S2k guideline on diagnosis and treatment of atopic dermatitis - short version

Full-body blue light irradiation as treatment for atopic dermatitis: a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial (AD-Blue)

BACKGROUND

Visible blue light (wavelength 400-495 nm) is a promising new treatment option for both psoriasis and atopic dermatitis (AD). Whilst previous clinical trials featured various devices and blue light at a variety of wavelengths, none of these interventions were challenged in objective clinical criteria.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty-seven patients diagnosed with AD were enrolled in AD-Blue, an international, prospective, double-blinded, three-armed (415 nm vs. 450 nm vs. sham control), randomized trial designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of prototype full-body blue light devices.

RESULTS

Full-body irradiation with 450 nm blue light but not 415 nm had a significant impact on itch (Itch-VAS, -1.6 ± 2.3; p  =  0.023 vs. sham irradiation). PO-SCORAD values also decreased significantly in response to irradiation at 415 nm (-11.5 ± 18.4; p = 0.028 vs. sham irradiation). None of the other outcome measures (EASI, SCORAD, IGA, DLQI) changed significantly. No safety signals were observed. Evaluation of skin transcriptomes, cytokine levels in serum, and ELISpots from peripheral blood mononuclear cells isolated from a subset of patients revealed moderate decreases in IL-31 in response to irradiation with blue light.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite its favorable safety profile and moderate reductions in itch and IL-31 levels, full-body blue light irradiation did not lead to an amelioration of any of the objective measures of AD.

Ganzkörper-Blaulichtbestrahlung zur Behandlung der atopischen Dermatitis: eine randomisierte, placebokontrollierte klinische Studie (AD-Blue)

Hintergrund

Sichtbares blaues Licht (Wellenlänge 400–495 nm) ist eine vielversprechende neue Behandlungsoption sowohl für Psoriasis als auch für atopische Dermatitis (AD). In früheren klinischen Studien wurden zwar verschiedene Geräte und blaues Licht mit unterschiedlichen Wellenlängen eingesetzt, aber keine dieser Prozeduren wurde anhand objektiver klinischer Kriterien geprüft.

Patienten und Methodik

87 Patienten mit AD wurden in die AD‐Blue‐Studie aufgenommen, eine internationale, prospektive, doppelblinde, dreiarmige (415 nm vs. 450 nm vs. Placebo), randomisierte Studie zur Untersuchung der Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit von Prototypen von Ganzkörper‐Blaulicht‐Bestrahlungsgeräten.

Ergebnisse

Die Ganzkörper‐Bestrahlung mit 450 nm blauem Licht, aber nicht mit 415 nm, hatte einen signifikant positiven Einfluss auf den Juckreiz (Pruritus‐VAS, –1,6 ± 2,3; p = 0,023 gegenüber der Placebobestrahlung). Die PO‐SCORAD‐Werte sanken ebenfalls signifikant als Reaktion auf die Bestrahlung bei 415 nm (–11,5 ± 18,4; p = 0,028 im Vergleich zur Placebobestrahlung). Keines der anderen Ergebnisse (EASI, SCORAD, IGA, DLQI) veränderte sich signifikant. Es wurden keine Sicherheitsprobleme beobachtet. Die Auswertung von Hauttranskriptomdaten, Zytokinspiegeln im Serum und ELISpots aus mononukleären Zellen des peripheren Blutes, die von einer Untergruppe von Patienten isoliert wurden, ergab eine moderate Abnahme von IL‐31 als Reaktion auf die Bestrahlung mit blauem Licht.

Schlussfolgerungen

Trotz des günstigen Sicherheitsprofils und der mäßigen Verringerung von Pruritus und IL‐31‐Spiegel führte die Ganzkörper‐Blaulichtbestrahlung bei AD zu keiner Verbesserung der objektiven Parameter zu Krankheitsschwere.

Itch, sleep loss, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and productivity loss in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Analyses of TREATgermany registry data

BACKGROUND

TREATgermany is a multicenter registry including patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) from currently 74 study centers (university clinics, hospitals and practices) in Germany. As of August 31, 2021, 1,230 adult patients were enrolled.

METHODS

In TREATgermany, patients and physicians fill in questionnaires pertaining to symptoms, disease severity, quality of life, depressiveness, and fatigue. In particular, limitations in work performance are assessed using the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ). To assess associations between occupational performance/work limitations and symptoms, correlations and regression models were calculated.

