Background Eczema is a common skin condition. Although topical corticosteroids have been a first‐line treatment for eczema for decades, there are uncertainties over their optimal use. Objectives To establish the effectiveness and safety of different ways of using topical corticosteroids for treating eczema. Search methods We searched databases to January 2021 (Cochrane Skin Specialised Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; GREAT) and five clinical trials registers. We checked bibliographies from included trials to identify further trials. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials in adults and children with eczema that compared at least two strategies of topical corticosteroid use. We excluded placebo comparisons, other than for trials that evaluated proactive versus reactive treatment. Data collection and analysis We used standard Cochrane methods, with GRADE certainty of evidence for key findings. Primary outcomes were changes in clinician‐reported signs and relevant local adverse events. Secondary outcomes were patient‐reported symptoms and relevant systemic adverse events. For local adverse events, we prioritised abnormal skin thinning as a key area of concern for healthcare professionals and patients. Main results We included 104 trials (8443 participants). Most trials were conducted in high‐income countries (81/104), most likely in outpatient or other hospital settings. We judged only one trial to be low risk of bias across all domains. Fifty‐five trials had high risk of bias in at least one domain, mostly due to lack of blinding or missing outcome data. Stronger‐potency versus weaker‐potency topical corticosteroids Sixty‐three trials compared different potencies of topical corticosteroids: 12 moderate versus mild, 22 potent versus mild, 25 potent versus moderate, and 6 very potent versus potent. Trials were usually in children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, lasting one to five weeks. The most reported outcome was Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of clinician‐reported signs of eczema. We pooled four trials that compared moderate‐ versus mild‐potency topical corticosteroids (420 participants). Moderate‐potency topical corticosteroids probably result in more participants achieving treatment success, defined as cleared or marked improvement on IGA (52% versus 34%; odds ratio (OR) 2.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.04; moderate‐certainty evidence). We pooled nine trials that compared potent versus mild‐potency topical corticosteroids (392 participants). Potent topical corticosteroids probably result in a large increase in number achieving treatment success (70% versus 39%; OR 3.71, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.72; moderate‐certainty evidence). We pooled 15 trials that compared potent versus moderate‐potency topical corticosteroids (1053 participants). There was insufficient evidence of a benefit of potent topical corticosteroids compared to moderate topical corticosteroids (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.89; moderate‐certainty evidence). We pooled three trials that compared very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids (216 participants). The evidence is uncertain with a wide confidence interval (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.09; low‐certainty evidence). Twice daily or more versus once daily application We pooled 15 of 25 trials in this comparison (1821 participants, all reported IGA). The trials usually assessed adults and children with moderate or severe eczema, where specified, using potent topical corticosteroids, lasting two to six weeks. Applying potent topical corticosteroids only once a day probably does not decrease the number achieving treatment success compared to twice daily application (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.38; 15 trials, 1821 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Local adverse events Within the trials that tested 'treating eczema flare‐up' strategies, we identified only 26 cases of abnormal skin thinning from 2266 participants (1% across 22 trials). Most cases were from the use of higher‐potency topical corticosteroids (16 with very potent, 6 with potent, 2 with moderate and 2 with mild). We assessed this evidence as low certainty, except for very potent versus potent topical corticosteroids, which was very low‐certainty evidence. Longer versus shorter‐term duration of application for induction of remission No trials were identified. Twice weekly application (weekend, or ‘proactive therapy') to prevent relapse (flare‐ups) versus no topical corticosteroids/reactive application Nine trials assessed this comparison, generally lasting 16 to 20 weeks. We pooled seven trials that compared weekend (proactive) topical corticosteroids therapy versus no topical corticosteroids (1179 participants, children and adults with a range of eczema severities, though mainly moderate or severe). Weekend (proactive) therapy probably results in a large decrease in likelihood of a relapse from 58% to 25% (risk ratio (RR) 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57; 7 trials, 1149 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Local adverse events We did not identify any cases of abnormal skin thinning in seven trials that assessed skin thinning (1050 participants) at the end of treatment. We assessed this evidence as low certainty. Other comparisons Other comparisons included newer versus older preparations of topical corticosteroids (15 trials), cream versus ointment (7 trials), topical corticosteroids with wet wrap versus no wet wrap (6 trials), number of days per week applied (4 trials), different concentrations of the same topical corticosteroids (2 trials), time of day applied (2 trials), topical corticosteroids alternating with topical calcineurin inhibitors versus topical corticosteroids alone (1 trial), application to wet versus dry skin (1 trial) and application before versus after emollient (1 trial). No trials compared branded versus generic topical corticosteroids and time between application of emollient and topical corticosteroids. Authors' conclusions Potent and moderate topical corticosteroids are probably more effective than mild topical corticosteroids, primarily in moderate or severe eczema; however, there is uncertain evidence to support any advantage of very potent over potent topical corticosteroids. Effectiveness is similar between once daily and twice daily (or more) frequent use of potent topical corticosteroids to treat eczema flare‐ups, and topical corticosteroids weekend (proactive) therapy is probably better than no topical corticosteroids/reactive use to prevent eczema relapse (flare‐ups). Adverse events were not well reported and came largely from low‐ or very low‐certainty, short‐term trials. In trials that reported abnormal skin thinning, frequency was low overall and increased with increasing potency. We found no trials on the optimum duration of treatment of a flare, branded versus generic topical corticosteroids, and time to leave between application of topical corticosteroids and emollient. There is a need for longer‐term trials, in people with mild eczema.

