIO‐REAL was a multinational, prospective, real‐world, non‐interventional study of skin clearance and patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) with biologics. A total of 846 patients from the United States (32%), France (28%), Italy (22%), the United Kingdom (11%) and Germany (8%) were enrolled and followed for one year. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who had initiated a biologic for plaque psoriasis. Patients could be biologic‐naïve or switching biologics (biologic‐experienced). Assessments were made at baseline and at months 6 and 12.

Results

At 6 and 12 months, 23% and 26% of patients achieved complete skin clearance, respectively. Prior to study entry, 60% were biologic‐naïve. The proportion of patients achieving complete skin clearance was lower among biologic‐experienced patients (20% at both months 6 and 12) compared with biologic‐naïve patients (25% at month 6, 30% at month 12). The rate of complete skin clearance decreased as the number of prior biologics and baseline comorbidities increased.

Conclusion

Only one in four patients achieved complete skin clearance after 6 months of treatment with biologics. The study indicates there still is an unmet need for more efficacious biologics for patients with psoriasis.

Recommendations for rosacea diagnosis, classification and management: update from the global ROSacea COnsensus 2019 panel

Background

A transition from a subtyping to a phenotyping approach in rosacea is underway, allowing individual patient management according to presenting features instead of categorization by predefined subtypes. The ROSacea COnsensus (ROSCO) 2017 recommendations further support this transition and align with guidance from other working groups.

Objectives

To update and extend previous global ROSCO recommendations in line with the latest research and continue supporting uptake of the phenotype approach in rosacea through clinical tool development.

Methods

Nineteen dermatologists and two ophthalmologists used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on statements pertaining to critical aspects of rosacea diagnosis, classification and management. Voting was electronic and blinded.

Results

Delphi statements on which the panel achieved consensus of ≥ 75% voting ‘Agree’ or ‘Strongly agree’ are presented. The panel recommends discussing disease burden with patients during consultations, using four questions to assist conversations. The primary treatment objective should be achievement of complete clearance, owing to previously established clinical benefits for patients. Cutaneous and ocular features are defined. Treatments have been reassessed in line with recent evidence and the prior treatment algorithm updated. Combination therapy is recommended to benefit patients with multiple features. Ongoing monitoring and dialogue should take place between physician and patients, covering defined factors to maximize outcomes. A prototype clinical tool (Rosacea Tracker) and patient case studies have been developed from consensus statements.

Conclusions

The current survey updates previous recommendations as a basis for local guideline development and provides clinical tools to facilitate a phenotype approach in practice and improve rosacea patient management.

What's already known about this topic?

A transition to a phenotype approach in rosacea is underway and is being recommended by multiple working groups.

New research has become available since the previous ROSCO consensus, necessitating an update and extension of recommendations.

What does this study add?

We offer updated global recommendations for clinical practice that account for recent research, to continue supporting the transition to a phenotype approach in rosacea.

We present prototype clinical tools to facilitate use of the phenotype approach in practice and improve management of patients with rosacea.

Linked Comment: Elewski. Br J Dermatol 2020; 182:1090–1091.

Plain language summary available online

Quality of life measurement in hidradenitis suppurativa: position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology task forces on Quality of Life and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa

This paper is organized jointly by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and the EADV TF on acne, rosacea and hidradenitis suppurativa (ARHS). The purpose of this paper was to present current knowledge about QoL assessment in HS, including data on HS-specific health-related (HR) QoL instruments and HRQoL changes in clinical trials, and to make practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in people with HS. HS results in significant quimp that is higher than in most other chronic skin diseases. HS impact in published studies was assessed predominantly (84% of studies) by the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). There is a lack of high-quality clinical trials in HS patients where HRQoL instruments have been used as outcome measures. One double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial on infliximab with low number of participants reported significantly better HRQoL improvement in the treatment group than in the placebo group. Well-designed clinical studies in HS patients to compare different treatment methods, including surgical methods and assessing long-term effects, are needed. Because of lack of sufficient validation, the Task Forces are not at present able to recommend existing HS-specific HRQoL instruments for use in clinical studies. The EADV TFs recommend the dermatology-specific DLQI questionnaire for use in HS patients. The EADV TFs encourage the further development, validation and use of other HS-specific, dermatology-specific and generic instruments but such use should be based on the principles presented in the previous publications of the EADV TF on QoL and Patient-Oriented Outcomes.

