Treating skin involvement in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis: results from an international scleroderma specialist survey.

IF 2.8 Q3 RHEUMATOLOGY
Rheumatology Advances in Practice Pub Date : 2026-07-21 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.1093/rap/rkag086
Kimberly S Lakin, Antonia Valenzuela, John D Pauling, Deanna P Jannat-Khah, Kelsey Gripp, Oshmita Golam, Robyn T Domsic, Robert F Spiera, Jessica K Gordon
{"title":"Treating skin involvement in diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis: results from an international scleroderma specialist survey.","authors":"Kimberly S Lakin, Antonia Valenzuela, John D Pauling, Deanna P Jannat-Khah, Kelsey Gripp, Oshmita Golam, Robyn T Domsic, Robert F Spiera, Jessica K Gordon","doi":"10.1093/rap/rkag086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate contemporary global treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) skin by SSc specialists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An anonymous survey was distributed via the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium, European Scleroderma Trials and Research Group (EUSTAR), and Collaborative National Quality and Efficacy Registry (CONQUER) distribution lists between June and September 2025. The survey comprised four sections: Demographics, Treatment of dcSSc Skin, Impact of Recent Guidelines, and Clinical Trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses included 103 physicians (93 completed): 43% North America, 31% Europe, 15% South America and 12% elsewhere. The majority practice within an SSc centre (80%) and participate in clinical trials (84%). Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was preferred first-line treatment (71%) for dcSSc without ILD, rising to 92% for dcSSc with mild/non-progressive ILD. For active skin involvement despite MMF, trial referral was preferred as next step irrespective of ILD (59% without ILD and 58% with ILD). Treatment preferences have evolved, with 40% increasing MMF use and 47% decreasing methotrexate use, over the previous 2-3 years. Biologic use has increased, with 56% and 37% reporting increasing rituximab and tocilizumab use, respectively. For dcSSc without ILD, 85% have prescribed rituximab, and 65% have prescribed tocilizumab. Biologic availability has impacted trial enrolment (73% agreement). Treatment decision-making for dcSSc skin involvement has been materially influenced by recent BSR and/or EULAR guidelines (43% agreement).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MMF is preferred first-line for dcSSc. In the absence of compelling scientific justification for combination or step-up immunomodulatory approaches, trial referral is currently the preferred next treatment option. Biologic use is increasing, which impacts trial enrolment.</p>","PeriodicalId":21350,"journal":{"name":"Rheumatology Advances in Practice","volume":"10 3","pages":"rkag086"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13424433/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rheumatology Advances in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rap/rkag086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate contemporary global treatment of diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis (dcSSc) skin by SSc specialists.

Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed via the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium, European Scleroderma Trials and Research Group (EUSTAR), and Collaborative National Quality and Efficacy Registry (CONQUER) distribution lists between June and September 2025. The survey comprised four sections: Demographics, Treatment of dcSSc Skin, Impact of Recent Guidelines, and Clinical Trials.

Results: Responses included 103 physicians (93 completed): 43% North America, 31% Europe, 15% South America and 12% elsewhere. The majority practice within an SSc centre (80%) and participate in clinical trials (84%). Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) was preferred first-line treatment (71%) for dcSSc without ILD, rising to 92% for dcSSc with mild/non-progressive ILD. For active skin involvement despite MMF, trial referral was preferred as next step irrespective of ILD (59% without ILD and 58% with ILD). Treatment preferences have evolved, with 40% increasing MMF use and 47% decreasing methotrexate use, over the previous 2-3 years. Biologic use has increased, with 56% and 37% reporting increasing rituximab and tocilizumab use, respectively. For dcSSc without ILD, 85% have prescribed rituximab, and 65% have prescribed tocilizumab. Biologic availability has impacted trial enrolment (73% agreement). Treatment decision-making for dcSSc skin involvement has been materially influenced by recent BSR and/or EULAR guidelines (43% agreement).

Conclusion: MMF is preferred first-line for dcSSc. In the absence of compelling scientific justification for combination or step-up immunomodulatory approaches, trial referral is currently the preferred next treatment option. Biologic use is increasing, which impacts trial enrolment.

治疗弥漫性皮肤系统性硬化症的皮肤受累:来自国际硬皮病专家调查的结果。
目的:评价漫漫性皮肤系统性硬化症(dcSSc)专家的当代全球治疗方法。方法:在2025年6月至9月期间,通过硬皮病临床试验联盟、欧洲硬皮病试验和研究小组(EUSTAR)和国家质量和疗效合作登记处(CONQUER)分发匿名调查。调查包括四个部分:人口统计、dcSSc皮肤的治疗、最新指南的影响和临床试验。结果:103名医生(93名完成)参与了调查,其中43%来自北美,31%来自欧洲,15%来自南美,12%来自其他地区。大多数在SSc中心实习(80%),参加临床试验(84%)。霉酚酸酯(MMF)是无ILD的dcSSc的首选一线治疗(71%),对于轻度/非进展性ILD的dcSSc,这一比例上升至92%。对于尽管有MMF,但仍有皮肤受累的患者,无论是否有ILD(59%无ILD, 58%有ILD),首选转诊作为下一步。在过去的2-3年中,治疗偏好发生了变化,40%的人增加了MMF的使用,47%的人减少了甲氨蝶呤的使用。生物制剂的使用有所增加,分别有56%和37%的人报告利妥昔单抗和托珠单抗的使用有所增加。对于没有ILD的dcSSc, 85%的患者开了利妥昔单抗,65%的患者开了托珠单抗。生物制剂的可获得性影响了试验的入组(73%的人同意)。最近的BSR和/或EULAR指南在很大程度上影响了dcSSc受累皮肤的治疗决策(43%的一致性)。结论:MMF是治疗dcSSc的首选一线治疗方法。在缺乏令人信服的联合或加强免疫调节方法的科学依据的情况下,临床转诊目前是首选的下一个治疗方案。生物制剂的使用正在增加,这影响了试验的招募。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rheumatology Advances in Practice
Rheumatology Advances in Practice Medicine-Rheumatology
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
3.20%
发文量
197
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书