STL Volume 26 Number 4 – Skin Therapy Letter https://www.skintherapyletter.com Written by Dermatologists for Dermatologists Wed, 01 Sep 2021 16:27:50 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.1 Rosacea: An Update in Diagnosis, Classification and Management https://www.skintherapyletter.com/rosacea/update-diagnosis-management/ Sun, 01 Aug 2021 17:00:15 +0000 https://www.skintherapyletter.com/?p=12670 Cindy Na-Young Kang, BMSc1, Monica Shah, BSc1, Jerry Tan, MD, FRCPC2,3

1Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
2Windsor Clinical Research, Windsor, ON, Canada
3Western University, Schulich School of Medicine, Windsor, ON, Canada

Conflict of interest:
Cindy Kang and Monica Shah have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Jerry Tan has been a consultant, investigator and/or speaker for Almirall, Bausch, Boots/Walgreens, Cipher, Galderma, L’Oréal, Promius, Sun and Vichy. Disclaimers: This manuscript is an original submission. Views expressed in the submitted article are our own and not official positions of our institutions.

Abstract:
The diagnosis and classification of rosacea has been modified to reflect presenting features. On exclusion of differentials, the diagnosis of rosacea is based on the presence of either (1) phymatous changes, or (2) centrofacial persistent erythema. In their absence, diagnosis can be established by presence of any two of: flushing/transient erythema, papules and pustules, telangiectases, or ocular manifestations. Management of rosacea depends on presenting feature(s), their severity, and impact. General management includes gentle skin care, sun protection, and trigger avoidance. Evidence-based treatment recommendations include topical brimonidine and oxymetazoline for persistent erythema; topical azelaic acid, ivermectin, metronidazole, minocycline and oral doxycycline, tetracycline and isotretinoin for papules and pustules; vascular lasers and light devices for telangiectases; and omega-3 fatty acids and cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion for ocular rosacea. While surgical or laser therapy can be considered for clinically noninflamed phyma, there are no trials on their utility. Combination therapies include topical brimonidine with topical ivermectin, or topical metronidazole with oral doxycycline. Topical metronidazole, topical ivermectin, and topical azelaic acid are appropriate for maintenance therapy. In conclusion, the updated phenotype approach, based on presenting clinical features, is the foundation for current diagnosis, classification, and treatment of rosacea.

Key Words:
alpha-adrenergic agonist, anti-parasitic, antibiotic, diagnosis, dicarboxylic acid, erythema, laser therapy, management, phenotype approach, phyma, retinoids, rosacea, telangiectasia

Table of Content:

  1. Introduction
  2. Quality of Evidence
  3. Diagnosis
  4. Evaluation and Differential Diagnosis
  5. Associated Comorbidities
  6. Management
  7. Conclusion


Introduction

Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis affecting the centrofacial region (cheeks, chin, nose, and central forehead), with a prevalence of 5.5% of the adult population.1 While rosacea has been considered to primarily affect fair-skinned individuals, this may be due to difficulty in detecting facial redness in darker skin types. Nevertheless, rosacea patients of Asian, Hispanic, or African ancestry have been described in literature.2 Women are more likely to develop rosacea, however, when present in men, the disease tends to be more severe.3 The typical age of onset is after 30 years old;4,5 however, ocular rosacea can occur as early as 22 months of age.6 Pediatric rosacea is rare and is usually associated with a family history of the condition.6,7 Ocular manifestations of rosacea occur in more than 50% of rosacea patients.8

There are several flare triggers in patients with rosacea including temperature changes, heat, cold, exercise, ultraviolet radiation, spicy food, and alcoholic beverages.9 Microbes have also been implicated in the pathophysiology of rosacea, including Demodex species, Bacillus oleronius, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Helicobacter pylori, and Bartonella quintana.10 The immune system, neurogenic inflammation, and vascular hyperreactivity are central to the pathophysiology of rosacea. Specifically, innate immune system activation via toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2), transient receptor potential (TRP) ion channels, and proinflammatory cytokines contribute to clinical manifestations of rosacea.11

Rosacea has a significant impact on the emotional, social, and occupational wellbeing of affected individuals. Due to the altered facial features characterising this disease, patients with rosacea frequently experience stigmatization. Consequently, they can suffer from depression and anxiety and tend to avoid social situations.12

The phenotype approach establishes diagnosis and management based on the presenting features of the individual.13 While previously classified according to subtypes, each potentially comprising multiple signs and symptoms, this nomenclature should be abandoned as it limits the ability to study, evaluate, and treat individual features.13 The phenotype approach more accurately addresses patient features and can facilitate focused treatment on those of greatest severity and impact.13 Thus, this review provides an overview of the updated phenotype approach in the diagnosis and management of rosacea.


Quality of Evidence

The PubMed database was searched for systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and guidelines on the diagnosis, classification, and management of rosacea, with a focus on phenotypes. Key words included “rosacea” and “diagnosis” or “classification” or “management” or “guidelines” or “treatment”. There were no limits on age, sex, or nationality or year of publication. Only studies published in English on human subjects were included.


Diagnosis

The diagnosis of rosacea is clinical and based on specific features according to the ROSacea COnsensus expert panel (ROSCO)13 and the National Rosacea Society (NRS).14 On clinical exclusion of other conditions with similar presenting features, the diagnosis of rosacea is established with either: (1) phymatous changes, or (2) centrofacial persistent erythema (Table 1).13,15 In their absence, diagnosis can be established by the presence of any two of the following major features: flushing/transient erythema, papules and pustules, telangiectases (Table 1), or ocular rosacea (Table 2).13,15 Minor features, such as burning, stinging, dry sensation of the skin, or edema are not diagnostic of rosacea (Table 1).15 The diagnosis of rosacea in darker skin types (Fitzpatrick phototypes V and VI) is difficult as erythema and telangiectasia may not be readily visible, and a high level of suspicion based on minor features is required. A less common variant of rosacea is granulomatous rosacea, with multiple brown, yellow, or red cutaneous papules of uniform size. Occasionally, skin biopsy may be useful for diagnostic support.13

Cutaneous Rosacea Features Description
Diagnostic features
Phymatous changes Facial skin thickening due to fibrosis and/or sebaceous glandular hyperplasia. Most commonly affects the nose, where it can impart a bulbous appearance.
Persistent erythema Background ongoing centrofacial redness. May periodically intensify in response to variable triggers. In darker skin phototypes (V and VI), erythema may be difficult to detect visually.
Major features
Flushing/transient erythema Temporary increase in centrofacial redness, which may include sensations of warmth, heat, burning and/or pain.
Papules and pustules Red papules and pustules, usually in the centrofacial area. Some may be larger and deeper.
Telangiectases Visible vessels in the centrofacial region but not only in the alar area.
Minor features
Burning sensation of the skin An uncomfortable or painful feeling of heat, typically in the centrofacial region.
Stinging sensation of the skin An uncomfortable or painful sharp, pricking sensation, typically in the centrofacial region.
Dry sensation of the skin Skin that feels rough. May be tight, scaly and/or itchy.
Edema Localized facial swelling. Can be soft or firm (nonpitting) and may be self-limited in duration or persistent.

Table 1: Descriptions of cutaneous rosacea features by consensus

Consensus of an expert panel of 19 dermatologists from Argentina (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), Canada (n = 1), France (n = 1), Germany (n = 2), India (n = 1), Italy (n = 1), the Netherlands (n = 1), Qatar (n = 1), Singapore (n = 1), South Africa (n = 1), the U.K. (n = 1) and the U.S.A. (n = 6); and two ophthalmologists from Germany (n = 1) and the U.S.A (n = 1). Some panellists abstained when their clinical expertise did not extend to a particular subject.
Reprinted from Schaller M. et al., 2019, Br J Dermatol, 176, p. 1273.15


 

Ocular Rosacea Features Description
Lid margin telangiectasia Visible vessels around the eyelid margins. May be difficult to detect visually in darker skin phototypes (V and VI).
Blepharitis Inflammation of the eyelid margin, most commonly arising from Meibomian gland dysfunction.
Keratitis Inflammation of the cornea that can lead to defects and, in the most severe cases, vision loss.
Conjunctivitis Inflammation of the mucous membranes lining the inner surface of the eyelids and bulbar conjunctiva. Typically associated with injection or vascular congestion and conjunctival oedema.
Anterior uveitis Inflammation of the iris and/or ciliary body.

