Search

Background: Psoriasis is a common skin disorder linked to systemic inflammation and immune dysregulation. It is believed to involve activated T cells and neutrophils. Recent research has highlighted the potential role of hematological ratios, such as neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (PLR), eosinophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (ELR), eosinophil‐to‐neutrophil ratio (ENR), and eosinophil‐to‐monocyte ratio (EMR), as markers for inflammatory skin diseases, including psoriasis. Objectives: We aimed to investigate hematological ratios between children and adults, patients and controls, and patients with moderate‐to‐severe and mild psoriasis. Materials and Methods: This national retrospective cohort study included over 16,000 psoriasis patients in Israel. Patients with comorbidities influencing blood counts were excluded. Ratios were calculated from blood counts taken within 30 days of diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression, including age, gender, ethnicity, smoking status, and socioeconomic status, was performed. Results: Findings revealed age‐specific variations in blood counts, hematological ratios, and differences between mild and moderate–severe patients and patients versus controls. Moderate–severe psoriasis patients had elevated neutrophil and eosinophil counts (4.57 vs. 4.25, P < 0.001, and 0.24 vs. 0.22, P = 0.047, respectively), as well as increased NLR (2.46 vs. 2.29, P < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis confirmed the significance of neutrophil and platelet counts as well as NLR and PLR in predicting psoriasis severity. Limitations: This was a retrospective study without subjective data on disease severity. Conclusion: This study highlights hematologic ratios' diagnostic and prognostic potential in psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The growing presence of allergens in materials and scarce data on allergic contact dermatitis in children has increased our need to refine its diagnosis in this population. We aimed to analyze children's specific responsivity to highly reactive subcomponents of Fragrance mix I, Fragrance mix II, and Textile dye mix from the European baseline series. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patch test records of children aged 2 to 18 who underwent patch testing with the European baseline series between 2014 and 2022 in Israel. Results: A total of 367 children were included in the study. In all, 160 children had positive results; 43 patients reacted to one of the mixes, and 20 performed further testing. Eleven of them completed the extended series at the exact same times as the regular European series, which benefited children. Farnesol was the most reactive compound (30.8%). Conclusions: Performing the extended European series provides a more accurate and time‐efficient allergic contact dermatitis diagnosis. Farnesol reactivity appears prominent in children and may justify tighter product regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent years have seen significant exploration into the potential link between allergic contact dermatitis and atopic dermatitis, yielding contradictory findings. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of children aged 2 to 18 who underwent patch testing at the pediatric dermatology clinic at a tertiary medical center in Israel was conducted. Results: Overall, 367 patients were included in the study, 31.6% of whom were diagnosed with atopic dermatitis. 160 children (43.6%) exhibited a positive reaction to at least one compound in the European baseline series. There was no statistically significant difference in reactivity between children with atopic dermatitis and those without (P = 0.848). Sub‐analyses based on ethnicity, gender, and age did not reveal significant differences in overall European baseline series reactivity (P = 0.612, P = 0.446, P = 0.488, respectively). Sensitivity was notably higher when patch readings were conducted 72 h after application compared to 48 h [0.95 (CI: 0.91–0.97) vs. 0.60 (CI: 0.55–0.66)]. Conclusions: Patch testing is imperative for suspected cases of allergic contact dermatitis in all children, regardless of their atopic background. Further research is warranted to potentially replace the traditional 48‐h reading with a single 72‐h reading in future guidelines, contributing to enhanced efficiency and cost‐effectiveness in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses a retrospective cohort study that aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of switching from the JAK inhibitor baricitinib to the biological treatment dupilumab in pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). The study collected data from pediatric patients who had been treated with baricitinib for at least 6 months before switching to dupilumab. The study found that after switching to dupilumab, patients experienced positive outcomes, including complete response and partial response, with notable itch improvement. However, the study has limitations due to its small size and retrospective nature, and further research is needed to confirm the efficacy of dupilumab after JAK inhibitor failure in pediatric AD. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) topical treatments may have low efficacy, while systemic treatments have adverse effects (AEs) and high cost. Since treatment options for CL nowadays have numerous disadvantages, an alternative topical treatment is vastly needed. We assessed liposomal amphotericin B gel (LAmB gel) treatment efficacy and safety. Methods: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Adults with CL (PCR proven, ≤5 lesions) were randomized for 28 days with LAmB gel (cases) versus placebo gel (controls), followed by LAmB gel for 28 days (both groups). Lesion size, ulceration, induration, scarring, swelling, and AEs (pain, itch, erythema, discharge, fever, and urticaria) were assessed at days 1, 28, and 56. PCR was repeated at day 56. Results: Thirteen patients (four cases, nine controls) with 39 lesions (11 cases, 28 controls) caused by Leishmania major (L. major) were randomized. Ulcer, induration, scarring, and swelling were noted in 18%, 91%, 0%, and 27% of cases, respectively, versus 86%, 89%, 7%, and 54% of controls, respectively. At day 28, improvement rates were low in both groups. Induration improved comparing LAmB gel treatment for 56 days versus 28 days. Ulceration, induration, and swelling improved comparing all patients at 56 days versus 28 days. PCR turned negative in three of four cases and eight of nine controls. Mild, only local, AEs were reported in <30% of the patients. Conclusions: LAmB gel is safe and may be considered as an alternative topical treatment for CL caused by L. major. Further, larger‐scale studies are warranted to evaluate the long‐term impact of LAmB gel on the management of CL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]