RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) are evaluated primarily in placebo-controlled trials with binary efficacy outcomes. In a living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we previously analysed continuous efficacy measures. OBJECTIVES: To compare binary efficacy outcomes of systemic treatments for AD. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information (LILACS) database, Global Resource for Eczema Trials (GREAT) database and trial registries up to 1 March 2023. We included randomized trials examining ≥ 8 weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate-to-severe AD. We screened titles, abstracts and full texts and abstracted data independently, in duplicate. Outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving at least 50%, 75% and 90% improvements in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 50, EASI 75 and EASI 90, respectively) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) success. We performed random-effects Bayesian NMAs to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) between each intervention for each outcome. RESULTS: Eighty-three trials with 22 122 participants were included in the systematic review. In analyses limited to trials of 8-16 weeks' duration with predominantly adult populations, abrocitinib 200â mg daily (OR 1.5, 95% CrI 1.1-2.2) and upadacitinib 15â mg daily (OR 1.7, 95% CrI 0.9-3.3) and 30â mg daily (OR 2.5, 95% CrI 1.3-5.0) were associated with higher odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Abrocitinib 100â mg daily (OR 0.7, 95% CrI 0.5-1.0), baricitinib 2â mg daily (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.5) and 4â mg daily (OR 0.5, 95% CrI 0.3-0.7), and tralokinumab (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.6) were associated with lower odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Results were similar for EASI 75, EASI 90 and IGA success. CONCLUSIONS: Supporting results for continuous outcome measures, upadacitinib 30â mg daily and abrocitinib 200â mg daily are the most efficacious with regard to binary efficacy endpoints up to 16 weeks in adults with moderate-to-severe AD, followed by upadacitinib 15â mg daily, dupilumab and abrocitinib 100â mg daily. Dupilumab and both doses of upadacitinib and abrocitinib are more efficacious than baricitinib 4 and 2â mg daily and tralokinumab.
Assuntos
Azetidinas , Dermatite Atópica , Eczema , Purinas , Pirazóis , Pirimidinas , Sulfonamidas , Adulto , Humanos , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Metanálise em Rede , Teorema de Bayes , Resultado do Tratamento , Imunoglobulina A , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Método Duplo-CegoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Increased Staphylococcus aureus (SA) colonization is considered an important factor in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Antibacterial therapeutic clothing aims to reduce SA colonization and AD inflammation; however, its role in the management of AD remains poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness of antibacterial therapeutic clothing + standard topical treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe AD vs. standard therapeutic clothing + standard topical treatment; and, if effectiveness was demonstrated, to demonstrate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A pragmatic double-blinded multicentre randomized controlled trial (NCT04297215) was conducted in patients of all ages with moderate-to-severe AD. Patients were centrally randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to receive standard therapeutic clothing or antibacterial clothing based on chitosan or silver. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) measured over 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes (PROs), topical corticosteroid (TCS) use, SA colonization, safety and cost-effectiveness. Outcomes were assessed by means of (generalized) linear mixed-model analyses. RESULTS: Between 16 March 2020 and 20 December 2021, 171 patients were enrolled. In total, 159 patients were included (54 in the standard therapeutic clothing group, 50 in the chitosan group and 55 in the silver group). Adherence was high [median 7 nights a week wear (interquartile range 3-7)]. Median EASI scores at baseline and at 4, 12, 26 and 52 weeks were 11.8, 4.3, 4.6, 4.2 and 3.6, respectively, in the standard therapeutic clothing group vs. 11.3, 5.0, 3.0, 3.0 and 4.4, respectively, in the chitosan group, and 11.6, 5.0, 5.4, 4.6 and 5.8, respectively, in the silver group. No differences in EASI over 52 weeks between the standard therapeutic clothing group, the chitosan group [-0.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.3 to 0.2; P = 0.53] or the silver group (-0.1, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.2; P = 0.58) were found. However, a small significant group × time interaction effect between the standard and silver groups was found (P = 0.03), in which the silver group performed worse after 26 weeks. No differences between groups were found in PROs, TCS use, SA skin colonization and healthcare utilization. No severe adverse events or silver absorption were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest no additional benefits of antibacterial agents in therapeutic clothing in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.
