User login
VIDEO: When to consider systemic exposure in patients with contact dermatitis
SAN FRANCISCO – When patients with contact dermatitis who have had a patch test positive to an allergen and are not improving despite avoiding cutaneous exposure, it’s important to consider the possibility of systemic exposure, according to Nina Botto, MD, of the department of dermatology, at the University of California, San Francisco.
“Theoretically, any allergen can cause a systemic contact dermatitis. The ones that we think about and encounter more frequently are earth metals like nickel and balsam of Peru, which is a component of many fragrances and flavorings,” she said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the Pacific Dermatologic Association.
In the interview, Dr. Botto, who is codirector of the Occupational and Contact Dermatitis Clinic at UCSF, provides recommendations on how to approach patients with systemic contact dermatitis, including dietary avoidance. But following these diets can be challenging. She recommends starting with avoiding cutaneous exposure to the suspected allergen. For patients not improving after two months of avoidance, “it may be reasonable to consider a diet,”she advised.
Dr. Botto cited the following two publications with tables and guidelines for diets as helpful resources for patients: Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug;24(4):153-60 (for a diet low in balsam of Peru); and Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug; 24(4):190-5 (for a diet low in nickel).
Another useful resource is the American Contact Dermatitis Society website, which produces a customized list of safe products for patients after they enter the allergen into the system.
Dr. Botto had no disclosures.
SAN FRANCISCO – When patients with contact dermatitis who have had a patch test positive to an allergen and are not improving despite avoiding cutaneous exposure, it’s important to consider the possibility of systemic exposure, according to Nina Botto, MD, of the department of dermatology, at the University of California, San Francisco.
“Theoretically, any allergen can cause a systemic contact dermatitis. The ones that we think about and encounter more frequently are earth metals like nickel and balsam of Peru, which is a component of many fragrances and flavorings,” she said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the Pacific Dermatologic Association.
In the interview, Dr. Botto, who is codirector of the Occupational and Contact Dermatitis Clinic at UCSF, provides recommendations on how to approach patients with systemic contact dermatitis, including dietary avoidance. But following these diets can be challenging. She recommends starting with avoiding cutaneous exposure to the suspected allergen. For patients not improving after two months of avoidance, “it may be reasonable to consider a diet,”she advised.
Dr. Botto cited the following two publications with tables and guidelines for diets as helpful resources for patients: Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug;24(4):153-60 (for a diet low in balsam of Peru); and Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug; 24(4):190-5 (for a diet low in nickel).
Another useful resource is the American Contact Dermatitis Society website, which produces a customized list of safe products for patients after they enter the allergen into the system.
Dr. Botto had no disclosures.
SAN FRANCISCO – When patients with contact dermatitis who have had a patch test positive to an allergen and are not improving despite avoiding cutaneous exposure, it’s important to consider the possibility of systemic exposure, according to Nina Botto, MD, of the department of dermatology, at the University of California, San Francisco.
“Theoretically, any allergen can cause a systemic contact dermatitis. The ones that we think about and encounter more frequently are earth metals like nickel and balsam of Peru, which is a component of many fragrances and flavorings,” she said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the Pacific Dermatologic Association.
In the interview, Dr. Botto, who is codirector of the Occupational and Contact Dermatitis Clinic at UCSF, provides recommendations on how to approach patients with systemic contact dermatitis, including dietary avoidance. But following these diets can be challenging. She recommends starting with avoiding cutaneous exposure to the suspected allergen. For patients not improving after two months of avoidance, “it may be reasonable to consider a diet,”she advised.
Dr. Botto cited the following two publications with tables and guidelines for diets as helpful resources for patients: Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug;24(4):153-60 (for a diet low in balsam of Peru); and Dermatitis. 2013 Jul-Aug; 24(4):190-5 (for a diet low in nickel).
Another useful resource is the American Contact Dermatitis Society website, which produces a customized list of safe products for patients after they enter the allergen into the system.
Dr. Botto had no disclosures.
AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE PACIFIC DERMATOLOGIC ASSOCIATION
First IL-23 blocker, guselkumab, earns FDA approval for psoriasis
, based on three phase 3 studies of more than 2,000 adults, the manufacturer announced July 13.
The approved indication is for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy, according to a press release issued by Janssen Biotech, which stated that this is the first IL-23 blocker approved for psoriasis.
Results of one of the phase 3 trials, VOYAGE 1, included a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with guselkumab achieving at least a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 90) at 16 weeks, compared with placebo (73.3% vs. 2.9%). At 16 weeks, 85.1% of those treated with guselkumab achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 (cleared) or 1 (minimal disease), compared with 6.9% of those on placebo. Superior responses continued through 48 weeks.
In an active comparator arm of the study comparing guselkumab with the TNF blocker adalimumab (Humira), a significantly higher proportion of those treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90 scores (76.3% vs. 47.9%) and IGA 0/1 scores (80.5% vs. 55.4%) at week 48. The results were published in March (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:405-17).
Results of VOYAGE 2 comparing guselkumab with adalimumab included a PASI 90 rate of 66.1% at week 48 among adalimumab nonresponders who switched to guselkumab (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:418-31).
