Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.

Top Sections
Aesthetic Dermatology Update
Commentary
Dermpath Diagnosis
For Residents
Law & Medicine
Make the Diagnosis
Photo Challenge
Product Review
mdderm
Main menu
MD Dermatology Main Menu
Explore menu
MD Dermatology Explore Menu
Proclivity ID
18851001
Unpublish
Specialty Focus
Acne
Actinic Keratosis
Atopic Dermatitis
Psoriasis
Negative Keywords Excluded Elements
header[@id='header']
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
Altmetric
Click for Credit Button Label
Click For Credit
DSM Affiliated
Display in offset block
Disqus Exclude
Best Practices
CE/CME
Education Center
Medical Education Library
Enable Disqus
Display Author and Disclosure Link
Publication Type
Clinical
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Disable Sticky Ads
Disable Ad Block Mitigation
Featured Buckets Admin
Publication LayerRX Default ID
960
Non-Overridden Topics
Show Ads on this Publication's Homepage
Consolidated Pub
Show Article Page Numbers on TOC
Expire Announcement Bar
Mon, 11/25/2024 - 23:12
Use larger logo size
On
publication_blueconic_enabled
Off
Show More Destinations Menu
Disable Adhesion on Publication
Off
Restore Menu Label on Mobile Navigation
Disable Facebook Pixel from Publication
Exclude this publication from publication selection on articles and quiz
Gating Strategy
First Peek Free
Challenge Center
Disable Inline Native ads
survey writer start date
Mon, 11/25/2024 - 23:12

Emerging Insights in Keloid Pathogenesis and Therapeutics

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 16:41
Display Headline
Emerging Insights in Keloid Pathogenesis and Therapeutics

Keloids are fibroproliferative lesions caused by aberrant wound healing in predisposed individuals.1 While keloids have been reported in patients of all races and ethnicities, they most commonly develop in individuals of African or Asian descent.2 Often associated with symptoms such as pain and itching, keloids can be disfiguring and result in poorer quality of life.3 There is a paucity of research on keloid pathogenesis and efficacious therapeutics, particularly in patients with skin of color (SOC). Herein, we outline the current research on keloid treatment and highlight promising new therapies ranging from innovative intralesional techniques to advanced laser-based and biologic therapies.

Deficiencies in Skin of Color Research

Although keloids are 17 times more prevalent in patients with SOC,4 there is a considerable lack of focus on this population in the literature.5 Studies on keloids that include individuals with SOC often group patients of all skin types together, and subgroup analyses are not always performed.6,7 As a result, dermatologists may face considerable challenges in providing effective treatments for keloids in patients with SOC. With few evidence-based options available, patients with SOC who have keloids continue to experience impairments in quality of life.

Common Keloid Therapies

There currently is no gold-standard treatment for keloids. Common therapeutic modalities include intralesional corticosteroids (ILCs), antineoplastic agents and neuromodulators, laser-based devices, and surgical therapies (eg, excision), as well as combined medical and surgical techniques.8

Intralesional Corticosteroids—Minimally invasive ILCs are the first-line treatment in all patients with keloids, regardless of skin phototype. Because keloid formation results from trauma to the skin, ILCs often are recommended to minimize further skin damage.5 One meta-analysis found that ILCs have demonstrated success rates of 50% to 100%9; however, these studies frequently combine ILCs with other treatment modalities, and few studies have focused on the efficacy of ILC monotherapy in patients with SOC.6,10-13

Antineoplastic Agents and Neuromodulators—Certain antineoplastic agents (eg, 5-fluorouracil [5-FU] and bleomycin) and neuromodulators (eg, botulinum toxin A [BTA]) also have been studied in keloid management.8

5-Fluorouracil frequently is combined with ILCs such as triamcinolone (TAC). Combined therapy is more effective than TAC monotherapy in scar height reduction.14,15 Rates of adverse events such as dyspigmentation, atrophy, and telangiectasias also were lower in patients who received combined therapy.14,15 A systematic review found that intralesional bleomycin may be more effective than TAC alone, 5-FU alone, TAC combined with 5-FU, and TAC combined with cryotherapy; however, hyperpigmentation was a common adverse event, occurring in roughly 70% (42/60) of patients.16,17 Additionally, a 2024 meta-analysis evaluated 20 randomized controlled trials comprising 1114 patients treated with intralesional TAC, 5-FU, BTA, verapamil, and/or bleomycin. Botulinum toxin A and TAC plus 5-FU were found to have outstanding therapeutic efficacy for keloids, and rates of adverse events were similar among users of TAC, 5-FU, BTA, and TAC plus 5-FU.18

While antineoplastic agents and BTA may be promising keloid therapies, further studies demonstrating their efficacy and safety profiles are necessary, particularly regarding dyspigmentation as a potential adverse event, as this may be of concern in patients with darker phototypes.

Laser Therapies—Of all treatment modalities, laser-based keloid therapies have been the most robustly studied in SOC. The 2 main types are ablative (eg, CO2, Er:YAG) and nonablative (eg, pulsed dye, Nd:YAG) lasers. Ablative lasers rapidly heat water molecules within the skin, thereby vaporizing the skin cells in a controlled precise process that reduces scar tissue by removing layers of skin. Nonablative lasers target hemoglobin in blood vessels, reducing oxygen supply and inducing collagen remodeling without damaging the epidermis.19

For patients with SOC, lasers carry a risk for postinflammatory hyperpigmentation.20 To address this risk, recent advancements in laser technology and procedural protocols have aimed to minimize the number of passes and utilize cooling devices21; however, many of these recommendations are based on retrospective reviews and small case series. A 2024 meta-analysis comprising 550 patients found that the combination of fractional CO2 laser therapy and 5-FU was the most effective intervention, markedly reducing Vancouver Scar Scale and pliability scores as well as keloid thickness.22 Conversely, pulsed dye lasers were the least effective in terms of improving scar thickness, pigmentation, and pliability when compared to other treatments.

Randomized controlled trials of laser-based therapies in patients with SOC are lacking in the literature. Future studies should focus on calibrating laser-based therapies for those with darker skin tones and examine the efficacy and adverse effects of ablative and nonablative lasers in patients with SOC.

Promising New Keloid Therapies

Keloid disease pathogenesis is incompletely understood, but several new therapeutic targets have been highlighted in the literature, including dupilumab, pentoxifylline, sirtuin 6 (SIRT6) modulators, remdesivir, and needle-assisted electrocoagulation plus pharmacotherapy.

Dupilumab—An anti–IL-4 and IL-13 monoclonal antibody, dupilumab was first approved for the treatment of severe atopic dermatitis. Its use has broadened since its approval, and keloids have been identified as a potential therapeutic target. A 2019 case study described a 53-year-old Black man with severe atopic dermatitis and chronic keloids that regressed with systemic dupilumab therapy.23 This prompted a follow-up case-control study using real-time polymerase chain reaction testing to evaluate Th2 gene expression (IL-4R, IL-13, and CCL18) of lesional and nonlesional tissue in 3 Black patients with chronic keloids and no concurrent atopic dermatitis vs 5 healthy Black controls.Despite the limited sample size, a significant increase in IL-13 and the Th2 chemokine CCL18 was found in patients with keloids compared to controls (P<.05), suggesting that the entire integument of patients with severe keloids is abnormal.23 This finding supports the use of systemic treatments for chronic and multifocal keloid disease. Several subsequent case reports have corroborated the efficacy of systemic and/or intralesional dupilumab.24,25 However, some studies have reported contradictory findings, suggesting the need for high-quality clinical trials.26,27

Pentoxifylline—Pentoxifylline is a methylated xanthine derivative and a nonspecific phosphodiesterase ­inhibitor used to treat claudication from peripheral artery disease. It also inhibits the proliferation and rate of collagen synthesis of fibroblasts from keloids in vitro.28,29 A 2019 retrospective, open-label pilot study analyzed postsurgical keloid recurrence in 45 patients with 67 unique keloids that were stratified into low- and high-risk groups based on clinical factors including multiple symptomatic keloids, history of recurrence, and family history.30 Both the low- and the high-risk groups were treated with 40 mg/mL intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monthly for 6 months; however, some of the high-risk keloids also received pentoxifylline 300 mg 3 times daily for 6 months. There was a statistically significant decrease in keloid recurrence rate between the high-risk group treated with pentoxifylline and the low-risk group for whom pentoxifylline was not prescribed (P=.015).

Similarly, a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of combination intralesional pentoxifylline and intralesional triamcinolone vs monotherapy with pentoxifylline or triamcinolone found the most significant improvement in the combination cohort with reduction in keloid height (P=.04), pliability (P=.003), and vascularity (P=.05).31 These findings highlight the need for supplementary studies on the use of pentoxifylline for keloid therapy.

SIRT6 Modulators—SIRT6 modulators are an exciting future therapeutic target. In a recent case-control study evaluating the histologic milieu of keloid tissue vs normal skin specimens, the researchers found that selective overexpression of SIRT6 via the use of a recombinant adenovirus in keloid fibroblasts attenuated proliferation, invasion, and collagen synthesis while fostering apoptosis, likely through the suppression of MAPK/ERK pathway activity.32

Remdesivir—The antiviral drug remdesivir has been reported to have pharmacologic activities in a wide range of fibrotic diseases, including keloids. A 2024 study explored the potential effect and mechanisms of remdesivir on skin fibrosis both in vitro and in rodents.33 Remdesivir was found to decrease skin fibrosis and attenuate the gross weight of keloid tissues in vivo, suppress fibroblast activation and autophagy both in vivo and in vitro, dampen fibroblast activation by the TGF-β1/Smad signaling pathway, and inhibit fibroblasts autophagy by the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway. These results demonstrate the therapeutic potential of remdesivir for keloid management.

Needle-Assisted Electrocoagulation Plus Pharmacotherapy—A novel needle-assisted electrocoagulation technique combined with pharmacotherapy (corticosteroid and 5-FU injections) was effective in a Chinese clinical trial involving 6 patients with keloids.34 Investigators used Vancouver Scar Scale and both Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores to grade patients’ scars before treatment and 1 month after the first treatment cycle. They found that ablation combined with pharmacotherapy significantly reduced all 3 scores without any obvious adverse events (P=.004, P=.006, and P=.017, respectively). This novel combination treatment may serve as a safe and effective therapeutic approach for keloid removal.

Final Thoughts

Emerging treatments offer promising new horizons in keloid management; however, the lack of robust, high-quality clinical trials, especially those focusing on SOC, underscores a pressing need for comprehensive and inclusive studies. There is much work to be done to close the existing knowledge gap, and future studies must be more intentional with recruitment, assuring that the patients who are disproportionately affected by these lesions are represented in study populations.

References
  1. Téot L, Mustoe TA, Middelkoop E, eds. Textbook on Scar Management: State of the Art Management and Emerging Technologies. Springer; 2020.
  2. Davis SA, Feldman SR, McMichael AJ. Management of keloids in the United States, 1990-2009: an analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:988-994. doi:10.1111/dsu.12182
  3. Kassi K, Kouame K, Kouassi A, et al. Quality of life in black African patients with keloid scars. Dermatol Reports. 2020;12:8312. doi:10.4081/dr.2020.8312
  4. Delaleu J, Charvet E, Petit A. Keloid disease: review with clinical atlas. part I: definitions, history, epidemiology, clinics and diagnosis. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2023;150:3-15. doi:10.1016/j.annder.2022.08.010
  5. Bronte J, Zhou C, Vempati A, et al. A comprehensive review of non-surgical treatments for hypertrophic and keloid scars in skin of color. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:1459-1469. doi:10.2147/CCID.S470997
  6. Davison SP, Dayan JH, Clemens MW, et al. Efficacy of intralesional 5-fluorouracil and triamcinolone in the treatment of keloids. Aesthet Surg J. 2009;29:40-46. doi:10.1016/j.asj.2008.11.006
  7. Azzam OA, Bassiouny DA, El-Hawary MS, et al. Treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids by fractional carbon dioxide laser: a clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical study. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31:9-18. doi:10.1007/s10103-015-1824-4
  8. Ekstein SF, Wyles SP, Moran SL, et al. Keloids: a review of therapeutic management. Int J Dermatol. 2021;60:661-671. doi:10.1111/ijd.15159
  9. Morelli Coppola M, Salzillo R, Segreto F, et al. Triamcinolone acetonide intralesional injection for the treatment of keloid scars: patient selection and perspectives. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2018;11:387-396. doi:10.2147/CCID.S133672
  10. Kant SB, van den Kerckhove E, Colla C, et al. A new treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars with combined triamcinolone and verapamil: a retrospective study. Eur J Plast Surg. 2018;41:69-80. doi:10.1007/s00238-017-1322-y
  11. Cohen AJ, Talasila S, Lazarevic B, et al. Combination cryotherapy and intralesional corticosteroid versus steroid monotherapy in the treatment of keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22:932-936. doi:10.1111/jocd.15520
  12. Tawaranurak N, Pliensiri P, Tawaranurak K. Combination of fractional carbon dioxide laser and topical triamcinolone vs intralesional triamcinolone for keloid treatment: a randomised clinical trial. Int Wound J. 2022;19:1729-1735. doi:10.1111/iwj.13775
  13. Belie O, Ugburo AO, Mofikoya BO, et al. A comparison of intralesional verapamil and triamcinolone monotherapy in the treatment of keloids in an African population. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021;24:986-992. doi:10.4103/njcp.njcp_474_20
  14. Khalid FA, Mehrose MY, Saleem M, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone and combination of triamcinolone with 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars: randomised control trial. Burns. 2019;45:69-75. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2018.08.011
  15. Asilian A, Darougheh A, Shariati F. New combination of triamcinolone, 5-Fluorouracil, and pulsed-dye laser for treatment of keloid and hypertrophic scars. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:907-915. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2006.32195.x
  16. Kim WI, Kim S, Cho SW, et al. The efficacy of bleomycin for treating keloid and hypertrophic scar: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19:3357-3366. doi:10.1111/jocd.13390
  17. Kabel A, Sabry H, Sorour N, et al. Comparative study between intralesional injection of bleomycin and 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars. J Dermatol Dermatol Surg. 2016;20:32-38.
  18. Yang HA, Jheng WL, Yu J, et al. Comparative efficacy of drug interventions for keloids: a network meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2024;92(1S suppl 1):S52-S59. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000003759
  19. Preissig J, Hamilton K, Markus R. Current laser resurfacing technologies: a review that delves beneath the surface. Semin Plast Surg. 2012;26:109-116. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1329413
  20. Bin Dakhil A, Shadid A, Altalhab S. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation after carbon dioxide laser: review of prevention and risk factors. Dermatol Reports. 2023;15:9703. doi:10.4081/dr.2023.9703
  21. Kaushik SB, Alexis AF. Nonablative fractional laser resurfacing in skin of color: evidence-based review. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017;10:51-67.
  22. Foppiani JA, Khaity A, Al-Dardery NM, et al. Laser therapy in hypertrophic and keloid scars: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. Published May 17, 2024. doi:10.1007/s00266-024-04027-9
  23. Diaz A, Tan K, He H, et al. Keloid lesions show increased IL-4/IL-13 signaling and respond to Th2-targeting dupilumab therapy. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:E161-E164. doi:10.1111/jdv.16097
  24. Min MS, Mazori DR, Lee MS, et al. Successful treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars with systemic and intralesional dupilumab. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22:1220-1222. doi:10.36849/JDD.6385
  25. Wittmer A, Finklea L, Joseph J. Effects of dupilumab on keloid stabilization and prevention. JAAD Case Rep. 2023;37:103-105. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2023.05.001
  26. Luk K, Fakhoury J, Ozog D. Nonresponse and progression of diffuse keloids to dupilumab therapy. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022;21:197-199. doi:10.36849/jdd.6252
  27. Tirgan MH, Uitto J. Lack of efficacy of dupilumab in the treatment of keloid disorder. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022;36:E120-E122. doi:10.1111/jdv.17669
  28. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits the proliferation of human fibroblasts derived from keloid, scleroderma and morphoea skin and their production of collagen, glycosaminoglycans and fibronectin. Br J Dermatol. 1990;123:339-346. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb06294.x
  29. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits normal human dermal fibroblast in vitro proliferation, collagen, glycosaminoglycan, and fibronectin production, and increases collagenase activity. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;92:605-610.
  30. Tan A, Martinez Luna O, Glass DA 2nd. Pentoxifylline for the prevention of postsurgical keloid recurrence. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1353-1356. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002090
  31. Serag-Eldin YMA, Mahmoud WH, Gamea MM, et al. Intralesional pentoxifylline, triamcinolone acetonide, and their combination for treatment of keloid scars. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3330-3340. doi:10.1111/jocd.14305
  32. Zhou T, Chen Y, Wang C, et al. SIRT6 inhibits the proliferation and collagen synthesis of keloid fibroblasts through MAPK/ERK pathway. Discov Med. 2024;36:1430-1440. doi:10.24976/Discov.Med.202436186.133
  33. Zhang J, Zhang X, Guo X, et al. Remdesivir alleviates skin fibrosis by suppressing TGF-β1 signaling pathway. PLoS One. 2024;19:E0305927. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0305927
  34. Zhao J, Zhai X, Xu Z, et al. Novel needle-type electrocoagulation and combination pharmacotherapy: basic and clinical studies on efficacy and safety in treating keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. doi:10.1111/jocd.16453
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Noelle Desir is from Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Iain Noel Encarnacion is from Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk. Dr. Taylor is from the Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Noelle Desir and Iain Noel Encarnacion have no relevant financial disclosures to report. Dr. Taylor has served as a consultant, advisory board member, investigator, and/or speaker for AbbVie, Allergan Aesthetics, Arcutis, Armis Biopharma, Avita Medical, Beiersdorf, Biorez, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Catalyst Medical Education, Concert Pharmaceuticals, Croma-Pharma GmbH, Dermsquared, Dior, Eli Lilly and Company, EPI Health, Estée Lauder, Evolus, Galderma, GloGetter, Hugel America, Incyte, Johnson & Johnson Innovate Medicine, LearnSkin, L’Oreal USA, Medscape, MJH Life Sciences, Pfizer, Piction Health, Sanofi, Scientis US, UCB, and Vichy Laboratories. She also serves on the board of directors for Mercer Strategies; has received stock options for Armis Biopharma, GloGetter, and Piction Health; and has received royalties from McGraw-Hill.

Correspondence: Susan C. Taylor, MD, Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):137-139. doi:10.12788/cutis.1122

Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
137-139
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Noelle Desir is from Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Iain Noel Encarnacion is from Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk. Dr. Taylor is from the Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Noelle Desir and Iain Noel Encarnacion have no relevant financial disclosures to report. Dr. Taylor has served as a consultant, advisory board member, investigator, and/or speaker for AbbVie, Allergan Aesthetics, Arcutis, Armis Biopharma, Avita Medical, Beiersdorf, Biorez, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Catalyst Medical Education, Concert Pharmaceuticals, Croma-Pharma GmbH, Dermsquared, Dior, Eli Lilly and Company, EPI Health, Estée Lauder, Evolus, Galderma, GloGetter, Hugel America, Incyte, Johnson & Johnson Innovate Medicine, LearnSkin, L’Oreal USA, Medscape, MJH Life Sciences, Pfizer, Piction Health, Sanofi, Scientis US, UCB, and Vichy Laboratories. She also serves on the board of directors for Mercer Strategies; has received stock options for Armis Biopharma, GloGetter, and Piction Health; and has received royalties from McGraw-Hill.

Correspondence: Susan C. Taylor, MD, Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):137-139. doi:10.12788/cutis.1122

Author and Disclosure Information

Noelle Desir is from Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Iain Noel Encarnacion is from Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk. Dr. Taylor is from the Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Noelle Desir and Iain Noel Encarnacion have no relevant financial disclosures to report. Dr. Taylor has served as a consultant, advisory board member, investigator, and/or speaker for AbbVie, Allergan Aesthetics, Arcutis, Armis Biopharma, Avita Medical, Beiersdorf, Biorez, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cara Therapeutics, Catalyst Medical Education, Concert Pharmaceuticals, Croma-Pharma GmbH, Dermsquared, Dior, Eli Lilly and Company, EPI Health, Estée Lauder, Evolus, Galderma, GloGetter, Hugel America, Incyte, Johnson & Johnson Innovate Medicine, LearnSkin, L’Oreal USA, Medscape, MJH Life Sciences, Pfizer, Piction Health, Sanofi, Scientis US, UCB, and Vichy Laboratories. She also serves on the board of directors for Mercer Strategies; has received stock options for Armis Biopharma, GloGetter, and Piction Health; and has received royalties from McGraw-Hill.

Correspondence: Susan C. Taylor, MD, Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA 19104 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):137-139. doi:10.12788/cutis.1122

Article PDF
Article PDF

Keloids are fibroproliferative lesions caused by aberrant wound healing in predisposed individuals.1 While keloids have been reported in patients of all races and ethnicities, they most commonly develop in individuals of African or Asian descent.2 Often associated with symptoms such as pain and itching, keloids can be disfiguring and result in poorer quality of life.3 There is a paucity of research on keloid pathogenesis and efficacious therapeutics, particularly in patients with skin of color (SOC). Herein, we outline the current research on keloid treatment and highlight promising new therapies ranging from innovative intralesional techniques to advanced laser-based and biologic therapies.

Deficiencies in Skin of Color Research

Although keloids are 17 times more prevalent in patients with SOC,4 there is a considerable lack of focus on this population in the literature.5 Studies on keloids that include individuals with SOC often group patients of all skin types together, and subgroup analyses are not always performed.6,7 As a result, dermatologists may face considerable challenges in providing effective treatments for keloids in patients with SOC. With few evidence-based options available, patients with SOC who have keloids continue to experience impairments in quality of life.

Common Keloid Therapies

There currently is no gold-standard treatment for keloids. Common therapeutic modalities include intralesional corticosteroids (ILCs), antineoplastic agents and neuromodulators, laser-based devices, and surgical therapies (eg, excision), as well as combined medical and surgical techniques.8

Intralesional Corticosteroids—Minimally invasive ILCs are the first-line treatment in all patients with keloids, regardless of skin phototype. Because keloid formation results from trauma to the skin, ILCs often are recommended to minimize further skin damage.5 One meta-analysis found that ILCs have demonstrated success rates of 50% to 100%9; however, these studies frequently combine ILCs with other treatment modalities, and few studies have focused on the efficacy of ILC monotherapy in patients with SOC.6,10-13

Antineoplastic Agents and Neuromodulators—Certain antineoplastic agents (eg, 5-fluorouracil [5-FU] and bleomycin) and neuromodulators (eg, botulinum toxin A [BTA]) also have been studied in keloid management.8

5-Fluorouracil frequently is combined with ILCs such as triamcinolone (TAC). Combined therapy is more effective than TAC monotherapy in scar height reduction.14,15 Rates of adverse events such as dyspigmentation, atrophy, and telangiectasias also were lower in patients who received combined therapy.14,15 A systematic review found that intralesional bleomycin may be more effective than TAC alone, 5-FU alone, TAC combined with 5-FU, and TAC combined with cryotherapy; however, hyperpigmentation was a common adverse event, occurring in roughly 70% (42/60) of patients.16,17 Additionally, a 2024 meta-analysis evaluated 20 randomized controlled trials comprising 1114 patients treated with intralesional TAC, 5-FU, BTA, verapamil, and/or bleomycin. Botulinum toxin A and TAC plus 5-FU were found to have outstanding therapeutic efficacy for keloids, and rates of adverse events were similar among users of TAC, 5-FU, BTA, and TAC plus 5-FU.18

While antineoplastic agents and BTA may be promising keloid therapies, further studies demonstrating their efficacy and safety profiles are necessary, particularly regarding dyspigmentation as a potential adverse event, as this may be of concern in patients with darker phototypes.

Laser Therapies—Of all treatment modalities, laser-based keloid therapies have been the most robustly studied in SOC. The 2 main types are ablative (eg, CO2, Er:YAG) and nonablative (eg, pulsed dye, Nd:YAG) lasers. Ablative lasers rapidly heat water molecules within the skin, thereby vaporizing the skin cells in a controlled precise process that reduces scar tissue by removing layers of skin. Nonablative lasers target hemoglobin in blood vessels, reducing oxygen supply and inducing collagen remodeling without damaging the epidermis.19

For patients with SOC, lasers carry a risk for postinflammatory hyperpigmentation.20 To address this risk, recent advancements in laser technology and procedural protocols have aimed to minimize the number of passes and utilize cooling devices21; however, many of these recommendations are based on retrospective reviews and small case series. A 2024 meta-analysis comprising 550 patients found that the combination of fractional CO2 laser therapy and 5-FU was the most effective intervention, markedly reducing Vancouver Scar Scale and pliability scores as well as keloid thickness.22 Conversely, pulsed dye lasers were the least effective in terms of improving scar thickness, pigmentation, and pliability when compared to other treatments.

