User login
Study Indicates Skin Cancer Risk Elevated Among Veterans
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed the prevalence and likelihood of skin cancer and other dermatologic conditions between veterans and nonveterans using national representative NHANES data collected over two decades (1999-2018).
- They included 61,307 participants, with 54,554 nonveterans (42.76% men; 65.78% non-Hispanic White individuals) and 6753 veterans (92.74% men; 80.42% non-Hispanic White individuals).
- A total of 54,991 participants (48,278 nonveterans and 6713 veterans) answered questions about their cancer history.
TAKEAWAY:
- Veterans had a higher prevalence of any skin cancer than nonveterans (9% vs 2.9%; P < .001). Specifically, the prevalence of melanoma (2.2% vs 0.6%), nonmelanoma skin cancer (5.1% vs 1.6%), and skin cancer of unknown subtype (2.2% vs 0.8%) was significantly higher in veterans (P < .001, for all).
- Veterans showed elevated risks for any skin cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23-2.40), melanoma (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.17-4.39), and nonmelanoma skin cancer (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.17-2.78) after adjusting for demographic factors.
- Veterans also had a higher risk for psoriasis (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.05-2.46), but not for eczema/dermatitis/inflamed rash in the previous 30 days anywhere on the body, although risk was significantly increased when localized to the arms.
- Veterans were more likely to spend time outdoors on workdays (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.04-2.25) but their status did not differ significantly from that of nonveterans in sunscreen use or other sun protection behaviors. However, veterans had a 44%-45% (P < .05) increased risk for severe sunburn after brief sun exposure.
IN PRACTICE:
“Public health measures seeking to address veteran healthcare differences could emphasize primary preventive strategies to mitigate risk and early detection of dermatologic conditions through regular skin examinations,” the study authors concluded. An accompanying editorial noted that “dermatologists should be aware that veterans face higher skin cancer risks even after adjusting for demographic differences, potentially due at least in part, to occupational exposures.” In addition, the editorial authors wrote, “additional research is needed to identify and quantify the effects of UV and military toxic exposures on skin cancer risk among active duty service members.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Shawheen J. Rezaei, MPhil, from the Department of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology. The authors of the editorial are from the Departments of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
LIMITATIONS:
Skin cancer, psoriasis, and eczema/dermatitis were self-reported, and the predominance of older White men limited the generalizability of the findings.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by Veterans Affairs (VA) Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, and Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island. The authors had no disclosures. The authors of the editorial disclosed receiving grants from the VA; one author’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from and being a scientific officer for Evereden, receiving grants and research funding from DermaSensor, and consulting for Oasis Pharmaceuticals and Almirall.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed the prevalence and likelihood of skin cancer and other dermatologic conditions between veterans and nonveterans using national representative NHANES data collected over two decades (1999-2018).
- They included 61,307 participants, with 54,554 nonveterans (42.76% men; 65.78% non-Hispanic White individuals) and 6753 veterans (92.74% men; 80.42% non-Hispanic White individuals).
- A total of 54,991 participants (48,278 nonveterans and 6713 veterans) answered questions about their cancer history.
TAKEAWAY:
- Veterans had a higher prevalence of any skin cancer than nonveterans (9% vs 2.9%; P < .001). Specifically, the prevalence of melanoma (2.2% vs 0.6%), nonmelanoma skin cancer (5.1% vs 1.6%), and skin cancer of unknown subtype (2.2% vs 0.8%) was significantly higher in veterans (P < .001, for all).
- Veterans showed elevated risks for any skin cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23-2.40), melanoma (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.17-4.39), and nonmelanoma skin cancer (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.17-2.78) after adjusting for demographic factors.
- Veterans also had a higher risk for psoriasis (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.05-2.46), but not for eczema/dermatitis/inflamed rash in the previous 30 days anywhere on the body, although risk was significantly increased when localized to the arms.
- Veterans were more likely to spend time outdoors on workdays (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.04-2.25) but their status did not differ significantly from that of nonveterans in sunscreen use or other sun protection behaviors. However, veterans had a 44%-45% (P < .05) increased risk for severe sunburn after brief sun exposure.
IN PRACTICE:
“Public health measures seeking to address veteran healthcare differences could emphasize primary preventive strategies to mitigate risk and early detection of dermatologic conditions through regular skin examinations,” the study authors concluded. An accompanying editorial noted that “dermatologists should be aware that veterans face higher skin cancer risks even after adjusting for demographic differences, potentially due at least in part, to occupational exposures.” In addition, the editorial authors wrote, “additional research is needed to identify and quantify the effects of UV and military toxic exposures on skin cancer risk among active duty service members.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Shawheen J. Rezaei, MPhil, from the Department of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology. The authors of the editorial are from the Departments of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
LIMITATIONS:
Skin cancer, psoriasis, and eczema/dermatitis were self-reported, and the predominance of older White men limited the generalizability of the findings.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by Veterans Affairs (VA) Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, and Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island. The authors had no disclosures. The authors of the editorial disclosed receiving grants from the VA; one author’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from and being a scientific officer for Evereden, receiving grants and research funding from DermaSensor, and consulting for Oasis Pharmaceuticals and Almirall.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed the prevalence and likelihood of skin cancer and other dermatologic conditions between veterans and nonveterans using national representative NHANES data collected over two decades (1999-2018).
