How to use the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema Core Outcome Set for atopic dermatitis trials: a users' guide.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has agreed upon the Core Outcome Set (COS) for use in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials, but additional guidance is needed to maximize its uptake. OBJECTIVES: To provide answers to some of the commonly asked questions about using the HOME COS; to provide data to help with the interpretation of trial results; and to support sample size calculations for future trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: We provide practical guidance on the use of the HOME COS for investigators planning clinical trials in patients with AD. It answers some of the common questions about using the HOME COS, how to access the outcome measurement instruments, what training/resources are needed to use them appropriately and clarifies when the COS is applicable. We also provide exemplar data to inform sample size calculations for eczema trials and encourage standardized data collection and reporting of the COS. CONCLUSIONS: By encouraging adoption of the COS and facilitating consistent reporting of outcome data, it is hoped that the results of eczema trials will be more comprehensive and readily combined in meta-analyses and that patient care will subsequently be improved.

Combining treat-to-target principles and shared decision-making: International expert consensus-based recommendations with a novel concept for minimal disease activity criteria in atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Current treat-to-target recommendations for atopic dermatitis (AD) may not include high enough treatment targets and do not fully consider patient needs. OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for optimized AD management, including disease severity assessments, treatment goals and targets, and guidance for treatment escalation/modification. METHODS: An international group of expert dermatologists drafted a series of recommendations for AD management using insights from a global patient study and 87 expert dermatologists from 44 countries. Experts voted on recommendations using a modified eDelphi voting process. RESULTS: The Aiming High in Eczema/Atopic Dermatitis (AHEAD) recommendations establish a novel approach to AD management, incorporating shared decision-making and a concept for minimal disease activity (MDA). Consensus (≥70% agreement) was reached for all recommendations in 1 round of voting; strong consensus (≥90% agreement) was reached for 30/34 recommendations. In the AHEAD approach, patients select their most troublesome AD feature(s); the clinician chooses a corresponding patient-reported severity measure and objective severity measure. Treatment targets are chosen from a list of 'moderate' and 'optimal' targets, with achievement of 'optimal' targets defined as MDA. CONCLUSIONS: Patient and expert insights led to the development of AHEAD recommendations, which establish a novel approach to AD management. Patients were not involved in the eDelphi voting process used to generate consensus on each recommendation. However, patient perspectives were captured in a global, qualitative patient research study that was considered by the experts in their initial drafting of the recommendations.

Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Phase 3 trials have assessed efficacy of abrocitinib versus placebo in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, a common immunoinflammatory skin disease. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-treatment, phase 3 trial enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who requir=ed systemic therapy or had inadequate response to topical medications. Participants were enrolled from 151 sites, located in Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the USA. These participants were then randomly assigned (1:1) with block randomisation to receive oral abrocitinib (200 mg per day) or subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks) for 26 weeks. Participants were required to apply topical corticosteroids (medium or low potency), topical calcineurin inhibitors, or a topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor to active lesion areas. Primary endpoints were response based on achieving a 4 point or higher improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) at week 2 and a 90% or better improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-90) at week 4. Family-wise type 1 error was controlled via a sequential multiple-testing procedure (two sided, α=0·05). Randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention were included in the efficacy and safety analysis sets. This trial was completed on July 13, 2021 (NCT04345367). FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2020, and Dec 16, 2020, 940 patients were screened and 727 were enrolled (362 in the abrocitinib group and 365 in the dupilumab group). Compared with dupilumab, a larger proportion of patients treated with abrocitinib reached the primary outcomes, PP-NRS4 at week 2 (172 [48%] of 357, 95% CI 43·0-53·4 vs 93 [26%] of 364, 21·1-30·0; difference 22·6%, 15·8-29·5; p<0·0001), and EASI-90 at week 4 (101 [29%] of 354, 23·8-33·2 vs 53 [15%] of 364, 10·9-18·2; difference 14·1%, 8·2-20·0; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 268 (74%) of 362 patients treated with abrocitinib and by 239 (65%) of 365 patients treated with dupilumab. Two non-treatment-related deaths occurred in the abrocitinib group. INTERPRETATION: Abrocitinib 200 mg per day was more efficacious than dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis on background topical therapy in inducing early reductions of itch and atopic dermatitis disease signs. Both treatments were well tolerated over 26 weeks. FUNDING: Pfizer.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) implementation roadmap.

