An expert panel appointed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology has issued a new guideline for the treatment and follow-up of patients with early-stage colorectal cancer.

The multidisciplinary, multinational panel identified and reviewed previous guidelines from 12 different developers to create the new ASCO guideline; of these, recommendations from six guidelines were adapted into the evidence base. All recommendations have a consensus rate of at least 75%.

For patients with basic, nonobstructing stage I-IIA colon cancer, open resection is recommended; those with enhanced disease should receive laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery. For nonobstructing stage IIB-IIC colon cancer, recommended treatment for basic disease is open resection; emergency surgical resection is recommended in enhanced disease.

Treatment for basic, obstructing IIB-IIC disease is resection and/or diversion and is emergency surgical resection in enhanced disease. In left-sided, stage IIB-IIC disease, colonic stent placement is recommended. In high-risk, obstructing stage II disease or in T4N0/T3N0 disease with high-risk features, adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended.

In cT1N0 and cT2n0 rectal cancer, total mesorectal excision is recommended; for cT3n0, total mesorectal excision is recommended in basic and limited cases, with diversion recommended in other cases. For resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer, patients should receive base neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

For follow-up, patients should receive a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy, with the frequency depending on patient setting.

More information, including a data supplement with additional evidence tables, a methodology supplement with information about evidence quality and strength of recommendations, slide sets, and clinical tools and resources is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines, according to the guideline.

Several members of the expert panel reported conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Costas-Chavarri A et al. J Glob Oncol. 2019 Feb 25. doi: 10.1200/JGO.18.00214.

An expert panel appointed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology has issued a new guideline for the treatment and follow-up of patients with early-stage colorectal cancer.

The multidisciplinary, multinational panel identified and reviewed previous guidelines from 12 different developers to create the new ASCO guideline; of these, recommendations from six guidelines were adapted into the evidence base. All recommendations have a consensus rate of at least 75%.

For patients with basic, nonobstructing stage I-IIA colon cancer, open resection is recommended; those with enhanced disease should receive laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery. For nonobstructing stage IIB-IIC colon cancer, recommended treatment for basic disease is open resection; emergency surgical resection is recommended in enhanced disease.

Treatment for basic, obstructing IIB-IIC disease is resection and/or diversion and is emergency surgical resection in enhanced disease. In left-sided, stage IIB-IIC disease, colonic stent placement is recommended. In high-risk, obstructing stage II disease or in T4N0/T3N0 disease with high-risk features, adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended.

In cT1N0 and cT2n0 rectal cancer, total mesorectal excision is recommended; for cT3n0, total mesorectal excision is recommended in basic and limited cases, with diversion recommended in other cases. For resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer, patients should receive base neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

For follow-up, patients should receive a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy, with the frequency depending on patient setting.

More information, including a data supplement with additional evidence tables, a methodology supplement with information about evidence quality and strength of recommendations, slide sets, and clinical tools and resources is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines, according to the guideline.

Several members of the expert panel reported conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Costas-Chavarri A et al. J Glob Oncol. 2019 Feb 25. doi: 10.1200/JGO.18.00214.

An expert panel appointed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology has issued a new guideline for the treatment and follow-up of patients with early-stage colorectal cancer.

The multidisciplinary, multinational panel identified and reviewed previous guidelines from 12 different developers to create the new ASCO guideline; of these, recommendations from six guidelines were adapted into the evidence base. All recommendations have a consensus rate of at least 75%.

For patients with basic, nonobstructing stage I-IIA colon cancer, open resection is recommended; those with enhanced disease should receive laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery. For nonobstructing stage IIB-IIC colon cancer, recommended treatment for basic disease is open resection; emergency surgical resection is recommended in enhanced disease.

Treatment for basic, obstructing IIB-IIC disease is resection and/or diversion and is emergency surgical resection in enhanced disease. In left-sided, stage IIB-IIC disease, colonic stent placement is recommended. In high-risk, obstructing stage II disease or in T4N0/T3N0 disease with high-risk features, adjuvant chemotherapy is recommended.

In cT1N0 and cT2n0 rectal cancer, total mesorectal excision is recommended; for cT3n0, total mesorectal excision is recommended in basic and limited cases, with diversion recommended in other cases. For resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer, patients should receive base neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

For follow-up, patients should receive a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy, with the frequency depending on patient setting.

More information, including a data supplement with additional evidence tables, a methodology supplement with information about evidence quality and strength of recommendations, slide sets, and clinical tools and resources is available at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines, according to the guideline.

Several members of the expert panel reported conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Costas-Chavarri A et al. J Glob Oncol. 2019 Feb 25. doi: 10.1200/JGO.18.00214.

Incidence and Characteristics

Stingrays are the most common cause of fish-related stings worldwide.¹ The Urolophidae and Dasyatidae stingray families are responsible for most marine stingray injuries, including approximately 1500 reported injuries in the United States annually.^1,2 Saltwater stingrays from these families commonly are encountered in shallow temperate and tropical coastal waters across the globe and possess dorsally and distally located spines capable of injuring humans that step on them (Figure 1).^1,3 Freshwater stingrays (Potamotrygonidae family)(Figure 2) are not present in North America but rather inhabit lakes and river systems in South America, Africa, Laos, and Vietnam.⁴ Although recent incidence is unknown, Marinkelle⁵ estimated that thousands of stingray injuries occurred annually in the freshwater of Columbia during the 1960s. Unfortunately, the annual worldwide incidence of stingray injuries is generally unknown and is difficult to estimate, in part because injuries often go unreported.

Stingrays are dorsoventrally flattened, diamond-shaped fish with light-colored ventral and dark-colored dorsal surfaces. They have strong pectoral wings that allow them to swim forward and backward and even launch off waves.³ Stingrays range in size from the palm of a human hand to 6.5 ft in width. They possess 1 or more spines (2.5 to >30 cm in length) that are disguised by much longer tails.^6,7 They often are encountered accidentally because they bury themselves in the sand or mud of shallow coastal waters or rivers with only their eyes and tails exposed to fool prey and avoid predators.

Injury Clinical Presentation

Stingray injuries typically involve the lower legs, ankles, or feet after stepping on a stingray.⁸ Fishermen can present with injuries of the upper extremities after handling fish with their hands.⁹ Other rarer injuries occur when individuals are swimming alongside stingrays or when stingrays catapult off waves into moving boats.^10,11 Stingrays impale victims by using their tails to direct a retroserrate barb composed of a strong cartilaginous material called vasodentin. The barb releases venom by breaking through the venom-containing integumentary sheath that encapsulates it. Stingray venom contains phosphodiesterase, serotonin, and 5′-nucleotidase. It causes severe pain, vasoconstriction, ischemia, and poor wound healing, along with systemic effects such as disorientation, syncope, seizures, salivation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, muscle cramps or fasciculations, pruritus, allergic reaction, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, dyspnea, paralysis, and possibly death.^1,8,12,13

Management

Pain Relief
As with many marine envenomations, immersion in hot but not scalding water can inactivate venom and reduce symptoms.^8,9 In one retrospective review, 52 of 75 (69%) patients reporting to a California poison center with stingray injuries had improvement in pain within 1 hour of hot water immersion before any analgesics were instituted.⁸ In another review, 65 of 74 (88%) patients presenting to a California emergency department within 24 hours of sustaining a stingray injury had complete relief of pain within 30 minutes of hot water immersion. Patients who received analgesics in addition to hot water immersion did not require a second dose.⁹ In concordance with these studies, we suggest immersing areas affected by stingray injuries in hot water (temperature, 43.3°C to 46.1°C [110°F–115°F]; or as close to this range as tolerated) until pain subsides.^8,9,14 Ice packs are an alternative to hot water immersion that may be more readily available to patients. If pain does not resolve following hot water immersion or application of an ice pack, additional analgesics and xylocaine without epinephrine may be helpful.^9,15

Infection
One major complication of stingray injuries is infection.^8,9 Many bacterial species reside in stingray mucus, the marine environment, or on human skin that may be introduced during a single injury. Marine envenomations can involve organisms such as Vibrio, Aeromonas, and Mycobacterium species, which often are resistant to antibiotic prophylaxis covering common causes of soft-tissue infection such as Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species.^8,9,16,17 Additionally, physicians should cover for Clostridium species and ensure patients are up-to-date on vaccinations because severe cases of tetanus following stingray injuries have been reported.¹⁸ Lastly, fungal infections including fusariosis have been reported following stingray injuries and should be considered if a patient develops an infection.¹⁹

Several authors support the use of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics in all but mild stingray injuries.^8,9,20,21 Although no standardized definition exists, mild injuries generally represent patients with superficial lacerations or less, while deeper lacerations and puncture wounds require prophylaxis. Several authors agree on the use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics (eg, ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice daily) for 5 to 7 days following severe stingray injuries.^1,9,13,22 Other proposed antibiotic regimens include trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (160/800 mg twice daily) or tetracycline (500 mg 4 times daily) for 7 days.¹³ Failure of ciprofloxacin therapy after 7 days has been reported, with resolution of infection after treatment with an intravenous cephalosporin for 7 days.²⁰ Failure of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole therapy also has been reported, with one case requiring levofloxacin for a much longer course.²¹ Clinical follow-up remains essential after prescribing prophylactic antibiotics, as resistance is common.

Foreign Bodies
Stingray injuries also are often complicated by foreign bodies or retained spines.^3,8 Although these complications are less severe than infection, all wounds should be explored for material under local anesthesia. Furthermore, there has been support for thorough debridement of necrotic tissue with referral to a hand specialist for deeper injuries to the hands as well as referral to a foot and ankle specialist for deeper injuries of the lower extremities.^23,24 More serious injuries with penetration of vital structures, such as through the chest or abdomen, require immediate exploration in an operating room.^1,24

Imaging
Routine imaging of stingray injuries remains controversial. In a case series of 119 patients presenting to a California emergency department with stingray injuries, Clark et al⁹ found that radiographs were not helpful. This finding likely is due in part to an inability to detect hypodense material such as integumentary or glandular tissue via radiography.³ However, radiographs have been used to identify retained stingray barbs in select cases in which retained barbs are suspected.^2,25 Lastly, ultrasonography potentially may offer a better first choice when a barb is not readily apparent; magnetic resonance imaging may be indicated for more involved areas and for further visualization of suspected hypodense material, though at a higher expense.^2,9

Biopsy
Biopsies of stingray injuries are rarely performed, and the findings are not well characterized. One case biopsied 2 months after injury showed a large zone of paucicellular necrosis with superficial ulceration and granulomatous inflammation. The stingray venom was most likely responsible for the pattern of necrosis noted in the biopsy.²¹

Avoidance and Prevention

Patients traveling to areas of the world inhabited by stingrays should receive counseling on how to avoid injury. Prior to entry, individuals can throw stones or use a long stick to clear their walking or swimming areas of venomous fish.²⁶ Polarized sunglasses may help spot stingrays in shallow water. Furthermore, wading through water with a shuffling gait can help individuals avoid stepping directly on a stingray and also warns stingrays that someone is in the area. Individuals who spend more time in coastal waters or river systems inhabited by stingrays may invest in protective stingray gear such as leg guards or specialized wading boots.²⁶ Lastly, fishermen should be advised to avoid handling stingrays with their hands and instead cut their fishing line to release the fish.

Incidence and Characteristics

Stingrays are the most common cause of fish-related stings worldwide.¹ The Urolophidae and Dasyatidae stingray families are responsible for most marine stingray injuries, including approximately 1500 reported injuries in the United States annually.^1,2 Saltwater stingrays from these families commonly are encountered in shallow temperate and tropical coastal waters across the globe and possess dorsally and distally located spines capable of injuring humans that step on them (Figure 1).^1,3 Freshwater stingrays (Potamotrygonidae family)(Figure 2) are not present in North America but rather inhabit lakes and river systems in South America, Africa, Laos, and Vietnam.⁴ Although recent incidence is unknown, Marinkelle⁵ estimated that thousands of stingray injuries occurred annually in the freshwater of Columbia during the 1960s. Unfortunately, the annual worldwide incidence of stingray injuries is generally unknown and is difficult to estimate, in part because injuries often go unreported.

Stingrays are dorsoventrally flattened, diamond-shaped fish with light-colored ventral and dark-colored dorsal surfaces. They have strong pectoral wings that allow them to swim forward and backward and even launch off waves.³ Stingrays range in size from the palm of a human hand to 6.5 ft in width. They possess 1 or more spines (2.5 to >30 cm in length) that are disguised by much longer tails.^6,7 They often are encountered accidentally because they bury themselves in the sand or mud of shallow coastal waters or rivers with only their eyes and tails exposed to fool prey and avoid predators.

Injury Clinical Presentation

Stingray injuries typically involve the lower legs, ankles, or feet after stepping on a stingray.⁸ Fishermen can present with injuries of the upper extremities after handling fish with their hands.⁹ Other rarer injuries occur when individuals are swimming alongside stingrays or when stingrays catapult off waves into moving boats.^10,11 Stingrays impale victims by using their tails to direct a retroserrate barb composed of a strong cartilaginous material called vasodentin. The barb releases venom by breaking through the venom-containing integumentary sheath that encapsulates it. Stingray venom contains phosphodiesterase, serotonin, and 5′-nucleotidase. It causes severe pain, vasoconstriction, ischemia, and poor wound healing, along with systemic effects such as disorientation, syncope, seizures, salivation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, muscle cramps or fasciculations, pruritus, allergic reaction, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, dyspnea, paralysis, and possibly death.^1,8,12,13

Management

Pain Relief
As with many marine envenomations, immersion in hot but not scalding water can inactivate venom and reduce symptoms.^8,9 In one retrospective review, 52 of 75 (69%) patients reporting to a California poison center with stingray injuries had improvement in pain within 1 hour of hot water immersion before any analgesics were instituted.⁸ In another review, 65 of 74 (88%) patients presenting to a California emergency department within 24 hours of sustaining a stingray injury had complete relief of pain within 30 minutes of hot water immersion. Patients who received analgesics in addition to hot water immersion did not require a second dose.⁹ In concordance with these studies, we suggest immersing areas affected by stingray injuries in hot water (temperature, 43.3°C to 46.1°C [110°F–115°F]; or as close to this range as tolerated) until pain subsides.^8,9,14 Ice packs are an alternative to hot water immersion that may be more readily available to patients. If pain does not resolve following hot water immersion or application of an ice pack, additional analgesics and xylocaine without epinephrine may be helpful.^9,15

Infection
One major complication of stingray injuries is infection.^8,9 Many bacterial species reside in stingray mucus, the marine environment, or on human skin that may be introduced during a single injury. Marine envenomations can involve organisms such as Vibrio, Aeromonas, and Mycobacterium species, which often are resistant to antibiotic prophylaxis covering common causes of soft-tissue infection such as Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species.^8,9,16,17 Additionally, physicians should cover for Clostridium species and ensure patients are up-to-date on vaccinations because severe cases of tetanus following stingray injuries have been reported.¹⁸ Lastly, fungal infections including fusariosis have been reported following stingray injuries and should be considered if a patient develops an infection.¹⁹

Several authors support the use of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics in all but mild stingray injuries.^8,9,20,21 Although no standardized definition exists, mild injuries generally represent patients with superficial lacerations or less, while deeper lacerations and puncture wounds require prophylaxis. Several authors agree on the use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics (eg, ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice daily) for 5 to 7 days following severe stingray injuries.^1,9,13,22 Other proposed antibiotic regimens include trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (160/800 mg twice daily) or tetracycline (500 mg 4 times daily) for 7 days.¹³ Failure of ciprofloxacin therapy after 7 days has been reported, with resolution of infection after treatment with an intravenous cephalosporin for 7 days.²⁰ Failure of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole therapy also has been reported, with one case requiring levofloxacin for a much longer course.²¹ Clinical follow-up remains essential after prescribing prophylactic antibiotics, as resistance is common.

Foreign Bodies
Stingray injuries also are often complicated by foreign bodies or retained spines.^3,8 Although these complications are less severe than infection, all wounds should be explored for material under local anesthesia. Furthermore, there has been support for thorough debridement of necrotic tissue with referral to a hand specialist for deeper injuries to the hands as well as referral to a foot and ankle specialist for deeper injuries of the lower extremities.^23,24 More serious injuries with penetration of vital structures, such as through the chest or abdomen, require immediate exploration in an operating room.^1,24

Imaging
Routine imaging of stingray injuries remains controversial. In a case series of 119 patients presenting to a California emergency department with stingray injuries, Clark et al⁹ found that radiographs were not helpful. This finding likely is due in part to an inability to detect hypodense material such as integumentary or glandular tissue via radiography.³ However, radiographs have been used to identify retained stingray barbs in select cases in which retained barbs are suspected.^2,25 Lastly, ultrasonography potentially may offer a better first choice when a barb is not readily apparent; magnetic resonance imaging may be indicated for more involved areas and for further visualization of suspected hypodense material, though at a higher expense.^2,9

Biopsy
Biopsies of stingray injuries are rarely performed, and the findings are not well characterized. One case biopsied 2 months after injury showed a large zone of paucicellular necrosis with superficial ulceration and granulomatous inflammation. The stingray venom was most likely responsible for the pattern of necrosis noted in the biopsy.²¹

Avoidance and Prevention

Patients traveling to areas of the world inhabited by stingrays should receive counseling on how to avoid injury. Prior to entry, individuals can throw stones or use a long stick to clear their walking or swimming areas of venomous fish.²⁶ Polarized sunglasses may help spot stingrays in shallow water. Furthermore, wading through water with a shuffling gait can help individuals avoid stepping directly on a stingray and also warns stingrays that someone is in the area. Individuals who spend more time in coastal waters or river systems inhabited by stingrays may invest in protective stingray gear such as leg guards or specialized wading boots.²⁶ Lastly, fishermen should be advised to avoid handling stingrays with their hands and instead cut their fishing line to release the fish.

Incidence and Characteristics

Stingrays are the most common cause of fish-related stings worldwide.¹ The Urolophidae and Dasyatidae stingray families are responsible for most marine stingray injuries, including approximately 1500 reported injuries in the United States annually.^1,2 Saltwater stingrays from these families commonly are encountered in shallow temperate and tropical coastal waters across the globe and possess dorsally and distally located spines capable of injuring humans that step on them (Figure 1).^1,3 Freshwater stingrays (Potamotrygonidae family)(Figure 2) are not present in North America but rather inhabit lakes and river systems in South America, Africa, Laos, and Vietnam.⁴ Although recent incidence is unknown, Marinkelle⁵ estimated that thousands of stingray injuries occurred annually in the freshwater of Columbia during the 1960s. Unfortunately, the annual worldwide incidence of stingray injuries is generally unknown and is difficult to estimate, in part because injuries often go unreported.

Stingrays are dorsoventrally flattened, diamond-shaped fish with light-colored ventral and dark-colored dorsal surfaces. They have strong pectoral wings that allow them to swim forward and backward and even launch off waves.³ Stingrays range in size from the palm of a human hand to 6.5 ft in width. They possess 1 or more spines (2.5 to >30 cm in length) that are disguised by much longer tails.^6,7 They often are encountered accidentally because they bury themselves in the sand or mud of shallow coastal waters or rivers with only their eyes and tails exposed to fool prey and avoid predators.

Injury Clinical Presentation

Stingray injuries typically involve the lower legs, ankles, or feet after stepping on a stingray.⁸ Fishermen can present with injuries of the upper extremities after handling fish with their hands.⁹ Other rarer injuries occur when individuals are swimming alongside stingrays or when stingrays catapult off waves into moving boats.^10,11 Stingrays impale victims by using their tails to direct a retroserrate barb composed of a strong cartilaginous material called vasodentin. The barb releases venom by breaking through the venom-containing integumentary sheath that encapsulates it. Stingray venom contains phosphodiesterase, serotonin, and 5′-nucleotidase. It causes severe pain, vasoconstriction, ischemia, and poor wound healing, along with systemic effects such as disorientation, syncope, seizures, salivation, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, diarrhea, muscle cramps or fasciculations, pruritus, allergic reaction, hypotension, cardiac arrhythmias, dyspnea, paralysis, and possibly death.^1,8,12,13

Management

Pain Relief
As with many marine envenomations, immersion in hot but not scalding water can inactivate venom and reduce symptoms.^8,9 In one retrospective review, 52 of 75 (69%) patients reporting to a California poison center with stingray injuries had improvement in pain within 1 hour of hot water immersion before any analgesics were instituted.⁸ In another review, 65 of 74 (88%) patients presenting to a California emergency department within 24 hours of sustaining a stingray injury had complete relief of pain within 30 minutes of hot water immersion. Patients who received analgesics in addition to hot water immersion did not require a second dose.⁹ In concordance with these studies, we suggest immersing areas affected by stingray injuries in hot water (temperature, 43.3°C to 46.1°C [110°F–115°F]; or as close to this range as tolerated) until pain subsides.^8,9,14 Ice packs are an alternative to hot water immersion that may be more readily available to patients. If pain does not resolve following hot water immersion or application of an ice pack, additional analgesics and xylocaine without epinephrine may be helpful.^9,15

Infection
One major complication of stingray injuries is infection.^8,9 Many bacterial species reside in stingray mucus, the marine environment, or on human skin that may be introduced during a single injury. Marine envenomations can involve organisms such as Vibrio, Aeromonas, and Mycobacterium species, which often are resistant to antibiotic prophylaxis covering common causes of soft-tissue infection such as Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species.^8,9,16,17 Additionally, physicians should cover for Clostridium species and ensure patients are up-to-date on vaccinations because severe cases of tetanus following stingray injuries have been reported.¹⁸ Lastly, fungal infections including fusariosis have been reported following stingray injuries and should be considered if a patient develops an infection.¹⁹

Several authors support the use of prophylactic broad-spectrum antibiotics in all but mild stingray injuries.^8,9,20,21 Although no standardized definition exists, mild injuries generally represent patients with superficial lacerations or less, while deeper lacerations and puncture wounds require prophylaxis. Several authors agree on the use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics (eg, ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice daily) for 5 to 7 days following severe stingray injuries.^1,9,13,22 Other proposed antibiotic regimens include trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (160/800 mg twice daily) or tetracycline (500 mg 4 times daily) for 7 days.¹³ Failure of ciprofloxacin therapy after 7 days has been reported, with resolution of infection after treatment with an intravenous cephalosporin for 7 days.²⁰ Failure of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole therapy also has been reported, with one case requiring levofloxacin for a much longer course.²¹ Clinical follow-up remains essential after prescribing prophylactic antibiotics, as resistance is common.

