Skin mapping for the classification of generalized morphea

Noelle Teske, Joseph Welser, Heidi Jacobe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Generalized morphea lacks cohesive clinical features, limiting its clinical and investigative utility. Objective: We sought to use computerized lesion mapping to objectively subtype morphea. Methods: We conducted a 2-part cross-sectional study. In part 1, we created a discovery cohort of patients with generalized morphea of whom lesion maps were created to characterize subsets. Clinical and demographic features were compared between proposed subsets to determine if they identified clinically relevant differences. In part 2, we created a validation cohort to determine if proposed criteria were applicable to different individuals. Results: A total of 123 patients with generalized morphea were included. Mapping produced 2 distribution patterns that encompassed the majority in both cohorts: isomorphic (areas of skin friction) and symmetric (symmetrically distributed on trunk/extremities). In the discovery cohort, the isomorphic subset was older (55.6 ± 12.7 vs 42.2 ± 20.1 years, P <.001), all female (30/30 vs 38/43, P =.05), and more often had lichen sclerosus changes (12/43 vs 8/43, P =.02); involvement of the reticular dermis, subcutaneous fat, and/or fascia was more common in symmetric (10/43 vs 1/30) (P =.02). These features persisted in the validation cohort. Limitations: Single cohort was a limitation. Conclusions: Symmetric and isomorphic subsets possess distinctive demographic and clinical features, suggesting they more accurately define the phenotype of generalized morphea. Consideration should be given to revising classification.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)351-357
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology
Volume78
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

Localized Scleroderma
Skin
Demography
Lichen Sclerosus et Atrophicus
Friction
Subcutaneous Fat
Fascia
Dermis
Extremities
Cross-Sectional Studies
Phenotype

Keywords

  • clinical research
  • cohort study
  • cross-sectional study
  • disease registry
  • localized scleroderma
  • morphea
  • skin mapping

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology

Cite this

Skin mapping for the classification of generalized morphea. / Teske, Noelle; Welser, Joseph; Jacobe, Heidi.

In: Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 78, No. 2, 01.02.2018, p. 351-357.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b06c057c16314aba92c86d95dcbc5271,
title = "Skin mapping for the classification of generalized morphea",
abstract = "Background: Generalized morphea lacks cohesive clinical features, limiting its clinical and investigative utility. Objective: We sought to use computerized lesion mapping to objectively subtype morphea. Methods: We conducted a 2-part cross-sectional study. In part 1, we created a discovery cohort of patients with generalized morphea of whom lesion maps were created to characterize subsets. Clinical and demographic features were compared between proposed subsets to determine if they identified clinically relevant differences. In part 2, we created a validation cohort to determine if proposed criteria were applicable to different individuals. Results: A total of 123 patients with generalized morphea were included. Mapping produced 2 distribution patterns that encompassed the majority in both cohorts: isomorphic (areas of skin friction) and symmetric (symmetrically distributed on trunk/extremities). In the discovery cohort, the isomorphic subset was older (55.6 ± 12.7 vs 42.2 ± 20.1 years, P <.001), all female (30/30 vs 38/43, P =.05), and more often had lichen sclerosus changes (12/43 vs 8/43, P =.02); involvement of the reticular dermis, subcutaneous fat, and/or fascia was more common in symmetric (10/43 vs 1/30) (P =.02). These features persisted in the validation cohort. Limitations: Single cohort was a limitation. Conclusions: Symmetric and isomorphic subsets possess distinctive demographic and clinical features, suggesting they more accurately define the phenotype of generalized morphea. Consideration should be given to revising classification.",
keywords = "clinical research, cohort study, cross-sectional study, disease registry, localized scleroderma, morphea, skin mapping",
author = "Noelle Teske and Joseph Welser and Heidi Jacobe",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jaad.2016.08.052",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "78",
pages = "351--357",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology",
issn = "0190-9622",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Skin mapping for the classification of generalized morphea

AU - Teske, Noelle

AU - Welser, Joseph

AU - Jacobe, Heidi

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - Background: Generalized morphea lacks cohesive clinical features, limiting its clinical and investigative utility. Objective: We sought to use computerized lesion mapping to objectively subtype morphea. Methods: We conducted a 2-part cross-sectional study. In part 1, we created a discovery cohort of patients with generalized morphea of whom lesion maps were created to characterize subsets. Clinical and demographic features were compared between proposed subsets to determine if they identified clinically relevant differences. In part 2, we created a validation cohort to determine if proposed criteria were applicable to different individuals. Results: A total of 123 patients with generalized morphea were included. Mapping produced 2 distribution patterns that encompassed the majority in both cohorts: isomorphic (areas of skin friction) and symmetric (symmetrically distributed on trunk/extremities). In the discovery cohort, the isomorphic subset was older (55.6 ± 12.7 vs 42.2 ± 20.1 years, P <.001), all female (30/30 vs 38/43, P =.05), and more often had lichen sclerosus changes (12/43 vs 8/43, P =.02); involvement of the reticular dermis, subcutaneous fat, and/or fascia was more common in symmetric (10/43 vs 1/30) (P =.02). These features persisted in the validation cohort. Limitations: Single cohort was a limitation. Conclusions: Symmetric and isomorphic subsets possess distinctive demographic and clinical features, suggesting they more accurately define the phenotype of generalized morphea. Consideration should be given to revising classification.

AB - Background: Generalized morphea lacks cohesive clinical features, limiting its clinical and investigative utility. Objective: We sought to use computerized lesion mapping to objectively subtype morphea. Methods: We conducted a 2-part cross-sectional study. In part 1, we created a discovery cohort of patients with generalized morphea of whom lesion maps were created to characterize subsets. Clinical and demographic features were compared between proposed subsets to determine if they identified clinically relevant differences. In part 2, we created a validation cohort to determine if proposed criteria were applicable to different individuals. Results: A total of 123 patients with generalized morphea were included. Mapping produced 2 distribution patterns that encompassed the majority in both cohorts: isomorphic (areas of skin friction) and symmetric (symmetrically distributed on trunk/extremities). In the discovery cohort, the isomorphic subset was older (55.6 ± 12.7 vs 42.2 ± 20.1 years, P <.001), all female (30/30 vs 38/43, P =.05), and more often had lichen sclerosus changes (12/43 vs 8/43, P =.02); involvement of the reticular dermis, subcutaneous fat, and/or fascia was more common in symmetric (10/43 vs 1/30) (P =.02). These features persisted in the validation cohort. Limitations: Single cohort was a limitation. Conclusions: Symmetric and isomorphic subsets possess distinctive demographic and clinical features, suggesting they more accurately define the phenotype of generalized morphea. Consideration should be given to revising classification.

KW - clinical research

KW - cohort study

KW - cross-sectional study

KW - disease registry

KW - localized scleroderma

KW - morphea

KW - skin mapping

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044659978&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044659978&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.08.052

DO - 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.08.052

M3 - Article

C2 - 29332706

AN - SCOPUS:85044659978

VL - 78

SP - 351

EP - 357

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

SN - 0190-9622

IS - 2

ER -