Psoriasis

Menter A, Korman NJ, Elmets CA, Feldman SR, Gelfand JM, Gordon KB, Gottlieb A, Koo JY, Lebwohl M, Lim HW, Van Voorhees AS, Beutner KR, Bhushan R, Anonymous00035. · Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #19217694 No free full text.

Abstract: Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multi-system disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In this third of 6 sections of the guidelines of care for psoriasis, we discuss the use of topical medications for the treatment of psoriasis. The majority of patients with psoriasis have limited disease (<5% body surface area involvement) and can be treated with topical agents, which generally provide a high efficacy-to-safety ratio. Topical agents may also be used adjunctively for patients with more extensive psoriasis undergoing therapy with either ultraviolet light, systemic or biologic medications. However, the use of topical agents as monotherapy in the setting of extensive disease or in the setting of limited, but recalcitrant, disease is not routinely recommended. Treatment should be tailored to meet individual patients' needs. We will discuss the efficacy and safety of as well as offer recommendations for the use of topical corticosteroids, vitamin D analogues, tazarotene, tacrolimus, pimecrolimus, emollients, salicylic acid, anthralin, coal tar, as well as combination therapy.

Morton CA, McKenna KE, Rhodes LE, Anonymous00070. · Department of Dermatology, Stirling Royal Infirmary, Stirling FK2 8AU, UK. · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #18945319 No free full text.

Abstract: Multicentre randomized controlled studies now demonstrate high efficacy of topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) for actinic keratoses, Bowen's disease (BD) and superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC), and efficacy in thin nodular BCC, while confirming the superiority of cosmetic outcome over standard therapies. Long-term follow-up studies are also now available, indicating that PDT has recurrence rates equivalent to other standard therapies in BD and superficial BCC, but with lower sustained efficacy than surgery in nodular BCC. In contrast, current evidence does not support the use of topical PDT for squamous cell carcinoma. PDT can reduce the number of new lesions developing in patients at high risk of skin cancer and may have a role as a preventive therapy. Case reports and small series attest to the potential of PDT in a wide range of inflammatory/infective dermatoses, although recent studies indicate insufficient evidence to support its use in psoriasis. There is an accumulating evidence base for the use of PDT in acne, while detailed study of an optimized protocol is still required. In addition to high-quality treatment site cosmesis, several studies observe improvements in aspects of photoageing. Management of treatment-related pain/discomfort is a challenge in a minority of patients, and the modality is otherwise well tolerated. Long-term studies provide reassurance over the safety of repeated use of PDT.

Lecluse LL, Piskin G, Mekkes JR, Bos JD, de Rie MA. · Department of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22700, 1100 DE Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #18627374 No free full text.

Abstract: Infliximab (Remicade; Schering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ, U.S.A.) is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that acts as a tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor. Infliximab is registered for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, Crohn disease, ulcerative colitis, ankylosing spondylitis and plaque-type psoriasis. Like other foreign protein-derived agents, infliximab may lead to infusion reactions during and after infusion. Infusion reactions occur in 3-22% of patients with psoriasis treated with infliximab. Most of these reactions are mild or moderate and only few are severe. Nevertheless, they may lead to discontinuation of treatment. As infliximab for psoriasis is prescribed as a last resort and is in most cases very effective, discontinuation of treatment is undesirable. With proper care and prevention of the infusion reactions the need to discontinue treatment with infliximab can be diminished. The objective of this article is to present a guideline for the management of infliximab-related infusion reactions, based on the best available evidence. This guideline can be used in patients with psoriasis as well as in dermatology patients receiving infliximab for off-label indications such as hidradenitis suppurativa or pyoderma gangrenosum.