Foreign Bodies
Stingray injuries also are often complicated by foreign bodies or retained spines.^3,8 Although these complications are less severe than infection, all wounds should be explored for material under local anesthesia. Furthermore, there has been support for thorough debridement of necrotic tissue with referral to a hand specialist for deeper injuries to the hands as well as referral to a foot and ankle specialist for deeper injuries of the lower extremities.^23,24 More serious injuries with penetration of vital structures, such as through the chest or abdomen, require immediate exploration in an operating room.^1,24

Imaging
Routine imaging of stingray injuries remains controversial. In a case series of 119 patients presenting to a California emergency department with stingray injuries, Clark et al⁹ found that radiographs were not helpful. This finding likely is due in part to an inability to detect hypodense material such as integumentary or glandular tissue via radiography.³ However, radiographs have been used to identify retained stingray barbs in select cases in which retained barbs are suspected.^2,25 Lastly, ultrasonography potentially may offer a better first choice when a barb is not readily apparent; magnetic resonance imaging may be indicated for more involved areas and for further visualization of suspected hypodense material, though at a higher expense.^2,9

Biopsy
Biopsies of stingray injuries are rarely performed, and the findings are not well characterized. One case biopsied 2 months after injury showed a large zone of paucicellular necrosis with superficial ulceration and granulomatous inflammation. The stingray venom was most likely responsible for the pattern of necrosis noted in the biopsy.²¹

Avoidance and Prevention

Patients traveling to areas of the world inhabited by stingrays should receive counseling on how to avoid injury. Prior to entry, individuals can throw stones or use a long stick to clear their walking or swimming areas of venomous fish.²⁶ Polarized sunglasses may help spot stingrays in shallow water. Furthermore, wading through water with a shuffling gait can help individuals avoid stepping directly on a stingray and also warns stingrays that someone is in the area. Individuals who spend more time in coastal waters or river systems inhabited by stingrays may invest in protective stingray gear such as leg guards or specialized wading boots.²⁶ Lastly, fishermen should be advised to avoid handling stingrays with their hands and instead cut their fishing line to release the fish.

Eccrine porocarcinoma (EPC), originally described by Pinkus and Mehregan¹ in 1963, is an exceedingly rare sweat gland tumor most commonly seen in older patients. Fewer than 300 cases have been reported in the literature, and it is believed to represent only 0.005% to 0.01% of cutaneous malignancies.² In the absence of established guidelines, wide local excision (WLE) has traditionally been considered the standard of treatment; however, local recurrence and nodal metastasis rates associated with WLE have been reported as high as 20%.³ More recently, a number of case reports and small case series have demonstrated higher cure rates with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), though follow-up is limited.^3-5 We describe a case of EPC presenting as a recurrent wart in a 36-year-old man that was successfully treated with MMS.

Case Report

A 36-year-old man with no notable medical history presented with a 0.5×0.5-cm, asymptomatic, flesh-colored, hyperkeratotic, polypoid papule on the right medial thigh (Figure 1). The lesion was diagnosed as a wart and treated with cryotherapy by another dermatologist several years prior to presentation. Dermatoscopic examination at the current presentation showed a homogenous yellow center with a few peripheral vessels and a faint pink-tan halo (Figure 2). Our differential diagnosis included a recurrent wart, fibrosed pyogenic granuloma, irritated intradermal nevus, skin tag, and adnexal neoplasm. A shave biopsy was performed. Histopathologic analysis revealed multiple aggregations of mildly pleomorphic epithelial cells emanating from the epidermis, with many aggregations containing ductal structures (Figure 3). Rare necrotic and pyknotic cells were present, but no mitotic figures or lymphovascular invasion were identified. Immunohistochemical staining was positive for carcinoembryonic antigen and epithelial membrane antigen but negative for Ber-EP4. These findings were consistent with a well-differentiated EPC.

The patient was offered MMS or WLE, with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). He opted for MMS. The initial 1-cm margin taken during MMS was sufficient to achieve complete tumor extirpation, and the final 3.7×2.5-cm defect was closed primarily. The MMS debulking specimen was sent for permanent sectioning and showed a small focus of residual tumor cells, but no mitoses or lymphovascular invasion were seen. The patient was referred to surgical oncology to discuss the option of SLNB, which he ultimately declined. He also was offered regional or whole-body positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT) to rule out metastatic disease, which he also declined. There was no evidence of recurrence or lymphadenopathy 19 months postoperatively.

Comment

Eccrine porocarcinoma is an exceptionally rare adnexal neoplasm that most commonly affects older adults. The average age at diagnosis is 71 years in men and 75 years in women.² Our case is rare because of the patient’s age. Benign eccrine poromas occur most frequently on the palms, soles, axillae, and forehead where eccrine density is highest; EPC occurs most frequently on the lower extremities.⁶ It may arise de novo or from malignant transformation of a preexisting benign poroma. Clinically, EPC may present as an asymptomatic pink-brown papule, plaque, or nodule and may have a polypoid or verrucous appearance, as in our patient. Ulceration is common.⁷ The differential diagnosis often includes nodular basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, pyogenic granuloma, and seborrheic keratosis.

Histologically, EPCs are characterized by aggregations of cohesive basaloid epithelial cells forming eccrine ductal structures.² Cellular atypia may be extremely subtle but, if present, can be helpful in differentiating malignant from benign lesions. Features of basal and squamous cell carcinoma also may be present. Definitive diagnosis is frequently based on the overall invasive architectural pattern.⁵ Robson et al² examined 69 cases of EPC for high-risk histologic features and concluded that tumor depth greater than 7 mm, mitoses greater than 14 per high-power field, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion were independently predictive of mortality. Moreover, after adjusting for mitosis and depth, an infiltrative border vs a pushing border was strongly predictive of local recurrence.² Immunohistochemical stains, although not necessary for diagnosis, may have utility as adjunctive tools. Cells lining the ducts within EPCs commonly stain positive for carcinoembryonic antigen, though glandular myoepithelial cells stain positive for S-100. Negative Ber-EP4 staining helps to differentiate EPC from basal cell carcinoma. Abnormal expression of p53 and overexpression of p16 also has been described.⁴

The rarity of EPC has precluded the development of any evidence-based management guidelines. Historically, the standard of care has been WLE with 2- to 3-cm margins. A review of 105 cases of EPC treated with WLE showed 20% local recurrence, 20% regional metastases, and 12% distant metastasis rates.⁸ Mohs micrographic surgery, which allows examination of 100% of the surgical margin vs less than 1% for WLE with the standard bread-loafing technique, might be expected to achieve higher cure rates. A review of 29 cases treated with MMS monotherapy demonstrated no local recurrences, distant metastasis, or disease-specific deaths with follow-up ranging from 19 months to 6 years.⁵ One case was associated with regional lymph node metastases that were treated with completion lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy.⁷ The high mortality rate of patients with nodal disease has led some to recommend PET-CT and SLNB for patients with EPC. However, the prognostic value of such procedures has not been clearly defined and there is no demonstrated survival benefit for treatment of widespread disease. Our patient declined both SLNB and PET-CT, and our plan was to follow him clinically with symptom-directed imaging only.

Conclusion

Patients with EPC generally have a favorable prognosis with prompt diagnosis and complete surgical excision. Although most commonly seen in elderly patients, EPC may present in younger patients and may be clinically and histologically nondescript with little cytologic atypia. Based on a small but growing body of literature, MMS appears to be at least as effective as WLE as a primary treatment modality for EPC, while offering the advantage of tissue sparing in cosmetically or functionally important areas.

Eccrine porocarcinoma (EPC), originally described by Pinkus and Mehregan¹ in 1963, is an exceedingly rare sweat gland tumor most commonly seen in older patients. Fewer than 300 cases have been reported in the literature, and it is believed to represent only 0.005% to 0.01% of cutaneous malignancies.² In the absence of established guidelines, wide local excision (WLE) has traditionally been considered the standard of treatment; however, local recurrence and nodal metastasis rates associated with WLE have been reported as high as 20%.³ More recently, a number of case reports and small case series have demonstrated higher cure rates with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), though follow-up is limited.^3-5 We describe a case of EPC presenting as a recurrent wart in a 36-year-old man that was successfully treated with MMS.

Case Report

A 36-year-old man with no notable medical history presented with a 0.5×0.5-cm, asymptomatic, flesh-colored, hyperkeratotic, polypoid papule on the right medial thigh (Figure 1). The lesion was diagnosed as a wart and treated with cryotherapy by another dermatologist several years prior to presentation. Dermatoscopic examination at the current presentation showed a homogenous yellow center with a few peripheral vessels and a faint pink-tan halo (Figure 2). Our differential diagnosis included a recurrent wart, fibrosed pyogenic granuloma, irritated intradermal nevus, skin tag, and adnexal neoplasm. A shave biopsy was performed. Histopathologic analysis revealed multiple aggregations of mildly pleomorphic epithelial cells emanating from the epidermis, with many aggregations containing ductal structures (Figure 3). Rare necrotic and pyknotic cells were present, but no mitotic figures or lymphovascular invasion were identified. Immunohistochemical staining was positive for carcinoembryonic antigen and epithelial membrane antigen but negative for Ber-EP4. These findings were consistent with a well-differentiated EPC.

The patient was offered MMS or WLE, with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). He opted for MMS. The initial 1-cm margin taken during MMS was sufficient to achieve complete tumor extirpation, and the final 3.7×2.5-cm defect was closed primarily. The MMS debulking specimen was sent for permanent sectioning and showed a small focus of residual tumor cells, but no mitoses or lymphovascular invasion were seen. The patient was referred to surgical oncology to discuss the option of SLNB, which he ultimately declined. He also was offered regional or whole-body positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT) to rule out metastatic disease, which he also declined. There was no evidence of recurrence or lymphadenopathy 19 months postoperatively.

Comment

Eccrine porocarcinoma is an exceptionally rare adnexal neoplasm that most commonly affects older adults. The average age at diagnosis is 71 years in men and 75 years in women.² Our case is rare because of the patient’s age. Benign eccrine poromas occur most frequently on the palms, soles, axillae, and forehead where eccrine density is highest; EPC occurs most frequently on the lower extremities.⁶ It may arise de novo or from malignant transformation of a preexisting benign poroma. Clinically, EPC may present as an asymptomatic pink-brown papule, plaque, or nodule and may have a polypoid or verrucous appearance, as in our patient. Ulceration is common.⁷ The differential diagnosis often includes nodular basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, pyogenic granuloma, and seborrheic keratosis.

Histologically, EPCs are characterized by aggregations of cohesive basaloid epithelial cells forming eccrine ductal structures.² Cellular atypia may be extremely subtle but, if present, can be helpful in differentiating malignant from benign lesions. Features of basal and squamous cell carcinoma also may be present. Definitive diagnosis is frequently based on the overall invasive architectural pattern.⁵ Robson et al² examined 69 cases of EPC for high-risk histologic features and concluded that tumor depth greater than 7 mm, mitoses greater than 14 per high-power field, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion were independently predictive of mortality. Moreover, after adjusting for mitosis and depth, an infiltrative border vs a pushing border was strongly predictive of local recurrence.² Immunohistochemical stains, although not necessary for diagnosis, may have utility as adjunctive tools. Cells lining the ducts within EPCs commonly stain positive for carcinoembryonic antigen, though glandular myoepithelial cells stain positive for S-100. Negative Ber-EP4 staining helps to differentiate EPC from basal cell carcinoma. Abnormal expression of p53 and overexpression of p16 also has been described.⁴

The rarity of EPC has precluded the development of any evidence-based management guidelines. Historically, the standard of care has been WLE with 2- to 3-cm margins. A review of 105 cases of EPC treated with WLE showed 20% local recurrence, 20% regional metastases, and 12% distant metastasis rates.⁸ Mohs micrographic surgery, which allows examination of 100% of the surgical margin vs less than 1% for WLE with the standard bread-loafing technique, might be expected to achieve higher cure rates. A review of 29 cases treated with MMS monotherapy demonstrated no local recurrences, distant metastasis, or disease-specific deaths with follow-up ranging from 19 months to 6 years.⁵ One case was associated with regional lymph node metastases that were treated with completion lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy.⁷ The high mortality rate of patients with nodal disease has led some to recommend PET-CT and SLNB for patients with EPC. However, the prognostic value of such procedures has not been clearly defined and there is no demonstrated survival benefit for treatment of widespread disease. Our patient declined both SLNB and PET-CT, and our plan was to follow him clinically with symptom-directed imaging only.

Conclusion

Patients with EPC generally have a favorable prognosis with prompt diagnosis and complete surgical excision. Although most commonly seen in elderly patients, EPC may present in younger patients and may be clinically and histologically nondescript with little cytologic atypia. Based on a small but growing body of literature, MMS appears to be at least as effective as WLE as a primary treatment modality for EPC, while offering the advantage of tissue sparing in cosmetically or functionally important areas.

Eccrine porocarcinoma (EPC), originally described by Pinkus and Mehregan¹ in 1963, is an exceedingly rare sweat gland tumor most commonly seen in older patients. Fewer than 300 cases have been reported in the literature, and it is believed to represent only 0.005% to 0.01% of cutaneous malignancies.² In the absence of established guidelines, wide local excision (WLE) has traditionally been considered the standard of treatment; however, local recurrence and nodal metastasis rates associated with WLE have been reported as high as 20%.³ More recently, a number of case reports and small case series have demonstrated higher cure rates with Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS), though follow-up is limited.^3-5 We describe a case of EPC presenting as a recurrent wart in a 36-year-old man that was successfully treated with MMS.

Case Report

A 36-year-old man with no notable medical history presented with a 0.5×0.5-cm, asymptomatic, flesh-colored, hyperkeratotic, polypoid papule on the right medial thigh (Figure 1). The lesion was diagnosed as a wart and treated with cryotherapy by another dermatologist several years prior to presentation. Dermatoscopic examination at the current presentation showed a homogenous yellow center with a few peripheral vessels and a faint pink-tan halo (Figure 2). Our differential diagnosis included a recurrent wart, fibrosed pyogenic granuloma, irritated intradermal nevus, skin tag, and adnexal neoplasm. A shave biopsy was performed. Histopathologic analysis revealed multiple aggregations of mildly pleomorphic epithelial cells emanating from the epidermis, with many aggregations containing ductal structures (Figure 3). Rare necrotic and pyknotic cells were present, but no mitotic figures or lymphovascular invasion were identified. Immunohistochemical staining was positive for carcinoembryonic antigen and epithelial membrane antigen but negative for Ber-EP4. These findings were consistent with a well-differentiated EPC.

The patient was offered MMS or WLE, with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). He opted for MMS. The initial 1-cm margin taken during MMS was sufficient to achieve complete tumor extirpation, and the final 3.7×2.5-cm defect was closed primarily. The MMS debulking specimen was sent for permanent sectioning and showed a small focus of residual tumor cells, but no mitoses or lymphovascular invasion were seen. The patient was referred to surgical oncology to discuss the option of SLNB, which he ultimately declined. He also was offered regional or whole-body positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET-CT) to rule out metastatic disease, which he also declined. There was no evidence of recurrence or lymphadenopathy 19 months postoperatively.

Comment

Eccrine porocarcinoma is an exceptionally rare adnexal neoplasm that most commonly affects older adults. The average age at diagnosis is 71 years in men and 75 years in women.² Our case is rare because of the patient’s age. Benign eccrine poromas occur most frequently on the palms, soles, axillae, and forehead where eccrine density is highest; EPC occurs most frequently on the lower extremities.⁶ It may arise de novo or from malignant transformation of a preexisting benign poroma. Clinically, EPC may present as an asymptomatic pink-brown papule, plaque, or nodule and may have a polypoid or verrucous appearance, as in our patient. Ulceration is common.⁷ The differential diagnosis often includes nodular basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, pyogenic granuloma, and seborrheic keratosis.

Histologically, EPCs are characterized by aggregations of cohesive basaloid epithelial cells forming eccrine ductal structures.² Cellular atypia may be extremely subtle but, if present, can be helpful in differentiating malignant from benign lesions. Features of basal and squamous cell carcinoma also may be present. Definitive diagnosis is frequently based on the overall invasive architectural pattern.⁵ Robson et al² examined 69 cases of EPC for high-risk histologic features and concluded that tumor depth greater than 7 mm, mitoses greater than 14 per high-power field, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion were independently predictive of mortality. Moreover, after adjusting for mitosis and depth, an infiltrative border vs a pushing border was strongly predictive of local recurrence.² Immunohistochemical stains, although not necessary for diagnosis, may have utility as adjunctive tools. Cells lining the ducts within EPCs commonly stain positive for carcinoembryonic antigen, though glandular myoepithelial cells stain positive for S-100. Negative Ber-EP4 staining helps to differentiate EPC from basal cell carcinoma. Abnormal expression of p53 and overexpression of p16 also has been described.⁴

The rarity of EPC has precluded the development of any evidence-based management guidelines. Historically, the standard of care has been WLE with 2- to 3-cm margins. A review of 105 cases of EPC treated with WLE showed 20% local recurrence, 20% regional metastases, and 12% distant metastasis rates.⁸ Mohs micrographic surgery, which allows examination of 100% of the surgical margin vs less than 1% for WLE with the standard bread-loafing technique, might be expected to achieve higher cure rates. A review of 29 cases treated with MMS monotherapy demonstrated no local recurrences, distant metastasis, or disease-specific deaths with follow-up ranging from 19 months to 6 years.⁵ One case was associated with regional lymph node metastases that were treated with completion lymphadenectomy and adjuvant radiation therapy.⁷ The high mortality rate of patients with nodal disease has led some to recommend PET-CT and SLNB for patients with EPC. However, the prognostic value of such procedures has not been clearly defined and there is no demonstrated survival benefit for treatment of widespread disease. Our patient declined both SLNB and PET-CT, and our plan was to follow him clinically with symptom-directed imaging only.

Conclusion

Patients with EPC generally have a favorable prognosis with prompt diagnosis and complete surgical excision. Although most commonly seen in elderly patients, EPC may present in younger patients and may be clinically and histologically nondescript with little cytologic atypia. Based on a small but growing body of literature, MMS appears to be at least as effective as WLE as a primary treatment modality for EPC, while offering the advantage of tissue sparing in cosmetically or functionally important areas.

Hailey-Hailey disease (HHD), also known as benign familial chronic pemphigus, is an autosomal-dominant genodermatosis caused by mutations of the ATPase secretory pathway Ca²⁺ transporting 1 gene, ATP2C1.¹ It is characterized by crusted macerated erosions and velvety, fissured, hypertrophic plaques classically involving the intertriginous areas. The diagnosis is suggested by characteristic clinical morphology, involvement of the intertriginous areas, and a positive family history. Histology often confirms the diagnosis and demonstrates a characteristic dilapidated brick wall appearance. If there is a need to distinguish HHD from pemphigus, direct immunofluorescence studies also should be performed, which would be negative.^2,3 However, HHD often is misdiagnosed due to lack of knowledge of this uncommon disorder and its resemblance to other dermatoses of the intertriginous areas.⁴ We present an unusual presentation of HHD with late onset and involvement of the skin of the abdomen and foot.

Case Report

A 61-year-old woman presented with a 3×4-cm fissured plaque with erosions and a peripheral yellow crust on the left side of the anterior abdomen (Figure 1A). There was another fissured plaque with surrounding erythema and scaling on the fifth digit of the right foot (Figure 1B). For the last 11 years, she periodically experienced erosive and scabbing skin plaques under the breasts and on the axillae and groin. Her mother and maternal grandfather had a history of similar skin lesions. Due to a suspicion of HHD, a skin biopsy specimen of the abdominal plaque was performed, which demonstrated epidermal acanthosis and suprabasal acantholysis with lacunae formation (Figure 2). There was uneven thickening of the epidermal keratin layer with parakeratotic nests. The upper layer of the dermis demonstrated edema and focal fibrosis, enlarged capillaries, and pericapillary lymphohistiocytic infiltration with eosinophils and neutrophils. Accordingly, a diagnosis of HHD was established.

Comment

Hailey-Hailey disease occurs in 1 to 4 per 100,000 individuals without predilection for sex or ethnic group.^5-9 Onset usually occurs after puberty, most commonly in the third decade of life.^8,10-12 Mutations of the ATP2C1 gene on band 3q22.1 cause haploinsufficiency of Ca²⁺/Mn²⁺−ATPase protein 1 (hSPCA1) that alters the intracellular calcium gradient, leading to disruptions in assembly and trafficking of desmosomal proteins to the cell membrane. Consequently, altered intercellular connections and acantholysis of the epidermis occur.^1,13-16

Hailey-Hailey disease initially manifests as grouped flaccid vesicles that rupture easily, leaving behind crusted erosions and dry, scaly, eczematous patches.^17,18 Over time, velvety, fissured, and hypertrophic plaques develop. Up to 80% of patients experience secondary bacterial and fungal superinfections that may cause vegetative or malodorous plaques.⁹ Although HHD has no specific treatment, symptoms are managed with topical corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents. Patients should be advised to avoid irritants such as friction, sunlight, or sweat. For severe cases, botulinum toxin type A, laser therapy, dermabrasion, and surgery have been utilized with variable success.^19-22 The responsiveness of HHD to corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents facilitates misdiagnosis as intertrigo, erythrasma, or dermatophytosis.

