Dupilumab provides sustained effectiveness on patient-reported outcomes and favorable safety in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Up to 5-year results from the daily practice BioDay registry.

BACKGROUND: Long-term daily practice data on patient-reported benefits of dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) remains limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the safety of dupilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe AD over a follow-up period of up to 5 years. METHODS: Data were extracted from the prospective, multicenter BioDay registry (October 2017-2022) of patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with dupilumab in daily practice. RESULTS: In total 1223 patients, 1108 adults and 115 pediatric patients were included. After ≥1 year of treatment, mean Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Numeric rating scale (NRS)-pruritus ranged between 7.8 and 8.7, 3.5 and 4.2, and 2.9 and 3.1 in adults, respectively, whilst these patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) ranged between 8.9 and 10.9, 4.4 and 6.4, and 3.0 and 3.7 in pediatric patients, respectively. At follow-up, overall work impairment decreased from 40.1% to 16.3% to 13.3% in adults. Furthermore, class I obesity and itch-dominant patients generally had less favorable treatment response. Of all patients, 66.8% reported ≥1 adverse event, with conjunctivitis being the most common (33.7%). LIMITATIONS: The overall percentage of missing values for selected PROMs was 26% in adults and 46% in pediatric patients. CONCLUSION: In addition to favorable safety, dupilumab has demonstrated sustained effectiveness across various PROMs, underscoring the treatment benefits from patients' perspectives.

Real-world Experience of Abrocitinib Treatment in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis and Hand Eczema: Up to 28-week Results from the BioDay Registry.

Limited daily practice data on the effect of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis are available. The aim of this multicentre prospective study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis treated in daily practice. In a subgroup, the effectiveness of abrocitinib on hand eczema was evaluated. A total of 103 patients from the BioDay registry were included in the study: week 4 (n = 95), week 16 (n = 61) and week 28 (n = 39). At week 28, the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-50/75/90 was achieved by 81.8%, 57.6%, and 18.2%, respectively, and the weekly average pruritus numerical rating scale ≤ 4 by 62.9%. The effectiveness of abrocitinib was not significantly different between dupilumab non-responders and dupilumab-naïve patients/responders, and between upadacitinib non-responders and upadacitinib-naïve patients/responders. Mean ± standard deviation Hand Eczema Severity Index decreased from 27.4 ± 27.7 at baseline to 7.7 ± 12.1 at week 28 (n = 31). Thirty-two patients (31.1%) discontinued treatment due to ineffectiveness (n = 17), adverse events (n = 9) or both (n = 3). The most frequently reported adverse event was nausea (n = 28). In conclusion, abrocitinib is an effective treatment for atopic dermatitis and can be effective for patients with previous inadequate response to dupilumab or upadacitinib. Furthermore, hand eczema can improve in patients treated with abrocitinib for atopic dermatitis.

Experiences from daily practice of upadacitinib treatment on atopic dermatitis with a focus on hand eczema: Results from the BioDay registry.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on the effectiveness of upadacitinib on atopic dermatitis (AD), hand eczema (HE) and HE in the context of AD are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib on AD and on HE in patients with AD. METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study includes clinical outcomes: Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI), Photographic guide; and PROMs: average pruritus and pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score of the past week, Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Patient-Oriented Eczema, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT), Patient Global Assessment of Disease (PGAD), Quality Of Life Hand Eczema Questionnaire (QOLHEQ) at baseline, Week 4, and Week 16 of upadacitinib-treated patients. Adverse events were monitored during each visit. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were included, of which 32 patients had HE. At Week 16, EASI-75 was achieved by 50.0%. Absolute cutoff score NRS-pruritus ≤4 was reached by 62.5%, POEM ≤7 by 37.5%, DLQI ≤5 by 59.4%, ADCT <7 by 68.8%, and PGAD rating of at least 'good' by 53.1%. HECSI-75 was achieved by 59.3% and (almost) clear on the Photographic guide by 74.1%. The minimally important change in QOLHEQ was achieved by 57.9%. Sub-analysis in patients with concomitant irritant contact dermatitis showed no differences. Safety analysis showed no new findings compared to clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib can be an effective treatment for patients with AD and concomitant HE in daily practice. Future studies should focus on the effectiveness of upadacitinib on chronic HE, especially on the different etiological subtypes of HE, including HE in non-atopic individuals.

Daily Practice Experience of Baricitinib Treatment for Patients with Difficult-to-Treat Atopic Dermatitis: Results from the BioDay Registry.

Clinical trials have shown that baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, is effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. However, daily practice data are limited. Therefore, this multicentre prospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 16-weeks' treatment with baricitinib in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in daily practice. A total of 51 patients from the BioDay registry treated with baricitinib were included and evaluated at baseline and after 4, 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Effectiveness was assessed using clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements. Adverse events and laboratory assessments were evaluated at every visit. At week 16, the probability (95% confidence interval) of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7 and numerical rating scale pruritus ≤ 4 was 29.4% (13.1-53.5) and 20.5% (8.8-40.9), respectively. No significant difference in effectiveness was found between dupilumab non-responders and responders. Twenty-two (43.2%) patients discontinued baricitinib treatment due to ineffectiveness, adverse events or both (31.4%, 9.8% and 2.0%, respectively). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (n = 6, 11.8%), urinary tract infection (n = 5, 9.8%) and herpes simplex infection (n = 4, 7.8%). In conclusion, baricitinib can be an effective treatment option for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, including patients with non-responsiveness on dupilumab. However, effectiveness of baricitinib is heterogeneous, which is reflected by the high discontinuation rate in this difficult-to-treat cohort.

Lifestyle factors and hand eczema: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

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.

Hyperkeratotic hand eczema: Eczema or not?

