Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
: 20 | 50 | 100
1 - 7 de 7
3.
Curr Oncol ; 30(7): 6019-6040, 2023 06 23.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37489567

Incidence rates of melanoma and keratinocyte skin cancers have been on the rise globally in recent decades. While there has been a select focus on personal sun protection awareness, to our knowledge, there is a paucity of legislation in place to help support citizens' efforts to protect themselves from the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation (UVR). Given this, we conducted a comprehensive review of legislation and guidelines pertaining to a variety of sun protection-related topics in countries of the Group of Seven (G7), Australia and New Zealand. Australia was the only country to have banned tanning beds for individuals of all ages, while other select countries have instituted bans for minors. In workplace policy, there is very little recognition of the danger of occupational UVR exposure in outdoor workers, and thus very few protective measures are in place. With regard to sports and recreation, certain dermatological/professional associations have put forward recommendations, but no legislation was brought forward by government bodies outside of Australia and New Zealand. With regard to youth, while there are various guidelines and frameworks in place across several countries, adherence remains difficult in the absence of concrete legislation and standardization of procedures. Finally, only Australia and a few select jurisdictions in the United States have implemented sales tax exemptions for sunscreen products. In light of our findings, we have made several recommendations, which we anticipate will help reduce the rates of melanoma and keratinocyte cancers in years to come. However, minimizing UVR exposure is not without risk, and we, therefore, suggest the promotion of vitamin D supplementation in conjunction with sun protective practices to limit potential harm.


Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Adolescent , Humans , New Zealand , Ultraviolet Rays , Australia
4.
Int J Mol Sci ; 24(5)2023 Mar 05.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36902419

Actinic keratosis (AK) is among the most commonly diagnosed skin diseases with potentially life-threatening repercussions if left untreated. Usage of pharmacologic agents represents one of many therapeutic strategies that can be used to help manage these lesions. Ongoing research into these compounds continues to change our clinical understanding as to which agents most benefit particular patient populations. Indeed, factors such as past personal medical history, lesion location and tolerability of therapy only represent a few considerations that clinicians must account for when prescribing appropriate treatment. This review focuses on specific drugs used in either the prevention or treatment of AKs. Nicotinamide, acitretin and topical 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) continue to be used with fidelity in the chemoprevention of actinic keratosis, although some uncertainty persists in regard to which agents should be used in immunocompetent vs. immunodeficient/immunosuppressed patients. Topical 5-FU, including combination formulations with either calcipotriol or salicylic acid, as well as imiquimod, diclofenac and photodynamic light therapy are all accepted treatment strategies employed to target and eliminate AKs. Five percent of 5-FU is regarded as the most effective therapy in the condition, although the literature has conflictingly shown that lower concentrations of the drug might also be as effective. Topical diclofenac (3%) appears to be less efficacious than 5% 5-FU, 3.75-5% imiquimod and photodynamic light therapy despite its favorable side effect profile. Finally, traditional photodynamic light therapy, while painful, appears to be of higher efficacy in comparison to its more tolerable counterpart, daylight phototherapy.


Keratosis, Actinic , Photochemotherapy , Humans , Keratosis, Actinic/pathology , Aminolevulinic Acid , Diclofenac , Imiquimod/therapeutic use , Photochemotherapy/adverse effects , Fluorouracil/therapeutic use , Photosensitizing Agents/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome
6.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 26(4): 404-413, 2022.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35379011

Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is an autoimmune blistering skin disease. Current treatment strategies are limited by their efficacy and/or side effect profile and the need for safer and effective alternatives is undeniable. We aimed to conduct a systematic review focusing on the efficacy and safety of omalizumab in BP patients. Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for English and French articles published from inception to July 1, 2021, using search terms "omalizumab" OR "Xolair" OR "IGE025" OR "olizumab" AND "bullous pemphigoid." Screening and data extraction was performed by two raters independently. The primary outcome was complete response (CR), and secondary outcomes were partial response (PR), flare-ups, adverse events/vital status. In total, 22 articles were included, with a total of 56 patients. All patients had a refractory BP with mean disease duration of 13.5 ± 20.2 months (Standard Deviation (SD)) and failed 3.1 ± 1.6 therapies and many remained corticosteroids dependent. Overall, 87.5% of patients responded to treatment (55.4% CR and 32.1% PR), 7.1% discontinued the protocol and only 5.4% were non responders. A third of patients were able to discontinue all other therapies and most others were able to discontinue or taper systemic corticosteroids to <10 mg daily. Flare-ups occurred in 57.7% of patients upon discontinuation of omalizumab and/or steroid tapering, most patients recaptured response thereafter. Omalizumab was well tolerated by most patients. Omalizumab appears to be a promising treatment for BP with a good response rate and safety profile. However, several limitations were identified in current literature, and highlight the need for randomized controlled trials of omalizumab in BP.


Autoimmune Diseases , Pemphigoid, Bullous , Humans , Omalizumab/adverse effects , Pemphigoid, Bullous/chemically induced
7.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 26(1): 33-49, 2022.
Article En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34261335

Type 2 immunity, illustrated by T helper 2 lymphocytes (Th2) and downstream cytokines (IL-4, IL-13, IL-31) as well as group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2), is important in host defense and wound healing.1 The hallmark of type 2 inflammation is eosinophilia and/or high IgE counts and is best recognized in atopic diathesis. Persistent eosinophilia, such as seen in hypereosinophilic syndromes, leads to fibrosis and hence therapeutic Type 2 inhibition in fibrotic diseases is of high interest. Furthermore, as demonstrated in cutaneous T cell lymphoma, advanced disease is characterized by Th1 to Th2 switch allowing cancer progression and immunosuppression. Development of targeted monoclonal antibodies against IL-4Rα (eg, dupilumab) led to a paradigm shift for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) and stimulated research to better understand the role of Type 2 inflammation in other skin conditions. In this review, we summarize up to date knowledge on the role of Type 2 inflammation in skin diseases other than AD and highlight whether the use of Type 2 targeted therapies has been documented or is being investigated in clinical trials. This manuscript reviews the role of Type 2 inflammation in dermatitis, neurodermatitis, IgE-mediated dermatoses (eg, bullous pemphigoid, chronic spontaneous urticaria), sclerodermoid conditions and skin neoplasms.


Immunity, Innate , Immunotherapy/methods , Skin Diseases/immunology , Skin Diseases/therapy , Wound Healing/immunology , Cytokines/immunology , Humans , Th2 Cells/immunology
...