Search

Romy van der Groef,1 Pascal HP de Jong,1 Dirk Jan Hijnen,2 Christien J van der Woude,3 Jan AM van Laar,4 P Hugo M van der Kuy,5 Jan-Dietert Brugma,6 Annelieke Pasma1 1Department of Rheumatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 2Department of Dermatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 3Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 4Department of Internal Medicine and Immunology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 5Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; 6Department of Outpatient Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the NetherlandsCorrespondence: Romy van der Groef, Erasmus University Medical Center, Department of Rheumatology, Room Na-523, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Tel +31 648284141, Email r.vandergroef@erasmusmc.nlPurpose: During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, national and international societies have recommended continuing biological agents in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) in the absence of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms. However, adherence to biological treatment might decrease, because these recommendations contradict patients’ beliefs. Especially an increased concern about side effects could have influenced the adherence to biological treatment during the first lockdown. The primary objective was to investigate the impact of the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown on adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients.Patients and Methods: In this prospective cohort study, IMID patients who received a biological agent before and during the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown (March 2020- June 2020) were included. Patients were excluded if they did not complete the medication adherence report scale-5 (MARS-5) questionnaire at ≥ 1 visit before the lockdown and ≥ 1 visit during the lockdown. Adherence to biological treatment was measured with the MARS-5 and Medication Possession Ratio (MPR).Results: We included 157 IMID patients. The percentage of adherent patients, defined as MARS-5 score > 21, was significantly lower during the lockdown compared to the period before the lockdown (88.5% vs 84.1%, p< 0.001). Additionally, the overall percentage of adherent patients during the lockdown based on the MPR ≥ 90% was significantly lower compared to adherence based upon the MARS-5 (65.1% vs 84.1%, p< 0.001).Conclusion: This study showed that the first SARS-CoV-2 lockdown negatively impacts adherence to biological treatment in IMID patients. Therefore, treating physicians should be aware of this problem to minimize the potential harmful effects of non-adherence.Keywords: adherence, biological, SARS-CoV-2, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the daily life of many patients with dermatological immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (DIMIDs), such as atopic dermatitis (AD), psoriasis, and vitiligo, was impacted by social restrictions caused by (fear of) morbidity, mortality associated with COVID-19, and vaccine hesitancy. This prospective observational, multicenter, multidisciplinary cohort study explored the impact of COVID-19 disease and vaccination on DIMIDs, specifically AD, psoriasis, and vitiligo. Data from patients with DIMIDs were collected as part of the Target2B! study (between February 2021 and October 2022). We analyzed the differences in baseline characteristics, risk of developing COVID-19, proportion of DIMIDs in patients reaching seroconversion upon vaccination per DIMID, and self-reported increase in DIMID activity by multivariable logistic regression and sensitivity analyses. A total of 424 patients with DIMID were included. COVID-19 disease commonly occurred in patients with vitiligo (51.1%), AD (42.0%), and psoriasis (34.3%) (p = 0.038). COVID-19 was not associated with the use of immunosuppressive therapy. Three patients (two with AD and one with vitiligo) were hospitalized due to COVID-19. Nearly all patients with DIMIDs exhibited effective seroconversion after regular vaccination regimens (vitiligo 100%, psoriasis 97.9%, AD 96.5%). Increased DIMID activity after COVID-19 (6.6%) or severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination (12.26%) was reported in a minority of patients, with baseline progressive disease (disease activity 3 months preceding baseline survey) being the only associated risk factor (COVID-19: odds ratio [OR], 4.27 [p = 0.02]; vaccination OR, 3.45 [p = 0.002]). In conclusion, no alarming signs were shown in this study regarding (severe) COVID-19 in patients with AD, psoriasis, or vitiligo. Vaccination against COVID-19 is advised in patients with DIMIDs. Moreover, patients with DIMIDs can safely continue their immunosuppressant therapy, since this does not increase the risk of COVID-19, while vaccination-induced humoral responses are adequate. In only a minority of patients, increased DIMID activity after COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 vaccination occurred., (© 2025 The Author(s). The Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Background: Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have the potential to alter the landscape of atopic dermatitis (AD) management dramatically, owing to promising efficacy results from phase III trials and their rapid onset of action. However, JAKi are not without risk, and their use is not appropriate for all patients with AD, making this a medication class that dermatologists should understand and consider when treating patients with moderate-to-severe AD., Objectives: To provide a consensus expert opinion statement from the International Eczema Council (IEC) that provides a pragmatic approach to prescribing JAKi, including choosing appropriate patients and dosing, clinical and laboratory monitoring and advice about long-term use., Methods: An international cohort of authors from the IEC with expertise in JAKi selected topics of interest were placed into authorship groups covering 10 subsections. The groups performed topic-specific literature reviews, consulted up-to-date adverse event (AE) data, referred to product labels and provided analysis and expert opinion. The manuscript guidance and recommendations were reviewed by all authors, as well as the IEC Research Committee., Results: We recommend that JAKi be considered for patients with moderate-to-severe AD seeking the benefits of a rapid reduction in disease burden and itch, oral administration and the potential for flexible dosing. Baseline risk factors should be assessed prior to prescribing JAKi, including increasing age, venous thromboembolisms, malignancy, cardiovascular health, kidney/liver function, pregnancy and lactation, and immunocompetence. Patients being considered for JAKi treatment should be current on vaccinations and we provide a generalized framework for laboratory monitoring, although clinicians should consult individual product labels for recommendations as there are variations among the different JAKi. Patients who achieve disease control should be maintained on the lowest possible dose, as many of the observed AEs occurred in a dose-dependent manner. Future studies are needed in patients with AD to assess the durability and safety of continuous long-term JAKi use, combination medication regimens and the effects of flexible, episodic treatment over time., Conclusions: The decision to initiate JAKi treatment should be shared between the patient and provider, accounting for AD severity and personal risk-benefit assessment, including consideration of baseline health risk factors, monitoring requirements and treatment costs., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest A.A. has institutional grants with AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Arcutis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Castle, Dermavant, Galderma, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Valeant (Bausch Health) and Vyne; is an advisory board member or consultant with Pfizer, AbbVie, Allergan, Almirall, Alphyn, Amgen, Apogee, Arcutis, Bausch Health, Beiersdorf, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Canfield, Castle, Cutera, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, EPI Health, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, Ortho, Sanofi Regeneron, Swiss-American, UCB, VisualDx and Vyne; and has given lectures and presentations for Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Regeneron and Sanofi Genzyme. V.A. has clinical trials with Sanofi, Eli Lilly and Amgen, and has consulted for AbbVie and Pfizer. R.B. is an advisory board member, consultant, speaker and/or investigator for and receives honoraria and/or grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Apogee, Arcutis, Asana BioSciences, Bellus, BioMimetix, Bluefin, Biomedicine, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Pharma, CARA Therapeutic, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Escient, Evidera, Fresh Tracks (Brickell), Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Inmagene Bio, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Opsidio, Pfizer, RAPT Therapeutic, Sanofi, Target RWE, Vyne Therapeutics and Zencor. R.B. is also an employee and shareholder of Innovaderm Research. A.B. has served as a speaker (received honoraria) for Eli Lilly, Pfizer and UCB; has served as a scientific adviser (received honoraria) for AbbVie, Abcentra, Aclaris, Affibody, Aligos, Almirall, Alumis, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Apogee, Arcutis, Arena, ASLAN, Athenex, Bluefin Biomedicine, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, CTI BioPharma, Dermavant, EcoR1, Eli Lilly, Escient, Evelo, Evommune, Forte, Galderma, HighlightII Pharma, Incyte, InnoventBio, Janssen, Landos, LEO Pharma, Lipidio, Microbion, Merck, Monte Rosa Therapeutics, Nektar, Novartis, Overtone Therapeutics, Paragon, Pfizer, Q32 Bio, Rani, Rapt, Regeneron, Sanofi Genzyme, Spherix Global Insights, Sun Pharma, Takeda, TLL Pharmaceutical, TrialSpark, UCB Pharma, Union, Ventyx, Vibliome and Xencor; and has acted as a clinical study investigator (institution has received clinical study funds) for AbbVie, Acelyrin, Allakos, Almirall, Alumis, Amgen, Arcutis, Athenex, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Concert, Dermavant, DermBiont, Eli Lilly, Evelo, Evommune, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, Takeda, UCB Pharma and Ventyx. R.C. has served as an advisor, consultant, speaker and/or investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, Apogee Therapeutics, Arcutis, Argenx, ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, Beiersdorf, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, FIDE, Galderma, Genentech, GSK, Incyte, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, Nektar Therapeutics, Opsidio, Pfizer, Regeneron, RAPT, Sanofi and UCB. M.J.C. has grants from Hyphens Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, Kymab, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, Perrigo, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi; and has received personal fees from AbbVie, Astellas Pharma, Boots, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Galderma, Hyphens Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Oxagen, Perrigo, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Reckitt Benckiser, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi. S.G.D. has grants with Sanofi, Almirall, Johnson & Johnson and LEO Pharma; and has received grants and personal fees from Perrigo, Pfizer and Hyphens Pharma. L.F.E. has served as a consultant, speaker, advisory board member or investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, Apogee, Arcutis, ASLAN, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Castle Biosciences, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Forte, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Ortho Dermatologics, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi Genzyme, Target RWE and UCB. K.E. has served as a consultant and/or scientific advisor for AbbVie, Almirall, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB; and has received research support from AbbVie, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Janssen and UCB. M.G. has served as an investigator, speaker and/or adviser for AbbVie, Amgen, Akros, Arcutis, Aristea, AnaptysBio, Apogee, Bausch Health, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Dermira, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Medimmune, Meiji, Merck, MoonLake, Nimbus, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Sun Pharma, Tarsus, Takeda, UCB, Union and Ventyx. E.G.