Measuring Signs of Atopic Dermatitis in Clinical Practice: A HOME-CP Consensus Statement.

Importance: Outcome measurement is an essential component of value-based health care and can aid patient care, quality improvement, and clinical effectiveness evidence generation. The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema Clinical Practice initiative aims to identify a list of validated, feasible, outcome measurement instruments recommended to measure atopic dermatitis (AD) in the clinical practice setting. The clinical practice set is a list of instruments that clinicians can pick and choose from to suit their needs in the context of clinical care. Objective: To recommend instruments to measure clinical signs of AD in clinical practice. Evidence Review: Following the predefined roadmap, a mixed methods design was implemented and incorporated systematic reviews and qualitative consensus methods. Previous systematic reviews identified few clinical signs instruments with sufficient validation for recommendation. An updated systematic review evaluating the validity of clinical signs instruments informed an international meeting to reach consensus on recommended instruments to measure AD clinical signs in clinical practice. Consensus was defined as less than 30% disagreement. An in-person consensus exercise was held in Montreal, Canada, on October 16, 2022. The 34 attendees included patient and patient advocate research partners, health care professionals, researchers, methodologists, and industry representatives. Findings: The updated systematic review found that the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Scoring Atopic Dermatitis, and objective Scoring Atopic Dermatitis were the only instruments that demonstrated sufficient performance in all assessed measurement properties. The modified EASI and Signs Global Assessment × Body Surface Area instruments were also recommended. The EASI, Validated Investigator Global Assessment, and Investigator's Global Assessment multiplied by or measured concurrently with a body surface area measure achieved consensus in criteria and were adopted. Conclusions and Relevance: This consensus statement by the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema initiative suggests that when assessing and documenting clinical signs of AD, there are several valid and feasible instruments that can best fit a clinician's specific practice needs. These instruments should improve and standardize the documentation of signs severity, help determine the effect of treatment, facilitate the generation of clinical effectiveness evidence, and enhance the implementation of value-based health care.

Upadacitinib Rapidly Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes in Atopic Dermatitis: 16-Week Results from Phase 3 Clinical Trials (Measure Up 1 and 2).

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is characterized by intense itch and other symptoms that negatively impact quality of life (QoL). This study evaluates the effect of upadacitinib (an oral selective Janus kinase inhibitor) monotherapy on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD over 16 weeks. METHODS: This integrated analysis of the double-blind, placebo-controlled periods of phase 3 monotherapy clinical trials Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293) and Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422) assessed itch (Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [WP-NRS] and SCORing Atopic Dermatitis [SCORAD]), skin pain and symptom severity (AD Symptom Scale), symptom frequency (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure), sleep (AD Impact Scale [ADerm-IS] and SCORAD), daily activities and emotional state (ADerm-IS), QoL (Dermatology Life Quality Index [DLQI] and Children's DLQI), mental health (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and patient impressions (Patient Global Impression of Severity, Patient Global Impression of Change, and Patient Global Impression of Treatment). RESULTS: Data from 1683 patients (upadacitinib 15 mg, n = 557; upadacitinib 30 mg, n = 567; placebo, n = 559) were analyzed. A greater proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib versus placebo experienced improvements in itch (≥ 4-point improvement on WP-NRS) by week 1 (upadacitinib 15 mg, 11.2%; upadacitinib 30 mg, 17.7%; placebo, 0.5%; P < 0.001), with response rates sustained through week 16 (upadacitinib 15 mg, 47.1%; upadacitinib 30 mg, 59.8%; placebo, 10.4%; P < 0.001). Improvements were similar for PROs assessing skin pain/symptoms, sleep, daily activities, QoL, emotional state, mental health, and patient impressions of disease severity and treatment. Responses generally improved rapidly (within 1-2 weeks), increased through weeks 4-6, and were maintained through week 16. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily oral upadacitinib monotherapy improved response rates across PROs compared with placebo. Upadacitinib therapy resulted in rapid, sustained improvements in PROs measuring symptom burden and QoL in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT03569293 and NCT03607422.