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets (COS) are consensus-driven sets of minimum outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials. COS aim to reduce heterogeneity in outcome measurement and reporting, and selective outcome reporting. Implementing COS into clinical trials is challenging. Guidance to improve COS uptake in dermatology is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To develop a structured practical guide to COS implementation. METHODS: Members of the Harmonising Outcome Measurement for Eczema (HOME) executive committee developed an expert opinion-based roadmap founded on a combination of a review of the COS implementation literature, the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative resources, input from HOME members and experience in COS development and clinical trials. RESULTS: The data review and input from HOME members was synthesized into themes, which guided roadmap development: (a) barriers and facilitators to COS uptake based on stakeholder awareness/engagement and COS features; and (b) key implementation science principles (assessment-driven, data-centred, priority-based and context-sensitive). The HOME implementation roadmap follows three stages. Firstly, the COS uptake scope and goals need to be defined. Secondly, during COS development, preparation for future implementation is supported by establishing the COS as a credible evidence-informed consensus by applying robust COS development methodology, engaging multiple stakeholders, fostering sustained and global engagement, emphasizing COS ease of use and universal applicability, and providing recommendations on COS use. Thirdly, incorporating completed COS into primary (trials) and secondary (reviews) research is an iterative process starting with mapping COS uptake and stakeholders' attitudes, followed by designing and carrying out targeted implementation projects. Main themes for implementation projects identified at HOME are stakeholder awareness/engagement; universal applicability for different populations; and improving ease-of-use by reducing administrative and study burden. Formal implementation frameworks can be used to identify implementation barriers/facilitators and to design implementation strategies. The effect of these strategies on uptake should be evaluated and implementation plans adjusted accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: COS can improve the quality and applicability of research and, so, clinical practice but can only succeed if used and reported consistently. The HOME implementation roadmap is an extension of the original HOME roadmap for COS development and provides a pragmatic framework to develop COS implementation strategies.

The Treat-to-Target Project in Atopic Dermatitis: One Year On.

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic skin condition for which a range of systemic treatments have recently been approved. A treat-to-target strategy has been developed previously alongside an algorithm to guide the management of patients with atopic dermatitis. Here, we review the strategy and algorithm in the context of the evolving therapeutic landscape, and identify areas for further refinement and development.

Abrocitinib efficacy and safety in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from phase 3 studies, including the long-term extension JADE EXTEND study.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib improved signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) at 12 or 16 weeks in phase 3 studies with a manageable safety profile. Further understanding of the abrocitinib long-term efficacy and safety profile is important for its appropriate use in treating chronic AD. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the abrocitinib efficacy up to 48 weeks and long-term safety in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: JADE EXTEND (NCT03422822) is an ongoing, phase 3, long-term extension study that enrolled patients from previous abrocitinib AD trials. This analysis focusses on patients from the phase 3 JADE MONO-1 (NCT03349060), JADE MONO-2 (NCT03575871) and JADE COMPARE (NCT03720470) studies who completed the full treatment period of placebo or abrocitinib (200 mg or 100 mg once daily) and subsequently entered JADE EXTEND. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving skin clearance (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] 0/1 [clear/almost clear]; ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI-75]) and itch response (Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [PP-NRS] severity ≥4-point improvement). Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Data cut-off: April 22, 2020. RESULTS: As of the data cut-off, ~70% and ~45% of patients received abrocitinib for ≥36 and ≥48 weeks, respectively. Nasopharyngitis, atopic dermatitis, nausea and upper respiratory tract infections were the most frequent TEAEs. Serious TEAEs occurred in 7% and 5% and TEAEs leading to study discontinuation occurred in 9% and 7% of patients receiving abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively. Week 48 efficacy responses with abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg were as follows: IGA 0/1 52% and 39%; EASI-75 82% and 67%, and PP-NRS severity ≥4-point improvement 68% and 51%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate-to-severe AD, long-term abrocitinib treatment resulted in clinically meaningful skin and pruritus improvement. The long-term safety profile was manageable and consistent with previous reports.

The HOME Core outcome set for clinical trials of atopic dermatitis.

