ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Case Report: Abrocitinib treatment for refractory palmoplantar pustulosis.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) is a chronic relapsing inflammatory dermatosis characterized by recurrent sterile pustules on the palms and soles and often shows inadequate or unsustained responses to conventional systemic therapies and biologics. We report a 58-year-old woman with a 3-year history of refractory PPP. Before referral, oral prednisone and acitretin provided only transient disease control, with rapid relapse during dose tapering. Apremilast combined with topical halometasone cream and 308-nm excimer laser therapy failed to adequately control the plantar lesions. After referral, the patient declined cyclosporine and methotrexate because of concerns regarding potential systemic adverse effects. Baseline PPPASI and DLQI scores were 46.0 and 23, respectively. Secukinumab 300 mg with topical halometasone reduced the scores to 22.0 and 18 by week 8, indicating a partial but clinically inadequate response. Clinically active plantar lesions persisted, and new intensely pruritic erythematous papules developed on the lower extremities, accompanied by peripheral eosinophilia (0.62 × 10⁹/L) and elevated serum IgE (256 kIU/L). Secukinumab and topical halometasone were discontinued at week 8, and abrocitinib was initiated at 100 mg once daily. PPPASI decreased to 1.5 and 1.2 and DLQI to 8 and 3 at weeks 4 and 8, respectively. By week 8, the lower-extremity papules had markedly improved, and the eosinophil count and serum IgE had returned to their reference ranges. At week 16, disease control remained stable without treatment-related adverse events or laboratory abnormalities. This case suggests that abrocitinib may represent a potential treatment option for selected patients with refractory PPP who exhibit a partial but clinically inadequate response to secukinumab and concurrent clinical and laboratory changes suggestive of Th2-associated inflammation.
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.