Key clinical point: Abrocitinib is safe and effective in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice, regardless of their previous inadequate response to upadacitinib or dupilumab.

Major finding: At week 28, 57.6% of patients achieved a ≥75% reduction in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores. At week 16, no significant difference was observed in the EASI scores between nonresponders and patients naive or responsive to upadacitinib or dupilumab (all P > .05). Most adverse events (81.6%) were mild in severity.

Study details: This multicenter prospective study included 103 patients with AD from the BioDay registry who did or did not exhibit adequate response to previous dupilumab or upadacitinib treatment and received abrocitinib for ≤28 weeks.

Disclosures: The BioDay registry was sponsored by Eli Lilly, Sanofi Genzyme, Leo Pharma, AbbVie, and Pfizer. Seven authors reported being consultants, speakers, etc., for or having other ties with various sources, including the aforementioned organizations. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

Source: Kamphuis E, Boesjes CM, Loman L, et al. Real-world experience of abrocitinib treatment in patients with atopic dermatitis and hand eczema: Up to 28-week results from the BioDay Registry. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 7). Doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.19454 Source

Key clinical point: Abrocitinib is safe and effective in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice, regardless of their previous inadequate response to upadacitinib or dupilumab.

Major finding: At week 28, 57.6% of patients achieved a ≥75% reduction in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores. At week 16, no significant difference was observed in the EASI scores between nonresponders and patients naive or responsive to upadacitinib or dupilumab (all P > .05). Most adverse events (81.6%) were mild in severity.

Study details: This multicenter prospective study included 103 patients with AD from the BioDay registry who did or did not exhibit adequate response to previous dupilumab or upadacitinib treatment and received abrocitinib for ≤28 weeks.

Disclosures: The BioDay registry was sponsored by Eli Lilly, Sanofi Genzyme, Leo Pharma, AbbVie, and Pfizer. Seven authors reported being consultants, speakers, etc., for or having other ties with various sources, including the aforementioned organizations. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

Source: Kamphuis E, Boesjes CM, Loman L, et al. Real-world experience of abrocitinib treatment in patients with atopic dermatitis and hand eczema: Up to 28-week results from the BioDay Registry. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 7). Doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.19454 Source

Key clinical point: Abrocitinib is safe and effective in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice, regardless of their previous inadequate response to upadacitinib or dupilumab.

Major finding: At week 28, 57.6% of patients achieved a ≥75% reduction in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores. At week 16, no significant difference was observed in the EASI scores between nonresponders and patients naive or responsive to upadacitinib or dupilumab (all P > .05). Most adverse events (81.6%) were mild in severity.

Study details: This multicenter prospective study included 103 patients with AD from the BioDay registry who did or did not exhibit adequate response to previous dupilumab or upadacitinib treatment and received abrocitinib for ≤28 weeks.

Disclosures: The BioDay registry was sponsored by Eli Lilly, Sanofi Genzyme, Leo Pharma, AbbVie, and Pfizer. Seven authors reported being consultants, speakers, etc., for or having other ties with various sources, including the aforementioned organizations. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

Source: Kamphuis E, Boesjes CM, Loman L, et al. Real-world experience of abrocitinib treatment in patients with atopic dermatitis and hand eczema: Up to 28-week results from the BioDay Registry. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 7). Doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.19454 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) does not have a significant association with the development of photodermatoses, including photosensitivity, photoallergy, and contact allergy.

Major finding: Of the phototested patients, 23 had a history of AD, of whom 52.2% were photosensitive and 34.8% were photopatch test-positive. Phototested patients with and without AD showed no significant differences in terms of the development of photosensitivity (P = .61), photoallergy (P = .25), or contact allergy (P = .74).

Study details: Findings are from a 10-year retrospective cohort study including 101 patients with or without a history of AD who were tested for sensitivity to UV-A, UV-B, and visible light, followed by photopatch or contact patch testing if photoallergy or simple contact dermatitis was suspected.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Afvari S and Zippin JH. Photodermatoses in patients with atopic dermatitis: A 10-year retrospective cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2024 (Feb 18). doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.01.032 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) does not have a significant association with the development of photodermatoses, including photosensitivity, photoallergy, and contact allergy.

Major finding: Of the phototested patients, 23 had a history of AD, of whom 52.2% were photosensitive and 34.8% were photopatch test-positive. Phototested patients with and without AD showed no significant differences in terms of the development of photosensitivity (P = .61), photoallergy (P = .25), or contact allergy (P = .74).

Study details: Findings are from a 10-year retrospective cohort study including 101 patients with or without a history of AD who were tested for sensitivity to UV-A, UV-B, and visible light, followed by photopatch or contact patch testing if photoallergy or simple contact dermatitis was suspected.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Afvari S and Zippin JH. Photodermatoses in patients with atopic dermatitis: A 10-year retrospective cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2024 (Feb 18). doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.01.032 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) does not have a significant association with the development of photodermatoses, including photosensitivity, photoallergy, and contact allergy.

Major finding: Of the phototested patients, 23 had a history of AD, of whom 52.2% were photosensitive and 34.8% were photopatch test-positive. Phototested patients with and without AD showed no significant differences in terms of the development of photosensitivity (P = .61), photoallergy (P = .25), or contact allergy (P = .74).

Study details: Findings are from a 10-year retrospective cohort study including 101 patients with or without a history of AD who were tested for sensitivity to UV-A, UV-B, and visible light, followed by photopatch or contact patch testing if photoallergy or simple contact dermatitis was suspected.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Afvari S and Zippin JH. Photodermatoses in patients with atopic dermatitis: A 10-year retrospective cohort study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2024 (Feb 18). doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.01.032 Source

Key clinical point: Dupilumab led to rapid and significant improvements in atopic dermatitis (AD) signs and symptoms in children, including those who failed to attain clear or almost clear skin according to Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA).

Major finding: At week 16, the composite endpoint, including ≥50% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index scores, was achieved by significantly more children receiving dupilumab vs placebo in the overall group (77.7% vs 24.6%; P < .0001) and the subgroup with an IGA score > 1 (68.9% vs 21.5%; P < .0001). Significant improvements were observed as early as week 2.

Study details: This post hoc analysis of LIBERTY AD PRESCHOOL (Part B) included 162 children age 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe AD who were randomized to receive dupilumab or placebo and low-potency topical corticosteroids, of whom 136 had an IGA score > 1.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. Three authors reported being employees of or owning stocks or stock options in Sanofi or Regeneron. The remaining authors reported receiving grants from or having other ties with Sanofi, Regeneron, or others.

Source: Cork MJ, Lockshin B, Pinter A, et al. Clinically meaningful responses to dupilumab among children aged 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who did not achieve clear or almost clear skin according to the investigator's global assessment: A post hoc analysis of a phase 3 trial. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 12). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.13467 Source

Key clinical point: Dupilumab led to rapid and significant improvements in atopic dermatitis (AD) signs and symptoms in children, including those who failed to attain clear or almost clear skin according to Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA).

Major finding: At week 16, the composite endpoint, including ≥50% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index scores, was achieved by significantly more children receiving dupilumab vs placebo in the overall group (77.7% vs 24.6%; P < .0001) and the subgroup with an IGA score > 1 (68.9% vs 21.5%; P < .0001). Significant improvements were observed as early as week 2.

Study details: This post hoc analysis of LIBERTY AD PRESCHOOL (Part B) included 162 children age 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe AD who were randomized to receive dupilumab or placebo and low-potency topical corticosteroids, of whom 136 had an IGA score > 1.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. Three authors reported being employees of or owning stocks or stock options in Sanofi or Regeneron. The remaining authors reported receiving grants from or having other ties with Sanofi, Regeneron, or others.

Source: Cork MJ, Lockshin B, Pinter A, et al. Clinically meaningful responses to dupilumab among children aged 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who did not achieve clear or almost clear skin according to the investigator's global assessment: A post hoc analysis of a phase 3 trial. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 12). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.13467 Source

Key clinical point: Dupilumab led to rapid and significant improvements in atopic dermatitis (AD) signs and symptoms in children, including those who failed to attain clear or almost clear skin according to Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA).

Major finding: At week 16, the composite endpoint, including ≥50% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index scores, was achieved by significantly more children receiving dupilumab vs placebo in the overall group (77.7% vs 24.6%; P < .0001) and the subgroup with an IGA score > 1 (68.9% vs 21.5%; P < .0001). Significant improvements were observed as early as week 2.

