Practicality, Validity and Responsiveness of Using the Proxy Version of the CHU-9D with Children Aged 2 to 5 Years.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the practicality, validity and responsiveness of proxy CHU-9D in children aged 2-5 years. METHODS: We used data from BEEP, a UK randomised controlled trial testing whether daily emollients in infancy could prevent eczema in high-risk infants. The main parent/carer completed the proxy CHU-9D using developers' additional guidance for completion in under-5's and the Patient-Orientated Eczema Measure (POEM) at ages 2, 3, 4 and 5. Practicality was assessed by completion rates. Construct validity assessed if CHU-9D could discriminate between those with/without eczema and between eczema severity levels on POEM. Responsiveness was determined by ability to discriminate between three groups: those whose POEM score, i) deteriorated ≥3 points, ii) change not clinically important (-2.9 to 2.9 points), and iii) improved ≥3 points. Analysis was conducted in STATA 17. RESULTS: Of 1,394 children participating in BEEP, study questionnaires were completed by 1,212 (87%), 981 (70%), 990 (71%), and 976 (70%) at 2, 3, 4 and 5-years. Of these the CHU-9D was completed by 1,066 (88.0%), 685 (69.8%), 925 (93.4%) and 923 (94.6%) respectively. Mean utility at all timepoints was around 0.934 (range 0.443-1). For construct validity, very small differences on the CHU-9D between known groups were observed(p <0.01). 801 participants had responsiveness data: 13% deteriorated, 72% had non-clinically important change, and 15% improved. Mean utility change (standardised response mean) for these groups was -0.0198 (0.21), 0.0041 (0.05), and 0.0175 (0.21)showing small change and small responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Proxy CHU-9D in 2-5 year old children shows potential but further research is needed.

Skin diseases among adults in Tasiilaq, East Greenland.

Cold climate and unique genetic and environmental factors may influence the prevalence of skin diseases in Greenland. However, there is a lack of epidemiological studies on skin diseases in the adult Greenlandic population. To address this unmet need a cross-sectional study, run by dermatologists from Denmark, the UK, and Switzerland estimated the prevalence and clinical manifestations of skin diseases among adults in East Greenland in May 2022. All adults ≥18 years in the town of Tasiilaq were invited, and 295 individuals aged 18-78 years participated (22.5% of the overall adult population in Tasiilaq). Two-hundred and three participants (69%) had visible signs of current skin disease, and among these, 242 cases of dermatoses were identified. The most common skin diseases were hand eczema (22.4%), lichen simplex (9.5%), discoid eczema (7.1%), psoriasis, atopic dermatitis and acne vulgaris (5.8% each). Scabies was the most frequent infectious skin disease (4.4%). No cases of skin cancer were identified. Atopic dermatitis and psoriasis presented with disease that was of limited extent and different from the classical presentations. Skin diseases showed a high prevalence among adults in East Greenland, and some of them were severe. This indicates a noteworthy public health problem that warrants better access to dermatologist support.

A Case Series of Refractory Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis Effectively Treated With Dupilumab in Combination With Abrocitinib.

Children with severe atopic dermatitis (AD), refractory to conventional systemic treatment as well as single-agent biologic and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) such as abrocitinib, currently face a lack of treatment options. In response to this clinical conundrum, we present three cases of severe and refractory pediatric AD successfully managed with combined dupilumab and abrocitinib. These children had exhausted all conventional treatments and had undergone treatment with both dupilumab and abrocitinib individually, as well as dupilumab in conjunction with methotrexate. It was only when the combination of dupilumab and abrocitinib was introduced that they finally achieved noticeable and sustained improvements in disease control.

