Biologics for Treatment of Pityriasis Rubra Pilaris: A Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the published efficacy and adverse event rates associated with existing biologics for the treatment of pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP). DATA SOURCES: A literature review using the PubMed database (January 1990-July 2023) was conducted. Multiple search combinations were conducted using "pityriasis rubra pilaris" and various biologics as keywords to identify relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Inclusion criteria included all study types that were published within the past 30 years in English and mentioned at least one biologic and PRP. A preliminary search yielded a total of 499 results. After screening using inclusion and exclusion criteria, 77 relevant articles (69 case reports, 5 case series, 2 clinical trials, and 1 retrospective analysis) were analyzed. DATA SYNTHESIS: TNF-α inhibitors have been evaluated and are effective in treating PRP. However, recent treatment with anti-interleukin (IL)-17 and anti-IL-23 therapies such as ustekinumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab are emerging as new treatment options with a mean improvement in PRP Area and Severity Index scores, change in severity of erythema, scaling, and thickness of PRP lesions. From initial clinical trials, secukinumab and ixekizumab are promising treatment options for achieving remission. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review compares the efficacy for numerous biologics and a discussion to guide clinicians on benefits and risks in choosing a biologic for PRP patients. CONCLUSIONS: Biologics may be a favourable treatment option leading to greater patient adherence due to reduced dosing frequencies, improvement in quality of life, and reduction in frequency and severity of flares.

Noncorticosteroid Topical Therapies for the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis: A Narrative Review.

Objective: The objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of noncorticosteroid topical treatments for plaque psoriasis. Data Sources: A literature search of the PubMed database was performed (January 1978 to May 2023) using the keywords plaque psoriasis, tapinarof, benvitimod, Vtama, roflumilast, Zoryve, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, tazarotene, tacalcitol, calcitriol, Vectical, calcipotriene, Dovonex, tacalcitol, vitamin D analogs, salicylic acid, non-corticosteroid topical, Investigator's Global Assessment, and Physician's Global Assessment. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant English-language articles and clinical trial data were considered. Data Synthesis: Six noncorticosteroid topical classes for the treatment of plaque psoriasis were selected. The percentage of patients with plaque psoriasis who achieved Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) success after 8 weeks of treatment with tacalcitol, calcipotriene/betamethasone dipropionate compound, tazarotene/halobetasol propionate, and roflumilast was 17.9%, 39.9%, 40.7%, and 42.4%, respectively. For 12-week trials of tapinarof and coal tar, 37.4% and 58.2% of patients achieved IGA success, respectively. There were 48% and 71.4% reductions in IGA scores with salicylic acid (12 weeks) and pimecrolimus (4 weeks), respectively. Finally, 66.7% of patients achieved Physician's Global Assessment success with 8 weeks of tacrolimus. There were no serious adverse events for the noncorticosteroid topicals. Conclusion: Noncorticosteroid topicals are suitable options for patients with plaque psoriasis who would like to avoid topical corticosteroids or have experienced adverse effects from chronic corticosteroid use. Due to treatment duration differences and varied outcome measures, it is unclear which noncorticosteroid topical is most efficacious; however, calcineurin inhibitors appear to exhibit the greatest efficacy. Each topical was efficacious in treating plaque psoriasis and had an adequate safety profile. Despite several treatment options for plaque psoriasis, medication adherence is a limiting factor.

Live vaccinations in dermatology for immunosuppressed patients: a narrative review.

Given the higher susceptibility to infectious disease in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for inflammatory dermatologic conditions, immunization is important in this population. While live vaccines protect against life-threatening diseases, they can be harmful in immunosuppressed patients given the risk of replication of the attenuated pathogen and adverse reactions. The utilization of live vaccines in immunosuppressed patients depends on multiple factors such as the vaccine and therapy regimen. To provide an overview of evidence-based recommendations for the use of live vaccines in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for dermatological conditions. A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords live vaccine, live-attenuated vaccine, dermatology, immunosuppressed, and immunocompromised, and specific immunosuppressive therapies: corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, biologics. Relevant articles written in English were included. Using these keywords, 125 articles were reviewed, of which 28 were ultimately selected. Recommendations for live vaccines can be determined on a case-by-case basis. Measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (MMRV) vaccines may be safely administered to patients on low-dose immunosuppressive agents while the yellow fever vaccine is typically contraindicated. It may be safe to administer live MMRV boosters to children on immunosuppressive therapies and the live herpes zoster vaccine to patients on biologics. Given poor adherence to immunization guidelines in immunosuppressed patients, dermatologists have a critical role in educating patients and general practitioners regarding live vaccines. By reviewing a patient's vaccination history and following immunization guidelines prior to initiating immunosuppressive therapies, physicians can mitigate morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases.

Recurrence rates in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars with intralesional triamcinolone combined with other intralesional agents.