Doherty SD, Van Voorhees A, Lebwohl MG, Korman NJ, Young MS, Hsu S, National Psoriasis Foundation. · Department of Dermatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #18485527 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Chronic immunosuppression is a known risk factor for allowing latent tuberculosis (TB) infection to transform into active TB. Immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapies, while highly efficacious in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, may be associated with an increased rate of active TB in patients receiving some of these therapies. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to arrive at a consensus on screening for latent TB infection in psoriasis patient treated with systemic and biologic agents. METHODS: Reports in the literature were reviewed regarding immunosuppressive therapies and risk of TB. RESULTS: Screening patients for latent TB infection before commencement of treatment is of utmost importance when beginning treatment with the tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors, T-cell blockers, cyclosporine, or methotrexate. The currently recommended method for screening is the tuberculin skin test. It is preferable that positively screened patients be treated with a full course of latent TB infection prophylaxis before immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy is initiated. However, in the opinion of many experts, patients may be started on the immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy after 1 to 2 months, if their clinical condition requires, as long as they are strictly adhering to and tolerating their prophylactic regimen. LIMITATIONS: There are few evidence-based studies on screening for latent TB infection in psoriasis patients treated with systemic and biologic agents. CONCLUSIONS: The biologic TNF-alpha inhibitors are very promising in the treatment of psoriasis. However, because TNF-alpha is also an important cytokine in preventing TB infection and in keeping latent TB infection from becoming active disease, the use of TNF-alpha inhibitors has been associated with an increased risk of developing active TB. A higher incidence of TB has also been reported with other immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory treatments for psoriasis. It is, therefore, of utmost importance to appropriately screen all patients for latent TB infection prior to initiating any immunologic therapy. Delaying immunologic therapy until latent TB infection prophylaxis is completed is preferable. However, if the patient is adhering to his prophylactic regimen and is appropriately tolerating the regimen, therapy may be started after 1 to 2 months if the clinical condition requires.

Gottlieb A, Korman NJ, Gordon KB, Feldman SR, Lebwohl M, Koo JY, Van Voorhees AS, Elmets CA, Leonardi CL, Beutner KR, Bhushan R, Menter A. · Department of Dermatology, Tufts-New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #18423261 No free full text.

Abstract: Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In this second of 5 sections of the guidelines of care for psoriasis, we give an overview of psoriatic arthritis including its cardinal clinical features, pathogenesis, prognosis, classification, assessment tools used to evaluate psoriatic arthritis, and the approach to treatment. Although patients with mild to moderate psoriatic arthritis may be treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or intra-articular steroid injections, the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, particularly methotrexate, along with the biologic agents, are considered the standard of care in patients with more significant psoriatic arthritis. We will discuss the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and the biologic therapies in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis.

Menter A, Gottlieb A, Feldman SR, Van Voorhees AS, Leonardi CL, Gordon KB, Lebwohl M, Koo JY, Elmets CA, Korman NJ, Beutner KR, Bhushan R. · Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #18423260 No free full text.

Abstract: Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In this first of 5 sections of the guidelines of care for psoriasis, we discuss the classification of psoriasis; associated comorbidities including autoimmune diseases, cardiovascular risk, psychiatric/psychologic issues, and cancer risk; along with assessment tools for skin disease and quality-of-life issues. Finally, we will discuss the safety and efficacy of the biologic treatments used to treat patients with psoriasis.

Kimball AB, Gladman D, Gelfand JM, Gordon K, Horn EJ, Korman NJ, Korver G, Krueger GG, Strober BE, Lebwohl MG, Anonymous00020. · Department of Dermatology, Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114, USA. · J Am Acad Dermatol. · Pubmed #18313171 No free full text.

Abstract: There have been several articles and reports in recent months about comorbidities and risks that affect psoriasis patients in addition to their underlying disease. This piece reviews the current literature and begins to address what should be done with this new information by updating the clinician about what health screening tests, preventative exams, and referrals should be considered in this population.

Zhang W, Doherty M, Leeb BF, Alekseeva L, Arden NK, Bijlsma JW, Dincer F, Dziedzic K, Hauselmann HJ, Kaklamanis P, Kloppenburg M, Lohmander LS, Maheu E, Martin-Mola E, Pavelka K, Punzi L, Reiter S, Smolen J, Verbruggen G, Watt I, Zimmermann-Gorska I, Anonymous00031. · Dr W Zhang, Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, Clinical Sciences Building, City Hospital, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK. · Ann Rheum Dis. · Pubmed #18250111 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of hand osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The multidisciplinary guideline development group, representing 15 European countries, generated 10 key propositions regarding diagnosis using a Delphi consensus approach. For each recommendation, research evidence was searched for systematically. Whenever possible, the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio (LR) were calculated; relative risk and odds ratios were estimated for risk factors for hand OA. Quality of evidence was categorised using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) hierarchy, and strength of recommendation was assessed by the EULAR visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Diagnostic topics included clinical manifestations, radiographic features, subgroups, differential diagnosis, laboratory tests, risk factors and comorbidities. The sensitivity, specificity and LR varied between tests depending upon the cut-off level, gold standard and controls. Overall, no single test could be used to define hand OA on its own (LR <10) but a composite of the tests greatly increased the chance of the diagnosis. The probability of a subject having hand OA was 20% when Heberden nodes alone were present, but this increased to 88% when in addition the subject was over 40 years old, had a family history of nodes and had joint space narrowing in any finger joint. CONCLUSION: Ten key recommendations for diagnosis of hand OA were developed using research evidence and expert consensus. Diagnosis of hand OA should be based on assessment of a composite of features.

