Wound management represents a substantial clinical challenge due to the growing incidence of chronic skin wounds resulting from venous insufficiency, diabetes, and obesity, along with acute injuries and surgical wounds. The risk of infection, a key impediment to healing and a driver of increased morbidity and mortality, is a primary concern in wound care. Recently, antimicrobial dressings have emerged as a promising approach for bioburden control and wound healing. The selection of a suitable antimicrobial dressing depends on various parameters, including cost, wound type, local microbial burden and the location and condition of the wound. This review covers the different types of antimicrobial dressings, their modes of action, advantages, and drawbacks, thereby providing clinicians with the knowledge to optimize wound management.

Intermediate filament (IntFil) genes arose during early metazoan evolution, to provide mechanical support for plasma membranes contacting/interacting with other cells and the extracellular matrix. Keratin genes comprise the largest subset of IntFil genes. Whereas the first keratin gene appeared in sponge, and three genes in arthropods, more rapid increases in keratin genes occurred in lungfish and amphibian genomes, concomitant with land animal-sea animal divergence (~ 440 to 410 million years ago). Human, mouse and zebrafish genomes contain 18, 17 and 24 non-keratin IntFil genes, respectively. Human has 27 of 28 type I “acidic” keratin genes clustered at chromosome (Chr) 17q21.2, and all 26 type II “basic” keratin genes clustered at Chr 12q13.13. Mouse has 27 of 28 type I keratin genes clustered on Chr 11, and all 26 type II clustered on Chr 15. Zebrafish has 18 type I keratin genes scattered on five chromosomes, and 3 type II keratin genes on two chromosomes. Types I and II keratin clusters—reflecting evolutionary blooms of keratin genes along one chromosomal segment—are found in all land animal genomes examined, but not fishes; such rapid gene expansions likely reflect sudden requirements for many novel paralogous proteins having divergent functions to enhance species survival following sea-to-land transition. Using data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) project, tissue-specific keratin expression throughout the human body was reconstructed. Clustering of gene expression patterns revealed similarities in tissue-specific expression patterns for previously described “keratin pairs” (i.e., KRT1/KRT10, KRT8/KRT18, KRT5/KRT14, KRT6/KRT16 and KRT6/KRT17 proteins). The ClinVar database currently lists 26 human disease-causing variants within the various domains of keratin proteins.

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic skin disease characterized by intense itch and eczematous skin lesions. Some patients with AD continue to experience flares and substantial clinical burden, despite ongoing systemic treatment. Objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily upadacitinib (UPA), initiated at 15 mg and dose-escalated to 30 mg based on clinical response, compared with dupilumab (DUPI) as per its label, and present the week 16 primary analysis results. Methods: Level Up is a phase IIIb/IV global randomized open-label efficacy assessor-blinded study evaluating UPA vs. DUPI in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD who had an inadequate response to systemic therapy or when use was inadvisable. Patients were randomized to UPA or DUPI for 16 weeks of treatment (period 1). Patients on UPA were started on 15 mg and dose-escalated to 30 mg if they did not achieve an Eczema Area and Severity Index reduction of at least 50% (EASI 50) or a ≥ 4-point Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS) improvement on or after week 4, or an EASI reduction of at least 75% (EASI 75) on or after week 8. The primary endpoint was simultaneous achievement of an EASI reduction of at least 90% (EASI 90) and WP-NRS 0/1 at week 16. Ranked secondary endpoints included skin and itch responses at varying response levels and timepoints. Safety measures were assessed throughout the study. Results: Superior efficacy in achieving simultaneous EASI 90 and WP-NRS 0/1 response at week 16 was demonstrated with UPA vs. DUPI (19.9% vs 8.9%, respectively; P < 0.001). UPA showed superiority over DUPI for all ranked secondary endpoints, with post hoc analyses exhibiting higher itch response rates as early as day 2. No new safety signals were identified in this period. Conclusions: Treatment of moderate-to-severe AD with UPA, initiated at 15 mg and dose-escalated based on clinical response, demonstrated superiority over DUPI per its label for the primary endpoint of simultaneous achievement of near-complete skin clearance (EASI 90) and little-to-no itch (WP-NRS 0/1) at week 16, with all ranked secondary endpoints demonstrating superiority at varying skin and itch response levels and timepoints. No new safety signals were identified vs. the previously reported safety profiles of UPA and DUPI.