American Journal of Clinical Dermatology最新文献

Pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) is a rare papulosquamous reaction pattern with a significant impact on quality of life. Type I PRP is the most common PRP variant, presenting as erythematous papules emerging in a follicular distribution and later coalescing into plaques with characteristic islands of sparing; histologically, an alternating pattern of orthokeratosis and parakeratosis is considered the hallmark of PRP (checkerboard hyperkeratosis). Other PRP variants (types II–V) differ in their age of onset and clinical presentation. Type VI PRP is a rare PRP subtype associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection and is occasionally associated with diseases of the follicular occlusion tetrad. Caspase recruitment domain family, member 14 (CARD14)-associated papulosquamous eruption and facial discoid dermatitis are newly described disease states that have an important clinical overlap with PRP, creating shared conundrums with respect to diagnosis and treatment. The etiology inciting PRP often remains uncertain; PRP has been suggested to be associated with infection, malignancy, or drug/vaccine administration in some cases, although these are based on case reports and causality has not been established. Type V PRP is often due to inborn CARD14 mutations. Furthermore, recent literature has identified interleukin-23/T-helper-17 cell axis dysregulation to be a major mediator of PRP pathogenesis, paving the way for mechanism-directed therapy. At present, high-dose isotretinoin, ixekizumab, and secukinumab are systemic agents supported by single-arm prospective studies; numerous other agents have also been trialed for PRP, with variable success rates. Here, we discuss updates on clinical manifestations, present new insights into etiopathogenesis, and offer a survey of recently described therapeutic options.

Rare cases of autoinflammatory neutrophilic dermatoses (AINDs) have been reported in patients during pregnancy with associated adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. Due to the rarity and heterogeneous morphology of pregnancy-associated AINDs, clinical diagnosis is often overlooked, and treatment options are limited. In this review, we present the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, therapeutic interventions, maternal and fetal outcomes, and discuss the possible pathophysiology of various pregnancy associated AINDs. Risk factors for the onset and exacerbation of AINDs in pregnancy include older maternal age, disease duration, and specific gestational age. The varied disease courses and conflicting clinical outcomes in both mothers and fetuses demonstrate the importance of symptom recognition and the understanding of the role of pregnancy on AINDs.

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) and morphea are autoimmune sclerosing diseases that cause significant morbidity, and in the case of SSc, mortality. The pathogenesis of both SSc and morphea share vascular dysfunction, auto-reactive T cells and Th2-associated cytokines, such as interleukin 4, and overproduction of transforming growth factor beta (TGFβ). TGFβ stimulates fibroblast collagen and extra-cellular matrix production. Although morphea and SSc have similar pathogenic pathways and histological findings, they are distinct diseases. Recent advances in treatment of morphea, skin sclerosis in SSc, and interstitial lung disease in SSc are focused on targeting known pathogenic pathways.

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases among children and adults. Over the last 5 years, the armamentarium for the treatment of this disease, with both topical and systemic drugs, has increased. Treat-to-target is basically the concept where a treatment goal and a time frame for that goal is set at initiation of a new treatment, and if the goals are not achieved in time, treatment will be adjusted. In clinical trials, treatment targets are based on scoring systems for disease severity as recommended by the Harmonizing Outcome Measure for Eczema (HOME) initiative, with the primary endpoint being a reduction of at least 75% of the baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score (EASI-75). The question, however, is if these are useful targets in real-world settings and how this should be implemented in everyday clinical practice. In rheumatology, setting a measurable target and a time frame for an instigated therapy has been shown to lead to more efficient and successful treatment. For atopic dermatitis, the instruments recommended by HOME form the core outcome measures for the treat-to-target frameworks published to date, which are based on expert consensus and Delphi processes. Although atopic dermatitis patients have a high risk of co-morbidities, including physical, psychological and socioeconomic, instruments to measure the severity of co-morbidities have not been included in these existing frameworks. In order to apply a treat-to-target strategy that is meaningful for both the patient and the doctor, validated tools for the measurement of treatment effect on co-morbidities exist and should be included in a shared decision-making process with the individual patient when choosing which targets to aim for and what should be considered treatment success. An obvious limitation for the implementation of a treat-to-target strategy in the clinical setting with atopic dermatitis is that retrieving the data needed is very time consuming. This could to some degree be mitigated by the use of electronic applications in which patients could report their outcomes.

Utilization of telemedicine for dermatology has greatly expanded since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, with over 500 new teledermatology studies published since 2020. An updated review on teledermatology is necessary to incorporate new findings and perspectives, and educate dermatologists on effective utilization. We discuss teledermatology in terms of diagnostic accuracy and clinical outcomes, patient and physician satisfaction, considerations for special patient populations, published practice guidelines, cost effectiveness and efficiency, as well as administrative regulations and policies. Our findings emphasize the need for dermatologist education, prioritization of reliable reimbursement systems, and technological innovations to support the continued development of teledermatology in the post-pandemic era.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common skin cancer, for which there are multiple treatment options, including the gold standard Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), surgical excision, electrodesiccation and curettage, radiation therapy, cryosurgery, and photodynamic therapy (PDT). While PDT is currently approved for treating actinic keratosis, it has been used off-label to treat BCC patients who may not tolerate surgery or other treatment modalities. We present a review of the efficacy of these modalities and describe important considerations that affect the usage of PDT and MMS. ALA-PDT and MAL-PDT are both efficacious treatment options for lower-risk BCC that can serve as non-invasive alternatives to surgical excision with favorable cosmetic outcomes in patients unsuitable to undergo surgery. In particular, PDT may be considered an adjuvant for the prevention and treatment of BCC lesions in patients with some genetic syndromes such as Gorlin syndrome, and in combination with surgical excision in lesions presenting in certain locations. Limitations to PDT include lack of margin control to prevent recurrence, pain, and cost of certain photosensitizers. Future studies should investigate the role of PDT as adjunctive therapy, standardization of protocols, and causes and ways to address recurrence following PDT treatment.

Cutaneous T-cell lymphomas are a heterogenous group of lymphomas that cause various skin manifestations. Severe pruritus occurs frequently in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma and negatively impacts patients’ quality of life. The pathophysiology of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma-associated itch is complex and involves various immune cells, inflammatory cytokines, and neuroimmune interactions. Treating cutaneous T-cell lymphoma pruritus can be challenging, and there have been few randomized controlled studies evaluating the use of antipruritic treatments in these patients. Systemic therapies targeting the disease have also been shown to have some antipruritic effects. Furthermore, although biologic therapy has revolutionized the treatment of other pruritic skin conditions, the use of biologics in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma remains controversial.