Search

Filomena Russo,1 Marco Galluzzo,2,3 Luca Stingeni,4 Severino Persechino,5 Leonardo Zichichi,6 Andrea Conti,7 Claudia Giofrè,8 Valentina Dini,9 Martina Vispi,10 Laura Atzori,11 Angelo Cattaneo,12 Aurora Parodi,13 Federico Bardazzi,14 Giuseppe Stinco,15 Paolo Dapavo,16 Giampiero Girolomoni,17 Maria Letizia Musumeci,18 Manuela Papini,19 Marina Venturini,20 Stefano Dastoli,21 Sergio Di Nuzzo,22 Maria Concetta Fargnoli,23 Gianluca Pagnanelli,24 Nicoletta Bernardini,25 Daniele Mario Gambini,26 Piergiorgio Malagoli,27 Carlo Mazzatenta,28 Ketty Peris,29 Iris Zalaudek,30 Gabriella Fabbrocini31 ,† Francesco Loconsole,32 Camilla Vassallo,33 Lucia Pietroleonardo,34 Francesca Prignano,35 Chiara Franchi,36 Anna Maria Offidani,37 Claudio Bonifati,38 Vito Di Lernia,39 Giovanni Gigante,40 Marta Silvia Bartezaghi,40 Matteo Franchi,41,42 Paola Ursoleo,40 Elisabetta Aloisi40 1Dermatology Section, Department of Medical, Surgical and Neurological Science, University of Siena, S. Maria Alle Scotte Hospital, Siena, Italy; 2Department of Systems Medicine, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy; 3Dermatology Unit, Fondazione Policlinico “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy; 4Section of Dermatology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; 5Dermatology Unit, NESMOS Department, Faculty of Medicine & Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Sant’Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy; 6Unit of Dermatology, San Antonio Abate Hospital, Trapani, Italy; 7Section of Dermatology, Department of Specialized Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy; 8U.O.C. Dermatologia, A.O. Papardo, Messina, Italy; 9Section of Dermatology, Department of Medicine and Oncology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy; 10Dermatology Unit, Misericordia Hospital, Grosseto, Italy; 11Dermatology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy; 12Dermatology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milano, Italy; 13Section of Dermatology, DiSSal University of Genoa, Ospedale-Policlinico San Martino IRCCS, Genova, Italy; 14Dermatology Division, Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 15Section of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy; 16Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy; 17Section of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; 18Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy; 19Dermatology Clinic of Terni, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; 20Section of Dermatology, Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy; 21Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University, Catanzaro, Italy; 22Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy; 23Section of Dermatology, Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Science, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy; 24Department of Dermatology, Istituto Dermopatico dell’Immacolata - IRCCS, Roma, Italy; 25Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Dermatology Unit, “Daniele Innocenzi”, Asl Latina, Italy; 26Dermatology Unit, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy; 27Dermatology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy; 28Dermatology Unit, Lucca Azienda USL Toscana Nord Ovest, Pisa, Italy; 29Department of Translational Medicine and Surgery, IRCCS A. Gemelli University Polyclinic Foundation, Sacred Heart Catholic University, Rome, Italy; 30Department of Dermatology, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy; 31Section of Dermatology, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy; 32Department of Dermatology, University of Bari, Bari, Italy; 33Institute of Dermatology, IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo Foundation and University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy; 34Dermatology Unit, Vito Fazzi Hospital, Lecce, Italy; 35Dermatology Clinic, Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; 36Dermatology Unit, IRCCS IO Galeazzi, Milan, Italy; 37Dermatological Clinic, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region, Ancona, Italy; 38Department of Dermatology, Istituto Dermatologico San Gallicano - IRCCS, Roma, Italy; 39Dermatology Unit, Arcispedale S. Maria Nuova IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy; 40Novartis Farma SpA, Origgio, Italy; 41National Centre for Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, Milan, Italy; 42Laboratory of Healthcare Research and Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milano Bicocca, Milan, Italy†Gabriella Fabbrocini passed away on 3 March 2023Correspondence: Filomena Russo, Dermatology Section, Department of Medical, Surgical and Neurological Science, University of Siena, S. Maria Alle Scotte Hospital, Siena, Italy, Email file.russo@libero.itPurpose: SUPREME, a phase IIIb study conducted in Italy, demonstrated safety and high efficacy of secukinumab for up to 72 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque-type psoriasis. SUPREME 2.0 study aimed to provide real-world data on the long-term drug survival and effectiveness of secukinumab beyond 72 weeks.Patients and Methods: SUPREME 2.0 is a retrospective observational chart review study conducted in patients previously enrolled in SUPREME study. After the end of the SUPREME study, eligible patients continued treatment as per clinical practice, and their effectiveness and drug survival data were retrieved from medical charts.Results: Of the 415 patients enrolled in the SUPREME study, 297 were included in SUPREME 2.0; of which, 210 (70.7%) continued secukinumab treatment throughout the 42-month observation period. Patients in the biologic-naïve cohort had higher drug survival than those in the biologic-experienced cohort (74.9% vs 61.7%), while HLA-Cw6–positive and HLA-Cw6–negative patients showed similar drug survival (69.3% and 71.9%). After 42 months, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 was achieved by 79.6% of patients overall; with a similar proportion of biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients achieving PASI90 (79.8% and 79.1%). The mean absolute PASI score reduced from 21.94 to 1.38 in the overall population, 21.90 to 1.24 in biologic-naïve and 22.03 to 1.77 in biologic-experienced patients after 42 months. The decrease in the absolute PASI score was comparable between HLA-Cw6–positive and HLA–Cw6-negative patients. The baseline Dermatology Life Quality Index scores also decreased in the overall patients (10.5 to 2.32) and across all study sub-groups after 42 months. Safety was consistent with the known profile of secukinumab, with no new findings.Conclusion: In this real-world cohort study, secukinumab showed consistently high long-term drug survival and effectiveness with a favourable safety profile.Keywords: psoriasis, secukinumab, real-world evidence, drug survival, SUPREME