An expert consensus on managing dupilumab-related ocular surface disorders in people with atopic dermatitis 2024.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common inflammatory skin condition which affects all ages. New therapies, including the monoclonal antibody therapy dupilumab, offer excellent efficacy. However, in clinical trials, and emphasised in real-world observations, the unexpected increased frequency of ocular adverse effects became apparent. The effectiveness of dupilumab and the unpredictability of ocular adverse effects mean that clinicians need guidance on counselling patients prior to treatment and on managing them if they arise. OBJECTIVES: The British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) and Royal College of Ophthalmologists collaborated on this consensus guidance on managing dupilumab-related ocular surface disorders (DROSD). METHODS: A multidisciplinary group was formed of adult and paediatric dermatologists and ophthalmologists with DROSD expertise, patient representation, and BAD Clinical Standards Unit. A literature search was conducted, and the results reviewed. All recommendations were reviewed, discussed and voted on. RESULTS: The recommendations pertain to dermatology and ophthalmology management, and apply to all ages, unless otherwise stated. Importantly, initiation of dupilumab for AD should not be delayed for most eye disorders except acute new problems, e.g. infections, or potentially severe conditions, e.g. a history of corneal transplant (ophthalmology advice should be sought first). There is insufficient evidence to recommend lubricant drops prophylactically. Dermatologists should assess eye complaints to diagnose DROSD; a severity grading system is provided. DROSD management differs slightly in those aged <7 years as ocular complications may affect neuro-ocular development; therefore, irrespective of DROSD severity, this population should be referred for ophthalmology advice. In those aged ≥7 years, dermatologists should feel confident to trial treatment and reserve ophthalmology advice for severe or non-responding cases. Discussion about dupilumab withdrawal should be prompted by a significant impact on quality of life, threat to sight, or other complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although dupilumab is a highly effective agent for treating AD, the risk of ocular adverse effects should not inhibit clinicians or patients from using it, but clinicians should be aware of them. If a patient develops DROSD, there are clear pathways to assess severity and offer initial management; where ineffective, dermatologists should assess the urgency and seek advice from or initiate referral to ophthalmology. While the evidence reviewed for these guidelines reflects the extensive literature on dupilumab, we believe our advice has relevance for ocular surface disorders in atopic dermatitis (AD) patients treated with tralokinumab and lebrikizumab.

International consensus on methotrexate dosing for patients with atopic dermatitis: An eDelphi study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread off-label use of methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), there is limited high-quality evidence on dosing regimens and existing guidelines do not provide clear recommendations regarding dosing strategies. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to achieve international consensus among AD experts to standardize the dosing regimen for MTX treatment in adults and children with AD. METHODS: An electronic Delphi (eDelphi) study was conducted from October 2021 to September 2022. Recruitment was conducted through dermatology societies and AD interest groups. Participation was open to dermatologists and dermatology residents experienced in treating AD patients with MTX. The study consisted of three online rounds. The first round was informed by a systematic review of relevant literature, and subsequent rounds were adjusted based on the results of the previous round. Participants voted on 19 proposals using a 9-point scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neither agree nor disagree, 7-9 agree). Consensus was achieved when at least 70% of participants agreed, and less than 15% disagreed. Proposals that did not reach consensus in the first three rounds were discussed in a consensus meeting, where consensus was defined as less than 30% disagreement. RESULTS: In total, 152 participants completed Round 1, 104 (68%) completed all survey rounds, and 43 (28%) joined the consensus meeting. Consensus was achieved on 7 proposals in Round 1, 4 in Round 2 and 6 in Round 3. The final 2 proposals reached consensus during the consensus meeting. Consensus topics include test dose, start dose, maximum dose, administration route, dosing schedule, management of stopping treatment, treatment duration and folic acid supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: This eDelphi study achieved consensus on 19 proposals related to MTX dosing for adults and children with AD. These results aim to guide prescribing decisions and encourage a standardized global approach to MTX use in AD.

A prospective observational cohort study comparing the treatment effectiveness and safety of ciclosporin, dupilumab and methotrexate in adult and paediatric patients with atopic dermatitis: results from the UK-Irish A-STAR register.

