Emollients and moisturisers for eczema

Canadian Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis with Topical Therapies

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a highly prevalent disease in Canada with significant patient burden. Treatment guidance for topical therapy (the mainstay of AD management), with particular consideration of emerging treatments, may further improve patient care. Here, we aim to provide healthcare professionals with AD treatment recommendations from the perspective of 10 Canadian dermatologists with expertise in managing AD.

METHODS

The panel of dermatologists conducted a systematic literature review and leveraged their clinical experience to develop generally accepted principles, consensus statements, and a treatment algorithm using an iterative consensus process.

RESULTS

The panel collectively developed six generally accepted principles, 10 consensus statements, and a treatment algorithm. The guidance notes that assessment of disease severity should encompass both physician-rated measures and patient-reported outcomes. Disease education, lifestyle-based strategies (e.g., trigger avoidance), and supportive measures (e.g., moisturizers) can help reduce signs and symptoms of AD. Choice of therapy should consider disease-, patient-, and treatment-related factors. Although topical corticosteroids (TCS) are often used as first-line treatment in AD, they should be limited to intermittent short-term use. Noncorticosteroid topical therapies (e.g., topical calcineurin inhibitors; topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors; and topical Janus kinase inhibitors) can be used for widespread involvement of AD according to approved use. Once treatment goals are achieved, noncorticosteroid topical maintenance therapy should continue to prevent flares and reduce the need for TCS.

CONCLUSION

Guidance reflecting the benefits and limitations of topical AD treatments in conjunction with patient understanding of treatment goals supports robust shared decision-making in the management of AD.

Clinical Benefits of Basic Emollient Therapy for the Management of Patients With Xerosis Cutis

Xerosis cutis refers to dry skin that may be caused or exacerbated by external triggers (e.g., cold weather), endogenous factors (e.g., aging), or present as a symptom of other diseases (e.g., atopic dermatitis). Emollients are topical products formulated to rehydrate and restore the barrier function of the skin and are consistently recommended for the management of xerosis cutis and related diseases. Following the previous articles in this supplement, the present article aims to review the wider spectrum of clinical benefits associated with emollient therapy for xerosis cutis and diseases associated with dry skin. In clinical studies, the biophysical effects of emollients are often demonstrated using instrumental measures of skin hydration and barrier function, as well as clinical scoring systems that grade xerosis severity. In addition to these objective measures, the effectiveness of emollients has also been assessed by evaluating changes in subjective symptoms and patient-reported quality of life. Other reported benefits of emollient therapy for atopic dermatitis include delaying and preventing flares and reducing topical corticosteroid use. Although the current body of literature demonstrates the wide range of clinical benefits of emollient therapy for xerosis cutis, they also highlight a high degree of heterogeneity across clinical studies, a need for consensus outcome measures that facilitate direct comparisons between formulations, and a need to establish treatment targets for emollient therapy in clinical practice. Nevertheless, available evidence indicates that emollients demonstrate a favorable risk-benefit profile overall and should continue to be the mainstay of basic therapy for people with xerosis cutis and diseases associated with dry skin.

2024 British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH) UK national guideline on the management of vulval conditions

BackgroundThe management of vulval disorders in Genitourinary Medicine (GUM) clinics requires targeted approaches due to the wide range of conditions affecting the vulva. Vulval diseases encompass various aetiologies, including dermatoses, pain syndromes, and pre-malignant conditions, necessitating specialized care often involving multidisciplinary collaboration.PurposeThis guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of specific vulval conditions that may present in GUM clinics. The focus is on conditions commonly managed by Genitourinary Physicians, either independently or in partnership with other specialists, depending on available local expertise. Additionally, guidance on onward referral is included to ensure optimal patient care.Study SampleThe guideline primarily addresses the management of individuals aged 16 years and older presenting to GUM clinics with non-infective vulval conditions.Data CollectionRecommendations within this guideline are derived from a review of existing literature, clinical expertise, and consensus among specialists. Emphasis is placed on diagnostic tests and treatment regimens tailored to the following conditions: Lichen sclerosus, Lichen planus, Eczema, Lichen simplex, Psoriasis, Vulval high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (previously vulval intraepithelial neoplasia), Vulval pain syndromes, and Non-sexually acquired acute genital ulceration (Ulcer of Lipschütz).ConclusionsThis guideline offers practical recommendations for the effective management of specific vulval disorders in GUM settings. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all vulval diseases but rather a focused resource to assist clinicians in providing high-quality, patient-centred care. Onward referral pathways are also outlined to support collaborative and multidisciplinary management of complex cases.

Exploring the role of breastfeeding, antibiotics, and indoor environments in preschool children atopic dermatitis through machine learning and hygiene hypothesis

The increasing global incidence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children, especially in Western industrialized nations, has attracted considerable attention. The hygiene hypothesis, which posits that early pathogen exposure is crucial for immune system development, is central to understanding this trend. Furthermore, advanced machine learning algorithms have provided fresh insights into the interactions among various risk factors. This study investigates the relationship between early childhood antibiotic use, the duration of exclusive breastfeeding, indoor environmental factors, and child AD. By integrating machine learning techniques with the hygiene hypothesis, we aim to assess and interpret the significance of these risk factors. In this community-based case-control study with a 1:4 matching design, we evaluated the prevalence of AD in preschool-aged children. Data were collected via questionnaires completed by the parents of 771 children diagnosed with AD, matched with controls based on gender, age, and ethnicity. Univariate analyses identified relevant characteristics, which were further examined using multivariable logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (ORs). Stratified analyses assessed confounders and interactions, while the significance of variables was determined using a machine learning model. Renovating the dwelling during the mother's pregnancy (OR = 1.50; 95% CI 1.15-1.96) was identified as a risk factor for childhood AD. Additionally, antibiotic use three or more times during the child's first year (OR = 1.92; 95% CI 1.29-2.85) increased the risk of AD, independent of the parents' history of atopic disease and the child's mode of birth. Moreover, exclusive breastfeeding for four months or more (OR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.17-2.17) was identified as a risk factor for AD, particularly in the group without a maternal history of atopic disease. In contrast, having older siblings in the family (OR = 0.76; 95% CI 0.63-0.92) and low birth weight (OR = 0.62; 95% CI 0.47-0.81) were identified as protective factors against AD. Machine learning modeling indicated that the duration of exclusive breastfeeding, having older siblings, low birth weight, and parental history of AD or allergic rhinitis are key predictors of childhood AD. Our findings support the broader interpretation of the hygiene hypothesis. Machine learning analysis highlights the key role of the hygiene hypothesis and underscores the need for future AD prevention and healthcare initiatives focusing on children with a parental history of AD or allergic rhinitis. Moreover, minimizing antibiotic overuse may be essential for preventing AD in children. Further research is necessary to elucidate the impact and mechanisms of exclusive breastfeeding on AD to instruct maternal and child healthcare practices.

Topical Medications for Chronic Itch in Older Patients: Navigating a Pressing Need

Chronic itch in older patients is a common problem, with a significant impact on quality of life. Chronic itch in the older population may be attributable to several causes, such as age-related changes, skin conditions, systemic conditions, medications, and psychological conditions. Given the complexity of itch in this population, comorbidities, and polypharmacy in most geriatric patients, treating chronic itch can be challenging for healthcare providers. Therefore, optimized topical treatment regimens are paramount to help these patients and prevent side effects.

Skin 101: Understanding the Fundamentals of Skin Barrier Physiology-Why is This Important for Clinicians?

This article reviews epidermal barrier dysfunctions and more thoroughly discusses the stratum corneum (SC) permeability barrier, physiologic self-repair mechanisms in healthy skin, and the clinical and structural effects of an overstressed SC permeability barrier. Discussion includes epidermal barrier impairments induced by both exogenous exposures and endogenous factors such as specific dermatologic disorders. Due the plethora of skin care products on the market and the variability of their contents and vehicle formulations, this article addresses core concepts required to optimize skin care product selection, including for specific disease states such as atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, acne vulgaris, and rosacea. To summarize, the selection of skin care products is directed at maintaining SC hydration, including assisting the SC in self-repair when conditions are adverse. This approach optimizes the ability to sustain healthy skin structure, function and appearance.

Skin microbiota: pathogenic roles and implications in atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and inflammatory skin disorder characterized by impaired barrier function and imbalanced immunity. Recent advances have revealed that dysbiosis of skin microbiota plays important roles in the pathogenesis and development of AD. Meanwhile, endogenous and external factors contribute to the dysbiosis of skin microbiota in AD. Additionally, various treatments, including topical treatments, phototherapy, and systemic biologics, have demonstrated positive impacts on the clinical outcomes, alongside with the modulations of cutaneous microbiota in AD patients. Importantly, therapeutics or products regulating skin microbiota homeostasis have demonstrated potential for AD treatment in early clinical studies. In this review, we underline changes of the skin microbiota correlated with AD. Meanwhile, we provide an overview of the skin microbiota regarding its roles in the pathogenesis and development of AD. Finally, we summarize therapeutic strategies restoring the skin microbial homeostasis in AD management.

Soothing the Itch: The Role of Medicinal Plants in Alleviating Pruritus in Palliative Care

Chronic pruritus, or persistent itching, is a debilitating condition that severely impacts quality of life, especially in palliative care settings. Traditional treatments often fail to provide adequate relief or are associated with significant side effects, prompting interest in alternative therapies. This review investigates the antipruritic potential of eight medicinal plants: chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla), aloe vera (Aloe barbadensis), calendula (Calendula officinalis), curcumin (Curcuma longa), lavender (Lavandula angustifolia), licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra), peppermint (Mentha piperita), and evening primrose (Oenothera biennis). These plants are analyzed for their traditional applications, active bioactive compounds, mechanisms of action, clinical evidence, usage, dosage, and safety profiles. Comprehensive searches were conducted in databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and b-on, focusing on in vitro, animal, and clinical studies using keywords like "plant", "extract", and "pruritus". Studies were included regardless of publication date and limited to English-language articles. Findings indicate that active compounds such as polysaccharides in aloe vera, curcuminoids in turmeric, and menthol in peppermint exhibit significant anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and immune-modulating properties. Chamomile and calendula alleviate itching through anti-inflammatory and skin-soothing effects, while lavender and licorice offer antimicrobial benefits alongside antipruritic relief. Evening primrose, rich in gamma-linolenic acid, is effective in atopic dermatitis-related itching. Despite promising preclinical and clinical results, challenges remain in standardizing dosages and formulations. The review highlights the necessity of further clinical trials to ensure efficacy and safety, advocating for integrating these botanical therapies into complementary palliative care practices. Such approaches emphasize holistic treatment, addressing chronic pruritus's physical and emotional burden, thereby enhancing patient well-being.

