Search

Eveline De Brandt, Tom Hillary Department of Dermatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, BelgiumCorrespondence: Tom Hillary, Department of Dermatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, Leuven, 3000, Belgium, Tel +3216337950 Email tom.hillary@uzleuven.bePurpose: To review the literature on guidance on the follow-up of psoriasis and its comorbidities and to provide practical recommendations.Patients and Methods: A PubMed search was conducted using MeSH terms and free text keywords related to “psoriasis”, “obesity”, “hypertension”, “diabetes”, “dyslipidemia”, “metabolic syndrome” and “Psoriatic arthritis”. The search was conducted between September 2021 and January 2022. References of selected articles were scanned to identify additional articles.Results: Recommendations on the follow-up of hypertension, obesity, dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, psoriatic arthritis, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and inflammatory bowel disease in psoriasis patients were extracted from the included articles. These data are presented in summary tables for both adults and children. A practical and feasible approach for each comorbidity is discussed.Conclusion: Awareness among dermatologists for relevant psoriasis-associated comorbidities is crucial. The dermatologist should function as gatekeeper and screen for comorbidities, in order to make timely referrals when indicated.Keywords: psoriasis, comorbidities, metabolic syndrome, psoriatic arthritis, screening, atherosclerosis, liver disease, cardiovascular disease

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a collection of genetic lesions that manifest in the diminished effectiveness of hemoglobin. We collected and reviewed the recent and extant literature on SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and SCD. We posit an answer to the question associated with any adaptive responses to COVID-19 in individuals with SCD. We collected papers from MEDLINE and all available published papers on COVID-19 and SCD. Unlike a formal meta-analysis, given the early phase of this review in the pandemic, we did not seek unpublished papers. We found an emerging literature where case studies dominated, and traditional large N epidemiological studies were absent. Patients with SCD share many comorbid illnesses with an increased risk of mortality associated with contracting COVID-19. There is sufficient empirical justification to accelerate research on the impact of a viral pathogen like COVID-19 on individuals with SCD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tom Hillary,1 Jo Lambert2 1Department of Dermatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, 3000, Belgium; 2Department of Dermatology, Ghent University Hospital, Gent, 9000, BelgiumCorrespondence: Tom HillaryDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, Leuven, 3000, BelgiumEmail tom.hillary@uzleuven.beObjective: To assess the feasibility of the future implementation of a recently published Belgian treat-to-target scoring in daily practice, we investigated to what extent Belgian dermatologists use metrics and take comorbidities into account in the follow-up of psoriasis patients.Methods: Belgian dermatologists were addressed to fill out an online questionnaire in April 2020.Results: A total of 149 dermatologists completed the survey. About 55% (n = 78) indicated to do a full-body examination during every visit. Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) was the most frequently used clinical score: 25% (n = 35) and 61% (n = 87) indicated to use it every visit or sometimes (> 1/year), respectively. The most frequently used patient-reported outcome scoring system was the Dermatology Life Quality Index: 35% use it sometimes. Overall, there is awareness for the association with metabolic syndrome.Conclusion: Among tools for follow-up on moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients, Belgian dermatologists most frequently apply full-body examination and PASI score. Patient-reported outcome scoring systems are used infrequently. Psoriasis is perceived as a disease with comorbidities beyond the skin, especially obesity and hypertension. These real-world data on the use of clinical scores and PROs indicate a discrepancy from the academic setting in which new drugs are developed and evaluated. Furthermore, these data are imperative to estimate the feasibility of implementing a treat-to-target strategy published earlier by a Belgian expert group.Keywords: psoriasis, comorbidities, patient care, treat to target, metrics

Targeted biologic drugs and small molecules have transformed the psoriasis treatment landscape in recent years. The Belgian healthcare system, in common with many others across Europe, must balance the burgeoning use of these transformative, yet expensive, drugs with the sustainable use of limited resources. Drawing on recent updates to the EuroGuiDerm and the German S2 psoriasis guidelines, eight Belgian dermatologists experienced in treating patients with psoriasis undertook a quasi‐Delphi initiative to provide perspectives on the current opportunities and challenges in psoriasis. This update focuses on responsible ways to rationalize the use of innovative treatments (e.g. biologics and small molecules). Inherently, this required viewpoints on the International Psoriasis Council's new definition of severe psoriasis, defining psoriasis severity and the concept of treating to target. It discusses the appropriateness of using older biologics classes, biosimilars and personalized dosing and lastly, how teledermatology may play a role in providing sustainable, patient‐centric psoriasis