User login
Anti-infective update addresses SSSI choices
ORLANDO – What’s new in infectious disease therapeutics for dermatologists? He ran through an array of updates at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
While naturally occurring smallpox was globally eradicated in 1980, small research stores are held in the United States and Russia, and effective antivirals are part of a strategy to combat bioweapons. Tecovirimat (TPOXX) is an antiviral that inhibits a major envelope protein that poxviruses need to produce extracellular virus. Approved by the Food and Drug Administration in mid-2018, it is currently the only antiviral for treating variola virus infection approved in the United States, noted Dr. Finch of the University of Connecticut, Farmington. He added that 2 million doses are currently held in the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile.
Another anti-infective agent that won’t be used by those practicing in the United States, but which promises to alleviate a significant source of suffering in the developing world, is moxidectin. The anthelmintic had previously been approved for veterinary uses, but in June 2018, the FDA approved moxidectin to treat onchocerciasis, also known as river blindness. The drug defeats the parasitic worm by binding to glutamate-gated chloride ion channels; it is licensed by the nonprofit Medicines Development for Global Health.
Another antiparasitic drug, benznidazole, was approved to treat children aged 2-12 years with Chagas disease in 2017, Dr. Finch said.
Also in 2017, a topical quinolone, ozenoxacin (Xepi) was approved to treat impetigo in adults and children aged at least 2 months. Formulated as a 1% cream, ozenoxacin is applied twice daily for 5 days. In clinical trials, ozenoxacin was shown to be noninferior to retapamulin, he said.
A new topical choice is important as mupirocin resistance climbs, Dr. Finch added. A recent Greek study showed that 20% (437) of 2,137 staph infections studied were mupirocin resistant. Of the 20%, all but one were skin and skin structure infections (SSSIs), with 88% of these being impetigo.
In the United States, mupirocin resistance has been seen in one in three outpatients in a Florida study and in 31% of patients in a New York City sample. Other studies have shown mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolates with resistance in the 10%-15% range among children with SSSIs, Dr. Finch said.
Two other new antibiotics to fight SSSIs can each be administered orally or intravenously. One, omadacycline (Nuzyra), is a novel tetracycline that maintains efficacy against bacteria that express tetracycline resistance through efflux and ribosomal protection. Approved in late 2018 for acute bacterial SSSIs, omadacycline treats not just methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant S. aureus, but also Streptococcus species and gram-negative rods such as Enterobacter and Klebsiella pneumoniae, Dr. Finch noted.
Another new fluorinated quinolone, approved in 2017, delafloxacin (Baxdela) has broad spectrum activity against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria.
Dr. Finch reported that he has no relevant conflicts of interest.
ORLANDO – What’s new in infectious disease therapeutics for dermatologists? He ran through an array of updates at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
While naturally occurring smallpox was globally eradicated in 1980, small research stores are held in the United States and Russia, and effective antivirals are part of a strategy to combat bioweapons. Tecovirimat (TPOXX) is an antiviral that inhibits a major envelope protein that poxviruses need to produce extracellular virus. Approved by the Food and Drug Administration in mid-2018, it is currently the only antiviral for treating variola virus infection approved in the United States, noted Dr. Finch of the University of Connecticut, Farmington. He added that 2 million doses are currently held in the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile.
Another anti-infective agent that won’t be used by those practicing in the United States, but which promises to alleviate a significant source of suffering in the developing world, is moxidectin. The anthelmintic had previously been approved for veterinary uses, but in June 2018, the FDA approved moxidectin to treat onchocerciasis, also known as river blindness. The drug defeats the parasitic worm by binding to glutamate-gated chloride ion channels; it is licensed by the nonprofit Medicines Development for Global Health.
Another antiparasitic drug, benznidazole, was approved to treat children aged 2-12 years with Chagas disease in 2017, Dr. Finch said.
Also in 2017, a topical quinolone, ozenoxacin (Xepi) was approved to treat impetigo in adults and children aged at least 2 months. Formulated as a 1% cream, ozenoxacin is applied twice daily for 5 days. In clinical trials, ozenoxacin was shown to be noninferior to retapamulin, he said.
A new topical choice is important as mupirocin resistance climbs, Dr. Finch added. A recent Greek study showed that 20% (437) of 2,137 staph infections studied were mupirocin resistant. Of the 20%, all but one were skin and skin structure infections (SSSIs), with 88% of these being impetigo.
In the United States, mupirocin resistance has been seen in one in three outpatients in a Florida study and in 31% of patients in a New York City sample. Other studies have shown mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolates with resistance in the 10%-15% range among children with SSSIs, Dr. Finch said.
Two other new antibiotics to fight SSSIs can each be administered orally or intravenously. One, omadacycline (Nuzyra), is a novel tetracycline that maintains efficacy against bacteria that express tetracycline resistance through efflux and ribosomal protection. Approved in late 2018 for acute bacterial SSSIs, omadacycline treats not just methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant S. aureus, but also Streptococcus species and gram-negative rods such as Enterobacter and Klebsiella pneumoniae, Dr. Finch noted.
Another new fluorinated quinolone, approved in 2017, delafloxacin (Baxdela) has broad spectrum activity against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria.
Dr. Finch reported that he has no relevant conflicts of interest.
ORLANDO – What’s new in infectious disease therapeutics for dermatologists? He ran through an array of updates at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
While naturally occurring smallpox was globally eradicated in 1980, small research stores are held in the United States and Russia, and effective antivirals are part of a strategy to combat bioweapons. Tecovirimat (TPOXX) is an antiviral that inhibits a major envelope protein that poxviruses need to produce extracellular virus. Approved by the Food and Drug Administration in mid-2018, it is currently the only antiviral for treating variola virus infection approved in the United States, noted Dr. Finch of the University of Connecticut, Farmington. He added that 2 million doses are currently held in the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile.
Another anti-infective agent that won’t be used by those practicing in the United States, but which promises to alleviate a significant source of suffering in the developing world, is moxidectin. The anthelmintic had previously been approved for veterinary uses, but in June 2018, the FDA approved moxidectin to treat onchocerciasis, also known as river blindness. The drug defeats the parasitic worm by binding to glutamate-gated chloride ion channels; it is licensed by the nonprofit Medicines Development for Global Health.
Another antiparasitic drug, benznidazole, was approved to treat children aged 2-12 years with Chagas disease in 2017, Dr. Finch said.
Also in 2017, a topical quinolone, ozenoxacin (Xepi) was approved to treat impetigo in adults and children aged at least 2 months. Formulated as a 1% cream, ozenoxacin is applied twice daily for 5 days. In clinical trials, ozenoxacin was shown to be noninferior to retapamulin, he said.
A new topical choice is important as mupirocin resistance climbs, Dr. Finch added. A recent Greek study showed that 20% (437) of 2,137 staph infections studied were mupirocin resistant. Of the 20%, all but one were skin and skin structure infections (SSSIs), with 88% of these being impetigo.
In the United States, mupirocin resistance has been seen in one in three outpatients in a Florida study and in 31% of patients in a New York City sample. Other studies have shown mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolates with resistance in the 10%-15% range among children with SSSIs, Dr. Finch said.
Two other new antibiotics to fight SSSIs can each be administered orally or intravenously. One, omadacycline (Nuzyra), is a novel tetracycline that maintains efficacy against bacteria that express tetracycline resistance through efflux and ribosomal protection. Approved in late 2018 for acute bacterial SSSIs, omadacycline treats not just methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant S. aureus, but also Streptococcus species and gram-negative rods such as Enterobacter and Klebsiella pneumoniae, Dr. Finch noted.
Another new fluorinated quinolone, approved in 2017, delafloxacin (Baxdela) has broad spectrum activity against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria.
Dr. Finch reported that he has no relevant conflicts of interest.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019
Fine-tune staging for better SCC risk stratification
ORLANDO – When caring for individuals with sun-damaged skin, dermatologists need comfort with the full spectrum of photo-related skin disease. From assessment and treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs) and field cancerization, to long-term follow-up of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs), appropriate treatment and staging can improve patient quality of life and reduce health care costs, Vishal Patel, MD, said at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
said Dr. Patel, director of cutaneous oncology at George Washington University Cancer Center, Washington. On the other hand, he added, “field disease can be a marker for invasive squamous cell carcinoma risk, and it requires field treatment.” Treatment that reduces field disease is primary prevention because it decreases the formation of invasive SCC, he noted.
“But this level of disease – AKs and SCC in situ – doesn’t kill people,” he emphasized. “I want to leave you with an ability to stage this disease,” said Dr. Patel, noting that SCC mortality may eventually surpass melanoma mortality as deaths from the latter decline and numbers of older Americans with high ultraviolet light exposure and other risk factors climb.
While the majority of AKs regress within 5 years, he looks at the total burden of AKs as a marker for field cancerization “because having less than five in situ or actinic lesions puts you at less than a 1% risk of squamous cell carcinoma formation. Having more than 20 increases that risk 20-fold to 20%,” he said. “That’s the way we need to start thinking about this: Is this a disease – or a symptom?”
Rather than thinking of each AK or SCC in situ as a separate disease event, “the disease we need to be focusing on and treating is field cancerization,” he continued. Within this context, “we should not be thinking that … we need to be aggressive in our management,” which is what results in high costs.
“The reality is that this is a big quality of life issue for our patients. So what do we do?” Field treatment is appropriate for field disease, he said. Dr. Patel said that at GW only field treatment is used; destructive treatment for AKs and SCC in situ is not used. In the absence of patient and lesion characteristics that elevate risk,“surgery is really not the standard of care for in situ lesions for us,” he commented.
“We start by discerning the field disease from the invasive disease” with an initial round of field treatment and, if needed, adjunctive oral chemoprophylaxis. “We lather, rinse, and repeat” the field therapy, continuously if needed, Dr. Patel said.
“We like to do that because we can then identify those specific lesions we want to go after. No cryosurgery, no destructive therapy, because we run the risk of burying those tumors under the scar. They may recur and make it more difficult to accurately stage them in the future,” he noted.
“I like to be more sophisticated in thinking about our approach to the outcomes of these individual lesions,” he said. When it comes to excising lesions that have been biopsied and show invasive SCC, “disc excision may be a more cost-effective way to treat many low-risk SCCs,” he noted. In any case, “removal with clear surgical margins is key.”
Primary tumors with such low-risk attributes as diameter under a centimeter and thickness under 2 mm; well-defined borders; location on the trunk, neck, or extremities; well-differentiated histology; and lack of perineural invasion can all be considered for a disc technique, especially if the patient is immunocompetent without background chronic inflammation or a history of prior radiation therapy.
Staging SCCs, said Dr. Patel, is where things really get tricky. Older staging systems for SCC “led us to overtreat nonaggressive disease and undertreat aggressive disease. I think we have the responsibility to lead the charge to having a more sophisticated approach.” For example, patients whose tumors were staged T2 in the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) 7 classification system were most likely to have poor outcomes – in part because so few tumors were staged higher – which meant AJCC 7 didn’t provide adequate differentiation for useful risk prognostication.
A group of researchers at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), Boston, “came up with a better system to better differentiate those T2 tumors into a high-risk and a low-risk subtype,” according to Dr. Patel.
With use of validated risk factors, the investigators applied a long list of risk factors to 2,000 tumors to see which risk factors, taken individually, were really contributing to poor outcomes. Eventually, four risk factors that made the most difference were identified: size greater than 2 cm, poor tumor differentiation, perineural invasion greater than 0.1 mm in diameter, and tumor invasion beyond subcutaneous fat. “I really want to highlight the size portion of those risk factors,” said Dr. Patel. “Something I’d like you to do in your clinical practice is to measure and document the size of the lesion. … That really, clearly helps” with risk prognostication.