Pham T, Fautrel B, Dernis E, Goupille P, Guillemin F, Le Loët X, Ravaud P, Claudepierre P, Miceli-Richard C, de Bandt M, Breban M, Maillefert JF, Masson C, Saraux A, Schaeverbeke T, Wendling D, Mariette X, Combe B, Anonymous00063. · Rheumatology Department, la Conception Teaching Hospital, 147 boulevard Baille, 13005 Marseille, France. · Joint Bone Spine. · Pubmed #18065252 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To update French Society for Rheumatology guidelines regarding the use of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) antagonists for treating patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: We used the method recommended by Shekelle et al. to update the original recommendations: a limited group of experts selected the items that required updating, the relevant literature was critically appraised, and the experts developed new wording for the recommendations, which was then subjected to internal and external validation. As with the original recommendations, three topics were addressed, namely, indications of TNFalpha antagonist therapy, treatment initiation, and treatment adjustment and follow-up. RESULTS: Four criteria should be used to evaluate the indication of TNFalpha antagonist therapy. First, the patient must have a definitive diagnosis of AS or PsA. Thus, patients with AS must meet modified New York criteria or exhibit characteristic involvement of the sacroiliac joints, spine, or peripheral sites documented by radiographs or computed tomography (structural damage) or by magnetic resonance imaging (inflammation). Patients with PsA must meet validated criteria such as the Moll and Wright or CASPAR criteria. The second criterion is active disease for more than 1month, with a BASDAI >or=4 in patients with predominantly axial disease or a tender/swollen joint count >or=3, and with a physician assessment of disease activity of >or=4/10. The third criterion is failure of at least three non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with axial disease or of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy (methotrexate, salazopyrine, or leflunomide) in patients with peripheral disease. Fourth, the patient must be free of contraindications to TNFalpha antagonist therapy. Four recommendations pertain to the initiation of TNFalpha antagonist therapy: a workup should be performed prior to treatment initiation; there is no evidence that one TNFalpha antagonist is more effective than the others, so decisions about drug selection should be shared with the patient and guided by available safety data and the patient's profile; there is no proof that greater effectiveness can be achieved by routinely combining a conventional DMARD; and patients should receive regular standardized follow-up. The last four recommendations deal with adjusting TNFalpha antagonist therapy: the treatment objective is a 2-point or greater improvement in the BASDAI in patients with axial disease and a 30% or greater improvement in the tender/swollen joint counts in patients with peripheral disease; there is no evidence to support the introduction of DMARD therapy in non-responders, who can be switched to another TNFalpha antagonist or, when on infliximab, given higher dosages or more closely spaced injections; patients who fail to tolerate one TNFalpha antagonist can be switched to another TNFalpha antagonist if allowed by the nature of the adverse event; and when a remission is achieved, reduction or discontinuation of concomitant anti-inflammatory therapy should be considered, followed in the event of a prolonged remission by a reduction in the dosage of the TNFalpha antagonist.

Mrowietz U, Altmeyer P, Bieber T, Röcken M, Schopf RE, Sterry W. · Psoriasis Center, Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergy, University Clinic of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany. · J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. · Pubmed #17659047 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Weisenseel P, Kuznetsov AV, Prinz JC. · Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany. · J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. · Pubmed #17659043 No free full text.

Abstract: The recently published German S3- guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris offer an extensive evidence-based documentation and evaluation of currently available treatment modalities. In order to incorporate this detailed information into the actual treatment decisions in individual patients, we have transformed the recommendations regarding phototherapy and systemic therapies into an algorithm. This algorithm should allow a stepwise treatment approach in adult patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, in whom topical therapy is not sufficient. It can also facilitate documentation of treatment. In our hands the treatment algorithm proved to be feasible and reliable in a large number of patients.

