Observational studyThe Journal of dermatology2025
Efficacy of granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis on skin and joint manifestations of palmoplantar pustulosis with pustulotic arthro-osteitis: A multicentric, prospective, observational study.
Observational study in The Journal of dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Guidelines on the Use of Therapeutic Apheresis in Clinical Practice-Evidence-Based Approach From the Writing Committee of the American Society for Apheresis: The Tenth Special Issue.Journal of clinical apheresis · 2026Guideline
- Ethnic Differences of Palmoplantar Pustulosis: A Systematic Review.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis on skin and joint manifestations of palmoplantar pustulosis with pustulotic arthro-osteitis: A multicentric, prospective, observational study.The Journal of dermatology · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Granulocyte and monocyte adsorptive apheresis (GMA) selectively removes activated granulocytes and monocytes from the peripheral blood. In 2012, GMA was approved in Japan as a treatment for generalized pustular psoriasis and localized pustular psoriasis or palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP). Limited evidence from case reports and monocentric studies suggested that GMA is an effective treatment for skin and joint symptoms of PPP with pustulotic arthro-osteitis (PAO). The present, prospective, observational study was performed at three dermatology departments in Japan to evaluate the efficacy and safety of GMA in patients with PPP with PAO. Between April 2017 and December 2020, two male and 12 female patients with PPP and PAO were enrolled. Their mean age, mean duration of skin manifestations, and mean duration of PAO symptoms was 52.8 years, 51.2 months, and 44.9 months, respectively. GMA was applied weekly over five sessions. The skin and joint symptoms were assessed at baseline, post-GMA, and at the 3-month follow-up. A total of 12 patients completed five GMA sessions, and two patients discontinued the treatment because of adverse events. Thus, 12 patients were finally assessed post-GMA, and 10 patients were assessed at the 3-month follow-up. The assessment of GMA efficacy demonstrated that the skin symptoms had remarkably improved and improved in 33.3% (4/12) and 70% (7/10) of the patients post-GMA and at the 3-month follow-up, respectively. Furthermore, the joint symptoms had remarkably improved in 66.7% (8/12) and 60% (6/10) of the patients post-GMA and at the 3-month follow-up, respectively. These results suggest that GMA is effective in treating the skin and joint symptoms of PPP with PAO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.