OBJECTIVE: The incidence of paediatric inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) continues to increase in both adults and children across the globe, with more than one third of the patients not responding to anti-tumour necrosis factor biologics and immune modulators. This narrative review provides an overview of novel pharmacological developments in the management of paediatric IBD, including new biological therapies.
METHODS: A PubMed Medline search was performed to include randomised controlled trials, retrospective and prospective observational studies, and relevant case reports of children with IBD published between 2018 and January 2023. Guidelines and protocols from relevant paediatric and adult gastroenterology societies, such as the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition and the European Crohn\'s and Colitis Organisation, were also included. Non-pharmacological treatments including therapeutic diets and faecal microbiota transplantation were outside the scope of this work.
RESULTS: Early real-world evidence suggests that newer biologics and small molecules, such as anti-integrins, interleukin-12 and/or interleukin-23 inhibitors, Janus kinase and signal transducer and activator of transcription proteins inhibitors, are safe and effective in adult patients with IBD, with promising growing evidence for paediatric IBD.
CONCLUSIONS: While many developments have been achieved with novel pharmacological treatments to manage IBD, ongoing research is required to confirm their effectiveness and safety in the paediatric age. Extending the licence of novel treatments to children will be crucial to tackle the increasing loss of response to conventional treatments. International guidelines will require timely updating to incorporate novel treatments within the existing protocols.

Biologic therapies are known to reduce exacerbations and improve severe uncontrolled asthma management. The at-home administration of biologics has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the characteristics of severe uncontrolled asthma patients who may benefit from at-home administration of biologic therapy have yet to be identified.
This project is based on the Delphi method, designed to reach an expert consensus through a multidisciplinary scientific committee addressing the following questions: clinical characteristics, treatment adherence, patient or caregiver administration ability, patient self-care, relationship with the healthcare professional, patient preference, and access to the hospital.
One hundred and thirty-one healthcare professionals (pulmonologists, allergists, nurses, and hospital pharmacists) completed two Delphi consensus questionnaires. Fourteen items were identified as priority characteristics, the first five being: 1. The patient follows the healthcare team\'s indications/recommendations to control their disease, 2. The patient is capable of detecting any deterioration in their disease and of identifying exacerbation triggers, 3. The patient receives biologic therapy and has stable disease with no vital risk, 4. The patient takes responsibility for their self-care, 5. The patient has occupational/educational obligations that prevent them from going to the hospital regularly.
Disease stability and control plus the ability to identify exacerbation triggers are the most important characteristics when opting for at-home administration for a patient with severe uncontrolled asthma on biologic therapy. These recommendations could be applicable in clinical practice.

暂无摘要。

Ulcerative colitis (US) is a chronic disease of unknown etiology. It is incurable and its clinical course is intermittent, characterized by periods of remission and relapse. The prevalence and incidence of the disease has been increasing worldwide. The update presented herein includes the participation of healthcare professionals, decision-makers, and a representative of the patients, all of whom declared their conflicts of interest. Answerable clinical questions were formulated, and the outcomes were graded. The information search was conducted on the Medline/PubMed, Embase, Epistemonikos, and LILACS databases, and covered grey literature sources, as well. The search was updated on November 30, 2020, with no restrictions regarding date or language. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification system was implemented to establish the strength of the recommendation and quality of evidence. A formal consensus was developed, based on the RAND/UCLA methodology and the document was peer reviewed. The short version of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis in the Adult Population is presented herein, together with the supporting evidence and respective recommendations. In mild-to-moderate UC, budesonide MMX is an option when treatment with 5-ASA fails, and before using systemic steroids. In moderate-to-severe UC, infliximab, adalimumab, vedolizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib can be used as first-line therapy. If there is anti-TNF therapy failure, ustekinumab and tofacitinib provide the best results. In patients with antibiotic-refractory pouchitis, anti-TNFs are the treatment of choice.

OBJECTIVE: Since its inception, the Psoriasis Group (GPs) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV) has worked to continuously update recommendations for the treatment of psoriasis based on the best available evidence and incorporating proposals arising from and aimed at clinical practice. An updated GPs consensus document on the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis was needed because of changes in the treatment paradigm and the approval in recent years of a large number of new biologic agents.
METHODS: The consensus document was developed using the nominal group technique complemented by a scoping review. First, a designated coordinator selected a group of GPs members for the panel based on their experience and knowledge of psoriasis. The coordinator defined the objectives and key points for the document and, with the help of a documentalist, conducted a scoping review of articles in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2021. The review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical trials not included in those studies and high-quality real-world studies. National and international clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents on the management of moderate to severe psoriasis were also reviewed. The coordinator then drew up a set of proposed recommendations, which were discussed and modified in a nominal group meeting. After several review processes, including external review by other GPs members, the final document was drafted.
RESULTS: The present guidelines include updated recommendations on assessing the severity of psoriasis and criteria for the indication of systemic treatment. They also include general principles for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and define treatment goals for these patients as well as criteria for the indication and selection of initial and subsequent therapies Practical issues, such as treatment failure and maintenance of response, are also addressed.

