Search

Background Autofluorescence (AF)–Raman microspectroscopy is a technology that can detect residual basal cell carcinoma (BCC) on the resection margin of fresh, surgically excised tissue specimens. The technology does not require tissue fixation, staining, labelling or sectioning, and provides quantitative diagnosis maps of the surgical margins in 30 min. Objectives To determine the accuracy of the AF–Raman instrument in detecting incomplete BCC excisions during Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), using histology as the reference standard. Methods Skin layers from 130 patients undergoing MMS at the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (September 2022–July 2023) were investigated with the AF–Raman instrument. The layers were measured when fresh, immediately after excision. The AF–Raman results and the intraoperative assessment by Mohs surgeons were compared with a postoperative consensus-derived reference produced by three dermatopathologists. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03482622). Results AF–Raman analysis was successfully completed for 125 of 130 layers and, on average, covered 91% of the specimen surface area, with the lowest surface area covered being 87% for the eyelid and the highest being 94% for forehead specimens. The AF–Raman instrument identified positive margins in 24 of 36 BCC-positive cases [67% sensitivity, 95% confidence interval (CI) 49–82] and negative margins in 65 of 89 BCC-negative cases (73% specificity, 95% CI 63–82). Only one of 12 false-negative cases was caused by misclassification by the AF–Raman algorithm. The other 11 false-negatives cases were a result of no valid Raman signal being recorded at the location of the residual BCC due to either occlusion by blood or poor contact between tissue and the cassette window. The intraoperative diagnosis by Mohs surgeons identified positive margins in 31 of 36 BCC-positive cases (86% sensitivity, 95% CI 70–95) and negative margins in 79 of 89 BCC-negative cases (89% specificity, 95% CI 81–95). Conclusions The AF–Raman instrument has the potential to provide intraoperative microscopic assessment of surgical margins in BCC surgery. Further improvements are required for tissue processing, to ensure complete coverage of the surgical specimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There is no evidence base to support the use of 6-monthly monitoring blood tests for the early detection of liver, blood and renal toxicity during established anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) treatment. Objectives To evaluate the incidence and risk factors of anti-TNFα treatment cessation owing to liver, blood and renal side-effects, and to estimate the cost-effectiveness of alternate intervals between monitoring blood tests. Methods A secondary care-based retrospective cohort study was performed. Data from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologic and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR) were used. Patients with at least moderate psoriasis prescribed their first anti-TNFα treatment were included. Treatment discontinuation due to a monitoring blood test abnormality was the primary outcome. Patients were followed-up from start of treatment to the outcome of interest, drug discontinuation, death, 31 July 2021 or up to 5 years, whichever came first. The incidence rate (IR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of anti-TNFα discontinuation with monitoring blood test abnormality was calculated. Multivariate Cox regression was used to examine the association between risk factors and outcome. A mathematical model evaluated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with increasing the length of time between monitoring blood tests during anti-TNFα treatment. Results The cohort included 8819 participants [3710 (42.1%) female, mean (SD) age 44.76 (13.20) years] that contributed 25 058 person-years (PY) of follow-up and experienced 125 treatment discontinuations owing to a monitoring blood test abnormality at an IR of 5.85 (95% CI 4.91–6.97)/1000 PY. Of these, 64 and 61 discontinuations occurred within the first year and after the first year of treatment start, at IRs of 8.62 (95% CI 6.74–11.01) and 3.44 (95% CI 2.67–4.42)/1000 PY, respectively. Increasing age (in years), diabetes and liver disease were associated with anti-TNFα discontinuation after a monitoring blood test abnormality [adjusted hazard ratios of 1.02 (95% CI 1.01–1.04), 1.68 (95% CI 1.00–2.81) and 2.27 (95% CI 1.26–4.07), respectively]. Assuming a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained, no monitoring was most cost-effective, but all extended periods were cost-effective vs. 3- or 6-monthly monitoring. Conclusions Anti-TNFα drugs were uncommonly discontinued owing to abnormal monitoring blood tests after the first year of treatment. Extending the duration between monitoring blood tests was cost-effective. Our results produce evidence for specialist society guidance to reduce patient monitoring burden and healthcare costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The number of published systematic reviews has soared rapidly in recent years. Sadly, the quality of most systematic reviews in dermatology is substandard. With the continued increase in exposure to systematic reviews, and their potential to influence clinical practice, we sought to describe a sequence of useful tips for the busy clinician reader to determine study quality and clinical utility. Important factors to consider when assessing systematic reviews include: determining the motivation to performing the study, establishing if the study protocol was prepublished, assessing quality of reporting using the PRISMA checklist, assessing study quality using the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal checklist, assessing for evidence of spin, and summarizing the main strengths and limitations of the study to determine if it could change clinical practice. Having a set of heuristics to consider when reading systematic reviews serves to save time, enabling assessment of quality in a structured way, and come to a prompt conclusion of the merits of a review article in order to inform the care of dermatology patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated a rapid expansion of digital Advice and Guidance (A&G) across UK