Study details: This post hoc analysis of LIBERTY AD PRESCHOOL (Part B) included 162 children age 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe AD who were randomized to receive dupilumab or placebo and low-potency topical corticosteroids, of whom 136 had an IGA score > 1.

Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. Three authors reported being employees of or owning stocks or stock options in Sanofi or Regeneron. The remaining authors reported receiving grants from or having other ties with Sanofi, Regeneron, or others.

Source: Cork MJ, Lockshin B, Pinter A, et al. Clinically meaningful responses to dupilumab among children aged 6 months to 5 years with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who did not achieve clear or almost clear skin according to the investigator's global assessment: A post hoc analysis of a phase 3 trial. Acta Derm Venereol. 2024 (Feb 12). doi: 10.2340/actadv.v104.13467 Source

Key clinical point: Both the age of onset and persistence of atopic dermatitis (AD) are differentially associated with the expression and progression of other atopic diseases during childhood.

Major finding: Children who developed AD at 1 year of age (persistent AD) showed significantly higher rates of food allergy (P = .004), asthma (P < .001), and self-reported rhinitis (P < .001) during childhood compared with children without AD at age 1 year (none/intermittent AD [never had AD or had an intermittent course] or late-onset AD [onset from 4-6 years of age]).

Study details: This study included 285 children from the Childhood Origins of ASThma cohort with a history of physician-diagnosed asthma or respiratory allergies who were followed up to 18 years of age and categorized based on AD phenotypes into none/intermittent (n = 180), late-onset (n = 38), or persistent (n = 67) AD groups.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Two authors declared receiving funding from or having other ties with various sources, including NIH.

Source: Taki MH, Lee KE, Gangnon R, et al. Atopic dermatitis phenotypes impact expression of atopic diseases despite similar mononuclear cell cytokine responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Mar 2). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.02.015 Source

Key clinical point: Both the age of onset and persistence of atopic dermatitis (AD) are differentially associated with the expression and progression of other atopic diseases during childhood.

Major finding: Children who developed AD at 1 year of age (persistent AD) showed significantly higher rates of food allergy (P = .004), asthma (P < .001), and self-reported rhinitis (P < .001) during childhood compared with children without AD at age 1 year (none/intermittent AD [never had AD or had an intermittent course] or late-onset AD [onset from 4-6 years of age]).

Study details: This study included 285 children from the Childhood Origins of ASThma cohort with a history of physician-diagnosed asthma or respiratory allergies who were followed up to 18 years of age and categorized based on AD phenotypes into none/intermittent (n = 180), late-onset (n = 38), or persistent (n = 67) AD groups.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Two authors declared receiving funding from or having other ties with various sources, including NIH.

Source: Taki MH, Lee KE, Gangnon R, et al. Atopic dermatitis phenotypes impact expression of atopic diseases despite similar mononuclear cell cytokine responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Mar 2). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.02.015 Source

Key clinical point: Both the age of onset and persistence of atopic dermatitis (AD) are differentially associated with the expression and progression of other atopic diseases during childhood.

Major finding: Children who developed AD at 1 year of age (persistent AD) showed significantly higher rates of food allergy (P = .004), asthma (P < .001), and self-reported rhinitis (P < .001) during childhood compared with children without AD at age 1 year (none/intermittent AD [never had AD or had an intermittent course] or late-onset AD [onset from 4-6 years of age]).

Study details: This study included 285 children from the Childhood Origins of ASThma cohort with a history of physician-diagnosed asthma or respiratory allergies who were followed up to 18 years of age and categorized based on AD phenotypes into none/intermittent (n = 180), late-onset (n = 38), or persistent (n = 67) AD groups.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the US National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Two authors declared receiving funding from or having other ties with various sources, including NIH.

Source: Taki MH, Lee KE, Gangnon R, et al. Atopic dermatitis phenotypes impact expression of atopic diseases despite similar mononuclear cell cytokine responses. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2024 (Mar 2). doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.02.015 Source

Key clinical point: Children who later developed atopic dermatitis (AD) had a delayed maturation of the skin microbiome and increased levels of proinflammatory stratum corneum biomarkers before AD onset.

Major finding: Children who did vs did not develop AD later had significantly increased levels of stratum corneum biomarkers (thymus and activation-regulated chemokine, interleukin-18, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, interleukin-22, etc.; all P ≤ .01) and greater variance over time in the most abundant 14 core amplicon sequence variants (P = .04), indicating delayed establishment of a stable skin microbiome.

Study details: This study longitudinally analyzed the epidermal biomarker levels and microbiome profiles of 50 children who were at a high risk for AD from a previous randomized study, of whom 26% of children developed AD up to month 24.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the BIOMAP project, LA ROCHE-POSAY Laboratoire Pharmaceutique, France, and others. Four authors declared receiving institutional research grants, honoraria for consulting, etc., from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Fonfara M, Hartmann J, Stölzl D, et al. Stratum corneum and microbial biomarkers precede and characterize childhood atopic dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Feb 29). doi: 10.1111/jdv.19932 Source

Key clinical point: Children who later developed atopic dermatitis (AD) had a delayed maturation of the skin microbiome and increased levels of proinflammatory stratum corneum biomarkers before AD onset.

Major finding: Children who did vs did not develop AD later had significantly increased levels of stratum corneum biomarkers (thymus and activation-regulated chemokine, interleukin-18, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, interleukin-22, etc.; all P ≤ .01) and greater variance over time in the most abundant 14 core amplicon sequence variants (P = .04), indicating delayed establishment of a stable skin microbiome.

Study details: This study longitudinally analyzed the epidermal biomarker levels and microbiome profiles of 50 children who were at a high risk for AD from a previous randomized study, of whom 26% of children developed AD up to month 24.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the BIOMAP project, LA ROCHE-POSAY Laboratoire Pharmaceutique, France, and others. Four authors declared receiving institutional research grants, honoraria for consulting, etc., from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Fonfara M, Hartmann J, Stölzl D, et al. Stratum corneum and microbial biomarkers precede and characterize childhood atopic dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Feb 29). doi: 10.1111/jdv.19932 Source

Key clinical point: Children who later developed atopic dermatitis (AD) had a delayed maturation of the skin microbiome and increased levels of proinflammatory stratum corneum biomarkers before AD onset.

Major finding: Children who did vs did not develop AD later had significantly increased levels of stratum corneum biomarkers (thymus and activation-regulated chemokine, interleukin-18, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, interleukin-22, etc.; all P ≤ .01) and greater variance over time in the most abundant 14 core amplicon sequence variants (P = .04), indicating delayed establishment of a stable skin microbiome.

Study details: This study longitudinally analyzed the epidermal biomarker levels and microbiome profiles of 50 children who were at a high risk for AD from a previous randomized study, of whom 26% of children developed AD up to month 24.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the BIOMAP project, LA ROCHE-POSAY Laboratoire Pharmaceutique, France, and others. Four authors declared receiving institutional research grants, honoraria for consulting, etc., from or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Fonfara M, Hartmann J, Stölzl D, et al. Stratum corneum and microbial biomarkers precede and characterize childhood atopic dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2024 (Feb 29). doi: 10.1111/jdv.19932 Source

Key clinical point: The presence of atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms in children during early life is associated with increased likelihood of pain at 10 years of age, suggesting a prospective influence of AD on pain experiences in children.

Major finding: Children with AD-like symptoms at 6 and 15 months of age had a significantly higher risk of reporting any pain (relative risk [RR] 1.75; 95% CI 1.15-2.66) and multisite pain (RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.18-2.37), respectively, at age 10 years.

Study details: This prospective study analyzed the data of 1302 and 874 children from the Generation XXI birth cohort for AD-like symptoms at ages 6 months and 15 months, respectively, by interviewing parents; data on pain history in the last 3 months at age 10 years was collected using structured questionnaires for parents and children.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the European Regional Development Fund, through COMPETE 2020 Operational Programme 'Competitiveness and Internationalization,' projects at the Univeridade do Porto, Portugal, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Gorito V, Brandão M, Azevedo I, et al. Atopic dermatitis in early life and pain at 10 years of age: An exploratory study. Eur J Pediatr. 2024 (Feb 24). doi: 10.1007/s00431-024-05439-0 Source

Key clinical point: The presence of atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms in children during early life is associated with increased likelihood of pain at 10 years of age, suggesting a prospective influence of AD on pain experiences in children.

Major finding: Children with AD-like symptoms at 6 and 15 months of age had a significantly higher risk of reporting any pain (relative risk [RR] 1.75; 95% CI 1.15-2.66) and multisite pain (RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.18-2.37), respectively, at age 10 years.