OBJECTIVE: Since its inception, the Psoriasis Group (GPs) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV) has worked to continuously update recommendations for the treatment of psoriasis based on the best available evidence and incorporating proposals arising from and aimed at clinical practice. An updated GPs consensus document on the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis was needed because of changes in the treatment paradigm and the approval in recent years of a large number of new biologic agents.
METHODS: The consensus document was developed using the nominal group technique complemented by a scoping review. First, a designated coordinator selected a group of GPs members for the panel based on their experience and knowledge of psoriasis. The coordinator defined the objectives and key points for the document and, with the help of a documentalist, conducted a scoping review of articles in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2021. The review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical trials not included in those studies and high-quality real-world studies. National and international clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents on the management of moderate to severe psoriasis were also reviewed. The coordinator then drew up a set of proposed recommendations, which were discussed and modified in a nominal group meeting. After several review processes, including external review by other GPs members, the final document was drafted.
RESULTS: The present guidelines include updated recommendations on assessing the severity of psoriasis and criteria for the indication of systemic treatment. They also include general principles for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and define treatment goals for these patients as well as criteria for the indication and selection of initial and subsequent therapies Practical issues, such as treatment failure and maintenance of response, are also addressed.

OBJECTIVE: Since its inception, the Psoriasis Group (GPs) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV) has worked to continuously update recommendations for the treatment of psoriasis based on the best available evidence and incorporating proposals arising from and aimed at clinical practice. An updated GPs consensus document on the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis was needed because of changes in the treatment paradigm and the approval in recent years of a large number of new biologic agents.
METHODS: The consensus document was developed using the nominal group technique complemented by a scoping review. First, a designated coordinator selected a group of GPs members for the panel based on their experience and knowledge of psoriasis. The coordinator defined the objectives and key points for the document and, with the help of a documentalist, conducted a scoping review of articles in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2021. The review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical trials not included in those studies and high-quality real-world studies. National and international clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents on the management of moderate to severe psoriasis were also reviewed. The coordinator then drew up a set of proposed recommendations, which were discussed and modified in a nominal group meeting. After several review processes, including external review by other GPs members, the final document was drafted.
RESULTS: The present guidelines include updated recommendations on assessing the severity of psoriasis and criteria for the indication of systemic treatment. They also include general principles for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and define treatment goals for these patients as well as criteria for the indication and selection of initial and subsequent therapies Practical issues, such as treatment failure and maintenance of response, are also addressed.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are chronic, relapsing-remitting inflammatory conditions with a substantial negative impact on health-related quality of life and work productivity. Treatment of IBD has been revolutionized by the advent of biologic therapies, initially with anti-TNF agents and more recently with multiple alternatives targets, and yet more under development.
OBJECTIVE: Approximatively one third of patients do not respond to biologic therapy and more importantly a significant proportion experiences partial response or loss of response during treatment. The latter are common clinical situations and paradoxically are not addressed in the commercial drug labels and available guidelines. There is therefore a clinical need for physicians to understand when and how eventually to optimize the biologic therapy.
METHODS: This consensus using a Delphi methodology was promoted and supported by the Emirates Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology to close this gap.
METHODS: Following an extensive systematic review of over 60,000 studies, 81 studies with dose escalation and five addressing drug monitoring were selected and in addition five systematic reviews and three guidelines.
CONCLUSIONS: after three rounds of voting 18 statements were selected with agreement ranging from of 80% to 100.

UNASSIGNED: The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has an affinity for almost every organ system, including the skin. This review article will compile and compare dermatology guidelines related to the dermatologic care of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.
UNASSIGNED: To review and compare the available guidelines and recommendations on use of biologics and other systemic therapies in dermatology patients.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a search for guidelines and recommendations for dermatology providers, with specific attention to the management of biologics and non-biologic systemic agents during COVID-19. International and United States-based guidelines specific to the field of dermatology and guidance for healthcare providers were used as inclusion criteria. Available registries were included as well.
UNASSIGNED: The guidelines stress a shared decision-making approach with risk-benefit analysis and treatment strategy modifications tailored to each unique patient case. The guidelines were all concordant with one another in highlighting the importance that patients should not discontinue their medications without first speaking with their providers.

OBJECTIVE: There have been major advances in biologic treatment options for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) since the publication of the 2015 consensus recommendations by the Chapter of Rheumatologists, College of Physicians, Academy of Medicine, Singapore, for government-assisted funding, thus warranting a revision of this guideline.
METHODS: Recent trials and nine published guidelines on the use of biologic therapy for PsA were reviewed. Based on the synthesized evidence, a task force panel (TFP), consisting of 10 practicing rheumatologists in Singapore, rated the statements pertaining to the use of biologic therapy, using a modified Delphi approach. Consensus was obtained if >70% agreed on a statement.
RESULTS: The TFP agreed on 10 recommendations pertaining to the initiation, choice and continuation of biologic therapy. A biologic is indicated in patients with PsA: (a) with at least three swollen and tender joints, digits or entheses; and (b) who have failed at least two conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (csDMARD) strategies for a minimum of 3 months each. Any approved drug class including tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i), IL-12/23i or targeted synthetic DMARDs may be considered as first-line treatment, and continued only if a response is achieved by 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations developed through a formal consensus method may be useful to guide funding considerations for appropriate and equitable use of biologic therapy for eligible patients with PsA.