Defining disease severity in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis for the application to biomarker research- an inter-disciplinary perspective.

More severe atopic dermatitis (AD) 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 BIOMAP consortium (Biomarkers in AD and Psoriasis, a large-scale European, inter-disciplinary research initiative) has curated clinical and molecular data across diverse study designs and sources including cross-sectional and cohort studies (small scale through to large multi-centre 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 co-dependencies and relationships across variables and domains. We prioritise 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 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 generalisable to current and future research efforts.

Biomarkers of systemic treatment response in people with psoriasis: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Responses to the systemic treatments commonly used to treat psoriasis vary. Biomarkers that accurately predict effectiveness and safety would enable targeted treatment selection, improved patient outcomes and more cost-effective healthcare. OBJECTIVES: To perform a scoping review to identify and catalogue candidate biomarkers of systemic treatment response in psoriasis for the translational research community. METHODS: A systematic search of CENTRAL, Embase, LILACS and MEDLINE was performed for relevant articles published between 1990 and December 2021. Eligibility criteria were studies involving patients with psoriasis (any age, n ≥ 50) reporting biomarkers associated with systemic treatment response. The main outcomes were any measure of systemic treatment efficacy or safety. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second; studies meeting minimal quality criteria (use of methods to control for confounding) were formally assessed for bias. Candidate biomarkers were identified by an expert multistakeholder group using a majority voting consensus exercise and mapped to relevant cellular and molecular pathways. RESULTS: Of 71 included studies (67 studying effectiveness outcomes and eight safety outcomes; four studied both), most reported genomic or proteomic biomarkers associated with response to biologics (48 studies). Methodological or reporting limitations frequently compromised the interpretation of findings, including inadequate control for key covariates, lack of adjustment for multiple testing, and selective outcome reporting. We identified candidate biomarkers of efficacy to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors [variation in CARD14, CDKAL1, IL1B, IL12B and IL17RA loci, and lipopolysaccharide-induced phosphorylation of nuclear factor (NF)-κB in type 2 dendritic cells] and ustekinumab (HLA-C*06:02 and variation in an IL1B locus). None were supported by sufficient evidence for clinical use without further validation studies. Candidate biomarkers were found to be involved in the immune cellular crosstalk implicated in psoriasis pathogenesis, most notably antigen presentation, T helper (Th)17 cell differentiation, positive regulation of NF-κB, and Th17 cell activation. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive catalogue provides a key resource for researchers and reveals a diverse range of biomarker types and outcomes in the included studies. The candidate biomarkers identified require further evaluation in methodologically robust studies to establish potential clinical utility. Future studies should aim to address the common methodological limitations highlighted in this review to expedite discovery and validation of biomarkers for clinical use. What is already known about this topic? Responses to the systemic treatments commonly used to treat psoriasis vary. Biomarkers that accurately predict effectiveness and safety would enable targeted treatment selection, improved patient outcomes and more cost-effective healthcare. What does this study add? This review provides a comprehensive catalogue of investigated biomarkers of systemic treatment response in psoriasis. A diverse range of biomarker types and outcomes was found in the included studies, serving as a key resource for the translational research community.

Biomarkers of disease progression in people with psoriasis: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Identification of those at risk of more severe psoriasis and/or associated morbidities offers opportunity for early intervention, reduced disease burden and more cost-effective healthcare. Prognostic biomarkers of disease progression have thus been the focus of intense research, but none are part of routine practice. OBJECTIVES: To identify and catalogue candidate biomarkers of disease progression in psoriasis for the translational research community. METHODS: A systematic search of CENTRAL, Embase, LILACS and MEDLINE was performed for relevant articles published between 1990 and December 2021. Eligibility criteria were studies involving patients with psoriasis (any age, n ≥ 50) reporting biomarkers associated with disease progression. The main outcomes were any measure of skin severity or any prespecified psoriasis comorbidity. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second; studies meeting minimal quality criteria (longitudinal design and/or use of methods to control for confounding) were formally assessed for bias. Candidate biomarkers were identified by an expert multistakeholder group using a majority voting consensus exercise, and mapped to relevant cellular and molecular pathways. RESULTS: Of 181 included studies, most investigated genomic or proteomic biomarkers associated with disease severity (n = 145) or psoriatic arthritis (n = 30). Methodological and reporting limitations compromised interpretation of findings, most notably a lack of longitudinal studies, and inadequate control for key prognostic factors. The following candidate biomarkers with future potential utility were identified for predicting disease severity: LCE3D, interleukin (IL)23R, IL23A, NFKBIL1 loci, HLA-C*06:02 (genomic), IL-17A, IgG aHDL, GlycA, I-FABP and kallikrein 8 (proteomic), tyramine (metabolomic); psoriatic arthritis: HLA-C*06:02, HLA-B*27, HLA-B*38, HLA-B*08, and variation at the IL23R and IL13 loci (genomic); IL-17A, CXCL10, Mac-2 binding protein, integrin b5, matrix metalloproteinase-3 and macrophage-colony stimulating factor (proteomic) and tyramine and mucic acid (metabolomic); and type 2 diabetes mellitus: variation in IL12B and IL23R loci (genomic). No biomarkers were supported by sufficient evidence for clinical use without further validation. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a comprehensive catalogue of investigated biomarkers of disease progression in psoriasis. Future studies must address the common methodological limitations identified herein to expedite discovery and validation of biomarkers for clinical use. What is already known about this topic? The current treatment paradigm in psoriasis is reactive. There is a need to develop effective risk-stratified management approaches that can proactively attenuate the substantial burden of disease. Prognostic biomarkers of disease progression have therefore been the focus of intense research. What does this study add? This review is the first to scope, collate and catalogue research investigating biomarkers of disease progression in psoriasis. The review identifies potentially promising candidate biomarkers for further investigation and highlights common important limitations that should be considered when designing and conducting future studies in this area.

