Search

Background: Prurigo nodularis (PN) is an intensely pruritic disease characterized by itchy nodules on the trunk/extremities; it is often accompanied by skin pain and sleep disruption with negative impacts on the quality of life (QoL). The patient‐reported outcome (PRO) instruments, Worst Itch‐Numeric Rating Scale (WI‐NRS), Skin Pain‐NRS, Sleep‐NRS and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) have been psychometrically validated and the clinically meaningful within‐patient improvement thresholds (responder definition) have been established through data pooled from the two Phase‐3 trials (PRIME, NCT04183335 and PRIME2, NCT04202679) of dupilumab in adults with PN uncontrolled on topical therapies. Objectives: To estimate the proportion of dupilumab‐treated patients (vs. placebo) achieving clinically meaningful improvement in itch, skin pain, sleep and QoL, either alone or in combination, from the data pooled from PRIME and PRIME2 trials. Methods: The patient‐level data pooled from the two Phase‐3 trials (N = 311) were used for this post hoc analysis. Thresholds of clinically meaningful within‐patient improvement in PRO instrument scores from baseline at Week 24 used for defining responders were 4 (WI‐NRS and Skin Pain‐NRS), 2 (Sleep‐NRS) and 9 points (DLQI). The proportion of dupilumab‐treated patients, versus placebo, achieving the thresholds, and the time taken to achieve the thresholds were evaluated for the individual and combination of PROs. Results: Responder rates were significantly higher with dupilumab, versus placebo at Week 24 for WI‐NRS (58.8% vs. 19.0%, p < 0.0001), Skin Pain‐NRS (49.7% vs. 20.9%, p < 0.0001), Sleep‐NRS (42.5% vs. 23.4%, p < 0.0001) and DLQI (64.7% vs. 22.8%, p < 0.0001). Proportion of patients achieving simultaneous improvement in symptoms and QoL (24.8% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.0001) were significantly higher in dupilumab‐treated patients versus placebo. The time needed for achieving clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms were significantly lower in dupilumab‐treated patients, versus placebo. Conclusions: Significantly greater proportion of dupilumab‐treated patients with PN, versus placebo, demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in PRO measures of symptoms and QoL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a rare chronic inflammatory skin disease with a high disease burden, but data on clinical and economic burden are still scarce. Objective: To describe the real-world epidemiologic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics and related economic burden of patients with PN compared to a benchmark population in Germany. Methods: This retrospective study was based on an excerpt of German Statutory Health Insurance data of patients with an initial PN diagnosis between 2012 and 2016. PN cohort contained no record of PN in eight quarters before the index quarter and was followed up for eight quarters (unless deceased). Benchmark cohort without PN was calculated using direct standardization and 1:1 matching to PN cohort. Results: Out of 4,536,002 insured patients, 2309 incident patients with PN were identified and matched to the benchmark cohort out of 3,018,382 patients without PN. Patients were mostly between 45 and 80 years when diagnosed with PN. Higher comorbidity rates were reported for PN than benchmark, with a rising disease burden at follow-up. Most patients with PN (91.3%) were diagnosed outpatient and had >50% more outpatient visits than the benchmark cohort. Hospitalization rates were higher in PN (53.9%) versus benchmark (35.1%), yielding twice longer mean hospital stays for PN (12 days) compared to benchmark (6 days) (p < 0.001). The most common initial therapy for patients with PN was topical corticosteroids (47.6%); ≥10% of patients were treated with antidepressants, antihistamines or systemic corticosteroids. Therapy rates were higher for PN compared to benchmark (p < 0.001). Mean initial costs were twofold higher in PN versus benchmark for outpatient, inpatient and drugs. During follow-up, an increase of >70% in mean PN costs compared to benchmark was identified for outpatient, inpatient and concomitant treatments (p < 0.001). Conclusion: This study highlights the significantly higher clinical and economic burden incurred by PN compared to benchmark patients in Germany, reflecting the unmet medical need for PN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritic eczematous lesions. The effect of treatment withdrawal after response to upadacitinib oral treatment is not fully characterized. Objectives: Assess the effect of upadacitinib withdrawal on skin clearance and itch improvement in adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD and evaluate the kinetics of recovery on rescue treatment. Methods: Data from a phase 2b randomized, placebo‐controlled trial (NCT02925117) of upadacitinib in patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD were analysed. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive upadacitinib 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg or placebo, and then at Week 16, patients were re‐randomized 1:1 to receive the same dose of upadacitinib (upadacitinib 30 mg for patients initialized to placebo) or placebo. From Week 20, those who experienced loss of response defined as Eczema Area and Severity Index <50% improvement from baseline (EASI 50) received rescue treatment with upadacitinib 30 mg. Results: Patients who withdrew from upadacitinib experienced a rapid loss of skin clearance response, while those who switched from placebo to upadacitinib gained response. Loss of skin clearance response occurred within 4 weeks and worsening of itch occurred within 5 days. In patients who originally received placebo or a lower dose of upadacitinib leading to a loss of EASI response, rescue treatment with upadacitinib 30 mg resulted in rapid recovery or improvement of both skin and itch responses; most patients who were re‐randomized to placebo achieved EASI 75 and IGA 0/1 by 8 weeks of rescue treatment. No new safety risks were observed. Conclusions: Continuous treatment with upadacitinib is suggested to maintain skin clearance and antipruritic effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dear Editor, Brachioradial pruritus (BRP) is typically located at the dorsolateral part of the forearms, mostly at the dermatomes C5/C6 but it may also involve other dermatomes at the arm and neck. Prior to treatment with naloxone, pruritus intensity was severe in all patients (worst pruritus intensity on the numerical rating scale [WI-NRS]: 8-10/10). [Extracted from the article]

Background Objectives Methods Results Conclusions Technological advances in the field of virtual reality (VR) offer new opportunities in many areas of life, including medical education. The University of Münster has been using VR scenarios in the education of medical students for several years, especially for situations that are difficult to reproduce in reality (e.g., brain death). Due to the consistently positive feedback from students, a dermatological VR scenario for skin cancer screening was developed.Presentation and first evaluation of the skin cancer screening VR scenario to determine to what extent the technical implementation of the scenario was evaluated overall by the students and how their subjective competence to perform a skin cancer screening changed over the course of the teaching unit (theory seminar, VR scenario, theoretical debriefing).Students (n = 140) participating in the curricular pilot project during the 2023 summer term were surveyed throughout the teaching unit using several established questionnaires (System Usability Scale, Simulation Task‐Load‐Index, Realism and Presence Questionnaire) as well as additional questions on cybersickness and subjective learning.(i) The use of VR is technically feasible, (ii) students evaluate the VR scenario as a useful curricular supplement, and (iii) from the students' subjective perspective, a good learning outcome is achieved. Although preparation and follow‐up appear to be important for overall learning, the greatest increase in subjective competence to perform a skin cancer screening is achieved by the VR scenario.Technically feasible and positively evaluated by students, VR can already be a useful addition to dermatology education, although costs are still high. As a visual discipline, dermatology offers special opportunities to create VR scenarios that are not always available or comfortable for patients in reality. Additionally, VR scenarios guarantee the same conditions for all students, which is essential for a high‐quality education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]