-
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2021The aim of this systematic review of systematic reviews was to identify, summarise, and synthesise the available evidence of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review of systematic reviews was to identify, summarise, and synthesise the available evidence of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) on the preventative and therapeutic psychological and physical effects of forest-based interventions. Both bibliographic databases and grey literature sources were searched for SRs and MAs published until May 2020. Eight databases were searched for relevant articles: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, CiNii, EBSCO, and Scopus. Grey literature was sourced from Google Scholar and other web-based search tools. SRs and MAs that included randomised controlled (RCT), non-randomised controlled (NRCT), and non-controlled trials (NCT) on health-related effects of forest-based interventions were eligible if they had searched at least two databases. The methodological quality of eligible reviews was assessed by AMSTAR-2. We evaluated 11 systematic reviews covering 131 different primary intervention studies, mostly from Asian countries, three of which included supplementary meta-analyses. The quality assessment resulted in moderate confidence in the results of two reviews, low confidence in six, and critically low confidence in three. The results of the eight moderate and low-rated reviews indicated that forest-based interventions are beneficial to the cardiovascular system, immune system, and mental health (in the areas of stress, depression, anxiety, and negative emotions). Evidence for the effectiveness of forest-based interventions on metabolic parameters in adults, the severity of atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents, and social skills and sociality in healthy primary school children was weak. Evidence suggests beneficial therapeutic effects of forest-based interventions on hypertension, stress, and mental-health disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Changes in immunological and inflammatory parameters after forest therapy should be verified in bio-geographically native forests. In the future, more attention should be paid to careful planning, implementation, and reporting of primary studies and to systematic reviews on the effects of forest-based interventions.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anxiety; Asia; Child; Forests; Humans; Mental Disorders; Mental Health; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 33670337
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18041770 -
Phytomedicine : International Journal... Jul 2023Every day the skin is constantly exposed to several harmful factors that induce oxidative stress. When the cells are incapable to maintain the balance between... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Every day the skin is constantly exposed to several harmful factors that induce oxidative stress. When the cells are incapable to maintain the balance between antioxidant defenses and reactive oxygen species, the skin no longer can keep its integrity and homeostasis. Chronic inflammation, premature skin aging, tissue damage, and immunosuppression are possible consequences induced by sustained exposure to environmental and endogenous reactive oxygen species. Skin immune and non-immune cells together with the microbiome are essential to efficiently trigger skin immune responses to stress. For this reason, an ever-increasing demand for novel molecules capable of modulating immune functions in the skin has risen the level of their development, particularly in the field of natural product-derived molecules.
PURPOSE
In this review, we explore different classes of molecules that showed evidence in modulate skin immune responses, as well as their target receptors and signaling pathways. Moreover, we describe the role of polyphenols, polysaccharides, fatty acids, peptides, and probiotics as possible treatments for skin conditions, including wound healing, infection, inflammation, allergies, and premature skin aging.
METHODS
Literature was searched, analyzed, and collected using databases, including PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. The search terms used included "Skin", "wound healing", "natural products", "skin microbiome", "immunomodulation", "anti-inflammatory", "antioxidant", "infection", "UV radiation", "polyphenols", "polysaccharides", "fatty acids", "plant oils", "peptides", "antimicrobial peptides", "probiotics", "atopic dermatitis", "psoriasis", "auto-immunity", "dry skin", "aging", etc., and several combinations of these keywords.
RESULTS
Natural products offer different solutions as possible treatments for several skin conditions. Significant antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities were reported, followed by the ability to modulate immune functions in the skin. Several membrane-bound immune receptors in the skin recognize diverse types of natural-derived molecules, promoting different immune responses that can improve skin conditions.
CONCLUSION
Despite the increasing progress in drug discovery, several limiting factors need future clarification. Understanding the safety, biological activities, and precise mechanisms of action is a priority as well as the characterization of the active compounds responsible for that. This review provides directions for future studies in the development of new molecules with important pharmaceutical and cosmeceutical value.