BACKGROUND: The main conventional systemic atopic dermatitis (AD) treatments are methotrexate (MTX) and ciclosporin (CyA). Dupilumab was the first novel systemic agent to enter routine clinical practice. There are no head-to-head randomised controlled trials or real-world studies comparing these agents directly. Network meta-analyses provide indirect comparative efficacy and safety data and have shown strong evidence for dupilumab and CyA. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the real-world clinical effectiveness and safety of CyA, dupilumab and MTX in AD. METHODS: We compared the effectiveness and safety of these systemic agents in a prospective observational cohort study of adult and paediatric patients recruited into the UK-Irish Atopic eczema Systemic TherApy Register (A-STAR). Treatment effectiveness measures included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and children's DLQI (cDLQI). Minimum duration of treatment was 28 days and follow-up was 12 months. Adjusted Cox-regression was used to compare the hazards of achieving EASI-50, EASI-75 and EASI-90 over time, and linear mixed-effects models were used to estimate changes in efficacy scores. Treatment safety was assessed by examining adverse events (AEs) at follow-up visits. RESULTS: 488 patients (n=311 adults and n=177 children/adolescents) on dupilumab (n=282), methotrexate (n=149), or CyA (n=57) were included. CyA and MTX were primarily used first line, while dupilumab was mainly a second line systemic as per UK National Institute of Clinical and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendations. EASI-50, EASI-75 and EASI-90 were achieved more rapidly in the dupilumab and CyA groups compared to MTX. After adjustment for previous severity, the reduction in EASI, POEM, PP-NRS and DLQI was greater for patients treated with dupilumab compared to MTX. In severe patients the reduction in EASI, POEM, and PP-NRS was even greater with CyA. The incidence of AEs was similar across groups (734, 654 and 594 per 10,000 person-month on CyA, dupilumab and MTX respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This real-world comparison of CyA, dupilumab and MTX in AD suggests that dupilumab is consistently more effective than MTX and that CyA is most effective in very severe disease within one follow-up year.

Systemic Immunomodulatory Treatments for Atopic Dermatitis: Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis Update.

Importance: There are multiple approved systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis. Lebrikizumab is a newly licensed biologic medication that has been compared to placebo in clinical trials but not to other systemic treatments. Objective: To compare reported measures of efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab to other systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data Sources: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, and trial registries were searched from inception through November 3, 2023. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials evaluating 8 or more weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate and random-effects bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. Minimal important differences were used to define important differences between medications. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The updated analysis was completed from December 13, 2023, to February 20, 2024. Main Outcome Measures: Efficacy outcomes were the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scales (PP-NRS) and were compared using mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). Safety outcomes were serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Other outcomes included the proportion of participants with 50%, 75%, and 90% improvement in EASI (EASI-50, -75, -90) and the proportion with success on the Investigator Global Assessment compared using odds ratios with 95% CrI. Results: The study sample included 97 eligible trials, with a total of 24 679 patients. Lebrikizumab was associated with no important difference in change in EASI (MD, -2.0; 95% CrI, -4.5 to 0.3; moderate certainty), POEM (MD, -1.1; 95% CrI -2.5 to 0.2; moderate certainty), DLQI (MD, -0.2; 95% CrI -2.1 to 1.6; moderate certainty), or PP-NRS (MD, 0.1; 95% CrI -0.4, 0.6; high certainty) compared to dupilumab among adults with atopic dermatitis who were treated for up to 16 weeks. Dupilumab was associated with higher odds of efficacy in binary outcomes compared with lebrikizumab. The relative efficacy of other approved systemic medications was similar to that found by previous updates of this living study, with high-dose upadacitinib and abrocitinib demonstrating numerically highest relative efficacy. For safety outcomes, low event rates limited useful comparisons. Conclusions and Relevance: In this living systematic review and network meta-analysis, lebrikizumab was similarly effective to dupilumab for the short-term treatment of atopic dermatitis in adults. Clinicians and patients can use these comparative data to inform treatment decisions.

Emollient application from birth to prevent eczema in high-risk children: the BEEP RCT.

