-
Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease 2022Numerous previous studies have examined risk of herpes zoster (HZ) in psoriatic disease; however, the results of these studies are conflicting and the relative risks...
BACKGROUND
Numerous previous studies have examined risk of herpes zoster (HZ) in psoriatic disease; however, the results of these studies are conflicting and the relative risks associated with different treatments remain largely unknown. In this meta-analysis, we examined the relative risk of HZ associated with systemic treatments for psoriatic disease.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant English-language studies published up to April 2021. Data were extracted using a standardized data extraction form. Network meta-analyses (NMA) was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We examined the differences in HZ risk (incidence rate ratio; IRR) between treatments using a random-effects model for direct pairwise comparisons and NMA. The surface under the cumulative ranking area was calculated to rank the HZ risk for each treatment condition.
RESULTS
This study analyzed 13 studies including 19 treatment arms involving a total of 443,104 patients with psoriatic disease. Corticosteroids (CS) [IRR, 2.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.59-4.13], a Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi; tofacitinib) (IRR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.03-5.32), infliximab (IRR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.27-4.21), conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) + CS (IRR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.23-4.17), anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) + csDMARDs and/or CS (IRR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.38-3.31), csDMARDs (IRR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.18-2.22), and anti-TNF-α except infliximab (IRR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.13-2.30) were all associated with a significantly higher HZ risk compared to controls. CS treatment possessed the highest HZ risk, followed by infliximab and JAKi (tofacitinib). Phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, anti-interleukin-17, -23 or -12/23, phototherapy, and acitretin showed a risk similar to controls without significant differences.
CONCLUSION
The NMA demonstrated CS, infliximab, and JAKi (tofacitinib), and several combination treatments were associated with higher HZ risk in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Differences in HZ risk should be taken into consideration when considering optimal psoriasis treatment.
PubMed: 35519434
DOI: 10.1177/20406223221091188 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2021Psoriasis continues to have unmet needs in its management despite introduction of newer molecules. Monotherapy with these newer agents may not achieve therapeutic goals...
Psoriasis continues to have unmet needs in its management despite introduction of newer molecules. Monotherapy with these newer agents may not achieve therapeutic goals in all cases, hence necessitating their combinations with other molecules. Improved understanding of newer as well as conventional treatment modalities and experiences in their combinations hence necessitates therapeutic guidelines for their use in psoriasis. To review the combinations of treatments reported in literature and recommendations for their use based on best current evidence in literature. A literature review of MEDLINE database for studies evaluating combinations of newer therapies with conventional therapies in psoriasis was done. Newer therapies were identified as biologic disease modifying anti rheumatic drugs and other molecules such as apremilast while conventional therapies included methotrexate, cyclosporine, or retinoids, phototherapy and others. The therapeutic guidelines are proposed with the aim to provide evidenced based approach to combine newer and conventional agents in day-to-day psoriasis management. Combination of acitretin and narrow band ultraviolet B (NB-UVB)/Psoralen with ultraviolet A (PUVA) achieves faster clearance and allows reduction of dose of the latter. A variable outcome is reported of methotrexate with TNF-α inhibitors vs. TNF-α inhibitors alone, although addition of methotrexate appears to reduce immunogenicity of TNF-α inhibitors thereby preventing formation of anti-drug antibodies especially in case of infliximab. While combination of acitretin and PUVA is beneficial, combining TNF-α inhibitors and phototherapy too produces better and faster results but long term risks of Non Melanoma Skin Cancers (NMSCs) may preclude their use together. Combination of cyclosporine and phototherapy is not recommended due to greater chances of NMSCs. Adding phototherapy to Fumaric Acid Esters (FAEs) improves efficacy. Apremilast can be safely combined with available biologic agents in patients with plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis not responding adequately to biologics alone. Hydroxyurea and acitretin may be used together increasing their efficacy and reducing doses of both and hence their adverse effects. Selected clinical scenarios shall benefit from combinations therapies, improving efficacy of both conventional and newer agents and at the same time helping reduce toxicity of higher dosages when used individually.
PubMed: 34490293
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.696597 -
Dermatology Online Journal Jul 2021Periungual pyogenic granulomas are benign vascular tumors that present as painful, round, spontaneously bleeding lesions composed of rapidly proliferating capillaries...
