-
Drugs of Today (Barcelona, Spain : 1998) Aug 2016Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is difficult to treat. Official guidelines have only recently been developed, and suggest that patients should be provided with both... (Review)
Review
Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is difficult to treat. Official guidelines have only recently been developed, and suggest that patients should be provided with both adjuvant, medical and surgical therapy. The guidelines are the result of resurgent interest in this disease, in which etiology and pathogenesis are only partially understood at present. Recent research has, however, identified possible targets for specific intervention using biologicals. In addition, classical clinically driven developments of new treatments continue to evolve, leading to several interesting new therapies for HS patients. In this article recent trends in medical treatments are described following a systematic review. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE(R), the Cochrane Library and Web of Science(TM) where specific treatments were combined with the search term 'hidradenitis suppurativa' and references from 2010 to March 2016 were included. A total of 365 papers were identified, 79 of which were retained for analysis following exclusions. The following treatments are discussed in detail: infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, anakinra, alitretinoin, metformin and vitamin D. HS is a disease with a considerable morbidity and a great unmet need for treatment. A continued need for development of new treatments therefore exists for this otherwise often devastating disease.
Topics: Hidradenitis Suppurativa; Humans; Interleukin-17; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 27722212
DOI: 10.1358/dot.2016.52.8.2517967 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Dec 2011Topical retinoids have been in clinical use for the treatment of chronic skin conditions, including acne, photodamage, and psoriasis, for 30 years. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Topical retinoids have been in clinical use for the treatment of chronic skin conditions, including acne, photodamage, and psoriasis, for 30 years.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic literature review was conducted to assess the incidence of noncutaneous adverse events (AE) among patients treated with topical retinoids with a focus on topical tretinoin studies reported before the Veterans Affairs Topical Tretinoin Chemoprevention trial.
METHODS
Electronic literature searches were conducted in Embase and MEDLINE for literature reporting development of nonteratogenic, noncutaneous AE among patients treated with topical retinoids published through September 2008.
RESULTS
The search yielded 2778 citations, of which 20 studies met inclusion criteria. Tretinoin was used in 14 of the studies. Other retinoids assessed included isotretinoin, adapalene, alitretinoin, and tazarotene. Within patients receiving topical tretinoin, 27.9% reported the occurrence of at least one noncutaneous AE. The majority of noncutaneous AE were transient and judged not to be related to tretinoin treatment.
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions of this study apply largely to tretinoin compared with other topical retinoids. Many of the included trials were designed to evaluate the efficacy of topical treatment and reporting of safety events concentrated on incidence of localized AE, rather than systemic or noncutaneous events.
CONCLUSION
We found no clear evidence of a relationship between the use of topical tretinoin and the development of noncutaneous AE before a recent report of excess mortality in a clinical trial. The majority of noncutaneous AE reported by patients receiving topical retinoids consisted of nonsevere, nonspecific symptoms that were judged not to be related to treatment.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Tretinoin
PubMed: 21550137
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2010.10.014 -
Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and... Nov 2023Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a debilitating inflammatory skin disease characterized by red to violaceous pruritic lesions. The goal of therapy is to break the scratch-itch... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a debilitating inflammatory skin disease characterized by red to violaceous pruritic lesions. The goal of therapy is to break the scratch-itch cycle. Treatment varies and often requires a multimodal approach to target both immune and neural mediated aspects of disease.
OBJECTIVES
To review the efficacy of systemic treatment used to treat PN.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic search of keywords and Medical Subject Headings was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The first 200 results of an abbreviated search in Google Scholar were also included. PRISMA guidelines were followed and the review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023412012). GRADE criteria were used to assess articles for quality of evidence.
