Dermatologists' Perspectives on Biosimilars.

BACKGROUND: Biosimilars are biologic agents the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has deemed to have no clinical difference from their reference biologics. In dermatology,  biosimilars are approved for the treatment of psoriasis and hidradenitis suppurativa. Although dermatologists are high prescribers of biologics, they are more reluctant to prescribe biosimilars than other specialists. This survey-based study sought to characterize dermatologists’ current perspectives on biosimilars.  Methods: A 27-question survey was distributed via email to dermatologists between September and October of 2022.  Results: Twenty percent of respondents would not prescribe a biosimilar for an FDA-approved indication. When asked about the greatest barriers to biosimilar adoption, 61% had concerns about biosimilar safety and efficacy, 24% reported uncertainty about state laws for interchangeability and substitutions, and 20% had concerns about biosimilar safety without concerns about efficacy. Thirty-five percent of respondents felt moderately or extremely knowledgeable about biosimilar interchangeability.  Conclusion: Biosimilars are safe and effective for treating approved dermatological conditions and may lower patient costs compared to their reference products. Patients are not always offered biosimilar therapy as an option, which may be due to unfamiliarity among dermatologists.  This survey suggests a need for more research and educational initiatives, such as modules and workshops that focus on biosimilar safety, efficacy, and interchangeability guidelines. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(4):doi:10.36849/JDD.7755.

Overview of Dermatological Manifestations Associated with the COVID-19 Infection.

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 that is characterized by respiratory symptoms, fever, and chills.[1] While these systemic symptoms are widely known and well understood, there have also been reports of dermatological manifestations in patients with COVID-19. These manifestations include chilblain-like lesions, maculopapular lesions, urticarial lesions, necrosis, and other varicella-like exanthems.[2] The pathogenesis of these lesions are not well understood, but the procoagulant and pro-inflammatory state induced by COVID-19 infections may be contributing to varied cutaneous manifestations.[3] Drug interactions and concurrent hypersensitivity reactions have also been postulated.[4] This review aims to compile and analyze various retrospective studies and case reports to summarize the clinical presentation of dermatological lesions associated with COVID-19 infections and suggest further areas of research.

Rosacea Core Domain Set for Clinical Trials and Practice: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: Inconsistent reporting of outcomes in clinical trials of rosacea is impeding and likely preventing accurate data pooling and meta-analyses. There is a need for standardization of outcomes assessed during intervention trials of rosacea. Objective: To develop a rosacea core outcome set (COS) based on key domains that are globally relevant and applicable to all demographic groups to be used as a minimum list of outcomes for reporting by rosacea clinical trials, and when appropriate, in clinical practice. Evidence Review: A systematic literature review of rosacea clinical trials was conducted. Discrete outcomes were extracted and augmented through discussions and focus groups with key stakeholders. The initial list of 192 outcomes was refined to identify 50 unique outcomes that were rated through the Delphi process Round 1 by 88 panelists (63 physicians from 17 countries and 25 patients with rosacea in the US) on 9-point Likert scale. Based on feedback, an additional 11 outcomes were added in Round 2. Outcomes deemed to be critical for inclusion (rated 7-9 by ≥70% of both groups) were discussed in consensus meetings. The outcomes deemed to be most important for inclusion by at least 85% of the participants were incorporated into the final core domain set. Findings: The Delphi process and consensus-building meetings identified a final core set of 8 domains for rosacea clinical trials: ocular signs and symptoms; skin signs of disease; skin symptoms; overall severity; patient satisfaction; quality of life; degree of improvement; and presence and severity of treatment-related adverse events. Recommendations were also made for application in the clinical setting. Conclusions and Relevance: This core domain set for rosacea research is now available; its adoption by researchers may improve the usefulness of future trials of rosacea therapies by enabling meta-analyses and other comparisons across studies. This core domain set may also be useful in clinical practice.

