9 research outputs found
Updates in SJS/TEN: collaboration, innovation, and community
Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (SJS/TEN) is a predominantly drug-induced disease, with a mortality rate of 15–20%, that engages the expertise of multiple disciplines: dermatology, allergy, immunology, clinical pharmacology, burn surgery, ophthalmology, urogynecology, and psychiatry. SJS/TEN has an incidence of 1–5/million persons per year in the United States, with even higher rates globally. One of the challenges of SJS/TEN has been developing the research infrastructure and coordination to answer questions capable of transforming clinical care and leading to improved patient outcomes. SJS/TEN 2021, the third research meeting of its kind, was held as a virtual meeting on August 28–29, 2021. The meeting brought together 428 international scientists, in addition to a community of 140 SJS/TEN survivors and family members. The goal of the meeting was to brainstorm strategies to support the continued growth of an international SJS/TEN research network, bridging science and the community. The community workshop section of the meeting focused on eight primary themes: mental health, eye care, SJS/TEN in children, non-drug induced SJS/TEN, long-term health complications, new advances in mechanisms and basic science, managing long-term scarring, considerations for skin of color, and COVID-19 vaccines. The meeting featured several important updates and identified areas of unmet research and clinical need that will be highlighted in this white paper
SJS/TEN 2019: From science to translation.
Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN) are potentially life-threatening, immune-mediated adverse reactions characterized by widespread erythema, epidermal necrosis, and detachment of skin and mucosa. Efforts to grow and develop functional international collaborations and a multidisciplinary interactive network focusing on SJS/TEN as an uncommon but high burden disease will be necessary to improve efforts in prevention, early diagnosis and improved acute and long-term management. SJS/TEN 2019: From Science to Translation was a 1.5-day scientific program held April 26-27, 2019, in Vancouver, Canada. The meeting successfully engaged clinicians, researchers, and patients and conducted many productive discussions on research and patient care needs
Society of Dermatology Hospitalists supportive care guidelines for the management of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in adults
Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are life-threatening conditions with high morbidity and mortality. Supportive care management of SJS/TEN is highly variable. A systematic review of the literature was performed by dermatologists, ophthalmologists, intensivists, and gynecologists with expertise in SJS/TEN to generate statements for supportive care guideline development. Members of the Society of Dermatology Hospitalists with expertise in SJS/TEN were invited to participate in a modified, online Delphi-consensus. Participants were administered 9-point Likert scale questionnaires regarding 135 statements. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to evaluate and select proposed statements for guideline inclusion; statements with median ratings of 6.5 to 9 and a disagreement index of ≤1 were included in the guideline. For the final round, the guidelines were appraised by all of the participants. Included are an evidence-based discussion and recommendations for hospital setting and care team, wound care, ocular care, oral care, urogenital care, pain management, infection surveillance, fluid and electrolyte management, nutrition and stress ulcer prophylaxis, airway management, and anticoagulation in adult patients with SJS/TEN
Recommended from our members
Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.
Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707
Corrigendum to ‘SJS/TEN 2019: From science to translation’ [J. Dermatol. Sci. 98/1 (2020) 2–12]: From science to translation’ (Journal of Dermatological Science (2020) 98(1) (2–12), (S0923181120300645), (10.1016/j.jdermsci.2020.02.003)
The authors regret not all contributing authors correctly acknowledged funding. Jonathan Peter's IMARI-Africa project (AFRISCAR) is part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union (grant number TMA2017SF-1981). The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused
Development of a skin-directed scoring system for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and epidermal necrolysis: a Delphi consensus exercise
Importance Scoring systems for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and epidermal necrolysis (EN) only estimate patient prognosis and are weighted toward comorbidities and systemic features; morphologic terminology for EN lesions is inconsistent.Objectives To establish consensus among expert dermatologists on EN terminology, morphologic progression, and most-affected sites, and to build a framework for developing a skin-directed scoring system for EN.Evidence Review A Delphi consensus using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness criteria was initiated with a core group from the Society of Dermatology Hospitalists to establish agreement on the optimal design for an EN cutaneous scoring instrument, terminology, morphologic traits, and sites of involvement.Findings In round 1, the 54 participating dermatology hospitalists reached consensus on all 49 statements (30 appropriate, 3 inappropriate, 16 uncertain). In round 2, they agreed on another 15 statements (8 appropriate, 7 uncertain). There was consistent agreement on the need for a skin-specific instrument; on the most-often affected skin sites (head and neck, chest, upper back, ocular mucosa, oral mucosa); and that blanching erythema, dusky erythema, targetoid erythema, vesicles/bullae, desquamation, and erosions comprise the morphologic traits of EN and can be consistently differentiated.Conclusions and Relevance This consensus exercise confirmed the need for an EN skin-directed scoring system, nomenclature, and differentiation of specific morphologic traits, and identified the sites most affected. It also established a baseline consensus for a standardized EN instrument with consistent terminology