The Alopecia Areata Severity and Morbidity Index (ASAMI) Study: Results From a Global Expert Consensus Exercise on Determinants of Alopecia Areata Severity.

Importance: Current measures of alopecia areata (AA) severity, such as the Severity of Alopecia Tool score, do not adequately capture overall disease impact. Objective: To explore factors associated with AA severity beyond scalp hair loss, and to support the development of the Alopecia Areata Severity and Morbidity Index (ASAMI). Evidence Review: A total of 74 hair and scalp disorder specialists from multiple continents were invited to participate in an eDelphi project consisting of 3 survey rounds. The first 2 sessions took place via a text-based web application following the Delphi study design. The final round took place virtually among participants via video conferencing software on April 30, 2022. Findings: Of all invited experts, 64 completed the first survey round (global representation: Africa [4.7%], Asia [9.4%], Australia [14.1%], Europe [43.8%], North America [23.4%], and South America [4.7%]; health care setting: public [20.3%], private [28.1%], and both [51.6%]). A total of 58 specialists completed the second round, and 42 participated in the final video conference meeting. Overall, consensus was achieved in 96 of 107 questions. Several factors, independent of the Severity of Alopecia Tool score, were identified as potentially worsening AA severity outcomes. These factors included a disease duration of 12 months or more, 3 or more relapses, inadequate response to topical or systemic treatments, rapid disease progression, difficulty in cosmetically concealing hair loss, facial hair involvement (eyebrows, eyelashes, and/or beard), nail involvement, impaired quality of life, and a history of anxiety, depression, or suicidal ideation due to or exacerbated by AA. Consensus was reached that the Alopecia Areata Investigator Global Assessment scale adequately classified the severity of scalp hair loss. Conclusions and Relevance: This eDelphi survey study, with consensus among global experts, identified various determinants of AA severity, encompassing not only scalp hair loss but also other outcomes. These findings are expected to facilitate the development of a multicomponent severity tool that endeavors to competently measure disease impact. The findings are also anticipated to aid in identifying candidates for current and emerging systemic treatments. Future research must incorporate the perspectives of patients and the public to assign weight to the domains recognized in this project as associated with AA severity.

In-person validation of the Ichthyosis Scoring System.

BACKGROUND: Ichthyoses are a heterogeneous group of skin disorders characterized by scaling and erythema. Recognizing the variability of scale and erythema by region and ichthyosis subtype, we developed the Ichthyosis Scoring System (ISS) to quantify severity. We previously found ISS to have high inter- and intrarater reliability in evaluating photographic images. To confirm ISS clinical utility, we examined its performance at the 2022 Foundation for Ichthyosis and Related Skin Types conference. METHODS: Sixty-five participants were evaluated by 3 of 9 medical professionals trained to score ichthyosis scale and erythema using ISS. Intrarater and interrater intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were analyzed using one-way and two-way random effects models, respectively. RESULTS: Intrarater reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.931, 95% CI, 0.921-0.940) for scale and good (ICC = 0.876, 95% CI, 0.853-0.899) for erythema scoring. Compared to photo validation with excellent intrarater reliability ratings for both scale (ICC = 0.956, 95% CI, 0.925-0.974) and erythema (ICC = 0.913, 95% CI, 0.855-0.949), ISS demonstrated equivalent reliability for live use. Overall interrater reliability for 10 body sites showed excellent (ICC >0.9) and good (ICC >0.75) agreement and consistency for both scale and erythema. Palms were an exception, demonstrating moderate (ICC >0.5) interrater agreement and consistency for erythema evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: ISS is a reliable measure of global and regional ichthyosis severity during in-person evaluations. Ease-of-use, accessibility, and content validity in both live and photographic evaluation endorse ISS as a standard for ichthyosis severity analysis.

When to expect scalp hair regrowth during treatment of severe alopecia areata with baricitinib: insights from trajectories analyses of patients enrolled in two phase III trials.