Table 2: Descriptions of ocular rosacea features

Note that these are recommendations rather than consensus due to n = 2. Both ophthalmologists voted ‘Agree’ or ‘Strongly agree’ to the descriptions.
Consensus of an expert panel of 19 dermatologists from Argentina (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), Canada (n = 1), France (n = 1), Germany (n = 2), India (n = 1), Italy (n = 1), the Netherlands (n = 1), Qatar (n = 1), Singapore (n = 1), South Africa (n = 1), the U.K. (n = 1) and the U.S.A. (n = 6); and two ophthalmologists from Germany (n = 1) and the U.S.A (n = 1). Some panellists abstained when their clinical expertise did not extend to a particular subject.
Reprinted from Schaller M. et al., 2019, Br J Dermatol, 176, p. 1274.15



Evaluation and Differential Diagnosis

Differential diagnoses of rosacea depend on the clinical feature(s) present (Table 3). Examples include contact dermatitis, photodermatitis, seborrheic dermatitis, and systemic lupus erythromatous for facial erythema; perimenopausal flushing, emotional flushing, carcinoid syndrome, and mastocytosis for flushing; and acne vulgaris and folliculitis for papules and pustules.16 Exclusion of mimics can be established by taking an adequate history, performing a directed physical evaluation for distinguishing features, and further testing as required.

Distinguishing Clinical Feature Differential Diagnosis Other Clinical Features
Facial erythema Contact dermatitis Itching, eczematous features
Photodermatitis Tender erythema in photo-distribution
Seborrheic dermatitis Scaly erythema at frontal hairline, scalp, eyebrows, and nasolabial folds
Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) Cheilitis and other manifestations of SLE
Flushing Perimenopausal flushing Transient episodes of intense heat sensation
Flushing of chest, head, and neck
Profuse drenching sweats
Episodes lasts 3-5 minutes up to 20 times a day and are frequently followed by chills accompanied by palpitations and sense of anxiety
Emotional flushing Episodes of flushing are correlated with emotional upset or feelings of embarrassment
Carcinoid syndrome Associated diarrhea, wheezing, and abdominal pain
Mastocytosis Associated diarrhea, abdominal pain, and musculoskeletal pain
Papules and pustules Acne vulgaris Presence of comedones
Folliculitis Monomorphous lesions, no centrofacial erythema

Table 3: Differential diagnoses of rosacea

Information from Asai et al., 2016,16 Ogé et al., 2015,19 Scheinfeld et al., 2010,55 and Izikson et al., 2006.56



Associated Comorbidities

Associations between rosacea and metabolic, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal (GI), neurologic, and psychiatric diseases have been established (Table 4).17 Some of these share common innate inflammatory elements with rosacea, such as macrophage and macrophage-derived mediators, reactive oxygen species, matrix metalloproteinases, interleukin-1b (IL-1b), and tumor-necrosis-factor (TNF).18

 

Associated Comorbidity OR 95% CI P-Value Reference
Metabolic
Type 1 diabetes 2.59 1.41-4.73 <0.002 Egeberg et al., 201657
Dyslipidemia 1.41 1.36-1.46 <0.008 Hua et al., 201558
Cardiovascular
Hypertension 1.17 1.12-1.21 <0.008 Hua et al., 201558
Coronary artery disease 1.35 1.29-1.41 <0.008 Hua et al., 201558
Gastrointestinal
Ulcerative colitis 1.65 1.43-1.90 N/A Spoendlin et al., 201659
Crohn’s disease 1.49 1.25-1.77 N/A Holmes et al., 201818
Inflammatory bowel disease 2.17 1.59-2.97 <0.001 Kim et al., 201760
Celiac disease 2.03 1.35-3.08 <0.001 Egeberg et al., 201657
Gastroesophageal reflux disease 4.2 1.70-10.20 <0.002 Rainer et al., 201561
Neurologic/psychiatric
Depression N/A N/A N/A Wu et al., 201862
Migraine 1.18 1.13-1.24 N/A Spoendlin et al., 201363

Table 4: Rosacea and associated comorbidities

CI = confidence interval, N/A = not available, OR = odds ratio, P = probability



Management

The goals of rosacea treatment are to reduce the severity of features and the frequency and intensity of flares.13 General management includes routine skin care: gentle cleansers, moisturizers, sun protection, and avoidance of triggers.16,19 Specific treatments should be targeted at clinical features (Table 5 on pages 7-8). If multiple features are present, combination treatment should be considered.16 The phenotype approach allows for such feature-based treatment according to the severity and impact of the presentation.20 An updated systematic review of rosacea treatment based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) framework, is outlined below (Table 5).21

 

Treatment Dose Efficacy Certainty of Evidence for Efficacy Rate of Adverse Events Certainty of Evidence for Adverse Events Reference
Persistent erythema
Topical brimonidine 0.33% gel Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.60-2.78, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%; NNTB 5, 95% CI 3-7 High Equal to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.98-1.69, I2 = 0% Moderate Fowler et al., 201322
Topical oxymetazoline 1% cream Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.23–2.21, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%; NNTB 11, 95% CI 7-27 Moderate Equal to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.97-1.78, I2 = 13 Moderate Baumann et al., 201823
Kircik et al., 201824
Papules and pustules
Dicarboxylic acids
Topical azelaic acid 15% foam Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.28-1.53, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%; NNTB 6, 95% CI 5-8 High Equal to vehicle/ placebo; RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.92-1.81, I2 = 46% Moderate Draelos et al., 201327
Draelos et al., 201528
Topical azelaic acid is superior to topical metronidazole 15% gel azelaic acid, 0.5% gel metronidazole Mean nominal lesion count reduction –12.9 vs. –10.7, P = 0.003 Moderate; non-reproducible by other RCTs N/A Moderate Elewski et al., 200329
Antiparasitics
Topical ivermectin 1% cream Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.62-2.09, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%; NNTB 3, 95% CI 3-4 High Equal to vehicle/placebo; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54-1.28, I2 = 26% Moderate Stein et al., 201432
Topical ivermectin is superior to topical metronidazole 1% cream ivermectin, 0.75% cream metronidazole Topical ivermectin compared to topical metronidazole; RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.07-1.22, P <0.001; NNTB 10, 95% CI 7-17 Moderate N/A N/A Taieb et al., 201533
Retinoids
Oral isotretinoin 0.25 mg/kg, 0.30 mg/kg Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 5.51, 95% CI 2.37-12.83, P < 0.001; NNTB 2, 95% CI 2-3 High Higher than vehicle/placebo; RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.12-2.24, P = 0.009, NNTH 4, 95% CI 2-11 Moderate Sbidian et al., 201634
Antibiotics
Topical metronidazole 1% cream Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.29-3.02, P = 0.002 Moderate Equal to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94-1.51, I2 = 0% Moderate Bjerke et al., 198936
Breneman et al., 199837
Nielsen, 198338
Topical minocycline 1.5% or 3% foam Compared to vehicle/placebo; MD – 13.30, 95% CI -15.82 to -10.78, P < 0.001 Moderate Higher than vehicle/placebo; RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.05-2.04, P = 0.02; NNTH 5, 95% CI 3-32 Moderate Mrowietz et al., 201839
Oral doxycycline 40 mg MR Compared to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26-2.28, P < 0.001, I2 = 0; NNTB 9, 95% CI 6-20 Moderate Equal to vehicle/placebo; RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08-1.49 Moderate Di Nardo et al., 201640
Oral tetracycline 250 mg N/A Low N/A Moderate Marks, 197141
Sneddon, 196642
Oral doxycycline is just as effective as oral minocycline 40 mg doxycycline, 100 mg minocycline Oral doxycycline compared to oral minocycline; RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.72-1.67 Moderate Equal to minocycline; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.83-1.65 Low van der Linden et al., 201744
Oral doxycycline is similar to oral azithromycin 100 mg doxycycline, 500 mg three times a week then tapered azithromycin Mean nominal lesion count reduction N/A, 95% CI –30.1 to –32.4, P = 0.771 Very low N/A N/A Akhyani et al., 200845
Oral doxycycline (low dose) is similar to oral doxycycline (high dose) 40 mg, 100 mg doxycycline N/A Low N/A N/A Del Rosso et al., 200846
Telangiectasias
PDL, Nd:YAG, IPL N/A N/A Low-to-moderate N/A N/A van Zuuren et al., 201921
Clinically non-inflamed phyma
Ablative laser surgery, Er:YAG modalities, electrosurgery, cryosurgery N/A N/A No RCTs but recommended by experts N/A N/A Ogé et al., 201519
Clinically inflamed phyma
Oral doxycycline N/A N/A No RCTs but recommended by experts N/A N/A Ogé et al., 201519
Oral isotretinoin N/A N/A No RCTs but recommended by experts N/A N/A Ogé et al., 201519
Ocular rosacea
Omega-3 fatty acids 180 mg eicosapentaenoic acid and 120 mg docosahexaenoic acid N/A Moderate N/A N/A Bhargava et al., 201647
Cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion is superior to artificial tears 0.05% cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion N/A Low Similar to artificial tears; N/A Low Schechter et al., 200948
Cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion is superior to artificial tears 0.05% cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion N/A Low Similar to artificial tears; N/A Low Schechter et al., 200948
Cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion is superior to oral doxycycline 0.05% cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion, 100 mg doxycycline N/A Low N/A N/A Arman et al., 201549
Combination therapies
Topical brimonidine with topical ivermectin 0.33% gel brimonidine, 1% topical ivermectin RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.38-2.46, P < 0.001; NNTB 3, 95% CI 2-5 N/A N/A N/A Gold et al., 201750
Topical metronidazole with oral doxycycline is superior to topical metronidazole alone 1% gel metronidazole, 40 mg MR doxycycline N/A N/A N/A N/A Fowler, 200751
Oral minocycline with topical azelaic acid is just as effective as oral
minocycline without azelaic acid
45 mg minocycline, 15% gel azelaic acid N/A Moderate N/A N/A Jackson et al., 201352
Topical clindamycin phosphate with tretinoin 1.2% clindamycin phosphate, 0.025% gel tretinoin N/A Moderate Higher than vehicle/placebo; N/A Moderate Chang et al., 201253
Maintenance therapies
Topical metronidazole 0.75% gel for papules and pustules 0.75% gel N/A N/A N/A N/A Stein Gold et al., 201454
Topical ivermectin for papules and pustules 1% cream N/A N/A N/A N/A Stein Gold et al., 201454
Topical azelaic acid for papules and pustules 15% gel N/A N/A N/A N/A Stein Gold et al., 201454

