Antidepressant activity of anti-cytokine treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials of chronic inflammatory conditions.

Inflammatory cytokines are commonly elevated in acute depression and are associated with resistance to monoaminergic treatment. To examine the potential role of cytokines in the pathogenesis and treatment of depression, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of antidepressant activity of anti-cytokine treatment using clinical trials of chronic inflammatory conditions where depressive symptoms were measured as a secondary outcome. Systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases, search of reference lists and conference abstracts, followed by study selection process yielded 20 clinical trials. Random effect meta-analysis of seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2370 participants showed a significant antidepressant effect of anti-cytokine treatment compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD)=0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.22-0.59). Anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs were most commonly studied (five RCTs); SMD=0.33 (95% CI; 0.06-0.60). Separate meta-analyses of two RCTs of adjunctive treatment with anti-cytokine therapy and eight non-randomised and/or non-placebo studies yielded similar small-to-medium effect estimates favouring anti-cytokine therapy; SMD=0.19 (95% CI, 0.00-0.37) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.34-0.67), respectively. Adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab and tocilizumab all showed statistically significant improvements in depressive symptoms. Meta-regression exploring predictors of response found that the antidepressant effect was associated with baseline symptom severity (P=0.018) but not with improvement in primary physical illness, sex, age or study duration. The findings indicate a potentially causal role for cytokines in depression and that cytokine modulators may be novel drugs for depression in chronically inflamed subjects. The field now requires RCTs of cytokine modulators using depression as the primary outcome in subjects with high inflammation who are free of other physical illnesses.GMK is supported by a Clinical Lecturer Starter Grant from the Academy of Medical Sciences, UK (grant no. 80354) and a Gosling Fellowship from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, UK (2015). GMK also received funding support from the Wellcome Trust 094790/Z/10/Z). PBJ acknowledges grant sup port from the Wellcome Trust (095844/Z/11/Z & 088869/Z/09/Z) and NIHR (RP-PG-0606-1335, Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and CLAHRC East of England). RD has received grants from the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke of the National Institutes of Health (grants R01 NS073939; R01 NS074999).This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Nature Publishing Group via http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/mp.2016.16

Guidelines on the use of extracorporeal photopheresis

Peer reviewe

Position statement for a pragmatic approach to immunotherapeutics in patients with inflammatory skin diseases during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and beyond

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2, a novel RNA virus that was declared a global pandemic on 11 March 2020. The efficiency of infection with SARS-CoV-2 is reflected by its rapid global spread. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has implications for patients with inflammatory skin diseases on systemic immunotherapy who may be at increased risk of infection or more severe infection. This position paper is a focused examination of current evidence considering the mechanisms of action of immunotherapeutic drugs in relation to immune response to SARS-CoV-2. We aim to provide practical guidance for dermatologists managing patients with inflammatory skin conditions on systemic therapies during the current pandemic and beyond. Considering the limited and rapidly evolving evidence, mechanisms of action of therapies, and current knowledge of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we propose that systemic immunotherapy can be continued, with special considerations for at risk patients or those presenting with symptoms

EORTC consensus recommendations for the treatment of mycosis fungoides/Sézary syndrome - Update 2023.

On behalf of the EORTC Cutaneous Lymphoma Tumours Group (EORTC-CLTG) and following up on earlier versions published in 2006 and 2017 this document provides an updated standard for the treatment of mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome (MF/SS). It considers recent relevant publications and treatment options introduced into clinical practice after 2017. Consensus was established among the authors through a series of consecutive consultations in writing and a round of discussion. Treatment options are assigned to each disease stage and, whenever possible and clinically useful, separated into first- and second line options annotated with levels of evidence. Major changes to the previous version include the incorporation of chlormethine, brentuximab vedotin, and mogamulizumab, recommendations on the use of pegylated interferon α (after withdrawal of recombinant unpegylated interferons), and the addition of paragraphs on supportive therapy and on the care of older patients. Still, skin-directed therapies are the most appropriate option for early-stage MF and most patients have a normal life expectancy but may suffer morbidity and impaired quality of life. In advanced disease treatment options have expanded recently. Most patients receive multiple consecutive therapies with treatments often having a relatively short duration of response. For those patients prognosis is still poor and only for a highly selected subset long term remission can be achieved with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Understanding of the disease, its epidemiology and clinical course, and its most appropriate management are gradually advancing, and there is well-founded hope that this will lead to further improvements in the care of patients with MF/SS

Pharmacological Undertreatment of Coronary Risk Factors in Patients with Psoriasis: Observational Study of the Danish Nationwide Registries

BACKGROUND: Patients with psoriasis have increased prevalence of coronary risk factors and limited recent results have suggested that these risk factors are undertreated in patients with psoriasis. This may contribute to the increased risk of cardiovascular diseases observed in patients with psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To examine the pharmacological treatment of coronary risk factors in patients with severe psoriasis treated with biologic agents in a real-world setting. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Medical history of patients with severe psoriasis treated with biologic agents in the time period 2007-09 was retrieved from a Danish nationwide registry (DERMBIO). Individual-level linkage of nationwide administrative registries of hospitalizations, concomitant medications, and socioeconomic status was performed to gain insights into the use of pharmacological treatment. A total of 693 patients (mean age 46.1 ± 12.7 years, 65.7% male) with severe psoriasis treated with biologic agents were identified. Hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes mellitus were identified in 16.6%, 9.2%, and 6.7% of cases, respectively. Patients with severe psoriasis were significantly less likely to receive cardiovascular pharmacotherapy compared to age, sex, and coronary risk factor matched controls. In psoriatic patients with hypertension 27.7% received no antihypertensive pharmacotherapy. Patients with dyslipidemia received cholesterol-lowering medications in 55.8% of cases and patients with diabetes mellitus received angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers and cholesterol-lowering medications in 42.1% and 23.7% of cases, respectively. Similar results were found for the subset of patients with >1 coronary risk factor and for high risk patients with established atherosclerotic disease. CONCLUSION: This nationwide study of patients with severe psoriasis demonstrated substantial undertreatment of coronary risk factors. Increased focus on identifying cardiovascular risk factors and initiation of preventive cardiovascular pharmacotherapy in patients with psoriasis is warranted

European dermatology forum - updated guidelines on the use of extracorporeal photopheresis 2020 - part 1.