BACKGROUND: Baricitinib is approved for the treatment of adults with severe alopecia areata (AA). In the absence of robust data on the patterns of regrowth during treatment of severe AA, there is a gap in the knowledge regarding treatment expectations. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether different clinical response subgroups could be identified in baricitinib-treated patients with severe AA and factors that contribute to these subgroups. METHODS: The BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2 phase III trials enrolled patients with severe AA [Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score ≥ 50 (≥ 50% scalp hair loss)]. Patients randomized to baricitinib 4 mg or 2 mg retained their treatment allocation for 52 weeks. Based on patterns identified through growth mixture modelling (GMM), patients were categorized into responder subgroups according to when they first achieved ≥ 30% improvement from baseline in SALT score (SALT30). For each responder subgroup, trajectories of response (i.e. achievement of a SALT score ≤ 20, SALT score ≤ 10 and ≥ 50% change from baseline in SALT score) and baseline disease characteristics are reported. RESULTS: Respectively, 515 and 340 patients were randomized to once-daily baricitinib 4 mg and 2 mg at baseline; 69% and 51%, respectively, achieved SALT30 at least once by week 52. Based on GMM findings, we identified three responder subgroups: early (SALT30 by week 12), gradual (SALT30 after week 12-week 36) and late (SALT30 after week 36-week 52). The proportions of early, gradual and late responders and nonresponders were, respectively, 33%, 28%, 8% and 31% among patients treated with baricitinib 4 mg, and 20%, 23%, 9% and 49%, respectively, among those treated with baricitinib 2 mg. Early responders had a shorter trajectory to maximal clinical outcomes (e.g. > 78% achieved a SALT score ≤ 20 by week 36) vs. gradual or late responders. Early responders were more frequent among patients with baseline severe AA (SALT score 50 to < 95) vs. very severe AA (SALT score 95-100). Overall, responders (early to late) were more frequent in patients with short (< 4 years) episodes of hair loss. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses identified early, gradual and late responder subgroups for scalp hair regrowth in baricitinib-treated patients with severe AA, and that these subgroups are influenced by baseline characteristics. Findings from these analyses will help to inform treatment expectations for scalp hair regrowth.

Clinical Outcomes for Uptitration of Baricitinib Therapy in Patients With Severe Alopecia Areata: A Pooled Analysis of the BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2 Trials.

Importance: Baricitinib is an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor that has achieved clinically meaningful outcomes for scalp, eyebrow, and eyelash hair regrowth in patients with severe alopecia areata (AA) at week 36 of treatment. Treatment with baricitinib, 4 mg, has resulted in higher response rates than baricitinib, 2 mg, at weeks 36 and 52. Objective: To determine the efficacy of uptitration to baricitinib, 4 mg, for 24 weeks in patients who had previously not responded to baricitinib, 2 mg (Severity of Alopecia Tool [SALT] score of >20). Design, Setting, and Participants: BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2 are multicenter, placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomized clinical trials that were initiated on September 24, 2018, and July 8, 2019, respectively, with follow-up to 200 weeks (data cutoffs of November 11, 2021, and November 5, 2021, respectively). This pooled analysis reports long-term extension data up to week 76. At baseline, 1200 adult patients with severe AA (SALT score ≥50) were randomly assigned in a 3:2:2 ratio to receive baricitinib, 4 mg; baricitinib, 2 mg; or placebo. Patients treated with baricitinib remained on the same treatment dose until week 52. Patients were considered nonresponders to baricitinib, 2 mg, if they had a SALT score greater than 20 after 52 weeks of therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportions of patients achieving a SALT score of 20 or lower and clinician-reported outcome for eyebrow hair loss and eyelash hair loss scores of 0 or 1 (full coverage or minimal gaps) with 2-point or higher improvements from baseline (among those with baseline scores ≥2 [significant gaps to no notable hair]) were analyzed through week 76. Results: At week 52, of the 340 patients (mean [SD] age, 38.4 [12.9] years; 212 [62.4%] female) treated with baricitinib, 2 mg, 212 (62.4%) had a SALT score higher than 20 and were uptitrated to baricitinib, 4 mg. Two-thirds of these patients (142 of 212 [67.0%]) had a baseline SALT score of 95 to 100, indicating very severe AA. At week 76, 55 of the 212 patients (25.9%) had achieved a SALT score of 20 or lower. During the same period, response rates for clinician-reported outcome scores of 0 or 1 increased from 19.3% (31 of 161 patients) to 37.9% (61 of 161 patients) for eyebrows and from 24.1% (33 of 137 patients) to 40.9% (56 of 137 patients) for eyelashes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this pooled analysis of the BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2 trials, uptitration of baricitinib, 2 mg, to baricitinib, 4 mg, in those who did not respond to the 2-mg dose resulted in meaningful improvement of response rates over the subsequent 24 weeks for scalp, eyebrow, and eyelash hair loss. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03570749 and NCT03899259.

