MDedge Dermatology

Key clinical point: A causal relationship was observed between genetically related atopic dermatitis (AD) and brain cancer, delineating AD as a potential risk factor for brain cancer.

Major finding: The presence of AD led to an increased risk for brain cancer (odds ratio 1.0005; P = .0096); however, no significant causal association was observed on conducting reverse Mendelian randomization analysis.

Study details: This cohort study analyzed the data on AD-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms of patients with AD (n = 15,208) and control individuals without AD (n = 367,046) from the FinnGen database (10^th release) and the summary data of patients with brain cancer (n = 606) and control individuals without cancer (n = 372,016) from the IEU Open GWAS database.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xin Y, Yuan T, Wang J. The causal relationship between atopic dermatitis and brain cancer: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study. Skin Res Technol. 2024;30(4):e13715. doi: 10.1111/srt.13715 Source

Key clinical point: A causal relationship was observed between genetically related atopic dermatitis (AD) and brain cancer, delineating AD as a potential risk factor for brain cancer.

Major finding: The presence of AD led to an increased risk for brain cancer (odds ratio 1.0005; P = .0096); however, no significant causal association was observed on conducting reverse Mendelian randomization analysis.

Study details: This cohort study analyzed the data on AD-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms of patients with AD (n = 15,208) and control individuals without AD (n = 367,046) from the FinnGen database (10^th release) and the summary data of patients with brain cancer (n = 606) and control individuals without cancer (n = 372,016) from the IEU Open GWAS database.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xin Y, Yuan T, Wang J. The causal relationship between atopic dermatitis and brain cancer: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study. Skin Res Technol. 2024;30(4):e13715. doi: 10.1111/srt.13715 Source

Key clinical point: A causal relationship was observed between genetically related atopic dermatitis (AD) and brain cancer, delineating AD as a potential risk factor for brain cancer.

Major finding: The presence of AD led to an increased risk for brain cancer (odds ratio 1.0005; P = .0096); however, no significant causal association was observed on conducting reverse Mendelian randomization analysis.

Study details: This cohort study analyzed the data on AD-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms of patients with AD (n = 15,208) and control individuals without AD (n = 367,046) from the FinnGen database (10^th release) and the summary data of patients with brain cancer (n = 606) and control individuals without cancer (n = 372,016) from the IEU Open GWAS database.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Xin Y, Yuan T, Wang J. The causal relationship between atopic dermatitis and brain cancer: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization study. Skin Res Technol. 2024;30(4):e13715. doi: 10.1111/srt.13715 Source

Key clinical point: Maternal probiotic supplementation was effective in preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) in children regardless of their filaggrin (FLG) gene mutation status.

Major finding: Heterozygous FLG mutations were observed in 7% of children. The risk for AD after maternal probiotic supplementation was similar between children who expressed a FLG mutation (risk ratio [RR] 0.6; 95% CI 0.1-4.1) and those having a wild-type FLG (RR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9).

Study details: This exploratory study included the data of 228 children from the Probiotic in the Prevention of Allergy among Children in Trondheim (ProPACT) study who did or did not have FLG mutations and whose mothers received probiotic or placebo milk from 36 weeks of gestation until 3 months post delivery while breastfeeding.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and the Norwegian Research Council. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zakiudin DP, Thyssen JP, Zachariae C, Videm V, Øien T, Simpson MR. Filaggrin mutation status and prevention of atopic dermatitis with maternal probiotic supplementation. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024;104:adv24360 (Apr 24). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.24360  Source

Key clinical point: Maternal probiotic supplementation was effective in preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) in children regardless of their filaggrin (FLG) gene mutation status.

Major finding: Heterozygous FLG mutations were observed in 7% of children. The risk for AD after maternal probiotic supplementation was similar between children who expressed a FLG mutation (risk ratio [RR] 0.6; 95% CI 0.1-4.1) and those having a wild-type FLG (RR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9).

Study details: This exploratory study included the data of 228 children from the Probiotic in the Prevention of Allergy among Children in Trondheim (ProPACT) study who did or did not have FLG mutations and whose mothers received probiotic or placebo milk from 36 weeks of gestation until 3 months post delivery while breastfeeding.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and the Norwegian Research Council. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zakiudin DP, Thyssen JP, Zachariae C, Videm V, Øien T, Simpson MR. Filaggrin mutation status and prevention of atopic dermatitis with maternal probiotic supplementation. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024;104:adv24360 (Apr 24). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.24360  Source

Key clinical point: Maternal probiotic supplementation was effective in preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) in children regardless of their filaggrin (FLG) gene mutation status.

Major finding: Heterozygous FLG mutations were observed in 7% of children. The risk for AD after maternal probiotic supplementation was similar between children who expressed a FLG mutation (risk ratio [RR] 0.6; 95% CI 0.1-4.1) and those having a wild-type FLG (RR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9).

Study details: This exploratory study included the data of 228 children from the Probiotic in the Prevention of Allergy among Children in Trondheim (ProPACT) study who did or did not have FLG mutations and whose mothers received probiotic or placebo milk from 36 weeks of gestation until 3 months post delivery while breastfeeding.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Liaison Committee between the Central Norway Regional Health Authority and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and the Norwegian Research Council. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zakiudin DP, Thyssen JP, Zachariae C, Videm V, Øien T, Simpson MR. Filaggrin mutation status and prevention of atopic dermatitis with maternal probiotic supplementation. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024;104:adv24360 (Apr 24). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.24360  Source

Key clinical point: Pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing disease severity in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) are also effective for improving anxiety and depression.

Major finding: Pharmacologic interventions for AD led to significant improvements in anxiety levels (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.29; 95% CI −0.49 to −0.09) and depression severity (SMD −0.27; 95% CI −0.45 to −0.08) and an overall significant improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale scores (SMD −0.50; 95% CI −0.064 to −0.35).