care. In addition, this manuscript includes the updated Belgian evidence‐based treatment advice in psoriasis (BETA‐PSO) to reflect recent data and drug approvals. The recommendations reflect the best practices for clinicians when using systemic and biologic therapies to treat patients with psoriasis and offer guidance on how they may prescribe these drugs sustainably and efficiently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As the COVID-19 pandemic becomes an endemic state, still many questions remain regarding the risks and impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) who were excluded from the phase 3 COVID-19 vaccination trials., Methods: The BELCOMID study collected patient data and serological samples from a large, multicentric IMID patient cohort that was prospectively followed during sequential stages of the pandemic. Patients were stratified according to vaccination status into five groups across three sampling periods. Interactions between SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination status, IMID-treatment modalities and IMID course were explored., Results: In total, 2165 patients with IBD, a dermatological or rheumatological IMID participated. SARS-CoV-2 infection rates increased over the course of the pandemic and were highest in IMID patients that had refused every vaccine. After baseline COVID-19 vaccination, serologic spike (S)-antibody responses were attenuated by particular types of immune-modulating treatment: anti-TNF, rituximab, JAKi, systemic steroids, combined biologic/immunomodulator treatment. Nonetheless, S-antibody concentration increased progressively in patients who received a booster vaccination, reaching 100% seroconversion rate in patients who had received two booster vaccines. Previous SARS-CoV-2 infection was found as a predictor of higher S-antibody response. Patients who had refused every vaccine showed the lowest rates of S-seroconversion (53.8%). Multiple logistic regression did not identify previous SARS-CoV-2 infection as a risk factor for IMID flare-up. Furthermore, no increased risk of IMID flare-up was found with booster vaccination., Conclusions: Altogether, the BELCOMID study provides evidence for the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccination and confirms the importance of repeated booster vaccination in IMID patients.

Background: Biologicals targeting interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 improve quality of life in psoriasis and other chronic autoimmune disorders with a favorable safety profile. However, current guidelines do not recommend their use in patients with recent oncologic history due to limited evidence., Objective: To understand the impact of IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors on cancer development, progression, and recurrence by systematically reviewing available literature., Methods: We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines., Results: Most studies investigating the use of IL-23 and IL-17 blockers did not find a higher incidence of cancer compared to the general population. One study observed no relapse in patients with a history of cancer., Limitations: The systematic review is limited due to variations in study designs and outcomes, making it difficult to achieve a comprehensive synthesis and comparison between studies. Furthermore, small sample sizes were notable., Conclusion: Preclinical studies suggest that treating psoriasis with IL-17 or IL-23 blockers is safe, also in patients witch active cancer or a history of it. Pharmacovigilance data show no increased malignancy rate in patients treated with these treatment modalities. However, data on relapse in patients with a history or active malignancy are limited., Competing Interests: None disclosed., (© 2024 by the American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: While higher infliximab (IFX) trough concentrations (TCs) are associated with better outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), they could pose a risk for adverse events (AEs), including IFX-induced skin lesions. Therefore, we studied correlations between IFX TCs and occurrence of AEs in paediatric IBD patients., Methods: In this single-centre study, all children with Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) receiving IFX maintenance therapy who underwent proactive drug monitoring between March 2015 and August 2022 were included. IFX doses/intervals/TCs and patient characteristics were systematically registered, as well as AEs and skin lesions appearance., Results: A total of 109 patients (72 CD and 37 UC) contributed 2913 IFX TCs. During a median follow-up of 3.0 [1.5-4.5] years, we observed 684 AEs in 101 patients and 49 skin lesions in 35 patients. There was no significant difference (p = .467) in median TCs between patients with and without skin lesions. However, higher median IFX doses were associated with an increased hazard rate of skin lesions [HR 1.084 (1.024-1.148), p = .005], in addition to female sex [2.210 (1.187-5.310), p = .016] and diagnosis of CD [1.695 (1.241-1.877), p = .011]. Considering IFX therapeutic TC cut-offs of 5.0 and 9.0 µg/mL, there was no significant difference in AE rate (p = .749 and p = .833, respectively). Also, no significant association between IFX doses and AE rate (p = .159)., Conclusions: Increasing the IFX dose to achieve therapeutic TCs may not increase the overall risk of AEs in paediatric IBD patients. However, concerns arise regarding the risk of skin lesions, especially in female CD patients., (© 2023 European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition and North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.)