Our patient presented with late-onset HHD (age, 50 years) compared to the typical age of onset in the third decade of life.⁸ Furthermore, her presentation was atypical for HHD, which characteristically affects intertriginous areas due to sweat, heat, friction, and microorganisms. Hailey-Hailey disease involving the abdominal skin is unusual, as it typically occurs in regions of friction such as the belt area.²³ Our patient lacked a history of friction or trauma at the site of the abdominal plaque. In addition, HHD involving the feet is exceedingly rare. It is plausible that friction and heat caused by footwear may have predisposed her to these skin changes.

Conclusion

This case highlights the difficulties of diagnosing HHD, especially if it appears in atypical locations.²⁴ Obtaining a thorough family history and detailed dermatologic examination as well as maintaining a high level of suspicion can assist in diagnosing this uncommon disorder.

Hailey-Hailey disease (HHD), also known as benign familial chronic pemphigus, is an autosomal-dominant genodermatosis caused by mutations of the ATPase secretory pathway Ca²⁺ transporting 1 gene, ATP2C1.¹ It is characterized by crusted macerated erosions and velvety, fissured, hypertrophic plaques classically involving the intertriginous areas. The diagnosis is suggested by characteristic clinical morphology, involvement of the intertriginous areas, and a positive family history. Histology often confirms the diagnosis and demonstrates a characteristic dilapidated brick wall appearance. If there is a need to distinguish HHD from pemphigus, direct immunofluorescence studies also should be performed, which would be negative.^2,3 However, HHD often is misdiagnosed due to lack of knowledge of this uncommon disorder and its resemblance to other dermatoses of the intertriginous areas.⁴ We present an unusual presentation of HHD with late onset and involvement of the skin of the abdomen and foot.

Case Report

A 61-year-old woman presented with a 3×4-cm fissured plaque with erosions and a peripheral yellow crust on the left side of the anterior abdomen (Figure 1A). There was another fissured plaque with surrounding erythema and scaling on the fifth digit of the right foot (Figure 1B). For the last 11 years, she periodically experienced erosive and scabbing skin plaques under the breasts and on the axillae and groin. Her mother and maternal grandfather had a history of similar skin lesions. Due to a suspicion of HHD, a skin biopsy specimen of the abdominal plaque was performed, which demonstrated epidermal acanthosis and suprabasal acantholysis with lacunae formation (Figure 2). There was uneven thickening of the epidermal keratin layer with parakeratotic nests. The upper layer of the dermis demonstrated edema and focal fibrosis, enlarged capillaries, and pericapillary lymphohistiocytic infiltration with eosinophils and neutrophils. Accordingly, a diagnosis of HHD was established.

Comment

Hailey-Hailey disease occurs in 1 to 4 per 100,000 individuals without predilection for sex or ethnic group.^5-9 Onset usually occurs after puberty, most commonly in the third decade of life.^8,10-12 Mutations of the ATP2C1 gene on band 3q22.1 cause haploinsufficiency of Ca²⁺/Mn²⁺−ATPase protein 1 (hSPCA1) that alters the intracellular calcium gradient, leading to disruptions in assembly and trafficking of desmosomal proteins to the cell membrane. Consequently, altered intercellular connections and acantholysis of the epidermis occur.^1,13-16

Hailey-Hailey disease initially manifests as grouped flaccid vesicles that rupture easily, leaving behind crusted erosions and dry, scaly, eczematous patches.^17,18 Over time, velvety, fissured, and hypertrophic plaques develop. Up to 80% of patients experience secondary bacterial and fungal superinfections that may cause vegetative or malodorous plaques.⁹ Although HHD has no specific treatment, symptoms are managed with topical corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents. Patients should be advised to avoid irritants such as friction, sunlight, or sweat. For severe cases, botulinum toxin type A, laser therapy, dermabrasion, and surgery have been utilized with variable success.^19-22 The responsiveness of HHD to corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents facilitates misdiagnosis as intertrigo, erythrasma, or dermatophytosis.

Our patient presented with late-onset HHD (age, 50 years) compared to the typical age of onset in the third decade of life.⁸ Furthermore, her presentation was atypical for HHD, which characteristically affects intertriginous areas due to sweat, heat, friction, and microorganisms. Hailey-Hailey disease involving the abdominal skin is unusual, as it typically occurs in regions of friction such as the belt area.²³ Our patient lacked a history of friction or trauma at the site of the abdominal plaque. In addition, HHD involving the feet is exceedingly rare. It is plausible that friction and heat caused by footwear may have predisposed her to these skin changes.

Conclusion

This case highlights the difficulties of diagnosing HHD, especially if it appears in atypical locations.²⁴ Obtaining a thorough family history and detailed dermatologic examination as well as maintaining a high level of suspicion can assist in diagnosing this uncommon disorder.

Hailey-Hailey disease (HHD), also known as benign familial chronic pemphigus, is an autosomal-dominant genodermatosis caused by mutations of the ATPase secretory pathway Ca²⁺ transporting 1 gene, ATP2C1.¹ It is characterized by crusted macerated erosions and velvety, fissured, hypertrophic plaques classically involving the intertriginous areas. The diagnosis is suggested by characteristic clinical morphology, involvement of the intertriginous areas, and a positive family history. Histology often confirms the diagnosis and demonstrates a characteristic dilapidated brick wall appearance. If there is a need to distinguish HHD from pemphigus, direct immunofluorescence studies also should be performed, which would be negative.^2,3 However, HHD often is misdiagnosed due to lack of knowledge of this uncommon disorder and its resemblance to other dermatoses of the intertriginous areas.⁴ We present an unusual presentation of HHD with late onset and involvement of the skin of the abdomen and foot.

Case Report

A 61-year-old woman presented with a 3×4-cm fissured plaque with erosions and a peripheral yellow crust on the left side of the anterior abdomen (Figure 1A). There was another fissured plaque with surrounding erythema and scaling on the fifth digit of the right foot (Figure 1B). For the last 11 years, she periodically experienced erosive and scabbing skin plaques under the breasts and on the axillae and groin. Her mother and maternal grandfather had a history of similar skin lesions. Due to a suspicion of HHD, a skin biopsy specimen of the abdominal plaque was performed, which demonstrated epidermal acanthosis and suprabasal acantholysis with lacunae formation (Figure 2). There was uneven thickening of the epidermal keratin layer with parakeratotic nests. The upper layer of the dermis demonstrated edema and focal fibrosis, enlarged capillaries, and pericapillary lymphohistiocytic infiltration with eosinophils and neutrophils. Accordingly, a diagnosis of HHD was established.

Comment

Hailey-Hailey disease occurs in 1 to 4 per 100,000 individuals without predilection for sex or ethnic group.^5-9 Onset usually occurs after puberty, most commonly in the third decade of life.^8,10-12 Mutations of the ATP2C1 gene on band 3q22.1 cause haploinsufficiency of Ca²⁺/Mn²⁺−ATPase protein 1 (hSPCA1) that alters the intracellular calcium gradient, leading to disruptions in assembly and trafficking of desmosomal proteins to the cell membrane. Consequently, altered intercellular connections and acantholysis of the epidermis occur.^1,13-16

Hailey-Hailey disease initially manifests as grouped flaccid vesicles that rupture easily, leaving behind crusted erosions and dry, scaly, eczematous patches.^17,18 Over time, velvety, fissured, and hypertrophic plaques develop. Up to 80% of patients experience secondary bacterial and fungal superinfections that may cause vegetative or malodorous plaques.⁹ Although HHD has no specific treatment, symptoms are managed with topical corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents. Patients should be advised to avoid irritants such as friction, sunlight, or sweat. For severe cases, botulinum toxin type A, laser therapy, dermabrasion, and surgery have been utilized with variable success.^19-22 The responsiveness of HHD to corticosteroids and antimicrobial agents facilitates misdiagnosis as intertrigo, erythrasma, or dermatophytosis.

Our patient presented with late-onset HHD (age, 50 years) compared to the typical age of onset in the third decade of life.⁸ Furthermore, her presentation was atypical for HHD, which characteristically affects intertriginous areas due to sweat, heat, friction, and microorganisms. Hailey-Hailey disease involving the abdominal skin is unusual, as it typically occurs in regions of friction such as the belt area.²³ Our patient lacked a history of friction or trauma at the site of the abdominal plaque. In addition, HHD involving the feet is exceedingly rare. It is plausible that friction and heat caused by footwear may have predisposed her to these skin changes.

Conclusion

This case highlights the difficulties of diagnosing HHD, especially if it appears in atypical locations.²⁴ Obtaining a thorough family history and detailed dermatologic examination as well as maintaining a high level of suspicion can assist in diagnosing this uncommon disorder.

The connection between diet and physical beauty has been an area of increasing interest in popular culture as well as in the scientific community. Numerous supplements, plant derivatives, and antioxidants have been proposed to help improve skin conditions and prevent signs of aging.¹ Clinical and basic research has played an important role in confirming or debunking these claims, leading to new insight into oral supplements that may play a role in improving signs of photoaging, as well as symptoms of common skin diseases such as acne vulgaris (AV), atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis. This article reviews some of the vitamins, supplements, and antioxidants that have been studied in the improvement of these conditions.

Photoaging

Recently, there has been increased interest among researchers in the role of antioxidants in combatting photoaging. The main determinants of photoaging are chronic sunlight exposure and melanin density. Photoaging presentation includes deep rhytides, pigmentary changes, dryness, loss of skin tone, leathery appearance, and actinic purpura.^2-4

Beta-carotene is a fat-soluble derivative of vitamin A, which has retinol activity and has an inhibitory effect on free radicals. It has been used to decrease the effect of UV light on the skin as well as to treat erythropoietic porphyria.^5-7 One study evaluated the efficacy of low-dose and high-dose beta-carotene in improving facial rhytides and elasticity in a cohort of 30 women older than 50 years.⁸ Participants were given 30 or 90 mg of beta-carotene once daily for 90 days, and the final results were compared to baseline. Those who received the 30-mg dose showed improvements in facial rhytides and elasticity, increased type I procollagen messenger RNA levels, decreased UV-induced thymine dimer staining, and decreased 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine staining. The lower dose of beta-carotene was found to prevent photoaging and was superior to the higher dose, which actually significantly decreased the minimal erythema dose (indicating a deleterious effect)(P=.025).⁸

Another study compared the role of a 25-mg carotenoid supplement vs a combination of carotenoid and vitamin E (335 mg [500 IU] RRR-α-tocopherol) supplements in preventing erythema development on the back.⁹ Using a blue light solar stimulator for illumination, erythema on the dorsal back skin was significantly reduced after week 8 (P<.01). The erythema was lower in the combination group than the carotenoid group alone, but the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, after 12 weeks, yellowing of the skin was observed in both groups, especially the skin of the palms and face.⁹

Collagen peptides also have been used in the prevention and repair of photoaging. Proksch et al¹⁰ conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the role of collagen peptides on skin elasticity in 69 women aged 35 to 55 years. At 4 weeks, oral supplementation of collagen hydrolysate (2.5 g once daily or 5 g once daily for 8 weeks) showed significant (P<.05) improvement of skin elasticity in both the low-dose and high-dose groups in women older than 50 years; however, collagen peptides did not lead to statistically significant improvement in skin hydration or transepidermal water loss. No known side effects were reported; thus, collagen peptides may be both efficacious and safe in improving signs of photoaging in elderly patients.¹⁰ Thus, these studies have shown potentially positive effects of beta-carotene, vitamin E, and collagen peptides in improving the signs of photoaging.

Acne Vulgaris

Acne vulgaris is a common dermatologic condition seen in the western hemisphere, with 40 to 50 million affected individuals in the United States annually.^11,12 A landmark study that examined 1200 Kitavans from Papua New Guinea and 115 Aché individuals from a hunter-gatherer community in Paraguay found no cases of AV in either group.¹² These findings have led to the speculation that AV may be associated with environmental factors, particularly the Western diet.

An investigator-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) explored the role of a low-glycemic diet compared to a carbohydrate-dense diet on improvement of AV lesions after 12 weeks.¹³ The results yielded a significant decrease in lesions in the low-glycemic group (mean [SEM], −23.5 [−3.9]) vs the control group (−12.0 [−3.0])(P=.03). Furthermore, the results indicated a significant decrease in weight (P<.001) and body mass index (P=.001) with an improvement in insulin sensitivity in the low-glycemic group vs the control group.¹³ Kwon et al¹⁴ conducted a similar investigator-blinded parallel study with 32 participants receiving either a low-glycemic diet or continuing their normal diet for 10 weeks. Participants in the low-glycemic group demonstrated a significant reduction in mean noninflammatory lesions (−27.6% [P=.04]) and mean inflammatory lesions (−70.9% [P<.05]). Histologic image analysis showed a significant decrease in the mean (SEM) area of sebaceous glands in the low-glycemic group (0.32 [0.03] mm²) compared to baseline (0.24 [0.03] mm²)(P=.03). At 10 weeks, immunohistochemical specimens showed reduction in IL-8 (P=.03) and sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1 (P=.03), which regulates the synthesis of lipids.¹⁴ Thus, both studies concluded that a reduction in glycemic load may improve acne overall.^13,14

Another study attempted to investigate the role of additional dietary supplements in improving acne. A double-blinded RCT explored the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids or γ-linoleic acid compared to a control group in improving mild to moderate AV lesions through clinical and histological evaluations.¹⁵ The 10-week prospective study included 45 patients who were allocated to 3 matched groups and randomized to 3 treatment arms. They were given omega-3 fatty acids (1000 mg each of eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) or γ-linoleic acid (borage oil with 400 mg of γ-linoleic acid) or no intervention. After treatment completion, patients in both treatment groups showed significant reduction in mean inflammatory acne lesions, mean noninflammatory acne lesions, and mean acne severity (all P<.05), while the control group showed no significant reduction in acne lesions or acne severity. Furthermore, hematoxylin and eosin and IL-8 immunohistochemical staining of biopsies from the affected areas showed significant reduction of inflammation in both treatment groups (P<.05) but not in the control group. Therefore, the authors concluded that both omega-3 fatty acids and γ-linoleic acid could be used as adjuvant therapies in AV treatment.¹⁵

Atopic Dermatitis

The prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children ranges from approximately 9% to 18% across the United States.¹⁶ Pyridoxine, or vitamin B₆, is an important water-soluble vitamin and a cofactor for numerous biochemical processes including carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism pathways and glucocorticoid receptor regulation.^17,18 However, a double-blinded, placebo-controlled RCT failed to show efficacy of once-daily pyridoxine hydrochloride 50 mg in improving erythema, itching, or nocturnal sleep disturbance associated with AD in a cohort of 48 children. The investigators concluded that pyridoxine supplementation cannot be recommended to improve the symptoms of AD in children.¹⁹

Zinc is an essential nutrient that functions as an important cofactor in cell metabolism and growth pathways.²⁰ One study showed that intracellular erythrocyte zinc levels were significantly lower in AD patients compared to healthy controls (P<.001); however, there was no observed difference in serum zinc levels (P=.148). Furthermore, greater disease severity as determined by the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index was negatively correlated with erythrocyte zinc levels (r=−0.791; P<.001).²¹ Kim et al²² investigated hair zinc levels and the efficacy of oral zinc supplementation in children with mild to moderate AD. Mean (SD) hair zinc levels were lower in the AD group compared to the control group (113.10 [33.6] μg vs 130.90 [36.63] μg [P=.012]). Of 41 AD patients with low zinc levels, 22 were allocated to group A, which received oral zinc oxide 12 mg for 8 weeks, and 19 were allocated to group B, which did not receive any supplementation over the same period. Groups A and B also received oral antihistamines and topical moisturizers. Mean (SD) zinc levels increased significantly in group A from 96.36 (21.05) μg to 131.81 (27.45) μg (P<.001). Furthermore, relative to group B, group A showed significantly greater improvements in eczema area and severity index (P=.044), transepidermal water loss (P=.015), and visual analog scale for pruritus (P<.001) at the end of 8 weeks. The authors concluded that oral zinc supplementation might be an effective adjunctive therapy for AD patients with low hair zinc levels.²²

Researchers also have explored the efficacy of fat-soluble vitamins D and E in treating AD. Vitamin D is thought to downregulate IgE-mediated skin reactions and decrease adverse effects of UV light on the skin.^23,24 A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 45 patients with AD to 4 groups: vitamins D and E placebos (n=11), 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus vitamin E placebo (n=12), 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol) plus vitamin D placebo (n=11), and 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol)(n=11).²⁵ After 60 days, the SCORAD index was reduced by 28.9% in the placebo group, 34.8% in the vitamin D₃ group, 35.7% in the vitamin E group, and 64.3% in the combined vitamins D and E group (P=.004). Furthermore, prior to intervention, a negative correlation was demonstrated between plasma α-tocopherol concentration and the SCORAD index (r=−.33; P=.025).²⁵ Thus, supplementing vitamins D and E may play a beneficial role in the treatment of AD.

Other emerging studies are investigating the role of the gut microbiome in various pathologies. Prebiotics may alter the gut microbiome and are thought to play a role in reducing intestinal inflammation.²⁶ One randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study examined the effect of prebiotic oligosaccharide supplementation on the development of AD in at-risk children, defined as having a biological parent with a history of asthma, allergic rhinitis, or AD.²⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 10 infants (9.8%)(95% CI, 5.4%-17.1%) in the intervention group (n=102) and 24 infants (23.1%)(95% CI, 16.0%-32.1%) in the placebo group (n=104) had developed AD. The authors postulated that the prebiotic oligosaccharides might play a role in immune modulation by altering bowel flora and preventing the development of AD in infancy.²⁷

Notably, a 2012 Cochrane review evaluated 11 studies of dietary supplements as possible treatment options for AD. The authors concluded that the evidence was minimal to support the regular use of dietary supplements, especially due to their high cost as well as the possibility that high levels of certain vitamins (eg, vitamin D) may cause long-term complications.²⁶

Psoriasis

Psoriasis is an autoimmune skin condition that has an annual prevalence ranging from approximately 1% to 9% in adults residing in Western countries.^28,29 Some have argued that due to decreased bacterial diversity and increased bacterial growth in the small bowel, psoriatic patients are exposed to higher levels of bacterial peptidoglycans and endotoxins.³⁰ To combat the absorption of these substances in psoriasis patients, we advocate for a vegetarian diet with low fats, limited alcohol consumption, and supplements of bile acids and bioflavonoid.

The effects of very long chain fatty acids also have been examined. A 4-month, double-blind, multicenter RCT compared the effects of daily supplementation with 6 g of either omega-3 fatty acids or omega-6 fatty acids in patients with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis.³¹ Psoriasis area and severity index scores and patient subjective scores did not change significantly in either group; however, scaling was reduced in both groups (P<.01). The group receiving omega-3 fatty acids had decreased cellular infiltration (P<.01), and the group receiving omega-6 fatty acids had decreased desquamation and redness (P<.05). In the omega-6 group, there was a significant correlation between clinical improvement (decrease in clinical score) and increase in serum eicosapentaenoic acid (r=−0.34; P<.05) and total omega-3 fatty acids (r=−0.36; P<.05). Overall, the authors concluded that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil) was no better than omega-6 fatty acids (corn oil) for treatment of psoriasis.³¹

Some dermatologists have advocated for the use of oral vitamin D supplementation as an adjunctive treatment of psoriasis, given that it is inexpensive and also may play a role in reducing the risk for cancer and cardiovascular events.³² One study evaluated the level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D in 43 psoriasis patients compared to 43 healthy controls. Mean (SD) vitamin D levels were significantly lower in psoriasis patients (13.3 [6.9]) compared to controls (22.4 [18.4])(P=.004).³³ A cross-sectional study similarly found significantly higher rates of vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxy vitamin D <20 ng/mL) in psoriatic patients (57.8%) compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (37.5%) and healthy controls (29.7%)(P<.001). Interestingly, during winter the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency increased to 80.9%, 41.3%, and 30.3% in the 3 groups, respectively; however, no significant correlation was seen between psoriasis severity, as measured by psoriasis area and severity index, and serum vitamin D levels.³⁴ Although vitamin D deficiency may be more prevalent among patients with psoriasis, data regarding the efficacy of treating psoriasis with oral vitamin D supplementation is still lacking.

Conclusion

Our understanding of the link between diet and dermatologic conditions continues to evolve. Recent data for several dietary supplements and therapies showed promising results in repairing signs of photoaging, as well as treating AV, AD, and psoriasis. As patients seek these adjunctive therapies, it is important for physicians to be well informed on the benefits and risks to appropriately counsel patients.

Globally, physicians advocate for a low-glycemic diet rich in fruits and vegetables. Furthermore, the cosmetic diet can be enhanced by the consumption of dietary supplements such as beta-carotene, collagen peptides, zinc, and fat-soluble vitamins such as vitamins D and E. However, prospective RCTs are needed to further investigate the role of these dietary elements in treating and improving dermatologic conditions.