These four factors were then used to break out a T2a stage for tumors with one risk factor and a T2b stage for tumors with two or three risk factors. Tumors with no risk factors are stage T1, and those with all four risk factors are stage T3. In situ SCC is T0.
Applying this new staging system to a 2,000-patient cohort with SCC yielded clear separation in outcomes including recurrence, nodal metastasis, disease-specific death, and overall survival between patients with the T2a and T2b tumors (P less than .001 for all; J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 1;32[4]:327-34).
While AJCC 8 is “significantly better” than AJCC 7 in its incorporation of meaningful risk factors into the SCC staging system, “it still underperforms in comparison” with the BWH staging system using the 2000 patient cohort, he said. Recent work has shown the BWH classification system to have superior specificity and positive predictive value in detecting nodal metastasis and disease-specific death in higher-grade tumors. But both BWH and AJCC 8 need further refinement.
“So what are the staging pearls to take home?” Dr. Patel asked. “First, utilize a staging system.” “Staging of SCC utilizing should be done routinely. Most data seems to suggest that the BWH system appears to outperform AJCC 8, and it is what we currently use routinely at GW,” he said.
Patients who are T1 by BWH criteria, with no risk factors, are at low or even no risk, he noted. He pointed out that of the nearly 1,400 patients who met T1 criteria, there were just eight local recurrences, one nodal metastasis, and no distant metastases or deaths. Knowing this should guide physicians on a treatment path that will reduce costs and provide patients with peace of mind, he said.
In the BWH schema, T2a patients fared almost as well, with a 2% risk of nodal metastasis and an overall 1% risk of disease-specific death. “T2a disease is low risk, in my mind. Most of these patients will go on to do well,” he said.
By contrast, “there may be a number of tumors that you are missing” that are candidates for close follow-up if the BWH criteria are not being used, said Dr. Patel. These are the T2b tumors. “For those patients, we want to aggressively follow them and think about a more aggressive management plan.”
The bottom line is that BWH T2b and T3 tumors are both high risk, and management needs to acknowledge this, he said. The current protocol in our cutaneous oncology program includes using routine radiologic nodal staging in patients with BWH stage 2b and above SCCs and considering sentinel lymph node biopsy for certain individuals.
For patients with BWH T2b and T3 tumors, dermatologists should give consideration to tertiary care or cancer center referrals so they have access to the full spectrum of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities and the opportunity to participate in clinical trials, Dr. Patel said.
Dr. Patel reported that he is a speaker for Regeneron/Sanofi and a cofounder of the Skin Cancer Outcomes (SCOUT) consortium.
This article was updated 2/9/2019
ORLANDO – When caring for individuals with sun-damaged skin, dermatologists need comfort with the full spectrum of photo-related skin disease. From assessment and treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs) and field cancerization, to long-term follow-up of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs), appropriate treatment and staging can improve patient quality of life and reduce health care costs, Vishal Patel, MD, said at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
said Dr. Patel, director of cutaneous oncology at George Washington University Cancer Center, Washington. On the other hand, he added, “field disease can be a marker for invasive squamous cell carcinoma risk, and it requires field treatment.” Treatment that reduces field disease is primary prevention because it decreases the formation of invasive SCC, he noted.
“But this level of disease – AKs and SCC in situ – doesn’t kill people,” he emphasized. “I want to leave you with an ability to stage this disease,” said Dr. Patel, noting that SCC mortality may eventually surpass melanoma mortality as deaths from the latter decline and numbers of older Americans with high ultraviolet light exposure and other risk factors climb.
While the majority of AKs regress within 5 years, he looks at the total burden of AKs as a marker for field cancerization “because having less than five in situ or actinic lesions puts you at less than a 1% risk of squamous cell carcinoma formation. Having more than 20 increases that risk 20-fold to 20%,” he said. “That’s the way we need to start thinking about this: Is this a disease – or a symptom?”
Rather than thinking of each AK or SCC in situ as a separate disease event, “the disease we need to be focusing on and treating is field cancerization,” he continued. Within this context, “we should not be thinking that … we need to be aggressive in our management,” which is what results in high costs.
“The reality is that this is a big quality of life issue for our patients. So what do we do?” Field treatment is appropriate for field disease, he said. Dr. Patel said that at GW only field treatment is used; destructive treatment for AKs and SCC in situ is not used. In the absence of patient and lesion characteristics that elevate risk,“surgery is really not the standard of care for in situ lesions for us,” he commented.
“We start by discerning the field disease from the invasive disease” with an initial round of field treatment and, if needed, adjunctive oral chemoprophylaxis. “We lather, rinse, and repeat” the field therapy, continuously if needed, Dr. Patel said.
“We like to do that because we can then identify those specific lesions we want to go after. No cryosurgery, no destructive therapy, because we run the risk of burying those tumors under the scar. They may recur and make it more difficult to accurately stage them in the future,” he noted.
“I like to be more sophisticated in thinking about our approach to the outcomes of these individual lesions,” he said. When it comes to excising lesions that have been biopsied and show invasive SCC, “disc excision may be a more cost-effective way to treat many low-risk SCCs,” he noted. In any case, “removal with clear surgical margins is key.”
Primary tumors with such low-risk attributes as diameter under a centimeter and thickness under 2 mm; well-defined borders; location on the trunk, neck, or extremities; well-differentiated histology; and lack of perineural invasion can all be considered for a disc technique, especially if the patient is immunocompetent without background chronic inflammation or a history of prior radiation therapy.
Staging SCCs, said Dr. Patel, is where things really get tricky. Older staging systems for SCC “led us to overtreat nonaggressive disease and undertreat aggressive disease. I think we have the responsibility to lead the charge to having a more sophisticated approach.” For example, patients whose tumors were staged T2 in the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) 7 classification system were most likely to have poor outcomes – in part because so few tumors were staged higher – which meant AJCC 7 didn’t provide adequate differentiation for useful risk prognostication.
A group of researchers at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), Boston, “came up with a better system to better differentiate those T2 tumors into a high-risk and a low-risk subtype,” according to Dr. Patel.
With use of validated risk factors, the investigators applied a long list of risk factors to 2,000 tumors to see which risk factors, taken individually, were really contributing to poor outcomes. Eventually, four risk factors that made the most difference were identified: size greater than 2 cm, poor tumor differentiation, perineural invasion greater than 0.1 mm in diameter, and tumor invasion beyond subcutaneous fat. “I really want to highlight the size portion of those risk factors,” said Dr. Patel. “Something I’d like you to do in your clinical practice is to measure and document the size of the lesion. … That really, clearly helps” with risk prognostication.
These four factors were then used to break out a T2a stage for tumors with one risk factor and a T2b stage for tumors with two or three risk factors. Tumors with no risk factors are stage T1, and those with all four risk factors are stage T3. In situ SCC is T0.
Applying this new staging system to a 2,000-patient cohort with SCC yielded clear separation in outcomes including recurrence, nodal metastasis, disease-specific death, and overall survival between patients with the T2a and T2b tumors (P less than .001 for all; J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 1;32[4]:327-34).
While AJCC 8 is “significantly better” than AJCC 7 in its incorporation of meaningful risk factors into the SCC staging system, “it still underperforms in comparison” with the BWH staging system using the 2000 patient cohort, he said. Recent work has shown the BWH classification system to have superior specificity and positive predictive value in detecting nodal metastasis and disease-specific death in higher-grade tumors. But both BWH and AJCC 8 need further refinement.
“So what are the staging pearls to take home?” Dr. Patel asked. “First, utilize a staging system.” “Staging of SCC utilizing should be done routinely. Most data seems to suggest that the BWH system appears to outperform AJCC 8, and it is what we currently use routinely at GW,” he said.
Patients who are T1 by BWH criteria, with no risk factors, are at low or even no risk, he noted. He pointed out that of the nearly 1,400 patients who met T1 criteria, there were just eight local recurrences, one nodal metastasis, and no distant metastases or deaths. Knowing this should guide physicians on a treatment path that will reduce costs and provide patients with peace of mind, he said.
In the BWH schema, T2a patients fared almost as well, with a 2% risk of nodal metastasis and an overall 1% risk of disease-specific death. “T2a disease is low risk, in my mind. Most of these patients will go on to do well,” he said.
By contrast, “there may be a number of tumors that you are missing” that are candidates for close follow-up if the BWH criteria are not being used, said Dr. Patel. These are the T2b tumors. “For those patients, we want to aggressively follow them and think about a more aggressive management plan.”
The bottom line is that BWH T2b and T3 tumors are both high risk, and management needs to acknowledge this, he said. The current protocol in our cutaneous oncology program includes using routine radiologic nodal staging in patients with BWH stage 2b and above SCCs and considering sentinel lymph node biopsy for certain individuals.
For patients with BWH T2b and T3 tumors, dermatologists should give consideration to tertiary care or cancer center referrals so they have access to the full spectrum of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities and the opportunity to participate in clinical trials, Dr. Patel said.
Dr. Patel reported that he is a speaker for Regeneron/Sanofi and a cofounder of the Skin Cancer Outcomes (SCOUT) consortium.
This article was updated 2/9/2019
ORLANDO – When caring for individuals with sun-damaged skin, dermatologists need comfort with the full spectrum of photo-related skin disease. From assessment and treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs) and field cancerization, to long-term follow-up of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs), appropriate treatment and staging can improve patient quality of life and reduce health care costs, Vishal Patel, MD, said at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
said Dr. Patel, director of cutaneous oncology at George Washington University Cancer Center, Washington. On the other hand, he added, “field disease can be a marker for invasive squamous cell carcinoma risk, and it requires field treatment.” Treatment that reduces field disease is primary prevention because it decreases the formation of invasive SCC, he noted.
“But this level of disease – AKs and SCC in situ – doesn’t kill people,” he emphasized. “I want to leave you with an ability to stage this disease,” said Dr. Patel, noting that SCC mortality may eventually surpass melanoma mortality as deaths from the latter decline and numbers of older Americans with high ultraviolet light exposure and other risk factors climb.
While the majority of AKs regress within 5 years, he looks at the total burden of AKs as a marker for field cancerization “because having less than five in situ or actinic lesions puts you at less than a 1% risk of squamous cell carcinoma formation. Having more than 20 increases that risk 20-fold to 20%,” he said. “That’s the way we need to start thinking about this: Is this a disease – or a symptom?”
Rather than thinking of each AK or SCC in situ as a separate disease event, “the disease we need to be focusing on and treating is field cancerization,” he continued. Within this context, “we should not be thinking that … we need to be aggressive in our management,” which is what results in high costs.
“The reality is that this is a big quality of life issue for our patients. So what do we do?” Field treatment is appropriate for field disease, he said. Dr. Patel said that at GW only field treatment is used; destructive treatment for AKs and SCC in situ is not used. In the absence of patient and lesion characteristics that elevate risk,“surgery is really not the standard of care for in situ lesions for us,” he commented.
“We start by discerning the field disease from the invasive disease” with an initial round of field treatment and, if needed, adjunctive oral chemoprophylaxis. “We lather, rinse, and repeat” the field therapy, continuously if needed, Dr. Patel said.
“We like to do that because we can then identify those specific lesions we want to go after. No cryosurgery, no destructive therapy, because we run the risk of burying those tumors under the scar. They may recur and make it more difficult to accurately stage them in the future,” he noted.
“I like to be more sophisticated in thinking about our approach to the outcomes of these individual lesions,” he said. When it comes to excising lesions that have been biopsied and show invasive SCC, “disc excision may be a more cost-effective way to treat many low-risk SCCs,” he noted. In any case, “removal with clear surgical margins is key.”
