Position statement for the diagnosis and management of anogenital warts.

BACKGROUND: Anogenital warts (AGW) can cause economic burden on healthcare systems and are associated with emotional, psychological and physical issues. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to physicians on the diagnosis and management of AGW. METHODS: Fourteen global experts on AGW developed guidance on the diagnosis and management of AGW in an effort to unify international recommendations. Guidance was developed based on published international and national AGW guidelines and an evaluation of relevant literature published up to August 2016. Authors provided expert opinion based on their clinical experiences. RESULTS: A checklist for a patient's initial consultation is provided to help physicians when diagnosing AGW to get the relevant information from the patient in order to manage and treat the AGW effectively. A number of frequently asked questions are also provided to aid physicians when communicating with patients about AGW. Treatment of AGW should be individualized and selected based on the number, size, morphology, location, and keratinization of warts, and whether they are new or recurrent. Different techniques can be used to treat AGW including ablation, immunotherapy and other topical therapies. Combinations of these techniques are thought to be more effective at reducing AGW recurrence than monotherapy. A simplified algorithm was created suggesting patients with 1-5 warts should be treated with ablation followed by immunotherapy. Patients with >5 warts should use immunotherapy for 2 months followed by ablation and a second 2-month course of immunotherapy. Guidance for daily practice situations and the subsequent action that can be taken, as well as an algorithm for treatment of large warts, were also created. CONCLUSION: The guidance provided will help physicians with the diagnosis and management of AGW in order to improve the health and quality of life of patients with AGW.

Autoantibodies against TIF-1-γ and CADM-140 in Spanish patients with clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis (CADM): clinical significance and diagnostic utility.

BACKGROUND: Patients with clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis (CADM) appear to be at risk for developing cancer and interstitial lung diseases, but population data to confirm this hypothesis are limited. Moreover, CADM presents cutaneous and histological findings that may overlap with subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE). OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between myositis-specific autoantibodies, myositis-associated autoantibodies and CADM in Spanish patients. In addition, to study the usefulness of these autoantibodies in the differential diagnosis between CADM and SCLE. METHODS: Serum samples were tested for myositis-specific autoantibodies and myositis-associated autoantibodies through immunoprecipitation and other standardized methods. RESULTS: Anti-CADM-p140 and anti-p155 antibodies were the only myositis-specific autoantibodies found and were associated with interstitial lung diseases and cancer respectively. No myositis-associated autoantibodies were found in CADM. Moreover, clinical subsets and proportions seemed to differ from Asian cohorts, where anti-CADM-p140 is considered a CADM hallmark antibody and a risk factor for the development of interstitial lung disease. Interestingly, anti-SSA was highly associated with SCLE, whereas no myositis-specific autoantibodies were found in this entity. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY: Association between CADM and myositis-specific autoantibodies and differences between CADM and SCLE were tested on a relatively small cohort of patients. CONCLUSION: There is an association between cancer-associated myositis and interstitial lung diseases and their hallmark autoantibodies in our cohort. In addition, the combined determination of myositis-specific autoantibodies and SSA autoantibodies may help to accurately discriminate SCLE from CADM.