-
Blood Transfusion = Trasfusione Del... Jan 2023The number of articles evaluating the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in androgenetic alopecia (AGA) and alopecia areata (AA) has increased exponentially during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The number of articles evaluating the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in androgenetic alopecia (AGA) and alopecia areata (AA) has increased exponentially during the last years. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aimed at evaluating the benefit of PRP in the treatment of alopecia.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We searched MEDLINE (through PUBMED), Embase, and CENTRAL for relevant data. Treatment effect was described by mean difference (MD) and risk difference with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The GRADE system was used to assess the certainty of the body of evidence.
RESULTS
We found 27 controlled trials (1,117 subjects) that met our inclusion criteria: 18 trials (713 subjects) in patients with AGA, and 9 (404 subjects) in patients with AA. Eleven studies had a split head design. There was heterogeneity in types of PRP (e.g., activated and non-activated) and administration schedules. PRP was compared to saline injections (18 studies), local steroid injections (4 studies) and other comparators (5 studies). Most commonly reported outcomes were hair density and hair regrowth. It was not possible to pool all outcome data because of heterogeneity in reporting, and because reporting was often limited to a single study. Compared to saline injections, PRP injections increased hair density over a medium-term follow-up (MD, 25.6 hairs/cm; 95 % CI: 2.62-48.57), but the evidence was rated as low quality due to inconsistency and risk of bias. In individuals with AA, it is unclear whether PRP injection compared with triamcinolone injection increase the rate of subjects with hair regrowth (very-low quality of evidence due to inconsistency, imprecision, and risk of bias). There were no serious adverse events related to PRP injection or control treatments.
CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence showing benefit of PRP for treatment of alopecia, and most of this evidence is of low quality.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Clinical Protocols; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34967722
DOI: 10.2450/2021.0216-21 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Mar 2020Alopecia areata (AA) is a common autoimmune alopecia with heterogeneous severity and distribution. Previous studies found conflicting results about AA epidemiology. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata (AA) is a common autoimmune alopecia with heterogeneous severity and distribution. Previous studies found conflicting results about AA epidemiology.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the prevalence, incidence, and predictors of AA, alopecia totalis, alopecia ophiasis, and alopecia universalis.
METHODS
A systematic review of all published cohort and cross-sectional studies that analyzed AA and its subtypes. MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and GREAT were searched. At least 2 reviewers performed study title/abstract review and data extraction. Random-effects meta-analysis was used because of significant heterogeneity (I = 99.97%).
RESULTS
Ninety-four studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence (95% confidence interval, N) of AA overall was 2.11% (1.82-2.42, N = 302,157,365), with differences of population-based (0.75% [0.49-1.06%], N = 301,173,403) and clinic-based (3.47% [3.01-3.96], N = 983,962) studies. The prevalences of alopecia totalis, ophiasis, and universalis were 0.08% (0.04-0.13, N = 1,088,149), 0.02% (0.00-0.06, N = 1,075,203), and 0.03% (0.01-0.06, N = 1,085,444), respectively. AA prevalence (95% confidence interval) increased over time (<2000: 1.02% [0.85-1.22]; 2000-2009: 1.76% [1.51-2.03]; >2009: 3.22% [2.59-3.92]; P < .0001) and differed by region. AA prevalence was significantly lower in adults (1.47% [1.18-1.80]) than children (1.92% [1.31-2.65]; P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS
AA affects 2% of the global population. AA prevalence is lower in adults than children, is increasing over time, and significantly differs by region.
Topics: Alopecia; Alopecia Areata; Humans; Incidence; Prevalence
PubMed: 31437543
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.08.032 -
The Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic... Aug 2020Central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia (CCCA), a scarring alopecia that commonly affects women of African descent, can be challenging to manage, and there are limited... (Review)
Review
Central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia (CCCA), a scarring alopecia that commonly affects women of African descent, can be challenging to manage, and there are limited treatment modalities available. The use of natural ingredients for nonscarring hair loss has gained popularity among patients, but has not been previously studied for CCCA. We sought to review clinical studies evaluating the use of natural ingredients in the treatment of CCCA. Systematic searches of the PubMed and SCOPUS databases were performed in March 2018 using various ingredient names and the terms , and . Specific ingredients included azelaic acid, peppermint oil, pumpkin seed oil, garlic supplements/shampoo, Black castor oil, jojoba oil, argan oil, olive oil, horsetail plant oil, lavender oil, coconut oil, chamomile oil, thyme oil, tea tree oil, sulfur oil, menthol, and rosemary oil. Two reviewers independently screened titles, leading to the selection of eight clinical studies. A review of the literature revealed no clinical trials that evaluated the treatment of CCCA with natural ingredients. Despite limited evidence-based research for CCCA, several natural ingredients showed efficacy in alopecia areata, androgenetic alopecia, and psoriatic alopecia. Upon review of the literature, there were no randomized, controlled studies evaluating the use of natural ingredients or aromatherapy in the management of CCCA. Despite this, several botanical and natural ingredients do show promise in treating androgenetic alopecia and alopecia areata. More clinical studies need to be performed to evaluate treatment options as a whole, including natural modalities, to better serve these patients.