Atopic dermatitis, or eczema, is characterized by itchy, dry, inflamed skin. These symptoms often make it difficult for patients to get adequate sleep. Patients with atopic dermatitis may also experience anxiety, depression, reduced self-confidence, social isolation, disruption to daily activities like school and work, and decreased quality of life. Many atopic dermatitis symptoms, including itch and psychological impact, are difficult for doctors to assess. Thus, it is important to consider patients' descriptions of their symptoms and quality of life, particularly when assessing treatment benefit. Upadacitinib is an orally administered drug approved to treat moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. We investigated how upadacitinib (15 mg or 30 mg) given once daily to adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in the Measure Up 1 and 2 clinical trials impacts their symptoms and quality of life over a 16-week period. We compared changes in patient-reported itch, pain, sleep, daily activities, emotional state, mental health, and overall quality of life among patients in the clinical trials who received upadacitinib with those in the same studies who received a dummy (placebo) treatment. Upadacitinib improved patient-reported symptoms and quality of life early in the clinical trials, often within the first 1­2 weeks. The extent of the improvements increased through weeks 4­6 of treatment and lasted through week 16. Patients who received upadacitinib reported greater improvements in symptoms and quality of life than did patients who received placebo. Upadacitinib treatment resulted in rapid and lasting improvements in the well-being of patients with atopic dermatitis.

Treat-to-target in dermatology: A scoping review and International Eczema Council survey on the approach in atopic dermatitis.

Treat-to-target (T2T) is a pragmatic therapeutic strategy being gradually introduced into dermatology after adoption in several other clinical areas. Atopic dermatitis (AD), one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases, may also benefit from this structured and practical therapeutic approach. We aimed to evaluate existing data regarding the T2T approach in dermatology, with a specific focus on AD, as well as the views of International Eczema Council (IEC) members on the potential application of a T2T approach to AD management. To do so, we systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications on the T2T approach for any skin disease in the PubMed and Scopus databases up to February 2022 and conducted a survey among IEC members regarding various components to potentially include in a T2T approach in AD. We identified 21 relevant T2T-related reports in dermatology, of which 14 were related to psoriasis, five to AD, one for juvenile dermatomyositis and one for urticaria. In the IEC member survey, respondents proposed treatable traits (with itch, disease severity and sleep problems getting the highest scores), relevant comorbidities (with asthma being selected most commonly, followed by anxiety and depression in adults), recommended specialists that should define the approach in AD (dermatologists, allergists and primary care physicians were most commonly selected in adults), and applicable assessment tools (both physician- and patient-reported), in both adult and paediatric patients, for potential future utilization of the T2T approach in AD. In conclusion, while the T2T approach may become a useful tool to simplify therapeutic goals and AD management, its foundation in AD is only starting to build. A multidisciplinary approach, including a wide range of stakeholders, including patients, is needed to further define the essential components needed to utilize T2T in AD.

How to use the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema Core Outcome Set for atopic dermatitis trials: a users' guide.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has agreed upon the Core Outcome Set (COS) for use in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials, but additional guidance is needed to maximize its uptake. OBJECTIVES: To provide answers to some of the commonly asked questions about using the HOME COS; to provide data to help with the interpretation of trial results; and to support sample size calculations for future trials. METHODS AND RESULTS: We provide practical guidance on the use of the HOME COS for investigators planning clinical trials in patients with AD. It answers some of the common questions about using the HOME COS, how to access the outcome measurement instruments, what training/resources are needed to use them appropriately and clarifies when the COS is applicable. We also provide exemplar data to inform sample size calculations for eczema trials and encourage standardized data collection and reporting of the COS. CONCLUSIONS: By encouraging adoption of the COS and facilitating consistent reporting of outcome data, it is hoped that the results of eczema trials will be more comprehensive and readily combined in meta-analyses and that patient care will subsequently be improved.

Psychometric evaluation of the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS), and Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS).