Oriana Simonetti,1,* Giulio Rizzetto,1,* Elisa Molinelli,1 Oscar Cirioni,2 Annamaria Offidani1 1Clinic of Dermatology, Department of Clinical and Molecular Sciences, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy; 2Clinic of Infectious Diseases, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Oriana SimonettiDermatological Unit, Department of Clinical and Molecular Sciences, Polytechnic Marche University, Via Conca 71, Ancona, 60126, ItalyEmail o.simonetti@staff.univpm.itIntroduction: Dalbavancin is a bactericidal lipoglycopeptide active against gram-positives. Its use has been approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI).Methods: We conducted a narrative review of the literature on the safety profile of dalbavancin. The bibliographic research was carried out on the PubMed database on 6 November 2020 by seeking combinations of the following keywords: dalbavancin, adverse effects, safety, drug interactions, and skin infections.Results: Five double-blind Phase 3 randomized clinical trials, 2 open-label randomized trials, and 4 retrospective studies were identified. No statistically significant differences were found between dalbavancin and comparators in the incidence of adverse events. Retrospective studies confirm the low incidence of adverse events.Conclusion: Dalbavancin is a therapeutic option that has demonstrated an excellent safety profile, also in relation to the other MRSA therapies available. Its use represents a cost-effective solution for the treatment of those patients with ABSSSI who would need hospitalization. One limitation of this study is that most of the available data are from Phase III clinical trials. Further real-life studies with a larger sample size are therefore needed to better assess the safety profile of the dalbavancin, especially to investigate the true incidence of rare adverse events.Keywords: dalbavancin, adverse events, safety, skin infections, ABSSSI

ObjectivesInformed by a social-ecological framework, this study nested undocumented students' individual mental health needs within micro-level campus factors and the macro-level immigration policy context to examine how these are associated with undocumented Latina/o/x college students' use of on-campus mental health services.MethodA large-scale survey was administered to 1,277 undocumented college students attending 4-year public universities in California. Only Latina/o/x respondents were included in this study (N = 1,181). Fifty percent of students attended a UC system (n = 589). On average, students were 21.84 years old (SE = .15), and most were women (75.3%, n = 890).ResultsGreater level of mental health symptoms and perceived mental health need, and greater use of campus-wide resources and undocumented student services predicted greater likelihood of using on-campus mental health services. Greater perceptions of social exclusion due to the immigration policy context predicted lower use of mental health services.ConclusionsResults indicate that a greater use of resources and an inclusive campus environment, as well as efforts to minimize policy-related feelings of social exclusion, may facilitate undocumented students' professional mental health help-seeking. These findings emphasize the need to take multiple and multi-level ecological factors into account when considering mental health service use, particularly in the case of undocumented immigrants and likely other structurally marginalized groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

(1) Background: In their 60-year history, dimethyl fumarate and other salts of fumaric acid have been used for the treatment of psoriasis and other immune-mediated diseases for their immune-modulating properties. Over the years, new mechanisms of action have been discovered for this evergreen drug that remains a first-line treatment for several different inflammatory diseases. Due to its pleiotropic effects, this molecule is still of great interest in varied conditions, not exclusively inflammatory diseases. (2) Methods: The PubMed database was searched using combinations of the following keywords: dimethyl fumarate, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse effects, psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, and clinical indications. This article reviews and updates the pharmacokinetics, mechanisms of action, and clinical indications of dimethyl fumarate. (3) Conclusions: The pharmacology of dimethyl fumarate is complex, fascinating, and not fully known. Progressive insights into the molecule’s mechanisms of action will make it possible to maximize its clinical efficacy, reduce concerns about adverse effects, and find other possible areas of application.