-Y. has research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Cara Therapeutics, UCB, Kyowa Kirin, RAPT, Amgen, GSK, Incyte, Sanofi, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, ASLAN, Regeneron, AnaptysBio, Concert and Janssen; and has been a consultant for AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Apogee Therapeutics, Apollo Therapeutics, Artax Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cara Therapeutics, Centrexion Therapeutics, Connect Biopharm, Eli Lilly, Enveda Biosciences, Escient Pharmaceuticals, Fairmount Funds Management, Galderma, Gate Bio, Google Ventures (GV), GSK Immunology, Horizon Therapeutics USA, Incyte, Inmagene, Janssen Biotech, Japan Tobacco, Jasper Therapeutics, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Merck, Nektar Therapeutics, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, NUMAB Therapeutics, OrbiMed Advisors, OTSUKA Pfizer, Pharmaxis, Pioneering Medicine VII, Proteologix US, RAPT, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Ribon Therapeutics, Sanofi, SATO, Schrödinger, Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company (SPARC), Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D and UCB. D.-J.H. is or has been a consultant and/or investigator for AbbVie, Almirall, AstraZeneca, Galderma, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB. A.D.I. has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Almirall, Arena, Benevolent AI, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi; has patents pending with Johnson & Johnson and Regeneron; and is President Elect of the International Eczema Council. N.K. has received honoraria as a speaker/consultant for Sanofi, Maruho, AbbVie, Eli Lilly Japan, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Otsuka Pharmaceutical and LEO Pharma; and has received grants as an investigator from Maruho, Torii Pharmaceutical, AbbVie, Sun Pharma and LEO Pharma. Y.A.L. has received honoraria or fees as a consultant from AbbVie, Sanofi, Janssen, Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Genentech, and as an advisory board member from Sanofi, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer and AbbVie; has received an independent research grant from AbbVie; and has, without personal compensation, provided investigator services for Eli Lilly, Pfizer and AbbVie. D.F.M. has served as a consultant, investigator and/or on the advisory board for Sanofi, AbbVie, Arena, LEO Pharma, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Dermira, Pfizer, BMS, Kineska, Fujisawa, Novartis and Evelo. I.V. has received research support from Sanofi/Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Almirall and AbbVie; personal honoraria for lecturing from Pfizer and AbbVie; and has been a subinvestigator for LEO Pharma. R.L.O. has been involved in clinical trials for Sanofi, Amgen and Lilly, and has been a consultant for AbbVie. A.S.P. has been an investigator for AbbVie, Applied Pharma Research, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Janssen, Krystal, Regeneron and UCB; a consultant for Aegerion Pharma, Azitra, BioCryst, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Krystal, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Primus, Regeneron, Sanofi Genzyme, Seanergy, TWI Biotechnology and UCB; and has been on data and safety monitoring boards for AbbVie, Abeona, Catawba, Galderma and InMed. D.R. has consulted, spoken for or conducted trials for the following companies: AbbVie, Abcuro, AltruBio, Amgen, Arena, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Concert, CSL Behring, Dermavant, Dermira, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Lilly, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, RAPT, Regeneron, Recludix, Revolo Biotherapeutics, Sanofi, Sun Pharmaceuticals, UCB, Viela Bio and Zura Bio. J.I.S. has received honoraria as a consultant and/or advisory board member for AbbVie, Aldena, Amgen, AOBiome, Apollo, Arcutis, Arena, Asana, ASLAN, Attovia, BiomX, Biosion, Bodewell, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Meyers Squibb, Cara, Castle Biosciences, Celgene, Connect Biopharma, CorEvitas, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Invea, Kiniksa, LEO Pharma, My-Or Diagnostics, Nektar, Novartis, Optum, Pfizer, RAPT, Recludix, Regeneron, Sanofi Genzyme, Shaperon, TARGET-RWE, Union and UpToDate; has been a speaker for AbbVie, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi Genzyme; and their institution has received grants from Galderma, Incyte and Pfizer. E.L.S. reports personal fees from AbbVie, Amgen, Arcutis, Areteia Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CorEvitas, Corvus, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Evelo Biosciences, FIDE, Forte Bio RX, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead Sciences, Impetus Healthcare, Incyte, Innovaderm Reche, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Kyowa Kirin Pharmaceutical Development, LEO Pharma, Merck, MJH Holding, NUMAB Therapeutics, Pfizer, Physicians World, PRImE, Recludix Pharma, Regeneron, Roivant, Sanofi Genzyme, Trevi Therapeutics and Valeant; has received grants from (or serves as Principal investigator role for) AbbVie, Acrotech, Amgen, Arcutis, ASLAN, Castle, CorEvitas, Dermavant, Dermira, Incyte, Lilly, Kymab, Kyowa Kirin, National Jewish Health, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Target and VeriSkin. S.S. has grants from Almirall, Beiersdorf, LEO Pharma, Galderma and Sanofi; has consulted for and been on advisory boards for AbbVie, Almirall, Beiersdorf, Clexio, Escient, Galderma, Grünenthal, Incyte, Integrity CE, Kiniksa, Klinge Pharma, Lilly, P.G. Unna Academy, Pfizer, Sanofi, touchIME, Vifor and WebMD; and has delivered lectures and presentations for AbbVie, BMS, FOMF, Galderma, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, MEDahead, Moroscience, Novartis, Sanofi, P. G. Unna Academy, Pfizer, UCB and Vifor. J.P.T. reports, with no relation to the present manuscript, that he has previously been an advisor for AbbVie, Almirall, Arena Pharmaceuticals, OM Pharma, ASLAN Pharmaceuticals, Union Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi Genzyme; has been a speaker for AbbVie, Almirall, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi-Genzyme; and has received research grants from Pfizer, Regeneron and Sanofi Genzyme. He is currently an employee of LEO Pharma. J.Y. has served on advisory boards for Sanofi, Incyte and Arcutis; has served as a consultant for the National Eczema Association, iRhthym, O’Glacee and Inner Archways; and has served as site investigator on clinical trials sponsored by AbbVie, Pfizer, Lilly and SmartPractice. C.H., A.A.L., J.I.O., Y.R.-Y., N.S. and G.T. declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

The 4th Davos Declaration was developed during the Global Allergy Forum in Davos which aimed to elevate the care of patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) by uniting experts and stakeholders. The forum addressed the high prevalence of AD, with a strategic focus on advancing research, treatment, and management to meet the evolving challenges in the field. This multidisciplinary forum brought together top leaders from research, clinical practice, policy, and patient advocacy to discuss the critical aspects of AD, including neuroimmunology, environmental factors, comorbidities, and breakthroughs in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. The discussions were geared towards fostering a collaborative approach to integrate these advancements into practical, patient-centric care. The forum underlined the mounting burden of AD, attributing it to significant environmental and lifestyle changes. It acknowledged the progress in understanding AD and in developing targeted therapies but recognized a gap in translating these innovations into clinical practice. Emphasis was placed on the need for enhanced awareness, education, and stakeholder engagement to address this gap effectively and to consider environmental and lifestyle factors in a comprehensive disease management strategy. The 4th Davos Declaration marks a significant milestone in the journey to improve care for people with AD. By promoting a holistic approach that combines research, education, and clinical application, the Forum sets a roadmap for stakeholders to collaborate to improve patient outcomes in AD, reflecting a commitment to adapt and respond to the dynamic challenges of AD in a changing world., (© 2024 The Author(s). Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) phototherapy is commonly prescribed for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE). The efficacy of NB-UVB, however, has not yet properly been established, as current evidence is of low certainty. Our aim is to assess the short-term and long-term (cost-)effectiveness and safety of NB-UVB in adult AE patients by performing a pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint (PROBE) trial. This protocol outlines its methodology., Methods: A pragmatic, multicenter, PROBE trial will be performed with 1:1 randomization of 316 adult patients with moderate-to-severe AE who have inadequate disease control with topical therapy and who are eligible for optimal topical therapy (OTT) or NB-UVB in combination with OTT as a next step. Participants in the interventional arm will receive a minimum of 3 months of OTT combined with 8 to 16 weeks of NB-UVB. The control group receives 3 months of OTT. Following the interventional phase, follow-up will continue for 9 months. Physician-reported and patient-reported outcomes (according to the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) Core Outcome Set) and adverse events are assessed at 4 weeks, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months., Discussion: The UPDATE trial aims to provide high-quality evidence regarding the (cost-)effectiveness and safety of NB-UVB phototherapy in moderate-to-severe AE patients. Challenges that are addressed in the protocol include the possible bias arising from applying open-label treatment and the necessity of introducing OTT into the study design to prevent a high dropout rate., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05704205. Registered on December 8, 2022., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The noninflammatory immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) is linked to tolerance and is unique to humans. Although poorly