- They included 61,307 participants, with 54,554 nonveterans (42.76% men; 65.78% non-Hispanic White individuals) and 6753 veterans (92.74% men; 80.42% non-Hispanic White individuals).
- A total of 54,991 participants (48,278 nonveterans and 6713 veterans) answered questions about their cancer history.
TAKEAWAY:
- Veterans had a higher prevalence of any skin cancer than nonveterans (9% vs 2.9%; P < .001). Specifically, the prevalence of melanoma (2.2% vs 0.6%), nonmelanoma skin cancer (5.1% vs 1.6%), and skin cancer of unknown subtype (2.2% vs 0.8%) was significantly higher in veterans (P < .001, for all).
- Veterans showed elevated risks for any skin cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.23-2.40), melanoma (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.17-4.39), and nonmelanoma skin cancer (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.17-2.78) after adjusting for demographic factors.
- Veterans also had a higher risk for psoriasis (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.05-2.46), but not for eczema/dermatitis/inflamed rash in the previous 30 days anywhere on the body, although risk was significantly increased when localized to the arms.
- Veterans were more likely to spend time outdoors on workdays (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.04-2.25) but their status did not differ significantly from that of nonveterans in sunscreen use or other sun protection behaviors. However, veterans had a 44%-45% (P < .05) increased risk for severe sunburn after brief sun exposure.
IN PRACTICE:
“Public health measures seeking to address veteran healthcare differences could emphasize primary preventive strategies to mitigate risk and early detection of dermatologic conditions through regular skin examinations,” the study authors concluded. An accompanying editorial noted that “dermatologists should be aware that veterans face higher skin cancer risks even after adjusting for demographic differences, potentially due at least in part, to occupational exposures.” In addition, the editorial authors wrote, “additional research is needed to identify and quantify the effects of UV and military toxic exposures on skin cancer risk among active duty service members.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Shawheen J. Rezaei, MPhil, from the Department of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology. The authors of the editorial are from the Departments of Dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.
LIMITATIONS:
Skin cancer, psoriasis, and eczema/dermatitis were self-reported, and the predominance of older White men limited the generalizability of the findings.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by Veterans Affairs (VA) Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, and Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, Rhode Island. The authors had no disclosures. The authors of the editorial disclosed receiving grants from the VA; one author’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from and being a scientific officer for Evereden, receiving grants and research funding from DermaSensor, and consulting for Oasis Pharmaceuticals and Almirall.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Neurofibromatosis: What Affects Quality of Life Most?
TOPLINE:
Mobile images may be reliable for assessing cutaneous neurofibroma (cNF) features in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), according to a crowd-sourced .
METHODOLOGY:
- To learn more about the association of cNFs with QoL, pain, and itch in patients with this rare disease, researchers enrolled 1016 individuals aged 40 years and older with NF1 who had at least one cNF, from May 2021 to December 2023, after reaching out to patient-led or NF1 advocacy organizations in 13 countries, including the United States.
- Participants provided demographic data, detailed photographs, and saliva samples for genetic sequencing, with 583 participants (mean age, 51.7 years; 65.9% women) submitting high-quality photographs from seven body regions at the time of the study analysis.
- A subset of 50 participants also underwent whole-body imaging.
- Four researchers independently rated the photographs for various cNF features, including general severity, number, size, facial severity, and subtypes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Based on evaluations by NF1 specialists, the agreement between mobile and whole-body images was “substantial” (74%-88% agreement) for the number of cNFs, general severity, and facial severity. Agreement between self-reported numbers of cNFs and investigator-rated numbers based on photographs was “minimal to fair.”
- Female sex, the number of cNFs, severity of cNFs on the face, and globular cNFs were associated with worse QoL (based on Skindex scores); severity of cNFs on the face had the strongest impact on overall QoL (P < .001).
- An increasing number of cNFs and worsening facial severity were strongly correlated with higher emotion subdomain scores.
- A higher number of cNFs, more severe cNFs on the face, and larger cNFs were all slightly associated with increased itch and pain (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“To develop effective therapeutics, meaningful clinical outcomes that are tied with improvement in QoL for persons with NF1 must be clearly defined,” the authors wrote. The results of this study, they added, “suggested the benefit of this crowd-sourced resource by identifying the features of cNFs with the greatest association with QoL and symptoms of pain and itch in persons with NF1, highlighting new intervention strategies and features to target to most improve QoL in NF1.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Michelle Jade Lin, BS, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study included only a small number of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups and did not capture ethnicity information, which could have provided further insights into disease impact across different demographics.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and the Bloomberg Family Foundation. Ms. Lin reported support from the Stanford Medical Scholars Research Program. Three authors reported personal fees or grants outside this work. Other authors reported no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Mobile images may be reliable for assessing cutaneous neurofibroma (cNF) features in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), according to a crowd-sourced .
METHODOLOGY:
- To learn more about the association of cNFs with QoL, pain, and itch in patients with this rare disease, researchers enrolled 1016 individuals aged 40 years and older with NF1 who had at least one cNF, from May 2021 to December 2023, after reaching out to patient-led or NF1 advocacy organizations in 13 countries, including the United States.
- Participants provided demographic data, detailed photographs, and saliva samples for genetic sequencing, with 583 participants (mean age, 51.7 years; 65.9% women) submitting high-quality photographs from seven body regions at the time of the study analysis.
