Search

Introduction: Three-dimensional (3D) total body photography may improve early detection of melanoma and facilitate surveillance, leading to better prognosis and lower healthcare costs. The Australian Centre of Excellence in Melanoma Imaging and Diagnosis (ACEMID) cohort study will assess long-term outcomes from delivery of a precision strategy of monitoring skin lesions using skin surface imaging technology embedded into health services across Australia., Methods and Analysis: A prospective cohort study will enrol 15 000 participants aged 18 years and above, across 15 Australian sites. Participants will attend study visits according to their melanoma risk category: very high risk, high risk or low/average risk, every 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively, over 3 years. Participants will undergo 3D total body photography and dermoscopy imaging at study visits. A baseline questionnaire will be administered to collect sociodemographic, phenotypic, quality of life and sun behaviour data. A follow-up questionnaire will be administered every 12 months to obtain changes in sun behaviour and quality of life. A saliva sample will be collected at the baseline visit from a subsample., Ethics and Dissemination: The ACEMID cohort study was approved by the Metro South Health Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: HREC/2019/QMS/57206) and the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (approval number: 2019003077). The findings will be reported through peer-reviewed and lay publications and presentations at conferences., Trial Registration Number: ACTRN12619001706167., Competing Interests: Competing interests: HPS is a shareholder of MoleMap NZ and E-derm-Consult and undertakes regular teledermatological reporting for both companies. HPS is a Medical Consultant for Canfield Scientific, Blaze Bioscience and a Medical Advisor for First Derm. VM has received speakers fees from Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Janssen and conference sponsorship from L’Oreal. PF-P has consulted for Leo, Amgen, Abbvie, UCB, Sanofi, Janssen, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pfizer and Lilly. PF-P has received speakers fees from Janssen, Leo, Amgen, Sanofi, Lilly, Abbvie, UCB, Novartis, Merck and Pfizer., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma are the most common malignancies and are classified under the umbrella of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC). NMSC exerts a small but appreciable decrement in quality of life (QOL). The impact posed may arise from the tumour itself or as a result of treatment, and through symptoms, functional limitations, cosmetic burden and auxiliary considerations such as cost and disturbance to the activities of daily living. Researchers have evaluated this burden using a variety of outcome measures including generic, dermatology-specific and disease-specific instruments. The skin cancer index represents a promising disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure in this setting. To overcome some of the constraints inherent to disease-specific instruments, and to allow comparisons with other diseases, utility weightings have been developed. Utility weightings represent a cardinal measure for a specific health status and are established through methods such as the standard gamble, willingness-to-pay and time trade-off, and have also been employed to generate utility weightings for NMSC. Utilities are becoming increasingly important as a means of comparing health states across medicine and are of particular importance from a health-care policy perspective as they are used for resource allocation. The small but definite impact on the individual's QOL posed by NMSC should be a clinical consideration for physicians and it should be recognised by researchers as a potential outcome measure., (© 2014 The Australasian College of Dermatologists.)

Studies on the psychosocial and emotional burden of psoriasis have been extensive; however, there is limited knowledge and awareness of patients' attitude and behavior towards psoriasis treatment. To understand psoriasis patients' attitude and behavior towards treatment of psoriasis, especially those treated with biologics, a multi‐stage study qualitative and quantitative methodology was conducted among psoriasis patients. An online survey was conducted with 45 moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis patients each in Australia, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan for 20 min. This was followed by qualitative in‐depth interviews conducted among psoriasis patients in Australia (n = 3) and Japan (n = 2) for 60 min. All of the findings were workshopped with key opinion leaders and patient advisory groups to identify potential solutions addressing patients' unmet needs. Five common insights were identified across the region, highlighting patients' attitude and behavior towards psoriasis treatment, especially for those treated with biologics. These insights comprised the following: (i) one of the key factors driving patients' treatment choice included their ability to enjoy clear skin for longer period (68%); (ii) bio‐maintenance patients had a higher expectation (4.9 months) of how long their skin could stay clear, compared to their pre‐biologics initiation days (2.9 months); (iii) once a good response is achieved, bio‐maintenance patients were more concerned about symptoms returning (44%) than development of side‐effects (19%); (iv) bio‐maintenance patients felt psychologically and physically affected during flare‐ups despite being on more efficacious treatment; and (v) bio‐maintenance patients still felt they were at risk of flare‐ups (4.5/7), almost similar risk perception as non‐biologics patients (4.9/7). Findings from this study showed that psoriasis patients look for treatment with the least risk of flare‐ups so that they were able to enjoy clear skin for a long time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Skin pain (described as discomfort or soreness) is increasingly recognized as a symptom of atopic dermatitis which impacts patient quality of life. This analysis examined the effect of baricitinib on skin pain in atopic dermatitis in three phase 3 studies (BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, and -AD7). Methods: Patients were randomly assigned 2:1:1:1 to receive once-daily placebo, baricitinib 1 mg, 2 mg, or 4 mg in BREEZE-AD1 (N = 624) and -AD2 (N = 615) and 1:1:1 to receive once-daily placebo, baricitinib 2 mg, or 4 mg, with topical corticosteroids, in BREEZE-AD7 (N = 329) for 16 weeks. Patients recorded their skin pain severity using the Skin Pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) via an electronic daily diary. Data were analyzed by study as least squares mean change from baseline in daily scores for the randomly assigned patients using mixed model repeated measures analysis. Analysis of Skin Pain NRS response was done using logistic regression using non-responder imputation. Results: Baricitinib produced significant percentage change from baseline compared with placebo in patient-reported skin pain severity by day 2 in BREEZE-AD1 (baricitinib 4 mg − 11.9%, p < 0.001; baricitinib 2 mg − 6.4%, p = 0.016; baricitinib 1 mg − 6.2%, p = 0.016), -AD2 (baricitinib 4 mg − 12.6%, p < 0.001; baricitinib 2 mg − 5.6%, p = 0.036; baricitinib 1 mg − 6.9%, p = 0.011), and -AD7 (baricitinib 4 mg − 6.9%, p = 0.04; baricitinib 2 mg − 7.9%, p = 0.018). A greater proportion of patients treated with baricitinib reported at least a 4-point reduction in Skin Pain NRS score at week 16 (Skin Pain NRS responders) in BREEZE-AD1 (baricitinib 4 mg 25.3%, p < 0.001), -AD2 (baricitinib 4 mg 20.0%, p < 0.001; baricitinib 2 mg 19.0%, p < 0.001), and -AD7 (baricitinib 4 mg 48.8%, p < 0.001; baricitinib 2 mg 45.2%, p = 0.004) compared to placebo. A significantly higher proportion of Skin Pain NRS responders also achieved at least a 4-point improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index at week 16 when compared with Skin Pain NRS non-responders in BREEZE-AD1 (89.2%, p < 0.0001), -AD2 (92.5%, p < 0.0001), and -AD7 (88.3%, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Baricitinib improved patient-reported skin pain severity as early as day 2. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: BREEZE-AD1, NCT03334396; BREEZE-AD2, NCT03334422; BREEZE-AD7, NCT03733301. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study on treating hidradenitis suppurativa with adalimumab in patients with melanoma and debilitating systemic diseases. It mentions that the hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic skin disease with debilitating effects on quality of life. It also menitons that the TNF inhibitor adalimumab has been approved in Australia for the management of severe treatment-resistant hidradenitis suppurativa.