Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Patients with a History of Treated Solid Tumours: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with treated solid tumours (TSTs) are a highly heterogeneous population at an increased risk for malignancy compared with the general population. When treating psoriasis in patients with a history of TSTs, clinicians are concerned about the immunosuppressive nature of psoriasis therapies, the possibility of augmenting cancer recurrence/progression, and infectious complications. No direct, high-level evidence exists to address these concerns. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework supporting healthcare professional and patient discussions on the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in patients with previously TSTs. Our goal was to address the clinically important question, "In patients with TSTs, does therapy with systemic agents used for psoriasis increase the risk of malignancy or malignancy recurrence?" METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial and real-world data were absent. We reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in patients with TSTs. Recommendations on systemic psoriasis therapies in patients with TSTs were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified five indirect indicators of iatrogenic immunosuppression informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) overall survival, (2) rate of malignancies with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (3) rate of infections with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (4) common disease biochemical pathways for solid tumours and systemic psoriasis therapies, and (5) solid organ transplant outcomes. On the basis of review of the totality of this data, we provided inference-based conclusions and ascribed level of support for each statement. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to considering new therapies for psoriasis, an understanding of cancer prognosis should be addressed. Patients with TSTs and a good cancer prognosis will have similar outcomes to non-TST patients when treated with systemic psoriasis therapies. For patients with TSTs and a poor cancer prognosis, the quality-of-life benefits of treating psoriasis may outweigh the theoretical risks.

Patients with previously treated cancer have a higher chance of cancer recurrence compared with the general population. With cancer incidence rising worldwide, doctors across medical specialities will need to treat other medical conditions, including inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis, in these patients. Effective systemic therapies for psoriasis reduce immune cell activity. Accordingly, there are concerns that treatments for psoriasis could worsen cancer recurrence/progression and infectious complications. There is not enough quality evidence to make broad recommendations for treating other inflammatory conditions in patients with a history of cancer. To guide patient and doctor discussions, we asked: what are effective and safe treatments when patients with treated solid tumours need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis? We focused on patients with solid tumours and excluded blood and skin cancers. Our panel of experts, including 12 dermatologists and 3 medical oncologists, reviewed direct and indirect evidence to answer this question. Considering the totality of evidence reviewed, the expert panel drafted and rated their level of support for opinion statements on important considerations in treating patients with psoriasis who have a history of solid tumours. By making inferences on systemic psoriasis therapies in this heterogeneous population, we take the onus off individual physicians to review the indirect data. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent. To support treatment decisions, doctors should have a guided conversation with the patient and their family on a case-by-case basis about the risks and benefits of treatment.

Clinical Implications of Targeting the JAK-STAT Pathway in Psoriatic Disease: Emphasis on the TYK2 Pathway.

Cytokines in the interleukin (IL)-23/IL-17 axis are central to psoriasis pathogenesis. Janus kinase (JAK) signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) regulates intracellular signalling of several cytokines (including IL-12, 23, 22, 6, 17, and interferon (IFN)-γ) in the IL-23/IL-17 axis, and, as a result, has become a therapeutic target for psoriasis treatment. Although several JAK1-3 inhibitors, with varying degrees of selectivity, have been developed for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, use in psoriasis is limited by a low therapeutic index as anticipated by signals from other disease indications. More selective inhibition of the JAK family is an area of interest. Specifically, selective tyrosine kinase (TYK)2 inhibition suppresses IL-23/IL-17 axis signalling, and at therapeutic doses, has a favorable safety profile compared to therapeutic doses of JAK1-3 inhibitors. Phase III efficacy and safety data for the selective allosteric TYK2-inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis is promising. Furthermore, phase II clinical trials for ropsacitinib (PF-06826647), a selective TYK2 inhibitor, and brepocitinib (PF-06700841), a JAK1/TYK2 inhibitor, have also demonstrated efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Other novel TYK2 allosteric inhibitors, NDI-034858 and ESK-001, are currently being investigated in adult patients with plaque psoriasis. This article reviews the details of the JAK-STAT pathway in psoriasis pathophysiology, the rationale for selective targeting of JAKs in the treatment of psoriasis, and provides clinical perspective on clinical trial data for JAK and TYK2 inhibitors.

