-
The Journal of Dermatology Jan 2022Trichoscopy represents a non-invasive diagnostic modality widely used in daily practice. Despite the common perception that this technique has been fairly established,... (Review)
Review
Trichoscopy represents a non-invasive diagnostic modality widely used in daily practice. Despite the common perception that this technique has been fairly established, some key issues remain to be addressed. Complexity and inconsistency in terminology in past literature are likely to confuse investigators when they are recording, reporting, and retrieving the findings. In addition, a diagnostic algorithm adopting sufficiently integrated and updated findings is not readily available. By adopting a systematic review approach, this review attempted to redefine major trichoscopic findings and integrate their synonyms individually into the most frequently used terms besides identifying and discussing terms which potentially cause confusion. The findings are categorized into five subgroups: hair shaft, follicular, perifollicular, scalp findings, and hair distribution pattern abnormalities. The calculation of sensitivities and positive predictive values of such redefined findings was conducted by reviewing the descriptions in the past literature on major hair diseases, including alopecia areata, androgenetic alopecia/female pattern hair loss, telogen effluvium, trichotillomania, lichen planopilaris, frontal fibrosing alopecia, central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia, discoid lupus erythematosus, folliculitis decalvans, tinea capitis, and dissecting cellulitis, to confirm the diagnostically meaningful findings for representative diseases. This attempt redefined, for instance, yellow dots, short vellus hairs, exclamation mark hairs, black dots, and broken hairs as the findings of diagnostic significance for alopecia areata and hair diameter diversity, peripilar sign, and focal atrichia for androgenetic alopecia/female pattern hair loss. An updated diagnostic flowchart is proposed with the instructions to maximize its usefulness. Current limitations and future perspectives of trichoscopy as well as other emerging non-invasive diagnostic modalities for hair diseases are also discussed.
Topics: Alopecia; Alopecia Areata; Dermoscopy; Female; Hair; Hair Diseases; Humans; Software Design
PubMed: 34806223
DOI: 10.1111/1346-8138.16233 -
International Journal of Dermatology Aug 2020Topical minoxidil has been used for almost 40 years to treat alopecia. There is growing evidence supporting off-label use of low-dose oral minoxidil.
BACKGROUND
Topical minoxidil has been used for almost 40 years to treat alopecia. There is growing evidence supporting off-label use of low-dose oral minoxidil.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review evaluating the use of oral minoxidil for all types of alopecia.
METHODS
A primary literature search was conducted using PubMed in May 2019, utilizing the search term "oral minoxidil AND (hair loss OR alopecia OR baldness)". Reviews, non-English studies, and articles concerning only topical minoxidil were excluded.
RESULTS
Ten articles were included for review comprising a total 19,218 patients (215 women and 19,003 men). Oral minoxidil dose ranged from 0.25 to 5 mg daily to twice daily. The strongest evidence existed for androgenetic alopecia and alopecia areata (AA), with 61-100% and 18-82.4% of patients demonstrating objective clinical improvement. Successful treatment of female pattern hair loss, chronic telogen effluvium, monilethrix, and permanent chemotherapy-induced alopecia was also reported. The most common adverse effects with oral minoxidil included hypertrichosis and postural hypotension.
