Draping in Dermatology: A Physician's Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Patient dignity is a core component of medicine and health care, yet maintaining patient dignity can be challenging in clinical settings in dermatology, specifically during a total body skin examinations (TBSE) for appropriate assessment and diagnosis. A recent study evaluated patient perspectives in dermatology. The purpose of this study was to investigate current draping practices and perspectives from a physicians' perspective. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed with the use of study-specific questionnaire distributed to staff dermatologists and dermatology residents across Canada. RESULTS: A total of 117 physicians were included (84 attending dermatologists and 33 dermatology residents). Nearly all staff and resident dermatologists (90.6%) indicated that draping was important. Specific practices differed between residents and staff (P = .03). Only 3.1% of residents indicated that they did not receive any form of teaching on draping during their training compared to 21.4% of attending physicians (P = .03). DISCUSSION: This study confirms that draping practices in dermatology are perceived as important by dermatologists, consistent with other reports emphasizing approaches to protect patient privacy and dignity. There is a shared value for draping and consistent integration of this within current practice of Canadian dermatologists. Formal and informal education incorporated in medical education and dermatology training is becoming more prominent. Major study limitations include sampling bias, convenience bias and nonresponse bias. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate physician perspectives on draping in dermatology or other areas in medicine. Findings from this study support a focus on draping in medical education.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Patients with a History of Treated Solid Tumours: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with treated solid tumours (TSTs) are a highly heterogeneous population at an increased risk for malignancy compared with the general population. When treating psoriasis in patients with a history of TSTs, clinicians are concerned about the immunosuppressive nature of psoriasis therapies, the possibility of augmenting cancer recurrence/progression, and infectious complications. No direct, high-level evidence exists to address these concerns. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework supporting healthcare professional and patient discussions on the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in patients with previously TSTs. Our goal was to address the clinically important question, "In patients with TSTs, does therapy with systemic agents used for psoriasis increase the risk of malignancy or malignancy recurrence?" METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial and real-world data were absent. We reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in patients with TSTs. Recommendations on systemic psoriasis therapies in patients with TSTs were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified five indirect indicators of iatrogenic immunosuppression informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) overall survival, (2) rate of malignancies with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (3) rate of infections with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (4) common disease biochemical pathways for solid tumours and systemic psoriasis therapies, and (5) solid organ transplant outcomes. On the basis of review of the totality of this data, we provided inference-based conclusions and ascribed level of support for each statement. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to considering new therapies for psoriasis, an understanding of cancer prognosis should be addressed. Patients with TSTs and a good cancer prognosis will have similar outcomes to non-TST patients when treated with systemic psoriasis therapies. For patients with TSTs and a poor cancer prognosis, the quality-of-life benefits of treating psoriasis may outweigh the theoretical risks.

Patients with previously treated cancer have a higher chance of cancer recurrence compared with the general population. With cancer incidence rising worldwide, doctors across medical specialities will need to treat other medical conditions, including inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis, in these patients. Effective systemic therapies for psoriasis reduce immune cell activity. Accordingly, there are concerns that treatments for psoriasis could worsen cancer recurrence/progression and infectious complications. There is not enough quality evidence to make broad recommendations for treating other inflammatory conditions in patients with a history of cancer. To guide patient and doctor discussions, we asked: what are effective and safe treatments when patients with treated solid tumours need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis? We focused on patients with solid tumours and excluded blood and skin cancers. Our panel of experts, including 12 dermatologists and 3 medical oncologists, reviewed direct and indirect evidence to answer this question. Considering the totality of evidence reviewed, the expert panel drafted and rated their level of support for opinion statements on important considerations in treating patients with psoriasis who have a history of solid tumours. By making inferences on systemic psoriasis therapies in this heterogeneous population, we take the onus off individual physicians to review the indirect data. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent. To support treatment decisions, doctors should have a guided conversation with the patient and their family on a case-by-case basis about the risks and benefits of treatment.

Vesiculobullous and Other Cutaneous Manifestations of COVID-19 Vaccines: a Scoping and Narrative Review.

As coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccines continue to be administered, dermatologists play a critical role in recognizing and treating the cutaneous manifestations (CM) associated with the vaccines. Adverse cutaneous reactions of COVID-19 vaccines reported in the literature range from common urticarial to rare vesiculobullous reactions. In this study, we performed a (1) scoping review to assess the occurrences of vesicular, papulovesicular, and bullous CMs of COVID-19 vaccines and their respective treatments, and (2) a narrative review discussing other common and uncommon CMs of COVID-19 vaccines. Thirty-six articles were included in the scoping review, and 66 articles in the narrative review. We found that vesicular, papulovesicular, and bullous lesions are infrequent, reported mostly after the first dose of Moderna or Pfizer vaccines. Eleven of the 36 studies reported vesicular reactions consistent with activation or reactivation of the herpes zoster virus. Most vesicular and bullous lesions were self-limited or treated with topical corticosteroids. Other CMs included injection-site, urticarial or morbilliform reactions, vasculitis, toxic epidermal necrolysis, and flaring of or new-onset skin diseases such as psoriasis. Treatments for CMs included topical or oral corticosteroids, antihistamines, or no treatment in self-limited cases. Although most CMs are benign and treatable, the data on the effect of systemic corticosteroids and immunosuppressive therapies on the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines is limited. Some studies report reduced immunogenicity of the vaccines after high-dose corticosteroids use. Physicians may consult local guidelines where available when recommending COVID-19 vaccines to immunosuppressed patients, and when using corticosteroids to manage the CMs of COVID-19 vaccines.

Follow-up of Patients With Keratinocyte Carcinoma: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Importance: Patients treated for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and basal cell carcinoma (BCC), collectively called keratinocyte carcinoma (KC), are at risk for recurrence, metastasis, and additional primary cutaneous malignant neoplasms. It is unclear how often patients should be seen for follow-up skin examination after initial treatment of KC. Objective: To summarize the recommendations and evaluate the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines for dermatologic follow-up of patients with BCC and invasive SCC. Evidence Review: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched for relevant articles published from January 2010 to March 2022. Search terms included guideline, squamous cell carcinoma, and basal cell carcinoma. National or international guidelines containing recommendations for follow-up frequency after a diagnosis of localized cutaneous KC were included. Quality was assessed using the 6 domains of the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool: (1) scope and purpose; (2) stakeholder development; (3) rigor of development; (4) clarity of presentation; (5) applicability; and (6) editorial independence. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) was used to guide study reporting. Findings: Among the 14 guidelines meeting eligibility criteria, there was little consensus on the appropriate follow-up frequency after initial KC treatment. Overall duration of follow-up ranged from a single posttreatment visit to lifelong surveillance. Most guidelines stratified their recommendations by recurrence risk. For low-risk BCC and guidelines that did not stratify by risk, follow-up recommendations ranged from every 6 to 12 months. For high-risk BCC, 1 guideline suggested follow-up every 3 months, while 4 recommended every 6 months. For low-risk SCC, 5 guidelines recommended annual follow-up; 3 guidelines, every 6 months; and 1 guideline, every 3 months. For high-risk SCC, recommendations included a range of follow-up frequencies, spanning every 3 months (n = 5 guidelines), 4 months (n = 1), 6 months (n = 6), or annually (n = 4). One guideline did not use risk stratification and recommended annual screening. The highest scoring AGREE II domain was "scope and purpose," which assessed the guideline's overall objectives, and the lowest scoring was "applicability," which assessed barriers and facilitators to implementation. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this systemic review highlight variations in follow-up recommendations for patients after initial treatment for KC. Randomized clinical trials are needed to define an optimal follow-up regimen.

Sustained Effectiveness of Secukinumab Across Different Body Regions in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis from the PURE Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The association between physician-reported and patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriasis is not adequately explored. Trends in PASI scores across body regions and the descriptive correspondence between physician-reported PASI components and patient-reported Psoriasis Symptom Diary are reported here. METHODS: PURE is a prospective observational study in adult patients from Canada and Latin America with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. The study enrolled 2362 adult patients treated with secukinumab versus other approved therapies (1:1 ratio). The PASI total score, PASI sub-scores for erythema, thickening, and scaling, and PASI scores for each body region were evaluated and further correlated with disease impact using the Psoriasis Symptom Diary. RESULTS: Secukinumab treatment showed early reduction in the PASI total score (mean ± SD) from 13.3 ± 9.02 at baseline to 2.3 ± 3.99 at 3 months; a similar trend was observed for PASI sub-scores for erythema (4.8 ± 3.21 to 0.9 ± 1.44), thickening (4.3 ± 3.00 to 0.7 ± 1.33) and scaling (4.2 ± 3.04 to 0.7 ± 1.30). The reduction in PASI total and sub-scores were sustained up to 36 months. Psoriasis Symptom Diary component scores related to redness, cracking, and scaling showed a similar reduction from baseline at 3 months that was also sustained up to 36 months. PASI regional scores for each body region showed reduction at 3 months with disease in the lower limbs being more treatment resistant. Safety profile of secukinumab was consistent with its established safety profile without any new or unexpected signals. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, an early and sustained resolution of erythema, thickening, and scaling was observed. Improvements were evident across all body regions, with the most persistent disease seen in the lower limbs. Trends in disease severity, as assessed by physicians using PASI, broadly reflected the trend in the comparable questions of the Psoriasis Symptom Diary assessed by patients.