FINDINGS
The search resulted in 1153 articles; 382 were duplicates, 643 were irrelevant, 19 were not retrieved, 21 were abstract only, and 88 are included in this review. There were 24 studies on dupilumab, 16 on thalidomide, 8 on cyclosporin, 7 on methotrexate, 3 each on lenalidomide and aprepitant, 2 each on alitretinoin, apremilast, baricitinib, gabapentin, intravenous (IV) immunoglobulins, pregabalin, tofacitinib, and 1 each on amitriptyline, azathioprine, butorphanol, isoquercitin, IV dexamethasone-cyclophosphamide/ oral cyclophosphamide, ketotifen, metronidazole, montelukast, nalbuphine, nemolizumab, serolopitant, tacrolimus, and herose derma zima capsule.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Dupilumab reduces pruritus and appearance of lesions and is associated with the fewest number of side effects. Thalidomide and pregabalin are also effective, but their long-term use is limited by muscle and nerve pain. Janus Kinase inhibitors may be beneficial, but large population studies are lacking.
Topics: Humans; Thalidomide; Prurigo; Pregabalin; Cyclosporine; Pruritus; Cyclophosphamide
PubMed: 37987710
DOI: 10.1177/12034754231211797 -
Skin Health and Disease Jun 2022While treatment options exist for solitary or disseminated Kaposi sarcoma (KS) disease, there are currently no standardized clinical treatment guidelines for cutaneous...
BACKGROUND
While treatment options exist for solitary or disseminated Kaposi sarcoma (KS) disease, there are currently no standardized clinical treatment guidelines for cutaneous KS.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review seeks to identify safe and effective topical treatments for cutaneous KS lesions.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review using peer-reviewed articles from January 1970 to September 2021 published in the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases.
RESULTS
From the initial search that yielded 590 studies, 34 met the inclusion criteria and were selected. Of the 34 studies, seven were clinical trials, 26 were case reports/series and one was a multicentre study. A total of 634 patients were included in our review. The three most common topical treatments used for cutaneous KS were imiquimod, alitretinoin and timolol. Topical alitretinoin was used in three case reports and three clinical trials. Topical imiquimod was used in eight case reports, one prospective phase II cohort study and one comparative single-blinded non-controlled clinical study. Topical timolol was used in nine case reports/series. Our review also identified reports of less widely used topical treatments for cutaneous KS. These include topical diphencyprone (DPCP), all--retinoic-acid, rapamycin and bleomycin-dimethylsulfoxide (BLM-DMSO) which achieved variable response rates but have not been widely studied.
CONCLUSION
Topical alitretinoin, imiquimod and timolol demonstrated positive responses for cutaneous KS and the treatments were well tolerated. These three topical treatment modalities could be considered by clinicians when treating cutaneous KS.
PubMed: 35677916
DOI: 10.1002/ski2.107 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2019Hand eczema is an inflammation of the skin of the hands that tends to run a chronic, relapsing course. This common condition is often associated with itch, social... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Hand eczema is an inflammation of the skin of the hands that tends to run a chronic, relapsing course. This common condition is often associated with itch, social stigma, and impairment in employment. Many different interventions of unknown effectiveness are used to treat hand eczema.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical and systemic interventions for hand eczema in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following up to April 2018: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, LILACS, GREAT, and four trials registries. We checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared interventions for hand eczema, regardless of hand eczema type and other affected sites, versus no treatment, placebo, vehicle, or active treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Primary outcomes were participant- and investigator-rated good/excellent control of symptoms, and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 60 RCTs, conducted in secondary care (5469 participants with mild to severe chronic hand eczema). Most participants were over 18 years old. The duration of treatment was short, generally up to four months. Only 24 studies included a follow-up period. Clinical heterogeneity in treatments and outcome measures was evident. Few studies performed head-to-head comparisons of different interventions. Risk of bias varied considerably, with only five studies at low risk in all domains. Twenty-two studies were industry-funded.Eighteen trials studied topical corticosteroids or calcineurin inhibitors; 10 studies, phototherapy; three studies, systemic immunosuppressives; and five studies, oral retinoids. Most studies compared an active intervention against no treatment, variants of the same medication, or placebo (or vehicle). Below, we present results from the main comparisons.Corticosteroid creams/ointments: when assessed 15 days after the start of treatment, clobetasol propionate 0.05% foam probably improves participant-rated control of symptoms compared to vehicle (risk ratio (RR) 2.