Search

Abstract Introduction This systematic review and meta‐analysis aims to investigate the mutual impact of COVID‐19 and psoriasis to inform clinical practice and future research. Methods We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analysis protocol for systematic reviews and searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar until May 1, 2022. Eligibility criteria included full‐text articles in English reporting COVID‐19 treatment outcomes in psoriasis patients. Studies on animals, letters to editors, non‐English studies, and studies with no access to full articles were excluded. Search results were screened and data were extracted by two groups of reviewers with any discrepancies resolved by the senior author. The risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS‐I for nonrandomized studies. The hospitalization rate, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission rate, case fatality rate, odds ratios of COVID‐19 infection and hospitalization rate in psoriasis patients were extracted and analyzed using random effects analysis to calculate pooled prevalence and odds ratios, as well as to explore heterogeneity. Results We found 1980 records from four databases and included 20 studies after screening and removing duplicates. These studies evaluated 185,000 psoriasis patients and included eight retrospective cohort studies, one case‐control study, three cross‐sectional studies, and eight case series studies. The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on psoriasis treatment and the outcome of COVID‐19 infection in psoriasis patients receiving different forms of treatment were evaluated. The pooled data from included studies showed that the incidence rate of COVID‐19 infection among psoriasis patients was 0.03% (confidence interval [CI]: 0.01–0.06), with a pooled odds ratio of 1.97 (CI: 0.69–5.60) compared to the general population. The hospitalization rate, ICU admission rate, and case fatality rate for psoriasis patients with COVID‐19 were 0.17 (CI: 0.10–0.31), 0.06 (CI: 0.06–0.46), and 0.02 (CI: 0.01–0.04), respectively. Additionally, psoriasis patients receiving systemic nonbiologic therapy had a pooled odds ratio of 2.32 (CI: 1.18–4.57) for hospitalization compared to those using biologic agents. Conclusion Studies have shown that biologic therapy for psoriasis did not increase the risk of hospitalization due to COVID‐19 infection and may have even offered some protection. Treatment adherence was higher in psoriasis patients receiving biologic therapies than those receiving conventional therapies. These findings suggest that psoriasis treatment did not negatively impact COVID‐19 infection and that treatment could be continued on a case‐by‐case basis during the pandemic.

Abstract Background and Aim Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is a well‐known noncommunicable disease that plays a significant role in emerging other chronic disorders and following complications. MetS is also involved in the pathophysiology of numerous dermatological diseases. We aim to evaluate the association of MetS with the most prevalent dermatological diseases. Methods A systematic search was carried out on PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Cochrane, as well as the Google Scholar search engine. Only English case‐control studies regarding MetS and any skin disease from the beginning of 2010 up to November 15, 2022, were selected. The study was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA). Results A total of 37 studies (13,830 participants) met the inclusion criteria. According to our result, patients with psoriasis, hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), vitiligo, androgenetic alopecia (AGA), and lichen planus (LP) have a higher chance of having MetS compared to the general population. Furthermore, people with seborrheic dermatitis (SED) and rosacea are more prone to insulin resistance, high blood pressure (BP), and higher blood lipids. After pooling data, the meta‐analysis revealed a significant association between MetS and skin diseases (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 3.28, 95% confidence interval: 2.62−4.10). Concerning the type of disease, MetS has been correlated with AGA (OR: 11.86), HS (OR: 4.46), LP (OR: 3.79), and SED (OR: 2.45). Psoriasis also showed a significant association but with high heterogeneity (OR: 2.89). Moreover, skin diseases and MetS are strongly associated in Spain (OR: 5.25) and Thailand (OR: 11.86). Regarding the metaregression model, the effect size was reduced with increasing age (OR: 0.965), while the size increased with AGA (OR: 3.064). Conclusions MetS is closely associated with skin complications. Dermatologists and other multidisciplinary teams should be cautious while treating these patients to prevent severe complications resulting from MetS.

This study conducted a systematic review of studies on the relationship between androgenic alopecia and metabolic syndrome. We performed a comprehensive review of databases including PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase, and extracted relevant articles published from 2010 to 2018. The case reports, review articles, or studies lacking full-text articles were excluded. We examined nine studies for the meta-analysis step. The results showed a significant relationship between alopecia and metabolic syndrome (OR = 2.81; CI 95% = 2.16-3.66; I2 = 73%; P = 0.0003). There is a significant correlation between androgenic alopecia and metabolic syndrome.