Draping in Dermatology: A Patient's Perspective.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Patient dignity is a core component of the Canadian health care system; however, there may be challenges to maintaining patient dignity in clinical settings requiring total body skin examination (TBSE) for adequate assessment and diagnosis. As standardized TBSE draping practices have not been investigated in a dermatology setting, we sought out to investigate subjective patient experiences of draping practices. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed using a paper survey in dermatology hospital clinics over a 6-month period to 150 patients. RESULTS: Draping was considered important by over 50% of patients surveyed (54.7%). Respondents who indicated that draping impacted their comfort level "a lot" or "very much" had a mean age of 52 and were more likely to be females (P < .05). Females were also more likely to answer that their body weight/shape (P < .05), physician of same (P < .01) or opposite sex (P < .001), and the degree of privacy offered by drapes (P < .001) impacted their comfort level when undressing for a TBSE. Respondents who reported that any assessed factor impacted their comfort during a TBSE were also younger (P < .05), suggesting that younger and female patients were more likely to have comfort concerns than males. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed that most patients surveyed considered draping to be important. Our findings highlight the importance of adequate draping practices to maintain patient privacy and dignity for all patients, with special attention to younger female patients to ensure they feel as comfortable as possible. Future research should focus on how these identified patient comfort factors can be implemented into medical education.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in People Living with Controlled HIV: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have a similar prevalence of psoriasis as the general population, though incidence and severity correlate with HIV viral load. Adequately treating HIV early renders the infection a chronic medical condition and allows PLHIV with a suppressed viral load (PLHIV-s) to live normal lives. Despite this, safety concerns and a lack of high-level data have hindered the use of systemic psoriasis therapies in PLHIV-s. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework that supports healthcare professionals and patients discussing the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in PLHIV-s. Our goal was to address the primary question, are responses to systemic therapies for the treatment of psoriasis in PLHIV-s similar to those in the non-HIV population? METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial data were absent. In this instance, we reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in PLHIV. Recommendations on systemic treatment for psoriasis in PLHIV were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified seven indirect indicators of immune function informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) functional assays, (2) vaccine response, (3) life expectancy, (4) psoriasis manifestations, (5) rate of infections, (6) rate of malignancies, and (7) organ transplant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related benefits and risks when treating a patient with systemic psoriasis therapies are similar for non-HIV patients and PLHIV with a suppressed viral load and normalized CD4 counts. Prior to initiating psoriasis treatment in PLHIV, HIV replication should be addressed by an HIV specialist. Exercise additional caution for patients with a suppressed viral load and discordant CD4 responses on antiretroviral therapy.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) develop psoriasis as often as everyone else. We asked: what are effective and safe treatments when PLHIV need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis?HIV infection attacks the immune system. When HIV is not treated, the immune system declines. A less effective immune system makes it harder for the body to fight infections and certain cancers. Psoriasis is a skin condition caused by overactive immune cells. Effective psoriasis treatments reduce immune-cell activity. There are some concerns that treatments for psoriasis may not work and could worsen infections or cancers.To answer the question, we gathered 11 dermatologists and 4 HIV specialists. We reviewed the international scientific literature on PLHIV and psoriasis. The absence of direct evidence and volume of information to review made the process challenging. The end results were worthwhile.We concluded that people who are diagnosed early and take antiretroviral therapy to control their HIV infection (PLHIV-c) can live long, healthy lives. Accordingly, we determined that PLHIV-c can likely expect the same safety and efficacy for systemic psoriasis treatments as the general population. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis through consultation with the patient and treating physician(s).Pillars of modern medicine are evidence-based care and collaborative decision-making. Too often, neither care provider nor patient are adequately informed. We have tried to fill one information gap for PLHIV and psoriasis. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent.

