Classifying atopic dermatitis: a systematic review of phenotypes and associated characteristics.

Atopic dermatitis is a heterogeneous disease, accompanied by a wide variation in disease presentation and the potential to identify many phenotypes that may be relevant for prognosis and treatment. We aimed to systematically review previously reported phenotypes of atopic dermatitis and any characteristics associated with them. Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched from inception till 12 February 2021 for studies attempting to classify atopic dermatitis. Primary outcomes are atopic dermatitis phenotypes and characteristics associated with them in subsequent analyses. A secondary outcome is the methodological approach used to derive them. In total, 8511 records were found. By focussing only on certain clinical phenotypes, 186 studies were eligible for inclusion. The majority of studies were hospital-based (59%, 109/186) and cross-sectional (76%, 141/186). The number of included patients ranged from seven to 526 808. Data-driven approaches to identify phenotypes were only used in a minority of studies (7%, 13/186). Ninety-one studies (49%) investigated a phenotype based on disease severity. A phenotype based on disease trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum was investigated in 56 (30%), 22 (12%) and 11 (6%) studies respectively. Thirty-six studies (19%) investigated morphological characteristics in other phenotypes. Investigated associated characteristics differed between studies. In conclusion, we present an overview of phenotype definitions used in literature for severity, trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum, including associated characteristics. There is a lack of uniform and consistent use of atopic dermatitis phenotypes across studies

Over 1200 drugs-related deaths and 190,000 opiate-user-years of follow-up : relative risks by sex and age-group

Heroin users/injectors' risk of drugs-related death by sex and current age is weakly estimated both in individual cohorts of under 1000 clients, 5000 person-years or 50 drugs-related deaths and when using cross-sectional data. A workshop in Cambridge analysed six cohorts who were recruited according to a common European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) protocol from drug treatment agencies in Barcelona, Denmark, Dublin, Lisbon, Rome and Vienna in the 1990s; and, as external reference, opiate-user arrestees in France and hepatitis C diagnosed ever-injectors in Scotland in 1993-2001, both followed by database linkage to December 2001. EMCDDA cohorts recorded approximately equal numbers of drugs-related deaths (864) and deaths from other non-HIV causes (865) during 106,152 person-years of follow-up. External cohorts contributed 376 drugs-related deaths (Scotland 195, France 181) and 418 deaths from non-HIV causes (Scotland 221, France 197) during 86,417 person-years of follow-up (Scotland 22,670, France 63,747). EMCDDA cohorts reported 707 drugs-related deaths in 81,367 man-years {8.7 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI: 8.1 to 9.4} but only 157 in 24,785 person-years for females {6.3 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI: 5.4 to 7.4}. Except in external cohorts, relative risks by current age-group were not particularly strong, and more modest in Poisson regression than in cross-sectional analyses: relative risk was 1.2 (95% CI: 1.0-1.4) for 35-44 year olds compared to 15-24 year 3 olds, but 1.4 for males (95%CI: 1.2-1.6), and dramatically lower at 0.44 after the first year of follow-up (95% CI: 0.37-0.52)

Problem drug use the public health imperative: what some of the literature says

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>With more than 200,000 problem drug users is contact with structured treatment services in England the public health imperative behind drug treatment is great. Problem drug use for many is a chronic and relapsing condition, where "cure" is often neither a reasonable or appropriate expectation and it can further be argued that in these circumstances problem drug use is no different from any number of chronic and enduring health conditions that are managed in the health care system and therefore should be conceptualised as such.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>A public health approach to drug treatment emphasises the need for drug users in or accessing treatment, to reduce their harmful drug use, reduce drug use related risks such as sepsis and overdose and stay alive for longer. However a public health perspective in relation to problem drug use isn't always either apparent or readily understood and to that end there is still a significant need to continue the arguments and debate that treatment and interventions for problem and dependent drug users need to extend beyond an individualistic approach. For the purposes of discussion in this article public and population health will be used interchangeably.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>A recognition and acceptance that a public and population health approach to the management of problem drug users is sound public health policy also then requires a long term commitment in terms of staffing and resources where service delivery mirrors that of chronic condition management.</p

Choice of comparator in active control trials of new drugs.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: When choosing the active control group in a randomized trial, it is important to maintain standard treatment for the therapeutic indication for which a medicine is studied. This choice is relevant not only for demonstrating the efficacy and safety of a new drug, but also for assessing its place in therapy in comparison with existing medicines. Comparative information is important for decisions on prescribing and reimbursement. However, choosing the most suitable comparator is difficult when recommendations on drugs of first choice vary depending on clinical settings and times. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the choice of comparator in premarketing randomized active control trials (RaCTs) in comparison with recommendations for standard treatment. METHODS: We evaluated drugs that were authorized for use in the European Union market between 1999 and 2005. Information on active comparators in RaCTs was extracted from the European Public Assessment Reports and information on recommendations regarding standard treatment was retrieved from the annual editions of the Dutch reference book on pharmacotherapy. Data on prescribing and indications at the time of authorization and 3 years before authorization were included. The comparator was considered to be in line with standard treatment if there was a similarity in both active substance or therapeutic class and the dosage. RESULTS: For 58 new medications identified, treatment in the active control group was in line with the recommended standard treatment in 108 of 153 (71%) RaCTs at the time of the drug's authorization; 47 (81%) of the new drugs had been compared with the recommended standard treatment in at least one trial. When dissimilarities occurred, none of the comparators had been recommended as standard treatment 3 years earlier (the supposed time of defining the trials' protocol). CONCLUSIONS: Most comparators in the premarketing RaCTs of new medicines were in line with the recommended standard treatment at the moment of marketing authorization. In view of this similarity, most of these trials are also fit for postmarketing decision-making on prescribing and on inclusion in clinical guidelines and reimbursement systems