The connection between diet and physical beauty has been an area of increasing interest in popular culture as well as in the scientific community. Numerous supplements, plant derivatives, and antioxidants have been proposed to help improve skin conditions and prevent signs of aging.¹ Clinical and basic research has played an important role in confirming or debunking these claims, leading to new insight into oral supplements that may play a role in improving signs of photoaging, as well as symptoms of common skin diseases such as acne vulgaris (AV), atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis. This article reviews some of the vitamins, supplements, and antioxidants that have been studied in the improvement of these conditions.

Photoaging

Recently, there has been increased interest among researchers in the role of antioxidants in combatting photoaging. The main determinants of photoaging are chronic sunlight exposure and melanin density. Photoaging presentation includes deep rhytides, pigmentary changes, dryness, loss of skin tone, leathery appearance, and actinic purpura.^2-4

Beta-carotene is a fat-soluble derivative of vitamin A, which has retinol activity and has an inhibitory effect on free radicals. It has been used to decrease the effect of UV light on the skin as well as to treat erythropoietic porphyria.^5-7 One study evaluated the efficacy of low-dose and high-dose beta-carotene in improving facial rhytides and elasticity in a cohort of 30 women older than 50 years.⁸ Participants were given 30 or 90 mg of beta-carotene once daily for 90 days, and the final results were compared to baseline. Those who received the 30-mg dose showed improvements in facial rhytides and elasticity, increased type I procollagen messenger RNA levels, decreased UV-induced thymine dimer staining, and decreased 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine staining. The lower dose of beta-carotene was found to prevent photoaging and was superior to the higher dose, which actually significantly decreased the minimal erythema dose (indicating a deleterious effect)(P=.025).⁸

Another study compared the role of a 25-mg carotenoid supplement vs a combination of carotenoid and vitamin E (335 mg [500 IU] RRR-α-tocopherol) supplements in preventing erythema development on the back.⁹ Using a blue light solar stimulator for illumination, erythema on the dorsal back skin was significantly reduced after week 8 (P<.01). The erythema was lower in the combination group than the carotenoid group alone, but the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, after 12 weeks, yellowing of the skin was observed in both groups, especially the skin of the palms and face.⁹

Collagen peptides also have been used in the prevention and repair of photoaging. Proksch et al¹⁰ conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the role of collagen peptides on skin elasticity in 69 women aged 35 to 55 years. At 4 weeks, oral supplementation of collagen hydrolysate (2.5 g once daily or 5 g once daily for 8 weeks) showed significant (P<.05) improvement of skin elasticity in both the low-dose and high-dose groups in women older than 50 years; however, collagen peptides did not lead to statistically significant improvement in skin hydration or transepidermal water loss. No known side effects were reported; thus, collagen peptides may be both efficacious and safe in improving signs of photoaging in elderly patients.¹⁰ Thus, these studies have shown potentially positive effects of beta-carotene, vitamin E, and collagen peptides in improving the signs of photoaging.

Acne Vulgaris

Acne vulgaris is a common dermatologic condition seen in the western hemisphere, with 40 to 50 million affected individuals in the United States annually.^11,12 A landmark study that examined 1200 Kitavans from Papua New Guinea and 115 Aché individuals from a hunter-gatherer community in Paraguay found no cases of AV in either group.¹² These findings have led to the speculation that AV may be associated with environmental factors, particularly the Western diet.

An investigator-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) explored the role of a low-glycemic diet compared to a carbohydrate-dense diet on improvement of AV lesions after 12 weeks.¹³ The results yielded a significant decrease in lesions in the low-glycemic group (mean [SEM], −23.5 [−3.9]) vs the control group (−12.0 [−3.0])(P=.03). Furthermore, the results indicated a significant decrease in weight (P<.001) and body mass index (P=.001) with an improvement in insulin sensitivity in the low-glycemic group vs the control group.¹³ Kwon et al¹⁴ conducted a similar investigator-blinded parallel study with 32 participants receiving either a low-glycemic diet or continuing their normal diet for 10 weeks. Participants in the low-glycemic group demonstrated a significant reduction in mean noninflammatory lesions (−27.6% [P=.04]) and mean inflammatory lesions (−70.9% [P<.05]). Histologic image analysis showed a significant decrease in the mean (SEM) area of sebaceous glands in the low-glycemic group (0.32 [0.03] mm²) compared to baseline (0.24 [0.03] mm²)(P=.03). At 10 weeks, immunohistochemical specimens showed reduction in IL-8 (P=.03) and sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1 (P=.03), which regulates the synthesis of lipids.¹⁴ Thus, both studies concluded that a reduction in glycemic load may improve acne overall.^13,14

Another study attempted to investigate the role of additional dietary supplements in improving acne. A double-blinded RCT explored the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids or γ-linoleic acid compared to a control group in improving mild to moderate AV lesions through clinical and histological evaluations.¹⁵ The 10-week prospective study included 45 patients who were allocated to 3 matched groups and randomized to 3 treatment arms. They were given omega-3 fatty acids (1000 mg each of eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) or γ-linoleic acid (borage oil with 400 mg of γ-linoleic acid) or no intervention. After treatment completion, patients in both treatment groups showed significant reduction in mean inflammatory acne lesions, mean noninflammatory acne lesions, and mean acne severity (all P<.05), while the control group showed no significant reduction in acne lesions or acne severity. Furthermore, hematoxylin and eosin and IL-8 immunohistochemical staining of biopsies from the affected areas showed significant reduction of inflammation in both treatment groups (P<.05) but not in the control group. Therefore, the authors concluded that both omega-3 fatty acids and γ-linoleic acid could be used as adjuvant therapies in AV treatment.¹⁵

Atopic Dermatitis

The prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children ranges from approximately 9% to 18% across the United States.¹⁶ Pyridoxine, or vitamin B₆, is an important water-soluble vitamin and a cofactor for numerous biochemical processes including carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism pathways and glucocorticoid receptor regulation.^17,18 However, a double-blinded, placebo-controlled RCT failed to show efficacy of once-daily pyridoxine hydrochloride 50 mg in improving erythema, itching, or nocturnal sleep disturbance associated with AD in a cohort of 48 children. The investigators concluded that pyridoxine supplementation cannot be recommended to improve the symptoms of AD in children.¹⁹

Zinc is an essential nutrient that functions as an important cofactor in cell metabolism and growth pathways.²⁰ One study showed that intracellular erythrocyte zinc levels were significantly lower in AD patients compared to healthy controls (P<.001); however, there was no observed difference in serum zinc levels (P=.148). Furthermore, greater disease severity as determined by the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index was negatively correlated with erythrocyte zinc levels (r=−0.791; P<.001).²¹ Kim et al²² investigated hair zinc levels and the efficacy of oral zinc supplementation in children with mild to moderate AD. Mean (SD) hair zinc levels were lower in the AD group compared to the control group (113.10 [33.6] μg vs 130.90 [36.63] μg [P=.012]). Of 41 AD patients with low zinc levels, 22 were allocated to group A, which received oral zinc oxide 12 mg for 8 weeks, and 19 were allocated to group B, which did not receive any supplementation over the same period. Groups A and B also received oral antihistamines and topical moisturizers. Mean (SD) zinc levels increased significantly in group A from 96.36 (21.05) μg to 131.81 (27.45) μg (P<.001). Furthermore, relative to group B, group A showed significantly greater improvements in eczema area and severity index (P=.044), transepidermal water loss (P=.015), and visual analog scale for pruritus (P<.001) at the end of 8 weeks. The authors concluded that oral zinc supplementation might be an effective adjunctive therapy for AD patients with low hair zinc levels.²²

Researchers also have explored the efficacy of fat-soluble vitamins D and E in treating AD. Vitamin D is thought to downregulate IgE-mediated skin reactions and decrease adverse effects of UV light on the skin.^23,24 A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 45 patients with AD to 4 groups: vitamins D and E placebos (n=11), 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus vitamin E placebo (n=12), 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol) plus vitamin D placebo (n=11), and 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol)(n=11).²⁵ After 60 days, the SCORAD index was reduced by 28.9% in the placebo group, 34.8% in the vitamin D₃ group, 35.7% in the vitamin E group, and 64.3% in the combined vitamins D and E group (P=.004). Furthermore, prior to intervention, a negative correlation was demonstrated between plasma α-tocopherol concentration and the SCORAD index (r=−.33; P=.025).²⁵ Thus, supplementing vitamins D and E may play a beneficial role in the treatment of AD.

Other emerging studies are investigating the role of the gut microbiome in various pathologies. Prebiotics may alter the gut microbiome and are thought to play a role in reducing intestinal inflammation.²⁶ One randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study examined the effect of prebiotic oligosaccharide supplementation on the development of AD in at-risk children, defined as having a biological parent with a history of asthma, allergic rhinitis, or AD.²⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 10 infants (9.8%)(95% CI, 5.4%-17.1%) in the intervention group (n=102) and 24 infants (23.1%)(95% CI, 16.0%-32.1%) in the placebo group (n=104) had developed AD. The authors postulated that the prebiotic oligosaccharides might play a role in immune modulation by altering bowel flora and preventing the development of AD in infancy.²⁷

Notably, a 2012 Cochrane review evaluated 11 studies of dietary supplements as possible treatment options for AD. The authors concluded that the evidence was minimal to support the regular use of dietary supplements, especially due to their high cost as well as the possibility that high levels of certain vitamins (eg, vitamin D) may cause long-term complications.²⁶

Psoriasis

Psoriasis is an autoimmune skin condition that has an annual prevalence ranging from approximately 1% to 9% in adults residing in Western countries.^28,29 Some have argued that due to decreased bacterial diversity and increased bacterial growth in the small bowel, psoriatic patients are exposed to higher levels of bacterial peptidoglycans and endotoxins.³⁰ To combat the absorption of these substances in psoriasis patients, we advocate for a vegetarian diet with low fats, limited alcohol consumption, and supplements of bile acids and bioflavonoid.

The effects of very long chain fatty acids also have been examined. A 4-month, double-blind, multicenter RCT compared the effects of daily supplementation with 6 g of either omega-3 fatty acids or omega-6 fatty acids in patients with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis.³¹ Psoriasis area and severity index scores and patient subjective scores did not change significantly in either group; however, scaling was reduced in both groups (P<.01). The group receiving omega-3 fatty acids had decreased cellular infiltration (P<.01), and the group receiving omega-6 fatty acids had decreased desquamation and redness (P<.05). In the omega-6 group, there was a significant correlation between clinical improvement (decrease in clinical score) and increase in serum eicosapentaenoic acid (r=−0.34; P<.05) and total omega-3 fatty acids (r=−0.36; P<.05). Overall, the authors concluded that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil) was no better than omega-6 fatty acids (corn oil) for treatment of psoriasis.³¹

Some dermatologists have advocated for the use of oral vitamin D supplementation as an adjunctive treatment of psoriasis, given that it is inexpensive and also may play a role in reducing the risk for cancer and cardiovascular events.³² One study evaluated the level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D in 43 psoriasis patients compared to 43 healthy controls. Mean (SD) vitamin D levels were significantly lower in psoriasis patients (13.3 [6.9]) compared to controls (22.4 [18.4])(P=.004).³³ A cross-sectional study similarly found significantly higher rates of vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxy vitamin D <20 ng/mL) in psoriatic patients (57.8%) compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (37.5%) and healthy controls (29.7%)(P<.001). Interestingly, during winter the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency increased to 80.9%, 41.3%, and 30.3% in the 3 groups, respectively; however, no significant correlation was seen between psoriasis severity, as measured by psoriasis area and severity index, and serum vitamin D levels.³⁴ Although vitamin D deficiency may be more prevalent among patients with psoriasis, data regarding the efficacy of treating psoriasis with oral vitamin D supplementation is still lacking.

Conclusion

Our understanding of the link between diet and dermatologic conditions continues to evolve. Recent data for several dietary supplements and therapies showed promising results in repairing signs of photoaging, as well as treating AV, AD, and psoriasis. As patients seek these adjunctive therapies, it is important for physicians to be well informed on the benefits and risks to appropriately counsel patients.

Globally, physicians advocate for a low-glycemic diet rich in fruits and vegetables. Furthermore, the cosmetic diet can be enhanced by the consumption of dietary supplements such as beta-carotene, collagen peptides, zinc, and fat-soluble vitamins such as vitamins D and E. However, prospective RCTs are needed to further investigate the role of these dietary elements in treating and improving dermatologic conditions.

The connection between diet and physical beauty has been an area of increasing interest in popular culture as well as in the scientific community. Numerous supplements, plant derivatives, and antioxidants have been proposed to help improve skin conditions and prevent signs of aging.¹ Clinical and basic research has played an important role in confirming or debunking these claims, leading to new insight into oral supplements that may play a role in improving signs of photoaging, as well as symptoms of common skin diseases such as acne vulgaris (AV), atopic dermatitis (AD), and psoriasis. This article reviews some of the vitamins, supplements, and antioxidants that have been studied in the improvement of these conditions.

Photoaging

Recently, there has been increased interest among researchers in the role of antioxidants in combatting photoaging. The main determinants of photoaging are chronic sunlight exposure and melanin density. Photoaging presentation includes deep rhytides, pigmentary changes, dryness, loss of skin tone, leathery appearance, and actinic purpura.^2-4

Beta-carotene is a fat-soluble derivative of vitamin A, which has retinol activity and has an inhibitory effect on free radicals. It has been used to decrease the effect of UV light on the skin as well as to treat erythropoietic porphyria.^5-7 One study evaluated the efficacy of low-dose and high-dose beta-carotene in improving facial rhytides and elasticity in a cohort of 30 women older than 50 years.⁸ Participants were given 30 or 90 mg of beta-carotene once daily for 90 days, and the final results were compared to baseline. Those who received the 30-mg dose showed improvements in facial rhytides and elasticity, increased type I procollagen messenger RNA levels, decreased UV-induced thymine dimer staining, and decreased 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine staining. The lower dose of beta-carotene was found to prevent photoaging and was superior to the higher dose, which actually significantly decreased the minimal erythema dose (indicating a deleterious effect)(P=.025).⁸

Another study compared the role of a 25-mg carotenoid supplement vs a combination of carotenoid and vitamin E (335 mg [500 IU] RRR-α-tocopherol) supplements in preventing erythema development on the back.⁹ Using a blue light solar stimulator for illumination, erythema on the dorsal back skin was significantly reduced after week 8 (P<.01). The erythema was lower in the combination group than the carotenoid group alone, but the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, after 12 weeks, yellowing of the skin was observed in both groups, especially the skin of the palms and face.⁹

Collagen peptides also have been used in the prevention and repair of photoaging. Proksch et al¹⁰ conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the role of collagen peptides on skin elasticity in 69 women aged 35 to 55 years. At 4 weeks, oral supplementation of collagen hydrolysate (2.5 g once daily or 5 g once daily for 8 weeks) showed significant (P<.05) improvement of skin elasticity in both the low-dose and high-dose groups in women older than 50 years; however, collagen peptides did not lead to statistically significant improvement in skin hydration or transepidermal water loss. No known side effects were reported; thus, collagen peptides may be both efficacious and safe in improving signs of photoaging in elderly patients.¹⁰ Thus, these studies have shown potentially positive effects of beta-carotene, vitamin E, and collagen peptides in improving the signs of photoaging.

Acne Vulgaris

Acne vulgaris is a common dermatologic condition seen in the western hemisphere, with 40 to 50 million affected individuals in the United States annually.^11,12 A landmark study that examined 1200 Kitavans from Papua New Guinea and 115 Aché individuals from a hunter-gatherer community in Paraguay found no cases of AV in either group.¹² These findings have led to the speculation that AV may be associated with environmental factors, particularly the Western diet.

An investigator-blinded randomized clinical trial (RCT) explored the role of a low-glycemic diet compared to a carbohydrate-dense diet on improvement of AV lesions after 12 weeks.¹³ The results yielded a significant decrease in lesions in the low-glycemic group (mean [SEM], −23.5 [−3.9]) vs the control group (−12.0 [−3.0])(P=.03). Furthermore, the results indicated a significant decrease in weight (P<.001) and body mass index (P=.001) with an improvement in insulin sensitivity in the low-glycemic group vs the control group.¹³ Kwon et al¹⁴ conducted a similar investigator-blinded parallel study with 32 participants receiving either a low-glycemic diet or continuing their normal diet for 10 weeks. Participants in the low-glycemic group demonstrated a significant reduction in mean noninflammatory lesions (−27.6% [P=.04]) and mean inflammatory lesions (−70.9% [P<.05]). Histologic image analysis showed a significant decrease in the mean (SEM) area of sebaceous glands in the low-glycemic group (0.32 [0.03] mm²) compared to baseline (0.24 [0.03] mm²)(P=.03). At 10 weeks, immunohistochemical specimens showed reduction in IL-8 (P=.03) and sterol regulatory element-binding protein 1 (P=.03), which regulates the synthesis of lipids.¹⁴ Thus, both studies concluded that a reduction in glycemic load may improve acne overall.^13,14

Another study attempted to investigate the role of additional dietary supplements in improving acne. A double-blinded RCT explored the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids or γ-linoleic acid compared to a control group in improving mild to moderate AV lesions through clinical and histological evaluations.¹⁵ The 10-week prospective study included 45 patients who were allocated to 3 matched groups and randomized to 3 treatment arms. They were given omega-3 fatty acids (1000 mg each of eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) or γ-linoleic acid (borage oil with 400 mg of γ-linoleic acid) or no intervention. After treatment completion, patients in both treatment groups showed significant reduction in mean inflammatory acne lesions, mean noninflammatory acne lesions, and mean acne severity (all P<.05), while the control group showed no significant reduction in acne lesions or acne severity. Furthermore, hematoxylin and eosin and IL-8 immunohistochemical staining of biopsies from the affected areas showed significant reduction of inflammation in both treatment groups (P<.05) but not in the control group. Therefore, the authors concluded that both omega-3 fatty acids and γ-linoleic acid could be used as adjuvant therapies in AV treatment.¹⁵

Atopic Dermatitis

The prevalence of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children ranges from approximately 9% to 18% across the United States.¹⁶ Pyridoxine, or vitamin B₆, is an important water-soluble vitamin and a cofactor for numerous biochemical processes including carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism pathways and glucocorticoid receptor regulation.^17,18 However, a double-blinded, placebo-controlled RCT failed to show efficacy of once-daily pyridoxine hydrochloride 50 mg in improving erythema, itching, or nocturnal sleep disturbance associated with AD in a cohort of 48 children. The investigators concluded that pyridoxine supplementation cannot be recommended to improve the symptoms of AD in children.¹⁹

Zinc is an essential nutrient that functions as an important cofactor in cell metabolism and growth pathways.²⁰ One study showed that intracellular erythrocyte zinc levels were significantly lower in AD patients compared to healthy controls (P<.001); however, there was no observed difference in serum zinc levels (P=.148). Furthermore, greater disease severity as determined by the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index was negatively correlated with erythrocyte zinc levels (r=−0.791; P<.001).²¹ Kim et al²² investigated hair zinc levels and the efficacy of oral zinc supplementation in children with mild to moderate AD. Mean (SD) hair zinc levels were lower in the AD group compared to the control group (113.10 [33.6] μg vs 130.90 [36.63] μg [P=.012]). Of 41 AD patients with low zinc levels, 22 were allocated to group A, which received oral zinc oxide 12 mg for 8 weeks, and 19 were allocated to group B, which did not receive any supplementation over the same period. Groups A and B also received oral antihistamines and topical moisturizers. Mean (SD) zinc levels increased significantly in group A from 96.36 (21.05) μg to 131.81 (27.45) μg (P<.001). Furthermore, relative to group B, group A showed significantly greater improvements in eczema area and severity index (P=.044), transepidermal water loss (P=.015), and visual analog scale for pruritus (P<.001) at the end of 8 weeks. The authors concluded that oral zinc supplementation might be an effective adjunctive therapy for AD patients with low hair zinc levels.²²

Researchers also have explored the efficacy of fat-soluble vitamins D and E in treating AD. Vitamin D is thought to downregulate IgE-mediated skin reactions and decrease adverse effects of UV light on the skin.^23,24 A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 45 patients with AD to 4 groups: vitamins D and E placebos (n=11), 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus vitamin E placebo (n=12), 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol) plus vitamin D placebo (n=11), and 1600 IU vitamin D₃ plus 600 IU vitamin E (synthetic all-rac-α-tocopherol)(n=11).²⁵ After 60 days, the SCORAD index was reduced by 28.9% in the placebo group, 34.8% in the vitamin D₃ group, 35.7% in the vitamin E group, and 64.3% in the combined vitamins D and E group (P=.004). Furthermore, prior to intervention, a negative correlation was demonstrated between plasma α-tocopherol concentration and the SCORAD index (r=−.33; P=.025).²⁵ Thus, supplementing vitamins D and E may play a beneficial role in the treatment of AD.

Other emerging studies are investigating the role of the gut microbiome in various pathologies. Prebiotics may alter the gut microbiome and are thought to play a role in reducing intestinal inflammation.²⁶ One randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study examined the effect of prebiotic oligosaccharide supplementation on the development of AD in at-risk children, defined as having a biological parent with a history of asthma, allergic rhinitis, or AD.²⁷ At 6-month follow-up, 10 infants (9.8%)(95% CI, 5.4%-17.1%) in the intervention group (n=102) and 24 infants (23.1%)(95% CI, 16.0%-32.1%) in the placebo group (n=104) had developed AD. The authors postulated that the prebiotic oligosaccharides might play a role in immune modulation by altering bowel flora and preventing the development of AD in infancy.²⁷

Notably, a 2012 Cochrane review evaluated 11 studies of dietary supplements as possible treatment options for AD. The authors concluded that the evidence was minimal to support the regular use of dietary supplements, especially due to their high cost as well as the possibility that high levels of certain vitamins (eg, vitamin D) may cause long-term complications.²⁶

Psoriasis

Psoriasis is an autoimmune skin condition that has an annual prevalence ranging from approximately 1% to 9% in adults residing in Western countries.^28,29 Some have argued that due to decreased bacterial diversity and increased bacterial growth in the small bowel, psoriatic patients are exposed to higher levels of bacterial peptidoglycans and endotoxins.³⁰ To combat the absorption of these substances in psoriasis patients, we advocate for a vegetarian diet with low fats, limited alcohol consumption, and supplements of bile acids and bioflavonoid.

