Efficacy of a moisturizer for pruritus accompanied by xerosis in patients undergoing dialysis: A multicenter, open-label, randomized verification study

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus: what is known and its application in children

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) or uremic pruritus (UP) is a frequent symptom in patients with kidney failure receiving kidney replacement therapy. Severe chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus correlates with poor outcome in patients on dialysis. It is multifactorial in etiology and has a significant impact on quality of life. There is, however, limited data for children. This review summarizes current epidemiology, clinical characteristics, pruritus scoring systems, and available therapeutic options for pruritus in patients with chronic kidney disease and those receiving dialysis. Optimal care requires proper awareness of the severity of symptoms, the impact on quality of life, and the possible long-term outcomes. Optimizing dialysis prescription and correcting electrolyte abnormalities are important treatment targets. A wide range of therapeutic options is also available although none are well-studied in children. An earlier recognition of this debilitating symptom in children and treatment is imperative. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus in patients undergoing hemodialysis: Xerosis and topical therapy

Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is a common and distressing symptom for patients with CKD and a difficult challenge for nephrologists and dermatologists. Recent results showed the multifactorial nature of the pathophysiology, and therapeutic trials were only successful in certain subsets of patients. The clinical manifestations are varied, with xerosis being the most common dermatological manifestation and correlated with the intensity of CKD-aP. A better understanding of the pathophysiology of xerosis in CKD-aP and appropriate topical treatment could correct xerosis to reduce the intensity of CKD-aP and improve the patient's quality of life.

Improvement of Quality of Life in Dialysis and Diabetic Patients by Skin Dryness and Pruritus Management with an Ecobiological Dermo-Cosmetic Product

PURPOSE

Xerosis and pruritus are common chronic dermatological disorders among dialysis and diabetic patients that are frequently underdiagnosed or neglected, which can impact the quality of life of these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a specific dermo-cosmetic product in the treatment of dry skin and pruritus associated with dialysis and diabetes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-nine dialysis patients (mean age 62 years) and 40 diabetic patients (mean age 57 years, 88% type 2) were included in two different single-center open-label uncontrolled clinical trials. All patients presented skin dryness according to the Scaling Roughness Redness and Cracks (SRRC) scale, and pruritus and/or insomnia. They applied the dermo-cosmetic product Medi-Secure Atoderm Xereane (NAOS, Laboratoire Bioderma) once or twice a day. The clinical efficacy (SRRC, pruritus, and insomnia), the skin-related quality of life (Dermatological Life Quality Index, DLQI), and the subjective efficacy were assessed at the inclusion visit and after 28 days of product application, as well as the safety.

RESULTS

After 28 days of application, the product significantly reduced the SRRC global score of 83% (0.9±0.8 vs 5.1±1.2) and 66% (1.4±1.2 vs 4.2±0.5), pruritus intensity of 76% (1.1±1.3 vs 4.6±2.1) and 78% (0.9±1.7 vs 4.2±2.6), and insomnia intensity of 61% (0.9±1.3 vs 2.4±2.3) and 82% (0.9±1.7 vs 4.8±2.7) in dialysis and diabetic patients, respectively. Furthermore, the product's application led to an improvement of the skin-related quality of life of 50% (5.4 vs 2.7; p<0.0001) in dialysis patients and 71% (6.6 vs 1.9; p<0.0001) in diabetic patients at D28. In addition, the product was greatly appreciated by all patients for its soothing, comforting, repairing, nourishing, and hydrating effects and was very well tolerated by the entire panels.

CONCLUSION

This specific dermo-cosmetic product significantly reduces skin dryness, pruritus, and insomnia in dialysis and diabetic patients, thereby greatly improves their skin-related quality of life. By managing and avoiding bothersome symptoms associated with their disease or treatment, this ecobiological dermo-cosmetic can prevent serious complications that constitute a substantial burden on their daily life.

Efficacy and Safety of Mucopolysaccharide Polysulfate Cream for Non-Exudative Eczema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Mucopolysaccharide polysulfate (MPS) cream as a moisturizer is widely applied to treat eczema, and a lot of clinical trials have demonstrated its efficacy and safety. However, there is no further research to collect and analyze these studies.

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of MPS cream as monotherapy or add-on therapy for non-exudative eczema.

Methods: Ten databases were searched to identify the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to July 31, 2021. Revman 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.

Results: A total of eligible 20 studies were included. Among the 20 studies, 2 studies compared MPS cream with other moisturizers, 14 compared MPS cream plus topical corticosteroids (TCS) with TCS alone, and 4 compared with MPS cream plus tacrolimus ointment with tacrolimus ointment alone. The pooled results demonstrated that MPS cream had a higher total efficacy rate [Risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.30, P < 0.00001], a lower recurrence rate (RR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.74, P = 0.002) and a lower pruritus score [mean difference (MD) −1.78, 95% CI: −2.16 to −1.40, P < 0.00001] than urea cream or vaseline ointment. Moreover, in comparison with TCS or tacrolimus ointment alone, the combination treatment performed better in terms of total efficacy rate, total symptom score, recurrence rate, and pruritus score. For safety, the skin adverse events were mild, and MPS cream as monotherapy or add-on therapy did not increase the risk of skin adverse events.

Conclusions: MPS cream as monotherapy or add-on therapy could provide a good effect for treating non-exudative eczema with mild and tolerable skin adverse events. However, due to the suboptimal quality of the included studies, high-quality and large-sample RCTs are needed in the future for update or validation.

Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/), identifier: CRD42021265735.