OBJECTIVES: To analyze the disease burden of melanoma among middle-aged and elderly populations in China, and to predict the future trend. METHODS: Data from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2021 were utilized to collect incidence and mortality rates of melanoma, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and corresponding age crude rates among the middle-aged and elderly population in China during 1990 and 2021. Additionally, the estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) was employed to assess the temporal trends. Age-period-cohort (APC) and Bayesian age-period-cohort (BAPC) models were utilized to compute age, period, and cohort effects on incidence and mortality rates of melanoma, as well as to predict future trends up to 2035. RESULTS: During 1990-2021, the incidence rate of melanoma for males was higher than that for females among the middle-aged and elderly population in China, and the overall incidence rate increased annually with an EAPC of 2.13 (1.90-2.36), while the overall mortality rate and DALY rate showed a declining trend with an EAPC of －0.28 (－0.41-－0.15) and －0.54 (－0.68-－0.41), respectively. The results of the APC model analysis revealed that age effects on both incidence and mortality rates of melanoma in China's middle-aged and elderly population were significant, with both increasing with age. Period and cohort effects showed an upward trend for incidence rates but a downward trend for mortality rates. Moreover, the period and cohort effects for mortality rates were not significant among females. In the BAPC prediction model, the number of incidences of melanoma in middle-aged and elderly people in China would increase dramatically. By 2035, the number of incidence cases is expected to reach approximately 9600 (males) and 10 300 (females), corresponding to an incidence rate of 2.66/10⁵ and 2.67/10⁵, respectively. The number of deaths is projected to be about 2600 (males) and 3500 (females) by 2035, corresponding to a mortality rate of 0.72/10⁵ and 0.91/10⁵, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The disease burden of melanoma among the middle-aged and elderly population in China remains substantial and is expected to increase over the next decade.
Humans ; Melanoma/mortality* ; China/epidemiology* ; Aged ; Middle Aged ; Male ; Female ; Incidence ; Disability-Adjusted Life Years ; Bayes Theorem ; Cost of Illness ; Skin Neoplasms/epidemiology*

Objective:To evaluate the clinical equivalence between a domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment and the originator product in the treatment of stable plaque psoriasis.Methods:A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group, active- and placebo-controlled study was conducted, and 449 patients aged 18 - 65 years with stable plaque psoriasis were enrolled from 25 hospitals (such as the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University). Eligible patients had a baseline physician's global assessment (PGA) score of ≥ 3 points, baseline body surface area (BSA) involvement of 5% - 30%, and a target lesion psoriasis area and severity index (TL-PASI) for plaque elevation of ≥ 3 points. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to the test group ( n = 179), reference group ( n = 180), and placebo group ( n = 90), and applied the domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment, originator product, and ointment base respectively, once daily in the evening for 4 weeks. Efficacy and safety were assessed at weeks 1, 2, and 4. The primary efficacy endpoints were the treatment success rates and clinical success rates in each group at week 4. The per-protocol set (PPS) was used for the primary efficacy analysis, and the intention-to-treat (ITT) set for supplementary efficacy analysis. Equivalence between the test and reference preparations was tested using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method adjusted for randomization strata. Superiority of the test and reference preparations over the placebo was also tested. Measurement data were compared among the 3 groups using analysis of variance or non-parametric tests, while treatment success rates, clinical success rates, and incidence rates of adverse reactions were compared using the chi-square test. Results:The ITT, PPS, and safety sets included 447, 420, and 448 patients, respectively. In the ITT set, patients were aged 43.6 ± 12.8 years, including 320 (71.6%) males and 127 (28.4%) females, and the disease duration was 11.21 ± 9.05 years; 316 (70.7%) had a PGA score of 3 points and 131 (29.3%) had a PGA score of 4 - 5 points. No significant differences in the baseline characteristics (including