Background: Atopic eczema is a common childhood skin problem linked with asthma, food allergy and allergic rhinitis that impairs quality of life. Objectives: To determine whether advising parents to apply daily emollients in the first year can prevent eczema and/or other atopic diseases in high-risk children. Design: A United Kingdom, multicentre, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel-group randomised controlled prevention trial with follow-up to 5 years. Setting: Twelve secondary and four primary care centres. Participants: Healthy infants (at least 37 weeks' gestation) at high risk of developing eczema, screened and consented during the third trimester or post delivery. Interventions: Infants were randomised (1 : 1) within 21 days of birth to apply emollient (Doublebase Gel®; Dermal Laboratories Ltd, Hitchin, UK or Diprobase Cream®) daily to the whole body (excluding scalp) for the first year, plus standard skin-care advice (emollient group) or standard skin-care advice only (control group). Families were not blinded to allocation. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome was eczema diagnosis in the last year at age 2 years, as defined by the UK Working Party refinement of the Hanifin and Rajka diagnostic criteria, assessed by research nurses blinded to allocation. Secondary outcomes up to age 2 years included other eczema definitions, time to onset and severity of eczema, allergic rhinitis, wheezing, allergic sensitisation, food allergy, safety (skin infections and slippages) and cost-effectiveness. Results: One thousand three hundred and ninety-four newborns were randomised between November 2014 and November 2016; 693 emollient and 701 control. Adherence in the emollient group was 88% (466/532), 82% (427/519) and 74% (375/506) at 3, 6 and 12 months. At 2 years, eczema was present in 139/598 (23%) in the emollient group and 150/612 (25%) in controls (adjusted relative risk 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.16; p = 0.61 and adjusted risk difference -1.2%, 95% confidence interval -5.9% to 3.6%). Other eczema definitions supported the primary analysis. Food allergy (milk, egg, peanut) was present in 41/547 (7.5%) in the emollient group versus 29/568 (5.1%) in controls (adjusted relative risk 1.47, 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 2.33). Mean number of skin infections per child in the first year was 0.23 (standard deviation 0.68) in the emollient group versus 0.15 (standard deviation 0.46) in controls; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1.55, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.09. The adjusted incremental cost per percentage decrease in risk of eczema at 2 years was £5337 (£7281 unadjusted). No difference between the groups in eczema or other atopic diseases was observed during follow-up to age 5 years via parental questionnaires. Limitations: Two emollient types were used which could have had different effects. The median time for starting emollients was 11 days after birth. Some contamination occurred in the control group (< 20%). Participating families were unblinded and reported on some outcomes. Conclusions: We found no evidence that daily emollient during the first year of life prevents eczema in high-risk children. Emollient use was associated with a higher risk of skin infections and a possible increase in food allergy. Emollient use is unlikely to be considered cost-effective in this context. Future research: To pool similar studies in an individual patient data meta-analysis. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN21528841. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 12/67/12) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Eczema is a troublesome itchy skin condition affecting 1 in 5 children and 1 in 10 UK adults. There is no cure and affected children are more likely to develop food allergies. We wanted to see if we could prevent eczema by protecting the skin of babies at higher risk of developing eczema (with an immediate relative with eczema, asthma or hay fever) with moisturisers used to treat dry skin. Previous research suggested that protecting the skin barrier might also prevent food allergy. One thousand three hundred and ninety-four families took part in a study; half of them were asked to apply moisturiser every day to their newborn baby for the first year and half to look after their baby's skin in the normal way. At the age of 2 years, we did not see any difference in how common eczema was between the two groups: 23% had eczema in the moisturiser group and 25% in the normal care group. It did not matter how we defined eczema ­ whether examined by a researcher or parent report. We did not find any differences in related conditions like asthma or hay fever either. We found that children using moisturisers had seen their doctor slightly more often for mild skin infections. There was a hint that food allergy might have been increased in the moisturiser group, but there was not enough data to be sure. We followed up the children to age 5 years, but we still did not find any benefits from using moisturisers in early life. Since this study, other similar research has been done using newer types of moisturisers, but their results are the same. This study shows that using daily moisturisers on healthy babies with a high risk of eczema does not prevent eczema. It is one less thing for busy families to worry about.

Biomarkers of peanut allergy in children over time.

BACKGROUND: Various biomarkers are used to define peanut allergy (PA). We aimed to observe changes in PA resolution and persistence over time comparing biomarkers in PA and peanut sensitised but tolerant (PS) children in a population-based cohort. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the EAT and EAT-On studies, conducted across England and Wales, and were exclusively breastfeed babies recruited at 3 months old and followed up until 7-12 years old. Clinical characteristics, skin prick test (SPT), sIgE to peanut and peanut components and mast cell activation tests (MAT) were assessed at 12 months, 36 months and 7-12 years. PA status was determined at the 7-12 year time point. RESULTS: The prevalence of PA was 2.1% at 7-12 years. Between 3 and 7-12 year, two children developed PA and one outgrew PA. PA children had larger SPT, higher peanut-sIgE, Ara h 2-sIgE and MAT (all p < .001) compared to PS children from 12 months onwards. SPT, peanut-sIgE, Ara h 2-sIgE and MAT between children with persistent PA, new PA, outgrown PA and PS were statistically significant from 12 months onwards (p < .001). Those with persistent PA had SPT, peanut-sIgE and Ara h 2-sIgE that increased over time and MAT which was highest at 36 months. New PA children had increased SPT and peanut-sIgE from 36 months to 7-12 years, but MAT remained low. PS children had low biomarkers across time. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, few children outgrow or develop new PA between 36 months and 7-12 years. Children with persistent PA have raised SPT, peanut-sIgE, Ara h 2-sIgE and MAT evident from infancy that consistently increase over time.