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritus, skin pain, and sleep impacts, which are only reportable by patients themselves. The goal of this research is to evaluate the reliability, validity, and interpretability of the scores from three patient-reported outcome measures within the context of a clinical trial for adolescents and adults with moderate to severe AD. METHODS: Data from a Phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational clinical trial for individuals 12-75 years of age with moderate to severe AD (AD Up [ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03568318]) were used to assess the reliability, validity, and interpretability of scores on the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the Atopic Dermatitis Symptom and Impact Scales (ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS). Analyses were conducted separately for the adult and adolescent subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 882 participants included in the psychometric analyses, the majority were adults (n = 769, 87.2%), male (n = 536, 60.8%), and white (n = 630, 71.4%). Multi-item scores from the ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS had good internal consistency reliability, and most scores demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability. Scores from the three questionnaires demonstrated adequate validity, exhibiting correlations with other conceptually related outcome assessments and score differences between clinically distinct subgroups. Finally, the score interpretation analyses provide estimates for meaningful within-person change and between-groups difference thresholds that may be useful for future research in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence that the scores produced by the Worst Pruritus NRS, ADerm-SS, and ADerm-IS are reliable and construct-valid when completed by adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD in a clinical trial setting. The results presented here expand upon the previous qualitative evidence of these tools and provide further support for their use in future clinical studies. While results are specific to clinical trials, next steps would be to evaluate the use of these questionnaires in clinical practice. This can provide clinicians and dermatologists a window into the patient's disease experience outside of the clinic, aid in shared decision making, and support a patient-centric approach to management of moderate to severe AD.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) implementation roadmap.

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets (COS) are consensus-driven sets of minimum outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials. COS aim to reduce heterogeneity in outcome measurement and reporting, and selective outcome reporting. Implementing COS into clinical trials is challenging. Guidance to improve COS uptake in dermatology is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To develop a structured practical guide to COS implementation. METHODS: Members of the Harmonising Outcome Measurement for Eczema (HOME) executive committee developed an expert opinion-based roadmap founded on a combination of a review of the COS implementation literature, the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative resources, input from HOME members and experience in COS development and clinical trials. RESULTS: The data review and input from HOME members was synthesized into themes, which guided roadmap development: (a) barriers and facilitators to COS uptake based on stakeholder awareness/engagement and COS features; and (b) key implementation science principles (assessment-driven, data-centred, priority-based and context-sensitive). The HOME implementation roadmap follows three stages. Firstly, the COS uptake scope and goals need to be defined. Secondly, during COS development, preparation for future implementation is supported by establishing the COS as a credible evidence-informed consensus by applying robust COS development methodology, engaging multiple stakeholders, fostering sustained and global engagement, emphasizing COS ease of use and universal applicability, and providing recommendations on COS use. Thirdly, incorporating completed COS into primary (trials) and secondary (reviews) research is an iterative process starting with mapping COS uptake and stakeholders' attitudes, followed by designing and carrying out targeted implementation projects. Main themes for implementation projects identified at HOME are stakeholder awareness/engagement; universal applicability for different populations; and improving ease-of-use by reducing administrative and study burden. Formal implementation frameworks can be used to identify implementation barriers/facilitators and to design implementation strategies. The effect of these strategies on uptake should be evaluated and implementation plans adjusted accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: COS can improve the quality and applicability of research and, so, clinical practice but can only succeed if used and reported consistently. The HOME implementation roadmap is an extension of the original HOME roadmap for COS development and provides a pragmatic framework to develop COS implementation strategies.

Determining Severity Strata for Three Atopic Dermatitis Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires: Defining Severity Score Ranges for the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale and the Atopic Dermatitis Symptom and Impact Scales (ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS).

INTRODUCTION: Three patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires-Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS), and Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS)-were developed to assess the symptoms and impacts of atopic dermatitis (AD). Severity strata for these PROs are needed to aid in their interpretation. METHODS: Using data from a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial (NCT03568318) of patients with moderate-severe AD (age ≥ 12 years), equipercentile linking analyses were conducted to define severity strata applying the Patient Global Impression of Severity as an anchor. Analyses were conducted separately for adults and adolescents, and then harmonized between the two age groups. RESULTS: The sample included 769 adults and 113 adolescents. For the WP-NRS, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3 with mild, 4-7 with moderate, and 8-10 with severe. For the ADerm-SS Skin Pain, 0 was associated with absent, 1 with minimal, 2 with mild, 3-6 with moderate, and 7-10 with severe. For ADerm-SS 7-Item Total Symptom Score (TSS-7), 0-1 was associated with absent, 2-11 with minimal, 12-22 with mild, 23-47 with moderate, and 48-70 with severe. For ADerm-IS Sleep, 0 was associated with absent, 1-3 with minimal, 4-6 with mild, 7-20 with moderate, and 21-30 with severe. For ADerm-IS Daily Activities, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-7 with mild, 8-25 with moderate, and 26-40 with severe. For ADerm-IS Emotional State, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-8 with mild, 9-22 with moderate, and 23-30 with severe. CONCLUSIONS: These severity strata provide score interpretations of the WP-NRS, ADerm-SS, and ADerm-IS, translating these scores to simple and intuitive outcomes, which can inform clinical studies and clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03568318.