Follow-up of Patients With Keratinocyte Carcinoma: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Importance: Patients treated for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC), collectively called keratinocyte carcinoma (KC), are at risk for recurrence, metastasis, and additional primary cutaneous malignant neoplasms. It is unclear how often patients should be seen for follow-up skin examination after initial treatment of KC. Objective: To summarize the recommendations and evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for dermatologic follow-up of patients with BCC and invasive SCC. Evidence Review: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched for relevant articles published from January 2010 to March 2022. Search terms included guideline, squamous cell carcinoma, and basal cell carcinoma. National or international guidelines containing recommendations for follow-up frequency after a diagnosis of localized cutaneous KC were included. Quality was assessed using the 6 domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool: (1) scope and purpose; (2) stakeholder development; (3) rigor of development; (4) clarity of presentation; (5) applicability; and (6) editorial independence. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) was used to guide study reporting. Findings: Among the 14 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria, there was little consensus on the appropriate follow-up frequency after initial KC treatment. Overall duration of follow-up ranged from a single posttreatment visit to lifelong surveillance. Most guidelines stratified their recommendations by recurrence risk. For low-risk BCC and guidelines that did not stratify by risk, follow-up recommendations ranged from every 6 to 12 months. For high-risk BCC, 1 guideline suggested follow-up every 3 months, while 4 recommended every 6 months. For low-risk SCC, 5 guidelines recommended annual follow-up; 3 guidelines, every 6 months; and 1 guideline, every 3 months. For high-risk SCC, recommendations included a range of follow-up frequencies, spanning every 3 months (n = 5 guidelines), 4 months (n = 1), 6 months (n = 6), or annually (n = 4). One guideline did not use risk stratification and recommended annual screening. The highest scoring AGREE II domain was "scope and purpose," which assessed the guideline's overall objectives, and the lowest scoring was "applicability," which assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systemic review highlight variations in follow-up recommendations for patients after initial treatment for KC. Randomized clinical trials are needed to define an optimal follow-up regimen.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in People Living with Controlled HIV: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have a similar prevalence of psoriasis as the general population, though incidence and severity correlate with HIV viral load. Adequately treating HIV early renders the infection a chronic medical condition and allows PLHIV with a suppressed viral load (PLHIV-s) to live normal lives. Despite this, safety concerns and a lack of high-level data have hindered the use of systemic psoriasis therapies in PLHIV-s. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework that supports healthcare professionals and patients discussing the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in PLHIV-s. Our goal was to address the primary question, are responses to systemic therapies for the treatment of psoriasis in PLHIV-s similar to those in the non-HIV population? METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial data were absent. In this instance, we reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in PLHIV. Recommendations on systemic treatment for psoriasis in PLHIV were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified seven indirect indicators of immune function informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) functional assays, (2) vaccine response, (3) life expectancy, (4) psoriasis manifestations, (5) rate of infections, (6) rate of malignancies, and (7) organ transplant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related benefits and risks when treating a patient with systemic psoriasis therapies are similar for non-HIV patients and PLHIV with a suppressed viral load and normalized CD4 counts. Prior to initiating psoriasis treatment in PLHIV, HIV replication should be addressed by an HIV specialist. Exercise additional caution for patients with a suppressed viral load and discordant CD4 responses on antiretroviral therapy.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) develop psoriasis as often as everyone else. We asked: what are effective and safe treatments when PLHIV need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis?HIV infection attacks the immune system. When HIV is not treated, the immune system declines. A less effective immune system makes it harder for the body to fight infections and certain cancers. Psoriasis is a skin condition caused by overactive immune cells. Effective psoriasis treatments reduce immune-cell activity. There are some concerns that treatments for psoriasis may not work and could worsen infections or cancers.To answer the question, we gathered 11 dermatologists and 4 HIV specialists. We reviewed the international scientific literature on PLHIV and psoriasis. The absence of direct evidence and volume of information to review made the process challenging. The end results were worthwhile.We concluded that people who are diagnosed early and take antiretroviral therapy to control their HIV infection (PLHIV-c) can live long, healthy lives. Accordingly, we determined that PLHIV-c can likely expect the same safety and efficacy for systemic psoriasis treatments as the general population. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis through consultation with the patient and treating physician(s).Pillars of modern medicine are evidence-based care and collaborative decision-making. Too often, neither care provider nor patient are adequately informed. We have tried to fill one information gap for PLHIV and psoriasis. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent.

Practical and Relevant Guidelines for the Management of Psoriasis: An Inference-Based Methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis (Pso) is a common, immune-mediated, chronic-relapsing, inflammatory skin disease. While a great deal is known about Pso and its treatment, there remain several treatment scenarios unaddressed by clinical studies. To be effective, treatment for Pso must alter the activity of one or more immunological pathways important in the pathogenesis of the disease. While the benefit of blocking these pathways may be apparent, there remain uncertainties regarding safety, such as infections, malignancies, and the potential for off-target effects. Existing guidelines and treatment recommendations rely primarily on clinical trial or observational data, none of which adequately address specific clinical challenges. This document describes a methodological framework for generating practical and clinically relevant guidance for situations where direct evidence is rare or absent. Guidelines implementing this framework are currently ongoing. METHODS: We develop a knowledge synthesis approach to guideline development, utilizing clinical trial data where available, and a formalized inferential decision-making process that considers indirect data coupled with structured expert opinion and analysis. This approach is best suited for situations where direct, high-level evidence is lacking. Support for each resultant recommendation is expressed as a quantified assessment of confidence. RESULTS: The topics to be addressed by this set of guidelines are ranked by clinicians and patients as areas of concern, with an emphasis on topics where high-level evidence may have limited availability. CONCLUSION: Through this novel approach, we will derive practical, informative recommendations using the best evidence available in combination with structured expert opinion to guide best practices in complex, real-world settings. Supplementary file2 (MP4 98653 kb).