Study details: This prospective study analyzed the data of 1302 and 874 children from the Generation XXI birth cohort for AD-like symptoms at ages 6 months and 15 months, respectively, by interviewing parents; data on pain history in the last 3 months at age 10 years was collected using structured questionnaires for parents and children.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the European Regional Development Fund, through COMPETE 2020 Operational Programme 'Competitiveness and Internationalization,' projects at the Univeridade do Porto, Portugal, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Gorito V, Brandão M, Azevedo I, et al. Atopic dermatitis in early life and pain at 10 years of age: An exploratory study. Eur J Pediatr. 2024 (Feb 24). doi: 10.1007/s00431-024-05439-0 Source

Key clinical point: The presence of atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms in children during early life is associated with increased likelihood of pain at 10 years of age, suggesting a prospective influence of AD on pain experiences in children.

Major finding: Children with AD-like symptoms at 6 and 15 months of age had a significantly higher risk of reporting any pain (relative risk [RR] 1.75; 95% CI 1.15-2.66) and multisite pain (RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.18-2.37), respectively, at age 10 years.

Study details: This prospective study analyzed the data of 1302 and 874 children from the Generation XXI birth cohort for AD-like symptoms at ages 6 months and 15 months, respectively, by interviewing parents; data on pain history in the last 3 months at age 10 years was collected using structured questionnaires for parents and children.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the European Regional Development Fund, through COMPETE 2020 Operational Programme 'Competitiveness and Internationalization,' projects at the Univeridade do Porto, Portugal, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Gorito V, Brandão M, Azevedo I, et al. Atopic dermatitis in early life and pain at 10 years of age: An exploratory study. Eur J Pediatr. 2024 (Feb 24). doi: 10.1007/s00431-024-05439-0 Source

Key clinical point: Topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient (strain CX) demonstrated superior efficacy in improving disease activity outcomes and a tolerable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a higher percentage of patients in the topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient vs placebo group (41.5% vs 12.1%; P = .005) achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 and a reduction of ≥1 point from baseline. No significant safety issues were identified during the study.

Study details: Findings are from a proof-of-concept trial including 98 patients with mild-to-moderate AD (age 12-70 years) who were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive daily topical 1.0% Strain CX postbiotic emollient (n = 65) or placebo (n = 33) for 8 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korea government and Cosmax BTI. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kim MS, Kim HJ, Kang SM, Heo YM, Kang J, et al. Efficacy and safety of topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient in adolescents and adults with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: A randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial. Allergy. 2024 (Mar 4). doi: 10.1111/all.16077 Source

Key clinical point: Topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient (strain CX) demonstrated superior efficacy in improving disease activity outcomes and a tolerable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a higher percentage of patients in the topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient vs placebo group (41.5% vs 12.1%; P = .005) achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 and a reduction of ≥1 point from baseline. No significant safety issues were identified during the study.

Study details: Findings are from a proof-of-concept trial including 98 patients with mild-to-moderate AD (age 12-70 years) who were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive daily topical 1.0% Strain CX postbiotic emollient (n = 65) or placebo (n = 33) for 8 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korea government and Cosmax BTI. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kim MS, Kim HJ, Kang SM, Heo YM, Kang J, et al. Efficacy and safety of topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient in adolescents and adults with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: A randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial. Allergy. 2024 (Mar 4). doi: 10.1111/all.16077 Source

Key clinical point: Topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient (strain CX) demonstrated superior efficacy in improving disease activity outcomes and a tolerable safety profile in patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD).

Major finding: At week 8, a higher percentage of patients in the topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient vs placebo group (41.5% vs 12.1%; P = .005) achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 and a reduction of ≥1 point from baseline. No significant safety issues were identified during the study.

Study details: Findings are from a proof-of-concept trial including 98 patients with mild-to-moderate AD (age 12-70 years) who were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive daily topical 1.0% Strain CX postbiotic emollient (n = 65) or placebo (n = 33) for 8 weeks.

Disclosures: This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea grant funded by the Korea government and Cosmax BTI. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kim MS, Kim HJ, Kang SM, Heo YM, Kang J, et al. Efficacy and safety of topical Streptococcus postbiotic emollient in adolescents and adults with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: A randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial. Allergy. 2024 (Mar 4). doi: 10.1111/all.16077 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with a higher likelihood of cognitive impairment symptoms involving difficulties in learning or memory, especially in children with neurodevelopmental comorbidities, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or learning disability.

Major finding: A significantly greater number of children with vs without AD experienced difficulties with learning (10.8% vs 5.9%) and memory (11.1% vs 5.8%; both P < .001). However, this association was observed only in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (adjusted odds ratio 2.26; 95% CI 1.43-3.57) including ADHD or learning disabilities.

Study details: This cross-sectional study analyzed the data of 7957 children, representing a weighted total of 69,732,807 children without intellectual disabilities from the 2021 US National Health Interview Survey who did (n = 9,223,013) or did not (n = 60,509,794) have AD. The survey randomly selects 1 child per surveyed household for whom a parent or adult caregiver provides information.

Disclosures: This study was supported by a grant to Joy Wan from the US National Institutes of Health. Joy Wan also declared receiving a grant and personal fees from various pharmaceutical companies. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Ma EZ, Chang HR, Radtke S, Wan J. Symptoms of cognitive impairment among children with atopic dermatitis. JAMA Dermatol. 2024 (Mar 6). doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.0015 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with a higher likelihood of cognitive impairment symptoms involving difficulties in learning or memory, especially in children with neurodevelopmental comorbidities, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or learning disability.

Major finding: A significantly greater number of children with vs without AD experienced difficulties with learning (10.8% vs 5.9%) and memory (11.1% vs 5.8%; both P < .001). However, this association was observed only in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (adjusted odds ratio 2.26; 95% CI 1.43-3.57) including ADHD or learning disabilities.

Study details: This cross-sectional study analyzed the data of 7957 children, representing a weighted total of 69,732,807 children without intellectual disabilities from the 2021 US National Health Interview Survey who did (n = 9,223,013) or did not (n = 60,509,794) have AD. The survey randomly selects 1 child per surveyed household for whom a parent or adult caregiver provides information.

Disclosures: This study was supported by a grant to Joy Wan from the US National Institutes of Health. Joy Wan also declared receiving a grant and personal fees from various pharmaceutical companies. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Ma EZ, Chang HR, Radtke S, Wan J. Symptoms of cognitive impairment among children with atopic dermatitis. JAMA Dermatol. 2024 (Mar 6). doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.0015 Source

Key clinical point: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with a higher likelihood of cognitive impairment symptoms involving difficulties in learning or memory, especially in children with neurodevelopmental comorbidities, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or learning disability.

Major finding: A significantly greater number of children with vs without AD experienced difficulties with learning (10.8% vs 5.9%) and memory (11.1% vs 5.8%; both P < .001). However, this association was observed only in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (adjusted odds ratio 2.26; 95% CI 1.43-3.57) including ADHD or learning disabilities.

Study details: This cross-sectional study analyzed the data of 7957 children, representing a weighted total of 69,732,807 children without intellectual disabilities from the 2021 US National Health Interview Survey who did (n = 9,223,013) or did not (n = 60,509,794) have AD. The survey randomly selects 1 child per surveyed household for whom a parent or adult caregiver provides information.

Disclosures: This study was supported by a grant to Joy Wan from the US National Institutes of Health. Joy Wan also declared receiving a grant and personal fees from various pharmaceutical companies. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Ma EZ, Chang HR, Radtke S, Wan J. Symptoms of cognitive impairment among children with atopic dermatitis. JAMA Dermatol. 2024 (Mar 6). doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.0015 Source

The rheumatologist of the future will see patients who have been assessed and triaged with artificial intelligence utilizing data from remote kiosk-placed ultrasound scanners and physician-directed algorithms. Practices will be broadly fueled by AI, which will screen charts, produce notes, handle prior authorizations and insurance issues, aid in earlier diagnoses, find patients for clinical trials, and maybe even suggest the next best therapy for individual patients.

Such is the future envisioned by Alvin F. Wells, MD, PhD, and John J. Cush, MD, who discussed the current and forthcoming reach of AI — and their own uses of it — at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“We’re not at the stage where ChatGPT and AI can tell us what the next best therapy is, but we’re getting there,” said Dr. Cush, a rheumatologist based in Dallas and executive director of RheumNow.com. For now, he said, “AI affords us a truly big-time increase in efficiency. It helps you deal with your time constraints in managing information overload and task overload.”

