Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Mycosis fungoides (MF) combined with photosensitive/autoimmune diseases has been reported, yet there are limited data regarding the therapeutic considerations in these patients, specifically phototherapy, a mainstay skin-directed treatment (SDT), being a relative or complete contra-indication.

Objectives: To outline therapeutic considerations for patients with MF who had also been diagnosed with photosensitive/autoimmune diseases.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with MF who were treated at our center between January 2008 and December 2024with photosensitive/autoimmune diseases, especially collagen vascular diseases (CVD) or autoimmune bullous diseases (AIBD),

Results: Eight patients were diagnosed with MF at a median age of 39 years. Seven had early-stage (4-IA, 3-IB) and one had Sézary syndrome. Six early-stage MF patients were diagnosed with lupus erythematosus (LE, 4) or AIBD (2) and were treated with SDT (topical corticosteroids/chlormethine gel), systemic retinoid or methotrexate. A patient with resistant early-stage MF and discoid LE was treated with electron beam and interferon. One patient who presented with variegate porphyria and localized MF was treated with electron beam. The patient with Sézary syndrome had inclusion body myositis. He was treated with low-dose total skin electron beam, methotrexate, extracorporeal photopheresis, and subsequently with romidepsin. After a median of 8 years, no stage progression of MF was observed. The Sézary syndrome patient achieved down-staging and was at stage IB. There was no aggravation of the co-morbidity in any of the patients.

Conclusions: Effective management of MF and associated photosensitive or autoimmune co-morbidities underscore the need for individualized treatment strategies in patients with these unique dual diagnoses.

Background: Epidemiological studies have shown a connection between ethnic origin and the incidence and outcome of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).

Objective: To evaluate the SLE outcomes among Ashkenazi Jews, non-Ashkenazi Jews, and Arabs.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients who were diagnosed with SLE and followed in lupus clinics at two large tertiary medical centers. The data were obtained from patient medical records. Patients were stratified into three ethnic origins: Ashkenazi Jews, non-Ashkenazi Jews, and Arabs. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, development of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) 2K ≤ 4 at last visit.

Results: We included 570 patients in this study. The Arab group showed the highest number of SLE classification criteria at diagnosis and last encounters compared to non-Ashkenazi and Ashkenazi Jewish groups (6.0 vs. 5.0 and 4.0, respectively at diagnosis, P < 0.001; 8.0 vs. 7.0 and 6.0 at last visit, P = 0.01). In multivariate models, Arab patients had three times higher risk of all-cause mortality than Ashkenazi Jews (hazard ratio 2.99, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.32–6.76, P = 0.009). ESKD was similar among the study groups. Low disease activity (SLEDAI 2K ≤ 4) at last visit was lower in the Arab group than the Ashkenazi Jews (odds ratio 0.50, 95%CI 0.28–0.87, P = 0.016), depicting a medium-to-high disease activity among the former.

Conclusions: Physicians should consider the influence of the ethnicity of the SLE patient when deciding on their care plan.

Background: Guidelines recommend initiation of parenteral biologic or oral target-specific disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs/tsDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who do not adequately respond to conventional DMARDs.

Objectives: To compare the preferred route of administration of bDMARDs or tsDMARDs in RA patients who were previously treated with at least one type.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of consecutive RA patients previously prescribed bDMARDs or tsDMARDs. We analyzed the factors associated with patients' preferred route of administration.

Results: The cohort included 95 patients, mostly female (72.6%), seropositive (81.05%), mean age 63.4 ± 11.9 years. The oral route was preferred by 39 patients (41%) and 56 (59%) preferred the parenteral route. Most patients (65.9%) preferred to continue with their current route (P < 0.001). Switching from a current route was less common with patients who were currently using the oral route (13.3% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.04). Many patients (53.8%) who preferred the oral route had never experienced it before, while this was rare (3.6%) regarding the parenteral route (P = 0.0001). Employment status was associated with preference of the subcutaneous route over the intravenous route of bDMARDs (P = 0.01). Of the 21 patients who had previously experienced both parenteral and oral treatment, 16 (76.2%) preferred the oral route.

Conclusions: RA patients preferred to continue treatment with an administration route they have already experienced. However, when choosing an unexperienced route, significantly more patients preferred the oral route. Our results strengthen the understanding of patient preferences, which could improve drug adherence, compliance, and disease outcome.