Chronic Hand Eczema

Chronic hand eczema (CHE) is a complex, challenging, and frequently multifactorial skin disease of the hands. It is very common in the general population, especially in certain professions. When hand eczema (HE) persists for longer than 3 months or has a minimum of two relapses per year after initial manifestation with complete clearance, it is considered chronic. In this case, health-related quality of life and the patient's working life are often impaired. CHE can be considered as an umbrella term because it covers different clinical pictures and etiologies. To date, there is no definite and unique HE classification. Treatment starts with identifying the individual HE etiology paralleled by symptomatic therapy (local and/or systemic and/or ultraviolet phototherapy). Sustainable management of HE requires the identification and avoidance of its triggering factors, from the professional and private environment. This includes ruling out allergic contact dermatitis if any HE persists for more than 3 months despite adequate therapy. Randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy in HE are lacking for several treatment modalities. Patient education measures of skin protection and prevention complete the multimodal treatment.

Bio-active metabolites from Chinese Medicinal Herbs for treatment of skin diseases

Skin diseases have become serious issues to human health and affect one-third of the world's population according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). These consist of internal (endogenous) and external (exogenous) factors referring to genetics, hormones, and the body's immune system, as well as environmental situations, UV radiation, or environmental pollution respectively. Generally, Western Medicines (WMs) are usually treated with topical creams or strong medications for skin diseases that help superficially, and often do not treat the root cause. The relief may be instant and strong, sometimes these medicines have adverse reactions that are too strong to be able and sustained over a long period, especially steroid drug type. Chinese Medicinal Herbs (CMHs) are natural resources and relatively mild in the treatment of both manifestation and the root cause of disease. Nowadays, CMHs are attractive to many scientists, especially in studying their formulations for the treatment of skin diseases.

METHODS

The methodology of this review was searched in nine electronic databases including WanFang Data, PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, Springer Link, SciFinder, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), without regard to language constraints. All eligible studies are analysed and summarised.

RESULTS

Based on the literature findings, some extracts or active metabolites divided from CMHs, including Curcumin, Resveratrol, Liquorice, Dandelions, Cortex Moutan, and Calendula officinalis L., are effective for the treatment and prevention of skin diseases because of a wide range of pharmacological activities, e.g. anti-bacterial, anti-microbial, anti-virus, and anti-inflammation to enhance the body's immune system. It is also responsible for skin whitening to prevent pigmentation and premature ageing through several mechanisms, such as regulation or inhibition of nuclear factor kappa B (IκB/NF-κB) signalling pathways.

CONCLUSION

This is possible to develop CMHs, such as Curcumin, Resveratrol, Liquorice, Dandelions, Cortex Moutan and Calendula officinalis L. The ratio of multiple CMH formulations and safety assessments on human skin diseases required studying to achieve better pharmacological activities. Nano formulations are the future investigation for CMHs to combat skin diseases.

Oral and topical administration of a geranyl acetophenone attenuates DNCB-induced atopic dermatitis-like skin lesions in BALB/c mice

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, allergic inflammatory skin disorder that lacks a definite cure. Using a mouse DNCB-induced AD-like skin lesions model, this study evaluated the potential therapeutic utility of tHGA as an oral and topical treatment for AD. Male BALB/c mice were sensitised and challenged with 1% and 0.5% DNCB on their shaved dorsal skin. Mice in the treatment group were administered tHGA (20, 40, and 80 mg/kg) orally three times per week for 2 weeks, or tHGA (0.2%, 1%, and 5%) topically once daily for 12 days. On day 34, the mice were euthanized, and blood and dorsal skin samples were obtained for analysis. All doses of orally and topically administered tHGA significantly improved scratching, epidermal thickness, blood eosinophilia and mast cell infiltration. There was a minor discrepancy between the two routes of administration, with orally treated tHGA showing significant reductions in Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), tissue eosinophil infiltration, serum IgE and skin IL-4 levels with treatment of 40 and 80 mg/kg tHGA, whereas topically applied tHGA showed significant reductions in all dosages. These findings suggest that tHGA exhibited therapeutic potential for AD as both oral and topical treatment ameliorates AD-like symptoms in the murine model.

Lesional skin of seborrheic dermatitis patients is characterized by skin barrier dysfunction and correlating alterations in the stratum corneum ceramide composition

Seborrheic dermatitis (SD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by erythematous papulosquamous lesions in sebum rich areas such as the face and scalp. Its pathogenesis appears multifactorial with a disbalanced immune system, Malassezia driven microbial involvement and skin barrier perturbations. Microbial involvement has been well described in SD, but skin barrier involvement remains to be properly elucidated. To determine whether barrier impairment is a critical factor of inflammation in SD alongside microbial dysbiosis, a cross-sectional study was performed in 37 patients with mild-to-moderate facial SD. Their lesional and non-lesional skin was comprehensively and non-invasively assessed with standardized 2D-photography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), microbial profiling including Malassezia species identification, functional skin barrier assessments and ceramide profiling. The presence of inflammation was established through significant increases in erythema, epidermal thickness, vascularization and superficial roughness in lesional skin compared to non-lesional skin. Lesional skin showed a perturbed skin barrier with an underlying skewed ceramide subclass composition, impaired chain elongation and increased chain unsaturation. Changes in ceramide composition correlated with barrier impairment indicating interdependency of the functional barrier and ceramide composition. Lesional skin showed significantly increased Staphylococcus and decreased Cutibacterium abundances but similar Malassezia abundances and mycobial composition compared to non-lesional skin. Principal component analysis highlighted barrier properties as main discriminating features. To conclude, SD is associated with skin barrier dysfunction and changes in the ceramide composition. No significant differences in the abundance of Malassezia were observed. Restoring the cutaneous barrier might be a valid therapeutic approach in the treatment of facial SD.

Plants with cosmetic uses

The use of plants as a source of active principles for cosmetics has significantly increased in the last few years. Safety, compatibility with all types of skin, fewer side effects, and availability are among the advantages of herbal cosmetics above synthetic ingredients. The present review aims to explore the most important plants used in cosmetics. A literature search was carried out in several electronic databases with the following phrases: skincare and plants; cosmetics and plants; natural and cosmetics; and natural and skincare. Furthermore, more detailed filters such as clinical studies, meta-analyses, and systemic reviews were applied to positive results. Various plants and plant extracts currently used in skin care, scaring, whitening, and aging, as well as in sun protection, acne, eczema, and others, have been included in this review. The effectiveness of these plants is based mainly on preclinical research, and to a lesser extent on clinical studies. Some plant extracts or oils have been tested clinically, such as onions, aloe, and tea tree oil, more than other plant extracts. Despite many studies on natural products to improve dermal needs, proper clinical cosmeceutical trials are much fewer than expected. Therefore, more clinical trials are needed to evaluate appropriate efficacy. Furthermore, new formulation technologies might enhance the cosmeceutical benefits, but more work is warranted.

Efficacy and Tolerability of a Novel Topical Treatment Containing Pea Protein and Xyloglucan in the Management of Atopic Dermatitis in Children: A Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Study

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic disease that occurs mainly in children. Topical corticosteroids are the main treatment for mild to moderate AD, although they can induce side effects. The efficacy and tolerability of xyloglucan and pea protein (XG-PP) was compared with hydrocortisone in pediatric patients with AD as a steroid-sparing solution.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, comparative study enrolled 42 patients (age 0.5-12 years) with mild-to-moderate AD, assigned 1:1 to XG-PP or hydrocortisone ointment. Treatments were applied twice daily for 14 consecutive days and assessed at baseline, day 8, and day 15. Efficacy endpoints were AD Severity Index (ADSI) score, Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index, and Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). Tolerability was assessed by the occurrence of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Both treatments significantly improved ADSI mean score from baseline to day 15; in the XG-PP arm, ADSI score decreased from 10.55 to 4.15 (p = 0.00001), and in the hydrocortisone arm, from 10.65 to 4.30 (p = 0.0001). In the XG-PP arm, the mean SCORAD score decreased from 65.86 to 30.26 (p = 0.00001) and in the hydrocortisone arm from 68.84 to 31.19 (p = 0.0001) at day 15. An overall decrease from moderate to mild AD for both arms (p = 0.0001) was observed with POEM. For all the three indexes evaluated, no statistical significant differences between the study arms evolution from baseline to day 8 or to day 15 were found. No AEs were reported.

CONCLUSION

XG-PP provided a comparable efficacy to hydrocortisone ointment in managing AD, thus representing a safe and effective steroid-sparing alternative in pediatric patients with AD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Retrospectively registered on 24 November 2021 in the ISRCTN registry: 11118799.

A single-center, randomized, controlled study on the efficacy of niacinamide-containing body emollients combined with cleansing gel in the treatment of mild atopic dermatitis

OBJECTIVE

To observe the effect of niacinamide-containing body emollients combined with a cleansing gel on the clinical symptoms of mild atopic dermatitis (AD) in adults.

METHODS

From July 2022 to January 2023, adults with mild AD were enrolled at Huashan Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University using single-center, randomized and placebo-controlled methods. They were divided into three groups: the control group, treatment group 1 (T1) receiving niacinamide-containing body emollients alone, and treatment group 2 (T2) receiving emollients plus niacinamide-containing cleansing gel. All patients were orally administered 10 mg of ebastine tablets daily. AD severity (SCORAD score), peak pruritus numeric rating scale (PP-NRS), patient-oriented measure of eczema (POEM), dermatological quality of life index (DLQI) score, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and stratum corneum water content (SCWC) were measured by the same dermatologist at days 0, 7, 14, and 28.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients were enrolled, including 38 in the control group, 42 in the T1 group and 42 in the T2 group. There were no obvious adverse reactions at the end of the study and the clinical scores and stratum corneum barrier of all the groups improved significantly relative to baseline. The SCORAD, PP-NRS, DLQI, TEWL and SCWC scores in T1 group (12.43 ± 3, 3.3 ± 0.9, 7.1 ± 2.33, 17.1 ± 9.12, 67.2 ± 21.46, seperately) and T2 group (11.17 ± 3.26, 3 ± 1.3, 6.5 ± 2.11, 16.3 ± 9.12, 69.4 ± 24.52, seperately) were significantly improved than the control group(15.1 ± 3.64, 4.3 ± 1.7, 9.5 ± 2.46, 21.2 ± 9.47, 52.7 ± 22.43, seperately) at the endpoint of the study, while compared the POEM scores, only T2 group showed the difference with control group (5.2 ± 1.4 vs. 6 ± 1.6). The epidermal barrier parameters of TEWL and SCWC in the T2 group (17.57 ± 5.24, 66.46 ± 21.38, seperately) were significantly better than that of the T1 (19.96 ± 4.45, 56.45 ± 20.48, seperately) and control group(21.89 ± 7.03, 51.56 ± 16.58, seperately) on the 14th day of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The use of niacinamide-containing body emollients can significantly improve the clinical symptoms, quality of life, and skin barrier function in patients with mild AD. The addition of niacinamide-containing cleansing gel can also affect the clinical efficacy at certain time points.