- A subset of 50 participants also underwent whole-body imaging.
- Four researchers independently rated the photographs for various cNF features, including general severity, number, size, facial severity, and subtypes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Based on evaluations by NF1 specialists, the agreement between mobile and whole-body images was “substantial” (74%-88% agreement) for the number of cNFs, general severity, and facial severity. Agreement between self-reported numbers of cNFs and investigator-rated numbers based on photographs was “minimal to fair.”
- Female sex, the number of cNFs, severity of cNFs on the face, and globular cNFs were associated with worse QoL (based on Skindex scores); severity of cNFs on the face had the strongest impact on overall QoL (P < .001).
- An increasing number of cNFs and worsening facial severity were strongly correlated with higher emotion subdomain scores.
- A higher number of cNFs, more severe cNFs on the face, and larger cNFs were all slightly associated with increased itch and pain (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“To develop effective therapeutics, meaningful clinical outcomes that are tied with improvement in QoL for persons with NF1 must be clearly defined,” the authors wrote. The results of this study, they added, “suggested the benefit of this crowd-sourced resource by identifying the features of cNFs with the greatest association with QoL and symptoms of pain and itch in persons with NF1, highlighting new intervention strategies and features to target to most improve QoL in NF1.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Michelle Jade Lin, BS, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study included only a small number of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups and did not capture ethnicity information, which could have provided further insights into disease impact across different demographics.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and the Bloomberg Family Foundation. Ms. Lin reported support from the Stanford Medical Scholars Research Program. Three authors reported personal fees or grants outside this work. Other authors reported no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Mobile images may be reliable for assessing cutaneous neurofibroma (cNF) features in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), according to a crowd-sourced .
METHODOLOGY:
- To learn more about the association of cNFs with QoL, pain, and itch in patients with this rare disease, researchers enrolled 1016 individuals aged 40 years and older with NF1 who had at least one cNF, from May 2021 to December 2023, after reaching out to patient-led or NF1 advocacy organizations in 13 countries, including the United States.
- Participants provided demographic data, detailed photographs, and saliva samples for genetic sequencing, with 583 participants (mean age, 51.7 years; 65.9% women) submitting high-quality photographs from seven body regions at the time of the study analysis.
- A subset of 50 participants also underwent whole-body imaging.
- Four researchers independently rated the photographs for various cNF features, including general severity, number, size, facial severity, and subtypes.
TAKEAWAY:
- Based on evaluations by NF1 specialists, the agreement between mobile and whole-body images was “substantial” (74%-88% agreement) for the number of cNFs, general severity, and facial severity. Agreement between self-reported numbers of cNFs and investigator-rated numbers based on photographs was “minimal to fair.”
- Female sex, the number of cNFs, severity of cNFs on the face, and globular cNFs were associated with worse QoL (based on Skindex scores); severity of cNFs on the face had the strongest impact on overall QoL (P < .001).
- An increasing number of cNFs and worsening facial severity were strongly correlated with higher emotion subdomain scores.
- A higher number of cNFs, more severe cNFs on the face, and larger cNFs were all slightly associated with increased itch and pain (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“To develop effective therapeutics, meaningful clinical outcomes that are tied with improvement in QoL for persons with NF1 must be clearly defined,” the authors wrote. The results of this study, they added, “suggested the benefit of this crowd-sourced resource by identifying the features of cNFs with the greatest association with QoL and symptoms of pain and itch in persons with NF1, highlighting new intervention strategies and features to target to most improve QoL in NF1.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Michelle Jade Lin, BS, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, California, and was published online in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study included only a small number of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups and did not capture ethnicity information, which could have provided further insights into disease impact across different demographics.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was supported by Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and the Bloomberg Family Foundation. Ms. Lin reported support from the Stanford Medical Scholars Research Program. Three authors reported personal fees or grants outside this work. Other authors reported no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Hidradenitis Suppurativa Risk Reduced After Patients Quit Smoking
TOPLINE:
, with this reduction becoming evident 3-4 years after cessation, in a cohort study from Korea.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a population-based cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database.
- A total of 6,230,189 participants in South Korea who underwent two consecutive biennial health examinations from 2004 to 2005 and 2006 to 2007 were included.
- Participants were categorized into six groups on the basis of their smoking status at both checkups: Sustained smokers, relapsed smokers, new smokers, smoking quitters, sustained ex-smokers, and never smokers.
- The primary outcome was the development of HS.
TAKEAWAY:
- A total of 3761 HS cases were detected during the 84,457,025 person-years of observation.
- Smoking quitters (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83), sustained ex-smokers (AHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77), and never smokers (AHR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.63) exhibited a reduced risk of developing HS compared with sustained smokers.
- The risk of developing HS varied over time, with smoking quitters showing no significant risk reduction compared with sustained smokers in the first 3 years. After 3 years, a statistically significant decrease in HS risk was observed among quitters, which persisted over time.
- At 3-6 years, the risk reduction in sustained quitters was comparable with that of never smokers (AHR, 0.58 and 0.63, respectively).
