Search

Background: Chronic hand eczema (CHE) is a highly prevalent, heterogeneous, skin disease that encompasses different aetiological and clinical subtypes. Severe CHE without atopic dermatitis has been associated with systemic inflammation; yet it remains unknown if specific CHE subtypes leave distinct, systemic, molecular signatures., Objectives: To characterize the inflammatory plasma signature of different aetiological and clinical CHE subtypes., Methods: We assessed expression levels of 266 inflammatory and cardiovascular disease risk plasma proteins as well as filaggrin gene mutation status in 51 well-characterized CHE patients without concomitant atopic dermatitis and 40 healthy controls. Plasma protein expression was compared between aetiological and clinical CHE subgroups and controls both overall and according to clinical CHE severity. Correlation analyses for biomarkers, clinical and self-reported variables were performed., Results: Very severe, chronic allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) on the hands was associated with a mixed Type 1/Type 2 systemic immune activation as compared with controls. Circulating levels of Type 1/Type 2 inflammatory biomarkers correlated positively with clinical disease severity among CHE patients with ACD. No biomarkers were found, that could discriminate between aetiological subtypes, for example, between ACD and irritant contact dermatitis. Hyperkeratotic CHE showed a distinct, non-atopic dermatitis-like, systemic footprint with upregulation of markers associated with Type 1 inflammation and tumour necrosis factor alpha, but not Type 2 inflammation. Increased levels of CCL19 and CXCL9/10 could discriminate hyperkeratotic CHE from both vesicular and chronic fissured CHE, whereas no difference was found between the latter two subtypes., Conclusion: Profiling of systemic biomarkers showed potential for identifying certain CHE subtypes. Peripheral blood levels of inflammatory biomarkers were associated and correlated with the clinical disease severity of chronic ACD on the hands, underlining that this is a systemic disease. We question whether hyperkeratotic CHE should be classified as eczema., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases among children and adults. Over the last 5 years, the armamentarium for the treatment of this disease, with both topical and systemic drugs, has increased. Treat-to-target is basically the concept where a treatment goal and a time frame for that goal is set at initiation of a new treatment, and if the goals are not achieved in time, treatment will be adjusted. In clinical trials, treatment targets are based on scoring systems for disease severity as recommended by the Harmonizing Outcome Measure for Eczema (HOME) initiative, with the primary endpoint being a reduction of at least 75% of the baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score (EASI-75). The question, however, is if these are useful targets in real-world settings and how this should be implemented in everyday clinical practice. In rheumatology, setting a measurable target and a time frame for an instigated therapy has been shown to lead to more efficient and successful treatment. For atopic dermatitis, the instruments recommended by HOME form the core outcome measures for the treat-to-target frameworks published to date, which are based on expert consensus and Delphi processes. Although atopic dermatitis patients have a high risk of co-morbidities, including physical, psychological and socioeconomic, instruments to measure the severity of co-morbidities have not been included in these existing frameworks. In order to apply a treat-to-target strategy that is meaningful for both the patient and the doctor, validated tools for the measurement of treatment effect on co-morbidities exist and should be included in a shared decision-making process with the individual patient when choosing which targets to aim for and what should be considered treatment success. An obvious limitation for the implementation of a treat-to-target strategy in the clinical setting with atopic dermatitis is that retrieving the data needed is very time consuming. This could to some degree be mitigated by the use of electronic applications in which patients could report their outcomes., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Treat-to-target (T2T) is a pragmatic therapeutic strategy being gradually introduced into dermatology after adoption in several other clinical areas. Atopic dermatitis (AD), one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases, may also benefit from this structured and practical therapeutic approach. We aimed to evaluate existing data regarding the T2T approach in dermatology, with a specific focus on AD, as well as the views of International Eczema Council (IEC) members on the potential application of a T2T approach to AD management. To do so, we systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications on the T2T approach for any skin disease in the PubMed and Scopus databases up to February 2022 and conducted a survey among IEC members regarding various components to potentially include in a T2T approach in AD. We identified 21 relevant T2T-related reports in dermatology, of which 14 were related to psoriasis, five to AD, one for juvenile dermatomyositis and one for urticaria. In the IEC member survey, respondents proposed treatable traits (with itch, disease severity and sleep problems getting the highest scores), relevant comorbidities (with asthma being selected most commonly, followed by anxiety and depression in adults), recommended specialists that should define the approach in AD (dermatologists, allergists and primary care physicians were most commonly selected in adults), and applicable assessment tools (both physician- and patient-reported), in both adult and paediatric patients, for potential future utilization of the T2T approach in AD. In conclusion, while the T2T approach may become a useful tool to simplify therapeutic goals and AD management, its foundation in AD is only starting to build. A multidisciplinary approach, including a wide range of stakeholders, including patients, is needed to further define the essential components needed to utilize T2T in AD., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Objective: Diabetes devices that deliver insulin and measure blood glucose levels are cornerstones in modern treatment of type 1 diabetes. However, their use is frequently associated with the development of skin problems, particularly eczema and wounds. Proper skin care may prevent skin problems, yet evidence-based information from interventional studies is missing. Providing this information is the aim of this study., Research Design and Methods: This cluster-controlled intervention study tested the efficacy of a basic skin care program (including use of lipid cream, removal, and avoidance of disinfection). A total of 170 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes were included and assigned either to the intervention group (n = 112) or the control group (n = 58). Participants were seen quarterly the first year after device initiation, with clinical assessment and interview in an unblinded setting., Results: Eczema or wounds were observed in 33.6% of the intervention group compared with 46.6% of control participants (absolute difference, 12.9% [95% CI -28.7%, 2.9%]; P = 0.10). The adjusted odds of wound development were decreased by 71% in the intervention compared with control group (for wounds, odds ratio 0.29 [95% CI 0.12, 0.68]; P = 0.005). In total, only eight infections were seen, without a higher frequency in the intervention group, despite advice to omit disinfection., Conclusions: These data indicate our basic skin care program partially prevented diabetes device-induced skin reactions. However, more preventive strategies with other adhesives, patches, and/or types of lotions are needed for optimized prevention., (© 2023 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Hand eczema (HE) is a prevalent skin disease. However, the classification of HE into different subtypes remains challenging. A limited number of previous studies have employed invasive biopsy-based strategies; yet, studies of the HE proteome using noninvasive tape-stripping methodology have not been reported. In this study, we wanted to assess whether global proteomic analysis of skin tape strip samples can be used for subclassification of patients with HE. Tape strips were collected from patients with HE and healthy skin. Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry proteomics was performed, and the global protein expression was analyzed. We identified 2,919 proteins in stratum corneum-derived skin cells from tape strip samples. Compared with healthy skin, the lesional samples from patients with HE exhibited increased expression of immune-related markers and a decreased expression of structural barrier proteins. The difference between HE subtypes was restricted to the lesional skin areas and included an increased expression of skin barrier-related proteins independently of the concurrent AD. In conclusion, we found that the noninvasive tape strip method used in combination with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry proteomics can be used for analysis of skin protein expression in patients with HE. Thus, the method shows potential for assessing the proteomic differences between subtypes of HE and biomarker discovery., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although chronic hand eczema (CHE) is a highly prevalent and disabling skin disease, it is currently unknown if CHE is associated with systemic inflammation., Objectives: To characterize the plasma inflammatory signature of CHE., Methods: Using Proximity Extension Assay technology, we assessed 266 inflammatory and cardiovascular disease risk proteins in the plasma of 40 healthy controls, 57 patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) with active lesions, 11 with CHE and a history of AD (CHEPREVIOUS_AD), and 40 with CHE and no history of AD (CHENO_AD). Filaggrin gene mutation status was also assessed. Protein expression was compared between groups and according to disease severity. Correlation analyses for biomarkers, and clinical- and self-reported variables, were performed., Results: Very severe CHENO_AD was associated with systemic inflammation when compared with controls. Levels of T helper (Th)2- and Th1-, general inflammation and eosinophil activation markers increased