Assuntos
Quitosana , Dermatite Atópica , Fármacos Dermatológicos , Infecções Estafilocócicas , Humanos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Quitosana/uso terapêutico , Vestuário , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Fármacos Dermatológicos/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Prata/uso terapêutico , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
More severe atopic dermatitis and psoriasis are associated with a higher cumulative impact on quality of life, multimorbidity and healthcare costs. Proactive, early intervention in those most at risk of severe disease may reduce this cumulative burden and modify the disease trajectory to limit progression. The lack of reliable biomarkers for this at-risk group represents a barrier to such a paradigm shift in practice. To expedite discovery and validation, the BIOMarkers in Atopic Dermatitis and Psoriasis (BIOMAP) consortium (a large-scale European, interdisciplinary research initiative) has curated clinical and molecular data across diverse study designs and sources including cross-sectional and cohort studies (small-scale studies through to large multicentre registries), clinical trials, electronic health records and large-scale population-based biobanks. We map all dataset disease severity instruments and measures to three key domains (symptoms, inflammatory activity and disease course), and describe important codependencies and relationships across variables and domains. We prioritize definitions for more severe disease with reference to international consensus, reference standards and/or expert opinion. Key factors to consider when analysing datasets across these diverse study types include explicit early consideration of biomarker purpose and clinical context, candidate biomarkers associated with disease severity at a particular point in time and over time and how they are related, taking the stage of biomarker development into account when selecting disease severity measures for analyses, and validating biomarker associations with disease severity outcomes using both physician- and patient-reported measures and across domains. The outputs from this exercise will ensure coherence and focus across the BIOMAP consortium so that mechanistic insights and biomarkers are clinically relevant, patient-centric and more generalizable to current and future research efforts.
Atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis are long-term skin conditions that can significantly affect people's lives, especially when symptoms are severe. Approximately 10% of adults and 20% of children are affected by AD, while psoriasis affects around 5% of people in the UK. Both conditions are associated with debilitating physical symptoms (such as itch) and have been linked to depression and anxiety. Biomarkers are naturally occurring chemicals in the human body and have potential to enhance the longer-term management of AD and psoriasis. Currently, there are no routinely used biomarkers that can identify people who experience or will go on to develop severe AD and psoriasis. For this reason, research is under way to understand which biomarkers are linked to severity. In this study, a multidisciplinary team of skin researchers from across Europe, along with patient groups, discussed the complexities of studying severity-related biomarkers. We identified a number of severity measurement approaches and there were recommendations for future biomarker research, including (i) considering multiple measures as no single measure can encompass all aspects of severity, (ii) exploring severity measures recorded by both healthcare professionals and patients, as each may capture different aspects, and (iii) accounting for influencing factors, such as different treatment approaches, that may impact AD and psoriasis severity, which make it challenging to compare findings across studies. Overall, we anticipate that the insights gained from these discussions will increase the likelihood of biomarkers being effectively applied in real-world settings, to ultimately improve outcomes for people with AD and psoriasis.