Efficacy of lebrikizumab in adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: 16-week results from three randomized phase 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Lebrikizumab, a high-affinity monoclonal antibody targeting IL-13, previously demonstrated clinical efficacy in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 trials that included adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD): ADvocate1, ADvocate2, and ADhere. AIM: This subset analysis evaluated 16-week physician- and patient-reported outcomes of lebrikizumab in the adolescent patients enrolled in these three trials. METHODS: Eligible adolescents (≥12 to <18 years weighing ≥40kg) were randomized 2:1 to subcutaneous lebrikizumab (500 mg loading doses at baseline and Week 2 followed by 250 mg every 2 weeks) or placebo as monotherapy in ADvocate1&2, and in combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS) in the ADhere study. Week 16 analyses included clinical efficacy outcomes (IGA (0,1) with ≥2-point improvement, EASI 75, EASI 90), patient-reported Pruritus NRS ≥4-point improvement and Sleep-Loss Scale ≥2-point improvement. RESULTS: Pooled ADvocate1&2 16-week results in lebrikizumab (N = 67) vs placebo (N = 35) were: IGA (0,1) 46.6% vs 14.3% (p < 0.01), EASI 75 62.0% vs 17.3% (p < 0.001), EASI 90 40.7% vs 11.5% (p < 0.01), Pruritus NRS 48.9% vs 13.1% (p < 0.01), and Sleep-Loss Scale 26.9% vs 6.9% (p = 0.137). Corresponding results for ADhere, (lebrikizumab + TCS, N = 32; placebo + TCS, N = 14), were consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Lebrikizumab treatment demonstrated efficacy in improving the signs and symptoms of AD in adolescent patients, consistent with the ADvocate and ADhere overall population results.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - Part 1: Systemic therapy, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Environmental Dermatology (SIDAPA).

SIDeMaST (Società Italiana di Dermatologia Medica, Chirurgica, Estetica e delle Malattie Sessualmente Trasmesse) contributed to the development of the present guideline on the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. With the permission of EuroGuiDerm, SIDeMaST adapted the guideline to the Italian healthcare context to supply a reliable and affordable tool to Italian physicians who take care of patients affected by atopic dermatitis. The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This first part of the guideline includes general information on its scope and purpose, the health questions covered, target users and a methods section. It also provides guidance on which patients should be treated with systemic therapies, as well as recommendations and detailed information on each systemic drug. The systemic treatment options discussed in the guideline comprise conventional immunosuppressive drugs (azathioprine, ciclosporin, glucocorticosteroids, methotrexate and mycophenolate mofetil), biologics (dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, omalizumab and tralokinumab) and janus kinase inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib). Part two of the guideline will address avoidance of provocation factors, dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine, educational interventions, occupational and psychodermatological aspects, patient perspective and considerations for pediatric, adolescent, pregnant and breastfeeding patients.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - Part 2: non-systemic treatments and treatment recommendations for special AE patient populations, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Occupational Dermatology (SIDAPA).

SIDeMaST (Società Italiana di Dermatologia Medica, Chirurgica, Estetica e delle Malattie Sessualmente Trasmesse) contributed to the development of the present guideline on the systemic treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis. With the permission of EuroGuiDerm, SIDeMaST adapted the guideline to the Italian healthcare context to supply a reliable and affordable tool to Italian physicians who take care of patients affected by atopic dermatitis. The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. This second part of the guideline includes recommendations and detailed information on basic therapy with emollients and moisturizers, topical anti-inflammatory treatment, antimicrobial and antipruritic treatment and UV phototherapy. Furthermore, this part of the guideline covers techniques for avoiding provocation factors, as well as dietary interventions, immunotherapy, complementary medicine and educational interventions for patients with atopic eczema and deals with occupational and psychodermatological aspects of the disease. It also contains guidance on treatment for pediatric and adolescent patients and pregnant or breastfeeding women, as well as considerations for patients who want to have a child. A chapter on the patient perspective is also provided. The first part of the guideline, published separately, contains recommendations and guidance on systemic treatment with conventional immunosuppressive drugs, biologics and janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, as well as information on the scope and purpose of the guideline, and a section on guideline methodology.