RESULTS

The examined sample of 228 employed patients reported an average of 6% at-work productivity loss within the past two weeks prior to enrolment in the registry. The WLQ productivity loss score was moderately associated with itch (r = 0.32) and sleep loss (r = 0.39) and strongly associated with depressive symptoms (r = 0.68) and fatigue (r = 0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

The analyses of the registry data show that moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis has a negative impact on the work productivity of the patients. The analyses further point out the relevant associations between work productivity, depressive symptoms, and fatigue highlighting the disease burden caused by the psychological components of AD.

Juckreiz, Schlafstörungen, depressive Symptome, Fatigue und Einschränkungen der Arbeitsproduktivität bei Patienten mit moderater bis schwerer atopischer Dermatitis: Daten aus dem TREATgermany-Register

Hintergrund

TREATgermany ist ein multizentrisches Register, das Patienten mit moderater bis schwerer atopischer Dermatitis (AD) aus derzeit 74 Studienzentren (Universitätskliniken, Krankenhäuser und Praxen) in Deutschland umfasst. Bis zum 31. August 2021 wurden 1.230 erwachsene Patienten eingeschlossen.

Methoden

In TREATgermany füllen Patienten und Ärzte Fragebögen zu Symptomen, Krankheitsschwere, Lebensqualität, Depressivität und Fatigue aus. Die Einschränkungen der Arbeitsleistung werden insbesondere mit dem Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) erfasst. Um Assoziationen zwischen beruflicher Leistung/Arbeitseinschränkungen und Symptomen zu bestimmen, wurden Korrelationen und Regressionsmodelle berechnet.

Ergebnisse

Die untersuchte Stichprobe von 228 berufstätigen Patienten beschrieb einen durchschnittlichen Produktivitätsverlust von 6% bei der Arbeit innerhalb der letzten zwei Wochen vor der Aufnahme in das Register. Der WLQ‐Wert für den Produktivitätsverlust war moderat mit Juckreiz (r = 0,32) und Schlafstörungen (r = 0,39) und stark mit depressiven Symptomen (r = 0,68) und Fatigue (r = 0,60) korreliert.

Schlussfolgerungen

Die Analysen der Registerdaten zeigen, dass eine moderate bis schwere AD einen negativen Einfluss auf die Arbeitsproduktivität der Patienten hat. Die Analysen weisen außerdem auf die relevanten Zusammenhänge zwischen Arbeitsproduktivität, depressiven Symptomen und Fatigue hin, was die durch die psychologischen Komponenten der AD verursachte Krankheitslast verdeutlicht.

Barrier defect in atopic dermatitis - possibilities and limits of basic skin therapy

The increased permeability of the skin barrier towards environmental factors such as allergens is considered a key factor in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Strengthening the skin barrier through basic skin therapy represents the basis of any therapy for AD. It is well known that genetic factors as well as the skin inflammation itself contribute to the weakening of the barrier; here, recent studies have led to a deeper understanding of the complex structures of the epidermis. The possibility of counteracting the disease preventively by the use of basic skin therapy from birth on has been studied intensively in recent years. This article summarizes recent findings on the effects of basic skin therapy as a primary and secondary preventive measure.

Prevalence and Medications of Atopic Dermatitis in Germany: Claims Data Analysis

Background

Information on the prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) varies greatly, and so far, only a few studies describe the healthcare of patients with AD in Germany.

Objective

The aim of the study is to describe the prevalence and medications of people with AD in Germany.

Methods

Health insurance data for the year 2019 were examined. Prevalence rates, the severity of disease, comorbidities and pharmaceutical supply were analyzed. Insured persons with AD were identified with at least one outpatient or inpatient International Classification Code of Diseases (L20).