The effects of very long chain fatty acids also have been examined. A 4-month, double-blind, multicenter RCT compared the effects of daily supplementation with 6 g of either omega-3 fatty acids or omega-6 fatty acids in patients with mild to moderate plaque psoriasis.³¹ Psoriasis area and severity index scores and patient subjective scores did not change significantly in either group; however, scaling was reduced in both groups (P<.01). The group receiving omega-3 fatty acids had decreased cellular infiltration (P<.01), and the group receiving omega-6 fatty acids had decreased desquamation and redness (P<.05). In the omega-6 group, there was a significant correlation between clinical improvement (decrease in clinical score) and increase in serum eicosapentaenoic acid (r=−0.34; P<.05) and total omega-3 fatty acids (r=−0.36; P<.05). Overall, the authors concluded that supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids (fish oil) was no better than omega-6 fatty acids (corn oil) for treatment of psoriasis.³¹

Some dermatologists have advocated for the use of oral vitamin D supplementation as an adjunctive treatment of psoriasis, given that it is inexpensive and also may play a role in reducing the risk for cancer and cardiovascular events.³² One study evaluated the level of 25-hydroxy vitamin D in 43 psoriasis patients compared to 43 healthy controls. Mean (SD) vitamin D levels were significantly lower in psoriasis patients (13.3 [6.9]) compared to controls (22.4 [18.4])(P=.004).³³ A cross-sectional study similarly found significantly higher rates of vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxy vitamin D <20 ng/mL) in psoriatic patients (57.8%) compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (37.5%) and healthy controls (29.7%)(P<.001). Interestingly, during winter the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency increased to 80.9%, 41.3%, and 30.3% in the 3 groups, respectively; however, no significant correlation was seen between psoriasis severity, as measured by psoriasis area and severity index, and serum vitamin D levels.³⁴ Although vitamin D deficiency may be more prevalent among patients with psoriasis, data regarding the efficacy of treating psoriasis with oral vitamin D supplementation is still lacking.

Conclusion

Our understanding of the link between diet and dermatologic conditions continues to evolve. Recent data for several dietary supplements and therapies showed promising results in repairing signs of photoaging, as well as treating AV, AD, and psoriasis. As patients seek these adjunctive therapies, it is important for physicians to be well informed on the benefits and risks to appropriately counsel patients.

Globally, physicians advocate for a low-glycemic diet rich in fruits and vegetables. Furthermore, the cosmetic diet can be enhanced by the consumption of dietary supplements such as beta-carotene, collagen peptides, zinc, and fat-soluble vitamins such as vitamins D and E. However, prospective RCTs are needed to further investigate the role of these dietary elements in treating and improving dermatologic conditions.

MAUI, HAWAII – The latest practice guidelines on the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease issued by the American Thoracic Society and allied organizations recommend as the standard of care a review of all cases by a multidisciplinary team consisting of a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist to ensure accurate diagnosis and classification.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

That’s not good enough. A rheumatologist needs to routinely be involved in those multidisciplinary discussions as well, Aryeh Fischer, MD, asserted at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Why? Because a rheumatologist’s input often leads to a change in diagnosis. And that change can have important prognostic and therapeutic implications.

“We want to distinguish the IPF [idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis] patients from everybody else. The most important thing with regards to therapy is to identify the IPF patient. The IPF patients are the only ones who are able to be treated with antifibrotic agents: pirfenidone or nintedanib. And we know that immunosuppression can make patients with IPF worse; their risks of hospitalization and mortality are higher on immunosuppression. But everybody else, including anyone with any of the autoimmune diseases along with ILD [interstitial lung disease] or any other causes of ILD, gets treated with immunosuppression,” explained Dr. Fischer, a rheumatologist with a special interest in autoimmune lung disease at the University of Colorado, Denver.

He cited a recent prospective blinded study in which 60 newly diagnosed ILD patients were evaluated separately by a multidisciplinary team comprising a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist and once again with the involvement of a rheumatologist. The rheumatologic assessment reclassified 21% of patients from IPF – that is, lung disease unrelated to connective tissue disease (CTD) or exposure to asbestos, bird droppings, or other triggers – to ILD with connective tissue disease (CTD-ILD). And the number of patients classified as having ILD with autoimmune features without meeting full diagnostic criteria for a major CTD, a category that includes antisynthetase syndrome and IgG4-related ILD, jumped by 77%. Also, the investigators determined that adding a rheumatologist to the multidisciplinary team would have resulted in seven fewer bronchoscopies and one less surgical biopsy among this 60-patient cohort (J Rheumatol. 2018 Nov;45[11]:1509-14).

It’s not at all uncommon to identify a new occult CTD in patients presenting with ILD. Dr. Fischer noted that in a series of 114 consecutive patients evaluated at the interdisciplinary ILD program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 30% of them had a well-defined CTD, half of whom, or 15% of the total, were newly diagnosed with CTD by virtue of their ILD evaluation (Respir Med. 2009 Aug;103[8]:1152-8).

A CTD-ILD diagnosis has prognostic implications: Survival is significantly better than with IPF, with the exception of ILD with rheumatoid arthritis (RA-ILD), where the prognosis seems to be worse than for other forms of CTD-ILD and is more akin to that of IPF. Indeed, the risk of death is threefold higher in patients with RA-ILD than in those with RA without ILD. While the predominant pattern of lung injury in RA-ILD is usual interstitial pneumonia, marked by fibrosis and honeycombing, the predominant pattern in all other forms of CTD-ILD is nonspecific interstitial pneumonia.

A French study of 778 consecutive patients with ILD highlighted how common autoimmune disease is in the ILD population. Nearly one-third of the ILD patients had autoimmune disease: 22% had CTD-ILD and another 7% had interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features, or IPAF (Respir Med. 2017 Feb;123:56-62).

Dr. Fischer was lead author of a report by a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society task force that first put forth the term IPAF to describe ILD patients with subtle serologic, clinical, and/or morphologic findings that don’t rise to the level required for formal diagnosis of a defined CTD (Eur Respir J. 2015 Oct;46[4]:976-87).

IPAF is a research construct. Patients who fall into this category are the focus of ongoing prospective studies aimed at better understanding their prognosis and appropriate treatment.

The big three autoimmune diseases comorbid with ILD as reported by Dr. Fischer and coinvestigators in a study of 237 patients with an autoimmune phenotype in a Denver ILD clinic were scleroderma, present in 37%; rheumatoid arthritis, present in 18%; and myositis, with a prevalence of 11%. Another 24% had IPAF.

“There was surprisingly little SLE [3%], and not much Sjögren’s [6%],” he observed.

When pulmonologists come knocking on Dr. Fischer’s door asking if their patients with ILD have occult CTD, he finds it helpful to look for quantifiable specific extrathoracic features suggestive of rheumatologic disease, such as Raynaud’s, sclerodactyly, mechanic hands, and Gottron’s papules.

The ILD practice guidelines recently issued jointly by the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society recommend that serologic evaluation for a long list of autoantibodies “should be performed even in the absence of signs or symptoms of connective tissue disease” (Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Sep 1;198[5]:e44-e68). Dr. Fischer indicated he has a problem with that recommendation since nonrheumatologists aren’t typically adept in interpreting the significance of autoantibodies.

“I will just tell you, I see a lot of patients for ILD evaluation, and autoimmune serologies often lead to more questions than answers. They always need to be considered within the clinical context,” the rheumatologist said.

High-resolution CT (HRCT) is the imaging method of choice for detecting ILD and classifying its severity. HRCT also holds clues for detection of CTD-ILD.

“There are no upper lung–predominant ILDs that really make you think CTD. Our diseases like the lower lung zones. We like to see multicompartment involvement. When you hear ‘airways and parenchymal,’ ‘pleural,’ ‘pericardial thickening,’ that sounds a lot like autoimmune disease,” according to Dr. Fischer.

Also, the presence of a dilated esophagus on HRCT is strongly suggestive of scleroderma, he added.

In the event a pathology report is available, it’s important to read the fine print. Secondary histopathologic features of CTD-ILD include extensive pleuritis, lymphoid aggregates with germinal center formation, dense perivascular collagen, and/or prominent plasmacytic infiltration.

While ILD can be the first manifestation of an underlying occult CTD, it’s also common for a patient with an established CTD to subsequently develop ILD.

Rheumatologists are no strangers to ambiguity, so it should come as no surprise that while audible bibasilar crackles on physical examination are strongly predictive of ILD, their absence doesn’t indicate absence of ILD. Similarly, dyspnea in a patient with established CTD can be tough to interpret, and absence of dyspnea doesn’t imply absence of ILD. If a patient with CTD is on immunosuppressive therapy, bronchoalveolar lavage is of value in ruling out infection.

When to order a surgical lung biopsy

“If you’re pretty sure your patient had a CTD and then you get a characteristic HRCT and there are no exposures to account for the imaging findings – if we have a scenario where it all fits – we often don’t biopsy. Biopsy usually means a 2-night hospital stay, and it’s reportedly associated with about a 1% mortality risk. And the clinical reality is the biopsy may not impact treatment. They’re going to give you azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, or prednisone for the ILD and the extrathoracic disease irrespective of the ILD pattern,” the rheumatologist said.

He reserves surgical biopsy for patients with an atypical HRCT, those with known CTD and a possible alternative etiology for the ILD, such as exposure to asbestos or owning pet birds, and patients where he’s just not sure a CTD is actually present.
 

Treatment of CTD-ILD

“The available controlled efficacy data are limited to scleroderma-ILD, where cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate work a little bit. And that’s it. We don’t have good data to guide us on which agent for which CTD or ILD pattern, for how long, or what dose,” Dr. Fischer said. “We have good drugs for the joints, nothing for the lungs. Treatment is not evidence based. We initiate with high-dose steroids, switch to a steroid-sparing agent, we evaluate the response to treatment with surveillance every 3-6 months by 6-minute walking, lung function tests, and sometimes imaging, and we treat for a long time. Oftentimes stability equals success.”

That being said, it must be emphasized that not all CTD-ILD warrants treatment of the pulmonary disease. If the patient’s ILD is mild and indolent, clinical surveillance is often appropriate, he continued.

More important than the pharmacotherapy available at present are adjunctive nonpharmacologic approaches: supplemental oxygen, pulmonary rehabilitation, treatment of comorbid GERD, immunizations, and addressing mental health issues related to these devastating diseases.

“We really don’t do these things well,” Dr. Fischer said.
 

On the horizon

An investigator-driven phase 2 clinical trial of the antifibrotic drug pirfenidone (Esbriet), now approved for IPF, is underway in patients with RA-ILD. Results of a trial of antifibrotic therapy in patients with scleroderma-ILD are due to be presented this year at EULAR. And a small study of antifibrotic therapy in patients with myositis-ILD is ongoing.

As for the biologics, there is a signal in the literature that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may be associated with increased risk of rapidly progressive lung disease in patients with RA-ILD. An influential report from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register on 299 patients with preexisting RA-ILD treated with anti-TNF therapy and 68 who received traditional disease-modifying antirrheumatic drugs showed that while mortality during follow-up was similar in the two groups, the proportion of deaths attributed to RA-ILD was 21% in the group on anti-TNF therapy, compared with only 7% in those on traditional DMARDs (Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jun;69[6]:1086-91).

Paul Emery, MD, rose from the audience at Dr. Fischer’s request to share his extensive experience with anti-TNF therapy and rituximab (Rituxan) in the setting of RA-ILD. When he was involved in several of the pivotal clinical trials of anti-TNF agents for RA he encountered a couple of cases of rapidly progressive ILD in patients on treatment.

“We had never before seen rapidly progressive ILD that didn’t respond to cyclophosphamide. Both patients died,” recalled Dr. Emery, professor of rheumatology and director of the University of Leeds (England) Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Center.

“Our experience is if you’ve got mild ILD – and if you look hard enough you can find it in many rheumatoids – TNF inhibitor therapy doesn’t affect it. But if there’s any hint of deterioration we move away from anti-TNF therapy. Our preference has been for rituximab,” he said.

Dr. Emery was senior author of the largest study to date of rituximab in patients with RA-ILD (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2017 Aug 1;56[8]:1348-57). While he and his coinvestigators concluded that rituximab “appears to be an acceptable therapeutic choice for patients with RA-ILD,” Dr. Fischer didn’t find persuasive evidence from this relatively small retrospective observational study in which only 44 patients had lung data available.

“My own conclusion is evidence is lacking to support a role of rituximab for treating ILD in RA,” Dr. Fischer said.

He reported receiving research grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Corbus and serving as a consultant to a handful of other pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@mdedge.com

MAUI, HAWAII – The latest practice guidelines on the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease issued by the American Thoracic Society and allied organizations recommend as the standard of care a review of all cases by a multidisciplinary team consisting of a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist to ensure accurate diagnosis and classification.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

That’s not good enough. A rheumatologist needs to routinely be involved in those multidisciplinary discussions as well, Aryeh Fischer, MD, asserted at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Why? Because a rheumatologist’s input often leads to a change in diagnosis. And that change can have important prognostic and therapeutic implications.

“We want to distinguish the IPF [idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis] patients from everybody else. The most important thing with regards to therapy is to identify the IPF patient. The IPF patients are the only ones who are able to be treated with antifibrotic agents: pirfenidone or nintedanib. And we know that immunosuppression can make patients with IPF worse; their risks of hospitalization and mortality are higher on immunosuppression. But everybody else, including anyone with any of the autoimmune diseases along with ILD [interstitial lung disease] or any other causes of ILD, gets treated with immunosuppression,” explained Dr. Fischer, a rheumatologist with a special interest in autoimmune lung disease at the University of Colorado, Denver.

He cited a recent prospective blinded study in which 60 newly diagnosed ILD patients were evaluated separately by a multidisciplinary team comprising a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist and once again with the involvement of a rheumatologist. The rheumatologic assessment reclassified 21% of patients from IPF – that is, lung disease unrelated to connective tissue disease (CTD) or exposure to asbestos, bird droppings, or other triggers – to ILD with connective tissue disease (CTD-ILD). And the number of patients classified as having ILD with autoimmune features without meeting full diagnostic criteria for a major CTD, a category that includes antisynthetase syndrome and IgG4-related ILD, jumped by 77%. Also, the investigators determined that adding a rheumatologist to the multidisciplinary team would have resulted in seven fewer bronchoscopies and one less surgical biopsy among this 60-patient cohort (J Rheumatol. 2018 Nov;45[11]:1509-14).

It’s not at all uncommon to identify a new occult CTD in patients presenting with ILD. Dr. Fischer noted that in a series of 114 consecutive patients evaluated at the interdisciplinary ILD program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 30% of them had a well-defined CTD, half of whom, or 15% of the total, were newly diagnosed with CTD by virtue of their ILD evaluation (Respir Med. 2009 Aug;103[8]:1152-8).

A CTD-ILD diagnosis has prognostic implications: Survival is significantly better than with IPF, with the exception of ILD with rheumatoid arthritis (RA-ILD), where the prognosis seems to be worse than for other forms of CTD-ILD and is more akin to that of IPF. Indeed, the risk of death is threefold higher in patients with RA-ILD than in those with RA without ILD. While the predominant pattern of lung injury in RA-ILD is usual interstitial pneumonia, marked by fibrosis and honeycombing, the predominant pattern in all other forms of CTD-ILD is nonspecific interstitial pneumonia.

A French study of 778 consecutive patients with ILD highlighted how common autoimmune disease is in the ILD population. Nearly one-third of the ILD patients had autoimmune disease: 22% had CTD-ILD and another 7% had interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features, or IPAF (Respir Med. 2017 Feb;123:56-62).

Dr. Fischer was lead author of a report by a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society task force that first put forth the term IPAF to describe ILD patients with subtle serologic, clinical, and/or morphologic findings that don’t rise to the level required for formal diagnosis of a defined CTD (Eur Respir J. 2015 Oct;46[4]:976-87).

IPAF is a research construct. Patients who fall into this category are the focus of ongoing prospective studies aimed at better understanding their prognosis and appropriate treatment.

The big three autoimmune diseases comorbid with ILD as reported by Dr. Fischer and coinvestigators in a study of 237 patients with an autoimmune phenotype in a Denver ILD clinic were scleroderma, present in 37%; rheumatoid arthritis, present in 18%; and myositis, with a prevalence of 11%. Another 24% had IPAF.

“There was surprisingly little SLE [3%], and not much Sjögren’s [6%],” he observed.

When pulmonologists come knocking on Dr. Fischer’s door asking if their patients with ILD have occult CTD, he finds it helpful to look for quantifiable specific extrathoracic features suggestive of rheumatologic disease, such as Raynaud’s, sclerodactyly, mechanic hands, and Gottron’s papules.

The ILD practice guidelines recently issued jointly by the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society recommend that serologic evaluation for a long list of autoantibodies “should be performed even in the absence of signs or symptoms of connective tissue disease” (Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Sep 1;198[5]:e44-e68). Dr. Fischer indicated he has a problem with that recommendation since nonrheumatologists aren’t typically adept in interpreting the significance of autoantibodies.

“I will just tell you, I see a lot of patients for ILD evaluation, and autoimmune serologies often lead to more questions than answers. They always need to be considered within the clinical context,” the rheumatologist said.

High-resolution CT (HRCT) is the imaging method of choice for detecting ILD and classifying its severity. HRCT also holds clues for detection of CTD-ILD.

“There are no upper lung–predominant ILDs that really make you think CTD. Our diseases like the lower lung zones. We like to see multicompartment involvement. When you hear ‘airways and parenchymal,’ ‘pleural,’ ‘pericardial thickening,’ that sounds a lot like autoimmune disease,” according to Dr. Fischer.

Also, the presence of a dilated esophagus on HRCT is strongly suggestive of scleroderma, he added.

In the event a pathology report is available, it’s important to read the fine print. Secondary histopathologic features of CTD-ILD include extensive pleuritis, lymphoid aggregates with germinal center formation, dense perivascular collagen, and/or prominent plasmacytic infiltration.

While ILD can be the first manifestation of an underlying occult CTD, it’s also common for a patient with an established CTD to subsequently develop ILD.

Rheumatologists are no strangers to ambiguity, so it should come as no surprise that while audible bibasilar crackles on physical examination are strongly predictive of ILD, their absence doesn’t indicate absence of ILD. Similarly, dyspnea in a patient with established CTD can be tough to interpret, and absence of dyspnea doesn’t imply absence of ILD. If a patient with CTD is on immunosuppressive therapy, bronchoalveolar lavage is of value in ruling out infection.

When to order a surgical lung biopsy

“If you’re pretty sure your patient had a CTD and then you get a characteristic HRCT and there are no exposures to account for the imaging findings – if we have a scenario where it all fits – we often don’t biopsy. Biopsy usually means a 2-night hospital stay, and it’s reportedly associated with about a 1% mortality risk. And the clinical reality is the biopsy may not impact treatment. They’re going to give you azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, or prednisone for the ILD and the extrathoracic disease irrespective of the ILD pattern,” the rheumatologist said.

He reserves surgical biopsy for patients with an atypical HRCT, those with known CTD and a possible alternative etiology for the ILD, such as exposure to asbestos or owning pet birds, and patients where he’s just not sure a CTD is actually present.
 

Treatment of CTD-ILD

“The available controlled efficacy data are limited to scleroderma-ILD, where cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate work a little bit. And that’s it. We don’t have good data to guide us on which agent for which CTD or ILD pattern, for how long, or what dose,” Dr. Fischer said. “We have good drugs for the joints, nothing for the lungs. Treatment is not evidence based. We initiate with high-dose steroids, switch to a steroid-sparing agent, we evaluate the response to treatment with surveillance every 3-6 months by 6-minute walking, lung function tests, and sometimes imaging, and we treat for a long time. Oftentimes stability equals success.”

That being said, it must be emphasized that not all CTD-ILD warrants treatment of the pulmonary disease. If the patient’s ILD is mild and indolent, clinical surveillance is often appropriate, he continued.

More important than the pharmacotherapy available at present are adjunctive nonpharmacologic approaches: supplemental oxygen, pulmonary rehabilitation, treatment of comorbid GERD, immunizations, and addressing mental health issues related to these devastating diseases.

“We really don’t do these things well,” Dr. Fischer said.
 

On the horizon

An investigator-driven phase 2 clinical trial of the antifibrotic drug pirfenidone (Esbriet), now approved for IPF, is underway in patients with RA-ILD. Results of a trial of antifibrotic therapy in patients with scleroderma-ILD are due to be presented this year at EULAR. And a small study of antifibrotic therapy in patients with myositis-ILD is ongoing.

As for the biologics, there is a signal in the literature that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may be associated with increased risk of rapidly progressive lung disease in patients with RA-ILD. An influential report from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register on 299 patients with preexisting RA-ILD treated with anti-TNF therapy and 68 who received traditional disease-modifying antirrheumatic drugs showed that while mortality during follow-up was similar in the two groups, the proportion of deaths attributed to RA-ILD was 21% in the group on anti-TNF therapy, compared with only 7% in those on traditional DMARDs (Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jun;69[6]:1086-91).