Following the first investigational study on the use of extracorporeal photopheresis for the treatment of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma published in 1983, this technology has received continued use and further recognition for additional earlier as well as refractory forms. After the publication of the first guidelines for this technology in the JEADV in 2014, this technology has maintained additional promise in the treatment of other severe and refractory conditions in a multi-disciplinary setting. It has confirmed recognition in well-known documented conditions such as graft-versus-host disease after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, systemic sclerosis, solid organ transplant rejection including lung, heart and liver and to a lesser extent inflammatory bowel disease. In order to further provide recognized expert practical guidelines for the use of this technology for all indications, the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) again proceeded to address these questions in the hands of the recognized experts within and outside the field of dermatology. This was done using the recognized and approved guidelines of EDF for this task. All authors had the opportunity to review each contribution as it was added. These updated 2020 guidelines provide at present the most comprehensive available expert recommendations for the use of extracorporeal photopheresis based on the available published literature and expert consensus opinion. The guidelines are divided in two parts: PART I covers cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, chronic graft-versus-host disease and acute graft-versus-host disease while PART II will cover scleroderma, solid organ transplantation, Crohn's disease, use of ECP in paediatrics practice, atopic dermatitis, type 1 diabetes, pemphigus, epidermolysis bullosa acquisita and erosive oral lichen planus

TRPV6 Determines the Effect of Vitamin D3 on Prostate Cancer Cell Growth

Despite remarkable advances in the therapy and prevention of prostate cancer it is still the second cause of death from cancer in industrialized countries. Many therapies initially shown to be beneficial for the patients were abandoned due to the high drug resistance and the evolution rate of the tumors. One of the prospective therapeutical agents even used in the first stage clinical trials, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3, was shown to be either unpredictable or inefficient in many cases. We have already shown that TRPV6 calcium channel, which is the direct target of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 receptor, positively controls prostate cancer proliferation and apoptosis resistance (Lehen'kyi et al., Oncogene, 2007). However, how the known 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 antiproliferative effects may be compatible with the upregulation of pro-oncogenic TRPV6 channel remains a mystery. Here we demonstrate that in low steroid conditions 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 upregulates the expression of TRPV6, enchances the proliferation by increasing the number of cells entering into S-phase. We show that these pro-proliferative effects of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 are directly mediated via the overexpression of TRPV6 channel which increases calcium uptake into LNCaP cells. The apoptosis resistance of androgen-dependent LNCaP cells conferred by TRPV6 channel is drastically inversed when 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 effects were combined with the successful TRPV6 knockdown. In addition, the use of androgen-deficient DU-145 and androgen-insensitive LNCaP C4-2 cell lines allowed to suggest that the ability of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 to induce the expression of TRPV6 channel is a crucial determinant of the success or failure of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3-based therapies

European consensus statement on phenotypes of pustular psoriasis

Pustularpsoriasis (PP) isagroupof inflammatoryskinconditionscharacterizedby infiltrationofneutrophil granulocytes in theepidermis tosuchanextent that clinicallyvisiblesterilepustulesdevelop.Becauseof clinical co-incidence, PP is currently groupedwith psoriasis vulgaris (PV). However, PP andPV are phenotypically different, responddifferently totreatmentsandseemtobedistinctonthegenetic level. Incontrast toPV, thephenotypesof PParenotwell defined.Descriptionsof each formof PParediscordant amongstandarddermatology textbooks [SauratDermatologie2016, Rook’sDermatology2016, Fitzpatrick’s2012andBraun-Falco2012], encumbering the collectionofphenotypicallywell-matchedgroupsofpatientsaswellasclinical trials.TheEuropeanRareandSevere PsoriasisExpertNetwork(ERASPEN)wasfoundedtodefineconsensuscriteriafordiagnosis,deeplyphenotypelarge groupsofPPpatients,analysethegeneticsandpathophysiologyandprepareforprospectiveclinical trials.Thiswork reviewshistorical aspectsof theseconditions, newgeneticfindingsandpresentsour initial considerationson the phenotypesofPPandaconsensusclassificationof clinical phenotypes thatwill beusedasabaseline for further, prospectivestudiesofPP.Generalizedpustularpsoriasis(GPP) isdefinedasprimary,sterile,macroscopicallyvisible pustulesonnon-acralskin(excludingcaseswherepustulationisrestrictedtopsoriaticplaques).GPPcanoccurwith or without systemic inflammation, with or without PV and can either be a relapsing (>1 episode) or persistent (>3months) condition. Acrodermatitis continua of Hallopeau (ACH) is characterized by primary, persistent (>3months), sterile,macroscopicallyvisiblepustulesaffectingthenail apparatus.Palmoplantarpustulosis (PPP) has primary, persistent (>3months), sterile,macroscopicallyvisiblepustulesonpalmsand/or solesandcanoccurwith orwithoutPV