Randomized controlled trials of laser-based therapies in patients with SOC are lacking in the literature. Future studies should focus on calibrating laser-based therapies for those with darker skin tones and examine the efficacy and adverse effects of ablative and nonablative lasers in patients with SOC.

Promising New Keloid Therapies

Keloid disease pathogenesis is incompletely understood, but several new therapeutic targets have been highlighted in the literature, including dupilumab, pentoxifylline, sirtuin 6 (SIRT6) modulators, remdesivir, and needle-assisted electrocoagulation plus pharmacotherapy.

Dupilumab—An anti–IL-4 and IL-13 monoclonal antibody, dupilumab was first approved for the treatment of severe atopic dermatitis. Its use has broadened since its approval, and keloids have been identified as a potential therapeutic target. A 2019 case study described a 53-year-old Black man with severe atopic dermatitis and chronic keloids that regressed with systemic dupilumab therapy.23 This prompted a follow-up case-control study using real-time polymerase chain reaction testing to evaluate Th2 gene expression (IL-4R, IL-13, and CCL18) of lesional and nonlesional tissue in 3 Black patients with chronic keloids and no concurrent atopic dermatitis vs 5 healthy Black controls.Despite the limited sample size, a significant increase in IL-13 and the Th2 chemokine CCL18 was found in patients with keloids compared to controls (P<.05), suggesting that the entire integument of patients with severe keloids is abnormal.23 This finding supports the use of systemic treatments for chronic and multifocal keloid disease. Several subsequent case reports have corroborated the efficacy of systemic and/or intralesional dupilumab.24,25 However, some studies have reported contradictory findings, suggesting the need for high-quality clinical trials.26,27

Pentoxifylline—Pentoxifylline is a methylated xanthine derivative and a nonspecific phosphodiesterase ­inhibitor used to treat claudication from peripheral artery disease. It also inhibits the proliferation and rate of collagen synthesis of fibroblasts from keloids in vitro.28,29 A 2019 retrospective, open-label pilot study analyzed postsurgical keloid recurrence in 45 patients with 67 unique keloids that were stratified into low- and high-risk groups based on clinical factors including multiple symptomatic keloids, history of recurrence, and family history.30 Both the low- and the high-risk groups were treated with 40 mg/mL intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monthly for 6 months; however, some of the high-risk keloids also received pentoxifylline 300 mg 3 times daily for 6 months. There was a statistically significant decrease in keloid recurrence rate between the high-risk group treated with pentoxifylline and the low-risk group for whom pentoxifylline was not prescribed (P=.015).

Similarly, a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of combination intralesional pentoxifylline and intralesional triamcinolone vs monotherapy with pentoxifylline or triamcinolone found the most significant improvement in the combination cohort with reduction in keloid height (P=.04), pliability (P=.003), and vascularity (P=.05).31 These findings highlight the need for supplementary studies on the use of pentoxifylline for keloid therapy.

SIRT6 Modulators—SIRT6 modulators are an exciting future therapeutic target. In a recent case-control study evaluating the histologic milieu of keloid tissue vs normal skin specimens, the researchers found that selective overexpression of SIRT6 via the use of a recombinant adenovirus in keloid fibroblasts attenuated proliferation, invasion, and collagen synthesis while fostering apoptosis, likely through the suppression of MAPK/ERK pathway activity.32

Remdesivir—The antiviral drug remdesivir has been reported to have pharmacologic activities in a wide range of fibrotic diseases, including keloids. A 2024 study explored the potential effect and mechanisms of remdesivir on skin fibrosis both in vitro and in rodents.33 Remdesivir was found to decrease skin fibrosis and attenuate the gross weight of keloid tissues in vivo, suppress fibroblast activation and autophagy both in vivo and in vitro, dampen fibroblast activation by the TGF-β1/Smad signaling pathway, and inhibit fibroblasts autophagy by the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway. These results demonstrate the therapeutic potential of remdesivir for keloid management.

Needle-Assisted Electrocoagulation Plus Pharmacotherapy—A novel needle-assisted electrocoagulation technique combined with pharmacotherapy (corticosteroid and 5-FU injections) was effective in a Chinese clinical trial involving 6 patients with keloids.34 Investigators used Vancouver Scar Scale and both Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores to grade patients’ scars before treatment and 1 month after the first treatment cycle. They found that ablation combined with pharmacotherapy significantly reduced all 3 scores without any obvious adverse events (P=.004, P=.006, and P=.017, respectively). This novel combination treatment may serve as a safe and effective therapeutic approach for keloid removal.

Final Thoughts

Emerging treatments offer promising new horizons in keloid management; however, the lack of robust, high-quality clinical trials, especially those focusing on SOC, underscores a pressing need for comprehensive and inclusive studies. There is much work to be done to close the existing knowledge gap, and future studies must be more intentional with recruitment, assuring that the patients who are disproportionately affected by these lesions are represented in study populations.

Keloids are fibroproliferative lesions caused by aberrant wound healing in predisposed individuals.1 While keloids have been reported in patients of all races and ethnicities, they most commonly develop in individuals of African or Asian descent.2 Often associated with symptoms such as pain and itching, keloids can be disfiguring and result in poorer quality of life.3 There is a paucity of research on keloid pathogenesis and efficacious therapeutics, particularly in patients with skin of color (SOC). Herein, we outline the current research on keloid treatment and highlight promising new therapies ranging from innovative intralesional techniques to advanced laser-based and biologic therapies.

Deficiencies in Skin of Color Research

Although keloids are 17 times more prevalent in patients with SOC,4 there is a considerable lack of focus on this population in the literature.5 Studies on keloids that include individuals with SOC often group patients of all skin types together, and subgroup analyses are not always performed.6,7 As a result, dermatologists may face considerable challenges in providing effective treatments for keloids in patients with SOC. With few evidence-based options available, patients with SOC who have keloids continue to experience impairments in quality of life.

Common Keloid Therapies

There currently is no gold-standard treatment for keloids. Common therapeutic modalities include intralesional corticosteroids (ILCs), antineoplastic agents and neuromodulators, laser-based devices, and surgical therapies (eg, excision), as well as combined medical and surgical techniques.8

Intralesional Corticosteroids—Minimally invasive ILCs are the first-line treatment in all patients with keloids, regardless of skin phototype. Because keloid formation results from trauma to the skin, ILCs often are recommended to minimize further skin damage.5 One meta-analysis found that ILCs have demonstrated success rates of 50% to 100%9; however, these studies frequently combine ILCs with other treatment modalities, and few studies have focused on the efficacy of ILC monotherapy in patients with SOC.6,10-13

Antineoplastic Agents and Neuromodulators—Certain antineoplastic agents (eg, 5-fluorouracil [5-FU] and bleomycin) and neuromodulators (eg, botulinum toxin A [BTA]) also have been studied in keloid management.8

5-Fluorouracil frequently is combined with ILCs such as triamcinolone (TAC). Combined therapy is more effective than TAC monotherapy in scar height reduction.14,15 Rates of adverse events such as dyspigmentation, atrophy, and telangiectasias also were lower in patients who received combined therapy.14,15 A systematic review found that intralesional bleomycin may be more effective than TAC alone, 5-FU alone, TAC combined with 5-FU, and TAC combined with cryotherapy; however, hyperpigmentation was a common adverse event, occurring in roughly 70% (42/60) of patients.16,17 Additionally, a 2024 meta-analysis evaluated 20 randomized controlled trials comprising 1114 patients treated with intralesional TAC, 5-FU, BTA, verapamil, and/or bleomycin. Botulinum toxin A and TAC plus 5-FU were found to have outstanding therapeutic efficacy for keloids, and rates of adverse events were similar among users of TAC, 5-FU, BTA, and TAC plus 5-FU.18

While antineoplastic agents and BTA may be promising keloid therapies, further studies demonstrating their efficacy and safety profiles are necessary, particularly regarding dyspigmentation as a potential adverse event, as this may be of concern in patients with darker phototypes.

Laser Therapies—Of all treatment modalities, laser-based keloid therapies have been the most robustly studied in SOC. The 2 main types are ablative (eg, CO2, Er:YAG) and nonablative (eg, pulsed dye, Nd:YAG) lasers. Ablative lasers rapidly heat water molecules within the skin, thereby vaporizing the skin cells in a controlled precise process that reduces scar tissue by removing layers of skin. Nonablative lasers target hemoglobin in blood vessels, reducing oxygen supply and inducing collagen remodeling without damaging the epidermis.19

For patients with SOC, lasers carry a risk for postinflammatory hyperpigmentation.20 To address this risk, recent advancements in laser technology and procedural protocols have aimed to minimize the number of passes and utilize cooling devices21; however, many of these recommendations are based on retrospective reviews and small case series. A 2024 meta-analysis comprising 550 patients found that the combination of fractional CO2 laser therapy and 5-FU was the most effective intervention, markedly reducing Vancouver Scar Scale and pliability scores as well as keloid thickness.22 Conversely, pulsed dye lasers were the least effective in terms of improving scar thickness, pigmentation, and pliability when compared to other treatments.

Randomized controlled trials of laser-based therapies in patients with SOC are lacking in the literature. Future studies should focus on calibrating laser-based therapies for those with darker skin tones and examine the efficacy and adverse effects of ablative and nonablative lasers in patients with SOC.

Promising New Keloid Therapies

Keloid disease pathogenesis is incompletely understood, but several new therapeutic targets have been highlighted in the literature, including dupilumab, pentoxifylline, sirtuin 6 (SIRT6) modulators, remdesivir, and needle-assisted electrocoagulation plus pharmacotherapy.

Dupilumab—An anti–IL-4 and IL-13 monoclonal antibody, dupilumab was first approved for the treatment of severe atopic dermatitis. Its use has broadened since its approval, and keloids have been identified as a potential therapeutic target. A 2019 case study described a 53-year-old Black man with severe atopic dermatitis and chronic keloids that regressed with systemic dupilumab therapy.23 This prompted a follow-up case-control study using real-time polymerase chain reaction testing to evaluate Th2 gene expression (IL-4R, IL-13, and CCL18) of lesional and nonlesional tissue in 3 Black patients with chronic keloids and no concurrent atopic dermatitis vs 5 healthy Black controls.Despite the limited sample size, a significant increase in IL-13 and the Th2 chemokine CCL18 was found in patients with keloids compared to controls (P<.05), suggesting that the entire integument of patients with severe keloids is abnormal.23 This finding supports the use of systemic treatments for chronic and multifocal keloid disease. Several subsequent case reports have corroborated the efficacy of systemic and/or intralesional dupilumab.24,25 However, some studies have reported contradictory findings, suggesting the need for high-quality clinical trials.26,27

Pentoxifylline—Pentoxifylline is a methylated xanthine derivative and a nonspecific phosphodiesterase ­inhibitor used to treat claudication from peripheral artery disease. It also inhibits the proliferation and rate of collagen synthesis of fibroblasts from keloids in vitro.28,29 A 2019 retrospective, open-label pilot study analyzed postsurgical keloid recurrence in 45 patients with 67 unique keloids that were stratified into low- and high-risk groups based on clinical factors including multiple symptomatic keloids, history of recurrence, and family history.30 Both the low- and the high-risk groups were treated with 40 mg/mL intralesional triamcinolone acetonide monthly for 6 months; however, some of the high-risk keloids also received pentoxifylline 300 mg 3 times daily for 6 months. There was a statistically significant decrease in keloid recurrence rate between the high-risk group treated with pentoxifylline and the low-risk group for whom pentoxifylline was not prescribed (P=.015).

Similarly, a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of combination intralesional pentoxifylline and intralesional triamcinolone vs monotherapy with pentoxifylline or triamcinolone found the most significant improvement in the combination cohort with reduction in keloid height (P=.04), pliability (P=.003), and vascularity (P=.05).31 These findings highlight the need for supplementary studies on the use of pentoxifylline for keloid therapy.

SIRT6 Modulators—SIRT6 modulators are an exciting future therapeutic target. In a recent case-control study evaluating the histologic milieu of keloid tissue vs normal skin specimens, the researchers found that selective overexpression of SIRT6 via the use of a recombinant adenovirus in keloid fibroblasts attenuated proliferation, invasion, and collagen synthesis while fostering apoptosis, likely through the suppression of MAPK/ERK pathway activity.32

Remdesivir—The antiviral drug remdesivir has been reported to have pharmacologic activities in a wide range of fibrotic diseases, including keloids. A 2024 study explored the potential effect and mechanisms of remdesivir on skin fibrosis both in vitro and in rodents.33 Remdesivir was found to decrease skin fibrosis and attenuate the gross weight of keloid tissues in vivo, suppress fibroblast activation and autophagy both in vivo and in vitro, dampen fibroblast activation by the TGF-β1/Smad signaling pathway, and inhibit fibroblasts autophagy by the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathway. These results demonstrate the therapeutic potential of remdesivir for keloid management.

Needle-Assisted Electrocoagulation Plus Pharmacotherapy—A novel needle-assisted electrocoagulation technique combined with pharmacotherapy (corticosteroid and 5-FU injections) was effective in a Chinese clinical trial involving 6 patients with keloids.34 Investigators used Vancouver Scar Scale and both Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores to grade patients’ scars before treatment and 1 month after the first treatment cycle. They found that ablation combined with pharmacotherapy significantly reduced all 3 scores without any obvious adverse events (P=.004, P=.006, and P=.017, respectively). This novel combination treatment may serve as a safe and effective therapeutic approach for keloid removal.

Final Thoughts

Emerging treatments offer promising new horizons in keloid management; however, the lack of robust, high-quality clinical trials, especially those focusing on SOC, underscores a pressing need for comprehensive and inclusive studies. There is much work to be done to close the existing knowledge gap, and future studies must be more intentional with recruitment, assuring that the patients who are disproportionately affected by these lesions are represented in study populations.

References
  1. Téot L, Mustoe TA, Middelkoop E, eds. Textbook on Scar Management: State of the Art Management and Emerging Technologies. Springer; 2020.
  2. Davis SA, Feldman SR, McMichael AJ. Management of keloids in the United States, 1990-2009: an analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:988-994. doi:10.1111/dsu.12182
  3. Kassi K, Kouame K, Kouassi A, et al. Quality of life in black African patients with keloid scars. Dermatol Reports. 2020;12:8312. doi:10.4081/dr.2020.8312
  4. Delaleu J, Charvet E, Petit A. Keloid disease: review with clinical atlas. part I: definitions, history, epidemiology, clinics and diagnosis. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2023;150:3-15. doi:10.1016/j.annder.2022.08.010
  5. Bronte J, Zhou C, Vempati A, et al. A comprehensive review of non-surgical treatments for hypertrophic and keloid scars in skin of color. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:1459-1469. doi:10.2147/CCID.S470997
  6. Davison SP, Dayan JH, Clemens MW, et al. Efficacy of intralesional 5-fluorouracil and triamcinolone in the treatment of keloids. Aesthet Surg J. 2009;29:40-46. doi:10.1016/j.asj.2008.11.006
  7. Azzam OA, Bassiouny DA, El-Hawary MS, et al. Treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids by fractional carbon dioxide laser: a clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical study. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31:9-18. doi:10.1007/s10103-015-1824-4
  8. Ekstein SF, Wyles SP, Moran SL, et al. Keloids: a review of therapeutic management. Int J Dermatol. 2021;60:661-671. doi:10.1111/ijd.15159
  9. Morelli Coppola M, Salzillo R, Segreto F, et al. Triamcinolone acetonide intralesional injection for the treatment of keloid scars: patient selection and perspectives. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2018;11:387-396. doi:10.2147/CCID.S133672
  10. Kant SB, van den Kerckhove E, Colla C, et al. A new treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars with combined triamcinolone and verapamil: a retrospective study. Eur J Plast Surg. 2018;41:69-80. doi:10.1007/s00238-017-1322-y
  11. Cohen AJ, Talasila S, Lazarevic B, et al. Combination cryotherapy and intralesional corticosteroid versus steroid monotherapy in the treatment of keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22:932-936. doi:10.1111/jocd.15520
  12. Tawaranurak N, Pliensiri P, Tawaranurak K. Combination of fractional carbon dioxide laser and topical triamcinolone vs intralesional triamcinolone for keloid treatment: a randomised clinical trial. Int Wound J. 2022;19:1729-1735. doi:10.1111/iwj.13775
  13. Belie O, Ugburo AO, Mofikoya BO, et al. A comparison of intralesional verapamil and triamcinolone monotherapy in the treatment of keloids in an African population. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021;24:986-992. doi:10.4103/njcp.njcp_474_20
  14. Khalid FA, Mehrose MY, Saleem M, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone and combination of triamcinolone with 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars: randomised control trial. Burns. 2019;45:69-75. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2018.08.011
  15. Asilian A, Darougheh A, Shariati F. New combination of triamcinolone, 5-Fluorouracil, and pulsed-dye laser for treatment of keloid and hypertrophic scars. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:907-915. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2006.32195.x
  16. Kim WI, Kim S, Cho SW, et al. The efficacy of bleomycin for treating keloid and hypertrophic scar: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19:3357-3366. doi:10.1111/jocd.13390
  17. Kabel A, Sabry H, Sorour N, et al. Comparative study between intralesional injection of bleomycin and 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars. J Dermatol Dermatol Surg. 2016;20:32-38.
  18. Yang HA, Jheng WL, Yu J, et al. Comparative efficacy of drug interventions for keloids: a network meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2024;92(1S suppl 1):S52-S59. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000003759
  19. Preissig J, Hamilton K, Markus R. Current laser resurfacing technologies: a review that delves beneath the surface. Semin Plast Surg. 2012;26:109-116. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1329413
  20. Bin Dakhil A, Shadid A, Altalhab S. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation after carbon dioxide laser: review of prevention and risk factors. Dermatol Reports. 2023;15:9703. doi:10.4081/dr.2023.9703
  21. Kaushik SB, Alexis AF. Nonablative fractional laser resurfacing in skin of color: evidence-based review. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017;10:51-67.
  22. Foppiani JA, Khaity A, Al-Dardery NM, et al. Laser therapy in hypertrophic and keloid scars: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. Published May 17, 2024. doi:10.1007/s00266-024-04027-9
  23. Diaz A, Tan K, He H, et al. Keloid lesions show increased IL-4/IL-13 signaling and respond to Th2-targeting dupilumab therapy. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:E161-E164. doi:10.1111/jdv.16097
  24. Min MS, Mazori DR, Lee MS, et al. Successful treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars with systemic and intralesional dupilumab. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22:1220-1222. doi:10.36849/JDD.6385
  25. Wittmer A, Finklea L, Joseph J. Effects of dupilumab on keloid stabilization and prevention. JAAD Case Rep. 2023;37:103-105. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2023.05.001
  26. Luk K, Fakhoury J, Ozog D. Nonresponse and progression of diffuse keloids to dupilumab therapy. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022;21:197-199. doi:10.36849/jdd.6252
  27. Tirgan MH, Uitto J. Lack of efficacy of dupilumab in the treatment of keloid disorder. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022;36:E120-E122. doi:10.1111/jdv.17669
  28. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits the proliferation of human fibroblasts derived from keloid, scleroderma and morphoea skin and their production of collagen, glycosaminoglycans and fibronectin. Br J Dermatol. 1990;123:339-346. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb06294.x
  29. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits normal human dermal fibroblast in vitro proliferation, collagen, glycosaminoglycan, and fibronectin production, and increases collagenase activity. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;92:605-610.
  30. Tan A, Martinez Luna O, Glass DA 2nd. Pentoxifylline for the prevention of postsurgical keloid recurrence. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1353-1356. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002090
  31. Serag-Eldin YMA, Mahmoud WH, Gamea MM, et al. Intralesional pentoxifylline, triamcinolone acetonide, and their combination for treatment of keloid scars. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3330-3340. doi:10.1111/jocd.14305
  32. Zhou T, Chen Y, Wang C, et al. SIRT6 inhibits the proliferation and collagen synthesis of keloid fibroblasts through MAPK/ERK pathway. Discov Med. 2024;36:1430-1440. doi:10.24976/Discov.Med.202436186.133
  33. Zhang J, Zhang X, Guo X, et al. Remdesivir alleviates skin fibrosis by suppressing TGF-β1 signaling pathway. PLoS One. 2024;19:E0305927. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0305927
  34. Zhao J, Zhai X, Xu Z, et al. Novel needle-type electrocoagulation and combination pharmacotherapy: basic and clinical studies on efficacy and safety in treating keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. doi:10.1111/jocd.16453
References
  1. Téot L, Mustoe TA, Middelkoop E, eds. Textbook on Scar Management: State of the Art Management and Emerging Technologies. Springer; 2020.
  2. Davis SA, Feldman SR, McMichael AJ. Management of keloids in the United States, 1990-2009: an analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:988-994. doi:10.1111/dsu.12182
  3. Kassi K, Kouame K, Kouassi A, et al. Quality of life in black African patients with keloid scars. Dermatol Reports. 2020;12:8312. doi:10.4081/dr.2020.8312
  4. Delaleu J, Charvet E, Petit A. Keloid disease: review with clinical atlas. part I: definitions, history, epidemiology, clinics and diagnosis. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2023;150:3-15. doi:10.1016/j.annder.2022.08.010
  5. Bronte J, Zhou C, Vempati A, et al. A comprehensive review of non-surgical treatments for hypertrophic and keloid scars in skin of color. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:1459-1469. doi:10.2147/CCID.S470997
  6. Davison SP, Dayan JH, Clemens MW, et al. Efficacy of intralesional 5-fluorouracil and triamcinolone in the treatment of keloids. Aesthet Surg J. 2009;29:40-46. doi:10.1016/j.asj.2008.11.006
  7. Azzam OA, Bassiouny DA, El-Hawary MS, et al. Treatment of hypertrophic scars and keloids by fractional carbon dioxide laser: a clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical study. Lasers Med Sci. 2016;31:9-18. doi:10.1007/s10103-015-1824-4
  8. Ekstein SF, Wyles SP, Moran SL, et al. Keloids: a review of therapeutic management. Int J Dermatol. 2021;60:661-671. doi:10.1111/ijd.15159
  9. Morelli Coppola M, Salzillo R, Segreto F, et al. Triamcinolone acetonide intralesional injection for the treatment of keloid scars: patient selection and perspectives. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2018;11:387-396. doi:10.2147/CCID.S133672
  10. Kant SB, van den Kerckhove E, Colla C, et al. A new treatment of hypertrophic and keloid scars with combined triamcinolone and verapamil: a retrospective study. Eur J Plast Surg. 2018;41:69-80. doi:10.1007/s00238-017-1322-y
  11. Cohen AJ, Talasila S, Lazarevic B, et al. Combination cryotherapy and intralesional corticosteroid versus steroid monotherapy in the treatment of keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2023;22:932-936. doi:10.1111/jocd.15520
  12. Tawaranurak N, Pliensiri P, Tawaranurak K. Combination of fractional carbon dioxide laser and topical triamcinolone vs intralesional triamcinolone for keloid treatment: a randomised clinical trial. Int Wound J. 2022;19:1729-1735. doi:10.1111/iwj.13775
  13. Belie O, Ugburo AO, Mofikoya BO, et al. A comparison of intralesional verapamil and triamcinolone monotherapy in the treatment of keloids in an African population. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021;24:986-992. doi:10.4103/njcp.njcp_474_20
  14. Khalid FA, Mehrose MY, Saleem M, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of intralesional triamcinolone and combination of triamcinolone with 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars: randomised control trial. Burns. 2019;45:69-75. doi:10.1016/j.burns.2018.08.011
  15. Asilian A, Darougheh A, Shariati F. New combination of triamcinolone, 5-Fluorouracil, and pulsed-dye laser for treatment of keloid and hypertrophic scars. Dermatol Surg. 2006;32:907-915. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4725.2006.32195.x
  16. Kim WI, Kim S, Cho SW, et al. The efficacy of bleomycin for treating keloid and hypertrophic scar: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19:3357-3366. doi:10.1111/jocd.13390
  17. Kabel A, Sabry H, Sorour N, et al. Comparative study between intralesional injection of bleomycin and 5-fluorouracil in the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars. J Dermatol Dermatol Surg. 2016;20:32-38.
  18. Yang HA, Jheng WL, Yu J, et al. Comparative efficacy of drug interventions for keloids: a network meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg. 2024;92(1S suppl 1):S52-S59. doi:10.1097/SAP.0000000000003759
  19. Preissig J, Hamilton K, Markus R. Current laser resurfacing technologies: a review that delves beneath the surface. Semin Plast Surg. 2012;26:109-116. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1329413
  20. Bin Dakhil A, Shadid A, Altalhab S. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation after carbon dioxide laser: review of prevention and risk factors. Dermatol Reports. 2023;15:9703. doi:10.4081/dr.2023.9703
  21. Kaushik SB, Alexis AF. Nonablative fractional laser resurfacing in skin of color: evidence-based review. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017;10:51-67.
  22. Foppiani JA, Khaity A, Al-Dardery NM, et al. Laser therapy in hypertrophic and keloid scars: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. Published May 17, 2024. doi:10.1007/s00266-024-04027-9
  23. Diaz A, Tan K, He H, et al. Keloid lesions show increased IL-4/IL-13 signaling and respond to Th2-targeting dupilumab therapy. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:E161-E164. doi:10.1111/jdv.16097
  24. Min MS, Mazori DR, Lee MS, et al. Successful treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars with systemic and intralesional dupilumab. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22:1220-1222. doi:10.36849/JDD.6385
  25. Wittmer A, Finklea L, Joseph J. Effects of dupilumab on keloid stabilization and prevention. JAAD Case Rep. 2023;37:103-105. doi:10.1016/j.jdcr.2023.05.001
  26. Luk K, Fakhoury J, Ozog D. Nonresponse and progression of diffuse keloids to dupilumab therapy. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022;21:197-199. doi:10.36849/jdd.6252
  27. Tirgan MH, Uitto J. Lack of efficacy of dupilumab in the treatment of keloid disorder. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022;36:E120-E122. doi:10.1111/jdv.17669
  28. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits the proliferation of human fibroblasts derived from keloid, scleroderma and morphoea skin and their production of collagen, glycosaminoglycans and fibronectin. Br J Dermatol. 1990;123:339-346. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb06294.x
  29. Berman B, Duncan MR. Pentoxifylline inhibits normal human dermal fibroblast in vitro proliferation, collagen, glycosaminoglycan, and fibronectin production, and increases collagenase activity. J Invest Dermatol. 1989;92:605-610.
  30. Tan A, Martinez Luna O, Glass DA 2nd. Pentoxifylline for the prevention of postsurgical keloid recurrence. Dermatol Surg. 2020;46:1353-1356. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000002090
  31. Serag-Eldin YMA, Mahmoud WH, Gamea MM, et al. Intralesional pentoxifylline, triamcinolone acetonide, and their combination for treatment of keloid scars. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20:3330-3340. doi:10.1111/jocd.14305
  32. Zhou T, Chen Y, Wang C, et al. SIRT6 inhibits the proliferation and collagen synthesis of keloid fibroblasts through MAPK/ERK pathway. Discov Med. 2024;36:1430-1440. doi:10.24976/Discov.Med.202436186.133
  33. Zhang J, Zhang X, Guo X, et al. Remdesivir alleviates skin fibrosis by suppressing TGF-β1 signaling pathway. PLoS One. 2024;19:E0305927. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0305927
  34. Zhao J, Zhai X, Xu Z, et al. Novel needle-type electrocoagulation and combination pharmacotherapy: basic and clinical studies on efficacy and safety in treating keloids. J Cosmet Dermatol. doi:10.1111/jocd.16453
Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Page Number
137-139
Page Number
137-139
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Emerging Insights in Keloid Pathogenesis and Therapeutics
Display Headline
Emerging Insights in Keloid Pathogenesis and Therapeutics
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

When Your Malpractice Insurer Investigates You: What to Know

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 15:31

When psychiatrist Paul Sartain, MD (not his real name), received a letter from his state’s medical board, he was concerned. A patient’s family complained that he made sexual advances to a young woman he treated for psychotic depression.