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

At a time when “PubMed doubles every 73 days ... and it’s getting harder and harder to stay abreast,” for example, new applications such as Scite, SciSpace, and Consensus can help curate, focus, and analyze the literature to match one’s own clinical interests. Such review tools are “just now getting into play and are evolving,” Dr. Cush said, noting that many but not all of them are based on ChatGPT, OpenAI’s chatbot that had a over 100 million users by January 2023 — just over a month after its version 3.5 was released.

For Dr. Wells, a rheumatologist and Midwest Region director in the department of rheumatology for the Advocate Health Medical Group in Franklin, Wisconsin, clinician-developed algorithms are helping his group assess patients — often remotely — and triage them to be seen fairly immediately by a rheumatologist versus in 4-6 weeks or in several months. “You can use AI to guide your access,” he said.

A patient “with a family history of RA, sed rate above 50, and osteopenia on x-rays” would be seen within a week, for example, while “another patient who’s had a [positive] ANA with no other symptoms, and maybe a family history, might be seen in 4-6 weeks,” said Dr. Wells, sharing his belief that “there is not a shortage of rheumatologists, [but a] shortage of using rheumatologists efficiently.”

Dr. Wells

AI for Improving Workflow

Current and future advances will enrich the intersection of AI and virtual medicine and improve outcomes and the rheumatologist-patient interaction, Dr. Wells said, pointing to research presented at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting on the use of computer vision technology for remotely assessing disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

In the proof-of-concept “MeFisto” study, 28 patients with RA used an app that enabled computer vision inference of hand motion data. Upon recording, an algorithm tracked the mean degree change of joint angle on flexion and the mean time to maximal flexion for each joint.

The researchers found a strong correlation between flexion of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint and the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, the Swollen Hand Joint Count, and the Tender Hand Joint Count. DIP flexion was found to be a significant predictor of low disease activity/remission and high disease activity, the researchers reported in their abstract.

“This blows you away — that a single camera on [one’s] smartphone can look at the manipulation of a hand … and that AI can tell me, there’s a chance this might be an inflammatory arthritis,” said Dr. Wells, noting that researchers are also developing ways to detect joint swelling in RA by AI.

AI can also be used for remote ultrasound scanning in RA, as evidenced by use of the ARTHUR system in Europe, he said. Developed by the Danish company ROPCA, the ARTHUR technology (Rheumatoid Arthritis Ultrasound Robot) interacts directly with the patient who has new joint pain or established RA to capture ultrasound images in grayscale and color flow of 11 joints per hand. AI analyzes the images and creates a report for the specialist.

“They’re trying to get a foothold in the US,” Dr. Wells said, sharing his prediction that similar technology will someday be seen not only in pharmacies but also — in support of equitable access — in locations such as grocery stores. “Again,” he said, “nothing will replace us. I’m taking all [such] information and saying, who needs to be seen in 7 days and who can wait.”
 

AI for Writing, for Improving Practice and Patient Care

To manage his “task overload,” Dr. Cush uses ChatGPT for jobs such as first drafts of articles and making PowerPoint slides. It must be used cautiously for medical writing, however, as inaccuracies and false data/fabricated information — some of which has been coined AI “hallucinations” — are not uncommon.

“It’s very good at manuscript drafts, at generating bibliographies … it can do systematic reviews, it can do network meta-analyses, and it can find trends and patterns that can very helpful when it comes to writing. But you have to know how it’s a tool, and how it can hurt you,” he said.

Researchers recently reported asking ChatGPT to write an editorial about “how AI may replace the rheumatologist in editorial writing,” Dr. Cush noted. ChatGPT was “very politically correct,” he quipped, because it wrote that AI is “a tool to help the rheumatologist, but not replace him.”

Publishers want to preserve human intelligence — critical thinking and the ability to interpret, for instance — and most of the top medical journals (those most often cited) have issued guidance on the use of generative AI. “One said AI can’t be attributed as an author because being an author carries with it accountability of the work, and AI can’t take responsibility,” Dr. Cush said. Journals also “are saying you can use AI but you have to be totally transparent about it … [how it’s used] has to be very well spelled out.”

In practice, chatbots can be used for summarizing medical records, drafting post-visit summaries, collecting patient feedback, reminding about vaccinations, and performing administrative functions. “It’s really limitless as to what chatbots can do,” Dr. Cush said. “The question is, [what is] really going to help you?”

Much of the research submitted for presentation at major rheumatology meetings over the years has had questionable real-world utility and value, he said. But in the future this will likely change. “Take the PsA [psoriatic arthritis] patient who hasn’t responded to methotrexate or apremilast [Otezla]. There are [so many] choices, and there really isn’t a clear one. Shouldn’t data guide us on whether an IL-23 is better than a JAK, or maybe a JAK preferred over a TNF for some reason?” Dr. Cush said. “That’s what we’re hoping will happen down the line.”

More realistic AI-guided clinical scenarios for now include the following: AI screens the chart of a 68-year-old with RA on methotrexate and etanercept who is following up, and retrieves pieces of history — an elevated C-reactive protein 3 months ago, for instance, and diverticulosis 5 years ago. “AI tells you, based on this, he may have active disease, and here are three medications covered by his insurance,” Dr. Wells said.

Or, in the case of a 58-year-old patient with RA who has scheduled a virtual follow-up visit after having been on methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine for 12 weeks, AI detects a low platelet count in her previsit labs and also sees that she received an MMR booster 5 weeks ago at a local CVS Minute Clinic. AI retrieves for the rheumatologist a review article about thrombocytopenic purpura after MMR vaccination.
 

AI for Drug Development, Clinical Trials

Dr. Cush is following with keen interest the integration of AI into the process of drug development, from drug discovery and biomarker evaluation to clinical trial efficiency and patient recruitment, as well as marketing. “A lot hasn’t been ‘rolled out’ or shown to us, but there’s a lot going on … everyone is investing,” he said. “The number one challenge is regulatory: How will the [Food and Drug Administration] handle AI-generated data sets or AI-generated or monitored trials?”

The FDA is working to ensure quality and utility of data and is rapidly “approving AI algorithms for use in medicine and healthcare,” he said.

AI’s ability to identify patients in populations can not only facilitate earlier diagnoses but can accelerate patient recruitment for clinical trials, Dr. Cush emphasized. He pointed to research presented at the ACR 2021 annual meeting in which a machine-learning algorithm was used with electronic health records in the United Kingdom to estimate the probability of a patient’s being diagnosed with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

AI identified 89 best clinical predictors (out of 820 analyzed). When applying these predictors to the population, AI was able to differentiate patients with axSpA from healthy controls with a sensitivity of 75%, a specificity of 96%, and a positive predictive value of 81%. Such an application of AI “is ideal … It would make clinical trials more streamlined and productive,” he said.

The extent to which AI will lead to cost savings — in the pharmacology arena, for instance, or for Well’s medical group — is unknown, Dr. Cush and Dr. Wells said. And, of course, there are concerns about potential bias and abuse of AI. “The worry,” Dr. Cush said, “is, who’s watching?”

Dr. Wells disclosed that he has research support and has served as a member of advisory boards and/or speaker bureaus for 17 different pharmaceutical or medical technology companies. Dr. Cush disclosed relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi, and UCB.

The rheumatologist of the future will see patients who have been assessed and triaged with artificial intelligence utilizing data from remote kiosk-placed ultrasound scanners and physician-directed algorithms. Practices will be broadly fueled by AI, which will screen charts, produce notes, handle prior authorizations and insurance issues, aid in earlier diagnoses, find patients for clinical trials, and maybe even suggest the next best therapy for individual patients.

Such is the future envisioned by Alvin F. Wells, MD, PhD, and John J. Cush, MD, who discussed the current and forthcoming reach of AI — and their own uses of it — at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“We’re not at the stage where ChatGPT and AI can tell us what the next best therapy is, but we’re getting there,” said Dr. Cush, a rheumatologist based in Dallas and executive director of RheumNow.com. For now, he said, “AI affords us a truly big-time increase in efficiency. It helps you deal with your time constraints in managing information overload and task overload.”

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

At a time when “PubMed doubles every 73 days ... and it’s getting harder and harder to stay abreast,” for example, new applications such as Scite, SciSpace, and Consensus can help curate, focus, and analyze the literature to match one’s own clinical interests. Such review tools are “just now getting into play and are evolving,” Dr. Cush said, noting that many but not all of them are based on ChatGPT, OpenAI’s chatbot that had a over 100 million users by January 2023 — just over a month after its version 3.5 was released.