understood, prolonged antigenic stimulation and IL-4-signaling along the T helper 2-axis may be instrumental in IgG4 class switching. Recently, repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination has been linked to IgG4 skewing. Although widely used immunosuppressive drugs have been shown to only moderately affect humoral responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination, the effect on IgG4 switching has not been investigated., Methods: Here we study the impact of such immunosuppressive drugs, including the IL-4 receptor-blocking antibody dupilumab, on IgG4 skewing upon repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Receptor-binding domain (RBD) specific antibody responses were longitudinally measured in 600 individuals, including patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases treated with a TNF inhibitor (TNFi) and/or methotrexate (MTX), dupilumab, and healthy/untreated controls, after repeated mRNA vaccination., Results: We observed a substantial increase in the proportion of RBD-specific IgG4 antibodies (median 21%) in healthy/untreated controls after third vaccination. This IgG4 skewing was profoundly reduced in dupilumab-treated patients (<1%). Unexpectedly, an equally strong suppression of IgG4 skewing was observed in TNFi-treated patients (<1%), whereas MTX caused a modest reduction (7%). RBD-specific total IgG levels were hardly affected by these immunosuppressive drugs. Minimal skewing was observed, when primary vaccination was adenoviral vector-based., Conclusions: Our results imply a critical role for IL-4/IL-13 as well as TNF in vivo IgG4 class switching. These novel findings advance our understanding of IgG4 class switch dynamics, and may benefit humoral tolerance induction strategies, treatment of IgG4 pathologies and mRNA vaccine optimization., (© 2024 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on immunosuppressants (ISPs) may have impaired long-term humoral immune responses and increased disease activity after SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to investigate long-term humoral immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 and increased disease activity after a primary SARS-CoV-2 infection in unvaccinated IMID patients on ISPs., Methods: IMID patients on active treatment with ISPs and controls (i.e. IMID patients not on ISP and healthy controls) with a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection before first vaccination were included from an ongoing prospective cohort study (T2B! study). Clinical data on infections and increased disease activity were registered using electronic surveys and health records. A serum sample was collected before first vaccination to measure SARS-CoV-2 anti-receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibodies., Results: In total, 193 IMID patients on ISP and 113 controls were included. Serum samples from 185 participants were available, with a median time of 173 days between infection and sample collection. The rate of seropositive IMID patients on ISPs was 78% compared to 100% in controls (p < 0.001). Seropositivity rates were lowest in patients on anti-CD20 (40.0%) and anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents (60.5%), as compared to other ISPs (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Increased disease activity after infection was reported by 68 of 260 patients (26.2%; 95% CI 21.2-31.8%), leading to ISP intensification in 6 out of these 68 patients (8.8%)., Conclusion: IMID patients using ISPs showed reduced long-term humoral immune responses after primary SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was mainly attributed to treatment with anti-CD20 and anti-TNF agents. Increased disease activity after SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported commonly, but was mostly mild., Trial Registration: NL74974.018.20, Trial ID: NL8900. Registered on 9 September 2020., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Evidence about tralokinumab treatment for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice is limited., Aim: To report the first evidence, to our knowledge, from daily practice of treatment with tralokinumab in patients with AD., Methods: In this observational prospective study, patients with AD who received tralokinumab treatment in the context of routine care at the Erasmus Medical Centre were included between November 2021 and February 2022. This included 28 patients who had previously been treated with dupilumab, and 14 patients who had been treated with a Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi). The Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA; 0-4) and the numeric rating scale peak pruritus during the past 7 days (NRS itch 7d: 0-10), adverse events and reasons for discontinuation were analysed. A good clinical response was defined as any decrease in IGA and NRS itch 7d and if a patient was satisfied with the treatment and wished to continue with therapy., Results: In total, 37 patients were treated with tralokinumab. Twenty-two (59%) patients showed a good response to tralokinumab treatment. Fifteen (41%) patients discontinued treatment because of inadequate AD control or adverse events. Treatment-related adverse events were mild in most patients. Half of the patients where treatment with dupilumab had failed had a good clinical response to tralokinumab., Conclusions: Tralokinumab was found to be effective in most patients in this cohort with difficult-to-treat, severe AD from daily practice. Interestingly, tralokinumab was also found to be effective in 50% of patients who had previously experienced insufficient response or adverse events with dupilumab treatment., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest D.J.H. is an investigator for AbbVie, Almirall, LEO Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Sanofi; consultancies for AbbVie, Sanofi, LEO Pharma, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer and Lilly. The other authors declare they have no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Background: Itch, and thereby the scratching behavior, is a common complaint in atopic dermatitis. Scratching damages the skin, which in turn worsens the itch. This itch-scratch cycle perpetuates the skin condition and has a major impact on the patient's quality of life. In addition to pharmacological treatment, psychological interventions show promising results in reducing scratching behavior., Objectives: To investigate the effect of treatment according the EMDR treatment protocol for urge on scratching behavior of atopic dermatitis patients in a controlled study., Methods: This study applies a multiple baseline across subjects design. Six patients were randomly allocated to different baseline lengths and all of them started registration of scratching behavior at the same day, using a mobile phone application. Nocturnal scratching was registered by a smart watch application. The total study duration was 46 days and was equal for all patients. Treatment consisted of two sessions using the EMDR treatment protocol for urge. Furthermore, standardized measures were used to assess disease activity, quality of life, and self-control. The nonoverlap of all pairs effect size was calculated for the daily measure data., Results: One patient dropped out. Visual inspection suggests that the scratching behavior decreased over time in all patients. Furthermore, a moderate effect size of the treatment is found. During the baseline phase, scratching behavior fluctuated considerably and showed a slight negative trend. Outcomes of disease activity decreased over time and patients' self-control and quality of life improved after treatment. Nocturnal scratching behavior did not change after the intervention., Conclusion: The results of the visual analysis of day time scratching behavior, disease activity, quality of life, and self-control seem promising. These findings pave the way for future research into the effect of the new intervention on other skin conditions suffering from scratching behavior, such as prurigo nodularis., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 de Veer, Waalboer-Spuij, Hijnen, Doeksen, Busschbach and Kranenburg.)

Background: Despite enormous clinical improvements, due to better management strategies and the availability of biologicals, immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) still have a significant impact on patients' lives. To further reduce disease burden, provider- as well as patient-reported outcomes (PROs) should be taken into account during treatment and follow-up. Web-based collection of these outcomes generates valuable repeated measurements, which could be used (1) in daily clinical practice for patient-centered care, including shared decision-making; (2) for research purposes; and (3) as an essential step toward the implementation of value-based health care (VBHC). Our ultimate goal is that our health care delivery system is completely aligned with the principles of VBHC. For aforementioned reasons, we implemented the IMID registry., Objective: The IMID registry is a digital system for routine outcome measurement that mainly includes PROs to improve care for patients with IMIDs., Methods: The IMID registry is a longitudinal observational prospective cohort study within the departments of rheumatology, gastroenterology, dermatology, immunology, clinical pharmacy, and outpatient pharmacy of the Erasmus MC, the Netherlands. Patients with the following diseases are eligible for inclusion: inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, uveitis, Behçet disease, sarcoidosis, and systemic vasculitis. Generic and disease-specific (patient-reported) outcomes, including adherence to medication, side effects, quality of life, work productivity, disease damage, and activity, are collected from patients and providers at fixed intervals before and during outpatient clinic visits. Data are collected and visualized through a data capture system, which is linked directly to the patients' electronic health record, which not only facilitates a more holistic care approach, but also helps with shared decision-making., Results: The IMID registry is an ongoing cohort with no end date. Inclusion started in April 2018. From start until September 2022, a total of 1417 patients have been included from the participating departments. The mean age at inclusion was 46 (SD 16) years, and 56% of the patient population is female. The average percentage of filled out questionnaires at baseline is 84%, which drops to 72% after 1 year of follow-up. This decline may be due to the fact that the outcomes are not always discussed during the outpatient clinic visit or because the questionnaires were sometimes forgotten to set out. The registry is also used for research purposes and 92% of the patients with IMIDs gave informed consent to use their data for that., Conclusions: The IMID registry is a web-based digital system that collects provider- and PROs. The collected outcomes are used to improve care for the individual patient with an IMID and facilitate shared decision-making, and they are also used for research purposes. The measurement of these outcomes is an essential step toward the implementation of VBHC., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/43230., (©Agnes E M Looijen, Reinier C A van Linschoten, Jan-Dietert Brugma, Dirk Jan Hijnen, Pascal H P de Jong, P Hugo M van der Kuy, Jan A M van Laar, C Janneke van der Woude, Annelieke Pasma. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 30.03.2023.)

For patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), concerns exist about increased disease activity after vaccination. We aimed to assess changes in disease activity after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with IMIDs, and determine risk factors for increased disease activity. In this substudy of a prospective observational cohort study (Target-to-B!), we included patients with IMIDs who received a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Patients reported changes in disease activity on a five-point Likert scale every 60 days for up to twelve months after first vaccination. In case of self-reported increased activity, hospital records were screened whether the treating physician reported increased activity, and for potential intensification of immunosuppressive (ISP) treatment. Mixed models were used to study determinants for self-reported increased disease activity. In total, 2111 patients were included for analysis after primary immunization (mean age 49.7 years [SD 13.7], 1329/2111 (63.0%) female), from which 1266 patients for analysis after first additional vaccination. Increased disease activity at 60 days after start of primary immunization was reported by 223/2111 (10.6%). In 96/223 (43.0%) the increase was confirmed by the treating physician and in 36/223 (16.1%) ISP treatment was intensified. Increased disease activity at seven to 60 days after additional vaccination, was reported by 139/1266 (11.0%). Vaccinations were not temporally associated with self-reported increased disease activity. Conversely, increased disease activity before first vaccination, neuromuscular disease, and multiple sclerosis were associated. Altogether, self-reported increased disease activity after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 was recorded in a minority of patients and was generally mild. Moreover, multivariate analyses suggest that disease related factors, but not vaccinations are the major determinants for self-reported increased disease activity., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest F Eftimov and T Kuijpers report (governmental) grants from ZonMw to study immune response after SARS-Cov-2 vaccination in auto-immune diseases. F Eftimov also reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, CSL Behring, Kedrion, Terumo BCT, Grifols, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, and GBS-CIDP Foundation; consulting fees from UCB Pharma and CSL Behring; honoraria from Grifols. AJ van der Kooi reports grants from CSL Behring and participation on an advisory board for Argen-X. M Löwenberg reports a grant from Galapagos not related to this study, and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Takeda, and Tillotts. Ph I Spuls is involved in performing clinical trials with many pharmaceutical industries that manufacture drugs used for the treatment of e.g. psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, for which financial compensation is paid to the department/hospital and is a chief investigator of the TREAT NL registry taskforce and SECURE-AD registry. M.W. Bekkenk is a secretary for Dutch Experimental Dermatology Board and head of the pigmentary disorders group within the Dutch Dermatology Board, and reports honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi, Novartis and Fondation René Touraine. J Killestein has speaking relationships with Merck Serono, Biogen Idec, TEVA, Sanofi, Genzyme, Roche and Novartis; Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, MS Center Amsterdam has received financial support for research activities from Merck Serono, Bayer Shcering Pharma, Biogen Idec, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, Teva, Sanofi, Genzyme, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis. B Horváth reports unpaid positions as medical advisor for several patient groups, a board position for ERN-SKIN, and associate editor for The British Journal of Dermatology; reports grants from Abbvie, Akari Therapeutics, Celgene, and Novartis; consulting fees from UCB Pharma, Novartis and Janssen-Cilag; honoraria from Abbvie. J.J.G.M. Verschuuren reports consulting fees from Argenx, Alexion and NMD Pharma; is coinventor on patent applications based on MuSK-related research. DJ Hijnen reports grants from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, LEO Pharma and UCB Pharma, and honoraria from Abbvie, Galderma, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi and UCB Pharma, and a paid position in an advisory board for BIOMAP IMI. P.A. van Doorn participated on an advisory board for Octapharma. P. van Paassen reports grants from Alexion Pharma and GSK; and participation on GSK and Vifor Pharma advisory boards. G.R.A.M. D'Haens reports consulting fees from Abbvie, Agomab, AstraZeneca, AM Pharma, AMT, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Meiers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Exeliom Biosciences, Exo Biologics, Galapagos, Index Pharmaceuticals, Kaleido, Roche, Gilead, Glaxo Smith Kline, Gossamerbio, Pfizer, Immunic, Johnson and Johnson, Origo, Polpharma, Procise Diagnostics, Prometheus laboratories, Prometheus Biosciences, Progenity, and Protagonist; honoraria from Abbvie, Arena, Galapagos, Gilead, Pfizer, BMS, Takeda; participation on advisory boards for Abbvie, Seres Health, Galapagos, and AstraZeneca. R.B. Takkenberg reports honoraria from Sobi and Norgine and participation in an advisory board for Norgine. SH Goedee is a board member of the Dutch Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (unpaid), reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, and received speaker fees from Shire/Takeda. AH Zwinderman reports paid data safety monitoring board positions for Torrent Ltd and Foresee Pharmaceuticals Co. No other disclosures were reported. Bar plot showing proportions of self-reported increased disease activity (with corresponding 95% CI's), physician confirmed increased disease activity, and treatment intensification, within each IMID group at 60 days after start of primary immunization. IBD: inflammatory bowel disease; IMID: immune-mediated inflammatory disease; ISP: immunosuppressant; MS: multiple sclerosis; NMO: neuromyelitis optica; SLE: systemic lupus erythematosus. Bar plot showing incidence of self-reported increased disease activity at different timepoints. A) self-reported increased disease activity within 60 days after vaccination: at 60 days after start of primary immunization (prim. imm.), seven to 60 days after first additional vaccination (add. vacc.), and at other follow-up moments within seven to 60 days after a vaccination other than the moments mentioned before (e.g. second vaccination of primary immunization or second additional vaccination). B) self-reported increased disease activity not within 60 days after vaccination, in the two-monthly follow-up surveys starting at first vaccination. Figure showing the results of the multivariate mixed model on determinants of self-reported increased disease activity. RR's with corresponding 95% CI for age, female sex, BMI, IMID group (with gastro-intestinal disease as reference group), recent increased disease activity (self-reported increased disease activity in the three months preceding enrollment), ISP use, and any SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in 60 days before the survey. BMI: body mass index; CI: confidence interval; IMID: immune-mediated inflammatory disease; ISP: immunosuppressant; MS: multiple sclerosis; NMO: neuromyelitis optica; RR: relative risk; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: To compare the cumulative incidence and disease severity of reported SARS-CoV-2 omicron breakthrough infections between patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) on immunosuppressants and controls, and to investigate determinants for breakthrough infections., Methods: Data were used from an ongoing national prospective multicentre cohort study on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination responses in patients with IMID in the Netherlands (Target-to-B! (T2B!) study). Patients wih IMID on immunosuppressants and controls (patients with IMID not on immunosuppressants and healthy controls) who completed primary immunisation were included. The observation period was between 1 January 2022 and 1 April 2022, during which the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (BA.1 and BA.2 subvariant) was dominant. A SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection was defined as a reported positive PCR and/or antigen test at least 14 days after primary immunisation. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to investigate determinants., Results: 1593 patients with IMID on immunosuppressants and 579 controls were included. The cumulative incidence of breakthrough infections was 472/1593 (29.6%; 95% CI 27% to 32%) in patients with IMID on immunosuppressants and 181/579 (31.3%; 95% CI 28% to 35%) in controls (p=0.42). Three (0.5%) participants had severe disease. Seroconversion after primary immunisation (relative risk, RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.96), additional vaccinations (RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.76) and a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75) were associated with decreased risk of breakthrough infection., Conclusions: The cumulative incidence of reported SARS-CoV-2 omicron breakthrough infections was high, but similar between patients with IMID on immunosuppressants and controls, and disease severity was mostly mild. Additional vaccinations and prior SARS-CoV-2 infections may reduce the incidence of breakthrough infections., Competing Interests: Competing interests: FE and TWK report (governmental) grants from ZonMw to studyimmune response after SARS-Cov-2 vaccination in autoimmune diseases.FE also reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, CSL Behring,Kedrion, Terumo BCT, Grifols, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, andGBS-CIDP Foundation; consulting fees from UCB Pharma and CSlBehring; and honoraria from Grifols. AJvdK reports grants from CSLBehring and participation on an advisory board for Argen-X. ML reports agrant from Galapagos not related to this study, and honoraria from BristolMyers Squibb, Pfizer, Takeda, and Tillotts. PIS is involved in clinical trialswith many pharmaceutical industries that manufacture drugs used for thetreatment of, for example, psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, for whichfinancial compensation is paid to the department or hospital, and is achief investigator of the TREAT NL registry taskforce and SECURE-ADregistry. MWB is a secretary for the Dutch Experimental DermatologyBoard; head of the pigmentary disorders group within the DutchDermatology Board; and reports honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi, Novartis,and Fondation René Touraine. JK has speaking relationships with MerckSerono, Biogen Idec, TEVA, Sanofi, Genzyme, Roche, and Novartis;received financial support to his institution for researchactivities from Merck Serono, Bayer Shcering Pharma, Biogen Idec,GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Roche, Teva, Sanofi, Genzyme, and Novartis. BHreports unpaid positions as a medical adviser for several patient groups, aboard position for