Study details: This meta-analysis of seven phase 2b or 3 randomized controlled trials included 4723 patients with AD who were treated with either abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hartono SP, Chatrath S, Aktas ON, et al. Interventions for anxiety and depression in patients with atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2024;14:8844 (Apr 17). Source

Key clinical point: Pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing disease severity in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) are also effective for improving anxiety and depression.

Major finding: Pharmacologic interventions for AD led to significant improvements in anxiety levels (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.29; 95% CI −0.49 to −0.09) and depression severity (SMD −0.27; 95% CI −0.45 to −0.08) and an overall significant improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale scores (SMD −0.50; 95% CI −0.064 to −0.35).

Study details: This meta-analysis of seven phase 2b or 3 randomized controlled trials included 4723 patients with AD who were treated with either abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hartono SP, Chatrath S, Aktas ON, et al. Interventions for anxiety and depression in patients with atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2024;14:8844 (Apr 17). Source

Key clinical point: Pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing disease severity in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) are also effective for improving anxiety and depression.

Major finding: Pharmacologic interventions for AD led to significant improvements in anxiety levels (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.29; 95% CI −0.49 to −0.09) and depression severity (SMD −0.27; 95% CI −0.45 to −0.08) and an overall significant improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale scores (SMD −0.50; 95% CI −0.064 to −0.35).

Study details: This meta-analysis of seven phase 2b or 3 randomized controlled trials included 4723 patients with AD who were treated with either abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, or placebo.

Disclosures: This study did not disclose any funding source. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hartono SP, Chatrath S, Aktas ON, et al. Interventions for anxiety and depression in patients with atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2024;14:8844 (Apr 17). Source

Key clinical point: When combined with topical corticosteroids (TCS), tralokinumab and dupilumab demonstrate similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) at 32 weeks of therapy.

Major finding: At week 32, tralokinumab and dupilumab treatment, both in combination with TCS, led to a similar proportion of patients achieving an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 (49.9% vs 39.3%; P = .95) or 75% improvement in the Eczema Area Severity Index scores (71.5% vs 71.9%; P = .95).

Study details: This unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison study analyzed the individual patient data of adults with moderate to severe AD (sample size 123.4) treated with tralokinumab plus TCS in ECZTRA 3, which were matched with the aggregate data of 106 patients treated with dupilumab plus TCS in the LIBERTY AD CHRONOS trial.

Disclosures: This study was funded by LEO Pharma. Four authors declared being employees of LEO Pharma. The other authors declared receiving consultancy or speaker honoraria from or having other ties with various sources, including LEO Pharma.

Source: Torres T, Sohrt Petersen A, Ivens U, et al. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy at week 32 of tralokinumab and dupilumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024;14:983-992 (Apr 13). doi: 10.1007/s13555-024-01143-x Source

Key clinical point: When combined with topical corticosteroids (TCS), tralokinumab and dupilumab demonstrate similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) at 32 weeks of therapy.

Major finding: At week 32, tralokinumab and dupilumab treatment, both in combination with TCS, led to a similar proportion of patients achieving an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 (49.9% vs 39.3%; P = .95) or 75% improvement in the Eczema Area Severity Index scores (71.5% vs 71.9%; P = .95).

Study details: This unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison study analyzed the individual patient data of adults with moderate to severe AD (sample size 123.4) treated with tralokinumab plus TCS in ECZTRA 3, which were matched with the aggregate data of 106 patients treated with dupilumab plus TCS in the LIBERTY AD CHRONOS trial.

Disclosures: This study was funded by LEO Pharma. Four authors declared being employees of LEO Pharma. The other authors declared receiving consultancy or speaker honoraria from or having other ties with various sources, including LEO Pharma.

Source: Torres T, Sohrt Petersen A, Ivens U, et al. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy at week 32 of tralokinumab and dupilumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024;14:983-992 (Apr 13). doi: 10.1007/s13555-024-01143-x Source

Key clinical point: When combined with topical corticosteroids (TCS), tralokinumab and dupilumab demonstrate similar efficacy in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) at 32 weeks of therapy.

Major finding: At week 32, tralokinumab and dupilumab treatment, both in combination with TCS, led to a similar proportion of patients achieving an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 (49.9% vs 39.3%; P = .95) or 75% improvement in the Eczema Area Severity Index scores (71.5% vs 71.9%; P = .95).

Study details: This unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison study analyzed the individual patient data of adults with moderate to severe AD (sample size 123.4) treated with tralokinumab plus TCS in ECZTRA 3, which were matched with the aggregate data of 106 patients treated with dupilumab plus TCS in the LIBERTY AD CHRONOS trial.

Disclosures: This study was funded by LEO Pharma. Four authors declared being employees of LEO Pharma. The other authors declared receiving consultancy or speaker honoraria from or having other ties with various sources, including LEO Pharma.

Source: Torres T, Sohrt Petersen A, Ivens U, et al. Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the efficacy at week 32 of tralokinumab and dupilumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024;14:983-992 (Apr 13). doi: 10.1007/s13555-024-01143-x Source

Key clinical point: Topical 1.5% ruxolitinib was effective and well-tolerated and offered long-term disease control with as-needed use in adolescents with atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a substantially higher number of patients receiving 1.5% ruxolitinib vs vehicle achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 with ≥2 grade improvement from baseline (50.6% vs 14.0%) and ≥75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index score (60.9% vs 34.9%), with sustained or increased proportion of patients achieving an IGA score of 0 or 1 during the long-term safety (LTS) period. No serious adverse events were reported.