Table 5: Treatment recommendations and certainty of evidence

CI = confidence interval, Er:YAG = erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet, I2 = heterogeneity, IPL = intense pulsed light, MD = mean difference, MR = modified release, N/A = not available, Nd:YAG = neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet, NNTB = number needed to benefit, NNTH = number needed to harm, PDL = pulsed dye laser, P = probability, RCT = randomized controlled trial, RR = relative risk
Information from van Zuuren et al., 2019.21


Flushing/Transient Erythema

No randomized controlled trials available.

Persistent Erythema

Evidence to support the efficacy and safety in transient reduction of persistent erythema was derived from two randomized vehicle-controlled trials for topical brimonidine 0.33% gel22 and topical oxymetazoline 1% cream.23,24 Quality of evidence for efficacy was reported as high-certainty for brimonidine 0.33% gel and moderate-certainty for oxymetazoline 1% cream.21 Adverse event frequency was similar to vehicle for both brimonidine22 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 and for oxymetazoline23,24 (moderate-certainty evidence).21 In both, there is ongoing concern about the potential risk of worsening erythema with repeated use.25,26

Papules and Pustules

Dicarboxylic Acids

Topical azelaic acid 15% foam twice daily is a safe and effective treatment for papules and pustules27,28 (high-certainty evidence)21 with an adverse event frequency similar to vehicle27,28 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 according to two randomized vehicle-controlled trials.27,28

Another randomized controlled trial showed that azelaic acid 15% gel may be more effective in reducing mean nominal lesion count than metronidazole 0.75% gel29 (moderate-certainty evidence).21 These differences, however, were not reproducible and were considered to be unimportant.30,31

Antiparasitics

Topical ivermectin 1% cream once daily is more effective in the treatment of papules and pustules compared to vehicle32 (high-certainty evidence),21 and compared to metronidazole 0.75% cream twice daily33 (moderate-certainty evidence).21 Adverse event rates for topical ivermectin were similar compared to vehicle32 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 and topical metronidazole.33

Retinoids

In two randomized controlled trials, low-dose oral isotretinoin 0.25 mg/kg and low-dose oral isotretinoin 0.30 mg/kg were more effective than placebo34 (high-certainty evidence)21 and oral doxycycline (100 mg for 14 days, then tapered to 50 mg)35 (moderate-certainty evidence),21 respectively. The frequency of adverse events was higher for isotretinoin compared to placebo34 (moderate-certainty evidence),21 but similar to oral doxycycline35 (moderate-certainty evidence).21

Antibiotics

Several randomized vehicle- or placebo-controlled trials demonstrated the efficacy of topical metronidazole 1% cream,36-38 topical minocycline 1.5% and 3% foam,39 oral doxycycline 40 mg modified-release (MR),40 and oral tetracycline 250 mg twice daily41,42 in the treatment of papules and pustules. The quality of evidence for efficacy was moderate-certainty for the first three treatments, but low-certainty for oral tetracycline.21 Adverse event frequency was similar to vehicle/placebo for topical metronidazole36-38 (moderate-certainty evidence),21 oral doxycycline,40 and oral tetracycline,41,42 but higher than vehicle for topical minocycline39 (moderate-certainty evidence).21 Topical clindamycin 1% cream or gel was found to be no more effective than vehicle for any outcome43 (low-to-moderate certainty evidence).21 Compared to oral doxycycline 40 mg MR, oral minocycline 100 mg is similarly effective44 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 with no differences in the rate of adverse events44 (low-certainty evidence).21 Compared to oral doxycycline 100 mg, oral azithromycin 500 mg three times a week then tapered is similarly effective in reducing lesion counts45 (very low-certainty evidence).21 Finally, 40 mg MR doxycycline is as effective as 100 mg with fewer side effects.46

Telangiectases

There is low-to-moderate certainty evidence that long pulsed dye laser (PDL), neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) laser, and intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy reduce telangiectasia.21

Clinically Non-inflamed Phyma

Physical modalities, such as ablative laser surgery using carbon dioxide or erbium-doped yttrium aluminium garnet (Er:YAG) modalities, electrosurgery, or cryosurgery, may improve clinically noninflamed phyma.16 However, it is difficult to determine their effectiveness due to the lack of evaluation by randomized controlled trials.16,21

Clinically Inflamed Phyma

While there are no randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of treatments for clinically inflamed phyma, oral doxycycline or oral isotretinoin are still recommended.16,21

Ocular Rosacea

One randomized placebo-controlled trial supported omega-3 fatty acids (180 mg eicosapentaenoic acid and 120 mg docosahexaenoic acid) one capsule twice daily47 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 in the treatment of ocular rosacea. Another randomized controlled trial supported cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% twice daily versus artificial tears48 (low-certainty evidence)21 and versus oral doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for the first month followed by 2 months once daily49 (low-certainty evidence).21 For the cyclosporine ophthalmic emulsion, there were no differences in the rate of adverse events compared to artificial tears (low-certainty evidence).21 For severe ocular rosacea or when there is diagnostic uncertainty, referral to an ophthalmologist should be arranged.21

Combination Therapies

Treatment combinations may address several different clinical features of rosacea. For example, compared to vehicle, topical brimonidine 0.33% gel with topical ivermectin 1% cream can effectively reduce both erythema and papules and pustules.50 Compared to metronidazole 1% gel alone, metronidazole 1% gel with oral doxycycline 40 mg MR can reduce lesion counts to a greater extent.51

Finally, randomized controlled trials reported no difference in efficacy between oral minocycline 45 mg with or without topical azelaic acid 15% gel52 (moderate-certainty evidence)21 or between topical clindamycin phosphate 1.2% with tretinoin 0.025% gel compared to placebo53 (moderate-certainty evidence).21 However, in the latter, there was a higher rate of adverse events in the topical clindamycin/tretinoin group compared to placebo (moderate-certainty evidence).21

Maintenance Therapies

Topical metronidazole 0.75% gel, ivermectin 1% cream, and azelaic acid 15% gel are reported as effective and safe for maintenance therapy of papules and pustules.21,54


Conclusion

The diagnosis and classification of rosacea has evolved to a phenotype approach to accurately address the clinical features presenting in an individual and to advance epidemiological and clinical trials research.13 This review details the rosacea phenotype approach to diagnosis and classification, and summarizes current evidence-based treatment recommendations for individual features. There is no singularly effective treatment for all features of rosacea. There is an unmet need for high quality investigations for treatment of inflamed phyma, flushing/transient erythema, and ocular rosacea.