CONCLUSION
Oral minoxidil is a safe and successful treatment of androgenic alopecia and AA. In addition to its therapeutic benefits, practical advantages over topical minoxidil stem from improved patient compliance.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Alopecia; Alopecia Areata; Female; Humans; Hypertrichosis; Male; Minoxidil; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32516434
DOI: 10.1111/ijd.14933 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2023Alopecia areata is an autoimmune disease leading to nonscarring hair loss on the scalp or body. There are different treatments including immunosuppressants, hair growth... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata is an autoimmune disease leading to nonscarring hair loss on the scalp or body. There are different treatments including immunosuppressants, hair growth stimulants, and contact immunotherapy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of the treatments for alopecia areata (AA), alopecia totalis (AT), and alopecia universalis (AU) in children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP were searched up to July 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated classical immunosuppressants, biologics, small molecule inhibitors, contact immunotherapy, hair growth stimulants, and other therapies in paediatric and adult populations with AA.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard procedures expected by Cochrane including assessment of risks of bias using RoB2 and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The primary outcomes were short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (between 12 and 26 weeks of follow-up), and incidence of serious adverse events. The secondary outcomes were long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (greater than 26 weeks of follow-up) and health-related quality of life. We could not perform a network meta-analysis as very few trials compared the same treatments. We presented direct comparisons and made a narrative description of the findings.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 63 studies that tested 47 different treatments in 4817 randomised participants. All trials used a parallel-group design except one that used a cross-over design. The mean sample size was 78 participants. All trials recruited outpatients from dermatology clinics. Participants were between 2 and 74 years old. The trials included patients with AA (n = 25), AT (n = 1), AU (n = 1), mixed cases (n = 31), and unclear types of alopecia (n = 4). Thirty-three out of 63 studies (52.3%) reported the proportion of participants achieving short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (between 12 and 26 weeks). Forty-seven studies (74.6%) reported serious adverse events and only one study (1.5%) reported health-related quality of life. Five studies (7.9%) reported the proportion of participants with long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (greater than 26 weeks). Amongst the variety of interventions found, we prioritised some groups of interventions for their relevance to clinical practice: systemic therapies (classical immunosuppressants, biologics, and small molecule inhibitors), and local therapies (intralesional corticosteroids, topical small molecule inhibitors, contact immunotherapy, hair growth stimulants and cryotherapy). Considering only the prioritised interventions, 14 studies from 12 comparisons reported short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% and 22 studies from 10 comparisons reported serious adverse events (18 reported zero events and 4 reported at least one). One study (1 comparison) reported quality of life, and two studies (1 comparison) reported long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75%. For the main outcome of short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75%, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral prednisolone or cyclosporine versus placebo (RR 4.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 38.27; 79 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence), intralesional betamethasone or triamcinolone versus placebo (RR 13.84, 95% CI 0.87 to 219.76; 231 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), oral ruxolitinib versus oral tofacitinib (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.52; 80 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone or squaric acid dibutil ester versus placebo (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71; 99 participants; 1 study; very-low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone or squaric acid dibutyl ester versus topical minoxidil (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.71; 99 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), diphencyprone plus topical minoxidil versus diphencyprone (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.44; 30 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence), topical minoxidil 1% and 2% versus placebo (RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.96; 202 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and cryotherapy versus fractional CO2 laser (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.86; 80 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests oral betamethasone may increase short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% compared to prednisolone or azathioprine (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.88; 80 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between subcutaneous dupilumab and placebo in short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% (RR 3.59, 95% CI 0.19 to 66.22; 60 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) as well as between topical ruxolitinib and placebo (RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 100.89; 78 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). However, baricitinib results in an increase in short-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% when compared to placebo (RR 7.54, 95% CI 3.90 to 14.58; 1200 participants; 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). For the incidence of serious adverse events, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of topical ruxolitinib versus placebo (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.94; 78 participants; 1 study; very low-certainty evidence). Baricitinib and apremilast may result in little to no difference in the incidence of serious adverse events versus placebo (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.60; 1224 participants; 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). The same result is observed for subcutaneous dupilumab compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.07 to 36.11; 60 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). For health-related quality of life, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of oral cyclosporine compared to placebo (MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.07; very low-certainty evidence). Baricitinib results in an increase in long-term hair regrowth ≥ 75% compared to placebo (RR 8.49, 95% CI 4.70 to 15.34; 1200 participants; 2 studies; high-certainty evidence). Regarding the risk of bias, the most relevant issues were the lack of details about randomisation and allocation concealment, the limited efforts to keep patients and assessors unaware of the assigned intervention, and losses to follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found that treatment with baricitinib results in an increase in short- and long-term hair regrowth compared to placebo. Although we found inconclusive results for the risk of serious adverse effects with baricitinib, the reported small incidence of serious adverse events in the baricitinib arm should be balanced with the expected benefits. We also found that the impact of other treatments on hair regrowth is very uncertain. Evidence for health-related quality of life is still scant.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Child, Preschool; Adolescent; Young Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Alopecia Areata; Minoxidil; Network Meta-Analysis; Immunosuppressive Agents; Prednisolone; Betamethasone; Cyclosporins; Biological Products
PubMed: 37870096
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013719.pub2 -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Nov 2023Alopecia areata (AA) is a complex autoimmune condition resulting in nonscarring hair loss. In recent years, many studies have provided new evidence on comorbid diseases... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Alopecia areata (AA) is a complex autoimmune condition resulting in nonscarring hair loss. In recent years, many studies have provided new evidence on comorbid diseases present in patients with AA. However, some studies have conflicting results, and analyses conducting a comprehensive approach are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of our study was to provide an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of medical comorbidities associated with AA.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science for case-control, cross-sectional, and cohort studies investigating medical comorbidities in AA published from inception through 1 February 2023.
