Chronic urticaria in the real‐life clinical practice setting in the UK: results from the non‐interventional multicentre AWARE study

Abstract Background Chronic urticaria (CU) is a skin condition characterised by repeated occurrence of itchy wheals and/or angioedema for >6 weeks. Aim To provide data demonstrating the real‐life burden of CU in the UK. Methods This UK subset of the worldwide, prospective, non‐interventional AWARE study included patients aged 18–75 years diagnosed with H1‐antihistamine (H1‐AH)‐refractory chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) for >2 months. Baseline characteristics, disease activity, treatments, comorbidities and healthcare resource use were documented. Quality of life, work productivity and activity impairment were assessed. Results Baseline analysis included 252 UK patients. Mean age and body mass index were 45.0 years and 29.0 kg/m2, respectively. Most patients were female (77.8%) and had moderate/severe disease activity (mean Urticaria Activity Score over 7 days, 18.4) and a ‘spontaneous’ component to their CU (73.4% CSU; 24.6% CSU and chronic inducible urticaria). Common comorbidities included depression/anxiety (24.6%), asthma (23.8%) and allergic rhinitis (12.7%). A previous treatment was recorded for 57.9% of patients. Mean Dermatology Life Quality Index score was 9.5 and patients reported impairments in work productivity and activity. Healthcare resource use was high. Severity of CSU was associated with gender, obesity, anxiety and diagnosis. Only 28.5% of patients completed all nine study visits, limiting analysis of long‐term treatment patterns and disease impact. Conclusions Adult H1‐AH‐refractory CU patients in the UK reported high rates of healthcare resource use and impairment in quality of life, work productivity and activity at baseline. The differing structures of UK healthcare may explain the high study discontinuation rates versus other countries

Association of Serum Ustekinumab Levels With Clinical Response in Psoriasis

Importance: High-cost biologic therapies have transformed the management of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. To optimize outcomes and reduce costs, dose adjustment informed by measurement of circulating drug levels has been shown to be effective in various settings. However, limited evidence exists for this approach with the interleukin 12 and interleukin 23 inhibitor ustekinumab. Objective: To evaluate clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring for ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective observational cohort of 491 adults with psoriasis was recruited to the multicenter Biomarkers of Systemic Treatment Outcomes in Psoriasis study within the British Association of Dermatologists Biologic and Immunomodulators Register from June 2009 to December 2017; samples from some patients were taken between 2009 and 2011 as part of a pilot study with the same inclusion criteria. Exposure: Serum ustekinumab level measured at any point during the dosing cycle using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Main Outcomes and Measures@ Disease activity measured using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score. Treatment response outcomes were PASI75 (75% reduction in PASI score from baseline [primary outcome]), PASI90 (90% reduction of PASI score from baseline), and absolute PASI score of 1.5 or less. Results: A total of 491 patients (171 women and 320 men; mean [SD] age, 45.7 [12.8] years) had 1 or more serum samples (total, 853 samples obtained 0-56 weeks from start of treatment) and 1 or more PASI scores within the first year of treatment. Antidrug antibodies were detected in only 17 of 490 patients (3.5%). Early measured drug levels (1-12 weeks after starting treatment) were associated with PASI75 response 6 months after starting treatment (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71) when adjusted for baseline PASI score, age, and ustekinumab dose. However, this finding was not consistent across the other PASI outcomes (PASI90 and PASI score of ≤1.5). Conclusions and Relevance: This real-world study provides evidence that measurement of early serum ustekinumab levels could be useful to direct the treatment strategy for psoriasis. Adequate drug exposure early in the treatment cycle may be particularly important in determining clinical outcome

Doxycycline versus prednisolone as an initial treatment strategy for bullous pemphigoid: a pragmatic non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

Background: Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is a blistering skin disorder with increased mortality. We tested whether a strategy of starting treatment with doxycycline conveys acceptable short-term blister control whilst conferring long-term safety advantages over starting treatment with oral corticosteroids. Methods: Pragmatic multi-centre parallel-group randomised controlled trial of adults with BP (≥3 blisters ≥2 sites and linear basement membrane IgG/C3) plus economic evaluation. Participants were randomised to doxycycline (200 mg/day) or prednisolone (0·5 mg/kg/day). Localised adjuvant potent topical corticosteroids (<30 g/week) was permitted weeks 1-3. The non-inferiority primary effectiveness outcome was the proportion of participants with ≤3 blisters at 6 weeks. We assumed that doxycycline would be 25% less effective than corticosteroids with a 37% acceptable margin of noninferiority. The primary safety outcome was the proportion with severe, life-threatening or fatal treatment-related adverse events by 52 weeks. Analysis used a regression model adjusting for baseline disease severity, age and Karnofsky score, with missing data imputed. Results: 132 patients were randomised to doxycycline and 121 to prednisolone from 54 UK and 7 German dermatology centres. Mean age was 77·7 years and 68.4% had moderate to severe baseline disease. For those starting doxycycline, 83/112 (74·1%) had ≤3 blisters at 6 weeks compared with 92/101 (91·1%) for prednisolone, a difference of 18·6% favouring prednisolone (upper limit of 90% CI, 26·1%, within the predefined 37% margin). Related severe, life-threatening and fatal events at 52 weeks were 18·5% for those starting doxycycline and 36·6% for prednisolone (mITT analysis), an adjusted difference of 19·0% (95% CI, 7·9%, 30·1%, p=0·001). Conclusions: A strategy of starting BP patients on doxycycline is non-inferior to standard treatment with oral prednisolone for short-term blister control and significantly safer long-term

