A Community-based Assessment of Skin Care, Allergies, and Eczema (CASCADE): an atopic dermatitis primary prevention study using emollients-protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Primary Prevention of Canine Atopic Dermatitis: Breaking the Cycle-A Narrative Review

Canine atopic dermatitis (cAD) is a common and distressing skin condition in dogs, affecting up to 30% of the canine population. It not only impacts their quality of life but also that of their owners. Like human atopic dermatitis (hAD), cAD has a complex pathogenesis, including genetic and environmental factors. Current treatments focus on managing clinical signs, but they can be costly and have limitations. This article emphasizes the importance of preventing cAD from developing in the first place. Understanding the role of the skin's protective barrier is crucial, as its dysfunction plays a vital role in both hAD and cAD. hAD prevention studies have shown promising results in enhancing the skin barrier, but more research is needed to support more robust conclusions. While hAD primary prevention is currently a focal point of intensive investigation in human medicine, research on cAD primary prevention remains under-researched and almost non-existent. Pioneering effective prevention strategies for cAD holds immense potential to enhance the quality of life for both dogs and their owners. Additionally, it bears the promise of a translational impact on human research. Hence, further exploration of this crucial topic is not only relevant but also timely and imperative, warranting support and encouragement.

An update on recent developments and highlights in food allergy

While both the incidence and general awareness of food allergies is increasing, the variety and clinical availability of therapeutics remain limited. Therefore, investigations into the potential factors contributing to the development of food allergy (FA) and the mechanisms of natural tolerance or induced desensitization are required. In addition, a detailed understanding of the pathophysiology of food allergies is needed to generate compelling, enduring, and safe treatment options. New findings regarding the contribution of barrier function, the effect of emollient interventions, mechanisms of allergen recognition, and the contributions of specific immune cell subsets through rodent models and human clinical studies provide novel insights. With the first approved treatment for peanut allergy, the clinical management of FA is evolving toward less intensive, alternative approaches involving fixed doses, lower maintenance dose targets, coadministration of biologicals, adjuvants, and tolerance-inducing formulations. The ultimate goal is to improve immunotherapy and develop precision-based medicine via risk phenotyping allowing optimal treatment for each food-allergic patient.

Epicutaneous Sensitization and Food Allergy: Preventive Strategies Targeting Skin Barrier Repair-Facts and Challenges

Food allergy represents a growing public health and socio-economic problem with an increasing prevalence over the last two decades. Despite its substantial impact on the quality of life, current treatment options for food allergy are limited to strict allergen avoidance and emergency management, creating an urgent need for effective preventive strategies. Advances in the understanding of the food allergy pathogenesis allow to develop more precise approaches targeting specific pathophysiological pathways. Recently, the skin has become an important target for food allergy prevention strategies, as it has been hypothesized that allergen exposure through the impaired skin barrier might induce an immune response resulting in subsequent development of food allergy. This review aims to discuss current evidence supporting this complex interplay between the skin barrier dysfunction and food allergy by highlighting the crucial role of epicutaneous sensitization in the causality pathway leading to food allergen sensitization and progression to clinical food allergy. We also summarize recently studied prophylactic and therapeutic interventions targeting the skin barrier repair as an emerging food allergy prevention strategy and discuss current evidence controversies and future challenges. Further studies are needed before these promising strategies can be routinely implemented as prevention advice for the general population.

Recent Trends in Nanocarriers for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a pruritic inflammatory skin condition with increasing global prevalence, almost affecting 15% to 30% of children and 5% of adults. AD results due to a complex interaction between the impaired skin barrier function, allergens, and immunological cells. Topical corticosteroids or calcineurin inhibitors in the form of creams or ointments are the mainstay of therapy, but they have low skin penetration and skin barrier repair efficiency.

OBJECTIVE

The above limitations of conventional dosage forms have motivated the development of nanoformulations of drugs for improved penetration and deposition in the skin for better management of AD.

METHODS

Databases, such as Pubmed, Elsevier, and Google Scholar, were reviewed for the investigations or reviews published related to the title.

RESULTS

The present review discusses the advantages of nanoformulations for the management of AD. Further, it also discusses the various types of topically investigated nanoformulations, i.e., polymeric nanoparticles, inorganic nanoparticles, solid lipid nanoparticles, liposomes, ethosomes, transfersomes, cubosomes, and nanoemulsion for the management of atopic dermatitis. In addition, it also discusses advancements in nanoformulations, such as nanofibres, nanosponges, micelles, and nanoformulations embedded textiles development for the management of AD.

CONCLUSION

The nanoformulations of drugs can be a better alternative for the topical management of AD with enhanced skin penetration and deposition of drugs with reduced systemic side effects and better patient compliance.

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.

Effects of an emollient application on newborn skin from birth for prevention of atopic dermatitis: a randomized controlled study in Thai neonates

BACKGROUND

Enhancing the skin barrier in high-risk neonates by daily use of emollients during infancy might prevent atopic dermatitis (AD); however, there have been no studies on this topic in a country with a tropical climate. Climate may affect the results of the use of emollients in neonates for AD prevention and possible adverse cutaneous eruptions.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that emollients used during infancy can prevent AD in high-risk neonates in a country with a tropical climate and to evaluate other possible adverse cutaneous eruptions in this population.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled study in a tertiary care hospital with a 6 months' duration. Eligible neonates were randomly assigned to receive either emollient and skincare advice (emollient group) or skincare advice only (control group). The intervention was started within 3 weeks of birth.

