-
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Jan 2024Alopecia is a common and distressing medical condition that has been related to psychiatric disorders. Stem cell-derived conditioned medium (CM), a novel therapy for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Alopecia is a common and distressing medical condition that has been related to psychiatric disorders. Stem cell-derived conditioned medium (CM), a novel therapy for hair regeneration, has shown effectiveness in several trials.
METHODS
This meta-analysis aims to explore the effectiveness of stem cell-derived CM in improving hair growth for patients of alopecia. We prospectively registered this systematic review and meta-analysis in PROSPERO (CRD42023410249). Clinical trials that the enrolled participants suffering from alopecia applied stem cell-derived CM were included. We calculated the mean and standard deviation for the hair density and thickness.
RESULTS
Ten clinical trials were included in our analysis. On the basis of eight clinical trials (n = 221), our pooled results indicate that stem cell-derived CM is effective in increasing hair density (mean difference [MD]: 14.93, confidence interval [95% CI]: 10.20-19.67, p < 0.0001) and thickness (MD: 18.67, 95% CI: 2.75-34.59, p < 0.0001) (μm) in patients with alopecia. Moreover, our findings suggest that longer treatment duration is associated with significantly greater improvement than shorter treatment duration (p = 0.02). Three of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and when we specifically analyzed these RCTs; statistical significance could also be observed in terms of hair density (MD: 9.23, 95% CI: 1.79-16.68, p < 0.00001).
KEY MESSAGES
Stem cell-derived conditioned medium can effectively increase hair density and thickness for alopecia, and there is no difference between each method (topical application, microneedling, or injection).
Topics: Humans; Culture Media, Conditioned; Alopecia; Hair; Stem Cells; Duration of Therapy
PubMed: 37983981
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.10.060 -
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 -
A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Medical Therapies for Lichen Planopilaris.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) 2024Lichen planopilaris (LPP) is a primary chronic lymphocytic cutaneous disorder that selectively destroys the hair follicles, resulting in scarring alopecia.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Lichen planopilaris (LPP) is a primary chronic lymphocytic cutaneous disorder that selectively destroys the hair follicles, resulting in scarring alopecia. Unfortunately, current available treatments are not fully effective to stop hair loss, and the level of evidence for medical interventions is weak.
OBJECTIVES
The present article aimed to determine the efficacy of the different medical interventions in LPP through a network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed including randomized trials that report the outcomes of lichen planopilaris activity index (LPPAI). These articles were pooled and a NMA was conducted.
RESULTS
A total of seven studies were identified and included in meta-analysis, comprising 251 LPP patients. The NMA showed the mean difference in LLPAI was significantly superior with the combination of clobetasol plus N-acetylcysteine (mean difference: -2.0, 95% CI = -3.43 to -0.51) and the combination of clobetasol plus pentoxifylline (mean difference: -1.62, 95% CI = -3.0 to -0.25) compared to the treatment of reference (clobetasol). The NMA showed cyclosporine (mean difference: 2.05 95% CI = 0.68-3.49), methotrexate (mean difference: 1.95 95% CI = 1.23-3.17), the combination of methotrexate plus prednisolone (mean difference: 1.56 95% CI = 0.25-2.96) were significantly worse than hydroxychloroquine according to the differences in LLPAI.
CONCLUSION
This work is the first NMA in LPP and hence, it can be helpful in serving as an initial step toward better evidence-based decisions in the treatment of this challenging condition. We propose a triple-combined approach consisting of topical clobetasol, hydroxychloroquine, and N-acetylcysteine as resulted in the most effective approach. Considering the poor outcomes observed with pioglitazone, mycophenolate mofetil, and cyclosporine, it is advisable to contemplate the use of these medications in patients who have not responded adequately to more efficacious alternatives.
Topics: Humans; Clobetasol; Methotrexate; Network Meta-Analysis; Acetylcysteine; Bayes Theorem; Hydroxychloroquine; Lichen Planus; Cyclosporine; Alopecia; Chronic Disease
PubMed: 37852211
DOI: 10.1159/000534364 -
Acta Bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis Oct 2023Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is a common chronic, hereditary, cutaneous and androgen-dependent condition. Low self-esteem and negatively impact quality of life are often...
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is a common chronic, hereditary, cutaneous and androgen-dependent condition. Low self-esteem and negatively impact quality of life are often consequences of AGA. Clinical treatment of AGA using SVF (Stromal vascular fraction) has been effective. In fact, hair follicle is affected by various environment factors and one of the most important factors is the vascularity of the scalp which is itself affected bySVF.
