Oral Psoriasis Therapies.

Oral psoriasis therapies include both older traditional immunosuppressants, such as methotrexate, cyclosporine, and acitretin, as well as newer, more targeted agents, such as apremilast, deucravacitinib, and oral interleukin-23 receptor antagonists. Patients may prefer oral therapies to injectable therapies based on the route of administration. Both older and newer oral psoriasis therapies can be utilized effectively in the treatment of psoriasis. Here, we will review oral agents used in the treatment of psoriasis as well as provide commentary on their role in our current, evolving psoriasis treatment paradigm.

Demographic Gaps and Requirements for Participation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trial Designs in Hidradenitis Suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease that disproportionally affects women, as well as Black and biracial individuals. While adalimumab remains the only therapy approved by the Food and Drug Administration for HS, many HS clinical trials for novel and re-tasked therapies are ongoing or upcoming. To optimize treatment equity, reflect the patient population, and facilitate trial participation, it is important to elucidate aspects of clinical trial protocols that may systematically exclude specific patient groups or impose hardships. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to systematically review inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as participant demographics in HS clinical trials. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science databases was conducted. Peer-reviewed publications of randomized controlled trials that were written in English and had at least 10 participants were included. Title and abstract screening and data extraction were completed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies totaling 1,496 adult participants met the inclusion criteria. Race and ethnicity were not reported in 473/1,496 (31.6%) and 1,420/1,496 (94.9%) trial participants, respectively. Trial participants were predominantly white (811/1,023, 79.3%) and female (1,057/1,457, 72.5%). The median of each study's average age was 35.7 years (IQR 33.5-38.0), and 17/23 (73.9%) trials excluded pediatric patients. Nearly all participants had Hurley Stage II (499/958, 52.0%) or Hurley Stage III (385/958, 40.2%) disease. Many trials excluded patients who were pregnant (19/23, 82.6%) and breastfeeding (13/23, 56.5%), or who had HS that was "too severe" (8/23, 34.8%) or "too mild" (16/23, 70.0%). Frequently, trial protocols required prolonged washout periods from HS therapies, relatively long duration in the study's placebo arm, and prohibited concurrent analgesic use. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review of 23 HS clinical trials totaling 1,496 participants identified substantial hardships imposed by trial participation, high rates of missing race and ethnicity data, and low representation of key patient groups, including those who identify as Black. Future trials with pragmatic study designs, broader inclusion criteria, and study sites in diverse communities may alleviate burdens of trial participation and improve enrollment of diverse patient groups.

Pain measurement in painful skin conditions and rheumatoid arthritis randomized controlled trials: a scoping review to inform pain measurement in hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common and bothersome symptom experienced by people with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) and has been prioritized as an outcome domain by the HIdradenitis SuppuraTiva cORe outcomes set International Collaboration (HISTORIC). OBJECTIVES: To perform a scoping review of pain measurement in randomized control trials (RCTs) of painful skin conditions (PSCs) and use of the pain numerical rating scale (NRS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in rheumatoid arthritis RCTs, to inform the efforts of HISTORIC to reach consensus on how to measure pain intensity in HS trials. METHODS: A search was conducted on several publication databases. Inclusion criteria were RCTs with a minimum of 10 participants that measured pain intensity. RESULTS: Pain NRS and VAS were used in 68% of PSC trials. Respectively, 77% and 87% of PSC and rheumatoid arthritis RCTs did not specify the recall window. The commonest recall window in PSCs when specified was 24 h. In total, 33% of PSC trials assessed maximum pain intensity and 3% average pain intensity, while 87% of rheumatoid arthritis trials did not provide details. Pain data were reported as mean difference by 76% of PSC trials and 75% of rheumatoid arthritis trials. Respectively, 10% and 11% of PSC and rheumatoid arthritis studies reported pain as the percentage of patients reaching a desirable state and only 1% and 2% reported number needed to treat. CONCLUSIONS: While pain NRS and VAS are standard methods to measure pain intensity in PSCs, key details such as the recall window are often omitted and there is no consensus on how to report pain NRS data. What is already known about this topic? Pain is the most burdensome symptom experienced by patients with hidradenitis suppurativa and has been prioritized as an outcome domain by the HIdradenitis SuppuraTiva cORe outcomes set International Collaboration (HISTORIC). What does this study add? Our review shows substantial variation in how pain numerical rating scale (NRS) and visual analogue scale are utilized in clinical trials. This variation restricts meta-analysis of pain intensity results. There is a need for consensus regarding the recall window for pain NRS and maximum vs. average pain, and whether current pain should be measured.