Core outcome sets are critically important outcomes that should be measured in clinical trials. Their absence in atopic dermatitis is a form of research waste and impedes combining evidence to inform patient care. Here, we articulate the rationale for core outcome sets in atopic dermatitis and review the work of the international Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema group from its inception in Munich, 2010. We describe core domain determination (what should be measured), to instrument selection (how domains should be measured), culminating in the complete core outcome measurement set in Tokyo, 2019. Using a "road map," Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema includes diverse research methods including Delphi and nominal group techniques informed by systematic reviews of properties of candidate instruments. The 4 domains and recommended instruments for including in all clinical trials of atopic dermatitis are patient symptoms, measured by Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure and peak Numerical Rating Scale 11 for itch intensity over 24 hours, clinical signs measured using the Eczema Area and Severity Index, quality of life measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index series for adults, children, and infants, and long-term control measured by either Recap of atopic eczema or Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool.

[JAPANESE TRANSLATION AND LINGUISTIC VALIDATION OF THE RECAP OF ATOPIC ECZEMA (RECAP)].

BACKGROUND: The Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP), a new core outcome of the atopic dermatitis trial, was translated into Japanese and linguistically validated. METHODS: Translation into Japanese was accomplished according to the ISPOR (International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcome Research) guidelines and the basic guidelines for scale translation. The translation process included two forward translations, reconciliation with native English speakers, third-party back translation, cognitive debriefing, review and harmonization by the original authors. Twenty-seven atopic dermatitis and pediatric specialists from 21 centers in Japan participated in the translation process. Cognitive debriefing was conducted through face-to-face interviews using a think-aloud method with the interview guide including questions about comprehensibility, relevance, comprehensiveness, recall period and suggested improvements, based on the COSMIN methodology. RESULTS: No linguistic or cultural problems were encountered in the translation into Japanese. Cognitive debriefings were conducted with 10 adult patients and 10 parents of pediatric patients. Some minor modifications were made following discussion and approval by the research team and the original authors. The Japanese version of RECAP was considered to be understandable, comprehensive and relevant for adult patients and families of pediatric patients. CONCLUSION: The Japanese version of the RECAP, which has been validated as linguistically equivalent to the original version, is now available. Further evaluation of the measurement properties is needed in the future.

Increased plasma miR-24 and miR-191 levels in patients with severe atopic dermatitis: Possible involvement of platelet activation.

BACKGROUND: Platelets are involved in the pathomechanisms of atopic dermatitis (AD). This study aimed to elucidate the levels of platelet-related miRNAs, (miR-24 and miR-191) in the plasma of AD patients and their relationships with the disease severity and laboratory data. METHODS: miRNAs were detected in the subjects plasma using specifically primed quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The patients with severe AD had significantly higher plasma miR-24 or miR-191 levels than the patients with mild AD, the urticaria patients, and the healthy volunteers. The plasma miR-24 and miR-191 levels of the AD patients were correlated with their serum thymus and activation-regulated chemokine levels. In addition, plasma miR-24 and miR-191 levels were correlated with their plasma levels of platelet factor 4 and ß-thromboglobulin. CONCLUSION: Our findings imply that miR-24 and miR-191 may be involved in the pathomechanisms responsible for the worsening of AD, possibly through their effects on platelet activation.