Clinical outcomes and response to treatment of patients receiving topical treatments for pyoderma gangrenosum: a prospective cohort study

Background: pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is an uncommon dermatosis with a limited evidence base for treatment. Objective: to estimate the effectiveness of topical therapies in the treatment of PG. Methods: prospective cohort study of UK secondary care patients with a clinical diagnosis of PG suitable for topical treatment (recruited July 2009 to June 2012). Participants received topical therapy following normal clinical practice (mainly Class I-III topical corticosteroids, tacrolimus 0.03% or 0.1%). Primary outcome: speed of healing at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes: proportion healed by 6 months; time to healing; global assessment; inflammation; pain; quality-of-life; treatment failure and recurrence. Results: Sixty-six patients (22 to 85 years) were enrolled. Clobetasol propionate 0.05% was the most commonly prescribed therapy. Overall, 28/66 (43.8%) of ulcers healed by 6 months. Median time-to-healing was 145 days (95% CI: 96 days, ∞). Initial ulcer size was a significant predictor of time-to-healing (hazard ratio 0.94 (0.88;80 1.00); p = 0.043). Four patients (15%) had a recurrence. Limitations: No randomised comparator Conclusion: Topical therapy is potentially an effective first-line treatment for PG that avoids possible side effects associated with systemic therapy. It remains unclear whether more severe disease will respond adequately to topical therapy alone

Randomised controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home?based narrowband UVB for active and limited vitiligo: results of the HI?Light Vitiligo trial

BackgroundEvidence for the effectiveness of vitiligo treatments is limited.ObjectivesTo determine effectiveness of (a) hand‐held narrowband‐UVB (NB‐UVB) and (b) combination of potent topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB‐UVB compared to TCS, for localised vitiligo.MethodsPragmatic, 3‐arm, placebo‐controlled RCT (9 months’ treatment; 12 months’ follow‐up). Adults and children, recruited from secondary care and community, aged ≥5 years with active vitiligo affecting 75% expected were more likely to achieve treatment success, but effects were lost once treatment stopped. Localised grade 3 or 4 erythema was reported in 62 (12%) participants (including 3 with dummy light). Skin thinning was reported in 13 (2.5%) participants (including 1 with placebo ointment).ConclusionCombination treatment with home‐based hand‐held NB‐UVB plus TCS is likely to be superior to TCS alone for treatment of localised vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated but was only successful in around a quarter of participants

An economic evaluation of the randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo (the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial)

Background: Economic evidence for vitiligo treatments is absent. Objectives: To determine the cost-effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB compared with TCS alone for localized vitiligo. Methods: Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial with 9 months’ treatment. In total 517 adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin were recruited from secondary care and the community and were randomized 1: 1: 1 to receive TCS, NB-UVB or both. Cost per successful treatment (measured on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale) was estimated. Secondary cost–utility analyses measured quality-adjusted life-years using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels for those aged ≥ 11 years and the Child Health Utility 9D for those aged 5 to < 18 years. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015. Results: The mean ± SD cost per participant was £775 ± 83·7 for NB-UVB, £813 ± 111.4 for combination treatment and £600 ± 96·2 for TCS. In analyses adjusted for age and target patch location, the incremental difference in cost for combination treatment compared with TCS was £211 (95% confidence interval 188–235), corresponding to a risk difference of 10·9% (number needed to treat = 9). The incremental cost was £1932 per successful treatment. The incremental difference in cost for NB-UVB compared with TCS was £173 (95% confidence interval 151–196), with a risk difference of 5·2% (number needed to treat = 19). The incremental cost was £3336 per successful treatment. Conclusions: Combination treatment, compared with TCS alone, has a lower incremental cost per additional successful treatment than NB-UVB only. Combination treatment would be considered cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay £1932 per additional treatment success