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest T.H. has received grants and consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Lilly, MSD, Biogen, LEO Pharma, Amgen and UCB. S.V. has received grants from AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Galápagos and Takeda, and has received consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, AbolerIS Pharma, Agomab, Alimentiv, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Avaxia, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, CVasThera, Dr Falk Pharma, Ferring, Galápagos, Genentech-Roche, Gilead, GSK, Hospira, IMIDomics, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Materia Prima, MiroBio, Morphic, MrM Health, Mundipharma, MSD, Pfizer, Prodigest, Progenity, Prometheus, Robarts Clinical Trials, Second Genome, Shire, Surrozen, Takeda, Theravance, Tillots Pharma and Zealand Pharma.

Background: The prevalence of psoriasis is similar between men and women; however, evidence exists of sex- and gender-related differences in disease expression, impact, coping, and needs of patients with psoriasis. These differences are essential and should be considered in clinical practice and research., Objective: To compile available evidence on sex- and gender-related differences in psoriasis, identify the most critical gaps in clinical practice and research, and use it to propose strategies for improved clinical practice., Methods: Six European dermatologists selected the topics to consider according to their relevance in the dermatology setting with the support of methodologists. Evidence on sex- and gender-related differences was obtained by a scoping review based on search strategies in Medline and Cochrane Library from inception to October 2021 using the following terms: arthritis, psoriatic, psoriasis, gender, and sex. The panel discussed the results and proposed strategies by consensus., Results: The scoping review identified broad themes: (1) clinical expression, (2) severity and patient-reported outcomes, (3) psychosocial impact, (4) access to treatments and propensity to treat, (5) comorbidities, and (6) treatment effect. The strategies are based on these broad themes., Limitations: No risk of bias assessment was done due to the scoping nature of the review., Conclusion: This review offers insights into gender differences in psoriasis, providing a foundation for improving clinical practice and patient outcomes., Competing Interests: A.G.C. has served as a consultant for Abbie, Janssen, Novartis, Almirall, Celgene, and Leo Pharma, receiving grants/other payments. M.M.C. has received honoraria for participation on advisory boards, as a speaker and/or for consultancy, from AbbVie, Almirall, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Servier, Sun Pharma, UCB Pharma. A.D. has received honoraria for participation on advisory boards, as a speaker and/or for consultancy, from AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Leo Pharma, and Medac Pharma. T.H. has received consultancy, speaker fees, and/or research funding from AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB Pharma. N.M. has received Honoraria for participation on advisory boards, as a speaker, and/or for a consultancy from AbbVie, Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB Pharma. There is no conflict of interest for the remaining author., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of Women’s Dermatologic Society.)

Phage therapy is an emerging antimicrobial treatment for critical multidrug-resistant pathogens. In this review, the specific potential and challenges of phage therapy for patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) are discussed. This represents a unique challenge as HS is a chronic inflammatory disease, but presenting with acute exacerbations, which have an enormous negative impact on patient's quality of life. The therapeutic arsenal for HS has expanded in the past decade, for example, with adalimumab and several other biologicals that are currently under investigation. However, treatment of HS remains challenging for dermatologists because there are individuals who do not respond to any classes of the current treatment options when used for a first or second time. Furthermore, after several courses of treatment, a patient may lose their response to therapy, meaning long-term use is not always an option. Culturing studies and 16S ribosomal RNA profiling highlight the complex polymicrobial nature of HS lesions. Despite the detection of various bacterial species in lesion samples, several key pathogens, including Staphylococcus, Corynebacterium and Streptococcus, may be potential targets for phage therapy. Using phage therapy for the treatment of a chronic inflammatory disease could potentially provide new insights into the role of bacteria and the immune system in HS development. In addition, it is possible more details on the immunomodulatory effects of phages may come to light., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The risks and impact of COVID19 disease and vaccination in patients with Immune Mediated Inflammatory Diseases (IMID) remain incompletely understood. IMID patients and particularly patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment were excluded from the original, registrational phase-3 COVID19 vaccination efficacy and safety trials. Real-world observational data can help to fill this gap in knowledge. The BELCOMID study aims to explore the interaction between IMIDs, immune-modulating treatment modalities and SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in a real-life patient cohort., Methods: A multidisciplinary, prospective, observational cohort study was set up. Consecutive