Assuntos
Biomarcadores , Dermatite Atópica , Psoríase , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Humanos , Psoríase/imunologia , Psoríase/diagnóstico , Dermatite Atópica/diagnóstico , Dermatite Atópica/imunologia , Pesquisa InterdisciplinarRESUMO
Telemedicine, the provision of remote healthcare, has gained prominence, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. It has the potential to replace routine in-person follow-up visits for patients with chronic inflammatory skin conditions. However, it remains unclear whether telemedicine can effectively substitute in-person consultations for this patient group. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of telemedicine compared with traditional in-person care for chronic inflammatory skin diseases. A comprehensive search in various databases identified 11 articles, including 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 clinical controlled trial (CCT). These studies evaluated telemedicine's impact on patients with psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, with varying methods like video consultations and digital platforms. The findings tentatively suggest that telemedicine does not seem to be inferior compared with in-person care, particularly in terms of condition severity and quality of life for patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to the inherent uncertainties in the evidence. There are indications that telemedicine can offer benefits such as cost-effectiveness, time savings, and reduced travel distances, but it is important to recognize these findings as preliminary, necessitating further validation through more extensive research.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Telemedicina , Humanos , Telemedicina/métodos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Doença Crônica , Psoríase/terapia , Qualidade de Vida , Dermatite Atópica/terapia , Dermatite Atópica/diagnóstico , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
The Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP) assesses the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for high-burden skin diseases. This review focuses on contact dermatitis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier for CPGs published between 1 November 2018 and 1 November 2023. Prespecified guideline resources were hand searched. Two authors independently undertook screening, data extraction and quality assessments. Instruments used were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Reporting Checklist, the U.S. Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness, The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) Instrument and Lenzer's Red Flags. Twenty five CPGs were included, exhibiting heterogeneity in both the topics they addressed and their methodological quality. Whereas the CPGs on management of hand eczema from Denmark, Europe and the Netherlands scored best, most CPGs fell short of being clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence-based. Disclosure of conflicts of interest scored well, and areas needing improvement include 'strength and wording of recommendations', 'applicability', 'updating' and 'external review'. Adhering to AGREE II and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) enhances methodological quality.
Assuntos
Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Humanos , Dermatite de Contato/diagnóstico , Dermatologia/normasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the effects of systemic immunomodulatory treatments on COVID-19 outcomes in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVE: To investigate COVID-19 outcomes in patients with AD treated with or without systemic immunomodulatory treatments, using a global registry platform. METHODS: Clinicians were encouraged to report cases of COVID-19 in their patients with AD in the Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion for Atopic Dermatitis (SECURE-AD) registry. Data entered from 1 April 2020 to 31 October 2021 were analysed using multivariable logistic regression. The primary outcome was hospitalization from COVID-19, according to AD treatment groups. RESULTS: 442 AD patients (mean age 35.9 years, 51.8% male) from 27 countries with strongly suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were included in analyses. 428 (96.8%) patients were treated with a single systemic therapy (n = 297 [67.2%]) or topical therapy only (n = 131 [29.6%]). Most patients treated with systemic therapies received dupilumab (n = 216). Fourteen patients (3.2%) received a combination of systemic therapies. Twenty-six patients (5.9%) were hospitalized. No deaths were reported. Patients treated with topical treatments had significantly higher odds of hospitalization, compared with those treated with dupilumab monotherapy (odds ratio (OR) 4.65 [95%CI 1.71-14.78]), including after adjustment for confounding variables (adjusted OR (aOR) 4.99 [95%CI 1.4-20.84]). Combination systemic therapy which did not include systemic corticosteroids was associated with increased odds of hospitalization, compared with single agent non-steroidal immunosuppressive systemic treatment (OR 8.09 [95%CI 0.4-59.96], aOR 37.57 [95%CI 1.05-871.11]). Hospitalization was most likely in patients treated with combination systemic therapy which included systemic corticosteroids (OR 40.43 [95%CI 8.16-207.49], aOR 45.75 [95%CI 4.54-616.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the risk of COVID-19 complications appears low in patients with AD, even when treated with systemic immunomodulatory agents. Dupilumab monotherapy was associated with lower hospitalization than other therapies. Combination systemic treatment, particularly combinations including systemic corticosteroids, was associated with the highest risk of severe COVID-19.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Dermatite Atópica , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Feminino , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Sistema de Registros , Índice de Gravidade de DoençaRESUMO
This editorial for the British Journal of Dermatology provides an update from a patient editor point of view.
