Merola, Joseph F.

Patients with psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are at significantly increased risk for cardiovascular (CV) disease, attributed to chronic systemic inflammation and a high burden of cardiometabolic comorbidities. Despite this, CV risk factors in this population are frequently underdiagnosed and undertreated. This consensus document, developed by the Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Clinics Multicenter Advancement Network (PPACMAN), provides practical recommendations for dermatologists, rheumatologists, and primary care physicians to improve CV risk assessment and management in PsO and PsA. Key recommendations include conducting baseline CV risk assessments at diagnosis—particularly for patients with moderate-to-severe PsO, PsA, or those requiring biologic therapy—and routine screening for hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, smoking, obesity, and metabolic syndrome. The use of biomarkers such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and lipoprotein(a) may help refine risk stratification. Patients at elevated risk should be referred to their primary care provider or a cardiologist for further evaluation and may require additional imaging, including coronary artery calcium scoring. Lifestyle counseling on diet, exercise, weight management, and smoking cessation is essential. Pharmacologic strategies, such as earlier initiation of statins and consideration of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, are encouraged when clinically appropriate. Systemic inflammation should be reduced using anti-inflammatory therapies, although outcome data remain mixed. Clinicians must carefully assess the risks and benefits of NSAIDs, corticosteroids, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. This document aims to bridge existing gaps in interdisciplinary care and facilitate earlier, more aggressive CV risk management in psoriatic disease, aligning with current cardiology and dermatology guidelines to reduce morbidity and mortality.

AbstractThere is a lack of validated tools to measure fatigue in patients with inflammatory skin, neuropsychiatric, and medical disorders. The use of nonvalidated tools may compromise the quality of data. The purpose of this meta‐review was to evaluate existing fatigue scales commonly used to assess fatigue in other inflammatory conditions and to identify if there are scales that have been validated in dermatologic conditions. The PubMed/MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases were systematically searched from inception through March 10, 2020, in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Validated tools were identified and assessed according to their main measurement properties. The literature search identified 403 references, and eight studies were eligible and assessed in this review. The unidimensional fatigue scales included were the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Fatigue (FACIT‐F), Brief Fatigue Inventory, Fatigue Severity Scale, Numerical Rating Scale – Fatigue, and Visual Analog Scale – Fatigue. The multidimensional fatigue scales found were the Checklist Individual Strength, Chalder Fatigue Scale, Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory Scale, and Piper Fatigue Scale. To measure fatigue, a brief scale with the ability to detect change is needed as there is a growing interest in evaluating this dimension of treatment response. In addition, a good content validity is also needed. From this systematic review, none of the selected scales have had content validation, even though the FACIT was validated in patients with psoriatic arthritis. Validation studies in specific disorders are urgently warranted.