Biologics for Treatment of Pityriasis Rubra Pilaris: A Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the published efficacy and adverse event rates associated with existing biologics for the treatment of pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP). DATA SOURCES: A literature review using the PubMed database (January 1990-July 2023) was conducted. Multiple search combinations were conducted using "pityriasis rubra pilaris" and various biologics as keywords to identify relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Inclusion criteria included all study types that were published within the past 30 years in English and mentioned at least one biologic and PRP. A preliminary search yielded a total of 499 results. After screening using inclusion and exclusion criteria, 77 relevant articles (69 case reports, 5 case series, 2 clinical trials, and 1 retrospective analysis) were analyzed. DATA SYNTHESIS: TNF-α inhibitors have been evaluated and are effective in treating PRP. However, recent treatment with anti-interleukin (IL)-17 and anti-IL-23 therapies such as ustekinumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab are emerging as new treatment options with a mean improvement in PRP Area and Severity Index scores, change in severity of erythema, scaling, and thickness of PRP lesions. From initial clinical trials, secukinumab and ixekizumab are promising treatment options for achieving remission. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review compares the efficacy for numerous biologics and a discussion to guide clinicians on benefits and risks in choosing a biologic for PRP patients. CONCLUSIONS: Biologics may be a favourable treatment option leading to greater patient adherence due to reduced dosing frequencies, improvement in quality of life, and reduction in frequency and severity of flares.

Microbiome modulators for atopic eczema: a systematic review of experimental and investigational therapeutics.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory cutaneous disease that arises due to dysregulation of the Th2 immune response, impaired skin barrier integrity, and dysbiosis of the skin and gut microbiota. An abundance of Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in AD lesions increases the Th2 immune response, and gut bacteria release breakdown products such as Short Chain Fatty Acids that regulate the systemic immune response. AREAS COVERED: We aim to evaluate therapies that modulate the microbiome in humans and discuss the clinical implications of these treatments. We performed a review of the literature in which 2,673 records were screened, and describe the findings of 108 studies that were included after full-text review. All included studies discussed the effects of therapies on the human microbiome and AD severity. Oral probiotics, topical probiotics, biologics, and investigational therapies were included in our analysis. EXPERT OPINION: Oral probiotics demonstrate mixed efficacy at relieving AD symptoms. Topical probiotics reduce S. aureus abundance in AD lesional skin, yet for moderate-severe disease, these therapies may not reduce AD severity scores to the standard of biologics. Dupilumab and tralokinumab target key inflammatory pathways in AD and modulate the skin microbiome, further improving disease severity.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral systemic nonbiologic therapies for psoriasis patients.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory immune condition. Treatments for psoriasis vary with disease severity, ranging from topicals to systemic biologic agents. The pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of these therapies establish drug efficacy, toxicity, and optimal dosing to ensure therapeutic drug levels are sustained and adverse effects are minimized. AREAS COVERED: A literature search was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Ovid MEDLINE for PK and PD, efficacy, and safety data regarding oral systemic nonbiologic therapies utilized for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The findings were organized into sections for each drug: oral acitretin, methotrexate, cyclosporine, apremilast, tofacitinib, and deucravacitinib. EXPERT OPINION: Some psoriasis patients may not respond to initial therapy. Ongoing research is evaluating genetic polymorphisms that may predict an improved response to specific medications. However, financial and insurance barriers, as well as limited genetic polymorphisms correlated with treatment response, may restrict the implementation of genetic testing necessary to personalize treatments. How well psoriasis patients adhere to treatment may contribute greatly to variation in response. Therapeutic drug monitoring may help patients adhere to treatment, improve clinical response, and sustain disease control.

Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of topical non-biological therapies for psoriasis patients.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory cutaneous disease that causes patients psychosocial distress. Topical therapies are utilized for mild-to-moderate disease and for more severe disease in conjunction with systemic therapies. Topical corticosteroids are a cornerstone of treatment for psoriasis, but long-term use can cause stria and cutaneous atrophy and as well as systemic side effects such as topical steroid withdrawal. Non-steroidal topical therapies tend to be safer than topical corticosteroids for long-term use. AREAS COVERED: We conducted a literature review on the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of topical therapies for psoriasis. We discuss how the PK and PD characteristics of these therapies inform clinicians on efficacy and toxicity when prescribing for patients. EXPERT OPINION: Topical corticosteroids, used intermittently, are very safe and effective. Long-term, continuous use of topical corticosteroids can cause systemic side effects. Several generic and newly approved non-steroidal options are available, but no head-to-head studies compare the effectiveness of the generics (vitamin D analogs, tacrolimus, pimecrolimus) against the newer therapies (roflumilast, tapinarof). Patients often do not respond to topical therapies due to poor adherence to treatment regimens. For patients resistant to topical treatment, phototherapy or systemic therapy may be an option.

Poor adherence to and persistence with biologics in generalized pustular psoriasis: A claim-based study using real-world data from two large US databases.

Background: Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare skin disease characterized by episodes of widespread sterile pustules. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using data from the US IBM MarketScan Commercial and Optum Clinformatics Data Mart databases between October 1, 2015 and March 31, 2020 was performed to describe adherence and persistence to biologics in patients with GPP. Patients were aged ≥18 years with newly diagnosed GPP (International Classification of Diseases code L40.1) and had ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims. Results: Biologics were dispensed to 110 of 502 (22%) and 73 of 528 (14%) patients from MarketScan and Optum databases, respectively. The mean proportion of days covered (PDC) (range) was similar in both databases (MarketScan, 65% [8%-100%]; Optum, 59% [8%-99%]), and good adherence (≥80% PDC) was uncommon (MarketScan, 36%; Optum, 24%). Mean (standard deviation) persistence was similar in both databases (MarketScan, 287 [122] days; Optum, 261 [134] days). In Optum, the mean PDC was similar between age categories; good adherence was more common in patients aged 18 to 64 years (28%) versus ≥65 years (13%). Mean persistence was longer in patients aged 18 to 64 years (267 days) versus ≥65 years (242 days). Conclusions: Overall, adherence and persistence were generally poor and varied according to the biologic class, database, and age. Improving adherence may help improve GPP treatment outcomes.

Live vaccinations in dermatology for immunosuppressed patients: a narrative review.

Given the higher susceptibility to infectious disease in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for inflammatory dermatologic conditions, immunization is important in this population. While live vaccines protect against life-threatening diseases, they can be harmful in immunosuppressed patients given the risk of replication of the attenuated pathogen and adverse reactions. The utilization of live vaccines in immunosuppressed patients depends on multiple factors such as the vaccine and therapy regimen. To provide an overview of evidence-based recommendations for the use of live vaccines in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapies for dermatological conditions. A literature search of the PubMed database was performed using keywords live vaccine, live-attenuated vaccine, dermatology, immunosuppressed, and immunocompromised, and specific immunosuppressive therapies: corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, biologics. Relevant articles written in English were included. Using these keywords, 125 articles were reviewed, of which 28 were ultimately selected. Recommendations for live vaccines can be determined on a case-by-case basis. Measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (MMRV) vaccines may be safely administered to patients on low-dose immunosuppressive agents while the yellow fever vaccine is typically contraindicated. It may be safe to administer live MMRV boosters to children on immunosuppressive therapies and the live herpes zoster vaccine to patients on biologics. Given poor adherence to immunization guidelines in immunosuppressed patients, dermatologists have a critical role in educating patients and general practitioners regarding live vaccines. By reviewing a patient's vaccination history and following immunization guidelines prior to initiating immunosuppressive therapies, physicians can mitigate morbidity and mortality from vaccine-preventable diseases.

Race and ethnicity are inadequate predictors of ambulatory visit length and utilization of preventive services.