ERN-SKIN, and associate editor for The British Journalof Dermatology; reports grants from AbbVIe, Akari Therapeutics, Celgene, and Novartis; consulting fees from UCB Pharma, Novartis, and Janssen; and honoraria from AbbVie. JJGMV reports consulting fees from Argenx,Alexion, and NMD Pharma, and is a co-inventor on patent applicationsbased on MuSK-related research. DJH reportsgrants from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, LEO Pharma, and UCB;honoraria from AbbVie, Galderma, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB;and a paid position on an advisory board for BIOMAP IMI. PAvDparticipated on an advisory board for Octapharma. PvP reports grantsfrom Alexion Pharma and GSK, and participation on advisory boards forGSK and Vifor Pharma. GRAMD’H reports consulting fees from AbbVie,Agomab, AstraZeneca, AM Pharma, AMT, Arena Pharmaceuticals, BristolMyers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, ExeliomBiosciences, Exo Biologics, Galapagos, Index Pharmaceuticals, Kaleido,Roche, Gilead, GSK, Gossamerbio, Pfizer, Immunic, Johnson andJohnson, Origo, Polpharma, Procise Diagnostics, PrometheusLaboratories, Prometheus Biosciences, Progenity, and Protagonist;honoraria from AbbVie, Arena, Galapagos, Gilead, Pfizer, Bristol MyersSquibb, and Takeda; and participation on advisory boards for AbbVie,Seres Health, Galapagos, and AstraZeneca. RBT reports honoraria fromSobi and Norgine, and participation on an advisory board for Norgine.SHG is a board member of the Dutch Society of Clinical Neurophysiology(unpaid), reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, and receivedspeaker fees from Shire/Takeda. KAHZ reports paid data safetymonitoring board positions for Torrent and Foresee. All other authorsdeclare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Concerns have been raised regarding the risks of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in vaccinated patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases treated with immunosuppressants, but clinical data on breakthrough infections are still scarce. The primary objective of this study was to compare the incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections between patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases using immunosuppressants, and controls (patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases not taking immunosuppressants and healthy controls) who had received full COVID-19 vaccinations. The secondary objective was to explore determinants of breakthrough infections of the delta (B.1.617.2) variant of SARS-CoV-2, including humoral immune responses after vaccination., Methods: In this substudy, we pooled data collected in two large ongoing prospective multicentre cohort studies conducted in the Netherlands (Target to-B! [T2B!] study and Amsterdam Rheumatology Center COVID [ARC-COVID] study). Both studies recruited adult patients (age ≥18 years) with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and healthy controls. We sourced clinical data from standardised electronic case record forms, digital questionnaires, and medical files. We only included individuals who were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. For T2B!, participants were recruited between Feb 2 and Aug 1, 2021, and for ARC-COVID, participants were recruited between April 26, 2020, and March 1, 2021. In this study we assessed data on breakthrough infections collected between July 1 and Dec 15, 2021, a period in which the delta SARS-CoV-2 variant was the dominant variant in the Netherlands. We defined a SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection as a PCR-confirmed or antigen test-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection that occurred at least 14 days after vaccination. All breakthrough infections during this period were assumed to be due to the delta variant due to its dominance during the study period. We analysed post-vaccination serum samples for anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibodies to assess the humoral vaccination response (T2B! study only) and anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to identify asymptomatic breakthrough infections (ARC-COVID study only). We used multivariable logistic regression analyses to explore potential clinical and humoral determinants associated with the odds of breakthrough infections. The T2B! study is registered with the Dutch Trial Register, Trial ID NL8900, and the ARC-COVID study is registered with Dutch Trial Register, trial ID NL8513., Findings: We included 3207 patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases who receive immunosuppressants, and 1807 controls (985 patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disease not on immunosuppressants and 822 healthy controls). Among patients receiving immunosuppressants, mean age was 53 years (SD 14), 2042 (64%) of 3207 were female and 1165 (36%) were male; among patients not receiving immunosuppressants, mean age was 54 years (SD 14), 598 (61%) of 985 were female and 387 (39%) were male; and among healthy controls, mean age was 57 years (SD 13), 549 (67%) of 822 were female and 273 (33%) were male. The cumulative incidence of PCR-test or antigen-test confirmed SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections was similar in patients on immunosuppressants (148 of 3207; 4·6% [95% CI 3·9-5·4]), patients not on immunosuppressants (52 of 985; 5·3% [95% CI 4·0-6·9]), and healthy controls (33 of 822; 4·0% [95% CI 2·8-5·6]). There was no difference in the odds of breakthrough infection for patients with immune-mediate inflammatory disease on immunosuppressants versus combined controls (ie, patients not on immunosuppressants and healthy controls; adjusted odds ratio 0·88 [95% CI 0·66-1·18]). Seroconversion after vaccination (odds ratio 0·58 [95% CI 0·34-0·98]; T2B! cohort only) and SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination (0·34 [0·18-0·56]) were associated with a lower odds of breakthrough infections., Interpretation: The incidence and severity of SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases on immunosuppressants was similar to that in controls. However, caution might still be warranted for those on anti-CD20 therapy and those with traditional risk factors., Funding: ZonMw (the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development) and Reade foundation., Competing Interests: FE and TWK report (governmental) grants from ZonMw (the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development) to study immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in autoimmune diseases. FE also reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, CSL Behring, Kedrion, Terumo BCT, Grifols, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, and Guillain-Barré Syndrome-Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (GBS-CIDP) Foundation; consulting fees from UCB Pharma and CSl Behring; and honoraria from Grifols. AJvdK reports grants from CSL Behring and participation on an advisory board for Argen-X. MLö reports a grant from Galapagos NV not related to this study, and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Takeda, and Tillotts. PIS is involved in clinical trials with Regeneron, Sanofi, Leopharma, Lilly, AbbVie, Boerhinger, Celgene, Janssen, and UCB, which manufacture drugs used for the treatment of conditions, including psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, for which financial compensation is paid to their department or hospital, and is a chief investigator of the TREAT NL registry taskforce and SECURE-AD registry. MWB is a secretary for the Dutch Experimental Dermatology Board; head of the pigmentary disorders group within the Dutch Dermatology Board; and reports honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi, Novartis, and Fondation René Touraine. JKi has consulting relationships with Merck Serono, Biogen Idec, Teva, Genzyme, Sanofi, Roche, and Novartis; Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, MS Center Amsterdam has received financial support for research activities from Merck, Celgene, Biogen, GlaxoSmithKline, Immunic, Roche, Teva, Sanofi, Genzyme, and Novartis. BH reports unpaid positions as a medical adviser for several patient groups, a board position for European Reference Network for rare skin diseases (ERN-Skin), and associate editor for The British Journal of Dermatology; reports grants from AbbVIe, Akari Therapeutics, Celgene, and Novartis; consulting fees from UCB Pharma, Novartis, and Janssen; and honoraria from AbbVie. JJGMV reports consulting fees from Argen-X, Alexion, and NMD Pharma, and is a co-inventor on a patent applications based on MuSK-related research (patent number 9574015). DJH reports grants from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, LEO Pharma, and UCB; honoraria from AbbVie, Galderma, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB; and a paid position on an advisory board for Biomarkers in Atopic Dermatitis and Psoriasis (BIOMAP IMI). PAvD has participated on an advisory board for Octapharma. PvP reports grants from Alexion Pharma and GSK, and participation on advisory boards for GSK and Vifor Pharma. GRAMD reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Agomab, AstraZeneca, AM Pharma, AMT, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Exeliom Biosciences, Exo Biologics, Galapagos, Index Pharmaceuticals, Kaleido, Roche, Gilead, GSK, Gossamerbio, Pfizer, Immunic, Johnson & Johnson, Origo, Polpharma, Procise Diagnostics, Prometheus Laboratories, Prometheus Biosciences, Progenity, and Protagonist; honoraria from AbbVie, Arena, Galapagos NV, Gilead, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Takeda; and participation on advisory boards for AbbVie, Seres Health, Galapagos NV, and AstraZeneca. RBT reports honoraria from Sobi and Norgine and participation on an advisory board for Norgine. HSG is a board member of the Dutch Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (unpaid), reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, and has received speaker fees from Shire/Takeda. KAHZ reports paid data safety monitoring board positions for Torrent and Foresee. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Disease-specific studies have reported impaired humoral responses after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders treated with specific immunosuppressants. Disease-overarching studies, and data on recall responses and third vaccinations are scarce. Our primary objective was to investigate the effects of immunosuppressive monotherapies on the humoral immune response after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with prevalent immune-mediated inflammatory disorders., Methods: We did a cohort study in participants treated in outpatient clinics in seven university hospitals and one rheumatology treatment centre in the Netherlands as well as participants included in two national cohort studies on COVID-19-related disease severity. We included patients aged older than 18 years, diagnosed with any of the prespecified immune-mediated inflammatory disorders, who were able to understand and complete questionnaires in Dutch. Participants with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders who were not on systemic immunosuppressants and healthy participants were included as controls. Anti-receptor binding domain IgG responses and neutralisation capacity were monitored following standard vaccination regimens and a three-vaccination regimen in subgroups. Hybrid immune responses-ie, vaccination after previous SARS-CoV-2 infection-were studied as a proxy for recall responses., Findings: Between Feb 2 and Aug 1, 2021, we included 3222 participants in our cohort. Sera from 2339 participants, 1869 without and 470 participants with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were analysed (mean age 49·9 years [SD 13·7]; 1470 [62·8%] females and 869 [37·2%] males). Humoral responses did not differ between disorders. Anti-CD20 therapy, sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor (S1P) modulators, and mycophenolate mofetil combined with corticosteroids were associated with lower relative risks for reaching seroconversion following standard vaccination (0·32 [95% CI 0·19-0·49] for anti-CD20 therapy, 0·35 [0·21-0·55] for S1P modulators, and 0·61 [0·40-0·90] for mycophenolate mofetil combined with corticosteroids). A third vaccination increased seroconversion for mycophenolate mofetil combination treatments (from 52·6% after the second vaccination to 89·5% after the third) but not significantly for anti-CD20 therapies (from 36·8% to 45·6%) and S1P modulators (from 35·5% to 48·4%). Most other immunosuppressant groups showed moderately reduced antibody titres after standard vaccination that did not increase after a third vaccination, although seroconversion rates and neutralisation capacity were unaffected. In participants with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were boosted after vaccination, regardless of immunosuppressive treatment., Interpretation: Humoral responses following vaccination are impaired by specific immunosuppressants. After standard vaccination regimens, patients with immune-mediated inflammatory disorders taking most immunosuppressants show similar seroconversion to controls, although antibody titres might be moderately reduced. As neutralisation capacity and recall responses are also preserved in these patients, this is not likely to translate to loss of (short-term) protection. In patients on immunosuppressants showing poor humoral responses after standard vaccination regimens, a third vaccination resulted in additional seroconversion in patients taking mycophenolate mofetil combination treatments, whereas the effect of a third vaccination in patients on anti-CD20 therapy and S1P modulators was limited., Funding: ZonMw (The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development)., Competing Interests: FE and TWK report (governmental) grants from ZonMw to study immune response after SARS-Cov-2 vaccination in autoimmune diseases. FE also reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, CSL Behring, Kedrion, Terumo BCT, Grifols, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, and GBS-CIDP Foundation; consulting fees from UCB Pharma and CSL Behring; and honoraria from Grifols. AJvdK reports grants from CSL Behring and participation on an advisory board for Argen-X. ML reports a grant from Galapagos not related to this study, and honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Takeda, and Tillotts. PIS is involved in clinical trials with many pharmaceutical industries that manufacture drugs used for the treatment of, for example, psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, for which financial compensation is paid to the department or hospital, and is a chief investigator of the TREAT NL registry taskforce and SECURE-AD registry. MWB is a secretary for the Dutch Experimental Dermatology Board; head of the pigmentary disorders group within the Dutch Dermatology Board; and reports honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi, Novartis, and Fondation René Touraine. JK has speaking relationships with Merck Serono, Biogen Idec, TEVA, Sanofi, Genzyme, Roche, and Novartis; received financial support to his institution for research activities from Merck Serono, Bayer Shcering Pharma, Biogen Idec, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Roche, Teva, Sanofi, Genzyme, and Novartis. BH reports unpaid positions as a medical adviser for several patient groups, a board position for ERN-SKIN, and associate editor for The British Journal of Dermatology; reports grants from AbbVie, Akari Therapeutics, Celgene, and Novartis; consulting fees from UCB Pharma, Novartis, and Janssen; and honoraria from AbbVie. JJGMV reports consulting fees from Argenx, Alexion, and NMD Pharma, and is a co-inventor on patent applications based on MuSK protein-related research. DJH reports grants from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, LEO Pharma, and UCB; honoraria from AbbVie, Galderma, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sanofi, and UCB; and a paid position on an advisory board for BIOMAP IMI. PAvD participated on an advisory board for Octapharma. PvP reports grants from Alexion Pharma and GSK, and participation on advisory boards for GSK and Vifor Pharma. GRAMD'H reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Agomab, AstraZeneca, AM Pharma, AMT, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion, Eli Lilly, Exeliom Biosciences, Exo Biologics, Galapagos, Index Pharmaceuticals, Kaleido, Roche, Gilead, GSK, Gossamerbio, Pfizer, Immunic, Johnson and Johnson, Origo, Polpharma, Procise Diagnostics, Prometheus Laboratories, Prometheus Biosciences, Progenity, and Protagonist; honoraria from AbbVie, Arena, Galapagos, Gilead, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Takeda; and participation on advisory boards for AbbVie, Seres Health, Galapagos, and AstraZeneca. RBT reports honoraria from Sobi and Norgine, and participation on an advisory board for Norgine. HSG is a board member of the Dutch Society of Clinical Neurophysiology (unpaid), reports grants from Prinses Beatrix Spierfonds, and received speaker fees from Shire/Takeda. KAHZ reports paid data safety monitoring board positions for Torrent and Foresee. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had an enormous impact on health-care services, including on care provision for children with atopic dermatitis (AD). We investigated the impact of COVID-19 on the care for children with moderate to severe AD at our tertiary outpatient clinic and examined satisfaction with care. We reviewed outpatient records, comparing total number and types of consultations during the first COVID-19 wave (March until July 2020) with the corresponding months of 2019 and 2018. In addition, we conducted a questionnaire-based study investigating the impact of COVID-19 on clinical and psychological symptoms, and satisfaction with care. A total number of 913 consultations (466 individual children) were conducted during the first COVID-19 wave in 2020, while 698 (391 individual children) and 591 consultations (356 individual children) were conducted in 2019 and 2018. The proportion of remote consultations was higher (56.2%) compared to 14.0% in 2019 and 12.7% in 2018. Worsening of AD was reported by 9.7% of caretakers. Overall satisfaction with provided care was high (8.6; interquartile range [IQR] = 7.3-10.0). Caretakers receiving face-to-face consultation were significantly (p = 0.026) more satisfied (9.0; IQR = 8.0-10.0) than caretakers receiving remote consultation (7.9; IQR = 7.0-9.5). The COVID-19 pandemic had an unprecedented impact on care provision for children with AD, particularly on the number of remote consultations. Overall satisfaction with care was high. The impact of COVID-19 on disease severity remained limited. Remote consultations seem to be a useful tool that can be put into practice during the COVID-19 pandemic., (© 2021 The Authors. The Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a highly pruritic, chronic inflammatory skin disease. The diagnosis is made using evaluated clinical criteria. Disease activity and burden are best measured with a composite score, assessing both objective and subjective symptoms, such as SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD). AD management must take into account clinical and pathogenic variabilities, the patient's age and also target flare prevention. Basic therapy includes hydrating and barrier-stabilizing topical treatment universally applied, as well as avoiding specific and unspecific provocation factors. Visible skin lesions are treated with anti-inflammatory topical agents such as corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and pimecrolimus), which are preferred in sensitive locations. Topical tacrolimus and some mid-potency corticosteroids are proven agents for proactive therapy, which is defined as the long-term intermittent anti-inflammatory therapy of frequently relapsing skin areas. Systemic anti-inflammatory or immunosuppressive treatment is a rapidly changing field requiring monitoring. Oral corticosteroids have a largely unfavourable benefit-risk ratio. The IL-4R-blocker dupilumab is a safe, effective and licensed, but expensive, treatment option with potential ocular side-effects. Other biologicals targeting key pathways in the atopic immune response, as well as different Janus kinase inhibitors, are among emerging treatment options. Dysbalanced microbial colonization and infection may induce disease exacerbation and can justify additional antimicrobial treatment. Systemic antihistamines (H1R-blockers) only have limited effects on AD-related itch and eczema lesions. Adjuvant therapy includes UV irradiation, preferably narrowband UVB or UVA1. Coal tar may be useful for atopic hand and foot eczema. Dietary recommendations should be patient-specific, and elimination diets should only be advised in case of proven food allergy. Allergen-specific immunotherapy to aeroallergens may be useful in selected cases. Psychosomatic counselling is recommended to address stress-induced exacerbations. Efficacy-proven 'Eczema school' educational programmes and therapeutic patient education are recommended for both children and adults., (© 2020 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Dupilumab is the first biologic registered for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). We report on seven patients with AD presenting with a paradoxical head and neck erythema that appeared 10-39 weeks after the start of dupilumab treatment. The patients presented with a relatively sharply demarcated, patchy erythema in the head and neck area that showed no or less scaling compared with their usual eczema. Only one patient experienced symptoms of itch and burning, although this was notably different from his pre-existent facial AD. Except for a notable 'red face', eczema on other body parts had greatly improved in six of the seven patients, with a mean numerical rating scale for treatment satisfaction of 9 out of 10 at the time of biopsy. Treatment of the erythema with topical and systemic drugs was unsuccessful. Despite the presence of this erythema, none of our patients discontinued dupilumab treatment. Lesional skin biopsies showed an increased number of ectatic capillaries, and a perivascular lymphohistiocytic infiltration in all patients. In addition, epidermal hyperplasia with elongation of the rete ridges was observed in four patients, resembling a psoriasiform