Measuring Atopic Eczema Control and Itch Intensity in Clinical Practice: A Consensus Statement From the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema in Clinical Practice (HOME-CP) Initiative.

Importance: Measuring outcomes in clinical practice can aid patient care, quality improvement, and real-world evidence generation. The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) Clinical Practice initiative is developing a list of validated, feasible instruments to measure atopic eczema in clinical care. Prior work identified symptoms and long-term control as the most important domains to measure in clinical practice. The Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) and the Patient-Oriented Scoring Atopic Dermatitis Index (PO-SCORAD) were recommended by consensus to measure symptoms in clinical practice, but a need for instruments to measure itch intensity specifically was recognized. The HOME group also previously decided that long-term control should be captured by repeated measurements of eczema control. Recommended instruments to measure eczema control in clinical practice have not been defined. Objective: To recommend instruments to measure eczema control and itch intensity in patients with atopic eczema in clinical practice. Evidence Review: Available instruments to measure eczema control and itch intensity were identified through systematic reviews, informing a consensus process held at the HOME VIII virtual online meeting (October 6 and October 9, 2020). Feasibility aspects were highlighted to optimize instrument selection for the clinical practice. Consensus on an instrument was reached if fewer than 30% of the voters disagreed. Findings: Of 7 identified instruments, the Recap of Atopic Eczema (RECAP) and Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) were the recommended instruments to measure eczema control (3 of 63 [5%] and 7 of 69 [10%] of voters disagreed, respectively). A single-question patient global assessment garnered support, but the current available instrument did not reach consensus. Six available itch-intensity instruments were identified. Of them, 3 instruments were recommended by consensus: a peak 24-hour numeric rating scale (NRS)-itch, and 1-week NRS-itch instruments from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Itch Questionnaire, measuring average and peak itch (11 of 63 [17%], 14 of 63 [22%], and 16 of 59 [27%] voters disagreed, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: Clinicians and patients are encouraged to incorporate these well-validated, quick-to-perform, and easy-to-use instruments into their clinic, selecting the instruments that best fit their need. These assessments are meant to enhance, not replace, the patient-clinician encounter, and to support real-world research and health care improvement.

The Eczema Area and Severity Index-A Practical Guide.

ABSTRACT: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that affects approximately 18 million people in the United States. Assessing the extent and severity of atopic dermatitis is critical for determining baseline disease burden and treatment effectiveness for both investigators and clinicians. Considerable efforts over the past several decades have been made in developing a highly validated instrument called the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). Although several guides exist for the EASI, questions continue to arise regarding its use and interpretation. This review was developed to serve as the definitive guide for the EASI and to address commonly asked questions.

Facial demodicosis in the immunosuppressed state: a retrospective case series from a tertiary referral center.

BACKGROUND: Data on Demodex in the immunosuppressed state is limited, focusing mainly on patients with human immunodeficiency virus and hematological malignancies. The aim of this study was to describe the manifestations of facial demodicosis in diverse immunosuppressive states. METHODS: The medical records of all patients followed at a Demodex outpatient clinic of a tertiary medical center from January 2008 to November 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Data on patients who were immunosuppressed while with demodicosis were retrieved. RESULTS: The cohort included 28 patients (17 women and 11 men; median age, 58 years). Types of immunosuppression included treatments with hydroxyurea for polycythemia vera/essential thrombocytosis, mycophenolic acid, tacrolimus, and prednisone for liver and/or kidney transplantation, prednisone with cyclosporine/methotrexate/azathioprine/rituximab mainly for autoimmune diseases, mercaptopurine with/without anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) for Crohn's disease, chemotherapy for neoplasms, anti-TNF-α for psoriasis, and Cushing's syndrome. The clinical types of demodicosis included: papulopustular, erythematotelangiectatic and fulminant rosacea, hyperpigmented, pityriasis folliculorum, pustular folliculitis, and dermatitis. The diverse clinical presentations led to various differential diagnoses. Topical treatment with ivermectin (monotherapy/combination with other treatments) was effective. CONCLUSION: Clinicians treating immunosuppressed patients should be familiar with the different forms of demodicosis and include them in the differential diagnosis of facial eruptions.