Hypertrophic scars (HTS) and keloids are pathologic scars that are products of a wound healing pathway error attributed to genetic and inflammatory causes (Leventhal et al., Arch Facial Plast Surg 8(6):362-368. https://doi.org/10.1001/archfaci.8.6.362 , 2006). Methods of pathologic scar treatment include intralesional agents, cryotherapy, surgical excision, pressure dressings, topical agents, laser resurfacing, radiotherapy, and other investigational therapies (Leventhal et al. 2006). The recurrence of pathologic scar is high across all treatment modalities, including the use of intralesional agents (Trisliana Perdanasari et al., Arch Plast Surg 41(6):620-629. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2014.41.6.620 , 2014). In the treatment of pathologic scar, combination approaches using intralesional agents, such as triamcinolone (TAC), 5-fluorouracil (5FU), verapamil (VER), bleomycin (BLM), and botulinum toxin (BTX), are superior therapies when compared to monotherapy (Yosipovitch et al., J Dermatol Treat 12(2):87-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/095466301317085363 , 2001; Yang et al., Front Med 8:691628. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.691628 , 2021; Sun et al., Aesthetic Plast Surg 45(2):791-805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01570-8 , 2021). This review assesses recurrence and the reporting of recurrence in pathologic scar after treatment with intralesional triamcinolone (TAC) in combination with another intralesional agent. A literature review was conducted using research journals from PubMed using the following search terms: [(keloid) AND (triamcinolone) AND (combination) AND (intralesional)], as well as [(keloid) AND (triamcinolone) AND (combination)]. Articles were reviewed and included if the article analyzed  or compared intralesional agents for pathologic scar treatment within the last 10 years. The average follow-up period of included articles (n = 14) that utilized combination intralesional therapy (TAC-X) was approximately 11 months (range 1-24 months). Consistent recurrence rate reporting across studies was lacking. The combination agent with the highest recurrence rate was TAC-5FU (23.3%). The range of reported recurrence rates was 7.5-23.3%. Six studies using various intralesional combination regimens reported 0% recurrence over the follow-up period (TAC-5FU, TAC-BTX, TAC-BLM, TAC-CRY). Three studies did not report recurrence rates. While the efficacy of combination therapy is typically assessed via scar scales, the assessment of recurrence across studies of combination therapy is inconsistent and inadequate, with truncated follow-up periods. While scar recurrence can take place during 1-year post-treatment, long-term follow-up (18-24 months) is needed to characterize recurrence in the treatment of pathologic scar using various intralesional agents. Long-term follow-up periods allow patients to receive accurate prognostic information regarding recurrence after combination intralesional therapy. There are limitations to this review in that comparisons were made across studies with varying outcome variables, including scar size, injection concentration and interval, and follow-up period. Standardized follow-up periods and recurrence rate reporting are integral to furthering the understanding of these therapies and enhancing patient care.

The Pharmacist's role in dermatology: Patient medication adherence.

Medication non-adherence is currently estimated to have caused at least 100 000 preventable deaths and over $100 billion in preventable medical costs. Adherence is particularly poor in dermatological conditions, with more than 50% of patients discontinuing topical treatments within the first year. Pharmacists are among the most accessible health-care professionals with the potential to greatly impact medication non-adherence through patient education, medication therapy management, and improved access to care. This review aimed to determine how pharmacists have improved medication adherence in dermatology and discuss strategies for further involvement. An extensive medical literature search using the PubMed database was conducted to evaluate clinical studies, published in the last 20 years, that have evaluated the pharmacist's role and impact on adherence of to dermatological products. PubMed search terms include: "pharmacists' role in dermatologic medication adherence", "pharmacist-led interventions in dermatology", "pharmacist medication adherence dermatology" and "pharmacist intervention dermatology". A total of 18 relevant studies were identified. Pharmacists improved dermatological medication adherence by increasing access to medications, providing medication counseling programs, and performing treatment monitoring services. However, corticophobia may contribute to pharmacists' hesitancy in making corticosteroid over-the-counter recommendations. Pharmacists are accessible health-care providers with the potential to improve dermatological medication adherence. Future advanced training in dermatology medications may refine pharmacists' knowledge of dermatological products.

New synthetic pharmacotherapeutic approaches to the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in adults.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory and immune-mediated condition affecting 3.2% of the United States population. There are many options for psoriasis treatment including topicals, oral systemic agents, and biologics. A greater understanding of the pathophysiology of psoriasis has led to an increase in the therapeutic options for treatment. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we outline the novel synthetic agents for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and discuss a strategy for implementing these agents in clinical practice. A literature search was performed using PubMed to identify articles relevant to the topic published before October 2022. EXPERT OPINION: Topicals are first-line for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, most commonly including topical steroids, vitamin D analogs, and topical calcineurin inhibitors. While new topical agents have favorable properties, they are not always effective and adherence to topical agents is poor. Biologics are safe and effective, but patients often prefer oral therapy as opposed to injectable medications. Additionally, anti-drug antibodies can reduce effectiveness of biologics over time. Oral medications are preferred, but we now have a high bar for efficacy and safety. Cost is also a barrier for many patients. Recent development of new synthetic treatment options is promising, and we recommend that providers consider these agents as they develop holistic and individualized treatment plans for their patients.

Could red and near-infrared emitting fabric technology improve the severity of psoriasis, polymorphous light eruption, and alopecia areata?

AIM: Low-level light therapy (LLLT) may offer an adjunctive therapeutic tool for inflammatory skin conditions. This pilot study assessed the efficacy of a red/near-infrared (NIR)-emitting fabric for psoriasis, polymorphous light eruption (PMLE), and alopecia areata (AA). METHODS: Fourteen patients (five with psoriasis, five with PMLE, and four with AA) were instructed to wear a red/NIR-emitting (Lumiton®) garment during the 12-week study. Efficacy was assessed subjectively by patient-reported improvement and objectively by the redness, thickness, and scale of elbow psoriasis plaques, the frequency of PMLE flares, and the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score. RESULTS: Three patients with psoriasis completed the study while two self-discontinued. The three patients who completed the study noted improvement and two had improvements in lesion redness, thickness, or scale, while one was clinically stable. Three patients with PMLE completed the study, and none had a disease flare during the study period. Three patients with AA completed the study: two reported disease improvement and all three had an improved SALT score. CONCLUSION: Use of a wellness apparel that emits red and NIR light may be associated with improved disease severity in patients with mild elbow psoriasis, PMLE, and limited AA. Limitations of this study include continuation on topical, intralesional, or systemic medications and small sample size.