American Journal of Clinical Dermatology最新文献

Dermatophytoses are fungal infections of the skin, hair, and nails that affect approximately 25% of the global population. Occlusive clothing, living in a hot humid environment, poor hygiene, proximity to animals, and crowded living conditions are important risk factors. Dermatophyte infections are named for the anatomic area they infect, and include tinea corporis, cruris, capitis, barbae, faciei, pedis, and manuum. Tinea incognito describes steroid-modified tinea. In some patients, especially those who are immunosuppressed or who have a history of corticosteroid use, dermatophyte infections may spread to involve extensive skin areas, and, in rare cases, may extend to the dermis and hair follicle. Over the past decade, dermatophytoses cases not responding to standard of care therapy have been increasingly reported. These cases are especially prevalent in the Indian subcontinent, and Trichophyton indotineae has been identified as the causative species, generating concern regarding resistance to available antifungal therapies. Antifungal-resistant dermatophyte infections have been recently recognized in the United States. Antifungal resistance is now a global health concern. When feasible, mycological confirmation before starting treatment is considered best practice. To curb antifungal-resistant infections, it is necessary for physicians to maintain a high index of suspicion for resistant dermatophyte infections coupled with antifungal stewardship efforts. Furthermore, by forging partnerships with federal agencies, state and local public health agencies, professional societies, and academic institutions, dermatologists can lead efforts to prevent the spread of antifungal-resistant dermatophytes.

Background

Psoriasis is a major global health burden affecting ~ 60 million people worldwide. Existing studies on psoriasis focused on individual-level health behaviors (e.g. diet, alcohol consumption, smoking, exercise) and characteristics as drivers of psoriasis risk. However, it is increasingly recognized that health behavior arises in the context of larger social, cultural, economic and environmental determinants of health. We aimed to identify the top risk factors that significantly impact the incidence of psoriasis at the neighborhood level using populational data from the province of Quebec (Canada) and advanced tree-based machine learning (ML) techniques.

Methods

Adult psoriasis patients were identified using International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9/10 codes from Quebec (Canada) populational databases for years 1997–2015. Data on environmental and socioeconomic factors 1 year prior to psoriasis onset were obtained from the Canadian Urban Environment Health Consortium (CANUE) and Statistics Canada (StatCan) and were input as predictors into the gradient boosting ML. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC). Parsimonious models and partial dependence plots were determined to assess directionality of the relationship.

Results

The incidence of psoriasis varied geographically from 1.6 to 325.6/100,000 person-years in Quebec. The parsimonious model (top 9 predictors) had an AUC of 0.77 to predict high psoriasis incidence. Amongst top predictors, ultraviolet (UV) radiation, maximum daily temperature, proportion of females, soil moisture, urbanization, and distance to expressways had a negative association with psoriasis incidence. Nighttime light brightness had a positive association, whereas social and material deprivation indices suggested a higher psoriasis incidence in the middle socioeconomic class neighborhoods.

Conclusion

This is the first study to highlight highly variable psoriasis incidence rates on a jurisdictional level and suggests that living environment, notably climate, vegetation, urbanization and neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics may have an association with psoriasis incidence.

Acne is one of the most common dermatological conditions to affect women of childbearing age, so it is important to consider the safety of long-term acne treatments on women who could become pregnant. In this review article, we clarify what management options are available to treat acne during pregnancy. Topical treatments, typically first-line for acne, such as azelaic acid, clindamycin, erythromycin, metronidazole, benzoyl peroxide, salicylic acid, dapsone, and retinoids, were reviewed. Systemic treatments, such as zinc supplements, cephalexin, cefadroxil, amoxicillin, azithromycin, erythromycin, and corticosteroids, typically second-line for acne, were also reviewed. Alternative treatments such as light therapy and cosmetic procedures were also evaluated. Due to recommendation of sunscreen utilization during acne treatments, sunscreen usage during pregnancy was also assessed. Management of acne during unplanned pregnancy was discussed in further detail regarding safety and adverse effects. Through summarized tables and examples of studies demonstrating safety and efficacy of treatments, the following is a resource for providers and patients to utilize for management of acne during pregnancy.