Expert consensus on holistic skin care routine: Focus on acne, rosacea, atopic dermatitis, and sensitive skin syndrome

BACKGROUND

Treatment, cleansing, moisturizing, and photoprotection are four major components of holistic skin care for dermatological conditions. While treatment (T) is recognized as a key component in the management of dermatological conditions, there is a lack of practical guidance on the adjunctive role of cleansing, moisturizing, and photoprotection ("CMP"). Limited patient knowledge, confusion over product selection, and lack of guidance on how to choose and use CMP skin care products (in conjunction with pharmacological therapy) are the main barriers to establishing a holistic skin care routine for dermatological conditions.

AIMS

This study aimed to review current clinical evidence, identify gaps, and provide practical guidance on conceptualization and implementation of CMP routine in the management of sensitive skin due to underlying acne, atopic dermatitis, or rosacea, including conditions with idiopathic causes referred to as idiopathic sensitive skin syndrome.

METHODS

An expert panel comprising of 10 dermatologists from Australia, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, India, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand convened to develop consensus statements on holistic skin care in acne, rosacea, atopic dermatitis, and idiopathic sensitive skin syndrome using the Delphi approach.

RESULTS

Consensus was defined as ≥80% of panel rating statement as ≥8 or median rating of ≥8. The final statements were collated to develop consensus recommendations on holistic skin care.

CONCLUSION

A dermatologist-guided holistic skin care routine is essential to improve patient confidence and reduce confusion over product selection. The consensus recommendations presented here highlight the importance of cleansing, moisturization, and photoprotection in holistic skin care and how it can be utilized as a communication tool for physicians and patients to achieve overall better patient compliance, satisfaction, and treatment outcomes.

Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy

BACKGROUND

Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective for preventing eczema or food allergy.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess the effects of skin care interventions such as emollients for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants. Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed an updated search of the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase in September 2021. We searched two trials registers in July 2021. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews, and scanned conference proceedings to identify further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (≤ 12 months) without pre-existing eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition. Eligible comparisons were standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions could include moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured at the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 33 RCTs comprising 25,827 participants. Of these, 17 studies randomising 5823 participants reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review.  We included 11 studies, randomising 5217 participants, in one or more meta-analyses (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis), with 10 of these studies providing IPD; the remaining 6 studies were included in the narrative results only.   Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although the definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to three years. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported information on our prespecified outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. We assessed most of the evidence in the review as low certainty and had some concerns about risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. We assessed the evidence for the primary food allergy outcome as high risk of bias due to the inclusion of only one trial, where findings varied based on different assumptions about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change the risk of eczema by one to three years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; risk difference 5 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI 28 less to 47 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) or time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may increase the risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to three years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.49; low-certainty evidence; 976 participants, 1 trial) but may not change risk of allergic sensitisation to a food allergen by age one to three years (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.71; low-certainty evidence; 1794 participants, 3 trials). Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial); however, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to over-reporting of milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.75; risk difference 17 more cases per 1000 infants, 95% CI one more to 38 more; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase the risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) and stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although CIs for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions were wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses showed that the effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, filaggrin (FLG) mutation, chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434, or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and eczema or food allergy development.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection. Further study is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might prevent eczema or food allergy.

A Review of Moisturizing Additives for Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis, the most common form of eczema, is a chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin condition that occurs with dry skin, persistent itching, and scaly lesions. This debilitating condition significantly compromises the patient’s quality of life due to the intractable itching and other associated factors such as disfigurement, sleeping disturbances, and social stigmatization from the visible lesions. The treatment mainstay of atopic dermatitis involves applying topical glucocorticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors, combined with regular use of moisturizers. However, conventional treatments possess a certain degree of adverse effects, which raised concerns among the patients resulting in non-adherence to treatment. Hence, the modern use of moisturizers to improve barrier repair and function is of great value. One of the approaches includes incorporating bioactive ingredients with clinically proven therapeutic benefits into dermocosmetics emollient. The current evidence suggests that these dermocosmetics emollients aid in the improvement of the skin barrier and alleviate inflammation, pruritus and xerosis. We carried out a critical and comprehensive narrative review of the literature. Studies and trials focusing on moisturizers that include phytochemicals, natural moisturizing factors, essential fatty acids, endocannabinoids, and antioxidants were identified by searching electronic databases (PubMed and MEDLINE). We introduce the current knowledge on the roles of moisturizers in alleviating symptoms of atopic dermatitis. We then further summarize the science and rationale of the active ingredients in dermocosmetics and medical device emollients for treating atopic dermatitis. Finally, we highlight the limitations of the current evidence and future perspectives of cosmeceutical research on atopic dermatitis.

National Saudi Consensus Statement on the Management of Atopic Dermatitis (2021)

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with an increasing prevalence regionally and globally. It is characterized by intense itching and recurrent eczematous lesions. With the increase in the availability of treatment options for healthcare practitioner and patients, new challenges arise for treatment selection and approach. The current consensus statement has been developed to provide up-to-date evidence and evidence-based recommendations to guide dermatologists and healthcare professionals managing patients with AD in Saudi Arabia. By an initiative from the Ministry of Health (MOH), a multidisciplinary work group of 11 experts was convened to review and discuss aspects of AD management. Four consensus meetings were held on January 14, February 4, February 25, and March 18 of 2021. All consensus content was voted on by the work group, including diagnostic criteria, AD severity assessment, comorbidities, and therapeutic options for AD. Special consideration for the pediatric population, as well as women during pregnancy and lactation, was also discussed. The present consensus document will be updated as needed to incorporate new data or therapeutic agents.

How parents and children evaluate emollients for childhood eczema: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Eczema affects one in five children in the UK. Regular application of emollients is routinely recommended for children with eczema. There are four main emollient types, but no clear evidence of which is best. The current 'trial and error' approach to find suitable emollients can be frustrating for parents, children, and clinicians.

AIM

To identify how parents and children experience and evaluate emollients.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative interview study, nested within a primary care trial of emollients (Best Emollients for Eczema [BEE] trial).

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews with children with eczema and their parents were conducted. Participants were purposively sampled on emollient type (lotion, cream, gel, or ointment), age, and eczema severity.

RESULTS

Forty-four parents were interviewed, with children participating in 24 of those interviews. There was no clear preference for any one emollient type. The strongest theme was the variation of experience in each of the four types. Participants focused on thickness and absorbency, both positively and negatively, to frame their evaluations. Effectiveness and acceptability were both considered when evaluating an emollient but effectiveness was the primary driver for continued use. For some, participating in the trial had changed their knowledge and behaviour of emollients, resulting in use that was more regular and for a longer duration.

CONCLUSION

There is no one emollient that is suitable for everyone, and parents/children prioritise different aspects of emollients. Future research could evaluate decision aids and/or tester pots of different types, which could enable clinicians and parents/children to work collaboratively to identify the best emollient for them.

Eczema Care Online: development and qualitative optimisation of an online behavioural intervention to support self-management in young people with eczema

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of Eczema Care Online (ECO), an online behaviour change intervention for young people with eczema (phase I); and explore and optimise the acceptability of ECO among this target group using think-aloud interviews (phase II).

METHODS

Theory-based, evidence-based and person-based approaches to intervention development were used. In phase I, a qualitative systematic review and qualitative interviews developed an in-depth understanding of the needs and challenges of young people with eczema. Guiding principles highlighted key intervention design objectives and features to address the needs of this target group to maximise user engagement. Behavioural analysis and logic modelling developed ECO's hypothesised programme theory. In phase II, qualitative think-aloud interviews were carried out with 28 young people with eczema and the intervention was optimised based on their feedback.

RESULTS

The final intervention aimed to reduce eczema severity by supporting treatment use (emollients, topical corticosteroids/topical calcineurin inhibitors), management of irritants/triggers, emotional management and reducing scratching. Generally, young people expressed positive views of intervention content and design in think-aloud interviews. Quotes and stories from other young people with eczema and ECO's focus on living with eczema (not just topical treatments) were valuable for normalising eczema. Young people believed ECO addressed knowledge gaps they had from childhood and the safety information about topical corticosteroids was reassuring. Negative feedback was used to modify ECO.

CONCLUSIONS

A prototype of the ECO intervention was developed using rigorous and complementary intervention development approaches. Subsequent think-aloud interviews helped optimise the intervention, demonstrated ECO is likely to be acceptable to this target group, and provided support for our guiding principles including key design objectives and features to consider when developing interventions for this population. A randomised controlled trial and process evaluation of the intervention is underway to assess effectiveness and explore user engagement with the intervention's behavioural goals.

Experts' Consensus on the Use of Pimecrolimus in Atopic Dermatitis in China: A TCS-Sparing Practical Approach

Introduction

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic, inflammatory skin disease with rising prevalence. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are recommended as first-line therapy for patients with AD in China; however, corticophobia is a widespread concern, which can manifest as noncompliance: in a previous Chinese study, almost all parents whose children had AD were very concerned about the side effects of TCS and, as a result, nearly half did not use it in the event of recurrence. We propose a TCS-sparing treatment algorithm for the management of infants, children, adolescents, and adults with mild-to-moderate AD, to guide clinical practice in China.

Methods

A panel of eight experts in AD from China and one expert from Germany formed to develop a practical algorithm for the management of mild-to-moderate AD, focusing on pimecrolimus.

Results

Irrespective of body location, all patients with mild AD (including acute flares) and infants with moderate AD should apply the topical calcineurin inhibitor (TCI) pimecrolimus twice daily to the affected area until symptoms disappear. For children, adolescents, and adults with moderate AD, pimecrolimus should be applied twice daily to sensitive skin areas, and a TCI (either pimecrolimus or tacrolimus) should be applied twice daily to other body locations. Short-term administration of TCS, followed by TCI twice daily, is recommended for most patients with moderate AD experiencing acute flares, regardless of lesion site. Emollients should be used regularly.