Italian S3-Guideline on the treatment of Atopic Eczema - First Update, adapted from EuroGuiDerm by the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Occupational Dermatology (SIDAPA).

The evidence- and consensus-based guideline on atopic eczema, published in JEADV on 18 August 2022 (part 1) and 3 September 2022 (part 2) was developed in accordance with the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. Four consensus conferences were held between December 2020 and July 2021. Twenty-nine experts (including clinicians and patient representatives) from 12 European countries participated. To reflect the most recent evidence on novel systemic medications, an update was published in October 2022. According to the purpose of the Italian Society of Dermatology and STD (SIDEMAST), the Italian Association of Hospital Dermatologists (ADOI) and the Italian Society of Allergological and Environmental Dermatology (SIDAPA) to adapt the EuroGuiDerm guideline on the treatment of atopic eczema into the Italian Healthcare setting, the original update has been supplemented by inserting notes, well highlighted by the original text, to emphasize the laws, rules, procedures and suggestions of the Italian Ministry of Health and regional Health authorities.

Defining disease severity in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis for the application to biomarker research: an interdisciplinary perspective.

More severe atopic dermatitis and psoriasis are associated with a higher cumulative impact on quality of life, multimorbidity and healthcare costs. Proactive, early intervention in those most at risk of severe disease may reduce this cumulative burden and modify the disease trajectory to limit progression. The lack of reliable biomarkers for this at-risk group represents a barrier to such a paradigm shift in practice. To expedite discovery and validation, the BIOMarkers in Atopic Dermatitis and Psoriasis (BIOMAP) consortium (a large-scale European, interdisciplinary research initiative) has curated clinical and molecular data across diverse study designs and sources including cross-sectional and cohort studies (small-scale studies through to large multicentre registries), clinical trials, electronic health records and large-scale population-based biobanks. We map all dataset disease severity instruments and measures to three key domains (symptoms, inflammatory activity and disease course), and describe important codependencies and relationships across variables and domains. We prioritize definitions for more severe disease with reference to international consensus, reference standards and/or expert opinion. Key factors to consider when analysing datasets across these diverse study types include explicit early consideration of biomarker purpose and clinical context, candidate biomarkers associated with disease severity at a particular point in time and over time and how they are related, taking the stage of biomarker development into account when selecting disease severity measures for analyses, and validating biomarker associations with disease severity outcomes using both physician- and patient-reported measures and across domains. The outputs from this exercise will ensure coherence and focus across the BIOMAP consortium so that mechanistic insights and biomarkers are clinically relevant, patient-centric and more generalizable to current and future research efforts.

Atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis are long-term skin conditions that can significantly affect people's lives, especially when symptoms are severe. Approximately 10% of adults and 20% of children are affected by AD, while psoriasis affects around 5% of people in the UK. Both conditions are associated with debilitating physical symptoms (such as itch) and have been linked to depression and anxiety. Biomarkers are naturally occurring chemicals in the human body and have potential to enhance the longer-term management of AD and psoriasis. Currently, there are no routinely used biomarkers that can identify people who experience or will go on to develop severe AD and psoriasis. For this reason, research is under way to understand which biomarkers are linked to severity. In this study, a multidisciplinary team of skin researchers from across Europe, along with patient groups, discussed the complexities of studying severity-related biomarkers. We identified a number of severity measurement approaches and there were recommendations for future biomarker research, including (i) considering multiple measures as no single measure can encompass all aspects of severity, (ii) exploring severity measures recorded by both healthcare professionals and patients, as each may capture different aspects, and (iii) accounting for influencing factors, such as different treatment approaches, that may impact AD and psoriasis severity, which make it challenging to compare findings across studies. Overall, we anticipate that the insights gained from these discussions will increase the likelihood of biomarkers being effectively applied in real-world settings, to ultimately improve outcomes for people with AD and psoriasis.