patients with IMIDs of the gut, joints and skin followed at two high-volume referral centers were invited. Both patients under conventional treatment or targeted immune modulating therapies were included. Patient data and serological samples were collected at 3 predefined periods (before COVID19 vaccination, before booster vaccination, after booster vaccination). Primary endpoints were positive PCR-test and SARS-CoV-2 serology reflecting previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination. Associations with IMID treatment modality and IMID disease activity were assessed. Results of the first two inclusion periods (before booster vaccination) are reported., Results: At the first inclusion period data was assessed of 2165 IMID-patients before COVID19 vaccination. At the second inclusion period, data of 2065 patients was collected of whom 1547 had received complete baseline COVID19 vaccination and 222 were partially vaccinated. SARS-CoV-2 infection rate remained low in both groups. No significant increase in IMID flare-up rate was noted in patients with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Multiple logistic regression analyses did not show a significant influence of IMID-treatment modality or IMID activity on SARS-CoV-2 infection risk (based on PCR positivity or N-serology). Patients treated with conventional immunomodulators, systemic steroids, and patients on advanced therapies such as biologics or small molecules, had reduced S-antibody seroconversion. S-antibody response was also lower in patients without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and in active smokers. A subset of patients (4.1%) had no S- nor N-antibody seroconversion following complete baseline vaccination., Conclusion: The BELCOMID study results confirm the benign course of COVID19 infection and vaccination in a large real-life IMID-population. However, our results underscore the need for repeated vaccination and smoking cessation in patients with IMIDs treated with immune-modulating therapies or systemic steroids during the pandemic., Competing Interests: The BELCOMID study group received research grants from following pharmaceutical companies: Almirall, Roche, Janssen, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Amgen, Biogen, Mylan, LEO Pharma. These companies had no role in study design, conduct nor reporting of results. JG has served as advisory board member or speaker for Arena, Janssen and Galapagos. JS received speaker’s fees from Pfizer, Abbvie, Ferring, Falk, Takeda, Janssen, and Fresenius. JS received consultancy fees from Janssen, Ferring, Fresenius, Abbvie, Galapagos, Celltrion, Pharmacosmos, and Pharmanovia. Research support: Galapagos and Viatris. JS is supported by a Senior Clinical researcher grant from the Research foundation – Flanders. MF reports being a consultant or speaker for AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Celltrion, Dr Falk, Ferring, Janssen-Cilag, Lamepro, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme MSD, Mylan, Pfizer, Regeneron, Samsung Bioepis, Sandoz, Takeda, Thermo Fisher Scientific, and Truvion Healthcare; and received research grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Janssen, Pfizer, Takeda, and Viatris. JL has received recent grants/speaker fees of and did consulting for AbbVie, Almirall, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celtrion, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB Pharma – not personal but paid to an institutional university account. HL reports receiving consultancy or speaker fees from AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, – not personal but paid to an institutional university hospital account. TH has received grants and consulting and/or speaking fees from: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sandoz, Sanofi, UCB Pharma. AL reports being a consultant or speaker for: AbbVie, Bayer, Falk Pharma, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer Inc, Sanofi, UCB Pharma. KV reports being a consultant or speaker for Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Novartis,Pfizer, MSD, Acelyrin, UCB Pharma, Leo Pharma, Amgen and has received financial research support from UCB Pharma and Celgene. PV reports being a consultant or speaker for Abbvie, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, MSD, Nordic Pharma, Roularta, Sidekick Health and has received financial research support from Pfizer. EP has received a consultant of speaker’s fees/travel grants on institutional account from Hologic, bioMerieux, DiaSorin, Novosanis. TL has received financial support for research from Abbvie, Mylan, MSD, Mundipharma, Biogen, Janssen, Pfizer and Takeda, Speaker fees fromFerring, MSD, Abbvie, Janssen, Amgen, Fresenius Kabi, Galapagos and Takeda and Consultancy fee from Janssen, Galapagos, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Fresenius Kabi and Takeda. SV has received grants from AbbVie, J&J, Pfizer, Takeda and Galapagos; and consulting and/or speaking fees from: AbbVie, AbolerIS Pharma, AgomAb, Alimentiv, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Avaxia, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, CVasThera, Cytoki Pharma, Dr Falk Pharma, Ferring, Galapagos, Genentech-Roche, Gilead, GSK, Hospira, Imidomics, Janssen, J&J, Lilly, Materia Prima, MiroBio, Morphic, MrMHealth, Mundipharma, MSD, Pfizer, Prodigest, Progenity, Prometheus, Robarts Clinical Trials, Second Genome, Shire, Surrozen, Takeda, Theravance, Tillots Pharma AG, Zealand Pharma. The remaining author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Geldof, Truyens, Sabino, Ferrante, Lambert, Lapeere, Hillary, Van Laethem, de Vlam, Verschueren, Padalko, Lobaton and Vermeire.)