Periungual pyogenic granulomas are benign vascular tumors that present as painful, round, spontaneously bleeding lesions composed of rapidly proliferating capillaries and excess tissue. The vast majority of pyogenic granulomas are caused by physical trauma or infectious agents and they may resolve spontaneously. Herein, we highlight a very rare case of periungual pyogenic granulomas induced by the regularly prescribed oral retinoid acitretin during treatment for congenital palmoplantar keratoderma. This unique case showed that it is feasible to continue acitretin therapy in the presence of pyogenic granuloma development if proper dose reduction and topical therapies are utilized. The patient's lesions resolved within two weeks of this protocol's initiation and the pyogenic granulomas did not recur over the course of a six-month follow-up observation period. In addition, we performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed databases for the clinical features and treatments in other reported acitretin-induced pyogenic granuloma cases; we compiled a comprehensive list of other prescription drugs known to cause pyogenic granulomas up-to-date.
Topics: Acitretin; Administration, Oral; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clobetasol; Glucocorticoids; Granuloma, Pyogenic; Humans; Keratoderma, Palmoplantar; Keratolytic Agents; Male; Mupirocin; Nail Diseases
PubMed: 34391333
DOI: 10.5070/D327754369 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.
SEARCH METHODS
For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Chronic Disease; Cytokines; Female; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Male; Middle Aged; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Network Meta-Analysis; Placebos; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 33871055
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4 -
Dermatologic Therapy Mar 2021The use of combined systemic retinoids and intralesional immunotherapy in the management of warts is still debatable without straightforward evidence. Through network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The use of combined systemic retinoids and intralesional immunotherapy in the management of warts is still debatable without straightforward evidence. Through network meta-analysis, the current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of systemic retinoids alone or combined with other remedies in the treatment of warts. We searched six literature databases for clinical trials that compared systemic retinoids to local treatments or placebo in wart management. Outcomes were calculated as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence-interval. We used the R software to perform conventional and network meta-analyses (with a frequentist approach). Network meta-analysis of eight trials showed that oral acitretin plus intralesional Candida Ag (OR = 367.71), INF-α plus oral isotretinoin (OR = 223.77), oral acitretin (OR = 117), Candida Ag (OR = 91.93), oral isotretinoin (OR = 62.26) and topical isotretinoin (OR = 17.69) had higher complete recovery rates than placebo. Regarding the P-score, oral acitretin plus intralesional Candida Ag had the highest efficacy in achieving complete response (P-score = 0.88), followed by INF-α plus oral isotretinoin (P-score = 0.79), then oral acitretin (P-score = 0.60). Variable baseline characteristics and lack of data on some outcomes. The current study shows the efficacy for systemic retinoids in the treatment of warts, especially reluctant or recurrent types. Moreover, combinations of systemic retinoids with intralesional immunotherapy yield higher rates of complete clearance with lower recurrence.
Topics: Acitretin; Humans; Immunotherapy; Isotretinoin; Network Meta-Analysis; Warts
PubMed: 33480148
DOI: 10.1111/dth.14793 -
The Journal of Dermatological Treatment May 2022Psoriasis and inflammatory bowel diseases share common immunological pathomechanisms and therefore similar treatment options. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis and inflammatory bowel diseases share common immunological pathomechanisms and therefore similar treatment options.
OBJECTIVE
To assess already existing therapies and their efficacy versus adverse effects and paradoxical reactions in patients presenting with either disease or both.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search of the PubMed and Science.gov databases was performed for the period 2018-2020. Only articles in English were selected. Search terms included a combination of keywords: and in combination with each of the following: Other potentially relevant articles were identified by manually checking the references of the included literature.
STUDY SELECTION
Recent reviews and meta-analyses, pooled analyses, cohort studies, observational studies, care reports were all included.
CONCLUSIONS
Psoriasis and IBD can be treated concurrently as they share common inflammatory pathways. TNF-α inhibitors and IL-12/23 have been successful in treating both psoriasis and IBD. IL-17 inhibitors are recognized treatments for psoriasis but have the potential to exacerbate IBD. Newer molecules require further clinical trials and real-life studies in order to confirm their efficacy and safety.
Topics: Etanercept; Humans; Inflammatory Bowel Diseases; Infliximab; Psoriasis; Ustekinumab
PubMed: 33074781
DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2020.1836313 -
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and... Dec 2020To assess the efficacy and safety of Aβ-targeting agents for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and safety of Aβ-targeting agents for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal were searched from their inception to April 2020. We generated pooled estimates using random effects meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Nineteen randomised controlled trials, of which 17 had a low risk of bias, included 12 903 participants. The meta-analysis showed no difference in the cognitive subscale of Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog) between anti-Aβ drugs and placebo (mean difference (MD): 0.20, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.81; =99.8%; minimal important difference 3.1-3.8 points, moderate-certainty evidence). For ADAS-Cog, results suggested that one drug that increases Aβ clearance may differ in effect (MD: -0.96, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.92) from drugs that reduce Aβ production (MD: 0.78, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.32) (interaction p<0.000001); this difference also existed in the outcome of MMSE and CDR-SOB. Compared with placebo, anti-Aβ drug-related adverse events were as follows: anxiety, depression, diarrhoea, fatigue, rash, syncope and vomit.
