Comorbidities in childhood atopic dermatitis: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that is associated with allergic comorbidities. However, studies examining comorbidities in childhood AD are incomplete, which may contribute to suboptimal care. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the risk of developing different allergic and non-allergic comorbidities among children with AD to that of a matched non-AD reference cohort in Sweden. METHODS: This was a nationwide population-based cohort study using longitudinal data from primary and specialist care registers. Patients with AD were identified by confirmed diagnosis in primary or specialist care. The non-AD reference cohort was randomly drawn from the general population and matched 1:1 with the AD patients. The risk of developing the following conditions was evaluated: hypersensitivity and allergic disorders, neurological disorders, psychiatric disorders, infections, immunological and inflammatory disorders, Type 1 diabetes (T1D), endocrine and metabolic disorders, skeletal disorders, ocular disorders and malignancies. RESULTS: This study included 165,145 patients with AD (mild-to-moderate [n = 126,681] and severe [n = 38,464]) and an equally sized reference cohort. Patients with AD displayed a higher risk of developing comorbid conditions for all investigated categories, except for T1D and skeletal disorders, compared with the reference cohort. The highest risk compared with the reference cohort was observed for hypersensitivity and allergic disorders (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.87), followed by malignancies (HR: 2.53) and immunological and inflammatory disorders (HR: 2.36). Patients with AD also had higher risk of developing multiple comorbidities (≥2). The risk of comorbidity onset increased alongside AD severity and patients with active AD were associated with increased risk of comorbidity onset compared with patients in remission. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical burden of AD is substantial for children with AD and patients are at an increased risk of developing several comorbid conditions extending beyond the atopic march. Our results also showed a positive association between worsening severity of AD and an increased risk of comorbidity onset.

Influenza Adverse Events in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Ulcerative Colitis, or Psoriatic Arthritis in the Tofacitinib Clinical Development Programs.

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc analysis evaluated influenza adverse events (AEs) across rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ulcerative colitis (UC), and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) tofacitinib clinical programs. METHODS: Available data from phase 1, randomized phase 2/3/3b/4 clinical trials (completed by 2018), and long-term extension (LTE) studies (up to May 2019) in patients with RA, UC, and PsA were included [randomized or Overall (phase 1-3b/4 and LTE studies) tofacitinib cohorts]. Incidence rates (IRs; events per 100 patient-years) of combined influenza AEs (seasons 2004/2005 to 2018/2019) were analyzed, including by tofacitinib dose [5 or 10 mg twice daily (BID)] and age (< 65 versus ≥ 65 years). Logistic regression models evaluated risk factors for influenza AEs in the RA Overall tofacitinib cohort. RESULTS: In randomized cohorts, combined influenza AE IRs were generally similar across tofacitinib, adalimumab, methotrexate, and placebo groups, across indications. Among Overall tofacitinib cohorts, combined influenza AE IRs with tofacitinib 5/10 mg BID, respectively, were higher in the UC (3.66/5.09) versus RA (2.38/2.19) and PsA (1.74/1.29) cohorts. IRs were generally similar across tofacitinib dose and age groups. Most influenza AEs were nonserious and did not require changes to tofacitinib treatment. Significant risk factors for influenza AEs in patients with RA were geographic region, baseline oral corticosteroid and methotrexate use, and tofacitinib dose. CONCLUSIONS: In the RA, UC, and PsA clinical programs, combined influenza AE IRs were highest in UC, while in each indication they were generally similar across tofacitinib, placebo, and comparator groups. Influenza AEs were predominantly nonserious and not associated with changes to tofacitinib treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: NCT01262118, NCT01484561, NCT00147498, NCT00413660, NCT00550446, NCT00603512, NCT00687193, NCT01164579, NCT00976599, NCT01059864, NCT01359150, NCT02147587, NCT00960440, NCT00847613, NCT00814307, NCT00856544, NCT00853385, NCT01039688, NCT02281552, NCT02187055, NCT02831855, NCT00413699, NCT00661661, NCT00787202, NCT01465763, NCT01458951, NCT01458574, NCT01470612, NCT01877668, NCT01882439, NCT01976364.

Acute vasodilator response to vardenafil and clinical outcome in patients with pulmonary hypertension.

PURPOSE: Acute vasodilator testing is recommended in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension to identify individuals who may benefit from long-term treatment with oral calcium channel blockers. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of vardenafil in acute vasoreactivity testing compared to adenosine. METHODS: A total of 20 patients eligible for right heart catheterisation were enrolled. Acute vasoreactivity testing was carried out with intravenous (iv) adenosine (n = 18) followed by oral vardenafil (n = 20). Haemodynamic responses were recorded at baseline and after 60 min (vardenafil). Responders were defined according to consensus guideline criteria. RESULTS: Both vardenafil and adenosine significantly decreased mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP, p < 0.001 and p = 0.026, respectively) and pulmonary vascular resistance (p < 0.001 and p > 0.001, respectively), and significantly increased cardiac output (p = 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). Vardenafil reduced mPAP more than adenosine (p = 0.044), while adenosine resulted in higher responses of cardiac index (p = 0.009) and pulmonary arterial oxygen saturation (p = 0.042). Acute adverse reactions were common with adenosine, while no side effects were observed after a single oral dose vardenafil. Vardenafil identified five responders (out of 20), while adenosine identified three responders (out of 18). During a 7-year follow-up, vardenafil responders had significantly lower NT-proBNP levels compared to non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: Vardenafil may be safely used for acute vasoreactivity testing in patients with PH. A single oral dose of vardenafil is better tolerated than iv adenosine and may identify additional responders who could benefit from long-term vasodilator treatment.

Lack of evidence of stimulatory autoantibodies to platelet-derived growth factor receptor in patients with systemic sclerosis.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a severe connective tissue disease of unknown etiology, characterized by fibrosis of the skin and multiple internal organs. Recent findings suggested that the disease is driven by stimulatory autoantibodies to platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), which stimulate the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and collagen by fibroblasts. These results opened novel avenues of research into the diagnosis and treatment of SSc. The present study was undertaken to confirm the presence of anti-PDGFR antibodies in patients with SSc. METHODS: Immunoglobulins from 37 patients with SSc were purified by protein A/G chromatography. PDGFR activation was tested using 4 different sensitive bioassays, i.e., cell proliferation, ROS production, signal transduction, and receptor phosphorylation; the latter was also tested in a separate population of 7 patients with SSc from a different research center. RESULTS: Purified IgG samples from patients with SSc were positive when tested for antinuclear autoantibodies, but did not specifically activate PDGFRalpha or PDGFRbeta in any of the tests. Cell stimulation with PDGF itself consistently produced a strong signal. CONCLUSION: The present results raise questions regarding the existence of agonistic autoantibodies to PDGFR in SSc.