Information regarding the safety of biological drugs prescribed to psoriasis patients on daily and long-term bases is insufficient. We used data from the BIOBADADERM registry (Spanish Registry of Adverse Events for Biological Therapy in Dermatological Diseases) to generate crude rates of infection during therapy with systemic drugs, including biological drugs (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and ustekinumab) and nonbiological drugs (acitretin, cyclosporine, and methotrexate). We also calculated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) (with propensity score adjustment) of infection, serious infections, and recurrent infections of systemic therapies compared with methotrexate, using Poisson regression. Our study included records of 2,153 patients (7,867.5 person-years). The adjusted RR of overall infection was significantly increased in the groups treated with adalimumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-3.7), infliximab (adjusted RR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.1-2.65), cyclosporine (adjusted RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17-2.15), ustekinumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.08-2.25), and etanercept (adjusted RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02-1.76) compared with methotrexate alone. Cyclosporine had a significant risk of serious infection (adjusted RR = 3.12, 95% CI = 1.1-8.8), followed by adalimumab combined with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 3.28, 95% CI = 0.8-13.5). Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate had the highest risk of infection recurrence (adjusted RR = 4.33, 95% CI = 2.27-8.24).

No abstract

BackgroundDystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa (DEB) is a rare genodermatosis (7 cases per million) that causes blisters and erosions with minor trauma in skin and mucosa, and other systemic complications. A recently updated systematic review showed that the research evidence about DEB therapies is poor. As new trials in DEB are difficult and expensive, it is important to prioritizise research that patients and clinicians consider more relevant.ObjectivesTo describe and prioritize the most important uncertainties about DEB treatment shared by patients, carers and health care professionals (HCPs) in order to promote research in those areas.MethodsA DEB Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was established, including patients, carers and HCPs. DBE uncertainties were gathered from patients and clinicians, and prioritized in a transparent process, using the methodology advocated by the James Lind Alliance.ResultsIn the consultation stage, 323 uncertainties were submitted by 58 participants. Once the duplicated and non-treatment uncertainties were removed, the remainder were reduced to a list of 24 most voted questions. These 24 uncertainties were prioritized in a final workshop where a balanced number of patients, carers and HCPs selected the top 10 therapy uncertainties. The final list includes interventions in wound care, itch and pain management, treatment and prevention of syndactyly, cancer prevention and future promising therapies.ConclusionsThe final list of the top 10 treatment uncertainties on the management of DEB provides guidance for researchers and funding bodies, to ensure that future research answers questions that are important to both clinicians and patients. The method proposed by the James Lind Alliance is feasible for very rare disorders.

No abstract

No abstract

Linked Article: Sbidian et al. Br J Dermatol 2019; 180:86–93.

No abstract

No abstract