medical and surgical specialties. Dermatology A&G requests have increased by over 400% since the onset of the pandemic in 2020, with rapid expansion of teledermatology A&G services across England. Dermatology A&G is usually carried out asynchronously through dedicated digital platforms such as the National Health Service e-referral service, with streamlined conversion to referral if clinically indicated. A&G with images is advocated as the main referral pathway to dermatology specialist services in England (excluding the 2-week wait suspected skin cancer pathway). Providing dermatological care through A&G requires specific clinical skill sets to ensure rapid, safe and collaborative delivery, and optimization of educational benefit. Little published guidance is available to signpost clinicians to what constitutes a high-quality A&G request and response. This educational article discusses good clinical practice based on extensive local and national experience from primary and secondary care doctors. We cover digital communication skills, shared decision making, clinical competency and building collaborative links between patients, referrers and specialists. High-quality A&G, with agreed turn-around times and optimization of technology, can significantly streamline patient care and strengthen links between clinicians, providing it is appropriately resourced within the wider planning of elective care and outpatient activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Predatory journals, first recognized in the early 2000s, are fraudulent publications characterized by aggressive marketing solicitations and deviation from best publishing practices. These journals claim to be legitimate scholarly publications, and accept articles with no or poor peer review processes or quality checks, with rapid publication on payment by authors. They are a global threat as they are dishonest, lack transparency and seek only financial gain. More recently, predatory conferences have emerged and are expanding rapidly. Although they appear to be legitimate scientific conferences, they are also characterized by an overriding profit motive, with no concern for academic values. Predatory journals and conferences are on the rise; dermatology trainees, readers and those new to publishing and conferences are vulnerable to predatory exploitation. The consequences of falling victim to such predation include damage to the external reputation of the authors and their institution, and heightened concerns about the legitimacy of the research. This educational review defines predatory journals and conferences, and summarizes their distinguishing features such as a poor or no peer review process, rapid acceptance, flattering language and lack of meeting. It highlights the consequences of publishing in a predatory journal or attending a predatory conference, and outlines several tools available that dermatology researchers can use to recognize and reduce the likelihood of falling prey to a predatory journal or conference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To investigate the association between vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and autoimmune rheumatic disease (AIRD) flare. Material and methods Patients with AIRDs vaccinated against COVID-19 who consulted for disease flare between 1 December 2020 and 31 December 2021 were ascertained in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (Aurum). AIRD flare was defined as consultation for AIRD with CS prescription on the same day or the next day. Vaccination was defined using date of vaccination and product code. The observation period was partitioned into vaccine-exposed (21 days after vaccination), pre-vaccination (7 days before vaccination) and remaining vaccine-unexposed periods. Participants contributed data with multiple vaccinations and outcomes. Season adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) and 95% CI were calculated using self-controlled case series analysis. Results Data for 3554 AIRD cases, 72% female, mean age 65 years and 68.3% with RA, were included. COVID-19 vaccination was associated with significantly fewer AIRD flares in the 21-day vaccine-exposed period when all vaccinations were considered [aIRR (95% CI) 0.89 (0.80, 0.98)]. Using dose-stratified analyses there was a statistically significant negative association in the 21 days after first COVID-19 vaccination but no association after the second or third COVID-19 vaccinations [aIRR (95% CI) 0.76 (0.66, 0.89), 0.94 (0.79, 1.11) and 1.01 (0.85, 1.20), respectively]. On AIRD-type stratified analyses, vaccination was not associated with disease flares. Vaccination without or after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, and with vectored DNA or mRNA vaccines, associated with comparable reduced risk of AIRD flares in the vaccine-exposed period after first COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions Vaccination against COVID-19 was not associated with increased AIRD flares regardless of prior COVID-19, AIRD type, and whether mRNA or DNA vaccination technology were used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background There is a lack of well-conducted randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of theory-based online interventions for eczema. To address these deficiencies, we previously developed and demonstrated the effectiveness of two online behavioural interventions: Eczema Care Online for parents/carers of children with eczema, and Eczema Care Online for young people with eczema. Objectives To explore the views and experiences of people who have used the Eczema Care Online interventions to provide insights into how the interventions worked and identify contextual factors that may impede users' engagement with the interventions. Methods Qualitative semistructured interviews were conducted with 17 parents/carers of children with eczema and 17 young people with eczema. Participants were purposively sampled from two randomized controlled trials of the interventions and recruited from GP surgeries in England. Transcripts were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, and intervention modifications were identified using the person-based approach table of changes method. Results Both young people and parents/carers found the interventions easy to use, relatable and trustworthy, and