age, sex, disease duration and disease severity) were observed among the 3 groups (all P > 0.05). Based on the PPS analysis, the treatment success rates were 57.9% (99/171) in the test group, 50.3% (86/171) in the reference group, and 7.7% (6/78) in the placebo group, and the clinical success rates were 57.9% (99/171), 50.3% (86/171), and 10.3% (8/78), respectively; both the test and reference groups were superior to the placebo group in both treatment and clinical success rates (all P < 0.001) ; the rate differences for treatment success (90% confidence interval [ CI]: -1.3% - 16.4%) and clinical success (90% CI: -1.3% - 16.3%) between the test and reference groups were entirely within the pre-defined equivalence margin (-20% - 20%). Subgroup analyses by baseline PGA scores: for patients with a baseline PGA score of 3 points, the treatment success rates in the test, reference, and placebo groups were 60.8% (73/120), 52.1% (62/119), and 11.1% (6/54), respectively, and the corresponding clinical success rates were 61.7% (74/120), 53.8% (64/119), and 13% (7/54), respectively; the test and reference groups did not differ significantly in treatment or clinical success rates (both P > 0.05), but both showed higher success rates than the placebo group (all P < 0.001) ; the results of statistical comparisons among the 3 groups in patients with a baseline PGA score of 4 - 5 points were consistent with those observed in patients with a baseline PGA score of 3 points. The percentage reductions in PGA and TL-PASI scores from baseline to weeks 1, 2, and 4 showed significant differences among the 3 groups, which were significantly higher in the test and reference groups than in the placebo group (all P < 0.001), but did not differ between the test and reference groups (all P > 0.05). The primary adverse reactions were local skin reactions, such as pruritus, pain, and erythema. The incidence rates of adverse reactions were 8.9% (16/179) in the test group, 7.3% (13/179) in the reference group, and 7.8% (7/90) in the placebo group, with no significant difference among the 3 groups ( P > 0.05) . Conclusions:The domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment demonstrated clinical equivalence to the originator product in the treatment of stable plaque psoriasis, and the two agents exhibited comparable efficacy for patients with varying degrees of disease severity, and were comparable in the speed and degree of clinical improvement, with similar favorable safety profiles.

Objective:To evaluate the clinical equivalence between a domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment and the originator product in the treatment of stable plaque psoriasis.Methods:A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, three-arm, parallel-group, active- and placebo-controlled study was conducted, and 449 patients aged 18 - 65 years with stable plaque psoriasis were enrolled from 25 hospitals (such as the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University). Eligible patients had a baseline physician's global assessment (PGA) score of ≥ 3 points, baseline body surface area (BSA) involvement of 5% - 30%, and a target lesion psoriasis area and severity index (TL-PASI) for plaque elevation of ≥ 3 points. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to the test group ( n = 179), reference group ( n = 180), and placebo group ( n = 90), and applied the domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment, originator product, and ointment base respectively, once daily in the evening for 4 weeks. Efficacy and safety were assessed at weeks 1, 2, and 4. The primary efficacy endpoints were the treatment success rates and clinical success rates in each group at week 4. The per-protocol set (PPS) was used for the primary efficacy analysis, and the intention-to-treat (ITT) set for supplementary efficacy analysis. Equivalence between the test and reference preparations was tested using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method adjusted for randomization strata. Superiority of the test and reference preparations over the placebo was also tested. Measurement data were compared among the 3 groups using analysis of variance or non-parametric tests, while treatment success rates, clinical success rates, and incidence rates of adverse reactions were compared using the chi-square test. Results:The ITT, PPS, and safety sets included 447, 420, and 448 patients, respectively. In the ITT set, patients were aged 43.6 ± 12.8 years, including 320 (71.6%) males and 127 (28.4%) females, and the disease duration was 11.21 ± 9.05 years; 316 (70.7%) had a PGA score of 3 points and 131 (29.3%) had a PGA score of 4 - 5 points. No