Results

In 2019, 4.21% [95% CI 4.21−4.22%] of insured persons had AD (3.6 million). Women were affected slightly more frequently than men (4.74% [95% CI 4.73−4.74%] and 3.64% [95% CI 3.64−3.65%]). Adolescents and children under the age of 15 had the highest prevalence of AD compared to other age groups (9.44% [95% CI 9.42−9.46%]). Majority of the insured persons with AD were affected by a mild to moderate form of the disease. The most common co-morbidity was infections of the skin (RR 5.00 [95% CI 4.97−5.02%]). Some patients were treated by a dermatologist, while others by a general practitioner, 39.10% and 36.74%, respectively. Of the anti-inflammatory drugs, systemic glucocorticosteroids preparations were used most frequently and were most frequently prescribed by the general practitioner. With a total of 42,841 prescriptions (1.53%), methotrexate (third-line treatment option) was prescribed more frequently than ciclosporin with 19,628 prescriptions (0.70%) or azathioprine with 25,696 prescriptions (0.92%). Ciclosporin (first-line treatment option) was prescribed much more frequently by a dermatologist (44.00% versus 14.32% by general practitioner). The biological dupilumab was prescribed 30,801 times (1,10%) and was also primarily prescribed by a dermatologist (66.67%).

Conclusion

The present results reveal that a specialist treats approximately one-third of the patients with AD and that there is still a drug undersupply in some cases, especially concerning innovative drugs.

Topical therapy of atopic dermatitis with a focus on pimecrolimus

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and relapsing, inflammatory skin disease characterized by impaired skin barrier function and immune system dysregulation that results in dryness, skin microbiome dysbiosis and intense pruritus. It is highly heterogeneous, and its management is demanding. Patients with AD are at greater risk of comorbidities such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder as well as other atopic diseases. Early-onset AD cases typically improve or resolve in late childhood; however, it is proposed that the prevalence of persistent or adult-onset AD is higher than previously thought. Basic therapy consists of emollient application and trigger avoidance, and when insufficient, topical corticosteroids (TCS) are the first-line treatment. However, corticophobia/steroid aversion and TCS side-effects, particularly on sensitive skin areas, lead to low compliance and insufficient disease control. Several long- and short-term randomized controlled and daily practice studies have demonstrated that topical calcineurin inhibitors, such as pimecrolimus, have similar anti-inflammatory effects to low-to-medium strength TCS, reduce pruritus and improve the quality of life of patients. In addition, pimecrolimus does not cause skin atrophy, is steroid-sparing and has a good safety profile, with no evidence for an increased risk of malignancies or skin infections. In general, pimecrolimus cream is well-accepted and well-tolerated, encouraging patient adherence and leading to its use by many physicians as a preferred therapy for children and sensitive skin areas.

S3 Guidelines: Epicutaneous patch testing with contact allergens and drugs - Short version, Part 2

Epicutaneous patch testing is the diagnostic standard for the detection of allergic contact dermatitis. The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology and allergology as well as other medical specialties involved in establishing the indication for patch testing and its execution in patients with contact dermatitis and other forms of delayed-type hypersensitivity. The target audience also includes other health care providers and insurance funds. Based on a systematic literature search and a formal consensus process (S3), the guidelines were developed by dermatologists in collaboration with pediatricians, occupational medicine physicians, nursing staff as well as patient representatives. The systematic methodological approach and appraisal of evidence upon which the recommendations are based are outlined in a separate method report that also contains evidence tables. The guidelines address general aspects of patch testing as well as medicolegal issues. The recommendations given relate to topics such as the indication for patch testing, informed patient consent, as well as the choice of test substances, test chambers and test site, duration of exposure, reading times and interpretation of test reactions. Furthermore, recommendations are provided with respect to endogenous and exogenous factors, specific patient groups (children, pregnant women, immunosuppressed individuals) as well as possible risks and adverse events associated with patch testing using contact allergens.

European dermatology forum: Updated guidelines on the use of extracorporeal photopheresis 2020 - Part 2

Background

Following the first investigational study on the use of extracorporeal photopheresis for the treatment of cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma published in 1983, this technology has received continued use and further recognition for additional earlier as well as refractory forms. After the publication of the first guidelines for this technology in the JEADV in 2014, this technology has maintained additional promise in the treatment of other severe and refractory conditions in a multidisciplinary setting. It has confirmed recognition in well‐known documented conditions such as graft‐vs.‐host disease after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, systemic sclerosis, solid organ transplant rejection including lung, heart and liver and to a lesser extent inflammatory bowel disease.

Materials and methods

In order to further provide recognized expert practical guidelines for the use of this technology for all indications, the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) again proceeded to address these questions in the hands of the recognized experts within and outside the field of dermatology. This was done using the recognized and approved guidelines of EDF for this task. All authors had the opportunity to review each contribution as it was added.