RESULTS
We screened 3428 abstracts and titles and reviewed 345 full text articles for eligibility. Ultimately, 102 studies were analyzed, comprising 680,823 patients with AA and 72,011,041 healthy controls. Almost all included studies (100 of 102 studies) were of satisfactory to high quality (Newcastle-Ottawa scale score ≥ 4). Among patients with AA, comorbidities with the highest odds ratios (OR) compared with healthy controls and data available from more than one study included vitamin D deficiency (OR 10.13, 95% CI 4.24-24.20), systemic lupus erythematous (OR 5.53, 95% CI 3.31-9.23), vitiligo (OR 5.30, 95% CI 1.86-15.10), metabolic syndrome (OR 5.03, 95% CI 4.18-6.06), and Hashimoto's thyroiditis (OR 4.31, 95% CI 2.51-7.40). AA may be a protective factor for certain disorders, for which the AA group had lower odds compared with healthy controls, such as irritable bowel syndrome (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.14-0.99) and colorectal cancer (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.89).
CONCLUSION
These findings corroborate and contextualize the risks across comorbidities for patients with AA. Further work should be done to identify the underlying pathophysiology and understand appropriate screening criteria.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Cross-Sectional Studies; Comorbidity; Autoimmune Diseases
PubMed: 37464249
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-023-00805-4 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Jan 2023Despite high use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for alopecia areata (AA), efficacy and safety remain unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite high use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for alopecia areata (AA), efficacy and safety remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To identify all CAM therapies studied for treatment of AA. Outcomes of interest included disease course and psychologic well-being.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase were searched to identify English articles containing original data investigating CAM in individuals with AA from 1950-2018. Quality was assessed with Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine criteria.
RESULTS
Of 1015 initial citations, 16 articles met inclusion criteria: 5 randomized controlled trials, 5 prospective controlled cohorts, 4 prospective noncontrolled cohorts, 1 retrospective cohort, and 1 case series. CAM therapies with best evidence and efficacy for hair growth in AA include essential oil aromatherapy, topical garlic, and oral glucosides of peony with compound glycyrrhizin. Hypnosis and mindfulness psychotherapy represent low-quality evidence for improvement of psychologic and quality of life outcomes. Adverse events were rare and mild for all therapies evaluated.
LIMITATIONS
Inconsistent or poorly reported study methodology and nonstandardized outcomes limit the conclusions that can be made from these studies.
CONCLUSIONS
This work serves to inform physician treatment of patients with AA seeking CAM while encouraging further investigation into these therapies to address some of the therapeutic challenges of AA.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Complementary Therapies; Alopecia
PubMed: 31870916
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.12.027 -
Skin Research and Technology : Official... Jun 2023The incidence of alopecia areata (AA) has increased over the last few decades. Trichoscopy is a noninvasive procedure performed in dermatology clinics and is a helpful... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The incidence of alopecia areata (AA) has increased over the last few decades. Trichoscopy is a noninvasive procedure performed in dermatology clinics and is a helpful tool in determining the correct diagnosis of hair loss presentations.
OBJECTIVE
Through mapping the researches that have been done to represent the spectrum of trichoscopic findings in AA and to identify the most characteristic patterns.
METHODS
Thirty-nine studies were eligible for the quantitative analysis. Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were performed.
RESULTS
Thirty-nine studies (29 cross-sectional, five retrospective, two descriptive, one case series, one observational, and one cohort) with a total of 3204 patients were included. About 66.7% of the studies were from Asia, 25.6% from Europe, and 7.7% from Africa. The most characteristic trichoscopic findings of AA were as follows; yellow dots, black dots, broken hairs, short vellus hairs, and tapering hairs.
CONCLUSION
There is no single pathognomonic diagnostic trichoscopic finding in AA rather than a constellation of characteristic findings. The five most characteristic trichoscopic findings in AA are: yellow dots, black dots, broken hairs, short vellus hairs, and tapering hairs. Yellow dots and short vellus hairs considered the most sensitive clues for AA, while black dots and tapering hairs are the most specific ones. Furthermore, trichoscopy is a useful tool that allows monitoring of response during the treatment of AA. Treatment responded cases will show an increase in short vellus hairs, but loss of tapering hairs, broken hairs, and black dots, while yellow dots are the least responsive to the treatment.