with severity of CHENO_AD, primarily being significantly increased in very severe disease. Significant, positive correlations were found between markers from these pathways and severity of CHENO_AD. Moderate-to-severe but not mild AD displayed systemic inflammation. The Th2 markers C-C motif chemokine (CCL)17 and CCL13 (also known as monocyte chemotactic protein 4) were the top differentially expressed proteins in both very severe CHENO_AD and moderate-to-severe AD, showing a higher fold change and significance in AD. CCL17 and CCL13 levels further correlated positively with disease severity in both CHENO_AD and AD., Conclusions: Systemic Th2-driven inflammation is shared between very severe CHE with no history of AD, and moderate-to-severe AD, suggesting that Th2 cell targeting could be effective in several CHE subtypes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest C.B. is a consultant for Thorne HealthTech. J.P.T. is an advisor for AbbVie, Almirall, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Coloplast, OM Pharma, ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, UNION Therapeutics, Eli Lilly & Co., LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi-Genzyme, a speaker for AbbVie, Almirall, Eli Lilly & Co., LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi-Genzyme, and received research grants from Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi-Genzyme. The remaining authors declare they have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: Traditional systemic immunosuppressants and advanced therapies improve signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). However, data are limited in severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. In the phase 3 JADE COMPARE trial of patients with moderate-to-severe AD receiving background topical therapy, once-daily abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg showed significantly greater reductions in the symptoms of AD than placebo and significantly greater improvement in itch response (with abrocitinib 200 mg) than dupilumab at week 2., Objective: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib and dupilumab in a subset of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD in a post hoc analysis of the JADE COMPARE trial., Methods: Adults with moderate-to-severe AD received once-daily oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg, dupilumab 300 mg subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks, or placebo with concomitant medicated topical therapy. Severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD subgroups were classified by baseline characteristics [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 4, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) > 21, failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids), percentage of body surface area (%BSA) > 50, upper quartiles of EASI (EASI > 38) and %BSA (%BSA > 65), and combined subgroup of IGA 4, EASI > 21, and %BSA > 50, and failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids)]. Assessments included IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and a ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline, ≥ 75% and ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in EASI (EASI-75 and EASI-90), ≥ 4-point improvement from baseline in Peak Pruritus-Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4), time to PP-NRS4, least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in 14-day PP-NRS (days 2-15), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) up to week 16., Results: The proportion of patients achieving IGA 0/1, EASI-75, and EASI-90 responses was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.05) across all subgroups with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. Across most subgroups, PP-NRS4 response was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.01); the time to achieve this response was shorter with abrocitinib 200 mg (range 4.5-6.0 days) than abrocitinib 100 mg (range 5.0-17.0 days), dupilumab (range 8.0-11.0 days), and placebo (range 3.0-11.5 days). LSM change from baseline in POEM and DLQI was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.001) across all subgroups. Clinically meaningful differences were observed between abrocitinib and dupilumab for most evaluated endpoints across several subgroups, including in patients who failed or were intolerant to prior systemic therapy., Conclusions: Abrocitinib provided rapid and substantially greater improvements in skin clearance and quality of life compared with placebo and dupilumab in subgroups of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. These findings support the use of abrocitinib for severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03720470., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Measuring patient-reported outcomes is crucial to fully capture the burden of chronic hand eczema (CHE)., Objectives: To assess the effect of delgocitinib cream on itch, pain and nine additional key signs and symptoms reported by patients with CHE using the Hand Eczema Symptom Diary (HESD)., Methods: In a double-blind, phase IIb dose-ranging trial (NCT03683719), 258 adults with mild to severe CHE were randomized to delgocitinib cream 1, 3, 8 or 20 mg/g or cream vehicle twice daily for 16 weeks. Patients assessed 11 signs and symptoms of CHE daily through the HESD using an 11-point numeric rating scale; this was an exploratory endpoint., Results: Delgocitinib cream 20 mg/g was associated with an early and sustained reduction in itch and pain, along with clinically relevant reductions of ≥4 points from baseline to Week 16 in 48.4% and 63.6% of patients, respectively (17.9% and 5.9% with cream vehicle). There were improvements versus cream vehicle in all assessed CHE signs and symptoms (20 mg/g, p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Delgocitinib cream reduced itch, pain and other signs and symptoms in patients with CHE. This data correlated with clinician-reported outcomes, indicating that the HESD may be a useful assessment tool for CHE management., (© 2023 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Chronic hand eczema (CHE) significantly impacts quality of life. Published literature on pediatric CHE (P-CHE) in North America including knowledge on epidemiology and standard evaluation and management is limited., Objective: Our objective was to assess diagnostic practices when evaluating patients with P-CHE in the US and Canada, produce data on therapeutic agent prescribing practices for the disorder, and lay the foundation for future studies., Methods: We surveyed pediatric dermatologists to collect data on clinician and patient population demographics, diagnostic methods, therapeutic agent selection, among other statistics. From June 2021 to January 2022, a survey was distributed to members of the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance (PeDRA)., Results: Fifty PeDRA members responded stating that they would be interested in participating, and 21 surveys were completed. For patients with P-CHE, providers most often utilize the diagnoses of irritant contact dermatitis, allergic contact dermatitis, dyshidrotic hand eczema, and atopic dermatitis. Contact allergy patch testing and bacterial hand culture are the most used tests for workup. Nearly all utilize topical corticosteroids as first line therapy. Most responders report that they have treated fewer than six patients with systemic agents and prefer dupilumab as first-line systemic therapy., Conclusions: This is the first characterization of P-CHE among pediatric dermatologists in the United States and Canada. This assessment may prove useful in designing further investigations including prospective studies of P-CHE epidemiology, morphology, nomenclature, and management., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Importance: Atopic dermatitis onset usually occurs in childhood. Persistence of disease into adolescence and adulthood is common. It is important to evaluate new treatment options in adolescents because of the high unmet need in this population., Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib to treat moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adolescents., Design, Setting, and Participants: Prespecified analysis of adolescents enrolled in 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trials in more than 20 countries across Europe, North and South America, Oceania, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region from July 2018 through December 2020. Participants were adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Data analysis was performed from April to August 2021., Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo alone (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2) or with topical corticosteroids (AD Up)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Safety and efficacy, including at least a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline and validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) at week 16 (coprimary end points)., Results: A total of 552 adolescents (290 female; 262 male) were randomized. Mean (SD) age was 15.4 (1.8), 15.5 (1.7), and 15.3 (1.8) years for adolescents in Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up, respectively. In Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up, respectively, a greater proportion of adolescents (% [95% CI]) achieved at least 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index at week 16 with upadacitinib 15 mg (73% [63%-84%], 69% [57%-81%], 63% [51%-76%]), and upadacitinib 30 mg (78% [68%-88%], 73% [62%-85%], 84% [75%-94%]), than with placebo (12% [4%-20%], 13% [5%-22%], 30% [19%-42%]; nominal P < .001 for all comparisons vs placebo). Similarly, a greater proportion of adolescents treated with upadacitinib achieved a validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis score of 0 or 1 at week 16 and improvements in quality of life with upadacitinib than with placebo. Upadacitinib was generally well tolerated in adolescents. Acne was the most common adverse event, and all acne events were mild or moderate., Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of 3 randomized clinical trials, upadacitinib was an effective treatment for adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, with an acceptable safety profile., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03569293 (Measure Up 1), NCT03607422 (Measure Up 2), and NCT03568318 (AD Up).