References



  1. Gether L, Overgaard LK, Egeberg A, et al. Incidence and prevalence of rosacea: a systematic review and meta analysis. Br J Dermatol. 2018 Aug;179(2):282-9.

  2. Halder RM, Brooks HL, Callender VD. Acne in ethnic skin. Dermatol Clin. 2003 Oct;21(4):609-15.

  3. Powell FC. Clinical practice. Rosacea. N Engl J Med. 2005 Feb 24;352(8):793- 803. [PubMed]

  4. Berg M, Liden S. An epidemiological study of rosacea. Acta Derm Venereol. 1989 69(5):419-23.

  5. McAleer MA, Fitzpatrick P, Powell FC. Papulopustular rosacea: prevalence and relationship to photodamage. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010 Jul;63(1):33-9.

  6. Donaldson KE, Karp CL, Dunbar MT. Evaluation and treatment of children with ocular rosacea. Cornea. 2007 Jan;26(1):42-6.

  7. Lacz NL, Schwartz RA. Rosacea in the pediatric population. Cutis. 2004 Aug;74(2):99-103.

  8. Starr PA, Macdonald A. Oculocutaneous aspects of rosacea. Proc R Soc Med. 1969 Jan;62(1):9-11.

  9. Buddenkotte J, Steinhoff M. Recent advances in understanding and managing rosacea. F1000Res. 2018 7.

  10. Kelhala HL, Palatsi R, Fyhrquist N, et al. IL-17/Th17 pathway is activated in acne lesions. PLoS One. 2014 9(8):e105238.

  11. Rainer BM, Kang S, Chien AL. Rosacea: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and treatment. Dermatoendocrinol. 2017 9(1):e1361574.

  12. Heisig M, Reich A. Psychosocial aspects of rosacea with a focus on anxiety and depression. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2018 11:103-7.

  13. Tan J, Almeida LM, Bewley A, et al. Updating the diagnosis, classification and assessment of rosacea: recommendations from the global ROSacea COnsensus (ROSCO) panel. Br J Dermatol. 2017 Feb;176(2):431-8.

  14. Gallo RL, Granstein RD, Kang S, et al. Standard classification and pathophysiology of rosacea: the 2017 update by the National Rosacea Society Expert Committee. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Jan;78(1):148-55.

  15. Schaller M, Almeida LMC, Bewley A, et al. Recommendations for rosacea diagnosis, classification and management: update from the global ROSacea COnsensus 2019 panel. Br J Dermatol. 2020 May;182(5):1269-76.

  16. Asai Y, Tan J, Baibergenova A, et al. Canadian clinical practice guidelines for rosacea. J Cutan Med Surg. 2016 Sep;20(5):432-45.

  17. Aksoy B, Ekiz O, Unal E, et al. Systemic comorbidities associated with rosacea: a multicentric retrospective observational study. Int J Dermatol. 2019 Jun;58(6):722-8.

  18. Holmes AD, Spoendlin J, Chien AL, et al. Evidence-based update on rosacea comorbidities and their common physiologic pathways. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Jan;78(1):156-66.

  19. Ogé LK, Muncie HL, Phillips-Savoy AR. Rosacea: diagnosis and treatment. Am Fam Physician. 2015 Aug 1;92(3):187-96.

  20. Tan J, Berg M, Gallo RL, et al. Applying the phenotype approach for rosacea to practice and research. Br J Dermatol. 2018 Sep;179(3):741-6.

  21. van Zuuren EJ, Fedorowicz Z, Tan J, et al. Interventions for rosacea based on the phenotype approach: an updated systematic review including GRADE assessments. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Jul;181(1):65-79.

  22. Fowler J, Jr., Jackson M, Moore A, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-daily topical brimonidine tartrate gel 0.5% for the treatment of moderate to severe facial erythema of rosacea: results of two randomized, double-blind, and vehicle-controlled pivotal studies. J Drugs Dermatol. 2013 Jun 1;12(6):650-6.

  23. Baumann L, Goldberg DJ, Stein Gold L, et al. Pivotal trial of the efficacy and safety of oxymetazoline cream 1.0% for the treatment of persistent facial erythema associated with rosacea: findings from the second REVEAL trial. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018 Mar 1;17(3):290-8.

  24. Kircik LH, DuBois J, Draelos ZD, et al. Pivotal trial of the efficacy and safety of oxymetazoline cream 1.0% for the treatment of persistent facial erythema associated with rosacea: findings from the first REVEAL trial. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018 Jan 1;17(1):97-105.

  25. Docherty JR, Steinhoff M, Lorton D, et al. Multidisciplinary consideration of potential pathophysiologic mechanisms of paradoxical erythema with topical brimonidine therapy. Adv Ther. 2016 Nov;33(11):1885-95.

  26. Del Rosso JQ. Topical a-agonist therapy for persistent facial erythema of rosacea and the addition of oxmetazoline to the treatment armamentarium: where are we now? J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017 Jul;10(7):28-32.

  27. Draelos ZD, Elewski BE, Harper JC, et al. A phase 3 randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial of azelaic acid foam 15% in the treatment of papulopustular rosacea. Cutis. 2015 Jul;96(1):54-61.

  28. Draelos ZD, Elewski B, Staedtler G, et al. Azelaic acid foam 15% in the treatment of papulopustular rosacea: a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled study. Cutis. 2013 Dec;92(6):306-17.

  29. Elewski BE, Fleischer AB, Jr., Pariser DM. A comparison of 15% azelaic acid gel and 0.75% metronidazole gel in the topical treatment of papulopustular rosacea: results of a randomized trial. Arch Dermatol. 2003 Nov;139(11):1444- 50.

  30. Maddin S. A comparison of topical azelaic acid 20% cream and topical metronidazole 0.75% cream in the treatment of patients with papulopustular rosacea. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999 Jun;40(6 Pt 1):961-5.

  31. Wolf JE, Jr., Kerrouche N, Arsonnaud S. Efficacy and safety of once-daily metronidazole 1% gel compared with twice-daily azelaic acid 15% gel in the treatment of rosacea. Cutis. 2006 Apr;77(4 Suppl):3-11.

  32. Stein L, Kircik L, Fowler J, et al. Efficacy and safety of ivermectin 1% cream in treatment of papulopustular rosacea: results of two randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled pivotal studies. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014 Mar;13(3):316-23.

  33. Taieb A, Ortonne JP, Ruzicka T, et al. Superiority of ivermectin 1% cream over metronidazole 0.75% cream in treating inflammatory lesions of rosacea: a randomized, investigator-blinded trial. Br J Dermatol. 2015 Apr;172(4):1103- 10.

  34. Sbidian E, Vicaut E, Chidiack H, et al. A randomized-controlled trial of oral low-dose isotretinoin for difficult-to-treat papulopustular rosacea. J Invest Dermatol. 2016 Jun;136(6):1124-9.

  35. Gollnick H, Blume-Peytavi U, Szabo EL, et al. Systemic isotretinoin in the treatment of rosacea – doxycycline- and placebo-controlled, randomized clinical study. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2010 Jul;8(7):505-15.

  36. Bjerke, J, Nyfors, A, Austad, J, et al. Metronidazole (Elyzol) 1% cream v. placebo cream in the treatment of rosacea. Clin Trials J. 1989 Jan 1; 26(3):187-94.

  37. Breneman DL, Stewart D, Hevia O, et al. A double-blind, multicenter clinical trial comparing efficacy of once-daily metronidazole 1 percent cream to vehicle in patients with rosacea. Cutis. 1998 Jan;61(1):44-7.

  38. Nielsen PG. Treatment of rosacea with i% metronidazole cream. A double-blind study. Br J Dermatol. 1983 Mar;108(3):327-32.

  39. Mrowietz U, Kedem TH, Keynan R, et al. A phase II, randomized, double-blind clinical study evaluating the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of a topical minocycline foam, FMX103, for the treatment of facial papulopustular rosacea. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2018 Jun;19(3):427-36.

  40. Di Nardo A, Holmes AD, Muto Y, et al. Improved clinical outcome and biomarkers in adults with papulopustular rosacea treated with doxycycline modified-release capsules in a randomized trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Jun;74(6):1086-92.