For Dr. Wells, a rheumatologist and Midwest Region director in the department of rheumatology for the Advocate Health Medical Group in Franklin, Wisconsin, clinician-developed algorithms are helping his group assess patients — often remotely — and triage them to be seen fairly immediately by a rheumatologist versus in 4-6 weeks or in several months. “You can use AI to guide your access,” he said.

A patient “with a family history of RA, sed rate above 50, and osteopenia on x-rays” would be seen within a week, for example, while “another patient who’s had a [positive] ANA with no other symptoms, and maybe a family history, might be seen in 4-6 weeks,” said Dr. Wells, sharing his belief that “there is not a shortage of rheumatologists, [but a] shortage of using rheumatologists efficiently.”

Dr. Wells

AI for Improving Workflow

Current and future advances will enrich the intersection of AI and virtual medicine and improve outcomes and the rheumatologist-patient interaction, Dr. Wells said, pointing to research presented at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting on the use of computer vision technology for remotely assessing disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

In the proof-of-concept “MeFisto” study, 28 patients with RA used an app that enabled computer vision inference of hand motion data. Upon recording, an algorithm tracked the mean degree change of joint angle on flexion and the mean time to maximal flexion for each joint.

The researchers found a strong correlation between flexion of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint and the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, the Swollen Hand Joint Count, and the Tender Hand Joint Count. DIP flexion was found to be a significant predictor of low disease activity/remission and high disease activity, the researchers reported in their abstract.

“This blows you away — that a single camera on [one’s] smartphone can look at the manipulation of a hand … and that AI can tell me, there’s a chance this might be an inflammatory arthritis,” said Dr. Wells, noting that researchers are also developing ways to detect joint swelling in RA by AI.

AI can also be used for remote ultrasound scanning in RA, as evidenced by use of the ARTHUR system in Europe, he said. Developed by the Danish company ROPCA, the ARTHUR technology (Rheumatoid Arthritis Ultrasound Robot) interacts directly with the patient who has new joint pain or established RA to capture ultrasound images in grayscale and color flow of 11 joints per hand. AI analyzes the images and creates a report for the specialist.

“They’re trying to get a foothold in the US,” Dr. Wells said, sharing his prediction that similar technology will someday be seen not only in pharmacies but also — in support of equitable access — in locations such as grocery stores. “Again,” he said, “nothing will replace us. I’m taking all [such] information and saying, who needs to be seen in 7 days and who can wait.”
 

AI for Writing, for Improving Practice and Patient Care

To manage his “task overload,” Dr. Cush uses ChatGPT for jobs such as first drafts of articles and making PowerPoint slides. It must be used cautiously for medical writing, however, as inaccuracies and false data/fabricated information — some of which has been coined AI “hallucinations” — are not uncommon.

“It’s very good at manuscript drafts, at generating bibliographies … it can do systematic reviews, it can do network meta-analyses, and it can find trends and patterns that can very helpful when it comes to writing. But you have to know how it’s a tool, and how it can hurt you,” he said.

Researchers recently reported asking ChatGPT to write an editorial about “how AI may replace the rheumatologist in editorial writing,” Dr. Cush noted. ChatGPT was “very politically correct,” he quipped, because it wrote that AI is “a tool to help the rheumatologist, but not replace him.”

Publishers want to preserve human intelligence — critical thinking and the ability to interpret, for instance — and most of the top medical journals (those most often cited) have issued guidance on the use of generative AI. “One said AI can’t be attributed as an author because being an author carries with it accountability of the work, and AI can’t take responsibility,” Dr. Cush said. Journals also “are saying you can use AI but you have to be totally transparent about it … [how it’s used] has to be very well spelled out.”

In practice, chatbots can be used for summarizing medical records, drafting post-visit summaries, collecting patient feedback, reminding about vaccinations, and performing administrative functions. “It’s really limitless as to what chatbots can do,” Dr. Cush said. “The question is, [what is] really going to help you?”

Much of the research submitted for presentation at major rheumatology meetings over the years has had questionable real-world utility and value, he said. But in the future this will likely change. “Take the PsA [psoriatic arthritis] patient who hasn’t responded to methotrexate or apremilast [Otezla]. There are [so many] choices, and there really isn’t a clear one. Shouldn’t data guide us on whether an IL-23 is better than a JAK, or maybe a JAK preferred over a TNF for some reason?” Dr. Cush said. “That’s what we’re hoping will happen down the line.”

More realistic AI-guided clinical scenarios for now include the following: AI screens the chart of a 68-year-old with RA on methotrexate and etanercept who is following up, and retrieves pieces of history — an elevated C-reactive protein 3 months ago, for instance, and diverticulosis 5 years ago. “AI tells you, based on this, he may have active disease, and here are three medications covered by his insurance,” Dr. Wells said.

Or, in the case of a 58-year-old patient with RA who has scheduled a virtual follow-up visit after having been on methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine for 12 weeks, AI detects a low platelet count in her previsit labs and also sees that she received an MMR booster 5 weeks ago at a local CVS Minute Clinic. AI retrieves for the rheumatologist a review article about thrombocytopenic purpura after MMR vaccination.
 

AI for Drug Development, Clinical Trials

Dr. Cush is following with keen interest the integration of AI into the process of drug development, from drug discovery and biomarker evaluation to clinical trial efficiency and patient recruitment, as well as marketing. “A lot hasn’t been ‘rolled out’ or shown to us, but there’s a lot going on … everyone is investing,” he said. “The number one challenge is regulatory: How will the [Food and Drug Administration] handle AI-generated data sets or AI-generated or monitored trials?”

The FDA is working to ensure quality and utility of data and is rapidly “approving AI algorithms for use in medicine and healthcare,” he said.

AI’s ability to identify patients in populations can not only facilitate earlier diagnoses but can accelerate patient recruitment for clinical trials, Dr. Cush emphasized. He pointed to research presented at the ACR 2021 annual meeting in which a machine-learning algorithm was used with electronic health records in the United Kingdom to estimate the probability of a patient’s being diagnosed with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

AI identified 89 best clinical predictors (out of 820 analyzed). When applying these predictors to the population, AI was able to differentiate patients with axSpA from healthy controls with a sensitivity of 75%, a specificity of 96%, and a positive predictive value of 81%. Such an application of AI “is ideal … It would make clinical trials more streamlined and productive,” he said.

The extent to which AI will lead to cost savings — in the pharmacology arena, for instance, or for Well’s medical group — is unknown, Dr. Cush and Dr. Wells said. And, of course, there are concerns about potential bias and abuse of AI. “The worry,” Dr. Cush said, “is, who’s watching?”

Dr. Wells disclosed that he has research support and has served as a member of advisory boards and/or speaker bureaus for 17 different pharmaceutical or medical technology companies. Dr. Cush disclosed relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi, and UCB.

The rheumatologist of the future will see patients who have been assessed and triaged with artificial intelligence utilizing data from remote kiosk-placed ultrasound scanners and physician-directed algorithms. Practices will be broadly fueled by AI, which will screen charts, produce notes, handle prior authorizations and insurance issues, aid in earlier diagnoses, find patients for clinical trials, and maybe even suggest the next best therapy for individual patients.

Such is the future envisioned by Alvin F. Wells, MD, PhD, and John J. Cush, MD, who discussed the current and forthcoming reach of AI — and their own uses of it — at the 2024 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“We’re not at the stage where ChatGPT and AI can tell us what the next best therapy is, but we’re getting there,” said Dr. Cush, a rheumatologist based in Dallas and executive director of RheumNow.com. For now, he said, “AI affords us a truly big-time increase in efficiency. It helps you deal with your time constraints in managing information overload and task overload.”

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

At a time when “PubMed doubles every 73 days ... and it’s getting harder and harder to stay abreast,” for example, new applications such as Scite, SciSpace, and Consensus can help curate, focus, and analyze the literature to match one’s own clinical interests. Such review tools are “just now getting into play and are evolving,” Dr. Cush said, noting that many but not all of them are based on ChatGPT, OpenAI’s chatbot that had a over 100 million users by January 2023 — just over a month after its version 3.5 was released.

For Dr. Wells, a rheumatologist and Midwest Region director in the department of rheumatology for the Advocate Health Medical Group in Franklin, Wisconsin, clinician-developed algorithms are helping his group assess patients — often remotely — and triage them to be seen fairly immediately by a rheumatologist versus in 4-6 weeks or in several months. “You can use AI to guide your access,” he said.