“There was absolutely no evidence, and the claims were vague,” he said. “I think the family was angry at me and with the system — the woman had not gotten better.” Sartain reviewed his medical records and then called his malpractice insurer.

The insurer asked about his involvement with the patient’s case, if there was anything credible to the patient’s complaint, and if he had thorough documentation. Then, the carrier offered Sartain his choice of several attorneys who could represent him. The medical board ultimately closed the case with no findings against him, and the patient’s family never sued him.

While Sartain said he trusted his carrier-provided attorney, he would have considered hiring his own attorney as well if a criminal issue was also alleged.

“If I’m wrongly accused, I’m defended (by the carrier). If I had stolen money or had a sexual relationship with the patient, then you’re acting outside the bounds of what is protected (by the carrier),” he said.
 

How Medical Board and Malpractice Insurer Investigations Differ

Medical board complaints differ from malpractice claims, in which patients seek damages. The investigation process also varies.

When a patient reports a doctor to a state medical board, they may also sue the doctor for monetary damages in civil court. The medical board responds to patient complaints made directly to them, but it also may also initiate its own investigations. Those can be prompted by a malpractice claim resolution, with a court verdict against the doctor, or a settlement recorded in the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Malpractice insurers may offer limited legal representation for medical board investigations, requiring the doctor to report the medical board issue to them before the doctor takes any action. Often, they will cover up to $50,000 in defense costs but not cover any subsequent medical board fines or required classes or medical board fees.

When a doctor contacts the carrier about a medical board investigation, the carrier may ask for the medical board document and the medical records, said Alex Keoskey, a partner in Frier Levitt’s life sciences group.

The carrier may want to ask about the patient, staff members involved, the doctor’s background, if there have been previous medical board investigations or lawsuits against this doctor, and the doctor’s opinion of the allegations. The doctor should be transparent with the carrier, Keoskey said.

Some carriers conduct more in-depth investigations, examining record-keeping, prescription practices, patient consent processes, and continuing medical education status. That’s because the medical board may inquire about these as well should its own investigation expand.

Not all carriers explore cases like these, even if reimbursing for defense costs, said Karen Frisella, director of professional liability claims at BETA Healthcare Group in California. In her experience, a licensing investigation usually follows a claim resolution that was already worked up by the carrier. If a complaint was made directly to the licensing board without an accompanying liability claim, the carrier’s ability to initiate an investigation on the incident depends on the policy terms or coverage available.

“Typically, a professional liability policy requires that the insured report a claim to trigger coverage. The carrier can’t unilaterally decide to open a claim,” she said. A licensing board investigation is not a claim by definition and therefore does not provide a mechanism for the carrier to open a liability claim file, she added.

If the medical board ultimately restricts the doctor’s license or puts the doctor on probation, that becomes public, and the underwriting department may then look into it.

Malpractice insurers routinely monitor licensing board discipline notices. A reprimand or restrictions on a doctor’s license could trigger a review of the physician’s future insurability and lead to higher premiums or even nonrenewal, Frisella said.

If a carrier investigates a reported claim and determines there are issues with the care rendered, whether there is an accompanying medical board action, that also can affect underwriting decisions, Frisella said.
 

 

 

Who Is Your Attorney Really Working for?

The doctor should understand whose interests the attorney represents. In a medical board claim, the attorney — even if defense is paid by the carrier — represents the doctor.

Frisella said her organization provides pass-through coverage, meaning it reimburses the doctor for medical board defense costs. “Because the carrier isn’t directing the medical board defense, it is not generally privy to the work product.”

If a patient files a malpractice claim, however, the attorney ultimately represents the insurance company.

“The panel counsel who works for the insurer does not work for the doctor, and that’s always important to remember,” Keoskey said. While the attorney will do their best to aggressively defend the doctor, “he’s going to protect the insurer’s interest before the doctor’s.”

Physicians who find any conflict of interest with their insurer should seek counsel.

Such conflicts could include:

  • Disagreements over the case’s ultimate worth. For example, a physician might want a case to settle for less than their carrier is willing to pay.
  • The legal judgment may exceed the carrier’s policy limits, or there are punitive damages or allegations of criminal acts that the insurer does not cover.

In these cases, the insurance company should recommend the doctor get personal counsel. They will send a reservation of rights letter saying they will defend the doctor for now, but if the facts show the doctor committed some type of misconduct, they may decline coverage, said Keoskey. Some states, including California, require that the carrier pay for this independent counsel.

Unless there is a conflict of interest, though, having a personal attorney just makes the situation more complicated, said Frisella.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

When psychiatrist Paul Sartain, MD (not his real name), received a letter from his state’s medical board, he was concerned. A patient’s family complained that he made sexual advances to a young woman he treated for psychotic depression.

“There was absolutely no evidence, and the claims were vague,” he said. “I think the family was angry at me and with the system — the woman had not gotten better.” Sartain reviewed his medical records and then called his malpractice insurer.

The insurer asked about his involvement with the patient’s case, if there was anything credible to the patient’s complaint, and if he had thorough documentation. Then, the carrier offered Sartain his choice of several attorneys who could represent him. The medical board ultimately closed the case with no findings against him, and the patient’s family never sued him.

While Sartain said he trusted his carrier-provided attorney, he would have considered hiring his own attorney as well if a criminal issue was also alleged.

“If I’m wrongly accused, I’m defended (by the carrier). If I had stolen money or had a sexual relationship with the patient, then you’re acting outside the bounds of what is protected (by the carrier),” he said.
 

How Medical Board and Malpractice Insurer Investigations Differ

Medical board complaints differ from malpractice claims, in which patients seek damages. The investigation process also varies.

When a patient reports a doctor to a state medical board, they may also sue the doctor for monetary damages in civil court. The medical board responds to patient complaints made directly to them, but it also may also initiate its own investigations. Those can be prompted by a malpractice claim resolution, with a court verdict against the doctor, or a settlement recorded in the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Malpractice insurers may offer limited legal representation for medical board investigations, requiring the doctor to report the medical board issue to them before the doctor takes any action. Often, they will cover up to $50,000 in defense costs but not cover any subsequent medical board fines or required classes or medical board fees.

When a doctor contacts the carrier about a medical board investigation, the carrier may ask for the medical board document and the medical records, said Alex Keoskey, a partner in Frier Levitt’s life sciences group.

The carrier may want to ask about the patient, staff members involved, the doctor’s background, if there have been previous medical board investigations or lawsuits against this doctor, and the doctor’s opinion of the allegations. The doctor should be transparent with the carrier, Keoskey said.

Some carriers conduct more in-depth investigations, examining record-keeping, prescription practices, patient consent processes, and continuing medical education status. That’s because the medical board may inquire about these as well should its own investigation expand.

Not all carriers explore cases like these, even if reimbursing for defense costs, said Karen Frisella, director of professional liability claims at BETA Healthcare Group in California. In her experience, a licensing investigation usually follows a claim resolution that was already worked up by the carrier. If a complaint was made directly to the licensing board without an accompanying liability claim, the carrier’s ability to initiate an investigation on the incident depends on the policy terms or coverage available.

“Typically, a professional liability policy requires that the insured report a claim to trigger coverage. The carrier can’t unilaterally decide to open a claim,” she said. A licensing board investigation is not a claim by definition and therefore does not provide a mechanism for the carrier to open a liability claim file, she added.

If the medical board ultimately restricts the doctor’s license or puts the doctor on probation, that becomes public, and the underwriting department may then look into it.

Malpractice insurers routinely monitor licensing board discipline notices. A reprimand or restrictions on a doctor’s license could trigger a review of the physician’s future insurability and lead to higher premiums or even nonrenewal, Frisella said.

If a carrier investigates a reported claim and determines there are issues with the care rendered, whether there is an accompanying medical board action, that also can affect underwriting decisions, Frisella said.
 

 

 

Who Is Your Attorney Really Working for?

The doctor should understand whose interests the attorney represents. In a medical board claim, the attorney — even if defense is paid by the carrier — represents the doctor.

Frisella said her organization provides pass-through coverage, meaning it reimburses the doctor for medical board defense costs. “Because the carrier isn’t directing the medical board defense, it is not generally privy to the work product.”

If a patient files a malpractice claim, however, the attorney ultimately represents the insurance company.

“The panel counsel who works for the insurer does not work for the doctor, and that’s always important to remember,” Keoskey said. While the attorney will do their best to aggressively defend the doctor, “he’s going to protect the insurer’s interest before the doctor’s.”

Physicians who find any conflict of interest with their insurer should seek counsel.

Such conflicts could include:

  • Disagreements over the case’s ultimate worth. For example, a physician might want a case to settle for less than their carrier is willing to pay.
  • The legal judgment may exceed the carrier’s policy limits, or there are punitive damages or allegations of criminal acts that the insurer does not cover.

In these cases, the insurance company should recommend the doctor get personal counsel. They will send a reservation of rights letter saying they will defend the doctor for now, but if the facts show the doctor committed some type of misconduct, they may decline coverage, said Keoskey. Some states, including California, require that the carrier pay for this independent counsel.

Unless there is a conflict of interest, though, having a personal attorney just makes the situation more complicated, said Frisella.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

When psychiatrist Paul Sartain, MD (not his real name), received a letter from his state’s medical board, he was concerned. A patient’s family complained that he made sexual advances to a young woman he treated for psychotic depression.

“There was absolutely no evidence, and the claims were vague,” he said. “I think the family was angry at me and with the system — the woman had not gotten better.” Sartain reviewed his medical records and then called his malpractice insurer.

The insurer asked about his involvement with the patient’s case, if there was anything credible to the patient’s complaint, and if he had thorough documentation. Then, the carrier offered Sartain his choice of several attorneys who could represent him. The medical board ultimately closed the case with no findings against him, and the patient’s family never sued him.

While Sartain said he trusted his carrier-provided attorney, he would have considered hiring his own attorney as well if a criminal issue was also alleged.

“If I’m wrongly accused, I’m defended (by the carrier). If I had stolen money or had a sexual relationship with the patient, then you’re acting outside the bounds of what is protected (by the carrier),” he said.
 

How Medical Board and Malpractice Insurer Investigations Differ

Medical board complaints differ from malpractice claims, in which patients seek damages. The investigation process also varies.

When a patient reports a doctor to a state medical board, they may also sue the doctor for monetary damages in civil court. The medical board responds to patient complaints made directly to them, but it also may also initiate its own investigations. Those can be prompted by a malpractice claim resolution, with a court verdict against the doctor, or a settlement recorded in the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Malpractice insurers may offer limited legal representation for medical board investigations, requiring the doctor to report the medical board issue to them before the doctor takes any action. Often, they will cover up to $50,000 in defense costs but not cover any subsequent medical board fines or required classes or medical board fees.

When a doctor contacts the carrier about a medical board investigation, the carrier may ask for the medical board document and the medical records, said Alex Keoskey, a partner in Frier Levitt’s life sciences group.

The carrier may want to ask about the patient, staff members involved, the doctor’s background, if there have been previous medical board investigations or lawsuits against this doctor, and the doctor’s opinion of the allegations. The doctor should be transparent with the carrier, Keoskey said.

Some carriers conduct more in-depth investigations, examining record-keeping, prescription practices, patient consent processes, and continuing medical education status. That’s because the medical board may inquire about these as well should its own investigation expand.

Not all carriers explore cases like these, even if reimbursing for defense costs, said Karen Frisella, director of professional liability claims at BETA Healthcare Group in California. In her experience, a licensing investigation usually follows a claim resolution that was already worked up by the carrier. If a complaint was made directly to the licensing board without an accompanying liability claim, the carrier’s ability to initiate an investigation on the incident depends on the policy terms or coverage available.

“Typically, a professional liability policy requires that the insured report a claim to trigger coverage. The carrier can’t unilaterally decide to open a claim,” she said. A licensing board investigation is not a claim by definition and therefore does not provide a mechanism for the carrier to open a liability claim file, she added.

If the medical board ultimately restricts the doctor’s license or puts the doctor on probation, that becomes public, and the underwriting department may then look into it.

Malpractice insurers routinely monitor licensing board discipline notices. A reprimand or restrictions on a doctor’s license could trigger a review of the physician’s future insurability and lead to higher premiums or even nonrenewal, Frisella said.

If a carrier investigates a reported claim and determines there are issues with the care rendered, whether there is an accompanying medical board action, that also can affect underwriting decisions, Frisella said.
 

 

 

Who Is Your Attorney Really Working for?

The doctor should understand whose interests the attorney represents. In a medical board claim, the attorney — even if defense is paid by the carrier — represents the doctor.

Frisella said her organization provides pass-through coverage, meaning it reimburses the doctor for medical board defense costs. “Because the carrier isn’t directing the medical board defense, it is not generally privy to the work product.”

If a patient files a malpractice claim, however, the attorney ultimately represents the insurance company.

“The panel counsel who works for the insurer does not work for the doctor, and that’s always important to remember,” Keoskey said. While the attorney will do their best to aggressively defend the doctor, “he’s going to protect the insurer’s interest before the doctor’s.”

Physicians who find any conflict of interest with their insurer should seek counsel.

Such conflicts could include:

  • Disagreements over the case’s ultimate worth. For example, a physician might want a case to settle for less than their carrier is willing to pay.
  • The legal judgment may exceed the carrier’s policy limits, or there are punitive damages or allegations of criminal acts that the insurer does not cover.

In these cases, the insurance company should recommend the doctor get personal counsel. They will send a reservation of rights letter saying they will defend the doctor for now, but if the facts show the doctor committed some type of misconduct, they may decline coverage, said Keoskey. Some states, including California, require that the carrier pay for this independent counsel.

Unless there is a conflict of interest, though, having a personal attorney just makes the situation more complicated, said Frisella.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

The Rise of Sham Peer Reviews

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 15:26

While a medical peer review occurs once a patient, fellow doctor, or staff member reports that a physician failed to treat a patient up to standards or acted improperly, a “sham peer review” is undertaken for ulterior motives.

Sham peer reviews can be used to attack a doctor for unrelated professional, personal, or nonmedical reasons; intimidate, silence, or target a physician; or to carry out a personal vendetta. They’re typically undertaken due to professional competition or institutional politics rather than to promote quality care or uphold professional standards.

Physicians should be concerned. In a soon-to-be-published Medscape report on peer reviews, 56% of US physicians surveyed expressed higher levels of concern that a peer review could be misused to punish a physician for reasons unrelated to the matter being reviewed.

This is a troublesome issue, and many doctors may not be aware of it or how often it occurs.

“The biggest misconception about sham peer reviews is a denial of how pervasive they are,” said Andy Schlafly, general counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), which offers a free legal consultation service for physicians facing a sham peer review. “Many hospital administrations are as dangerous to good physicians as street gangs can be in a crime-ridden neighborhood.”

“Physicians should become aware of whether sham peer reviews are prevalent at their hospital and, if so, those physicians should look to practice somewhere else,” Schlafly said in an interview.

Unfortunately, there are limited data on how often this happens. When it does, it can be a career killer, said Lawrence Huntoon, MD, PhD, who has run the AAPS sham peer review hotline for over 20 years.

The physicians at the most risk for a sham peer review tend to be those who work for large hospital systems — as this is one way for hospitals to get rid of the doctors they don’t want to retain on staff, Huntoon said.

“Hospitals want a model whereby every physician on the medical staff is an employee,” Huntoon added. “This gives them complete power and control over these physicians, including the way they practice and how many patients they see per day, which, for some, is 20-50 a day to generate sufficient revenue.”

Complaints are generally filed via incident reporting software.

“The complaint could be that the physician is ‘disruptive,’ which can include facial expression, tone of voice, and body language — for example, ‘I found his facial expression demeaning’ or ‘I found her tone condescending’ — and this can be used to prosecute a doctor,” Huntoon said.

After the complaint is filed, the leaders of a hospital’s peer review committee meet to discuss the incident, followed by a panel of fellow physicians convened to review the matter. Once the date for a meeting is set, the accused doctor is allowed to testify, offer evidence, and have attorney representation.

The entire experience can take a physician by surprise.

“A sham peer review is difficult to prepare for because no physician thinks this is going to happen to them,” said Laurie L. York, a medical law attorney in Austin, Texas.

York added that there may also be a misperception of what is actually happening.

“When a physician becomes aware of an investigation, it initially may look like a regular peer review, and the physician may feel there has been a ‘misunderstanding’ that they can make right by explaining things,” York said. “The window of opportunity to shut down a sham peer review happens quickly. That’s why the physician needs the help of an experienced attorney as early in the process as possible.”
 

 

 

If You’re a Victim of a Sham Peer Review

Be vigilant. The most important thing you should think about when it comes to sham peer reviews is that this can, indeed, happen to you, Huntoon said. “I’ve written articles to help educate physicians about the tactics that are used,” he said. “You need to be educated and read medical staff bylaws to know your rights before something bad happens.”

Stay in your job. No matter what, if you’re under review, do not resign your position, no matter how difficult this may be. “A resignation during a sham peer review triggers an adverse report to the National Practitioner Data Bank [NPDB],” Schlafly said. The NPDB is a flagging system created by Congress to improve healthcare quality and reduce healthcare fraud and abuse. “A resignation also waives the physician’s right to contest the unfair review. In addition, leverage to negotiate a favorable settlement is lost if the physician simply resigns.”

Get a lawyer on board early. This is the only way to protect your rights. “Don’t wait a year to get an attorney involved,” Huntoon said. But this also can’t be any lawyer. It’s critical to find someone who specializes in sham peer reviews, so be sure to ask about their experience in handling peer review matters in hospitals and how knowledgeable they are about databank reporting requirements. “Sometimes, doctors will hire a malpractice attorney with no knowledge of what happens with sham peer reviews, and they may give bad advice,” he said. “Others may hire an employment attorney and that attorney will be up on employment law but has no experience with peer review matters in hospitals.”

Given the seriousness of a sham peer review, following these guidelines can help.

Contact the AAPA right away. There are things that can be done early on like getting a withdrawal of the request for corrective action as well as obtaining a preliminary injunction. Preparing for the fallout that may occur can be just as challenging.

“After this situation, the doctor is damaged goods,” Huntoon said. “What hospital will want to hire damaged goods to be part of their medical staff? Finding employment is going to be challenging and opening your own practice may also be difficult because the insurers have access to data bank reports.”

Ultimately, the best advice Huntoon can offer is to do your best to stay one step ahead of any work issues that could even lead to a sham peer review.

“Try and shield yourself from a sham peer review and be prepared should it happen,” he said. “I’ve seen careers end in the blink of an eye — wrongfully.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

While a medical peer review occurs once a patient, fellow doctor, or staff member reports that a physician failed to treat a patient up to standards or acted improperly, a “sham peer review” is undertaken for ulterior motives.

Sham peer reviews can be used to attack a doctor for unrelated professional, personal, or nonmedical reasons; intimidate, silence, or target a physician; or to carry out a personal vendetta. They’re typically undertaken due to professional competition or institutional politics rather than to promote quality care or uphold professional standards.

Physicians should be concerned. In a soon-to-be-published Medscape report on peer reviews, 56% of US physicians surveyed expressed higher levels of concern that a peer review could be misused to punish a physician for reasons unrelated to the matter being reviewed.

This is a troublesome issue, and many doctors may not be aware of it or how often it occurs.

“The biggest misconception about sham peer reviews is a denial of how pervasive they are,” said Andy Schlafly, general counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), which offers a free legal consultation service for physicians facing a sham peer review. “Many hospital administrations are as dangerous to good physicians as street gangs can be in a crime-ridden neighborhood.”

“Physicians should become aware of whether sham peer reviews are prevalent at their hospital and, if so, those physicians should look to practice somewhere else,” Schlafly said in an interview.

Unfortunately, there are limited data on how often this happens. When it does, it can be a career killer, said Lawrence Huntoon, MD, PhD, who has run the AAPS sham peer review hotline for over 20 years.

The physicians at the most risk for a sham peer review tend to be those who work for large hospital systems — as this is one way for hospitals to get rid of the doctors they don’t want to retain on staff, Huntoon said.

“Hospitals want a model whereby every physician on the medical staff is an employee,” Huntoon added. “This gives them complete power and control over these physicians, including the way they practice and how many patients they see per day, which, for some, is 20-50 a day to generate sufficient revenue.”

Complaints are generally filed via incident reporting software.

“The complaint could be that the physician is ‘disruptive,’ which can include facial expression, tone of voice, and body language — for example, ‘I found his facial expression demeaning’ or ‘I found her tone condescending’ — and this can be used to prosecute a doctor,” Huntoon said.

After the complaint is filed, the leaders of a hospital’s peer review committee meet to discuss the incident, followed by a panel of fellow physicians convened to review the matter. Once the date for a meeting is set, the accused doctor is allowed to testify, offer evidence, and have attorney representation.

The entire experience can take a physician by surprise.

“A sham peer review is difficult to prepare for because no physician thinks this is going to happen to them,” said Laurie L. York, a medical law attorney in Austin, Texas.

York added that there may also be a misperception of what is actually happening.