  41. Marks R, Ellis J. Comparative effectiveness of tetracycline and ampicillin in rosacea. A controlled trial. Lancet. 1971 Nov 13;2(7733):1049-52.

  42. Sneddon IB. A clinical trial of tetracycline in rosacea. Br J Dermatol. 1966 Dec;78(12):649-52.

  43. Martel P, Jarratt M, Weiss J, et al. Lack of significant anti-inflammatory activity with clindamycin in the treatment of rosacea: results of 2 randomized, vehicle-controlled trials. Cutis. 2017 Jul;100(1):53-8.

  44. van der Linden MMD, van Ratingen AR, van Rappard DC, et al. DOMINO, doxycycline 40 mg vs. minocycline 100 mg in the treatment of rosacea: a randomized, single-blinded, noninferiority trial, comparing efficacy and safety. Br J Dermatol. 2017 Jun;176(6):1465-74.

  45. Akhyani M, Ehsani AH, Ghiasi M, et al. Comparison of efficacy of azithromycin vs. doxycycline in the treatment of rosacea: a randomized open clinical trial. Int J Dermatol. 2008 Mar;47(3):284-8.

  46. Del Rosso JQ, Schlessinger J, Werschler P. Comparison of anti-inflammatory dose doxycycline versus doxycycline 100 mg in the treatment of rosacea. J Drugs Dermatol. 2008 Jun;7(6):573-6.

  47. Bhargava R, Chandra M, Bansal U, et al. A randomized controlled trial of omega 3 fatty acids in rosacea patients with dry eye symptoms. Curr Eye Res. 2016 Oct;41(10):1274-80.

  48. Schechter BA, Katz RS, Friedman LS. Efficacy of topical cyclosporine for the treatment of ocular rosacea. Adv Ther. 2009 Jun;26(6):651-9.

  49. Arman A, Demirseren DD, Takmaz T. Treatment of ocular rosacea: comparative study of topical cyclosporine and oral doxycycline. Int J Ophthalmol. 2015 8(3):544-9.

  50. Gold LS, Papp K, Lynde C, et al. Treatment of rosacea with concomitant use of topical ivermectin 1% cream and brimonidine 0.33% gel: a randomized, vehicle-controlled study. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017 Sep 1;16(9):909-16.

  51. Fowler JF, Jr. Combined effect of anti-inflammatory dose doxycycline (40-mg doxycycline, usp monohydrate controlled-release capsules) and metronidazole topical gel 1% in the treatment of rosacea. J Drugs Dermatol. 2007 Jun;6(6):641-5.

  52. Jackson JM, Kircik LH, Lorenz DJ. Efficacy of extended-release 45 mg oral minocycline and extended-release 45 mg oral minocycline plus 15% azelaic acid in the treatment of acne rosacea. J Drugs Dermatol. 2013 Mar;12(3):292-8.

  53. Chang AL, Alora-Palli M, Lima XT, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, pilot study to assess the efficacy and safety of clindamycin 1.2% and tretinoin 0.025% combination gel for the treatment of acne rosacea over 12 weeks. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012 Mar;11(3):333-9.

  54. Stein Gold L, Kircik L, Fowler J, et al. Long-term safety of ivermectin 1% cream vs azelaic acid 15% gel in treating inflammatory lesions of rosacea: results of two 40-week controlled, investigator-blinded trials. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014 Nov;13(11):1380-6.

  55. Scheinfeld N, Berk T. A review of the diagnosis and treatment of rosacea. Postgrad Med. 2010 Jan;122(1):139-43.

  56. Izikson L, English JC, 3rd, Zirwas MJ. The flushing patient: differential diagnosis, workup, and treatment. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006 Aug;55(2):193- 208.

  57. Egeberg A, Hansen PR, Gislason GH, et al. Clustering of autoimmune diseases in patients with rosacea. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 Apr;74(4):667-72 e1.

  58. Hua TC, Chung PI, Chen YJ, et al. Cardiovascular comorbidities in patients with rosacea: a nationwide case-control study from Taiwan. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015 Aug;73(2):249-54.

  59. Spoendlin J, Karatas G, Furlano RI, et al. Rosacea in patients with ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease: d population-based case-control study. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2016 Mar;22(3):680-7.

  60. Kim M, Choi KH, Hwang SW, et al. Inflammatory bowel disease is associated with an increased risk of inflammatory skin diseases: a population-based cross-sectional study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Jan;76(1):40-8.

  61. Rainer BM, Fischer AH, Luz Felipe da Silva D, et al. Rosacea is associated with chronic systemic diseases in a skin severity-dependent manner: results of a case-control study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015 Oct;73(4):604-8.

  62. Wu Y, Fu C, Zhang W, et al. The dermatology life quality index (DLQI) and the hospital anxiety and depression (HADS) in Chinese rosacea patients. Psychol Health Med. 2018 Apr;23(4):369-74.

  63. Spoendlin J, Voegel JJ, Jick SS, et al. Migraine, triptans, and the risk of developing rosacea: a population-based study within the United Kingdom. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Sep;69(3):399-406.


Purchase Article PDF for $1.99

]]>
Moisturizers and Cleansers in the Management of Skin Conditions Caused by Personal Protective Equipment and Frequent Handwashing https://www.skintherapyletter.com/atopic-dermatitis/moisturizers-cleansers-covid-19/ Sun, 01 Aug 2021 15:49:18 +0000 https://www.skintherapyletter.com/?p=12694 Sara Mirali, PhD1; Patrick Fleming, MD, MSc, FRCPC, FCDA1,2,3; Charles W. Lynde, MD, FRCPC, DABD1,2,3

1Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
2Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
3Lynde Institute for Dermatology, Markham, ON, Canada

Conflict of interest:
Funding sources: None. Conflicts of interest: Sara Mirali has no conflicts of interest to declare. Patrick Fleming has received honorarium and/or consulting and/or advisory boards and/or speaking fees for AbbVie, Altius, Amgen, Aralez, Bausch Health, Cipher, Galderma, Eli Lilly, L’Oréal, UCB, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Genzyme. Charles Lynde has acted as a principal investigator, speaker and/or consultant and/or advisory board member for AbbVie, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Avillon, Arcutis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Cipher, Genentech, GlenMark, Incyte, Janssen, Leo Pharma, L’Oréal, Kyowa, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi.

Abstract:
During the COVID-19 pandemic, prolonged usage of personal protective equipment (PPE) and frequent handwashing has exacerbated or caused skin diseases, particularly amongst frontline workers. Skin conditions, such as atopic dermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis, and hand eczema, affect patients’ quality of life and their ability to work. These conditions can be managed by frequent moisturization and washing with gentle cleansers. In this review, we discuss the properties of effective moisturizers and cleansers for patients with skin diseases related to enhanced infection control procedures.

Key Words:
COVID-19, personal protective equipment, PPE, skin pH, eczema, atopic dermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis, acne, hand eczema

Table of Content:

  1. Introduction
  2. PPE-related Dermatitis
  3. Moisturizers
  4. Hand Eczema
  5. Cleansers
  6. Conclusion


Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2, health authorities advised frontline workers and the public to take infection control precautions. Current evidence suggests that COVID-19 is transmitted through respiratory droplets and contact with contaminated surfaces.1 To prevent transmission, frequent handwashing and prolonged usage of personal protective equipment (PPE), such as goggles, masks, face shields, and gloves, are recommended. These enhanced precautions can cause or exacerbate inflammatory skin conditions, which impact patients’ quality of life and, in some cases, their ability to work.2 Moreover, associated symptoms, such as pruritis affecting the face, increase the risk of transmission.

Recent studies have shown that 75-97% of healthcare workers (HCWs) treating COVID-19 patients suffered from adverse skin reactions, including contact and pressure urticaria, rosacea, perioral dermatitis, contact dermatitis, or aggravation of preexisting skin disorders. The most commonly affected areas were the hands, cheeks, and nasal bridge.2,3 These adverse effects are not restricted to HCWs4 and are mainly caused by the hyperhydration effects of PPE, friction, epidermal barrier breakdown, and contact reactions. All of these can aggravate preexisting skin diseases or cause new skin diseases, many of which can be controlled with proper moisturization. In this review, we discuss the role of moisturizers and cleansers in the management of skin conditions caused by frequent handwashing and PPE.