Results and conclusion

These updated 2020 guidelines provide at present the most comprehensive available expert recommendations for the use of extracorporeal photopheresis based on the available published literature and expert consensus opinion. The guidelines were divided into two parts: PART I covers Cutaneous T‐cell lymphoma, chronic graft‐vs.‐host disease and acute graft‐vs.‐host disease, while PART II will cover scleroderma, solid organ transplantation, Crohn’s disease, use of ECP in paediatric patients, atopic dermatitis, type 1 diabetes, pemphigus, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita and erosive oral lichen planus.

[New aspects in systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis]

In severe cases of atopic dermatitis (AD) systemic treatment is indicated. So far, cyclosporine and systemic glucocorticosteroids represented the only systemic treatment options approved for the indications of AD in Germany; however, from clinical practice there is increasing evidence for beneficial therapeutic effects in AD by other immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory substances, such as mycophenolate, methotrexate, alitretinoin and ustekinumab. Beyond this, ongoing research activities focus on a better understanding of genetic and immunological aspects of this chronic inflammatory skin disease. Regarding treatment with mycophenolate, genetic polymorphisms in AD patients could be identified that might predict responsiveness to this medication. Moreover, several new substances specifically targeting inflammation in AD are currently being studied and the first promising treatment effects on skin condition and pruritic symptoms of AD could be observed. As an exceptional result of this development in September 2017 in Europe and therefore in Germany the first biologic as first-line treatment was approved for the indication of moderate to severe AD in adults. Dupilumab is a human monoclonal IgG4 antibody that blocks a subunit of the interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 receptors, thus inhibiting the proinflammatory effects of these cytokines. Furthermore, the cytokine IL-13 itself, the IL-31 receptor, which is of particular relevance for pruritus in AD, the histamine-4-receptor and Janus kinases represent further promising targets currently being investigated in clinical trials for the treatment of AD.