Background: Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are a first-line treatment for eczema, but there are concerns about their safety when used long-term. Objectives: To systematically review adverse effects associated with longer-term use of TCS for eczema. Methods: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and case-control studies reporting adverse effects of TCS (comparators: no TCS treatment, other topicals) in patients with eczema were identified. Included studies had greater than one year of follow-up, minimum cohort size of 50 participants, or minimum 50 per arm for RCTs. Evidence was GRADE-assessed. Prospero registration CRD42021286413. Results: We found seven studies (two randomised, five observational); two RCTs (n = 2570, including 1288 receiving TCS), two cohort (all received TCS n = 148) and three case-control studies (cases n = 10 322, controls n = 12 201). Evidence from two RCTS (n = 2570, children, three and five years' duration) comparing TCS to topical calcineurin inhibitors found intermittent TCS use probably results in little to no difference in risk of growth abnormalities, non-skin infections, impaired vaccine response and lymphoma/non lymphoma malignancies. The five-year RCT reported only one episode of skin atrophy (n = 1213 TCS arm; mild/moderate potency), suggesting TCS use probably results in little to no difference in skin thinning when used intermittently to treat flares. No cases of clinical adrenal insufficiency were reported in 75 patients using mild/moderate TCS in the three-year RCT. Small associations between TCS and type-2 diabetes and lymphoma were identified in two case-control studies compared to no TCS, but the evidence is very uncertain. No long-term studies concerning topical steroid withdrawal or eye problems were identified. Conclusion: This review provides some reassuring data on growth and skin thinning when TCS are used intermittently for up to 5 years, but many knowledge gaps remain.

A growing number of loci within the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) region have been implicated in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) etiology. Here, we test a complementary hypothesis of “heterozygote advantage” regarding the role of HLA and NHL, whereby HLA diversity is beneficial and homozygous HLA loci are associated with increased disease risk. HLA alleles at class I and II loci were imputed from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) using SNP2HLA for 3,617 diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL), 2,686 follicular lymphomas (FL), 2,878 chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphomas (CLL/SLL), 741 marginal zone lymphomas (MZL), and 8,753 controls of European descent. Both DLBCL and MZL risk were elevated with homozygosity at class I HLA-B and -C loci (OR DLBCL = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.06–1.60; OR MZL = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.12–1.89) and class II HLA-DRB1 locus (OR DLBCL = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.24–3.55; OR MZL = 2.10, 95% CI = 0.99–4.45). Increased FL risk was observed with the overall increase in number of homozygous HLA class II loci (P trend < 0.0001, FDR = 0.0005). These results support a role for HLA zygosity in NHL etiology and suggests that distinct immune pathways may underly the etiology of the different NHL subtypes. Significance: HLA gene diversity reduces risk for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer Res; 78(14); 4086–96. ©2018 AACR.