Topics: Alopecia Areata; Dermoscopy; Vitamin D Deficiency; Humans
PubMed: 37357664
DOI: 10.1111/srt.13378 -
Association between alopecia areata, anxiety, and depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American Academy of... May 2023To date, there is no comprehensive meta-analysis analyzing the association between alopecia areata, anxiety, and depression. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To date, there is no comprehensive meta-analysis analyzing the association between alopecia areata, anxiety, and depression.
OBJECTIVE
We sought to analyze the existing literature to examine the association between alopecia areata, anxiety, and depression.
METHODS
We extracted literature from 4 databases including MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, and Web of Science. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (ie, PRISMA) reporting guidelines to finalize a list of relevant articles to be included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. There were no restrictions placed on publication year or age of participants.
RESULTS
Eight studies that included 6010 patients with AA and 20 961 control individuals were included in the quantitative analysis. These included 4 cross-sectional studies and 4 case-control studies. Analysis of these studies showed a positive association with anxiety (pooled odds ratio, 2.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-4.06) and depression (pooled odds ratio, 2.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-4.82).
LIMITATIONS
Publication bias may be a limitation of the study.
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that patients with AA are at higher risk of both anxiety and depression. Health care professionals must be cognizant of this higher risk and consider routine assessment of these conditions and referral to appropriate providers when indicated.
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata; Depression; Cross-Sectional Studies; Anxiety
PubMed: 31163237
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.05.086 -
JAAD International Jun 2022COVID-19 may play a role in various immune-related dermatologic conditions. The relationship between COVID-19 and alopecia areata remains unclear. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
COVID-19 may play a role in various immune-related dermatologic conditions. The relationship between COVID-19 and alopecia areata remains unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To review the existing literature for clinical studies and reports investigating the association between new-onset alopecia areata or the exacerbation of preexisting alopecia areata following infection with SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed using PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases from inception to October 2021. Included articles assessed alopecia areata following infection with SARS-CoV-2.
RESULTS
Of 402 total articles, 9 were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Six articles described case reports of 7 patients with new-onset alopecia areata following confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2, and 3 articles reported on alopecia areata recurrence or exacerbation following SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with preexisting disease. Studies investigating the exacerbation or recurrence of alopecia areata following infection reported mixed findings.
LIMITATIONS
A majority of the included studies were case reports. The heterogeneity of articles precluded data synthesis.
CONCLUSION
Alopecia areata may be a dermatologic manifestation of COVID-19, with cases most often appearing 1 to 2 months following infection. Additional research is necessary to better elucidate the relationship and draw conclusions.
PubMed: 35165668
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdin.2022.02.002 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Jan 2024
Topics: Humans; Alopecia Areata
PubMed: 37207950
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2023.05.022 -
Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology Jun 2022Alopecia Areata is a nonscarring hair loss disorder and is the most common hair loss cause in children. It is a chronic autoimmune disorder with a severe psychological...
INTRODUCTION
Alopecia Areata is a nonscarring hair loss disorder and is the most common hair loss cause in children. It is a chronic autoimmune disorder with a severe psychological impact in patients' lives. JAK inhibitors, in particular Tofacitinib, have been having promising results on Alopecia Areata Treatment. In this study we aimed to do a Systematic Review on the role of Tofacitinib (either orally or topically), considering efficacy and safety, in treating children with Alopecia Areata.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched (up to 1st of September of 2021) looking for Tofacitinib (all text/all fields) and MeSH/Keyword term Alopecia Areata.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
We included 14 studies and 64 cases in the Systematic Review. From these, 12 were considering systemic administration (47 patients) and two were considering topical administration (17 patients). Responsiveness was as high as 81.3%. The responsiveness was similar among different genders (78.6% in males and 80.0% in females) and either whether administration was topic (70.6% responsiveness) or systemic (85.1% responsiveness). Adverse effects were rare and, when present, were mild. Studies shows promising results in what considers the efficacy and safety of Tofacitinib in the treatment of Alopecia Areata. As the available evidence to date is of low quality, further randomised studies are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Alopecia; Alopecia Areata; Child; Female; Humans; Male; Piperidines; Pyrimidines
PubMed: 35687530
DOI: 10.1080/15569527.2022.2084622