The HOME Core outcome set for clinical trials of atopic dermatitis.

Core outcome sets are critically important outcomes that should be measured in clinical trials. Their absence in atopic dermatitis is a form of research waste and impedes combining evidence to inform patient care. Here, we articulate the rationale for core outcome sets in atopic dermatitis and review the work of the international Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema group from its inception in Munich, 2010. We describe core domain determination (what should be measured), to instrument selection (how domains should be measured), culminating in the complete core outcome measurement set in Tokyo, 2019. Using a "road map," Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema includes diverse research methods including Delphi and nominal group techniques informed by systematic reviews of properties of candidate instruments. The 4 domains and recommended instruments for including in all clinical trials of atopic dermatitis are patient symptoms, measured by Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure and peak Numerical Rating Scale 11 for itch intensity over 24 hours, clinical signs measured using the Eczema Area and Severity Index, quality of life measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index series for adults, children, and infants, and long-term control measured by either Recap of atopic eczema or Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool.

Epidemiology and Economic Burden of Atopic Dermatitis: Real-World Retrospective Data from a Large Nationwide Israeli Healthcare Provider Database.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world data on the epidemiology and economic burden of atopic dermatitis (AD) are limited. Here we describe the epidemiology and economic burden of AD using electronic healthcare data from Israel. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed using the Maccabi Healthcare Services database. AD incidence in 2008-2017 and point prevalence (ADprev) on 31 December 2017 were described using diagnosis codes for overall patients, and sex and age subgroups. For ADprev, severity was defined using recently dispensed treatments for AD. Annual healthcare resource utilization in AD prevalent patients was compared with non-AD matched controls using generalized linear modelling. Direct annual costs were estimated also. RESULTS: AD incidence was 7.0/1000 person-years; overall prevalence was 4.4% (female patients 4.5%, male patients 4.3%; age 0 to less than 6 months, 0.9%; 6 months to less than 12 years, 11.0%; 12 to less than 18 years, 5.8%; 18 years or older, 2.2%). Among ADprev (n = 94,483), mild, moderate, and severe AD comprised 57.7%, 36.2%, and 6.1% (adults 43.8%, 46.3%, 9.9%), respectively. Dermatologist and allergist visits and hospitalization rates (at least one) were 40.7%, 6.6%, and 3.8% in 2017. Compared with controls, overall and moderate-to-severe AD were associated with 36% and 52% increases in annual per-person costs (incremental costs $126 and $190). CONCLUSIONS: AD epidemiology in Israel is comparable with other real-world database studies. AD imposes an economic burden that increases with disease severity.

Occurrence and costs of atopic dermatitis in IsraelAtopic dermatitis is a disease that causes the skin to be inflamed and itchy. Atopic dermatitis is most common in children but can also occur in adolescents and adults. Using data from a large healthcare provider in Israel, this study aimed to describe how common atopic dermatitis is within the population. Costs related to the use of healthcare services (such as visits to dermatologists and creams to treat atopic dermatitis) in the year 2017 were compared between persons with versus without atopic dermatitis. For the years 2008 to 2017, approximately 7 out of 1000 people were newly diagnosed with atopic dermatitis each year (incidence). Among people alive on 31 December 2017, 4.4% had atopic dermatitis (prevalence), with 42.3% suggestive of moderate to severe disease. Patients with atopic dermatitis, particularly those with more severe disease, used healthcare services more frequently. Compared with people without atopic dermatitis, medical costs among patients with atopic dermatitis were 36% higher (corresponding to added costs of $126 per person per year). This study helps to better understand how many people have atopic dermatitis, and what healthcare resources are needed to manage this disease.