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.38 to 3.91; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 3, 95% CI 2 to 8; 1 study, 125 participants); the effect of clobetasol compared to vehicle for investigator-rated improvement is less clear (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.40). More participants had at least one adverse event with clobetasol (11/62 versus 5/63; RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.82 to 6.06), including application site burning/pruritus. This evidence was rated as moderate certainty.When assessed 36 weeks after the start of treatment, mometasone furoate cream used thrice weekly may slightly improve investigator-rated symptom control compared to twice weekly (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.61; 1 study, 72 participants) after remission is reached. Participant-rated symptoms were not measured. Some mild atrophy was reported in both groups (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.45 to 6.83; 5/35 versus 3/37). This evidence was rated as low certainty.Irradiation with ultraviolet (UV) light: local combination ultraviolet light therapy (PUVA) may lead to improvement in investigator-rated symptom control when compared to local narrow-band UVB after 12 weeks of treatment (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.16; 1 study, 60 participants). However, the 95% CI indicates that PUVA might make little or no difference. Participant-rated symptoms were not measured. Adverse events (mainly erythema) were reported by 9/30 participants in the narrow-band UVB group versus none in the PUVA group. This evidence was rated as moderate certainty.Topical calcineurin inhibitors: tacrolimus 0.1% over two weeks probably improves investigator-rated symptom control measured after three weeks compared to vehicle (14/14 tacrolimus versus 0/14 vehicle; 1 study). Participant-rated symptoms were not measured. Four of 14 people in the tacrolimus group versus zero in the vehicle group had well-tolerated application site burning/itching.A within-participant study in 16 participants compared 0.1% tacrolimus to 0.1% mometasone furoate but did not measure investigator- or participant-rated symptoms. Both treatments were well tolerated when assessed at two weeks during four weeks of treatment.Evidence from these studies was rated as moderate certainty.Oral interventions: oral cyclosporin 3 mg/kg/d probably slightly improves investigator-rated (RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.88 to 3.99; 1 study, 34 participants) or participant-rated (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.27) control of symptoms compared to topical betamethasone dipropionate 0.05% after six weeks of treatment. The risk of adverse events such as dizziness was similar between groups (up to 36 weeks; RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.86, n = 55; 15/27 betamethasone versus 19/28 cyclosporin). The evidence was rated as moderate certainty.Alitretinoin 10 mg improves investigator-rated symptom control compared with placebo (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.07; NNTB 11, 95% CI 6.3 to 26.5; 2 studies, n = 781) and alitretinoin 30 mg also improves this outcome compared with placebo (RR 2.75, 95% CI 2.20 to 3.43; NNTB 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; 2 studies, n = 1210). Similar results were found for participant-rated symptom control: alitretinoin 10 mg RR 1.73 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.40) and 30 mg RR 2.75 (95% CI 2.18 to 3.48). Evidence was rated as high certainty. The number of adverse events (including headache) probably did not differ between alitretinoin 10 mg and placebo (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.55; 1 study, n = 158; moderate-certainty evidence), but the risk of headache increased with alitretinoin 30 mg (RR 3.43, 95% CI 2.45 to 4.81; 2 studies, n = 1210; high-certainty evidence). Outcomes were assessed between 48 and 72 weeks.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Most findings were from single studies with low precision, so they should be interpreted with caution. Topical corticosteroids and UV phototherapy were two of the major standard treatments, but evidence is insufficient to support one specific treatment over another. The effect of topical calcineurin inhibitors is not certain. Alitretinoin is more effective than placebo in controlling symptoms, but advantages over other treatments need evaluating.Well-designed and well-reported, long-term (more than three months), head-to-head studies comparing different treatments are needed. Consensus is required regarding the definition of hand eczema and its subtypes, and a standard severity scale should be established.The main limitation was heterogeneity between studies. Small sample size impacted our ability to detect differences between treatments.