Health disparities can be experienced by any disadvantaged group who has limited access to healthcare or decreased quality of care. Quality of care can be measured by physician-patient communication measures such as length of visit, health outcomes, patient satisfaction, or by the services one receives such as screening or health education. This study aims to determine the relationship between length of physician-patient encounter, number of preventive services, ethnicity, and race. This study utilizes data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) from 2007 to 2016. Visits with a single diagnosis were selected. Visits with the five most frequent diagnoses were selected by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth or Tenth Revision (ICD-9/ICD-10) classification. The primary outcome is time spent with a physician in minutes and the number of preventive services provided represented by the Preventive Service Index (PSI). Of 255,916 visits, non-white individuals made up 16.2% (95% Confidence Interval 15.9-16.4) while Latinos represented 13.4% (95%CI 13.2-13.6) of individuals. Multivariate analysis revealed minimal differences in visit length in race and ethnic groups regardless of diagnosis. Greater PSI was associated with individuals less than 43 years old (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.3, p =< 0.0001), those who reside in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p = 0.006), non-white individuals (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3, p = 0.004), and those with private insurance (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p =< 0.0001). Race and ethnicity do not predict length of time with a physician regardless of diagnosis. Age, race, location within a metropolitan area, and insurance are significant but minimal predictors of receiving preventive services in the rank-order leading five most frequent diagnoses. This large, population-based study highlights improvements in the distribution of healthcare services from previous studies.

Number of Affected Nails Is the Primary Determinant of Efinaconazole 10% Solution Usage for Onychomycosis.

Good adherence to treatment is necessary for the successful treatment of onychomycosis and requires that an appropriate amount of medication be prescribed. Most prescriptions for efinaconazole 10% solution, a topical azole antifungal, are for 4 mL per month but there are no data on patient factors or disease characteristics that impact how much medication is needed. Data from two phase 3 studies of efinaconazole 10% solution for the treatment of toenail onychomycosis were pooled and analyzed to determine monthly medication usage based on the number of affected toenails, percent involvement of the target toenail, body mass index (BMI), and sex. Participants with two or more affected nails required, on average, >4 mL of efinaconazole per month, with increasing amounts needed based on the number of nails with onychomycosis (mean: 4.39 mL for 2 nails; 6.36 mL for 6 nails). In contrast, usage was not greatly impacted by target toenail involvement, BMI, or sex. Together, these data indicate that the number of affected nails should be the major consideration when determining the monthly efinaconazole quantity to prescribe. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(2):110-112.    doi:10.36849/JDD.7676.

Benefit of Topical Combination Therapy for Acne: Analyzing Effect Size Using Number Needed to Treat.

BACKGROUND: Topical acne trials often are confounded by high vehicle response rates and differing outcome measures, making it difficult to compare treatments. Number needed to treat (NNT) can be a simple, clinically meaningful way to indirectly compare treatment options without head-to-head data. NNT is the number of patients who need to be treated with an intervention to observe one additional patient successfully achieving a desired outcome versus vehicle/placebo. While treatment attributes such as adverse events may not be captured, lower NNT is a good indicator of a more effective treatment. METHODS: Following a search of combination topical treatments for acne vulgaris, all treatments that reported pivotal trial efficacy data consistent with the 2018 FDA definition of success were included in NNT analyses.  Results: Of 13 treatments, 7 reported 12-week treatment success rates in 11 phase 3 trials, with similar baseline demographics/disease severity. Treatment success ranged from 26.8% with tretinoin 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide (BPO) 3% cream to 50% with triple-combination clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/adapalene 0.15%/BPO 3.1% gel. NNTs for the triple-combination gel were 4 and 5 (from 2 pivotal trials). Adapalene 0.3%/BPO 2.5% gel had an NNT of 5. Tretinoin/BPO had the largest range between trials, with NNTs of 4 and 9. The other 4 treatments had NNTs ranging from 6 to 8. CONCLUSION: A comparison of combination topical acne treatment trial data, using the same treatment outcome and similar patient populations, resulted in triple-combination clindamycin phosphate/adapalene/BPO gel and adapalene/BPO gel having the most favorable NNTs.J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(2):42-49.  doi:10.36849/JDD.7927.