PPE-related Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) are common types of eczema that are characterized by pruritus, eczematous lesions, xerosis, and lichenification. AD is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition that often develops at a young age, while ICD is caused by direct contact of the skin with environmental, chemical, or physical agents that disrupt the epidermal barrier.5,6 AD and ICD can be exacerbated or caused by wearing PPE for long periods of time.2,3

Prolonged usage of PPE can also exacerbate or cause acne vulgaris.7,8 The tight seal and humid environment created by masks, particularly N95s, aggravates acne (also known colloquially as maskne). This is likely because pressure on the skin can rupture comedones and block pilosebaceous ducts. Moreover, the humid microclimate within the mask is ideal for bacterial growth and prevents filaggrin (FLG) breakdown, which contributes to skin barrier disruption.8,9 In addition to AD and acne, masks can exacerbate other inflammatory skin disorders, such as rosacea and perioral dermatitis.7,8


Moisturizers

Moisturizers are widely used to treat AD and ICD. Moisturizers treat damaged skin by repairing the stratum corneum, increasing hydration, and reducing transepidermal water loss (TEWL). In addition to restoring the skin barrier and relieving symptoms, frequent use of moisturizers can reduce the need for topical steroids.10 While steroids may reduce inflammation, they can also compromise the skin barrier and increase TEWL.11

An effective moisturizer should contain an occlusive barrier, humectants, and emollients (Table 1). Occlusives block TEWL by forming a film on the surface of the skin, while humectants retain moisture by attracting water from the environment and from the dermis. Emollients soften the skin by repairing the stratum corneum’s lipid-rich matrix and filling the spaces between desquamating corneocytes.

Property Purpose Side Effects Examples
Occlusive barrier Creates a protective barrier and reduces TEWL Cosmetically unappealing, occlusive folliculitis (petrolatum, mineral oil), contact dermatitis (lanolin)
  • Fatty acids
  • Fatty alcohols
  • Lanolin
  • Oil-based oils and waxes
  • Petrolatum
  • Phospholipids
  • Silicone derivatives
  • Sterols
  • Vegetable waxes
  • Wax esters
Humectants Attracts water from external environment and dermis Irritation (lactic acid, PCA, urea)
  • Gelatin
  • Glycerin
  • Honey
  • Hyaluronic acid
  • Lactic acid
  • Panthenol
  • Propylene glycol
  • Sodium PCA
  • Sorbitol
  • Urea
Emollients Smooths skin, restores stratum corneum’s lipid-rich matrix Sometimes ineffective
  • Ceramides
  • Cholesterol
  • Fatty acids

Table 1: Basic properties of an effective moisturizer

PCA = pyrrolidine carboxylic acid; TEWL = transepidermal water loss


 

Treatment with moisturizers is largely based on patient compliance. Consumer preferences must be taken into account as compliance will likely be poor if patients are unsatisfied with the treatment.12 An ideal moisturizer should be non-irritating, hydrating, cosmetically appealing, pH balanced, and contain ceramides.10,13,14 Moreover, an ideal moisturizer should be inexpensive and widely available.

Non-irritating

Sensory reactions are a common adverse effect of moisturizers. Sensory reactions consist of burning or stinging sensations without evidence of inflammation.15 Although urea, lactic acid, and pyrrolidine carboxylic acid (PCA) are clinically effective humectants, they cause irritation in some patients, particularly in those with damaged skin.12,16,17 In contrast, the humectant glycerin is well-tolerated.16 Preservatives, such as benzoic acid and sorbic acid, can also cause irritation (Table 2).12,17

Adverse Side Effect Potential Causes
Acne vulgaris petrolatum
Allergic contact dermatitis lanolin, fragrances, preservatives (benzoic acid, sorbic acid), MCI/MI, vitamin E, chamomile oil, aloe vera, olive oil, tea tree oil
Contact urticaria preservatives, fragrances
Irritation humectants (lactic acid, PCA, urea), preservatives, propylene glycol, solvents, retinoids, benzoyl peroxide
Occlusive folliculitis petrolatum, mineral oils
Photosensitivity or photomelanosis fragrances, alpha hydroxy acids, sunscreens

Table 2: Side effects of moisturizers and potential causes

Adapted from Lynde et al.23
PCA = pyrrolidine carboxylic acid
MCI/MI = methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone


 

Fragrances are the most common allergen found in moisturizers and are the most frequent cosmetic cause of allergic contact dermatitis.18,19 Fragrances can also cause photo contact dermatitis and contact urticaria.20 Moisturizers should be fragrance-free and fragrance-related allergens, such as benzyl alcohols, essential oils, and biologic additives should also be avoided.18 dermatitis and contact urticaria.20 Moisturizers should be fragrance-free and fragrance-related allergens, such as benzyl alcohols, essential oils, and biologic additives should also be avoided.18

Moisturizers may contain or be used alongside treatments for acne vulgaris, such as retinoids and benzoyl peroxide. These compounds can disrupt the skin barrier and cause further irritation, particularly if patients recently integrated them into their skincare routine.21 To prevent maskne, skincare routines should be limited to a pH-balanced gentle non-soap cleanser and mild moisturizer free of irritants. Products with a physiological skin surface pH (4.0-6.0) should be used to reduce inflammation and improve skin barrier function.22 Changes in skincare routine (i.e., addition of a retinol) should be incorporated with caution because mask occlusion may worsen irritation from new products. Likewise, cosmetic products should not be used as mask occlusion will intensify product delivery to the skin, increasing irritation and maskne.

Hydrating Properties

Moisturizers derive their hydrating properties from humectants that attract water from the dermis and from the external environment. Within the stratum corneum, corneocytes contain natural moisturizing factors (NMF), a humectant mixture derived from amino acids and salts. NMF are made of amino acids produced by the breakdown of the protein FLG, which retains water within the corneocytes and maintains skin hydration.24 Patients suffering from AD are deficient in FLG, resulting in increased TEWL and impaired skin barrier function.25 Moisturizers containing FLG breakdown products have been shown to improve barrier function in AD patients.26

Commonly used humectants include the FLG breakdown products lactic acid and PCA, as well as urea. Another frequently used humectant is hyaluronic acid, which has been shown to be efficacious in mild-to-moderate AD.27 If patients are sensitive to these humectants, a moisturizer with glycerin should be considered. Glycerin is an effective humectant that is inexpensive and well-tolerated.16 Because humectants draw up water from the dermis, they must be used in combination with an occlusive agent to prevent TEWL.28

Cosmetically Appealing

Moisturizers are formulated to be non-greasy, non-comedogenic, and smoothing. The consistency of a moisturizer depends on its emulsification. Creams are available as water-in-oil (W/O) or oil-in-water (O/W) emulsions. O/W emulsions are less viscous compared to W/O emulsions, which have an oil content between 15-30%. A higher oil content retains more moisture but increases the greasiness of the product.15

New emulsion technologies allow for better delivery of active ingredients. Multivesicular emulsions (MVE®) are multi-lamellar emulsions with a series of concentric spheres containing oil and water. Ingredients are stored within the oil or water phases and layers are released slowly over time. While traditional emulsions release all of their ingredients at once, MVEs® allows for sustained release, increasing the effective duration of the product.29

pH Balanced

Normal physiological skin surface pH ranges from 4.0-6.0 but is elevated in AD, ICD, and acne.30-32 Elevated skin pH can result in inflammation, disrupted stratum corneum cohesion, and impaired skin permeability. Moreover, for individuals with acne-prone skin, high pH moisturizers can interfere with the efficacy of topical acne treatments.22,33 To improve skin barrier function, moisturizers at physiological skin surface pH (4.0-6.0) should be used, although there is limited clinical evidence directly linking low pH moisturizers and reduced irritation.