The most common serious adverse effects associated with treatment included upper respiratory infections, headache, injection site reactions, arthralgias, diarrhea, gastroenteritis, fungal skin infections, and herpes simplex infections, according to the company statement.
Phase 3 studies of guselkumab for active psoriatic arthritis and in comparison with secukinumab (Cosentyx) in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are underway, according to Janssen, which is marketing guselkumab as Tremfya.
, based on three phase 3 studies of more than 2,000 adults, the manufacturer announced July 13.
The approved indication is for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy, according to a press release issued by Janssen Biotech, which stated that this is the first IL-23 blocker approved for psoriasis.
Results of one of the phase 3 trials, VOYAGE 1, included a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with guselkumab achieving at least a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 90) at 16 weeks, compared with placebo (73.3% vs. 2.9%). At 16 weeks, 85.1% of those treated with guselkumab achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 (cleared) or 1 (minimal disease), compared with 6.9% of those on placebo. Superior responses continued through 48 weeks.
In an active comparator arm of the study comparing guselkumab with the TNF blocker adalimumab (Humira), a significantly higher proportion of those treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90 scores (76.3% vs. 47.9%) and IGA 0/1 scores (80.5% vs. 55.4%) at week 48. The results were published in March (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:405-17).
Results of VOYAGE 2 comparing guselkumab with adalimumab included a PASI 90 rate of 66.1% at week 48 among adalimumab nonresponders who switched to guselkumab (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:418-31).
The most common serious adverse effects associated with treatment included upper respiratory infections, headache, injection site reactions, arthralgias, diarrhea, gastroenteritis, fungal skin infections, and herpes simplex infections, according to the company statement.
Phase 3 studies of guselkumab for active psoriatic arthritis and in comparison with secukinumab (Cosentyx) in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are underway, according to Janssen, which is marketing guselkumab as Tremfya.
, based on three phase 3 studies of more than 2,000 adults, the manufacturer announced July 13.
The approved indication is for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy, according to a press release issued by Janssen Biotech, which stated that this is the first IL-23 blocker approved for psoriasis.
Results of one of the phase 3 trials, VOYAGE 1, included a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with guselkumab achieving at least a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 90) at 16 weeks, compared with placebo (73.3% vs. 2.9%). At 16 weeks, 85.1% of those treated with guselkumab achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 (cleared) or 1 (minimal disease), compared with 6.9% of those on placebo. Superior responses continued through 48 weeks.
In an active comparator arm of the study comparing guselkumab with the TNF blocker adalimumab (Humira), a significantly higher proportion of those treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90 scores (76.3% vs. 47.9%) and IGA 0/1 scores (80.5% vs. 55.4%) at week 48. The results were published in March (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:405-17).
Results of VOYAGE 2 comparing guselkumab with adalimumab included a PASI 90 rate of 66.1% at week 48 among adalimumab nonresponders who switched to guselkumab (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Mar;76[3]:418-31).
The most common serious adverse effects associated with treatment included upper respiratory infections, headache, injection site reactions, arthralgias, diarrhea, gastroenteritis, fungal skin infections, and herpes simplex infections, according to the company statement.
Phase 3 studies of guselkumab for active psoriatic arthritis and in comparison with secukinumab (Cosentyx) in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis are underway, according to Janssen, which is marketing guselkumab as Tremfya.
Acne improved in most women treated with spironolactone
Most of the postadolescent women with acne in a retrospective review of 400 patients treated over a 4-year period improved with spironolactone treatment, with a low rate of side effects, according to the authors.
“The vast majority of our patients improved on spironolactone, despite many previously failing other acne treatments,” wrote Radhika Grandhi, MD, and Ali Alikhan, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of Cincinnati. They conducted a review of 400 postadolescent female patients treated with spironolactone from July 2012 through February 2016, representing 292 patient years of experience.
Of the 400 patients, 345 improved, 27 were unchanged, 11 became worse, and 17 had an indeterminate response. Most (220 of 253 or 87%) of previously treated patients improved with spironolactone as did most (137 of 147 or 93%) of previously untreated patients.
About half of patients were on a combination of spironolactone, at least one topical agent, and an oral treatment; almost 90% of these patients improved with spironolactone. Of the remainder, 81% of those on spironolactone plus an oral medication improved, and 95% of those on spironolactone plus a topical agent improved. Of the 41 patients on spironolactone monotherapy, 35 (85%) improved.
The most common adverse effect reported was hyperkalemia in six patients, followed by facial/perioral xerosis, erythema, irritation, and pruritus in four, and one report each of severe headaches, feeling sick, heavy menstrual cycles, back pain, abdominal fullness, and breast tenderness.
These data suggest that spironolactone, a second-line acne treatment, “is a useful drug, and the results further support that spironolactone is a safe medication with tolerable side effects,” the authors noted. ‘It may be speculated that an increased use of spironolactone may decrease our dependence on oral antibiotics in acne management, which is paramount in this age of antibiotic stewardship.”
For the full study, go to (Dermatology doi: 10.1159/000471799).
Most of the postadolescent women with acne in a retrospective review of 400 patients treated over a 4-year period improved with spironolactone treatment, with a low rate of side effects, according to the authors.