Mario Puviani,1 Elena Campione,2 Anna Maria Offidani,3 Roberta De Grandi,4 Luca Bianchi,2 Ivan Bobyr,3 Melania Giannoni,3 Anna Campanati,3 Marta Bottagisio,4 Alessandro Bidossi,4 Elena De Vecchi,4 Klaus Eisendle,5 Massimo Milani5,61Medica Plus Dermatology Outpatients Clinic, Modena, Italy; 2Dermatology Clinic, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy; 3Dermatology Clinic, Ospedali Riuniti Ancona University, Ancona, Italy; 4Laboratory of Clinical Chemistry and Microbiology, IRCCS Orthopedic Institute Galeazzi, Milan, Italy; 5Dermatology Clinic, Ospedale Centrale di Bolzano (BZ), Bolzano, BZ, Italy; 6Medical Department Cantabria Labs, Difa Cooper, Caronno Pertusella, VA, ItalyObjective: A new cream formulation containing hyaluronic acid 5%, complexed with a mix of a bacterial-wall-derived glycoprotein and peptide glycan complex (EDS), has been recently developed. We evaluated in a prospective, assessor-blinded, 6-week study the efficacy and tolerability of EDS in the treatment of facial seborrheic dermatitis (SD) and the effects on skin microbiota.Subjects and methods: Seventy-five subjects (mean age 46; 60 men) with moderate-severe SD of the face were enrolled. EDS cream was applied twice daily. The primary outcome was the evolution of the Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score, evaluating erythema, scale/flaking, grade of seborrhea and itch. Superficial skin bacterial microbiome at baseline and after treatment was assessed, using the 16S rRNA gene methodology, in affected and non-affected face areas. Local tolerability was evaluated checking self-reported side effects at each visit.Results: Baseline IGA scores (mean±SD) was 10±3. The use of EDS reduced IGA score significantly by 70% at week 3 and by 88% at week 6. An increase in the abundance of Cutibacterium acnes genera associated with a significant drop of Staphylococcus genera presence was detected in affected areas. The ratio of relative abundance of genera Cutibacterium/Staphylococcus increased significantly after treatment in affected areas. The product was very well tolerated.Conclusion: Treatment with EDS applied twice daily for 6 consecutive weeks was associated with a reduction of the signs and symptoms of SD. Furthermore, after EDS cream treatment, a reequilibrating effect on facial skin microbiota was observed. The product was very well tolerated.Keywords: seborrheic dermatitis, skin microbiota, hyaluronic acid, assessor blinded trial

Anna Campanati*, Veronica Consales*, Monia Orciani, Katia Giuliodori, Giulia Ganzetti, Ivan Bobyr, Giulia Sorgentoni, Roberto di Primio, Annamaria Offidani Dermatological Clinic, Department of Clinical and Molecular Sciences, Polytechnic Marche University, Ancona, Italy *These authors contributed equally to this work Abstract: Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are multipotent nonhematopoietic stromal cells studied for their properties and importance in management of several skin diseases. This review collects and analyzes the emerging published data, which describe the function of MSCs in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Keywords: mesenchymal stem cells, pathogenesis of psoriasis, review

Prior research has established that undocumented immigrant experiences are dynamic, reflecting the complex web of immigration-related policies that create legal vulnerability. As such, undocumented college students' experiences must be situated in their current policy context. Drawing on descriptive analyses of a survey of 1,277 undocumented 4-year college students in California, we examine how undocumented students are faring in a relatively inclusive policy context. Results demonstrate the heterogeneity of undocumented student experiences and unpack the challenges they confront while also demonstrating the ways they thrive. We document how respondents are performing across a variety of academic, well-being, and civic and political engagement outcomes. We also show that undocumented students' perceptions of legal vulnerability are complex and varied, taking into account family-level legal vulnerability and individual protections. Further, students perceive campuses as fairly welcoming spaces, with some differences arising across the two university systems. Ultimately, we argue that undocumented college students' experiences merit more nuanced and contextualized analysis.