Clinical guidelines aim to assist doctors in managing their patients' medical conditions. A limitation of current guidelines is that they are frequently based on randomized clinical research trials­often considered the gold standard in medical research. Clinical trials are designed to estimate the safety and effectiveness of treatment. Outside of clinical trials, doctors encounter a range of patient cases excluded from clinical trials. Our group aims to create guidelines for those clinical scenarios not adequately addressed by clinical trials. Examples include patients excluded from clinical trials, the elderly, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and pregnant or breastfeeding women. When clinical trial data is limited, doctors must make decisions nonetheless. In certain clinical situations they are left to their own resources to consult with experts, review the data, and make inferences based on the limited data available. Instead of concluding that there is no data, the topic of interest can be broken down into components that are answerable by different types of research studies. This inference-based approach uses expert opinion and indirect evidence to support an inference-based position on topics where direct clinical data is sparse or insufficient to answer the question. This approach can be used as a complement to clinical trial data informing disease management guidelines.

Management of Plaque Psoriasis With Biologic Therapies in Women of Child-Bearing Potential Consensus Paper.

BACKGROUND: Plaque psoriasis (PsO) is a chronic inflammatory disease that often presents at peak reproductive age in women of child-bearing potential (WOCBP). With the emergence of biologic therapies to treat PsO, guidance on disease management in WOCBP is needed to inform treatment decisions before, during, and after pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: To develop a practical, up-to-date consensus document, based on available evidence and expert opinion where evidence was lacking, in order to guide both Canadian and international clinicians treating PsO in WOCBP. METHODS: A panel of 9 Canadian dermatologists with extensive clinical experience managing PsO reviewed the relevant literature from the past 25 years in 3 key domains: overview of PsO in WOCBP and clinical considerations, treatment considerations, and postpartum considerations. The structured literature search focused on WOCBP treated with TNF-alpha inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), IL-23 inhibitors (guselkumab, risankizumab, tildrakizumab), IL-12/23 inhibitors (ustekinumab), and IL-17 inhibitors (brodalumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab). This literature review, along with clinical expertise and opinion, was used to develop concise and clinically relevant consensus statements to guide practical management of PsO in WOCBP. Experts voted on the statements using a modified Delphi process and prespecified agreement cut-off of 75%. RESULTS AND IMPLICATIONS: After review, discussion, and voting on 19 draft consensus statements at an in-person meeting and remotely, 12 consensus statements were approved by the expert panel. The statements presented here will guide healthcare providers in practical disease management using biologic therapies for the treatment of PsO in WOCBP.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Pediatric Patients with Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section II: Comorbid Disease in Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis.

Pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common skin conditions encountered by health-care providers caring for infants, children, and adolescents. Pediatric patients with AD may present with other allergic and nonallergic comorbidities that require appropriate treatment and referral. They may also experience a trajectory of allergic diseases known as the atopic march, which depends on a complex interaction between genetic and environmental factors and likely involves early epidermal barrier dysfunction. Here we provide a review and clinical recommendations on the assessment and referral of comorbidities in pediatric AD.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Pediatric Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section IV: Consensus Statements on the Assessment and Management of Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis.

This document is intended to provide practical guidance to physicians treating pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD), especially dermatologists, pediatricians, allergists, and other health-care professionals. The recommendations contained here were formalized based on a consensus of 12 Canadian pediatric dermatologists, dermatologists, pediatricians, and pediatric allergists with extensive experience managing AD in the pediatric population. A modified Delphi process was adopted with iterative voting on a 5-point Likert scale, with a prespecified agreement cutoff of 75%. Topic areas addressed in the 17 consensus statements reflect areas of practical management, including counselling, assessment, comorbidity management, and therapy.

Evidence Review of Topical Calcineurin Inhibitors for the Treatment of Adult Atopic Dermatitis.

Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) were approved in the early 2000s for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), and despite the recent introduction of newer topical and systemic therapies for AD, TCIs such as tacrolimus ointment (0.03% and 0.1%) and pimecrolimus cream (1%), remain recommended treatment options in contemporary management guidelines. The goal of this article is to review the evidence supporting the approved indications for TCIs in adults with AD, including short-term treatment of active disease and as intermittent or maintenance treatment for the prevention of flares. Other evidence reviewed in this article includes the treatment of specific body areas (such as the face and eyelids), combination or sequential use of TCIs with topical corticosteroids, and the comparative efficacy of the 2 commercially available TCIs. This review of the evidence confirms that TCIs remain an effective treatment option for the management of adult AD.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document.