IN PRACTICE:
“Smoking cessation and maintaining a smoke-free lifestyle may be important preventive measures against the development of HS,” the authors concluded. In an accompanying editorial, Alexandra Charrow, MD, and Leandra A. Barnes, MD, of the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, respectively, wrote that while the study “importantly contributes to the understanding of the association of smoking tobacco and HS onset, prospective cohort studies in large, diverse cohorts of patients with HS may help dermatologists better understand the causal relationship between smoking and the onset or exacerbation of HS.” For now, they added, “dermatologists must continue to use comprehensive HS treatment strategies, including lifestyle modifications that promote overall health like smoking cessation, to improve the lives of those enduring HS.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Seong Rae Kim, MD, Department of Dermatology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea, and was published online, along with the editorial, on August 21 in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study limitations include the potential for unexamined confounding factors like hereditary background, reliance on self-reported smoking status, and the exclusion of electronic cigarette use and nicotine replacement therapy. The predominantly male smoker population may limit generalizability, and delayed diagnosis of HS may not reflect the actual time of onset.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One study author reported various financial ties with pharmaceutical companies outside this work; other authors had no disclosures. Dr. Charrow’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with this reduction becoming evident 3-4 years after cessation, in a cohort study from Korea.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a population-based cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database.
- A total of 6,230,189 participants in South Korea who underwent two consecutive biennial health examinations from 2004 to 2005 and 2006 to 2007 were included.
- Participants were categorized into six groups on the basis of their smoking status at both checkups: Sustained smokers, relapsed smokers, new smokers, smoking quitters, sustained ex-smokers, and never smokers.
- The primary outcome was the development of HS.
TAKEAWAY:
- A total of 3761 HS cases were detected during the 84,457,025 person-years of observation.
- Smoking quitters (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83), sustained ex-smokers (AHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77), and never smokers (AHR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.63) exhibited a reduced risk of developing HS compared with sustained smokers.
- The risk of developing HS varied over time, with smoking quitters showing no significant risk reduction compared with sustained smokers in the first 3 years. After 3 years, a statistically significant decrease in HS risk was observed among quitters, which persisted over time.
- At 3-6 years, the risk reduction in sustained quitters was comparable with that of never smokers (AHR, 0.58 and 0.63, respectively).
IN PRACTICE:
“Smoking cessation and maintaining a smoke-free lifestyle may be important preventive measures against the development of HS,” the authors concluded. In an accompanying editorial, Alexandra Charrow, MD, and Leandra A. Barnes, MD, of the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, respectively, wrote that while the study “importantly contributes to the understanding of the association of smoking tobacco and HS onset, prospective cohort studies in large, diverse cohorts of patients with HS may help dermatologists better understand the causal relationship between smoking and the onset or exacerbation of HS.” For now, they added, “dermatologists must continue to use comprehensive HS treatment strategies, including lifestyle modifications that promote overall health like smoking cessation, to improve the lives of those enduring HS.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Seong Rae Kim, MD, Department of Dermatology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea, and was published online, along with the editorial, on August 21 in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study limitations include the potential for unexamined confounding factors like hereditary background, reliance on self-reported smoking status, and the exclusion of electronic cigarette use and nicotine replacement therapy. The predominantly male smoker population may limit generalizability, and delayed diagnosis of HS may not reflect the actual time of onset.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One study author reported various financial ties with pharmaceutical companies outside this work; other authors had no disclosures. Dr. Charrow’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with this reduction becoming evident 3-4 years after cessation, in a cohort study from Korea.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a population-based cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database.
- A total of 6,230,189 participants in South Korea who underwent two consecutive biennial health examinations from 2004 to 2005 and 2006 to 2007 were included.
- Participants were categorized into six groups on the basis of their smoking status at both checkups: Sustained smokers, relapsed smokers, new smokers, smoking quitters, sustained ex-smokers, and never smokers.
- The primary outcome was the development of HS.
TAKEAWAY:
- A total of 3761 HS cases were detected during the 84,457,025 person-years of observation.
- Smoking quitters (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83), sustained ex-smokers (AHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57-0.77), and never smokers (AHR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52-0.63) exhibited a reduced risk of developing HS compared with sustained smokers.
- The risk of developing HS varied over time, with smoking quitters showing no significant risk reduction compared with sustained smokers in the first 3 years. After 3 years, a statistically significant decrease in HS risk was observed among quitters, which persisted over time.
- At 3-6 years, the risk reduction in sustained quitters was comparable with that of never smokers (AHR, 0.58 and 0.63, respectively).
IN PRACTICE:
“Smoking cessation and maintaining a smoke-free lifestyle may be important preventive measures against the development of HS,” the authors concluded. In an accompanying editorial, Alexandra Charrow, MD, and Leandra A. Barnes, MD, of the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, and Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, respectively, wrote that while the study “importantly contributes to the understanding of the association of smoking tobacco and HS onset, prospective cohort studies in large, diverse cohorts of patients with HS may help dermatologists better understand the causal relationship between smoking and the onset or exacerbation of HS.” For now, they added, “dermatologists must continue to use comprehensive HS treatment strategies, including lifestyle modifications that promote overall health like smoking cessation, to improve the lives of those enduring HS.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Seong Rae Kim, MD, Department of Dermatology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea, and was published online, along with the editorial, on August 21 in JAMA Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
The study limitations include the potential for unexamined confounding factors like hereditary background, reliance on self-reported smoking status, and the exclusion of electronic cigarette use and nicotine replacement therapy. The predominantly male smoker population may limit generalizability, and delayed diagnosis of HS may not reflect the actual time of onset.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One study author reported various financial ties with pharmaceutical companies outside this work; other authors had no disclosures. Dr. Charrow’s disclosures included receiving personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Nemolizumab Benefits Seen in Adults, Teens With Atopic Dermatitis
TOPLINE:
(AD).