Primary tumors with such low-risk attributes as diameter under a centimeter and thickness under 2 mm; well-defined borders; location on the trunk, neck, or extremities; well-differentiated histology; and lack of perineural invasion can all be considered for a disc technique, especially if the patient is immunocompetent without background chronic inflammation or a history of prior radiation therapy.
Staging SCCs, said Dr. Patel, is where things really get tricky. Older staging systems for SCC “led us to overtreat nonaggressive disease and undertreat aggressive disease. I think we have the responsibility to lead the charge to having a more sophisticated approach.” For example, patients whose tumors were staged T2 in the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) 7 classification system were most likely to have poor outcomes – in part because so few tumors were staged higher – which meant AJCC 7 didn’t provide adequate differentiation for useful risk prognostication.
A group of researchers at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), Boston, “came up with a better system to better differentiate those T2 tumors into a high-risk and a low-risk subtype,” according to Dr. Patel.
With use of validated risk factors, the investigators applied a long list of risk factors to 2,000 tumors to see which risk factors, taken individually, were really contributing to poor outcomes. Eventually, four risk factors that made the most difference were identified: size greater than 2 cm, poor tumor differentiation, perineural invasion greater than 0.1 mm in diameter, and tumor invasion beyond subcutaneous fat. “I really want to highlight the size portion of those risk factors,” said Dr. Patel. “Something I’d like you to do in your clinical practice is to measure and document the size of the lesion. … That really, clearly helps” with risk prognostication.
These four factors were then used to break out a T2a stage for tumors with one risk factor and a T2b stage for tumors with two or three risk factors. Tumors with no risk factors are stage T1, and those with all four risk factors are stage T3. In situ SCC is T0.
Applying this new staging system to a 2,000-patient cohort with SCC yielded clear separation in outcomes including recurrence, nodal metastasis, disease-specific death, and overall survival between patients with the T2a and T2b tumors (P less than .001 for all; J Clin Oncol. 2014 Feb 1;32[4]:327-34).
While AJCC 8 is “significantly better” than AJCC 7 in its incorporation of meaningful risk factors into the SCC staging system, “it still underperforms in comparison” with the BWH staging system using the 2000 patient cohort, he said. Recent work has shown the BWH classification system to have superior specificity and positive predictive value in detecting nodal metastasis and disease-specific death in higher-grade tumors. But both BWH and AJCC 8 need further refinement.
“So what are the staging pearls to take home?” Dr. Patel asked. “First, utilize a staging system.” “Staging of SCC utilizing should be done routinely. Most data seems to suggest that the BWH system appears to outperform AJCC 8, and it is what we currently use routinely at GW,” he said.
Patients who are T1 by BWH criteria, with no risk factors, are at low or even no risk, he noted. He pointed out that of the nearly 1,400 patients who met T1 criteria, there were just eight local recurrences, one nodal metastasis, and no distant metastases or deaths. Knowing this should guide physicians on a treatment path that will reduce costs and provide patients with peace of mind, he said.
In the BWH schema, T2a patients fared almost as well, with a 2% risk of nodal metastasis and an overall 1% risk of disease-specific death. “T2a disease is low risk, in my mind. Most of these patients will go on to do well,” he said.
By contrast, “there may be a number of tumors that you are missing” that are candidates for close follow-up if the BWH criteria are not being used, said Dr. Patel. These are the T2b tumors. “For those patients, we want to aggressively follow them and think about a more aggressive management plan.”
The bottom line is that BWH T2b and T3 tumors are both high risk, and management needs to acknowledge this, he said. The current protocol in our cutaneous oncology program includes using routine radiologic nodal staging in patients with BWH stage 2b and above SCCs and considering sentinel lymph node biopsy for certain individuals.
For patients with BWH T2b and T3 tumors, dermatologists should give consideration to tertiary care or cancer center referrals so they have access to the full spectrum of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities and the opportunity to participate in clinical trials, Dr. Patel said.
Dr. Patel reported that he is a speaker for Regeneron/Sanofi and a cofounder of the Skin Cancer Outcomes (SCOUT) consortium.
This article was updated 2/9/2019
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019
Will microneedling enhance the impact of photodynamic therapy?
ORLANDO –
Dr. Spencer, who practices in St. Petersburg, Fla., and is cochair of the conference, gave attendees a roundup of what’s new in adjuncts and delivery methods for photodynamic therapy (PDT). Among the updates is the promise of PDT delivered by means of an ultrashort incubation time of 10-20 minutes, followed by prolonged blue light exposure time of 1 hour. “The idea is that the enzymatic conversion is occurring during the light exposure,” Dr. Spencer said, adding that reports of this approach are mostly anecdotal.
A variation on the ultrashort incubation adds microneedling, he said. In one recent study, 33 patients who had facial actinic keratoses (AKs) were randomized to 10 or 20 minutes of incubation after application of aminolevulinic acid (ALA), followed by 1,000 seconds of exposure to blue light. However, in this split-face study, participants each had one side of their faces treated with microneedling and the other half with a sham treatment before ALA was applied.
Those who had the shorter incubation time had 43% of AKs cleared on the side that received microneedling, compared with 38% on the sham side. For those who received 20 minutes of ALA incubation, rates were higher, with 76% AK clearance on the treated side and 58% on the sham side. “Patients reported that the procedure was virtually painless on both sides,” said Dr. Spencer.
Though the addition of microneedling to PDT is a newer trend, there’s one that’s been a mainstay in Europe for some time: daylight PDT. He cited a review article published in 2016, which identified 17 studies on the use of daylight PDT (Dermatol Surg. 2016 Mar;42[3]:286-95).
Advantages of daylight PDT, he said, include less time in the office for patients and “supposedly less pain.” European protocols vary, but most use methyl aminolevulinate, which he said is a “little more lipophilic than ALA,” with incubation times ranging from 0 to 30 minutes. Exposure time is also variable, but will usually range from 1.5 to 2.5 hours. Most patients receive just one treatment, but some protocols will include up to three treatments.
Overall, studies show a range from 46% to almost 90% complete response rates when AKs are treated with daylight PDT. One study that looked at daylight PDT for small basal cell carcinomas showed that 94% of patients had clinical clearance of their lesions after two treatment sessions; however, the recurrence rate at 12 months post therapy was 21%, Dr. Spencer said.
He shared results of a recent head-to-head study of conventional and daylight PDT; conducted in Greece, the study enrolled patients with “high sun exposure” and used a split-face design.
Of the 46 patients who received MAL on both sides of their faces, response rates were similar at both 3 and 12 months, with slightly numerically higher clearance rates for conventional versus daylight PDT. The 3-month clearance rate for conventional PDT was 80.6%, compared with 78.0% for daylight PDT. At 12 months, the respective clearance rates were 73.7% and 71.8% (J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018 Apr;32[4]:595-600). However, “significantly less pain was reported with daylight PDT,” Dr. Spencer said.
Daylight PDT hasn’t caught on the United States. Physicians have concern about the lack of control of UV dosing, and, he pointed out, “this, of course, is not billable.”
Dr. Spencer reported that he serves on the speakers bureau for Genentech.
ORLANDO –
Dr. Spencer, who practices in St. Petersburg, Fla., and is cochair of the conference, gave attendees a roundup of what’s new in adjuncts and delivery methods for photodynamic therapy (PDT). Among the updates is the promise of PDT delivered by means of an ultrashort incubation time of 10-20 minutes, followed by prolonged blue light exposure time of 1 hour. “The idea is that the enzymatic conversion is occurring during the light exposure,” Dr. Spencer said, adding that reports of this approach are mostly anecdotal.
A variation on the ultrashort incubation adds microneedling, he said. In one recent study, 33 patients who had facial actinic keratoses (AKs) were randomized to 10 or 20 minutes of incubation after application of aminolevulinic acid (ALA), followed by 1,000 seconds of exposure to blue light. However, in this split-face study, participants each had one side of their faces treated with microneedling and the other half with a sham treatment before ALA was applied.
Those who had the shorter incubation time had 43% of AKs cleared on the side that received microneedling, compared with 38% on the sham side. For those who received 20 minutes of ALA incubation, rates were higher, with 76% AK clearance on the treated side and 58% on the sham side. “Patients reported that the procedure was virtually painless on both sides,” said Dr. Spencer.
Though the addition of microneedling to PDT is a newer trend, there’s one that’s been a mainstay in Europe for some time: daylight PDT. He cited a review article published in 2016, which identified 17 studies on the use of daylight PDT (Dermatol Surg. 2016 Mar;42[3]:286-95).
Advantages of daylight PDT, he said, include less time in the office for patients and “supposedly less pain.” European protocols vary, but most use methyl aminolevulinate, which he said is a “little more lipophilic than ALA,” with incubation times ranging from 0 to 30 minutes. Exposure time is also variable, but will usually range from 1.5 to 2.5 hours. Most patients receive just one treatment, but some protocols will include up to three treatments.
Overall, studies show a range from 46% to almost 90% complete response rates when AKs are treated with daylight PDT. One study that looked at daylight PDT for small basal cell carcinomas showed that 94% of patients had clinical clearance of their lesions after two treatment sessions; however, the recurrence rate at 12 months post therapy was 21%, Dr. Spencer said.
He shared results of a recent head-to-head study of conventional and daylight PDT; conducted in Greece, the study enrolled patients with “high sun exposure” and used a split-face design.
Of the 46 patients who received MAL on both sides of their faces, response rates were similar at both 3 and 12 months, with slightly numerically higher clearance rates for conventional versus daylight PDT. The 3-month clearance rate for conventional PDT was 80.6%, compared with 78.0% for daylight PDT. At 12 months, the respective clearance rates were 73.7% and 71.8% (J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018 Apr;32[4]:595-600). However, “significantly less pain was reported with daylight PDT,” Dr. Spencer said.
Daylight PDT hasn’t caught on the United States. Physicians have concern about the lack of control of UV dosing, and, he pointed out, “this, of course, is not billable.”
Dr. Spencer reported that he serves on the speakers bureau for Genentech.
ORLANDO –
Dr. Spencer, who practices in St. Petersburg, Fla., and is cochair of the conference, gave attendees a roundup of what’s new in adjuncts and delivery methods for photodynamic therapy (PDT). Among the updates is the promise of PDT delivered by means of an ultrashort incubation time of 10-20 minutes, followed by prolonged blue light exposure time of 1 hour. “The idea is that the enzymatic conversion is occurring during the light exposure,” Dr. Spencer said, adding that reports of this approach are mostly anecdotal.
A variation on the ultrashort incubation adds microneedling, he said. In one recent study, 33 patients who had facial actinic keratoses (AKs) were randomized to 10 or 20 minutes of incubation after application of aminolevulinic acid (ALA), followed by 1,000 seconds of exposure to blue light. However, in this split-face study, participants each had one side of their faces treated with microneedling and the other half with a sham treatment before ALA was applied.
Those who had the shorter incubation time had 43% of AKs cleared on the side that received microneedling, compared with 38% on the sham side. For those who received 20 minutes of ALA incubation, rates were higher, with 76% AK clearance on the treated side and 58% on the sham side. “Patients reported that the procedure was virtually painless on both sides,” said Dr. Spencer.
Though the addition of microneedling to PDT is a newer trend, there’s one that’s been a mainstay in Europe for some time: daylight PDT. He cited a review article published in 2016, which identified 17 studies on the use of daylight PDT (Dermatol Surg. 2016 Mar;42[3]:286-95).
Advantages of daylight PDT, he said, include less time in the office for patients and “supposedly less pain.” European protocols vary, but most use methyl aminolevulinate, which he said is a “little more lipophilic than ALA,” with incubation times ranging from 0 to 30 minutes. Exposure time is also variable, but will usually range from 1.5 to 2.5 hours. Most patients receive just one treatment, but some protocols will include up to three treatments.
