Garg, Amit

Importance Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a substantial burden. Standardized global prevalence estimates and data on associated sociodemographic and risk factors are lacking. Objective To estimate the global prevalence of HS and study differences in prevalence by age, sex, geographical location, body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), smoking status, gross domestic product (GDP), and Human Development Index (HDI). Data Sources and Study Selection Included studies were conducted using the standardized Global Hidradenitis Suppurativa Atlas methodology with finalized data collection before May 19, 2023. Studies were required to use a population-based sampling method and conduct clinical confirmation of HS diagnosis following a screening questionnaire. Data Extraction and Synthesis Data were independently extracted from relevant studies by 2 reviewers (D.B. and C.E.M.) using a standardized form. Extracted variables included geographic location, age, sex, BMI (median and BMI >30), smoking status, HS prevalence estimates (with 95% CIs), GDP, and HDI. A proportional meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted on the included studies. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the point prevalence of HS, confirmed by clinical examination. Secondary outcomes included differences in HS prevalence by sex, age, BMI category, smoking status, and country-level socioeconomic indicators (GDP and HDI). All outcomes were prespecified before data analysis. Results The sample included 22 743 participants, identifying 247 patients with HS, across 25 studies in 23 countries spanning 6 continents. The median proportion of female patients with HS was 55.6%, and the median age was 34.5 years. While the prevalence estimates showed considerable inconsistency ( I 2 > 75%; τ 2 = 0.747), the overall random-effects global prevalence of HS was 0.99% (95% CI, 0.67%-1.46%). Female sex was the only factor observed to be associated with the prevalence estimates (β = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03). Conclusions and Relevance In this meta-analysis, an estimated global prevalence of HS between 0.67% and 1.46% surpassed previous global estimates. Substantial global variations in HS prevalence were also observed. Female sex was the only factor associated with prevalence in this sample. Future studies assessing genetic, environmental, and etiological factors are warranted to explain the heterogeneity in prevalence.

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 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 < 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 < 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.