METHODOLOGY:
- The researchers conducted two 48-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, ARCADIA 1 (n = 941; 47% women) and ARCADIA 2 (n = 787; 52% women), involving patients aged 12 and older with moderate to severe AD.
- Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 30 mg nemolizumab (with a 60-mg loading dose) or placebo, along with background topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors. The mean age range was 33.3-35.2 years.
- The coprimary endpoints were Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) success (score of 0 or 1 with at least a two-point improvement from baseline) and at least a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75) at week 16.
TAKEAWAY:
- At week 16, significantly more patients receiving nemolizumab vs placebo achieved IGA success in both the ARCADIA 1 (36% vs 25%; P = .0003) and ARCADIA 2 (38% vs 26%; P = .0006) trials.
- EASI-75 response rates were also significantly higher in the nemolizumab group than in the placebo group in both trials: ARCADIA 1 (44% vs 29%; P < .0001) and 2 (42% vs 30%; P = .0006).
- Significant improvements in pruritus were observed as early as week 1, with a greater proportion of participants in the nemolizumab vs placebo group achieving at least a four-point reduction in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score in both trials.
- Rates of adverse events were similar between the nemolizumab and placebo groups, with severe treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in 2%-4% of patients.
IN PRACTICE:
“Nemolizumab showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in inflammation and pruritus in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis and a rapid effect in reducing pruritus, as one of the primary complaints of patients. As such, nemolizumab might offer a valuable extension of the therapeutic armament if approved,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, from the Department of Dermatology, George Washington University, Washington, DC. It was published online in The Lancet.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s limitations included the absence of longer-term safety data. Additionally, the predominantly White population of the trials may limit the generalizability of the findings to other racial and ethnic groups. The use of concomitant topical therapy might have influenced the placebo response.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by Galderma. Dr. Silverberg received honoraria from pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, and his institution also received grants from Galderma, Incyte, and Pfizer. Four authors were employees of Galderma. Other authors also declared having ties with pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, outside this work.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(AD).
METHODOLOGY:
- The researchers conducted two 48-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, ARCADIA 1 (n = 941; 47% women) and ARCADIA 2 (n = 787; 52% women), involving patients aged 12 and older with moderate to severe AD.
- Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 30 mg nemolizumab (with a 60-mg loading dose) or placebo, along with background topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors. The mean age range was 33.3-35.2 years.
- The coprimary endpoints were Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) success (score of 0 or 1 with at least a two-point improvement from baseline) and at least a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75) at week 16.
TAKEAWAY:
- At week 16, significantly more patients receiving nemolizumab vs placebo achieved IGA success in both the ARCADIA 1 (36% vs 25%; P = .0003) and ARCADIA 2 (38% vs 26%; P = .0006) trials.
- EASI-75 response rates were also significantly higher in the nemolizumab group than in the placebo group in both trials: ARCADIA 1 (44% vs 29%; P < .0001) and 2 (42% vs 30%; P = .0006).
- Significant improvements in pruritus were observed as early as week 1, with a greater proportion of participants in the nemolizumab vs placebo group achieving at least a four-point reduction in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score in both trials.
- Rates of adverse events were similar between the nemolizumab and placebo groups, with severe treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in 2%-4% of patients.
IN PRACTICE:
“Nemolizumab showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in inflammation and pruritus in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis and a rapid effect in reducing pruritus, as one of the primary complaints of patients. As such, nemolizumab might offer a valuable extension of the therapeutic armament if approved,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, from the Department of Dermatology, George Washington University, Washington, DC. It was published online in The Lancet.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s limitations included the absence of longer-term safety data. Additionally, the predominantly White population of the trials may limit the generalizability of the findings to other racial and ethnic groups. The use of concomitant topical therapy might have influenced the placebo response.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by Galderma. Dr. Silverberg received honoraria from pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, and his institution also received grants from Galderma, Incyte, and Pfizer. Four authors were employees of Galderma. Other authors also declared having ties with pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, outside this work.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(AD).
METHODOLOGY:
- The researchers conducted two 48-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials, ARCADIA 1 (n = 941; 47% women) and ARCADIA 2 (n = 787; 52% women), involving patients aged 12 and older with moderate to severe AD.
- Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either 30 mg nemolizumab (with a 60-mg loading dose) or placebo, along with background topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors. The mean age range was 33.3-35.2 years.
- The coprimary endpoints were Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) success (score of 0 or 1 with at least a two-point improvement from baseline) and at least a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75) at week 16.
TAKEAWAY:
- At week 16, significantly more patients receiving nemolizumab vs placebo achieved IGA success in both the ARCADIA 1 (36% vs 25%; P = .0003) and ARCADIA 2 (38% vs 26%; P = .0006) trials.
- EASI-75 response rates were also significantly higher in the nemolizumab group than in the placebo group in both trials: ARCADIA 1 (44% vs 29%; P < .0001) and 2 (42% vs 30%; P = .0006).