Oral H1 antihistamines as 'add-on' therapy to topical treatment for eczema

BACKGROUND

The symptoms of eczema can lead to sleeplessness and fatigue and may have a substantial impact on quality of life. Use of oral H1 antihistamines (H1 AH) as adjuvant therapy alongside topical agents is based on the idea that combining the anti-inflammatory effects of topical treatments with the blocking action of histamine on its receptors in the skin by H1 AH (to reduce the principal symptom of itch) might magnify or intensify the effect of treatment. Also, it would be unethical to compare oral H1 AH alone versus no treatment, as topical treatment is the standard management for this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of oral H1 antihistamines as 'add-on' therapy to topical treatment in adults and children with eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to May 2018: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the GREAT database (Global Resource of EczemA Trials; from inception). We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also searched the abstracts of four conference proceedings held between 2000 and 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought RCTs assessing oral H1 AH as 'add-on' therapy to topical treatment for people with eczema compared with topical treatment plus placebo or no additional treatment as add-on therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Primary outcome measures were 'Mean change in patient-assessed symptoms of eczema' and 'Proportion of participants reporting adverse effects and serious adverse events'. Secondary outcomes were 'Mean change in physician-assessed clinical signs', 'Mean change in quality of life', and 'Number of eczema flares'.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies (3285 randomised participants). Seventeen studies included 1344 adults, and eight studies included 1941 children. Most studies failed to report eczema severity at baseline, but they were conducted in secondary care settings, so it is likely that they recruited patients with more severe cases of eczema. Trial duration was between three days and 18 months. Researchers studied 13 different H1 AH treatments. We could not undertake pooling because of the high level of diversity across studies in terms of duration and dose of intervention, concomitant topical therapy, and outcome assessment. Risk of bias was generally unclear, but five studies had high risk of bias in one domain (attrition, selection, or reporting bias). Only one study measured quality of life, but these results were insufficient for statistical analysis.Although this review assessed 17 comparisons, we summarise here the results of three key comparisons in this review.Cetirizine versus placeboOne study compared cetirizine 0.5 mg/kg/d against placebo over 18 months in 795 children. Study authors did not report patient-assessed symptoms of eczema separately for pruritus. Cetirizine is probably associated with fewer adverse events (mainly mild) (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.01) and the need for slightly less additional H1 AH use as an indication of eczema flare rate (P = 0.035; no further numerical data given). Physician-assessed clinical signs (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis index (SCORAD)) were reduced in both groups, but the difference between groups was reported as non-significant (no P value given). Evidence for this comparison was of moderate quality.One study assessed cetirizine 10 mg/d against placebo over four weeks in 84 adults. Results show no evidence of differences between groups in patient-assessed symptoms of eczema (pruritus measured as part of SCORAD; no numerical data given), numbers of adverse events (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.45; mainly sedation, other skin-related problems, respiratory symptoms, or headache), or physician-assessed changes in clinical signs, amount of local rescue therapy required, or number of applications as an indicator of eczema flares (no numerical data reported). Evidence for this comparison was of low quality.Fexofenadine versus placeboCompared with placebo, fexofenadine 120 mg/d taken in adults over one week (one study) probably leads to a small reduction in patient-assessed symptoms of pruritus on a scale of 0 to 8 (mean difference (MD) -0.25, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.07; n = 400) and a greater reduction in the ratio of physician-assessed pruritus area to whole body surface area (P = 0.007; no further numerical data given); however, these reductions may not be clinically meaningful. Results suggest probably little or no difference in adverse events (mostly somnolence and headache) (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.50; n = 411) nor in the amount of 0.1% hydrocortisone butyrate used (co-intervention in both groups) as an indicator of eczema flare, but no numerical data were given. Evidence for this comparison was of moderate quality.Loratadine versus placeboA study of 28 adults compared loratadine 10 mg/d taken over 4 weeks versus placebo. Researchers found no evidence of differences between groups in patient-assessed pruritus, measured by a 100-point visual analogue scale (MD -2.30, 95% CI -20.27 to 15.67); reduction in physician-assessed clinical signs (SCORAD) (MD -4.10, 95% CI -13.22 to 5.02); or adverse events. Study authors reported only one side effect (folliculitis with placebo) (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.76). Evidence for this comparison was of low quality. Number of eczema flares was not measured for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the main comparisons, we did not find consistent evidence that H1 AH treatments are effective as 'add-on' therapy for eczema when compared to placebo; evidence for this comparison was of low and moderate quality. However, fexofenadine probably leads to a small improvement in patient-assessed pruritus, with probably no significant difference in the amount of treatment used to prevent eczema flares. Cetirizine was no better than placebo in terms of physician-assessed clinical signs nor patient-assessed symptoms, and we found no evidence that loratadine was more beneficial than placebo, although all interventions seem safe.The quality of evidence was limited because of poor study design and imprecise results. Future researchers should clearly define the condition (course and severity) and clearly report their methods, especially participant selection and randomisation; baseline characteristics; and outcomes (based on the Harmonising Outcome Measures in Eczema initiative).

Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis Using a Full-Body Blue Light Device (AD-Blue): Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Irradiation with visible blue light (wavelength 400-495 nm) is a promising, effective, and safe new treatment option for chronic inflammatory skin diseases such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis.

Objective

We will perform a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, 3-armed, prospective, randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of full-body blue light devices (wavelengths: 415 nm and 450 nm) compared with that of placebo irradiation for the treatment of atopic dermatitis.

Methods

We are planning to enroll a total of 150 patients at the University hospitals in Göttingen (Germany), Marburg (Germany), and Geneva (Switzerland).

Results

The trial was approved by the lead ethics committee of the medical faculty of the University of Göttingen (21/11/16). Further approvals were obtained from local and federal authorities (ethics committee Marburg, Cantonal Commission for Research Ethics Geneva, Suisse Medic, and Bundesinstitut für Arzneimittel und Medizinprodukte).

Conclusions

We will disseminate the results in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03085303; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03085303 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73ucqkkA1)

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/11911

The role of the histamine H4 receptor in atopic dermatitis and psoriasis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis are common skin diseases with a high negative impact on patients' quality of life. Both diseases are mediated by a pro-inflammatory infiltrate consisting of several cell types, such as T-cells, antigen-presenting cells and granulocytes and display disturbed keratinocyte differentiation. Given the fact that histamine levels are also highly elevated in inflamed skin, it is likely that histamine plays a relevant role in disease pathology. However, antagonists blocking histamine H₁ receptor or H₂ receptors are largely ineffective in reducing chronic symptoms in AD and psoriasis. Over the last years, much research has been undertaken to shed light into the mode of action of the most recently discovered histamine H₄ receptor. This research has shown that H₄ receptor antagonists display antipruritic and anti-inflammatory effects not only in mouse models but also in first human clinical trials, and therefore, H₄ receptors might present a novel therapeutic target. In this review, we summarize the effects of the H₄ receptors on different cell types, mouse models and clinical studies in regard to AD and psoriasis respectively. LINKED ARTICLES: This article is part of a themed section on New Uses for 21st Century. To view the other articles in this section visit http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bph.v177.3/issuetoc.