Overall, studies show a range from 46% to almost 90% complete response rates when AKs are treated with daylight PDT. One study that looked at daylight PDT for small basal cell carcinomas showed that 94% of patients had clinical clearance of their lesions after two treatment sessions; however, the recurrence rate at 12 months post therapy was 21%, Dr. Spencer said.
He shared results of a recent head-to-head study of conventional and daylight PDT; conducted in Greece, the study enrolled patients with “high sun exposure” and used a split-face design.
Of the 46 patients who received MAL on both sides of their faces, response rates were similar at both 3 and 12 months, with slightly numerically higher clearance rates for conventional versus daylight PDT. The 3-month clearance rate for conventional PDT was 80.6%, compared with 78.0% for daylight PDT. At 12 months, the respective clearance rates were 73.7% and 71.8% (J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018 Apr;32[4]:595-600). However, “significantly less pain was reported with daylight PDT,” Dr. Spencer said.
Daylight PDT hasn’t caught on the United States. Physicians have concern about the lack of control of UV dosing, and, he pointed out, “this, of course, is not billable.”
Dr. Spencer reported that he serves on the speakers bureau for Genentech.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019
When sweaty palms are more than just sweaty palms
ORLANDO – When you extend your hand to a new patient, and he reflexively wipes his palm before shaking hands, be alert. It’s possible you’re seeing primary hyperhidrosis, a condition that’s both more common and more disabling than once thought.
“Looking at the biology of sweating, normally, it’s a good thing – we need it to survive. However, hyperhidrosis is too much of a good thing – it’s an excess of what is needed for normal biology,” said Adam Friedman, MD, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
Recent data, he pointed out, show that hyperhidrosis is more prevalent than previously thought – about 4.8% of individuals may have the condition, with about half having axillary hyperhidrosis. Symptoms peak in early adulthood, with adults aged 18-54 most affected. “These are the prime working years,” he said.
About 2% of teens are affected, and many adults report that symptoms began before they were 12 years old. Hand hyperhidrosis is a factor for computer and electronic device work, sports, and even handling paper and pencils, noted Dr. Friedman, professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington.
“Does it affect quality of life? Yes. We have data to support the impact. The adverse impact is actually greater than that of eczema and psoriasis,” he said, adding that patients won’t always bring up their concerns about sweating. “Often, it’s the patient who apologizes for having sweaty palms or who sticks to the paper on the exam table. It’s worth asking these patients if they are bothered by excessive sweating.”
Is it hyperhidrosis?
A 2016 paper defined hyperhidrosis as “a condition that involves chronic excessive sweating of the underarms, hands, feet, face, groin, or other bodily areas, which is much more than what is normal, and occurs regardless of temperature, exercise, or situation, and may have an impact on quality of life” (Arch Dermatol Res. 2016 Dec;308[10]:743-9). The amount of sweating can be four to five times that seen in healthy controls.
Other clues that excess sweating might be hyperhidrosis? General hyperhidrosis is a secondary syndrome that can be caused by a variety of conditions including endocrine and metabolic disorders and malignancies. Drugs and toxins can also cause generalized excessive sweating.
Focal hyperhidrosis can be primary idiopathic disease; some neuropathies and certain spinal diseases and spinal cord injury can also cause focal hyperhidrosis, though not usually in the axillary/palmar/plantar distribution seen in primary hyperhidrosis.
Before settling on primary hyperhidrosis, the history and exam should also account for other possibilities in the differential: social anxiety disorder, eccrine nevus, gustatory sweating, Frey syndrome, and impaired evaporation could all account for excess sweating, which is also a postsurgical phenomenon for some patients.
Diagnostic criteria call for “focal, visible, excessive sweating” persisting for at least 6 months with no apparent cause. Additionally, patients must have at least two of the additional following criteria: sweating that is bilateral and symmetric, occurs at least once weekly, impairs daily activities, and starts before age 25 years, as well as a positive family history of hyperhidrosis and cessation of sweating during sleep.
The last point is critical, Dr. Friedman said. “If you sweat a lot at night, it’s not hyperhidrosis!”
Though gravimetric evaluation is used in hyperhidrosis research, the history and exam are really where the diagnosis is made in practice, he noted. The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale is a brief, useful clinical tool that asks patients to peg the extent to which their sweating interferes with daily life.
Topical treatments to try
Topical antiperspirants and other topical agents are a logical place to start and may be required as part of step therapy by insurers. Many patients will already have tried clinical strength over-the-counter antiperspirants containing aluminum zirconium trichlorohydrex, but these products rate low in patient satisfaction among those with primary hyperhidrosis.
Prescription aluminum salts can be compounded to various strengths, with 10%-20% concentration appropriate for axillae and 30%-40% a good strength for palms and soles, according to Dr. Friedman. All of these agents work by precipitating out solids that form a shallow plug in sweat ducts, slowing the flow of perspiration.
Pearls for topical treatment include the need for the product to be on the skin for 6-8 hours overnight. “Remember hyperhidrosis patients do not sweat at night,” so this is the time when the occlusive plugs can form. Then residue can be washed off in the morning, and patients can apply a deodorant. “I remind my patients that antiperspirants are for sweating, and deodorants are for odor,” said Dr. Friedman. These products can damage fabric, and they can be irritating, a problem addressed with low-potency topical steroids.
Topical regimens don’t need to be adjusted for pediatric patients, said Dr. Friedman.
Iontophoresis has been around since the 1950s, is effective, has few side effects, and is considered first-line treatment for severe palmar and plantar hyperhidrosis. But he said there’s one big rub: time. To be effective, patients need 20-30 minutes of application of 15-20 milliamperes of current 3-4 times weekly, not a schedule that works for most patients or practitioners, Dr. Friedman noted.
A treatment recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for primary axillary hyperhidrosis is a topical anticholinergic, glycopyrronium tosylate, applied with wipes impregnated with glycopyrronium solution. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with up to 64% of users meeting the primary endpoint of improving by at least 4 points on the Axillary Sweating Daily Diary (ASDD) scale. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with 53% and 66% of users meeting the primary endpoint, improvement of at least 4 points from baseline in the weekly mean ASDD Item #2. It was approved in those aged 9 years and older.
“You can use this in kids, but you need to educate the kid and the parent or adult,” he said. “This is the last thing you do before bed, after brushing your teeth and after washing your face.”
Patients should apply one swipe to the clean skin of each underarm, and then wash their hands thoroughly. Clinical trials saw a greater proportion of off-target effects such as dry eyes and mouth and mydriasis in the active arm; unilateral mydriasis was more common than bilateral, underscoring the importance of hand washing as this was probably secondary transfer from hands to face during sleep, said Dr. Friedman. Patients can expect results in 2-3 weeks, and doses can be held as needed for anticholinergic side effects.
Systemic choices are limited
There are no FDA-approved systemic agents for hyperhidrosis, and the literature holds only case reports or small series, Dr. Friedman pointed out.
Though systemic treatment may be more effective in generalized hyperhidrosis and for patients with dysautonomia-associated hyperhidrosis, glycopyrrolate is a logical choice if a systemic anticholinergic is desired. A starting dose of 1 mg twice daily can be titrated for effect to about 6 mg daily. Though off-target effects may be a dose-limiting factor, glycopyrrolate is not very lipid soluble, so it penetrates the blood-brain barrier relatively poorly, he said.
Oxybutynin is available in many forms, including a slow-release tablet that permits once-daily dosing. Starting at 5-10 mg daily is a good idea, but dosing may need to be increased to as high as 20 mg daily to be effective. However, patients will often experience “major side effects” with oxybutynin, including significant xerostomia, constipation, blurred vision, and difficulty urinating.
For children, small studies have seen improvement with glycopyrrolate at an average dose of about 2 mg/day. Oxybutynin, which has been extensively studied in the pediatric population, was also effective, but central nervous system adverse events were common.
For some, beta-adrenergic blockade can be an extremely valuable tool, said Dr. Friedman. When sweating is linked to social phobia or performance anxiety, 10-20 mg of atenolol about an hour before the performance or public appearance can make a big difference. Bradycardia, atrioventricular block, and asthma are all contraindications, and the usual precautions should be taken with a host of other comorbidities, he noted.
It’s a good idea to check resting blood pressure and heart rate and take body mass into consideration, and adjust the dose downward appropriately. A key pearl: “Have them do a test run at home, to make sure they don’t keel over on the podium!” said Dr. Friedman.
Botulinum toxin tips and tricks
Botulinum toxin can be very effective and works directly by blocking acetylcholine release at the junction of the sympathetic sudomotor neuron and the sweat gland.
Before treatment, make sure the patient prepares correctly by abstaining from over-the-counter deodorants or antiperspirants, and resting without exertion or drinking hot beverages for about 30 minutes before the procedure.
To ascertain the follicular outline of the area to be injected, the iodine starch test can be used: Paint the axilla with iodine, allow it to dry, and then dust corn starch over the area. The follicular outline is mapped by the purple-blue reaction of the starch and iodine in the presence of moisture from perspiration, Dr. Friedman said.
Applying topical analgesia 30 minutes prior to the procedure helps with patient discomfort with axillary injections. When it comes time to inject, a shallow approach with the bevel side up works well, with a goal of blanketing the field identified by the iodine starch test with small aliquots of toxin placed 1-2 centimeters apart, said Dr. Friedman. However, for patients who might have tattoos that extend to the axillary area, “Avoid the ink!”
Patients will start to see improvement within 2-4 days, and although the literature says a toxin treatment can last 6-9 months, Dr. Friedman said he sees patients coming back in 4-5 months.
Obtaining botulinum toxin can be done in one of two ways: the “buy and bill” approach has the dermatologist purchasing the medication, using CPT 64650 and J code J0585 – “Remember the units!” said Dr. Friedman, because reimbursement will be based on the volume of toxin purchased.. This route may be cheaper for the patient because it avoids a medication copay. The physician obtains preauthorization for both the medication and procedure with this strategy.
The other route is to have the provider prescribe botulinum toxin and the patient purchase it at a regular or specialty pharmacy. In this case, the pharmacist obtains precertification for the medication, but the physician still needs to be precertified – and bill – for the injection procedure itself. This scenario is less risky for the physician but may trigger two separate copays for the patient.
Botulinum toxin can be effective for up to 90% of patients, but at a cost: Without insurance reimbursement, treatments can cost in the neighborhood of $1,500.
A good resource for patients and clinicians is the International Hyperhidrosis Society’s website (sweathelp.org), said Dr. Friedman.
Dr. Friedman disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies, including Dermira, which markets topical glycopyrronium tosylate as Qbrexza.
ORLANDO – When you extend your hand to a new patient, and he reflexively wipes his palm before shaking hands, be alert. It’s possible you’re seeing primary hyperhidrosis, a condition that’s both more common and more disabling than once thought.
“Looking at the biology of sweating, normally, it’s a good thing – we need it to survive. However, hyperhidrosis is too much of a good thing – it’s an excess of what is needed for normal biology,” said Adam Friedman, MD, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
Recent data, he pointed out, show that hyperhidrosis is more prevalent than previously thought – about 4.8% of individuals may have the condition, with about half having axillary hyperhidrosis. Symptoms peak in early adulthood, with adults aged 18-54 most affected. “These are the prime working years,” he said.
About 2% of teens are affected, and many adults report that symptoms began before they were 12 years old. Hand hyperhidrosis is a factor for computer and electronic device work, sports, and even handling paper and pencils, noted Dr. Friedman, professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington.
“Does it affect quality of life? Yes. We have data to support the impact. The adverse impact is actually greater than that of eczema and psoriasis,” he said, adding that patients won’t always bring up their concerns about sweating. “Often, it’s the patient who apologizes for having sweaty palms or who sticks to the paper on the exam table. It’s worth asking these patients if they are bothered by excessive sweating.”
