No abstract

Background. Assessment methods for atopic dermatitis (AD) are not standardized, and therapeutic studies are difficult to interpret. Aims. To obtain a consensus on assessment methods in AD and to use a statistical method to develop a composite severity index.Methods. Consensus definitions were given for items used in the scoring system (extent, intensity, subjective) and illustrated for intensity items. Slides were reviewed to address within and between-observer variability by a group of 10 trained clinicians, and data were statistically evaluated with a two way analysis of variance. Two variants of an assessment system were compared in 88 patients at 5 different institutions. Data were analyzed using principal-component analysis. Results. For 5 intensity items studied (erythema, edema/papulation, oozing/crusts, excoriations, lichenification), within- and between-observer variability was good overall, except for edema/papulation which was difficult to assess with slides. In the series of 88 patients, principal-component analysis allowed to extract two unrelated components: the first one accounting for 33% of total variance was interpreted as a ‘severity’ component; the second one, accounting for 18% of variance, was interpreted as a ‘profile’ component distinguishing patients with mostly erythema and subjective symptoms and those with mostly lichenification and dryness and lower subjective symptoms. Of the two evaluation systems used, the one using the rule of nine to assess extent was found more workable than the one using a distribution × intensity product. A scoring index (SCORAD) combining extent, severity and subjective symptoms was mathematically derived from the first system and showed a normal distribution of the population studied. Conclusion. The final choice for the evaluation system was mostly made based on simplicity and easy routine use in outpatient clinics. Based on mathematical appreciation of weights of the items used in the assessment of AD, extent and subjective symptoms account for around 20% each of the total score, intensity items representing 60%. The so-designed composite index SCORAD needs to be further tested in clinical trials.

Background: We previously proposed a set of 4 clinical criteria for the diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP) that consisted of age greater than 70 years, absence of atrophic scars, absence of mucosal involvement and absence of predominant bullous lesions on the neck and head. These results have been challenged because direct immunoelectron microscopy (IEM), which was used as the standard diagnostic criterion in our initial study, does not identify the different antigens of the basement membrane zone. Objective: To reassess the validity of these clinical criteria for the diagnosis of BP using immunoblot analysis of patient sera as the main diagnostic criterion, in order to precisely identify the antigens recognized by patient sera. Methods: One hundred and eighty-nine sera from patients with various subepidermal autoimmune blistering diseases (AIBDs) were tested by immunoblotting using dermal and epidermal extracts. IEM was used as a complementary diagnostic procedure in a few patients whose serum recognized BPAG2 exclusively or was negative in immunoblotting. Results: 142 patients (75%) had at least 3 of the 4 clinical diagnostic criteria. Sera from patients who lacked the set of BP clinical criteria were more frequently immunoblot negative (34%) than sera from patients who had the criteria (18%; p = 0.025). BPAG1 was more frequently recognized by sera from patients with the set of BP clinical criteria (78%) than by sera from patients without the criteria (45%; p = 5·10^–4). In contrast, BPAG2 was recognized by a great number of sera from patients who lacked the criteria of BP (71%), which was in accordance with the presence of numerous patients with cicatricial pemphigoid in this group. Among patients with various subepidermal AIBDs, the diagnosis of BP could be made with a sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 90% and an excellent prognostic positive value over 95%, if 3 of these clinical criteria were present. Conclusion: These results confirm the interest of this set of clinical criteria for the rapid diagnosis of BP.

A skin equivalent model has been used to fabricate tissues with psoriatic and normal cells. Psoriatic fibroblasts can induce hyperproliferative activity in normal keratinocytes. The psoriatic epidermis from lesions continues to proliferate at high rates for at least 15 days in this model, and normal fibroblasts are unable to suppress this hyperproliferation. The primary defect in psoriatic skin may reside in the dermal fibroblast.

Our data reveal the extremely high frequency, diversity and potential severity of paediatric emergency skin disorders. Specific educational measures and closer co-operation between Dermatologists and Paediatricians are essential if the skin care dispensed to children and teenagers is to be improved.