- Significant improvements in pruritus were observed as early as week 1, with a greater proportion of participants in the nemolizumab vs placebo group achieving at least a four-point reduction in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score in both trials.
- Rates of adverse events were similar between the nemolizumab and placebo groups, with severe treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in 2%-4% of patients.
IN PRACTICE:
“Nemolizumab showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in inflammation and pruritus in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis and a rapid effect in reducing pruritus, as one of the primary complaints of patients. As such, nemolizumab might offer a valuable extension of the therapeutic armament if approved,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, from the Department of Dermatology, George Washington University, Washington, DC. It was published online in The Lancet.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s limitations included the absence of longer-term safety data. Additionally, the predominantly White population of the trials may limit the generalizability of the findings to other racial and ethnic groups. The use of concomitant topical therapy might have influenced the placebo response.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by Galderma. Dr. Silverberg received honoraria from pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, and his institution also received grants from Galderma, Incyte, and Pfizer. Four authors were employees of Galderma. Other authors also declared having ties with pharmaceutical companies, including Galderma, outside this work.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Vitamin B1 May Reduce Constipation in Adults
TOPLINE:
Increased dietary intake of vitamin B1 is associated with a lower prevalence of constipation, particularly among men and individuals without hypertension or diabetes.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2005-2010 involving 10,371 adults aged ≥ 20 years.
- Participants provided information on fecal characteristics and bowel movement frequency, which was documented for 30 days prior to data collection.
- Constipation was established by either frequency of bowel movements (fewer than three per week) or stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale type 1 or 2).
- Data on vitamin B1 intake were collected through 24-hour total nutritional intake recall interviews. Patients were divided into three groups based on their level of B1 intake: 0.064-1.21 mg, 1.21-1.76 mg, and 1.76-12.61 mg.
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 10.8% of participants were identified as having constipation.
- Greater dietary vitamin B1 intake was associated with a 23% reduction in constipation risk (P = .034).
- Additionally, a subgroup analysis found that higher B1 intake was associated with a reduction in constipation risk of 20% in men, 16% in people without hypertension, and 14% in those without diabetes.
IN PRACTICE:
“This association suggests that enhanced intake of vitamin B1 through diet may facilitate softer stools and heightened intestinal motility, thereby potentially alleviating constipation symptoms. Consequently, healthcare professionals are advised to prioritize the promotion of a well-balanced diet as an initial therapeutic approach, preceding medical interventions,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, led by Wenyi Du, the Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou Stomatological Hospital, Suzhou, China, and Wuxi People’s Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi Medical Center, Wuxi, China, was published online in BMC Gastroenterology.
LIMITATIONS:
A causal relationship could not be established between vitamin B1 intake and constipation owing to the cross-sectional nature of the study. The study relied on patient interviews and patient self-reported data. Additionally, 24-hour dietary recalls may not have accurately reflected the long-term eating habits of the participants.
DISCLOSURES:
The study had no specific funding source. The authors declared no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Increased dietary intake of vitamin B1 is associated with a lower prevalence of constipation, particularly among men and individuals without hypertension or diabetes.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2005-2010 involving 10,371 adults aged ≥ 20 years.
- Participants provided information on fecal characteristics and bowel movement frequency, which was documented for 30 days prior to data collection.
- Constipation was established by either frequency of bowel movements (fewer than three per week) or stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale type 1 or 2).
- Data on vitamin B1 intake were collected through 24-hour total nutritional intake recall interviews. Patients were divided into three groups based on their level of B1 intake: 0.064-1.21 mg, 1.21-1.76 mg, and 1.76-12.61 mg.
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 10.8% of participants were identified as having constipation.
- Greater dietary vitamin B1 intake was associated with a 23% reduction in constipation risk (P = .034).
- Additionally, a subgroup analysis found that higher B1 intake was associated with a reduction in constipation risk of 20% in men, 16% in people without hypertension, and 14% in those without diabetes.
IN PRACTICE:
“This association suggests that enhanced intake of vitamin B1 through diet may facilitate softer stools and heightened intestinal motility, thereby potentially alleviating constipation symptoms. Consequently, healthcare professionals are advised to prioritize the promotion of a well-balanced diet as an initial therapeutic approach, preceding medical interventions,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, led by Wenyi Du, the Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou Stomatological Hospital, Suzhou, China, and Wuxi People’s Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi Medical Center, Wuxi, China, was published online in BMC Gastroenterology.
LIMITATIONS:
A causal relationship could not be established between vitamin B1 intake and constipation owing to the cross-sectional nature of the study. The study relied on patient interviews and patient self-reported data. Additionally, 24-hour dietary recalls may not have accurately reflected the long-term eating habits of the participants.
DISCLOSURES:
The study had no specific funding source. The authors declared no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Increased dietary intake of vitamin B1 is associated with a lower prevalence of constipation, particularly among men and individuals without hypertension or diabetes.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2005-2010 involving 10,371 adults aged ≥ 20 years.
- Participants provided information on fecal characteristics and bowel movement frequency, which was documented for 30 days prior to data collection.
- Constipation was established by either frequency of bowel movements (fewer than three per week) or stool consistency (Bristol Stool Scale type 1 or 2).
- Data on vitamin B1 intake were collected through 24-hour total nutritional intake recall interviews. Patients were divided into three groups based on their level of B1 intake: 0.064-1.21 mg, 1.21-1.76 mg, and 1.76-12.61 mg.