DISCUSSION
From current evidence, anti-Aβ interventions are unlikely to have an important impact on slowing cognitive or functional decline. Although the subgroup analysis suggested possible benefits from Aβ clearance drugs, the analysis has limited credibility, and a benefit from drugs that increase clearance, if real, is very small.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO registration number CRD42019126272.
Topics: Acitretin; Alanine; Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Anxiety; Azepines; Clioquinol; Copper; Cyclic S-Oxides; Depression; Diarrhea; Exanthema; Fatigue; Flurbiprofen; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Inositol; Mental Status and Dementia Tests; Minimal Clinically Important Difference; Orotic Acid; Oxadiazoles; Severity of Illness Index; Sulfonamides; Syncope; Thiadiazines; Treatment Outcome; Vomiting
PubMed: 33046560
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2020-323497 -
JAMA Dermatology Nov 2020Treating older adults with psoriasis can be challenging owing to comorbidities, concomitant medication use, and consequent safety risks. Although many studies focus on...
IMPORTANCE
Treating older adults with psoriasis can be challenging owing to comorbidities, concomitant medication use, and consequent safety risks. Although many studies focus on the effectiveness and safety of systemic antipsoriatic therapies in the general population, their effectiveness in older adults with psoriasis has not been systematically assessed.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of systemic antipsoriatic therapies in patients 65 years or older.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on November 11, 2019. No date limit was used. Randomized clinical trials, cohort studies, large case series, and meta-analyses assessing efficacy (or effectiveness) and/or safety of systemic antipsoriatic therapies in patients 65 years or older were included.
FINDINGS
The initial search yielded 11 096 results, of which 31 unique articles with 39 561 patients were included in analysis. Overall, limited data were available per systemic agent, and overall quality of the included studies on conventional systemic therapies was low. At the end of the induction phase (12-16 weeks after start of treatment), a reduction of 75% in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index was achieved in 49% of 74 methotrexate sodium users 65 years or older, 46% to 52.6% of 178 older cyclosporin users, 27% to 47.8% of 108 older acitretin users, 15.6% to 64% of 256 etanercept users 65 years or older, 66.7% to 93% of 43 infliximab users 65 years or older, 60.7% to 65% of 100 adalimumab users 65 years or older, 56.5% of 46 ustekinumab users 65 years or older, and 86.4% of 67 secukinumab users 65 years or older. Effectiveness of acitretin, etanercept, adalimumab, and secukinumab appeared not to be associated with age; studies regarding other systemic antipsoriatic therapies did not provide age group comparisons. Older age was significantly associated with renal function deterioration in cyclosporin users and with lymphopenia in fumaric acid esters users (hazard ratio, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.65-3.55; P < .001). Infections were the most frequently reported adverse event in patients 65 years or older using biologics, but no significant association with age was found.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
On the basis of limited available evidence, age alone should not be a limiting factor in psoriasis management. Awareness of comorbidities and concomitant medication use is very important, as well as appropriate dosing and frequent laboratory and clinical monitoring. More real-world evidence and (sub)analyses of prospective cohort studies on the effectiveness and safety of systemic therapies in older adults are critical to optimize personalized, effective, and safe antipsoriatic management in this growing patient group.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Biological Products; Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Psoriasis; Remission Induction; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32822455
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.2311 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2020Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common type of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, a malignant, chronic disease initially affecting the skin. Several therapies are available,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common type of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, a malignant, chronic disease initially affecting the skin. Several therapies are available, which may induce clinical remission for a time. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2012: we wanted to assess new trials, some of which investigated new interventions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of interventions for MF in all stages of the disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to May 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We searched 2 trials registries for additional references. For adverse event outcomes, we undertook separate searches in MEDLINE in April, July and November 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of local or systemic interventions for MF in adults with any stage of the disease compared with either another local or systemic intervention or with placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were improvement in health-related quality of life as defined by participants, and common adverse effects of the treatments. Key secondary outcomes were complete response (CR), defined as complete disappearance of all clinical evidence of disease, and objective response rate (ORR), defined as proportion of patients with a partial or complete response. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence and considered comparisons of psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA) light treatment as most important because this is first-line treatment for MF in most guidelines.
MAIN RESULTS
This review includes 20 RCTs (1369 participants) covering a wide range of interventions. The following were assessed as either treatments or comparators: imiquimod, peldesine, hypericin, mechlorethamine, nitrogen mustard and intralesional injections of interferon-α (IFN-α) (topical applications); PUVA, extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP: photochemotherapy), and visible light (light applications); acitretin, bexarotene, lenalidomide, methotrexate and vorinostat (oral agents); brentuximab vedotin; denileukin diftitox; mogamulizumab; chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, etoposide, and vincristine; a combination of chemotherapy with electron beam radiation; subcutaneous injection of IFN-α; and intramuscular injections of active transfer factor (parenteral systemics). Thirteen trials used an active comparator, five were placebo-controlled, and two compared an active operator to observation only. In 14 trials, participants had MF in clinical stages IA to IIB. All participants were treated in secondary and tertiary care settings, mainly in Europe, North America or Australia. Trials recruited both men and women, with more male participants overall. Trial duration varied from four weeks to 12 months, with one longer-term study lasting more than six years. We judged 16 trials as at high risk of bias in at least one domain, most commonly performance bias (blinding of participants and investigators), attrition bias and reporting bias. None of our key comparisons measured quality of life, and the two studies that did presented no usable data. Eighteen studies reported common adverse effects of the treatments. Adverse effects ranged from mild symptoms to lethal complications depending upon the treatment type. More aggressive treatments like systemic chemotherapy generally resulted in more severe adverse effects. In the included studies, CR rates ranged from 0% to 83% (median 31%), and ORR ranged from 0% to 88% (median 47%). Five trials assessed PUVA treatment, alone or combined, summarised below. There may be little to no difference between intralesional IFN-α and PUVA compared with PUVA alone for 24 to 52 weeks in CR (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.31; 2 trials; 122 participants; low-certainty evidence). Common adverse events and ORR were not measured. One small cross-over trial found once-monthly ECP for six months may be less effective than twice-weekly PUVA for three months, reporting CR in two of eight participants and ORR in six of eight participants after PUVA, compared with no CR or ORR after ECP (very low-certainty evidence). Some participants reported mild nausea after PUVA but no numerical data were given. One participant in the ECP group withdrew due to hypotension. However, we are unsure of the results due to very low-certainty evidence. One trial comparing bexarotene plus PUVA versus PUVA alone for up to 16 weeks reported one case of photosensitivity in the bexarotene plus PUVA group compared to none in the PUVA-alone group (87 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between bexarotene plus PUVA and PUVA alone in CR (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.80) and ORR (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.44) (93 participants; low-certainty evidence). One trial comparing subcutaneous IFN-α injections combined with either acitretin or PUVA for up to 48 weeks or until CR indicated there may be little to no difference in the common IFN-α adverse effect of flu-like symptoms (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.88; 82 participants). There may be lower CR with IFN-α and acitretin compared with IFN-α and PUVA (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84; 82 participants) (both outcomes: low-certainty evidence). This trial did not measure ORR. One trial comparing PUVA maintenance treatment to no maintenance treatment, in participants who had already had CR, did report common adverse effects. However, the distribution was not evaluable. CR and OR were not assessable. The range of treatment options meant that rare adverse effects consequently occurred in a variety of organs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is a lack of high-certainty evidence to support decision making in the treatment of MF. Because of substantial heterogeneity in design, missing data, small sample sizes, and low methodological quality, the comparative safety and efficacy of these interventions cannot be reliably established on the basis of the included RCTs. PUVA is commonly recommended as first-line treatment for MF, and we did not find evidence to challenge this recommendation. There was an absence of evidence to support the use of intralesional IFN-α or bexarotene in people receiving PUVA and an absence of evidence to support the use of acitretin or ECP for treating MF. Future trials should compare the safety and efficacy of treatments to PUVA, as the current standard of care, and should measure quality of life and common adverse effects.
Topics: Acitretin; Antineoplastic Agents; Bexarotene; Combined Modality Therapy; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Interferon-alpha; Mycosis Fungoides; Neoplasm Staging; PUVA Therapy; Photochemotherapy; Photopheresis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 32632956
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008946.pub3 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Feb 2021
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Acitretin; Carcinoma, Basal Cell; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Humans; Keratosis, Actinic; Niacinamide; Organ Transplantation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms; Transplant Recipients; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32387631
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.04.160