Objective: Eczema is the most burdensome skin condition worldwide and topical anti‐inflammatory treatments are commonly used to control symptoms. The relative effectiveness and safety of different topical anti‐inflammatory treatments is uncertain.Design: Network meta‐analysis performed within a Cochrane systematic review to compare and statistically rank efficacy and safety of topical anti‐inflammatory eczema treatments.Data Sources: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and trial registries to June 2023.Eligibility Criteria for Selected Trials: Included trials were within‐participant or between‐participant randomised controlled trials. Participants had eczema that was not clinically infected and was not contact dermatitis, seborrheic eczema or hand eczema. Interventions were topical anti‐inflammatory treatments but not complementary treatments, antibiotics alone, wet wraps, phototherapy or systemic treatments. Comparators were no treatment/vehicle or another topical anti‐inflammatory.Results: We identified 291 trials (45,846 participants), mainly in high‐income countries. Most were industry‐funded with median 3 weeks treatment duration. Risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was high in 89% of trials, mainly due to risk of selective reporting. Network meta‐analysis of binary outcomes ranked potent and/or very potent topical steroids, tacrolimus 0.1% and ruxolitinib 1.5% among the most effective treatments for improving patient‐reported symptoms (40 trials, all low confidence) and clinician‐reported signs (32 trials, all moderate confidence). For investigator global assessment, the Janus kinas inhibitors ruxolitinib 1.5%, delgocitinib 0.5% or 0.25%, very potent/potent topical steroids and tacrolimus 0.1% were ranked as most effective (140 trials, all moderate confidence). Continuous outcome data were mixed. Local application site reactions were most common with tacrolimus 0.1% (moderate confidence) and crisaborole 2% (high confidence) and least common with topical steroids (moderate confidence). Skin thinning was not increased with short‐term use of any topical steroid potency (low confidence) but skin thinning was reported in 6/2044 (0.3%) participants treated with longer‐term (6–60 months) topical steroids.Conclusion: Potent topical steroids, Janus kinase inhibitors and tacrolimus 0.1% were consistently ranked as among the most effective topical anti‐inflammatory treatments for eczema.

Little is known of the regulation of IL-23 secretion in dendritic cells (DC) despite its importance for human Th17 responses. In this study, we show for first time, to our knowledge, that the ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) pathway, involved in DNA damage sensing, acts as an IL-23 repressor. Inhibition of ATM with the highly selective antagonist KU55933 markedly increased IL-23 secretion in human monocyte-derived DC and freshly isolated myeloid DC. In contrast, inhibiting the closely related mammalian target of rapamycin had no effect on IL-23. Priming naive CD4+ T cells with ATM-inhibited DC increased Th17 responses over and above those obtained with mature DC. Although ATM blockade increased the abundance of p19, p35, and p40 mRNA, IL-12p70 secretion was unaffected. To further examine a role for ATM in IL-23 regulation, we exposed DC to low doses of ionizing radiation. Exposure of DC to x-rays resulted in ATM phosphorylation and a corresponding depression of IL-23. Importantly, ATM inhibition with KU55933 prevented radiation-induced ATM phosphorylation and abrogated the capacity of x-rays to suppress IL-23. To explore how ATM repressed IL-23, we examined a role for endoplasmic reticulum stress responses by measuring generation of the spliced form of X-box protein-1, a key endoplasmic reticulum stress transcription factor. Inhibition of ATM increased the abundance of X-box protein-1 mRNA, and this was followed 3 h later by increased peak p19 transcription and IL-23 release. In summary, ATM activation or inhibition, respectively, inhibited or augmented IL-23 release. This novel role of the ATM pathway represents a new therapeutic target in autoimmunity and vaccine development.

Oral iron is first-line medication for iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy. We conducted a pilot randomized trial to investigate the impact of different doses of oral iron supplementation started early in pregnancy on women without anemia for 4 main outcomes: recruitment and protocol compliance, adherence, maintenance of maternal hemoglobin, and side effects. At antenatal clinic visits, participants were allocated to 1 of 3 trial arms in a 1:1:1 ratio: 200 mg ferrous sulfate daily, alternate days, or 3 times per week. The participants were followed to delivery. Baseline characteristics of 300 recruited participants were well matched between trial arms. The mean proportion of tablets taken as expected per participant was 82.5% overall (72.3%, 89.6%, and 84.5% for the daily, alternate days, and 3 times a week arm, respectively). There was a lower overall adherence rate in the daily arm (47%) than in the alternate days (62%) and the 3 times per week (61%) arms. A reduction in hemoglobin between randomization and 28 weeks’ gestation seemed smaller for the daily arm. A range of side effects were commonly reported at baseline before starting interventions and at later antenatal visits. Many side effects of iron overlapped with normal pregnancy symptoms. A daily iron dosing schedule might give the best opportunity for delivering an adequate iron load during pregnancy in women without anemia. Further randomized trials powered on clinical outcomes are needed to establish the clinical effectiveness of oral iron supplementation to prevent iron deficiency anemia. This study was registered (#ISRCTN12911644).