Once-daily upadacitinib versus placebo in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2): results from two replicate double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with greater inhibitory potency for JAK1 than JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib compared with placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 were replicate multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials; Measure Up 1 was done at 151 clinical centres in 24 countries across Europe, North and South America, Oceania, and the Asia-Pacific region; and Measure Up 2 was done at 154 clinical centres in 23 countries across Europe, North America, Oceania, and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and adults (aged 18-75 years) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (≥10% of body surface area affected by atopic dermatitis, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] score of ≥16, validated Investigator's Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis [vIGA-AD] score of ≥3, and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score of ≥4). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using an interactive response technology system to receive upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo once daily for 16 weeks, stratified by baseline disease severity, geographical region, and age. Coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had achieved at least a 75% improvement in EASI score from baseline (EASI-75) and the proportion of patients who had achieved a vIGA-AD response (defined as a vIGA-AD score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with ≥2 grades of reduction from baseline) at week 16. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03569293 (Measure Up 1) and NCT03607422 (Measure Up 2), and are both active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2018, and Dec 23, 2019, 847 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=281), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=285), or placebo (n=281) in the Measure Up 1 study. Between July 27, 2018, and Jan 17, 2020, 836 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=276), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=282), or placebo (n=278) in the Measure Up 2 study. At week 16, the coprimary endpoints were met in both studies (all p<0·0001). The proportion of patients who had achieved EASI-75 at week 16 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg (196 [70%] of 281 patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg (227 [80%] of 285 patients) groups than the placebo group (46 [16%] of 281 patients) in Measure Up 1 (adjusted difference in EASI-75 response rate vs placebo, 53·3% [95% CI 46·4-60·2] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 63·4% [57·1-69·8] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group) and Measure Up 2 (166 [60%] of 276 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 206 [73%] of 282 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 37 [13%] of 278 patients in the placebo group; adjusted difference in EASI-75 response rate vs placebo, 46·9% [39·9-53·9] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 59·6% [53·1-66·2] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group). The proportion of patients who achieved a vIGA-AD response at week 16 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg (135 [48%] patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg (177 [62%] patients) groups than the placebo group (24 [8%] patients) in Measure Up 1 (adjusted difference in vIGA-AD response rate vs placebo, 39·8% [33·2-46·4] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 53·6% [47·2-60·0] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group) and Measure Up 2 (107 [39%] patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 147 [52%] patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 13 [5%] patients in the placebo group; adjusted difference in vIGA-AD response rate vs placebo, 34·0% [27·8-40·2] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 47·4% [41·0-53·7] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group). Both upadacitinib doses were well tolerated. The incidence of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation were similar among groups. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were acne (19 [7%] of 281 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group, 49 [17%] of 285 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group, and six [2%] of 281 patients in the placebo group in Measure Up 1; 35 [13%] of 276 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group, 41 [15%] of 282 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group, and six [2%] of 278 patients in the placebo group in Measure Up 2), upper respiratory tract infection (25 [9%] patients, 38 [13%] patients, and 20 [7%] patients; 19 [7%] patients, 17 [16%] patients, and 12 [4%] patients), nasopharyngitis (22 [8%] patients, 33 [12%] patients, and 16 [6%] patients; 16 [6%] patients, 18 [6%] patients, and 13 [5%] patients), headache (14 [5%] patients, 19 [7%] patients, and 12 [4%] patients; 18 [7%] patients, 20 [7%] patients, and 11 [4%] patients), elevation in creatine phosphokinase levels (16 [6%] patients, 16 [6%] patients, and seven [3%] patients; nine [3%] patients, 12 [4%] patients, and five [2%] patients), and atopic dermatitis (nine [3%] patients, four [1%] patients, and 26 [9%] patients; eight [3%] patients, four [1%] patients, and 26 [9%] patients). INTERPRETATION: Monotherapy with upadacitinib might be an effective treatment option and had a positive benefit-risk profile in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food-A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions: A GA²LEN position paper.

BACKGROUND: Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. RESULTS: In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. CONCLUSION: Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged.

Adverse reactions to the first and second doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers.

INTRODUCTION: In the current coronavirus infection 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the messenger RNA vaccines have been shown to help protect high-risk groups from COVID-19. Among healthcare workers vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, a survey was conducted to analyze the relationship between the incidence and severity of adverse reactions after vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a prospective self-reported survey of adverse reactions among healthcare workers vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (Comirnaty®) in Japan. After the first and second dose of vaccine, local and systemic reactions for 8 days after vaccination were reported by volunteer participants using a website. After receiving vaccination, 374 respondents participated in this matched-pair study. RESULTS: Both the incidence and severity of adverse reactions tended to be higher after the second vaccine dose than after the first dose. However, the incidence and numeric rating scale (NRS) score of muscle and skin pain were nearly the same after the first and second doses. In a comparison by sex, women had significantly higher incidence and NRS scores for adverse reactions such as headache, skin pain, erythema, and itching. The results also showed that younger age groups had higher incidence rates and NRS scores for all adverse reactions investigated, except for muscle pain, compared with older age groups. CONCLUSION: Some adverse reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty® COVID-19 vaccine showed gender and age differences. However, generally speaking, all side reactions disappear within a week. Therefore, these side reactions are not a significant concern in recommending vaccination.