“When a physician becomes aware of an investigation, it initially may look like a regular peer review, and the physician may feel there has been a ‘misunderstanding’ that they can make right by explaining things,” York said. “The window of opportunity to shut down a sham peer review happens quickly. That’s why the physician needs the help of an experienced attorney as early in the process as possible.”
 

 

 

If You’re a Victim of a Sham Peer Review

Be vigilant. The most important thing you should think about when it comes to sham peer reviews is that this can, indeed, happen to you, Huntoon said. “I’ve written articles to help educate physicians about the tactics that are used,” he said. “You need to be educated and read medical staff bylaws to know your rights before something bad happens.”

Stay in your job. No matter what, if you’re under review, do not resign your position, no matter how difficult this may be. “A resignation during a sham peer review triggers an adverse report to the National Practitioner Data Bank [NPDB],” Schlafly said. The NPDB is a flagging system created by Congress to improve healthcare quality and reduce healthcare fraud and abuse. “A resignation also waives the physician’s right to contest the unfair review. In addition, leverage to negotiate a favorable settlement is lost if the physician simply resigns.”

Get a lawyer on board early. This is the only way to protect your rights. “Don’t wait a year to get an attorney involved,” Huntoon said. But this also can’t be any lawyer. It’s critical to find someone who specializes in sham peer reviews, so be sure to ask about their experience in handling peer review matters in hospitals and how knowledgeable they are about databank reporting requirements. “Sometimes, doctors will hire a malpractice attorney with no knowledge of what happens with sham peer reviews, and they may give bad advice,” he said. “Others may hire an employment attorney and that attorney will be up on employment law but has no experience with peer review matters in hospitals.”

Given the seriousness of a sham peer review, following these guidelines can help.

Contact the AAPA right away. There are things that can be done early on like getting a withdrawal of the request for corrective action as well as obtaining a preliminary injunction. Preparing for the fallout that may occur can be just as challenging.

“After this situation, the doctor is damaged goods,” Huntoon said. “What hospital will want to hire damaged goods to be part of their medical staff? Finding employment is going to be challenging and opening your own practice may also be difficult because the insurers have access to data bank reports.”

Ultimately, the best advice Huntoon can offer is to do your best to stay one step ahead of any work issues that could even lead to a sham peer review.

“Try and shield yourself from a sham peer review and be prepared should it happen,” he said. “I’ve seen careers end in the blink of an eye — wrongfully.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

While a medical peer review occurs once a patient, fellow doctor, or staff member reports that a physician failed to treat a patient up to standards or acted improperly, a “sham peer review” is undertaken for ulterior motives.

Sham peer reviews can be used to attack a doctor for unrelated professional, personal, or nonmedical reasons; intimidate, silence, or target a physician; or to carry out a personal vendetta. They’re typically undertaken due to professional competition or institutional politics rather than to promote quality care or uphold professional standards.

Physicians should be concerned. In a soon-to-be-published Medscape report on peer reviews, 56% of US physicians surveyed expressed higher levels of concern that a peer review could be misused to punish a physician for reasons unrelated to the matter being reviewed.

This is a troublesome issue, and many doctors may not be aware of it or how often it occurs.

“The biggest misconception about sham peer reviews is a denial of how pervasive they are,” said Andy Schlafly, general counsel for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), which offers a free legal consultation service for physicians facing a sham peer review. “Many hospital administrations are as dangerous to good physicians as street gangs can be in a crime-ridden neighborhood.”

“Physicians should become aware of whether sham peer reviews are prevalent at their hospital and, if so, those physicians should look to practice somewhere else,” Schlafly said in an interview.

Unfortunately, there are limited data on how often this happens. When it does, it can be a career killer, said Lawrence Huntoon, MD, PhD, who has run the AAPS sham peer review hotline for over 20 years.

The physicians at the most risk for a sham peer review tend to be those who work for large hospital systems — as this is one way for hospitals to get rid of the doctors they don’t want to retain on staff, Huntoon said.

“Hospitals want a model whereby every physician on the medical staff is an employee,” Huntoon added. “This gives them complete power and control over these physicians, including the way they practice and how many patients they see per day, which, for some, is 20-50 a day to generate sufficient revenue.”

Complaints are generally filed via incident reporting software.

“The complaint could be that the physician is ‘disruptive,’ which can include facial expression, tone of voice, and body language — for example, ‘I found his facial expression demeaning’ or ‘I found her tone condescending’ — and this can be used to prosecute a doctor,” Huntoon said.

After the complaint is filed, the leaders of a hospital’s peer review committee meet to discuss the incident, followed by a panel of fellow physicians convened to review the matter. Once the date for a meeting is set, the accused doctor is allowed to testify, offer evidence, and have attorney representation.

The entire experience can take a physician by surprise.

“A sham peer review is difficult to prepare for because no physician thinks this is going to happen to them,” said Laurie L. York, a medical law attorney in Austin, Texas.

York added that there may also be a misperception of what is actually happening.

“When a physician becomes aware of an investigation, it initially may look like a regular peer review, and the physician may feel there has been a ‘misunderstanding’ that they can make right by explaining things,” York said. “The window of opportunity to shut down a sham peer review happens quickly. That’s why the physician needs the help of an experienced attorney as early in the process as possible.”
 

 

 

If You’re a Victim of a Sham Peer Review

Be vigilant. The most important thing you should think about when it comes to sham peer reviews is that this can, indeed, happen to you, Huntoon said. “I’ve written articles to help educate physicians about the tactics that are used,” he said. “You need to be educated and read medical staff bylaws to know your rights before something bad happens.”

Stay in your job. No matter what, if you’re under review, do not resign your position, no matter how difficult this may be. “A resignation during a sham peer review triggers an adverse report to the National Practitioner Data Bank [NPDB],” Schlafly said. The NPDB is a flagging system created by Congress to improve healthcare quality and reduce healthcare fraud and abuse. “A resignation also waives the physician’s right to contest the unfair review. In addition, leverage to negotiate a favorable settlement is lost if the physician simply resigns.”

Get a lawyer on board early. This is the only way to protect your rights. “Don’t wait a year to get an attorney involved,” Huntoon said. But this also can’t be any lawyer. It’s critical to find someone who specializes in sham peer reviews, so be sure to ask about their experience in handling peer review matters in hospitals and how knowledgeable they are about databank reporting requirements. “Sometimes, doctors will hire a malpractice attorney with no knowledge of what happens with sham peer reviews, and they may give bad advice,” he said. “Others may hire an employment attorney and that attorney will be up on employment law but has no experience with peer review matters in hospitals.”

Given the seriousness of a sham peer review, following these guidelines can help.

Contact the AAPA right away. There are things that can be done early on like getting a withdrawal of the request for corrective action as well as obtaining a preliminary injunction. Preparing for the fallout that may occur can be just as challenging.

“After this situation, the doctor is damaged goods,” Huntoon said. “What hospital will want to hire damaged goods to be part of their medical staff? Finding employment is going to be challenging and opening your own practice may also be difficult because the insurers have access to data bank reports.”

Ultimately, the best advice Huntoon can offer is to do your best to stay one step ahead of any work issues that could even lead to a sham peer review.

“Try and shield yourself from a sham peer review and be prepared should it happen,” he said. “I’ve seen careers end in the blink of an eye — wrongfully.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Sulfites: The 2024 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 16:37
Display Headline
Sulfites: The 2024 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year

The American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) selected sulfites as the 2024 Allergen of the Year.1 Due to their preservative and antioxidant properties, sulfites are prevalent in a variety of foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products; however, sulfites also have been implicated as a potential contact allergen. In this article, we review common sources of sulfite exposure, clinical manifestations of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to sulfites, and patch testing considerations for this emerging allergen.

What Are Sulfites?

Sulfiting agents are compounds that contain the sulfite ion SO32-, including sulfur dioxide, sodium disulfite (sodium metabisulfite), and potassium metabisulfite.2 Sulfites occur naturally in the environment and commonly are used as preservatives, antibrowning agents, and antioxidants in various foods, beverages, medications, cosmetics, and skin care products. As antibrowning agents and antioxidants, sulfites help maintain the natural appearance of foods and other products and prevent premature spoiling by inactivating oxidative enzymes.3 It should be noted that sulfites and sulfates are distinct and unrelated compounds that do not cross-react.1

Common Sources of Sulfite Exposure

From a morning glass of juice to an evening shower, in the pharmacy and at the hair salon, sulfite exposure is ubiquitous in most daily routines. Sulfites are present in many foods and beverages, either as a byproduct of natural fermentation or as an additive to prevent spoiling and color change. The Table provides examples of foods with high sulfite content.1,4-6 In particular, dried fruit, bottled lemon juice, wine, grape juice, sauerkraut juice, and pickled onions have high sulfite content.

Topical medications and personal care products represent other potential sources of sulfite exposure. A number of reports have shown that sulfites may be included in topical steroids,7 antibiotics,8 antifungals,9 hemorrhoidal preparations,10 local anesthetics,11 and urinary catheterization gel,12 highlighting their many potential applications. In addition, a comprehensive ingredient analysis of 264 ophthalmic medications found that 3.8% of the products contained sodium disulfite.13 Sulfites may be found in personal care products, including facial and hand cleansers, shampoos, moisturizers, and toothpastes. Hair dyes also commonly contain sulfites,7 which are listed in as many as 90% of hair dye kits in the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program database.1

Occupational exposures also are widespread, as sulfites are extensively utilized across diverse industries such as pharmaceuticals, health care, leather manufacturing, mineral extraction, food preparation, chemical manufacturing, textiles, alcohol brewing, and wine production.1

Sulfites also are used in the rubber industry—­particularly in gloves—due to their anticoagulant and preservative properties.4 This is relevant to health care providers, who may use dozens of disposable gloves in a single day. In an experimental pilot study, ­researchers detected sulfites in 83% (5/6) of natural rubber latex gloves, 96% (23/24) of synthetic (nitrile) gloves, and 0% (0/5) of polyvinyl chloride gloves.14 While this study was limited to a small sample size, it demonstrates the common use of sulfites in certain rubber gloves and encourages future studies to determine whether there is a quantitative threshold to elicit allergic reactions.

Sulfite Allergy

In 1968, an early case report of ACD to sulfites was published involving a pharmaceutical worker who developed hand eczema after working at a factory for 3 months and had a positive patch test to potassium metabisulfite.15 There have been other cases published in the literature since then, including localized ACD as well as less common cases of systemic contact dermatitis following oral, injectable, and rectal sulfite exposures.16

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group found that, among 132 (2.7%) of 4885 patients with positive patch tests to sodium disulfite from 2017 to 2018, the most commonly involved body sites were the face (28.8%) and hands (20.5%) followed by a scattered/generalized distribution (13.6%). Involvement of the face and hands may correlate with the most frequent sources of exposure that were identified, including personal care products (particularly hair dyes)(18.9%), medications (9.1%), and foods (7.6%).17 A multicenter analysis of patch test results from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland from 1999 to 2013 showed that 357 (2.9%) of 12,156 patients had positive reactions to sodium disulfite, with the most commonly identified exposure sources being topical pharmaceutical agents (59.3%); cosmetics, creams, and sunscreens (13.6%); and systemic drugs (6.8%).18 However, it is not always possible to determine the clinical relevance of a positive patch test to sulfites.1

Other than the face and hands, there have been other unexpected anatomic locations for sulfite ACD (eg, the lower back), and systemic contact dermatitis has manifested with widespread rashes due to oral, rectal, and parenteral exposure.4,16,19 There is no definitive link between sulfite contact allergy and patient sex, but there seems to be a higher prevalence in patients older than 40 years, perhaps related to overall lifetime exposure.1

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites also have been reported, including urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis.4 Due to multiple cases of severe dermatologic and respiratory reactions to food products containing sulfites,20 the US Food and Drug Administration prohibited their use in fresh fruit and vegetables as antibrowning agents in 1986 and required labels on packaged foods that contained sulfites at more than 10 parts per million.21 However, food and drinks produced in restaurants, bakeries, and cafes as well as those that are distributed directly to consumers from the preparation site are exempt from these rules.17

In addition, consuming high amounts of dietary sulfites has been linked to headaches through unclear (ie, not necessarily allergic) mechanisms.4,22 One study found that wine with a higher sulfite concentration was associated with increased risk for headaches in participants who had a history of headaches related to wine consumption.22

Patch Testing to Sulfites

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group has tested sodium disulfite since 2017 and found an increased frequency of positive patch tests from 2.7% (N=4885) in 2017 and 201817 to 3.3% (N=4115) in 2019 and 202023 among patients referred for testing. Similarly, patch testing to sodium disulfite in nearly 40,000 patients in 9 European countries showed a pooled prevalence of reactions of 3.1%.17 However, this contact allergy may go unrecognized, as sulfites are not included in common patch test series, including the thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous test and the ACDS Core Allergen Series.24,25 The relatively high patch test positivity to sulfites along with the prevalence of daily exposures supports the addition of sulfites to more patch test screening series.

The recommended patch test concentration for sodium disulfite is 1% in petrolatum.5 Testing in aqueous solutions is not recommended because they can cause sulfites to break down, potentially producing false-positive or irritant patch test reactions.7,26,27

Recommendations for Patients With Sulfite Allergies

Individuals with contact allergies to sulfites should be counseled on exposure sources and should be given resources providing a list of safe products, such as the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program (https://www.acdscamp.org/login) or SkinSAFE ­(https://www.skinsafeproducts.com/). Prescribers should be cognizant of sulfites that are present in prescription medications. Just because a patient has a positive patch test to sulfites does not automatically imply that they will need to modify their diet to avoid sulfite-containing foods; in the absence of cheilitis or a distribution suggestive of systemic contact dermatitis (eg, vesicular hand/foot dermatitis, intertriginous eruptions), this step may be unnecessary. On the other hand, individuals who have experienced immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites should avoid sulfite-containing foods and carry an epinephrine autoinjector.

Final Interpretation

Sulfites are ubiquitous compounds found in various foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products in addition to a range of occupational exposures. The face and hands are the most common sites of sulfite ACD. Despite patch test positivity in as many as 3% of tested patients,17,23 sulfite allergy may be missed due to lack of routine testing on standard screening series.

References
  1. Ekstein SF, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: allergen of the year 2024. Dermatitis. 2024;35:6-12. doi:10.1089/derm.2023.0154
  2. Gunnison AF, Jacobsen DW. Sulfite hypersensitivity. a critical review. CRC Crit Rev Toxicol. 1987;17:185-214. doi:10.3109/10408448709071208
  3. Clough SR. Sodium sulfite. In: Wexler P, ed. Encyclopedia of Toxicology. 3rd ed. Academic Press; 2014: 341-343.
  4. Vally H, Misso NL, Madan V. Clinical effects of sulphite additives. Clin Exp Allergy. 2009;39:1643-1651. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2009.03362.x
  5. Ralph N, Verma S, Merry S, et al. What is the relevance of contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite and which concentration of the allergen should we use? Dermatitis. 2015;26:162-165. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000120
  6. Madan V, Walker SL, Beck MH. Sodium metabisulfite allergy is common but is it relevant? Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:173-176. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01188.x
  7. García-Gavín J, Parente J, Goossens A. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite: a challenging allergen. a case series and literature review. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:260-269. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02135.x
  8. Milpied B, van Wassenhove L, Larousse C, et al. Contact dermatitis from rifamycin. Contact Dermatitis. 1986;14:252-253. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1986.tb01240.x
  9. Lodi A, Chiarelli G, Mancini LL, et al. Contact allergy to sodium sulfite contained in an antifungal preparation. Contact Dermatitis. 1993;29:97. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1993.tb03493.x
  10. Sánchez-Pérez J, Abajo P, Córdoba S, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis from sodium metabisulfite in an antihemorrhoidal cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:176-177.
  11. Boyd AH, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: no longer a zebra? Dermatitis. 2017;28:364-366. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000312
  12. Grosch E, Mahler V. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by a catheter system containing sodium metabisulfite. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:186-187. doi:10.1111/cod.12675
  13. Shaver RL, Warshaw EM. Contact allergens in prescription topical ophthalmic medications. Dermatitis. 2022;33:135-143. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000751
  14. Dendooven E, Darrigade AS, Foubert K, et al. The presence of sulfites in ‘natural rubber latex’ and ‘synthetic’ rubber gloves: an experimental pilot study. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:1054-1055. doi:10.1111/bjd.18608
  15. Nater JP. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by potassium metabisulfite. Dermatologica. 1968;136:477-478. doi:10.1159/000254143
  16. Borges AS, Valejo Coelho MM, Fernandes C, et al. Systemic allergic dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite in rectal enemas. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:429-430. doi:10.1111/cod.12971
  17. Warshaw EM, Buonomo M, DeKoven JG, et al. Patch testing with sodium disulfite: North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 2017 to 2018. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:285-296. doi:10.1111/cod.13860
  18. Häberle M, Geier J, Mahler V. Contact allergy to sulfites: clinical and occupational relevance—new data from the German ­Contact ­Dermatitis Research Group and the Information Network of ­Departments of ­Dermatology (IVDK). J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2016;14:938-941. doi:10.1111/ddg.13009
  19. Tan MG, Li HO, Pratt MD. Systemic allergic dermatitis to sodium metabisulfite in local anesthetic solution. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:120-121. doi:10.1111/cod.13978
  20. D’Amore T, Di Taranto A, Berardi G, et al. Sulfites in meat: occurrence, activity, toxicity, regulation, and detection. a comprehensive review. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2020;19:2701-2720. doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12607
  21. Grotheer P, Marshall M, Simonne A. Sulfites: separating fact from fiction. May 11, 2022. UF IFAS Extension. University of Florida. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FY731
  22. Silva M, Gama J, Pinto N, et al. Sulfite concentration and the occurrence of headache in young adults: a prospective study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2019;73:1316-1322. doi:10.1038/s41430-019-0420-2
  23. DeKoven JG, Warshaw EM, Reeder MJ, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2019-2020. Dermatitis. 2023;34:90-104. doi:10.1089/derm.2022.29017.jdk
  24. T.R.U.E. Test. Thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous patch test. SmartPractice Dermatology Allergy. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://www.smartpractice.com/shop/category?id=581719&m=SPA
  25. Schalock PC, Dunnick CA, Nedorost, et al; American Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series Committee. American ­Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series: 2020 update. Dermatitis. 2020;31:279-282.
  26. Kaaman AC, Boman A, Wrangsjö K, et al. Contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite: an occupational problem. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;63:110-112. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01756.x
  27. Vena GA, Foti C, Angelini G. Sulfite contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 1994;31:172-175. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1994.tb01959.x
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Solbie Choi is from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. Sarak K. Zemlok is from the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington. Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Solbie Choi has no relevant financial disclosures to report. Sarah K. Zemlok receives royalties from Kadmon Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi. Dr. Yu has served as a consultant, advisory board member, and/or investigator for and/or has received income or honoraria from AbbVie, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Astria Therapeutics, Dermatology Foundation, Dermavant Sciences Ltd, Dynamed, Eli Lilly and Company, Incyte, iRhythm, LEO Pharma, National Eczema Association, O’Glacée, Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, Pfizer, Sanofi, SmartPractice, Sol-Gel Technologies, and UptoDate, Inc. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie and Dermavant Sciences Ltd and serves as chair of the Contact Allergen Management Program Council for the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the opinions of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

Correspondence: Brandon L. Adler, MD, 1441 Eastlake Ave, Ezralow Tower, Ste 5301, Los Angeles, CA 90033 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):141-143. doi:10.12788/cutis.1124

Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
141-143
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Solbie Choi is from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. Sarak K. Zemlok is from the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington. Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Solbie Choi has no relevant financial disclosures to report. Sarah K. Zemlok receives royalties from Kadmon Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi. Dr. Yu has served as a consultant, advisory board member, and/or investigator for and/or has received income or honoraria from AbbVie, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Astria Therapeutics, Dermatology Foundation, Dermavant Sciences Ltd, Dynamed, Eli Lilly and Company, Incyte, iRhythm, LEO Pharma, National Eczema Association, O’Glacée, Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, Pfizer, Sanofi, SmartPractice, Sol-Gel Technologies, and UptoDate, Inc. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie and Dermavant Sciences Ltd and serves as chair of the Contact Allergen Management Program Council for the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the opinions of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

Correspondence: Brandon L. Adler, MD, 1441 Eastlake Ave, Ezralow Tower, Ste 5301, Los Angeles, CA 90033 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):141-143. doi:10.12788/cutis.1124

Author and Disclosure Information

Solbie Choi is from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York. Sarak K. Zemlok is from the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington. Dr. Yu is from the Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Dr. Adler is from the Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Solbie Choi has no relevant financial disclosures to report. Sarah K. Zemlok receives royalties from Kadmon Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi. Dr. Yu has served as a consultant, advisory board member, and/or investigator for and/or has received income or honoraria from AbbVie, Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Astria Therapeutics, Dermatology Foundation, Dermavant Sciences Ltd, Dynamed, Eli Lilly and Company, Incyte, iRhythm, LEO Pharma, National Eczema Association, O’Glacée, Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, Pfizer, Sanofi, SmartPractice, Sol-Gel Technologies, and UptoDate, Inc. He also is the Director and President-Elect of the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Dr. Adler has received research grants from AbbVie and Dermavant Sciences Ltd and serves as chair of the Contact Allergen Management Program Council for the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not represent the opinions of the American Contact Dermatitis Society.

Correspondence: Brandon L. Adler, MD, 1441 Eastlake Ave, Ezralow Tower, Ste 5301, Los Angeles, CA 90033 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):141-143. doi:10.12788/cutis.1124

Article PDF
Article PDF

The American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) selected sulfites as the 2024 Allergen of the Year.1 Due to their preservative and antioxidant properties, sulfites are prevalent in a variety of foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products; however, sulfites also have been implicated as a potential contact allergen. In this article, we review common sources of sulfite exposure, clinical manifestations of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to sulfites, and patch testing considerations for this emerging allergen.

What Are Sulfites?

Sulfiting agents are compounds that contain the sulfite ion SO32-, including sulfur dioxide, sodium disulfite (sodium metabisulfite), and potassium metabisulfite.2 Sulfites occur naturally in the environment and commonly are used as preservatives, antibrowning agents, and antioxidants in various foods, beverages, medications, cosmetics, and skin care products. As antibrowning agents and antioxidants, sulfites help maintain the natural appearance of foods and other products and prevent premature spoiling by inactivating oxidative enzymes.3 It should be noted that sulfites and sulfates are distinct and unrelated compounds that do not cross-react.1

Common Sources of Sulfite Exposure

From a morning glass of juice to an evening shower, in the pharmacy and at the hair salon, sulfite exposure is ubiquitous in most daily routines. Sulfites are present in many foods and beverages, either as a byproduct of natural fermentation or as an additive to prevent spoiling and color change. The Table provides examples of foods with high sulfite content.1,4-6 In particular, dried fruit, bottled lemon juice, wine, grape juice, sauerkraut juice, and pickled onions have high sulfite content.

Topical medications and personal care products represent other potential sources of sulfite exposure. A number of reports have shown that sulfites may be included in topical steroids,7 antibiotics,8 antifungals,9 hemorrhoidal preparations,10 local anesthetics,11 and urinary catheterization gel,12 highlighting their many potential applications. In addition, a comprehensive ingredient analysis of 264 ophthalmic medications found that 3.8% of the products contained sodium disulfite.13 Sulfites may be found in personal care products, including facial and hand cleansers, shampoos, moisturizers, and toothpastes. Hair dyes also commonly contain sulfites,7 which are listed in as many as 90% of hair dye kits in the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program database.1

Occupational exposures also are widespread, as sulfites are extensively utilized across diverse industries such as pharmaceuticals, health care, leather manufacturing, mineral extraction, food preparation, chemical manufacturing, textiles, alcohol brewing, and wine production.1

Sulfites also are used in the rubber industry—­particularly in gloves—due to their anticoagulant and preservative properties.4 This is relevant to health care providers, who may use dozens of disposable gloves in a single day. In an experimental pilot study, ­researchers detected sulfites in 83% (5/6) of natural rubber latex gloves, 96% (23/24) of synthetic (nitrile) gloves, and 0% (0/5) of polyvinyl chloride gloves.14 While this study was limited to a small sample size, it demonstrates the common use of sulfites in certain rubber gloves and encourages future studies to determine whether there is a quantitative threshold to elicit allergic reactions.