Conclusions

The algorithm presented intends to simplify treatment of AD in China and guide clinical decision-making.

Strategies for using topical corticosteroids in children and adults with eczema

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common skin condition. Although topical corticosteroids have been a first-line treatment for eczema for decades, there are uncertainties over their optimal use.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the effectiveness and safety of different ways of using topical corticosteroids for treating eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases to January 2021 (Cochrane Skin Specialised Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; GREAT) and five clinical trials registers. We checked bibliographies from included trials to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in adults and children with eczema that compared at least two strategies of topical corticosteroid use. We excluded placebo comparisons, other than for trials that evaluated proactive versus reactive treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods, with GRADE certainty of evidence for key findings. Primary outcomes were changes in clinician-reported signs and relevant local adverse events. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported symptoms and relevant systemic adverse events. For local adverse events, we prioritised abnormal skin thinning as a key area of concern for healthcare professionals and patients.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 104 trials (8443 participants). Most trials were conducted in high-income countries (81/104), most likely in outpatient or other hospital settings. We judged only one trial to be low risk of bias across all domains. Fifty-five trials had high risk of bias in at least one domain, mostly due to lack of blinding or missing outcome data. Stronger-potency versus weaker-potency topical corticosteroids Sixty-three trials compared different potencies of topical corticosteroids: 12 moderate versus mild, 22 potent versus mild, 25 potent versus moderate, and 6 very potent versus potent. Trials were usually in children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, lasting one to five weeks. The most reported outcome was Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of clinician-reported signs of eczema. We pooled four trials that compared moderate- versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (420 participants). Moderate-potency topical corticosteroids probably result in more participants achieving treatment success, defined as cleared or marked improvement on IGA (52% versus 34%; odds ratio (OR) 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.04; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled nine trials that compared potent versus mild-potency topical corticosteroids (392 participants). Potent topical corticosteroids probably result in a large increase in number achieving treatment success (70% versus 39%; OR 3.71, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.72; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled 15 trials that compared potent versus moderate-potency topical corticosteroids (1053 participants). There was insufficient evidence of a benefit of potent topical corticosteroids compared to moderate topical corticosteroids (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.89; moderate-certainty evidence). We pooled three trials that compared very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids (216 participants). The evidence is uncertain with a wide confidence interval (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.09; low-certainty evidence). Twice daily or more versus once daily application We pooled 15 of 25 trials in this comparison (1821 participants, all reported IGA). The trials usually assessed adults and children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, using potent topical corticosteroids, lasting two to six weeks. Applying potent topical corticosteroids only once a day probably does not decrease the number achieving treatment success compared to twice daily application (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.38; 15 trials, 1821 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events Within the trials that tested 'treating eczema flare-up' strategies, we identified only 26 cases of abnormal skin thinning from 2266 participants (1% across 22 trials). Most cases were from the use of higher-potency topical corticosteroids (16 with very potent, 6 with potent, 2 with moderate and 2 with mild). We assessed this evidence as low certainty, except for very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids, which was very low-certainty evidence.  Longer versus shorter-term duration of application for induction of remission No trials were identified. Twice weekly application (weekend, or 'proactive therapy') to prevent relapse (flare-ups) versus no topical corticosteroids/reactive application Nine trials assessed this comparison, generally lasting 16 to 20 weeks. We pooled seven trials that compared weekend (proactive) topical corticosteroids therapy versus no topical corticosteroids (1179 participants, children and adults with a range of eczema severities, though mainly moderate or severe). Weekend (proactive) therapy probably results in a large decrease in likelihood of a relapse from 58% to 25% (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57; 7 trials, 1149 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Local adverse events We did not identify any cases of abnormal skin thinning in seven trials that assessed skin thinning (1050 participants) at the end of treatment. We assessed this evidence as low certainty. Other comparisons  Other comparisons included newer versus older preparations of topical corticosteroids (15 trials), cream versus ointment (7 trials), topical corticosteroids with wet wrap versus no wet wrap (6 trials), number of days per week applied (4 trials), different concentrations of the same topical corticosteroids (2 trials), time of day applied (2 trials), topical corticosteroids alternating with topical calcineurin inhibitors versus topical corticosteroids alone (1 trial), application to wet versus dry skin (1 trial) and application before versus after emollient (1 trial). No trials compared branded versus generic topical corticosteroids and time between application of emollient and topical corticosteroids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Potent and moderate topical corticosteroids are probably more effective than mild topical corticosteroids, primarily in moderate or severe eczema; however, there is uncertain evidence to support any advantage of very potent over potent topical corticosteroids. Effectiveness is similar between once daily and twice daily (or more) frequent use of potent topical corticosteroids to treat eczema flare-ups, and topical corticosteroids weekend (proactive) therapy is probably better than no topical corticosteroids/reactive use to prevent eczema relapse (flare-ups). Adverse events were not well reported and came largely from low- or very low-certainty, short-term trials. In trials that reported abnormal skin thinning, frequency was low overall and increased with increasing potency. We found no trials on the optimum duration of treatment of a flare, branded versus generic topical corticosteroids, and time to leave between application of topical corticosteroids and emollient. There is a need for longer-term trials, in people with mild eczema.

Topical Ectoine Application in Children and Adults to Treat Inflammatory Diseases Associated with an Impaired Skin Barrier: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Inflammatory skin diseases are a significant burden on affected patients. Inflammation is caused by various stress factors to the epidermis resulting in, e.g., dryness, redness, and pruritus. Emollients are used in basic therapy to restore the natural skin barrier and relieve symptoms. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ectoine-containing topical formulations in inflammatory skin diseases characterized by an impaired skin barrier.

Methods

A systematic review was carried out in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Microsoft Academic up to October 2021. Inclusion criteria were ectoine-containing topical formulations (creams, emollients) used for (adjuvant) therapy of inflammatory skin diseases. Clinical studies of any design published in any language were included.

Results

A total of 230 references were screened for eligibility, of which six were selected for inclusion in the review (five studies on atopic dermatitis and one study on prevention and management of retinoid dermatitis). The application of topical formulations containing 5.5–7.0% ectoine positively influenced skin dryness and, consequently, pruritus and dermatitis-specific scores in patients with atopic dermatitis. Especially in infants and children, who belong to the most frequently affected group, the formulations were well-tolerated when applied for up to 4 weeks. In studies where ectoine was used as an adjuvant therapy, application was associated with a decreased need for pharmacological therapy and also improved the effectiveness of, e.g., topical corticosteroids. In patients undergoing isotretinoin therapy, ectoine was as effective as dexpanthenol in reducing retinoid dermatitis or improving symptoms.

Conclusion

Ectoine is an effective natural substance with an excellent tolerability and safety profile, representing a beneficial alternative as basic therapy or to increase the efficacy of the pharmacological treatment regimen for patients with inflammatory skin diseases, including infants and children.

"His first word was 'cream'." The burden of treatment in pediatric atopic dermatitis-A mixed methods study

The burden of treatment (BOT) is the workload of health care experienced by patients with chronic conditions and consequences on well-being. This study aimed to assess the BOT of atopic dermatitis (AD) on children and caregivers using mixed methods. The quantitative component of this mixed methods study involved the Treatment Burden Questionnaire. The qualitative component involved interviews with parents of children with moderate-severe AD. The questionnaire was completed by 168 parents; 32.1% had mild AD, 39.9% had moderate AD, and 28% had severe AD. The average burden score was 3.5 (out of 10). Average burden scores were low in mild AD (1.0 out of 10) and were proportionally higher in moderate (3.9 out of 10) and severe (5.8 out of 10) AD (p < 0.001). Increased frequency of therapy had increased perceived burden. In moderate-severe AD, oral therapy was rated as less burdensome than topical therapies. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 parents of children with moderate-severe AD. Thematic analysis grouped experiences into health care burden, treatment burden, and financial burden. Insights from health care burden analysis included "mixed messages," "treatment futility," and "expectant resolution." Insights from treatment burden included treatment routine, schooling impact, and "topical-sparing" with systemic treatment. Factors of financial burden included topical treatments, clothing, and health care visits. Moderate-severe AD is associated with high BOT, particularly related to topical therapies, which may be reduced by systemic treatment. All physicians treating children with AD should avoid potentially damaging communication regarding mixed messages, treatment futility, and expectant resolution.

Efficacy of moisturizers in paediatric atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Topical moisturizer is recommended for atopic dermatitis.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to investigate the knowledge gap regarding the efficacy of moisturizer in young patients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on randomised controlled trials comparing participant's ≤15 years with atopic dermatitis, receiving either topical moisturizer or no moisturizer treatment. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

RESULTS

Six trials were included (intervention n= 436; control n= 312). Moisturizer use extended time to flare by 13.52 days (95% confidence interval 0.05-26.99, I2 88%). Greater reduction in risk of relapse was observed during the first month of latency (pooled risk ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.72, I2 28%) compared to the second and third months (pooled risk ratio 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.91, I2 35% and pooled risk ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.83, I2 33%, respectively).Treated patients were 2.68 times more likely to experience a three-six months remission (95% confidence interval1.18-6.09, I2 56%). Moisturizer minimally improved disease severity and quality of life.

LIMITATIONS

There is a dire need to conduct randomised controlled trialswith more robust and standardised designs.

CONCLUSION

Moisturizer benefits young patients with atopic dermatitis. However, more research is needed to better estimate its efficacy.

A Clinical Investigation of the Performance and Safety of Epaderm®, an Emollient Cream

Introduction

Emollients provide an occlusive barrier for dry and atopic skin, retain moisture, protect it from irritants, and form the basis of eczema treatment.

Methods and Analysis

A prospective interventional single arm study to evaluate the performance and safety of Epaderm^® Cream, an emollient and cleanser containing 25% (w/w) paraffin and 5% (w/w) glycerine (thereafter, an emollient cream), in patients with dry skin conditions. The primary outcome measure was participant evaluation of skin moisturisation after treatment with an emollient cream for up to 4 weeks. Secondary outcome measures included: evaluation of skin softness using a questionnaire and of pruritus on a visual analogue scale (VAS); clinician assessment of xerosis using Overall Dry Skin (ODS) score and measurement of skin hydration using a non-invasive device (MoistureMeterEpiD, Delfin Technologies) at each visit. Sign test and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used to analyse changes from baseline.