Is it hyperhidrosis?
A 2016 paper defined hyperhidrosis as “a condition that involves chronic excessive sweating of the underarms, hands, feet, face, groin, or other bodily areas, which is much more than what is normal, and occurs regardless of temperature, exercise, or situation, and may have an impact on quality of life” (Arch Dermatol Res. 2016 Dec;308[10]:743-9). The amount of sweating can be four to five times that seen in healthy controls.
Other clues that excess sweating might be hyperhidrosis? General hyperhidrosis is a secondary syndrome that can be caused by a variety of conditions including endocrine and metabolic disorders and malignancies. Drugs and toxins can also cause generalized excessive sweating.
Focal hyperhidrosis can be primary idiopathic disease; some neuropathies and certain spinal diseases and spinal cord injury can also cause focal hyperhidrosis, though not usually in the axillary/palmar/plantar distribution seen in primary hyperhidrosis.
Before settling on primary hyperhidrosis, the history and exam should also account for other possibilities in the differential: social anxiety disorder, eccrine nevus, gustatory sweating, Frey syndrome, and impaired evaporation could all account for excess sweating, which is also a postsurgical phenomenon for some patients.
Diagnostic criteria call for “focal, visible, excessive sweating” persisting for at least 6 months with no apparent cause. Additionally, patients must have at least two of the additional following criteria: sweating that is bilateral and symmetric, occurs at least once weekly, impairs daily activities, and starts before age 25 years, as well as a positive family history of hyperhidrosis and cessation of sweating during sleep.
The last point is critical, Dr. Friedman said. “If you sweat a lot at night, it’s not hyperhidrosis!”
Though gravimetric evaluation is used in hyperhidrosis research, the history and exam are really where the diagnosis is made in practice, he noted. The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale is a brief, useful clinical tool that asks patients to peg the extent to which their sweating interferes with daily life.
Topical treatments to try
Topical antiperspirants and other topical agents are a logical place to start and may be required as part of step therapy by insurers. Many patients will already have tried clinical strength over-the-counter antiperspirants containing aluminum zirconium trichlorohydrex, but these products rate low in patient satisfaction among those with primary hyperhidrosis.
Prescription aluminum salts can be compounded to various strengths, with 10%-20% concentration appropriate for axillae and 30%-40% a good strength for palms and soles, according to Dr. Friedman. All of these agents work by precipitating out solids that form a shallow plug in sweat ducts, slowing the flow of perspiration.
Pearls for topical treatment include the need for the product to be on the skin for 6-8 hours overnight. “Remember hyperhidrosis patients do not sweat at night,” so this is the time when the occlusive plugs can form. Then residue can be washed off in the morning, and patients can apply a deodorant. “I remind my patients that antiperspirants are for sweating, and deodorants are for odor,” said Dr. Friedman. These products can damage fabric, and they can be irritating, a problem addressed with low-potency topical steroids.
Topical regimens don’t need to be adjusted for pediatric patients, said Dr. Friedman.
Iontophoresis has been around since the 1950s, is effective, has few side effects, and is considered first-line treatment for severe palmar and plantar hyperhidrosis. But he said there’s one big rub: time. To be effective, patients need 20-30 minutes of application of 15-20 milliamperes of current 3-4 times weekly, not a schedule that works for most patients or practitioners, Dr. Friedman noted.
A treatment recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for primary axillary hyperhidrosis is a topical anticholinergic, glycopyrronium tosylate, applied with wipes impregnated with glycopyrronium solution. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with up to 64% of users meeting the primary endpoint of improving by at least 4 points on the Axillary Sweating Daily Diary (ASDD) scale. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with 53% and 66% of users meeting the primary endpoint, improvement of at least 4 points from baseline in the weekly mean ASDD Item #2. It was approved in those aged 9 years and older.
“You can use this in kids, but you need to educate the kid and the parent or adult,” he said. “This is the last thing you do before bed, after brushing your teeth and after washing your face.”
Patients should apply one swipe to the clean skin of each underarm, and then wash their hands thoroughly. Clinical trials saw a greater proportion of off-target effects such as dry eyes and mouth and mydriasis in the active arm; unilateral mydriasis was more common than bilateral, underscoring the importance of hand washing as this was probably secondary transfer from hands to face during sleep, said Dr. Friedman. Patients can expect results in 2-3 weeks, and doses can be held as needed for anticholinergic side effects.
Systemic choices are limited
There are no FDA-approved systemic agents for hyperhidrosis, and the literature holds only case reports or small series, Dr. Friedman pointed out.
Though systemic treatment may be more effective in generalized hyperhidrosis and for patients with dysautonomia-associated hyperhidrosis, glycopyrrolate is a logical choice if a systemic anticholinergic is desired. A starting dose of 1 mg twice daily can be titrated for effect to about 6 mg daily. Though off-target effects may be a dose-limiting factor, glycopyrrolate is not very lipid soluble, so it penetrates the blood-brain barrier relatively poorly, he said.
Oxybutynin is available in many forms, including a slow-release tablet that permits once-daily dosing. Starting at 5-10 mg daily is a good idea, but dosing may need to be increased to as high as 20 mg daily to be effective. However, patients will often experience “major side effects” with oxybutynin, including significant xerostomia, constipation, blurred vision, and difficulty urinating.
For children, small studies have seen improvement with glycopyrrolate at an average dose of about 2 mg/day. Oxybutynin, which has been extensively studied in the pediatric population, was also effective, but central nervous system adverse events were common.
For some, beta-adrenergic blockade can be an extremely valuable tool, said Dr. Friedman. When sweating is linked to social phobia or performance anxiety, 10-20 mg of atenolol about an hour before the performance or public appearance can make a big difference. Bradycardia, atrioventricular block, and asthma are all contraindications, and the usual precautions should be taken with a host of other comorbidities, he noted.
It’s a good idea to check resting blood pressure and heart rate and take body mass into consideration, and adjust the dose downward appropriately. A key pearl: “Have them do a test run at home, to make sure they don’t keel over on the podium!” said Dr. Friedman.
Botulinum toxin tips and tricks
Botulinum toxin can be very effective and works directly by blocking acetylcholine release at the junction of the sympathetic sudomotor neuron and the sweat gland.
Before treatment, make sure the patient prepares correctly by abstaining from over-the-counter deodorants or antiperspirants, and resting without exertion or drinking hot beverages for about 30 minutes before the procedure.
To ascertain the follicular outline of the area to be injected, the iodine starch test can be used: Paint the axilla with iodine, allow it to dry, and then dust corn starch over the area. The follicular outline is mapped by the purple-blue reaction of the starch and iodine in the presence of moisture from perspiration, Dr. Friedman said.
Applying topical analgesia 30 minutes prior to the procedure helps with patient discomfort with axillary injections. When it comes time to inject, a shallow approach with the bevel side up works well, with a goal of blanketing the field identified by the iodine starch test with small aliquots of toxin placed 1-2 centimeters apart, said Dr. Friedman. However, for patients who might have tattoos that extend to the axillary area, “Avoid the ink!”
Patients will start to see improvement within 2-4 days, and although the literature says a toxin treatment can last 6-9 months, Dr. Friedman said he sees patients coming back in 4-5 months.
Obtaining botulinum toxin can be done in one of two ways: the “buy and bill” approach has the dermatologist purchasing the medication, using CPT 64650 and J code J0585 – “Remember the units!” said Dr. Friedman, because reimbursement will be based on the volume of toxin purchased.. This route may be cheaper for the patient because it avoids a medication copay. The physician obtains preauthorization for both the medication and procedure with this strategy.
The other route is to have the provider prescribe botulinum toxin and the patient purchase it at a regular or specialty pharmacy. In this case, the pharmacist obtains precertification for the medication, but the physician still needs to be precertified – and bill – for the injection procedure itself. This scenario is less risky for the physician but may trigger two separate copays for the patient.
Botulinum toxin can be effective for up to 90% of patients, but at a cost: Without insurance reimbursement, treatments can cost in the neighborhood of $1,500.
A good resource for patients and clinicians is the International Hyperhidrosis Society’s website (sweathelp.org), said Dr. Friedman.
Dr. Friedman disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies, including Dermira, which markets topical glycopyrronium tosylate as Qbrexza.
ORLANDO – When you extend your hand to a new patient, and he reflexively wipes his palm before shaking hands, be alert. It’s possible you’re seeing primary hyperhidrosis, a condition that’s both more common and more disabling than once thought.
“Looking at the biology of sweating, normally, it’s a good thing – we need it to survive. However, hyperhidrosis is too much of a good thing – it’s an excess of what is needed for normal biology,” said Adam Friedman, MD, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
Recent data, he pointed out, show that hyperhidrosis is more prevalent than previously thought – about 4.8% of individuals may have the condition, with about half having axillary hyperhidrosis. Symptoms peak in early adulthood, with adults aged 18-54 most affected. “These are the prime working years,” he said.
About 2% of teens are affected, and many adults report that symptoms began before they were 12 years old. Hand hyperhidrosis is a factor for computer and electronic device work, sports, and even handling paper and pencils, noted Dr. Friedman, professor of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington.
“Does it affect quality of life? Yes. We have data to support the impact. The adverse impact is actually greater than that of eczema and psoriasis,” he said, adding that patients won’t always bring up their concerns about sweating. “Often, it’s the patient who apologizes for having sweaty palms or who sticks to the paper on the exam table. It’s worth asking these patients if they are bothered by excessive sweating.”
Is it hyperhidrosis?
A 2016 paper defined hyperhidrosis as “a condition that involves chronic excessive sweating of the underarms, hands, feet, face, groin, or other bodily areas, which is much more than what is normal, and occurs regardless of temperature, exercise, or situation, and may have an impact on quality of life” (Arch Dermatol Res. 2016 Dec;308[10]:743-9). The amount of sweating can be four to five times that seen in healthy controls.
Other clues that excess sweating might be hyperhidrosis? General hyperhidrosis is a secondary syndrome that can be caused by a variety of conditions including endocrine and metabolic disorders and malignancies. Drugs and toxins can also cause generalized excessive sweating.
Focal hyperhidrosis can be primary idiopathic disease; some neuropathies and certain spinal diseases and spinal cord injury can also cause focal hyperhidrosis, though not usually in the axillary/palmar/plantar distribution seen in primary hyperhidrosis.
Before settling on primary hyperhidrosis, the history and exam should also account for other possibilities in the differential: social anxiety disorder, eccrine nevus, gustatory sweating, Frey syndrome, and impaired evaporation could all account for excess sweating, which is also a postsurgical phenomenon for some patients.
Diagnostic criteria call for “focal, visible, excessive sweating” persisting for at least 6 months with no apparent cause. Additionally, patients must have at least two of the additional following criteria: sweating that is bilateral and symmetric, occurs at least once weekly, impairs daily activities, and starts before age 25 years, as well as a positive family history of hyperhidrosis and cessation of sweating during sleep.
The last point is critical, Dr. Friedman said. “If you sweat a lot at night, it’s not hyperhidrosis!”
Though gravimetric evaluation is used in hyperhidrosis research, the history and exam are really where the diagnosis is made in practice, he noted. The Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale is a brief, useful clinical tool that asks patients to peg the extent to which their sweating interferes with daily life.
Topical treatments to try
Topical antiperspirants and other topical agents are a logical place to start and may be required as part of step therapy by insurers. Many patients will already have tried clinical strength over-the-counter antiperspirants containing aluminum zirconium trichlorohydrex, but these products rate low in patient satisfaction among those with primary hyperhidrosis.