Quality of life measurement in skin cancer patients: literature review and position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) present a review of the literature and position statement on health-related (HR) QoL assessment in skin cancer patients. A literature search was carried out to identify publications since 1980 that included information about the impact of SC on QoL. Generic, dermatology-specific, cancer-specific, SC-specific, facial SC-specific, NMSC-specific, basal cell carcinoma-specific and melanoma-specific QoL questionnaires have been used to assess HRQoL in SC patients. HRQoL was assessed in the context of creation and validation of the HRQoL instruments, clinical trials, comparison of QoL in SC and other cancers, other diseases or controls, HRQoL assessment after treatment, comorbidities, behaviour modification, predictors of QoL and survival, supportive care needs, coping strategies and fear of cancer recurrence. The most widely used instruments for HRQoL assessment in SC patients are the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), Skin Cancer Index (SCI), Short Form 36 Item Health Survey (SF-36) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). The TFs recommend the use of the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30, especially in late stages of disease, and the melanoma-specific FACT-M and SC-specific SCI questionnaires. These instruments have been well validated and used in several studies. Other HRQoL instruments, also with good basic validation, are not currently recommended because the experience of their use is too limited. Dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments can be used to assess the impact of skin-related problems in SC. The TFs encourage further studies to validate HRQoL instruments for use in different stages of SC, in order to allow more detailed practical recommendations on HRQoL assessment in SC.

Patient perceptions of clear/almost clear skin in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: results of the Clear About Psoriasis worldwide survey

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic advances have made the achievement of clear/almost clear skin possible for many patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine patient perceptions of the impact of psoriasis and of attaining clear/almost clear skin.

METHODS

Global survey of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

RESULTS

A total of 8338 patients from 31 countries participated. The majority (57%) had not achieved self-assessed clear/almost clear skin with their current therapy, and 56% of those who had not met this goal believed it would be impossible to do so. Among the patients who had clear/almost clear skin, 73% had not initiated their current treatment until >1 year after psoriasis diagnosis, and 28% had to wait >5 years. Eighty-four percent of all respondents experienced discrimination and/or humiliation due to psoriasis, and many reported negative effects on work, intimate relationships, sleep and mental health. Patients without clear/almost clear skin reported that such achievement would open new possibilities, such as swimming (58%), a wider choice of clothing (40%), and meeting new people (26%). A limitation of this study, as with any survey-based research, is that selection and recall bias may have been present. Additionally, respondent definitions of clear/almost clear skin were subjective and may have varied.

CONCLUSION

Despite the importance of clear/almost clear skin to psoriasis patients, most are still not achieving it, and many are unaware it is possible.

Safety and efficacy of apremilast through 104 weeks in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis who continued on apremilast or switched from etanercept treatment: findings from the LIBERATE study

Background

Apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase‐4 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Objective

To evaluate long‐term efficacy and safety of apremilast in biologic‐naive patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and safety of switching from etanercept to apremilast in the phase 3b LIBERATE trial.

Methods

Two hundred fifty patients were randomized to placebo, apremilast 30 mg BID or etanercept 50 mg QW through Week 16; thereafter, all patients continued or switched to apremilast through Week 104 (extension phase). Skin, scalp and nail involvement at Weeks 16, 52 and 104 were assessed using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI; 0–72), Scalp Physician Global Assessment (ScPGA; 0–5) and Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI; 0–8); patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; 0–32) and pruritus visual analog scale (VAS; 0–100 mm).

Results

The apremilast‐extension phase (Weeks 16–104) included 226 patients in the placebo/apremilast (n = 73), apremilast/apremilast (n = 74) and etanercept/apremilast (n = 79) groups, and at Week 104, 50.7%, 45.9% and 51.9% of these patients, respectively, maintained ≥75% reduction from baseline in PASI score (based on last‐observation‐carried‐forward analysis). Across treatment groups, ScPGA 0 (clear) or 1 (minimal) was achieved by 50.0%–59.2% of patients; NAPSI mean change from baseline was −48.1% to −51.1%; DLQI score ≤5 was achieved by 66.0%–72.5% of patients; and pruritus VAS mean change from baseline was −24.4 to −32.3. AEs in ≥5% of patients (diarrhoea, nausea, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection and headache) did not increase with prolonged apremilast exposure.

Conclusions

Apremilast demonstrated significant and sustained improvements in skin, scalp, nails and PROs (pruritus and quality of life) over 104 weeks in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Safety was consistent with the known safety profile of apremilast.

Rosacea treatment update: recommendations from the global ROSacea COnsensus (ROSCO) panel

BACKGROUND

Rosacea is currently treated according to subtypes. As this does not adequately address the spectrum of clinical presentation (phenotypes), it has implications for patient management. The ROSacea COnsensus panel was established to address this issue.

OBJECTIVES

To incorporate current best treatment evidence with clinical experience from an international expert panel and establish consensus to improve outcomes for patients with rosacea.