Systemic interventions for treatment of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome are rare, severe cutaneous adverse reactions usually triggered by medications. In addition to tertiary-level supportive care, various systemic therapies have been used including glucocorticoids, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIGs), cyclosporin, N-acetylcysteine, thalidomide, infliximab, etanercept, and plasmapheresis. There is an unmet need to understand the efficacy of these interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of systemic therapies (medicines delivered orally, intramuscularly, or intravenously) for the treatment of SJS, TEN, and SJS/TEN overlap syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up to March 2021: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched five clinical trial registers, the reference lists of all included studies and of key review articles, and a number of drug manufacturer websites. We searched for errata or retractions of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational comparative studies of participants of any age with a clinical diagnosis of SJS, TEN, or SJS/TEN overlap syndrome. We included all systemic therapies studied to date and permitted comparisons between each therapy, as well as between therapy and placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as specified by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were SJS/TEN-specific mortality and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of SJS/TEN therapy. Secondary outcomes included time to complete re-epithelialisation, intensive care unit length of stay, total hospital length of stay, illness sequelae, and other adverse effects attributed to systemic therapy. We rated the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine studies with a total of 308 participants (131 males and 155 females) from seven countries. We included two studies in the quantitative meta-analysis. We included three RCTs and six prospective, controlled observational studies. Sample sizes ranged from 10 to 91. Most studies did not report study duration or time to follow-up. Two studies reported a mean SCORe of Toxic Epidermal Necrosis (SCORTEN) of 3 and 1.9. Seven studies did not report SCORTEN, although four of these studies reported average or ranges of body surface area (BSA) (means ranging from 44% to 51%). Two studies were set in burns units, two in dermatology wards, one in an intensive care unit, one in a paediatric ward, and three in unspecified inpatient units. Seven studies reported a mean age, which ranged from 29 to 56 years. Two studies included paediatric participants (23 children). We assessed the results from one of three RCTs as low risk of bias in all domains, one as high, and one as some concerns. We judged the results from all six prospective observational comparative studies to be at a high risk of bias. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of serious risk of bias concerns and for imprecision due to small numbers of participants. The interventions assessed included systemic corticosteroids, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) inhibitors, cyclosporin, thalidomide, N-acetylcysteine, IVIG, and supportive care. No data were available for the main comparisons of interest as specified in the review protocol: etanercept versus cyclosporin, etanercept versus IVIG, IVIG versus supportive care, IVIG versus cyclosporin, and cyclosporin versus corticosteroids. Corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids It is uncertain if there is any difference between corticosteroids (methylprednisolone 4 mg/kg/day for two more days after fever had subsided and no new lesions had developed) and no corticosteroids on disease-specific mortality (risk ratio (RR) 2.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 9.03; 2 studies; 56 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time to complete re-epithelialisation, length of hospital stay, and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. IVIG versus no IVIG It is uncertain if there is any difference between IVIG (0.2 to 0.5 g/kg cumulative dose over three days) and no IVIG in risk of disease-specific mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.91); time to complete re-epithelialisation (mean difference (MD) -2.93 days, 95% CI -4.4 to -1.46); or length of hospital stay (MD -2.00 days, 95% CI -5.81 to 1.81). All results in this comparison were based on one study with 36 participants, and very low-certainty evidence. Adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. Etanercept (TNF-alpha inhibitor) versus corticosteroids Etanercept (25 mg (50 mg if weight > 65 kg) twice weekly "until skin lesions healed") may reduce disease-specific mortality compared to corticosteroids (intravenous prednisolone 1 to 1.5 mg/kg/day "until skin lesions healed") (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.63; 1 study; 91 participants; low-certainty evidence); however, the CIs were consistent with possible benefit and possible harm. Serious adverse events, such as sepsis and respiratory failure, were reported in 5 of 48 participants with etanercept and 9 of 43 participants with corticosteroids, but it was not clear if they led to discontinuation of therapy. Time to complete re-epithelialisation and length of hospital stay were not reported. Cyclosporin versus IVIG  It is uncertain if there is any difference between cyclosporin (3 mg/kg/day or intravenous 1 mg/kg/day until complete re-epithelialisation, then tapered off (10 mg/day reduction every 48 hours)) and IVIG (continuous infusion 0.75 g/kg/day for 4 days (total dose 3 g/kg) in participants with normal renal function) in risk of disease-specific mortality (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98, 1 study; 22 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Time to complete re-epithelialisation, length of hospital stay, and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were not reported. No studies measured intensive care unit length of stay. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: When compared to corticosteroids, etanercept may result in mortality reduction. For the following comparisons, the certainty of the evidence for disease-specific mortality is very low: corticosteroids versus no corticosteroids,  IVIG versus no IVIG and cyclosporin versus IVIG. There is a need for more multicentric studies, focused on the most important clinical comparisons, to provide reliable answers about the best treatments for SJS/TEN.