Janus kinase inhibitors for alopecia areata.

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have ushered in a new era in alopecia areata (AA). Historically, moderate-to-severe AA was refractory to treatment. JAK inhibitors have changed that; now, treatment of moderate-to-severe AA is possible. Here, we briefly review the history of and rationale for JAK inhibitor treatment of AA, phase 3 clinical trial data, and considerations regarding differences among JAK inhibitors, safety, and patient selection.

The Invisible Impact of a Visible Disease: Psychosocial Impact of Alopecia Areata.

INTRODUCTION: The physical impact of alopecia areata (AA) is visible, but the psychological and social consequences and emotional burden are often underrecognized. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 547 participants recruited via the National Alopecia Areata Foundation completed a survey encompassing demographics; AA illness characteristics; and five patient-reported outcome measures on anxiety and depression, perceived stress, psychological illness impact, stigma, and quality of life (QoL). Differences in disease severity subgroups were assessed via analysis of variance (ANOVA) and t tests. RESULTS: Mean age was 44.6 years, and 76.6% were female. Participants with more severe hair loss tended to report longer duration of experiencing AA symptoms (P < 0.001). Overall, participants reported negative psychological impact, emotional burden, and poor QoL due to AA. Participants with 21-49% or 50-94% scalp hair loss reported greater psychological impact and poorer QoL than those with 95-100% scalp hair loss (most parameters P < 0.05). Similar results were observed for eyebrow/eyelash involvement subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that participants with AA experience emotional burden, negative self-perception, and stigma, but the impact of AA is not dependent solely on the amount of hair loss. Lower impact among participants with 95-100% scalp hair loss may indicate that they have adapted to living with AA.

Scalp hair regrowth is associated with improvements in health-related quality of life and psychological symptoms in patients with severe alopecia areata: results from two randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This post hoc analysis assessed association between scalp hair regrowth and improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychological burden in patients with severe alopecia areata (AA). METHODS: Data were pooled from two phase-3 trials (N = 1200). Patients randomized to once-daily placebo, baricitinib 2-mg, or 4-mg were analyzed independently of treatment allocation, and categorized according to scalp hair regrowth (at Week 36): meaningful regrowth (Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score ≤20); intermediate regrowth (≥30% SALT improvement [SALT30] at any post-baseline visit to Week 36, but SALT score > 20 at Week 36); no/minimal regrowth (never achieved SALT30). Skindex-16 for AA score change-from-baseline and proportion of patients with baseline Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores ≥8 that shifted to <8 (normal) were assessed. RESULTS: Patients with meaningful regrowth achieved greater improvements in all Skindex-16 AA domains versus no/minimal regrowth. More patients with meaningful versus no/minimal regrowth shifted from HADS ≥8 to <8 (anxiety:46.8% versus 26.4%; depression:52.3% versus 24.0%). Improvements occurred with intermediate regrowth but to a lesser extent versus meaningful regrowth. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe AA and scalp hair regrowth at Week 36 experienced greater improvements in HRQoL and anxiety and depression versus patients with no/minimal regrowth. The highest benefit was observed in patients with meaningful regrowth (SALT score ≤20).ClinicalTrials.gov listing: NCT03570749 and NCT03899259.

Development of the alopecia areata scale for clinical use: Results of an academic-industry collaborative effort.

BACKGROUND: The current classification for alopecia areata (AA) does not provide a consistent assessment of disease severity. OBJECTIVE: To develop an AA severity scale based on expert experience. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was utilized. An advisory group of 22 AA clinical experts from the United States was formed to develop this AA scale. Representatives from the pharmaceutical industry provided feedback during its development. RESULTS: Survey responses were used to draft severity criteria, aspiring to develop a simple scale that may be easily applied in clinical practice. A consensus vote was held to determine the final AA severity statement, with all AA experts agreeing to adopt the proposed scale. LIMITATIONS: The scale is a static assessment intended to be used in clinical practice and not clinical trials. CONCLUSION: The final AA disease severity scale, anchored in the extent of hair loss, captures key features commonly used by AA experts in clinical practice. This scale will better aid clinicians in appropriately assessing severity in patients with this common disease.