perceived that they helped them to manage their eczema, thus suggesting that Eczema Care Online may be acceptable to its target groups. Our analysis suggested that the interventions may reduce eczema severity by facilitating empowerment among its users, specifically through improved understanding of, and confidence in, eczema management, reduced treatment concerns, and improved treatment adherence and management of irritants/triggers. Reading about the experiences of others with eczema helped people to feel 'normal' and less alone. Some (mainly young people) expressed firmly held negative beliefs about topical corticosteroids, views that were not influenced by the intervention. Minor improvements to the design and navigation of the Eczema Care Online interventions and content changes were identified and made, ready for wider implementation. Conclusions People with eczema and their families can benefit from reliable information, specifically information on the best and safest ways to use their eczema treatments early in their eczema journey. Together, our findings from this study and the corresponding trials suggest wider implementation of Eczema Care Online (EczemaCareOnline.org.uk) is justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Clinical question: Is monitoring of liver function, lipids and full blood count necessary in healthy people taking isotretinoin? Background: Routine blood testing was recommended in the original licence for Roaccutane™ (isotretinoin) in 1983. In recent years, less frequent monitoring has been suggested by various authors. Data sources We performed four individual systematic searches of the MEDLINE database, via PubMed, from origin to 2 May 2021, supplemented by a hand search of all references in the identified papers. Study selection: Inclusion criteria were any description of clinical symptoms, laboratory abnormalities and/or physical findings, and any paper that explicitly described the patients as asymptomatic, during treatment with oral isotretinoin. Data extraction: Two independent reviewers (J.A. and D.J.) assessed articles for eligibility of inclusion. Evaluation of the data was done also by two of the authors (A.A., D.J. and J.A.) for each section, with the aim to use the presented evidence including guidelines, databases, case series, case reports, cohort studies and randomized clinical trials to delineate the clinical presentation and frequency of adverse events that might be amenable to laboratory monitoring. Results: We identified 407 papers in our searches and reviewed 125 papers in four sections. Overall, reported adverse events were very rare (< 1 in 10 000) and were either idiosyncratic or not preventable by monitoring, accompanied by symptoms, or seen in identifiable predisposed individuals who might benefit from monitoring because of pre‐existing conditions. Recommendation for clinical care: We could not find evidence to support the benefit of monitoring to detect adverse events. We suggest that in healthy young people laboratory monitoring for oral isotretinoin is unnecessary and risks detecting nonserious biochemical abnormalities. However, we recognize that new information about adverse events may change that recommendation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In Part 1 of this two‐part review, conceptual frameworks for defining skin diseases were articulated. In this review, the main approaches that can be used to develop diagnostic criteria for skin disease are summarized, using atopic dermatitis (AD) as an example. Different frameworks for defining skin disease for research purposes are articulated, including statistical, prognostic, operational, clinical and epidemiological approaches. All share the common aim of attempting to develop criteria that enable meaningful comparisons between groups of people. The desirable attributes of a good definition are described: diagnostic criteria should measure what they are meant to measure; the results should be the same for different assessors; the criteria should be coherent with what is known about that disease; they should reflect some degree of morbidity and not pick up subclinical disease; they should be easy to administer; and they should be applicable to a range of people of different ages, sexes/genders and ethnicities. Consensus‐based criteria are contrasted with epidemiological derivation methods that assess the performance of diagnostic criteria in relation to a reference standard. The sensitivity and specificity of a disease definition is explained, along with how the trade‐off between these two properties can vary, depending on the purpose of the study and the study setting. The review closes with some reflections on when it is appropriate to consider splitting a disease into more than one category and how diagnostic criteria can be interpreted in the clinical setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: In Part 1 of this 2‐part review of the 20th anniversary of the UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network (UK DCTN), we described its role in developing and supporting clinical trial proposals, elaborating on structure, process and clinical trials activity. This review describes the diverse educational and training activities that the UK DCTN supports. Although not primarily set up as an educational organization, an education and training function emerged organically as the network grew. Education and training also embodies the democratization principle that drove the formation of the UK DCTN, allowing participation from a much wider group of individuals than just senior academics. Far from being a sideline, education and training has now become a major component of the UK DCTN that evolves constantly through changing training curricula and trial methodology developments. Formal UK DCTN training opportunities started in 2007 with competitively awarded annual fellowships for dermatology trainees, followed by similar schemes for general practitioners, Staff and Associate Specialist clinicians and dermatology nurses. These were followed in 2013 by larger groups of trainees who work up specific trial proposals with senior mentors. Finally, a virtual journal club emerged during the pandemic in 2020 in order to reach trainees with little access to academic training. Focused activities with dermatological nurses and