METHODS
During October 2022 we carried out a systematic review to identify all scientific publications discussing about hair loss treatment with stromal vascular fraction or adipose stem cell. We selected 140 articles. After screening process, we kept 9 articles complying with inclusion criteria. Results: No serious adverse events were reported in all studies. Despite standardized protocol was not found, all studies reported a statistically significant increase in the number (density) of hair after SVF treatment. Two studies found a significant improvement at pull test. An increase of hair diameter was noticed after treatment. The combination between medical therapy and SVF proved to be advantageous.
CONCLUSIONS
SVF is nowadays at the center of studies in the field of regenerative medicine due to its potential applications in many branches of medicine and surgery. The initial results are very promising but furthermore studies are necessary to establish a methodical and systematic research capable of demonstrating its real benefits and the creation of homogenous treatment protocols.
Topics: Humans; Stromal Vascular Fraction; Quality of Life; Alopecia; Hair; Adipose Tissue
PubMed: 37850761
DOI: 10.23750/abm.v94i5.15069 -
Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology Nov 2023Finasteride and minoxidil are medicaments commonly prescribed for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPA), hypertension, and/or androgenetic alopecia (AGA). The...
Finasteride and minoxidil are medicaments commonly prescribed for treating benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPA), hypertension, and/or androgenetic alopecia (AGA). The mechanism of action of finasteride is based on the interference in androgenic pathways, which may lead to fertility-related disorders in men. Minoxidil, however, can act in multiple ways, and there is no consensus that its use can adversely affect male fertility. Since finasteride and minoxidil could be risk factors for male fertility, we aimed to compare their impact on the two reproductive organs testis and epididymis of adult murine models, besides testis/epididymis-related cells, and describe the mechanism of action involved. For such, we used the PRISMA guideline. We included 31 original studies from a structured search on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. For in vivo studies, the bias analysis and the quality of the studies were assessed as described by SYRCLE (Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory Animal Experimentation). We concluded that finasteride and minoxidil act as hormone disruptors, causing oxidative stress and morphological changes mainly in the testis. Our results also revealed that finasteride treatment could be more harmful to male reproductive health because it was more associated with reproductive injuries, including damage to the epididymis, erectile dysfunction, decreased libido, and reduced semen volume. Thus, this study contributes to the global understanding of the mechanisms by which medicaments used for alopecia might lead to male reproductive disorders. We hope that our critical analysis expedites clinical research and reduces methodological bias. The registration number on the Prospero platform is CRD42022313347.
Topics: Adult; Male; Humans; Animals; Mice; Minoxidil; Finasteride; Alopecia; Administration, Oral; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37805090
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2023.116710 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Dec 2023Androgenetic alopecia is a widespread condition that is the most common type of hair loss affecting approximately 58% and 40% of men and women by the age of 50,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Androgenetic alopecia is a widespread condition that is the most common type of hair loss affecting approximately 58% and 40% of men and women by the age of 50, respectively. Patients have been known to experience severe distress due to androgenetic alopecia, including anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of combination therapy using topical minoxidil and microneedling compared to topical minoxidil alone. This systematic review of randomized controlled trials was carried out using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. The literature search was performed using Scopus, Cochrane, Embase, and the National Institutes of Health's United States National Library of Medicine from inception through January 20, 2023. Randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy of combinational therapy and monotherapy using microneedling and minoxidil on patients with clinically diagnosed androgenetic alopecia were included after screening titles, abstracts, and full texts. Two independent reviewers selected studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. Ten randomized controlled trials, including 466 patients, were selected for this review and eight studies were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. All eight studies displayed a statistically significant increase in total hair count [standard mean difference (SMD) 1.76; 95% CI 1.26-2.26; P < 0.00001]; however, the evidence did not support a statistically significant increase in hair diameter (SMD 0.82; 95% CI - 0.01 to 1.65; P = 0.05). No scarring nor serious adverse events were reported in any of the studies. The findings of this meta-analysis strongly support the utilization of a multimodal therapeutic approach of minoxidil and microneedling for hair growth in patients with androgenetic alopecia. However, variations in factors such as rating scale measurements, microneedling methods, and areas of treatment may have resulted in confounding. Further randomized controlled, large-sample trials employing rigorous methodologies are needed to gain a more comprehensive understanding regarding treatment efficacy, namely the impact of combinational therapy on hair diameter.Clinical trial registrations This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42023391164) and the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (INPLASY) database (INPLASY202310031).