Diversities of allergic pathologies and their modifiers: Report from the second DGAKI-JSA meeting.

In October 2021, researchers from the German Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) and from the Japanese Society of Allergology (JSA) focused their attention on the pathological conditions and modifiers of various allergic diseases. Topics included 1) the pathophysiology of IgE/mast cell-mediated allergic diseases; 2) the diagnosis and prevention of IgE/mast cell-mediated diseases; 3) the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of eosinophilic airway diseases; and 4) host-pathogen interaction and allergic diseases. This report summarizes the panel discussions, which highlighted the importance of recognizing the diversity of genetics, immunological mechanisms, and modifying factors underlying allergic diseases.

Executive summary: Japanese guidelines for atopic dermatitis (ADGL) 2021.

This is an abridged edition of English version of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis 2021. Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a disease characterized by relapsing eczema with pruritus as a primary lesion. In Japan, from the perspective of evidence-based medicine, the current strategies for the treatment of AD consist of three primary measures: (i) use of topical corticosteroids, tacrolimus ointment, and delgocitinib ointment as the main treatment of the inflammation; (ii) topical application of emollients to treat the cutaneous barrier dysfunction; and (iii) avoidance of apparent exacerbating factors, psychological counseling, and advice about daily life. In the present revised guidelines, the description about three new drugs, namely, dupilumab, delgocitinib, and baricitinib, has been added. The guidelines present recommendations to review clinical research articles, evaluate the balance between the advantages and disadvantages of medical activities, and optimize medical activity-related patient outcomes with respect to several important points requiring decision-making in clinical practice.

Effect of adalimumab on axial manifestations in Japanese patients with psoriatic arthritis: a 24 week prospective, observational study.

OBJECTIVES: PsA is characterized by enthesitis, synovitis and osseous involvement in the peripheral and axial joints. Few studies have examined axial involvement in PsA using imaging techniques. Here we examined axial involvement in PsA patients using MRI. In addition, we determined the efficacy of 24 week adalimumab treatment in improving the MRI findings of spondylitis and sacroiliitis. METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label, single-arm study in patients with PsA. Adalimumab was administered to patients for a total of 24 weeks. MRI examinations were conducted at baseline and at week 24 of adalimumab treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with PsA were included in this study. Spondylitis was observed in at least one site of the positive scan in 91% (n = 31) of patients with PsA. The number of arthritic sites in the cervical, thoracic and lumbar regions of the spine was 48, 67 and 53, respectively. All patients had MRI-determined sacroiliitis of grade ≥1 severity while 28 patients (82%) had grade ≥2 sacroiliitis in at least one sacroiliac region. Sacroiliac arthritis was statistically more severe on the right side than on the left side (P < 0.05). In 34 patients with PsA, the thoracic spine was the most common site of spondylitis. In addition, 24 week adalimumab treatment led to an improvement in the mean number of spondylitis sites and the mean grade of sacroiliitis. CONCLUSION: Treatment with adalimumab for 24 weeks resulted in improvement in spondylitis and sacroiliitis.

Effects of constant light exposure on allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in mice reared under constant light conditions.

Environmental light levels can affect physiological functions, such as general activity, body temperature and metabolism. Irregular lifestyles, such as those involving exposure to light during the night, can exacerbate the clinical symptoms of several inflammatory skin diseases. However, the effects of constant light exposure on immune responses are not fully understood. This study aimed to elucidate the effects of constant light exposure on two major types of skin reactions, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). BALB/c mice were kept under constant light conditions or a normal light and dark cycle, and their ACD and ICD responses were assessed after the topical application of 2,4,6-trinitro-1-chlorobenzene and croton oil, respectively, to the ear skin. Interestingly, in both ACD and ICD, the ear-swelling response and local leukocyte infiltration were aggravated by constant exposure to light, which has previously been shown to severely disturb the behavioural rhythms of mice. In ACD, these findings were accompanied by increases in the numbers of degranulated mast cells and eosinophils. These results suggest that constant light exposure intensifies allergic and non-allergic skin inflammation.

Treat-to-Target in Atopic Dermatitis: An International Consensus on a Set of Core Decision Points for Systemic Therapies.

