Goldfarb, Noah

Importance Accurate classification and reliability in assessment for lesions of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) by investigators is critical to the determination of responder status and to overall data quality in clinical trials. Objective To establish consensus-based morphological definitions of HS lesions and guidance statements that standardize investigator lesion assessments for implementation in clinical trials. Evidence Review Health professionals (primarily dermatologists) with expertise in the measurement of HS disease activity as well as novice raters completed a preliminary questionnaire in which participants were asked to assess images of HS lesions and provide qualitative feedback on their decision making. Based on this feedback, detailed morphologic definitions for lesions and guidance statements that standardize lesion assessments were formulated and presented for consensus voting in 2 electronic Delphi surveys. A virtual group discussion after round 1 supported participants in round 2 voting. Findings Response rates were 84.7% (50 of 59), 86.0% (43 of 50), and 90.9% (40 of 44) in the preliminary, electronic Delphi round 1, and electronic Delphi round 2 surveys, respectively. Morphological definitions for 11 lesion types achieved the prespecified 70% consensus threshold, with 9 definitions reaching at least 90% agreement. After 2 electronic Delphi rounds, 16 of 18 guidance statements achieved the prespecified consensus threshold, with 13 statements receiving endorsement from more than 80% of participants. Two guidance statements related to assessment of tunneled plaques with multiple openings and assessment of scalp lesions failed to reach consensus. Conclusions and Relevance Common morphologic definitions and guidance that standardize assessment of HS lesions can be implemented in clinical trial protocols and investigator trainings with the goals of improving accuracy and reliability of investigator ratings.

ImportanceMetastatic cutaneous Crohn disease (MCD) is a rare condition for which there are currently no published diagnostic criteria. Formal MCD diagnostic criteria will expand clinical care and research by enabling future diagnostic code validation, crystallizing a more uniform disease entity for the purposes of translational research, and allowing the development of more formalized outcome measures aimed at treatment response.ObjectiveTo define a set of criteria for the diagnosis of MCD.Evidence ReviewIn this consensus statement, a panel of experts on MCD and related conditions was assembled. Their opinions were gathered regarding the clinical and histologic findings that are sufficient, necessary, and highly suggestive of MCD through serial survey. Subsequent surveys were continued until consensus was achieved. Sufficient was defined as a feature that, if noted, would enable diagnosis of MCD without any other signs, symptoms, or testing. Necessary was defined as a feature that must be present to establish a diagnosis of MCD. Highly suggestive referred to any other features that were indicative of MCD but did not qualify as sufficient or necessary to diagnose MCD.FindingsOf 24 experts invited, 19 agreed to participate, with a 79% to 100% response rate across 5 rounds conducted. Five patients were also invited to participate, but none opted to participate, citing lack of clinical expertise and time concerns. The experts were all from the US; 5 (26%) have practiced medicine for 0 to 5 years, 5 (26%) practiced for 6 to 10 years, 6 (32%) practiced for 11 to 15 years, and 3 (16%) practiced for more than 20 years. A total of 18 experts (95%) worked in an academic practice setting. There was consensus agreement that MCD could present as oral disease, genital disease, or, rarely, in another location. Consensus was achieved on 2 major and 5 minor criteria for genital/other subtypes of MCD and 5 minor criteria for oral MCD. There was consensus that, while there are some pathological findings that are highly suggestive of MCD, histologic criteria are not necessary for diagnosis.Conclusions and RelevanceA panel of experts reached consensus on the diagnostic criteria for MCD described in this study. These criteria include major and minor clinical criteria, along with histopathological criteria for the diagnosis of genital and oral MCD. This consensus is a crucial step in the diagnosis of and future treatment development for MCD, a rare and clinically understudied condition.

Abstract Background Perianal draining tunnels in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) and perianal fistulizing inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) present diagnostic and management dilemmas. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients with perianal disease evaluated at Mayo Clinic from January 1, 1998, through July 31, 2021. Patients' demographic and clinical data were extracted, and 28 clinical features were collected. After experimenting with several machine learning techniques, random forests were used to select the 15 most important clinical features to construct the diagnostic prediction model to distinguish perianal HS from fistulizing perianal IBD. Results A total of 263 patients were included (98 with HS, 100 with IBD, and 65 with both IBD and HS). Patients with HS had a higher mean body mass index, a higher smoking rate, and more commonly showed cutaneous manifestations of tunnels and comedones, while fistulas, abscesses, induration, anal tags, ulcers, and anal fissures were more common in patients with IBD. In addition to having lesions in the perianal area, patients with IBD often had lesions in the buttocks and perineum, while those with HS had additional lesions in the axillae and groin. Among the statistically significant features, the 15 most important were identified by random forest: fistula , tunnel , digestive symptom , knife‐cut ulcer , perineum , body mass index , age , axilla , abscess , tags , smoking , groin , genital cutaneous edema , erythema , and bilateral/unilateral . Conclusions The results of this study may help differentiate perianal lesions, especially perineal HS and fistulizing perineal IBD, and provide promise for a better therapeutic outcome.