Sulfite Allergy

In 1968, an early case report of ACD to sulfites was published involving a pharmaceutical worker who developed hand eczema after working at a factory for 3 months and had a positive patch test to potassium metabisulfite.15 There have been other cases published in the literature since then, including localized ACD as well as less common cases of systemic contact dermatitis following oral, injectable, and rectal sulfite exposures.16

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group found that, among 132 (2.7%) of 4885 patients with positive patch tests to sodium disulfite from 2017 to 2018, the most commonly involved body sites were the face (28.8%) and hands (20.5%) followed by a scattered/generalized distribution (13.6%). Involvement of the face and hands may correlate with the most frequent sources of exposure that were identified, including personal care products (particularly hair dyes)(18.9%), medications (9.1%), and foods (7.6%).17 A multicenter analysis of patch test results from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland from 1999 to 2013 showed that 357 (2.9%) of 12,156 patients had positive reactions to sodium disulfite, with the most commonly identified exposure sources being topical pharmaceutical agents (59.3%); cosmetics, creams, and sunscreens (13.6%); and systemic drugs (6.8%).18 However, it is not always possible to determine the clinical relevance of a positive patch test to sulfites.1

Other than the face and hands, there have been other unexpected anatomic locations for sulfite ACD (eg, the lower back), and systemic contact dermatitis has manifested with widespread rashes due to oral, rectal, and parenteral exposure.4,16,19 There is no definitive link between sulfite contact allergy and patient sex, but there seems to be a higher prevalence in patients older than 40 years, perhaps related to overall lifetime exposure.1

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites also have been reported, including urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis.4 Due to multiple cases of severe dermatologic and respiratory reactions to food products containing sulfites,20 the US Food and Drug Administration prohibited their use in fresh fruit and vegetables as antibrowning agents in 1986 and required labels on packaged foods that contained sulfites at more than 10 parts per million.21 However, food and drinks produced in restaurants, bakeries, and cafes as well as those that are distributed directly to consumers from the preparation site are exempt from these rules.17

In addition, consuming high amounts of dietary sulfites has been linked to headaches through unclear (ie, not necessarily allergic) mechanisms.4,22 One study found that wine with a higher sulfite concentration was associated with increased risk for headaches in participants who had a history of headaches related to wine consumption.22

Patch Testing to Sulfites

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group has tested sodium disulfite since 2017 and found an increased frequency of positive patch tests from 2.7% (N=4885) in 2017 and 201817 to 3.3% (N=4115) in 2019 and 202023 among patients referred for testing. Similarly, patch testing to sodium disulfite in nearly 40,000 patients in 9 European countries showed a pooled prevalence of reactions of 3.1%.17 However, this contact allergy may go unrecognized, as sulfites are not included in common patch test series, including the thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous test and the ACDS Core Allergen Series.24,25 The relatively high patch test positivity to sulfites along with the prevalence of daily exposures supports the addition of sulfites to more patch test screening series.

The recommended patch test concentration for sodium disulfite is 1% in petrolatum.5 Testing in aqueous solutions is not recommended because they can cause sulfites to break down, potentially producing false-positive or irritant patch test reactions.7,26,27

Recommendations for Patients With Sulfite Allergies

Individuals with contact allergies to sulfites should be counseled on exposure sources and should be given resources providing a list of safe products, such as the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program (https://www.acdscamp.org/login) or SkinSAFE ­(https://www.skinsafeproducts.com/). Prescribers should be cognizant of sulfites that are present in prescription medications. Just because a patient has a positive patch test to sulfites does not automatically imply that they will need to modify their diet to avoid sulfite-containing foods; in the absence of cheilitis or a distribution suggestive of systemic contact dermatitis (eg, vesicular hand/foot dermatitis, intertriginous eruptions), this step may be unnecessary. On the other hand, individuals who have experienced immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites should avoid sulfite-containing foods and carry an epinephrine autoinjector.

Final Interpretation

Sulfites are ubiquitous compounds found in various foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products in addition to a range of occupational exposures. The face and hands are the most common sites of sulfite ACD. Despite patch test positivity in as many as 3% of tested patients,17,23 sulfite allergy may be missed due to lack of routine testing on standard screening series.

The American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) selected sulfites as the 2024 Allergen of the Year.1 Due to their preservative and antioxidant properties, sulfites are prevalent in a variety of foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products; however, sulfites also have been implicated as a potential contact allergen. In this article, we review common sources of sulfite exposure, clinical manifestations of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to sulfites, and patch testing considerations for this emerging allergen.

What Are Sulfites?

Sulfiting agents are compounds that contain the sulfite ion SO32-, including sulfur dioxide, sodium disulfite (sodium metabisulfite), and potassium metabisulfite.2 Sulfites occur naturally in the environment and commonly are used as preservatives, antibrowning agents, and antioxidants in various foods, beverages, medications, cosmetics, and skin care products. As antibrowning agents and antioxidants, sulfites help maintain the natural appearance of foods and other products and prevent premature spoiling by inactivating oxidative enzymes.3 It should be noted that sulfites and sulfates are distinct and unrelated compounds that do not cross-react.1

Common Sources of Sulfite Exposure

From a morning glass of juice to an evening shower, in the pharmacy and at the hair salon, sulfite exposure is ubiquitous in most daily routines. Sulfites are present in many foods and beverages, either as a byproduct of natural fermentation or as an additive to prevent spoiling and color change. The Table provides examples of foods with high sulfite content.1,4-6 In particular, dried fruit, bottled lemon juice, wine, grape juice, sauerkraut juice, and pickled onions have high sulfite content.

Topical medications and personal care products represent other potential sources of sulfite exposure. A number of reports have shown that sulfites may be included in topical steroids,7 antibiotics,8 antifungals,9 hemorrhoidal preparations,10 local anesthetics,11 and urinary catheterization gel,12 highlighting their many potential applications. In addition, a comprehensive ingredient analysis of 264 ophthalmic medications found that 3.8% of the products contained sodium disulfite.13 Sulfites may be found in personal care products, including facial and hand cleansers, shampoos, moisturizers, and toothpastes. Hair dyes also commonly contain sulfites,7 which are listed in as many as 90% of hair dye kits in the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program database.1

Occupational exposures also are widespread, as sulfites are extensively utilized across diverse industries such as pharmaceuticals, health care, leather manufacturing, mineral extraction, food preparation, chemical manufacturing, textiles, alcohol brewing, and wine production.1

Sulfites also are used in the rubber industry—­particularly in gloves—due to their anticoagulant and preservative properties.4 This is relevant to health care providers, who may use dozens of disposable gloves in a single day. In an experimental pilot study, ­researchers detected sulfites in 83% (5/6) of natural rubber latex gloves, 96% (23/24) of synthetic (nitrile) gloves, and 0% (0/5) of polyvinyl chloride gloves.14 While this study was limited to a small sample size, it demonstrates the common use of sulfites in certain rubber gloves and encourages future studies to determine whether there is a quantitative threshold to elicit allergic reactions.

Sulfite Allergy

In 1968, an early case report of ACD to sulfites was published involving a pharmaceutical worker who developed hand eczema after working at a factory for 3 months and had a positive patch test to potassium metabisulfite.15 There have been other cases published in the literature since then, including localized ACD as well as less common cases of systemic contact dermatitis following oral, injectable, and rectal sulfite exposures.16

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group found that, among 132 (2.7%) of 4885 patients with positive patch tests to sodium disulfite from 2017 to 2018, the most commonly involved body sites were the face (28.8%) and hands (20.5%) followed by a scattered/generalized distribution (13.6%). Involvement of the face and hands may correlate with the most frequent sources of exposure that were identified, including personal care products (particularly hair dyes)(18.9%), medications (9.1%), and foods (7.6%).17 A multicenter analysis of patch test results from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland from 1999 to 2013 showed that 357 (2.9%) of 12,156 patients had positive reactions to sodium disulfite, with the most commonly identified exposure sources being topical pharmaceutical agents (59.3%); cosmetics, creams, and sunscreens (13.6%); and systemic drugs (6.8%).18 However, it is not always possible to determine the clinical relevance of a positive patch test to sulfites.1

Other than the face and hands, there have been other unexpected anatomic locations for sulfite ACD (eg, the lower back), and systemic contact dermatitis has manifested with widespread rashes due to oral, rectal, and parenteral exposure.4,16,19 There is no definitive link between sulfite contact allergy and patient sex, but there seems to be a higher prevalence in patients older than 40 years, perhaps related to overall lifetime exposure.1

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites also have been reported, including urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis.4 Due to multiple cases of severe dermatologic and respiratory reactions to food products containing sulfites,20 the US Food and Drug Administration prohibited their use in fresh fruit and vegetables as antibrowning agents in 1986 and required labels on packaged foods that contained sulfites at more than 10 parts per million.21 However, food and drinks produced in restaurants, bakeries, and cafes as well as those that are distributed directly to consumers from the preparation site are exempt from these rules.17

In addition, consuming high amounts of dietary sulfites has been linked to headaches through unclear (ie, not necessarily allergic) mechanisms.4,22 One study found that wine with a higher sulfite concentration was associated with increased risk for headaches in participants who had a history of headaches related to wine consumption.22

Patch Testing to Sulfites

The North American Contact Dermatitis Group has tested sodium disulfite since 2017 and found an increased frequency of positive patch tests from 2.7% (N=4885) in 2017 and 201817 to 3.3% (N=4115) in 2019 and 202023 among patients referred for testing. Similarly, patch testing to sodium disulfite in nearly 40,000 patients in 9 European countries showed a pooled prevalence of reactions of 3.1%.17 However, this contact allergy may go unrecognized, as sulfites are not included in common patch test series, including the thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous test and the ACDS Core Allergen Series.24,25 The relatively high patch test positivity to sulfites along with the prevalence of daily exposures supports the addition of sulfites to more patch test screening series.

The recommended patch test concentration for sodium disulfite is 1% in petrolatum.5 Testing in aqueous solutions is not recommended because they can cause sulfites to break down, potentially producing false-positive or irritant patch test reactions.7,26,27

Recommendations for Patients With Sulfite Allergies

Individuals with contact allergies to sulfites should be counseled on exposure sources and should be given resources providing a list of safe products, such as the ACDS Contact Allergen Management Program (https://www.acdscamp.org/login) or SkinSAFE ­(https://www.skinsafeproducts.com/). Prescribers should be cognizant of sulfites that are present in prescription medications. Just because a patient has a positive patch test to sulfites does not automatically imply that they will need to modify their diet to avoid sulfite-containing foods; in the absence of cheilitis or a distribution suggestive of systemic contact dermatitis (eg, vesicular hand/foot dermatitis, intertriginous eruptions), this step may be unnecessary. On the other hand, individuals who have experienced immediate hypersensitivity reactions to sulfites should avoid sulfite-containing foods and carry an epinephrine autoinjector.

Final Interpretation

Sulfites are ubiquitous compounds found in various foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products in addition to a range of occupational exposures. The face and hands are the most common sites of sulfite ACD. Despite patch test positivity in as many as 3% of tested patients,17,23 sulfite allergy may be missed due to lack of routine testing on standard screening series.

References
  1. Ekstein SF, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: allergen of the year 2024. Dermatitis. 2024;35:6-12. doi:10.1089/derm.2023.0154
  2. Gunnison AF, Jacobsen DW. Sulfite hypersensitivity. a critical review. CRC Crit Rev Toxicol. 1987;17:185-214. doi:10.3109/10408448709071208
  3. Clough SR. Sodium sulfite. In: Wexler P, ed. Encyclopedia of Toxicology. 3rd ed. Academic Press; 2014: 341-343.
  4. Vally H, Misso NL, Madan V. Clinical effects of sulphite additives. Clin Exp Allergy. 2009;39:1643-1651. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2009.03362.x
  5. Ralph N, Verma S, Merry S, et al. What is the relevance of contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite and which concentration of the allergen should we use? Dermatitis. 2015;26:162-165. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000120
  6. Madan V, Walker SL, Beck MH. Sodium metabisulfite allergy is common but is it relevant? Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:173-176. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01188.x
  7. García-Gavín J, Parente J, Goossens A. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite: a challenging allergen. a case series and literature review. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:260-269. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02135.x
  8. Milpied B, van Wassenhove L, Larousse C, et al. Contact dermatitis from rifamycin. Contact Dermatitis. 1986;14:252-253. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1986.tb01240.x
  9. Lodi A, Chiarelli G, Mancini LL, et al. Contact allergy to sodium sulfite contained in an antifungal preparation. Contact Dermatitis. 1993;29:97. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1993.tb03493.x
  10. Sánchez-Pérez J, Abajo P, Córdoba S, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis from sodium metabisulfite in an antihemorrhoidal cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:176-177.
  11. Boyd AH, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: no longer a zebra? Dermatitis. 2017;28:364-366. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000312
  12. Grosch E, Mahler V. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by a catheter system containing sodium metabisulfite. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:186-187. doi:10.1111/cod.12675
  13. Shaver RL, Warshaw EM. Contact allergens in prescription topical ophthalmic medications. Dermatitis. 2022;33:135-143. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000751
  14. Dendooven E, Darrigade AS, Foubert K, et al. The presence of sulfites in ‘natural rubber latex’ and ‘synthetic’ rubber gloves: an experimental pilot study. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:1054-1055. doi:10.1111/bjd.18608
  15. Nater JP. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by potassium metabisulfite. Dermatologica. 1968;136:477-478. doi:10.1159/000254143
  16. Borges AS, Valejo Coelho MM, Fernandes C, et al. Systemic allergic dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite in rectal enemas. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:429-430. doi:10.1111/cod.12971
  17. Warshaw EM, Buonomo M, DeKoven JG, et al. Patch testing with sodium disulfite: North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 2017 to 2018. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:285-296. doi:10.1111/cod.13860
  18. Häberle M, Geier J, Mahler V. Contact allergy to sulfites: clinical and occupational relevance—new data from the German ­Contact ­Dermatitis Research Group and the Information Network of ­Departments of ­Dermatology (IVDK). J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2016;14:938-941. doi:10.1111/ddg.13009
  19. Tan MG, Li HO, Pratt MD. Systemic allergic dermatitis to sodium metabisulfite in local anesthetic solution. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:120-121. doi:10.1111/cod.13978
  20. D’Amore T, Di Taranto A, Berardi G, et al. Sulfites in meat: occurrence, activity, toxicity, regulation, and detection. a comprehensive review. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2020;19:2701-2720. doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12607
  21. Grotheer P, Marshall M, Simonne A. Sulfites: separating fact from fiction. May 11, 2022. UF IFAS Extension. University of Florida. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FY731
  22. Silva M, Gama J, Pinto N, et al. Sulfite concentration and the occurrence of headache in young adults: a prospective study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2019;73:1316-1322. doi:10.1038/s41430-019-0420-2
  23. DeKoven JG, Warshaw EM, Reeder MJ, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2019-2020. Dermatitis. 2023;34:90-104. doi:10.1089/derm.2022.29017.jdk
  24. T.R.U.E. Test. Thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous patch test. SmartPractice Dermatology Allergy. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://www.smartpractice.com/shop/category?id=581719&m=SPA
  25. Schalock PC, Dunnick CA, Nedorost, et al; American Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series Committee. American ­Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series: 2020 update. Dermatitis. 2020;31:279-282.
  26. Kaaman AC, Boman A, Wrangsjö K, et al. Contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite: an occupational problem. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;63:110-112. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01756.x
  27. Vena GA, Foti C, Angelini G. Sulfite contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 1994;31:172-175. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1994.tb01959.x
References
  1. Ekstein SF, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: allergen of the year 2024. Dermatitis. 2024;35:6-12. doi:10.1089/derm.2023.0154
  2. Gunnison AF, Jacobsen DW. Sulfite hypersensitivity. a critical review. CRC Crit Rev Toxicol. 1987;17:185-214. doi:10.3109/10408448709071208
  3. Clough SR. Sodium sulfite. In: Wexler P, ed. Encyclopedia of Toxicology. 3rd ed. Academic Press; 2014: 341-343.
  4. Vally H, Misso NL, Madan V. Clinical effects of sulphite additives. Clin Exp Allergy. 2009;39:1643-1651. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2009.03362.x
  5. Ralph N, Verma S, Merry S, et al. What is the relevance of contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite and which concentration of the allergen should we use? Dermatitis. 2015;26:162-165. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000120
  6. Madan V, Walker SL, Beck MH. Sodium metabisulfite allergy is common but is it relevant? Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:173-176. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01188.x
  7. García-Gavín J, Parente J, Goossens A. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite: a challenging allergen. a case series and literature review. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:260-269. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02135.x
  8. Milpied B, van Wassenhove L, Larousse C, et al. Contact dermatitis from rifamycin. Contact Dermatitis. 1986;14:252-253. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1986.tb01240.x
  9. Lodi A, Chiarelli G, Mancini LL, et al. Contact allergy to sodium sulfite contained in an antifungal preparation. Contact Dermatitis. 1993;29:97. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1993.tb03493.x
  10. Sánchez-Pérez J, Abajo P, Córdoba S, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis from sodium metabisulfite in an antihemorrhoidal cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:176-177.
  11. Boyd AH, Warshaw EM. Sulfites: no longer a zebra? Dermatitis. 2017;28:364-366. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000312
  12. Grosch E, Mahler V. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by a catheter system containing sodium metabisulfite. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;76:186-187. doi:10.1111/cod.12675
  13. Shaver RL, Warshaw EM. Contact allergens in prescription topical ophthalmic medications. Dermatitis. 2022;33:135-143. doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000751
  14. Dendooven E, Darrigade AS, Foubert K, et al. The presence of sulfites in ‘natural rubber latex’ and ‘synthetic’ rubber gloves: an experimental pilot study. Br J Dermatol. 2020;182:1054-1055. doi:10.1111/bjd.18608
  15. Nater JP. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by potassium metabisulfite. Dermatologica. 1968;136:477-478. doi:10.1159/000254143
  16. Borges AS, Valejo Coelho MM, Fernandes C, et al. Systemic allergic dermatitis caused by sodium metabisulfite in rectal enemas. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:429-430. doi:10.1111/cod.12971
  17. Warshaw EM, Buonomo M, DeKoven JG, et al. Patch testing with sodium disulfite: North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 2017 to 2018. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:285-296. doi:10.1111/cod.13860
  18. Häberle M, Geier J, Mahler V. Contact allergy to sulfites: clinical and occupational relevance—new data from the German ­Contact ­Dermatitis Research Group and the Information Network of ­Departments of ­Dermatology (IVDK). J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2016;14:938-941. doi:10.1111/ddg.13009
  19. Tan MG, Li HO, Pratt MD. Systemic allergic dermatitis to sodium metabisulfite in local anesthetic solution. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;86:120-121. doi:10.1111/cod.13978
  20. D’Amore T, Di Taranto A, Berardi G, et al. Sulfites in meat: occurrence, activity, toxicity, regulation, and detection. a comprehensive review. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2020;19:2701-2720. doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12607
  21. Grotheer P, Marshall M, Simonne A. Sulfites: separating fact from fiction. May 11, 2022. UF IFAS Extension. University of Florida. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/FY731
  22. Silva M, Gama J, Pinto N, et al. Sulfite concentration and the occurrence of headache in young adults: a prospective study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2019;73:1316-1322. doi:10.1038/s41430-019-0420-2
  23. DeKoven JG, Warshaw EM, Reeder MJ, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2019-2020. Dermatitis. 2023;34:90-104. doi:10.1089/derm.2022.29017.jdk
  24. T.R.U.E. Test. Thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous patch test. SmartPractice Dermatology Allergy. Accessed October 4, 2024. https://www.smartpractice.com/shop/category?id=581719&m=SPA
  25. Schalock PC, Dunnick CA, Nedorost, et al; American Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series Committee. American ­Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series: 2020 update. Dermatitis. 2020;31:279-282.
  26. Kaaman AC, Boman A, Wrangsjö K, et al. Contact allergy to sodium metabisulfite: an occupational problem. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;63:110-112. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01756.x
  27. Vena GA, Foti C, Angelini G. Sulfite contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 1994;31:172-175. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1994.tb01959.x
Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Issue
Cutis - 114(5)
Page Number
141-143
Page Number
141-143
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Sulfites: The 2024 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year
Display Headline
Sulfites: The 2024 American Contact Dermatitis Society Allergen of the Year
Sections
Inside the Article

 

Practice Points

  • Sulfites are ubiquitous compounds that serve as preservatives and antioxidants in various foods, beverages, medications, and personal care products.
  • Allergic contact dermatitis to sulfites most commonly affects the face and hands.
  • Because sulfites are not included in most patch test screening series, contact allergy to sulfites may be missed unless expanded testing is performed.
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Longitudinal Depression on the Right Thumbnail

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 11/08/2024 - 10:50
Display Headline
Longitudinal Depression on the Right Thumbnail

THE DIAGNOSIS: Habit-Tic Deformity

Habit-tic deformity is a cause of nail dystrophy that commonly arises in children and adults due to subconscious repetitive and self-injurious manipulation of the nail bed or cuticle, which ultimately damages the nail matrix.1,2 It can be considered a variant of onychotillomania.1

Characteristic features of habit-tic deformity include a longitudinal depression on the central nail plate with transverse ridges,1 which can be more prominent on the dominant hand.3 Patients typically note a long duration of nail deformity, often without insight into its etiology.2 Diagnosis relies on careful assessment of the clinical presentation and the patient’s history to rule out other differential diagnoses. Based on our patient’s clinical presentation and history, we excluded wart, squamous cell carcinoma, eczema, psoriasis, lichen planus, autoimmune connective tissue disease, onychomycosis, paronychia, pincer nail deformity, and Beau line as potential diagnoses. Biopsy also can be performed to exclude these diagnoses from the differential if the cause is unclear following clinical examination.

Treatment for habit-tic deformity involves identifying and addressing the underlying habit. Barrier methods such as bandages and cyanoacrylate adhesives that prevent further manipulation of the nail matrix are effective treatments for habit-tic deformity.2 A multidisciplinary approach with psychiatry may be optimal to identify underlying psychological comorbidities and break the habit through behavior interventions and medications.4 Nail dystrophy generally improves once the habit is disrupted; however, a younger age of onset may carry a worse prognosis.3 Patients should be counseled that the affected nail may never grow normally.

Our patient was advised to use fluocinonide ointment 0.05% to reduce inflammation of the proximal nail fold and to cover the thumbnail with a bandage to prevent picking. He also was counseled that the nail may show ongoing abnormal growth. Minimal improvement was noted after 6 months.

References
  1. Rieder EA, Tosti A. Onychotillomania: an underrecognized disorder. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:1245-1250.doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016
  2. Ring DS. Inexpensive solution for habit-tic deformity. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:1222-1223. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2010.287
  3. Horne MI, Utzig JB, Rieder EA, et al. Alopecia areata and habit tic deformities. Skin Appendage Disord. 2018;4:323-325. doi:10.1159/000486540
  4. Sonthalia S, Sharma P, Kapoor J, et al. Habit tic deformity: need fora comprehensive approach. Skin Appendage Disord. 2019;5:117-118.doi:10.1159/000489320 .05.036
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Shealinna Ge, MD, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, 419 W Redwood St, Ste 235, Baltimore, MD 21201 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):140,144. doi:10.12788/cutis.1120

Publications
Topics
Page Number
140-141
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Shealinna Ge, MD, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, 419 W Redwood St, Ste 235, Baltimore, MD 21201 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):140,144. doi:10.12788/cutis.1120

Author and Disclosure Information

From the Department of Dermatology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore.

The authors have no relevant financial disclosures to report.

Correspondence: Shealinna Ge, MD, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Department of Dermatology, 419 W Redwood St, Ste 235, Baltimore, MD 21201 ([email protected]).

Cutis. 2024 November;114(5):140,144. doi:10.12788/cutis.1120

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

THE DIAGNOSIS: Habit-Tic Deformity

Habit-tic deformity is a cause of nail dystrophy that commonly arises in children and adults due to subconscious repetitive and self-injurious manipulation of the nail bed or cuticle, which ultimately damages the nail matrix.1,2 It can be considered a variant of onychotillomania.1

Characteristic features of habit-tic deformity include a longitudinal depression on the central nail plate with transverse ridges,1 which can be more prominent on the dominant hand.3 Patients typically note a long duration of nail deformity, often without insight into its etiology.2 Diagnosis relies on careful assessment of the clinical presentation and the patient’s history to rule out other differential diagnoses. Based on our patient’s clinical presentation and history, we excluded wart, squamous cell carcinoma, eczema, psoriasis, lichen planus, autoimmune connective tissue disease, onychomycosis, paronychia, pincer nail deformity, and Beau line as potential diagnoses. Biopsy also can be performed to exclude these diagnoses from the differential if the cause is unclear following clinical examination.

