Higher levels of response on clinical atopic dermatitis severity measures are associated with meaningful improvements in patient-reported symptom and quality of life measures: Integrated analysis of three Upadacitinib phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: It is not fully understood how different degrees of improvements in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical outcome measures translate to improvements in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, such as those assessing itch, symptoms, sleep, anxiety, depression, quality of life (QoL), and work productivity. OBJECTIVES: This post hoc analysis of three clinical studies assessed how more robust improvements in clinical responses are associated with improvements in PROs and QoL. METHODS: Data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up) were included. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg) or placebo once daily (alone or in combination with topical corticosteroids). The mean percentage improvement from baseline to week 16 and percentage of patients achieving responses at week 16 were summarized by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and validated Investigator Global Assessment of Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD) response level categories. RESULTS: A total of 2392 patients from the three trials were included in the analysis. Increasingly greater mean percentage improvement and proportion of patients achieving response was observed at higher clinical response levels (i.e., stepwise pattern). Mean percentage improvement and proportion of patients achieving response exceeded 69% and 70% at EASI ≥ 90 and vIGA-AD 0/1, respectively, for most PROs including Worst Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale, Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, and Dermatology Life Quality Index. CONCLUSIONS: Greater degrees of clinical responses are related to more robust improvements across multiple dimensions impacted by AD, including itch, skin pain, sleep, anxiety, depression, and QoL.

Conjunctivitis in atopic dermatitis patients with and without dupilumab therapy - international eczema council survey and opinion.

BACKGROUND: Conjunctivitis is common in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in general and a commonly reported adverse event in AD clinical trials with dupilumab. OBJECTIVE: To survey opinions and experience about conjunctivitis occurring in AD, including those during dupilumab treatment in a group of AD experts from the International Eczema Council (IEC). METHODS: Electronic survey and in-person discussion of management strategies. RESULTS: Forty-six (53.5%) IEC members from 19 countries responded to the survey. Consensus was reached for several statements regarding diagnostic workup, referral and treatment. IEC members suggest that patients with AD should (i) routinely be asked about ocular complaints or symptoms, (ii) obtain information about the potential for conjunctivitis before starting dupilumab therapy and (iii) if indicated, be treated with dupilumab despite previous or current conjunctivitis. In cases of new-onset conjunctivitis, there was consensus that dupilumab treatment should be continued when possible, with appropriate referral to an ophthalmologist. LIMITATIONS: The study relies on expert opinion from dermatologists. Responses from few dermatologists without dupilumab access were not excluded from the survey. CONCLUSION: The IEC recommends that dermatologists address conjunctivitis in patients with AD, especially during treatment with dupilumab.

Use of systemic corticosteroids for atopic dermatitis: International Eczema Council consensus statement.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines discourage the use of systemic corticosteroids for atopic dermatitis (AD), but their use remains widespread. OBJECTIVES: To reach consensus among an international group of AD experts on the use of systemic corticosteroids for AD. METHODS: A survey consisting of statements accompanied by visual analogue scales ranging from 'strongly disagree' to 'neutral' to 'strongly agree' was distributed to the International Eczema Council (IEC). Consensus was reached in agreement on a statement if < 30% of respondents marked to the left of 'neutral' towards 'strongly disagree'. RESULTS: Sixty of 77 (78%) IEC members participated. Consensus was reached on 12 statements, including that systemic corticosteroids should generally be avoided but can be used rarely for severe AD under certain circumstances, including a lack of other treatment options, as a bridge to other systemic therapies or phototherapy, during acute flares in need of immediate relief, in anticipation of a major life event or in the most severe cases. If used, treatment should be limited to the short term. Most respondents agreed that systemic corticosteroids should never be used in children, but consensus was not reached on that statement. The conclusions of our expert group are limited by a dearth of high-quality published evidence. If more stringent consensus criteria were applied (e.g. requiring < 20% of respondents marking towards 'strongly disagree'), consensus would have been reached on fewer statements. CONCLUSIONS: Based on expert opinion from the IEC, routine use of systemic corticosteroids for AD is generally discouraged and should be reserved for special circumstances.

Is there an increased risk of cervical neoplasia in atopic dermatitis patients treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs?