Prescription aluminum salts can be compounded to various strengths, with 10%-20% concentration appropriate for axillae and 30%-40% a good strength for palms and soles, according to Dr. Friedman. All of these agents work by precipitating out solids that form a shallow plug in sweat ducts, slowing the flow of perspiration.
Pearls for topical treatment include the need for the product to be on the skin for 6-8 hours overnight. “Remember hyperhidrosis patients do not sweat at night,” so this is the time when the occlusive plugs can form. Then residue can be washed off in the morning, and patients can apply a deodorant. “I remind my patients that antiperspirants are for sweating, and deodorants are for odor,” said Dr. Friedman. These products can damage fabric, and they can be irritating, a problem addressed with low-potency topical steroids.
Topical regimens don’t need to be adjusted for pediatric patients, said Dr. Friedman.
Iontophoresis has been around since the 1950s, is effective, has few side effects, and is considered first-line treatment for severe palmar and plantar hyperhidrosis. But he said there’s one big rub: time. To be effective, patients need 20-30 minutes of application of 15-20 milliamperes of current 3-4 times weekly, not a schedule that works for most patients or practitioners, Dr. Friedman noted.
A treatment recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for primary axillary hyperhidrosis is a topical anticholinergic, glycopyrronium tosylate, applied with wipes impregnated with glycopyrronium solution. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with up to 64% of users meeting the primary endpoint of improving by at least 4 points on the Axillary Sweating Daily Diary (ASDD) scale. This product significantly outperformed placebo in two clinical trials, with 53% and 66% of users meeting the primary endpoint, improvement of at least 4 points from baseline in the weekly mean ASDD Item #2. It was approved in those aged 9 years and older.
“You can use this in kids, but you need to educate the kid and the parent or adult,” he said. “This is the last thing you do before bed, after brushing your teeth and after washing your face.”
Patients should apply one swipe to the clean skin of each underarm, and then wash their hands thoroughly. Clinical trials saw a greater proportion of off-target effects such as dry eyes and mouth and mydriasis in the active arm; unilateral mydriasis was more common than bilateral, underscoring the importance of hand washing as this was probably secondary transfer from hands to face during sleep, said Dr. Friedman. Patients can expect results in 2-3 weeks, and doses can be held as needed for anticholinergic side effects.
Systemic choices are limited
There are no FDA-approved systemic agents for hyperhidrosis, and the literature holds only case reports or small series, Dr. Friedman pointed out.
Though systemic treatment may be more effective in generalized hyperhidrosis and for patients with dysautonomia-associated hyperhidrosis, glycopyrrolate is a logical choice if a systemic anticholinergic is desired. A starting dose of 1 mg twice daily can be titrated for effect to about 6 mg daily. Though off-target effects may be a dose-limiting factor, glycopyrrolate is not very lipid soluble, so it penetrates the blood-brain barrier relatively poorly, he said.
Oxybutynin is available in many forms, including a slow-release tablet that permits once-daily dosing. Starting at 5-10 mg daily is a good idea, but dosing may need to be increased to as high as 20 mg daily to be effective. However, patients will often experience “major side effects” with oxybutynin, including significant xerostomia, constipation, blurred vision, and difficulty urinating.
For children, small studies have seen improvement with glycopyrrolate at an average dose of about 2 mg/day. Oxybutynin, which has been extensively studied in the pediatric population, was also effective, but central nervous system adverse events were common.
For some, beta-adrenergic blockade can be an extremely valuable tool, said Dr. Friedman. When sweating is linked to social phobia or performance anxiety, 10-20 mg of atenolol about an hour before the performance or public appearance can make a big difference. Bradycardia, atrioventricular block, and asthma are all contraindications, and the usual precautions should be taken with a host of other comorbidities, he noted.
It’s a good idea to check resting blood pressure and heart rate and take body mass into consideration, and adjust the dose downward appropriately. A key pearl: “Have them do a test run at home, to make sure they don’t keel over on the podium!” said Dr. Friedman.
Botulinum toxin tips and tricks
Botulinum toxin can be very effective and works directly by blocking acetylcholine release at the junction of the sympathetic sudomotor neuron and the sweat gland.
Before treatment, make sure the patient prepares correctly by abstaining from over-the-counter deodorants or antiperspirants, and resting without exertion or drinking hot beverages for about 30 minutes before the procedure.
To ascertain the follicular outline of the area to be injected, the iodine starch test can be used: Paint the axilla with iodine, allow it to dry, and then dust corn starch over the area. The follicular outline is mapped by the purple-blue reaction of the starch and iodine in the presence of moisture from perspiration, Dr. Friedman said.
Applying topical analgesia 30 minutes prior to the procedure helps with patient discomfort with axillary injections. When it comes time to inject, a shallow approach with the bevel side up works well, with a goal of blanketing the field identified by the iodine starch test with small aliquots of toxin placed 1-2 centimeters apart, said Dr. Friedman. However, for patients who might have tattoos that extend to the axillary area, “Avoid the ink!”
Patients will start to see improvement within 2-4 days, and although the literature says a toxin treatment can last 6-9 months, Dr. Friedman said he sees patients coming back in 4-5 months.
Obtaining botulinum toxin can be done in one of two ways: the “buy and bill” approach has the dermatologist purchasing the medication, using CPT 64650 and J code J0585 – “Remember the units!” said Dr. Friedman, because reimbursement will be based on the volume of toxin purchased.. This route may be cheaper for the patient because it avoids a medication copay. The physician obtains preauthorization for both the medication and procedure with this strategy.
The other route is to have the provider prescribe botulinum toxin and the patient purchase it at a regular or specialty pharmacy. In this case, the pharmacist obtains precertification for the medication, but the physician still needs to be precertified – and bill – for the injection procedure itself. This scenario is less risky for the physician but may trigger two separate copays for the patient.
Botulinum toxin can be effective for up to 90% of patients, but at a cost: Without insurance reimbursement, treatments can cost in the neighborhood of $1,500.
A good resource for patients and clinicians is the International Hyperhidrosis Society’s website (sweathelp.org), said Dr. Friedman.
Dr. Friedman disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies, including Dermira, which markets topical glycopyrronium tosylate as Qbrexza.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019
Fine-tuning the male aesthetic consultation includes consideration of gender-specific wrinkle pattern
ORLANDO – The , a dermatologist in private practice in Arlington, Va. And he may not even be sure what he’s looking for.
However, he probably knows what he doesn’t like about his appearance. When men are questioned, the three areas they are most concerned about is their hairline, their eyes, and their jawline, said Dr. Keaney, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
It’s important to evaluate men differently, not just for anatomic differences from women, but also for behavioral and psychological factors unique to men as aesthetic patients, he noted.
Anatomic differences are significant and fundamentally shape treatment decisions, Dr. Keaney said. Broadly speaking, “the male face is traditionally more square, with a prominent supraorbital ridge.” Rather than emphasizing breadth across the cheeks, as in rejuvenation for women, a strong, youthful male face will have a square jaw, appropriate width across the cheeks, and a strong brow line with an arch that is flatter than what women seek.
Male cosmetic goals can be complicated by the fact that men “age poorly” and tend to look older than their stated age, he continued, referring to a study that found that men appear about one-third year older than their age, and women about a half year younger. A higher rate of smoking and excess ultraviolet light exposure among men may contribute to this discrepancy, he said.
Overall, men see steady atrophy of facial soft tissue throughout adulthood, in contrast to women who see a more rapid decline that starts at menopause. This makes sense in the context of the slow drop in circulating testosterone that men see beginning at about age 30, at which time men can expect a decrease of about 1% per year, he noted.
A common opener from men, said Dr. Keaney, is “’I look tired.’ When I hear that, I’m thinking about the eyes.” Men are more likely to develop tear troughs and a sunken appearance because of their larger orbital cavities and smaller orbital fat pads, so periocular fillers are often a treatment tool to consider.
Around mens’ eyes, “it’s not just the presence, but the pattern of wrinkles that guides treatment,” he noted. At the lateral canthi, both at rest and with maximum smile, the predominant wrinkle pattern in crows’ feet is the lower fan. The cheek elevator musculature, including the zygomaticus major, are more involved in animation around the eyes with smiling, which is important because reaching for botulinum toxin alone is probably not going to give the patient his desired effect, he added.
Other differences in the male wrinkle pattern can be found on the brow. The “U” contraction pattern between the brows is more common in men than women, at least partly because men have greater involvement of the procerus muscle, Dr. Keaney said.
Taking all of this into account, caution is the watchword when using botulinum toxin for the glabellar and brow region. “Beware of eyebrow ptosis: avoid the frontalis in patients with eyebrow ptosis,” he said. Treating the corrugators can also be an unwise move, since toxin can diffuse to the inferior fibers of the frontalis muscle, he added.
For men with jawline concerns, consider a combination approach, Dr. Keaney said. The lower face and neck can be rejuvenated by a redraping solution, such as skin tightening with high frequency ultrasound or radiofrequency ablation.
Sometimes, a clean, tight sweep of jawline can be restored with dermal fillers to the lower face, along with a noninvasive fat reduction approach, said Dr. Keaney.
Knowing men’s unique anatomy and aging patterns is only half the battle, though. “How you communicate with men and evaluate them has to take into account that you might be seeing a sweaty, nervous, treatment-naive patient,” at the initial consultation, said Dr. Keaney. “Do men care? Yes, but men display a different set of motivations.”
Plan for all of this to take time. “The initial consultation tends to be longer” for male patients, who are “less savvy” about cosmetic procedures than women, he pointed out.
A clear discussion of side effects is critical when discussing treatment options with men. “If they get a side effect, you’ll never see them again – and you won’t ever hear about it,” he added.
Though overall, women have been shown to be more sensitive to pain, in cosmetic procedures, “men are less tolerant of pain.” Plan for this, set reasonable expectations but be proactive about pain control, and still expect a need for some hand-holding, said Dr. Keaney.
“Men do not like surprises,” he added. Clearly define what expected side effects may be, what they’ll look like, and what downtime the patient should expect.
For Dr. Keaney’s part, he’s found that the best way to retain men in his cosmetic practice is to “start with a home run treatment to earn trust.” Men often appreciate a slow and steady approach to addressing concerns. “Make sure to connect the treatment plan to the primary cosmetic concern.”
Dr. Keaney reported that he has relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
ORLANDO – The , a dermatologist in private practice in Arlington, Va. And he may not even be sure what he’s looking for.
However, he probably knows what he doesn’t like about his appearance. When men are questioned, the three areas they are most concerned about is their hairline, their eyes, and their jawline, said Dr. Keaney, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
It’s important to evaluate men differently, not just for anatomic differences from women, but also for behavioral and psychological factors unique to men as aesthetic patients, he noted.
Anatomic differences are significant and fundamentally shape treatment decisions, Dr. Keaney said. Broadly speaking, “the male face is traditionally more square, with a prominent supraorbital ridge.” Rather than emphasizing breadth across the cheeks, as in rejuvenation for women, a strong, youthful male face will have a square jaw, appropriate width across the cheeks, and a strong brow line with an arch that is flatter than what women seek.
Male cosmetic goals can be complicated by the fact that men “age poorly” and tend to look older than their stated age, he continued, referring to a study that found that men appear about one-third year older than their age, and women about a half year younger. A higher rate of smoking and excess ultraviolet light exposure among men may contribute to this discrepancy, he said.
Overall, men see steady atrophy of facial soft tissue throughout adulthood, in contrast to women who see a more rapid decline that starts at menopause. This makes sense in the context of the slow drop in circulating testosterone that men see beginning at about age 30, at which time men can expect a decrease of about 1% per year, he noted.