The Genomic and Phenotypic Landscape of Ichthyosis: An Analysis of 1000 Kindreds.

IMPORTANCE: Ichthyoses are clinically and genetically heterogeneous disorders characterized by scaly skin. Despite decades of investigation identifying pathogenic variants in more than 50 genes, clear genotype-phenotype associations have been difficult to establish. OBJECTIVE: To expand the genotypic and phenotypic spectra of ichthyosis and delineate genotype-phenotype associations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study recruited an international group of individuals with ichthyosis and describes characteristic and distinguishing features of common genotypes, including genotype-phenotype associations, during a 10-year period from June 2011 to July 2021. Participants of all ages, races, and ethnicities were included and were enrolled worldwide from referral centers and patient advocacy groups. A questionnaire to assess clinical manifestations was completed by those with a genetic diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Genetic analysis of saliva or blood DNA, a phenotyping questionnaire, and standardized clinical photographs. Descriptive statistics, such as frequency counts, were used to describe the cases in the cohort. Fisher exact tests identified significant genotype-phenotype associations. RESULTS: Results were reported for 1000 unrelated individuals enrolled from around the world (mean [SD] age, 50.0 [34.0] years; 524 [52.4%] were female, 427 [42.7%] were male, and 49 [4.9%] were not classified); 75% were from the US, 12% from Latin America, 4% from Canada, 3% from Europe, 3% from Asia, 2% from Africa, 1% from the Middle East, and 1% from Australia and New Zealand. A total of 266 novel disease-associated variants in 32 genes were identified among 869 kindreds. Of these, 241 (91%) pathogenic variants were found through multiplex amplicon sequencing and 25 (9%) through exome sequencing. Among the 869 participants with a genetic diagnosis, 304 participants (35%) completed the phenotyping questionnaire. Analysis of clinical manifestations in these 304 individuals revealed that pruritus, hypohydrosis, skin pain, eye problems, skin odor, and skin infections were the most prevalent self-reported features. Genotype-phenotype association analysis revealed that the presence of a collodion membrane at birth (odds ratio [OR], 6.7; 95% CI, 3.0-16.7; P < .001), skin odor (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-6.8; P = .02), hearing problems (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.6-5.5; P < .001), eye problems (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0; P < .001), and alopecia (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.4-9.0; P < .001) were significantly associated with TGM1 variants compared with other ichthyosis genotypes studied. Skin pain (OR, 6.8; 95% CI, 1.6-61.2; P = .002), odor (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.0-19.7; P < .001), and infections (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.4-7.7; P = .03) were significantly associated with KRT10 pathogenic variants compared with disease-associated variants in other genes that cause ichthyosis. Pathogenic variants were identified in 869 (86.9%) participants. Most of the remaining individuals had unique phenotypes, enabling further genetic discovery. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study expands the genotypic and phenotypic spectrum of ichthyosis, establishing associations between clinical manifestations and genotypes. Collectively, the findings may help improve clinical assessment, assist with developing customized management plans, and improve clinical course prognostication.

A phase 2a randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the oral Janus kinase inhibitors ritlecitinib and brepocitinib in alopecia areata: 24-week results.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune form of hair loss with limited treatments. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Janus kinase inhibitors ritlecitinib and brepocitinib in patients who have AA with ≥ 50% scalp hair loss. METHODS: Patients were randomized to once-daily ritlecitinib, brepocitinib, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was a 24-week change from baseline in the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score. The key secondary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving 30% improvement in SALT score (SALT30). RESULTS: The ritlecitinib, brepocitinib, and placebo groups included 48, 47, and 47 patients, respectively. At week 24, least-squares mean difference from placebo in SALT score change from baseline was 31.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.8-43.5) for ritlecitinib and 49.2 (95% CI, 36.6-61.7) for brepocitinib (P < .0001 for both comparisons with placebo). SALT30 was achieved by 50% (90% CI, 38%-62%) of patients receiving ritlecitinib, 64% (90% CI, 51%-75%) receiving brepocitinib, and 2% (90% CI, 0%-9%) receiving placebo. Two patients experienced a serious adverse event (rhabdomyolysis) in the brepocitinib group only. LIMITATIONS: Only a single-dosage regimen of each study drug was included. CONCLUSION: Treatment with ritlecitinib or brepocitinib for 24 weeks was efficacious and generally well tolerated.