BACKGROUND: Oral immunosuppressive drugs are frequently prescribed in young women with atopic dermatitis (AD). Immunocompromised patients may have a higher risk of developing high-risk HPV infections, cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) and cervical carcinoma. Most literature on patients using oral immunosuppressive drugs is available in organ transplant patients. Literature on the risk of developing cervical carcinoma in AD patients treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs is lacking. At this moment, there is no clear guideline/consensus on this topic, but in daily practice, questions arise concerning whether this risk is increased and whether more intensive screening in women using immunosuppressive drugs should take place. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the occurrence of cervical carcinoma in women with AD treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study in two university medical centres in the Netherlands, all female adult AD patients receiving oral immunosuppressive drugs (cyclosporine A, azathioprine, methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium and extended release tacrolimus) for more than 2 months between 1989 and 1 January 2014 were included. Patient files in the national histopathology register were screened for PAP3a, CIN I, CIN II, CIN III and cervical carcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 257 female AD patients with one or more treatment episodes from 1989 until 1 January 2014 were identified and included in this study. In 189 patients (73.5%), results of cervical examination were reported in the national histopathology database. Median total duration of treatment in these 189 women was 407.0 days (IQR 243.0-940.0). No cervical carcinoma during or following immunosuppressive therapy was found in our patient group. CONCLUSIONS: No intensified screening programme for cervical neoplasia seems necessary for women with AD using oral immunosuppressive drugs.

Use of oral immunosuppressive drugs in the treatment of atopic dermatitis in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Although atopic dermatitis (AD) is a very common skin disease, data on the percentage of patients with really difficult-to-treat AD are scarce. From socio-economic perspective, it is important to have more insight into these numbers, as new very effective, but expensive, treatment options will be available in the near future for difficult-to-treat AD. Estimating the number of patients with AD using oral immunosuppressive drugs can give an impression of the percentage of difficult-to-treat patients in the total AD population. OBJECTIVE: To give an overview of the use of oral immunosuppressive drugs in patients with AD in the Netherlands. METHODS: Prescription data of oral immunosuppressive drugs in the Netherlands were extracted from a pharmaceutical database (NControl) containing data of 557 million prescriptions and 7.2 million patients. An algorithm, based on the WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) codes, was used to identify patients with AD. The prescription of oral immunosuppressive drugs in patients with AD between 1 January 2012 and 1 January 2017 was evaluated. RESULTS: Based on the algorithm, 65 943 patients with AD were selected. 943 patients with AD (1.4%) used cyclosporine A, methotrexate, azathioprine or mycophenolic acid. Methotrexate was most commonly used, followed by azathioprine and cyclosporine A. A switch in medication was rarely seen. In the evaluation period, a decrease in the prescription of cyclosporine A was seen, together with an increase in the prescription of methotrexate. In 31% of the patients who stopped treatment, the discontinuation took place within the first months of treatment. CONCLUSION: In this study population, 1.4% of the patients with AD used oral immunosuppressive drugs for their eczema in a 5-year period. Methotrexate was the most commonly used systemic drug in the Netherlands for the treatment of AD.

Atopic dermatitis characteristics and medication-use patterns in school-age children with AD and asthma symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) and asthma often coexist. Both diseases can have a major impact on the lives of children with AD and their caregivers. AIM: To investigate the association of patient characteristics, comorbidities and impact of AD on children who have both asthma and AD. METHODS: Children with AD (n = 140) were selected from a larger cohort of children with a reported use of asthma medication. The Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) was used to assess Quality of Life (QoL), and the Self-Assessed Eczema Area and Severity Index (SA-EASI) was used to measure AD severity. Characteristics assessed included: age, sex, and the number and type of atopic comorbidities. Medication use for AD was defined using the total number of AD prescriptions, the number of different topical AD prescriptions and the highest potency topical corticosteroid (TCS) used. Determinants of AD severity and QoL were evaluated using Spearman rank tests. RESULTS: The following factors were most strongly associated with a lower QoL: characteristics of AD lesions (Spearman Rs = 0.61-0.69, P < 0.01), a higher SA-EASI score (Rs = 0.54, P < 0.01) and a larger number of different topical AD prescriptions (Rs = 0.38, P < 0.01). The following factors were correlated with more severe AD: age (Rs = -0.36, P < 0.01), larger number of different TCS preparations used (Rs = 0.27, P < 0.05) and larger number of TCS prescriptions (Rs = 0.25, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In children with asthma and AD, the number of TCS preparations used is associated with lower QoL and increased AD severity.

Drug survival of cyclosporine in the treatment of hand eczema: a multicentre, daily use study.

BACKGROUND: Hand eczema is a common condition; it is often chronic and can be difficult to treat. Cyclosporine is used off-label to treat severe hand eczema; however, the evidence for this treatment is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To examine the drug survival of cyclosporine in a daily practice cohort of patients with chronic hand eczema. METHODS: This retrospective daily use study included hand eczema patients who were treated with cyclosporine between 01-06-1999 and 01-06-2014 in two Dutch university hospitals. Patient and treatment characteristics were retrospectively collected from medical charts. First treatment episodes were analysed by means of Kaplan-Meier drug survival curves. Possible determinants of drug survival were analysed by Cox regression models. Treatment effectiveness was analysed with a retrospective physician's global assessment. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were treated with cyclosporine. The median drug survival rate was 0.86 years (10.3 months). The overall drug survival rate after 6 months, 1, 2 and 3 years were 61.7%, 45.2%, 18.6% and 13.9% respectively. Main reasons for discontinuation were adverse events, especially early in treatment, and ineffectiveness. After 3 months, a good response to treatment was recorded in 62.9% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Cyclosporine had a median drug survival of 10.3 months. Especially patients with recurrent vesicular hand eczema showed a good treatment response.