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 10.8% of participants were identified as having constipation.
- Greater dietary vitamin B1 intake was associated with a 23% reduction in constipation risk (P = .034).
- Additionally, a subgroup analysis found that higher B1 intake was associated with a reduction in constipation risk of 20% in men, 16% in people without hypertension, and 14% in those without diabetes.
IN PRACTICE:
“This association suggests that enhanced intake of vitamin B1 through diet may facilitate softer stools and heightened intestinal motility, thereby potentially alleviating constipation symptoms. Consequently, healthcare professionals are advised to prioritize the promotion of a well-balanced diet as an initial therapeutic approach, preceding medical interventions,” the authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study, led by Wenyi Du, the Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou Stomatological Hospital, Suzhou, China, and Wuxi People’s Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Wuxi Medical Center, Wuxi, China, was published online in BMC Gastroenterology.
LIMITATIONS:
A causal relationship could not be established between vitamin B1 intake and constipation owing to the cross-sectional nature of the study. The study relied on patient interviews and patient self-reported data. Additionally, 24-hour dietary recalls may not have accurately reflected the long-term eating habits of the participants.
DISCLOSURES:
The study had no specific funding source. The authors declared no competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Studies Show Dupilumab Effects In Children with Both Atopic Dermatitis and Alopecia
TOPLINE:
(AA) in a review.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a scoping review of seven studies, a result of a MEDLINE and Embase search on March 1, 2024, which included 31 patients aged 4-17 years with both AD and AA (average age, 11.4 years; 64.5% women).
- The review included four case reports, two case series, and one retrospective chart review.
- Patients had an average duration of AA and AD of 3.31 years and 5.33 years, respectively, before starting dupilumab.
- The type of AA was listed in 22 patients; among these patients, alopecia universalis was the most common (50%), followed by alopecia ophiasis (22.7%), patchy alopecia (18.2%), and alopecia totalis (9.09%).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 77.4% of patients in the trials achieved hair regrowth with dupilumab treatment with a mean 42.6 reduction in SALT score (measuring scalp hair loss on a scale of 0-100) over an average of 3.21 months (P < .01).
- Severity of AD was reduced by an average of 2.14 units to an average of 0.857 (clear or almost clear AD; P < .01) on the AD Investigator Global Assessment dropping from an average of 3 (severe disease) before treatment.
- There were no characteristics that significantly distinguished patients with AA who responded to treatment from those who did not.
- Four patients reported worsening of preexisting AA after starting dupilumab; two of these continued dupilumab and showed improvement at subsequent follow-ups.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our review highlights the efficacy of dupilumab in pediatric AA with concurrent AD,” wrote the authors, noting that “the exact mechanism for this efficacy remains speculative.” Although there have been reports of new or worsening AA with dupilumab, they added, its “favorable safety profile in pediatrics enhances its appeal for AA treatment, as monotherapy or in combination with other AA medications.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Dea Metko, Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. It was published online on July 4, 2024, in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
Potential publication bias, inconsistent data reporting, the small number of patients, and short follow-up duration were the main limitations of this study.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One author received honoraria outside this work. Other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(AA) in a review.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a scoping review of seven studies, a result of a MEDLINE and Embase search on March 1, 2024, which included 31 patients aged 4-17 years with both AD and AA (average age, 11.4 years; 64.5% women).
- The review included four case reports, two case series, and one retrospective chart review.
- Patients had an average duration of AA and AD of 3.31 years and 5.33 years, respectively, before starting dupilumab.
- The type of AA was listed in 22 patients; among these patients, alopecia universalis was the most common (50%), followed by alopecia ophiasis (22.7%), patchy alopecia (18.2%), and alopecia totalis (9.09%).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 77.4% of patients in the trials achieved hair regrowth with dupilumab treatment with a mean 42.6 reduction in SALT score (measuring scalp hair loss on a scale of 0-100) over an average of 3.21 months (P < .01).
- Severity of AD was reduced by an average of 2.14 units to an average of 0.857 (clear or almost clear AD; P < .01) on the AD Investigator Global Assessment dropping from an average of 3 (severe disease) before treatment.
- There were no characteristics that significantly distinguished patients with AA who responded to treatment from those who did not.
- Four patients reported worsening of preexisting AA after starting dupilumab; two of these continued dupilumab and showed improvement at subsequent follow-ups.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our review highlights the efficacy of dupilumab in pediatric AA with concurrent AD,” wrote the authors, noting that “the exact mechanism for this efficacy remains speculative.” Although there have been reports of new or worsening AA with dupilumab, they added, its “favorable safety profile in pediatrics enhances its appeal for AA treatment, as monotherapy or in combination with other AA medications.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Dea Metko, Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. It was published online on July 4, 2024, in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
Potential publication bias, inconsistent data reporting, the small number of patients, and short follow-up duration were the main limitations of this study.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One author received honoraria outside this work. Other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(AA) in a review.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a scoping review of seven studies, a result of a MEDLINE and Embase search on March 1, 2024, which included 31 patients aged 4-17 years with both AD and AA (average age, 11.4 years; 64.5% women).
- The review included four case reports, two case series, and one retrospective chart review.
- Patients had an average duration of AA and AD of 3.31 years and 5.33 years, respectively, before starting dupilumab.