Ceramide Content

The stratum corneum’s lipid-rich matrix is composed of approximately 50% ceramides, 25% cholesterol, and 10-20% fatty acids.34 Ceramides are synthesized in keratinocytes and play an important role in skin barrier maintenance, cell adhesion, and epidermal differentiation. Reductions in ceramide correlate with clinical irritation and barrier disruption.35 Natural ceramides are expensive to synthesize but moisturizers containing synthetic ceramides have been shown to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life in patients with AD and ICD.10,13,14,36


Hand Eczema

Hand eczema (HE) is the most common form of ICD.37 Anionic surfactants, commonly found in hand soaps, disrupt the stratum corneum by damaging proteins and the processing of new lipids, allowing for greater penetration of irritants and TEWL.38 Likewise, extended exposure to water disrupts the stratum corneum’s lipid structure and increases skin permeability.39 Other irritants, such as organic solvents used in hand sanitizers, strip away lipids from the stratum corneum, although they are less damaging compared to harsh detergents.40


Cleansers

Cleansers are mainly available as soaps, combars, and synthetic detergents (syndets) (Table 3 & Table 4). Soaps are typically very alkaline and range from pH 9.0-10.0. In contrast, syndets contain synthetic detergents and are acidic or neutral (pH 5.5- 7.0). Combars are a combination of soaps and syndets.41 While soaps are more effective at removing soluble proteins and lipids, their high pH disrupts the skin barrier and causes irritation.42 Fragrance-free, hypoallergenic, non-soap cleansers that are neutral to low pH are recommended.43 Frequent handwashing with low pH cleansers is preferred as they have been shown to be less irritating.44

Cleanser Description pH Range Surfactants
Soap
  • Derived from lye and natural fats
  • Removal of intercellular lipids and stratum corneum swelling
9.0-10.0
  • Sodium lauryl sulfate
  • Sodium laureth sulfate
Combars
  • Combination of soap and synthetic detergents
  • Intermediate between soap and syndet
  • Mild removal of intercellular lipids
7.0 Combination of soap and syndet detergents
Synthetic detergents (syndet)
  • Derived from petrolatum and surfactants, contain <10% soap
  • A subset are lipid-free with no fats or oils
  • Low removal of intercellular lipids
5.5-7.0
  • Sodium cocoyl isethionate
  • Sulfosuccinates

Table 3: Cleanser categories


 

Allergen Examples
Fragrance Any fragrance or fragrance-related components
Surfactants
  • Cocamidopropyl betaine
  • Cocamide diethanolamine
  • Decyl glucoside
  • Dimethylaminopro pylamine
  • Oleamidopropyl dimethylamine
Preservatives
  • Dimethyloldimethyl (DMDM) hydantoin
  • Diazolidinyl
  • Formaldehyde
  • Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate
  • Imidazolidinyl urea
  • Isothiazolinones
  • Quaternium-15

Table 4: Allergens in cleansers

Adapted from Rundle et al.40



Conclusion

Prolonged PPE usage and frequent handwashing increases the risk of developing or aggravating skin diseases, such as AD, ICD, acne, and HE. Routine moisturization with non-irritating, pH-adjusted, ceramide-based products and gentle cleansing with a pH-adjusted cleanser can treat the unique dermatological challenges posed by COVID-19 (Table 5).

Characteristic Recommendation Clinical Evidence
Non-irritating
  • Use moisturizers with glycerin as a humectant for sensitive skin
  • Avoid fragrances
  • Avoid changes in skincare routine
In a double-blind, randomized study of 197 AD patients, 20% cream caused less adverse effects compared to a cream containing 4% urea and 4% sodium chloride.16

In a multi-centre, randomized trial of 3119 individuals, the prevalence of fragrance contact allergies was found to be 0.7-2.6%.45

Hydrating Use moisturizers with FLG breakdown products or other humectants In a single-centre intra-individual comparison trial of 20 AD patients, a moisturizer containing FLG breakdown products and ceramide precursors reduced TEWL and improved clinical symptoms.26
Cosmetically appealing Avoid moisturizers that contain petrolatum Petrolatum is cosmetically unappealing to some patients.43,46
pH balanced Moisturizers and cleansers with a pH of 4.0-6.0 should be used Subjects using low pH soaps reported less irritation compared to those using high pH soaps.44
Contains ceramides Moisturizers that contain ceramides improve symptoms of eczema and xerosis In a cohort study of 151 pediatric and adult AD patients, twice-daily use of CeraVe® improved quality of life and skin condition after 6 weeks.13

Compared to a standard hydrophilic cream, CeraVe® improved barrier function and decreased TEWL and skin pH in 24 senior xerosis patients.14

In a single-centre, randomized study of 60 patients with mild to moderate eczema, use of CeraVe® moisturizer and cleanser twice daily with fluocinonide cream 0.05% significantly improved outcomes after 4 weeks.10

Table 5: Ideal characteristics of moisturizers/cleansers and summary of recommendations

AD = atopic dermatitis; FLG = filaggrin; PCA = pyrrolidine carboxylic acid; TEWL = transepidermal water loss


References



  1. van Doremalen N, Bushmaker T, Morris DH, et al. Aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 as compared with SARS-CoV-1. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 16;382(16):1564-7. [PubMed]

  2. Lan J, Song Z, Miao X, et al. Skin damage among health care workers managing coronavirus disease-2019. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020 May;82(5):1215-6. [PubMed]

  3. Lin P, Zhu S, Huang Y, et al. Adverse skin reactions among healthcare workers during the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak: a survey in Wuhan and its surrounding regions. Br J Dermatol. 2020 Jul;183(1):190-2. [PubMed]

  4. Giacalone S, Minuti A, Spigariolo CB, et al. Facial dermatoses in the general population due to wearing of personal protective masks during the COVID-19 pandemic: first observations after lockdown. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2021 Mar;46(2):368-9. [PubMed]

  5. Bieber T. Atopic dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2008 Apr 3;358(14):1483-94. [PubMed]

  6. Bains SN, Nash P, Fonacier L. Irritant contact dermatitis. Clin Rev Allergy Immunol. 2019 Feb;56(1):99-109. [PubMed]

  7. Zuo Y, Hua W, Luo Y, et al. Skin reactions of N95 masks and medial masks among health-care personnel: a self-report questionnaire survey in China. Contact Dermatitis. 2020 Aug;83(2):145-7. [PubMed]

  8. Foo CC, Goon AT, Leow YH, et al. Adverse skin reactions to personal protective equipment against severe acute respiratory syndrome–a descriptive study in Singapore. Contact Dermatitis. 2006 Nov;55(5):291-4. [PubMed]

  9. Cau L, Pendaries V, Lhuillier E, et al. Lowering relative humidity level increases epidermal protein deimination and drives human filaggrin breakdown. J Dermatol Sci. 2017 May;86(2):106-13. [PubMed]

  10. Draelos ZD. The effect of ceramide-containing skin care products on eczema resolution duration. Cutis. 2008 Jan;81(1):87-91. [PubMed]

  11. Del Rosso JQ, Cash K. Topical corticosteroid application and the structural and functional integrity of the epidermal barrier. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2013 Nov;6(11):20-7. [PubMed]

  12. Loden M. Role of topical emollients and moisturizers in the treatment of dry skin barrier disorders. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2003 4(11):771-88. [PubMed]

  13. Lynde CW, Andriessen A. A cohort study on a ceramide-containing cleanser and moisturizer used for atopic dermatitis. Cutis. 2014 Apr;93(4):207-13. [PubMed]

  14. Lueangarun S, Tragulplaingam P, Sugkraroek S, et al. The 24-hr, 28-day, and 7-day post-moisturizing efficacy of ceramides 1, 3, 6-II containing moisturizing cream compared with hydrophilic cream on skin dryness and barrier disruption in senile xerosis treatment. Dermatol Ther. 2019 Nov;32(6):e13090. [PubMed]

  15. Loden M. The clinical benefit of moisturizers. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005 Nov;19(6):672-88. [PubMed]

  16. Loden M, Andersson AC, Anderson C, et al. A double-blind study comparing the effect of glycerin and urea on dry, eczematous skin in atopic patients. Acta Derm Venereol. 2002 82(1):45-7. [PubMed]

  17. Larmi E, Lahti A, Hannuksela M. Immediate contact reactions to benzoic acid and the sodium salt of pyrrolidone carboxylic acid. Comparison of various skin sites. Contact Dermatitis. 1989 Jan;20(1):38-40. [PubMed]

  18. Zirwas MJ, Stechschulte SA. Moisturizer allergy: diagnosis and management. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2008 Nov;1(4):38-44. [PubMed]

  19. Cheng J, Zug KA. Fragrance allergic contact dermatitis. Dermatitis. 2014 Sep-Oct;25(5):232-45. [PubMed]

  20. Katsarou A, Armenaka M, Kalogeromitros D, et al. Contact reactions to fragrances. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1999 May;82(5):449-55. [PubMed]

  21. Bolognia J, Schaffer J, Cerroni L, eds. Dermatology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2018.

  22. Lynde C, Tan J, Andriesse A, et al. Clinical insights about the role of pH in acne. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019 Dec 1;18(12):221. [PubMed]