dermatitis. Additional immunohistochemical stainings revealed increased numbers of plasma cells, histiocytes and T lymphocytes. Interestingly, spongiosis was largely absent in all biopsies. We report on patients with AD treated with dupilumab developing a paradoxical erythema in a head and neck distribution. Both clinically and histopathologically we found a heterogeneous response, which was most suggestive of a drug-induced skin reaction., (© 2019 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Background: Dupilumab is the first biologic registered for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD), and efficacy was shown in phase III clinical trials (primary outcome at week 16 was reached in 38% of patients). Currently, there are limited daily practice data available for dupilumab, especially when it is combined with systemic immunosuppressants., Objectives: To evaluate dupilumab treatment in daily practice in patients with AD., Methods: In this observational cohort study, we prospectively included all adult patients with AD who had been treated with dupilumab in two university hospitals in the Netherlands. Concomitant systemic immunosuppressive treatment was monitored. Physician-reported outcome measures and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after ≥ 12 weeks of follow-up were analysed. We used a linear mixed-effects model to determine changes in scores during follow-up., Results: Ninety-five patients were included. Of these, 62 patients were using systemic immunosuppressants at baseline; the use of systemic immunosuppressants was continued during dupilumab treatment in 43 patients. From baseline to 16 weeks of treatment, the estimated mean Eczema Area and Severity Index score (0-72) decreased from 18·6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 16·0-21·4)] to 7·3 (95% CI 5·4-10·0), and the estimated mean PROMs showed a decrease of 41-66%. Investigator's Global Assessment 0 or 1 (clear/almost clear) was reached in 38% of the patients. Five patients discontinued dupilumab treatment due to side-effects or ineffectiveness. Eye symptoms and orofacial (nonocular) herpes simplex virus (HSV) reactivation were reported in 62% and 8% of the patients, respectively., Conclusions: Dupilumab treatment in daily practice shows a clinically relevant improvement of physician-reported outcome measures and PROMs, which is in line with efficacy data from clinical trials. Besides frequently reported eye symptoms and orofacial (nonocular) HSV reactivation, there were no apparent safety concerns. What's already known about this topic? Dupilumab has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for atopic dermatitis in several clinical trials. However, it is known that there may be considerable differences in patient characteristics and treatment responses between clinical trials and daily practice. What does this study add? This study presents the first experience with dupilumab treatment in 95 patients with atopic dermatitis in daily practice in two Dutch university hospitals. Less stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria and follow-up schedules, in contrast to those used in clinical trials, might better represent daily practice. Dupilumab treatment shows a clinically relevant improvement of physician- and patient-reported outcome measures; besides patient-reported eye symptoms (in 59 of 95 patients; 62%) and an apparent increase in orofacial (nonocular) herpes simplex virus reactivation (eight of 95 patients; 8%), there were no other safety concerns during follow-up up to 16 weeks of dupilumab treatment., (© 2019 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a prevalent disease worldwide and is associated with systemic comorbidities representing a significant burden on patients, their families, and society. Therapeutic options for AD remain limited, in part because of a lack of well-characterized animal models. There has been increasing interest in developing experimental approaches to study the pathogenesis of human AD in vivo, in vitro, and in silico to better define pathophysiologic mechanisms and identify novel therapeutic targets and biomarkers that predict therapeutic response. This review critically appraises a range of models, including genetic mutations relevant to AD, experimental challenge of human skin in vivo, tissue culture models, integration of "omics" data sets, and development of predictive computational models. Although no one individual model recapitulates the complex AD pathophysiology, our review highlights insights gained into key elements of cutaneous biology, molecular pathways, and therapeutic target identification through each approach. Recent developments in computational analysis, including application of machine learning and a systems approach to data integration and predictive modeling, highlight the applicability of these methods to AD subclassification (endotyping), therapy development, and precision medicine. Such predictive modeling will highlight knowledge gaps, further inform refinement of biological models, and support new experimental and systems approaches to AD., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dupilumab is the first and long-awaited biological for treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. In randomised clinical trials approximately 40% of patients using dupilumab 300 mg every two weeks were clear or almost clear of their eczema after 16 and 52 weeks. We now face the challenge of patient stratification to limit the budget impact of dupilumab and hope that more targeted therapies for atopic dermatitis will follow soon.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a complex, chronic inflammatory skin disorder affecting more than 10% of U.K. children and is a major cause of occupation-related disability. A subset of patients, particularly those with severe AD, are persistently colonized with Staphylococcus aureus and exacerbation of disease is commonly associated with this bacterium by virtue of increased inflammation and allergic sensitization, aggravated by skin barrier defects. Understanding the complex biology of S. aureus is an important factor when developing new drugs to combat infection. Staphylococcus aureus generates exoproteins that enable invasion and dissemination within the host skin but can also damage the skin and activate the host immune system. Antibiotics are often used by dermatologists to aid clearance of S. aureus; however, these are becoming less effective and chronic usage is discouraged with the emergence of multiple antibiotic-resistant strains. New ways to target S. aureus using monoclonal antibodies and vaccines are now being developed. This review will attempt to evaluate the key biology of S. aureus, current treatment of S. aureus infections in AD and recent advances in developing new anti-S. aureus therapies that have potential in severe AD., (© 2016 British Association of Dermatologists.)

There is uncertainty about the risk of developing non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), including basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs. A total of 557 patients with AD treated with these drugs in the University Medical Center Utrecht and Groningen, the Netherlands, were analysed. NMSC after oral immunosuppressive treatment was reported in 18 patients (3.2%). The standardized incidence ratio for developing SCC was 13.1 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 6.5-19.7). Patients developing NMSC were older at the start of therapy (p<0.001) and data lock (p<0.001) compared with patients without NMSC. No significant differences were found in sex, cumulative days of oral immunosuppressive drugs and follow-up between these groups (p=0.42, p=0.88, and p=0.34, respectively). In interpreting these results it is important to include other factors, such as lack of association between treatment duration and tumour development and the long interval between treatment discontinuation and tumour development in some patients.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a very common chronic inflammatory skin disease requiring long-term treatment. Mycophenolic acid (MPA) is used off-label in treatment of patients with severe AD failing Cyclosporin A (CsA) treatment, however clinical efficacy is observed in only half of the AD patients. In blood, MPA levels are known to have a large interindividual variability. Low MPA exposure and increased enzyme activity correlates with the presence of UGT1A9 polymorphisms. In this retrospective study, 65 adult AD patients treated with MPA were classified as responder or non-responder to MPA treatment. UGT1A9 polymorphisms were determined using PCR. A significantly higher number of UGT1A9 polymorphisms was found in the group that did not respond to MPA treatment. Of the patients that carried a UGT1A9 polymorphism, 85.7% were non-responsive to MPA treatment. This implies that non-responsiveness in AD patients is more likely to occur in carriers of a UGT1A9 polymorphism. In a binary logistic regression analysis the odds ratio (OR) was 8.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.93-80.17). Our results show that UGT1A9 polymorphisms can be used to identify patients with non-responsiveness to MPA. Patients with UGT1A9 polymorphisms might benefit from higher MPA dosage.

Background: Although total IgE levels have been proposed as a biomarker for disease severity in atopic dermatitis (AD) and are increased in the majority of AD patients, they do not correlate with disease severity during short-term follow-up. During the synthesis of immunoglobulins, free light chains (Ig-FLCs) are produced in excess over heavy chains. In comparison with IgE molecules, Ig-FLCs have a very short serum half-life. Therefore, Ig-FLCs might be more suitable as a biomarker for disease severity during follow-up. Recent studies showed increased serum levels of kappa Ig-FLCs in infants with AD, correlating with disease severity. The aim of this study was to investigate serum kappa Ig-FLC levels in adults with AD, and their correlation to disease severity., Methods: Serum kappa If-FLC and total IgE levels were measured in 82 moderate to severe AD patients and 49 non-atopic controls. Blood was collected from patients before start of treatment with potent topical steroids (European classification: III-IV). 32 patients were treated during a clinical admission, and in this subpopulation a second blood sample was taken after 2 weeks of treatment. Clinical severity was determined by the Six Area Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis (SASSAD) severity score and a panel of serum biomarkers, including thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC)., Results: Serum kappa Ig-FLCs levels in adult AD patients were not increased compared to non-atopic controls. Moreover, we observed no correlation between kappa Ig-FLC serum levels and disease severity determined by SASSAD and a panel of serum biomarkers, including TARC. Serum kappa Ig-FLC levels did also not decrease during treatment., Conclusion: There are no differences in serum kappa Ig-FLC levels between adult patients suffering from moderate to severe AD compared to non-atopic controls. Moreover, serum levels of kappa Ig-FLCs cannot be used as a biomarker for disease severity in adult AD.