Topics: Humans; Skin Aging; Reactive Oxygen Species; Biological Products; Antioxidants; Inflammation; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Polyphenols; Peptides; Polysaccharides
PubMed: 37119762
DOI: 10.1016/j.phymed.2023.154824 -
Health Technology Assessment... Jan 2024Atopic dermatitis is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition. One of the most common skin disorders in children, atopic dermatitis typically manifests before the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Atopic dermatitis is a chronic relapsing inflammatory skin condition. One of the most common skin disorders in children, atopic dermatitis typically manifests before the age of 5 years, but it can develop at any age. Atopic dermatitis is characterised by dry, inflamed skin accompanied by intense itchiness (pruritus).
OBJECTIVES
To appraise the clinical and cost effectiveness of abrocitinib, tralokinumab and upadacitinib within their marketing authorisations as alternative therapies for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis compared to systemic immunosuppressants (first-line ciclosporin A or second-line dupilumab and baricitinib).
DATA SOURCES
Studies were identified from an existing systematic review (search date 2019) and update searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) to November 2021, from bibliographies of retrieved studies, clinical trial registers and evidence provided by the sponsoring companies of the treatments under review.
METHODS
A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness literature was carried out and a network meta-analysis undertaken for adults and adolescents at different steps of the treatment pathway. The primary outcome of interest was a combined response of Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4; where this was consistently unavailable for a step in the pathway, an analysis of Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 was conducted. A de novo economic model was developed to assess cost effectiveness from the perspective of the National Health Service in England. The model structure was informed through systematic review of the economic literature and by consulting clinical experts. Effectiveness data were obtained from the network meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were obtained from the evidence provided by sponsoring companies and standard UK sources.
RESULTS
Network meta-analyses indicate that abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg may be more effective, and tralokinumab may be less effective than dupilumab and baricitinib as second-line systemic therapies. Abrocitinib 100 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg have a more similar effectiveness to dupilumab. Upadacitinib 30 and 15 mg are likely to be more effective than ciclosporin A as a first-line therapy. Upadacitinib 15 mg, abrocitinib 200 and 100 mg may be more effective than dupilumab in adolescents. The cost effectiveness of abrocitinib and upadacitinib for both doses is dependent on the subgroup of interest. Tralokinumab can be considered cost-effective as a second-line systemic therapy owing to greater cost savings per quality-adjusted life-year lost.
CONCLUSIONS
The primary strength of the analysis of the three new drugs compared with current practice for each of the subpopulations is the consistent approach to the assessment of clinical and cost effectiveness. However, the conclusions are limited by the high uncertainty around the clinical effectiveness and lack of data for the primary outcome for comparisons with baricitinib and for the adolescent and adult first-line populations.
FUTURE WORK AND LIMITATIONS
The most significant limitation that Eczema Area and Severity Index 50 + Dermatology Life Quality Index ≥ 4 could not be obtained for the adolescent and adult first-line systemic treatment populations is due to a paucity of data for dupilumab and ciclosporin A. A comparison of the new drugs against one another in addition to current practice would be beneficial to provide a robust view on which treatments are the most cost-effective.
STUDY REGISTRATION
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021266219.
FUNDING
This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Evidence Synthesis programme (NIHR award ref: 135138) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 4. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Topics: Child; Adult; Adolescent; Humans; Child, Preschool; Dermatitis, Atopic; Cyclosporine; State Medicine; Treatment Outcome; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Eczema; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Purines; Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring; Sulfonamides; Pyrazoles; Pyrimidines; Azetidines
PubMed: 38343072
DOI: 10.3310/LEXB9006 -
Nutrients Sep 2022We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of vitamin D (VitD) supplementation on children with allergic diseases. MEDLINE, Embase,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of vitamin D (VitD) supplementation on children with allergic diseases. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane library, and three Chinese databases were searched up to 15 August 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a VitD supplementation versus a placebo for children with allergic diseases were included. Thirty-two RCTs with 2347 participants were included. VitD supplementation did not reduce the risk of asthma exacerbations in children compared with placebo overall (risk ratio (RR) = 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.65 to 1.08, p = 0.18), but reduced the risk of asthma exacerbation in children with baseline serum 25(OH)D of <10 ng/mL compared with placebo (RR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.83, p = 0.009). VitD supplementation significantly reduced Scoring Atopic Dermatitis or the Eczema Area and Severity Index scores in children with atopic dermatitis compared with placebo (standard mean difference = −0.5, 95% CI: −0.87 to −0.12, p = 0.009). VitD supplementation also reduced the symptom-medication score in children with allergic rhinitis compared with placebo (mean (standard deviation): 43.7 (3.3) vs. 57.8 (4.4), p = 0.001). In conclusion, VitD supplementation did not reduce asthma exacerbation risk in children overall but may reduce asthma exacerbation risk in children with serum 25(OH)D concentration < 10 ng/mL. VitD supplementation reduces the severity of atopic dermatitis and symptoms of allergic rhinitis in children.
