1. Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) is a chronic pustular dermatitis of the palms and soles, characterized by vesicles, pustules, erythema, lichenification, and abnormal desquamation.
2. The pathomechanism of PPP is unclear and the disease remains poorly defined, making adequate treatment for PPP lacking.
3. In 2018, Gulselkumab was certified for use in Japan as the first biologic effective in PPP both in Japanese and other patients.
The article provides an overview of current understanding of palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP), including its revised definition and possible pathomechanism. The article is written by Masamoto Murakami et al., published in the Journal of Dermatology Science in 2020.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy as it provides a comprehensive overview of PPP with relevant information on its definition, pathomechanism, prevalence, treatments available, etc. It also cites several studies to support its claims which adds to its credibility. However, there are some potential biases that should be noted when reading this article. Firstly, the authors have declared conflicts of interest which may lead to partiality or one-sided reporting in favour of certain treatments or therapies mentioned in the article. Secondly, while the article does provide an overview of treatments available for PPP such as conventional therapies used for plaque-type psoriasis and Gulselkumab (a monoclonal antibody against interleukin (IL)-23), it does not explore any potential risks associated with these treatments or discuss any unexplored counterarguments that could be made against them. Lastly, while the article does mention that PPP has a much lower prevalence in Western countries than in Japan, it does not provide any evidence to support this claim or explore why this might be the case.
In conclusion, while this article provides a comprehensive overview of palmoplantar pustulosis with relevant information on its definition and pathomechanism as well as treatments available for it; potential biases due to conflicts of interest should be noted when reading this article along with missing points such as potential risks associated with certain treatments mentioned and unexplored counterarguments against them as well as lack of evidence supporting certain claims made about prevalence rates between different countries.