  23. Lynde CW. Moisturizers: what they are and how they work. Skin Therapy Lett. 2001 Dec;6(13):3-5. [PubMed]

  24. Eyerich S, Eyerich K, Traidl-Hoffmann C, et al. Cutaneous barriers and skin immunity: differentiating a connected network. Trends Immunol. 2018 Apr;39(4):315-27. [PubMed]

  25. O’Regan GM, Sandilands A, McLean WHI, et al. Filaggrin in atopic dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008 Oct;122(4):689-93. [PubMed]

  26. Simpson E, Bohling A, Bielfeldt S, et al. Improvement of skin barrier function in atopic dermatitis patients with a new moisturizer containing a ceramide precursor. J Dermatolog Treat. 2013 Apr;24(2):122-5. [PubMed]

  27. Frankel A, Sohn A, Patel RV, et al. Bilateral comparison study of pimecrolimus cream 1% and a ceramide-hyaluronic acid emollient foam in the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis. J Drugs Dermatol. 2011 Jun;10(6):666-72. [PubMed]

  28. Kraft JN, Lynde CW. Moisturizers: what they are and a practical approach to product selection. Skin Therapy Lett. 2005 Jun;10(5):1-8. [PubMed]

  29. Espinoza R (Inventor); HealthPoint, LTD, assignee. Multivesicular emulsion drug delivery systems. US Patent 6,709,663. March 23, 2004. Available from: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/patent/US-6709663-B2. Accessed June 7, 2021.

  30. Seidenari S, Francomano M, Mantovani L. Baseline biophysical parameters in subjects with sensitive skin. Contact Dermatitis. 1998 Jun;38(6):311-5. [PubMed]

  31. Eberlein-Konig B, Schafer T, Huss-Marp J, et al. Skin surface pH, stratum corneum hydration, trans-epidermal water loss and skin roughness related to atopic eczema and skin dryness in a population of primary school children. Acta Derm Venereol. 2000 May;80(3):188-91. [PubMed]

  32. Prakash C, Bhargava P, Tiwari S, et al. Skin surface pH in acne vulgaris: insights from an observational study and review of the literature. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017 Jul;10(7):33-9. [PubMed]

  33. Lynde CW, Andriessen A, Barankin B, et al. Moisturizers and ceramide-containing moisturizers may offer concomitant therapy with benefits. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2014 Mar;7(3):18-26. [PubMed]

  34. Wertz PW. Lipids and barrier function of the skin. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh). 2000 208:7-11. [PubMed]

  35. di Nardo A, Sugino K, Wertz P, et al. Sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) induced irritant contact dermatitis: a correlation study between ceramides and in vivo parameters of irritation. Contact Dermatitis. 1996 Aug;35(2):86-91. [PubMed]

  36. Sugarman JL, Parish LC. Efficacy of a lipid-based barrier repair formulation in moderate-to-severe pediatric atopic dermatitis. J Drugs Dermatol. 2009 Dec;8(12):1106-11. [PubMed]

  37. Elston DM, Ahmed DD, Watsky KL, et al. Hand dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002 Aug;47(2):291-9. [PubMed]

  38. Fartasch M, Schnetz E, Diepgen TL. Characterization of detergent-induced barrier alterations — effect of barrier cream on irritation. J Investig Dermatol Symp Proc. 1998 Aug;3(2):121-7. [PubMed]

  39. Warner RR, Stone KJ, Boissy YL. Hydration disrupts human stratum corneum ultrastructure. J Invest Dermatol. 2003 Feb;120(2):275-84. [PubMed]

  40. Rundle CW, Presley CL, Militello M, et al. Hand hygiene during COVID-19: recommendations from the American Contact Dermatitis Society. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020 Dec;83(6):1730-7. [PubMed]

  41. Draelos ZD. The science behind skin care: cleansers. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2018 Feb;17(1):8-14. [PubMed]

  42. Ananthapadmanabhan KP, Moore DJ, Subramanyan K, et al. Cleansing without compromise: the impact of cleansers on the skin barrier and the technology of mild cleansing. Dermatol Ther. 2004 17 Suppl 1:16-25. [PubMed]

  43. Eichenfield LF, Tom WL, Berger TG, et al. Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis: section 2. Management and treatment of atopic dermatitis with topical therapies. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014 Jul;71(1):116-32. [PubMed]

  44. Baranda L, Gonzalez-Amaro R, Torres-Alvarez B, et al. Correlation between pH and irritant effect of cleansers marketed for dry skin. Int J Dermatol. 2002 Aug;41(8):494-9. [PubMed]

  45. Bruze M, Mowitz M, Ofenloch R, et al. The significance of batch and patch test method in establishing contact allergy to fragrance mix I-EDEN Fragrance Study Group. Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Aug;81(2):104-9. [PubMed]

  46. Murakami Y, Saya Y, Morita E, et al. Novel petrolatum-based ointment that is highly moisturizing and has superior usability with increased adherence in patients with facial dry skin. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020 Oct;19(10):2650-5. [PubMed]


Purchase Article PDF for $1.99

]]>
Update on Drugs & Devices: July – August 2021 https://www.skintherapyletter.com/drug-updates/jul-aug-2021/ Sun, 01 Aug 2021 12:49:20 +0000 https://www.skintherapyletter.com/?p=12667 Secukinumab for SC use

Trade Name: Cosentyx®
Company: Novartis

Approval Dates/Comments: The US FDA approved secukinumab in June 2021 for pediatric patients aged 6 years and older with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. This expanded approval marks the first for a pediatric patient population in the US. Secukinumab is a fully human biologic agent that inhibits interleukin-17A (IL-17A) directly. The IL-17A is considered a “cornerstone cytokine” implicated in inflammation as well as the development of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.


Brincidofovir tablets and oral suspension

Trade Name: Tembexa®
Company: Chimerix

Approval Dates/Comments: The FDA approved the oral antiviral brincidofovir in June 2021 for the treatment of smallpox in adult and pediatric patients, including neonates. Brincidofovir is a lipid conjugate of cidofovir with good oral bioavailability. The compound is designed to release cidofovir intracellularly, allowing for higher intracellular and lower plasma concentrations of cidofovir, thereby increasing its activity against double-stranded DNA viruses.


Plasminogen, humantvmh

Trade Name: Ryplazim®
Company: Liminal BioSciences

Approval Dates/Comments: In June 2021, the FDA approved this plasma-derived human plasminogen for the treatment of patients with plasminogen deficiency type 1, also referred to as hypoplasminogenemia, a disorder that can impair normal tissue and organ function. Affected individuals lack a protein called plasminogen, which is responsible for the ability of the body to break down fibrin clots. Plasminogen deficiency leads to an accumulation of fibrin, causing the development of lesions that can impair normal tissue and organ function. With this approval, Ryplazim® becomes the first FDA approved therapy for this rare genetic disorder.


Halobetasol propionate lotion 0.01% w/w

Trade Name: Bryhali™
Company: Bausch Health

Approval Dates/Comments: Health Canada approved halobetasol propionate lotion 0.01% w/w, a high to super-high potency topical corticosteroid, in May 2021 for treating corticosteroid-responsive dermatoses and the topical treatment of plaque psoriasis. Common corticosteroid-responsive dermatoses include seborrheic dermatitis and eczematous dermatoses (e.g., atopic dermatitis and contact dermatitis).


Nomacopan for SC use

Trade Name: (formerly known as Coversin)
Company: Akari Therapeutics

Approval Dates/Comments: In April 2021, the FDA granted Fast Track designation to nomacopan for the treatment of patients with moderate and severe bullous pemphigoid (BP). Nomacopan has also been granted Orphan Drug designation for the treatment of BP by the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Nomacopan is a C5 complement inhibitor that independently and specifically binds to and inhibits leukotriene B4 (LTB4) activity. In patients with BP, there is evidence that nomacopan’s ability to inhibit C5 and LTB4 gives it a unique potential therapeutic advantage, which is upstream of other approaches (such as cytokine inhibitors) that are being investigated for the treatment of BP. A multicenter Phase III study of nomacopan for the treatment of moderate and severe BP has been initiated. Nomacopan has the potential to replace long-term steroid treatment (standard of care) in BP, which has multiple adverse effects and increases mortality in this elderly and frail population.

Purchase Article PDF for $1.99

]]>