BACKGROUND:: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting inflammatory skin disease with complex pathophysiology, primarily driven by type 2 inflammation. Existing guidelines often do not reflect all current therapeutic options and guidance on the practical management of patients with AD is lacking. OBJECTIVES:: To develop practical, up-to-date guidance on the assessment and management of adult patients with AD. METHODS:: An expert panel of 17 Canadian experts, including 16 dermatologists and 1 allergist, with extensive clinical experience managing moderate-to-severe AD reviewed the available literature from the past 5 years using a defined list of key search terms. This literature, along with clinical expertise and opinion, was used to draft concise, clinically relevant reviews of the current literature. Based on these reviews, experts developed and voted on recommendations and statements to reflect the practical management of adult patients with AD as a guide for health care providers in Canada and across the globe, using a prespecified agreement cutoff of 75%. RESULTS:: Eleven consensus statements were approved by the expert panel and reflected 4 key domains: pathophysiology, assessment, comorbidities, and treatment. CONCLUSIONS:: These statements aim to provide a framework for the assessment and management of adult patients with AD and to guide health care providers in practically relevant aspects of patient management.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section III: Evaluation of Atopic Dermatitis Patients for Comorbidities.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is often associated with other atopic diseases, including asthma, allergic rhinitis, atopy-associated eye disorders, and eosinophilic esophagitis. Depression and anxiety are also comorbidities to AD that significantly affect quality of life and should be screened for in patients with AD. Links to other comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and malignancy are considered inconclusive, but patient counselling and screening may be appropriate in some patients. This article highlights practical recommendations for the recognition and management of atopic and nonatopic comorbidities commonly associated with AD.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section I: Pathophysiology of Atopic Dermatitis and Implications for Systemic Therapy.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting inflammatory skin disease whose onset typically occurs early in life. AD pathophysiology includes genetic, immune, and environmental factors contributing to chronic inflammation. A rapidly evolving understanding of the pathogenesis of AD has led to the development of several treatment options for AD in adults, including topicals, phototherapy, and systemic therapies. Here, we provide a concise summary of AD pathophysiology with a focus on implications for systemic therapy.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section II: Tools for Assessing the Severity of Atopic Dermatitis.

Clinicians rely on clinical measures to define the severity of atopic dermatitis and assess outcomes of therapy. These measures can be objective (ie, physician assessments of disease severity) or subjective (ie, patient-reported symptoms and quality of life outcomes). In this review, the most commonly used tools for assessing atopic dermatitis severity in adult patients are presented and compared. These include Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI); SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD); Physician Global Assessment (PGA); body surface area (BSA); Atopic Dermatitis Severity Index (ADSI); Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis (SASSAD); Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM); Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI); and pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Available severity strata for the tools are summarized, although the use of severity strata in clinical practice is not recommended. Since both objective and subjective assessments of disease severity are important to assess, consideration of clinical characteristics such as disease recurrence or persistence, as well as location of the affected areas, should be considered in the overall judgement of disease severity and consideration of therapy choice.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section V: Consensus Statements on the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

This document is a concise, current, and practical guide for dermatologists and other health care providers managing adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). The recommendations made here are based on a consensus of specialists with extensive experience managing patients with AD. Topics reviewed in this publication include AD pathophysiology, assessment, comorbidities, and treatment options.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section IV: Treatment Options for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis.

The objectives of therapy for atopic dermatitis (AD) are to reduce skin inflammation and pruritus, restore skin barrier function, and improve quality of life (QoL). Treatments can be classified as moisturizing and basic care, topical therapy, phototherapy, and systemic therapy. In this review, we summarize the treatments for AD and recommendations for their use.

A Treatment Algorithm for Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Adults.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common and chronic inflammatory skin disease. Approximately 10% of adults with AD do not respond adequately to topical therapies and require phototherapy and/or systemic therapy. OBJECTIVE: To provide a patient-focused approach to the identification and management of adults with AD who require systemic treatment. METHODS: A working group of clinicians experienced in managing AD was convened to review and discuss current evidence on the identification and clinical management of adults with moderate to severe AD. RESULTS: We propose a set of simple and practical clinical criteria for selecting candidates for systemic treatment of AD based on their response to first-line topical therapy and 4 clinical measures that are easily incorporated into routine practice. We also suggest a framework for evaluating systemic treatments according to attributes that are important from both a clinician's and a patient's perspective. An algorithm was developed proposing a pathway for treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults. CONCLUSION: Adults with moderate to severe AD that does not respond adequately to topical therapies currently have few safe and effective treatment options. A clinical algorithm could help guide treatment decisions.