Marzano, Angelo Valerio

Abstract Background Small vessel vasculitides (SVV) comprise a heterogeneous group of cutaneous SVV (CSVV) that can be skin‐limited or systemic. Given their diverse forms and symptoms and the lack of a standardized diagnostic approach, it is crucial to establish clear and consensus‐driven recommendations for diagnosis. Objectives To standardize diagnosis for the detection of the type, extent, potential causes or underlying conditions of CSVV. Methods International experts comprised the panel. The Delphi panel data was collected through two rounds of questionnaires. Agreement was measured using an 11‐point Likert scale (0 = strongly disagree, 10 = strongly agree). A 7‐vote minimum was required for agreement on each statement. Delphi panel statements scoring 3–7 were discussed during the meeting. Results 20 experts participated in the first round of the Delphi panel, while 17 experts took part in the second. They agreed that the diagnosis of CSVV relies on a combination of clinical manifestations, laboratory findings and histopathology. Palpable purpura on the lower extremities is recognized as the most reliable hallmark for most SVV and a sign of immune complex vasculitis. When the latter is suspected, a skin biopsy for direct immunofluorescence (DIF) should be obtained from an early, partially blanchable macule because the type of perivascular immunoglobulin is important for further diagnosis. The proper selection of biopsy sites for routine HE biopsy depends on the morphology of lesions. A comprehensive medical history and selected laboratory testing should be conducted to investigate organ involvement, potential causes and associated conditions. The extent of diagnostic procedures should be based on the severity, duration, systemic symptoms and recurrence of SVV. Conclusions Experts reached a strong consensus on the management of CSVV patients, culminating in the first International Consensus Statement for adult CSVV. This statement proposes a practical management algorithm and underscores the importance of collaboration in rare diseases management.

AbstractIntroductionThe International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4) is a validated tool that measures inflammatory lesions, including draining tunnels, in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS).ObjectiveTo evaluate secukinumab efficacy using IHS4 in patients with moderate to severe HS.MethodsData from the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE trials, which assessed subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 2 (SECQ2W) and 4 (SECQ4W) weeks in adults with moderate to severe HS, were analyzed. Assessments included changes from baseline in IHS4 and severity classification up to Week 52; IHS4‐55, IHS4‐75, IHS4‐90 responses (55%, 75% and 90% reduction in IHS4) and concordance between IHS4‐55 and HS clinical response (HiSCR), at Weeks 16 and 52.ResultsIn total, 1084 patients (SECQ2W = 361; SECQ4W = 360; placebo = 363) were analyzed. At Week 16, SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated a numerically higher reduction in IHS4 from baseline versus placebo (adjusted mean [95% CI]: −10.80 [−12.30 to −9.30] and −9.46 [−10.96 to −7.96] vs. −4.92 [−6.43 to −3.41]); the reduction was maintained until Week 52 in both dose regimens. A greater proportion of patients achieved IHS4‐55 with SECQ2W (43.4%) and SECQ4W (39.5%) versus placebo (31.5%) at Week 16, with further improvement at Week 52. Similar trends were observed for IHS4‐75 and IHS4‐90 responses. While no patients had mild disease based on IHS4 (80.7% had severe and 19.3% had moderate HS) at baseline, a greater proportion of patients were categorized as having mild disease at Week 16 in the SECQ2W (25.9%) and SECQ4W (24.0%) groups versus placebo (16.4%); this trend continued up to Week 52 in both dose regimens. Strong concordance (>85%) was observed between IHS4‐55 and HiSCR.ConclusionsBoth SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated efficacy in improving treatment response as measured by IHS4 and reducing disease severity versus placebo at Week 16 and these improvements were sustained through Week 52. These findings support that the dynamic and dichotomous IHS4 can efficiently detect treatment response changes in clinical trial settings.Clinical Trials RegistrationSUNSHINE (NCT03713619); SUNRISE (NCT03713632).

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.

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.