Currently no treat-to-target framework to guide systemic treatment in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis exists. We sought to reach international consensus through an eDelphi process on a core set of recommendations for such an approach. Recommendations were developed by an international Steering Committee, spanning 3 areas (Guiding Principles, Decision Making, and Outcome Thresholds) and 2 specific time-points; an initial acceptable target at 3 months and an optimal target at 6 months, each based on improvements in patient global assessment plus at least one specific outcome domain. These treat-to-target- orientated recommendations were evaluated by an extended international panel of physicians, nurses and patients. Proposed recommendations were rated using a 9-point Likert scale; for each recommendation, consensus agreement was reached if ≥ 75% of all respondents rated agreement as ≥ 7. Consensus on 16 core recommendations was reached over 2 eDelphi rounds. These provide a framework for shared decision-making on systemic treatment continuation, modification, or discontinuation.

Clobetasol propionate 0.05% under occlusion for alopecia areata: Clinical effect and influence on intraocular pressure.

Topical corticosteroids are known to be effective in the treatment of alopecia areata, but the potential effects on intraocular pressure are a concern. The purpose of this retrospective study is to evaluate the effect of clobetasol propionate 0.05% under occlusion on patients with active phase alopecia areata and to examine the effects on intraocular pressure. We also wished to see if reducing the frequency of application of clobetasol increased the safety with respect to intraocular pressure. Elevation of intraocular pressure due to topical corticosteroids is unlikely to occur at the dose of 9.8 g or less per week used in this study; however, ophthalmologic examination at the start of treatment was thought to be worthwhile in identifying patients with latent glaucoma.

CD163-positive macrophage infiltration predicts systemic involvement in sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is a chronic and systemic inflammatory disease, in which patients present with noncaseating epithelioid granulomas. Cutaneous lesions of sarcoidosis develop in 9% to 35% of all sarcoidosis patients and comprise various clinical subtypes. It usually affects multiple organs and has a variable clinical course; this is called systemic sarcoidosis (SS). However, occasionally, it only affects the skin and is then called cutaneous sarcoidosis (CS). Recent observations suggest that serum levels of soluble CD163 correlate with immune cell activity in sarcoidosis patients; however, the contribution of M1 and M2 macrophages toward disease progression remains unclear. METHODS: We evaluated macrophage phenotypes histopathologically using skin biopsy samples obtained from patients with CS (n = 8) and SS (n = 31) and performed immunostaining with CD68, iNOS (M1 macrophages), PD-L1, and CD163 (M2 macrophages). RESULTS: The density of CD163-positive cells in the SS group was significantly higher than that in the CS group. There was no significant correlation between the CD163 (+) cell density and serum angiotensin-converting enzyme level, serum calcium, or tuberculin reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Immunostaining for CD163 may be a novel and useful marker to predict systemic involvement in patients with cutaneous lesions of epithelioid granulomas.

IgA nephropathy in a patient receiving infliximab for generalized pustular psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: IgA nephropathy is the most common glomerulonephritis. Secondary IgA nephropathy complicated with systemic diseases, including psoriasis, is also often reported. Generalized pustular psoriasis is a form of psoriasis characterized by sterile pustules on reddened skin and fever. Infliximab, one of the first-line therapies for severe psoriasis, has also been reported to cause systemic vasculitis and IgA nephropathy. We herein report a case of IgA nephropathy activated during infliximab treatment for generalized pustular psoriasis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 28-year-old woman presented with episodic gross hematuria, increasing proteinuria, and renal dysfunction. She had been receiving anti-TNFα therapy with infliximab because of generalized pustular psoriasis for 3 years, but her skin symptoms worsened following withdrawal during pregnancy. After delivery, her skin symptoms improved with the resumption of infliximab, but clinical signs suggested glomerulonephritis, and renal biopsy showed active IgA nephropathy. Infliximab was discontinued, and the combination of corticosteroids, tonsillectomy, and secukinumab, an IL-17A inhibitor, improved both the skin symptoms and the glomerulonephritis. CONCLUSIONS: In our case, the activity of IgA nephropathy was exacerbated by anti-TNFα therapy but was improved by the combination of corticosteroids, tonsillectomy, and an IL-17A inhibitor against the original disease. Autoimmune diseases may underlie the development of secondary IgA nephropathy associated with anti-TNFα therapy, and so further studies are needed to better understand the association between molecular-targeted drugs and IgA nephropathy.