Background

The comparative efficacy of biologics and small-molecule inhibitors in treating palmoplantar psoriasis (PP) and palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) remains uncertain.

Objective

The aim was to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of biologics and small-molecule inhibitors for the treatment of PP and PPP.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for eligible studies from inception to May 13, 2023. This NMA was conducted and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension Statement for Network Meta-Analyses guidelines. Frequentist random-effects models NMA was performed with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve calculated for ranking. Our primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving a clear/minimal Palmoplantar Psoriasis/Pustulosis Physician Global Assessment score (PPPGA 0/1 or PPPPGA 0/1) response at 12–16 weeks. Secondary outcomes consisted of the percentage of overall improvement in palmoplantar score and of improvement ≥ 75%, at 12–16 weeks.

Results

The study comprised a total of 29 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), involving 4798 psoriasis patients with palmoplantar diseases. For PP, 16 RCTs with nine different treatments, including adalimumab, apremilast, bimekizumab, etanercept, guselkumab, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and ustekinumab were included for the analysis. In the NMA of PP, secukinumab 300 mg ranked highest (odds ratio [OR] 33.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.37–256.86) in achieving PPPGA 0/1, followed by guselkumab 100 mg (OR 18.68, 95% CI 10.07–34.65). In the case of PPP, seven RCTs with six treatments, including apremilast, etanercept, guselkumab, imsidolimab, spesolimab, and ustekinumab, were included for the analysis. In the NMA of PPP, although no treatment demonstrated a significant difference compared to placebo in achieving PPPPGA 0/1, guselkumab 100 mg showed the greatest statistically significant improvement in the palmoplantar score (weighted mean difference 31.73, 95% CI 19.89–43.57) as a secondary outcome.

Conclusion

Among all available biologics and small-molecule inhibitors, secukinumab 300 mg and guselkumab 100 mg had the most favorable efficacy in treating PP and PPP, respectively.

With the development of effective BRAF-targeted and immune-checkpoint immunotherapies for metastatic melanoma, clinical trials are moving these treatments into earlier adjuvant and perioperative settings. BRAF-targeted therapy is a standard of care in resected stage III–IV melanoma, while anti-programmed death-1 (PD1) immunotherapy is now a standard of care option in resected stage IIB through IV disease. With both modalities, recurrence-free survival and distant-metastasis-free survival are improved by a relative 35–50%, yet no improvement in overall survival has been demonstrated. Neoadjuvant anti-PD1 therapy improves event-free survival by approximately an absolute 23%, although improvements in overall survival have yet to be demonstrated. Understanding which patients are most likely to recur and which are most likely to benefit from treatment is now the highest priority question in the field. Biomarker analyses, such as gene expression profiling of the primary lesion and circulating DNA, are preliminarily exciting as potential biomarkers, though each has drawbacks. As in the setting of metastatic disease, markers that inform positive outcomes include interferon-γ gene expression, PD-L1, and high tumor mutational burden, while negative predictors of outcome include circulating factors such as lactate dehydrogenase, interleukin-8, and C-reactive protein. Integrating and validating these markers into clinically relevant models is thus a high priority. Melanoma therapeutics continues to advance with combination adjuvant approaches now investigating anti-PD1 with lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG3), T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT), and individualized neoantigen therapies. How this progress will be integrated into the management of a unique patient to reduce recurrence, limit toxicity, and avoid over-treatment will dominate clinical research and patient care over the next decade.

Dermatologic adverse events resulting from oncologic therapy are common and negatively impact patients’ quality of life. Dermatologic adverse events include toxicity of the skin, oral mucosa, nails, and hair and are seen with cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and radiation therapy, with distinct patterns of dermatologic adverse events by drug class. Here, we review the literature on the impact of dermatologic adverse events on quality of life. Studies on quality of life in patients with cancer have relied on scales such as the Dermatologic Life Quality Index and Skindex to demonstrate the association between dermatologic adverse events and declining quality of life. This relationship is likely due to a variety of factors, including physical discomfort, changes to body image, decreased self-esteem, and an effect on social interactions. Addressing such quality-of-life concerns for patients with cancer is critical, not only for patients’ well-being but also because decreased satisfaction with treatment can lead to discontinuation of treatment or dose reduction. Prophylactic treatment and early management of dermatologic adverse events by experienced dermatologists can alleviate the negative effects on quality of life and allow continuation of life-prolonging treatment.