METHODS

Seventeen dermatologists and three ophthalmologists reached consensus on critical aspects of rosacea treatment and management using a modified Delphi approach. The panel voted on statements using the responses 'strongly disagree', 'disagree', 'agree' or 'strongly agree'. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% 'agree' or 'strongly agree'. All voting was electronic and blinded.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on phenotype-based treatments for signs and symptoms presenting in individuals with rosacea. First-line treatments were identified for individual major features of transient and persistent erythema, inflammatory papules/pustules, telangiectasia and phyma, underpinned by general skincare measures. Multiple features in an individual patient can be simultaneously treated with multiple agents. If treatment is inadequate given appropriate duration, another first-line option or the addition of another first-line agent should be considered. Maintenance treatment depends on treatment modality and patient preferences. Ophthalmological referral for all but the mildest ocular features should be considered. Lid hygiene and artificial tears in addition to medications are used to treat ocular rosacea.

CONCLUSIONS

Rosacea diagnosis and treatment should be based on clinical presentation. Consensus was achieved to support this approach for rosacea treatment strategies.

Updating the diagnosis, classification and assessment of rosacea: recommendations from the global ROSacea COnsensus (ROSCO) panel

BACKGROUND

Rosacea is currently diagnosed by consensus-defined primary and secondary features and managed by subtype. However, individual features (phenotypes) can span multiple subtypes, which has implications for clinical practice and research. Adopting a phenotype-led approach may facilitate patient-centred management.

OBJECTIVES

To advance clinical practice by obtaining international consensus to establish a phenotype-led rosacea diagnosis and classification scheme with global representation.

METHODS

Seventeen dermatologists and three ophthalmologists used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on statements pertaining to critical aspects of rosacea diagnosis, classification and severity evaluation. All voting was electronic and blinded.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for transitioning to a phenotype-based approach to rosacea diagnosis and classification. The following two features were independently considered diagnostic for rosacea: (i) persistent, centrofacial erythema associated with periodic intensification; and (ii) phymatous changes. Flushing, telangiectasia, inflammatory lesions and ocular manifestations were not considered to be individually diagnostic. The panel reached agreement on dimensions for phenotype severity measures and established the importance of assessing the patient burden of rosacea.

CONCLUSIONS

The panel recommended an approach for diagnosis and classification of rosacea based on disease phenotype.

The efficacy and safety of apremilast, etanercept and placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: 52-week results from a phase IIIb, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (LIBERATE)

Background

Apremilast, an oral, small‐molecule phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Objective

Evaluate efficacy and safety of apremilast vs. placebo in biologic‐naive patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis and safety of switching from etanercept to apremilast in a phase IIIb, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study (NCT01690299).

Methods

Two hundred and fifty patients were randomized to placebo (n = 84), apremilast 30 mg BID (n = 83) or etanercept 50 mg QW (n = 83) through Week 16; thereafter, all patients continued or switched to apremilast through Week 104. The primary efficacy endpoint was achievement of PASI‐75 at Week 16 with apremilast vs. placebo. Secondary endpoints included achievement of PASI‐75 at Week 16 with etanercept vs. placebo and improvements in other clinical endpoints vs. placebo at Week 16. Outcomes were assessed through Week 52. This study was not designed for apremilast vs. etanercept comparisons.

Results

At Week 16, PASI‐75 achievement was greater with apremilast (39.8%) vs. placebo (11.9%; P < 0.0001); 48.2% of patients achieved PASI‐75 with etanercept (P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). PASI‐75 response was maintained in 47.3% (apremilast/apremilast), 49.4% (etanercept/apremilast) and 47.9% (placebo/apremilast) of patients at Week 52. Most common adverse events (≥5%) with apremilast, including nausea, diarrhoea, upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, tension headache and headache, were mild or moderate in severity; diarrhoea and nausea generally resolved in the first month. No new safety or tolerability issues were observed through Week 52 with apremilast.

Conclusion

Apremilast demonstrated significant efficacy vs. placebo at Week 16 in biologic‐naive patients with psoriasis, which was sustained over 52 weeks, and demonstrated safety consistent with the known safety profile of apremilast. Switching from etanercept to apremilast did not result in any new or clinically significant safety findings, and efficacy was maintained with apremilast through Week 52.

Dysaesthetic penoscrotodynia may be a somatoform disorder: results from a two-centre retrospective case series

BACKGROUND

Dysaesthetic penoscrotodynia (DPSD) is a poorly understood disorder, in which men experience distressing symptoms such as burning pain in their genital skin. Drugs for neuropathic pain are often used, but with little success.

AIM

To review a series of patients with DPSD to highlight common themes and response to treatment.

METHODS

Ten consecutive patients with DPSD were identified from specialist male genital dermatology and psychodermatology clinics at two centres. Clinical details, including psychiatric history, were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with no previously diagnosed psychiatric illness completed either the Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD)-7 scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9 depression scale, or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI).