Results

A total of 114 participants completed the study. 84.2% (80 out of 95) of participants or parents strongly agreed or agreed that the cream improved skin moisturisation at 4 weeks of treatment at the target area (p<0.0001). 86.3% of participants agreed that skin softness improved after 4 weeks (p <0.0001). ODS score improved from 2.1 (standard deviation (SD) 1.0) to 0.7 (SD 0.8) at 4 weeks. Skin hydration at the target area improved from 31.5 (SD 9.3) to 40.5 (SD 8.3) (p<0.001) at 4 weeks. Mean skin itchiness reduced from 38.0 (SD 25.4) to 17.7 (SD 19.8) at 4 weeks (p<0.0001). Ten (8.3%) adverse device events (ADEs) were reported.

Conclusion

The emollient cream was well tolerated and demonstrated significant improvements in patient-reported skin moisturisation and softness as well as in clinical measurement of xerosis and skin hydration across all age groups including infants. The emollient cream can be recommended for dry skin conditions including atopic dermatitis and psoriasis.

Safety of topical corticosteroids in atopic eczema: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVE

An umbrella review summarising all safety data from systematic reviews of topical corticosteroids (TCS) in adults and children with atopic eczema.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology map of eczema systematic reviews were searched until 7 November 2018 and Epistemonikos until 2 March 2021. Reviews were included if they assessed the safety of TCS in atopic eczema and searched >1 database using a reproducible search strategy. Review quality was assessed using version 2 of 'A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR 2 tool).

RESULTS

38 systematic reviews included, 34 low/critically low quality. Treatment and follow-up were usually short (2-4 weeks).

KEY FINDINGS

TCS versus emollient/vehicle: No meta-analyses identified for skin-thinning. Two 2-week randomised controlled trials (RCTs) found no significant increased risk with very potent TCS (0/196 TCS vs 0/33 vehicle in children and 6/109 TCS vs 2/50 vehicle, age unknown). Biochemical adrenal suppression (cortisol) was 3.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 5.8%) in a meta-analysis of 11 uncontrolled observational studies (any potency TCS, 522 children). Effects reversed when treatment ceased.TCS versus topical calcineurin inhibitors: Meta-analysis showed higher relative risk of skin thinning with TCS (4.86, 95% CI 1.06 to 22.28, n=4128, four RCTs, including one 5-year RCT). Eight cases in 2068 participants, 7 using potent TCS. No evidence of growth suppression.Once daily versus more frequent TCS: No meta-analyses identified. No skin-thinning in one RCT (3 weeks potent TCS, n=94) or biochemical adrenal suppression in two RCTs (up to 2 weeks very potent/moderate TCS, n=129).TCS twice/week to prevent flares ('weekend therapy') versus vehicle: No meta-analyses identified. No evidence of skin thinning in five RCTs. One RCT found biochemical adrenal suppression (2/44 children, potent TCS).

CONCLUSIONS

W e found no evidence of harm when TCS were used intermittently 'as required' to treat flares or 'weekend therapy' to prevent flares. However, long-term safety data were limited.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018079409.

Art of prevention: Allergic sensitization through damaged skin: Atopic, occupational, and stasis dermatitis

The prevention of allergic contact dermatitis hinges on maintaining the integrity of the skin barrier and responding appropriately when it is disturbed. Although intact skin is subject to sensitization via highly irritating allergens, such as poison ivy, acutely inflamed and chronically inflamed skin is subject to sensitization to allergens without inherent irritant potential. In the chronically inflamed state of atopic dermatitis, sensitization to proteins, such as food, also carries a risk for systemic contact dermatitis via ingestion of the allergen. Minimizing the development of irritant dermatitis is key to preventing sensitization. However, in patients with already chronically inflamed skin, reducing the use of products to the involved areas, recommending hypoallergenic products with caution, and taking measures to prevent biofilm formation are also integral to preventing sensitization to chemicals and proteins, such as food and commensal organisms.

Reducing corticosteroid phobia in pharmacy staff and parents of children with atopic dermatitis

Background Besides physicians, pharmacy staff has an important role to inform patients on appropriate medication use. However, they might also experience corticophobia themselves, affecting patient counseling and subsequently patient’s disease management. Objective Implementation of an intervention for pharmacy staff to improve knowledge and stimulate positive perceptions towards TCS use, in order to reduce corticophobia in pharmacy staff and parents of young AD patients. Setting Nine community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Method We developed an intervention consisting of education of pharmacy staff followed by counseling of parents. The intervention was implemented in pharmacies and intervention effectiveness was studied using a pre-post design with an intervention period of 3 months. At baseline and follow-up (3 months), pharmacy staff and parents completed a questionnaire. Main outcome measure Corticophobia, both beliefs and worries, measured with the TOPICOP questionnaire. Higher scores indicate a more negative attitude. Result Baseline and follow-up data were available for 19 pharmacy staff members and 48 parents who attended a counseling session in the pharmacy. In both groups there was as decrease in negative beliefs and worries towards TCS (p < 0.05). Mean total TOPICOP scores decreased from 42 to 35% and from 33 to 25% for parents and pharmacy staff respectively. Conclusion Our results show the prevalence of corticophobia among parents. Education of pharmacy staff and targeted patient counseling seems to be effective in reducing corticophobia.

Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy

BACKGROUND

Eczema and food allergy are common health conditions that usually begin in early childhood and often occur together in the same people. They can be associated with an impaired skin barrier in early infancy. It is unclear whether trying to prevent or reverse an impaired skin barrier soon after birth is effective in preventing eczema or food allergy.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess effects of skin care interventions, such as emollients, for primary prevention of eczema and food allergy in infants Secondary objective To identify features of study populations such as age, hereditary risk, and adherence to interventions that are associated with the greatest treatment benefit or harm for both eczema and food allergy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to July 2020: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers and checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We contacted field experts to identify planned trials and to seek information about unpublished or incomplete trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs of skin care interventions that could potentially enhance skin barrier function, reduce dryness, or reduce subclinical inflammation in healthy term (> 37 weeks) infants (0 to 12 months) without pre-existing diagnosis of eczema, food allergy, or other skin condition were included. Comparison was standard care in the locality or no treatment. Types of skin care interventions included moisturisers/emollients; bathing products; advice regarding reducing soap exposure and bathing frequency; and use of water softeners. No minimum follow-up was required.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This is a prospective individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures, and primary analyses used the IPD dataset. Primary outcomes were cumulative incidence of eczema and cumulative incidence of immunoglobulin (Ig)E-mediated food allergy by one to three years, both measured by the closest available time point to two years. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during the intervention period; eczema severity (clinician-assessed); parent report of eczema severity; time to onset of eczema; parent report of immediate food allergy; and allergic sensitisation to food or inhalant allergen.

MAIN RESULTS

This review identified 33 RCTs, comprising 25,827 participants. A total of 17 studies, randomising 5823 participants, reported information on one or more outcomes specified in this review. Eleven studies randomising 5217 participants, with 10 of these studies providing IPD, were included in one or more meta-analysis (range 2 to 9 studies per individual meta-analysis). Most studies were conducted at children's hospitals. All interventions were compared against no skin care intervention or local standard care. Of the 17 studies that reported our outcomes, 13 assessed emollients. Twenty-five studies, including all those contributing data to meta-analyses, randomised newborns up to age three weeks to receive a skin care intervention or standard infant skin care. Eight of the 11 studies contributing to meta-analyses recruited infants at high risk of developing eczema or food allergy, although definition of high risk varied between studies. Durations of intervention and follow-up ranged from 24 hours to two years. We assessed most of this review's evidence as low certainty or had some concerns of risk of bias. A rating of some concerns was most often due to lack of blinding of outcome assessors or significant missing data, which could have impacted outcome measurement but was judged unlikely to have done so. Evidence for the primary food allergy outcome was rated as high risk of bias due to inclusion of only one trial where findings varied when different assumptions were made about missing data. Skin care interventions during infancy probably do not change risk of eczema by one to two years of age (risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.31; moderate-certainty evidence; 3075 participants, 7 trials) nor time to onset of eczema (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.14; moderate-certainty evidence; 3349 participants, 9 trials). It is unclear whether skin care interventions during infancy change risk of IgE-mediated food allergy by one to two years of age (RR 2.53, 95% CI 0.99 to 6.47; 996 participants, 1 trial) or allergic sensitisation to a food allergen at age one to two years (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.69; 1055 participants, 2 trials) due to very low-certainty evidence for these outcomes. Skin care interventions during infancy may slightly increase risk of parent report of immediate reaction to a common food allergen at two years (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.61; low-certainty evidence; 1171 participants, 1 trial). However, this was only seen for cow's milk, and may be unreliable due to significant over-reporting of cow's milk allergy in infants. Skin care interventions during infancy probably increase risk of skin infection over the intervention period (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.77; moderate-certainty evidence; 2728 participants, 6 trials) and may increase risk of infant slippage over the intervention period (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.99; low-certainty evidence; 2538 participants, 4 trials) or stinging/allergic reactions to moisturisers (RR 2.24, 95% 0.67 to 7.43; low-certainty evidence; 343 participants, 4 trials), although confidence intervals for slippages and stinging/allergic reactions are wide and include the possibility of no effect or reduced risk. Preplanned subgroup analyses show that effects of interventions were not influenced by age, duration of intervention, hereditary risk, FLG mutation,  or classification of intervention type for risk of developing eczema. We could not evaluate these effects on risk of food allergy. Evidence was insufficient to show whether adherence to interventions influenced the relationship between skin care interventions and risk of developing eczema or food allergy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema, and probably increase risk of skin infection. Effects of skin care interventions on risk of food allergy are uncertain. Further work is needed to understand whether different approaches to infant skin care might promote or prevent eczema and to evaluate effects on food allergy based on robust outcome assessments.

The Chinese herbal formula Huoxiang Zhengqi for atopic dermatitis with dampness pattern (CHARM): a study protocol for a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

Background

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a complex, common inflammatory skin disease. The Chinese herbal formula Huoxiang Zhengqi (HXZQ) has been a common dermatosis treatment in China for many years, but there is no high-level evidence for its effect on AD/eczema. The aim of this trial is to examine the efficacy and safety of HXZQ treating AD/eczema patients.