AbstractPregnancy is a conjectured risk factor for pyoderma gangrenosum (PG), an autoinflammatory neutrophilic dermatosis characterized by painful ulcers. Even so, there are no available treatment guidelines for those with PG who are pregnant or breastfeeding. To describe existing treatment options, we systematically reviewed the literature on PG treatment in pregnant or breastfeeding patients. A search over four databases was completed in October 2022. Independent reviewers accomplished screening and data extraction. 18 articles met the inclusion criteria. 15 cases involved the treatment of PG during pregnancy, and three cases involved the treatment of PG while breastfeeding. Most patients did not have a history of PG prior to pregnancy (77.7%), and most did not have PG‐associated comorbidity (61.1%). Of the cases involving treatment of PG during pregnancy, the majority (73%) found treatment success with a systemic corticosteroid (SCS). Only three cases reported an adverse outcome, including premature rupture of membranes and premature birth (16.7%); all these cases involved treatment with a SCS at >0.5 mg/kg/day during pregnancy. We present a treatment algorithm for pregnant or breastfeeding patients with PG. Our findings suggest prioritizing topicals and TNF inhibitors due to more favorable side effect profiles. However, there is a paucity of data on the safety of PG therapies in pregnancy and breastfeeding, and thus, controlled studies and pregnancy registries must be pursued.

AbstractBackgroundThe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) clinical response (HiSCR) has come under scrutiny as several HS clinical trials failed to meet primary endpoints with high placebo responses. This may be due to limitations of the tool and raters' ability to accurately characterize and count lesions, rather than lack of efficacy of the studied drug. Due to HS lesion complexity and potential differences in rater training, it was hypothesized that there would be discrepancies in how providers characterize and count lesions for HS clinical trials.ObjectiveTo evaluate how HS providers and patients name and count HS lesions and to identify discrepancies among providers to initiate the development of consensus‐driven guidance for HS rater training.MethodsAn online survey was distributed to the members of HIdradenitis SuppuraTiva cORe outcomes set International Collaboration (HISTORIC). Respondents were asked to classify lesion images composed of multiple and different morphology types and answer questions regarding inclusion of associated dermatological conditions.ResultsForty‐seven HISTORIC members responded (29 providers; 18 patients). There was variability in how respondents classified HS lesions. Of 12 questions containing images, four had ≥50% of respondents choosing the same answer. With an image of a lesion composed of different morphologies, 45% of providers counted it as a single lesion and 45% counted it as multiple distinct lesions. With an image of multiple interconnected draining tunnels, 7% of providers classified it as a single draining tunnel while 79% categorized it as multiple draining tunnels with the number estimated by visual inspection. There was also variability in deciding whether lesions occurring in associated conditions should be considered separately or included in HS lesion counts. Patient responses were also variable.ConclusionsThe result of the current study reaffirms the gap in how providers characterize and count HS lesions for clinical trials and the need to develop consensus‐driven rater training related to HS outcome measures.

AbstractWe report a case of a 41‐year‐old woman who developed pregnancy‐associated pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) at 4 weeks gestation. She was initially treated with prednisone, however, due to lack of improvement and risk of systemic corticosteroids in pregnancy, underwent a prednisone taper and was initiated on certolizumab pegol (CZP). The patient experienced complete wound re‐epithelialization 1 month after CZP initiation. She had no pregnancy complications except for prednisone‐associated gestational diabetes and gave birth to a healthy baby. CZP is a tumour necrosis factor‐inhibitor with negligible placental transfer and no known adverse effects in pregnancy. Its efficacy and safety for autoinflammatory dermatoses in pregnancy are very promising. This is the first case to report CZP treatment for PG in a pregnant patient.

Current validated hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) severity assessment tools are time-consuming and impractical in fast-paced, ambulatory clinic settings. This study evaluated the construct validity of the most severe or ‘worst’ area local Hidradenitis suppurativa Activity and Severity Index-Revised (W-HASI-R) as a novel target area assessment tool for clinical setting use. W-HASI-R had strong association with the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System and abscess and nodule count, moderate association with Hurley stage and HS physician global assessment and weak, negative association with reverse-scored Dermatology Quality Life Index. The resulting data suggest that W-HASI-R may be an option as an efficient target area assessment tool for fast-paced, ambulatory settings.