Nast A, Kopp IB, Augustin M, Banditt KB, Boehncke WH, Follmann M, Friedrich M, Huber M, Kahl C, Klaus J, Koza J, Kreiselmaier I, Mohr J, Mrowietz U, Ockenfels HM, Orzechowski HD, Prinz J, Reich K, Rosenbach T, Rosumeck S, Schlaeger M, Schmid-Ott G, Sebastian M, Streit V, Weberschock T, Rzany B, Anonymous00272, Anonymous00273. · Division of Evidence Based Medicine (dEBM), Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. · J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. · Pubmed #17615051 No free full text.

Abstract: Psoriasis vulgaris is a common and often chronic inflammatory skin disease. The incidence of psoriasis in Western industrialized countries ranges from 1 to 2%. Patients afflicted with severe psoriasis vulgaris may experience a significant reduction in quality of life. Despite the large variety of treatment options available, patient surveys have revealed lack of satisfaction with the efficacy of available treatments and a high rate of non-compliance. To optimize the treatment of psoriasis in Germany, the Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG) and the Berufsverband Deutscher Dermatologen (BVDD) initiated a project to develop evidence-based guidelines for the management of psoriasis. These resulting Guidelines focus on induction therapy in cases of mild, moderate, and severe plaquetype psoriasis in adults. The Guidelines include evidence-based evaluation of the efficacy of all currently available therapeutic options in Germany. In addition, they offer detailed information on how best to administer the various treatments and give information on contraindications, adverse drug reactions, and drug interactions as well as estimates of practicability and cost. The Guidelines were developed following the recommendations of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft wissenschaftlicher medizinischer Fachgesellschaften (AWMF). The therapeutic recommendations were developed by an expert group and finalized during interdisciplinary consensus conferences.

Nast A, Kopp I, Augustin M, Banditt KB, Boehncke WH, Follmann M, Friedrich M, Huber M, Kahl C, Klaus J, Koza J, Kreiselmaier I, Mohr J, Mrowietz U, Ockenfels HM, Orzechowski HD, Prinz J, Reich K, Rosenbach T, Rosumeck S, Schlaeger M, Schmid-Ott G, Sebastian M, Streit V, Weberschock T, Rzany B. · Division of Evidence Based Medicine, Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie, Allergologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Schumannstrasse 20/21, Berlin, Germany. · Arch Dermatol Res. · Pubmed #17497162 links to  free full text

Abstract: Psoriasis vulgaris is a common and chronic inflammatory skin disease which has the potential to significantly reduce the quality of life in severely affected patients. The incidence of psoriasis in Western industrialized countries ranges from 1.5 to 2%. Despite the large variety of treatment options available, patient surveys have revealed insufficient satisfaction with the efficacy of available treatments and a high rate of medication non-compliance. To optimize the treatment of psoriasis in Germany, the Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft and the Berufsverband Deutscher Dermatologen (BVDD) have initiated a project to develop evidence-based guidelines for the management of psoriasis. The guidelines focus on induction therapy in cases of mild, moderate, and severe plaque-type psoriasis in adults. The short version of the guidelines reported here consist of a series of therapeutic recommendations that are based on a systematic literature search and subsequent discussion with experts in the field; they have been approved by a team of dermatology experts. In addition to the therapeutic recommendations provided in this short version, the full version of the guidelines includes information on contraindications, adverse events, drug interactions, practicality, and costs as well as detailed information on how best to apply the treatments described (for full version, please see Nast et al., JDDG, Suppl 2:S1-S126, 2006; or http://www.psoriasis-leitlinie.de ).

Pariser DM, Bagel J, Gelfand JM, Korman NJ, Ritchlin CT, Strober BE, Van Voorhees AS, Young M, Rittenberg S, Lebwohl MG, Horn EJ, Anonymous00184. · Department of Dermatology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, USA. · Arch Dermatol. · Pubmed #17310004 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: A task force of the National Psoriasis Foundation Medical Board was convened to evaluate the current severity criteria of mild, moderate, and severe psoriasis and to make recommendations concerning a 2-tiered categorization of severity based on current clinical practice and related to intent to treat. PARTICIPANTS: This volunteer task force, led by David M. Pariser, MD, included Jerry Bagel, MD, Joel M. Gelfand, MD, MSCE, Neil J. Korman, MD, PhD, Christopher T. Ritchlin, MD, Bruce E. Strober, MD, PhD, Abby S. Van Voorhees, MD, and Melodie Young, MSN, RN, ANP. Meetings were held by teleconference and were coordinated and funded by the National Psoriasis Foundation. EVIDENCE: This task force reviewed psoriasis severity criteria and other published psoriasis consensus statements. Current standards of care and expert opinion were used to inform the process. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Based on meetings of the task force and under the guidance of David M. Pariser, MD, a statement was drafted by Elizabeth J. Horn, PhD, presented to the task force, and reviewed and approved by the task force. This statement was then reviewed and approved by Robert E. Kalb, MD, Gerald G. Krueger, MD, and Alan Menter, MD. The National Psoriasis Foundation Medical Board reviewed and endorsed this statement by a majority vote on March 2, 2006, at the medical board meeting. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical consensus statement proposes a 2-tiered system for plaque psoriasis therapy that reflects more accurately than the current system how patients are treated in clinical practice. This statement, focused on plaque psoriasis, is intended to assist medical professionals and insurance payers in understanding these 2 categories of patients with psoriasis and choosing appropriate therapies for these patients.