BACKGROUND: Hyperkeratotic hand eczema (HHE) is a typical clinical hand eczema subtype with a largely unknown pathophysiology. OBJECTIVE: To investigate histopathology, expression of keratins (K), epidermal barrier proteins, and adhesion molecules in HHE. METHODS: Palmar skin biopsies (lesional and perilesional) were obtained from seven HHE patients and two healthy controls. Moreover, 135 candidate genes associated with palmoplantar keratoderma were screened for mutations. RESULTS: Immunofluorescence staining showed a significant reduction of K9 and K14 in lesional skin. Upregulation was found for K5, K6, K16, and K17 in lesional skin compared with perilesional and healthy palmar skin. Further, upregulation of involucrin and alternating loricrin staining, both in an extracellular staining pattern, was found. Filaggrin expression was similar in lesional, perilesional, and control skin. No monogenetic mutations were found. CONCLUSION: Currently, the phenotype of HHE is included in the hand eczema classification system; however, it can be argued whether this is justified. The evident expression of filaggrin and involucrin in lesional skin does not support a pathogenesis of atopic eczema. The upregulation of K6, K16, and K17 and reduction of K9 and K14 might contribute to the underlying pathogenesis. Unfortunately, comparison with hand eczema studies is not possible yet, because similar protein expression studies are lacking.

Quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and adherence to treatment in patients with vesicular hand eczema: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent vesicular hand eczema frequently has a chronic course and needs long-term treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL), treatment satisfaction, and adherence in patients with vesicular hand eczema. METHODS: Patients using one main treatment for at least three months were included. Data on HRQoL (Quality of Life in Hand Eczema Questionnaire [QOLHEQ]), treatment satisfaction (Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication, version II), and treatment adherence (4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale) were collected. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were used to predict variables associated with HRQoL. RESULTS: HRQoL was moderately impaired, with the highest impact in the QOLHEQ subdomain symptoms. Female sex, more severe hand eczema, and lower treatment satisfaction were associated with more impairment in HRQoL. Patients with severe/very severe hand eczema had significant lower "global satisfaction" scores compared with the other severity groups. The "global satisfaction" and treatment adherence in patients using systemic treatment were significantly higher compared with those with only topical treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with vesicular hand eczema disease severity affects both HRQoL and treatment satisfaction. Systemic treatment of severe hand eczema could improve the severity and as a result also HRQoL, treatment satisfaction, and medication adherence.

Risk of Non-melanoma Skin Cancer in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis Treated with Oral Immunosuppressive Drugs.

There is uncertainty about the risk of developing non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), including basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs. A total of 557 patients with AD treated with these drugs in the University Medical Center Utrecht and Groningen, the Netherlands, were analysed. NMSC after oral immunosuppressive treatment was reported in 18 patients (3.2%). The standardized incidence ratio for developing SCC was 13.1 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 6.5-19.7). Patients developing NMSC were older at the start of therapy (p<0.001) and data lock (p<0.001) compared with patients without NMSC. No significant differences were found in sex, cumulative days of oral immunosuppressive drugs and follow-up between these groups (p=0.42, p=0.88, and p=0.34, respectively). In interpreting these results it is important to include other factors, such as lack of association between treatment duration and tumour development and the long interval between treatment discontinuation and tumour development in some patients.

Systematic review of cost-of-illness studies in hand eczema.

The individual burden of disease in hand eczema patients is considerable. However, little is known about the socio-economic impact of this disease. The aims of this review were to evaluate the literature on cost-of-illness in hand eczema, and to compose a checklist for future use. The literature was retrieved from the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to October 2015. Quality evaluation was based on seven relevant items in cost-of-illness studies. Cost data (direct and indirect) were extracted and converted into euros (2014 price level) by use of the Dutch Consumer Price Index. Six articles were included. The mean annual total cost per patient ranged from €1311 [corrected] to €9792 (direct cost per patient, €521 to €3722; [corrected] and indirect cost per patient, €100 to €6846). Occupational hand eczema patients showed indirect costs up to 70% of total costs, mainly because of absenteeism. A large diversity in hand eczema severity was found between studies. The socio-economic burden of hand eczema is considerable, especially for more severe and/or occupational hand eczema. Absenteeism from paid work leads to a high total cost-of-illness, although disregard of presenteeism often leads to underestimation of indirect costs. Differences in included cost components, the occupational status of patients and hand eczema severity make international comparison difficult. A checklist was added to standardize the approach to cost-of-illness studies in hand eczema.

Alitretinoin and acitretin in severe chronic hand eczema; results from a retrospective daily practice study.

Acitretin has been used off-label for years to treat chronic hand eczema, but acitretin is less often prescribed as alitretinoïne was approved. This study evaluates both retinoids in a daily practice cohort of patients with severe chronic hand eczema in terms of drug survival and reasons for discontinuation. Patients using alitretinoin or acitretin between 01-01-1994 and 01-08-2015 were included in this retrospective daily practice study and analyzed by Kaplan-Meier drug survival curves. Potential determinants were analyzed by Cox regression analyses. Ninety-five patients were treated with alitretinoin and 109 patients with acitretin. The main reasons for discontinuation were adverse events and cleared hand eczema, 29.5 and 27.4% in alitretinoin versus 43.1 and 23.9% in acitretin. Patients with hyperkeratotic hand eczema had most often a good effect of treatment: 68.3% in alitretinoin and 50.7% in acitretin treatment. The drug survival rates of alitretinoin and acitretin after 12, 24, 36, and 52 weeks were 69.3, 45.1, 19.6, 7.0% and 74.3, 45.5, 33.8, 23.2%, respectively. Alitretinoin and acitretin are effective treatment options for patients with hand eczema. However, both treatments were more effective in patients with hyperkeratotic hand eczema. Fewer patients discontinued alitretinoin compared with acitretin due to adverse events.