Drug survival for ciclosporin A in a long-term daily practice cohort of adult patients with atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Long-term data of ciclosporin A (CsA) treatment in daily practice in patients with severe atopic dermatitis (AD) are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To perform a detailed analysis of drug survival, which is the length of time a patient continues to take a drug, for CsA in a long-term daily practice cohort of patients with AD. The secondary objective was to identify determinants of drug survival. METHODS: Data were extracted from a retrospective cohort of patients treated with CsA for AD. Drug survival was analysed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Determinants of drug survival were analysed using uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses with backward selection. RESULTS: In total, 356 adult patients were analysed (386 patient-years). The overall drug survival rates were 34%, 18%, 12% and 4% after 1, 2, 3 and 6 years, respectively. Reasons for discontinuation were controlled AD (26·4%), side-effects (22·2%), ineffectiveness (16·3%), side-effects plus ineffectiveness (6·2%) or other reasons (11·0%). Older age was associated with a decreased drug survival related to controlled AD [hazard ratio (HR) 0·91]. Older age was also associated with a decreased drug survival related to side-effects (HR 1·14). An intermediate-to-high starting dose (> 3·5-5·0 mg kg(-1) daily) was associated with an increased drug survival related to ineffectiveness (HR 0·63). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study on drug survival for CsA treatment in AD. Older age was associated with decreased drug survival related to controlled AD and side-effects. An intermediate-to-high starting dose was associated with an increased drug survival related to ineffectiveness.

Ten years experience with oral immunosuppressive treatment in adult patients with atopic dermatitis in two academic centres.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of information on the use oral immunosuppressive drugs in atopic dermatitis (AD) daily practice. OBJECTIVE: A 10-years overview of the use of oral immunosuppressive drugs in patients with severe AD. METHODS: Medical charts of patients with AD, who received oral immunosuppressive drugs at the Academic Medical Center Amsterdam and in the University Medical Center Utrecht between January 2001 and January 2011, were analysed. Particular attention was paid to patient characteristics, prior treatment, prescribed oral immunosuppressive drugs, the order of use, doses and treatment durations and reasons for discontinuation of treatment. RESULTS: Of 334 patients [53% male, mean age at start of an oral immunosuppressive drug 36.9 years (SD 13.6)] with AD received oral immunosuppressive treatment of which 102 (31%) participated in clinical trials. Cyclosporine A (CyA) was given in 80% of the patients, mycophenolate mofetil or enteric-coated mycophenolate (MMF/EC-MPS) in 31%, azathioprine (AZA) in 14%, methotrexate (MTX) in 11%, systemic glucocorticosteroids in 7% and systemic tacrolimus in 5%. In these academic centra, CyA was the first choice oral immunosuppressive in 252 patients. Reasons for discontinuation of oral immunosuppressive drugs were controlled AD disease, ineffectiveness and adverse events. CONCLUSION: Various types of oral immunosuppressive drugs have been used over the past 10 years for the treatment of severe AD with a prominent first choice for CyA. Adverse events and ineffectiveness were frequent reasons for discontinuation. A prospective database of patients using oral immunosuppressive treatments in daily practice will give more insight in the effectiveness and safety and may help to formulate future recommendations.

Rush immunotherapy for wasp venom allergy seems safe and effective in patients with mastocytosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with mastocytosis and wasp venom allergy (WA) may benefit from venom immunotherapy (VIT). However, fatal insect sting reactions have been described in mastocytosis patients despite previous immunotherapy. We investigated the safety and efficacy of (rush) VIT in patients with mastocytosis and WA. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of (rush) VIT in patients with mastocytosis and WA. METHODS: We describe nine patients with cutaneous mastocytosis and WA who received VIT. Cutaneous mastocytosis was confirmed by histopathology and systemic mastocytosis was diagnosed according to World Health Organization criteria. VIT was given according to a rush protocol. Given the difference in safety and efficacy of VIT in patients with WA and honeybee venom allergy, we reviewed the literature for VIT with the focus on WA patients with mastocytosis and addressed the difference between patients with cutaneous versus systemic mastocytosis. RESULTS: Nine patients had WA and mastocytosis, of whom six had cutaneous mastocytosis, two combined cutaneous and systemic mastocytosis and one systemic mastocytosis. All patients received rush IT with wasp venom. Most patients had only mild local side effects, with no systemic side effects during the course of VIT. One patient had a systemic reaction upon injection on one occasion, during the updosing phase, with dyspnoea and hypotension, but responded well to treatment. Immunotherapy was continued after temporary dose adjustment without problems. Two patients with a previous anaphylactic reaction were re-stung, without any systemic effects. CONCLUSIONS: VIT is safe in cutaneous mastocytosis patients with WA, while caution has to be made in case of systemic mastocytosis. VIT was effective in the patients who were re-stung.

