Citations

Importance Pyoderma gangrenosum (PG) is a rare neutrophilic dermatosis characterized by sterile ulcerative skin lesions. Multiple comorbidities and clinical features have been associated with PG, but no standardized guidelines exist for classifying PG phenotypes. Objective To develop an expert-established classification framework for PG phenotypes to inform treatment guidelines and future research endeavors. Evidence Review In this modified Delphi consensus study that included 23 board-certified dermatologists and Medical Dermatology Society members with expertise in PG, panelists completed 5 rounds of anonymous, iterative online surveys that were administered from December 2023 through July 2025. Before the beginning of the consensus exercise, a literature review was performed by nonvoting researchers to summarize existing data on PG clinical associations and comorbidities. A PubMed search from inception to September 2023 identified observational studies, narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses describing PG clinical associations and comorbidities that were published in English. Experts indicated their agreement with proposed PG phenotypes and disease modifiers with a consensus threshold of 70% or greater. Anonymous comments and aggregated results were presented in each subsequent round. In the final round, a framework of PG phenotypes and disease modifiers was proposed for agreement. Findings Twenty-three board-certified dermatologists and Medical Dermatology Society members with expertise in PG completed 5 rounds of iterative surveys. Consensus was reached on the final set of PG phenotypes and disease modifiers, with 83% of experts in agreement. PG phenotypes were overall classified into 2 major groups: PG with autoinflammatory syndromes and nonsyndromic PG. Nonsyndromic PG included 4 phenotypes: inflammatory bowel disease–associated PG, PG in association with hematologic cancers and blood dyscrasias, drug-induced PG, and other (including idiopathic) PG. Disease modifiers of PG phenotype presentations included involvement of special sites (head/neck, genitals, or peristomal skin) and extracutaneous manifestations. Conclusions and Relevance This expert-established, descriptive framework provides a standardized classification system for distinct PG phenotypes and its modifiers. This nomenclature may inform upcoming clinical guidelines and allow for consistency in reporting epidemiological research and outcomes among patients with PG.

The NCCN Guidelines for the Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities are intended to provide oncology practitioners with guidance on how to manage the wide-ranging and potentially fatal toxicities that may occur with cancer immunotherapy. The guidelines address immune-related adverse events related to immune checkpoint inhibitors, CAR T-cell therapies, and lymphocyte engagers (which include T-cell–engaging bispecific antibodies). These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight recent guideline updates pertaining to the management of emerging toxicities related to cancer immunotherapy.

Importance Office-based phototherapy is cost-effective for psoriasis but difficult to access. Home-based phototherapy is patient preferred but has limited clinical data, particularly in patients with darker skin. Objective To compare the effectiveness of home- vs office-based narrowband UV-B phototherapy for psoriasis. Design, Setting, and Participants The Light Treatment Effectiveness study was an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial embedded in routine care at 42 academic and private clinical dermatology practices in the US. Enrollment occurred from March 1, 2019, to December 4, 2023, with follow-up through June 2024. Participants were 12 years and older with plaque or guttate psoriasis who were candidates for home- and office-based phototherapy. Interventions Participants were randomized to receive a home narrowband UV-B machine with guided mode dosimetry or routine care with office-based narrowband UV-B for 12 weeks, followed by an additional 12-week observation period. Main Outcomes and Measures The coprimary effectiveness outcomes were Physician Global Assessment (PGA) dichotomized as clear/almost clear skin (score of ≤1) at the end of the intervention period and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score of 5 or lower (no to small effect on quality of life) at week 12. Results Of 783 patients enrolled (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [15.5] years; 376 [48.0%] male), 393 received home-based phototherapy and 390 received office-based phototherapy, with 350 (44.7%) having skin phototype (SPT) I/II, 350 (44.7%) having SPT III/IV, and 83 (10.6%) having SPT V/VI. A total of 93 patients (11.9%) were receiving systemic treatment. At baseline, mean (SD) PGA was 2.7 (0.8) and DLQI was 12.2 (7.2). At week 12, 129 patients (32.8%) receiving home-based phototherapy and 100 patients (25.6%) receiving office-based phototherapy achieved clear/almost clear skin, and 206 (52.4%) and 131 (33.6%) achieved DLQI of 5 or lower, respectively. Home-based phototherapy was noninferior to office-based phototherapy for PGA and DLQI in the overall population and across all SPTs. Home-based phototherapy, compared to office-based phototherapy, was associated with better treatment adherence (202 patients [51.4%] vs 62 patients [15.9%]; P < .001), lower burden of indirect costs to patients, and more episodes of persistent erythema (466 of 7957 treatments [5.9%] vs 46 of 3934 treatments [1.2%]; P < .001). Both treatments were well tolerated with no discontinuations due to adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, home-based phototherapy was as effective as office-based phototherapy for plaque or guttate psoriasis in everyday clinical practice and had less burden to patients. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03726489