PubMed: 33178378
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology Dec 2022Tofacitinib, a potent JAK inhibitor, has gained increasing interest, in recent years, among dermatologists for the management of refractory alopecia areata. Despite a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tofacitinib, a potent JAK inhibitor, has gained increasing interest, in recent years, among dermatologists for the management of refractory alopecia areata. Despite a growing number of studies on its safety and efficacy, there is still a lack of clarity, especially in the pediatric population, in treatment considerations such as proper dosage, treatment duration, side-effect profile, and therapeutic strategies to guide clinicians.
METHODS
Multiple databases were systematically searched. Following the PRISMA diagram, of a pool of 601 papers, seven met a checklist of inclusion criteria. These were observational studies including a total of 59 patients from four to 19 years of age.
RESULTS
In the evaluated studies, tofacitinib was administered either orally at a 2.5 to 15 mg daily (mostly 5 mg twice a day) dosage for 2 to 38 months or in the form of a 2% topical solution for 3-17 months. Metanalysis showed that 49% (95% CI: 29%-69%, I = 59.94%) of patients experienced a reversal of alopecia after a minimum of 3 to 9 months of therapy. Fifty-five percent (95% CI: 23%-86%, I = 75.07%) and 41% (95% CI: 23%-59%, I = 0.00%) showed Good/complete and partial response rates, respectively. Oral administration was significantly more efficacious than topical application (73% vs 23%, p-Value = 0.04). Few side effects such as diarrhea and mild liver transaminases abnormalities were noted in several patients.
CONCLUSION
Results of this review suggest that tofacitinib at 2.5-15 mg daily (especially 5 mg twice daily) oral formulation or 2% topical solution can be regarded as a viable alternative or adjunct to the conventional treatment options for moderate to severe forms of alopecia areata in children owing to its acceptable efficacy and side-effect profile. However, uncertainties continue to exist around treatment strategies including initial and maintenance dosages, route of administration, dose adjustments, the timing of tapering or discontinuation, and associated treatment modalities.
Topics: Humans; Child; Alopecia Areata; Pyrroles; Piperidines
PubMed: 36177815
DOI: 10.1111/jocd.15425 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Jul 2021Alopecia areata (AA) is an immune-mediated disease resulting in nonscarring hair loss. Systematic reviews on the psychosocial and psychiatric comorbidities,...
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata (AA) is an immune-mediated disease resulting in nonscarring hair loss. Systematic reviews on the psychosocial and psychiatric comorbidities, health-related quality of life, and interventions targeting psychosocial well-being are limited.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the psychosocial comorbidities, health-related quality of life, and treatment options targeting psychosocial well-being in adult and pediatric AA patients.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines within the PubMed database. Specific search terms included, but were not limited to, alopecia areata, psychosocial, psychiatry, and quality of life. Studies were then evaluated for their design and categorized into corresponding levels of evidence according to the guidelines adapted from the Oxford Center for Evidence Based Medicine.
FINDINGS
Seventy-three reports met inclusion criteria, involving approximately 414,319 unique participants. AA patients were found to have psychiatric comorbidities, particularly anxiety and depression. Health-related quality of life is reduced in AA patients, but data on pediatric AA quality of life are limited. Psychotherapy is often recommended as adjuvant treatment.
CONCLUSION
AA has substantial psychosocial impact on patients and results in reduced health-related quality of life. Addressing this should be an active part of treatment.
Topics: Alopecia Areata; Anxiety; Child; Child Behavior Disorders; Comorbidity; Depression; Humans; Mental Disorders; Quality of Life; Suicide
PubMed: 32561373
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.06.047 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Due to the lack of comprehensive evidence based on prospective studies, the efficacy and safety of Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors (including tofacitinib, ruxolitinib,...