Study details: This study used pooled data from two phase 3 trials (TRuE-AD1 and TRuE-AD2) and included 137 adolescents (age, 12-17 years) with AD who were randomly assigned to receive 0.75% or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or vehicle twice daily for 8 weeks, followed by an LTS period lasting up to 52 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Incyte Corporation. Four authors declared being employees or shareholders of Incyte Corporation. Several authors declared ties with various sources, including Incyte Corporation.

Source: Eichenfield LF, Simpson EL, Papp K, et al. Efficacy, safety, and long-term disease control of ruxolitinib cream among adolescents with atopic dermatitis: Pooled results from two randomized phase 3 studies. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2024 (May 2). doi:  10.1007/s40257-024-00855-2 Source

Key clinical point: Topical 1.5% ruxolitinib was effective and well-tolerated and offered long-term disease control with as-needed use in adolescents with atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a substantially higher number of patients receiving 1.5% ruxolitinib vs vehicle achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 with ≥2 grade improvement from baseline (50.6% vs 14.0%) and ≥75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index score (60.9% vs 34.9%), with sustained or increased proportion of patients achieving an IGA score of 0 or 1 during the long-term safety (LTS) period. No serious adverse events were reported.

Study details: This study used pooled data from two phase 3 trials (TRuE-AD1 and TRuE-AD2) and included 137 adolescents (age, 12-17 years) with AD who were randomly assigned to receive 0.75% or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or vehicle twice daily for 8 weeks, followed by an LTS period lasting up to 52 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Incyte Corporation. Four authors declared being employees or shareholders of Incyte Corporation. Several authors declared ties with various sources, including Incyte Corporation.

Source: Eichenfield LF, Simpson EL, Papp K, et al. Efficacy, safety, and long-term disease control of ruxolitinib cream among adolescents with atopic dermatitis: Pooled results from two randomized phase 3 studies. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2024 (May 2). doi:  10.1007/s40257-024-00855-2 Source

Key clinical point: Topical 1.5% ruxolitinib was effective and well-tolerated and offered long-term disease control with as-needed use in adolescents with atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a substantially higher number of patients receiving 1.5% ruxolitinib vs vehicle achieved an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 with ≥2 grade improvement from baseline (50.6% vs 14.0%) and ≥75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index score (60.9% vs 34.9%), with sustained or increased proportion of patients achieving an IGA score of 0 or 1 during the long-term safety (LTS) period. No serious adverse events were reported.

Study details: This study used pooled data from two phase 3 trials (TRuE-AD1 and TRuE-AD2) and included 137 adolescents (age, 12-17 years) with AD who were randomly assigned to receive 0.75% or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream or vehicle twice daily for 8 weeks, followed by an LTS period lasting up to 52 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was funded by Incyte Corporation. Four authors declared being employees or shareholders of Incyte Corporation. Several authors declared ties with various sources, including Incyte Corporation.

Source: Eichenfield LF, Simpson EL, Papp K, et al. Efficacy, safety, and long-term disease control of ruxolitinib cream among adolescents with atopic dermatitis: Pooled results from two randomized phase 3 studies. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2024 (May 2). doi:  10.1007/s40257-024-00855-2 Source

Key clinical point: Obesity is significantly associated with patient- and physician-assessed measures of atopic dermatitis (AD) disease severity.

Major finding: Increased body mass index (BMI) values were associated with higher disease severity as assessed by objective Scoring AD (adjusted β 1.24; P = .013) and patient-oriented eczema measure (adjusted β 1.09; P = .038) scores.

Study details: This study based on data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry included 1416 patients with moderate to severe AD who were either underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²; n = 33), normal weight or overweight (nonobese; BMI ≥ 18.5 and < 30 kg/m²; n = 1149), or obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; n = 234).

Disclosures: The TREATgermany registry is supported by AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Galderma SA, LEO Pharma GmbH, Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Pfizer Inc., and Sanofi. Eight authors declared serving as consultants or lecturers for or receiving research grants, personal fees, or lecture or consulting honoraria from various sources, including some of the supporters of TREATgermany.

Source: Traidl S, Hollstein MM, Kroeger N, et al, and The TREATgermany Study Group. Obesity is linked to disease severity in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis—Data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Apr 25). doi:  10.1111/jdv.20042 Source

Key clinical point: Obesity is significantly associated with patient- and physician-assessed measures of atopic dermatitis (AD) disease severity.

Major finding: Increased body mass index (BMI) values were associated with higher disease severity as assessed by objective Scoring AD (adjusted β 1.24; P = .013) and patient-oriented eczema measure (adjusted β 1.09; P = .038) scores.

Study details: This study based on data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry included 1416 patients with moderate to severe AD who were either underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²; n = 33), normal weight or overweight (nonobese; BMI ≥ 18.5 and < 30 kg/m²; n = 1149), or obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; n = 234).

Disclosures: The TREATgermany registry is supported by AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Galderma SA, LEO Pharma GmbH, Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Pfizer Inc., and Sanofi. Eight authors declared serving as consultants or lecturers for or receiving research grants, personal fees, or lecture or consulting honoraria from various sources, including some of the supporters of TREATgermany.

Source: Traidl S, Hollstein MM, Kroeger N, et al, and The TREATgermany Study Group. Obesity is linked to disease severity in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis—Data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Apr 25). doi:  10.1111/jdv.20042 Source

Key clinical point: Obesity is significantly associated with patient- and physician-assessed measures of atopic dermatitis (AD) disease severity.

Major finding: Increased body mass index (BMI) values were associated with higher disease severity as assessed by objective Scoring AD (adjusted β 1.24; P = .013) and patient-oriented eczema measure (adjusted β 1.09; P = .038) scores.