Topics: Calcineurin Inhibitors; Eczema; Emollients; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Odds Ratio; Pruritus; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31025714
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004055.pub2 -
Journal Der Deutschen Dermatologischen... Jan 2015The guidelines aim to provide advice on the management of hand eczema (HE), using an evidence- and consensus-based approach. The guidelines consider a systematic... (Review)
Review
The guidelines aim to provide advice on the management of hand eczema (HE), using an evidence- and consensus-based approach. The guidelines consider a systematic Cochrane review on interventions for HE, which is based on a systematic search of the published literature (including hand-searching). In addition to the evidence- and consensus-based recommendation on the treatment of HE, the guidelines cover mainly consensus-based diagnostic aspects and preventive measures (primary and secondary prevention). Treatment recommendations include non-pharmacological interventions, topical, physical and systemic treatments. Topical corticosteroids are recommended as first line treatment in the management of HE, however continuous long-term treatment beyond six weeks only when necessary and under careful me-dical supervision. Alitretinoin is recommended as a second line treatment (relative to topical corticosteroids) for patients with severe chronic HE. Randomized control trials (RCT) are missing for other used systemic treatments and comparison of systemic drugs in “head-to-head” RCTs are needed.The guidelines development group is a working group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD) and has carefully tried to reconcile opposite views, define current optimal practice and provide specific recommendations, and meetings have been chaired by a professional moderator of the AWMF (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wis-senschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften; Association of the Scientific Medi-cal Societies in Germany).No financial support was given by any medical company. The guidelines are expected to be valid until December 2017 at the latest.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Dermatologic Agents; Dermatology; Eczema; Europe; Evidence-Based Medicine; Germany; Hand Dermatoses; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25763418
DOI: 10.1111/ddg.12510_1 -
The Journal of Rheumatology Mar 2023Nail psoriasis is common, impairs fine motor finger functioning, affects cosmesis, and is associated with a lower quality of life. This review updates the previous Group...
OBJECTIVE
Nail psoriasis is common, impairs fine motor finger functioning, affects cosmesis, and is associated with a lower quality of life. This review updates the previous Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) treatment recommendations for nail psoriasis.
METHODS
This systematic literature review of the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases examined the updated evidence since the last GRAPPA nail psoriasis treatment recommendations published in 2014. Recommendations are based on preformed PICO (Patient/Population - Intervention - Comparison/Comparator - Outcome) questions formulated by an international group of dermatologists, rheumatologists, and patient panel members. Data from this literature review were evaluated in line with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.
RESULTS
Overall, there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendation for the use of topical corticosteroids, topical calcipotriol, topical tazarotene, topical cyclosporine, dimethyl fumarates/fumaric acid esters, phototherapy, and alitretinoin. There is a low strength of evidence to support the use of calcipotriol and corticosteroid preparations, topical tacrolimus, oral cyclosporine, oral methotrexate, intralesional corticosteroids, pulsed dye laser, acitretin, Janus kinase inhibitors, and apremilast.
CONCLUSION
The highest strength of supporting evidence is for the recommendation of biologic agents including tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, and interleukin 12/23, 17, and 23 inhibitors.
Topics: Humans; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Quality of Life; Psoriasis; Nail Diseases; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Cyclosporins
PubMed: 36319021
DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.220313 -
International Journal of Dermatology Nov 2022Treatment guidelines are not well established in AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma (KS). (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Treatment guidelines are not well established in AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma (KS).
OBJECTIVE
We aim to review the evidence on efficacy of treatments for AIDS-related Kaposi sarcoma.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase Database from date of database inception till July 2020. Randomized controlled trials reporting intervention consisting of any type of treatment compared to control/placebo to a different treatment modality or different combination of treatment/treatment doses with a diagnosis of AIDS-related KS are selected.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were response rates defined as complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD). Secondary outcomes were cosmesis and adverse outcomes such as pain and erythema.
RESULTS
Thirteen out of 536 articles met our eligibility criteria. Three studies reported the efficacy of chemotherapy, two studies looked at different doses of radiotherapy regimes, and three studies compared different antiretroviral therapy (ART) and chemotherapy regimens. Other studies reported topical therapies such as alitretinoin gel, IM862, and bHCG injection which showed varied efficacies.
LIMITATIONS
Lack of standardization classification of disease activity and clinical outcomes and treatment modalities precluded meaningful comparison of studies.
