European guideline (EuroGuiDerm) on atopic eczema - part II: non-systemic treatments and treatment recommendations for special AE patient populations.

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 paediatric 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.

European guideline (EuroGuiDerm) on atopic eczema: part I - systemic therapy.

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 paediatric, adolescent, pregnant and breastfeeding patients.

Immunogenicity of biologic therapies in psoriasis: Myths, facts and a suggested approach.

With biologic drugs dominating the therapeutic space for severe immune-mediated inflammatory disease, it is critical for clinicians to be familiar with the concept of drug immunogenicity, with the potential for our patients to develop antidrug antibodies (ADA) of clinical relevance. Whilst there are clear differences between different therapeutic biologics in terms of reported ADA rates, there is no accepted dermatology guideline or grouping of drugs by risk of clinically relevant ADA, nor a consensus on approach to ADA management. This is partly because making valid comparisons of immunogenicity across drugs is fundamentally flawed: the differing types of ADA assay, trial design and included patient population - as well as the molecular structure of the biologic molecules themselves - are all highly influential on reported ADA prevalence and impact on clinical response. Therefore, the first part of this article aims to give an overview of ADA that also clarifies common misconceptions on the subject, whilst the second part of this article outlines Phase III immunogenicity data on commonly used biologics for psoriasis, the most common dermatological indication. Based on this, and acknowledging current limitations in available evidence, we propose a working categorization of biologics together with a broad approach to management: Group 1 - biologics with higher risk of clinically relevant ADA; Group 2 - biologics with lower risk of clinically relevant ADA; and Group 3 - biologics with no established risk of clinically relevant ADA. However, these groupings represent a working concept only; more research is required, using comparable ADA assays and consistent reporting of related outcomes. Finally, there is an urgent need for better characterization of individuals at particular risk of developing ADA to inform future clinical decision-making.

Evidence-based (S3) guideline for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia in women and in men - short version.

Androgenetic alopecia is the most common hair loss disorder, affecting both men and women. Initial signs of androgenetic alopecia usually develop during teenage years leading to progressive hair loss with a pattern distribution. Moreover, its frequency increases with age and affects up to 80% Caucasian men and 42% of women. Patients afflicted with androgenetic alopecia may undergo significant impairment of quality of life. The European Dermatology Forum (EDF) initiated a project to develop evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia. Based on a systematic literature research the efficacy of the currently available therapeutic options was assessed and therapeutic recommendations were passed in a consensus conference. The purpose of the guideline is to provide dermatologists with an evidence-based tool for choosing an efficacious and safe therapy for patients with androgenetic alopecia.

German S3-guidelines on the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris (short version).

Psoriasis vulgaris is a common and often chronic inflammatory skin disease. The incidence of psoriasis in Western industrialized countries ranges from 1.5 to 2%. Patients afflicted with severe psoriasis vulgaris may experience a significant reduction in quality of life. Despite the large variety of treatment options available, patient surveys have revealed insufficient satisfaction with the efficacy of available treatments and a high rate of medication non-compliance (Richards et al. in J Am Acad Dermatol 41(4):581-583, 1999). To optimize the treatment of psoriasis in Germany, the Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG) and the Berufsverband Deutscher Dermatologen (BVDD) have initiated a project to develop evidence-based guidelines for the management of psoriasis first published in 2006 and now updated in 2011. The Guidelines focus on induction therapy in cases of mild, moderate, and severe plaque-type psoriasis in adults. This short version of the guidelines presents the resulting series of therapeutic recommendations, which were based on a systematic literature search and discussed and approved by a team of dermatology experts. In addition to the therapeutic recommendations provided in this short version, the full version of the guidelines includes information on contraindications, adverse events, drug interactions, practicality, and costs, as well as detailed information on how best to apply the treatments described (for full version please see Nast et al. in JDDG Suppl 2:S1-S104, 2011 or http://www.psoriasis-leitlinie.de ).

Assessment and management of methotrexate hepatotoxicity in psoriasis patients: report from a consensus conference to evaluate current practice and identify key questions toward optimizing methotrexate use in the clinic.

Experts in psoriasis, hepatology, pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics convened to discuss the safety and monitoring of methotrexate with respect to hepatotoxicity when used in the treatment of psoriasis. Methotrexate is an efficacious and cost-effective treatment for psoriasis, but is associated with significant safety issues, particularly relating to hepatotoxicity. Current British, Dutch, German, EU and US guidelines for baseline evaluations, monitoring and prevention of hepatotoxicity in patients with psoriasis receiving methotrexate were evaluated. Liver safety monitoring is currently reliant upon multiple methods, including biopsy, serological tests for biomarkers such as type III procollagen amino terminal propeptide (PIIINP), and liver function tests based on liver enzymes. Monitoring of patients receiving long-term therapy is expected to be improved by the utilization of serum biomarkers currently in development such as the Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) panel and other non-invasive tests of hepatic architecture, such as fibroelastography, microbubbles and magnetic resonance imaging. Appropriate studies to determine optimal dosing to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity, potentially utilizing pharmacogenetic principles, are clearly needed. Key questions for future research are identified including needs for optimal screening and monitoring, identification of appropriate biomarkers, assessment of relationships between dosing and safety, utility of liver biopsy, optimal dosing regimens (including route of administration), methods to measure methotrexate levels in blood, and use of methotrexate as a standardized active comparator in trials of experimental drugs used to treat psoriasis.

European S3-guidelines on the systemic treatment of psoriasis vulgaris.

Of the 131 studies on monotherapy or combination therapy assessed, 56 studies on the different forms of phototherapy fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in the guidelines. Approximately three-quarters of all patients treated with phototherapy attained at least a PASI 75 response after 4 to 6 weeks, and clearance was frequently achieved (levels of evidence 2 and 3). Phototherapy represents a safe and very effective treatment option for moderate to severe forms of psoriasis vulgaris. The onset of clinical effects occurs within 2 weeks. Of the unwanted side effects, UV erythema from overexposure is by far the most common and is observed frequently. With repeated or long-term use, the consequences of high, cumulative UV doses (such as premature aging of the skin) must be taken into consideration. In addition, carcinogenic risk is associated with oral PUVA and is probable for local PUVA and UVB. The practicability of the therapy is limited by spatial, financial, human, and time constraints on the part of the physician, as well as by the amount of time required by the patient. From the perspective of the cost-bearing institution, phototherapy has a good cost-benefit ratio. However, the potentially significant costs for, and time required of, the patient must be considered.