Treatment for habit-tic deformity involves identifying and addressing the underlying habit. Barrier methods such as bandages and cyanoacrylate adhesives that prevent further manipulation of the nail matrix are effective treatments for habit-tic deformity.2 A multidisciplinary approach with psychiatry may be optimal to identify underlying psychological comorbidities and break the habit through behavior interventions and medications.4 Nail dystrophy generally improves once the habit is disrupted; however, a younger age of onset may carry a worse prognosis.3 Patients should be counseled that the affected nail may never grow normally.

Our patient was advised to use fluocinonide ointment 0.05% to reduce inflammation of the proximal nail fold and to cover the thumbnail with a bandage to prevent picking. He also was counseled that the nail may show ongoing abnormal growth. Minimal improvement was noted after 6 months.

THE DIAGNOSIS: Habit-Tic Deformity

Habit-tic deformity is a cause of nail dystrophy that commonly arises in children and adults due to subconscious repetitive and self-injurious manipulation of the nail bed or cuticle, which ultimately damages the nail matrix.1,2 It can be considered a variant of onychotillomania.1

Characteristic features of habit-tic deformity include a longitudinal depression on the central nail plate with transverse ridges,1 which can be more prominent on the dominant hand.3 Patients typically note a long duration of nail deformity, often without insight into its etiology.2 Diagnosis relies on careful assessment of the clinical presentation and the patient’s history to rule out other differential diagnoses. Based on our patient’s clinical presentation and history, we excluded wart, squamous cell carcinoma, eczema, psoriasis, lichen planus, autoimmune connective tissue disease, onychomycosis, paronychia, pincer nail deformity, and Beau line as potential diagnoses. Biopsy also can be performed to exclude these diagnoses from the differential if the cause is unclear following clinical examination.

Treatment for habit-tic deformity involves identifying and addressing the underlying habit. Barrier methods such as bandages and cyanoacrylate adhesives that prevent further manipulation of the nail matrix are effective treatments for habit-tic deformity.2 A multidisciplinary approach with psychiatry may be optimal to identify underlying psychological comorbidities and break the habit through behavior interventions and medications.4 Nail dystrophy generally improves once the habit is disrupted; however, a younger age of onset may carry a worse prognosis.3 Patients should be counseled that the affected nail may never grow normally.

Our patient was advised to use fluocinonide ointment 0.05% to reduce inflammation of the proximal nail fold and to cover the thumbnail with a bandage to prevent picking. He also was counseled that the nail may show ongoing abnormal growth. Minimal improvement was noted after 6 months.

References
  1. Rieder EA, Tosti A. Onychotillomania: an underrecognized disorder. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:1245-1250.doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016
  2. Ring DS. Inexpensive solution for habit-tic deformity. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:1222-1223. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2010.287
  3. Horne MI, Utzig JB, Rieder EA, et al. Alopecia areata and habit tic deformities. Skin Appendage Disord. 2018;4:323-325. doi:10.1159/000486540
  4. Sonthalia S, Sharma P, Kapoor J, et al. Habit tic deformity: need fora comprehensive approach. Skin Appendage Disord. 2019;5:117-118.doi:10.1159/000489320 .05.036
References
  1. Rieder EA, Tosti A. Onychotillomania: an underrecognized disorder. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:1245-1250.doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016
  2. Ring DS. Inexpensive solution for habit-tic deformity. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:1222-1223. doi:10.1001/archdermatol.2010.287
  3. Horne MI, Utzig JB, Rieder EA, et al. Alopecia areata and habit tic deformities. Skin Appendage Disord. 2018;4:323-325. doi:10.1159/000486540
  4. Sonthalia S, Sharma P, Kapoor J, et al. Habit tic deformity: need fora comprehensive approach. Skin Appendage Disord. 2019;5:117-118.doi:10.1159/000489320 .05.036
Page Number
140-141
Page Number
140-141
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Longitudinal Depression on the Right Thumbnail
Display Headline
Longitudinal Depression on the Right Thumbnail
Sections
Questionnaire Body

A healthy 13-year-old boy presented to the dermatology department with dystrophy of the right thumbnail of 3 to 4 years’ duration. A 5-mm-wide, depressed median longitudinal groove with a fir tree pattern was noted on the central nail plate. The patient noted that the groove had been gradually deepening. There was erythema, edema, and lichenification of the proximal nailfold without vascular changes, and the lunula was enlarged. No hyperkeratosis, subungual debris, erythematous nail folds, or inward curvature of the lateral aspects of the nail were noted. The patient denied any pruritus, pain, discomfort, or bleeding; he also denied any recent illness or trauma to the nail. None of the other nails were affected, and no other lesions or rashes were observed elsewhere on the body. The patient was unsure if he picked at the nail but acknowledged that he may have done so subconsciously. He had no history of eczema, psoriasis, or autoimmune connective tissue disorders.

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 14:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 14:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 11/07/2024 - 14:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Sea Buckthorn

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 11/06/2024 - 15:07

A member of the Elaeagnaceae family, Hippophae rhamnoides, better known as sea buckthorn, is a high-altitude wild shrub endemic to Europe and Asia with edible fruits and a lengthy record of use in traditional Chinese medicine.1-6 Used as a health supplement and consumed in the diet throughout the world,5 sea buckthorn berries, seeds, and leaves have been used in traditional medicine to treat burns/injuries, edema, hypertension, inflammation, skin grafts, ulcers, and wounds.4,7

This hardy plant is associated with a wide range of biologic activities, including anti-atherogenic, anti-atopic dermatitis, antibacterial, anticancer, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, antioxidant, anti-psoriasis, anti-sebum, anti-stress, anti-tumor, cytoprotective, hepatoprotective, immunomodulatory, neuroprotective, radioprotective, and tissue regenerative functions.4,5,8-11Sea buckthorn has also been included in several cosmeceutical formulations to treat wrinkles, scars, pigmentary conditions, and hair disorders, as well as to rejuvenate, even, and smooth the skin.4

Indre Brazauskaite/EyeEm/Getty Images

Key Constituents

Functional constituents identified in sea buckthorn include alkaloids, carotenoids, flavonoids, lignans, organic acids, phenolic acids, proanthocyanidins, polyunsaturated acids (including omega-3, -6, -7, and -9), steroids, tannins, terpenoids, and volatile oils, as well as nutritional compounds such as minerals, proteins, and vitamins.4,5,11 Sea buckthorn pericarp oil contains copious amounts of saturated palmitic acid (29%-36%) and omega-7 unsaturated palmitoleic acid (36%-48%), which fosters cutaneous and mucosal epithelialization, as well as linoleic (10%-12%) and oleic (4%-6%) acids.12,6 Significant amounts of carotenoids as well as alpha‐linolenic fatty acid (38%), linoleic (36%), oleic (13%), and palmitic (7%) acids are present in sea buckthorn seed oil.6

Polysaccharides

In an expansive review on the pharmacological activities of sea buckthorn polysaccharides, Teng and colleagues reported in April 2024 that 20 diverse polysaccharides have been culled from sea buckthorn and exhibited various healthy activities, including antioxidant, anti-fatigue, anti-inflammatory, anti-obesity, anti-tumor, hepatoprotective, hypoglycemic, and immunoregulation, and regulation of intestinal flora activities.1

Proanthocyanidins and Anti-Aging

In 2023, Liu and colleagues investigated the anti–skin aging impact of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins in D-galactose-induced aging in mice given the known free radical scavenging activity of these compounds. They found the proanthocyanidins mitigated D-galactose-induced aging and can augment the total antioxidant capacity of the body. Sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can further attenuate the effects of skin aging by regulating the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and MMPs/TIMP system, thus amplifying collagen I and tropoelastin content.13

Baumann Cosmetic &amp; Research Institute
Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

A year earlier, many of the same investigators assessed the possible protective activity of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins against cutaneous aging engendered by oxidative stress from hydrogen peroxide. The compounds amplified superoxide dismutase and glutathione antioxidant functions. The extracts also fostered collagen I production in aging human skin fibroblasts via the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and hindered collagen I degradation by regulating the MMPs/TIMPs system, which maintained extracellular matrix integrity. Senescent cell migration was also promoted with 100 mcg/mL of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins. The researchers concluded that this sets the stage for investigating how sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can be incorporated in cosmetic formulations.14 In a separate study, Liu and colleagues demonstrated that sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can attenuate oxidative damage and protect mitochondrial function.9

 

 

Acne and Barrier Functions

The extracts of H rhamnoides and Cassia fistula in a combined formulation were found to be effective in lowering skin sebum content in humans with grade I and grade II acne vulgaris in a 2014 single-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, split-face study with two groups of 25 patients each (aged 18-37 years).15 Khan and colleagues have also reported that a sea buckthorn oil-in-water emulsion improved barrier function in human skin as tested by a tewameter and corneometer (noninvasive probes) in 13 healthy males with a mean age of 27 ± 4.8 years.16

Anti-Aging, Antioxidant, Antibacterial, Skin-Whitening Activity

Zaman and colleagues reported in 2011 that results from an in vivo study of the effects of a sea buckthorn fruit extract topical cream on stratum corneum water content and transepidermal water loss indicated that the formulation enhanced cell surface integrin expression thus facilitating collagen contraction.17

In 2012, Khan and colleagues reported amelioration in skin elasticity, thus achieving an anti-aging result, from the use of a water-in-oil–based hydroalcoholic cream loaded with fruit extract of H rhamnoides, as measured with a Cutometer.18 The previous year, some of the same researchers reported that the antioxidants and flavonoids found in a topical sea buckthorn formulation could decrease cutaneous melanin and erythema levels.

More recently, Gęgotek and colleagues found that sea buckthorn seed oil prevented redox balance and lipid metabolism disturbances in skin fibroblasts and keratinocytes caused by UVA or UVB. They suggested that such findings point to the potential of this natural agent to confer anti-inflammatory properties and photoprotection to the skin.19

In 2020, Ivanišová and colleagues investigated the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of H rhamnoides 100% oil, 100% juice, dry berries, and tea (dry berries, leaves, and twigs). They found that all of the studied sea buckthorn products displayed high antioxidant activity (identified through DPPH radical scavenging and molybdenum reducing antioxidant power tests). Sea buckthorn juice contained the highest total content of polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotenoids. All of the tested products also exhibited substantial antibacterial activity against the tested microbes.20

Burns and Wound Healing

In a preclinical study of the effects of sea buckthorn leaf extracts on wound healing in albino rats using an excision-punch wound model in 2005, Gupta and colleagues found that twice daily topical application of the aqueous leaf extract fostered wound healing. This was indicated by higher hydroxyproline and protein levels, a diminished wound area, and lower lipid peroxide levels. The investigators suggested that sea buckthorn may facilitate wound healing at least in part because of elevated antioxidant activity in the granulation tissue.3

A year later, Wang and colleagues reported on observations of using H rhamnoides oil, a traditional Chinese herbal medicine derived from sea buckthorn fruit, as a burn treatment. In the study, 151 burn patients received an H rhamnoides oil dressing (changed every other day until wound healing) that was covered with a disinfecting dressing. The dressing reduced swelling and effusion, and alleviated pain, with patients receiving the sea buckthorn dressing experiencing greater apparent exudation reduction, pain reduction, and more rapid epithelial cell growth and wound healing than controls (treated only with Vaseline gauze). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant.21

 

 

Conclusion

Sea buckthorn has been used for hundreds if not thousands of years in traditional medical applications, including for dermatologic purposes. Emerging data appear to support the use of this dynamic plant for consideration in dermatologic applications. As is often the case, much more work is necessary in the form of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of sea buckthorn formulations as well as the most appropriate avenues of research or uses for dermatologic application of this traditionally used botanical agent.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in office and as a e-commerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Teng H et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2024 Apr 24;324:117809. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2024.117809.

2. Wang Z et al. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024 Apr;263(Pt 1):130206. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130206.

3. Gupta A et al. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2005 Jun;4(2):88-92. doi: 10.1177/1534734605277401.

4. Pundir S et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2021 Feb 10;266:113434. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2020.113434.

5. Ma QG et al. J Agric Food Chem. 2023 Mar 29;71(12):4769-4788. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.2c06916.

6. Poljšak N et al. Phytother Res. 2020 Feb;34(2):254-269. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524.

7. Upadhyay NK et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:659705. doi: 10.1093/ecam/nep189.

8. Suryakumar G, Gupta A. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011 Nov 18;138(2):268-78. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.09.024.

9. Liu K et al. Front Pharmacol. 2022 Jul 8;13:914146. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.914146.

10. Akhtar N et al. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2010 Jan;2(1):13-7. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.62698.

11. Ren R et al. RSC Adv. 2020 Dec 17;10(73):44654-44671. doi: 10.1039/d0ra06488b.

12. Ito H et al. Burns. 2014 May;40(3):511-9. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2013.08.011.

13. Liu X et al. Food Sci Nutr. 2023 Dec 7;12(2):1082-1094. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.3823.

14. Liu X at al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2022 Sep 25;11(10):1900. doi: 10.3390/antiox11101900.

15. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Postepy Dermatol Alergol. 2014 Aug;31(4):229-234. doi: 10.5114/pdia.2014.40934.

16. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Pak J Pharm Sci. 2014 Nov;27(6):1919-22.

17. Khan AB et al. African J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011 Aug;5(8):1092-5.

18. Khan BA, Akhtar N, Braga VA. Trop J Pharm Res. 2012;11(6):955-62.

19. Gęgotek A et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2018 Aug 23;7(9):110. doi: 10.3390/antiox7090110.

20. Ivanišová E et al. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment. 2020 Apr-Jun;19(2):195-205. doi: 10.17306/J.AFS.0809.

21. Wang ZY, Luo XL, He CP. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2006 Jan;26(1):124-5.

Publications
Topics
Sections

A member of the Elaeagnaceae family, Hippophae rhamnoides, better known as sea buckthorn, is a high-altitude wild shrub endemic to Europe and Asia with edible fruits and a lengthy record of use in traditional Chinese medicine.1-6 Used as a health supplement and consumed in the diet throughout the world,5 sea buckthorn berries, seeds, and leaves have been used in traditional medicine to treat burns/injuries, edema, hypertension, inflammation, skin grafts, ulcers, and wounds.4,7

This hardy plant is associated with a wide range of biologic activities, including anti-atherogenic, anti-atopic dermatitis, antibacterial, anticancer, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, antioxidant, anti-psoriasis, anti-sebum, anti-stress, anti-tumor, cytoprotective, hepatoprotective, immunomodulatory, neuroprotective, radioprotective, and tissue regenerative functions.4,5,8-11Sea buckthorn has also been included in several cosmeceutical formulations to treat wrinkles, scars, pigmentary conditions, and hair disorders, as well as to rejuvenate, even, and smooth the skin.4

Indre Brazauskaite/EyeEm/Getty Images

Key Constituents

Functional constituents identified in sea buckthorn include alkaloids, carotenoids, flavonoids, lignans, organic acids, phenolic acids, proanthocyanidins, polyunsaturated acids (including omega-3, -6, -7, and -9), steroids, tannins, terpenoids, and volatile oils, as well as nutritional compounds such as minerals, proteins, and vitamins.4,5,11 Sea buckthorn pericarp oil contains copious amounts of saturated palmitic acid (29%-36%) and omega-7 unsaturated palmitoleic acid (36%-48%), which fosters cutaneous and mucosal epithelialization, as well as linoleic (10%-12%) and oleic (4%-6%) acids.12,6 Significant amounts of carotenoids as well as alpha‐linolenic fatty acid (38%), linoleic (36%), oleic (13%), and palmitic (7%) acids are present in sea buckthorn seed oil.6

Polysaccharides

In an expansive review on the pharmacological activities of sea buckthorn polysaccharides, Teng and colleagues reported in April 2024 that 20 diverse polysaccharides have been culled from sea buckthorn and exhibited various healthy activities, including antioxidant, anti-fatigue, anti-inflammatory, anti-obesity, anti-tumor, hepatoprotective, hypoglycemic, and immunoregulation, and regulation of intestinal flora activities.1

Proanthocyanidins and Anti-Aging

In 2023, Liu and colleagues investigated the anti–skin aging impact of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins in D-galactose-induced aging in mice given the known free radical scavenging activity of these compounds. They found the proanthocyanidins mitigated D-galactose-induced aging and can augment the total antioxidant capacity of the body. Sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can further attenuate the effects of skin aging by regulating the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and MMPs/TIMP system, thus amplifying collagen I and tropoelastin content.13

Baumann Cosmetic &amp; Research Institute
Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

A year earlier, many of the same investigators assessed the possible protective activity of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins against cutaneous aging engendered by oxidative stress from hydrogen peroxide. The compounds amplified superoxide dismutase and glutathione antioxidant functions. The extracts also fostered collagen I production in aging human skin fibroblasts via the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and hindered collagen I degradation by regulating the MMPs/TIMPs system, which maintained extracellular matrix integrity. Senescent cell migration was also promoted with 100 mcg/mL of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins. The researchers concluded that this sets the stage for investigating how sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can be incorporated in cosmetic formulations.14 In a separate study, Liu and colleagues demonstrated that sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can attenuate oxidative damage and protect mitochondrial function.9

 

 

Acne and Barrier Functions

The extracts of H rhamnoides and Cassia fistula in a combined formulation were found to be effective in lowering skin sebum content in humans with grade I and grade II acne vulgaris in a 2014 single-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, split-face study with two groups of 25 patients each (aged 18-37 years).15 Khan and colleagues have also reported that a sea buckthorn oil-in-water emulsion improved barrier function in human skin as tested by a tewameter and corneometer (noninvasive probes) in 13 healthy males with a mean age of 27 ± 4.8 years.16

Anti-Aging, Antioxidant, Antibacterial, Skin-Whitening Activity

Zaman and colleagues reported in 2011 that results from an in vivo study of the effects of a sea buckthorn fruit extract topical cream on stratum corneum water content and transepidermal water loss indicated that the formulation enhanced cell surface integrin expression thus facilitating collagen contraction.17

In 2012, Khan and colleagues reported amelioration in skin elasticity, thus achieving an anti-aging result, from the use of a water-in-oil–based hydroalcoholic cream loaded with fruit extract of H rhamnoides, as measured with a Cutometer.18 The previous year, some of the same researchers reported that the antioxidants and flavonoids found in a topical sea buckthorn formulation could decrease cutaneous melanin and erythema levels.

More recently, Gęgotek and colleagues found that sea buckthorn seed oil prevented redox balance and lipid metabolism disturbances in skin fibroblasts and keratinocytes caused by UVA or UVB. They suggested that such findings point to the potential of this natural agent to confer anti-inflammatory properties and photoprotection to the skin.19

In 2020, Ivanišová and colleagues investigated the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of H rhamnoides 100% oil, 100% juice, dry berries, and tea (dry berries, leaves, and twigs). They found that all of the studied sea buckthorn products displayed high antioxidant activity (identified through DPPH radical scavenging and molybdenum reducing antioxidant power tests). Sea buckthorn juice contained the highest total content of polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotenoids. All of the tested products also exhibited substantial antibacterial activity against the tested microbes.20

Burns and Wound Healing

In a preclinical study of the effects of sea buckthorn leaf extracts on wound healing in albino rats using an excision-punch wound model in 2005, Gupta and colleagues found that twice daily topical application of the aqueous leaf extract fostered wound healing. This was indicated by higher hydroxyproline and protein levels, a diminished wound area, and lower lipid peroxide levels. The investigators suggested that sea buckthorn may facilitate wound healing at least in part because of elevated antioxidant activity in the granulation tissue.3

A year later, Wang and colleagues reported on observations of using H rhamnoides oil, a traditional Chinese herbal medicine derived from sea buckthorn fruit, as a burn treatment. In the study, 151 burn patients received an H rhamnoides oil dressing (changed every other day until wound healing) that was covered with a disinfecting dressing. The dressing reduced swelling and effusion, and alleviated pain, with patients receiving the sea buckthorn dressing experiencing greater apparent exudation reduction, pain reduction, and more rapid epithelial cell growth and wound healing than controls (treated only with Vaseline gauze). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant.21

 

 

Conclusion

Sea buckthorn has been used for hundreds if not thousands of years in traditional medical applications, including for dermatologic purposes. Emerging data appear to support the use of this dynamic plant for consideration in dermatologic applications. As is often the case, much more work is necessary in the form of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of sea buckthorn formulations as well as the most appropriate avenues of research or uses for dermatologic application of this traditionally used botanical agent.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in office and as a e-commerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Teng H et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2024 Apr 24;324:117809. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2024.117809.

2. Wang Z et al. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024 Apr;263(Pt 1):130206. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130206.

3. Gupta A et al. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2005 Jun;4(2):88-92. doi: 10.1177/1534734605277401.

4. Pundir S et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2021 Feb 10;266:113434. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2020.113434.

5. Ma QG et al. J Agric Food Chem. 2023 Mar 29;71(12):4769-4788. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.2c06916.

6. Poljšak N et al. Phytother Res. 2020 Feb;34(2):254-269. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524.

7. Upadhyay NK et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:659705. doi: 10.1093/ecam/nep189.

8. Suryakumar G, Gupta A. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011 Nov 18;138(2):268-78. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.09.024.

9. Liu K et al. Front Pharmacol. 2022 Jul 8;13:914146. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.914146.

10. Akhtar N et al. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2010 Jan;2(1):13-7. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.62698.

11. Ren R et al. RSC Adv. 2020 Dec 17;10(73):44654-44671. doi: 10.1039/d0ra06488b.

12. Ito H et al. Burns. 2014 May;40(3):511-9. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2013.08.011.

13. Liu X et al. Food Sci Nutr. 2023 Dec 7;12(2):1082-1094. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.3823.

14. Liu X at al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2022 Sep 25;11(10):1900. doi: 10.3390/antiox11101900.

15. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Postepy Dermatol Alergol. 2014 Aug;31(4):229-234. doi: 10.5114/pdia.2014.40934.

16. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Pak J Pharm Sci. 2014 Nov;27(6):1919-22.

17. Khan AB et al. African J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011 Aug;5(8):1092-5.

18. Khan BA, Akhtar N, Braga VA. Trop J Pharm Res. 2012;11(6):955-62.

19. Gęgotek A et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2018 Aug 23;7(9):110. doi: 10.3390/antiox7090110.

20. Ivanišová E et al. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment. 2020 Apr-Jun;19(2):195-205. doi: 10.17306/J.AFS.0809.

21. Wang ZY, Luo XL, He CP. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2006 Jan;26(1):124-5.

A member of the Elaeagnaceae family, Hippophae rhamnoides, better known as sea buckthorn, is a high-altitude wild shrub endemic to Europe and Asia with edible fruits and a lengthy record of use in traditional Chinese medicine.1-6 Used as a health supplement and consumed in the diet throughout the world,5 sea buckthorn berries, seeds, and leaves have been used in traditional medicine to treat burns/injuries, edema, hypertension, inflammation, skin grafts, ulcers, and wounds.4,7

This hardy plant is associated with a wide range of biologic activities, including anti-atherogenic, anti-atopic dermatitis, antibacterial, anticancer, antifungal, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, antioxidant, anti-psoriasis, anti-sebum, anti-stress, anti-tumor, cytoprotective, hepatoprotective, immunomodulatory, neuroprotective, radioprotective, and tissue regenerative functions.4,5,8-11Sea buckthorn has also been included in several cosmeceutical formulations to treat wrinkles, scars, pigmentary conditions, and hair disorders, as well as to rejuvenate, even, and smooth the skin.4

Indre Brazauskaite/EyeEm/Getty Images

Key Constituents

Functional constituents identified in sea buckthorn include alkaloids, carotenoids, flavonoids, lignans, organic acids, phenolic acids, proanthocyanidins, polyunsaturated acids (including omega-3, -6, -7, and -9), steroids, tannins, terpenoids, and volatile oils, as well as nutritional compounds such as minerals, proteins, and vitamins.4,5,11 Sea buckthorn pericarp oil contains copious amounts of saturated palmitic acid (29%-36%) and omega-7 unsaturated palmitoleic acid (36%-48%), which fosters cutaneous and mucosal epithelialization, as well as linoleic (10%-12%) and oleic (4%-6%) acids.12,6 Significant amounts of carotenoids as well as alpha‐linolenic fatty acid (38%), linoleic (36%), oleic (13%), and palmitic (7%) acids are present in sea buckthorn seed oil.6

Polysaccharides

In an expansive review on the pharmacological activities of sea buckthorn polysaccharides, Teng and colleagues reported in April 2024 that 20 diverse polysaccharides have been culled from sea buckthorn and exhibited various healthy activities, including antioxidant, anti-fatigue, anti-inflammatory, anti-obesity, anti-tumor, hepatoprotective, hypoglycemic, and immunoregulation, and regulation of intestinal flora activities.1

Proanthocyanidins and Anti-Aging

In 2023, Liu and colleagues investigated the anti–skin aging impact of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins in D-galactose-induced aging in mice given the known free radical scavenging activity of these compounds. They found the proanthocyanidins mitigated D-galactose-induced aging and can augment the total antioxidant capacity of the body. Sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can further attenuate the effects of skin aging by regulating the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and MMPs/TIMP system, thus amplifying collagen I and tropoelastin content.13

Baumann Cosmetic &amp; Research Institute
Dr. Leslie S. Baumann

A year earlier, many of the same investigators assessed the possible protective activity of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins against cutaneous aging engendered by oxidative stress from hydrogen peroxide. The compounds amplified superoxide dismutase and glutathione antioxidant functions. The extracts also fostered collagen I production in aging human skin fibroblasts via the TGF-beta1/Smads pathway and hindered collagen I degradation by regulating the MMPs/TIMPs system, which maintained extracellular matrix integrity. Senescent cell migration was also promoted with 100 mcg/mL of sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins. The researchers concluded that this sets the stage for investigating how sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can be incorporated in cosmetic formulations.14 In a separate study, Liu and colleagues demonstrated that sea buckthorn proanthocyanidins can attenuate oxidative damage and protect mitochondrial function.9

 

 

Acne and Barrier Functions

The extracts of H rhamnoides and Cassia fistula in a combined formulation were found to be effective in lowering skin sebum content in humans with grade I and grade II acne vulgaris in a 2014 single-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, split-face study with two groups of 25 patients each (aged 18-37 years).15 Khan and colleagues have also reported that a sea buckthorn oil-in-water emulsion improved barrier function in human skin as tested by a tewameter and corneometer (noninvasive probes) in 13 healthy males with a mean age of 27 ± 4.8 years.16

Anti-Aging, Antioxidant, Antibacterial, Skin-Whitening Activity

Zaman and colleagues reported in 2011 that results from an in vivo study of the effects of a sea buckthorn fruit extract topical cream on stratum corneum water content and transepidermal water loss indicated that the formulation enhanced cell surface integrin expression thus facilitating collagen contraction.17

In 2012, Khan and colleagues reported amelioration in skin elasticity, thus achieving an anti-aging result, from the use of a water-in-oil–based hydroalcoholic cream loaded with fruit extract of H rhamnoides, as measured with a Cutometer.18 The previous year, some of the same researchers reported that the antioxidants and flavonoids found in a topical sea buckthorn formulation could decrease cutaneous melanin and erythema levels.