Nast A, Kopp IB, Augustin M, Banditt KB, Boehncke WH, Follmann M, Friedrich M, Huber M, Kahl C, Klaus J, Koza J, Kreiselmaier I, Mohr J, Mrowietz U, Ockenfels HM, Orzechowski HD, Prinz J, Reich K, Rosenbach T, Rosumeck S, Schlaeger M, Schmid-Ott G, Sebastian M, Streit V, Weberschock T, Rzany B, Anonymous00487. · Division of Evidence Based Medicine (dEBM), Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin. · J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. · Pubmed #17187649 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Pham T, Guillemin F, Claudepierre P, Luc M, Miceli-Richard C, Fautrel B, de Bandt M, Breban M, Goupille P, Maillefert JF, Masson C, Saraux A, Schaeverbeke T, Wendling D, Mariette X, Combe B, Anonymous00190, Anonymous00191. · Service de Rhumatologie, CHU de la Conception, 147, bd Baille, 13005 Marseille, France. · Joint Bone Spine. · Pubmed #16843030 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To develop recommendations for TNFalpha antagonist therapy in patients with spondyloarthropathies. METHODS: The Delphi consensus procedure was used to select questions, to which evidence-based answers were sought in the literature. Expert opinion was used when needed to estimate the risks and benefits of TNFalpha antagonists. TNFalpha antagonists exert potent antiinflammatory effects but fail to provide a definitive cure. RESULTS: Recommendations were developed for patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The following criteria for TNFalpha antagonist therapy were selected: definitive diagnosis of AS or PsA, active disease for at least 4 consecutive weeks documented during two physician visits, overall physician's assessment of disease activity>/=4/10 and BASDAI>/=4/10 in axial disease or at least three tender and swollen joints in peripheral disease, failure to respond adequately to at least three nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs given in optimal dosages for at least 3 months in axial disease or at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (methotrexate, leflunomide, sulfasalazine) for at least 4 months, with local glucocorticoid injections if appropriate, in peripheral disease. Effectiveness and safety should be evaluated by a rheumatologist. The frequency of monitoring depends on the drug. Lack of effectiveness should be defined as inadequate improvement after 6-12 weeks, with a less than two-point decrease in the BASDAI in axial disease or a less than 30% decrease in the tender and swollen joint counts in peripheral disease. CONCLUSION: These clinical practice recommendations should help rheumatologists in their everyday decisions regarding the use of TNFalpha antagonist therapy in patients with AS or PsA.

Mrowietz U, Barth J, Boehncke WH, Reich K, Rosenbach T, Streit V, Wozel G. · Universitäts-Hauklinik Kiel. · J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. · Pubmed #16734844 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Salvarani C, Olivieri I, Pipitone N, Cantini F, Marchesoni A, Punzi L, Scarpa R, Matucci-Cerinic M, Anonymous00280. · Rheumatology Unit, Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova, Reggio Emilia, Italy. · Clin Exp Rheumatol. · Pubmed #16539822 No free full text.

Abstract: AIM: To propose recommendations for the use of biologic (TNF-alpha blocking) agents in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: We developed these recommendations by reviewing the evidence published in medical journals and in abstracts of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and of the European League against Rheumatism. A draft of the recommendations was circulated to a group of Italian Rheumatologists with a special interest in PsA and in therapy with biologic agents, and their suggestions were incorporated in the final version. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved regarding the initiation and the monitoring of anti-TNF-alpha agents in PsA. More specifically, we propose that anti-TNF-alphaagents be considered in active PsA resistant to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, to at least two local steroid injections and at least 2 conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic agents (in cases of oligo/monoarthritis and/or enthesitis), and to at least two conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic agents (in patients with peripheral joints synovitis). Disease activity monitoring should be based on a variety of outcome measures including the ACR response criteria modified for use in PsA, the Bath ankylosing spondylitis disease activity index (BASDAI), and the Maastricht ankylosing spondylitis enthesis score (MASES). A favorable Expert opinion, based on evaluation of clinical symptoms and signs, of laboratory investigations (particularly acute phase reactants), and of imaging studies (whenever appropriate) should also be obtained. CONCLUSION: These recommendations may be used for guidance in deciding which patients with PsA should receive biologic therapy. Regular updates of these recommendations will be implemented on the basis of the results of new clinical studies and of data from post-marketing surveillance.