Topics: Asthma; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Rhinitis, Allergic; Vitamin D
PubMed: 36235600
DOI: 10.3390/nu14193947 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021This living systematic review is one of several Cochrane Reviews evaluating the medical management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic rhinosinusitis is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This living systematic review is one of several Cochrane Reviews evaluating the medical management of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. Chronic rhinosinusitis is common. It is characterised by inflammation of the nasal and sinus linings, nasal blockage, rhinorrhoea, facial pressure/pain and loss of sense of smell. It occurs with or without nasal polyps. 'Biologics' are medicinal products produced by a biological process. Monoclonal antibodies are one type, already evaluated in other inflammatory conditions (e.g. asthma and atopic dermatitis).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; CENTRAL (2020, Issue 9); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished studies. The date of the search was 28 September 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least three months follow-up comparing biologics (monoclonal antibodies) against placebo/no treatment in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Our primary outcomes were disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQL), disease severity and serious adverse events (SAEs). The secondary outcomes were avoidance of surgery, extent of disease (measured by endoscopic or computerised tomography (CT) score), generic HRQL and adverse effects (nasopharyngitis, including sore throat). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies. Of 1262 adult participants, 1260 had severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps; 43% to 100% of participants also had asthma. Three biologics, with different targets, were evaluated: dupilumab, mepolizumab and omalizumab. All of the studies were sponsored or supported by industry. For this update (2021) we have included two new studies, including 265 participants, which reported data relating to omalizumab. Anti-IL-4Rα mAb (dupilumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Three studies (784 participants) evaluated dupilumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22 (a 22-item questionnaire, with a score range of 0 to 110; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) 8.9 points). At 24 weeks, dupilumab results in a large reduction (improvement) in the SNOT-22 score (mean difference (MD) -19.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) -22.54 to -16.69; 3 studies; 784 participants; high certainty). At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab probably results in a large reduction in disease severity, as measured by a 0- to 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) (MD -3.00, 95% CI -3.47 to -2.53; 3 studies; 784 participants; moderate certainty). This is a global symptom score, including all aspects of chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. At between 16 and 52 weeks of follow-up, dupilumab may result in a reduction in serious adverse events compared to placebo (5.9% versus 12.5%, risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.76; 3 studies, 782 participants; low certainty). Anti-IL-5 mAb (mepolizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Two studies (137 participants) evaluated mepolizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 25 weeks, the SNOT-22 score may be reduced (improved) in participants receiving mepolizumab (MD -13.26 points, 95% CI -22.08 to -4.44; 1 study; 105 participants; low certainty; MCID 8.9). It is very uncertain whether there is a difference in disease severity at 25 weeks: on a 0- to 10-point VAS, disease severity was -2.03 lower in those receiving mepolizumab (95% CI -3.65 to -0.41; 1 study; 72 participants; very low certainty). It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events at between 25 and 40 weeks (1.4% versus 0%; RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.07 to 35.46; 2 studies; 135 participants, very low certainty). Anti-IgE mAb (omalizumab) versus placebo/no treatment (all receiving intranasal steroids) Five studies (329 participants) evaluated omalizumab. Disease-specific HRQL was measured with the SNOT-22. At 24 weeks omalizumab probably results in a large reduction in SNOT-22 score (MD -15.62, 95% CI -19.79 to -11.45; 2 studies; 265 participants; moderate certainty; MCID 8.9). We did not identify any evidence for overall disease severity. It is very uncertain whether omalizumab affects the number of serious adverse events, with follow-up between 20 and 26 weeks (0.8% versus 2.5%, RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.00; 5 studies; 329 participants; very low certainty).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Almost all of the participants in the included studies had nasal polyps (99.8%) and all were using topical nasal steroids for their chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms. In these patients, dupilumab improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It probably also results in a reduction in disease severity, and may result in a reduction in the number of serious adverse events. Mepolizumab may improve disease-specific HRQL. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in disease severity or the number of serious adverse events. Omalizumab probably improves disease-specific HRQL compared to placebo. It is very uncertain if there is a difference in the number of serious adverse events. There was no evidence regarding the effect of omalizumab on disease severity (using global scores that address all symptoms of chronic rhinosinusitis).
