The Role of Sex and Gender in Dermatology - From Pathogenesis to Clinical Implications.

BACKGROUND: Sex and gender have increasingly been recognized as significant risk factors for many diseases, including dermatological conditions. Historically, sex and gender have often been grouped together as a single risk factor in the scientific literature. However, both may have a distinct impact on disease incidence, prevalence, clinical presentation, severity, therapeutic response, and associated psychological distress. OBJECTIVES AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The mechanisms that underlie differences in skin diseases between males, females, men, and women remain largely unknown. The specific objectives of this review paper are:To highlight the biological differences between males and females (sex), as well as the sociocultural differences between men and women (gender) and how they impact the integumentary system.To perform a literature review to identify important sex- and gender-related epidemiological and clinical differences for various skin conditions belonging to a range of disease categories and to discuss possible biological and sociocultural factors that could explain the observed differences.To discuss dermatological skin conditions and gender-affirming treatments within the transgender community, a population of individuals who have a gender identity which is different than the gender identity they were assigned at birth. FUTURE IMPACT: With the rising number of individuals that identify as non-binary or transgender within our increasingly diverse communities, it is imperative to recognize gender identity, gender, and sex as distinct entities. By doing so, clinicians will be able to better risk-stratify their patients and select treatments that are most aligned with their values. To our knowledge, very few studies have separated sex and gender as two distinct risk factors within the dermatology literature. Our article also has the potential to help guide future prevention strategies that are patient-tailored rather than using a universal approach.

Immunomodulation for unexplained recurrent implantation failure: where are we now?

In brief: Immune dysfunction may contribute to or cause recurrent implantation failure. This article summarizes normal and pathologic immune responses at implantation and critically appraises currently used immunomodulatory therapies. Abstract: Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) may be defined as the absence of pregnancy despite the transfer of ≥3 good-quality blastocysts and is unexplained in up to 50% of cases. There are currently no effective treatments for patients with unexplained RIF. Since the maternal immune system is intricately involved in mediating endometrial receptivity and embryo implantation, both insufficient and excessive endometrial inflammatory responses during the window of implantation are proposed to lead to implantation failure. Recent strategies to improve conception rates in RIF patients have focused on modulating maternal immune responses at implantation, through either promoting or suppressing inflammation. Unfortunately, there are no validated, readily available diagnostic tests to confirm immune-mediated RIF. As such, immune therapies are often started empirically without robust evidence as to their efficacy. Like other chronic diseases, patient selection for immunomodulatory therapy is crucial, and personalized medicine for RIF patients is emerging. As the literature on the subject is heterogenous and rapidly evolving, we aim to summarize the potential efficacy, mechanisms of actions and side effects of select therapies for the practicing clinician.

Successful Milk Oral Immunotherapy Promotes Generation of Casein-Specific CD137+ FOXP3+ Regulatory T Cells Detectable in Peripheral Blood.

Background: Oral immunotherapy (OIT) is an emerging treatment for cow's milk protein (CMP) allergy in children. The mechanisms driving tolerance following OIT are not well understood. Regulatory T cells (TREG) cells are key inhibitors of allergic responses and promoters of allergen-specific tolerance. In an exploratory study, we sought to detect induction of allergen-specific TREG in a cohort of subjects undergoing OIT. Methods: Pediatric patients with a history of allergic reaction to cow's milk and a positive Skin Pick Test (SPT) and/or CMP-specific IgE >0.35 kU, as well as a positive oral challenge to CMP underwent OIT with escalating doses of milk and were followed for up to 6 months. At specific milestones during the dose escalation and maintenance phases, casein-specific CD4+ T cells were expanded from patient blood by culturing unfractionated PBMCs with casein in vitro. The CD4+ T cell phenotypes were quantified by flow cytometry. Results: Our culture system induced activated casein-specific FOXP3+Helios+ TREG cells and FOXP3- TEFF cells, discriminated by expression of CD137 (4-1BB) and CD154 (CD40L) respectively. The frequency of casein-specific TREG cells increased significantly with escalating doses of milk during OIT while casein-specific TEFF cell frequencies remained constant. Moreover, expanded casein-specific TREG cells expressed higher levels of FOXP3 compared to polyclonal TREG cells, suggesting a more robust TREG phenotype. The induction of casein-specific TREG cells increased with successful CMP desensitization and correlated with increased frequencies of casein-specific Th1 cells among OIT subjects. The level of casein-specific TREG cells negatively correlated with the time required to reach the maintenance phase of desensitization. Conclusions: Overall, effective CMP-OIT successfully promoted the expansion of casein-specific, functionally-stable FOXP3+ TREG cells while mitigating Th2 responses in children receiving OIT. Our exploratory study proposes that an in vitro TREG response to casein may correlate with the time to reach maintenance in CMP-OIT.

Maternal and Fetal Outcomes in a Cohort of Patients Exposed to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors throughout Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are increasingly used in pregnancy but are frequently withheld in the second or third trimesters. We evaluated the maternal and fetal outcomes of women who continued their TNFi throughout pregnancy compared to women who interrupted TNFi during pregnancy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of women seen in clinic with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), or ankylosing spondylitis, who were exposed to TNFi during pregnancy. We separated pregnancies into 2 groups based on the level of TNFi exposure and compared outcomes. RESULTS: In Group 1 (TNFi exposure in first trimester only), 11 women had 14 pregnancies and 12 live births. There were 2 first-trimester losses (2/14, 14%), one in the setting of active RA. Five pregnancies (5/14, 35.7%) were complicated by a disease flare. Eight patients (8/12, 66%) flared postpartum. In Group 2 (TNFi exposure throughout pregnancy), 29 women had 32 pregnancies and 34 live births. Three (3/28, 10.7%) adverse pregnancy outcomes were reported in 2 patients. One patient had a twin pregnancy and delivered at 33 weeks after developing preterm premature rupture of membranes at 32 weeks in the setting of a JIA flare. Her second pregnancy was complicated by active JIA before and throughout gestation, and hemolysis, elevated liver enzyme levels, and low platelet levels (HELLP) syndrome at 39 weeks. Another patient with comorbid antiphospholipid syndrome underwent a cesarean birth at 36 weeks for suspicion of HELLP syndrome. Six (6/32, 18.7%) postpartum flares occurred. CONCLUSION: Women who discontinued their TNFi during pregnancy had a higher risk of peri- or postpartum flare compared to those who continued their TNFi throughout pregnancy.