Choosing dermatologic therapies
J. Wilkin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-8019.2009.01230.x
2009-05-01
Dermatologic Therapy
Abstract:This special issue of Dermatologic Therapy is intended as an introductory step toward the rational choice of dermatologic products for patient care. This beginning is an important, but small fraction, of the “. . . knowledge of and competence in . . . topical and systemic pharmacotherapy . . . ,” which is cited as one of the Program Requirements for Graduate Medical Education in Dermatology (1). Residency training and Continuing Medical Education (CME) for this Program Requirement, in my view, have not kept pace everywhere with the availability of new and powerful medications and medical devices. Although residents keep logs recording surgical procedures performed, including cosmetic procedures, cognate records listing categories of, or specific, drug products for which comprehensive patient care has been given are not universally maintained. Most dermatology residents appear to be uninitiated into the process of reporting adverse drug reactions to Food and Drug Administration. Most training programs provide well-organized and comprehensive training, didactic sessions, and conferences, ensuring skills in clinical diagnosis, dermatopathology, mycology, and microbiology; however, learning how to choose and use therapeutic products may not get the same attention in all programs. Of course, how dermatologists learn to use the therapies available during their residency is not the whole question. Perhaps even more important is how dermatologists learn to evaluate and choose therapies that will become available only later, after their residency training is overdth_1230 187..190 In my clinical experiences in dermatology at four academic centers, I have cared for patients with psoriasis who were hospitalized for severe liver disease following years of methotrexate therapy, and patients with severe scarring acne who were treated with topicals and intermittent systemic antibiotics for over a year before referral specifically for isotretinoin therapy. In my estimation, although overtreatment and iatrogenic disease are all too common, it is undertreatment by well-trained, board-certified dermatologists that is most pervasive. In my view, dermatologists have an ethical imperative to learn about the therapeutic, especially pharmacotherapeutic, options for their patients. It does not seem plausible that a dermatologist can choose the best available therapy for a patient without an understanding of all available therapies. Fortunately, there is a rationale path available for evaluating dermatologic therapies. Evaluating the benefits is a useful first step in the assessment of dermatologic therapies. Benefit implies both a clinical and statistical improvement in the signs and symptoms of the skin disease over the course of therapy. Ellis and Grekin describe the approaches to measuring severity of skin disease before and after therapy to assess the benefit. Although there are forces continually attempting to define a clinically significant improvement in ever-smaller increments to encourage regulatory authorities to approve poorly performing products, Feldman reminds us that this is not in the best interest of either our patients or our specialty (2). Alosh, Fritsch, Soukup, and Wilkin show us what to look for in the clinical trial design and statistical analytical plan when reading reports of drug studies, especially when the dermatologist reader is evaluating the benefit claimed. Evaluation of the risks of a therapy, following the evaluation of benefit, will inform the risk–benefit calculus. Weaver, La Grenade, Kwon, and Avigan discuss the FDA’s approach to assessing risks. The FDA’s assessment remains the primary source for information on risk for the practicing dermatologist. However, the FDA has not fully evaluated every medically related product currently marketed. If you think that all drugs products in the Physicians’ Desk Reference have undergone full review and approval by the FDA, you will get better educated by reading Hyman and Carvajal’s revealing look into the reality otherwise. Importantly, these authors not only describe the differences in legal status and kinds of supporting evidence for the unanticipated variety of products, but they also