“The vast majority of our patients improved on spironolactone, despite many previously failing other acne treatments,” wrote Radhika Grandhi, MD, and Ali Alikhan, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of Cincinnati. They conducted a review of 400 postadolescent female patients treated with spironolactone from July 2012 through February 2016, representing 292 patient years of experience.
Of the 400 patients, 345 improved, 27 were unchanged, 11 became worse, and 17 had an indeterminate response. Most (220 of 253 or 87%) of previously treated patients improved with spironolactone as did most (137 of 147 or 93%) of previously untreated patients.
About half of patients were on a combination of spironolactone, at least one topical agent, and an oral treatment; almost 90% of these patients improved with spironolactone. Of the remainder, 81% of those on spironolactone plus an oral medication improved, and 95% of those on spironolactone plus a topical agent improved. Of the 41 patients on spironolactone monotherapy, 35 (85%) improved.
The most common adverse effect reported was hyperkalemia in six patients, followed by facial/perioral xerosis, erythema, irritation, and pruritus in four, and one report each of severe headaches, feeling sick, heavy menstrual cycles, back pain, abdominal fullness, and breast tenderness.
These data suggest that spironolactone, a second-line acne treatment, “is a useful drug, and the results further support that spironolactone is a safe medication with tolerable side effects,” the authors noted. ‘It may be speculated that an increased use of spironolactone may decrease our dependence on oral antibiotics in acne management, which is paramount in this age of antibiotic stewardship.”
For the full study, go to (Dermatology doi: 10.1159/000471799).
Most of the postadolescent women with acne in a retrospective review of 400 patients treated over a 4-year period improved with spironolactone treatment, with a low rate of side effects, according to the authors.
“The vast majority of our patients improved on spironolactone, despite many previously failing other acne treatments,” wrote Radhika Grandhi, MD, and Ali Alikhan, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of Cincinnati. They conducted a review of 400 postadolescent female patients treated with spironolactone from July 2012 through February 2016, representing 292 patient years of experience.
Of the 400 patients, 345 improved, 27 were unchanged, 11 became worse, and 17 had an indeterminate response. Most (220 of 253 or 87%) of previously treated patients improved with spironolactone as did most (137 of 147 or 93%) of previously untreated patients.
About half of patients were on a combination of spironolactone, at least one topical agent, and an oral treatment; almost 90% of these patients improved with spironolactone. Of the remainder, 81% of those on spironolactone plus an oral medication improved, and 95% of those on spironolactone plus a topical agent improved. Of the 41 patients on spironolactone monotherapy, 35 (85%) improved.
The most common adverse effect reported was hyperkalemia in six patients, followed by facial/perioral xerosis, erythema, irritation, and pruritus in four, and one report each of severe headaches, feeling sick, heavy menstrual cycles, back pain, abdominal fullness, and breast tenderness.
These data suggest that spironolactone, a second-line acne treatment, “is a useful drug, and the results further support that spironolactone is a safe medication with tolerable side effects,” the authors noted. ‘It may be speculated that an increased use of spironolactone may decrease our dependence on oral antibiotics in acne management, which is paramount in this age of antibiotic stewardship.”
For the full study, go to (Dermatology doi: 10.1159/000471799).
FROM DERMATOLOGY
Dupilumab approval marks the first targeted treatment for AD
The approval of dupilumab, the first targeted biologic therapy approved in the United States for treatment of atopic dermatitis, provides a welcome, long-awaited alternative to currently available therapies for moderate to severe disease, according to two of the pivotal trial investigators.
In late March, the Food and Drug Administration approved dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits signaling of both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults “whose disease is not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or when those therapies are not advisable.” It is administered subcutaneously, with an initial 600-mg dose, followed by 300 mg every other week, according to the prescribing information.
Dupilumab (Dupixent) was the second novel treatment approved for AD in less than 4 months – after years of no approvals of new therapies for this indication. In December, crisaborole ointment (Eucrisa) was approved for treatment of mild to moderate AD in patients aged 2 years and older. Crisaborole is a topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor.
Dupilumab’s approval was based on three phase III studies of adults with moderate to severe AD: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
At 16 weeks in the SOLO trials, those treated with dupilumab had improvements in signs and symptoms of AD, including pruritus, anxiety and depression, and quality of life, compared with placebo. Almost 40% of those treated with dupilumab met the primary outcome – a score of clear or almost clear on the Investigator’s Global Assessment and a reduction of 2 points or more in that score from baseline – compared with 8%-10% of those on placebo (P less than .001). Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common among those treated with dupilumab (N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2335-48).
Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, also an investigator in the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials, said that prior to the approval, “we had nothing to treat our patients safely long term.”
“With dupilumab, because it’s specific, it provides the safety that we need,” while providing efficacy that is similar to or better than that of cyclosporine, with the caveat that dupilumab and cyclosporine have not been evaluated in a head-to-head study, Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview.
About 5%-10% of those treated at her site had allergic conjunctivitis; most cases resolved with eye drops. So far, “it looks very safe but we need to have long-term data,” she added.
Dr. Simpson said that he was pleased to see the maintenance of therapeutic effects with no emergence of new side effects with the report of 52-week CHRONOS data in March at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.
“We’re entering the era and the decade of atopic dermatitis,” he said. “Dermatologists should look out for many new topical and systemic therapies now that we’re uncovering and figuring out the pathophysiology of atopic dermatitis.”