CONCLUSION
The evidence of efficacy of any particular intervention is overall varied and there was insufficient evidence to recommend any particular intervention. We have provided an overview of treatments for KS but larger studies need to be carried out to verify the efficacy of treatment options reported in the literature.
Topics: AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections; Alitretinoin; Antineoplastic Agents; HIV Infections; Humans; Sarcoma, Kaposi
PubMed: 35775738
DOI: 10.1111/ijd.16318 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2020Palmoplantar pustulosis is a chronic inflammatory disease in which sterile, relapsing pustules appear on the palms and soles, possibly in conjunction with other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Palmoplantar pustulosis is a chronic inflammatory disease in which sterile, relapsing pustules appear on the palms and soles, possibly in conjunction with other symptoms. The previous Cochrane Review on this topic was published in 2006, before biological treatments were extensively used.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for chronic palmoplantar pustulosis to induce and maintain complete remission.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to March 2019: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of the included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered RCTs including people with palmoplantar pustulosis or chronic palmoplantar pustular psoriasis assessing topical therapy, systemic therapy, combinations of topical or systemic therapies, or non-pharmacological therapies compared with placebo, no intervention, or each other.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our outcomes included 'Proportion of participants cleared or almost cleared', 'Proportion of participants with adverse effects serious or severe enough to cause withdrawal', 'Proportion of participants with at least 50% improvement in disease severity', and 'Proportion of participants with adverse effects'.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 37 studies (1663 participants; mean age 50 years (range 34 to 63); 24% males). These studies reported condition severity differently. Around half of the included trials stated the setting (hospitals, community clinics, or both). More than half of the studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Our included studies assessed mainly systemic treatments (retinoids, ciclosporin, biologics, etretinate + PUVA (combination of psoralens and long-wave ultraviolet radiation) therapy combined, and antibiotics), but also topical treatments (dermocorticoids, vitamin D) and phototherapy (PUVA, ultraviolet A1 (UVA1)). Other interventions were assessed by single studies. The most common comparator was placebo. All results presented in this abstract were assessed in the short term (mean treatment duration was 11 weeks (range 8 to 24 weeks)) and are based on participants with chronic palmoplantar pustulosis. All outcome time point measurements were taken from baseline and assessed at the end of treatment. Short-term and long-term outcomes were defined as measurement up to 24 weeks after randomisation and between 24 and 104 weeks after randomisation, respectively. One trial (188 participants) assessed the topical vitamin D derivative maxacalcitol versus placebo and found that maxacalcitol may be more effective than placebo in achieving clearance (risk ratio (RR) 7.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85 to 33.12; low-quality evidence), and the risk of adverse effects (such as mild local irritation, pruritus, and haematological or urinary test abnormalities) is probably similar in both groups (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.19; moderate-quality evidence). Severity was not reported. Two trials (49 participants) assessed PUVA therapy versus placebo or no treatment, providing very low-quality evidence. Adverse effects were reported with oral PUVA (including nausea, ankle swelling, and non-purulent conjunctivitis) and with local PUVA (including blistering, erythema, and pruritus). With regard to the systemic retinoid alitretinoin, one trial (33 participants; moderate-quality evidence) showed that alitretinoin probably makes little or no difference in reducing severity when compared to placebo (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.30). A similar number of adverse events were reported in both treatment groups, including headache, cheilitis, nausea, arthralgia, and nasopharyngitis (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.17). Clearance was not reported. There may be little or no difference between etanercept and placebo in achieving clearance (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.08 to 34.28; 1 study; 15 participants; low-quality evidence); however, the 95% CI was very wide, showing there may be a difference between groups. Severity was not measured. More patients treated with placebo may achieve reduced severity than those treated with ustekinumab, but the wide 95% CI indicates there might be little or no difference between groups and there might be greater effect with ustekinumab (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.13; 1 study; 33 participants; low-quality evidence). Clearance was not reported. It is uncertain whether guselkumab increases clearance when compared to placebo (2 studies; 154 participants) because the quality of evidence is very low, but guselkumab probably better reduces disease severity (RR 