The ELOQUENT‐3 trial demonstrated the superiority of the combination of elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (EloPd) in terms of efficacy and safety, compared to Pd in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), who had received at least two prior therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. The present study is an 18‐month follow‐up update of a previously published Italian real‐life RRMM cohort of patients treated with EloPd. This revised analysis entered 319 RRMM patients accrued in 41 Italian centers. After a median follow‐up of 17.7 months, 213 patients (66.4%) experienced disease progression or died. Median progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 7.5 and 19.2 months, respectively. The updated multivariate analysis showed a significant reduction of PFS benefit magnitude both in advanced International Staging System (ISS) (II and III) stages and previous exposure to daratumumab cases. Instead, advanced ISS (II and III) stages and more than 2 previous lines of therapy maintained an independent prognostic impact on OS. Major adverse events included grade three‐fourths neutropenia (24.9%), anemia (13.4%), lymphocytopenia (15.5%), and thrombocytopenia (10.7%), while infection rates and pneumonia were 19.3% and 8.7%, respectively. A slight increase in the incidence of neutropenia and lymphocytopenia was registered with longer follow‐up. In conclusion, our real‐world study still confirms that EloPd is a safe and possible therapeutic choice for RRMM. Nevertheless, novel strategies are desirable for those patients exposed to daratumumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to develop two survival risk scores (RS) for overall survival (OS, SRSKRd/EloRd) and progression-free survival (PFS, PRSKRd/EloRd) in 919 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients who received carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd)/elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (EloRd). The median OS was 35.4 months, with no significant difference between the KRd arm versus the EloRd arm. In the multivariate analysis, advanced ISS (HR = 1.31; P = 0.025), interval diagnosis–therapy (HR = 1.46; P = 0.001), number of previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.96; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.72; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.30; P = 0.026) remained independently associated with death. The median PFS was 20.3 months, with no difference between the two strategies. The multivariate model identified a significant progression/death risk increase for ISS III (HR = 1.37; P = 0.002), >3 previous lines of therapies (HR = 1.67; P < 0.0001), older age (HR = 1.64; P < 0.0001), and prior lenalidomide exposure (HR = 1.35; P = 0.003). Three risk SRSKRd/EloRd categories were generated: low-risk (134 cases, 16.5%), intermediate-risk (467 cases, 57.3%), and high-risk categories (213 cases, 26.2%). The 1- and 2-year OS probability rates were 92.3% and 83.8% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 81.1% and 60.6% (HR = 2.73; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 65.5% and 42.5% (HR = 4.91; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. Notably, unlike the low-risk group, which did not cross the median timeline, the OS median values were 36.6 and 18.6 months for the intermediate- and high-risk cases, respectively. Similarly, three PRSKRd/EloRd risk categories were engendered. Based on such grouping, 338 (41.5%) cases were allocated in the low-, 248 (30.5%) in the intermediate-, and 228 (28.0%) in the high-risk groups. The 1- and 2-year PFS probability rates were 71.4% and 54.5% for the low-risk (HR = 1, reference category), 68.9% and 43.7% (HR = 1.95; P < 0.0001) for the intermediate-risk, and 48.0% and 27.1% (HR = 3.73; P < 0.0001) for the high-risk groups, respectively. The PFS median values were 29.0, 21.0, and 11.7 months for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk cases. This analysis showed 2.7- and 4.9-fold increased risk of death for the intermediate- and high-risk cases treated with KRd/EloRd as salvage therapy. The combined progression/death risks of the two categories were increased 1.3- and 2.2-fold compared to the low-risk group. In conclusion, SRSKRd/EloRd and PRSKRd/EloRd may represent accessible and globally applicable models in daily clinical practice and ultimately represent a prognostic tool for RRMM patients who received KRd or EloRd.

Simple Summary: Multiple myeloma (MM) represents the second most common hematological malignancy, but its diagnosis can be significantly delayed since symptoms are not specific and, mainly in the older population, alternate diagnoses can mimic MM. Bone marrow biopsy (evaluating the amount of proliferating myeloma cells) remains an essential procedure, but several imaging methods such as whole-body low-dose computed tomography, positron emission tomography or whole-body magnetic resonance have become crucial for the diagnosis and staging of MM, and are also taking on a prognostic role. MM is a clinically and biologically heterogeneous disease; therefore, with the aim to identify patients with different outcomes, some risk models such as ISS, R-ISS or R2-ISS have been proposed over time. However, the most recent attempts have been to establish individualized patient risk, integrating clinical, genomic and therapeutic data in order to personalize treatment and avoid overtreatment and toxicities. The outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) has significantly improved in the last few decades due to several factors such as new biological discoveries allowing to better stratify disease risk, development of more effective therapies and better management of side effects related to them. However, handling all these aspects requires an interdisciplinary approach involving multiple knowledge and collaboration of different specialists. The hematologist, faced with a patient with MM, must not only choose a treatment according to patient and disease characteristics but must also know when therapy needs to be started and how to monitor it during and after treatment. Moreover, he must deal not only with organ issues related to MM such as bone disease, renal failure or neurological disease but also with adverse events, often very serious, related to novel therapies, particularly new generation immunotherapies such as CAR T cell therapy and bispecific antibodies. In this review, we provide an overview on the newer MM diagnostic and monitoring strategies and on the main side effects of MM therapies, focusing on adverse events occurring during treatment with CAR T cells and bispecific antibodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]