Differences in Clinical Features and Comorbid Burden between HLA-C∗06:02 Carrier Groups in >9,000 People with Psoriasis.

The identification of robust endotypes-disease subgroups of clinical relevance-is fundamental to stratified medicine. We hypothesized that HLA-C∗06:02 status, the major genetic determinant of psoriasis, defines a psoriasis endotype of clinical relevance. Using two United Kingdom-based cross-sectional datasets-an observational severe-psoriasis study (Biomarkers of Systemic Treatment Outcomes in Psoriasis; n = 3,767) and a large population-based bioresource (UK Biobank, including n = 5,519 individuals with psoriasis)-we compared demographic, environmental, and clinical variables of interest in HLA-C∗06:02-positive (one or two copies of the HLA-C∗06:02 allele) with those in HLA-C∗06:02‒negative (no copies) individuals of European ancestry. We used multivariable regression analyses to account for mediation effects established a priori. We confirm previous observations that HLA-C∗06:02-positive status is associated with earlier age of psoriasis onset and extend findings to reveal an association with disease expressivity in females (Biomarkers of Systemic Treatment Outcomes in Psoriasis: P = 2.7 × 10-14, UK Biobank: P = 1.0 × 10-8). We also show HLA-C∗06:02-negative status to be associated with characteristic clinical features (large plaque disease, OR for HLA-C∗06:02 = 0.73, P = 7.4 × 10-4; nail involvement, OR = 0.70, P = 2.4 × 10-6); higher central adiposity (Biomarkers of Systemic Treatment Outcomes in Psoriasis: waist circumference difference of 2.0 cm, P = 8.4 × 10-4; UK Biobank: waist circumference difference of 1.4 cm, P = 1.5 × 10-4), especially in women; and a higher prevalence of other cardiometabolic comorbidities. These findings extend the clinical phenotype delineated by HLA-C∗06:02 and highlight its potential as an important biomarker to consider in future multimarker stratified medicine approaches.

Bilateral corneal injury after face-paint application to upper eyelids.

A 40-year-old woman with no known medical conditions or allergies presented with severely painful, watery eyes and blurred vision. She reported topical application of face-paint onto both upper eyelids prior to attending a Halloween party. She subsequently noticed a burning sensation, epiphora and misty vision within a few hours. On examination, bilateral large corneal epithelial defects were highlighted with fluorescein dye under cobalt-blue light. Antibiotic ointment, mydriatic and sodium ascorbate 10% eye-drops were given, and patient was advised to keep the eyelids shut to promote healing. No corneal defects were visible by day 4 and the patient was discharged with vision recovering to normal levels.

The effect of statins on severity of psoriasis: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is becoming increasingly recognized as a chronic systemic inflammatory disease. Statins are generally well-tolerated drugs with pleiotropic effects including decreasing inflammation and may have the potential to reduce psoriasis severity. AIMS: To examine whether oral statins reduce the severity of psoriatic skin disease. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and adapted for Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials and Clinical trials.gov to January 6, 2016. We primarily examined randomized controlled trials that assessed the change in PASI score over a follow-up period of at least 8 weeks, for participants with an established diagnosis of psoriasis taking an oral statin versus placebo or other active treatment. Beyond this, we also examined other interventional studies that investigated the effect of statins on psoriasis severity using other designs. We extracted efficacy and adverse event data. The two study authors examined issues of study quality and study inclusion independently. RESULTS: Three studies were identified which measured the change in psoriasis severity using PASI, comparing statin with placebo or standard therapy alone in a prospective, randomized study design; these showed conflicting results. However, among the excluded studies, majority of which used a single arm, non-placebo controlled study design, most showed an improvement in PASI scores after statin use. LIMITATIONS: Included studies were of limited sample size and quality. They were not amenable to pooled analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the paucity of high quality, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials investigating the effects of statins on psoriasis severity using clinically objective measures. There is insufficient evidence that the use of oral statins as an adjunctive therapy can reduce the severity of psoriasis.

Prevalence, associations, and adequacy of treatment of major depression in patients with cancer: a cross-sectional analysis of routinely collected clinical data.

BACKGROUND: Major depression is an important complication of cancer. However, reliable data are lacking for the prevalence of depression in patients with cancer in different primary sites, the association of depression with demographic and clinical variables within cancer groupings, and the proportion of depressed patients with cancer receiving potentially effective treatment for depression. We investigated these questions with data from a large representative clinical sample. METHODS: We analysed data from patients with breast, lung, colorectal, genitourinary, or gynaecological cancer who had participated in routine screening for depression in cancer clinics in Scotland, UK between May 12, 2008, and Aug 24, 2011. Depression screening was done in two stages (first, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; then, major depression section of the Structured Clinical Interview for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition). Data for depression status were linked with demographic and clinical data obtained from the Scottish National Cancer Registry. FINDINGS: We analysed data for 21 151 patients. The prevalence of major depression was highest in patients with lung cancer (13·1%, 95% CI 11·9-14·2%), followed by gynaecological cancer (10·9%, 9·8-12·1), breast cancer (9·3%, 8·7-10·0), colorectal cancer (7·0%, 6·1-8·0), and genitourinary cancer (5·6%, 4·5-6·7). Within these cancer groupings, a diagnosis of major depression was more likely in patients who were younger, had worse social deprivation scores, and, for lung cancer and colorectal cancer, female patients. 1130 (73%) of 1538 patients with depression and complete patient-reported treatment data were not receiving potentially effective treatment. INTERPRETATION: Major depression is common in patients attending cancer clinics and most goes untreated. A pressing need exists to improve the management of major depression for patients attending specialist cancer services. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government.