A patient “with a family history of RA, sed rate above 50, and osteopenia on x-rays” would be seen within a week, for example, while “another patient who’s had a [positive] ANA with no other symptoms, and maybe a family history, might be seen in 4-6 weeks,” said Dr. Wells, sharing his belief that “there is not a shortage of rheumatologists, [but a] shortage of using rheumatologists efficiently.”

Dr. Wells

AI for Improving Workflow

Current and future advances will enrich the intersection of AI and virtual medicine and improve outcomes and the rheumatologist-patient interaction, Dr. Wells said, pointing to research presented at the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2023 annual meeting on the use of computer vision technology for remotely assessing disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

In the proof-of-concept “MeFisto” study, 28 patients with RA used an app that enabled computer vision inference of hand motion data. Upon recording, an algorithm tracked the mean degree change of joint angle on flexion and the mean time to maximal flexion for each joint.

The researchers found a strong correlation between flexion of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint and the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints, the Swollen Hand Joint Count, and the Tender Hand Joint Count. DIP flexion was found to be a significant predictor of low disease activity/remission and high disease activity, the researchers reported in their abstract.

“This blows you away — that a single camera on [one’s] smartphone can look at the manipulation of a hand … and that AI can tell me, there’s a chance this might be an inflammatory arthritis,” said Dr. Wells, noting that researchers are also developing ways to detect joint swelling in RA by AI.

AI can also be used for remote ultrasound scanning in RA, as evidenced by use of the ARTHUR system in Europe, he said. Developed by the Danish company ROPCA, the ARTHUR technology (Rheumatoid Arthritis Ultrasound Robot) interacts directly with the patient who has new joint pain or established RA to capture ultrasound images in grayscale and color flow of 11 joints per hand. AI analyzes the images and creates a report for the specialist.

“They’re trying to get a foothold in the US,” Dr. Wells said, sharing his prediction that similar technology will someday be seen not only in pharmacies but also — in support of equitable access — in locations such as grocery stores. “Again,” he said, “nothing will replace us. I’m taking all [such] information and saying, who needs to be seen in 7 days and who can wait.”
 

AI for Writing, for Improving Practice and Patient Care

To manage his “task overload,” Dr. Cush uses ChatGPT for jobs such as first drafts of articles and making PowerPoint slides. It must be used cautiously for medical writing, however, as inaccuracies and false data/fabricated information — some of which has been coined AI “hallucinations” — are not uncommon.

“It’s very good at manuscript drafts, at generating bibliographies … it can do systematic reviews, it can do network meta-analyses, and it can find trends and patterns that can very helpful when it comes to writing. But you have to know how it’s a tool, and how it can hurt you,” he said.

Researchers recently reported asking ChatGPT to write an editorial about “how AI may replace the rheumatologist in editorial writing,” Dr. Cush noted. ChatGPT was “very politically correct,” he quipped, because it wrote that AI is “a tool to help the rheumatologist, but not replace him.”

Publishers want to preserve human intelligence — critical thinking and the ability to interpret, for instance — and most of the top medical journals (those most often cited) have issued guidance on the use of generative AI. “One said AI can’t be attributed as an author because being an author carries with it accountability of the work, and AI can’t take responsibility,” Dr. Cush said. Journals also “are saying you can use AI but you have to be totally transparent about it … [how it’s used] has to be very well spelled out.”

In practice, chatbots can be used for summarizing medical records, drafting post-visit summaries, collecting patient feedback, reminding about vaccinations, and performing administrative functions. “It’s really limitless as to what chatbots can do,” Dr. Cush said. “The question is, [what is] really going to help you?”

Much of the research submitted for presentation at major rheumatology meetings over the years has had questionable real-world utility and value, he said. But in the future this will likely change. “Take the PsA [psoriatic arthritis] patient who hasn’t responded to methotrexate or apremilast [Otezla]. There are [so many] choices, and there really isn’t a clear one. Shouldn’t data guide us on whether an IL-23 is better than a JAK, or maybe a JAK preferred over a TNF for some reason?” Dr. Cush said. “That’s what we’re hoping will happen down the line.”

More realistic AI-guided clinical scenarios for now include the following: AI screens the chart of a 68-year-old with RA on methotrexate and etanercept who is following up, and retrieves pieces of history — an elevated C-reactive protein 3 months ago, for instance, and diverticulosis 5 years ago. “AI tells you, based on this, he may have active disease, and here are three medications covered by his insurance,” Dr. Wells said.

Or, in the case of a 58-year-old patient with RA who has scheduled a virtual follow-up visit after having been on methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine for 12 weeks, AI detects a low platelet count in her previsit labs and also sees that she received an MMR booster 5 weeks ago at a local CVS Minute Clinic. AI retrieves for the rheumatologist a review article about thrombocytopenic purpura after MMR vaccination.
 

AI for Drug Development, Clinical Trials

Dr. Cush is following with keen interest the integration of AI into the process of drug development, from drug discovery and biomarker evaluation to clinical trial efficiency and patient recruitment, as well as marketing. “A lot hasn’t been ‘rolled out’ or shown to us, but there’s a lot going on … everyone is investing,” he said. “The number one challenge is regulatory: How will the [Food and Drug Administration] handle AI-generated data sets or AI-generated or monitored trials?”

The FDA is working to ensure quality and utility of data and is rapidly “approving AI algorithms for use in medicine and healthcare,” he said.

AI’s ability to identify patients in populations can not only facilitate earlier diagnoses but can accelerate patient recruitment for clinical trials, Dr. Cush emphasized. He pointed to research presented at the ACR 2021 annual meeting in which a machine-learning algorithm was used with electronic health records in the United Kingdom to estimate the probability of a patient’s being diagnosed with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

AI identified 89 best clinical predictors (out of 820 analyzed). When applying these predictors to the population, AI was able to differentiate patients with axSpA from healthy controls with a sensitivity of 75%, a specificity of 96%, and a positive predictive value of 81%. Such an application of AI “is ideal … It would make clinical trials more streamlined and productive,” he said.

The extent to which AI will lead to cost savings — in the pharmacology arena, for instance, or for Well’s medical group — is unknown, Dr. Cush and Dr. Wells said. And, of course, there are concerns about potential bias and abuse of AI. “The worry,” Dr. Cush said, “is, who’s watching?”

Dr. Wells disclosed that he has research support and has served as a member of advisory boards and/or speaker bureaus for 17 different pharmaceutical or medical technology companies. Dr. Cush disclosed relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi, and UCB.

Patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and co-occurring anxiety or depression are less likely to achieve low disease activity (LDA) and better symptom control after 3 months of treatment, according to new research presented at the at the annual meeting of the Canadian Rheumatology Association.

The findings emphasized the importance of taking a multidisciplinary approach to RA treatment, said presenter Susan Bartlett, PhD, a professor in the Divisions of Clinical Epidemiology, Rheumatology, and Respiratory Epidemiology at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

McGill University

“In the absence of directly addressing anxiety and depression, people are not going to improve to the same extent we hope that they will,” she told this news organization.
 

Symptom Clusters in RA

In her research, presented on February 29, Dr. Bartlett explored how certain symptom clusters in RA predicted prognosis.

Symptom clusters are related symptoms that occur together and can be associated with worse outcomes than one symptom alone. Symptom science has been a growing interest in precision medicine, particularly for cancer, Dr. Bartlett noted, and this same approach could help pinpoint RA subtypes, disease trajectories, and personalized treatment.

In the study, Dr. Bartlett and colleagues used data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH), a multisite prospective research study following individuals with new-onset RA. They identified patients starting methotrexate (MTX) therapy who also had clinical and patient-reported outcome measures available. Individuals included in the analysis may have also been taking additional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs beyond MTX.

Across the 310 selected individuals, researchers identified four key symptoms: Pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression. Pain and fatigue were defined as physical symptoms, while anxiety and depression were classified as emotional symptoms. Results showed that the patients could be sorted into four distinct symptom clusters: Minimal symptoms (12%), mild physical and emotional symptoms (11%), moderate to severe pain and fatigue (40%), and moderate to severe physical and emotional symptoms (37%).

Researchers then followed patients during the first 6 months of treatment to evaluate if patients’ symptoms improved.

Symptom improvement mostly occurred during the first 3 months of treatment and remained consistent at 6 months. Overall, patients with moderate to severe emotional symptoms had a worse prognosis and were less likely to achieve milder symptoms than those who had only pain and fatigue or mild emotional symptoms. While 64% of patients in the moderate to severe physical symptoms group achieved minimal symptoms after 3 months of treatment, only 13% of patients with moderate to severe physical and emotional systems reported minimal symptoms during this same time frame.