Assuntos
Participação do Paciente , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are essential in delivering optimum healthcare, such as for atopic dermatitis (AD), a highly prevalent skin disease. Although many CPGs are available for AD, their quality has not been critically appraised. OBJECTIVES: To identify CPGs on AD worldwide and to assess with validated instruments whether those CPGs are clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence based (CUTE). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier for CPGs on AD published between 1 April 2016 and 1 April 2021. Additionally we hand searched prespecified guideline resources. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment of eligible guidelines were independently carried out by two authors. Instruments used for quality assessment were the AGREE II Reporting Checklist, the US Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness and Lenzer's Red Flags. RESULTS: Forty CPGs were included, mostly from countries with a high sociodemographic index. The reporting quality varied enormously. Three CPGs scored 'excellent' on all AGREE II domains and three scored 'poor' on all domains. We found no association between AGREE II scores and a country's gross domestic product. One CPG fully met all nine IOM criteria and two fully met eight. Three CPGs had no red flags. 'Applicability' and 'rigour of development' were the lowest scoring AGREE II domains; 'external review', 'updating procedures' and 'rating strength of recommendations' were the IOM criteria least met; and most red flags were for 'limited or no involvement of methodological expertise' and 'no external review'. Management of conflicts of interest (COIs) appeared challenging. When constructs of the instruments overlapped, they showed high concordance, strengthening our conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, many CPGs are not sufficiently clear, unbiased, trustworthy or evidence based (CUTE) and lack applicability. Therefore improvement is warranted, for which using the AGREE II instrument is recommended. Some improvements can be easily accomplished through robust reporting. Others, such as transparency, applicability, evidence foundation and managing COIs, might require more effort.
Assuntos
Dermatite Atópica , Dermatologia , Lista de Checagem , Dermatite Atópica/diagnóstico , Dermatite Atópica/terapia , Humanos , National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, U.S., Health and Medicine Division , PubMed , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hand eczema (HE) has a significant impact on patients' quality of life and work-related activities. However, little is known about the patients' perspectives on quality of care for HE. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the patient perspective of the HE care process in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Qualitative, semi-structured focus groups were carried out, recorded, transcribed, and analysed using an inductive-deductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Fifteen patients participated in four focus groups. Time and attention, together with being listened to and understood by the health care professional, were the most important aspects of care for HE mentioned by participants. Other aspects of care that were regarded as important were that diagnoses, causes and follow-up of HE were not always clear to the participant; more psychosocial support was needed, and that participants experienced frequent changes in doctors. Information provided by nurses was valuable, but more individualized advice was needed. CONCLUSIONS: To better meet the needs of patients, more explanation should be given about the causes of HE and the final diagnosis. Besides focusing on the treatment, it is also important to focus on its impact on the patient and options for psychosocial and peer support should be discussed. Furthermore, the beneficial role of the specialized nurse as part of integrated care was emphasized.
Assuntos
Atitude Frente a Saúde , Dermatite Alérgica de Contato/terapia , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto/métodos , Satisfação do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Adulto , Dermatite Alérgica de Contato/psicologia , Feminino , Comportamentos Relacionados com a Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Autocuidado/métodosRESUMO
Evidence regarding the association between lifestyle factors and hand eczema is limited.To extensively investigate the association between lifestyle factors (smoking, alcohol consumption, stress, physical activity, body mass index, diet, and sleep) and the prevalence, incidence, subtype, severity, and prognosis of hand eczema, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology consensus statement. MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched up to October 2021. The (modified) Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to judge risk of bias. Quality of the evidence was rated using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Eligibility and quality were blindly assessed by two independent investigators; disagreements were resolved by a third investigator. Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and when insufficient for a meta-analysis, evidence was narratively summarized. Fifty-five studies were included. The meta-analysis (17 studies) found very low quality evidence that smoking is associated with a higher prevalence of hand eczema (odds ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.26). No convincing evidence of associations for the other lifestyle factors with hand eczema were found, mostly due to heterogeneity, conflicting results, and/or the limited number of studies per outcome.
Assuntos
Dermatite Alérgica de Contato , Eczema , Eczema/epidemiologia , Eczema/etiologia , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Razão de Chances , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hand eczema is a common inflammatory skin disorder. Health care providers need continuously updated information about the management of hand eczema to ensure best treatment for their patients. OBJECTIVES: To update the European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline on the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment on of hand eczema. METHOD: The Guideline Development Group (GDG) was established on behalf of the ESCD. A call for interest was launched via the ESCD website and via the ESCD members' mailing list. Appraisal of the evidence for therapeutic and preventive interventions was applied and a structured method of developing consensus was used and moderated by an external methodologist. The final guideline was approved by the ESCD executive committee and was in external review on the ESCD webpage for 1 month. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for several statements and management strategies. CONCLUSION: The updated guideline should improve management of hand eczema.