Field cancerization theory highlights that the skin surrounding actinic keratoses (AK) is also at increased risk for possible malignant transformation; thus, field-directed treatments may both reduce the risk of AK recurrence and potentially reduce the risk of development of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Photodynamic therapy (PDT) with either aminolevulinic acid (ALA) or methylaminolevulinate (MAL), as well as topical treatments such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), diclofenac gel, piroxicam, imiquimod, and ingenol mebutate, have all shown higher efficacy than vehicle treatments. PDT is widely recognized for its high efficacy; however, concerns for associated pain have driven new studies to begin using alternative illumination and pretreatment techniques, including lasers. Among topical treatments, a combination of 5-FU and salicylic acid (5-FU–SA) has shown to be the most effective but also causes the most adverse reactions. Tirbanibulin, a new topical agent approved for use in 2020, boasts a favorable safety profile in comparison with imiquimod, 5-FU, and diclofenac. Meanwhile, ingenol mebutate is no longer recommended for the treatment of AKs due to concerns for increased risk of cSCC development. Moving forward, an increasing number of studies push for standardization of outcome measures to better predict risk of future cSCC and use of more effective measures of cost to better guide patients. Here, we present an updated and comprehensive narrative review both confirming the efficacy of previously mentioned therapies as well as highlighting new approaches to PDT and discussing the use of lasers and novel topical treatments for treatment of AK.

Background

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a debilitating cutaneous disease characterized by severe painful inflammatory nodules/abscesses. At present, data regarding the epidemiology and pathophysiology of this disease are limited.

Objective

To define the prevalence and comorbidity associations of HS.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of EPIC^TM Cosmos^© examining over 180 million US patients. Prevalences were calculated by demographic and odds ratios (OR) and identified comorbidity correlations.

Results

All examined metabolism-related, psychological, and autoimmune/autoinflammatory (AI) diseases correlated with HS. The strongest associations were with pyoderma gangrenosum [OR 26.56; confidence interval (CI): 24.98–28.23], Down syndrome (OR 11.31; CI 10.93–11.70), and polycystic ovarian syndrome (OR 11.24; CI 11.09–11.38). Novel AI associations were found between HS and lupus (OR 6.60; CI 6.26–6.94) and multiple sclerosis (MS; OR 2.38; CI 2.29–2.48). Cutaneous malignancies were largely not associated in the unsegmented cohort; however, among Black patients, novel associations with melanoma (OR 2.39; CI 1.86–3.08) and basal cell carcinoma (OR 2.69; CI 2.15–3.36) were identified.

Limitations

International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-based disease identification relies on coding fidelity and diagnostic accuracy.

Conclusion

This is the first study to identify correlations between HS with melanoma and basal cell carcinoma (BCC) among Black patients as well as MS and lupus in all patients with HS.

There have been many recent advances in melanoma therapy. While 50% of melanomas have a BRAF mutation and are a target for BRAF inhibitors, the remaining 50% are BRAF wild-type. Immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting PD-1, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) and lymphocyte activated gene-3 (Lag-3) are all approved for the treatment of patients with advanced BRAF wild-type melanoma; however, treatment of this patient population following initial immune checkpoint blockade is a current therapeutic challenge given the lack of other efficacious options. Here, we briefly review available US FDA-approved therapies for BRAF wild-type melanoma and focus on developing treatment avenues for this heterogeneous group of patients. We review the basics of genomic features of both BRAF mutant and BRAF wild-type melanoma as well as efforts underway to develop new targeted therapies involving the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway for patients with BRAF wild-type tumors. We then focus on novel immunotherapies, including developing checkpoint inhibitors and agonists, cytokine therapies, oncolytic viruses and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, all of which represent potential therapeutic avenues for patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma who progress on currently approved immune checkpoint inhibitors.