Dupilumab, which costs $37,000 per year, is marketed by Regeneron and Sanofi. Studies in children and adolescents with AD are underway.
Dr. Guttman-Yassky has received funding from Regeneron for mechanistic studies and is working with most companies developing AD treatments. Dr. Simpson has received research grants from and serves as a consultant to Regeneron, as well as other pharmaceutical companies.
The approval of dupilumab, the first targeted biologic therapy approved in the United States for treatment of atopic dermatitis, provides a welcome, long-awaited alternative to currently available therapies for moderate to severe disease, according to two of the pivotal trial investigators.
In late March, the Food and Drug Administration approved dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits signaling of both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults “whose disease is not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or when those therapies are not advisable.” It is administered subcutaneously, with an initial 600-mg dose, followed by 300 mg every other week, according to the prescribing information.
Dupilumab (Dupixent) was the second novel treatment approved for AD in less than 4 months – after years of no approvals of new therapies for this indication. In December, crisaborole ointment (Eucrisa) was approved for treatment of mild to moderate AD in patients aged 2 years and older. Crisaborole is a topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor.
Dupilumab’s approval was based on three phase III studies of adults with moderate to severe AD: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
At 16 weeks in the SOLO trials, those treated with dupilumab had improvements in signs and symptoms of AD, including pruritus, anxiety and depression, and quality of life, compared with placebo. Almost 40% of those treated with dupilumab met the primary outcome – a score of clear or almost clear on the Investigator’s Global Assessment and a reduction of 2 points or more in that score from baseline – compared with 8%-10% of those on placebo (P less than .001). Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common among those treated with dupilumab (N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2335-48).
Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, also an investigator in the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials, said that prior to the approval, “we had nothing to treat our patients safely long term.”
“With dupilumab, because it’s specific, it provides the safety that we need,” while providing efficacy that is similar to or better than that of cyclosporine, with the caveat that dupilumab and cyclosporine have not been evaluated in a head-to-head study, Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview.
About 5%-10% of those treated at her site had allergic conjunctivitis; most cases resolved with eye drops. So far, “it looks very safe but we need to have long-term data,” she added.
Dr. Simpson said that he was pleased to see the maintenance of therapeutic effects with no emergence of new side effects with the report of 52-week CHRONOS data in March at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.
“We’re entering the era and the decade of atopic dermatitis,” he said. “Dermatologists should look out for many new topical and systemic therapies now that we’re uncovering and figuring out the pathophysiology of atopic dermatitis.”
Dupilumab, which costs $37,000 per year, is marketed by Regeneron and Sanofi. Studies in children and adolescents with AD are underway.
Dr. Guttman-Yassky has received funding from Regeneron for mechanistic studies and is working with most companies developing AD treatments. Dr. Simpson has received research grants from and serves as a consultant to Regeneron, as well as other pharmaceutical companies.
The approval of dupilumab, the first targeted biologic therapy approved in the United States for treatment of atopic dermatitis, provides a welcome, long-awaited alternative to currently available therapies for moderate to severe disease, according to two of the pivotal trial investigators.
In late March, the Food and Drug Administration approved dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits signaling of both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults “whose disease is not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or when those therapies are not advisable.” It is administered subcutaneously, with an initial 600-mg dose, followed by 300 mg every other week, according to the prescribing information.
Dupilumab (Dupixent) was the second novel treatment approved for AD in less than 4 months – after years of no approvals of new therapies for this indication. In December, crisaborole ointment (Eucrisa) was approved for treatment of mild to moderate AD in patients aged 2 years and older. Crisaborole is a topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor.
Dupilumab’s approval was based on three phase III studies of adults with moderate to severe AD: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
At 16 weeks in the SOLO trials, those treated with dupilumab had improvements in signs and symptoms of AD, including pruritus, anxiety and depression, and quality of life, compared with placebo. Almost 40% of those treated with dupilumab met the primary outcome – a score of clear or almost clear on the Investigator’s Global Assessment and a reduction of 2 points or more in that score from baseline – compared with 8%-10% of those on placebo (P less than .001). Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common among those treated with dupilumab (N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2335-48).
Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, also an investigator in the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials, said that prior to the approval, “we had nothing to treat our patients safely long term.”
“With dupilumab, because it’s specific, it provides the safety that we need,” while providing efficacy that is similar to or better than that of cyclosporine, with the caveat that dupilumab and cyclosporine have not been evaluated in a head-to-head study, Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of dermatology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview.
About 5%-10% of those treated at her site had allergic conjunctivitis; most cases resolved with eye drops. So far, “it looks very safe but we need to have long-term data,” she added.
Dr. Simpson said that he was pleased to see the maintenance of therapeutic effects with no emergence of new side effects with the report of 52-week CHRONOS data in March at the American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting.
“We’re entering the era and the decade of atopic dermatitis,” he said. “Dermatologists should look out for many new topical and systemic therapies now that we’re uncovering and figuring out the pathophysiology of atopic dermatitis.”
Dupilumab, which costs $37,000 per year, is marketed by Regeneron and Sanofi. Studies in children and adolescents with AD are underway.