2.88, 95% CI 1.24 to 6.69; 1 study; 49 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Secukinumab is probably superior to placebo in reducing severity (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.35; 1 study; 157 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but our clearance outcome was not reported. None of these trials reported on occurrence of adverse effects. Only two of the studies discussed above reported adverse effects serious or severe enough to cause withdrawal. Guselkumab may cause more serious adverse events when compared to placebo, but there is uncertainty due to the very wide 95% CI showing there may be little or no difference and showing more events with placebo (RR 2.88, 95% CI 0.32 to 25.80; 1 study; 49 participants; low-quality evidence). Secukinumab probably causes more serious adverse events than placebo (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.40 to 7.75; 1 study; 157 participants; moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence is lacking for major chronic palmoplantar pustulosis treatments such as superpotent corticosteroids, phototherapy, acitretin, methotrexate, and ciclosporin. Risk of bias and imprecision limit our confidence. Maxacalcitol may be more effective than placebo in achieving clearance in the short term (low-quality evidence), and the risk of adverse effects is probably similar (moderate-quality evidence). Oral alitretinoin is probably no more effective than placebo in reducing severity, with a similar risk of adverse effects (moderate-quality evidence). Regarding biological treatments, we are uncertain of the effect of etanercept on clearance and the effect of ustekinumab on severity (low-quality evidence). Secukinumab and guselkumab are probably superior to placebo in reducing severity (moderate-quality evidence). Adverse events not requiring withdrawal were not reported for these treatments. Reporting of serious adverse effects was incomplete: compared to placebo, secukinumab probably caused more participant withdrawals (moderate-quality evidence), but we are uncertain of the effect of guselkumab (low-quality evidence). Future trials should assess commonly used treatments using validated severity and quality of life scales.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Chronic Disease; Exanthema; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Phototherapy; Psoriasis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Ultraviolet Rays; Ustekinumab
PubMed: 31958161
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011628.pub2 -
Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology Dec 2022Systemic retinoids are among the most prescribed drugs in dermatology, thanks to their activity as proliferation modulators and keratinisation normalisers. Common side...
PURPOSE
Systemic retinoids are among the most prescribed drugs in dermatology, thanks to their activity as proliferation modulators and keratinisation normalisers. Common side effects such as blood lipid disorders, xerosis and photosensitivity are well established and usually dose dependent. Conversely, retinoid-associated ocular disturbances have been reported, yet with differences in terms of frequency and manifestations As data regarding a potential correlation with refractive errors are heterogenous and have not been previously thoroughly addressed, we performed a systematic review of the literature with the aim of comprehensively evaluating the current evidence regarding retinoid-associated myopia in dermatologic patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines. A search on MEDLINE, Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Library was conducted using the MeSH terms: retinoid, isotretinoin, acitretin, bexarotene, etretinate, alitretinoin, myopia, refractive errors, via the Boolean term AND. Only manuscripts in English were considered, there was no restriction on type of article. Animal research and in vitro studies were excluded.
RESULTS
Six articles were finally included in this systematic review. One well designed prospective study was able to show a slight myopic shift in the first six months, but id did not evaluate further development of the refractive error nor the effects of drug discontinuation. Another prospective study, with a smaller sample size showed no myopic progression at 12 months. Two case reports showed a myopic shift after two weeks from therapy start. Another case report showed a myopic shift associated with narrowing of the anterior chamber after one week from therapy start. Finally a large retrospective study based on spontaneous reporting systems and world's literature classified myopia as a certain side effect.
CONCLUSION
Considering the current literature, it is not possible to define a clear correlation between the use of retinoids and the development or worsening of myopia. Some studies suggest that retinoids may cause a myopic shift and the pathophysiologyical mechanism is supported by some animal and in vitro studies, but there is a lack of large prospective and well-controlled studies. In case of ocular disturbances after retinoid use a prompt ophthalmological referral is advisable and in case of the detection of a myopic refractive error a relationship to retinoids should be ruled out, considering also other possible causes such as age and previous refractive status.
Topics: Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Myopia; Refractive Errors; Anterior Chamber; Acitretin
PubMed: 36260481
DOI: 10.1080/15569527.2022.2137177