Paul Emery, MD, rose from the audience at Dr. Fischer’s request to share his extensive experience with anti-TNF therapy and rituximab (Rituxan) in the setting of RA-ILD. When he was involved in several of the pivotal clinical trials of anti-TNF agents for RA he encountered a couple of cases of rapidly progressive ILD in patients on treatment.

“We had never before seen rapidly progressive ILD that didn’t respond to cyclophosphamide. Both patients died,” recalled Dr. Emery, professor of rheumatology and director of the University of Leeds (England) Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Center.

“Our experience is if you’ve got mild ILD – and if you look hard enough you can find it in many rheumatoids – TNF inhibitor therapy doesn’t affect it. But if there’s any hint of deterioration we move away from anti-TNF therapy. Our preference has been for rituximab,” he said.

Dr. Emery was senior author of the largest study to date of rituximab in patients with RA-ILD (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2017 Aug 1;56[8]:1348-57). While he and his coinvestigators concluded that rituximab “appears to be an acceptable therapeutic choice for patients with RA-ILD,” Dr. Fischer didn’t find persuasive evidence from this relatively small retrospective observational study in which only 44 patients had lung data available.

“My own conclusion is evidence is lacking to support a role of rituximab for treating ILD in RA,” Dr. Fischer said.

He reported receiving research grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Corbus and serving as a consultant to a handful of other pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@mdedge.com

MAUI, HAWAII – The latest practice guidelines on the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease issued by the American Thoracic Society and allied organizations recommend as the standard of care a review of all cases by a multidisciplinary team consisting of a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist to ensure accurate diagnosis and classification.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

That’s not good enough. A rheumatologist needs to routinely be involved in those multidisciplinary discussions as well, Aryeh Fischer, MD, asserted at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Why? Because a rheumatologist’s input often leads to a change in diagnosis. And that change can have important prognostic and therapeutic implications.

“We want to distinguish the IPF [idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis] patients from everybody else. The most important thing with regards to therapy is to identify the IPF patient. The IPF patients are the only ones who are able to be treated with antifibrotic agents: pirfenidone or nintedanib. And we know that immunosuppression can make patients with IPF worse; their risks of hospitalization and mortality are higher on immunosuppression. But everybody else, including anyone with any of the autoimmune diseases along with ILD [interstitial lung disease] or any other causes of ILD, gets treated with immunosuppression,” explained Dr. Fischer, a rheumatologist with a special interest in autoimmune lung disease at the University of Colorado, Denver.

He cited a recent prospective blinded study in which 60 newly diagnosed ILD patients were evaluated separately by a multidisciplinary team comprising a pulmonologist, radiologist, and pathologist and once again with the involvement of a rheumatologist. The rheumatologic assessment reclassified 21% of patients from IPF – that is, lung disease unrelated to connective tissue disease (CTD) or exposure to asbestos, bird droppings, or other triggers – to ILD with connective tissue disease (CTD-ILD). And the number of patients classified as having ILD with autoimmune features without meeting full diagnostic criteria for a major CTD, a category that includes antisynthetase syndrome and IgG4-related ILD, jumped by 77%. Also, the investigators determined that adding a rheumatologist to the multidisciplinary team would have resulted in seven fewer bronchoscopies and one less surgical biopsy among this 60-patient cohort (J Rheumatol. 2018 Nov;45[11]:1509-14).

It’s not at all uncommon to identify a new occult CTD in patients presenting with ILD. Dr. Fischer noted that in a series of 114 consecutive patients evaluated at the interdisciplinary ILD program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 30% of them had a well-defined CTD, half of whom, or 15% of the total, were newly diagnosed with CTD by virtue of their ILD evaluation (Respir Med. 2009 Aug;103[8]:1152-8).

A CTD-ILD diagnosis has prognostic implications: Survival is significantly better than with IPF, with the exception of ILD with rheumatoid arthritis (RA-ILD), where the prognosis seems to be worse than for other forms of CTD-ILD and is more akin to that of IPF. Indeed, the risk of death is threefold higher in patients with RA-ILD than in those with RA without ILD. While the predominant pattern of lung injury in RA-ILD is usual interstitial pneumonia, marked by fibrosis and honeycombing, the predominant pattern in all other forms of CTD-ILD is nonspecific interstitial pneumonia.

A French study of 778 consecutive patients with ILD highlighted how common autoimmune disease is in the ILD population. Nearly one-third of the ILD patients had autoimmune disease: 22% had CTD-ILD and another 7% had interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features, or IPAF (Respir Med. 2017 Feb;123:56-62).

Dr. Fischer was lead author of a report by a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society task force that first put forth the term IPAF to describe ILD patients with subtle serologic, clinical, and/or morphologic findings that don’t rise to the level required for formal diagnosis of a defined CTD (Eur Respir J. 2015 Oct;46[4]:976-87).

IPAF is a research construct. Patients who fall into this category are the focus of ongoing prospective studies aimed at better understanding their prognosis and appropriate treatment.

The big three autoimmune diseases comorbid with ILD as reported by Dr. Fischer and coinvestigators in a study of 237 patients with an autoimmune phenotype in a Denver ILD clinic were scleroderma, present in 37%; rheumatoid arthritis, present in 18%; and myositis, with a prevalence of 11%. Another 24% had IPAF.

“There was surprisingly little SLE [3%], and not much Sjögren’s [6%],” he observed.

When pulmonologists come knocking on Dr. Fischer’s door asking if their patients with ILD have occult CTD, he finds it helpful to look for quantifiable specific extrathoracic features suggestive of rheumatologic disease, such as Raynaud’s, sclerodactyly, mechanic hands, and Gottron’s papules.

The ILD practice guidelines recently issued jointly by the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society recommend that serologic evaluation for a long list of autoantibodies “should be performed even in the absence of signs or symptoms of connective tissue disease” (Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018 Sep 1;198[5]:e44-e68). Dr. Fischer indicated he has a problem with that recommendation since nonrheumatologists aren’t typically adept in interpreting the significance of autoantibodies.

“I will just tell you, I see a lot of patients for ILD evaluation, and autoimmune serologies often lead to more questions than answers. They always need to be considered within the clinical context,” the rheumatologist said.

High-resolution CT (HRCT) is the imaging method of choice for detecting ILD and classifying its severity. HRCT also holds clues for detection of CTD-ILD.

“There are no upper lung–predominant ILDs that really make you think CTD. Our diseases like the lower lung zones. We like to see multicompartment involvement. When you hear ‘airways and parenchymal,’ ‘pleural,’ ‘pericardial thickening,’ that sounds a lot like autoimmune disease,” according to Dr. Fischer.

Also, the presence of a dilated esophagus on HRCT is strongly suggestive of scleroderma, he added.

In the event a pathology report is available, it’s important to read the fine print. Secondary histopathologic features of CTD-ILD include extensive pleuritis, lymphoid aggregates with germinal center formation, dense perivascular collagen, and/or prominent plasmacytic infiltration.

While ILD can be the first manifestation of an underlying occult CTD, it’s also common for a patient with an established CTD to subsequently develop ILD.

Rheumatologists are no strangers to ambiguity, so it should come as no surprise that while audible bibasilar crackles on physical examination are strongly predictive of ILD, their absence doesn’t indicate absence of ILD. Similarly, dyspnea in a patient with established CTD can be tough to interpret, and absence of dyspnea doesn’t imply absence of ILD. If a patient with CTD is on immunosuppressive therapy, bronchoalveolar lavage is of value in ruling out infection.

When to order a surgical lung biopsy

“If you’re pretty sure your patient had a CTD and then you get a characteristic HRCT and there are no exposures to account for the imaging findings – if we have a scenario where it all fits – we often don’t biopsy. Biopsy usually means a 2-night hospital stay, and it’s reportedly associated with about a 1% mortality risk. And the clinical reality is the biopsy may not impact treatment. They’re going to give you azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, or prednisone for the ILD and the extrathoracic disease irrespective of the ILD pattern,” the rheumatologist said.

He reserves surgical biopsy for patients with an atypical HRCT, those with known CTD and a possible alternative etiology for the ILD, such as exposure to asbestos or owning pet birds, and patients where he’s just not sure a CTD is actually present.
 

Treatment of CTD-ILD

“The available controlled efficacy data are limited to scleroderma-ILD, where cyclophosphamide and mycophenolate work a little bit. And that’s it. We don’t have good data to guide us on which agent for which CTD or ILD pattern, for how long, or what dose,” Dr. Fischer said. “We have good drugs for the joints, nothing for the lungs. Treatment is not evidence based. We initiate with high-dose steroids, switch to a steroid-sparing agent, we evaluate the response to treatment with surveillance every 3-6 months by 6-minute walking, lung function tests, and sometimes imaging, and we treat for a long time. Oftentimes stability equals success.”

That being said, it must be emphasized that not all CTD-ILD warrants treatment of the pulmonary disease. If the patient’s ILD is mild and indolent, clinical surveillance is often appropriate, he continued.

More important than the pharmacotherapy available at present are adjunctive nonpharmacologic approaches: supplemental oxygen, pulmonary rehabilitation, treatment of comorbid GERD, immunizations, and addressing mental health issues related to these devastating diseases.

“We really don’t do these things well,” Dr. Fischer said.
 

On the horizon

An investigator-driven phase 2 clinical trial of the antifibrotic drug pirfenidone (Esbriet), now approved for IPF, is underway in patients with RA-ILD. Results of a trial of antifibrotic therapy in patients with scleroderma-ILD are due to be presented this year at EULAR. And a small study of antifibrotic therapy in patients with myositis-ILD is ongoing.

As for the biologics, there is a signal in the literature that tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may be associated with increased risk of rapidly progressive lung disease in patients with RA-ILD. An influential report from the British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Register on 299 patients with preexisting RA-ILD treated with anti-TNF therapy and 68 who received traditional disease-modifying antirrheumatic drugs showed that while mortality during follow-up was similar in the two groups, the proportion of deaths attributed to RA-ILD was 21% in the group on anti-TNF therapy, compared with only 7% in those on traditional DMARDs (Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Jun;69[6]:1086-91).

Paul Emery, MD, rose from the audience at Dr. Fischer’s request to share his extensive experience with anti-TNF therapy and rituximab (Rituxan) in the setting of RA-ILD. When he was involved in several of the pivotal clinical trials of anti-TNF agents for RA he encountered a couple of cases of rapidly progressive ILD in patients on treatment.

“We had never before seen rapidly progressive ILD that didn’t respond to cyclophosphamide. Both patients died,” recalled Dr. Emery, professor of rheumatology and director of the University of Leeds (England) Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Center.

“Our experience is if you’ve got mild ILD – and if you look hard enough you can find it in many rheumatoids – TNF inhibitor therapy doesn’t affect it. But if there’s any hint of deterioration we move away from anti-TNF therapy. Our preference has been for rituximab,” he said.

Dr. Emery was senior author of the largest study to date of rituximab in patients with RA-ILD (Rheumatology [Oxford]. 2017 Aug 1;56[8]:1348-57). While he and his coinvestigators concluded that rituximab “appears to be an acceptable therapeutic choice for patients with RA-ILD,” Dr. Fischer didn’t find persuasive evidence from this relatively small retrospective observational study in which only 44 patients had lung data available.

“My own conclusion is evidence is lacking to support a role of rituximab for treating ILD in RA,” Dr. Fischer said.

He reported receiving research grants from Boehringer-Ingelheim and Corbus and serving as a consultant to a handful of other pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@mdedge.com

Another Hill Day is coming – the all-day advocacy event on Capitol Hill is scheduled in conjunction with the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Annual Conference whenever it is held in Washington, DC. In 2019, Hill Day will take place on March 27, the final day of HM19.

This will be the fourth Hill Day, and the last for some time, said Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, senior advisor for government affairs at SHM and the society’s immediate past president. For at least the next 5 years, SHM’s annual conferences won’t be held in Washington, so there will not be any opportunities to plan a Hill Day during that time. “Members may want to take advantage of this opportunity,” Dr. Greeno said. “The people who do this never forget it.”
 

How Hill Day works

Sign up for Hill Day and you’ll spend a day visiting legislators and their health care staffers to educate them on what hospital medicine is, what a hospitalist does, and some of the pressing issues that affect the profession, said Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, chair of the SHM Public Policy Committee. “We try to leverage participants’ work and home addresses to pair them up with legislators from that area. Some hospitalists have personal or professional relationships with some of the legislators, and even if they’re not in their area, we’ll try to leverage that. And for people who have expertise in a particular topic, we try to arrange an audience with a member of Congress who may be promoting or sponsoring a bill related to that.”

Hill Day volunteers will attend an orientation to learn more about what the day will look like and what they’ll be talking about in their meetings. “We’ll only have time to cover one or two issues, and we’re in the process now of choosing the issues we want to address. We orient participants on those subjects so everybody is kind of saying the same thing,” Dr. Greeno said. “People shouldn’t be afraid of not being conversant with the issues because we do sufficient orientation that everybody gets comfortable enough to do a good job.”

Registration for Hill Day is happening online now. HM19 attendees can register at https://s1.goeshow.com/shm/annual/2019/registration_form.cfm.

“We beg people: If you sign up, show up, because we have many more people trying to participate than we can accommodate,” Dr. Greeno said. “If you change your mind, that’s fine because we have a waiting list, but please let us know because somebody else wants to take your place.”
 

The purpose of Hill Day

Educating legislators and their health care staff is the goal of the day, and it’s an important job. “Hospital medicine is still a relatively new field,” Dr. Lenchus said. “There are a fair number of legislators who still don’t know what a hospitalist is or what hospital medicine is. Part of our visits is always to educate them about what we do and what our impact is on the health care landscape of the country.” He added that educating Hill staff about the most pressing issues is another primary goal.

“Finally, and this is what separates us from other organizations that do legislative advocacy, we try to leave them with the idea that we’re here to help,” Dr. Lenchus said. “If there’s an issue or a particular bill that we’re asking them to sponsor or cosponsor, that’s one part of a visit. But by and large, we are trying to leave them with the sense that SHM is a resource when it comes to health care–related issues. We want to be there for legislators so that they can understand our position accurately from the outset.”

In short, Hill Day offers a rare opportunity to have direct access to the people who are voting on new legislation affecting hospitalists and affecting the implementation of existing legislation. “This is where the rubber meets the road,” Dr. Lenchus said. Each time a Hill Day is held, he noted, attendance increases. “That’s a true testament to the level of involvement and the interest that hospitalists have across the country. If you’re at all interested, you should absolutely sign up. This will be an amazing experience.”
 

The lasting impact

Though it’s just one day, Hill Day’s effects are significant.

“Before I started doing this work, I often thought, ‘What impact could someone have going into a legislator’s office?’ ” Dr. Greeno said. “But the answer is ‘A lot.’ The members and staff really do listen – especially if an advocate is highly educated and represent what legislators consider an important constituency, like health care providers. Health care is a hot topic, and it’s probably going to be one of the hot topics in the next election. Hospitalists have good ideas, and as a result these meetings are extremely influential; we wouldn’t do it otherwise. It is fun, but we’re not doing it for fun. We’re doing it because we know we can make a difference.”

In fact, in terms of impact on Capitol Hill, SHM punches above its weight, he added.

“We’re a relatively new society; we’re not huge. There are lots of societies that are much bigger than us and have many more resources, but people on the Hill have told us they like talking with us because they know we’re not looking at things the same way,” Dr. Greeno revealed. “We’re trying to help, and the issues that we’re addressing are not necessarily self-serving. We’re not saying, ‘You need to do this because it will make more money for our doctors.’ Instead, we’re saying, ‘You need to do this because the way it’s being done now is hurting patients. It’s hurting the health care system, and we have ideas about how to make that better.’ ”

SHM’s impressive track record has earned the society a positive reputation that will underlie the Hill Day meetings. “When we first set up the policy shop at SHM, we wanted to be seen as providers who cared about the American health care system and our patients,” Dr. Greeno said. “We have established that reputation, and that has led members on Capitol Hill to recognize us as being well intentioned and knowledgeable. So we have an outsize influence in Congress for our age and our size. When 200 hospitalists go to Capitol Hill, it’s an important thing.”

For more information about Hill Day, including details about participation, visit shmannualconference.org/hill-day/.

Another Hill Day is coming – the all-day advocacy event on Capitol Hill is scheduled in conjunction with the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Annual Conference whenever it is held in Washington, DC. In 2019, Hill Day will take place on March 27, the final day of HM19.

This will be the fourth Hill Day, and the last for some time, said Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, senior advisor for government affairs at SHM and the society’s immediate past president. For at least the next 5 years, SHM’s annual conferences won’t be held in Washington, so there will not be any opportunities to plan a Hill Day during that time. “Members may want to take advantage of this opportunity,” Dr. Greeno said. “The people who do this never forget it.”
 

How Hill Day works

Sign up for Hill Day and you’ll spend a day visiting legislators and their health care staffers to educate them on what hospital medicine is, what a hospitalist does, and some of the pressing issues that affect the profession, said Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, chair of the SHM Public Policy Committee. “We try to leverage participants’ work and home addresses to pair them up with legislators from that area. Some hospitalists have personal or professional relationships with some of the legislators, and even if they’re not in their area, we’ll try to leverage that. And for people who have expertise in a particular topic, we try to arrange an audience with a member of Congress who may be promoting or sponsoring a bill related to that.”

Hill Day volunteers will attend an orientation to learn more about what the day will look like and what they’ll be talking about in their meetings. “We’ll only have time to cover one or two issues, and we’re in the process now of choosing the issues we want to address. We orient participants on those subjects so everybody is kind of saying the same thing,” Dr. Greeno said. “People shouldn’t be afraid of not being conversant with the issues because we do sufficient orientation that everybody gets comfortable enough to do a good job.”

Registration for Hill Day is happening online now. HM19 attendees can register at https://s1.goeshow.com/shm/annual/2019/registration_form.cfm.

“We beg people: If you sign up, show up, because we have many more people trying to participate than we can accommodate,” Dr. Greeno said. “If you change your mind, that’s fine because we have a waiting list, but please let us know because somebody else wants to take your place.”
 

The purpose of Hill Day

Educating legislators and their health care staff is the goal of the day, and it’s an important job. “Hospital medicine is still a relatively new field,” Dr. Lenchus said. “There are a fair number of legislators who still don’t know what a hospitalist is or what hospital medicine is. Part of our visits is always to educate them about what we do and what our impact is on the health care landscape of the country.” He added that educating Hill staff about the most pressing issues is another primary goal.

“Finally, and this is what separates us from other organizations that do legislative advocacy, we try to leave them with the idea that we’re here to help,” Dr. Lenchus said. “If there’s an issue or a particular bill that we’re asking them to sponsor or cosponsor, that’s one part of a visit. But by and large, we are trying to leave them with the sense that SHM is a resource when it comes to health care–related issues. We want to be there for legislators so that they can understand our position accurately from the outset.”

In short, Hill Day offers a rare opportunity to have direct access to the people who are voting on new legislation affecting hospitalists and affecting the implementation of existing legislation. “This is where the rubber meets the road,” Dr. Lenchus said. Each time a Hill Day is held, he noted, attendance increases. “That’s a true testament to the level of involvement and the interest that hospitalists have across the country. If you’re at all interested, you should absolutely sign up. This will be an amazing experience.”
 

The lasting impact

Though it’s just one day, Hill Day’s effects are significant.

“Before I started doing this work, I often thought, ‘What impact could someone have going into a legislator’s office?’ ” Dr. Greeno said. “But the answer is ‘A lot.’ The members and staff really do listen – especially if an advocate is highly educated and represent what legislators consider an important constituency, like health care providers. Health care is a hot topic, and it’s probably going to be one of the hot topics in the next election. Hospitalists have good ideas, and as a result these meetings are extremely influential; we wouldn’t do it otherwise. It is fun, but we’re not doing it for fun. We’re doing it because we know we can make a difference.”

In fact, in terms of impact on Capitol Hill, SHM punches above its weight, he added.

“We’re a relatively new society; we’re not huge. There are lots of societies that are much bigger than us and have many more resources, but people on the Hill have told us they like talking with us because they know we’re not looking at things the same way,” Dr. Greeno revealed. “We’re trying to help, and the issues that we’re addressing are not necessarily self-serving. We’re not saying, ‘You need to do this because it will make more money for our doctors.’ Instead, we’re saying, ‘You need to do this because the way it’s being done now is hurting patients. It’s hurting the health care system, and we have ideas about how to make that better.’ ”

SHM’s impressive track record has earned the society a positive reputation that will underlie the Hill Day meetings. “When we first set up the policy shop at SHM, we wanted to be seen as providers who cared about the American health care system and our patients,” Dr. Greeno said. “We have established that reputation, and that has led members on Capitol Hill to recognize us as being well intentioned and knowledgeable. So we have an outsize influence in Congress for our age and our size. When 200 hospitalists go to Capitol Hill, it’s an important thing.”

For more information about Hill Day, including details about participation, visit shmannualconference.org/hill-day/.

Another Hill Day is coming – the all-day advocacy event on Capitol Hill is scheduled in conjunction with the Society of Hospital Medicine’s Annual Conference whenever it is held in Washington, DC. In 2019, Hill Day will take place on March 27, the final day of HM19.

This will be the fourth Hill Day, and the last for some time, said Ron Greeno, MD, FCCP, MHM, senior advisor for government affairs at SHM and the society’s immediate past president. For at least the next 5 years, SHM’s annual conferences won’t be held in Washington, so there will not be any opportunities to plan a Hill Day during that time. “Members may want to take advantage of this opportunity,” Dr. Greeno said. “The people who do this never forget it.”
 