Assuntos
Dermatite Alérgica de Contato , Eczema , Dermatoses da Mão , Dermatite Alérgica de Contato/diagnóstico , Dermatite Alérgica de Contato/prevenção & controle , Eczema/diagnóstico , Eczema/prevenção & controle , Dermatoses da Mão/diagnóstico , Dermatoses da Mão/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Testes do EmplastroRESUMO
Importance: There are multiple approved systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis. Lebrikizumab is a newly licensed biologic medication that has been compared to placebo in clinical trials but not to other systemic treatments. Objective: To compare reported measures of efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab to other systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data Sources: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, and trial registries were searched from inception through November 3, 2023. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials evaluating 8 or more weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened in duplicate. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate and random-effects bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. Minimal important differences were used to define important differences between medications. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). The updated analysis was completed from December 13, 2023, to February 20, 2024. Main Outcome Measures: Efficacy outcomes were the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scales (PP-NRS) and were compared using mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). Safety outcomes were serious adverse events and withdrawal due to adverse events. Other outcomes included the proportion of participants with 50%, 75%, and 90% improvement in EASI (EASI-50, -75, -90) and the proportion with success on the Investigator Global Assessment compared using odds ratios with 95% CrI. Results: The study sample included 97 eligible trials, with a total of 24â¯679 patients. Lebrikizumab was associated with no important difference in change in EASI (MD, -2.0; 95% CrI, -4.5 to 0.3; moderate certainty), POEM (MD, -1.1; 95% CrI -2.5 to 0.2; moderate certainty), DLQI (MD, -0.2; 95% CrI -2.1 to 1.6; moderate certainty), or PP-NRS (MD, 0.1; 95% CrI -0.4, 0.6; high certainty) compared to dupilumab among adults with atopic dermatitis who were treated for up to 16 weeks. Dupilumab was associated with higher odds of efficacy in binary outcomes compared with lebrikizumab. The relative efficacy of other approved systemic medications was similar to that found by previous updates of this living study, with high-dose upadacitinib and abrocitinib demonstrating numerically highest relative efficacy. For safety outcomes, low event rates limited useful comparisons. Conclusions and Relevance: In this living systematic review and network meta-analysis, lebrikizumab was similarly effective to dupilumab for the short-term treatment of atopic dermatitis in adults. Clinicians and patients can use these comparative data to inform treatment decisions.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , Dermatite Atópica , Agentes de Imunomodulação , Humanos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/administração & dosagem , Anticorpos Monoclonais/efeitos adversos , Dermatite Atópica/diagnóstico , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Dermatite Atópica/imunologia , Dermatite Atópica/psicologia , Agentes de Imunomodulação/administração & dosagem , Agentes de Imunomodulação/efeitos adversos , Metanálise em Rede , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is defined as research being carried out 'with' or 'by' members of the public, patients, and carers, on both an individual and a group level, rather than simply 'about', or 'for' them. Within dermatology, PPI is increasingly recognised as a vital component of research as it helps to ensure that research remains relevant to the populations we intend to serve. Dermatology scholarship, with its rich psychosocial implications due to the stigma, physical disability, and mental health burdens these conditions may incur, is in a unique position to benefit from PPI to unlock previously inaccessible patient lived experiences or therapeutic consequences. Throughout the rapid growth of PPI, it has been infused throughout the research lifecycle, from design to dissemination and beyond. After first explaining the principles of PPI, we examine the existing evidence base at each research stage to explore whether our specialty has effectively harnessed this approach and to identify any subsequent impact of PPI. Finally, we scrutinise the challenges faced by those implementing PPI in dermatology research.