Topics: Adult; Anti-Allergic Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Bias; Biological Products; Chronic Disease; Humans; Nasal Obstruction; Nasal Polyps; Omalizumab; Placebos; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33710614
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013513.pub3 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Jan 2024Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been recently approved by the FDA and are widely used in the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis. However, a comprehensive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have been recently approved by the FDA and are widely used in the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis. However, a comprehensive safety profile of JAK inhibitors in patients with atopic dermatitis has not been analysed. This study aimed to establish clinical evidence for the safety of systemic JAK inhibitors in patients with atopic dermatitis. Medline, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) were considered for search databases. Randomized controlled trials reporting the adverse events of systemic therapy in patients with atopic dermatitis were included. The risk of 11 adverse events was compared between the JAK inhibitors and placebo groups. Fourteen randomized controlled trials were analysed published between 2019 and 2022. The JAK inhibitors included in the analysis were abrocitinib (10, 30, 100 and 200 mg), baricitinib (1, 2 and 4 mg) and upadacitinib (7.5, 15 and 30 mg). The risk of herpes zoster, headache, acne, elevated blood creatinine phosphokinase and nausea was significantly increased, but the risk of serious infection, non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), malignancies other than NMSC, major adverse cardiovascular event, venous thromboembolism and nasopharyngitis was not increased. This study provides comprehensive clinical evidence on the risk of various adverse events in patients with atopic dermatitis. However, since the follow-up periods of the studies analysed in this review were mostly limited to 16 weeks or less, it is recommended that comprehensive long-term observational studies be conducted to determine any potential adverse events associated with major cardiovascular events or malignancies, which typically have prolonged courses.
Topics: Humans; Dermatitis, Atopic; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Herpes Zoster; Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37597261
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.19426 -
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 -
JAMA Dermatology Nov 2022The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), especially when receiving treatment with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, is unclear. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), especially when receiving treatment with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, is unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the association of AD with incident VTE and evaluate the risk of incident VTE among patients with AD who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors.
DATA SOURCES
The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched with no restrictions on language nor geographic locations from their respective inception to February 5, 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Cohort studies examining the association of AD with incident VTE and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting VTE events in participants with AD receiving JAK inhibitors were included. Around 0.7% of initially identified articles met the selection criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed. The risk of bias of included cohort studies and RCTs was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2, respectively. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and risk difference for incident VTE.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The HRs for incident VTE associated with AD and risk difference for incident VTE between participants with AD who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors and controls receiving placebo or dupilumab.
RESULTS
Two cohort studies and 15 RCTs with a total of 466 993 participants were included. The meta-analysis found no significant association of AD with incident VTE (HR, 0.95; 95% CI 0.62-1.45; incidence rate of VTE, 0.23 events/100 patient-years). Overall, 3 of 5722 patients with AD (0.05%) who were receiving treatment with JAK inhibitors experienced VTE compared with 1 of 3065 patients with AD (0.03%) receiving placebo or dupilumab (Mantel-Haenszel risk difference, 0; 95% CI, 0-0). The incidence rate of VTE was 0.15 and 0.12 events per 100 patient-years in participants with AD receiving JAK inhibitors and placebo, respectively. The findings were similar in 4 unique JAK inhibitors (abrocitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib, and SHR0302).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that the currently available evidence does not detect an increased risk of VTE associated with AD or treatment with JAK inhibitors. These findings may provide a reference for clinicians in prescribing JAK inhibitors for patients with AD.