Objective: Our aim was to summarize and evaluate the current quality of evidence regarding the efficacy of therapies for cutaneous psoriasis (PsO) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA)., Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and conference abstracts was conducted to identify interventional randomized controlled trials in patients with PsA between February 2013 and December 2021. Studies were included if PsO outcomes included achieving at least 75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index and the blinded comparison period was ≥ 10 weeks. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was employed to assess quality of the evidence to inform and update the 2021 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations., Results: A total of 116 studies and 36 abstracts identified in the initial search were screened. A total of 37 studies (40 treatment arms) met the criteria for final inclusion. Phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors, Janus kinase inhibitors, and tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitors, interleukin 17 inhibitors (IL-17i), IL-12/23i, IL-23i, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) had high-quality data broadly supporting the efficacy of each class for plaque PsO over placebo. Head-to-head studies with high-quality data supported both IL-17i and IL-23i over TNFi., Conclusion: Several pharmacologic therapeutic classes have high-quality evidence demonstrating efficacy for cutaneous PsO in the PsA population. The findings will be integrated into the 2021 GRAPPA treatment recommendations, intended to guide selection of a therapeutic class where efficacy in 1 or more cutaneous or musculoskeletal domains is required., (Copyright © 2023 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: Apremilast is approved for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. However, data on the efficacy and safety of apremilast in clinical practice are limited. We assessed the real-world use and effectiveness of apremilast in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis visiting dermatologist practices in Belgium, from the perspectives of the patient and the physician., Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled adults aged 18 years or more initiating apremilast between 6 April 2017 and 30 June 2018, per Belgian reimbursement criteria. Primary outcome was the Patient Benefit Index for Skin Diseases (PBI-S). Secondary outcomes included the Patient Global Assessment (PtGA), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), and body surface area (BSA). Patients were followed up for up to 18 months., Results: Overall, 122 enrolled patients received at least one dose of apremilast, of which 89 received treatment for more than 150 days and were included in the reference population. Treatment goals most frequently identified (at least 70% of patients) as "very important" in the PBI-S were related to physical impairments. After 6 months of apremilast treatment, 61-78% of patients reported they had achieved these goals; only 12.5% assessed their disease as severe (PtGA, 53.6% at apremilast initiation) and over half reported a DLQI score of 5 or less, indicating improved quality of life. As assessed by the physician, 68.4% and 35.1% of patients achieved at least a 50% and 75% reduction in PASI, respectively, at month 6. Apremilast was well tolerated with no new safety signals identified., Conclusions: Our real-world data indicate that apremilast fulfils the expectations of Belgian patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, and from the perspectives of both the patient and physician, apremilast has a positive impact on their disease., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03097003., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease associated with numerous comorbidities. Psoriasis has been linked to an increased risk of metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic arterial disease. Inflammatory conditions are known to increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality. However, the relationship between psoriasis and VTE has received little attention and existing studies have shown conflicting results., Objectives: This systematic review aims to perform a meta-analysis on VTE in psoriasis patients., Methods: We conducted a systematic electronic search of the incidence of VTE (pulmonary embolism [PE], deep venous thrombosis [DVT] and/or retinal vein occlusion [RVO]) in psoriasis patients on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane (specifics: see Appendix 1 in Supporting information). Only English literature and full manuscripts were included; abstracts were excluded. Pooled risk ratio and 95% confidence interval were calculated using Review Manager., Results: Seven articles were included. Each study separately indicated a correlation between psoriasis and VTE after adjustment for several clinical parameters. The confounders included in the adjustment differed between studies, but all included adjustment for age, gender and comorbidities. A meta-analysis of the unadjusted data of the five studies that reported raw data on number of VTE events and patient follow-up (person-years) showed a pooled risk ratio for VTE and psoriasis of 1.29 (95% CI: 0.92-1.81). The statistical heterogeneity was high with I 2 of 97%., Conclusions: Published data adjusted for key confounders demonstrate in general a significantly increased prevalence of VTE in psoriasis patients. Both psoriasis severity and number of confounders assessed seem to have an impact on this correlation. In this review, we pooled unadjusted data of the studies and we found a non-significant increased risk for VTE in psoriasis patients compared to healthy controls. This discrepancy suggests that psoriasis severity, age, gender or comorbidities may influence the risk of VTE in subgroups of the psoriasis population. Future research to identify subgroups at risk for VTE is warranted.Key messagesThe included studies reported an increased risk of VTE, DVT, PE and RVO in psoriasis patients.A meta-analysis was performed on five studies that reported raw data and showed that the pooled risk ratio for VTE in psoriasis patients overall was increased, however not significantly, compared to healthy controls.Further research to pinpoint psoriasis subgroups at risk (e.g. severe psoriasis patients, younger age, associated comorbidities) of developing VTE is warranted.