Study details: This study based on data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry included 1416 patients with moderate to severe AD who were either underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m²; n = 33), normal weight or overweight (nonobese; BMI ≥ 18.5 and < 30 kg/m²; n = 1149), or obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; n = 234).

Disclosures: The TREATgermany registry is supported by AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Galderma SA, LEO Pharma GmbH, Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Pfizer Inc., and Sanofi. Eight authors declared serving as consultants or lecturers for or receiving research grants, personal fees, or lecture or consulting honoraria from various sources, including some of the supporters of TREATgermany.

Source: Traidl S, Hollstein MM, Kroeger N, et al, and The TREATgermany Study Group. Obesity is linked to disease severity in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis—Data from the prospective observational TREATgermany registry. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Apr 25). doi:  10.1111/jdv.20042 Source

Key clinical point: Antibiotic use early in life, especially within one year of age, disrupts the gut microbiome and increases the risk for atopic dermatitis (AD) at 5 years of age.

Major finding: Children who received antibiotics during the first year of life vs later were significantly more likely to develop AD at 5 years of age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.81; P < .001), with an increased number of antibiotic courses leading to a dose-response-like increased risk for AD (1 course: aOR 1.67; P = .0044; ≥ 2 courses: aOR 2.16; P = .0030).

Study details: This study analyzed the clinical data for AD diagnosis at age 5 years of 2484 children from the prospective, general population CHILD birth cohort, which enrolled pregnant women and infants with no congenital abnormalities born at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation.

Disclosures: The CHILD Study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Allergy, Genes, and Environment Network of Centres of Excellence, Debbie and Don Morrison, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hoskinson C, Medeleanu MV, Reyna ME, et al. Antibiotics within first year are linked to infant gut microbiome disruption and elevated atopic dermatitis risk. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.03.025 Source

Key clinical point: Antibiotic use early in life, especially within one year of age, disrupts the gut microbiome and increases the risk for atopic dermatitis (AD) at 5 years of age.

Major finding: Children who received antibiotics during the first year of life vs later were significantly more likely to develop AD at 5 years of age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.81; P < .001), with an increased number of antibiotic courses leading to a dose-response-like increased risk for AD (1 course: aOR 1.67; P = .0044; ≥ 2 courses: aOR 2.16; P = .0030).

Study details: This study analyzed the clinical data for AD diagnosis at age 5 years of 2484 children from the prospective, general population CHILD birth cohort, which enrolled pregnant women and infants with no congenital abnormalities born at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation.

Disclosures: The CHILD Study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Allergy, Genes, and Environment Network of Centres of Excellence, Debbie and Don Morrison, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hoskinson C, Medeleanu MV, Reyna ME, et al. Antibiotics within first year are linked to infant gut microbiome disruption and elevated atopic dermatitis risk. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.03.025 Source

Key clinical point: Antibiotic use early in life, especially within one year of age, disrupts the gut microbiome and increases the risk for atopic dermatitis (AD) at 5 years of age.

Major finding: Children who received antibiotics during the first year of life vs later were significantly more likely to develop AD at 5 years of age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.81; P < .001), with an increased number of antibiotic courses leading to a dose-response-like increased risk for AD (1 course: aOR 1.67; P = .0044; ≥ 2 courses: aOR 2.16; P = .0030).

Study details: This study analyzed the clinical data for AD diagnosis at age 5 years of 2484 children from the prospective, general population CHILD birth cohort, which enrolled pregnant women and infants with no congenital abnormalities born at ≥ 34 weeks of gestation.

Disclosures: The CHILD Study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Allergy, Genes, and Environment Network of Centres of Excellence, Debbie and Don Morrison, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Hoskinson C, Medeleanu MV, Reyna ME, et al. Antibiotics within first year are linked to infant gut microbiome disruption and elevated atopic dermatitis risk. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.03.025 Source

To the Editor:

The term palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis (PNGD) has been proposed to encompass various conditions, including Winkelmann granuloma and superficial ulcerating rheumatoid necrobiosis. More recently, PNGD has been classified along with interstitial granulomatous dermatitis and interstitial granulomatous drug reaction under a unifying rubric of reactive granulomatous dermatitis (RGD).^1-4 The diagnosis of RGD can be challenging because of a range of clinical and histopathologic features as well as variable nomenclature.^1-3,5

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis classically manifests with papules and small plaques on the extensor extremities, with histopathology showing characteristic necrobiosis with both neutrophils and histiocytes.^1,2,6 We report 6 cases of RGD, including an index case in which a predominance of neutrophils in the infiltrate impeded the diagnosis.

An 85-year-old woman (the index patient) presented with a several-week history of asymmetric crusted papules on the right upper extremity—3 lesions on the elbow and forearm and 1 lesion on a finger. She was an avid gardener with severe rheumatoid arthritis treated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor therapy. An initial biopsy of the elbow revealed a dense infiltrate of neutrophils and sparse eosinophils within the dermis. Special stains for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast organisms were negative.

Because infection with sporotrichoid spread remained high in the differential diagnosis, the JAK inhibitor was discontinued and an antifungal agent was initiated. Given the persistence of the lesions, a subsequent biopsy of the right finger revealed scarce neutrophils and predominant histiocytes with rare foci of degenerated collagen. Sporotrichosis remained the leading diagnosis for these unilateral lesions. The patient subsequently developed additional crusted papules on the left arm (Figure 1). A biopsy of a left elbow lesion revealed palisades of histiocytes around degenerated collagen and collections of neutrophils compatible with RGD (Figures 2 and 3). Incidentally, the patient also presented with bilateral lower extremity palpable purpura, with a biopsy showing leukocytoclastic vasculitis. Antifungal therapy was discontinued and JAK inhibitor therapy resumed, with partial resolution of both the arm and right finger lesions and complete resolution of the lower extremity palpable purpura over several months.