More recently, Gęgotek and colleagues found that sea buckthorn seed oil prevented redox balance and lipid metabolism disturbances in skin fibroblasts and keratinocytes caused by UVA or UVB. They suggested that such findings point to the potential of this natural agent to confer anti-inflammatory properties and photoprotection to the skin.19

In 2020, Ivanišová and colleagues investigated the antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of H rhamnoides 100% oil, 100% juice, dry berries, and tea (dry berries, leaves, and twigs). They found that all of the studied sea buckthorn products displayed high antioxidant activity (identified through DPPH radical scavenging and molybdenum reducing antioxidant power tests). Sea buckthorn juice contained the highest total content of polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotenoids. All of the tested products also exhibited substantial antibacterial activity against the tested microbes.20

Burns and Wound Healing

In a preclinical study of the effects of sea buckthorn leaf extracts on wound healing in albino rats using an excision-punch wound model in 2005, Gupta and colleagues found that twice daily topical application of the aqueous leaf extract fostered wound healing. This was indicated by higher hydroxyproline and protein levels, a diminished wound area, and lower lipid peroxide levels. The investigators suggested that sea buckthorn may facilitate wound healing at least in part because of elevated antioxidant activity in the granulation tissue.3

A year later, Wang and colleagues reported on observations of using H rhamnoides oil, a traditional Chinese herbal medicine derived from sea buckthorn fruit, as a burn treatment. In the study, 151 burn patients received an H rhamnoides oil dressing (changed every other day until wound healing) that was covered with a disinfecting dressing. The dressing reduced swelling and effusion, and alleviated pain, with patients receiving the sea buckthorn dressing experiencing greater apparent exudation reduction, pain reduction, and more rapid epithelial cell growth and wound healing than controls (treated only with Vaseline gauze). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant.21

 

 

Conclusion

Sea buckthorn has been used for hundreds if not thousands of years in traditional medical applications, including for dermatologic purposes. Emerging data appear to support the use of this dynamic plant for consideration in dermatologic applications. As is often the case, much more work is necessary in the form of randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of sea buckthorn formulations as well as the most appropriate avenues of research or uses for dermatologic application of this traditionally used botanical agent.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in office and as a e-commerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Teng H et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2024 Apr 24;324:117809. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2024.117809.

2. Wang Z et al. Int J Biol Macromol. 2024 Apr;263(Pt 1):130206. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130206.

3. Gupta A et al. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2005 Jun;4(2):88-92. doi: 10.1177/1534734605277401.

4. Pundir S et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2021 Feb 10;266:113434. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2020.113434.

5. Ma QG et al. J Agric Food Chem. 2023 Mar 29;71(12):4769-4788. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.2c06916.

6. Poljšak N et al. Phytother Res. 2020 Feb;34(2):254-269. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524. doi: 10.1002/ptr.6524.

7. Upadhyay NK et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2011;2011:659705. doi: 10.1093/ecam/nep189.

8. Suryakumar G, Gupta A. J Ethnopharmacol. 2011 Nov 18;138(2):268-78. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2011.09.024.

9. Liu K et al. Front Pharmacol. 2022 Jul 8;13:914146. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.914146.

10. Akhtar N et al. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2010 Jan;2(1):13-7. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.62698.

11. Ren R et al. RSC Adv. 2020 Dec 17;10(73):44654-44671. doi: 10.1039/d0ra06488b.

12. Ito H et al. Burns. 2014 May;40(3):511-9. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2013.08.011.

13. Liu X et al. Food Sci Nutr. 2023 Dec 7;12(2):1082-1094. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.3823.

14. Liu X at al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2022 Sep 25;11(10):1900. doi: 10.3390/antiox11101900.

15. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Postepy Dermatol Alergol. 2014 Aug;31(4):229-234. doi: 10.5114/pdia.2014.40934.

16. Khan BA, Akhtar N. Pak J Pharm Sci. 2014 Nov;27(6):1919-22.

17. Khan AB et al. African J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011 Aug;5(8):1092-5.

18. Khan BA, Akhtar N, Braga VA. Trop J Pharm Res. 2012;11(6):955-62.

19. Gęgotek A et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2018 Aug 23;7(9):110. doi: 10.3390/antiox7090110.

20. Ivanišová E et al. Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment. 2020 Apr-Jun;19(2):195-205. doi: 10.17306/J.AFS.0809.

21. Wang ZY, Luo XL, He CP. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2006 Jan;26(1):124-5.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Skin Fungal Infections Increasing in the United States

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 11/05/2024 - 13:47

 

TOPLINE:

An estimated 72 million ambulatory visits for superficial cutaneous fungal infections (SCFIs) in the United States were recorded during 2005-2016, with an increasing trend over the years. Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were among the most common infections.

METHODOLOGY:

  • Researchers analyzed data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2005 to 2016, to evaluate trends in the prevalence of SCFIs during this period.
  • The analysis included over 13 billion ambulatory visits to nonfederally funded community, office-based physician practices, and emergency or outpatient departments in the United States, with an estimated 1,104,258,333 annual average.
  • The Jonckheere-Terpstra nonparametric test for trend was used to determine the pattern of SCFI prevalence over the 12-year period.

TAKEAWAY:

  • SCFIs constituted approximately 0.54% of all annual ambulatory visits, with an estimated 6,001,852 visits for SCFIs per year and over 72 million total visits for the infections during the study period.
  • Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were the most common infections, comprising 20.5%, 12.2%, and 12.0% of the total visits, respectively.
  • Researchers noted an increasing trend in annual SCFIs (P = .03).

IN PRACTICE:

“We observed a high burden of SCFIs among outpatient visits in the United States and an increasing trend in their prevalence,” the authors wrote. These results, they added, “highlight the importance of healthcare providers being able to identify, treat, and, when necessary, refer patients with SCFIs, as a high burden of disease is associated with a significant negative impact on the individual and population levels.”

SOURCE:

The study was co-led by Sarah L. Spaulding, BS, and A. Mitchel Wride, BA, from the Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and was published online October 30 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

LIMITATIONS:

The authors did not list any study limitations.

DISCLOSURES:

The lead authors were supported by Yale School of Medicine Medical Student Research Fellowships. Two other authors declared receiving consulting fees, research funding, and licensing fees outside the submitted work and also served on a data and safety monitoring board for Advarra Inc.
 

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

TOPLINE:

An estimated 72 million ambulatory visits for superficial cutaneous fungal infections (SCFIs) in the United States were recorded during 2005-2016, with an increasing trend over the years. Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were among the most common infections.

METHODOLOGY:

  • Researchers analyzed data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2005 to 2016, to evaluate trends in the prevalence of SCFIs during this period.
  • The analysis included over 13 billion ambulatory visits to nonfederally funded community, office-based physician practices, and emergency or outpatient departments in the United States, with an estimated 1,104,258,333 annual average.
  • The Jonckheere-Terpstra nonparametric test for trend was used to determine the pattern of SCFI prevalence over the 12-year period.

TAKEAWAY:

  • SCFIs constituted approximately 0.54% of all annual ambulatory visits, with an estimated 6,001,852 visits for SCFIs per year and over 72 million total visits for the infections during the study period.
  • Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were the most common infections, comprising 20.5%, 12.2%, and 12.0% of the total visits, respectively.
  • Researchers noted an increasing trend in annual SCFIs (P = .03).

IN PRACTICE:

“We observed a high burden of SCFIs among outpatient visits in the United States and an increasing trend in their prevalence,” the authors wrote. These results, they added, “highlight the importance of healthcare providers being able to identify, treat, and, when necessary, refer patients with SCFIs, as a high burden of disease is associated with a significant negative impact on the individual and population levels.”

SOURCE:

The study was co-led by Sarah L. Spaulding, BS, and A. Mitchel Wride, BA, from the Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and was published online October 30 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

LIMITATIONS:

The authors did not list any study limitations.

DISCLOSURES:

The lead authors were supported by Yale School of Medicine Medical Student Research Fellowships. Two other authors declared receiving consulting fees, research funding, and licensing fees outside the submitted work and also served on a data and safety monitoring board for Advarra Inc.
 

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

 

TOPLINE:

An estimated 72 million ambulatory visits for superficial cutaneous fungal infections (SCFIs) in the United States were recorded during 2005-2016, with an increasing trend over the years. Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were among the most common infections.

METHODOLOGY:

  • Researchers analyzed data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2005 to 2016, to evaluate trends in the prevalence of SCFIs during this period.
  • The analysis included over 13 billion ambulatory visits to nonfederally funded community, office-based physician practices, and emergency or outpatient departments in the United States, with an estimated 1,104,258,333 annual average.
  • The Jonckheere-Terpstra nonparametric test for trend was used to determine the pattern of SCFI prevalence over the 12-year period.

TAKEAWAY:

  • SCFIs constituted approximately 0.54% of all annual ambulatory visits, with an estimated 6,001,852 visits for SCFIs per year and over 72 million total visits for the infections during the study period.
  • Tinea unguium, tinea pedis, and tinea corporis were the most common infections, comprising 20.5%, 12.2%, and 12.0% of the total visits, respectively.
  • Researchers noted an increasing trend in annual SCFIs (P = .03).

IN PRACTICE:

“We observed a high burden of SCFIs among outpatient visits in the United States and an increasing trend in their prevalence,” the authors wrote. These results, they added, “highlight the importance of healthcare providers being able to identify, treat, and, when necessary, refer patients with SCFIs, as a high burden of disease is associated with a significant negative impact on the individual and population levels.”

SOURCE:

The study was co-led by Sarah L. Spaulding, BS, and A. Mitchel Wride, BA, from the Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, and was published online October 30 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

LIMITATIONS:

The authors did not list any study limitations.

DISCLOSURES:

The lead authors were supported by Yale School of Medicine Medical Student Research Fellowships. Two other authors declared receiving consulting fees, research funding, and licensing fees outside the submitted work and also served on a data and safety monitoring board for Advarra Inc.
 

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Study Finds Link to Increased Risk for Bulimia, Binge Eating and HS

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 11/05/2024 - 13:44

Individuals with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) face a significantly increased risk for bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, an analysis of national data showed.

“Clinicians should actively screen for eating disorders,” particularly bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, in patients with HS,” lead study author Christopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, told this news organization in advance of the annual Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurative Advances, where the study was presented during an oral abstract session. “The significant psychological burden in these patients requires a holistic approach that integrates both dermatologic and psychosocial care. Addressing their mental health needs is essential for improving overall patient outcomes and quality of life,” he added.

Chrisopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at the Georgetown University School of Medicine,
Chrisopher Guirguis
Dr. Chrisopher Guirguis

In collaboration with fellow Georgetown medical student and first author Lauren Chin and Mikael Horissian, MD, a dermatologist and director of the HS Clinic at Gesinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, Guirguis drew from the National Institutes of Health’s All of Us Research Program to identify 1653 individuals with a diagnosis of HS and a control group of 8265 individuals without a diagnosis of HS. They used the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, body dysmorphic disorder, binge eating disorder, and eating disorder, unspecified. Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) was also included because of its association with bulimia. They used statistical models to compare cohorts and comorbidities. “What makes this work unique is its focus on the link between HS and eating disorders, a relationship previously underexplored,” he said.

The mean age of the overall study cohort was 46.8 years, and 78.6% were female. Univariate analysis revealed that, compared with controls, individuals in the HS cohort showed significantly increased diagnoses of bulimia, binge eating disorder, OCD, and eating disorder, unspecified, by 2.6, 5.48, 2.50, and 2.43 times, respectively (< .05 for all associations). After adjusting for age, race, sex, and ethnicity, the researchers observed that patients with HS were 4.46 times as likely to have a diagnosis of binge eating disorder and 3.51 times as likely to have a diagnosis of bulimia as those who did not have HS (< .05 for both associations).

Guirguis said that the absence of body dysmorphic disorder diagnoses in the HS cohort was unexpected. “Given HS’s known association with body image issues, we anticipated a higher prevalence of BDD,” he said. “This discrepancy may reflect underreporting or diagnostic overshadowing, where the physical symptoms of HS dominate clinical attention, potentially masking or complicating the identification of psychological conditions like BDD.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the potential for variations in documentation practices in the database. “Additionally, there may be bias due to underrepresentation of certain demographic groups or underreporting of psychological comorbidities, which could influence the findings.”

Patricia M. Richey, MD, assistant professor of dermatology, at Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, who was asked to comment on the study, said the results “should affect how physicians discuss lifestyle recommendations in those already at increased risk of psychiatric disease and disrupted body image.” The findings should also “prompt physicians to screen this patient population more thoroughly for eating disorders as we know they are an underrecognized and often undertreated entity,” she added.

Neither the study authors nor Richey reported having relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Individuals with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) face a significantly increased risk for bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, an analysis of national data showed.

“Clinicians should actively screen for eating disorders,” particularly bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, in patients with HS,” lead study author Christopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, told this news organization in advance of the annual Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurative Advances, where the study was presented during an oral abstract session. “The significant psychological burden in these patients requires a holistic approach that integrates both dermatologic and psychosocial care. Addressing their mental health needs is essential for improving overall patient outcomes and quality of life,” he added.

Chrisopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at the Georgetown University School of Medicine,
Chrisopher Guirguis
Dr. Chrisopher Guirguis

In collaboration with fellow Georgetown medical student and first author Lauren Chin and Mikael Horissian, MD, a dermatologist and director of the HS Clinic at Gesinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, Guirguis drew from the National Institutes of Health’s All of Us Research Program to identify 1653 individuals with a diagnosis of HS and a control group of 8265 individuals without a diagnosis of HS. They used the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, body dysmorphic disorder, binge eating disorder, and eating disorder, unspecified. Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) was also included because of its association with bulimia. They used statistical models to compare cohorts and comorbidities. “What makes this work unique is its focus on the link between HS and eating disorders, a relationship previously underexplored,” he said.

The mean age of the overall study cohort was 46.8 years, and 78.6% were female. Univariate analysis revealed that, compared with controls, individuals in the HS cohort showed significantly increased diagnoses of bulimia, binge eating disorder, OCD, and eating disorder, unspecified, by 2.6, 5.48, 2.50, and 2.43 times, respectively (< .05 for all associations). After adjusting for age, race, sex, and ethnicity, the researchers observed that patients with HS were 4.46 times as likely to have a diagnosis of binge eating disorder and 3.51 times as likely to have a diagnosis of bulimia as those who did not have HS (< .05 for both associations).

Guirguis said that the absence of body dysmorphic disorder diagnoses in the HS cohort was unexpected. “Given HS’s known association with body image issues, we anticipated a higher prevalence of BDD,” he said. “This discrepancy may reflect underreporting or diagnostic overshadowing, where the physical symptoms of HS dominate clinical attention, potentially masking or complicating the identification of psychological conditions like BDD.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the potential for variations in documentation practices in the database. “Additionally, there may be bias due to underrepresentation of certain demographic groups or underreporting of psychological comorbidities, which could influence the findings.”

Patricia M. Richey, MD, assistant professor of dermatology, at Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, who was asked to comment on the study, said the results “should affect how physicians discuss lifestyle recommendations in those already at increased risk of psychiatric disease and disrupted body image.” The findings should also “prompt physicians to screen this patient population more thoroughly for eating disorders as we know they are an underrecognized and often undertreated entity,” she added.

Neither the study authors nor Richey reported having relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Individuals with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) face a significantly increased risk for bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, an analysis of national data showed.

“Clinicians should actively screen for eating disorders,” particularly bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder, in patients with HS,” lead study author Christopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, told this news organization in advance of the annual Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurative Advances, where the study was presented during an oral abstract session. “The significant psychological burden in these patients requires a holistic approach that integrates both dermatologic and psychosocial care. Addressing their mental health needs is essential for improving overall patient outcomes and quality of life,” he added.

Chrisopher Guirguis, DMD, a student at the Georgetown University School of Medicine,
Chrisopher Guirguis
Dr. Chrisopher Guirguis

In collaboration with fellow Georgetown medical student and first author Lauren Chin and Mikael Horissian, MD, a dermatologist and director of the HS Clinic at Gesinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, Guirguis drew from the National Institutes of Health’s All of Us Research Program to identify 1653 individuals with a diagnosis of HS and a control group of 8265 individuals without a diagnosis of HS. They used the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership to identify anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, body dysmorphic disorder, binge eating disorder, and eating disorder, unspecified. Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) was also included because of its association with bulimia. They used statistical models to compare cohorts and comorbidities. “What makes this work unique is its focus on the link between HS and eating disorders, a relationship previously underexplored,” he said.

The mean age of the overall study cohort was 46.8 years, and 78.6% were female. Univariate analysis revealed that, compared with controls, individuals in the HS cohort showed significantly increased diagnoses of bulimia, binge eating disorder, OCD, and eating disorder, unspecified, by 2.6, 5.48, 2.50, and 2.43 times, respectively (< .05 for all associations). After adjusting for age, race, sex, and ethnicity, the researchers observed that patients with HS were 4.46 times as likely to have a diagnosis of binge eating disorder and 3.51 times as likely to have a diagnosis of bulimia as those who did not have HS (< .05 for both associations).

Guirguis said that the absence of body dysmorphic disorder diagnoses in the HS cohort was unexpected. “Given HS’s known association with body image issues, we anticipated a higher prevalence of BDD,” he said. “This discrepancy may reflect underreporting or diagnostic overshadowing, where the physical symptoms of HS dominate clinical attention, potentially masking or complicating the identification of psychological conditions like BDD.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the potential for variations in documentation practices in the database. “Additionally, there may be bias due to underrepresentation of certain demographic groups or underreporting of psychological comorbidities, which could influence the findings.”

Patricia M. Richey, MD, assistant professor of dermatology, at Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts, who was asked to comment on the study, said the results “should affect how physicians discuss lifestyle recommendations in those already at increased risk of psychiatric disease and disrupted body image.” The findings should also “prompt physicians to screen this patient population more thoroughly for eating disorders as we know they are an underrecognized and often undertreated entity,” she added.

Neither the study authors nor Richey reported having relevant disclosures.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Effects of Bimekizumab Durable for HS Through One Year

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 11/05/2024 - 12:35

— The monoclonal antibody bimekizumab (Bimzelx) achieves significant and clinically meaningful improvements in moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) that are maintained well beyond the initial 1-year clinical trial treatment period, according to new data from an open-label extension period.

“Efficacy and health-related quality-of-life outcomes were maintained through 2 years of treatment,” study presenter Christos C. Zouboulis, MD, professor of dermatology, venereology, and allergology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Dessau, Germany, said at the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) 2024 Congress.

“No new safety signals were observed,” he added. “These data highlight the durability and consistency of bimekizumab treatment in patients with moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa,” Zouboulis concluded.
 

Efficacy Maintained

“This is the type of long-term data that clinicians hope to see in large phase 3 trials for hidradenitis suppurativa medications,” commented Jennifer L. Hsiao, MD, clinical associate professor of dermatology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the study.

She told this news organization that, beyond maintained improvement of patient-reported quality of life, the results are “raising the bar in terms of measuring treatment success,” with over three quarters of patients achieving a high level of response on the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) scale at the final 96-week follow-up.

“Clinicians and patients have struggled with maintaining treatment efficacy over time with the first [Food and Drug Administration]–approved class of biologics for hidradenitis suppurativa — TNF [tumor necrosis factor]–alpha antagonists,” Hsiao said. She emphasized that sustained treatment efficacy will reduce the need for continued treatment switching and “hopefully improve treatment adherence.”

“It was also helpful to see that, consistent with studies of bimekizumab in psoriasis, rates of oral candidiasis appear to decrease with prolonged exposure over 2 years, though as with any open-label extension study, study dropout is a limitation,” she said.

“The availability of long-term efficacy and safety data, such as those shown in this study, will help guide shared decision-making discussions with our patients.” Overall, Hsiao believes there is “much to be excited about in the field of hidradenitis suppurativa, with a robust pipeline of potential treatments.”
 

One-Year Extension Study

HS is a “chronic and debilitating inflammatory skin disease,” Zouboulis told the audience. He noted that interleukin (IL)–17F and IL-17A are highly expressed in lesional skin and play a role in the disease immunopathogenesis.

Bimekizumab is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits both IL-17F and IL-17A. It has previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in patients with moderate to severe HS in the phase 3 BE HEARD I and BE HEARD II trials evaluating several dosing regimens.

Zouboulis said the current analysis combines data from the two phase 3 studies with the BE HEARD EXT open-label extension study, in which patients from both trials were continued on bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks.

Of the 1014 patients initially enrolled in the two trials, 556 continued into the open-label extension. Their average age was 36.6 years, and 53.8% were women. The majority (80.6%) were White. Of the 556 patients enrolled in the extension, 446 completed the 1-year extension study.

The average draining tunnel count at baseline was 3.8, and 54.5% had Hurley stage II disease; the remaining 45.5% had stage III disease. The mean total Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score at baseline was 11.0, indicating the HS was having a very large impact on the patients’ lives.

After the 16-week initial treatment period and the maintenance treatment period out to 48 weeks, 64.0% of patients achieved HiSCR75, indicating at least a 75% reduction from baseline in the total abscess and inflammatory nodule count, rising to 77.1% at the end of the open-label extension, after a total follow-up of 96 weeks.

HiSCR100 scores, indicating a 100% reduction in total abscess and inflammatory nodule counts, were achieved by 30.2% of 556 patients after 48 weeks and 44.2% of 446 at the 96-week follow-up.

These findings were mirrored by substantial reductions on the International HS Severity Score System, with a 70.3% reduction over baseline at 48 weeks and a 79.8% reduction at the final follow-up.

There were also “clinically meaningful” reductions in the total draining tunnel count at 1 year that were further reduced at 2 years, Zouboulis reported, at a 57.5% reduction over baseline, increasing to 73.7% by 96 weeks. The mean draining tunnel count at the end of follow-up was 1.1.

Over the full 96 weeks, the mean DLQI score reduced from 11.0 to 4.7, with 33.9% of patients achieving a score of 0 or 1 on the scale, which he said is basically patients saying: “I don’t have disease now.”

Finally, the safety data showed that there were “no differences compared to what we knew before,” Zouboulis said, with the most common treatment-related adverse events being hidradenitis, coronavirus infection, and oral candidiasis. There were few serious and severe treatment-related adverse events, and few that led to treatment discontinuation.