How Hill Day works

Sign up for Hill Day and you’ll spend a day visiting legislators and their health care staffers to educate them on what hospital medicine is, what a hospitalist does, and some of the pressing issues that affect the profession, said Joshua Lenchus, DO, RPh, FACP, SFHM, chair of the SHM Public Policy Committee. “We try to leverage participants’ work and home addresses to pair them up with legislators from that area. Some hospitalists have personal or professional relationships with some of the legislators, and even if they’re not in their area, we’ll try to leverage that. And for people who have expertise in a particular topic, we try to arrange an audience with a member of Congress who may be promoting or sponsoring a bill related to that.”

Hill Day volunteers will attend an orientation to learn more about what the day will look like and what they’ll be talking about in their meetings. “We’ll only have time to cover one or two issues, and we’re in the process now of choosing the issues we want to address. We orient participants on those subjects so everybody is kind of saying the same thing,” Dr. Greeno said. “People shouldn’t be afraid of not being conversant with the issues because we do sufficient orientation that everybody gets comfortable enough to do a good job.”

Registration for Hill Day is happening online now. HM19 attendees can register at https://s1.goeshow.com/shm/annual/2019/registration_form.cfm.

“We beg people: If you sign up, show up, because we have many more people trying to participate than we can accommodate,” Dr. Greeno said. “If you change your mind, that’s fine because we have a waiting list, but please let us know because somebody else wants to take your place.”
 

The purpose of Hill Day

Educating legislators and their health care staff is the goal of the day, and it’s an important job. “Hospital medicine is still a relatively new field,” Dr. Lenchus said. “There are a fair number of legislators who still don’t know what a hospitalist is or what hospital medicine is. Part of our visits is always to educate them about what we do and what our impact is on the health care landscape of the country.” He added that educating Hill staff about the most pressing issues is another primary goal.

“Finally, and this is what separates us from other organizations that do legislative advocacy, we try to leave them with the idea that we’re here to help,” Dr. Lenchus said. “If there’s an issue or a particular bill that we’re asking them to sponsor or cosponsor, that’s one part of a visit. But by and large, we are trying to leave them with the sense that SHM is a resource when it comes to health care–related issues. We want to be there for legislators so that they can understand our position accurately from the outset.”

In short, Hill Day offers a rare opportunity to have direct access to the people who are voting on new legislation affecting hospitalists and affecting the implementation of existing legislation. “This is where the rubber meets the road,” Dr. Lenchus said. Each time a Hill Day is held, he noted, attendance increases. “That’s a true testament to the level of involvement and the interest that hospitalists have across the country. If you’re at all interested, you should absolutely sign up. This will be an amazing experience.”
 

The lasting impact

Though it’s just one day, Hill Day’s effects are significant.

“Before I started doing this work, I often thought, ‘What impact could someone have going into a legislator’s office?’ ” Dr. Greeno said. “But the answer is ‘A lot.’ The members and staff really do listen – especially if an advocate is highly educated and represent what legislators consider an important constituency, like health care providers. Health care is a hot topic, and it’s probably going to be one of the hot topics in the next election. Hospitalists have good ideas, and as a result these meetings are extremely influential; we wouldn’t do it otherwise. It is fun, but we’re not doing it for fun. We’re doing it because we know we can make a difference.”

In fact, in terms of impact on Capitol Hill, SHM punches above its weight, he added.

“We’re a relatively new society; we’re not huge. There are lots of societies that are much bigger than us and have many more resources, but people on the Hill have told us they like talking with us because they know we’re not looking at things the same way,” Dr. Greeno revealed. “We’re trying to help, and the issues that we’re addressing are not necessarily self-serving. We’re not saying, ‘You need to do this because it will make more money for our doctors.’ Instead, we’re saying, ‘You need to do this because the way it’s being done now is hurting patients. It’s hurting the health care system, and we have ideas about how to make that better.’ ”

SHM’s impressive track record has earned the society a positive reputation that will underlie the Hill Day meetings. “When we first set up the policy shop at SHM, we wanted to be seen as providers who cared about the American health care system and our patients,” Dr. Greeno said. “We have established that reputation, and that has led members on Capitol Hill to recognize us as being well intentioned and knowledgeable. So we have an outsize influence in Congress for our age and our size. When 200 hospitalists go to Capitol Hill, it’s an important thing.”

For more information about Hill Day, including details about participation, visit shmannualconference.org/hill-day/.

To the Editor:

In 1995, one of the authors (A.G.L.) reported the case of a 14-year-old boy who was diagnosed with pseudotumor cerebri following treatment with isotretinoin and tetracycline, both of which were implicated in the development of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). The patient subsequently underwent optic nerve sheath fenestration for decompression due to progressive deterioration of the visual field despite discontinuation of both drugs.¹

This patient recently returned to our office 28 years after his initial presentation with a recurrence of similar symptoms. He was subsequently diagnosed with elevated ICP after a single dose of doxycycline. His vision was 20/20 with correction for distance. Pupil size and extraocular motility were within normal limits. Physical examination was normal, and a dilated fundus examination showed a Frisen stage 1 disc edema in the right eye and a Frisen stage 3 disc edema in the left eye at presentation. The visual field showed enlarged blind spots in both eyes consistent with papilledema. Optical coherence tomography for optic nerve was 93 µm in the right eye and 124 µm in the left eye compared to earlier measures of 66 and 68 µm in the right and left eyes, respectively, indicating pseudonormalization of the parameters (disc edema in the setting of prior optic atrophy). In the setting of optic atrophy, when the nerve develops any swelling the thickness measured on optical coherence tomography may reach normal values, which are in fact abnormal and elevated in this case. Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance venography were within normal limits. Cerebrospinal fluid opening pressure was 26 cm of water, and analysis revealed high levels of West Nile virus antibodies (IgM and IgG), suggesting a recent viral infection. In addition to an established predisposition to develop elevated ICP on tetracycline antibiotics, this patient also had the precipitating factor of recent viral infection contributing to his raised ICP. Prior to his most recent presentation, his condition was stable with evidence of mild optic atrophy in both eyes and stable visual fields.

Various case reports have linked the use of tetracycline antibiotics to increased ICP. Gardner et al² reported a case of fraternal twins who developed elevated ICP while on tetracycline for acne, suggesting a possible genetic susceptibility. In one nested case-control study, it was found that the relative risk (RR) of developing elevated ICP with tetracycline antibiotics was increased (RR=2.68 [95% CI, 0.89-8.11] for 15 days of current use; RR=3.64 [95% CI, 1.67-7.91] for 30 days of current use).³ Retrospective studies have demonstrated that 9% of the population (N=207) had prior treatment with tetracylines in a cohort of patients diagnosed with elevated ICP.⁴

In this group of drugs, minocycline has been closely associated with development of elevated ICP. One retrospective study showed that 75% of patients (9/12) with minocycline-associated ICP developed symptoms of elevated ICP within 8 weeks of starting therapy; however, half of the patients included in the study were obese. The inclusion of obese patients in this study is a confounding variable because idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a disease that predominantly affects obese young females. The diagnosis of IIH, however, should be considered a diagnosis of exclusion, and it is uncommon in thin elderly or male patients.⁵

Tetracyclines have a half-life of 6 to 11 hours, and usually the elevated ICP decreases once the offending agent is discontinued, though papilledema could take months to resolve.

We describe an inadvertent rechallenge with a tetracycline antibiotic 28 years after presumed minocycline-induced IIH of childhood. Clinicians should be aware that any agent in the tetracycline family of antibiotics may cause increased ICP and that the predisposition to medication-induced IIH may be a lifelong risk.

To the Editor:

In 1995, one of the authors (A.G.L.) reported the case of a 14-year-old boy who was diagnosed with pseudotumor cerebri following treatment with isotretinoin and tetracycline, both of which were implicated in the development of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). The patient subsequently underwent optic nerve sheath fenestration for decompression due to progressive deterioration of the visual field despite discontinuation of both drugs.¹

This patient recently returned to our office 28 years after his initial presentation with a recurrence of similar symptoms. He was subsequently diagnosed with elevated ICP after a single dose of doxycycline. His vision was 20/20 with correction for distance. Pupil size and extraocular motility were within normal limits. Physical examination was normal, and a dilated fundus examination showed a Frisen stage 1 disc edema in the right eye and a Frisen stage 3 disc edema in the left eye at presentation. The visual field showed enlarged blind spots in both eyes consistent with papilledema. Optical coherence tomography for optic nerve was 93 µm in the right eye and 124 µm in the left eye compared to earlier measures of 66 and 68 µm in the right and left eyes, respectively, indicating pseudonormalization of the parameters (disc edema in the setting of prior optic atrophy). In the setting of optic atrophy, when the nerve develops any swelling the thickness measured on optical coherence tomography may reach normal values, which are in fact abnormal and elevated in this case. Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance venography were within normal limits. Cerebrospinal fluid opening pressure was 26 cm of water, and analysis revealed high levels of West Nile virus antibodies (IgM and IgG), suggesting a recent viral infection. In addition to an established predisposition to develop elevated ICP on tetracycline antibiotics, this patient also had the precipitating factor of recent viral infection contributing to his raised ICP. Prior to his most recent presentation, his condition was stable with evidence of mild optic atrophy in both eyes and stable visual fields.

Various case reports have linked the use of tetracycline antibiotics to increased ICP. Gardner et al² reported a case of fraternal twins who developed elevated ICP while on tetracycline for acne, suggesting a possible genetic susceptibility. In one nested case-control study, it was found that the relative risk (RR) of developing elevated ICP with tetracycline antibiotics was increased (RR=2.68 [95% CI, 0.89-8.11] for 15 days of current use; RR=3.64 [95% CI, 1.67-7.91] for 30 days of current use).³ Retrospective studies have demonstrated that 9% of the population (N=207) had prior treatment with tetracylines in a cohort of patients diagnosed with elevated ICP.⁴

In this group of drugs, minocycline has been closely associated with development of elevated ICP. One retrospective study showed that 75% of patients (9/12) with minocycline-associated ICP developed symptoms of elevated ICP within 8 weeks of starting therapy; however, half of the patients included in the study were obese. The inclusion of obese patients in this study is a confounding variable because idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a disease that predominantly affects obese young females. The diagnosis of IIH, however, should be considered a diagnosis of exclusion, and it is uncommon in thin elderly or male patients.⁵

Tetracyclines have a half-life of 6 to 11 hours, and usually the elevated ICP decreases once the offending agent is discontinued, though papilledema could take months to resolve.

We describe an inadvertent rechallenge with a tetracycline antibiotic 28 years after presumed minocycline-induced IIH of childhood. Clinicians should be aware that any agent in the tetracycline family of antibiotics may cause increased ICP and that the predisposition to medication-induced IIH may be a lifelong risk.

To the Editor:

In 1995, one of the authors (A.G.L.) reported the case of a 14-year-old boy who was diagnosed with pseudotumor cerebri following treatment with isotretinoin and tetracycline, both of which were implicated in the development of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). The patient subsequently underwent optic nerve sheath fenestration for decompression due to progressive deterioration of the visual field despite discontinuation of both drugs.¹

This patient recently returned to our office 28 years after his initial presentation with a recurrence of similar symptoms. He was subsequently diagnosed with elevated ICP after a single dose of doxycycline. His vision was 20/20 with correction for distance. Pupil size and extraocular motility were within normal limits. Physical examination was normal, and a dilated fundus examination showed a Frisen stage 1 disc edema in the right eye and a Frisen stage 3 disc edema in the left eye at presentation. The visual field showed enlarged blind spots in both eyes consistent with papilledema. Optical coherence tomography for optic nerve was 93 µm in the right eye and 124 µm in the left eye compared to earlier measures of 66 and 68 µm in the right and left eyes, respectively, indicating pseudonormalization of the parameters (disc edema in the setting of prior optic atrophy). In the setting of optic atrophy, when the nerve develops any swelling the thickness measured on optical coherence tomography may reach normal values, which are in fact abnormal and elevated in this case. Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance venography were within normal limits. Cerebrospinal fluid opening pressure was 26 cm of water, and analysis revealed high levels of West Nile virus antibodies (IgM and IgG), suggesting a recent viral infection. In addition to an established predisposition to develop elevated ICP on tetracycline antibiotics, this patient also had the precipitating factor of recent viral infection contributing to his raised ICP. Prior to his most recent presentation, his condition was stable with evidence of mild optic atrophy in both eyes and stable visual fields.

Various case reports have linked the use of tetracycline antibiotics to increased ICP. Gardner et al² reported a case of fraternal twins who developed elevated ICP while on tetracycline for acne, suggesting a possible genetic susceptibility. In one nested case-control study, it was found that the relative risk (RR) of developing elevated ICP with tetracycline antibiotics was increased (RR=2.68 [95% CI, 0.89-8.11] for 15 days of current use; RR=3.64 [95% CI, 1.67-7.91] for 30 days of current use).³ Retrospective studies have demonstrated that 9% of the population (N=207) had prior treatment with tetracylines in a cohort of patients diagnosed with elevated ICP.⁴

In this group of drugs, minocycline has been closely associated with development of elevated ICP. One retrospective study showed that 75% of patients (9/12) with minocycline-associated ICP developed symptoms of elevated ICP within 8 weeks of starting therapy; however, half of the patients included in the study were obese. The inclusion of obese patients in this study is a confounding variable because idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is a disease that predominantly affects obese young females. The diagnosis of IIH, however, should be considered a diagnosis of exclusion, and it is uncommon in thin elderly or male patients.⁵

Tetracyclines have a half-life of 6 to 11 hours, and usually the elevated ICP decreases once the offending agent is discontinued, though papilledema could take months to resolve.

We describe an inadvertent rechallenge with a tetracycline antibiotic 28 years after presumed minocycline-induced IIH of childhood. Clinicians should be aware that any agent in the tetracycline family of antibiotics may cause increased ICP and that the predisposition to medication-induced IIH may be a lifelong risk.

Effective January 1, 2019, the 2 long-standing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) biopsy codes 11100 (first lesion) and 11101 (each additional lesion biopsied on the same date of service) were replaced by a series of new biopsy codes that are specific to the method of removal, including tangential (11102, +11103), punch (11104, +11105), and incisional biopsies (11106, +11107)(Table).^1,2 If a biopsy is performed using multiple techniques, only a single primary code of the highest value would be reported (ie, incisional>punch>tangential). The add-on codes are to be used for each additional lesion biopsied using the same or a different technique on the same day.

Tangential biopsies, performed with a sharp blade to remove epidermal tissue, include scoop, shave, and curette biopsies. Punch biopsies are performed using a punch tool, while incisional biopsies involve the use of a sharp blade to remove a full-thickness tissue sample.

Using Biopsy Codes Correctly

Only one primary biopsy code is to be reported on a given date. If 2 or more biopsies are performed using 2 or more techniques, then additional biopsies are to be reported using the relevant add-on codes. It is important to note that codes 11104 to 11107 include simple closures, which should not be coded separately.

In all cases, appropriate documentation is essential to support proper biopsy coding. Prior to any biopsy, patients should be educated on the associated risks, including bleeding, infection, and scarring, and patient consent should be obtained and documented in the medical record.

It bears noting the distinction between biopsies and excisions and their associated codes. Biopsies are performed for diagnostic purposes, with samples sent for histopathologic evaluation. Excisions are performed to entirely remove a lesion; it makes no difference whether or not the excised tissue is sent for histopathologic evaluation.

Reimbursement for biopsies has changed in 2019, with the rates for tangential biopsies decreasing relative to 2018 (−10.6%), while the rates for punch (+12.5%) and incisional (+35.5%) biopsies will be increasing.³

New Codes in Action

The following examples demonstrate how to use the new biopsy codes correctly in clinical practice.

A patient presents for evaluation of 3 lesions that he deems suspicious: 1 on the neck, 1 on the left upper arm, and 1 on the right lower arm. The dermatologist diagnoses the lesion on the neck as a seborrheic keratosis, a benign lesion, and the patient declines treatment. The lesions on each arm are suspicious for basal cell carcinoma, and the dermatologist performs shave biopsies at both sites to determine an accurate diagnosis. In this case, you would use CPT code 11102 (tangential biopsy of skin) for the first lesion and 11103 (tangential biopsy of skin, each additional lesion) for the second lesion.

A patient presents for evaluation of an itchy rash on both hands. On physical examination you observe small, firm, slightly erythematous papules in a ring formation on both hands. The patient says similar lesions have appeared and resolved in the past. She says she has sensitive skin and assumes the rash may have been caused by exposure to an irritating soap. The patient also points out a suspicious lesion on the right side of the upper back that seems to have grown in size over the last year. Based on the recurrence of the lesions on the hands and the characteristic formation of the papules, the dermatologist suspects granuloma annulare and performs a punch biopsy to confirm the diagnosis via histopathology. The lesion on the back is suspicious for melanoma, so the dermatologist performs an incisional biopsy of the lesion. For this patient, you would use CPT code 11106 (incisional biopsy) for the lesion on the back and 11105 (punch biopsy, each additional lesion) for the biopsy of the hand.

Effective January 1, 2019, the 2 long-standing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) biopsy codes 11100 (first lesion) and 11101 (each additional lesion biopsied on the same date of service) were replaced by a series of new biopsy codes that are specific to the method of removal, including tangential (11102, +11103), punch (11104, +11105), and incisional biopsies (11106, +11107)(Table).^1,2 If a biopsy is performed using multiple techniques, only a single primary code of the highest value would be reported (ie, incisional>punch>tangential). The add-on codes are to be used for each additional lesion biopsied using the same or a different technique on the same day.

Tangential biopsies, performed with a sharp blade to remove epidermal tissue, include scoop, shave, and curette biopsies. Punch biopsies are performed using a punch tool, while incisional biopsies involve the use of a sharp blade to remove a full-thickness tissue sample.

Using Biopsy Codes Correctly

Only one primary biopsy code is to be reported on a given date. If 2 or more biopsies are performed using 2 or more techniques, then additional biopsies are to be reported using the relevant add-on codes. It is important to note that codes 11104 to 11107 include simple closures, which should not be coded separately.

In all cases, appropriate documentation is essential to support proper biopsy coding. Prior to any biopsy, patients should be educated on the associated risks, including bleeding, infection, and scarring, and patient consent should be obtained and documented in the medical record.

It bears noting the distinction between biopsies and excisions and their associated codes. Biopsies are performed for diagnostic purposes, with samples sent for histopathologic evaluation. Excisions are performed to entirely remove a lesion; it makes no difference whether or not the excised tissue is sent for histopathologic evaluation.

Reimbursement for biopsies has changed in 2019, with the rates for tangential biopsies decreasing relative to 2018 (−10.6%), while the rates for punch (+12.5%) and incisional (+35.5%) biopsies will be increasing.³

New Codes in Action

The following examples demonstrate how to use the new biopsy codes correctly in clinical practice.

A patient presents for evaluation of 3 lesions that he deems suspicious: 1 on the neck, 1 on the left upper arm, and 1 on the right lower arm. The dermatologist diagnoses the lesion on the neck as a seborrheic keratosis, a benign lesion, and the patient declines treatment. The lesions on each arm are suspicious for basal cell carcinoma, and the dermatologist performs shave biopsies at both sites to determine an accurate diagnosis. In this case, you would use CPT code 11102 (tangential biopsy of skin) for the first lesion and 11103 (tangential biopsy of skin, each additional lesion) for the second lesion.

A patient presents for evaluation of an itchy rash on both hands. On physical examination you observe small, firm, slightly erythematous papules in a ring formation on both hands. The patient says similar lesions have appeared and resolved in the past. She says she has sensitive skin and assumes the rash may have been caused by exposure to an irritating soap. The patient also points out a suspicious lesion on the right side of the upper back that seems to have grown in size over the last year. Based on the recurrence of the lesions on the hands and the characteristic formation of the papules, the dermatologist suspects granuloma annulare and performs a punch biopsy to confirm the diagnosis via histopathology. The lesion on the back is suspicious for melanoma, so the dermatologist performs an incisional biopsy of the lesion. For this patient, you would use CPT code 11106 (incisional biopsy) for the lesion on the back and 11105 (punch biopsy, each additional lesion) for the biopsy of the hand.

Effective January 1, 2019, the 2 long-standing Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) biopsy codes 11100 (first lesion) and 11101 (each additional lesion biopsied on the same date of service) were replaced by a series of new biopsy codes that are specific to the method of removal, including tangential (11102, +11103), punch (11104, +11105), and incisional biopsies (11106, +11107)(Table).^1,2 If a biopsy is performed using multiple techniques, only a single primary code of the highest value would be reported (ie, incisional>punch>tangential). The add-on codes are to be used for each additional lesion biopsied using the same or a different technique on the same day.

Tangential biopsies, performed with a sharp blade to remove epidermal tissue, include scoop, shave, and curette biopsies. Punch biopsies are performed using a punch tool, while incisional biopsies involve the use of a sharp blade to remove a full-thickness tissue sample.

Using Biopsy Codes Correctly

Only one primary biopsy code is to be reported on a given date. If 2 or more biopsies are performed using 2 or more techniques, then additional biopsies are to be reported using the relevant add-on codes. It is important to note that codes 11104 to 11107 include simple closures, which should not be coded separately.

In all cases, appropriate documentation is essential to support proper biopsy coding. Prior to any biopsy, patients should be educated on the associated risks, including bleeding, infection, and scarring, and patient consent should be obtained and documented in the medical record.

It bears noting the distinction between biopsies and excisions and their associated codes. Biopsies are performed for diagnostic purposes, with samples sent for histopathologic evaluation. Excisions are performed to entirely remove a lesion; it makes no difference whether or not the excised tissue is sent for histopathologic evaluation.