RESULTS

Of the 10 patients, 9 had known or newly diagnosed psychopathology. All patients were offered psychodermatological treatment, of which 7 of 10 accepted. All of those who accepted psychodermatological treatment experienced an improvement in their genital symptoms. When post-treatment scores were collected, improvement in psychiatric symptoms accompanied improvement in genital symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychopathology is almost invariably present in individuals with DPSD, yet these patients rarely volunteer such information. DPSD is most likely to constitute a functional somatic symptom disorder, hence psychodermatological treatment is indicated for its management. This concept reflects a significant change in the approach to this condition.

Tertiary syphilis and Kaposi sarcoma mistaken for systemic sarcoidosis in an HIV-negative patient

We describe a case of an HIV-negative man who was mistakenly diagnosed as having systemic sarcoidosis, which led to a delay in diagnosing tertiary syphilis and Kaposi sarcoma (KS). The patient presented initially with scrotal swelling and leg oedema. Initial blood tests were unremarkable and HIV testing was negative. The patient then developed unilateral limb weakness. Computed tomography showed lung lesions and hilar lymphadenopathy, while magnetic resonance imaging showed an increased signal in the cervical cord. Serum angiotensin-converting enzyme was raised, and a diagnosis of sarcoidosis was made and the patient started on steroids. Subsequently, his clinical symptoms and radiological abnormalities improved. However, he then developed progressive neurological deficits over several weeks, together with uveitis and cutaneous lesions. A uveitis screen showed a raised venereal disease research laboratory test titre and the cause of his multisystemic symptoms was revisited. He was diagnosed with tertiary syphilis and treated with antibiotics. Dermatologists reviewed the skin lesions and diagnosed KS, which was confirmed with biopsies. The patient's neurological deficit remains. Syphilis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of any patient presenting with neurological problems, skin lesions or symptoms affecting multiple systems. Co-existing KS presented an extra therapeutic challenge in this case.

Suicide and depression in a patient with psoriasis receiving adalimumab: the role of the dermatologist

A 53-year-old man took his own life while receiving biological therapy with the tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor adalimumab for severe psoriasis. The patient had a psychiatric history and a 32-year history of variable unstable psoriasis. Reported suicide in patients with psoriasis receiving adalimumab is rare (only one other reported case). It is important, however, to recognize the effects of skin disease on the mental health of vulnerable patients receiving biological agents. Patients will benefit from a more holistic approach that includes both dermatological and psychological assessment and treatment.

How to set up a psychodermatology clinic

BACKGROUND

Psychodermatology is a recognized subspecialty, but lack of awareness among dermatologists and limitation of resources make the management of these patients challenging. Clinicians are often unsure about the practicalities of setting up a psychodermatology service. There is confusion about which model is best suited to which service, and about the development of a psychodermatology multidisciplinary team.

AIM

To identify the necessary steps in setting up a psychodermatology clinic.

METHODS

The study was based on the experience of a UK-based psychodermatology unit and the recently published standards by the UK Psychodermatology Working Party.

RESULTS

The type of service provision will depend on the type of patients seen in the unit. The core team will be composed of a psychodermatologist and a psychologist. Access to a psychiatrist is essential if patients present with primary psychiatric conditions or primary cutaneous conditions with suicidal or other psychiatric risks. Adequate training of the healthcare staff is advised. The premises and time allocation should be adequate, and this translates into higher tariffs. Using business care tariffs for people with mental health conditions might be more appropriate, as the consultations are longer and involve more members of staff; however, the overall cost remains lower than if these patients were seen in a general dermatology service or in the community.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychodermatology services are globally limited, and yet the demand for psychodermatology care is high. There is evidence that dedicated psychodermatology services are cost-effective. Healthcare professionals need to be aware of the steps necessary to establish and maintain psychodermatology services.

Psoriasis: 'the badge of shame'. A case report of a psychological intervention to reduce and potentially clear chronic skin disease

The psychological effects of skin disorders have long been established. Most research on psychological interventions for people with skin disorders has focused predominantly on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT); however, CBT is not appropriate for everyone. We assessed the benefits of a psychological intervention, using the principles of systemic family therapy (SFT). The key to SFT is the understanding of problems in the context of family and social relationships, and how reciprocal dynamics influence problems. Problems thus have a dual construction; they do not exist only within individuals but rather are a product of the interactions between people and wider systems, such as communities and cultures. This report focuses on the importance of practice-based evidence and the need for more research. A 46-year-old female with a 40-year history of psoriasis was referred for psychological therapy for feelings of shame and low self-esteem. Many medications, including biologics, had been tried previously with no success. Initially, the patient attended therapy alone; later, her husband and other family members joined her. Issues around her past, relationships, and personal beliefs/assumptions were explored. Over ten 50-min sessions, she was able to view her dynamics and relationships in a more helpful way. Her psoriasis cleared, reinforcing that it may have been caused by underlying psychological difficulties. Dermatologists need to work in a more holistic way to provide quality care to patients, meeting their psychological and dermatological needs. There is also a need to develop a broader evidence base and interventions for people with skin disorders.