Comparing the frequency of isotretinoin-induced hair loss at <0.5-mg/kg/d versus ≥0.5-mg/kg/d dosing in acne patients: A systematic review.

Over 1 million isotretinoin prescriptions are authorized in the United States per year. An insight into the frequency, dose dependency, timing, and reversibility of hair loss associated with isotretinoin treatment for acne vulgaris could help guide dosing regimens and patient counseling. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the frequency of hair loss in patients with acne vulgaris on <0.5 mg/kg/d daily doses of isotretinoin versus the frequency of hair loss in patients with acne vulgaris on ≥0.5 mg/kg/d daily doses of isotretinoin. An Embase and MEDLINE search was conducted on July 15, 2020, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The review focused on acne vulgaris patients. The treatment of acne vulgaris is the most common use of isotretinoin, and the population is typically younger and with fewer comorbidities. Twenty-two studies reported hair loss with oral isotretinoin treatment. A frequency analysis suggested that patients with acne vulgaris on <0.5 mg/kg/d of isotretinoin experienced hair loss at a frequency of 3.2% (n = 18/565) compared with those on ≥0.5 mg/kg/d, who experienced hair loss at a frequency of 5.7% (n = 192/3375). Inferential statistics were not possible. Physicians should consider counseling patients about the risk of telogen effluvium prior to drug initiation, as is commonly done for other side effects. The potential trend of increased hair loss frequency at a higher daily dosing warrants further investigation using higher-quality research.

"I Think There Should Be Photos": Female Indoor Tanners' Perceptions of Health Warning Labels for Tanning Beds.

This study explores female indoor tanners' perceptions of the current, text-only Canadian health warning label (HWL) for tanning equipment, as well as pictorial, evidence-based alternative HWLs. We created 10 test HWLs that depicted skin health effects, eye damage, premature aging, and death. Young women who had tanned indoors in the past year discussed these and the current federal HWL in focus groups. Although the current Canadian HWL was seen as informative, several participants did not recognize it, and many said that they would not read it due to the small text, wordiness, and lack of an image. Graphic images, particularly those depicting permanent conditions affecting the face, eyes, or appearance, were seen as effective. Common criticisms of the images were lack of believability, relatability, and comprehensibility. Although concise text was important for encouraging reading, many participants expressed a desire for more information in the test HWLs. Premature aging was of great concern to many participants, but the images selected for these HWLs were not perceived as effective. Although the text was seen as effective in the death HWLs, most participants dismissed the images. This research has implications for IT HWLs in Canada and globally. These results suggest that graphic images may be impactful in IT HWLs. Images must be supplemented with informative text that increases believability, relatability, and comprehensibility. These modifications would create HWLs that are engaging, informative, and that form part of a wider effort to spread awareness about the harmful effects of IT.

Racial Differences in the Prognosis and Survival of Cutaneous Melanoma From 1990 to 2020 in North America: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Factors influencing the difference in the diagnosis and treatment of melanoma in racial minority groups are well-described in the literature and include atypical presentations and socioeconomic factors that impede access to care. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the differences in melanoma survival outcomes between non-Hispanic white patients and ethnic minority patients in North America. METHODS: We conducted searches of Embase via Ovid and MEDLINE via Ovid of studies published from 1989 to August 5, 2020. We included observational studies in North America which reported crude or effect estimate data on patient survival with cutaneous melanoma stratified by race. RESULTS: Forty-four studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. Pooled analysis revealed that black patients were at a significantly increased risk for overall mortality (HR 1.42, 95% CI, 1.25-1.60), as well as for melanoma-specific mortality (HR 1.27, 95% CI, 1.03-1.56). Pooled analyses using a representative study for each database yielded similar trends. Other ethnic minorities were also more likely report lower melanoma-specific survival compared to non-Hispanic white patients. CONCLUSION: Our results support findings that melanoma patients of ethnic minorities, particularly black patients, experience worse health outcomes with regards to mortality. Overall survival and melanoma-specific survival are significantly decreased in black patients compared to non-Hispanic white patients. With the advent of more effective, contemporary treatments such as immunotherapy, our review identifies a gap in the literature investigating present-day or prospective data on melanoma outcomes, in order to characterize how current racial differences compare to findings from previous decades.