A 35-year-old, pregnant, Caucasian woman presented with symmetric band-like pigmentation lines on the medial side of both upper legs, recognised as pigmentary demarcation lines type B.

Regulatory T cells (Tregs) are a specific subset of lymphocytes that are critical for the maintenance of self-tolerance. Expression levels of the transcription factor Foxp3 have been causally associated with Treg differentiation and function. Recent studies show that Foxp3 can also be transiently expressed in effector T cells; however, stable Foxp3 expression is required for development of a functional Treg suppressor phenotype. Here, we demonstrate that Foxp3 is acetylated, and this can be reciprocally regulated by the histone acetyltransferase p300 and the histone deacetylase SIRT1. Hyperacetylation of Foxp3 prevented polyubiquitination and proteasomal degradation, therefore dramatically increasing stable Foxp3 protein levels. Moreover, using mouse splenocytes, human peripheral blood mononuclear cells, T cell clones, and skin-derived T cells, we demonstrate that treatment with histone deacetylase inhibitors resulted in significantly increased numbers of functional Treg cells. Taken together, our data demonstrate that modulation of the acetylation state of Foxp3 provides a novel molecular mechanism for assuring rapid temporal control of Foxp3 levels in T cells, thereby regulating Treg numbers and functionality. Manipulating Foxp3 acetylation levels could therefore provide a new therapeutic strategy to control inappropriate (auto)immune responses.

Although a marked increase in the reporting of wheezing symptoms since the mid-1970s has been described, the underlying immunopathology of the different wheezing phenotypes has not been clarified. Since differences in gene expression might be involved, the objective of the present study was to identify gene expression profiles in CD4+ T-cells from two distinct infant wheezing phenotypes. The gene expression profiles of peripheral CD4+ T-cells were compared by means of microarray analysis of six transient wheezers, six persistent wheezers and seven healthy controls. The differentially expressed genes were subsequently validated by RT-PCR. The differential gene expression profiles reflected common immunological pathways involved in apoptosis or proliferation of T-cells. Furthermore, both wheezing phenotypes showed decreased expression of the complement component 5 receptor 1 gene, a gene involved in the regulation of bronchial responsiveness. Moreover, differences in gene expression profiles were found in genes involved in the immune response against respiratory syncytial virus, such as those encoding signal transducer and activator of transcription 1 and an inflammatory mediator showing enhanced production in asthma (prostaglandin E(2) receptor 2). The present findings suggest that clinical symptoms of wheeze are reflected in common immunological pathways, whereas differences between wheezing phenotypes are, in part, reflected in distinct gene expression profiles.

Cyclosporin A is increasingly used in the treatment of severe refractory atopic dermatitis. Although cyclosporin A treatment is highly efficacious and relatively safe, we report four adult atopic dermatitis (AD) patients who deteriorated during long-term cyclosporin A treatment, with clinical signs and symptoms more severe than at the onset of treatment. Interestingly, these patients showed large increases of total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels, paralleled by increasing disease severity and serum levels of thymus and activation-regulated chemokine. This implies that cyclosporin A may induce a shift to Th2, resulting in increased IgE synthesis, in a subpopulation of AD patients. We therefore suggest that in this subpopulation, treatment with anti-B cell or combined anti-B and T-cell treatment may be favorable.

Background: Topical corticosteroids are used extensively to treat inflammatory skin disorders including atopic dermatitis (AD). Several studies have described temporary reversible suppression of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function. However, sound evidence of permanent disturbance of adrenal gland function is lacking., Objectives: To relate basal cortisol levels to prior use of topical corticosteroids and disease activity in patients with moderate to severe AD and to investigate the effect on basal serum cortisol levels of topical corticosteroid treatment during hospitalization., Methods: Two groups of patients with AD were evaluated: 25 inpatients with severe AD who required hospitalization (group 1) and 28 outpatients with moderate to severe AD (group 2). In group 1, morning basal serum cortisol levels were measured twice, at admission and at discharge; in group 2, morning basal serum cortisol levels were measured once. Use of topical corticosteroids in the 3 months prior to the cortisol measurement was recorded and disease activity was monitored using the Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis (SASSAD) score and serum thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC) levels., Results: On admission, basal cortisol levels in group 1 were significantly (P < 0.001) decreased in 80% of the patients. In group 2, the basal cortisol levels were normal in all but three patients. Comparing the two groups, group 1 on admission had a significantly lower cortisol level than that of group 2 (P < 0.001). Disease activity in group 1 on admission was significantly higher than that of group 2 (P < 0.001). There was no difference in use of topical corticosteroids in the 3 months before cortisol measurement. At discharge in group 1 there was a significant increase (P < 0.0001) of basal cortisol levels and a significant (P < 0.001) decrease in disease activity reflected by the decrease in serum TARC levels and SASSAD score., Conclusions: Disease activity, rather than the use of topical corticosteroids, is responsible for the low basal cortisol values in patients with severe AD.

Background: Eosinophils may play an important role in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). Interleukin-5 is essential for eosinophil growth, differentiation and migration. A monoclonal antibody to human interleukin-5 (mepolizumab) was developed for atopic diseases. This study was designed to study the effect of mepolizumab in AD., Methods: Two single doses of 750 mg mepolizumab, given 1 week apart, were studied in patients with moderate to severe AD using a randomized, placebo-controlled parallel group design. The primary endpoint of 'success' to treatment was defined as the percentage of patients with at least 'marked improvement' after 2 weeks as assessed by the Physician's Global Assessment of Improvement (PGA). Furthermore, SCORing AD (SCORAD), pruritus scoring, number of blood eosinophils and serum thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC) values served as secondary endpoints. Fluticasone propionate cream 0.05%, once daily could be used as rescue medication from day 16 if no improvement was recorded., Results: Eighteen patients received mepolizumab and 22 placebo treatment. Peripheral blood eosinophil numbers were significantly reduced in the treatment group compared with placebo (P < 0.05). No clinical success was reached by PGA assessment (P = 0.115), SCORAD (P = 0.293), pruritus scoring and TARC values in the mepolizumab-treated group compared with placebo. However, modest improvement (<50% improvement) assessed by PGA was scored significantly more in the mepolizumab-treated group compared with placebo (P < 0.05)., Conclusion: Two single doses of 750 mg mepolizumab did not result in clinical success in patients with AD, despite a significant decrease in peripheral blood eosinophils.

Atherosclerotic luminal narrowing is determined by plaque mass and the mode of geometrical remodeling. Recently, we reported that the type of atherosclerotic remodeling is associated with the presence of histological markers for plaque vulnerability. Inflammation and matrix degrading proteases (MMPs) may play a role in both plaque vulnerability and in expansive arterial remodeling. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between the remodeling mode and the localization of macrophages and MMPs in coronary atherosclerotic segments. From 36 atherosclerotic coronary arteries, 45 and 51 segments were selected with a vessel area that was >10% smaller and larger compared with the adjacent segments, respectively. No significant difference in staining for macrophages was observed between segments with expansive and constrictive remodeling. More MMP-2 and MMP-9 staining was observed in plaques of expansively remodeled segments compared with constrictively remodeled segments. In general, MMP-staining was less evident in the adventitial layer compared with the plaque. Zymography revealed more active MMP-2 in expansively remodeled segments compared with constrictively remodeled segments (340+/-319 vs. 199+/-181 (adjusted counts/mm(2)), respectively, P=0.019). Zymography did not show differences in inactive MMP-2 or MMP-9 among groups. It might be postulated that MMPs within the plaque play a causal role not only in plaque vulnerability but also in de novo atherosclerotic remodeling.

-Retrospectively, plaque rupture is often colocalized with inflammation of the cap and shoulder of the atherosclerotic plaque. Local inflammation is therefore considered a potential marker for plaque vulnerability. However, high specificity of inflammation for plaque rupture is a requisite for application of inflammation markers to detect rupture-prone lesions. The objective of the present study was to investigate the prevalence and distribution (local versus general) of inflammatory cells in nonruptured atherosclerotic plaques. The cap and shoulder of the plaque were stained for the presence of macrophages and T lymphocytes in 282 and 262 cross sections obtained from 74 coronary and 50 femoral arteries, respectively. From most cases, 2 atherosclerotic arteries were studied to gain insight into the local and systemic distribution of the inflammatory process. In 45% and 41% of all cross sections, staining for macrophages was observed in the femoral and coronary arteries, respectively. Rupture of the fibrous cap was observed in 2 femoral and 3 coronary artery segments and was always colocalized with inflammatory cells. At least 1 cross section stained positively for CD68 or acid phosphatase in 84% and 71% of all femoral and coronary arteries, respectively. Only 1 femoral and 6 coronary arteries revealed a positive stain for CD68 in all investigated segments. Inflammation of the cap and shoulder of the plaque is a common feature, locally observed, in atherosclerotic femoral and coronary arteries. The high prevalence of local inflammatory responses should be considered if they are used as a diagnostic target to detect vulnerable, rupture-prone lesions.