Factors Influencing Major Life-Changing Decisions in Patients with Psoriasis: A Cross-sectional Study

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with significant impairment in quality of life. Although quality of life in patients with psoriasis has been widely studied, there is little evidence regarding the impact of psoriasis on major life-changing decisions (MLCD). The aims of this study are to describe the impact of psoriasis on MLCD and to explore the potential clinical factors associated with MLCD. This cross-sectional study included 113 patients with psoriasis, regardless of disease severity, duration, or current treatment. The impact of the disease on different MLCD, including those related to professional career, decision of having children, choice of clothing, and leisure activities, was explored using Likert scales. Mean age was 51 years old and female to male ratio was 1.08 (54/50). The mean Psoriasis Area Severity Index was 3.75, and 30% (35/113) of the patients had psoriatic arthropathy. The most affected MLCD were career choice (median (interquartile range) score 3 (2–4)), social relationships (2 (1–3)), choice of clothing (2 (1–3)), job performance, absenteeism, and choice of holiday destination (1 (0–2)). Female sex, early age of onset and psoriatic arthropathy were associated with a greater impact of the disease on MLCD (p < 0.05). The results showed that a range of MLCD are affected in patients with psoriasis, such as career choice, job performance, absenteeism, or choice of clothing. Female sex,  psoriatic arthritis and early age of onset are factors associated with a greater impact on MLCD. In order to limit the long-term negative effects of psoriasis on patients, special attention should be paid to detection of psoriatic arthritis, and to patients with early disease onset

Dupilumab Improves Skin Barrier Function in Adults with Atopic Dermatitis: A Prospective Observational Study.

Epidermal barrier dysfunction plays an important role in atopic dermatitis (AD). The difficulty of objectively assessing AD severity and the introduction of new biologicals into clinical practice highlight the need to find parameters to monitor clinical outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of dupilumab on skin barrier function and compare it with other treatments in patients with AD. A prospective observational study was conducted in adults with AD treated with topical corticosteroids (TCS), cyclosporine, or dupilumab. The main outcome measures after 16 weeks of treatment were Eczema Area and Severity (EASI)-50 (50% improvement in EASI), and transepidermal water loss (TEWL)-50 (50% improvement in TEWL). Forty-six patients with AD were included in the study. The proportion of patients who achieved EASI-50 at week 16 was significantly higher in patients receiving dupilumab (81.8% vs. 28.6% vs. 40%, p = 0.004). In eczematous lesions, TEWL decreased in patients receiving dupilumab (31.02 vs. 12.10 g·h−1·m−2,

Alirocumab and cardiovascular outcomes after acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUN

Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P=0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P=0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction

Alirocumab and Cardiovascular Outcomes after Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUN

Health status after invasive or conservative care in coronary and advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of &lt;30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status. METHODS We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy. RESULTS Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, 120.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, 122.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, 121.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, 122.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSIONS Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy

Risk Categorization Using New American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Cholesterol Management and Its Relation to Alirocumab Treatment Following Acute Coronary Syndromes

10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.042551CIRCULATION140191578-158