TYK 2 inhibitors for the treatment of dermatologic conditions: the evolution of JAK inhibitors.

Increasing understanding of cytokines as major drivers of immune-mediated diseases has revolutionized targeted treatments for these conditions. As the pathogenesis of autoimmune conditions is mediated by a complex interplay of various cytokines, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been of particular interest due to their ability to target multiple cytokines simultaneously. However, due to safety concerns with first generation JAK inhibitors, most notably from JAK2 and JAK3 inhibition, interest has shifted to more selective inhibition of TYK2. Three key TYK2 inhibitors that have advanced furthest in clinical trials for treatment of dermatologic autoimmune conditions are deucravacitinib (BMS-986165), brepocitinib (PF-06700841), and PF-06826647. This review outlines the current understanding of the efficacy and safety of these three TYK2 inhibitors from completed phase I and II studies and summarizes studies currently in progress for dermatologic conditions.

Practical and Relevant Guidelines for the Management of Psoriasis: An Inference-Based Methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis (Pso) is a common, immune-mediated, chronic-relapsing, inflammatory skin disease. While a great deal is known about Pso and its treatment, there remain several treatment scenarios unaddressed by clinical studies. To be effective, treatment for Pso must alter the activity of one or more immunological pathways important in the pathogenesis of the disease. While the benefit of blocking these pathways may be apparent, there remain uncertainties regarding safety, such as infections, malignancies, and the potential for off-target effects. Existing guidelines and treatment recommendations rely primarily on clinical trial or observational data, none of which adequately address specific clinical challenges. This document describes a methodological framework for generating practical and clinically relevant guidance for situations where direct evidence is rare or absent. Guidelines implementing this framework are currently ongoing. METHODS: We develop a knowledge synthesis approach to guideline development, utilizing clinical trial data where available, and a formalized inferential decision-making process that considers indirect data coupled with structured expert opinion and analysis. This approach is best suited for situations where direct, high-level evidence is lacking. Support for each resultant recommendation is expressed as a quantified assessment of confidence. RESULTS: The topics to be addressed by this set of guidelines are ranked by clinicians and patients as areas of concern, with an emphasis on topics where high-level evidence may have limited availability. CONCLUSION: Through this novel approach, we will derive practical, informative recommendations using the best evidence available in combination with structured expert opinion to guide best practices in complex, real-world settings. Supplementary file2 (MP4 98653 kb).

Clinical guidelines aim to assist doctors in managing their patients' medical conditions. A limitation of current guidelines is that they are frequently based on randomized clinical research trials­often considered the gold standard in medical research. Clinical trials are designed to estimate the safety and effectiveness of treatment. Outside of clinical trials, doctors encounter a range of patient cases excluded from clinical trials. Our group aims to create guidelines for those clinical scenarios not adequately addressed by clinical trials. Examples include patients excluded from clinical trials, the elderly, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and pregnant or breastfeeding women. When clinical trial data is limited, doctors must make decisions nonetheless. In certain clinical situations they are left to their own resources to consult with experts, review the data, and make inferences based on the limited data available. Instead of concluding that there is no data, the topic of interest can be broken down into components that are answerable by different types of research studies. This inference-based approach uses expert opinion and indirect evidence to support an inference-based position on topics where direct clinical data is sparse or insufficient to answer the question. This approach can be used as a complement to clinical trial data informing disease management guidelines.

Return of Lymantria dispar dispar (gypsy moth): A case report.

An invasive moth, Lymantria dispar dispar, also known as the gypsy moth, originates from Europe and first came to Ontario, Canada, in 1969. The moth is a defoliator which feeds on oak and other deciduous trees, and less commonly, conifers. Outbreaks of Lymantria dispar dispar moth infestation occur every 7-10 years with rapid expansion of the population until there is a natural collapse due to pathogens and predators. In addition to the extensive environmental impact of defoliation of the tree canopy, the Lymantria dispar dispar moth larva (caterpillar) is responsible for causing a significant cutaneous eruption in exposed individuals. In our report, we describe six cases of Lymantria dispar dispar dermatitis which occurred in Ontario, Canada, in May of 2021. It is important for dermatologists to be aware of this potential diagnosis and to be aware of local infestation in affected areas.