Topics: Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Dermatitis, Atopic
PubMed: 36001310
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.3516 -
The Lancet. Child & Adolescent Health Jan 2023Atopic dermatitis is a prevalent condition in children and can be effectively managed with medications such as topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Atopic dermatitis is a prevalent condition in children and can be effectively managed with medications such as topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus or tacrolimus). A key unresolved safety concern is whether use of topical calcineurin inhibitors is associated with cancer. We systematically reviewed the risk of cancer in patients with atopic dermatitis exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors.
METHODS
As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters atopic dermatitis guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, the Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the US Food and Drug Administration database, the European Medicines Agency database, company registers, and relevant citations from inception to June 6, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials and comparative and non-comparative non-randomised studies in any language addressing cancer risk in patients with atopic dermatitis using topical calcineurin inhibitors. We excluded split-body studies and studies with less than 3 weeks of follow-up. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We used Bayesian models to estimate the probability for cancer due to topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure and the GRADE approach to determine the certainty of the evidence. Patients, advocacy groups, and care providers set a priori thresholds of important effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/v4bfc.
FINDINGS
We identified and analysed 110 unique studies (52 randomised controlled trials and 69 non-randomised studies [11 were non-randomised study extensions of randomised controlled trials]) including 3·4 million patients followed up for a mean of 11 months (range 0·7-120). The absolute risk of any cancer with topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure was not different from controls (absolute risk 4·70 per 1000 with topical calcineurin inhibitors vs 4·56 per 1000 without; odds ratio 1·03 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·11]; moderate certainty). For all age groups and using data from observational studies and randomised controlled trials, the use of pimecrolimus (OR 1·05 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·15]) or tacrolimus (0·99 [0·89-1·09]) is likely to have had little to no association with cancer compared with no topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure. For pimecrolimus versus tacrolimus, the finding was similar (0·95 [95% credible interval 0·83-1·07]). Findings were similar in infants, children, and adults, and robust to trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.
INTERPRETATION
Among individuals with atopic dermatitis, moderate-certainty evidence shows that topical calcineurin inhibitors do not increase the risk of cancer. These findings support the safe use of topical calcineurin inhibitors in the optimal treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis.
FUNDING
American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology via the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Infant; Asthma; Bayes Theorem; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Dermatitis, Atopic; Hypersensitivity; Neoplasms; Tacrolimus; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36370744
DOI: 10.1016/S2352-4642(22)00283-8 -
Dermatology Online Journal Apr 2021Non-celiac gluten sensitivity is often clinically indistinguishable from celiac disease, and patients show improvement or resolution of their symptoms with a gluten-free...
Non-celiac gluten sensitivity is often clinically indistinguishable from celiac disease, and patients show improvement or resolution of their symptoms with a gluten-free diet. In contrast to celiac disease, the effects of gluten on the skin and hair in the context of non-celiac gluten sensitivity are not as clear. This review aims to describe the impact of gluten on the skin and hair in patients with non-celiac gluten sensitivity and those without a definitive celiac disease diagnosis. A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) reporting guidelines for systematic reviews. Forty-two publications met inclusion criteria with five studies describing the skin manifestations of non-celiac gluten sensitivity. Trials identifying the impact of a gluten-free diet on skin disease, as well as dermatologic conditions and their associations with antigliadin antibodies were also identified. Dermatologic manifestations in patients with non-celiac gluten sensitivity vary and may be non-specific. It may be appropriate for some of these patients with skin manifestations to trial a gluten-free diet. Dermatologic conditions that may respond positively to a gluten-free diet include psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, vitiligo, and palmoplantar pustulosis, while linear IgA disease does not appear to improve with this dietary change.
Topics: Antibodies; Diet, Gluten-Free; Gliadin; Glutens; Hair; Hair Diseases; Humans; Skin; Skin Diseases
PubMed: 33999573
DOI: No ID Found