Methods

This is a double-blind, multi-center, randomized controlled trial comparing HXZQ to a placebo. It will consist of 4 weeks’ treatment and 4 weeks of follow-up. A total of 218 participants will be randomly allocated into two groups—an HXZQ group and a placebo group, from 7 hospitals in China. Patients diagnosed with AD will be enrolled if they are in accordance with CM dampness pattern, have body surface area (BSA) of 1–10%, have investigator’s global assessment (IGA) of 1–3, have age between 18 and 70 years, and provide signed informed consent. The Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) is the primary outcome. The secondary outcomes are the numerical itch rating scale, IGA, BSA, Skindex-29, and EQ-5D-5L score, from baseline to the end of the treatment. Analysis will be on intention-to-treat and per-protocol subject analysis principles.

Discussion

The goal of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy and availability of HXZQ oral liquid in treating AD/eczema in terms of symptoms and eczematous lesions. It will also address whether it has positive effect on QoL.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx): Chinese herbal formula Huoxiang Zhengqi for atopic dermatitis with dampness pattern (CHARM): a double-blinded randomized controlled trial, ChiCTR1900026700. Registered on 19 October 2019.

Brief Academic Review and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis

In this clinical guidelines article, we first include a brief review of the epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical diagnoses, and scoring-scales for pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD). We then offer a set of pharmacologic treatment guidelines for infants and toddlers (<2 years), children (2-12 years), and adolescents (>12 years). We recommend irritant avoidance and liberal emollient usage as the cornerstone of treatment in all age-groups. In infants <2 years, we recommend topical corticosteroids as first-line medication-based therapy. In infants as young as 3 months, pimecrolimus, a topical calcineurin inhibitor, may also be used. As a last resort in patients <2 years, non-traditional therapies, such as the Aron regime, may be a safer option for refractory or resistant AD before off- label medications are considered. In children and adolescents >2 years, topical corticosteroids are still considered first-line therapies, but there is sufficient safety data to utilize topical calcineurin inhibitors and topical PDE4 inhibitors as well. In children ages 2-12 years whose atopic dermatitis fails to respond to prior treatments, oral systemic immunosuppressants can be used. For adolescents >12, the biologic, dupilumab, is an additional therapeutic option. A trial of phototherapy may also be utilized in children, particularly in adolescents >12 years, if they have access to treatment. Although not currently approved for the treatment of AD, Janus-kinase (JAK) inhibitors represent a promising new class of biologics with recently completed phase III clinical trials (JADE-- MONO1/2).

Cost Effectiveness of Emollients in the Prevention of Relapses in Atopic Dermatitis

Introduction

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is chronic inflammatory skin condition, characterized by its remission-relapse cycles. This predominantly pediatric disease is becoming more and more prevalent. Emollients are part of the therapeutic management and particularly a way to increase time between relapses. The follow-up of AD and relapses have a great impact on patient’s quality of life, expenditures and society costs. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of different emollients prescribed to AD patients.

Methods

A three-state Markov simulation model was developed over a six-year period with 28 days cycles. Two perspectives were adopted, a health care system perspective and a societal perspective. Four different emollients (A, B, C, D) were compared with no emollient use. Time without flare-up was the key endpoint of the study. quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assessed as a secondary outcome. Cost and effectiveness data were derived from (i) randomized clinical trials and literature review for the efficacy of treatments, (ii) resource utilization and quality of life data, and (iii) unit prices from official price lists.

Results

The six-year health care costs associated with emollient A amount to £1844.23 and generate 4.58 years-without flare-up. Compared to emollient B, emollient A is costlier (Δ £41) but more effective (0.097 years). The ICER is £428.30 per year without flare-up. Emollient A is the dominant strategy compared to no treatment (£2,251.01; 3.99 years without flare-ups). When accounting for the societal costs, emollient A is the dominant strategy.

Discussion

According to the analysis, treatment with preventive emollient was a cost-effective option compared with no treatment in adult AD patients. In this comparative study, emollient A is the most efficient strategy from a willingness to pay £200 with a probability of 49%.

Paediatric atopic eczema (atopic dermatitis) in South Africa: A practical algorithm for the management of mild-to-moderate disease in daily clinical practice

Background

Atopic eczema (AE) is a chronic, highly pruritic, inflammatory skin condition with increasing prevalence worldwide. Atopic eczema mostly affects children, impairing quality of life with poor disease control leading to progression of other atopic disorders. As most patients in South Africa have no access to specialist healthcare, a practical approach is needed for the management of mild-to-moderate AE in paediatric patients for daily clinical practice.

Methods

A panel of experts in AE convened to develop a practical algorithm for the management of AE for children and adolescents in South Africa.

Results

Regular moisturising with an oil-based emollient remains the mainstay of AE treatment. Severe AE flares should be managed with topical corticosteroids (TCSs). For mild-to-moderate AE flares in sensitive skin areas, a topical calcineurin inhibitor (TCI) should be applied twice daily from the first signs of AE until complete resolution. Topical corticosteroids may be used when TCIs are unavailable. In non-sensitive skin areas, TCSs should be used for mild-to-moderate AE, but TCIs twice daily may be considered. Proactive maintenance treatment with low-dose TCI or TCS 2–3 times weekly and the liberal use of emollients is recommended for patients with recurrent flares.

Conclusions

This algorithm aims to simplify treatment of paediatric AE, optimising clinical outcomes and reducing disease burden. This approach excludes treatment of patients with severe AE, who should be referred to specialist care. Emphasis has been given to the importance of general skincare, patient education and the topical anti-inflammatory medications available in South Africa (TCSs and TCIs).

The role of the nurse in the care and management of patients with atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of key aspects of specialised dermatology nursing practice in the management of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. The role of dermatology nurse specialists in supporting patients and promoting disease understanding, education and treatment adherence continues to evolve. As features of specialised nursing care can also inform other nursing staff in a wide range of care settings, an overview of key components is examined. Observations presented are from a pan-European perspective and represent the collected view of a group of dermatology nurse specialists, dermatologists and patient advocates following two round-table discussions.

MAIN BODY

Atopic dermatitis is a common, chronic, inflammatory disease characterised by erythematous/scaling skin lesions, with often intense pruritus. Disease course is cyclic with periodic disease flares of varying intensity, presenting management challenges to patients and families. Dermatology nurse specialists play a key role in providing education and substantial patient support to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life to patients and their family, delivered within a multidisciplinary team framework. Nurse-led education and 'eczema schools' are of benefit in reducing disease severity and improving quality of life by enhancing self-management, adherence and patient engagement. eHealth tools, such as patient portals or online training platforms, can provide online learning, individualised education, and help to improve engagement. These and other initiatives, such as written action plans, are all essential to improve or maintain treatment adherence, self-management and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermatology nurse specialists play a central role in the assessment and management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis patients and families. This places them in an ideal position to build strong and often long-term relationships with patients and parents. Such engagement promotes trust, assists in setting realistic expectations of treatment and outcomes, and enhances self-management and engagement in their own care. Providing emotional support, as well as formal and systematic education (including individualised practical advice) all contribute to improved treatment adherence and can enhance the quality of life of patients and their families throughout the course of this long-term condition.

Efficacy of Nonprescription Moisturizers for Atopic Dermatitis: An Updated Review of Clinical Evidence

Twice-daily moisturization is recommended by international guidelines as the bedrock of the management of atopic dermatitis (AD). Moisturizers should be selected based on proven clinical effectiveness in improving the skin barrier and improving the symptoms of AD. We searched the PubMed database for clinical trials assessing daily moisturization for the treatment of AD published between 2006 and 2019. Studies had to assess the efficacy of commercially available moisturizers using objective measures of corneometry, transepidermal water loss, or incidence of flare as endpoints, and treatments had to be currently available to patients. Clinical studies showed that moisturization (typically twice daily) significantly improved the skin barrier in adults and children with AD. Longer-term flare studies showed that daily moisturization reduced the incidence of flares and extended the time between flares. Proactive moisturization of infants at high risk of developing AD may reduce its manifestation. Therapeutic moisturizers for AD are specifically formulated with ingredients that target symptoms of AD, such as itch, inflammation, or compromised skin barrier. The US FDA requires that any moisturizer available in the USA and claiming to treat AD must contain colloidal oatmeal. Healthcare providers can maximize compliance and outcomes by educating patients on the benefits of liberally applying a therapeutic moisturizer twice daily to support the skin barrier and help reduce the incidence of flares. Specific recommendations should be for clinically tested moisturizers evaluated using objective, validated skin assessments.