Home-based narrowband UVB, topical corticosteroid or combination for children and adults with vitiligo: HI-Light Vitiligo three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews suggest that narrowband ultraviolet B light combined with treatments such as topical corticosteroids may be more effective than monotherapy for vitiligo. OBJECTIVE: To explore the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topical corticosteroid monotherapy compared with (1) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light monotherapy and (2) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light/topical corticosteroid combination treatment for localised vitiligo. DESIGN: Pragmatic, three-arm, randomised controlled trial with 9 months of treatment and a 12-month follow-up. SETTING: Sixteen UK hospitals - participants were recruited from primary and secondary care and the community. PARTICIPANTS: Adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active non-segmental vitiligo affecting ≤ 10% of their body area. INTERVENTIONS: Topical corticosteroids [mometasone furoate 0.1% (Elocon®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) plus dummy narrowband ultraviolet B light]; narrowband ultraviolet B light (narrowband ultraviolet B light plus placebo topical corticosteroids); or combination (topical corticosteroids plus narrowband ultraviolet B light). Topical corticosteroids were applied once daily on alternate weeks and narrowband ultraviolet B light was administered every other day in escalating doses, with a dose adjustment for erythema. All treatments were home based. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self-assessed treatment success for a chosen target patch after 9 months of treatment ('a lot less noticeable' or 'no longer noticeable' on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale). Secondary outcomes included blinded assessment of primary outcome and percentage repigmentation, onset and maintenance of treatment response, quality of life, side effects, treatment burden and cost-effectiveness (cost per additional successful treatment). RESULTS: In total, 517 participants were randomised (adults, n = 398; and children, n =  119; 52% male; 57% paler skin types I-III, 43% darker skin types IV-VI). At the end of 9 months of treatment, 370 (72%) participants provided primary outcome data. The median percentage of narrowband ultraviolet B light treatment-days (actual/allocated) was 81% for topical corticosteroids, 77% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 74% for combination groups; and for ointment was 79% for topical corticosteroids, 83% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 77% for combination. Target patch location was head and neck (31%), hands and feet (32%), and rest of the body (37%). Target patch treatment 'success' was 20 out of 119 (17%) for topical corticosteroids, 27 out of 123 (22%) for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 34 out of 128 (27%) for combination. Combination treatment was superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 10.9%, 95% confidence interval 1.0% to 20.9%; p = 0.032; number needed to treat = 10). Narrowband ultraviolet B light was not superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 5.2%, 95% confidence interval -4.4% to 14.9%; p = 0.290; number needed to treat = 19). The secondary outcomes supported the primary analysis. Quality of life did not differ between the groups. Participants who adhered to the interventions for > 75% of the expected treatment protocol were more likely to achieve treatment success. Over 40% of participants had lost treatment response after 1 year with no treatment. Grade 3 or 4 erythema was experienced by 62 participants (12%) (three of whom were using the dummy) and transient skin thinning by 13 participants (2.5%) (two of whom were using the placebo). We observed no serious adverse treatment effects. For combination treatment compared with topical corticosteroids, the unadjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £2328.56 (adjusted £1932) per additional successful treatment (from an NHS perspective). LIMITATIONS: Relatively high loss to follow-up limits the interpretation of the trial findings, especially during the post-intervention follow-up phase. CONCLUSION: Hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light plus topical corticosteroid combination treatment is superior to topical corticosteroids alone for treatment of localised vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated, but was effective in around one-quarter of participants only. Whether or not combination treatment is cost-effective depends on how much decision-makers are willing to pay for the benefits observed. FUTURE WORK: Development and testing of new vitiligo treatments with a greater treatment response and longer-lasting effects are needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17160087. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Genome-wide association study in frontal fibrosing alopecia identifies four susceptibility loci including HLA-B*07:02

Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is a recently described inflammatory and scarring type of hair loss affecting almost exclusively women. Despite a dramatic recent increase in incidence the aetiopathogenesis of FFA remains unknown. We undertake genome-wide association studies in females from a UK cohort, comprising 844 cases and 3,760 controls, a Spanish cohort of 172 cases and 385 controls, and perform statistical meta-analysis. We observe genome-wide significant association with FFA at four genomic loci: 2p22.2, 6p21.1, 8q24.22 and 15q2.1. Within the 6p21.1 locus, fine-mapping indicates that the association is driven by the HLA-B*07:02 allele. At 2p22.1, we implicate a putative causal missense variant in CYP1B1, encoding the homonymous xenobiotic- and hormone-processing enzyme. Transcriptomic analysis of affected scalp tissue highlights overrepresentation of transcripts encoding components of innate and adaptive immune response pathways. These findings provide insight into disease pathogenesis and characterise FFA as a genetically predisposed immuno-inflammatory disorder driven by HLA-B*07:02