Dr. Guttman-Yassky has received funding from Regeneron for mechanistic studies and is working with most companies developing AD treatments. Dr. Simpson has received research grants from and serves as a consultant to Regeneron, as well as other pharmaceutical companies.
Dupilumab: FDA approves first biologic for atopic dermatitis
Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, has been approved for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or for whom topicals are not appropriate.
The approval marks the first biologic approved for treating AD, according to a March 28 announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Dupilumab “inhibits signaling of IL-4 and IL-13, two key cytokines required for the type 2 (including Th2) immune response, which is believed to be a major driver in the pathogenesis of the disease,” according to Regeneron, which will market dupilumab.
Approval was based on three phase III pivotal studies of adults with moderate to severe AD whose disease was not adequately controlled with topical prescription treatments: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
The 16-week data from the SOLO-1 and -2 studies were presented at the 2016 annual congress of the European Academy for Dermatology and Venereology.
In two phase III trials of identical design involving patients with atopic dermatitis, dupilumab, administered weekly or every 2 weeks, improved the signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis, including pruritus, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and quality of life, as compared with placebo. Eczema Area and Severity Index was reported in significantly more patients who received each regimen of dupilumab than in patients who received placebo (P less than .001 for all comparisons).
Dupilumab also was associated with improvement in other clinical endpoints, including reductions in pruritus and symptoms of anxiety or depression, and an improvement in quality of life. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more frequent in the dupilumab groups than in the placebo groups. The results were published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2016;375:2335-48).
More recently, 52-week data from the CHRONOS study were reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in March. In that study of 740 adults with moderate to severe AD that was not controlled with topical medications – including corticosteroids with or without calcineurin inhibitors – those randomized to 300 mg of dupilumab once a week, plus topical corticosteroids, showed significantly greater improvements in measures of overall disease severity at 16 weeks and at 52 weeks, compared with those treated with steroids alone. Measures used included Eczema Area and Severity Index and the Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, Dermatology Life Quality Index.
Adverse events experienced with dupilumab included injection site reactions, eye and eyelid inflammation, and cold sores on the mouth or lips, according to a Regeneron statement.
Dupilumab will be available “later this week,” according to the statement, which noted the wholesale acquisition cost of the medication is expected to be $37,000 annually.
The FDA approval announcement noted that the safety and efficacy of dupilumab had not been established in patients with asthma.
Dupilumab currently is being studied for children with AD in phase II studies and is being studied for other indications: eosinophilic esophagitis in phase II studies, and asthma and nasal polyps in phase III studies.
Dupilumab will be marketed as Dupixent by Regeneron.
Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, has been approved for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or for whom topicals are not appropriate.
The approval marks the first biologic approved for treating AD, according to a March 28 announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Dupilumab “inhibits signaling of IL-4 and IL-13, two key cytokines required for the type 2 (including Th2) immune response, which is believed to be a major driver in the pathogenesis of the disease,” according to Regeneron, which will market dupilumab.
Approval was based on three phase III pivotal studies of adults with moderate to severe AD whose disease was not adequately controlled with topical prescription treatments: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
The 16-week data from the SOLO-1 and -2 studies were presented at the 2016 annual congress of the European Academy for Dermatology and Venereology.
In two phase III trials of identical design involving patients with atopic dermatitis, dupilumab, administered weekly or every 2 weeks, improved the signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis, including pruritus, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and quality of life, as compared with placebo. Eczema Area and Severity Index was reported in significantly more patients who received each regimen of dupilumab than in patients who received placebo (P less than .001 for all comparisons).
Dupilumab also was associated with improvement in other clinical endpoints, including reductions in pruritus and symptoms of anxiety or depression, and an improvement in quality of life. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more frequent in the dupilumab groups than in the placebo groups. The results were published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2016;375:2335-48).
More recently, 52-week data from the CHRONOS study were reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in March. In that study of 740 adults with moderate to severe AD that was not controlled with topical medications – including corticosteroids with or without calcineurin inhibitors – those randomized to 300 mg of dupilumab once a week, plus topical corticosteroids, showed significantly greater improvements in measures of overall disease severity at 16 weeks and at 52 weeks, compared with those treated with steroids alone. Measures used included Eczema Area and Severity Index and the Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, Dermatology Life Quality Index.
Adverse events experienced with dupilumab included injection site reactions, eye and eyelid inflammation, and cold sores on the mouth or lips, according to a Regeneron statement.
Dupilumab will be available “later this week,” according to the statement, which noted the wholesale acquisition cost of the medication is expected to be $37,000 annually.
The FDA approval announcement noted that the safety and efficacy of dupilumab had not been established in patients with asthma.
Dupilumab currently is being studied for children with AD in phase II studies and is being studied for other indications: eosinophilic esophagitis in phase II studies, and asthma and nasal polyps in phase III studies.
Dupilumab will be marketed as Dupixent by Regeneron.
Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets both interleukin-4 and interleukin-13, has been approved for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults not adequately controlled with topical prescription therapies or for whom topicals are not appropriate.
The approval marks the first biologic approved for treating AD, according to a March 28 announcement from the Food and Drug Administration.
Dupilumab “inhibits signaling of IL-4 and IL-13, two key cytokines required for the type 2 (including Th2) immune response, which is believed to be a major driver in the pathogenesis of the disease,” according to Regeneron, which will market dupilumab.