Due to the lack of comprehensive evidence based on prospective studies, the efficacy and safety of Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors (including tofacitinib, ruxolitinib, baricitinib, ritlecitinib and brepocitinib) for alopecia areata (AA) are yet to be proved. The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed pursuant to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022303007). Fourteen prospective studies (5 RCTs and 9 non-RCTs), enrolling a total of 1845 patients with AA, were included for quantitative analysis. In RCTs, oral JAK inhibitors resulted in higher good response rate compared with control (RR: 6.86, 95% CI: 2.91-16.16); topical JAK inhibitors did not show any difference compared with control (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.31-3.18). In non-RCTs, the pooled rate of good response to oral, topical and sublingual JAK inhibitors were 63% (95% CI: 44%-80%), 28% (95% CI: 1%-72%) and 11% (95% CI: 1%-29%), respectively. The pooled recurrence rate in patients treated with JAK inhibitors was 54% (95% CI: 39%-69%), mainly due to the withdrawal of JAK inhibitors. In RCTs, no difference was found in the risk of experiencing most kind of adverse events; in non-RCTs, the reported adverse events with high incidence rate were mostly mild and manageable. JAK inhibitors are efficacious and generally well-tolerated in treating AA with oral administration, whereas topical or sublingual administration lacks efficacy. Subgroup analyses indicate that baricitinib, ritlecitinib and brepocitinib seem to have equal efficacy for AA in RCTs; ruxolitinib (vs. tofacitinib) and AA (vs. AT/AU) are associated with better efficacy outcomes in non-RCT. Due to the high recurrence rate after withdrawal of JAK inhibitors, continuous treatment should be considered to maintain efficacy. PROSPERO: CRD 42022303007.
PubMed: 36091777
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.950450 -
JAMA Dermatology Jan 2024Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are an effective treatment option for patients with certain skin-related conditions, such as atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are an effective treatment option for patients with certain skin-related conditions, such as atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, and vitiligo, but there is a current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) boxed warning label for oral and topical JAK inhibitors regarding increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), venous thromboembolism (VTE), serious infections, malignant neoplasm, and death. However, this boxed warning was precipitated by results of the Oral Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial (ORAL) Surveillance study, which only included patients with rheumatoid arthritis, and the same association may not be observed in dermatologic conditions.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the risk of all-cause mortality, MACE, and VTE with JAK inhibitors in patients with dermatologic conditions.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception to April 1, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
This review included phase 3 randomized clinical trials with a placebo/active comparator group of JAK inhibitors used for a dermatologic indication with FDA approval or pending approval or with European Union or Japanese approval. Studies without a comparison group, case reports, observational studies, and review articles were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Adverse events using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated using a random-effects model and the DerSimonian-Laird method. Studies were screened, data abstracted, and quality assessed by 2 independent authors. The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were a composite of adjudicated MACE and all-cause mortality, and VTE.
RESULTS
The analysis included 35 randomized clinical trials with 20 651 patients (mean [SD] age, 38.5 [10.1] years; male, 54%) and a mean (SD) follow-up time of 4.9 (2.68) months. Findings did not show a significant difference between JAK inhibitors and placebo/active comparator in composite MACE and all-cause mortality (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.44-1.57) or VTE (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.26-1.04).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, use of JAK inhibitors was not associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, MACE, and VTE compared to the placebo/active comparator groups. Additional trials with long-term follow-up are needed to better understand the safety risks of JAK inhibitors used for dermatologic indications.