The study was funded by UCB.Zouboulis declared relationships with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, EAD, European Union, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, GSK, InflaRx, MSD, Novartis, Relaxera, UCB, Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Idorsia, Incyte, L’Oréal, NAOS-BIODERMA, Pfizer, PM, Sanofi. Hsiao is on the board of directors for the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation and has declared relationships with AbbVie, Aclaris Therapeutics, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Novartis, Sanofi-Regeneron, and UCB.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

— The monoclonal antibody bimekizumab (Bimzelx) achieves significant and clinically meaningful improvements in moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) that are maintained well beyond the initial 1-year clinical trial treatment period, according to new data from an open-label extension period.

“Efficacy and health-related quality-of-life outcomes were maintained through 2 years of treatment,” study presenter Christos C. Zouboulis, MD, professor of dermatology, venereology, and allergology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Dessau, Germany, said at the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) 2024 Congress.

“No new safety signals were observed,” he added. “These data highlight the durability and consistency of bimekizumab treatment in patients with moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa,” Zouboulis concluded.
 

Efficacy Maintained

“This is the type of long-term data that clinicians hope to see in large phase 3 trials for hidradenitis suppurativa medications,” commented Jennifer L. Hsiao, MD, clinical associate professor of dermatology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the study.

She told this news organization that, beyond maintained improvement of patient-reported quality of life, the results are “raising the bar in terms of measuring treatment success,” with over three quarters of patients achieving a high level of response on the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) scale at the final 96-week follow-up.

“Clinicians and patients have struggled with maintaining treatment efficacy over time with the first [Food and Drug Administration]–approved class of biologics for hidradenitis suppurativa — TNF [tumor necrosis factor]–alpha antagonists,” Hsiao said. She emphasized that sustained treatment efficacy will reduce the need for continued treatment switching and “hopefully improve treatment adherence.”

“It was also helpful to see that, consistent with studies of bimekizumab in psoriasis, rates of oral candidiasis appear to decrease with prolonged exposure over 2 years, though as with any open-label extension study, study dropout is a limitation,” she said.

“The availability of long-term efficacy and safety data, such as those shown in this study, will help guide shared decision-making discussions with our patients.” Overall, Hsiao believes there is “much to be excited about in the field of hidradenitis suppurativa, with a robust pipeline of potential treatments.”
 

One-Year Extension Study

HS is a “chronic and debilitating inflammatory skin disease,” Zouboulis told the audience. He noted that interleukin (IL)–17F and IL-17A are highly expressed in lesional skin and play a role in the disease immunopathogenesis.

Bimekizumab is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits both IL-17F and IL-17A. It has previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in patients with moderate to severe HS in the phase 3 BE HEARD I and BE HEARD II trials evaluating several dosing regimens.

Zouboulis said the current analysis combines data from the two phase 3 studies with the BE HEARD EXT open-label extension study, in which patients from both trials were continued on bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks.

Of the 1014 patients initially enrolled in the two trials, 556 continued into the open-label extension. Their average age was 36.6 years, and 53.8% were women. The majority (80.6%) were White. Of the 556 patients enrolled in the extension, 446 completed the 1-year extension study.

The average draining tunnel count at baseline was 3.8, and 54.5% had Hurley stage II disease; the remaining 45.5% had stage III disease. The mean total Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score at baseline was 11.0, indicating the HS was having a very large impact on the patients’ lives.

After the 16-week initial treatment period and the maintenance treatment period out to 48 weeks, 64.0% of patients achieved HiSCR75, indicating at least a 75% reduction from baseline in the total abscess and inflammatory nodule count, rising to 77.1% at the end of the open-label extension, after a total follow-up of 96 weeks.

HiSCR100 scores, indicating a 100% reduction in total abscess and inflammatory nodule counts, were achieved by 30.2% of 556 patients after 48 weeks and 44.2% of 446 at the 96-week follow-up.

These findings were mirrored by substantial reductions on the International HS Severity Score System, with a 70.3% reduction over baseline at 48 weeks and a 79.8% reduction at the final follow-up.

There were also “clinically meaningful” reductions in the total draining tunnel count at 1 year that were further reduced at 2 years, Zouboulis reported, at a 57.5% reduction over baseline, increasing to 73.7% by 96 weeks. The mean draining tunnel count at the end of follow-up was 1.1.

Over the full 96 weeks, the mean DLQI score reduced from 11.0 to 4.7, with 33.9% of patients achieving a score of 0 or 1 on the scale, which he said is basically patients saying: “I don’t have disease now.”

Finally, the safety data showed that there were “no differences compared to what we knew before,” Zouboulis said, with the most common treatment-related adverse events being hidradenitis, coronavirus infection, and oral candidiasis. There were few serious and severe treatment-related adverse events, and few that led to treatment discontinuation.

The study was funded by UCB.Zouboulis declared relationships with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, EAD, European Union, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, GSK, InflaRx, MSD, Novartis, Relaxera, UCB, Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Idorsia, Incyte, L’Oréal, NAOS-BIODERMA, Pfizer, PM, Sanofi. Hsiao is on the board of directors for the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation and has declared relationships with AbbVie, Aclaris Therapeutics, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Novartis, Sanofi-Regeneron, and UCB.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

— The monoclonal antibody bimekizumab (Bimzelx) achieves significant and clinically meaningful improvements in moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) that are maintained well beyond the initial 1-year clinical trial treatment period, according to new data from an open-label extension period.

“Efficacy and health-related quality-of-life outcomes were maintained through 2 years of treatment,” study presenter Christos C. Zouboulis, MD, professor of dermatology, venereology, and allergology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Dessau, Germany, said at the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) 2024 Congress.

“No new safety signals were observed,” he added. “These data highlight the durability and consistency of bimekizumab treatment in patients with moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa,” Zouboulis concluded.
 

Efficacy Maintained

“This is the type of long-term data that clinicians hope to see in large phase 3 trials for hidradenitis suppurativa medications,” commented Jennifer L. Hsiao, MD, clinical associate professor of dermatology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, who was not involved in the study.

She told this news organization that, beyond maintained improvement of patient-reported quality of life, the results are “raising the bar in terms of measuring treatment success,” with over three quarters of patients achieving a high level of response on the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) scale at the final 96-week follow-up.

“Clinicians and patients have struggled with maintaining treatment efficacy over time with the first [Food and Drug Administration]–approved class of biologics for hidradenitis suppurativa — TNF [tumor necrosis factor]–alpha antagonists,” Hsiao said. She emphasized that sustained treatment efficacy will reduce the need for continued treatment switching and “hopefully improve treatment adherence.”

“It was also helpful to see that, consistent with studies of bimekizumab in psoriasis, rates of oral candidiasis appear to decrease with prolonged exposure over 2 years, though as with any open-label extension study, study dropout is a limitation,” she said.

“The availability of long-term efficacy and safety data, such as those shown in this study, will help guide shared decision-making discussions with our patients.” Overall, Hsiao believes there is “much to be excited about in the field of hidradenitis suppurativa, with a robust pipeline of potential treatments.”
 

One-Year Extension Study

HS is a “chronic and debilitating inflammatory skin disease,” Zouboulis told the audience. He noted that interleukin (IL)–17F and IL-17A are highly expressed in lesional skin and play a role in the disease immunopathogenesis.

Bimekizumab is a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody that selectively inhibits both IL-17F and IL-17A. It has previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements in patients with moderate to severe HS in the phase 3 BE HEARD I and BE HEARD II trials evaluating several dosing regimens.

Zouboulis said the current analysis combines data from the two phase 3 studies with the BE HEARD EXT open-label extension study, in which patients from both trials were continued on bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks.

Of the 1014 patients initially enrolled in the two trials, 556 continued into the open-label extension. Their average age was 36.6 years, and 53.8% were women. The majority (80.6%) were White. Of the 556 patients enrolled in the extension, 446 completed the 1-year extension study.

The average draining tunnel count at baseline was 3.8, and 54.5% had Hurley stage II disease; the remaining 45.5% had stage III disease. The mean total Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score at baseline was 11.0, indicating the HS was having a very large impact on the patients’ lives.

After the 16-week initial treatment period and the maintenance treatment period out to 48 weeks, 64.0% of patients achieved HiSCR75, indicating at least a 75% reduction from baseline in the total abscess and inflammatory nodule count, rising to 77.1% at the end of the open-label extension, after a total follow-up of 96 weeks.

HiSCR100 scores, indicating a 100% reduction in total abscess and inflammatory nodule counts, were achieved by 30.2% of 556 patients after 48 weeks and 44.2% of 446 at the 96-week follow-up.

These findings were mirrored by substantial reductions on the International HS Severity Score System, with a 70.3% reduction over baseline at 48 weeks and a 79.8% reduction at the final follow-up.

There were also “clinically meaningful” reductions in the total draining tunnel count at 1 year that were further reduced at 2 years, Zouboulis reported, at a 57.5% reduction over baseline, increasing to 73.7% by 96 weeks. The mean draining tunnel count at the end of follow-up was 1.1.

Over the full 96 weeks, the mean DLQI score reduced from 11.0 to 4.7, with 33.9% of patients achieving a score of 0 or 1 on the scale, which he said is basically patients saying: “I don’t have disease now.”

Finally, the safety data showed that there were “no differences compared to what we knew before,” Zouboulis said, with the most common treatment-related adverse events being hidradenitis, coronavirus infection, and oral candidiasis. There were few serious and severe treatment-related adverse events, and few that led to treatment discontinuation.

The study was funded by UCB.Zouboulis declared relationships with AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, EAD, European Union, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, GSK, InflaRx, MSD, Novartis, Relaxera, UCB, Almirall, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Idorsia, Incyte, L’Oréal, NAOS-BIODERMA, Pfizer, PM, Sanofi. Hsiao is on the board of directors for the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation and has declared relationships with AbbVie, Aclaris Therapeutics, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Incyte, Novartis, Sanofi-Regeneron, and UCB.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM EADV 2024

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Men Wanted: New Efforts to Attract Male Nurses

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 11/05/2024 - 11:34

Only 12% of the nurses providing patient care at hospitals and health clinics today are men. Although the percentage of nurses has increased — men made up just 2.7% of nurses in 1970 — nursing is still considered a “pink collar” profession, a female-dominated field.

“We’ve made strides over the last couple of decades, but [the number of men pursuing nursing careers] is leveling out,” said Jason Dunne, DNP, MSN, RN, chief academic officer at the Arizona College of Nursing, Phoenix. “There continues to be persistent gender stereotypes that [have] discouraged men from entering the profession.”

A nationwide nursing shortage has led to increased efforts to attract more men to the profession and ensure that men in nursing feel valued and supported and want to continue their careers long term.

“The nursing shortage is very real,” Dunne said. “We need to be highly focused on the shortage and look at opportunities to bring diversity into the profession, and one big way to solve it is bringing more men into nursing.”
 

Representation Matters

Colleges recognize the need to diversify their nursing student population and have turned their attention to increasing the number of men attending informational sessions and career days. Dunne believes, “There is a general lack of awareness of nursing as a career choice [for men].”

The Nursing Consortium of Florida hosts a “Day in the Life of a Nurse” program to introduce high school students to nursing careers, and the University of Virginia School of Nursing invites male nursing students to speak at educational events to promote workforce diversity.

“When I was growing up, the males wouldn’t have been included in those sessions,” said Melissa Gilbert Gomes, PhD, APRN, PMHNP-BC, FNAP, FAAN, associate dean for diversity, equity, and inclusion at the University of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, Virginia. “It was nice to see their interest and to have a male student there for them to ask questions and to help them see that this could be a place for them.”

Nursing schools have also engaged in other efforts to encourage more men to consider nursing careers, from highlighting male nurses in marketing materials and engaging with men at career fairs to updating course curriculum to include content on men’s health and connecting male nursing students with men in nursing faculty or clinical settings.

Focusing on nursing as a lucrative career choice could also attract more men to the profession. On average, male registered nurses (RNs) make $7300 per year more than their female counterparts due to the gender pay gap. The median wage for male RNs in acute care, cardiology, and perioperative specialties is $90,000 annually.

At the University of Virginia School of Nursing, which the American Association for Men in Nursing (AAMN) named “Best School for Men in Nursing” in 2023, 20% of nursing students are men.

The school has a Men Advancing Nursing club and is in the process of chartering a new AAMN chapter. The goal, according to Gomes, is to create an environment where male nursing students feel represented and supported.

“Valuing the perspective that men bring [to nursing] is important,” she said. “Coming together [and] having that camaraderie and intrinsic motivation to specifically speak to areas that impact men ... is important.”
 

 

 

Promoting Patient Care

Highlighting the diversity of career options within the nursing profession is also essential. RNs can pursue careers in specialties ranging from pediatrics, orthopedics, and occupational health to anesthesia, cardiology, and nephrology. The specialty with the highest number of male RNs tends to be acute care, which encompasses emergency/trauma and medical-surgical.

John Schmidt, DNP, MSN, BSN, faculty member and program lead for the acute care nurse practitioner program at Purdue Global School of Nursing, refers to these specialties as having a high excitement factor.

“Men gravitate to nursing to help people,” he said. “In critical care, there is instant gratification. You see patients get better. It’s the same in the [intensive care unit] and the emergency department. We take care of them and can see how we made a difference.”

When hospitals and health systems create environments that support men in nursing, patients also benefit. Research shows that patients often prefer nurses of the same gender, and a more diverse healthcare workforce has been linked to improved patient outcomes. Reducing gender inequities among nursing staff could also improve job satisfaction and retention rates for men in nursing.

“When you’re in a vulnerable space as a patient ... it’s important to know that your care provider understands you [and] having men as nurses is a part of that,” said Gomes. “Even though patients might not be used to having a male nurse at the bedside, once they have the experience, it challenges preconceived notions [and] that connection is important.”

Hospitals must proactively support men in nursing to achieve the benefits of greater gender diversity in the nursing workforce. Male nurses have fewer role models and report higher levels of loneliness, isolation, and role strain.

Groups such as NYC Men in Nursing and mentorship programs such as Men in Nursing at RUSH University College of Nursing and RUSH University Medical Center, and the North Carolina Healthcare Association Diverse Healthcare Leaders Mentorship Program were designed to provide coaching, education, and networking opportunities and connect men in nursing.

Male nurses, Dunne added, must be role models and must take the lead in changing the conversations about gender roles in nursing. Establishing support systems and mentorship opportunities is instrumental in inspiring men to pursue nursing careers and creating visibility into the profession and “would create a level of parity for men in the profession and encourage them to want to stay in nursing as a long-term career.”

He told this news organization that creating scholarships for men enrolled in nursing school, increasing the involvement of male nurse leaders in recruitment efforts, and updating curriculum to ensure men are reflected in the materials is also essential.

“We’ve got to be willing and open to having the conversations to end the stereotypes that have plagued the profession,” said Dunne. “And we’ve got to push men in nursing to be front and center so folks see that there are opportunities for men in nursing.”
 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Only 12% of the nurses providing patient care at hospitals and health clinics today are men. Although the percentage of nurses has increased — men made up just 2.7% of nurses in 1970 — nursing is still considered a “pink collar” profession, a female-dominated field.

“We’ve made strides over the last couple of decades, but [the number of men pursuing nursing careers] is leveling out,” said Jason Dunne, DNP, MSN, RN, chief academic officer at the Arizona College of Nursing, Phoenix. “There continues to be persistent gender stereotypes that [have] discouraged men from entering the profession.”

A nationwide nursing shortage has led to increased efforts to attract more men to the profession and ensure that men in nursing feel valued and supported and want to continue their careers long term.

“The nursing shortage is very real,” Dunne said. “We need to be highly focused on the shortage and look at opportunities to bring diversity into the profession, and one big way to solve it is bringing more men into nursing.”
 

Representation Matters

Colleges recognize the need to diversify their nursing student population and have turned their attention to increasing the number of men attending informational sessions and career days. Dunne believes, “There is a general lack of awareness of nursing as a career choice [for men].”

The Nursing Consortium of Florida hosts a “Day in the Life of a Nurse” program to introduce high school students to nursing careers, and the University of Virginia School of Nursing invites male nursing students to speak at educational events to promote workforce diversity.

“When I was growing up, the males wouldn’t have been included in those sessions,” said Melissa Gilbert Gomes, PhD, APRN, PMHNP-BC, FNAP, FAAN, associate dean for diversity, equity, and inclusion at the University of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, Virginia. “It was nice to see their interest and to have a male student there for them to ask questions and to help them see that this could be a place for them.”

Nursing schools have also engaged in other efforts to encourage more men to consider nursing careers, from highlighting male nurses in marketing materials and engaging with men at career fairs to updating course curriculum to include content on men’s health and connecting male nursing students with men in nursing faculty or clinical settings.

Focusing on nursing as a lucrative career choice could also attract more men to the profession. On average, male registered nurses (RNs) make $7300 per year more than their female counterparts due to the gender pay gap. The median wage for male RNs in acute care, cardiology, and perioperative specialties is $90,000 annually.

At the University of Virginia School of Nursing, which the American Association for Men in Nursing (AAMN) named “Best School for Men in Nursing” in 2023, 20% of nursing students are men.

The school has a Men Advancing Nursing club and is in the process of chartering a new AAMN chapter. The goal, according to Gomes, is to create an environment where male nursing students feel represented and supported.

“Valuing the perspective that men bring [to nursing] is important,” she said. “Coming together [and] having that camaraderie and intrinsic motivation to specifically speak to areas that impact men ... is important.”
 

 

 

Promoting Patient Care

Highlighting the diversity of career options within the nursing profession is also essential. RNs can pursue careers in specialties ranging from pediatrics, orthopedics, and occupational health to anesthesia, cardiology, and nephrology. The specialty with the highest number of male RNs tends to be acute care, which encompasses emergency/trauma and medical-surgical.

John Schmidt, DNP, MSN, BSN, faculty member and program lead for the acute care nurse practitioner program at Purdue Global School of Nursing, refers to these specialties as having a high excitement factor.

“Men gravitate to nursing to help people,” he said. “In critical care, there is instant gratification. You see patients get better. It’s the same in the [intensive care unit] and the emergency department. We take care of them and can see how we made a difference.”

When hospitals and health systems create environments that support men in nursing, patients also benefit. Research shows that patients often prefer nurses of the same gender, and a more diverse healthcare workforce has been linked to improved patient outcomes. Reducing gender inequities among nursing staff could also improve job satisfaction and retention rates for men in nursing.

“When you’re in a vulnerable space as a patient ... it’s important to know that your care provider understands you [and] having men as nurses is a part of that,” said Gomes. “Even though patients might not be used to having a male nurse at the bedside, once they have the experience, it challenges preconceived notions [and] that connection is important.”

Hospitals must proactively support men in nursing to achieve the benefits of greater gender diversity in the nursing workforce. Male nurses have fewer role models and report higher levels of loneliness, isolation, and role strain.

Groups such as NYC Men in Nursing and mentorship programs such as Men in Nursing at RUSH University College of Nursing and RUSH University Medical Center, and the North Carolina Healthcare Association Diverse Healthcare Leaders Mentorship Program were designed to provide coaching, education, and networking opportunities and connect men in nursing.

Male nurses, Dunne added, must be role models and must take the lead in changing the conversations about gender roles in nursing. Establishing support systems and mentorship opportunities is instrumental in inspiring men to pursue nursing careers and creating visibility into the profession and “would create a level of parity for men in the profession and encourage them to want to stay in nursing as a long-term career.”

He told this news organization that creating scholarships for men enrolled in nursing school, increasing the involvement of male nurse leaders in recruitment efforts, and updating curriculum to ensure men are reflected in the materials is also essential.

“We’ve got to be willing and open to having the conversations to end the stereotypes that have plagued the profession,” said Dunne. “And we’ve got to push men in nursing to be front and center so folks see that there are opportunities for men in nursing.”
 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Only 12% of the nurses providing patient care at hospitals and health clinics today are men. Although the percentage of nurses has increased — men made up just 2.7% of nurses in 1970 — nursing is still considered a “pink collar” profession, a female-dominated field.

“We’ve made strides over the last couple of decades, but [the number of men pursuing nursing careers] is leveling out,” said Jason Dunne, DNP, MSN, RN, chief academic officer at the Arizona College of Nursing, Phoenix. “There continues to be persistent gender stereotypes that [have] discouraged men from entering the profession.”

A nationwide nursing shortage has led to increased efforts to attract more men to the profession and ensure that men in nursing feel valued and supported and want to continue their careers long term.

“The nursing shortage is very real,” Dunne said. “We need to be highly focused on the shortage and look at opportunities to bring diversity into the profession, and one big way to solve it is bringing more men into nursing.”
 

Representation Matters

Colleges recognize the need to diversify their nursing student population and have turned their attention to increasing the number of men attending informational sessions and career days. Dunne believes, “There is a general lack of awareness of nursing as a career choice [for men].”

The Nursing Consortium of Florida hosts a “Day in the Life of a Nurse” program to introduce high school students to nursing careers, and the University of Virginia School of Nursing invites male nursing students to speak at educational events to promote workforce diversity.

“When I was growing up, the males wouldn’t have been included in those sessions,” said Melissa Gilbert Gomes, PhD, APRN, PMHNP-BC, FNAP, FAAN, associate dean for diversity, equity, and inclusion at the University of Virginia School of Nursing, Charlottesville, Virginia. “It was nice to see their interest and to have a male student there for them to ask questions and to help them see that this could be a place for them.”

Nursing schools have also engaged in other efforts to encourage more men to consider nursing careers, from highlighting male nurses in marketing materials and engaging with men at career fairs to updating course curriculum to include content on men’s health and connecting male nursing students with men in nursing faculty or clinical settings.

Focusing on nursing as a lucrative career choice could also attract more men to the profession. On average, male registered nurses (RNs) make $7300 per year more than their female counterparts due to the gender pay gap. The median wage for male RNs in acute care, cardiology, and perioperative specialties is $90,000 annually.

At the University of Virginia School of Nursing, which the American Association for Men in Nursing (AAMN) named “Best School for Men in Nursing” in 2023, 20% of nursing students are men.

The school has a Men Advancing Nursing club and is in the process of chartering a new AAMN chapter. The goal, according to Gomes, is to create an environment where male nursing students feel represented and supported.

“Valuing the perspective that men bring [to nursing] is important,” she said. “Coming together [and] having that camaraderie and intrinsic motivation to specifically speak to areas that impact men ... is important.”
 

 

 

Promoting Patient Care

Highlighting the diversity of career options within the nursing profession is also essential. RNs can pursue careers in specialties ranging from pediatrics, orthopedics, and occupational health to anesthesia, cardiology, and nephrology. The specialty with the highest number of male RNs tends to be acute care, which encompasses emergency/trauma and medical-surgical.

John Schmidt, DNP, MSN, BSN, faculty member and program lead for the acute care nurse practitioner program at Purdue Global School of Nursing, refers to these specialties as having a high excitement factor.

“Men gravitate to nursing to help people,” he said. “In critical care, there is instant gratification. You see patients get better. It’s the same in the [intensive care unit] and the emergency department. We take care of them and can see how we made a difference.”

When hospitals and health systems create environments that support men in nursing, patients also benefit. Research shows that patients often prefer nurses of the same gender, and a more diverse healthcare workforce has been linked to improved patient outcomes. Reducing gender inequities among nursing staff could also improve job satisfaction and retention rates for men in nursing.

“When you’re in a vulnerable space as a patient ... it’s important to know that your care provider understands you [and] having men as nurses is a part of that,” said Gomes. “Even though patients might not be used to having a male nurse at the bedside, once they have the experience, it challenges preconceived notions [and] that connection is important.”

Hospitals must proactively support men in nursing to achieve the benefits of greater gender diversity in the nursing workforce. Male nurses have fewer role models and report higher levels of loneliness, isolation, and role strain.

Groups such as NYC Men in Nursing and mentorship programs such as Men in Nursing at RUSH University College of Nursing and RUSH University Medical Center, and the North Carolina Healthcare Association Diverse Healthcare Leaders Mentorship Program were designed to provide coaching, education, and networking opportunities and connect men in nursing.

Male nurses, Dunne added, must be role models and must take the lead in changing the conversations about gender roles in nursing. Establishing support systems and mentorship opportunities is instrumental in inspiring men to pursue nursing careers and creating visibility into the profession and “would create a level of parity for men in the profession and encourage them to want to stay in nursing as a long-term career.”

He told this news organization that creating scholarships for men enrolled in nursing school, increasing the involvement of male nurse leaders in recruitment efforts, and updating curriculum to ensure men are reflected in the materials is also essential.

“We’ve got to be willing and open to having the conversations to end the stereotypes that have plagued the profession,” said Dunne. “And we’ve got to push men in nursing to be front and center so folks see that there are opportunities for men in nursing.”
 

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article