Dermatomyositis is an autoimmune disease that occurs in association with underlying malignancy in a subset of patients. Given this association, diagnosis of dermatomyositis typically triggers malignancy screening. Although various malignancy screening protocols have been proposed, none have been extensively studied or taken into account prevalence of dermatomyositis-associated malignancies. We utilized peer-reviewed manuscripts identified by a Medline search from May 2000 to April 2020 to present a focused review concerning the association between dermatomyositis and malignancy, and controversies related to screening for malignancies most commonly occurring in dermatomyositis patients. This information was then synthesized to propose a rational strategy for approaching malignancy screening in dermatomyositis patients. Our review supports that risk of malignancy in dermatomyositis patients is wellestablished. However, the subset of dermatomyositis patients in whom the benefits of malignancy screening outweigh the risks of harm is unknown. Additionally, an evidence-based malignancy screening protocol for dermatomyositis patients that optimizes the risk:benefit ratio does not exist. Given the clear harms that can result, we propose that shared decision-making strategies be implemented to determine whether pursuit of malignancy screening conforms with dermatomyositis patients' desires and values. Physicians should be clear about potential risks and benefits of malignancy screening, and discuss clinical and serologic features present that may suggest/refute underlying malignancy during conversations aimed at shared decision-making.Research is greatly needed to determine which dermatomyositis patients warrant malignancy screening, which tests should be performed, and the intensity with which they should be ordered. Only after such work is done can malignancy screening in dermatomyositis patients be considered to have high value.

No abstract

BackgroundGranuloma annulare (GA) is a skin disorder of uncertain etiology. Patch (type) GA is an uncommon variant of GA with a paucity of data characterizing it. We describe the features of 23 cases of patch GA.MethodsThe archives of dermatopathology were searched for cases of patch GA. The clinical history and morphology for each patient were reviewed. Only cases with patch clinical morphology were included. The clinical and histopathologic features were assessed including the pattern of granulomatous inflammation and presence of other inflammatory cell types.ResultsMost patients were female (19/23) with erythematous patches on the trunk and proximal extremities. The most common clinical differential diagnosis included mycosis fungoides (MF), morphea and contact dermatitis. Dyslipidemia was the most common comorbidity (30%), followed by diabetes (15%) and hypertension (15%). Histopathologic features included interstitial lymphocytes and histiocytes with dermal mucin. Two cases showed focal palisaded granulomas. Eosinophils and plasma cells were present in 1/3 of cases.ConclusionPatch GA is an uncommon GA variant with an interstitial granulomatous histopathologic pattern that predominantly affects women over 50. It can mimic interstitial MF and early morphea both clinically and histopathologically. Awareness of this GA variant can help prevent misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment for these patients.

Background: Melasma is a disorder of hyperpigmentation and vascularization often found in women between the ages of 20 and 40. The pathogenesis is unknown, but melasma often occurs in sun-exposed areas of the face, forearms, and back. Risk factors include family history, increased estrogen/progesterone, certain medications, and UV exposure. Melasma is typically treated with topical hydroquinone (HQ); however, it is often refractory to treatment. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is a plasmin inhibitor used off-label in the treatment of melasma. TXA can be administered orally, topically, or intralesionally. Aims:The purpose of this review is to characterize the wide variety of TXA delivery methods for melasma treatment and the efficacy of these methods compared with traditional treatments.Patients/Methods: A comprehensive PubMed and Embase search was conducted in May 2022 using the phrases tranexamic acid and melasma. Forty-six articles were included in this review.Results: Oral, intralesional, and topical TXA is safe and effective treatments for melasma. They have been studied in a variety of randomized controlled trials and have been compared with several traditional treatments. Overall, MASI scores in patients using TXA in any form improved. Conclusions:Oral TXA was found to be the most effective, especially in cases of refractory melasma; however, it caused GI upset and menstrual irregularities in many patients. The pro-thrombotic nature of this drug must be considered before safely prescribing to patients. Intralesional injections and microneedling with topical TXA were found to be effective alternatives to oral treatment. Lastly, topical TXA alone was found to be the least effective method but can be combined with other cosmeceuticals to improve outcomes. Topical TXA was also found to be better tolerated than hydroquinone, a traditional topical melasma treatment.