Importance Scoring systems for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and epidermal necrolysis (EN) only estimate patient prognosis and are weighted toward comorbidities and systemic features; morphologic terminology for EN lesions is inconsistent. Objectives To establish consensus among expert dermatologists on EN terminology, morphologic progression, and most-affected sites, and to build a framework for developing a skin-directed scoring system for EN. Evidence Review A Delphi consensus using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness criteria was initiated with a core group from the Society of Dermatology Hospitalists to establish agreement on the optimal design for an EN cutaneous scoring instrument, terminology, morphologic traits, and sites of involvement. Findings In round 1, the 54 participating dermatology hospitalists reached consensus on all 49 statements (30 appropriate, 3 inappropriate, 16 uncertain). In round 2, they agreed on another 15 statements (8 appropriate, 7 uncertain). There was consistent agreement on the need for a skin-specific instrument; on the most-often affected skin sites (head and neck, chest, upper back, ocular mucosa, oral mucosa); and that blanching erythema, dusky erythema, targetoid erythema, vesicles/bullae, desquamation, and erosions comprise the morphologic traits of EN and can be consistently differentiated. Conclusions and Relevance This consensus exercise confirmed the need for an EN skin-directed scoring system, nomenclature, and differentiation of specific morphologic traits, and identified the sites most affected. It also established a baseline consensus for a standardized EN instrument with consistent terminology.

ABSTRACT Background Evaluation and interpretation of the literature on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) allows for consolidation and determination of the key factors important for clinical management of the adult OSA patient. Toward this goal, an international collaborative of multidisciplinary experts in sleep apnea evaluation and treatment have produced the International Consensus statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (ICS:OSA). Methods Using previously defined methodology, focal topics in OSA were assigned as literature review (LR), evidence‐based review (EBR), or evidence‐based review with recommendations (EBR‐R) formats. Each topic incorporated the available and relevant evidence which was summarized and graded on study quality. Each topic and section underwent iterative review and the ICS:OSA was created and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results The ICS:OSA addresses OSA syndrome definitions, pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors for disease, screening methods, diagnostic testing types, multiple treatment modalities, and effects of OSA treatment on multiple OSA‐associated comorbidities. Specific focus on outcomes with positive airway pressure (PAP) and surgical treatments were evaluated. Conclusion This review of the literature consolidates the available knowledge and identifies the limitations of the current evidence on OSA. This effort aims to create a resource for OSA evidence‐based practice and identify future research needs. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities include improving the metrics of OSA disease, determining the optimal OSA screening paradigms, developing strategies for PAP adherence and longitudinal care, enhancing selection of PAP alternatives and surgery, understanding health risk outcomes, and translating evidence into individualized approaches to therapy.

The aim of the NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities is to provide guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events resulting from cancer immunotherapy. The NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel is an interdisciplinary group of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions, consisting of medical and hematologic oncologists with expertise across a wide range of disease sites, and experts from the areas of dermatology, gastroenterology, endocrinology, neurooncology, nephrology, cardio-oncology, ophthalmology, pulmonary medicine, and oncology nursing. The content featured in this issue is an excerpt of the recommendations for managing toxicities related to CAR T-cell therapies and a review of existing evidence. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines, including recommendations for managing toxicities related to immune checkpoint inhibitors, visitNCCN.org.