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Alopecia; Hair; Minoxidil; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37665358
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-023-02688-1 -
Psychology, Health & Medicine Apr 2024The adverse psychosocial impact of androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is often framed as an essential motivation for developing efficacious treatments to halt hair loss or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The adverse psychosocial impact of androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is often framed as an essential motivation for developing efficacious treatments to halt hair loss or promote regrowth, especially since AGA is common among men but does not result in physically harmful or life-limiting consequences. Yet, empirical evidence documenting the impact of AGA on men's psychological wellbeing and quality of life is patchy and has not previously been subject to systematic review. This systemic review and meta-analyses aim to integrate and evaluate evidence regarding the psychosocial impact of AGA on men. A database and manual reference search identified English-language articles which reported: 1) empirical research; of ii) psychosocial distress (mental health, depression, anxiety, self-esteem, or quality of life); and iii) data separately for male AGA participants. Screening of 607 articles resulted in 37 (6%) for inclusion. PRISMA guidelines, the (modified) AXIS quality assessment tool, and independent extraction were deployed. Heterogeneity in measures and study aims, moderate study quality ( = 7.37, SD = 1.31), probable conflicts of interest (78%) and biased samples (68%) suggest that results should be treated cautiously. Meta-analyses revealed no impact on depression (pooled = 8.8, 95% CI = 6.8-10.8) and moderate impact on quality of life (pooled = 9.12, 95% CI = 6.14-12.10). Men with AGA were found to have average or better mental health compared to those without AGA. Overall, there was limited evidence of a severe impact on mental health and quality of life for men experiencing hair loss, with most studies evidencing (at best) a moderate impact. Good dermatological care includes accurately educating about the psychosocial impact of AGA on men, taking care not to overstate levels of distress, and screening for distress using validated measures which have clear clinical thresholds.
Topics: Humans; Male; Quality of Life; Alopecia; Anxiety; Self Concept; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37605428
DOI: 10.1080/13548506.2023.2242049 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Dec 2023
Topics: Humans; Alopecia; Ethnicity; Hair; Scalp; Scalp Dermatoses
PubMed: 37604232
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2023.08.028 -
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment Dec 2023Mesotherapy is a technique by which lower doses of therapeutic agents and bioactive substances are administered by intradermal injections to the skin. Through... (Review)
Review
Mesotherapy is a technique by which lower doses of therapeutic agents and bioactive substances are administered by intradermal injections to the skin. Through intradermal injections, mesotherapy can increase the residence time of therapeutic agents in the affected area, thus allowing for the use of lower doses and longer intervals between sessions which may in turn improve the treatment outcome and patient compliance. This systematic review aims to summarize the current literature that evaluates the efficacy of this technique for the treatment of hair loss and provides an overview of the results observed. Of the 416 records identified, 27 articles met the inclusion criteria. To date, mesotherapy using 6 classes of agents and their combinations have been studied; this includes dutasteride, minoxidil, growth factors or autologous suspension, botulinum toxin A, stem cells, and mesh solutions/multivitamins. While several studies report statistically significant improvements in hair growth after treatment, there is currently a lack of standardized regimens. The emergence of adverse effects after mesotherapy has been reported. Further large-scale and controlled clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the utility of mesotherapy for hair loss disorders.
Topics: Humans; Mesotherapy; Alopecia; Minoxidil; Treatment Outcome; Injections, Intradermal
PubMed: 37558233
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2023.2245084 -
Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and... 2023Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) contains a variety of growth factors and has been widely used in maxillofacial surgery, orthopedics, plastic surgery, ophthalmology, and other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) contains a variety of growth factors and has been widely used in maxillofacial surgery, orthopedics, plastic surgery, ophthalmology, and other fields. In recent years, with the increasing morbidity of androgenetic alopecia (AGA), the use of PRP has also increased. The objective of this article was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PRP for AGA. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, covering the databases from their earliest records until March 2022. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to explore the effects of PRP for hair density, hair count, and hair diameter in AGA. Nine trials involving 238 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that PRP for AGA increased hair density at 3 and 6 months with statistically significant differences compared with the placebo ( < .05). PRP also increased hair count and hair diameter compared with the baseline, but there was no significant difference compared with the placebo ( > .05). Two of the 7 studies reported adverse reactions. No serious adverse reactions were found. In conclusion, PRP is an effective and safe treatment for increasing the hair density in AGA. Trial registration: The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022362432).
Topics: Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Alopecia; Hair; Platelet-Rich Plasma; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37533146
DOI: 10.1177/12034754231191461