Background: The TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce is a collaborative international network of registries collecting data of atopic eczema (AE) patients receiving systemic and phototherapy with the common goal to provide long-term real-world data on the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies. A core dataset, consisting of domains and domain items with corresponding measurement instruments, has been developed to harmonize data collection., Objectives: We aimed to give an overview of the status and characteristics of the eight established TREAT registries, and to perform a mapping exercise to examine the degree of overlap and pooling ability between the national registry datasets. This will allow us to determine which research questions can be answered in the future by pooling data., Methods: All eight registries were asked to share their dataset and information on the current status and characteristics. The overlap between the core dataset and each registry dataset was identified (according to the domains, domain items and measurement instruments of the TREAT core dataset)., Results and Conclusions: A total of 4702 participants have been recruited in the eight registries as of 1st of May 2022. Of the 69 core dataset domain items, data pooling was possible for 69 domain item outcomes in TREAT NL (the Netherlands), 61 items in A-STAR (UK and Ireland), 38 items in TREATgermany (Germany), 36 items in FIRST (France), 33 items in AtopyReg (Italy), 29 items in Biobadatop (Spain), 28 items in SCRATCH (Denmark) and 20 items in SwedAD (Sweden). Pooled analyses across all registries can be performed on multiple important domain items, covering the main aims of analysing data on the (cost-)effectiveness and safety of AE therapies. These results will facilitate future comparative or joint analyses., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Background: The accuracy of self-reported hand eczema (HE) is currently unclear, and it is unknown how well self-reported signs and symptoms of skin lesions that indicate HE correlate with self-reported HE., Objectives: To correlate self-reported signs and symptoms of skin lesions on the hands with self-reported HE, to assess the sensitivity and specificity, and to suggest a definition for HE., Method: Seven hundred ninety-five (47.8%) of 1663 invited healthcare workers completed a digital questionnaire, and were asked to report if they experienced HE or any of the following skin signs/symptoms in past 11 months: scaling, erythema, fissures, vesicles, dryness, itch, stinging., Results: HE during the past 11 months was reported by 11.9%. Of these, 91.4% reported at least one skin sign versus 32.3% of those without self-reported HE. The highest sensitivity and specificity were found for erythema (77.4% and 78.2%, respectively) and itch (78.5% and 78.6%, respectively), both separately and combined. The combination of ≥2 signs (erythema, scaling, fissures and vesicles) and itch, reached a sensitivity of 52.7% and specificity of 93.9%., Conclusion: The marked difference between self-reported HE and signs/symptoms highlights the importance of differentiating between data based on self-reported HE and signs/symptoms. As a first step towards diagnostic HE criteria, ≥2 signs combined with itch could be considered, but clinical studies are needed to verify the precision., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Compliance with glove use and safe work practices are important factors in primary prevention of occupational hand eczema (OHE) in hairdressers., Objective: To assess the risk OHE and compliance with skin protective measures in hairdressers trained before and after implementation of a nationwide skin protection program in Danish hairdressing vocational schools in 2011., Methods: A repeated cross-sectional study was performed. A questionnaire was sent in 2009 and 2020. The Danish Labour Market Supplementary Pension Scheme provided information on yearly payments from the hairdressing profession., Results: A response rate of 66.6% (305/460) was obtained in the 2009 survey and of 29.9% (363/1215) in the 2020 survey. The career time prevalence of OHE decreased from 42.8% to 29.0% (adjusted odds ratio 0.55 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.77) and the incidence rate of OHE decreased from 57.5 (95%CI 48.4-68.4) to 42.0 (95%CI 34.6-50.9) per 1000 person years (incidence rate ratio 0.73 [95%CI 0.56-0.95] between the two surveys). A statistically significant (P < .05) increase in glove use when doing wet-work and when handling hair dyes, permanent wave solutions and bleaching products was observed in the 2020 compared to the 2009 survey., Conclusion: Our data suggest that skin protection training during apprenticeship reduces the risk of OHE in hairdressers. The lack of primary prevention of OHE in hairdressing vocational schools may be a missed opportunity in the prevention of the disease., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Artificial nail modelling systems (ANMS), encompassing artificial nails and long-lasting nail polish, are sources of acrylate exposure in beauticians and users of ANMS. Hairdressers' exposure to ANMS from self-use and occupational exposure is currently unknown. In 2020 a questionnaire was sent to all hairdressers graduating during 2008 to 2018 in Denmark (n = 4,830). Self-use of ANMS was reported by 87.6% of respondents (1,251/1,428), and application of ANMS to others was reported by 22.1% (316/1,428). Of these, application to others was performed in a salon by 37.1% (109/294), privately by 51.0% (150/294) and in both settings by 11.9% (35/294). Compliance with glove use was seen in 23.0% (67/291) among those applying ANMS to others. Among hairdressers exposed to ANMS, 4.3% (52/1,218) reported ANMS-related hand eczema. Being a trained beautician (adjusted odds ratio 3.26, 95% confidence interval 1.06-9.99) and having had a positive patch-test to acrylates (adjusted odds ratio 7.70, 95% confidence interval 1.44-41.13) were associated with ANMS-related hand dermatitis. In conclusion, hairdressers have a high prevalence of exposure to ANMS and ANMS-related hand dermatitis. Compliance with glove use when applying ANMS to others is poor. Patch-testing with acrylates is valuable in the diagnostic work-up of hand eczema in hairdressers.

Introduction: Healthcare workers (HCWs) constitute a high-risk group for developing occupational hand eczema (HE). The present systematic review and meta-analysis will compile and appraise evidence regarding prevalence and incidence of HE in HCWs., Methods and Analysis: Systematic searches will be performed in three electronic literature databases (PubMed/Medline, Web of Science-Core Collection and Embase). Further references will be retrieved by a manual search of included studies' reference lists using snowballing techniques. We will include experimental studies, observational studies, survey-based studies and clinical studies (publications in English, French and German from 2000 onwards) reporting on certified and apprentice HCWs, who actively work in the job. We will look at the following outcomes: Prevalence and incidence of clinically assessed as well as self-reported HE in the style of the Nordic Occupational Skin Questionnaire-2002; HE severity (measured by eg, Hand Eczema Severity Index, Osnabrück Hand Eczema Severity Index, Physician Global Assessment or other validated instruments as well as self-reported or by using undefined categories such as 'mild', 'moderate' or 'severe'); clinically assessed (eg, clinical diagnosis, UK Working Party's diagnostic criteria, Hanifin and Rajka diagnostic criteria for atopic dermatitis (AD)) and self-reported AD. We will assess the risk of bias within studies using detailed criteria according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. As we expect heterogeneity in methods and outcomes, we will conduct sensitivity analyses. A narrative synthesis of results instead of a meta-analysis will be done in case that quantitative pooling is not feasible., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval and patient consent are not required as this work is based on published studies. The results will be published in an international, peer-reviewed journal., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42022303044., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Data from real-world use of new systemic treatments in atopic dermatitis (AD) is important for assessing safety and efficacy. The aim of this study is to describe the baseline characteristics of adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD enrolled in the Danish nationwide Severe and ChRonic Atopic dermatitis Treatment CoHort (SCRATCH) database, between October 2017 and August 2021. A total of 282 adult patients were included. Most (62%) were men, the median age at baseline was 43 years (interquartile range (IQR) 29-54 years), and median age at onset of AD was 1 year (IQR 0-6 years). The median Eczema Area and Severity Index at treatment initiation was 19.1 (IQR 11.9-25.7); median Patient Oriented Eczema Measure 21.0 (IQR 16.0-25.0); median Dermatology Life Quality Index 13.0 (IQR 7.0-19.0); and median itch and sleep numerical rating scale scores 8.0 (IQR 6.0-9.0) and 6.0 (IQR 4.0-8.0). Differences were found between the sexes. This registry will provide a source for future efficacy and safety studies.