Systemic treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common and chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin disorder. It seriously impacts quality of life and economic outcomes, especially for those with moderate to severe eczema. Various treatments allow sustained control of the disease; however, their relative benefit remains unclear due to the limited number of trials directly comparing treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different types of systemic immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe eczema using NMA and to generate rankings of available systemic immunosuppressive treatments for eczema according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to August 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic immunosuppressive agents for moderate to severe atopic eczema when compared against placebo or any other eligible eczema treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We synthesised data using pair-wise analysis and NMA to compare treatments and rank them according to their effectiveness. Effectiveness was assessed primarily by determining the proportion of participants who achieved at least 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75) and improvement in the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). Safety was evaluated primarily by considering the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) and infection. We deemed short-term follow-up as ≤ 16 weeks and long-term follow-up as > 16 weeks. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for these primary outcomes using six domains of CiNEMA grading.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 74 studies, with 8177 randomised participants. Approximately 55% of participants were male, with average age of 32 years (range 2 to 84 years), although age and gender were unreported for 419 and 902 participants, respectively. Most of the included trials were placebo controlled (65%), 34% were head-to-head studies (15% assessed the effects of different doses of the same drug), and 1% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. All trials included participants with moderate to severe eczema, but 62% of studies did not separate data by severity; 38% of studies assessed only severe eczema. The total duration of included trials ranged from 2 weeks to 60 months, whereas treatment duration varied from a single dose (CIM331, KPL-716) to 60 months (methotrexate (MTX)). Seventy studies were available for quantitative synthesis; this review assessed 29 immunosuppressive agents from three classes of interventions. These included (1) conventional treatments, with ciclosporin assessed most commonly; (2) small molecule treatments, including phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors; and (3) biological treatments, including anti-CD31 receptors, anti-interleukin (IL)-22, anti-IL-31, anti-IL-13, anti-IL-12/23p40, anti-OX40, anti-TSLP, anti-CRTH2, and anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibodies, but most commonly dupilumab. Most trials (73) assessed outcomes at a short-term duration ranging from 2 to 16 weeks, whereas 33 trials assessed long-term outcomes, with duration ranging from 5 to 60 months. All participants were from a hospital setting. Fifty-two studies declared a source of funding, and of these, pharmaceutical companies funded 88%. We rated 37 studies as high risk; 21, unclear risk, and 16, low risk of bias, with studies most commonly at high risk of attrition bias. Network meta-analysis suggests that dupilumab ranks first for effectiveness when compared with other biological treatments. Dupilumab is more effective than placebo in achieving EASI75 (risk ratio (RR) 3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.51 to 3.69) and improvement in POEM score (mean difference 7.30, 95% CI 6.61 to 8.00) at short-term follow-up (high-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain of the effects of dupilumab when compared with placebo, in terms of the proportion of participants who achieve EASI75 (RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.60) at longer-term follow-up. Low-certainty evidence indicates that tralokinumab may be more effective than placebo in achieving short-term EASI75 (RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.34), but there was no evidence for tralokinumab to allow us to assess short-term follow-up of POEM or long-term follow-up of EASI75. We are uncertain of the effect of ustekinumab compared with placebo in achieving EASI75 (long-term follow-up: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.45; short-term follow-up: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.97; both very low certainty). We found no evidence on ustekinumab for the POEM outcome. We are uncertain whether other immunosuppressive agents that targeted our key outcomes influence the achievement of short-term EASI75 compared with placebo due to low- or very low-certainty evidence. Dupilumab and ustekinumab were the only immunosuppressive agents evaluated for longer-term EASI75. Dupilumab was the only agent evaluated for improvement in POEM during short-term follow-up. Low- to moderate-certainty evidence indicates a lower proportion of participants with SAEs after treatment with QAW039 and dupilumab compared to placebo during short-term follow-up, but low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in SAEs during short-term follow-up of other immunosuppressive agents compared to placebo. Evidence for effects of immunosuppressive agents on risk of any infection during short-term follow-up and SAEs during long-term follow-up compared with placebo was of low or very low certainty but did not indicate a difference. We did not identify differences in other adverse events (AEs), but dupilumab is associated with specific AEs, including eye inflammation and eosinophilia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that dupilumab is the most effective biological treatment for eczema. Compared to placebo, dupilumab reduces eczema signs and symptoms in the short term for people with moderate to severe atopic eczema. Short-term safety outcomes from clinical trials did not reveal new safety concerns with dupilumab. Overall, evidence for the efficacy of most other immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe atopic eczema is of low or very low certainty. Given the lack of data comparing conventional with newer biological treatments for the primary outcomes, there remains high uncertainty for ranking the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments such as ciclosporin and biological treatments such as dupilumab. Most studies were placebo-controlled and assessed only short-term efficacy of immunosuppressive agents. Further adequately powered head-to-head RCTs should evaluate comparative long-term efficacy and safety of available treatments for moderate to severe eczema.

An Investigation of the Skin Barrier Restoring Effects of a Cream and Lotion Containing Ceramides in a Multi-vesicular Emulsion in People with Dry, Eczema-Prone, Skin: The RESTORE Study Phase 1

Introduction

The replenishment of skin lipids depleted in the dry skin state is a desirable therapeutic target to restore skin moisturization; however, there is limited evidence demonstrating the success of this approach through the use of topical emollients. The purpose of this study was to provide evidence of the benefits of a cream and equivalent lotion containing skin lipids in a multi-vesicular emulsion for the management of dry skin. The hypothesis was that the test cream and test lotion could sustain skin moisturization for longer than traditional emollients by sustainably delivering skin lipids.

Methods

A double-blind intra-subject vehicle-controlled single open-application test on the lower legs in people with dry, atopic dermatitis (atopic eczema)-prone, skin was conducted. There were six treatment sites, three per lower leg in each participant, which were treated with the test cream, the test lotion, three reference creams commonly prescribed in the UK and no treatment as a control. After baseline measurements of skin hydration, 100 μl of the test/reference creams was applied to each of the relevant treatment sites (random site allocation). Following treatment, measurements of skin hydration and scoring of visual dryness was conducted at timed intervals (3, 6, 12 and 24 h post-product application).

Results

The test cream and lotion both significantly increased skin hydration and reduced skin dryness for at least 24 h following a single application compared to a no treatment control site. Compared to three reference emollient creams the test cream and test lotion were the only products capable of sustaining clinically meaningful improvements in skin moisturization for 24 h.

Conclusion

The sustained moisturization imparted by the test products reduces the need for frequent emollient application, often requiring 3–4 applications per day for traditional emollients, and should reduce the high burden of managing dry skin conditions like atopic dermatitis.

Coronavirus-days ın dermatology

Severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is highly contagious and a particularly popular problem in all around the World and also in all departments of every hospital. In order to protect the well-being of health care providers while providing a sufficient workforce to respond to the COVID-19 are vital for pandemic planning. In this article, we will discuss this problem from a dermatological aspect.

A randomized half-body, double blind, controlled trial on the effects of a pH-modified moisturizer vs. standard moisturizer in mild to moderate atopic dermatitis

Background

Higher skin pH in atopic dermatitis contributes to impaired epidermal barrier. A moisturizer compatible with physiological pH could improve atopic dermatitis.

Objective

To determine the effect of a physiologically compatible pH moisturizer in atopic dermatitis.

Methods

A randomized half body, double blind, controlled trial involving patients with stable atopic dermatitis was performed. pH-modified moisturizer and standard moisturizer were applied to half body for 6 weeks.

Results

A total of 6 (16.7%) males and 30 (83.3%) females participated. Skin pH reductions from week 0, week 2 and 6 were significant at the forearms (5.315 [0.98] to 4.85 [0.54] to 5.04 [0.78], p = 0.02) and abdomen (5.25 [1.01], 4.82 [0.64], 5.01 [0.59], p = 0.00) but not at the shins (5.01 [0.80], 4.76 [0.49], 4.85 [0.79], p = 0.09) with pH-modified moisturizer. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) at the forearms decreased (4.60 [2.55] to 3.70 [3.10] to 3.00 [3.55], p = 0.00), abdomen (3.90 [2.90] to 2.40 [3.45] to 2.70 [2.25], p = 0.046). SCORAD improved from 14.1 ± 12.75 to 10.5 ± 13.25 to 7 ± 12.25, p = 0.00. In standard moisturizer group, pH reductions were significant at the forearms (5.29 [0.94] to 4.84 [0.55] to 5.02 [0.70], p = 0.00) and abdomen (5.25 [1.09], 4.91 [0.63], 5.12 [0.66], p = 0.00). TEWL at the forearm were (4.80 [2.95], 4.10 [2.15], 4.60 [3.40], p = 0.67), shins (3.80 [1.40], 3.50 [2.35], 4.00 [2.50], p = 0.91) and abdomen (3.70 [2.45], 4.10 [3.60], 3.40 [2.95], p = 0.80). SCORAD improved from 14.2 ± 9.1 to 10.9 ± 10.65 to 10.5 ± 11, p = 0.00. Reduction in pH was observed with both moisturizers while TEWL significantly improved with pH-modified moisturizer. pH-modified moisturizer resulted in greater pH, TEWL and SCORAD improvements however the differences were not significant from standard moisturizer.

Study limitation

Skin hydration was not evaluated.

Conclusion

Moisturization is beneficial for atopic dermatitis; use of physiologically compatible pH moisturizer is promising.

Daily emollient during infancy for prevention of eczema: the BEEP randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Skin barrier dysfunction precedes eczema development. We tested whether daily use of emollient in the first year could prevent eczema in high-risk children.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in 12 hospitals and four primary care sites across the UK. Families were approached via antenatal or postnatal services for recruitment of term infants (at least 37 weeks' gestation) at high risk of developing eczema (ie, at least one first-degree relative with parent-reported eczema, allergic rhinitis, or asthma, diagnosed by a doctor). Term newborns with a family history of atopic disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to application of emollient daily (either Diprobase cream or DoubleBase gel) for the first year plus standard skin-care advice (emollient group) or standard skin-care advice only (control group). The randomisation schedule was created using computer-generated code (stratified by recruiting centre and number of first-degree relatives with atopic disease) and participants were assigned to groups using an internet-based randomisation system. The primary outcome was eczema at age 2 years (defined by UK working party criteria) with analysis as randomised regardless of adherence to allocation for participants with outcome data collected, and adjusting for stratification variables. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN21528841. Data collection for long-term follow-up is ongoing, but the trial is closed to recruitment.

FINDINGS

1394 newborns were randomly assigned to study groups between Nov 19, 2014, and Nov 18, 2016; 693 were assigned to the emollient group and 701 to the control group. Adherence in the emollient group was 88% (466 of 532) at 3 months, 82% (427 of 519) at 6 months, and 74% (375 of 506) at 12 months in those with complete questionnaire data. At age 2 years, eczema was present in 139 (23%) of 598 infants with outcome data collected in the emollient group and 150 (25%) of 612 infants in the control group (adjusted relative risk 0·95 [95% CI 0·78 to 1·16], p=0·61; adjusted risk difference -1·2% [-5·9 to 3·6]). Other eczema definitions supported the results of the primary analysis. Mean number of skin infections per child in year 1 was 0·23 (SD 0·68) in the emollient group versus 0·15 (0·46) in the control group; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1·55 (95% CI 1·15 to 2·09).