significant differences in the baseline characteristics (including age, sex, disease duration and disease severity) were observed among the 3 groups (all P > 0.05). Based on the PPS analysis, the treatment success rates were 57.9% (99/171) in the test group, 50.3% (86/171) in the reference group, and 7.7% (6/78) in the placebo group, and the clinical success rates were 57.9% (99/171), 50.3% (86/171), and 10.3% (8/78), respectively; both the test and reference groups were superior to the placebo group in both treatment and clinical success rates (all P < 0.001) ; the rate differences for treatment success (90% confidence interval [ CI]: -1.3% - 16.4%) and clinical success (90% CI: -1.3% - 16.3%) between the test and reference groups were entirely within the pre-defined equivalence margin (-20% - 20%). Subgroup analyses by baseline PGA scores: for patients with a baseline PGA score of 3 points, the treatment success rates in the test, reference, and placebo groups were 60.8% (73/120), 52.1% (62/119), and 11.1% (6/54), respectively, and the corresponding clinical success rates were 61.7% (74/120), 53.8% (64/119), and 13% (7/54), respectively; the test and reference groups did not differ significantly in treatment or clinical success rates (both P > 0.05), but both showed higher success rates than the placebo group (all P < 0.001) ; the results of statistical comparisons among the 3 groups in patients with a baseline PGA score of 4 - 5 points were consistent with those observed in patients with a baseline PGA score of 3 points. The percentage reductions in PGA and TL-PASI scores from baseline to weeks 1, 2, and 4 showed significant differences among the 3 groups, which were significantly higher in the test and reference groups than in the placebo group (all P < 0.001), but did not differ between the test and reference groups (all P > 0.05). The primary adverse reactions were local skin reactions, such as pruritus, pain, and erythema. The incidence rates of adverse reactions were 8.9% (16/179) in the test group, 7.3% (13/179) in the reference group, and 7.8% (7/90) in the placebo group, with no significant difference among the 3 groups ( P > 0.05) . Conclusions:The domestic calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate ointment demonstrated clinical equivalence to the originator product in the treatment of stable plaque psoriasis, and the two agents exhibited comparable efficacy for patients with varying degrees of disease severity, and were comparable in the speed and degree of clinical improvement, with similar favorable safety profiles.

Objective:To investigate COVID-19 vaccination status and relevant adverse reactions in patients with psoriasis treated with biological agents, and to explore the effect of COVID-19 vaccination on psoriatic lesions.Methods:Clinical data were collected from 572 psoriasis patients aged 18 - 60 years, who were registered in the management system of psoriasis patients treated with biological agents in the University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital from May 2019 to June 2021. The COVID-19 vaccination status was investigated by telephone interviews, and the vaccination-related information was obtained by fixed healthcare workers during a fixed time period according to a predesigned questionnaire. Measurement data were compared between two groups by using t test, and enumeration data were compared by using chi-square test or Fisher′s exact test. Results:The COVID-19 vaccination coverage rate was 43.13% (226 cases) among the 524 patients who completed the telephone interview, and was significantly lower in the biological agent treatment group (30.79%, 105/341) than in the traditional drug treatment group (66.12%, 121/183; χ2 = 60.60, P < 0.001) . The main reason for not being vaccinated was patients′ fear of vaccine safety (49.66%, 148/298) , followed by doctors′ not recommending (26.51%, 79/298) . In the biological agent treatment group after vaccination, the exacerbation of psoriatic lesions was more common in patients receiving prolonged-interval treatment (42.86%, 6/14) compared with those receiving regular treatment (4.40%, 4/91; Fisher′s exact test, P < 0.001) . Skin lesions were severely aggravated in two patients after COVID-19 vaccination, who ever experienced allergic reactions and whose skin lesions did not completely subside after the treatment with biological agents. Conclusions:The COVID-19 vaccination coverage rate was relatively low in the psoriasis patients treated with biological agents, and no serious adverse reaction was observed after vaccination. Prolonged-interval treatment due to COVID-19 vaccination ran the risk of exacerbation of skin lesions.