A common opener from men, said Dr. Keaney, is “’I look tired.’ When I hear that, I’m thinking about the eyes.” Men are more likely to develop tear troughs and a sunken appearance because of their larger orbital cavities and smaller orbital fat pads, so periocular fillers are often a treatment tool to consider.
Around mens’ eyes, “it’s not just the presence, but the pattern of wrinkles that guides treatment,” he noted. At the lateral canthi, both at rest and with maximum smile, the predominant wrinkle pattern in crows’ feet is the lower fan. The cheek elevator musculature, including the zygomaticus major, are more involved in animation around the eyes with smiling, which is important because reaching for botulinum toxin alone is probably not going to give the patient his desired effect, he added.
Other differences in the male wrinkle pattern can be found on the brow. The “U” contraction pattern between the brows is more common in men than women, at least partly because men have greater involvement of the procerus muscle, Dr. Keaney said.
Taking all of this into account, caution is the watchword when using botulinum toxin for the glabellar and brow region. “Beware of eyebrow ptosis: avoid the frontalis in patients with eyebrow ptosis,” he said. Treating the corrugators can also be an unwise move, since toxin can diffuse to the inferior fibers of the frontalis muscle, he added.
For men with jawline concerns, consider a combination approach, Dr. Keaney said. The lower face and neck can be rejuvenated by a redraping solution, such as skin tightening with high frequency ultrasound or radiofrequency ablation.
Sometimes, a clean, tight sweep of jawline can be restored with dermal fillers to the lower face, along with a noninvasive fat reduction approach, said Dr. Keaney.
Knowing men’s unique anatomy and aging patterns is only half the battle, though. “How you communicate with men and evaluate them has to take into account that you might be seeing a sweaty, nervous, treatment-naive patient,” at the initial consultation, said Dr. Keaney. “Do men care? Yes, but men display a different set of motivations.”
Plan for all of this to take time. “The initial consultation tends to be longer” for male patients, who are “less savvy” about cosmetic procedures than women, he pointed out.
A clear discussion of side effects is critical when discussing treatment options with men. “If they get a side effect, you’ll never see them again – and you won’t ever hear about it,” he added.
Though overall, women have been shown to be more sensitive to pain, in cosmetic procedures, “men are less tolerant of pain.” Plan for this, set reasonable expectations but be proactive about pain control, and still expect a need for some hand-holding, said Dr. Keaney.
“Men do not like surprises,” he added. Clearly define what expected side effects may be, what they’ll look like, and what downtime the patient should expect.
For Dr. Keaney’s part, he’s found that the best way to retain men in his cosmetic practice is to “start with a home run treatment to earn trust.” Men often appreciate a slow and steady approach to addressing concerns. “Make sure to connect the treatment plan to the primary cosmetic concern.”
Dr. Keaney reported that he has relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
ORLANDO – The , a dermatologist in private practice in Arlington, Va. And he may not even be sure what he’s looking for.
However, he probably knows what he doesn’t like about his appearance. When men are questioned, the three areas they are most concerned about is their hairline, their eyes, and their jawline, said Dr. Keaney, speaking at the Orlando Dermatology Aesthetic and Clinical Conference.
It’s important to evaluate men differently, not just for anatomic differences from women, but also for behavioral and psychological factors unique to men as aesthetic patients, he noted.
Anatomic differences are significant and fundamentally shape treatment decisions, Dr. Keaney said. Broadly speaking, “the male face is traditionally more square, with a prominent supraorbital ridge.” Rather than emphasizing breadth across the cheeks, as in rejuvenation for women, a strong, youthful male face will have a square jaw, appropriate width across the cheeks, and a strong brow line with an arch that is flatter than what women seek.
Male cosmetic goals can be complicated by the fact that men “age poorly” and tend to look older than their stated age, he continued, referring to a study that found that men appear about one-third year older than their age, and women about a half year younger. A higher rate of smoking and excess ultraviolet light exposure among men may contribute to this discrepancy, he said.
Overall, men see steady atrophy of facial soft tissue throughout adulthood, in contrast to women who see a more rapid decline that starts at menopause. This makes sense in the context of the slow drop in circulating testosterone that men see beginning at about age 30, at which time men can expect a decrease of about 1% per year, he noted.
A common opener from men, said Dr. Keaney, is “’I look tired.’ When I hear that, I’m thinking about the eyes.” Men are more likely to develop tear troughs and a sunken appearance because of their larger orbital cavities and smaller orbital fat pads, so periocular fillers are often a treatment tool to consider.
Around mens’ eyes, “it’s not just the presence, but the pattern of wrinkles that guides treatment,” he noted. At the lateral canthi, both at rest and with maximum smile, the predominant wrinkle pattern in crows’ feet is the lower fan. The cheek elevator musculature, including the zygomaticus major, are more involved in animation around the eyes with smiling, which is important because reaching for botulinum toxin alone is probably not going to give the patient his desired effect, he added.
Other differences in the male wrinkle pattern can be found on the brow. The “U” contraction pattern between the brows is more common in men than women, at least partly because men have greater involvement of the procerus muscle, Dr. Keaney said.
Taking all of this into account, caution is the watchword when using botulinum toxin for the glabellar and brow region. “Beware of eyebrow ptosis: avoid the frontalis in patients with eyebrow ptosis,” he said. Treating the corrugators can also be an unwise move, since toxin can diffuse to the inferior fibers of the frontalis muscle, he added.
For men with jawline concerns, consider a combination approach, Dr. Keaney said. The lower face and neck can be rejuvenated by a redraping solution, such as skin tightening with high frequency ultrasound or radiofrequency ablation.
Sometimes, a clean, tight sweep of jawline can be restored with dermal fillers to the lower face, along with a noninvasive fat reduction approach, said Dr. Keaney.
Knowing men’s unique anatomy and aging patterns is only half the battle, though. “How you communicate with men and evaluate them has to take into account that you might be seeing a sweaty, nervous, treatment-naive patient,” at the initial consultation, said Dr. Keaney. “Do men care? Yes, but men display a different set of motivations.”
Plan for all of this to take time. “The initial consultation tends to be longer” for male patients, who are “less savvy” about cosmetic procedures than women, he pointed out.
A clear discussion of side effects is critical when discussing treatment options with men. “If they get a side effect, you’ll never see them again – and you won’t ever hear about it,” he added.
Though overall, women have been shown to be more sensitive to pain, in cosmetic procedures, “men are less tolerant of pain.” Plan for this, set reasonable expectations but be proactive about pain control, and still expect a need for some hand-holding, said Dr. Keaney.
“Men do not like surprises,” he added. Clearly define what expected side effects may be, what they’ll look like, and what downtime the patient should expect.
For Dr. Keaney’s part, he’s found that the best way to retain men in his cosmetic practice is to “start with a home run treatment to earn trust.” Men often appreciate a slow and steady approach to addressing concerns. “Make sure to connect the treatment plan to the primary cosmetic concern.”
Dr. Keaney reported that he has relationships with multiple pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019
Platelet-rich plasma: Is your practice ready?
ORLANDO – Platelet-rich plasma offers much for patients and dermatologists: It’s low-risk, has a low cost of entry, and usefully augments other medications and procedures for androgenetic alopecia and facial rejuvenation.
But there’s work to be done in standardizing its use and really understanding where, when, and for whom platelet-rich plasma (PRP) will be best used, said Dierdre Hooper, MD, a dermatologist in private practice in New Orleans.
As far back as the 1970s, PRP was used as a transfusion product, with use expanding during the following decade. “It’s really the ‘everywhere’ product,’” said Dr. Hooper, speaking at the Aesthetic, Surgical, and Clinical Dermatology Conference (ODAC).
Over the course of the past four decades, PRP has been explored for musculoskeletal healing, in gynecology, urology, cardiac surgery, ophthalmology, and for plastic surgery. “Initial skepticism has given way as some evidence is building,” said Dr. Hooper.
PRP, considered a biologic product, is produced by centrifuging a donor venipuncture. Among the pros of using PRP in a clinical practice, said Dr. Hooper, is the fact that numerous clinical studies do show benefit. The risk is low, as is the cost, and downtime is brief. All of these contribute to attractiveness to patients, who also like the idea of an all-natural product with an autologous source.
But consensus is lacking about some key aspects of utilization, including the best mode of preparation and optimal treatment schedule. Outcomes can be unpredictable, making it tough to say how cost-effective the regimen will be for a particular patient. “The ‘cons’ just come down to no consensus,” said Dr. Hooper.
Some of the basic science makes a compelling case for PRP: Activated platelets have secretory granules. These modify the pericellular milieu through release of a variety of growth factors by secretory granules. “We all were taught back in the day that platelets adhere to promote clotting, but they do a lot more than that – when the platelet is activated, it releases growth factors,” said Dr. Hooper. “Big picture? Think: This is how we heal.”
After blood collection, the sample is centrifuged. The goal of centrifuging is to achieve a platelet concentration of 1 to 1.5 million platelets per mL, or four to six times the platelet concentration seen in whole blood. In practice, there are variations in the mode of preparation, and in an individual’s platelet level at the time of venipuncture, said Dr. Hooper, so it’s hard to know what the platelet “dose” is from PRP.
After centrifuging, the sample will be stratified into a bottom portion, consisting primarily of red blood cells, a middle portion that’s the PRP, and a top portion that is platelet-poor plasma. Dr. Hooper draws up and saves the platelet- poor plasma as well, since it probably also contains some growth factors. She’ll save that for application or injection after a PRP treatment for some patients.
Dermatology presents a host of uses for PRP. In addition to application after microneedling or resurfacing and injectable aesthetic uses, PRP can also be used to treat melasma, acne scarring, and androgenetic alopecia.
The strongest data for PRP currently are for androgenetic alopecia, said Dr. Hooper, because that’s where most of the work has been done to date. Growth factors in PRP can target the dermal papillae, shortening the anagen phase. “You will improve the anagen:telogen ratio and increase hair density and thickness,” she said.
“When you talk to your hair loss patients, there are drawbacks” with home therapy such as minoxidil and finasteride, said Dr. Hooper. “Compliance is an issue. I’m a firm believer in combination treatment for hair loss.” Studies have shown increased hair thickness and moderately decreased hair loss with PRP. Anecdotally, said Dr. Hooper, hair becomes coarser, feeling fuller and thicker; one study found that about a quarter of patients reported this effect.
Through experience, Dr. Hooper’s learned some pearls for using PRP for androgenetic alopecia. Her male patients appreciate the use of a chilling device to help with pain, especially since Dr. Hooper uses a triple-needle syringe to stamp the scalp as she injects the PRP. Depending on how her patients are tolerating the procedure, she’ll follow up by injecting some platelet-poor plasma as well.
An additional pearl? “Have your patients bring a baseball cap.” Between procedure preparation, some oozing of PRP, and bleeding from injection sites, men don’t leave as well-coiffed as when they entered, she said.
Dr. Hooper has patients return four times over the course of 6 months for androgenetic alopecia, with repeat treatments about every 6 months thereafter.
Several studies have looked at using intradermal PRP for facial rejuvenation, with largely positive results. “Once again, we see consistent efficacy with no side effects,” said Dr. Hooper. She will use PRP either intradermally or topically after microneedling or fractional ablative laser resurfacing.
If it’s being used topically, Dr. Hooper will simply wipe the PRP on after the resurfacing treatment. For microneedling, “As we finish one zone, we topically apply the PRP and move on,” she said, adding that she instructs the patient not to wash her face until bedtime.
“I like injectable delivery for PRP as well,” said Dr. Hooper. She will often use it for crepey skin under the eyes as an add-on to other treatments, she said.
Her patients report that one major upside of post-resurfacing PRP is that they feel they recover more quickly. “Less erythema and less recovery time – that’s something that’s always helpful,” said Dr. Hooper. She uses the same treatment schedule for rejuvenation as for alopecia.