Background: Chronic hand eczema (CHE) is a burdensome disease, and new well-documented, safe and efficacious treatments are warranted. In a recent CHE phase IIa trial, the pan-Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor delgocitinib in an ointment formulation was found to be efficacious and well tolerated., Objectives: This trial assessed the dose response, efficacy and safety of delgocitinib cream in CHE., Methods: In this double-blind, phase IIb dose-ranging trial, adults with CHE and a recent history of inadequate response or contraindication to topical corticosteroids were randomized to delgocitinib cream 1, 3, 8, 20 mg g -1 or vehicle treatment twice daily for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint was the Investigator's Global Assessment for CHE (IGA-CHE) treatment success [0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) with a ≥ two-point improvement from baseline to week 16]. Secondary endpoints were the time to IGA-CHE treatment success and changes in Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI); other endpoints were itch and pain numerical rating scale (NRS) scores, and Patient's Global Assessment (PaGA) at week 16., Results: Patients (n = 258) were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 to delgocitinib cream 1, 3, 8, 20 mg g -1 or vehicle. A significant dose-response relationship was established for IGA-CHE (P < 0.025). IGA-CHE treatment success at week 16 was achieved in 21.2% (1 mg g -1 ), 7.8% (3 mg g -1 ), 36.5% (8 mg g -1 ), 37.7% (20 mg g -1 ) and 8.0% (vehicle) of patients. Delgocitinib 8 and 20 mg g -1 showed a treatment effect against vehicle (P < 0.001). Similarly, there were improvements in HECSI, itch and pain NRS scores, and PaGA. Delgocitinib cream was well tolerated with the majority of adverse events being mild or moderate and considered unrelated to treatment. The most frequently reported adverse events were nasopharyngitis (17.3-29.4% in delgocitinib groups vs. 40% in vehicle group), eczema (5.8-11.3% in delgocitinib groups vs. 16.0% in vehicle group) and headache (3.8-11.5% in delgocitinib groups vs. 4.0% in vehicle group)., Conclusions: In this trial, delgocitinib cream showed a dose-response relationship in terms of efficacy and was well tolerated., (© 2022 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: Clinical trials of systemic therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD) often exclude patients based on age and comorbidities., Objectives: We conducted a scoping review of observational studies and survey of International Eczema Council (IEC) members on the treatment of AD in patients with liver disease, renal disease, viral hepatitis, HIV, or history of malignancy., Methods: We searched MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, and Web of Science from inception to September 14, 2020. We mapped the available evidence on the use of cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate, systemic corticosteroids, and dupilumab for AD in older adults (≥65 years) and adults with the previously mentioned comorbidities. We surveyed IEC members on their preferred systemic medications for each patient population., Results: We identified 25 studies on the use of systemic medications in special populations of adults with AD. Although IEC members preferred dupilumab as the first-line systemic agent across all special populations, many could not identify viable third-line systemic therapy options for some populations., Conclusions: Data on systemic therapy for AD for older adults and adults with comorbidities are limited. Although IEC members' access to systemic therapies differs geographically, expert opinion suggests that dupilumab is preferred for those patients., Competing Interests: A.M.D. has received compensation from the British Journal of Dermatology (reviewer and section editor), American Academy of Dermatology (guidelines writer), and National Eczema Association (grant reviewer). He has been a paid consultant for Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health. C.F. has received compensation from the British Journal of Dermatology (section editor). He is a chief investigator of the UK National Institute for Health Research–funded TREatment of Severe Atopic Eczema Trial and Softened Water for Eczema prevention trials as well as the UK-Irish Atopic eczema Systemic Therapy Register (A-STAR). He is also a principle investigator in the European Union Horizon 2020–funded BIOMAP Consortium (http://www.biomap-imi.eu/). His department has received funding from Sanofi-Genzyme for skin microbiome work. J.P.T. has been an advisor, investigator, or speaker for Regeneron, Sanofi-Genzyme, AbbVie, Pfizer, LEO Pharma, and Eli Lilly & Co. K.K. has received grants from Japan Tobacco, Inc; Kyowa Kirin; LEO Pharma; Maruho; Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma; Ono Pharmaceutical; Pola Pharma; Procter & Gamble Company; Taiho Pharma; and Torii Pharmaceutical. R.B. is an advisory board member, consultant, speaker, and/or investigator for and receives honoraria and/or grant from AbbVie, Arcutis, Arena Pharma, Asana BioSciences, Bellus Health, Bluefin Biomedicine, Boehringer-Ingelheim, CARA, Eli Lilly, Evidera, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, RAPT, Respivant, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Target RWE. R.B. is also an employee and shareholder of Innovaderm Research. V.A. is a principal investigator in the project 2018/23211-0 (Atopic Dermatitis) for FAPESP-Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo and is a consultant and/or investigator in clinical trials for AbbVie, Sanofi, and Ely-Lilly. A.N. an advisory board member, consultant, speaker, and/or investigator for and receives honoraria and/or grant from AbbVie, Celgene, Sanofi-Genzyme, Pierre Fabre, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Leo Pharma, Galderma, Incyte, IsisPharma, Leo Pharma, L'Oréal, Novartis, Medac SAS, and Pfizer. The other authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.)