Approval was based on three phase III pivotal studies of adults with moderate to severe AD whose disease was not adequately controlled with topical prescription treatments: SOLO-1 and SOLO-2, which evaluated dupilumab as monotherapy, and the CHRONOS study, which compared dupilumab with topical corticosteroids to treatment with topical corticosteroids alone.
The 16-week data from the SOLO-1 and -2 studies were presented at the 2016 annual congress of the European Academy for Dermatology and Venereology.
In two phase III trials of identical design involving patients with atopic dermatitis, dupilumab, administered weekly or every 2 weeks, improved the signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis, including pruritus, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and quality of life, as compared with placebo. Eczema Area and Severity Index was reported in significantly more patients who received each regimen of dupilumab than in patients who received placebo (P less than .001 for all comparisons).
Dupilumab also was associated with improvement in other clinical endpoints, including reductions in pruritus and symptoms of anxiety or depression, and an improvement in quality of life. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more frequent in the dupilumab groups than in the placebo groups. The results were published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2016;375:2335-48).
More recently, 52-week data from the CHRONOS study were reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in March. In that study of 740 adults with moderate to severe AD that was not controlled with topical medications – including corticosteroids with or without calcineurin inhibitors – those randomized to 300 mg of dupilumab once a week, plus topical corticosteroids, showed significantly greater improvements in measures of overall disease severity at 16 weeks and at 52 weeks, compared with those treated with steroids alone. Measures used included Eczema Area and Severity Index and the Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, Dermatology Life Quality Index.
Adverse events experienced with dupilumab included injection site reactions, eye and eyelid inflammation, and cold sores on the mouth or lips, according to a Regeneron statement.
Dupilumab will be available “later this week,” according to the statement, which noted the wholesale acquisition cost of the medication is expected to be $37,000 annually.
The FDA approval announcement noted that the safety and efficacy of dupilumab had not been established in patients with asthma.
Dupilumab currently is being studied for children with AD in phase II studies and is being studied for other indications: eosinophilic esophagitis in phase II studies, and asthma and nasal polyps in phase III studies.
Dupilumab will be marketed as Dupixent by Regeneron.
VIDEO: Picowave laser uses are expanding beyond tattoo removal
ORLANDO – The applications for picowavelength lasers are expanding, with emerging data on their uses for cosmetic indications other than tattoo removal, according to Anne Chapas, MD, who is in private practice in New York.
First introduced and cleared by the Food and Drug Administration for tattoo removal, “picowave devices ... are now being studied in multiple different cosmetic conditions, including their use in acne scars, fine lines and wrinkles, and melasma,” Dr. Chapas said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.
The No. 1 thing dermatologists need to know is that these types of lasers are delivering energy extremely quickly,” at 1,000 times faster than nanosecond lasers, she said. Another difference between the two is that “the laser tissue interaction between the two types of devices is completely different.”
In the interview, she highlighted other important points about picowave lasers, including less downtime after treatment.
At the meeting, Dr. Chapas spoke during a session entitled “the Science Behind New Devices in Dermatology.”
Her disclosures include serving as a consultant and investigator for Syneron and Candela.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ORLANDO – The applications for picowavelength lasers are expanding, with emerging data on their uses for cosmetic indications other than tattoo removal, according to Anne Chapas, MD, who is in private practice in New York.
First introduced and cleared by the Food and Drug Administration for tattoo removal, “picowave devices ... are now being studied in multiple different cosmetic conditions, including their use in acne scars, fine lines and wrinkles, and melasma,” Dr. Chapas said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.
The No. 1 thing dermatologists need to know is that these types of lasers are delivering energy extremely quickly,” at 1,000 times faster than nanosecond lasers, she said. Another difference between the two is that “the laser tissue interaction between the two types of devices is completely different.”
In the interview, she highlighted other important points about picowave lasers, including less downtime after treatment.
At the meeting, Dr. Chapas spoke during a session entitled “the Science Behind New Devices in Dermatology.”
Her disclosures include serving as a consultant and investigator for Syneron and Candela.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ORLANDO – The applications for picowavelength lasers are expanding, with emerging data on their uses for cosmetic indications other than tattoo removal, according to Anne Chapas, MD, who is in private practice in New York.
First introduced and cleared by the Food and Drug Administration for tattoo removal, “picowave devices ... are now being studied in multiple different cosmetic conditions, including their use in acne scars, fine lines and wrinkles, and melasma,” Dr. Chapas said in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.
The No. 1 thing dermatologists need to know is that these types of lasers are delivering energy extremely quickly,” at 1,000 times faster than nanosecond lasers, she said. Another difference between the two is that “the laser tissue interaction between the two types of devices is completely different.”
In the interview, she highlighted other important points about picowave lasers, including less downtime after treatment.
At the meeting, Dr. Chapas spoke during a session entitled “the Science Behind New Devices in Dermatology.”
Her disclosures include serving as a consultant and investigator for Syneron and Candela.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT AAD 17
VIDEO: Looking at keloids from a different perspective
ORLANDO – It may be time to start considering new options for treating keloids, according to Amy McMichael, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.