Smith CH, Anstey AV, Barker JN, Burden AD, Chalmers RJ, Chandler D, Finlay AY, Griffiths CE, Grifitths CE, Jackson K, McHugh NJ, McKenna KE, Reynolds NJ, Ormerod AD, Anonymous00078. · St John's Institute of Dermatology, GKT School of Medicine, St Thomas' Hospital, London SE1 7EH, UK. · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #16120132 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Kyle S, Chandler D, Griffiths CE, Helliwell P, Lewis J, McInnes I, Oliver S, Symmons D, McHugh N, Anonymous00081. · Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Upper Borough Wells, Bath, BA1 IRL, UK. · Rheumatology (Oxford). · Pubmed #15695305 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Salvarani C, Olivieri I, Cantini F, Marchesoni A, Punzi L, Scarpa R, Matucci-Cerinic M. · No affiliation provided · Reumatismo. · Pubmed #15470517 links to  free full text

This publication has no abstract.

Ibbotson SH, Bilsland D, Cox NH, Dawe RS, Diffey B, Edwards C, Farr PM, Ferguson J, Hart G, Hawk J, Lloyd J, Martin C, Moseley H, McKenna K, Rhodes LE, Taylor DK, Anonymous00115. · Pathobiology Unit, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK. · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #15327535 No free full text.

Abstract: Summary These guidelines for use of narrowband (TL-01) ultraviolet B have been prepared for dermatologists by the British Photodermatology Group on behalf of the British Association of Dermatologists. They present evidence-based guidance for treatment of patients with a variety of dermatoses and photodermatoses, with identification of the strength of evidence available at the time of preparation of the guidelines, and a brief overview of background photobiology.

Morton CA, Brown SB, Collins S, Ibbotson S, Jenkinson H, Kurwa H, Langmack K, McKenna K, Moseley H, Pearse AD, Stringer M, Taylor DK, Wong G, Rhodes LE. · Department of Dermatology, Falkirk Royal Infirmary, Falkirk FK1 5QE, U.K. · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #11966684 No free full text.

Abstract: Topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) is effective in the treatment of certain non-melanoma skin cancers and is under evaluation in other dermatoses. Its development has been enhanced by a low rate of adverse events and good cosmesis. 5-Aminolaevulinic acid (ALA) is the main agent used, converted within cells into the photosensitizer protoporphyrin IX, with surface illumination then triggering the photodynamic reaction. Despite the relative simplicity of the technique, accurate dosimetry in PDT is complicated by multiple variables in drug formulation, delivery and duration of application, in addition to light-specific parameters. Several non-coherent and coherent light sources are effective in PDT. Optimal disease-specific irradiance, wavelength and total dose characteristics have yet to be established, and are compounded by difficulties comparing light sources. The carcinogenic risk of ALA-PDT appears to be low. Current evidence indicates topical PDT to be effective in actinic keratoses on the face and scalp, Bowen's disease and superficial basal cell carcinomas (BCCs). PDT may prove advantageous where size, site or number of lesions limits the efficacy and/or acceptability of conventional therapies. Topical ALA-PDT alone is a relatively poor option for both nodular BCCs and squamous cell carcinomas. Experience of the modality in other skin diseases remains limited; areas where there is potential benefit include viral warts, acne, psoriasis and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. A recent British Photodermatology Group workshop considered published evidence on topical PDT in order to establish guidelines to promote the efficacy and safety of this increasingly practised treatment modality.

Schmutz JL, Jeanmougin M, Martin S, Amblard P, Thomas P. · Service de Dermatologie, Hôpital Fournier, 36, quai de la Bataille, 54035 Nancy Cedex. · Ann Dermatol Venereol. · Pubmed #11011174 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Anstey A, George S. · No affiliation provided · Br J Dermatol. · Pubmed #19476466 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.