[Basis for the treatment of eczematous diseases in otorhinolaryngology]

According to Coombs and Gell, cell-mediated immune responses belong to type IV reactions and are borne mainly by T lymphocytes. The eliciting allergens are usually so-called haptens. Haptens are substances which develop to whole antigens only by binding to protein carriers. In otorhinolaryngology, delayed allergic hypersensitivities are apparent mainly as contact eczemata. Facial dermatitis, auricle and ear canal eczema as well as perioral eczema belong to the most common forms of contact dermatitis in ENT patients. The patient's medical history and morphology of the eczema give a strong indication for a proper diagnosis. Verification is carried out by patch test according to the Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF, The Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany) guidelines. Hereby the most widespread contact allergens are tested in a so-called "standard block", which can be reduced to an individualized allergen spectrum, based on medical history. For therapy, allergen avoidance is the most important measure which should also be applied prophylactically. Moreover, antiinflammatory treatment of the contact eczema is carried out with tapering topical corticosteroids. Depending on the patient's age, location and severity of the contact eczema, newer class II or III preparations should be chosen. Skin care preparations are helpful to reduce corticosteroid consumption and are indicated additionally after the acute phase treatment. An important differential diagnosis of contact eczema is atopic dermatitis. Whilst contact dermatitis experiences healing by avoiding the triggering noxious agent, genetically determined atopic dermatitis shows a chronic, recurrent course. In addition to topical corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors have been approved for treatment of atopic eczema. In all eczema diseases, regular skin care is a necessary measure which contributes mainly to barrier repair.

[Neurodermatitis : Atopy of the skin]

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common skin diseases and is associated with an impaired quality of life due to tormenting itching and stigmatization. The disease almost always manifests in early childhood and exhibits specific features in this phase, with involvement of the extensor sides of the extremities. During the further course of disease, the typical flexor involvement becomes quite clear and a considerable proportion of patients develop the associated atopic respiratory diseases. Therapeutic and prophylactic measures focus on the prevention of trigger factors, basic skin care, and application of lipid-replenishing creams, as well as patient and parent education. In the case of exacerbation, anti-inflammatory drugs are treatment of choice.

[New developments in extemporaneous formulations]

Dermatology is in a state of flux, and systemic therapies have changed the prescription practice in the past few years. Nevertheless, topical therapy for dermatological illnesses is still the mainstay of dermatologists. Pharmaceutically manufactured drugs have a wide spectrum and allow for variability. Additionally, there are therapeutic niches that can be bridged by prescribing extemporaneous formulations. This is also true for the newly established basic therapies for many chronic dermatological illnesses which have become essential and are needed in large amounts. Unfortunately, neither during medical school, nor during residency training, not even the basic knowledge or the complexity of these extemporaneous formulations for topical therapy in dermatology is taught. This emphasizes why standardized, proven extemporaneous formulations are vital for physicians to achieve optimal and goal-oriented therapy for their patients. Sensible and effective prescriptions enhance the quality of formulations and the maintenance and well-being of our patients.

Quality management in IgE-based allergy diagnostics

Assays for total and allergen-specific (s) IgE are essential serological tests in the diagnostic work-up of immediate type hypersensitivity reactions and atopic diseases. Technical performance characteristics and clinical utility of IgE tests have been published in international guidelines. In the USA and in Europe, IgE tests are mainly performed by accredited medical laboratories and in Germany they are also performed by allergists carrying an OIII-limited license. Both have to perform continuously internal and external quality control measures including proficiency trials twice a year (in Germany). Due to the heterogeneity of the assay’s core allergen reagents, complex extracts and more recently defined allergenic molecules, and heterologous assay calibration, the results of qualitative and quantitative sIgE tests from different diagnostic manufacturers can vary considerably. Proficiency trial results are subsequently grouped according to each assay type. Passing acceptance criteria depend on national rules and regarding quality management. Future challenges include a more valid quantification of sIgE which would allow true comparisons with the international units for total IgE, and the use of harmonized allergen reagents for the most important allergen sources, which have hampered inter-assay comparability in the past.