Reimbursement for biopsies has changed in 2019, with the rates for tangential biopsies decreasing relative to 2018 (−10.6%), while the rates for punch (+12.5%) and incisional (+35.5%) biopsies will be increasing.³

New Codes in Action

The following examples demonstrate how to use the new biopsy codes correctly in clinical practice.

A patient presents for evaluation of 3 lesions that he deems suspicious: 1 on the neck, 1 on the left upper arm, and 1 on the right lower arm. The dermatologist diagnoses the lesion on the neck as a seborrheic keratosis, a benign lesion, and the patient declines treatment. The lesions on each arm are suspicious for basal cell carcinoma, and the dermatologist performs shave biopsies at both sites to determine an accurate diagnosis. In this case, you would use CPT code 11102 (tangential biopsy of skin) for the first lesion and 11103 (tangential biopsy of skin, each additional lesion) for the second lesion.

A patient presents for evaluation of an itchy rash on both hands. On physical examination you observe small, firm, slightly erythematous papules in a ring formation on both hands. The patient says similar lesions have appeared and resolved in the past. She says she has sensitive skin and assumes the rash may have been caused by exposure to an irritating soap. The patient also points out a suspicious lesion on the right side of the upper back that seems to have grown in size over the last year. Based on the recurrence of the lesions on the hands and the characteristic formation of the papules, the dermatologist suspects granuloma annulare and performs a punch biopsy to confirm the diagnosis via histopathology. The lesion on the back is suspicious for melanoma, so the dermatologist performs an incisional biopsy of the lesion. For this patient, you would use CPT code 11106 (incisional biopsy) for the lesion on the back and 11105 (punch biopsy, each additional lesion) for the biopsy of the hand.

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis (DDA) is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder that was originally thought to be a variant of cutaneous reactive angiomatosis (CREA) but is now considered to be on the spectrum of CREA. This article will focus on DDA and review the literature of prior case reports with brief descriptions of the differential diagnosis.

Case Report

A 43-year-old Haitian man presented to the clinic with a lesion on the left buttock that had developed over the last 6 years. The patient stated the lesion had been enlarging over the last several months. Upon examination, there was a large (15-cm diameter), indurated, hyperpigmented plaque covering the left buttock (Figure 1). The patient reported no medical or contributory family history. Upon review of systems, he described a burning sensation sometimes in the area of the lesion that would develop randomly throughout the year.

Three biopsies were performed, which revealed a collection of slightly dilated blood vessels with normal-appearing endothelial cells occupying the mid dermis and deep dermis (Figure 2). Immunohistochemical stains with antibodies were directed against human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8), CD31, CD34, the cell surface glycoprotein podoplanin, Ki-67, and smooth muscle actin antigens, with appropriate controls. The vessel walls were positive for CD31, CD34, and smooth muscle actin, and negative for HHV-8 and podoplanin; Ki-67 was not increased. These histologic findings were consistent with a diagnosis of DDA. A detailed history was taken. The cause of DDA in our patient was uncertain.

Comment

Classification and Epidemiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder first described by Krell et al¹ in 1994. Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is benign and is classified in the group of cutaneous reactive angiomatoses,² which are benign vascular disorders marked by intravascular and extravascular hyperplasia of endothelial cells that may or may not include pericytes.² Diffuse dermal angiomatosis was originally described as a variant of CREA, which is characterized by hyperplasia of endothelial dermal cells and intravascular proliferation.³ However, DDA has more recently been identified as a distinct disorder on the spectrum of CREA rather than as a variant of CREA.² Given the recent reclassification, not all physicians make this distinction. However, as more case reports of DDA are published, physicians continue to support this change.⁴ Nevertheless, DDA has been an established disorder since 1994.¹

Vascular proliferation in DDA is hypothesized to stem from ischemia or inflammation.⁵ Peripheral vascular atherosclerosis has been associated with DDA.⁶ The epidemiology of DDA is not well known because of the rarity of the disease. We performed a more specific review of the literature by limiting the PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE to the term diffuse dermal angiomatosis rather than a broader search including all reactive angioendotheliomatoses. Only 31 case reports have been published^1,3-32; of them, only adults were affected. Most reported cases were in middle-aged females. A summary of the demographics of DDA is provided in the Table.^1,3-32

Etiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare complication of ischemia that may be secondary to atherosclerosis, arteriovenous fistula, or macromastia.^9-11 In DDA of the breasts, ulcerations of fatty tissue occur due to trauma in these patients who have large pendulous breasts, causing angiogenesis resembling DDA histologically.² One case of DDA was reported secondary to relative ischemia from cutis marmorata telangiectatica congenita,¹² whereas another case highlighted Wegener granulomatosis as the cause of ischemia.⁷ There also have been reported cases associated with calciphylaxis and anticardiolipin antibiodies.¹³ In general, any medical condition that can lead to ischemia can cause DDA. Comorbid conditions for DDA include cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and most often severe peripheral vascular disease. Many patients also have a history of smoking.¹⁴ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis rarely presents without underlying comorbidity, with only 1 case report of unknown cause (Table).

Presentation, Histopathology, and Differential Diagnosis
Cutaneous reactive angiomatosis disorders present the same clinically, with multiple erythematous to violaceous purpuric patches and plaques that can progress to necrosis and ulceration. Lesions are widely distributed but are predisposed to the upper and lower extremities.² The differential diagnosis of DDA includes CREA, acroangiodermatitis (pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma), or vascular malignancies such as Kaposi sarcoma and low-grade angiosarcoma.⁷

In DDA, lesions may be painful and sometimes have a central ulceration.¹⁵ They often are associated with notable peripheral vascular atherosclerotic disease and are mainly found on the lower extremities.^12,16 Histologically, DDA presents as a diffuse proliferation of endothelial cells between collagen bundles. The endothelial cells are distributed throughout the papillary and reticular dermis and develop into vascular lumina.¹⁷ Furthermore, the proliferating endothelial cells are spindle shaped and contain vacuolated cytoplasm.¹⁴

Acroangiodermatitis, or pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma, presents as slow-growing, erythematous to violaceous, brown, or dusky macules, papules, or plaques of the legs.¹⁴ Histologically, acroangiodermatitis presents with relatively less proliferation of endothelial cells found intravascularly rather than extravascularly, as in DDA, forming new thick-walled vessels in a lobular pattern in the papillary dermis.¹⁴

Vascular malignancies, such as Kaposi sarcoma and angiosarcoma, may present similarly to DDA. Kaposi sarcoma, for example, presents as erythematous to violaceous patches, plaques, or nodules found mostly on the extremities.⁷ Histologically, spindle cells and vascular structures also are found but in a clefting pattern representative of Kaposi sarcoma (so-called vascular slits).⁷ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis and vascular malignancies can further be distinguished based on atypia of the proliferations and staining for HHV-8.^7,14 Lastly, DDA differs from vascular tumors in that vascular tumors are reactive to locations of occluded vessels, with vascular proliferation ceasing once the underlying cause of hypoxia is removed.²

Treatment
There is no standard treatment of DDA.⁷ Treatment of the underlying cause of ischemia is the primary goal, which will cause the DDA to resolve in most cases. Stenting, removal of an arteriovenous fistula, or other forms of revascularization may be warranted.^{1,5,6,10,17,29,30}

Reported medical therapies for DDA include systemic or topical corticosteroids used for their antiangiogenic properties with varying results.⁷ Isotretinoin also has been used, which has been found to be effective in several cases of DDA of the breast, though 1 study reported a subsequent elevated lipid profile, requiring a decrease in dosage.^14,15,27,31

Most interestingly, a study by Sanz-Motilva et al¹⁶ demonstrated that control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, led to improvement, which highlights the importance of incorporating nonpharmacotherapy rather than initiating treatment solely with medication. The Table summarizes treatments used and their efficacy.

Conclusion

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is associated with medical conditions that predispose an individual to ischemia. Although rare, DDA can present as painful and visibly disturbing lesions that can affect the daily life of afflicted patients. By reporting the few cases that do arise and reviewing prior cases and their treatments, physicians can consider DDA within the differential diagnosis and identify which treatment is most efficient for a given patient. For all DDA patients, strict control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, should be incorporated into the treatment plan. When DDA affects the breasts, isotretinoin appears to provide the best relief. Otherwise, treatment of the underlying cause, revascularization, withdrawal of the offending agent, or steroids seem to be the best treatment options.

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis (DDA) is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder that was originally thought to be a variant of cutaneous reactive angiomatosis (CREA) but is now considered to be on the spectrum of CREA. This article will focus on DDA and review the literature of prior case reports with brief descriptions of the differential diagnosis.

Case Report

A 43-year-old Haitian man presented to the clinic with a lesion on the left buttock that had developed over the last 6 years. The patient stated the lesion had been enlarging over the last several months. Upon examination, there was a large (15-cm diameter), indurated, hyperpigmented plaque covering the left buttock (Figure 1). The patient reported no medical or contributory family history. Upon review of systems, he described a burning sensation sometimes in the area of the lesion that would develop randomly throughout the year.

Three biopsies were performed, which revealed a collection of slightly dilated blood vessels with normal-appearing endothelial cells occupying the mid dermis and deep dermis (Figure 2). Immunohistochemical stains with antibodies were directed against human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8), CD31, CD34, the cell surface glycoprotein podoplanin, Ki-67, and smooth muscle actin antigens, with appropriate controls. The vessel walls were positive for CD31, CD34, and smooth muscle actin, and negative for HHV-8 and podoplanin; Ki-67 was not increased. These histologic findings were consistent with a diagnosis of DDA. A detailed history was taken. The cause of DDA in our patient was uncertain.

Comment

Classification and Epidemiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder first described by Krell et al¹ in 1994. Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is benign and is classified in the group of cutaneous reactive angiomatoses,² which are benign vascular disorders marked by intravascular and extravascular hyperplasia of endothelial cells that may or may not include pericytes.² Diffuse dermal angiomatosis was originally described as a variant of CREA, which is characterized by hyperplasia of endothelial dermal cells and intravascular proliferation.³ However, DDA has more recently been identified as a distinct disorder on the spectrum of CREA rather than as a variant of CREA.² Given the recent reclassification, not all physicians make this distinction. However, as more case reports of DDA are published, physicians continue to support this change.⁴ Nevertheless, DDA has been an established disorder since 1994.¹

Vascular proliferation in DDA is hypothesized to stem from ischemia or inflammation.⁵ Peripheral vascular atherosclerosis has been associated with DDA.⁶ The epidemiology of DDA is not well known because of the rarity of the disease. We performed a more specific review of the literature by limiting the PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE to the term diffuse dermal angiomatosis rather than a broader search including all reactive angioendotheliomatoses. Only 31 case reports have been published^1,3-32; of them, only adults were affected. Most reported cases were in middle-aged females. A summary of the demographics of DDA is provided in the Table.^1,3-32

Etiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare complication of ischemia that may be secondary to atherosclerosis, arteriovenous fistula, or macromastia.^9-11 In DDA of the breasts, ulcerations of fatty tissue occur due to trauma in these patients who have large pendulous breasts, causing angiogenesis resembling DDA histologically.² One case of DDA was reported secondary to relative ischemia from cutis marmorata telangiectatica congenita,¹² whereas another case highlighted Wegener granulomatosis as the cause of ischemia.⁷ There also have been reported cases associated with calciphylaxis and anticardiolipin antibiodies.¹³ In general, any medical condition that can lead to ischemia can cause DDA. Comorbid conditions for DDA include cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and most often severe peripheral vascular disease. Many patients also have a history of smoking.¹⁴ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis rarely presents without underlying comorbidity, with only 1 case report of unknown cause (Table).

Presentation, Histopathology, and Differential Diagnosis
Cutaneous reactive angiomatosis disorders present the same clinically, with multiple erythematous to violaceous purpuric patches and plaques that can progress to necrosis and ulceration. Lesions are widely distributed but are predisposed to the upper and lower extremities.² The differential diagnosis of DDA includes CREA, acroangiodermatitis (pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma), or vascular malignancies such as Kaposi sarcoma and low-grade angiosarcoma.⁷

In DDA, lesions may be painful and sometimes have a central ulceration.¹⁵ They often are associated with notable peripheral vascular atherosclerotic disease and are mainly found on the lower extremities.^12,16 Histologically, DDA presents as a diffuse proliferation of endothelial cells between collagen bundles. The endothelial cells are distributed throughout the papillary and reticular dermis and develop into vascular lumina.¹⁷ Furthermore, the proliferating endothelial cells are spindle shaped and contain vacuolated cytoplasm.¹⁴

Acroangiodermatitis, or pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma, presents as slow-growing, erythematous to violaceous, brown, or dusky macules, papules, or plaques of the legs.¹⁴ Histologically, acroangiodermatitis presents with relatively less proliferation of endothelial cells found intravascularly rather than extravascularly, as in DDA, forming new thick-walled vessels in a lobular pattern in the papillary dermis.¹⁴

Vascular malignancies, such as Kaposi sarcoma and angiosarcoma, may present similarly to DDA. Kaposi sarcoma, for example, presents as erythematous to violaceous patches, plaques, or nodules found mostly on the extremities.⁷ Histologically, spindle cells and vascular structures also are found but in a clefting pattern representative of Kaposi sarcoma (so-called vascular slits).⁷ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis and vascular malignancies can further be distinguished based on atypia of the proliferations and staining for HHV-8.^7,14 Lastly, DDA differs from vascular tumors in that vascular tumors are reactive to locations of occluded vessels, with vascular proliferation ceasing once the underlying cause of hypoxia is removed.²

Treatment
There is no standard treatment of DDA.⁷ Treatment of the underlying cause of ischemia is the primary goal, which will cause the DDA to resolve in most cases. Stenting, removal of an arteriovenous fistula, or other forms of revascularization may be warranted.^{1,5,6,10,17,29,30}

Reported medical therapies for DDA include systemic or topical corticosteroids used for their antiangiogenic properties with varying results.⁷ Isotretinoin also has been used, which has been found to be effective in several cases of DDA of the breast, though 1 study reported a subsequent elevated lipid profile, requiring a decrease in dosage.^14,15,27,31

Most interestingly, a study by Sanz-Motilva et al¹⁶ demonstrated that control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, led to improvement, which highlights the importance of incorporating nonpharmacotherapy rather than initiating treatment solely with medication. The Table summarizes treatments used and their efficacy.

Conclusion

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is associated with medical conditions that predispose an individual to ischemia. Although rare, DDA can present as painful and visibly disturbing lesions that can affect the daily life of afflicted patients. By reporting the few cases that do arise and reviewing prior cases and their treatments, physicians can consider DDA within the differential diagnosis and identify which treatment is most efficient for a given patient. For all DDA patients, strict control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, should be incorporated into the treatment plan. When DDA affects the breasts, isotretinoin appears to provide the best relief. Otherwise, treatment of the underlying cause, revascularization, withdrawal of the offending agent, or steroids seem to be the best treatment options.

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis (DDA) is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder that was originally thought to be a variant of cutaneous reactive angiomatosis (CREA) but is now considered to be on the spectrum of CREA. This article will focus on DDA and review the literature of prior case reports with brief descriptions of the differential diagnosis.

Case Report

A 43-year-old Haitian man presented to the clinic with a lesion on the left buttock that had developed over the last 6 years. The patient stated the lesion had been enlarging over the last several months. Upon examination, there was a large (15-cm diameter), indurated, hyperpigmented plaque covering the left buttock (Figure 1). The patient reported no medical or contributory family history. Upon review of systems, he described a burning sensation sometimes in the area of the lesion that would develop randomly throughout the year.

Three biopsies were performed, which revealed a collection of slightly dilated blood vessels with normal-appearing endothelial cells occupying the mid dermis and deep dermis (Figure 2). Immunohistochemical stains with antibodies were directed against human herpesvirus 8 (HHV-8), CD31, CD34, the cell surface glycoprotein podoplanin, Ki-67, and smooth muscle actin antigens, with appropriate controls. The vessel walls were positive for CD31, CD34, and smooth muscle actin, and negative for HHV-8 and podoplanin; Ki-67 was not increased. These histologic findings were consistent with a diagnosis of DDA. A detailed history was taken. The cause of DDA in our patient was uncertain.

Comment

Classification and Epidemiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare acquired, cutaneous, reactive, vascular disorder first described by Krell et al¹ in 1994. Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is benign and is classified in the group of cutaneous reactive angiomatoses,² which are benign vascular disorders marked by intravascular and extravascular hyperplasia of endothelial cells that may or may not include pericytes.² Diffuse dermal angiomatosis was originally described as a variant of CREA, which is characterized by hyperplasia of endothelial dermal cells and intravascular proliferation.³ However, DDA has more recently been identified as a distinct disorder on the spectrum of CREA rather than as a variant of CREA.² Given the recent reclassification, not all physicians make this distinction. However, as more case reports of DDA are published, physicians continue to support this change.⁴ Nevertheless, DDA has been an established disorder since 1994.¹

Vascular proliferation in DDA is hypothesized to stem from ischemia or inflammation.⁵ Peripheral vascular atherosclerosis has been associated with DDA.⁶ The epidemiology of DDA is not well known because of the rarity of the disease. We performed a more specific review of the literature by limiting the PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE to the term diffuse dermal angiomatosis rather than a broader search including all reactive angioendotheliomatoses. Only 31 case reports have been published^1,3-32; of them, only adults were affected. Most reported cases were in middle-aged females. A summary of the demographics of DDA is provided in the Table.^1,3-32

Etiology
Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is a rare complication of ischemia that may be secondary to atherosclerosis, arteriovenous fistula, or macromastia.^9-11 In DDA of the breasts, ulcerations of fatty tissue occur due to trauma in these patients who have large pendulous breasts, causing angiogenesis resembling DDA histologically.² One case of DDA was reported secondary to relative ischemia from cutis marmorata telangiectatica congenita,¹² whereas another case highlighted Wegener granulomatosis as the cause of ischemia.⁷ There also have been reported cases associated with calciphylaxis and anticardiolipin antibiodies.¹³ In general, any medical condition that can lead to ischemia can cause DDA. Comorbid conditions for DDA include cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and most often severe peripheral vascular disease. Many patients also have a history of smoking.¹⁴ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis rarely presents without underlying comorbidity, with only 1 case report of unknown cause (Table).

Presentation, Histopathology, and Differential Diagnosis
Cutaneous reactive angiomatosis disorders present the same clinically, with multiple erythematous to violaceous purpuric patches and plaques that can progress to necrosis and ulceration. Lesions are widely distributed but are predisposed to the upper and lower extremities.² The differential diagnosis of DDA includes CREA, acroangiodermatitis (pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma), or vascular malignancies such as Kaposi sarcoma and low-grade angiosarcoma.⁷

In DDA, lesions may be painful and sometimes have a central ulceration.¹⁵ They often are associated with notable peripheral vascular atherosclerotic disease and are mainly found on the lower extremities.^12,16 Histologically, DDA presents as a diffuse proliferation of endothelial cells between collagen bundles. The endothelial cells are distributed throughout the papillary and reticular dermis and develop into vascular lumina.¹⁷ Furthermore, the proliferating endothelial cells are spindle shaped and contain vacuolated cytoplasm.¹⁴

Acroangiodermatitis, or pseudo–Kaposi sarcoma, presents as slow-growing, erythematous to violaceous, brown, or dusky macules, papules, or plaques of the legs.¹⁴ Histologically, acroangiodermatitis presents with relatively less proliferation of endothelial cells found intravascularly rather than extravascularly, as in DDA, forming new thick-walled vessels in a lobular pattern in the papillary dermis.¹⁴

Vascular malignancies, such as Kaposi sarcoma and angiosarcoma, may present similarly to DDA. Kaposi sarcoma, for example, presents as erythematous to violaceous patches, plaques, or nodules found mostly on the extremities.⁷ Histologically, spindle cells and vascular structures also are found but in a clefting pattern representative of Kaposi sarcoma (so-called vascular slits).⁷ Diffuse dermal angiomatosis and vascular malignancies can further be distinguished based on atypia of the proliferations and staining for HHV-8.^7,14 Lastly, DDA differs from vascular tumors in that vascular tumors are reactive to locations of occluded vessels, with vascular proliferation ceasing once the underlying cause of hypoxia is removed.²

Treatment
There is no standard treatment of DDA.⁷ Treatment of the underlying cause of ischemia is the primary goal, which will cause the DDA to resolve in most cases. Stenting, removal of an arteriovenous fistula, or other forms of revascularization may be warranted.^{1,5,6,10,17,29,30}

Reported medical therapies for DDA include systemic or topical corticosteroids used for their antiangiogenic properties with varying results.⁷ Isotretinoin also has been used, which has been found to be effective in several cases of DDA of the breast, though 1 study reported a subsequent elevated lipid profile, requiring a decrease in dosage.^14,15,27,31

Most interestingly, a study by Sanz-Motilva et al¹⁶ demonstrated that control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, led to improvement, which highlights the importance of incorporating nonpharmacotherapy rather than initiating treatment solely with medication. The Table summarizes treatments used and their efficacy.

Conclusion

Diffuse dermal angiomatosis is associated with medical conditions that predispose an individual to ischemia. Although rare, DDA can present as painful and visibly disturbing lesions that can affect the daily life of afflicted patients. By reporting the few cases that do arise and reviewing prior cases and their treatments, physicians can consider DDA within the differential diagnosis and identify which treatment is most efficient for a given patient. For all DDA patients, strict control of comorbidities, especially smoking cessation, should be incorporated into the treatment plan. When DDA affects the breasts, isotretinoin appears to provide the best relief. Otherwise, treatment of the underlying cause, revascularization, withdrawal of the offending agent, or steroids seem to be the best treatment options.