RESULTS

The emollient group showed a significant reduction in the cumulative incidence of AD at 6 months (relative risk, 0.39; 95% CI 0.24-0.64; P < 0.001). The emollient group started to develop AD later and had a lower severity of AD than the control group (P < 0.001). Compared to moderate adherence, low adherence to emollient application was associated with a lower number of patients with AD (P = 0.008). Potentially emollient-related cutaneous eruptions, such as miliaria, and suspected cutaneous infections, such as impetigo, were more frequent in the emollient group. Exposure to passive smoking showed a significant difference in the development of AD compared to non-smoking exposure, both during pregnancy and after the child's birth (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that, in a tropical climate, emollient applied to the skin of at-risk neonates on an 'as needed' basis (depending on environmental factors, level of skin dryness), rather than on a 'daily basis', can provide a substantial benefit for AD prevention.

The Importance of Primary Care Research in Understanding Health Inequities in the United States

Eliminating health and health care inequities is a longstanding goal of multiple United States health agencies, but overwhelming scientific evidence suggests that health and health care inequities persist in the United States, despite decades of research and initiatives to alleviate them. Because of its comprehensiveness, studying health inequities in the context of primary care allows for the use of multiple paradigms and methodologic approaches to understanding almost any state of health, disease, social challenge, or societal circumstance a patient or group of patients might face. We argue in this special communication that the many features/advantages of primary care research have valuable contributions to make in reducing health inequity, and scientists, journals, and funders should increase the incorporation of primary care approaches and findings into their portfolios to better understand and end health inequity.

Spontaneously Resolved Atopic Dermatitis Shows Melanocyte and Immune Cell Activation Distinct From Healthy Control Skin

Atopic dermatitis (AD) typically starts in infancy or early childhood, showing spontaneous remission in a subset of patients, while others develop lifelong disease. Despite an increased understanding of AD, factors guiding its natural course are only insufficiently elucidated. We thus performed suction blistering in skin of adult patients with stable, spontaneous remission from previous moderate-to-severe AD during childhood. Samples were compared to healthy controls without personal or familial history of atopy, and to chronic, active AD lesions. Skin cells and tissue fluid obtained were used for single-cell RNA sequencing and proteomic multiplex assays, respectively. We found overall cell composition and proteomic profiles of spontaneously healed AD to be comparable to healthy control skin, without upregulation of typical AD activity markers (e.g., IL13, S100As, and KRT16). Among all cell types in spontaneously healed AD, melanocytes harbored the largest numbers of differentially expressed genes in comparison to healthy controls, with upregulation of potentially anti-inflammatory markers such as PLA2G7. Conventional T-cells also showed increases in regulatory markers, and a general skewing toward a more Th1-like phenotype. By contrast, gene expression of regulatory T-cells and keratinocytes was essentially indistinguishable from healthy skin. Melanocytes and conventional T-cells might thus contribute a specific regulatory milieu in spontaneously healed AD skin.

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 PRECIS-2 tool seems not to be useful to discriminate the degree of pragmatism of medicine masked trials from that of open-label trials

PURPOSE

To assess, with all available trial information, whether the assessment of the PRECIS-2 nine domains could provide a clear distinction between medicine masked pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) and open-label pRCTs.

METHODS

A search was conducted of participant-level pRCTs on medicines published on 25 influential medical journals in July 2018-December 2019. All pre-licensing (phases 1-3) and cluster pRCTs were excluded. All trials' available reports were searched through the published article information, Google Scholar, and trial websites. Instead of providing a score to each PRECIS-2 domain, these were classified as E (explanatory), N (neutral), or P (pragmatic).

RESULTS

Of 128 pRCTs, 18 (14%) were participant-level pRCTs on medicines. The full trial protocol was available for 14 trials; 12 had published the protocol and nine had additional reports published. All trials were prospectively registered, and none was funded by industry. Ten and eight were masked and open-label trials, respectively. Masked pRCTS had 34% of pragmatic and 60% of explanatory domains; open-label pRCTS had 45% pragmatic and 45% explanatory domains. Among the 10 masked trials, only one had a majority of five pragmatic domains; among the eight open-label trials, four had a majority of six or five pragmatic domains. "Follow-up" was considered explanatory in the 18 pRCTs; "primary analysis" was pragmatic in 17 pRCTs.

CONCLUSION

The PRECIS-2 tool seems not to be sensitive enough to clearly discriminate between medicine masked pRCTs and open-label pRCTs. When conducting systematic reviews, it is suggested that the PRECIS-2 tool should not be used to support placing masked trials in the pragmatic side of the explanatory/pragmatic continuum.

Trends in nanoformulations for atopic dermatitis treatment

INTRODUCTION

Immunological skin dysfunctions trigger the synthesis and release of inflammatory cytokines, which induce recurrent skin inflammation associated with chronic itching, inefficient barrier behavior, and reduced skin hydration. These features characterize a multifactorial chronic inflammatory disease atopic dermatitis (AD). AD therapy includes anti-inflammatory drugs and immunosuppressors as well as non-pharmacological alternatives such as emollients, moisturizers, and lipids (ceramides, phospholipids) for modulating the skin hydration and the barrier repair. However, these treatments are inconvenient with low drug skin penetration and insufficient maintenance on the application site.

AREAS COVERED

Nanotechnology-based therapies can be a great strategy to overcome these limitations. Considering the particular skin morphological organization, SC lipid matrix composition, and immunological functions/features related to nanocarriers, this review focuses on recent developments of nanoparticulate systems (polymeric, lipid-based, inorganic) as parent or hybrid systems including their chemical composition, physico-chemical and biopharmaceutical properties, and differential characteristics that evaluate them as new effective drug-delivery systems for AD treatment.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the several innovative formulations, research in nanotechnology-based carriers should address specific aspects such as the use of moisturizers associated to pharmacological therapies, toxicity studies, scale-up production processes and the nanocarrier influence on immunological response. These approaches will help researchers choose the most appropriate nanocarrier system and widen nanomedicine applications and commercialization.