-
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,... Jun 2024Topical minoxidil is generally well tolerated, yet there have been a few reports of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) confirmed through patch testing. This systematic... (Review)
Review
Topical minoxidil is generally well tolerated, yet there have been a few reports of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) confirmed through patch testing. This systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis sought to elucidate the primary allergens in patients exhibiting ACD in response to topical minoxidil formulations and to ascertain the appropriate testing concentrations and vehicles of minoxidil itself. A comprehensive search was conducted across the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases utilizing the keywords "minoxidil" and "contact dermatitis," or "contact allergy," or "contact eczema." Studies documenting ACD in patients using topical minoxidil confirmed by patch testing were deemed eligible. Our analysis included 46 studies encompassing 99 patients with patch-test-confirmed ACD to minoxidil-based topical treatments. The majority of these patients (93.9%) were exposed to minoxidil without additional active components. Minoxidil itself was identified as the primary allergen in 74.7% of the patients, with propylene glycol being the next most common allergen at 17.1%. Other allergens identified included estradiol, butylene glycol, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, canrenone, and latanoprost. The most effective concentration was found to be 2% minoxidil in propylene glycol, which yielded a 100% positivity rate. The findings indicate that minoxidil is the predominant allergen in ACD reactions to its topical formulations, followed by propylene glycol. For the accurate diagnosis of ACD related to minoxidil, patch testing with 2% minoxidil in propylene glycol is recommended, as are separate tests for propylene glycol and other potential allergenic ingredients.
PubMed: 38885151
DOI: 10.1089/derm.2024.0092 -
Dermatology and Therapy Jun 2024The minimal adverse-effect profile and positive clinical response of low-dose oral minoxidil (LDOM) have recently caused the drug to gain popularity for the treatment of... (Review)
Review
The minimal adverse-effect profile and positive clinical response of low-dose oral minoxidil (LDOM) have recently caused the drug to gain popularity for the treatment of hair disorders in adults. However, in the pediatric population, hesitancy still surrounds the use of oral minoxidil given the wide profile of potential side effects the drug offers. This review aims to characterize the safety and use of oral minoxidil in children for the treatment of all disorders to equip physicians with ample knowledge when prescribing oral minoxidil in the pediatric population. A total of 41 studies (19 case reports, 10 cohort studies, 7 retrospective chart reviews, and 5 case series) that reported data on 442 pediatric patients for whom oral minoxidil was used for treatment were included. Conditions for which treatment with minoxidil was described were hair disorders (83.9%, 371/442) and hypertension (11.3%, 50/442); accidental usage (4.8%, 21/442) was also noted in the literature and included in this review. This review is broken down by dosage and describes the safety and efficacy of oral minoxidil in pediatric patients aged 0 to 18 years old for the treatment of hair disorders. This review found that LDOM may represent a safe option for the treatment of hair disorders in children. This study also suggests moderate and high doses of oral minoxidil may not be safe for use in children. Additional studies are needed to further understand this drug's efficacy and safety in children.
PubMed: 38861138
DOI: 10.1007/s13555-024-01197-x -
Journal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy :... Jun 2024We aimed to determine the efficacy of the various available oral, topical, and procedural treatment options for hair loss in individuals with androgenic alopecia. Using...
We aimed to determine the efficacy of the various available oral, topical, and procedural treatment options for hair loss in individuals with androgenic alopecia. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the National Library of Medicine was performed. Overall, 141 unique studies met our inclusion criteria. We demonstrate that many over the counter (e.g. topical minoxidil, supplements, low-level light treatment), prescription (e.g. oral minoxidil, finasteride, dutasteride), and procedural (e.g. platelet-rich plasma, fractionated lasers, hair transplantation) treatments successfully promote hair growth, highlighting the superiority of a multifaceted and individualized approach to management.
PubMed: 38852607
DOI: 10.1080/14764172.2024.2362126 -
Cureus May 2024Patterned hair loss (PHL) is a severe hair condition that affects both sexes. Mesotherapy is a treatment that involves microinjecting medications and/or vitamins into... (Review)
Review
Patterned hair loss (PHL) is a severe hair condition that affects both sexes. Mesotherapy is a treatment that involves microinjecting medications and/or vitamins into the middle layer of the skin. Mesotherapy reduces systemic adverse effects by delivering drugs directly to the hair follicle, increasing local bioavailability while lowering systemic exposure. Local side effects and reactions may develop due to mesotherapy. This study systematically evaluated the safety and efficacy of mesotherapy to minoxidil 5%, as well as addressing its limitations, dosing, and technique, with the intent of providing valuable trials and insights for clinicians and patients considering mesotherapy for improved androgenetic alopecia (AGA) outcomes. The literature search carried out by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria yielded 11 relevant studies from an initial pool of 18 articles. These studies covered various aspects of the role of mesotherapy and minoxidil in AGA, including techniques, complications, limitations, and outcomes. In conclusion, available trials and research on mesotherapy and minoxidil demonstrated excellent statistical significance and a high patient satisfaction rate, with the exception of two publications that took into account certain uncommon adverse effects of mesotherapy. However, recent research suggests that a mesotherapy method for alopecia with a low risk of side effects is effective.
PubMed: 38841017
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59705 -
Journal of the American Academy of... May 2024
Review
PubMed: 38796079
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2024.05.037 -
Skin Appendage Disorders Dec 2023Combination treatments may improve the utility of approved agents for the treatment of pattern hair loss (PHL); however, head-to-head comparisons are lacking. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Combination treatments may improve the utility of approved agents for the treatment of pattern hair loss (PHL); however, head-to-head comparisons are lacking.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of 5% minoxidil, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and microneedling across adults with PHL insofar as change in total hair density at 24 weeks.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search in July 2022. Through our Bayesian network meta-analysis, we estimated treatments' surface under the cumulative ranking distribution (SUCRA) values and relative effects - in terms of mean difference (MD).
RESULTS
Data from 27 trials, totaling 1,110 patients, were extracted. Interventions were ranked based on the probability of inducing hair density improvements: 5% minoxidil plus microneedling (SUCRA = 95.8%), 5% minoxidil plus PRP (SUCRA = 64.7%), 5% minoxidil (SUCRA = 53.9%), PRP (SUCRA = 34.9%), microneedling (SUCRA = 27.8%), and PRP with microneedling (SUCRA = 22.9%). The efficacy of 5% minoxidil plus microneedling in improving total hair density was significantly greater ( < 0.05) than 5% minoxidil monotherapy (MD = 13 hairs/cm), PRP monotherapy (MD = 16 hairs/cm), and microneedling monotherapy (MD = 17 hairs/cm).
CONCLUSION
Five percent minoxidil plus microneedling is an effective treatment option for improving hair density at 6 months in adult PHL patients.
PubMed: 38058547
DOI: 10.1159/000534196 -
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 -
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 -
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