Human Leukocyte Antigens and Sulfamethoxazole/Cotrimoxazole-Induced Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) and cotrimoxazole (CTX), a fixed-dose combination of SMX and trimethoprim in a 5:1 ratio, are antibacterial sulfonamides commonly used for treating various diseases. A substantial prevalence of severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) following the administration of these drugs has been reported. However, the association between human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genotypes and SMX/CTX-induced SCARs has remained unclear. Objective: To investigate the association between HLA genotypes and SMX/CTX-induced SCARs. Data sources: A comprehensive search was conducted in CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to January 17, 2023. Study Selection: Case-control studies that recruited patients who had experienced SCARs following SMX or CTX were included, and HLA alleles were analyzed. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two independent authors extracted data on study characteristics and outcome data. The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines were followed. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies was used to assess study quality. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using a random-effects model for meta-analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The prespecified outcome was the OR comparing SMX/CTX-induced SCARs with healthy or SMX/CTX-tolerant controls based on different HLA alleles. Results: Six studies involving 322 patients with SCAR were included, including 236 patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis, 86 with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, 8448 healthy controls, and 229 tolerant controls. Significant associations were found in HLA-A*11:01 (OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.11-4.00), HLA-B*13:01 (OR, 5.96; 95% CI, 1.58-22.56), HLA-B*15:02 (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.20-4.14), HLA-B*38:02 (OR, 3.47; 95% CI, 1.42-8.48), and HLA-C*08:01 (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.07-6.44) compared with tolerant controls. In the Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis subgroup, significant associations were found in HLA-B*15:02 (OR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.56-5.80) and HLA-B*38:02 (OR, 5.13; 95% CI, 1.96-13.47). In the drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms subgroup, significant associations were found in HLA-A*68:01 (OR, 12.86; 95% CI, 1.09-151.34), HLA-B*13:01 (OR, 23.09; 95% CI, 3.31-161.00), HLA-B*39:01 (OR, 4.56; 95% CI, 1.31-15.82). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that multiple HLA alleles (HLA-A*11:01, HLA-B*13:01, HLA-B*15:02, HLA-B*38:02, and HLA-C*0801) are associated with SMX/CTX-induced SCARs.

Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Urticaria Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP).

BACKGROUND: Management of urticaria can be optimized with clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). However, the quality of recent urticaria CPGs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To identify and appraise urticaria CPGs worldwide published in the last 5 years. METHODS: A search for relevant urticaria CPGs was conducted between January 1, 2017, and May 31, 2022, using the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Evidence Search, Guidelines International Network, ECRI Guidelines Trust, Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines, Trip Medical Database, and DynaMed. The included CPGs were critically appraised using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, Lenzer et al's red flags, and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness. RESULTS: We included 21 urticaria CPGs. Most guidelines reviewed treatment recommendations of chronic spontaneous urticaria. The majority of guidelines were from European and Asian countries with high and high-middle sociodemographic index, written in English, and openly accessible. Seventeen guidelines (81%) had at least 1 AGREE II domain rated poor quality. Applicability, rigor of development, and stakeholder involvement were the 3 AGREE II domains that scored the lowest across guidelines. Appraisal with Lenzer et al's red flags showed that 18 guidelines (86%) raised at least 1 red flag indicating potential bias. The top 3 domains raising red flags were: no inclusion of nonphysician experts/patient representative/community stakeholders, no or limited involvement of a methodologist in the evaluation of evidence, and lack of external review. Based on IOM's criteria of trustworthiness, 20 guidelines (95%) had 1 or more criteria that did not meet best practice standards. The 3 domains with the highest number of best practice standards not met were updating procedures, rating strength of recommendations, and external review. Guidelines scored highest for the AGREE II domains of defining scope and purpose and clarity of presentation, and had the most fully met IOM's best practice standard for articulation of recommendations. However, only 1 urticaria CPG by NICE was identified as rigorously developed across all 3 appraisal tools. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of urticaria CPGs in the last 5 years varied widely. Only the NICE urticaria guideline consistently demonstrated excellent quality, high trustworthiness, and low risk of bias. Use of a rigorous framework to rate certainty of evidence and grade strength of recommendation, involvement of methodologists, stakeholder engagement with external review, and clear guidance for updating can help improve the quality of future CPGs.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration for acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Current practice guidelines for optimal infusion rates during early intravenous hydration in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) remain inconsistent. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare treatment outcomes between aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration in severe and non-severe AP. METHODS: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on November 23, 2022, and hand-searched the reference lists of included RCTs, relevant review articles and clinical guidelines. We included RCTs that compared clinical outcomes from aggressive and non-aggressive intravenous hydration in AP. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model for participants with severe AP and non-severe AP. Our primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and several secondary outcomes included fluid-related complications, clinical improvement and APACHE II scores within 48 h. RESULTS: We included a total of 9 RCTs with 953 participants. The meta-analysis indicated that, compared to non-aggressive intravenous hydration, aggressive intravenous hydration significantly increased mortality risk in severe AP (pooled RR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.37, 4.40), while the result in non-severe AP was inconclusive (pooled RR: 2.26, 95% CI: 0.54, 9.44). However, aggressive intravenous hydration significantly increased fluid-related complication risk in both severe (pooled RR: 2.22, 95% CI 1.36, 3.63) and non-severe AP (pooled RR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.53, 6.93). The meta-analysis indicated worse APACHE II scores (pooled mean difference: 3.31, 95% CI: 1.79, 4.84) in severe AP, and no increased likelihood of clinical improvement (pooled RR:1.20, 95% CI: 0.63, 2.29) in non-severe AP. Sensitivity analyses including only RCTs with goal-directed fluid therapy after initial fluid resuscitation therapy yielded consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Aggressive intravenous hydration increased the mortality risk in severe AP, and fluid-related complication risk in both severe and non-severe AP. More conservative intravenous fluid resuscitation protocols for AP are suggested.