Early rituximab treatment is associated with increased and sustained remission in pemphigus patients: A retrospective cohort of 99 patients.

Rituximab is the front-line therapy for pemphigus disease. Although very effective, relapse rates are high. We assessed factors associated with disease remission and early relapse following the first rituximab cycle. A single center, retrospective cohort study of patients with pemphigus treated with rituximab (1000 mg 0, 14 days) at the Autoimmune Bullous Disease Clinic of the Division of Dermatology in Rabin Medical Center, Israel, between January 1, 1995 and March 31, 2020. The cohort included 99 patients with a median follow-up of 37 months (range 12-155). After a single rituximab cycle, 74 patients (75%) achieved remission. Increased time to rituximab was associated with decreased remission rates (OR, 0.98 per month; 95% CI, 0.97-0.998). Of patients in remission with sufficient follow-up, 15/69 (22%) experienced an early relapse (≤12 months from remission). Prolonged time to rituximab and increased baseline disease severity, were associated with early relapse (OR, 1.02 per month; 95% CI, 1.001-1.04; OR, 1.04 per point; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08, accordingly). Initiating rituximab early following diagnosis is recommended. Maintenance rituximab infusions, especially for patients with severe baseline disease, should be further investigated.

Cutaneous Comorbidities Associated With Atopic Dermatitis in Israel: A Retrospective Real-World Data Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) are susceptible to infectious and inflammatory cutaneous comorbidities. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to describe the prevalence of cutaneous comorbidities associated with AD, including their relationship with AD severity. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was performed using the Israeli Maccabi Healthcare Services database. Prevalent AD cases on December 31, 2017, were diagnosed with AD at any time since 1998 and had 1 or more recent (2013-2017) AD diagnoses. Dispensed AD treatments within 5 or fewer years served as a surrogate for AD severity. Cutaneous comorbidities in AD cases were compared with non-AD controls matched 1:1 on age, sex, and residential area. Among adults, comorbidities were compared across AD severity using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: The eligible population included 94,483 patients with mild (57.7%), moderate (36.2%), or severe (6.1%) AD, and 94,483 matched non-AD controls. Skin infections, inflammatory skin conditions, cutaneous manifestations of AD, and sweat gland disorders were more prevalent ( P < 0.001) in patients with AD than in controls. Most cutaneous comorbidities that were more prevalent in adult patients with AD were also significantly ( P < 0.001) associated with AD severity. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that AD is associated with many infectious and inflammatory cutaneous comorbidities and highlights the relationship between AD severity and comorbidity prevalence.

Real-life experience with chlormethine gel for early-stage mycosis fungoides with emphasis on types and management of cutaneous side-effects.

BACKGROUND: Real-life efficacy data on the recently approved once daily application of chlormethine gel (CG) for mycosis fungoides (MF) is limited, and detailed characterization of the side effects and their management are strikingly sparse. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and particularly the side effect profile of CG in early-stage MF patients in a real-life setting. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of 66 early-stage MF adult patients treated with CG in 2016-2019. RESULTS: Treatment with a once-daily application (52%), or at lower frequencies (48%), in some with topical corticosteroids (TCS) (40%), resulted in an overall response rate of 50%, with no significant difference between stage IA and IB. Cutaneous side effects (56%) included irritant or allergic contact dermatitis (36%, mostly mild/moderate and manageable by reducing application frequency and/or adding TCS or interrupting treatment), unmasking effect (9%), hyperpigmentation (14%), and pruritus (9%). Withdrawal due to side effects occurred in 19.6% of patients (15% for contact dermatitis). CONCLUSION: In real-life management, flexible regimens of CG sometimes with TCS, show efficacy in early-stage MF and may reduce the rate of contact dermatitis, the main treatment-limiting side effect. Practical recommendations with emphasis of the types, time of appearance, and management of side effects are provided.

Isolated solar angioedema: A systematic review of the literature.