Some studies have shown promise for injected PRP for striae, said Dr. Hooper. She has just begun using injected PRP for striae in her practice and is encouraged by early results she’s seeing. It’s easier for patients than using multiple at-home treatments: “I think it’s just an option, they can pop in 3 times over the next few months” for some added benefit, she said.
Scanning the audience, Dr. Hooper said, “I see a lot of younger faces out there. I would challenge you to do the studies” to build evidence-based protocols for PRP in dermatology, since lack of consensus still hinders both adoption and high-quality research.
Dr. Hooper reported multiple financial relationships with pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
SOURCE: Hooper, D. ODAC 2018.
ORLANDO – Platelet-rich plasma offers much for patients and dermatologists: It’s low-risk, has a low cost of entry, and usefully augments other medications and procedures for androgenetic alopecia and facial rejuvenation.
But there’s work to be done in standardizing its use and really understanding where, when, and for whom platelet-rich plasma (PRP) will be best used, said Dierdre Hooper, MD, a dermatologist in private practice in New Orleans.
As far back as the 1970s, PRP was used as a transfusion product, with use expanding during the following decade. “It’s really the ‘everywhere’ product,’” said Dr. Hooper, speaking at the Aesthetic, Surgical, and Clinical Dermatology Conference (ODAC).
Over the course of the past four decades, PRP has been explored for musculoskeletal healing, in gynecology, urology, cardiac surgery, ophthalmology, and for plastic surgery. “Initial skepticism has given way as some evidence is building,” said Dr. Hooper.
PRP, considered a biologic product, is produced by centrifuging a donor venipuncture. Among the pros of using PRP in a clinical practice, said Dr. Hooper, is the fact that numerous clinical studies do show benefit. The risk is low, as is the cost, and downtime is brief. All of these contribute to attractiveness to patients, who also like the idea of an all-natural product with an autologous source.
But consensus is lacking about some key aspects of utilization, including the best mode of preparation and optimal treatment schedule. Outcomes can be unpredictable, making it tough to say how cost-effective the regimen will be for a particular patient. “The ‘cons’ just come down to no consensus,” said Dr. Hooper.
Some of the basic science makes a compelling case for PRP: Activated platelets have secretory granules. These modify the pericellular milieu through release of a variety of growth factors by secretory granules. “We all were taught back in the day that platelets adhere to promote clotting, but they do a lot more than that – when the platelet is activated, it releases growth factors,” said Dr. Hooper. “Big picture? Think: This is how we heal.”
After blood collection, the sample is centrifuged. The goal of centrifuging is to achieve a platelet concentration of 1 to 1.5 million platelets per mL, or four to six times the platelet concentration seen in whole blood. In practice, there are variations in the mode of preparation, and in an individual’s platelet level at the time of venipuncture, said Dr. Hooper, so it’s hard to know what the platelet “dose” is from PRP.
After centrifuging, the sample will be stratified into a bottom portion, consisting primarily of red blood cells, a middle portion that’s the PRP, and a top portion that is platelet-poor plasma. Dr. Hooper draws up and saves the platelet- poor plasma as well, since it probably also contains some growth factors. She’ll save that for application or injection after a PRP treatment for some patients.
Dermatology presents a host of uses for PRP. In addition to application after microneedling or resurfacing and injectable aesthetic uses, PRP can also be used to treat melasma, acne scarring, and androgenetic alopecia.
The strongest data for PRP currently are for androgenetic alopecia, said Dr. Hooper, because that’s where most of the work has been done to date. Growth factors in PRP can target the dermal papillae, shortening the anagen phase. “You will improve the anagen:telogen ratio and increase hair density and thickness,” she said.
“When you talk to your hair loss patients, there are drawbacks” with home therapy such as minoxidil and finasteride, said Dr. Hooper. “Compliance is an issue. I’m a firm believer in combination treatment for hair loss.” Studies have shown increased hair thickness and moderately decreased hair loss with PRP. Anecdotally, said Dr. Hooper, hair becomes coarser, feeling fuller and thicker; one study found that about a quarter of patients reported this effect.
Through experience, Dr. Hooper’s learned some pearls for using PRP for androgenetic alopecia. Her male patients appreciate the use of a chilling device to help with pain, especially since Dr. Hooper uses a triple-needle syringe to stamp the scalp as she injects the PRP. Depending on how her patients are tolerating the procedure, she’ll follow up by injecting some platelet-poor plasma as well.
An additional pearl? “Have your patients bring a baseball cap.” Between procedure preparation, some oozing of PRP, and bleeding from injection sites, men don’t leave as well-coiffed as when they entered, she said.
Dr. Hooper has patients return four times over the course of 6 months for androgenetic alopecia, with repeat treatments about every 6 months thereafter.
Several studies have looked at using intradermal PRP for facial rejuvenation, with largely positive results. “Once again, we see consistent efficacy with no side effects,” said Dr. Hooper. She will use PRP either intradermally or topically after microneedling or fractional ablative laser resurfacing.
If it’s being used topically, Dr. Hooper will simply wipe the PRP on after the resurfacing treatment. For microneedling, “As we finish one zone, we topically apply the PRP and move on,” she said, adding that she instructs the patient not to wash her face until bedtime.
“I like injectable delivery for PRP as well,” said Dr. Hooper. She will often use it for crepey skin under the eyes as an add-on to other treatments, she said.
Her patients report that one major upside of post-resurfacing PRP is that they feel they recover more quickly. “Less erythema and less recovery time – that’s something that’s always helpful,” said Dr. Hooper. She uses the same treatment schedule for rejuvenation as for alopecia.
Some studies have shown promise for injected PRP for striae, said Dr. Hooper. She has just begun using injected PRP for striae in her practice and is encouraged by early results she’s seeing. It’s easier for patients than using multiple at-home treatments: “I think it’s just an option, they can pop in 3 times over the next few months” for some added benefit, she said.
Scanning the audience, Dr. Hooper said, “I see a lot of younger faces out there. I would challenge you to do the studies” to build evidence-based protocols for PRP in dermatology, since lack of consensus still hinders both adoption and high-quality research.
Dr. Hooper reported multiple financial relationships with pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
SOURCE: Hooper, D. ODAC 2018.
ORLANDO – Platelet-rich plasma offers much for patients and dermatologists: It’s low-risk, has a low cost of entry, and usefully augments other medications and procedures for androgenetic alopecia and facial rejuvenation.
But there’s work to be done in standardizing its use and really understanding where, when, and for whom platelet-rich plasma (PRP) will be best used, said Dierdre Hooper, MD, a dermatologist in private practice in New Orleans.
As far back as the 1970s, PRP was used as a transfusion product, with use expanding during the following decade. “It’s really the ‘everywhere’ product,’” said Dr. Hooper, speaking at the Aesthetic, Surgical, and Clinical Dermatology Conference (ODAC).
Over the course of the past four decades, PRP has been explored for musculoskeletal healing, in gynecology, urology, cardiac surgery, ophthalmology, and for plastic surgery. “Initial skepticism has given way as some evidence is building,” said Dr. Hooper.
PRP, considered a biologic product, is produced by centrifuging a donor venipuncture. Among the pros of using PRP in a clinical practice, said Dr. Hooper, is the fact that numerous clinical studies do show benefit. The risk is low, as is the cost, and downtime is brief. All of these contribute to attractiveness to patients, who also like the idea of an all-natural product with an autologous source.
But consensus is lacking about some key aspects of utilization, including the best mode of preparation and optimal treatment schedule. Outcomes can be unpredictable, making it tough to say how cost-effective the regimen will be for a particular patient. “The ‘cons’ just come down to no consensus,” said Dr. Hooper.
Some of the basic science makes a compelling case for PRP: Activated platelets have secretory granules. These modify the pericellular milieu through release of a variety of growth factors by secretory granules. “We all were taught back in the day that platelets adhere to promote clotting, but they do a lot more than that – when the platelet is activated, it releases growth factors,” said Dr. Hooper. “Big picture? Think: This is how we heal.”
After blood collection, the sample is centrifuged. The goal of centrifuging is to achieve a platelet concentration of 1 to 1.5 million platelets per mL, or four to six times the platelet concentration seen in whole blood. In practice, there are variations in the mode of preparation, and in an individual’s platelet level at the time of venipuncture, said Dr. Hooper, so it’s hard to know what the platelet “dose” is from PRP.
After centrifuging, the sample will be stratified into a bottom portion, consisting primarily of red blood cells, a middle portion that’s the PRP, and a top portion that is platelet-poor plasma. Dr. Hooper draws up and saves the platelet- poor plasma as well, since it probably also contains some growth factors. She’ll save that for application or injection after a PRP treatment for some patients.
Dermatology presents a host of uses for PRP. In addition to application after microneedling or resurfacing and injectable aesthetic uses, PRP can also be used to treat melasma, acne scarring, and androgenetic alopecia.
The strongest data for PRP currently are for androgenetic alopecia, said Dr. Hooper, because that’s where most of the work has been done to date. Growth factors in PRP can target the dermal papillae, shortening the anagen phase. “You will improve the anagen:telogen ratio and increase hair density and thickness,” she said.
“When you talk to your hair loss patients, there are drawbacks” with home therapy such as minoxidil and finasteride, said Dr. Hooper. “Compliance is an issue. I’m a firm believer in combination treatment for hair loss.” Studies have shown increased hair thickness and moderately decreased hair loss with PRP. Anecdotally, said Dr. Hooper, hair becomes coarser, feeling fuller and thicker; one study found that about a quarter of patients reported this effect.
Through experience, Dr. Hooper’s learned some pearls for using PRP for androgenetic alopecia. Her male patients appreciate the use of a chilling device to help with pain, especially since Dr. Hooper uses a triple-needle syringe to stamp the scalp as she injects the PRP. Depending on how her patients are tolerating the procedure, she’ll follow up by injecting some platelet-poor plasma as well.
An additional pearl? “Have your patients bring a baseball cap.” Between procedure preparation, some oozing of PRP, and bleeding from injection sites, men don’t leave as well-coiffed as when they entered, she said.
Dr. Hooper has patients return four times over the course of 6 months for androgenetic alopecia, with repeat treatments about every 6 months thereafter.
Several studies have looked at using intradermal PRP for facial rejuvenation, with largely positive results. “Once again, we see consistent efficacy with no side effects,” said Dr. Hooper. She will use PRP either intradermally or topically after microneedling or fractional ablative laser resurfacing.
If it’s being used topically, Dr. Hooper will simply wipe the PRP on after the resurfacing treatment. For microneedling, “As we finish one zone, we topically apply the PRP and move on,” she said, adding that she instructs the patient not to wash her face until bedtime.
“I like injectable delivery for PRP as well,” said Dr. Hooper. She will often use it for crepey skin under the eyes as an add-on to other treatments, she said.
Her patients report that one major upside of post-resurfacing PRP is that they feel they recover more quickly. “Less erythema and less recovery time – that’s something that’s always helpful,” said Dr. Hooper. She uses the same treatment schedule for rejuvenation as for alopecia.
Some studies have shown promise for injected PRP for striae, said Dr. Hooper. She has just begun using injected PRP for striae in her practice and is encouraged by early results she’s seeing. It’s easier for patients than using multiple at-home treatments: “I think it’s just an option, they can pop in 3 times over the next few months” for some added benefit, she said.
Scanning the audience, Dr. Hooper said, “I see a lot of younger faces out there. I would challenge you to do the studies” to build evidence-based protocols for PRP in dermatology, since lack of consensus still hinders both adoption and high-quality research.
Dr. Hooper reported multiple financial relationships with pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies.
SOURCE: Hooper, D. ODAC 2018.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM ODAC 2019