Topics: Humans; Male; Adult; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Venous Thromboembolism; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Dermatitis, Atopic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37910098
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2023.4090 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Apr 2023Management options for moderate-to-severe alopecia areata (AA) are limited owing to a lack of safe and effective treatments suitable for long-term use. However, newer... (Review)
Review
Management options for moderate-to-severe alopecia areata (AA) are limited owing to a lack of safe and effective treatments suitable for long-term use. However, newer agents have the potential to induce and maintain hair regrowth in patients with a better side-effects profile compared to systemic steroids or conventional systemic agents. In this article, we conducted a systematic review of newer agents, including Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, biologics and phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors, for the treatment of AA in adult patients evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the Severity of Alopecia Tool score. A literature search was performed on PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, which identified 106 items with 12 RCTs eligible for review. Information regarding the treatment regimen, duration, endpoints, efficacy and adverse events were extracted; product monograph information was also summarized for approved agents with or without indications for AA. Overall, current data suggest the oral JAK inhibitors (baricitinib, ritlecitinib, deuruxolitinib, brepocitinib) as a promising new class of agents that can induce significant hair regrowth, with mild to moderate adverse effects. Baricitinib recently received US FDA approval for the treatment of severe AA, while ritlecitinib and deuruxolitinib have received the breakthrough therapy designation for AA. In contrast, PDE-4 inhibitors (apremilast) and the biologics (dupilumab, secukinumab and aldesleukin) appear to have limited efficacy thus far. Results from ongoing and future long-term studies could shed light on the utility of the newer agents in altering the progression of AA.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Alopecia Areata; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Phosphodiesterase 4 Inhibitors; Cyclic Nucleotide Phosphodiesterases, Type 4; Biological Products; Alopecia; Protein Kinase Inhibitors
PubMed: 36478475
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18810 -
Acta Dermato-venereologica Jan 2023The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of treatment with Janus kinase inhibitors for alopecia areata, measured by change in Severity of Alopecia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of treatment with Janus kinase inhibitors for alopecia areata, measured by change in Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score. A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was performed using Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane library. All studies investigating the efficacy of treatments for alopecia areata were included. Primary outcomes were the proportion of patients with alopecia areata achieving 30%, 50%, 75%, 90% and 100% improvement in SALT score after treatment with a Janus kinase inhibitor. A meta-analysis was performed including all randomized controlled trials investigating Janus kinase inhibitors. A total of 37 studies matched the inclusion criteria and were included. Meta-analysis was performed based on 5 randomized studies. Regarding patients with alopecia areata defined as ≥ 50% scalp hair loss, baricitinib 4 mg once daily demonstrated the highest efficacy. However, among patients with alopecia areata defined as a SALT score ≥ 50, oral deuruxolitinib 12 mg twice daily demonstrated the highest efficacy. Deuruxolitinib and baricitinib appear to be promising drugs for the treatment of alopecia areata. However, the response depends on the dosage of the drug. More randomized trials, with identical inclusion criteria and dose and duration of treatment, are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Alopecia; Pyrazoles
PubMed: 36695751
DOI: 10.2340/actadv.v103.4536 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2023Alopecia areata (AA) is an immune disease characterized by non-scarring hair loss. With the widespread application of JAK inhibitors in immune-related diseases,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata (AA) is an immune disease characterized by non-scarring hair loss. With the widespread application of JAK inhibitors in immune-related diseases, attention is being given to their role in the treatment of AA. However, it is unclear which JAK inhibitors have a satisfactory or positive effect on AA. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of different JAK inhibitors in the treatment of AA.
METHODS
The network meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials as well as a small number of cohort studies. The differences in efficacy and safety between the treatment and control groups were compared.
RESULTS
Five randomized controlled trials, two retrospective studies, and two prospective studies involving 1689 patients were included in this network meta-analysis. In terms of efficacy, oral baricitinib and ruxolitinib significantly improved the response rate of patients compared to placebo [MD = 8.44, 95% CI (3.63, 19.63)] and [MD = 6.94, 95% CI, (1.72, 28.05)],respectively. Oral baricitinib treatment significantly improved the response rate compared to non-oral JAK inhibitor treatment [MD=7.56, 95% CI (1.32,43.36)]. Oral baricitinib, tofacitinib, and ruxolitinib treatments significantly improved the complete response rate compared to placebo [MD = 12.21, 95% CI (3.41, 43.79)], [MD = 10.16, 95% CI (1.02, 101.54)], and [MD = 9.79, 95% CI, (1.29, 74.27)], respectively. In terms of safety, oral baricitinib, tofacitinib, and ruxolitinib treatments significantly reduced treatment-emergent adverse event rates compared with conventional steroid treatment [MD = 0.08, 95% CI (0.02, 0.42)], [MD = 0.14, 95% CI (0.04, 0.55)], and [MD = 0.35, 95% CI, (0.14, 0.88)], respectively.
CONCLUSION
Oral baricitinib and ruxolitinib are excellent options for the treatment of AA owing to their good efficacy and safety profiles. In contrast, non-oral JAK inhibitors do not appear to have satisfactory efficacy in treating AA. However, further studies are required to verify the optimal dose of JAK inhibitors for AA therapy.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37138884
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1152513