Solar urticaria is a well-recognized photodermatosis, sometimes accompanied by angioedema. However, isolated solar angioedema (ISA) is a rare and unrecognized entity. The purpose of our work was to systematically review the available data on ISA. Therefore, a systematic review of studies evaluating ISA was performed. Additionally, a case of a 21-years-old patient from our photodermatosis service is presented. The search yielded 421 publications, with 3 eligible for review. Together with our case, 5 cases were included overall. All patients were female. Four out of 5 patients first experienced ISA at childhood or early adulthood (age range 6-22 years). UVA photoprovocation was positive in the 3 out of the 4 patients who were tested. Improvement was noted following NB-UVB hardening (2 out of 5 patients) or a short course of oral prednisone (3 out of 5 patients) combined with regular sunscreen application. To conclude, ISA is an extremely rare entity, although it may be underdiagnosed due to lack of awareness. The clinician must consider ISA in the differential diagnosis of angioedema since it can have a detrimental effect on quality of life. Besides sun avoidance, there is no consensus regarding treatment.

Treatment of Pemphigus with Rituximab: Real-Life Experience in a Cohort of 117 Patients in Israel.

BACKGROUND: A combined regimen of rituximab with corticosteroids for the treatment of pemphigus was effective in a prospective randomized controlled trial. OBJECTIVE: To assess real-life response to rituximab in patients with pemphigus. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with pemphigus treated with ≥1 rituximab cycles (1,000 mg on days 0 and 14). The primary outcome was remission rate after 1 cycle. For efficacy analyses, a minimal 6-month follow-up was required. Adverse events were assessed in all patients. RESULTS: The cohort included 117 patients for safety analysis, 108 for efficacy analysis (median follow-up of 33 months). All but one received concomitant corticosteroids, a third also received adjuvants. Overall, 80/108 patients (74%) achieved remission after the first rituximab cycle at a median of 5.5 months. Relapses occurred in 39 patients (49%) at a median of 18 months. Repeating treatment in relapsed patients increased remission rates to 75 and 88% after the second and third cycles, respectively. Adverse events were similar to those of previous publications. Two elderly patients died of infections attributable to rituximab combined with high-dose corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: In a large real-life long-term cohort, rituximab with corticosteroids ± adjuvants induced remission in most patients with pemphigus, with relatively favorable safety. Repeating treatment following relapse or remission failure was beneficial.

Treatment of Pemphigus Vulgaris and Foliaceus with Adjuvant Rituximab Compared to Immunosuppression Alone: Real-Life Experience.

INTRODUCTION: In a randomized prospective trial, adjuvant rituximab was more efficacious than corticosteroids alone in the treatment of pemphigus; however, real-life data are limited. Rituximab treatment for pemphigus has only recently been introduced to the Israeli health basket. Previously, patients received rituximab if they paid out of pocket or through private insurance, separating patients into 2 treatment groups, mostly based on economic capability. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of the 12-month clinical response of pemphigus vulgaris/foliaceus patients. We compared patients after a single cycle (1,000 mg on days 0 and 15 or weekly 375 mg/m2 for 4 weeks) of adjuvant rituximab with systemic corticosteroids ± steroid-sparing agents, to patients who were prescribed rituximab, could not obtain it, and received systemic corticosteroids ± steroid-sparing agents. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included (adjuvant rituximab, n = 29; immunosuppression alone, n = 16). At baseline, rituximab patients had a higher mean pemphigus disease area index (PDAI) (p = 0.07) and higher mean daily dosages of prednisone (1.51 vs. 1.16 mg/kg, p = 0.39). All patients but 1 in the rituximab group continued systemic steroids, and 31% in the rituximab group versus 50% in the immunosuppression-alone group received systemic adjuvants. At 12 months, partial or complete remission rates (on or off maximum 40 mg/day prednisone equivalent) were nonsignificantly higher in the rituximab group (62 vs. 50%, p = 0.53); however, patients on rituximab showed faster remissions (3.4 ± 1.9 vs. 5.9 ± 3.6 months; p = 0.03) with a trend for a greater PDAI reduction (p = 0.051). Adverse events were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-life study, a single cycle of rituximab achieved more remissions and sooner compared to conventional immunosuppression, but the differences were not significant, probably due to a small sample size and severe baseline disease in the rituximab group. Future real-life studies on larger groups are needed.