A Global eDelphi Exercise to Identify Core Domains and Domain Items for the Development of a Global Registry of Alopecia Areata Disease Severity and Treatment Safety (GRASS).

Importance: A recent expert consensus exercise emphasized the importance of developing a global network of patient registries for alopecia areata to redress the paucity of comparable, real-world data regarding the effectiveness and safety of existing and emerging therapies for alopecia areata. Objective: To generate core domains and domain items for a global network of alopecia areata patient registries. Evidence Review: Sixty-six participants, representing physicians, patient organizations, scientists, the pharmaceutical industry, and pharmacoeconomic experts, participated in a 3-round eDelphi process, culminating in a face-to-face meeting at the World Congress of Dermatology, Milan, Italy, June 14, 2019. Findings: Ninety-two core data items, across 25 domains, achieved consensus agreement. Twenty further noncore items were retained to facilitate data harmonization in centers that wish to record them. Broad representation across multiple stakeholder groups was sought; however, the opinion of physicians was overrepresented. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identifies the domains and domain items required to develop a global network of alopecia areata registries. These domains will facilitate a standardized approach that will enable the recording of a comprehensive, comparable data set required to oversee the introduction of new therapies and harness real-world evidence from existing therapies at a time when the alopecia areata treatment paradigm is being radically and positively disrupted. Reuse of similar, existing frameworks in atopic dermatitis, produced by the Treatment of Atopic Eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce, increases the potential to reuse existing resources, creates opportunities for comparison of data across dermatology subspecialty disease areas, and supports the concept of data harmonization.

The Alopecia Areata Consensus of Experts (ACE) study part II: Results of an international expert opinion on diagnosis and laboratory evaluation for alopecia areata.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported the Alopecia Areata Consensus of Experts study, which presented results of an international expert opinion on treatments for alopecia areata. OBJECTIVE: To report the results of the Alopecia Areata Consensus of Experts international expert opinion on diagnosis and laboratory evaluation for alopecia areata. METHODS: Fifty hair experts from 5 continents were invited to participate in a 3-round Delphi process. Consensus threshold was set at greater than or equal to 66%. RESULTS: Of 148 questions, expert consensus was achieved in 82 (55%). Round 1 consensus was achieved in 10 of 148 questions (7%). Round 2 achieved consensus in 47 of 77 questions (61%). The final face-to-face achieved consensus in 25 of 32 questions (78%). Consensus was greatest for laboratory evaluation (12 of 14 questions [86%]), followed by diagnosis (11 of 14 questions [79%]) of alopecia areata. Overall, etiopathogenesis achieved the least category consensus (31 of 68 questions [46%]). LIMITATIONS: The study had low representation from Africa, South America, and Asia. CONCLUSION: There is expert consensus on aspects of epidemiology, etiopathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, laboratory evaluation, and prognostic indicators of alopecia areata. The study also highlights areas where future clinical research could be directed to address unresolved hypotheses in alopecia areata patient care.

Consensus recommendations for the use of retinoids in ichthyosis and other disorders of cornification in children and adolescents.

Topical and systemic retinoids have long been used in the treatment of ichthyoses and other disorders of cornification. Due to the need for long-term use of retinoids for these disorders, often beginning in childhood, numerous clinical concerns must be considered. Systemic retinoids have known side effects involving bone and eye. Additionally, potential psychiatric and cardiovascular effects need to be considered. Contraceptive concerns, as well as the additive cardiovascular and bone effects of systemic retinoid use with hormonal contraception must also be deliberated for patients of childbearing potential. The Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA) Use of Retinoids in Ichthyosis Work Group was formed to address these issues and to establish best practices regarding the use of retinoids in ichthyoses based on available evidence and expert opinion.