At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, Dr. McMichael discussed one of the highlights of the annual symposium of the Skin of Color Society, held right before the annual meeting, a presentation by Michael Tirgan, MD, who has treated patients with keloids for about 10 years.
Dr. Tirgan, an oncologist based in New York, has a large database and registry of patients and shared some interesting data at the symposium. “What he’s found is that those who come with the supermassive and massive keloids are those who have had the most surgery on their keloid,” Dr. McMichael said in a video interview at the meeting.
His findings shed light on what she described as “a new perspective in the way that we think about keloids” and a new approach to treatment – considering keloids as tumors – not just a scar.
Dr. McMichael had no relevant disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ORLANDO – It may be time to start considering new options for treating keloids, according to Amy McMichael, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.
At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, Dr. McMichael discussed one of the highlights of the annual symposium of the Skin of Color Society, held right before the annual meeting, a presentation by Michael Tirgan, MD, who has treated patients with keloids for about 10 years.
Dr. Tirgan, an oncologist based in New York, has a large database and registry of patients and shared some interesting data at the symposium. “What he’s found is that those who come with the supermassive and massive keloids are those who have had the most surgery on their keloid,” Dr. McMichael said in a video interview at the meeting.
His findings shed light on what she described as “a new perspective in the way that we think about keloids” and a new approach to treatment – considering keloids as tumors – not just a scar.
Dr. McMichael had no relevant disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
ORLANDO – It may be time to start considering new options for treating keloids, according to Amy McMichael, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C.
At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology, Dr. McMichael discussed one of the highlights of the annual symposium of the Skin of Color Society, held right before the annual meeting, a presentation by Michael Tirgan, MD, who has treated patients with keloids for about 10 years.
Dr. Tirgan, an oncologist based in New York, has a large database and registry of patients and shared some interesting data at the symposium. “What he’s found is that those who come with the supermassive and massive keloids are those who have had the most surgery on their keloid,” Dr. McMichael said in a video interview at the meeting.
His findings shed light on what she described as “a new perspective in the way that we think about keloids” and a new approach to treatment – considering keloids as tumors – not just a scar.
Dr. McMichael had no relevant disclosures.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT AAD 17
VIDEO: Updating the rule of threes for melanoma gene testing
ORLANDO – The rule of threes that has been used to identify patients at risk of hereditary melanoma who may be candidates for genetic testing may be modified soon, according to Sancy Leachman, MD, PhD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.
Dr. Leachman was the author of a 2009 study that listed three factors as criteria for identifying melanoma: a personal history of at least three invasive melanomas, a combination of at least three melanomas in the individual and in first-degree and second-degree blood relatives – or, in first- or second-degree relatives, a total of at least three diagnoses of melanoma or pancreatic cancer or astrocytoma, which also have been associated with a known susceptibility gene, p16 (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009 Oct;61[4]:677.e1-14).
But with more genetic testing, it is becoming clear that there are other cancers associated with an increased risk of hereditary melanoma, she explained in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. “The genes are a little bit different, but if you could identify those patients, you could potentially then screen them for those other cancers,” said Dr. Leachman, who is also director of the melanoma research program at Knight Cancer Institute at OHSU.
In the interview, she discussed a soon-to-be-published literature review that builds upon the rule of threes and suggests a strategy for deciding which patients should be considered for genetic testing, and includes “a suggested list of genes” that should be used in these different subsets of patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Dr. Leachman had no relevant disclosures.
ORLANDO – The rule of threes that has been used to identify patients at risk of hereditary melanoma who may be candidates for genetic testing may be modified soon, according to Sancy Leachman, MD, PhD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.
Dr. Leachman was the author of a 2009 study that listed three factors as criteria for identifying melanoma: a personal history of at least three invasive melanomas, a combination of at least three melanomas in the individual and in first-degree and second-degree blood relatives – or, in first- or second-degree relatives, a total of at least three diagnoses of melanoma or pancreatic cancer or astrocytoma, which also have been associated with a known susceptibility gene, p16 (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009 Oct;61[4]:677.e1-14).
But with more genetic testing, it is becoming clear that there are other cancers associated with an increased risk of hereditary melanoma, she explained in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. “The genes are a little bit different, but if you could identify those patients, you could potentially then screen them for those other cancers,” said Dr. Leachman, who is also director of the melanoma research program at Knight Cancer Institute at OHSU.
In the interview, she discussed a soon-to-be-published literature review that builds upon the rule of threes and suggests a strategy for deciding which patients should be considered for genetic testing, and includes “a suggested list of genes” that should be used in these different subsets of patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Dr. Leachman had no relevant disclosures.
ORLANDO – The rule of threes that has been used to identify patients at risk of hereditary melanoma who may be candidates for genetic testing may be modified soon, according to Sancy Leachman, MD, PhD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland.
Dr. Leachman was the author of a 2009 study that listed three factors as criteria for identifying melanoma: a personal history of at least three invasive melanomas, a combination of at least three melanomas in the individual and in first-degree and second-degree blood relatives – or, in first- or second-degree relatives, a total of at least three diagnoses of melanoma or pancreatic cancer or astrocytoma, which also have been associated with a known susceptibility gene, p16 (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009 Oct;61[4]:677.e1-14).