Evaluation of the adult patient with atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a large impact on quality of life of the patients and their families. In most cases, the diagnosis of AD can easily be made based on (family) history and clinical examination. If necessary, a practical set of diagnostic criteria such as the UK diagnostic criteria can be used. During the diagnostic phase, it is important to pay attention to atopic comorbidity, such as allergic airway disease (allergic asthma and/or rhinitis), allergic eye disease (atopic (kerato) conjunctivitis) and immediate-type food allergy. This will not have direct consequences for the treatment of AD, but may be important for the overall well-being of the patient. Psychological factors, such as family circumstances, work/school performance and lifestyle factors should also be explored. Severity scoring using properly validated scoring lists may not be necessary for the diagnosis, however, is recommended for monitoring therapy. Simple scoring systems, such as TIS and IGA are easy to perform in daily practice. Several flare factors in AD, such as exposure to irritants or UV light, can be identified by history and clinical examination: in individual cases, additional diagnostic tests may sometimes be useful to confirm clinical suspicion. There is only limited evidence that allergen exposure to aeroallergens and/or food allergens influences AD severity. Therefore, routine allergen testing is not necessary for diagnosis and treatment of AD. The decision to perform allergen tests mainly depends on atopic comorbidity.

Evaluation of the child with atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatis (AD) is a very common inflammatory skin disease in childhood. Various doctors such as paediatricians, general practitioners, allergologists and dermatologists are regularly consulted by these children and their parents, but there is no clear consensus on the diagnostic work-up that should be performed when evaluating a child with eczema. A careful history, clinical examination and adequate documentation of disease severity are essential in all children with eczema, irrespective of their disease severity. AD is a clinical diagnosis; diagnostic criteria, such as the UK diagnostic criteria, can be helpful for an accurate definition of the disease. A careful history, including alarm symptoms, respiratory symptoms and the impact of the disease on psychosocial functioning is important. Clinical scoring lists such as SCORAD and EASI are well validated for clinical studies; they are, however, not very suitable tools in clinical practice. More simple scoring systems, such as Three Item Severity Score (TIS) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), are more easy to use for clinical record keeping in daily practice. Allergen testing in children with AD without a history of acute non-eczematous reactions after allergen exposure is not necessary. In very young children with eczema, not yet exposed to foods, routine allergen testing is not necessary. If in individual cases, the decision is made to perform allergen tests, oral challenges should performed to confirm the diagnoses of food allergy.

E-health in caring for patients with atopic dermatitis: a randomized controlled cost-effectiveness study of internet-guided monitoring and online self-management training.

BACKGROUND: The Dermatology Department of the University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands, developed an e-health portal for patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), consisting of e-consultation, a patient-tailored website, monitoring and self-management training. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of individualized e-health compared with usual face-to-face care for children and adults with AD. METHODS: A randomized controlled cost-effectiveness study from a societal perspective in adults and parents of children with moderate AD. Outcomes were quality of life, severity of AD, itching and direct and indirect costs. Data were collected at baseline and at 3 and 12 months after randomization. Linear mixed models were used to analyse clinical outcomes. After multiple imputation of missing data, costs and differences in costs were calculated over a period of 1 year. RESULTS: In total, 199 patients were included. There were no significant differences in disease-specific quality of life, severity of AD and intensity of itching between both groups at the three time points. The difference in direct costs between the intervention and control groups was €24 [95% confidence interval (CI) -360 to 383], whereas this difference was -€618 (95% CI -2502 to 1143) for indirect costs. Overall, individual e-health was expected to save €594 (95% CI -2545 to 1227) per patient in the first year of treatment, mainly through a reduction in work absenteeism. Uncertainty analyses revealed that the probability of e-health reducing costs was estimated to be ≥ 73%. CONCLUSIONS: E-health during follow-up of patients with AD is, after initial diagnosis and treatment during face-to-face contact, just as effective as usual face-to-face care with regard to quality of life and severity of disease. However, when costs are considered, e-health is likely to result in substantial cost savings. Therefore, e-health is a valuable service for patients with AD.