Skin thickness, as known as inflammatory induration, is a component in several HS grading instruments including the HASI and HASI-R. This study sought to evaluate how thickest lesion measurement (mm) corresponds to HS severity. This study demonstrates that inflammatory induration has moderate association with HS severity, thickest lesion measurement (mm) demonstrates known-validity across Hurley stages, and cut-offs for thickest lesion measurement (mm) were determined for inflammatory induration grading for the purpose of HASI-R training.

Abstract Background Validated, inclusive and easy‐to‐use outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa are essential both in the clinical trial setting and clinical practice. The continuous IHS4 is a validated tool that dynamically assesses nodules/abscesses/draining tunnels and classifies disease severity as mild/moderate/severe. However, dichotomous outcomes are often required for clinical trials reporting. Objective To develop and validate a dichotomous outcome based on IHS4 that can be used in clinical trial settings and day‐to‐day clinical practice. Methods De‐identified data from the PIONEER‐I and ‐II studies were accessed through Vivli. Potential IHS4 thresholds were analysed using baseline to Week 12 data from adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients in the PIONEER‐I trial. The final threshold was chosen based on its ability to discriminate between patients treated with adalimumab or placebo and its association with reduction in inflammatory lesions. The final threshold was validated using data from baseline to Week 12 from adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients in both the PIONEER‐II and the combined PIONEER‐I and ‐II studies. Results The best performing cut‐off for the IHS4 was a 55% reduction of the IHS4 score (IHS4‐55). Patients who achieved the IHS4‐55 had an odd's ratio of 2.00 [95%‐CI 1.26–3.18, p = 0.003], 2.79 (95%‐CI 1.76–4.43, p < 0.001) and 2.16 (95%‐CI 1.43–3.29, p < 0.001) for being treated with adalimumab rather than placebo in PIONEER‐I, PIONEER‐II and the combined dataset, respectively. Additionally, the achievement of the IHS4‐55 was associated with a significant reduction in inflammatory nodules, abscesses and draining tunnels in all analysed datasets. Conclusions IHS4‐55, a novel dichotomous IHS4 version, based on a 55% reduction of the total score was developed. The IHS4‐55 performs similarly to the HiSCR in discriminating between adalimumab‐ and placebo‐treated hidradenitis suppurativa patients and shows significant associations with reductions in lesion counts. Moreover, the IHS4‐55 addresses some of the HiSCR drawbacks by dynamically including draining tunnels in a validated manner. By allowing the analysis of hidradenitis suppurativa patients with an abscess and nodule count below 3 but many draining tunnels, this outcome measure will improve inclusivity in clinical trials.

Abstract Background Nearly half of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) report dissatisfaction with their treatment. However, factors related to treatment satisfaction have not been explored. Objectives To measure associations between treatment satisfaction and clinical and treatment-related characteristics among patients with HS. Methods Treatment satisfaction was evaluated utilizing data from a cross-sectional global survey of patients with HS recruited from 27 institutions, mainly HS referral centres, in 14 different countries from October 2017 to July 2018. The primary outcome was patients’ self-reported overall satisfaction with their current treatments for HS, rated on a five-point scale from ‘very dissatisfied’ to ‘very satisfied’. Results The final analysis cohort comprised 1418 patients with HS, most of whom were European (55%, 780 of 1418) or North American (38%, 542 of 1418), and female (85%, 1210 of 1418). Overall, 45% (640 of 1418) of participants were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their current medical treatment. In adjusted analysis, patients primarily treated by a dermatologist for HS had 1·99 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1·62–2·44, P &lt; 0·001] times the odds of being satisfied with current treatment than participants not primarily treated by a dermatologist. Treatment with biologics was associated with higher satisfaction [odds ratio (OR) 2·36, 95% CI 1·74–3·19, P &lt; 0·001] relative to treatment with nonbiologic systemic medications. Factors associated with lower treatment satisfaction included smoking (OR 0·78, 95% CI 0·62–0·99; active vs. never), depression (OR 0·69, 95% CI 0·54–0·87), increasing number of comorbidities (OR 0·88 per comorbidity, 95% CI 0·81–0·96) and increasing flare frequency. Conclusions There are several factors that appear to positively influence satisfaction with treatment among patients with HS, including treatment by a dermatologist and treatment with a biologic medication. Factors that appear to lower treatment satisfaction include active smoking, depression, accumulation of comorbid conditions and increasing flare frequency. Awareness of these factors may support partnered decision making with the goal of improving treatment outcomes. What is already known about this topic? Nearly half of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa report dissatisfaction with their treatments. What does this study add? Satisfaction with treatment is increased by receiving care from a dermatologist and treatment with biologics.Satisfaction with treatment is decreased by tobacco smoking, accumulation of comorbid conditions including depression, and higher flare frequency. What are the clinical implications of this work? Awareness of the identified factors associated with poor treatment satisfaction may support partnered decision making and improve treatment outcomes.