Biologics for pediatric moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of biologic treatments for moderate-to-severe pediatric psoriasis approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched for the identification of eligible RCTs until May 7, 2021. Fixed-effect frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) calculated for ranking. Our primary outcomes included ≥ 90 % improvement of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 90) at 12-16 weeks and discontinuation owing to adverse events (DAE) through the first 12-16 weeks. RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 798 pediatric psoriasis patients were included. Compared to placebo, all biologic regimens exhibited a significantly higher PASI 90 response but did not differ in the risk for DAE. Based on the SUCRA, secukinumab-low dose (SEC-L) ranked first in the achieved PASI 90 response (84.7 %), followed by ixekizumab (70.8 %). CONCLUSIONS: Among all biologic treatments, SEC-L showed the best PASI 90 response without increasing the risk for DAE. More long-term studies are warranted.

Biologics and Small Molecule Inhibitors for Treating Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment guidelines for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) vary among different countries, and several biologics and small molecule inhibitors have been tested for treating moderate-to-severe HS over the past few years. However, treatment guidelines for HS vary among different countries. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to exam the efficacy and serious adverse events (SAEs) of biologics and small-molecule inhibitors in treating moderate-to-severe HS. Binary outcomes were presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: We included 16 RCTs with a total of 2076 participants on nine biologics and three small-molecule inhibitors for treating moderate-to-severe HS, including adalimumab, anakinra, apremilast, avacopan, bimekizumab, CJM112, etanercept, guselkumab, IFX-1, INCB054707, infliximab, and MABp1. The meta-analysis revealed only adalimumab (RR 1.77, 95% CI, 1.44-2.17) and bimekizumab (RR 2.25, 95% CI, 1.03-4.92) achieved significant improvement on hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response (HiSCR), and adalimumab was superior to placebo in achieving dermatology life quality index (DLQI) 0/1 (RR 3.97; 95% CI, 1.70-9.28). No increase in SAEs was found for all included active treatments when compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab and bimekizumab are the only two biologics effective in achieving HiSCR with acceptable safety profile, whereas adalimumab is the only biologic effective in achieving DLQI 0/1.

Systematic review and critical appraisal of psoriasis clinical practice guidelines: a Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP).

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) developed with rigorous methods can help optimize clinical care for patients with psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: To conduct an updated systematic review and comprehensive critical appraisal of global psoriasis CPGs. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE and Embase for psoriasis CPGs published between 1 January 2015 and 31 March 2021 was performed. Other guideline repositories were also searched for relevant CPGs. Descriptive analysis was conducted to summarize included guidelines. Three critical appraisal tools were used to assess the quality of included CPGs: the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument, Lenzer et al.'s red flags, and the US Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness. RESULTS: We included 33 psoriasis CPGs, with 25 openly accessible. Most CPGs were from high sociodemographic index countries in North America and Europe. Five CPGs received 'excellent quality' appraisals across all six AGREE II domains. Stakeholder involvement, rigour of development and applicability were the three domains with the lowest appraisal scores for AGREE II. Twenty-two CPGs raised at least one red flag indicative of potential bias. By the IOM's standards, external review of the guideline draft prior to publication and clear updating procedures were most often not addressed by guidelines, and only three CPGs were assessed as having higher overall trustworthiness. CONCLUSIONS: Most psoriasis guidelines were unable to consistently demonstrate high quality across multiple appraisal tools. The EuroGuiDerm guideline on the systemic treatment of psoriasis vulgaris was the only CPG to receive 'excellent quality' across all six AGREE II domains, to raise no Lenzer's red flags, and to have higher trustworthiness by IOM criteria.