patients/carers also take place. Such activities require considerable organization and volunteerism from the co‐ordinating centre and former fellows. Education and training has become an essential component for capacity building to develop clinical trials and succession planning for the UK DCTN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network (UK DCTN) was formed in 2002 with the aim of developing and supporting high‐quality independent national clinical trials that address prioritized research questions for people with skin disease. Its philosophy is to democratize UK dermatological clinical research and to tackle important clinical questions that industry has no incentive to answer. The network also plays a key role in training and capacity development. Its membership of over 1000 individuals includes dermatology consultants, trainees, dermatology nurses, general practitioners, methodologists and patients. Its organizational structures are lean and include a co‐ordinating team based at the Centre of Evidence‐Based Dermatology in Nottingham, and an executive with independent members to ensure probity and business progression. A prioritization panel and steering group enable a pipeline of projects to be prioritized and refined for external funding from independent sources. The UK DCTN has supported and completed 12 national clinical trials, attracting investment of over £15 million into UK clinical dermatology research. Trials have covered a range of interventions from drugs such as doxycycline (BLISTER), silk clothing for eczema (CLOTHES) and surgical interventions for hidradenitis suppurativa (THESEUS). Trial results are published in prestigious journals and have global impact. Genuine partnership with patients and carers has been a strong feature of the network since its inception. The UK DCTN is proud of its first 20 years of collaborative work, and aims to remain at the forefront of independent dermatological health technology assessment, as well as expanding into areas including diagnostics, artificial intelligence, efficient studies and innovative designs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The aim was to examine the incidence and pattern of MMF discontinuation associated with abnormal monitoring blood-test results. Methods Data from people prescribed MMF for common inflammatory conditions in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink were used. Participants were followed from the first MMF prescription. The primary outcome was drug discontinuation with an associated abnormal blood-test result within 60 days. Secondary outcomes were drug discontinuation for any reason and discontinuation associated with severely abnormal blood-test results within 60 days. Multivariable Cox regression was used to examine factors associated with the primary outcome. Results The cohort included 992 participants (68.9% female, mean age 51.95 years, 47.1% with SLE) contributing 1885 person-years of follow-up. The incidence of MMF discontinuation associated with any (severely) abnormal blood-test results was 153.46 (21.07) per 1000 person-years in the first year of prescription and 32.39 (7.91) per 1000 person-years in later years. Of those patients prescribed MMF, 11.5% (1.7%) discontinued treatment with any (severely) abnormal blood-test results in the first year of prescription. After this period, a mean of 2.6% (0.7%) of patients discontinued treatment with any (severely) abnormal blood-test results per year. Increased serum creatinine and cytopenia were more commonly associated with MMF discontinuation than elevated liver enzymes. Chronic kidney disease stage   3 or higher was significantly associated with MMF discontinuation with any blood-test abnormalities [adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) 2.22 (1.47, 3.37)]. Conclusion MMF is uncommonly discontinued for blood-test abnormalities and even less often discontinued for severe blood-test abnormalities after the first year of prescription. Consideration can be given to less frequent monitoring after 1 year of treatment, especially in those without chronic kidney disease stage   3 or higher. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors need to justify their replication in relation to author influence or conflicts of interest in previously published NMAs2-4. For example, if the NMA authors cite this being high-priority research, but do not cite this in comparison with a previously published NMA, they are not assessing priority in relation to the need for replication2. The assessment of this being a high-priority NMA should be made explicitly in relation to the need for replication of previously published NMAs. [Extracted from the article]

Antibiotics are among the most important interventions in healthcare. Resistance of bacteria to antibiotics threatens the effectiveness of treatment. Systematic reviews of antibiotic treatments often do not address resistance to antibiotics even when data are available in the original studies. This omission creates a skewed view, which emphasizes short-term efficacy and ignores the long-term consequences to the patient and other people. We offer a framework for addressing antibiotic resistance in systematic reviews. We suggest that the data on background resistance in the original trials should be reported and taken into account when interpreting results. Data on emergence of resistance (whether in the body reservoirs or in the bacteria causing infection) are important outcomes. Emergence of resistance should be taken into account when interpreting the evidence on antibiotic treatment in randomized controlled trials or systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several studies have suggested that the prevalence of atopic dermatitis has increased over the last three decades,[SUP1-7] and similar trends have been reported with asthma and hay fever. However, in common with other 'allergic' disease, the definition and measurement of atopic dermatitis in populations has been fraught with problems and has led to difficulties in separating any real changes in disease prevalence from secular changes in diagnosis. In this article, the evidence surrounding the claims of an increased prevalence of atopic dermatitis is examined, and possible reasons for such a change are suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]