INTERPRETATION

We found no evidence that daily emollient during the first year of life prevents eczema in high-risk children and some evidence to suggest an increased risk of skin infections. Our study shows that families with eczema, asthma, or allergic rhinitis should not use daily emollients to try and prevent eczema in their newborn.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Interventions for chronic pruritus of unknown origin

BACKGROUND

Pruritus is a sensation that leads to the desire to scratch; its origin is unknown in 8% to 15% of affected patients. The prevalence of chronic pruritus of unknown origin (CPUO) in individuals with generalised pruritus ranges from 3.6% to 44.5%, with highest prevalence among the elderly. When the origin of pruritus is known, its management may be straightforward if an effective treatment for the causal disease is available. Treatment of CPUO is particularly difficult due to its unknown pathophysiology.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for CPUO in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following up to July 2019: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and trials registries. We checked the reference lists of included studies for additional references to relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought to include randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed interventions for CPUO, as defined in category VI ('Other pruritus of undetermined origin, or chronic pruritus of unknown origin') of the International Forum for the Study of Itch (IFSI) classification, in children and adults. Eligible interventions were non-pharmacological or topical or systemic pharmacological interventions, and eligible comparators were another active treatment, placebo, sham procedures, or no treatment or equivalent (e.g. waiting list).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were 'Patient- or parent-reported pruritus intensity' and 'Adverse events'. Our secondary outcomes were 'Health-related quality of life', 'Sleep disturbances', 'Depression', and 'Patient satisfaction'. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We found there was an absence of evidence for the main interventions of interest: emollient creams, cooling lotions, topical corticosteroids, topical antidepressants, systemic antihistamines, systemic antidepressants, systemic anticonvulsants, and phototherapy. We included one study with 257 randomised (253 analysed) participants, aged 18 to 65 years; 60.6% were female. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of three different doses of oral serlopitant (5 mg, 1 mg, and 0.25 mg, once daily for six weeks) compared to placebo for severe chronic pruritus; 25 US centres participated (clinical research centres and universities). All outcomes were measured at the end of treatment (six weeks from baseline), except adverse events, which were monitored throughout. A pharmaceutical company funded this study. Fifty-five per cent of participants suffered from CPUO, and approximately 45% presented a dermatological diagnosis (atopic dermatitis/eczema 37.3%, psoriasis 6.7%, acne 3.6%, among other diagnoses). We unsuccessfully attempted to retrieve outcome data from study authors for the subgroup of participants with CPUO. Participants had pruritus for six weeks or longer. Total study duration was 10 weeks. Participants who received serlopitant 5 mg may have a greater rate of relief of patient-reported pruritus intensity as measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS; a reduction in VAS score indicates improvement) compared to placebo (126 participants, risk ratio (RR) 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 3.35; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effects of serlopitant 5 mg compared to placebo on the following outcomes due to very low-certainty evidence: adverse events (127 participants; RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.50); health-related quality of life (as measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI); a higher score indicates greater impairment; 127 participants; mean difference (MD) -4.20, 95% CI -11.68 to 3.28); and sleep disturbances (people with insomnia measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Symptom Questionnaire-Insomnia (PSSQ-I), a dichotomous measure; 128 participants; RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.01). Participants who received serlopitant 1 mg may have a greater rate of relief of patient-reported pruritus intensity as measured by VAS compared to placebo; however, the 95% CI indicates that there may also be little to no difference between groups (126 participants; RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.54; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effects of serlopitant 1 mg compared to placebo on the following outcomes due to very low-certainty evidence: adverse events (128 participants; RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.47); health-related quality of life (DLQI; 128 participants; MD -6.90, 95% CI -14.38 to 0.58); and sleep disturbances (PSSQ-I; 128 participants; RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.84). Participants who received serlopitant 0.25 mg may have a greater rate of relief of patient-reported pruritus intensity as measured by VAS compared to placebo; however, the 95% CI indicates that there may also be little to no difference between groups (127 participants; RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.77; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effects of serlopitant 0.25 mg compared to placebo on the following outcomes due to very low-certainty evidence: adverse events (127 participants; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.24); health-related quality of life (DLQI; 127 participants; MD -5.70, 95% CI -13.18 to 1.78); and sleep disturbances (PSSQ-I; 127 participants; RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.17). The most commonly reported adverse events were somnolence, diarrhoea, headache, and nasopharyngitis, among others. Our included study did not measure depression or patient satisfaction. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for all outcomes due to indirectness (only 55% of study participants had CPUO) and imprecision. We downgraded outcomes other than patient-reported pruritus intensity a further level due to concerns regarding risk of bias in selection of the reported result and some concerns with risk of bias due to missing outcome data (sleep disturbances only). We deemed risk of bias to be generally low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found lack of evidence to address our review question: for most of our interventions of interest, we found no eligible studies. The neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1R) antagonist serlopitant was the only intervention that we could assess. One study provided low-certainty evidence suggesting that serlopitant may reduce pruritus intensity when compared with placebo. We are uncertain of the effects of serlopitant on other outcomes, as certainty of the evidence is very low. More studies with larger sample sizes, focused on patients with CPUO, are needed. Healthcare professionals, patients, and other stakeholders may have to rely on indirect evidence related to other forms of chronic pruritus when deciding between the main interventions currently used for this condition.

Hygiene and emollient interventions for maintaining skin integrity in older people in hospital and residential care settings

BACKGROUND

Ageing has a degenerative effect on the skin, leaving it more vulnerable to damage. Hygiene and emollient interventions may help maintain skin integrity in older people in hospital and residential care settings; however, at present, most care is based on "tried and tested" practice, rather than on evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hygiene and emollient interventions for maintaining skin integrity in older people in hospital and residential care settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL, up to January 2019. We also searched five trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing hygiene and emollient interventions versus placebo, no intervention, or standard practices for older people aged ≥ 60 years in hospital or residential care settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were frequency of skin damage, for example, complete loss of integrity (tears or ulceration) or partial loss of integrity (fissuring), and side effects. Secondary outcomes included transepidermal water loss (TEWL), stratum corneum hydration (SCH), erythema, and clinical scores of dryness or itch. We used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials involving 1598 residential care home residents; no included trial had a hospital setting. Most participants had a mean age of 80+ years; when specified, more women were recruited than men. Two studies included only people with diagnosed dry skin. Studies were conducted in Asia, Australasia, Europe, and North America. A range of hygiene and emollient interventions were assessed: a moisturising soap bar; combinations of water soak, oil soak, and lotion; regular application of a commercially available moisturiser; use of two different standardised skin care regimens comprising a body wash and leave-on body lotion; bed bath with "wash gloves" containing numerous ingredients; and application of a hot towel after usual care bed bath. In five studies, treatment duration ranged from five days to six months; only one study had post-treatment follow-up (one to eight days from end of treatment). Outcomes in the hot towel study were measured 15 minutes after the skin was wiped with a dry towel. Three studies each had high risk of attrition, detection, and performance bias. Only one trial (n = 984) assessed frequency of skin damage via average monthly incidence of skin tears during six months of treatment. The emollient group (usual care plus twice-daily application of moisturiser) had 5.76 tears per month per 1000 occupied bed-days compared with 10.57 tears in the usual care only group (ad hoc or no standardised skin-moisturising regimen) (P = 0.004), but this is based on very low-quality evidence, so we are uncertain of this result. Only one trial (n = 133) reported measuring side effects. At 56 ± 4 days from baseline, there were three undesirable effects (itch (mild), redness (mild/moderate), and irritation (severe)) in intervention group 1 (regimen consisting of a moisturising body wash and a moisturising leave-on lotion) and one event (mild skin dryness) in intervention group 2 (regimen consisting of body wash and a water-in-oil emulsion containing emollients and 4% urea). In both groups, the body wash was used daily and the emollient twice daily for eight weeks. There were zero adverse events in the usual care group. This result is based on very low-quality evidence. This same study also measured TEWL at 56 ± 4 days in the mid-volar forearm (n = 106) and the lower leg (n = 105). Compared to usual care, there may be no difference in TEWL between intervention groups, but evidence quality is low. One study, which compared application of a hot towel for 10 seconds after a usual care bed bath versus usual care bed bath only, also measured TEWL at 15 minutes after the skin was wiped with a dry towel for one second. The mean TEWL was 8.6 g/m²/h (standard deviation (SD) 3.2) in the hot towel group compared with 8.9 g/m²/h (SD 4.1) in the usual care group (low-quality evidence; n = 42), showing there may be little or no difference between groups. A lower score is more favourable. Three studies (266 participants) measured SCH, but all evidence is of very low quality; we did not combine these studies due to differences in treatments (different skin care regimens for eight weeks; wash gloves for 12 weeks; and single application of hot towel to the skin) and differences in outcome reporting. All three studies showed no clear difference in SCH at follow-up (ranging from 15 minutes after the intervention to 12 weeks from baseline), when compared with usual care. A clinical score of dryness was measured by three studies (including 245 participants); pooling was not appropriate. The treatment groups (different skin care regimens for eight weeks; a moisturising soap bar used for five days; and combinations of water soak, oil soak, and lotion for 12 days) may reduce dryness compared to standard care or no intervention (results measured at 5, 8, and 56 ± 4 days after treatment was initiated). However, the quality of evidence for this outcome is low. Outcomes of erythema and clinical score of itch were not assessed in any included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence about the effects of hygiene and emollients in maintaining skin integrity in older people in residential and hospital settings is inadequate. We cannot draw conclusions regarding frequency of skin damage or side effects due to very low-quality evidence. Low-quality evidence suggests that in residential care settings for older people, certain types of hygiene and emollient interventions (two different standardised skin care regimens; moisturising soap bar; combinations of water soak, oil soak, and lotion) may be more effective in terms of clinical score of dryness when compared with no intervention or standard care. Studies were small and generally lacked methodological rigour, and information on effect sizes and precision was absent. More clinical trials are needed to guide practice; future studies should use a standard approach to measuring treatment effects and should include patient-reported outcomes, such as comfort and acceptability.

Best emollients for eczema (BEE) - comparing four types of emollients in children with eczema: protocol for randomised trial and nested qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis/eczema affects around 20% of children and is characterised by inflamed, dry, itchy skin. Guidelines recommend 'leave-on' emollients that are applied directly to the skin to add or trap moisture and used regularly, they can soothe, enhance the skin barrier and may prevent disease 'flares'. However, the suitability of the many different emollients varies between people and there is little evidence to help prescribers and parents and carers decide which type to try first.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Design: pragmatic, multicentre, individually randomised, parallel group superiority trial of four types of emollient (lotions, creams, gel or ointments).

SETTING

general practitioner surgeries in England.

PARTICIPANTS

children aged over 6 months and less than 12 years with mild-to-severe eczema and no known sensitivity to study emollients.

INTERVENTIONS

study-approved lotion, cream, gel or ointment as the only leave-on emollient for 16 weeks, with directions to apply twice daily and as required. Other treatments, such as topical corticosteroids, used as standard care.

FOLLOW-UP

52 weeks.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

validated patient-orientated eczema measure measured weekly for 16 weeks.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

eczema signs (Eczema Area Severity Index) by masked researcher, treatment use, parent satisfaction, adverse events, child and family quality of life (Atopic Dermatitis Quality of Life, Child Health Utility 9D and Dermatitis Family Impact).

SAMPLE SIZE

520 participants (130 per group).

ANALYSIS

intention-to-treat using linear mixed models for repeated measures.Nested qualitative study: audio-recording of sample of baseline appointments and up to 60 interviews with participants at 4 and 16 weeks, interviews to be transcribed and analysed thematically.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval granted by the NHS REC (South West - Central Bristol Research Ethics Committee 17/SW/0089). Findings will be presented at conferences, published in open-access peer-reviewed journals and the study website; and summaries shared with key stakeholders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN84540529.