The study builds on previous work that “suggests that there are different factors that we can identify around the time of diagnosis that point to how well a person is likely to respond,” Dr. Bartlett added. “What our work is showing pretty clearly [is that] the presence of anxiety and depression is one of those important markers.”
 

Patients With Depression Report Worse Disease Activity

In a related study, researchers from the University of Ottawa explored how depression in RA affected subjective and objective disease measures.

The study included patients from the Ottawa Rheumatology Comprehensive Treatment and Assessment (ORCHESTRA) clinic at The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, which sees patients with inflammatory arthritis who are starting biologic therapy or switching to another biologic. The clinic is designed to take a more comprehensive approach to managing inflammatory arthritis, including addressing comorbidities such as cardiac disease, depression, and cancer. Patients seen at the clinic can opt to be included in the ORCHESTRA cohort to be a part of ongoing research.

From this cohort, researchers identified 98 patients with RA. At enrollment, patients were screened for depression using patient health questionnaire scores and asked about duration of morning stiffness and tender joint counts. Swollen joint counts, ultrasound, and clinical scores were used to evaluate disease activity.

In the study group, 47 patients had no depression, 21 patients had mild depression, and 30 patients had moderate to severe depression. Researchers found that subjective disease measures, including visual analog pain scale, health assessment questionnaire, and disease activity score in 28 joints were all higher in patients with depression; however, depression did not appear to affect objective disease measures, such as the Global OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Score or Doppler scores.

While there is a known link between inflammation and depression, these findings suggest that depression is “a concomitant comorbidity just like cardiovascular disease, just like fibromyalgia, just like some other comorbidity that also needs to be addressed in its own right to improve the outcomes,” noted Elliot Hepworth, MD, a rheumatologist and ORCHESTRA clinic lead at The Ottawa Hospital, in an interview.

Dr. Hepworth presented the findings on March 1.

Dr. Elliot Hepworth

The data also suggested that patients with depression had poorer outcomes. For the 79 patients who had 3-month follow-up visit data, 43.9% of patients with no or mild depression achieved LDA and remission compared with 21.7% of patients with moderate to severe depression, though this difference was not statistically significant (P = .064). There was a similar trend for the 39 patients with 6-month follow-up data: Only 20% of patients with moderate to severe depression had reached LDA and remission compared with 37.9% of patients with no or mild depression (P = .445). The researchers noted this could be an issue with a smaller sample size.

“Every time more patients get added we approach closer to significance,” Dr. Hepworth added.
 

Some Disagreement, Same Takeaway

Commenting on the Ottawa study, Dr. Bartlett was skeptical of the conclusion that depression may not directly influence disease activity. “There’s just too much good evidence these days that [depression] very much coexists with worse disease activity,” she said. “It is not in the person’s head.”

Dr. Hepworth added that patient-reported outcomes are important for clinicians to address during treatment.

“There’s the tender joints, there’s the pain, there’s the fatigue, there’s the patient global assessment, which are subjective,” he said, “but that does not mean that they are not important. Those are important to the patient: That is how they’re living their life, and that is how they’re experiencing their disease.”

This is why efforts to treat depression in patients with RA such as cognitive behavioral therapy are so important, he said, to which Dr. Bartlett agreed.

“A comprehensive approach is required, which includes addressing depression,” she said. Otherwise, data show “that people just never make it to remission.”

The studies looked at different patient populations but ultimately complement each other, added Sibel Aydin, MD, a professor of medicine in the Division of Rheumatology at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, and senior author of the Ottawa study.

Dr. Sibel Aydin

“Two different cohorts with different patient populations still reached the same result,” she said. “If you don’t address the emotional aspect, you are not going to achieve the good outcomes.”

“It’s remarkable when you have two independent researchers coming to the same conclusion without ever talking to each other,” added Dr. Hepworth. “That really shows that this is something that’s pervasive, and it’s not just within our patient population.”

CATCH is funded by unrestricted research grants from programs with Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Organon, Viatris, JAMP, and Celltrion. Dr. Bartlett is president of the PROMIS Health Organization. She is a member of speakers bureaus or has consulted for Pfizer, Sandoz, Merck, Janssen, and Organon. Dr. Hepworth and Dr. Aydin declared no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .

Patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and co-occurring anxiety or depression are less likely to achieve low disease activity (LDA) and better symptom control after 3 months of treatment, according to new research presented at the at the annual meeting of the Canadian Rheumatology Association.

The findings emphasized the importance of taking a multidisciplinary approach to RA treatment, said presenter Susan Bartlett, PhD, a professor in the Divisions of Clinical Epidemiology, Rheumatology, and Respiratory Epidemiology at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

McGill University

“In the absence of directly addressing anxiety and depression, people are not going to improve to the same extent we hope that they will,” she told this news organization.
 

Symptom Clusters in RA

In her research, presented on February 29, Dr. Bartlett explored how certain symptom clusters in RA predicted prognosis.

Symptom clusters are related symptoms that occur together and can be associated with worse outcomes than one symptom alone. Symptom science has been a growing interest in precision medicine, particularly for cancer, Dr. Bartlett noted, and this same approach could help pinpoint RA subtypes, disease trajectories, and personalized treatment.

In the study, Dr. Bartlett and colleagues used data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH), a multisite prospective research study following individuals with new-onset RA. They identified patients starting methotrexate (MTX) therapy who also had clinical and patient-reported outcome measures available. Individuals included in the analysis may have also been taking additional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs beyond MTX.

Across the 310 selected individuals, researchers identified four key symptoms: Pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression. Pain and fatigue were defined as physical symptoms, while anxiety and depression were classified as emotional symptoms. Results showed that the patients could be sorted into four distinct symptom clusters: Minimal symptoms (12%), mild physical and emotional symptoms (11%), moderate to severe pain and fatigue (40%), and moderate to severe physical and emotional symptoms (37%).

Researchers then followed patients during the first 6 months of treatment to evaluate if patients’ symptoms improved.

Symptom improvement mostly occurred during the first 3 months of treatment and remained consistent at 6 months. Overall, patients with moderate to severe emotional symptoms had a worse prognosis and were less likely to achieve milder symptoms than those who had only pain and fatigue or mild emotional symptoms. While 64% of patients in the moderate to severe physical symptoms group achieved minimal symptoms after 3 months of treatment, only 13% of patients with moderate to severe physical and emotional systems reported minimal symptoms during this same time frame.

The study builds on previous work that “suggests that there are different factors that we can identify around the time of diagnosis that point to how well a person is likely to respond,” Dr. Bartlett added. “What our work is showing pretty clearly [is that] the presence of anxiety and depression is one of those important markers.”
 

Patients With Depression Report Worse Disease Activity

In a related study, researchers from the University of Ottawa explored how depression in RA affected subjective and objective disease measures.

The study included patients from the Ottawa Rheumatology Comprehensive Treatment and Assessment (ORCHESTRA) clinic at The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, which sees patients with inflammatory arthritis who are starting biologic therapy or switching to another biologic. The clinic is designed to take a more comprehensive approach to managing inflammatory arthritis, including addressing comorbidities such as cardiac disease, depression, and cancer. Patients seen at the clinic can opt to be included in the ORCHESTRA cohort to be a part of ongoing research.

From this cohort, researchers identified 98 patients with RA. At enrollment, patients were screened for depression using patient health questionnaire scores and asked about duration of morning stiffness and tender joint counts. Swollen joint counts, ultrasound, and clinical scores were used to evaluate disease activity.

In the study group, 47 patients had no depression, 21 patients had mild depression, and 30 patients had moderate to severe depression. Researchers found that subjective disease measures, including visual analog pain scale, health assessment questionnaire, and disease activity score in 28 joints were all higher in patients with depression; however, depression did not appear to affect objective disease measures, such as the Global OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Score or Doppler scores.

While there is a known link between inflammation and depression, these findings suggest that depression is “a concomitant comorbidity just like cardiovascular disease, just like fibromyalgia, just like some other comorbidity that also needs to be addressed in its own right to improve the outcomes,” noted Elliot Hepworth, MD, a rheumatologist and ORCHESTRA clinic lead at The Ottawa Hospital, in an interview.

Dr. Hepworth presented the findings on March 1.

Dr. Elliot Hepworth

The data also suggested that patients with depression had poorer outcomes. For the 79 patients who had 3-month follow-up visit data, 43.9% of patients with no or mild depression achieved LDA and remission compared with 21.7% of patients with moderate to severe depression, though this difference was not statistically significant (P = .064). There was a similar trend for the 39 patients with 6-month follow-up data: Only 20% of patients with moderate to severe depression had reached LDA and remission compared with 37.9% of patients with no or mild depression (P = .445). The researchers noted this could be an issue with a smaller sample size.