The dense neutrophilic infiltrate and asymmetric presentation seen in our index patient’s initial biopsy hindered categorization of the cutaneous findings as RGD in association with her rheumatoid arthritis rather than as an infectious process. To ascertain whether diagnosis also was difficult in other cases of RGD, we conducted a search of the Yale Dermatopathology database for the diagnosis palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, a term consistently used at our institution over the past decade. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Yale University (New Haven, Connecticut), and informed consent was waived. The search covered a 10-year period; 13 patients were found. Eight patients were eliminated because further clinical information or follow-up could not be obtained, leaving 5 additional cases (Table). The 8 eliminated cases were consultations submitted to the laboratory by outside pathologists from other institutions.

To the Editor:

The term palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis (PNGD) has been proposed to encompass various conditions, including Winkelmann granuloma and superficial ulcerating rheumatoid necrobiosis. More recently, PNGD has been classified along with interstitial granulomatous dermatitis and interstitial granulomatous drug reaction under a unifying rubric of reactive granulomatous dermatitis (RGD).^1-4 The diagnosis of RGD can be challenging because of a range of clinical and histopathologic features as well as variable nomenclature.^1-3,5

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis classically manifests with papules and small plaques on the extensor extremities, with histopathology showing characteristic necrobiosis with both neutrophils and histiocytes.^1,2,6 We report 6 cases of RGD, including an index case in which a predominance of neutrophils in the infiltrate impeded the diagnosis.

An 85-year-old woman (the index patient) presented with a several-week history of asymmetric crusted papules on the right upper extremity—3 lesions on the elbow and forearm and 1 lesion on a finger. She was an avid gardener with severe rheumatoid arthritis treated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor therapy. An initial biopsy of the elbow revealed a dense infiltrate of neutrophils and sparse eosinophils within the dermis. Special stains for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast organisms were negative.

Because infection with sporotrichoid spread remained high in the differential diagnosis, the JAK inhibitor was discontinued and an antifungal agent was initiated. Given the persistence of the lesions, a subsequent biopsy of the right finger revealed scarce neutrophils and predominant histiocytes with rare foci of degenerated collagen. Sporotrichosis remained the leading diagnosis for these unilateral lesions. The patient subsequently developed additional crusted papules on the left arm (Figure 1). A biopsy of a left elbow lesion revealed palisades of histiocytes around degenerated collagen and collections of neutrophils compatible with RGD (Figures 2 and 3). Incidentally, the patient also presented with bilateral lower extremity palpable purpura, with a biopsy showing leukocytoclastic vasculitis. Antifungal therapy was discontinued and JAK inhibitor therapy resumed, with partial resolution of both the arm and right finger lesions and complete resolution of the lower extremity palpable purpura over several months.

The dense neutrophilic infiltrate and asymmetric presentation seen in our index patient’s initial biopsy hindered categorization of the cutaneous findings as RGD in association with her rheumatoid arthritis rather than as an infectious process. To ascertain whether diagnosis also was difficult in other cases of RGD, we conducted a search of the Yale Dermatopathology database for the diagnosis palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, a term consistently used at our institution over the past decade. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Yale University (New Haven, Connecticut), and informed consent was waived. The search covered a 10-year period; 13 patients were found. Eight patients were eliminated because further clinical information or follow-up could not be obtained, leaving 5 additional cases (Table). The 8 eliminated cases were consultations submitted to the laboratory by outside pathologists from other institutions.

To the Editor:

The term palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis (PNGD) has been proposed to encompass various conditions, including Winkelmann granuloma and superficial ulcerating rheumatoid necrobiosis. More recently, PNGD has been classified along with interstitial granulomatous dermatitis and interstitial granulomatous drug reaction under a unifying rubric of reactive granulomatous dermatitis (RGD).^1-4 The diagnosis of RGD can be challenging because of a range of clinical and histopathologic features as well as variable nomenclature.^1-3,5

Palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis classically manifests with papules and small plaques on the extensor extremities, with histopathology showing characteristic necrobiosis with both neutrophils and histiocytes.^1,2,6 We report 6 cases of RGD, including an index case in which a predominance of neutrophils in the infiltrate impeded the diagnosis.

An 85-year-old woman (the index patient) presented with a several-week history of asymmetric crusted papules on the right upper extremity—3 lesions on the elbow and forearm and 1 lesion on a finger. She was an avid gardener with severe rheumatoid arthritis treated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor therapy. An initial biopsy of the elbow revealed a dense infiltrate of neutrophils and sparse eosinophils within the dermis. Special stains for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast organisms were negative.

Because infection with sporotrichoid spread remained high in the differential diagnosis, the JAK inhibitor was discontinued and an antifungal agent was initiated. Given the persistence of the lesions, a subsequent biopsy of the right finger revealed scarce neutrophils and predominant histiocytes with rare foci of degenerated collagen. Sporotrichosis remained the leading diagnosis for these unilateral lesions. The patient subsequently developed additional crusted papules on the left arm (Figure 1). A biopsy of a left elbow lesion revealed palisades of histiocytes around degenerated collagen and collections of neutrophils compatible with RGD (Figures 2 and 3). Incidentally, the patient also presented with bilateral lower extremity palpable purpura, with a biopsy showing leukocytoclastic vasculitis. Antifungal therapy was discontinued and JAK inhibitor therapy resumed, with partial resolution of both the arm and right finger lesions and complete resolution of the lower extremity palpable purpura over several months.

The dense neutrophilic infiltrate and asymmetric presentation seen in our index patient’s initial biopsy hindered categorization of the cutaneous findings as RGD in association with her rheumatoid arthritis rather than as an infectious process. To ascertain whether diagnosis also was difficult in other cases of RGD, we conducted a search of the Yale Dermatopathology database for the diagnosis palisaded neutrophilic and granulomatous dermatitis, a term consistently used at our institution over the past decade. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Yale University (New Haven, Connecticut), and informed consent was waived. The search covered a 10-year period; 13 patients were found. Eight patients were eliminated because further clinical information or follow-up could not be obtained, leaving 5 additional cases (Table). The 8 eliminated cases were consultations submitted to the laboratory by outside pathologists from other institutions.

SAN DIEGO — Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were more likely to correctly classify and grade dermatologic adverse events from cancer therapies, results from a multicenter survey showed.

“New cancer therapies have brought a diversity of treatment-related dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) beyond those experienced with conventional chemotherapy, which has demanded an evolving assessment of toxicities,” researchers led by Nicole R. LeBoeuf, MD, MPH, of the Department of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Center for Cutaneous Oncology at the Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Boston, wrote in a poster presented at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.

The authors noted that “Version 5.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v5.0)” serves as the current, broadly accepted criteria for classification and grading during routine medical care and clinical trials. But despite extensive utilization of CTCAE, there is little data regarding its application.”

To evaluate how CTCAE is being used in clinical practice, they sent a four-case survey of dAEs to 81 dermatologists and 182 medical oncologists at six US-based academic institutions. For three of the cases, respondents were asked to classify and grade morbilliform, psoriasiform, and papulopustular rashes based on a review of photographs and text descriptions. For the fourth case, respondents were asked to grade a dAE using only a clinic note text description. The researchers used chi-square tests in R software to compare survey responses.

Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were significantly more likely to provide correct responses in characterizing morbilliform and psoriasiform eruptions. “As low as 12%” of medical oncologists were correct, and “as low as 87%” of dermatologists were correct (P < .001). Similarly, dermatologists were significantly more likely to grade the psoriasiform, papulopustular, and written cases correctly compared with medical oncologists (P < .001 for all associations).

“These cases demonstrated poor concordance of classification and grading between specialties and across medical oncology,” the authors concluded in their poster, noting that 87% of medical oncologists were interested in additional educational tools on dAEs. “With correct classification as low as 12%, medical oncologists may have more difficulty delivering appropriate, toxicity-specific therapy and may consider banal eruptions dangerous.”

Poor concordance of grading among the two groups of clinicians “raises the question of whether CTCAE v5.0 is an appropriate determinant for patient continuation on therapy or in trials,” they added. “As anticancer therapy becomes more complex — with new toxicities from novel agents and combinations — we must ensure we have a grading system that is valid across investigators and does not harm patients by instituting unnecessary treatment stops.”

Future studies, they said, “can explore what interventions beyond involvement of dermatologists improve classification and grading in practice.”

Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study, noted that with the continued expansion and introduction of new targeted and immunotherapies in the oncology space, “you can be sure we will continue to appreciate the importance and value of the field of supportive oncodermatology, as hair, skin, and nails are almost guaranteed collateral damage in this story.

“Ensuring early identification and consistent grading severity is not only important for the plethora of patients who are currently developing the litany of cutaneous adverse events but to evaluate potential mitigation strategies and even push along countermeasures down the FDA approval pathway,” Dr. Friedman said. In this study, the investigators demonstrated that work “is sorely needed, not just in dermatology but even more so for our colleagues across the aisle. A central tenet of supportive oncodermatology must also be education for all stakeholders, and the good news is our oncology partners will welcome it.”

Dr. LeBoeuf disclosed that she is a consultant to and has received honoraria from Bayer, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi, Silverback, Fortress Biotech, and Synox Therapeutics outside the submitted work. No other authors reported having financial disclosures. Dr. Friedman directs the supportive oncodermatology program at GW that received independent funding from La Roche-Posay.
 

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

SAN DIEGO — Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were more likely to correctly classify and grade dermatologic adverse events from cancer therapies, results from a multicenter survey showed.

“New cancer therapies have brought a diversity of treatment-related dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) beyond those experienced with conventional chemotherapy, which has demanded an evolving assessment of toxicities,” researchers led by Nicole R. LeBoeuf, MD, MPH, of the Department of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Center for Cutaneous Oncology at the Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Boston, wrote in a poster presented at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.

The authors noted that “Version 5.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v5.0)” serves as the current, broadly accepted criteria for classification and grading during routine medical care and clinical trials. But despite extensive utilization of CTCAE, there is little data regarding its application.”

To evaluate how CTCAE is being used in clinical practice, they sent a four-case survey of dAEs to 81 dermatologists and 182 medical oncologists at six US-based academic institutions. For three of the cases, respondents were asked to classify and grade morbilliform, psoriasiform, and papulopustular rashes based on a review of photographs and text descriptions. For the fourth case, respondents were asked to grade a dAE using only a clinic note text description. The researchers used chi-square tests in R software to compare survey responses.

Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were significantly more likely to provide correct responses in characterizing morbilliform and psoriasiform eruptions. “As low as 12%” of medical oncologists were correct, and “as low as 87%” of dermatologists were correct (P < .001). Similarly, dermatologists were significantly more likely to grade the psoriasiform, papulopustular, and written cases correctly compared with medical oncologists (P < .001 for all associations).

“These cases demonstrated poor concordance of classification and grading between specialties and across medical oncology,” the authors concluded in their poster, noting that 87% of medical oncologists were interested in additional educational tools on dAEs. “With correct classification as low as 12%, medical oncologists may have more difficulty delivering appropriate, toxicity-specific therapy and may consider banal eruptions dangerous.”

Poor concordance of grading among the two groups of clinicians “raises the question of whether CTCAE v5.0 is an appropriate determinant for patient continuation on therapy or in trials,” they added. “As anticancer therapy becomes more complex — with new toxicities from novel agents and combinations — we must ensure we have a grading system that is valid across investigators and does not harm patients by instituting unnecessary treatment stops.”

Future studies, they said, “can explore what interventions beyond involvement of dermatologists improve classification and grading in practice.”

Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study, noted that with the continued expansion and introduction of new targeted and immunotherapies in the oncology space, “you can be sure we will continue to appreciate the importance and value of the field of supportive oncodermatology, as hair, skin, and nails are almost guaranteed collateral damage in this story.

“Ensuring early identification and consistent grading severity is not only important for the plethora of patients who are currently developing the litany of cutaneous adverse events but to evaluate potential mitigation strategies and even push along countermeasures down the FDA approval pathway,” Dr. Friedman said. In this study, the investigators demonstrated that work “is sorely needed, not just in dermatology but even more so for our colleagues across the aisle. A central tenet of supportive oncodermatology must also be education for all stakeholders, and the good news is our oncology partners will welcome it.”

Dr. LeBoeuf disclosed that she is a consultant to and has received honoraria from Bayer, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi, Silverback, Fortress Biotech, and Synox Therapeutics outside the submitted work. No other authors reported having financial disclosures. Dr. Friedman directs the supportive oncodermatology program at GW that received independent funding from La Roche-Posay.
 

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

SAN DIEGO — Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were more likely to correctly classify and grade dermatologic adverse events from cancer therapies, results from a multicenter survey showed.

“New cancer therapies have brought a diversity of treatment-related dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) beyond those experienced with conventional chemotherapy, which has demanded an evolving assessment of toxicities,” researchers led by Nicole R. LeBoeuf, MD, MPH, of the Department of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and the Center for Cutaneous Oncology at the Dana-Farber Brigham Cancer Center, Boston, wrote in a poster presented at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.

The authors noted that “Version 5.0 of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v5.0)” serves as the current, broadly accepted criteria for classification and grading during routine medical care and clinical trials. But despite extensive utilization of CTCAE, there is little data regarding its application.”

To evaluate how CTCAE is being used in clinical practice, they sent a four-case survey of dAEs to 81 dermatologists and 182 medical oncologists at six US-based academic institutions. For three of the cases, respondents were asked to classify and grade morbilliform, psoriasiform, and papulopustular rashes based on a review of photographs and text descriptions. For the fourth case, respondents were asked to grade a dAE using only a clinic note text description. The researchers used chi-square tests in R software to compare survey responses.

Compared with medical oncologists, dermatologists were significantly more likely to provide correct responses in characterizing morbilliform and psoriasiform eruptions. “As low as 12%” of medical oncologists were correct, and “as low as 87%” of dermatologists were correct (P < .001). Similarly, dermatologists were significantly more likely to grade the psoriasiform, papulopustular, and written cases correctly compared with medical oncologists (P < .001 for all associations).

“These cases demonstrated poor concordance of classification and grading between specialties and across medical oncology,” the authors concluded in their poster, noting that 87% of medical oncologists were interested in additional educational tools on dAEs. “With correct classification as low as 12%, medical oncologists may have more difficulty delivering appropriate, toxicity-specific therapy and may consider banal eruptions dangerous.”

Poor concordance of grading among the two groups of clinicians “raises the question of whether CTCAE v5.0 is an appropriate determinant for patient continuation on therapy or in trials,” they added. “As anticancer therapy becomes more complex — with new toxicities from novel agents and combinations — we must ensure we have a grading system that is valid across investigators and does not harm patients by instituting unnecessary treatment stops.”

Future studies, they said, “can explore what interventions beyond involvement of dermatologists improve classification and grading in practice.”

Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, who was asked to comment on the study, noted that with the continued expansion and introduction of new targeted and immunotherapies in the oncology space, “you can be sure we will continue to appreciate the importance and value of the field of supportive oncodermatology, as hair, skin, and nails are almost guaranteed collateral damage in this story.

“Ensuring early identification and consistent grading severity is not only important for the plethora of patients who are currently developing the litany of cutaneous adverse events but to evaluate potential mitigation strategies and even push along countermeasures down the FDA approval pathway,” Dr. Friedman said. In this study, the investigators demonstrated that work “is sorely needed, not just in dermatology but even more so for our colleagues across the aisle. A central tenet of supportive oncodermatology must also be education for all stakeholders, and the good news is our oncology partners will welcome it.”

Dr. LeBoeuf disclosed that she is a consultant to and has received honoraria from Bayer, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi, Silverback, Fortress Biotech, and Synox Therapeutics outside the submitted work. No other authors reported having financial disclosures. Dr. Friedman directs the supportive oncodermatology program at GW that received independent funding from La Roche-Posay.
 

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

Darker skin tones were underrepresented in images on patient-facing online educational material about skin cancer, an analysis of photos from six different federal and organization websites showed.

“Given the known disparities patients with darker skin tones face in terms of increased skin cancer morbidity and mortality, this lack of representation further disadvantages those patients by not providing them with an adequate representation of how skin cancers manifest on their skin tones,” the study’s first author, Alana Sadur, who recently completed her third year at the George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, said in an interview. “By not having images to refer to, patients are less likely to self-identify and seek treatment for concerning skin lesions.”

For the study, which was published in Journal of Drugs in Dermatology, Ms. Sadur and coauthors evaluated the inclusivity and representation of skin tones in photos of skin cancer on the following patient-facing websites: CDC.gov, NIH.gov, skincancer.org, americancancerfund.org, mayoclinic.org, and cancer.org. The researchers counted each individual person or image showing skin as a separate representation, and three independent reviewers used the 5-color Pantone swatch as described in a dermatology atlas to categorize representations as “lighter-toned skin” (Pantones A-B or lighter) or “darker-toned skin” (Pantones C-E or darker). 

Of the 372 total representations identified on the websites, only 49 (13.2%) showed darker skin tones. Of these, 44.9% depicted Pantone C, 34.7% depicted Pantone D, and 20.4% depicted Pantone E. The researchers also found that only 11% of nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSC) and 5.8% of melanoma skin cancers (MSC) were shown on darker skin tones, while no cartoon portrayals of NMSC or MSC included darker skin tones.

In findings related to nondisease representations on the websites, darker skin tones were depicted in just 22.7% of stock photos and 26.1% of website front pages.

The study’s senior author, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, emphasized the need for trusted sources like national organizations and federally funded agencies to be purposeful with their selection of images to “ensure all visitors to the site are represented,” he told this news organization.

“This is very important when dealing with skin cancer as a lack of representation could easily be misinterpreted as epidemiological data, meaning this gap could suggest certain individuals do not get skin cancer because photos in those skin tones are not present,” he added. “This doesn’t even begin to touch upon the diversity of individuals in the stock photos or lack thereof, which can perpetuate the lack of diversity in our specialty. We need to do better.”

The authors reported having no relevant disclosures.

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

Darker skin tones were underrepresented in images on patient-facing online educational material about skin cancer, an analysis of photos from six different federal and organization websites showed.

“Given the known disparities patients with darker skin tones face in terms of increased skin cancer morbidity and mortality, this lack of representation further disadvantages those patients by not providing them with an adequate representation of how skin cancers manifest on their skin tones,” the study’s first author, Alana Sadur, who recently completed her third year at the George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, said in an interview. “By not having images to refer to, patients are less likely to self-identify and seek treatment for concerning skin lesions.”

For the study, which was published in Journal of Drugs in Dermatology, Ms. Sadur and coauthors evaluated the inclusivity and representation of skin tones in photos of skin cancer on the following patient-facing websites: CDC.gov, NIH.gov, skincancer.org, americancancerfund.org, mayoclinic.org, and cancer.org. The researchers counted each individual person or image showing skin as a separate representation, and three independent reviewers used the 5-color Pantone swatch as described in a dermatology atlas to categorize representations as “lighter-toned skin” (Pantones A-B or lighter) or “darker-toned skin” (Pantones C-E or darker). 

Of the 372 total representations identified on the websites, only 49 (13.2%) showed darker skin tones. Of these, 44.9% depicted Pantone C, 34.7% depicted Pantone D, and 20.4% depicted Pantone E. The researchers also found that only 11% of nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSC) and 5.8% of melanoma skin cancers (MSC) were shown on darker skin tones, while no cartoon portrayals of NMSC or MSC included darker skin tones.

In findings related to nondisease representations on the websites, darker skin tones were depicted in just 22.7% of stock photos and 26.1% of website front pages.

The study’s senior author, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, emphasized the need for trusted sources like national organizations and federally funded agencies to be purposeful with their selection of images to “ensure all visitors to the site are represented,” he told this news organization.

“This is very important when dealing with skin cancer as a lack of representation could easily be misinterpreted as epidemiological data, meaning this gap could suggest certain individuals do not get skin cancer because photos in those skin tones are not present,” he added. “This doesn’t even begin to touch upon the diversity of individuals in the stock photos or lack thereof, which can perpetuate the lack of diversity in our specialty. We need to do better.”

The authors reported having no relevant disclosures.

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

Darker skin tones were underrepresented in images on patient-facing online educational material about skin cancer, an analysis of photos from six different federal and organization websites showed.

“Given the known disparities patients with darker skin tones face in terms of increased skin cancer morbidity and mortality, this lack of representation further disadvantages those patients by not providing them with an adequate representation of how skin cancers manifest on their skin tones,” the study’s first author, Alana Sadur, who recently completed her third year at the George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, said in an interview. “By not having images to refer to, patients are less likely to self-identify and seek treatment for concerning skin lesions.”

For the study, which was published in Journal of Drugs in Dermatology, Ms. Sadur and coauthors evaluated the inclusivity and representation of skin tones in photos of skin cancer on the following patient-facing websites: CDC.gov, NIH.gov, skincancer.org, americancancerfund.org, mayoclinic.org, and cancer.org. The researchers counted each individual person or image showing skin as a separate representation, and three independent reviewers used the 5-color Pantone swatch as described in a dermatology atlas to categorize representations as “lighter-toned skin” (Pantones A-B or lighter) or “darker-toned skin” (Pantones C-E or darker). 

Of the 372 total representations identified on the websites, only 49 (13.2%) showed darker skin tones. Of these, 44.9% depicted Pantone C, 34.7% depicted Pantone D, and 20.4% depicted Pantone E. The researchers also found that only 11% of nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSC) and 5.8% of melanoma skin cancers (MSC) were shown on darker skin tones, while no cartoon portrayals of NMSC or MSC included darker skin tones.

In findings related to nondisease representations on the websites, darker skin tones were depicted in just 22.7% of stock photos and 26.1% of website front pages.

The study’s senior author, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, emphasized the need for trusted sources like national organizations and federally funded agencies to be purposeful with their selection of images to “ensure all visitors to the site are represented,” he told this news organization.

“This is very important when dealing with skin cancer as a lack of representation could easily be misinterpreted as epidemiological data, meaning this gap could suggest certain individuals do not get skin cancer because photos in those skin tones are not present,” he added. “This doesn’t even begin to touch upon the diversity of individuals in the stock photos or lack thereof, which can perpetuate the lack of diversity in our specialty. We need to do better.”

The authors reported having no relevant disclosures.

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