- The type of AA was listed in 22 patients; among these patients, alopecia universalis was the most common (50%), followed by alopecia ophiasis (22.7%), patchy alopecia (18.2%), and alopecia totalis (9.09%).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 77.4% of patients in the trials achieved hair regrowth with dupilumab treatment with a mean 42.6 reduction in SALT score (measuring scalp hair loss on a scale of 0-100) over an average of 3.21 months (P < .01).
- Severity of AD was reduced by an average of 2.14 units to an average of 0.857 (clear or almost clear AD; P < .01) on the AD Investigator Global Assessment dropping from an average of 3 (severe disease) before treatment.
- There were no characteristics that significantly distinguished patients with AA who responded to treatment from those who did not.
- Four patients reported worsening of preexisting AA after starting dupilumab; two of these continued dupilumab and showed improvement at subsequent follow-ups.
IN PRACTICE:
“Our review highlights the efficacy of dupilumab in pediatric AA with concurrent AD,” wrote the authors, noting that “the exact mechanism for this efficacy remains speculative.” Although there have been reports of new or worsening AA with dupilumab, they added, its “favorable safety profile in pediatrics enhances its appeal for AA treatment, as monotherapy or in combination with other AA medications.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Dea Metko, Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. It was published online on July 4, 2024, in Pediatric Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
Potential publication bias, inconsistent data reporting, the small number of patients, and short follow-up duration were the main limitations of this study.
DISCLOSURES:
The study funding source was not disclosed. One author received honoraria outside this work. Other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication. A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Women’s Risk for Lupus Rises With Greater Intake of Ultraprocessed Foods
TOPLINE:
A higher intake of ultraprocessed foods increases the risk for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by over 50% in women. The risk doubled in those with anti–double-stranded DNA antibodies.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers assessed 204,175 women from two Nurses’ Health Study cohorts from 1984 to 2016.
- Participants completed semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires every 4 years for the assessment of dietary intake.
- Incident SLE cases were self-reported and confirmed using medical records, with 212 cases identified.
TAKEAWAY:
- A higher cumulative average daily intake of ultraprocessed foods was associated with a 56% increased risk for SLE (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.32).
- The risk for anti–double-stranded DNA antibody-positive SLE was more than doubled (hazard ratio, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.15-3.65).
- Sugar or artificially sweetened beverages were associated with a 45% increased risk for SLE (95% CI, 1.01-2.09).
- No significant interactions with body mass index were observed in the association between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE.
IN PRACTICE:
This study is too preliminary to have practical application.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Sinara Rossato, PhD, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. It was published online in Arthritis Care & Research.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s generalizability is limited due to the predominantly White female population of registered nurses. The relatively high baseline age of participants may not fully capture the peak incidence age range for SLE. The observational nature of the study cannot establish causality between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors did not declare any competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
A higher intake of ultraprocessed foods increases the risk for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by over 50% in women. The risk doubled in those with anti–double-stranded DNA antibodies.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers assessed 204,175 women from two Nurses’ Health Study cohorts from 1984 to 2016.
- Participants completed semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires every 4 years for the assessment of dietary intake.
- Incident SLE cases were self-reported and confirmed using medical records, with 212 cases identified.
TAKEAWAY:
- A higher cumulative average daily intake of ultraprocessed foods was associated with a 56% increased risk for SLE (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.32).
- The risk for anti–double-stranded DNA antibody-positive SLE was more than doubled (hazard ratio, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.15-3.65).
- Sugar or artificially sweetened beverages were associated with a 45% increased risk for SLE (95% CI, 1.01-2.09).
- No significant interactions with body mass index were observed in the association between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE.
IN PRACTICE:
This study is too preliminary to have practical application.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Sinara Rossato, PhD, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. It was published online in Arthritis Care & Research.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s generalizability is limited due to the predominantly White female population of registered nurses. The relatively high baseline age of participants may not fully capture the peak incidence age range for SLE. The observational nature of the study cannot establish causality between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors did not declare any competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
A higher intake of ultraprocessed foods increases the risk for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) by over 50% in women. The risk doubled in those with anti–double-stranded DNA antibodies.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers assessed 204,175 women from two Nurses’ Health Study cohorts from 1984 to 2016.
- Participants completed semiquantitative food frequency questionnaires every 4 years for the assessment of dietary intake.
- Incident SLE cases were self-reported and confirmed using medical records, with 212 cases identified.
TAKEAWAY:
- A higher cumulative average daily intake of ultraprocessed foods was associated with a 56% increased risk for SLE (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.32).
- The risk for anti–double-stranded DNA antibody-positive SLE was more than doubled (hazard ratio, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.15-3.65).
- Sugar or artificially sweetened beverages were associated with a 45% increased risk for SLE (95% CI, 1.01-2.09).
- No significant interactions with body mass index were observed in the association between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE.
IN PRACTICE:
This study is too preliminary to have practical application.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Sinara Rossato, PhD, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston. It was published online in Arthritis Care & Research.
LIMITATIONS:
The study’s generalizability is limited due to the predominantly White female population of registered nurses. The relatively high baseline age of participants may not fully capture the peak incidence age range for SLE. The observational nature of the study cannot establish causality between ultraprocessed food intake and SLE risk.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health. The authors did not declare any competing interests.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.