Background: Hand eczema is a common inflammatory skin disorder. Health care providers need continuously updated information about the management of hand eczema to ensure best treatment for their patients., Objectives: To update the European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline on the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment on of hand eczema., Method: The Guideline Development Group (GDG) was established on behalf of the ESCD. A call for interest was launched via the ESCD website and via the ESCD members' mailing list. Appraisal of the evidence for therapeutic and preventive interventions was applied and a structured method of developing consensus was used and moderated by an external methodologist. The final guideline was approved by the ESCD executive committee and was in external review on the ESCD webpage for 1 month., Results: Consensus was achieved for several statements and management strategies., Conclusion: The updated guideline should improve management of hand eczema., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

There has been no extensive synthesis of studies evaluating the cost of chronic hand eczema (CHE). This review evaluated the societal costs, healthcare resource utilisation, missed work time and job loss due to CHE. MEDLINE and 16 other databases and websites were searched in October 2020 for studies meeting prespecified inclusion criteria. Studies conducted in Europe, Australia, New Zealand or the Americas were included. Two reviewers independently assessed titles and abstracts, and full-text papers published in English between 2000 and 2020, for relevance. Data extraction was carried out by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. All data were based on costs between 2001 and 2013 but have been inflated to 2020 prices and converted to US dollars and Euros. A total of 30 studies (reported in 33 publications) were included in the synthesis. Mean total societal costs per year per patient ranged from $2549 (€1813) to $10,883 (€7738). Pharmacological therapy was, on average, $28.34 (€20.15) per month in Italy and $36.49 (€25.94) per month for emollients in Switzerland. Yearly treatment costs were $599.05 (€425.92) for drugs, including topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, other topical treatments and oral treatments, and $178.40 for emollients, in Germany. CHE was associated with hospitalisation costs ranging from $81.86 (€58.20) per patient per month (US) to $105.04 (€74.68) per patient per month (Italy) and $639.59 (€454.75) per year (Germany). Up to 57% of patients took sick leave and up to 25% reported job loss/job change due to CHE. This review confirms the significant cost burden of CHE. Given the paucity of studies estimating the monetary costs of absenteeism, presenteeism and job loss associated with CHE, current mean societal costs are likely underestimated. Uncontrolled disease may also lead to increased costs to patients and society., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Importance: Primary results from the Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 studies demonstrated upadacitinib efficacy and safety through 16 weeks in patients with atopic dermatitis. Longer-term outcomes remain unknown., Objective: To evaluate long-term (52 weeks) efficacy and safety of upadacitinib treatment in patients with atopic dermatitis., Design, Setting, and Participants: Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 are ongoing double-blind, placebo-controlled, replicate phase 3 randomized clinical trials that include adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis at 151 and 154 centers, respectively. Cutoffs for this analysis were December 21, 2020 (Measure Up 1), and January 15, 2021 (Measure Up 2)., Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg, 30 mg, or placebo. At week 16, patients randomized at baseline to receive upadacitinib 15 mg (273 and 260 patients in Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, respectively) and 30 mg (270 and 268 patients) continued assigned treatment; placebo-treated patients were rerandomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 15 mg (121 and 120 patients in Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, respectively) or 30 mg (123 and 121 patients) in a double-blinded manner., Main Outcomes and Measures: Safety and efficacy, including 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index and Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) with 2 or greater grades of improvement, were assessed., Results: Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 included a total of 1609 patients (mean [SD] age, 33.8 [15.6] years; 727 women [45.2%]; 882 men [54.8%]). Efficacy at week 16 was maintained through week 52. At week 52, 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index was achieved by 82.0% (95% CI, 77.0%-86.9%) and 79.1% (95% CI, 73.9%-84.4%) of patients continuing the 15-mg dose and 84.9% (95% CI, 80.3%-89.5%) and 84.3% (95% CI, 79.6%-89.0%) of patients continuing the 30-mg dose (for Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2, respectively); Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) with 2 or greater grades of improvement was achieved by 59.2% (95% CI, 52.9%-65.5%) and 52.6% (95% CI, 46.2%-59.1%) and 62.5% (95% CI, 56.3%-68.7%) and 65.1% (95% CI, 58.9%-71.2%) of patients in the Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 studies, respectively. Treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was low overall but was slightly higher for the upadacitinib 30-mg dose. Both upadacitinib doses were well tolerated with no new safety signals., Conclusions and Relevance: In this analysis of follow-up data from 2 randomized clinical trials, longer-term treatment of adolescents and adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis with upadacitinib demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile, with sustained efficacy responses through 52 weeks., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03569293 (Measure Up 1) and NCT03607422 (Measure Up 2).

Background: Parents of children with atopic dermatitis (AD) report reduced quality of life and higher stress level, which could increase risk of psychiatric and pain disorders, and medication use., Methods: By use of Danish national registries, we identified family members of all first-born Danish children born between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2013 with a hospital diagnosis of AD, matched them 1:10 with family members of children without AD, and followed the cohorts over time., Results: Mothers of children with hospital-managed AD had higher risk of filling a prescription for medications for depression, anxiety, pain and sleep problems, and of consulting a psychologist, but most associations disappeared after full adjustment. Siblings had higher risk of receiving a diagnosis for adjustment disorder, and fathers showed increased risk of filling a prescription for pain medication and of divorce, in crude but not adjusted models., Conclusions: The increased risk of study endpoints seen in mothers of children with hospital-managed AD was not explained by pediatric AD alone. Rather, the total burden in these families including parent and child morbidity and socioeconomic resources seems to explain these observations. The burden in families of children with AD may potentially affect the overall management of their child's AD., (© 2021 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Background: Assessment of chronic hand eczema (CHE) is complex and warrants standardization., Objective: We sought to guide clinicians on the assessment of CHE., Methods: An electronic questionnaire regarding the diagnosis and assessment of CHE was completed by councilors (n=45) of the International Eczema Council, an international group of clinicians and researchers with expertise in CHE. The survey consisted of 52 statements for consensus., Results: Overall, nine statements (17.3%) had strong, twenty-three (44.2%) moderate, 12 (23.1%) low, and 8 (15.4%) very low levels of agreement. Five statements had considerable disagreement, including the value of conducting a skin biopsy (62.2% disagreement), investigating for possible type 1 reactions (60.0%), conducting a fungal culture (44.4%), finding no history of relevant allergens and/or irritants (31.1%) in most or all cases, and performing patch testing irrespective of lesion location and morphology (28.9%). Agreement was generally highest among respondents from Europe (28.6-77.8% agreement), followed by Asia (7.1%-35.7% agreement), North America (0%-35.5% agreement), and other (0%-13.3% agreement)., Conclusions: There were substantial differences of agreement, suggesting there are many knowledge and/or practice gaps with respect to CHE. Future research is needed to inform evidence-based and/or consensus guidelines for CHE., Competing Interests: J.I.S. was a consultant and/or advisory board member for Asana, Leo Pharma, Regeneron, and Sanofi. D.C. was a consultant and received honorarium from Ferndale Laboratories, Asana, Leo, UCB, FSJ, FIDE; owns stock or stock options for Dermira, Medimetriks, Brickell Biotech, Kadmon, Evommune; and is on Board of Directors for Kadmon, Evommune, and Dermira. R.B. is an advisory board member, consultant, speaker, and/or investigator for and received honoraria and/or grants from, AbbVie, Almirall, Anaptys Bio, Arcutis, Aristea, Bausch Health/Valeant, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Escalier, Janssen, Kineta, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sienna and UCB. He is also an employee and shareholder of Innovaderm Research. Corporate support was provided to the International Eczema Council by Abbvie, Arena, Asana, Celgene, Chugai, Dermavant, Dermira, Eli Lilly and Company, Galderma, Incyte, Kyowa Kirin, Leo Foundation, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi Genzyme and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sienna. E.G.-Y. is an employee of Mount Sinai and has received research funds (grants paid to the institution) from Abbvie, Almirall, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Asana Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Boerhinger-Ingelhiem, Celgene, Dermavant, DS Biopharma, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Glenmark/Ichnos Sciences, Innovaderm, Janssen, Kiniksa, Kyowa Kirin, Leo Pharma, Novan, Novartis, Pfizer, Ralexar, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sienna Biopharma, UCB and Union Therapeutics/Antibiotx; and is a consultant for Abbvie, Aditum Bio, Almirall, Alpine, Amgen, Arena, Asana Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Bluefin Biomedicine, Boerhinger-Ingelhiem, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Botanix, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Celgene, Clinical Outcome Solutions, DBV, Dermavant, Dermira, Douglas Pharmaceutical, DS Biopharma, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Evelo Bioscience, Evidera, FIDE, Galderma, GSK, Haus Bioceuticals, Ichnos Sciences, Incyte, Kyowa Kirin, Larrk Bio, Leo Pharma, Medicxi, Medscape, Neuralstem, Noble Insights, Novan, Novartis, Okava Pharmaceuticals, Pandion Therapeutics, Pfizer, Principia Biopharma, RAPT Therapeutics, Realm, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, SATO Pharmaceutical, Sienna Biopharma, Seanegy Dermatology, Seelos Therapeutics, Serpin Pharma, Siolta Therapeutics, Sonoma Biotherapeutics, Sun Pharma, Target PharmaSolutions and Union Therapeutics, Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Ventyx Biosciences, Vimalan. Consultant for Abbvie, Aditum Bio, Almirall, Amgen, Asana Biosciences, AstraZeneca, Boerhinger-Ingelhiem, Cara Therapeutics, Celgene, Concert, DBV, Dermira, DS Biopharma, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Galderma, Ichnos Sciences, Incyte Kyowa Kirin, Leo Pharma, Pandion Therapeutics, Pfizer, RAPT Therapeutics, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sanofi, Sienna Biopharma, Target PharmaSolutions and Union Therapeutics. J.P.T. has been an Advisor, Investigator or Speaker for Abbvie, Pfizer, LEO Pharma, Sanofi-Genzyme, Eli Lilly & Co., and Regeneron. E.S. reports grants from Eli Lilly, Incyte, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Leo Pharmaceutical, Merck, Pfizer, and Regeneron, and personal fees from Abbvie, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Forte Bio Rx, Incyte, Leo, Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Genzyme. T.A. is an advisory board member and/or consultant for Leo Pharma, Sanofi, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and Abbvie. A.W. has no funding or conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.)

Accurate assessments of the burden of hand eczema (HE) in the general population are important for public awareness and intervention. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide updated estimates of prevalence and incidence, alongside additional epidemiological endpoints on HE in the general population. PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting the prevalence and/or incidence of HE in the general population. Proportion meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled estimates of prevalence, incidence, severity, and the proportion of individuals with HE and a history of atopic dermatitis. Sixty-six studies were included in the quantitative analysis encompassing 568 100 individuals. The pooled estimates for lifetime, 1-year, and point prevalence were 14.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.6-16.5), 9.1% (95% CI: 8.4-9.8) and 4.0% (95% CI: 2.6-5.7), respectively. The pooled incidence rate of HE was 7.3 cases/1000 person-years (95% CI: 5.4-9.5). The occurrence of HE was 1.5-2 times higher in females than males. More than one third suffered from moderate/severe disease and around one third had a history of atopic dermatitis. HE was a recurrent, long-lasting disease with an average age at onset of the early- to mid-twenties. In conclusion; HE is a highly prevalent disease in the general population and carries a significant risk of long-term or chronic disease., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic of Spring 2020, Denmark was one of the first countries to introduce lockdown measures, including closing of all daycare centers. Following the reopening of daycare centers, Danish Health Authorities implemented a mandatory intensive hand hygiene regimen., Objectives: To examine the occurrence and point prevalence of hand eczema as a consequence of more intensive hand hygiene among Danish children attending daycare., Methods: The heads of 1667 daycare centers in Denmark were contacted and asked to forward a link to a questionnaire to parents of the children attending the daycare center., Results: Among 6858 children, 12.1% had hand eczema before reopening of daycare centers, whereas 38.3% reported hand eczema after the children returned to daycare. Of the children who never had hand eczema, 28.6% developed hand eczema after returning to daycare. The risk of hand eczema was significantly associated with atopic dermatitis, female gender, higher age, and frequency of handwashing., Conclusion: Following the implemented hygiene regimen, a high proportion of young children rapidly developed hand eczema. Well-established prophylactic skin care might have spared a proportion of the children from developing hand eczema., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory skin disease characterized by intense pruritus and recurrent eczematous lesions that significantly impair quality of life. It is a heterogeneous disease affecting both children and adults. The treatment of moderate-to-severe forms of AD is challenging, as topical corticosteroids are often insufficient to achieve disease control or inappropriate and off-label use of immunosuppressants may have significant undesirable side effects. The development of targeted biologic therapies specifically for AD is thus highly desirable. Dupilumab is the only biologic therapy that is Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD in patients 6 years and older, with consistent long-term efficacy and safety trial data. In this article, we review the mechanisms, safety, and efficacy of dupilumab from recent clinical trials, and we review the current data, mechanism of action, clinical efficacy, and limitations of new biologics currently in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials (lebrikizumab, tralokinumab, nemolizumab, tezepelumab, and ISB 830)., (Copyright © 2020 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a prevalent relapsing inflammatory skin disease. There is currently little knowledge about healthcare utilization and medication use along with parental corticosteroid phobia in relation to severity of pediatric AD., Objectives: To study the association between parental-reported healthcare utilization, medication use, and topical corticosteroid phobia and pediatric AD severity., Methods: The study population included all children in Denmark with a diagnostic code of AD (ICD-10 code, group L20) given at a hospital department of dermatology between 2014 and 2018. A questionnaire containing 158 response items was sent to the legal parents. We surveyed disease severity, AD treatment, corticosteroid phobia, and healthcare use along with other variables. Disease severity was assessed using the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure tool, and corticosteroid phobia was assessed using the Topical Corticosteroid Phobia (TOPICOP) score., Results: In total, 1343 (39%) parents completed the questionnaire and 95.3% were completed by the biological mother. Children's mean age was 8.9 ± 4.5 years, and 52.8% were boys. Severe AD was associated with a higher number of healthcare visits to GPs, private dermatologists, and hospital departments. Mean global TOPICOP score was 38.27 ± 19.9%. There was a significant inverse linear trend between global TOPICOP score and parental educational level (P trend  < .0005)., Conclusions: The significant association between high global TOPICOP score and low parental educational level, resulting in delayed treatment of AD flares, indicates that improved family education ultimately may reduce healthcare expenses and burden of disease., (© 2020 EAACI and John Wiley and Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To examine whether adults with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis (AD) had reduced insulin sensitivity and/or exhibited other gluco-metabolic disturbances compared with carefully matched healthy controls., Materials and Methods: Sixteen adult, non-obese, non-diabetic patients with mild to moderate AD and 16 gender-, age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched healthy controls underwent a hyperinsulinaemic euglycaemic clamp (insulin infusion rate: 40 mU/m 2 /minute) and an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with frequent blood sampling for gut and pancreatic hormones., Results: The two groups were similar in age (33 ± 3 vs. 33 ± 3 years, mean ± standard error of the mean [SEM]), gender (56% women), BMI (24.5 ± 0.7 vs. 24.4 ± 0.7 kg/m 2 ), physical activity level, fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c. Patients with AD had a mean Eczema Area and Severity Index score of 8.5 ± 1.0 (moderate disease) and a mean AD duration of 28 ± 3 years. During the OGTT, circulating glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, respectively, were similar in the two groups, except glucagon-like peptide-1, which was higher in patients with AD. The clamp showed no differences in insulin sensitivity between groups (M-value 9.2 ± 0.6 vs. 9.8 ± 0.8, P = .541, 95% CI -1.51; 2.60), or circulating insulin, C-peptide and glucagon levels., Conclusions: Using OGTT and the hyperinsulinaemic euglycaemic clamp technique, we found no difference in insulin sensitivity or other gluco-metabolic characteristics between patients with mild to moderate AD and matched healthy controls, suggesting that the inflammatory skin disease AD has little or no influence on glucose metabolism., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Little is currently known about possible associations between disease specific characteristics of atopic dermatitis (AD) and use of medical treatments. We explored the use of AD treatments within the past 12 months in Danish adults according to distinct patient characteristics. Patients who had received a diagnosis of AD in a hospital in- or outpatient setting as adults were surveyed and data cross-linked to a national prescription registry. AD severity was measured by the Patient-Oriented SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (PO-SCORAD). A total of 3834 patients participated. Use of topical medication in the past 12 months increased with increasing AD severity, whereas no difference was observed for systemic medication use. Positive associations between AD in the face and neck, and use of mild and moderately potent topical corticosteroids were observed, while involvement of palms and chest was associated with use of more potent topical corticosteroids. The mean DLQI, skin pain, and itch severity scores were lower in patients managed only with topical corticosteroids (5.5, 3.2, and 4.3, respectively) compared to patients treated with both oral and topical medication (7.1, 3.8, and 5.0, respectively). Patients with frequent topical corticosteroid use tended to be older (50.7 vs 48.6 years), males (50.0% vs 33.6%), current daily smokers (17.3% vs 13.7%), and having asthma (59.1% vs 43.8%) compared with infrequent users of topical corticosteroids. We found a disconnect between the severity of AD signs and symptoms, and use of AD therapies. In particular, a very modest use of systemic immunosuppressants was seen even among patients with severe AD symptoms. However, the underlying clinical decisions and reasons behind this disconnect is not clear based on the current data., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Abrocitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, was effective and well tolerated in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a phase 2b trial. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib monotherapy in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis., Methods: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial (JADE MONO-1), patients (aged ≥12 years) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Investigator Global Assessment score ≥3, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] score ≥16, percentage of body surface area affected ≥10%, and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score ≥4) with a bodyweight of 40 kg or more, were enrolled at 69 sites in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to oral abrocitinib 100 mg, abrocitinib 200 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. Randomisation was done using an interactive response technology system, stratified by baseline disease severity and age. Patients, investigators, and the funder of the study were masked to study treatment. The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had achieved an Investigator Global Assessment response (score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with a ≥2-grade improvement from baseline), and the proportion of patients who achieved at least a 75% improvement in EASI score from baseline (EASI-75) score, both assessed at week 12. Efficacy was assessed in the full analysis set, which included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study medication. Safety was assessed in all randomised patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03349060., Findings: Between Dec 7, 2017, and March 26, 2019, 387 patients were enrolled: 156 were assigned to abrocitinib 100 mg, 154 to abrocitinib 200 mg, and 77 to placebo. All enrolled patients received at least one dose of study treatment and thus were evaluable for 12-week efficacy. Of the patients with available data for the coprimary endpoints at week 12, the proportion of patients who had achieved an Investigator Global Assessment response was significantly higher in the abrocitinib 100 mg group than in the placebo group (37 [24%] of 156 patients vs six [8%] of 76 patients; p=0·0037) and in the abrocitinib 200 mg group compared with the placebo group (67 [44%] of 153 patients vs six [8%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001). Of the patients with available data for the coprimary endpoints at week 12, compared with the placebo group, the proportion of patients who had achieved an EASI-75 response was significantly higher in the abrocitinib 100 mg group (62 [40%] of 156 patients vs nine [12%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001) and abrocitinib 200 mg group (96 [63%] of 153 patients vs nine [12%] of 76 patients; p<0·0001). Adverse events were reported in 108 (69%) of 156 patients in the abrocitinib 100 mg group, 120 (78%) of 154 patients in the abrocitinib 200 mg group, and 44 (57%) of 77 patients in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in five (3%) of 156 patients in the abrocitinib 100 mg group, five (3%) of 154 patients in the abrocitinib 200 mg group, and three (4%) of 77 patients in the placebo group. No treatment-related deaths were reported., Interpretation: Monotherapy with oral abrocitinib once daily was effective and well tolerated in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis., Funding: Pfizer., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Skin barrier development and dysfunction in premature and mature newborns is important for the risk of atopic dermatitis (AD)., Methods and Analysis: The Barrier dysfunction in Atopic newBorns studY (BABY) Cohort is a prospective birth cohort study of 150 preterm children (gestational age (GA) below 37+0) and 300 term children (GA 37+0 to 41+6). Skin barrier is assessed through transepidermal water loss, tape stripping, Raman-spectroscopy and microbiome sampling. Clinical examinations are done and DNA from buccal swabs is collected for genetic analyses. Thymus size is assessed by ultrasound examination. Information on pregnancy, delivery, parental exposures and diseases are collected, and structured telephone interviews are conducted at 18 and 24 months to assess exogenous exposures in the child and onset of AD. Hanifin and Rajka criteria as well as The UK Working Party's Diagnostic Criteria for Atopic Dermatitis are used to diagnose AD. Severity of AD is assessed using the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM)., Ethics and Dissemination: The study is approved by the scientific Ethical Committee of the Capital Region (H-16042289 and H-16042294).Outcomes will be presented at national and international conferences and in peer-reviewed publications., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JPT reports grants from The Leo Foundation, The Novo Nordisk Foundation, Pfizer, The Lundbeck Foundation and grants from Savværksejer Jeppe Juhl og hustru Ovita Juhls Mindelegat, during the conduct of the study. JPT has been an advisor, investigator and speaker for AbbVie, Regeneron, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, LEO Pharma and Eli Lilly and Company.LS reports personal fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Sanofi, Celgene, LEO Pharma and Almirall, outside the submitted work. LS reports non-financial support from AbbVie, Sanofi, Janssen and grants from Novartis, Janssen and Sanofi.TG, A-SH-H, MRR, NHR and MHK report grants from Herlev and Gentofte Hospital Research Foundation during the conduct of the study., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Hand eczema is a disease with large variation in clinical presentation and severity. Scoring systems for quantitative severity assessment exist. However, they are observer-dependent. An objective quantitative tool for scoring of hand eczema would improve categorization of hand eczema., Objective: To investigate the usefulness of multispectral imaging in assessing severity of hand eczema with respect to extent and the different morphological features., Methods: Patients with hand eczema (n = 60) and healthy controls (n = 28) were included. The severity of hand eczema was assessed by a dermatologist using the Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI) and a global assessment (Physician Global Assessment [PGA]). Multispectral imaging of the hand was performed on all patients and controls using the VideometerLab Instrument., Results: Areas of the morphological elements identified by multispectral imaging were statistically significantly correlated with the PGA scores. Analyzed by Cohen's kappa, a moderate agreement between imaging-based severity assessment and PGA was found. The imaging-based severity assessment was also correlated with HECSI (Spearman rho 0.683, P < .001). Still, the imaging-based algorithm was not capable of differentiating hand eczema patients from controls., Conclusions: Multispectral imaging allows quantitative measurements of different skin parameters to be performed. In its present form, multispectral imaging cannot replace the clinical assessment of a dermatologist. However, after refinement, this or similar technologies could prove useful., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In a 4-month follow-up survey, we examined whether treatment with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and/or continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adults with type 1 diabetes was associated with sustained skin problems and whether skin problems were associated with diabetes-related emotional distress., Research Design and Methods: A total of 111 adult patients completed a follow-up questionnaire concerning skin problems as a result of CSII and/or CGM use. The questionnaire included a patient-reported outcome measure, the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale., Results: Current visible skin problems caused by CSII or CGM use were reported by 51 (46.0%) participants, in 34 (66.7%) of whom skin problems had been reported more than 4 months earlier. Seventy-two (64.9%) participants reported skin problems as a result of CSII use, whereas 38 (74.5%) reported skin problems owing to CGM use at some time. Itching was the most prevalent complaint. CSII-related itching was associated with a mean PAID score >20 (P = 0.01), and patients with more than one skin problem had an increased PAID score compared with those with one or no skin problems (P = 0.006)., Conclusions: More than half patients treated with CSII, CGM, or both had experienced skin problems during 4 months of follow-up that were associated with increased diabetes burden. Skin problems represent a persistent health issue affecting diabetes-specific emotional distress.

Background: In the future, widespread use of closed-loop infusion (artificial pancreas) systems to treat type 1 diabetes (T1D) may significantly improve glycemic control and enhance treatment flexibility. However, the infusion sets and plasters necessary for these treatments can cause dermatological complications that may hamper the spread of the new technology; few studies have investigated these complications in adults. The aim of this study was to describe the dermatological complications associated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adults., Methods: A total of 118 adult patients from two different diabetes clinics completed a questionnaire concerning the dermatological complications associated with their CSII and/or CGM treatment, other treatment variables, duration of diabetes, allergies, skin care, and other pathologies., Results: CGM or CSII use was associated with current eczema, scars, and wounds. In total, 34% of CSII users and 35% of CGM users currently had one or more skin lesions due to the use of these devices. We found no significant association with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, a history of atopic dermatitis, or other skin pathologies. However, multivariate analysis revealed associations with a history of atopy and CSII-associated dermatological complications., Conclusions: Dermatological complications were present in one in every three patients and represent a significant challenge to using CSII and CGM to treat adults with T1D. Prospective studies on the causes of these complications will be required to develop preventive strategies and ensure that optimal diabetes treatment approaches that take advantage of the latest technology can be implemented.

Background: The lack of standardized nomenclature for atopic dermatitis (AD) creates challenges for scientific communication, patient education, and advocacy., Objective: We sought to determine the relative popularity of the terms eczema, AD, and atopic eczema (AE) using global search engine volumes., Methods: A retrospective analysis of average monthly search volumes from 2014 to 2016 of Google, Bing/Yahoo, and Baidu was performed for eczema, AD, and AE in English and 37 other languages. Google Trends was used to determine the relative search popularity of each term from 2006 to 2016 in English and the top foreign languages, German, Turkish, Russian, and Japanese., Results: Overall, eczema accounted for 1.5 million monthly searches (84%) compared with 247 000 searches for AD (14%) and 44 000 searches for AE (2%). For English language, eczema accounted for 93% of searches compared with 6% for AD and 1% for AE. Search popularity for eczema increased from 2006 to 2016 but remained stable for AD and AE., Conclusions: Given the ambiguity of the term eczema, we recommend the universal use of the next most popular term, AD.

This article provides an overview of clinical aspects of hand eczema in patients with atopic dermatitis. Hand eczema can be a part of atopic dermatitis itself or a comorbidity, for example, as irritant or allergic contact dermatitis. When managing hand eczema, it is important to first categorize the subtype and identify potential culprit allergens or irritants. First-line therapy should be a combination of emollients and topical corticosteroids; possible alternatives include topical calcineurin inhibitors or coal tar. Second-line therapy includes UV therapy and systemic therapy, including azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate. Prednisolone should only be very infrequently used., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Flexural eczema and atopic dermatitis are frequently synonymized. As respiratory atopy is rarely tested for and found in these patients, systematically equating a flexural distribution of dermatitis with atopic dermatitis may too frequently result in misclassified diagnoses and potentially missed opportunity for intervention toward improving patients' symptoms and quality of life. We present a critical review of the available evidence for the atopic dermatitis diagnosis and discuss the similarities between atopic dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. Because neither flexural predilection nor atopy is specific for atopic dermatitis, we conclude that the term atopic dermatitis is a misnomer and propose an etymologic reclassification of atopic dermatitis to "atopy-related" dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis can induce an atopic dermatitis-like phenotype, and thus, flexural dermatitis cannot be assumed as atopic without further testing. Patch testing should at least be considered in cases of chronic or recurrent eczema regardless of the working diagnosis.

Atopic dermatitis, hand eczema and contact sensitization are prevalent disorders, and may, in many cases, be secondary to skin barrier abnormality. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between self-reported generalized xerosis, atopic dermatitis, hand eczema and contact sensitization, taking filaggrin gene mutations into account. Questionnaire data were collected from a cross-sectional study performed in a general population in Copenhagen. A total of 3,460 18-69-year-olds were patch-tested and 3,335 were genotyped for the 2282del4 and R501X mutations in the filaggrin gene. Atopic dermatitis and hand eczema were significantly associated with generalized xerosis, whereas contact sensitization (not nickel) showed only a borderline significant association. These results suggest that generalized xerosis may increase the risk of common skin disorders.

During the last 2 years, we have performed filaggrin genotyping in patients with eczema seen in our hand eczema clinic. We present pictures of healthy and diseased hands from individuals with filaggrin gene (FLG) mutations to describe a clinical entity of hand eczema. We show that xerosis and hyperkeratosis on the dorsal aspects of the hands and fingers, as well as palmar hyperlinearity, should alert the clinician about a possible inherited barrier abnormality of the skin resulting from FLG mutations. The series of photographs range from the hands of an individual with FLG mutations but no history of eczema, to the hands of individuals with typical and atypical filaggrin hand eczema, and finally to the hands of an individual with FLG mutations and hand eczema caused by exposure to irritants and allergens. We briefly discuss this possible subtype of hand eczema, present pathomechanisms, and indicate the signs that should alert the clinicians about a possible inherited skin barrier defect., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Background: A recent Danish study showed a significant increase in the prevalence of chromate contact allergy after the mid-1990s, probably as a result of exposure to leather products., Objectives: To reproduce the results by analysing data from the period 1992-2009 at Odense University Hospital, Denmark. The temporal development in the occurrence of chromate contact allergy and assumed causative exposures were investigated., Patients, Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of patch test data was performed (n = 8483), and medical charts from patients with chromate allergy (n = 231) were reviewed. Comparisons were made using the χ(2) -test. A test of the reproducibility of the TRUE Test® was also performed. Logistic regression analyses were used to test for associations., Results: No significant changes in the prevalence or exposure sources of chromate allergy during 1992-2009 were identified. Leather shoes (24.4%) were the most frequent exposure sources in chromate allergy, and were mainly registered in women, although the difference between men and women was not significant (P = 0.07). Cement and leather glove exposure occurred significantly more often in men than in women (P = 0.002). Foot dermatitis (40.3%) was the most frequent anatomical location, apart from hand eczema (60.6%). The reproducibility of the TRUE Test® was 93.3%., Conclusions: Apart from hand eczema, the most frequent clinical picture of chromate allergy was foot dermatitis caused by leather shoe exposure. A tendency for an increasing prevalence of chromate contact allergy from 1997 was shown, but no significant change was detectable., (© 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

Numerous studies have investigated the prevalence and risk factors of hand eczema in the general population. These studies are of high value as they tend to be less biased than studies using clinical populations and as they are important for healthcare decision makers when they allocate resources. This study aimed to review the epidemiology of hand eczema in the general population. Literature was examined using Pubmed-Medline, Biosis, Science Citation Index, and dermatology text books. On the basis of studies performed between 1964 and 2007, the point prevalence of hand eczema was around 4%, the 1-year prevalence nearly 10%, whereas the lifetime prevalence reached 15%. Based on seven studies, the median incidence rate of hand eczema was 5.5 cases/1000 person-years (women = 9.6 and men = 4.0). A high incidence rate was associated with female sex, contact allergy, atopic dermatitis, and wet work. Atopic dermatitis was the single most important risk factor for hand eczema. Hand eczema resulted in medical consultations in 70%, sick leave (> 7 days) in about 20%, and job change in about 10%. Mean sick time was longer among those with allergic hand eczema than those with atopic and irritant hand eczema. Moderate to severe extension of hand eczema was the strongest risk factor for persistence of hand eczema. Other risk factors included early onset of hand eczema and childhood eczema. The aetiology of hand eczema is multifactorial and includes environmental as well as genetic factors. Future studies should focus on unresolved areas of hand eczema, for example, genetic predisposition.