Search

Background: Over the last decade, the treatment landscape for moderate–severe psoriasis has rapidly evolved. The Australasian College of Dermatologists sought to review and update previously published treatment goals for moderate–severe psoriasis. Methods: A modified Delphi approach was used. Comprehensive literature review and guideline evaluation resulted in the development of statements and other questions to establish current clinical practices. Two rounds of anonymous voting were undertaken, with a collaborative meeting held in between to discuss areas of discordance. Overall, consensus was defined as achievement of ≥75% agreement in the range 7–9 on a 9‐point scale (1 strongly disagree; 9 strongly agree). Results: Consensus was achieved on 26/29 statements in round 1 and a further 20 statements in round 2. There was strong agreement to expanding the classification/definition of psoriasis severity by including a choice of metrics, incorporating quality of life measures, and widening the scope of high‐impact sites. Consensus was also reached on revised treatment response criteria, which were then incorporated into a new treatment algorithm. There was discordance with the current requirement to undertake a trial with established systemic agents before accessing targeted therapy. Conclusion: The ability of new targeted treatment options to change the narrative in psoriasis patient care can only be properly realised if challenges to timely and equitable access are addressed. The proposed framework for the assessment, classification and management of moderate–severe psoriasis aligns with international recommendations. Its adoption into Australian clinical practice is hoped to improve treatment outcomes and patients' satisfaction with their care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) is a group of uncommon chronic inflammatory skin conditions with unclear pathophysiology and etiology. To date there is limited published literature and no clinical guidelines for the management of PRP. Infliximab, alone or in combination, is the most widely published successful treatment for adults and etanercept for pediatric populations. We present a case series of patients diagnosed with PRP. Retrospective data were collected from a tertiary Australian dermatology department between January 2010 and December 2019 on patients with PRP. Electronic medical records and pathology database were searched. A total of 13 patients were included. Twelve of the 13 patients used topical agents and three patients attempted narrow‐band ultraviolet B phototherapy. All patients received acitretin as first line systemic agent with the dose varying from 10 to 50 mg daily. Six patients treated with acitretin reported adverse events, requiring dose reduction or cessation. Of the nine patients who did not receive a biologic agent, complete clearance of PRP was achieved in five cases. At least one biologic agent was used in four cases with two experiencing a marked improvement. Overall, complete clearance was achieved in six patients. PRP continues to be a challenge to treat with many treatment options used with variable efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Optimal management of atopic dermatitis requires a comprehensive assessment of response to treatment in order to inform therapeutic decisions. In a realworld setting, successful response to atopic dermatitis treatment is measured by sustained improvements in signs, symptoms, and quality of life. Post-hoc analyses of a 1-year, randomized, double-blinded, placebocontrolled trial (NCT02260986) of dupilumab with concomitant topical corticosteroids in 421 adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (of whom 315/106 received placebo/dupilumab (of whom 315 received placebo and 106 received dupilumab) was performed to assess the proportion of responders to dupilumab through a multidimensional composite endpoint. At 6-months, 80.2% of dupilumab-treated vs 40.0% placebo patients (p < 0.0001) achieved improvement in signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7), symptoms (worst itch score ≤ 4), or quality of life (Dermatology Life Quality Index ≤5), representative of minimal/clear atopic dermatitis. All 3 endpoints, indicative of no/minimal atopic dermatitis, were achieved by 44.3% of dupilumab-treated vs 10.2% placebo patients (p < 0.0001) and sustained through 1 year. Dupilumab treatment provided sustained clinically meaningful improvement in signs, symptoms, and quality of life in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Dupilumab is approved as first-line systemic treatment for adults/adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in Europe and elsewhere owing to its favourable benefit–risk profile. However, systemic non-steroidal immunosuppressants (NSISS) are often used as first-line therapy in clinical practice. Impact of prior therapy with NSISS on dupilumab's treatment effect vs. control has not been described previously. This study assessed dupilumab's efficacy vs. control in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, comparing treatment effect in patients with/without prior systemic NSISS therapy, in four phase 3 trials. Methods: This post hoc analysis included 1553 patients randomized to placebo or dupilumab (300 mg q2w) as monotherapy for 16 weeks, or with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS) for 16/52 weeks, from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials. Patients were stratified by prior use of systemic NSISS and dupilumab-treated patients were analysed against control groups (treated with placebo or placebo + TCS). Results: Dupilumab-treated patients, regardless of prior treatment with NSISS, achieved a significantly higher percentage reduction from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), Dermatology life Quality Index (DLQI), and Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) vs. control; significantly more achieved EASI score ≤ 7, Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale ≤ 4, POEM ≤ 7, and DLQI ≤ 5 by week 4. These rapid, significant improvements were seen with or without concomitant TCS and sustained through end-of-treatment. Conclusions: Dupilumab treatment (monotherapy or + TCS) provides rapid, significant, sustained improvements in signs, symptoms, and quality of life in patients with moderate-to-severe AD compared with control, regardless of prior systemic NSISS use. Clinical Trial Registration: LIBERTY AD SOLO 1: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02277743, EudraCT 2014-001198-15. LIBERTY AD SOLO 2: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02277769, EudraCT 2014-002619-40. LIBERTY AD CHRONOS: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02260986, EudraCT 2013-003254-24. LIBERTY AD CAFÉ: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02755649, EudraCT 2015-002653-35. Plain Language Summary: Atopic dermatitis (AD), also known as eczema, is characterized by red, oozy, and dry skin that can become cracked and infected. Dupilumab is a drug that blocks key molecules that cause allergic conditions, such as AD. It has been shown to be effective in treating moderate-to-severe AD. Other drugs commonly used to treat AD include certain anti-inflammatory drugs, known as non-steroidal immunosuppressants (NSISS), such as cyclosporin. It is not known if patients treated in the past with NSISS get the same results from AD treatment with dupilumab. This analysis used data from four large studies that included patients with moderate-to-severe AD. The objective was to see if prior NSISS use impacted how dupilumab worked to control AD. The researchers looked at a range of measurements—including ones that were assessed by a patient's doctor such as measurements of AD skin lesions. Itching and how patients felt about their overall life quality were also analysed (which included items such as sleep, pain, ability to work or do normal leisure activities, etc.). The researchers found that if a patient had taken an NSISS for AD before taking dupilumab, it had no impact on the efficacy of dupilumab. All of the measurements evaluated improved significantly more in patients treated with dupilumab than in patients taking a placebo (dummy) medication. The benefits of treatment occurred within a few weeks of starting dupilumab treatment and remained until the end of the longest study included in this analysis, 1 year. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the rapid development of new, targeted therapies for the treatment of moderate/severe atopic dermatitis, it is opportune to review the available conventional systemic agents. We assess the published evidence for systemic therapies for atopic dermatitis and amalgamate this with real‐world experience. Discussions are centred on when systemic therapy should be considered, which drug(s), what dose, how to sequence or combine these therapies, how long they should be continued for and what is considered success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Objectives: Atopic dermatitis (AD) has significant negative impact on health‐related quality of life, mood, sleep, work productivity and everyday activities. Research into the use of new drugs in the management of AD continues to develop, and international updates and recommendations have been published. However, questions remain in the Australian setting. This consensus aims to provide evidence‐based insights and practical advice on the management of adult AD in Australia. Methods: A panel (five dermatologists and one clinical immunologist) met to review the literature, critically examine clinical questions of relevance to Australian healthcare practitioners and develop a series of recommendation statements. A consensus panel, comprising the initial panel plus nine additional members, used a 2‐round Delphi voting process to determine a set of final guidance statements. Consensus: ≥75% agreement in the range 7–9. Results: Round 1 voting comprised 66 guidance statements. Of these, consensus was reached on 26, which were retained, and five were removed. The remainder (35) were modified and one new guidance statement was added for inclusion in round 2 voting. After round 2, consensus was reached on 35, which were retained, and one was removed (considered redundant). The 61 guidance statements upon which consensus was reached were then used to support a series of core consensus recommendations and a management flow chart. Conclusions: Expert consensus recommendations providing practical guidance of clinical relevance to specialists and primary care physicians in Australia have been developed. Dissemination of this guidance and evaluation of its impact on patient outcomes remain to be undertaken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]