But with more genetic testing, it is becoming clear that there are other cancers associated with an increased risk of hereditary melanoma, she explained in a video interview at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology. “The genes are a little bit different, but if you could identify those patients, you could potentially then screen them for those other cancers,” said Dr. Leachman, who is also director of the melanoma research program at Knight Cancer Institute at OHSU.
In the interview, she discussed a soon-to-be-published literature review that builds upon the rule of threes and suggests a strategy for deciding which patients should be considered for genetic testing, and includes “a suggested list of genes” that should be used in these different subsets of patients.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Dr. Leachman had no relevant disclosures.
AT AAD 17
Late-breaking research presented March 4-5 at AAD meeting
Dermatology News will be on site later this week at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in Orlando. Look for the latest news in medical, surgical, and aesthetic dermatology starting Friday, March 3. The late-breaker sessions are on Saturday and Sunday March 4 and 5.
The late-breaking research session on clinical trials on March 4 will highlight:
- 16-week results from two phase III studies of certolizumab for chronic plaque psoriasis.
- Phase III results on the long-term management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids.
Additional late breakers focus on pediatric, procedural, and pathology studies:
- Data from the Pediatric Eczema Elective Registry, on racial/ethnic disparities in health care utilization and school attendance among children with AD.
- Results of a prospective study evaluating the efficacy and systemic absorption of topical timolol for infantile hemangioma.
- Results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of oral tranexamic acid for treating moderate to severe melasma.
- The efficacy of adjuvant treatment with the long-pulsed 1064nm Nd:YAG Laser for toe onychomycosis.
- Risk factors associated with a recent change in the size, shape or color of moles among participants in the AAD SPOTme® Program (2009-2010).
- A survey-based study on the management of longitudinal melanonychia among attending and resident dermatologists.
Dermatology News will be on site later this week at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in Orlando. Look for the latest news in medical, surgical, and aesthetic dermatology starting Friday, March 3. The late-breaker sessions are on Saturday and Sunday March 4 and 5.
The late-breaking research session on clinical trials on March 4 will highlight:
- 16-week results from two phase III studies of certolizumab for chronic plaque psoriasis.
- Phase III results on the long-term management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids.
Additional late breakers focus on pediatric, procedural, and pathology studies:
- Data from the Pediatric Eczema Elective Registry, on racial/ethnic disparities in health care utilization and school attendance among children with AD.
- Results of a prospective study evaluating the efficacy and systemic absorption of topical timolol for infantile hemangioma.
- Results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of oral tranexamic acid for treating moderate to severe melasma.
- The efficacy of adjuvant treatment with the long-pulsed 1064nm Nd:YAG Laser for toe onychomycosis.
- Risk factors associated with a recent change in the size, shape or color of moles among participants in the AAD SPOTme® Program (2009-2010).
- A survey-based study on the management of longitudinal melanonychia among attending and resident dermatologists.
Dermatology News will be on site later this week at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology in Orlando. Look for the latest news in medical, surgical, and aesthetic dermatology starting Friday, March 3. The late-breaker sessions are on Saturday and Sunday March 4 and 5.
The late-breaking research session on clinical trials on March 4 will highlight:
- 16-week results from two phase III studies of certolizumab for chronic plaque psoriasis.
- Phase III results on the long-term management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids.
Additional late breakers focus on pediatric, procedural, and pathology studies:
- Data from the Pediatric Eczema Elective Registry, on racial/ethnic disparities in health care utilization and school attendance among children with AD.
- Results of a prospective study evaluating the efficacy and systemic absorption of topical timolol for infantile hemangioma.
- Results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of oral tranexamic acid for treating moderate to severe melasma.
- The efficacy of adjuvant treatment with the long-pulsed 1064nm Nd:YAG Laser for toe onychomycosis.
- Risk factors associated with a recent change in the size, shape or color of moles among participants in the AAD SPOTme® Program (2009-2010).
- A survey-based study on the management of longitudinal melanonychia among attending and resident dermatologists.
VIDEO: Advances in noninvasive fat reduction include permanent effects
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
WAILEA, HAWAII – In the past few years, there have been “exciting” advances in noninvasive techniques to permanently remove fat, according to Suzanne Kilmer, MD, of the department of dermatology, University of California, Davis.
There are devices now available to reduce fat “in a permanent way that’s not injurious, it’s not uncomfortable – patients love it,” Dr. Kilmer said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.
Currently, the three noninvasive modalities she considers most effective for reducing fat are cryolipolysis, the 1,060-nm laser, and focused pulsed ultrasound. In the interview, she discussed the ways these treatments work and their safety.
With all three, “the fat that goes away stays away,” said Dr. Kilmer, who is director of the Laser and Skin Surgery Center of Northern California, Sacramento. Treatment results in release of fat, which is “cleared like it is as if you ate a cheeseburger,” she added. Interestingly, she said, trials that have looked at whether the fat reduction is accompanied by weight loss have found that, in most cases, the patient’s weight remains stable.
Dr. Kilmer’s disclosures included serving as a consultant and/or researcher for Allergan, Cutera, Cynosure, Cytrellis, Kythera, Lumenis, Merz, Miramar, Sebacia, Sienna Labs, Solta, Zeltiq, and Zift.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