Assuntos
Dermatologia , Cuidadores/psicologia , Humanos , Saúde Mental , Participação do PacienteRESUMO
The role of clinical practice guidelines has changed dramatically the past 50 years. Both beneficial, as also having some disadvantageous effects. Considering the international developments, such as a growing body of evidence and evolving methodologies, some limits might be in reach or already been reached. The solution thereof is part nationally and part internationally. Internationally because of new methodologies and technologies, such as use of artificial intelligence, and nationally in a more coherent approach. Coherent not only in medical disciplines, but also in policies of government, regulators, and health insurers. This calls for a renewed, integral and an all-encompassing vision.
Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Seguradoras , HumanosRESUMO
Importance: Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis are being evaluated primarily in placebo-controlled trials; network meta-analysis can provide relative efficacy and safety estimates for treatments that have not been compared head to head. Objective: To compare reported measures of efficacy and assessments of safety in clinical trials of systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data Sources: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database, Global Resource of EczemA Trials database, and trial registries were searched through June 15, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials examining 8 or more weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were included after screening titles, abstracts, and papers in duplicate. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate. Bayesian network meta-analyses and assessed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation certainty of evidence were performed. The updated analysis was completed from June to December 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes include change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scales (PP-NRS). Results: Since October 2019, 21 new studies were added, for a total of 60 trials with 16â¯579 patients. Up to 16 weeks of treatment in adults, abrocitinib, 200 mg daily (mean difference [MD], 2.2; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.2-4.0; high certainty) and upadacitinib, 30 mg daily (MD, 2.7; 95% CrI, 0.6-4.7; high certainty) were associated with reduced EASI slightly more than dupilumab, 600 mg then 300 mg every 2 weeks. Abrocitinib, 100 mg daily (MD, -2.1; 95% CrI, -4.1 to -0.3; high certainty), baricitinib, 4 mg daily (MD, -3.2; 95% CrI, -5.7 to -0.8; high certainty), baricitinib, 2 mg daily (MD, -5.2; 95% CrI, -7.5 to -2.9; high certainty) and tralokinumab, 600 mg then 300 mg every 2 weeks (MD, -3.5; 95% CrI, -5.8 to -1.3; high certainty) were associated with reduced EASI slightly less than dupilumab. There was little or no difference between upadacitinib, 15 mg daily, and dupilumab (MD, 0.2; 95% CrI, -1.9 to 2.2; high certainty). The pattern of results was similar for POEM, DLQI, and PP-NRS. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, abrocitinib, 200 mg; and upadacitinib, 30 mg daily, were associated with slightly better scores than dupilumab, and upadacitinib, 15 mg daily, was associated with similar scores to dupilumab. Abrocitinib, 100 mg daily, baricitinib, 4 mg and 2 mg daily, and tralokinumab, 300 mg, every 2 weeks were associated with slightly worse scores.
Assuntos
Dermatite Atópica , Eczema , Adulto , Teorema de Bayes , Dermatite Atópica/diagnóstico , Dermatite Atópica/tratamento farmacológico , Eczema/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Metanálise em Rede , Prurido/tratamento farmacológico , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis mainly affecting the cheeks, nose, chin, and forehead. Rosacea is characterized by recurrent episodes of flushing or transient erythema, persistent erythema, phymatous changes, papules, pustules, and telangiectasia. The eyes may also be involved. Due to rosacea affecting the face, it has a profound negative impact on quality of life, self-esteem, and well-being. In addition to general skin care, there are several approved treatment options available for addressing these features, both topical and systemic. For some features, intense pulse light, laser, and surgery are of value. Recent advances in fundamental scientific research have underscored the roles of the innate and adaptive immune systems as well as neurovascular dysregulation underlying the spectrum of clinical features of rosacea. Endogenous and exogenous stimuli may initiate and aggravate several pathways in patients with rosacea. This review covers the new phenotype-based diagnosis and classification system reflecting pathophysiology, and new and emerging treatment options and approaches. We address new topical and systemic formulations, as well as recent evidence on treatment combinations. In addition, ongoing studies investigating novel therapeutic interventions will be summarized.