“Every time more patients get added we approach closer to significance,” Dr. Hepworth added.
 

Some Disagreement, Same Takeaway

Commenting on the Ottawa study, Dr. Bartlett was skeptical of the conclusion that depression may not directly influence disease activity. “There’s just too much good evidence these days that [depression] very much coexists with worse disease activity,” she said. “It is not in the person’s head.”

Dr. Hepworth added that patient-reported outcomes are important for clinicians to address during treatment.

“There’s the tender joints, there’s the pain, there’s the fatigue, there’s the patient global assessment, which are subjective,” he said, “but that does not mean that they are not important. Those are important to the patient: That is how they’re living their life, and that is how they’re experiencing their disease.”

This is why efforts to treat depression in patients with RA such as cognitive behavioral therapy are so important, he said, to which Dr. Bartlett agreed.

“A comprehensive approach is required, which includes addressing depression,” she said. Otherwise, data show “that people just never make it to remission.”

The studies looked at different patient populations but ultimately complement each other, added Sibel Aydin, MD, a professor of medicine in the Division of Rheumatology at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, and senior author of the Ottawa study.

Dr. Sibel Aydin

“Two different cohorts with different patient populations still reached the same result,” she said. “If you don’t address the emotional aspect, you are not going to achieve the good outcomes.”

“It’s remarkable when you have two independent researchers coming to the same conclusion without ever talking to each other,” added Dr. Hepworth. “That really shows that this is something that’s pervasive, and it’s not just within our patient population.”

CATCH is funded by unrestricted research grants from programs with Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Organon, Viatris, JAMP, and Celltrion. Dr. Bartlett is president of the PROMIS Health Organization. She is a member of speakers bureaus or has consulted for Pfizer, Sandoz, Merck, Janssen, and Organon. Dr. Hepworth and Dr. Aydin declared no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .

Patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and co-occurring anxiety or depression are less likely to achieve low disease activity (LDA) and better symptom control after 3 months of treatment, according to new research presented at the at the annual meeting of the Canadian Rheumatology Association.

The findings emphasized the importance of taking a multidisciplinary approach to RA treatment, said presenter Susan Bartlett, PhD, a professor in the Divisions of Clinical Epidemiology, Rheumatology, and Respiratory Epidemiology at McGill University in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

McGill University

“In the absence of directly addressing anxiety and depression, people are not going to improve to the same extent we hope that they will,” she told this news organization.
 

Symptom Clusters in RA

In her research, presented on February 29, Dr. Bartlett explored how certain symptom clusters in RA predicted prognosis.

Symptom clusters are related symptoms that occur together and can be associated with worse outcomes than one symptom alone. Symptom science has been a growing interest in precision medicine, particularly for cancer, Dr. Bartlett noted, and this same approach could help pinpoint RA subtypes, disease trajectories, and personalized treatment.

In the study, Dr. Bartlett and colleagues used data from the Canadian Early Arthritis Cohort (CATCH), a multisite prospective research study following individuals with new-onset RA. They identified patients starting methotrexate (MTX) therapy who also had clinical and patient-reported outcome measures available. Individuals included in the analysis may have also been taking additional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs beyond MTX.

Across the 310 selected individuals, researchers identified four key symptoms: Pain, fatigue, anxiety, and depression. Pain and fatigue were defined as physical symptoms, while anxiety and depression were classified as emotional symptoms. Results showed that the patients could be sorted into four distinct symptom clusters: Minimal symptoms (12%), mild physical and emotional symptoms (11%), moderate to severe pain and fatigue (40%), and moderate to severe physical and emotional symptoms (37%).

Researchers then followed patients during the first 6 months of treatment to evaluate if patients’ symptoms improved.

Symptom improvement mostly occurred during the first 3 months of treatment and remained consistent at 6 months. Overall, patients with moderate to severe emotional symptoms had a worse prognosis and were less likely to achieve milder symptoms than those who had only pain and fatigue or mild emotional symptoms. While 64% of patients in the moderate to severe physical symptoms group achieved minimal symptoms after 3 months of treatment, only 13% of patients with moderate to severe physical and emotional systems reported minimal symptoms during this same time frame.

The study builds on previous work that “suggests that there are different factors that we can identify around the time of diagnosis that point to how well a person is likely to respond,” Dr. Bartlett added. “What our work is showing pretty clearly [is that] the presence of anxiety and depression is one of those important markers.”
 

Patients With Depression Report Worse Disease Activity

In a related study, researchers from the University of Ottawa explored how depression in RA affected subjective and objective disease measures.

The study included patients from the Ottawa Rheumatology Comprehensive Treatment and Assessment (ORCHESTRA) clinic at The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, which sees patients with inflammatory arthritis who are starting biologic therapy or switching to another biologic. The clinic is designed to take a more comprehensive approach to managing inflammatory arthritis, including addressing comorbidities such as cardiac disease, depression, and cancer. Patients seen at the clinic can opt to be included in the ORCHESTRA cohort to be a part of ongoing research.

From this cohort, researchers identified 98 patients with RA. At enrollment, patients were screened for depression using patient health questionnaire scores and asked about duration of morning stiffness and tender joint counts. Swollen joint counts, ultrasound, and clinical scores were used to evaluate disease activity.

In the study group, 47 patients had no depression, 21 patients had mild depression, and 30 patients had moderate to severe depression. Researchers found that subjective disease measures, including visual analog pain scale, health assessment questionnaire, and disease activity score in 28 joints were all higher in patients with depression; however, depression did not appear to affect objective disease measures, such as the Global OMERACT-EULAR Synovitis Score or Doppler scores.

While there is a known link between inflammation and depression, these findings suggest that depression is “a concomitant comorbidity just like cardiovascular disease, just like fibromyalgia, just like some other comorbidity that also needs to be addressed in its own right to improve the outcomes,” noted Elliot Hepworth, MD, a rheumatologist and ORCHESTRA clinic lead at The Ottawa Hospital, in an interview.

Dr. Hepworth presented the findings on March 1.

Dr. Elliot Hepworth

The data also suggested that patients with depression had poorer outcomes. For the 79 patients who had 3-month follow-up visit data, 43.9% of patients with no or mild depression achieved LDA and remission compared with 21.7% of patients with moderate to severe depression, though this difference was not statistically significant (P = .064). There was a similar trend for the 39 patients with 6-month follow-up data: Only 20% of patients with moderate to severe depression had reached LDA and remission compared with 37.9% of patients with no or mild depression (P = .445). The researchers noted this could be an issue with a smaller sample size.

“Every time more patients get added we approach closer to significance,” Dr. Hepworth added.
 

Some Disagreement, Same Takeaway

Commenting on the Ottawa study, Dr. Bartlett was skeptical of the conclusion that depression may not directly influence disease activity. “There’s just too much good evidence these days that [depression] very much coexists with worse disease activity,” she said. “It is not in the person’s head.”

Dr. Hepworth added that patient-reported outcomes are important for clinicians to address during treatment.

“There’s the tender joints, there’s the pain, there’s the fatigue, there’s the patient global assessment, which are subjective,” he said, “but that does not mean that they are not important. Those are important to the patient: That is how they’re living their life, and that is how they’re experiencing their disease.”

This is why efforts to treat depression in patients with RA such as cognitive behavioral therapy are so important, he said, to which Dr. Bartlett agreed.

“A comprehensive approach is required, which includes addressing depression,” she said. Otherwise, data show “that people just never make it to remission.”

The studies looked at different patient populations but ultimately complement each other, added Sibel Aydin, MD, a professor of medicine in the Division of Rheumatology at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, and senior author of the Ottawa study.

Dr. Sibel Aydin

“Two different cohorts with different patient populations still reached the same result,” she said. “If you don’t address the emotional aspect, you are not going to achieve the good outcomes.”

“It’s remarkable when you have two independent researchers coming to the same conclusion without ever talking to each other,” added Dr. Hepworth. “That really shows that this is something that’s pervasive, and it’s not just within our patient population.”

CATCH is funded by unrestricted research grants from programs with Pfizer, AbbVie, Roche, Sandoz, Fresenius Kabi, Organon, Viatris, JAMP, and Celltrion. Dr. Bartlett is president of the PROMIS Health Organization. She is a member of speakers bureaus or has consulted for Pfizer, Sandoz, Merck, Janssen, and Organon. Dr. Hepworth and Dr. Aydin declared no conflicts of interest.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .