Abstract Atopic dermatitis predisposes to skin infections, and on the other hand, some therapies used for atopic dermatitis may worsen viral infections whose lesions may be more diffuse and resistant to treatment. The authors present a patient with severe atopic dermatitis and disseminated molluscum contagiosum infection. The molluscum contagiosum did not clear with topical treatment, and it worsened her atopic dermatitis even more, so the authors started treatment with dupilumab. After two months, the patient's dermatitis went into clinical remission and there was resolution of the infection with no recurrence at the 12-month follow-up. Dupilumab is nowadays a promising treatment for severe atopic dermatitis. To our knowledge, only four reports of molluscum contagiosum during dupilumab therapy have been reported in the literature, with contrasting effects. According to the authors’ experience, treatment with dupilumab appears to be a safe alternative for patients with severe atopic dermatitis who are also infected with molluscum contagiosum, as opposed to other treatments such as systemic corticosteroids or cyclosporine.

ABSTRACT Background: The objective was to evaluate the efficiency (relation between the cost and the results in health) of the treatments in psoriasis, seeking a higher quality of economic evaluations, consistency and transparency in these studies. Methods: We developed a model of economic evaluation in psoriasis collecting all the many direct and indirect costs of each treatment. The effectiveness indicator used was Psoriasis Area Severity Index [PASI 75] which is generally acceptable in studies of psoriasis. The effectiveness indicator was a PASI 75. Subsequently we calculated the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for the period of 12 weeks and PASI 75, ordering treatments by level of effectiveness at the expense of treatment costs. Results: The most cost effective treatment was methotrexate (ICER -7.5) followed by acitretin (ICER 29.5). The least cost has proved effective PUVA (ICER 4,651), followed by UVB narrow band (2,886.1). Conclusions: When taking into account both direct and indirect costs together with efficiency, methotrexate is the most cost effective treatment.

RESUMEN Fundamentos: Los nuevos tratamientos biológicos, si bien mejoran la calidad de vida del paciente, incrementan los costes exponencialmente en relación al resto de tratamientos. El objetivo fue calcular el tratamiento más coste efectivo de los existentes para la psoriasis. Métodos: Se desarrolló un modelo de evaluación económica en psoriasis recogiendo todos los costes directos e indirectos de cada tratamiento. El indicador de efectividad que se utilizó fue Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 75), que es el aceptable de manera general en estudios de psoriasis. Posteriormente se realizó un análisis de incremento coste efectividad (ICER) para el periodo de 12 semanas y PASI 75, ordenando los tratamientos por nivel de efectividad en detrimento de los costes de los tratamientos. Resultados: El tratamiento más coste efectivo fue el metotrexato (ICER -7,5) seguido de acitretina (ICER 29,5). El menos coste efectivo resultó ser PUVA (ICER 4.651) seguido de UVB de banda estrecha (2.886,1). Conclusiones: Aunque el tratamiento más económico teniendo en cuenta solo los costes directos sería el UVBbe, al incluir los costes indirectos y ajustarlos por la efectividad el tratamiento más coste efectivo es el metotexato.

ABSTRACT Background: The objective was to evaluate the efficiency (relation between the cost and the results in health) of the treatments in psoriasis, seeking a higher quality of economic evaluations, consistency and transparency in these studies. Methods: We developed a model of economic evaluation in psoriasis collecting all the many direct and indirect costs of each treatment. The effectiveness indicator used was Psoriasis Area Severity Index [PASI 75] which is generally acceptable in studies of psoriasis. The effectiveness indicator was a PASI 75. Subsequently we calculated the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) for the period of 12 weeks and PASI 75, ordering treatments by level of effectiveness at the expense of treatment costs. Results: The most cost effective treatment was methotrexate (ICER -7.5) followed by acitretin (ICER 29.5). The least cost has proved effective PUVA (ICER 4,651), followed by UVB narrow band (2,886.1). Conclusions: When taking into account both direct and indirect costs together with efficiency, methotrexate is the most cost effective treatment.

RESUMEN Fundamentos: Los nuevos tratamientos biológicos, si bien mejoran la calidad de vida del paciente, incrementan los costes exponencialmente en relación al resto de tratamientos. El objetivo fue calcular el tratamiento más coste efectivo de los existentes para la psoriasis. Métodos: Se desarrolló un modelo de evaluación económica en psoriasis recogiendo todos los costes directos e indirectos de cada tratamiento. El indicador de efectividad que se utilizó fue Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 75), que es el aceptable de manera general en estudios de psoriasis. Posteriormente se realizó un análisis de incremento coste efectividad (ICER) para el periodo de 12 semanas y PASI 75, ordenando los tratamientos por nivel de efectividad en detrimento de los costes de los tratamientos. Resultados: El tratamiento más coste efectivo fue el metotrexato (ICER -7,5) seguido de acitretina (ICER 29,5). El menos coste efectivo resultó ser PUVA (ICER 4.651) seguido de UVB de banda estrecha (2.886,1). Conclusiones: Aunque el tratamiento más económico teniendo en cuenta solo los costes directos sería el UVBbe, al incluir los costes indirectos y ajustarlos por la efectividad el tratamiento más coste efectivo es el metotexato.