-
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2018Psoriasis is a chronic autoimmune-mediated skin disease that is characterized by persistent localized erythematous scaly plaque. Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF), a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis is a chronic autoimmune-mediated skin disease that is characterized by persistent localized erythematous scaly plaque. Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF), a well-known Chinese medicine that has been used for centuries in China to treat immune diseases, inflammation, and tumor, is accompanied by a degree of toxic effects. Its clinical efficacy and safety on psoriasis are incompletely understood.
AIM
To summarize evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of TwHF in treating psoriasis. EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, Springer, Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, and VIP database were searched up to October 2017. The included literature was assessed and extracted by two independent reviewers. To enhance the available evidence, a systematic review was performed to examine all relevant published literature relating to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TwHF. Relative ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and a meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
Twenty eligible RCTs with 1872 participants were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The meta-analysis of add-on effect of TwHF conferred benefit for psoriasis: combination treatment with compound glycyrrhizin (four studies, OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.22-0.52, < 0.00001, = 0%), combination treatment with acitretin (three studies, OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.10-0.63, = 0.003, = 50%), and combination treatment with compound amino-polypeptide tablet (three studies, OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.22-0.63, = 0.0002, = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Despite several mild side effects of TwHF, there is evidence that TwHF is an effective therapy for psoriasis. However, the conclusions are limited by the small number of included trials. More well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-up periods are warranted to clarify the effects and safety of TwHF in treating psoriasis.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42016041363).
PubMed: 29849698
DOI: 10.1155/2018/2623085 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2017Psoriasis 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 Review
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 conventional systemic agents (acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, methotrexate), small molecules (apremilast, tofacitinib, ponesimod), anti-TNF alpha (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab), anti-IL12/23 (ustekinumab), anti-IL17 (secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab), anti-IL23 (guselkumab, tildrakizumab), and other biologics (alefacept, itolizumab) for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases to December 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports. We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs. We searched the trial results databases of a number of pharmaceutical companies and handsearched the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic and biological 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.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three 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 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI) 90) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse effects). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes, according to GRADE; we evaluated evidence as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 109 studies in our review (39,882 randomised participants, 68% men, all recruited from a hospital). The overall average age was 44 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo controlled (67%), 23% were head-to-head studies, and 10% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and placebo. We have assessed all treatments listed in the objectives (19 in total). In all, 86 trials were multicentric trials (two to 231 centres). All of the trials included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment at less than 24 weeks after randomisation); in fact, all trials included in the network meta-analysis were measured between 12 and 16 weeks after randomisation. We assessed the majority of studies (48/109) as being at high risk of bias; 38 were assessed as at an unclear risk, and 23, low risk.Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90.In terms of 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 conventional systemic agents. Small molecules were associated with a higher chance of reaching PASI 90 compared to conventional systemic agents.At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, all of the anti-IL17 agents and guselkumab (an anti-IL23 drug) were significantly more effective than the anti-TNF alpha agents infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept, but not certolizumab. Ustekinumab was superior to etanercept. No clear difference was shown between infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept. Only one trial assessed the efficacy of infliximab in this network; thus, these results have to be interpreted with caution. Tofacitinib was significantly superior to methotrexate, and no clear difference was shown between any of the other small molecules versus conventional treatments.Network meta-analysis also showed that ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90: the most effective drug was ixekizumab (risk ratio (RR) 32.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23.61 to 44.60; Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 94.3; high-certainty evidence), followed by secukinumab (RR 26.55, 95% CI 20.32 to 34.69; SUCRA = 86.5; high-certainty evidence), brodalumab (RR 25.45, 95% CI 18.74 to 34.57; SUCRA = 84.3; moderate-certainty evidence), guselkumab (RR 21.03, 95% CI 14.56 to 30.38; SUCRA = 77; moderate-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 24.58, 95% CI 3.46 to 174.73; SUCRA = 75.7; moderate-certainty evidence), and ustekinumab (RR 19.91, 95% CI 15.11 to 26.23; SUCRA = 72.6; high-certainty evidence).We found no significant difference between all of the interventions and the placebo regarding the risk of serious adverse effects (SAEs): the relative ranking strongly suggested that methotrexate was associated with the best safety profile regarding all of the SAEs (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.99; SUCRA = 90.7; moderate-certainty evidence), followed by ciclosporin (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.10; SUCRA = 78.2; very low-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.36; SUCRA = 70.9; moderate-certainty evidence), infliximab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.00; SUCRA = 64.4; very low-certainty evidence), alefacept (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.55; SUCRA = 62.6; low-certainty evidence), and fumaric acid esters (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.99; SUCRA = 57.7; very low-certainty evidence). Major adverse cardiac events, serious infections, or malignancies were reported in both the placebo and intervention groups. Nevertheless, the SAEs analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just over half of the treatment estimates in total, moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be considered with caution.Considering both efficacy (PASI 90 outcome) and acceptability (SAEs outcome), highly effective treatments also had more SAEs compared to the other treatments, and ustekinumab, infliximab, and certolizumab appeared to have the better trade-off between efficacy and acceptability.Regarding the other efficacy outcomes, PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1, the results were very similar to the results for PASI 90.Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for a third of the interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab are the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate to severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. At class level, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents, too. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured between 12 to 16 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficiently relevant for a chronic disease. Moreover, low numbers of studies were found for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 44 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. Indeed, we found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs. Methotrexate appeared to have the best safety profile, but as the evidence was of very low to moderate quality, we cannot be sure of the ranking. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies as well.In terms of future research, randomised trials comparing directly active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between conventional systemic 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 patients, 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.
Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Chronic Disease; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha
PubMed: 29271481
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2 -
European Journal of Pediatrics Oct 2017This article provides comprehensive recommendations for the systemic treatment of severe pediatric psoriasis based on evidence obtained from a systematic review of the...
UNLABELLED
This article provides comprehensive recommendations for the systemic treatment of severe pediatric psoriasis based on evidence obtained from a systematic review of the literature and the consensus opinion of expert dermatologists and pediatricians. For each systemic treatment, the grade of recommendation (A, B, C) based on the treatment's approval by the European Medicines Agency for childhood psoriasis and the experts' opinions is discussed. The grade of recommendation for narrow-band-ultraviolet B phototherapy, cyclosporine, and retinoids is C, while that for methotrexate is C/B. The use of adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab has a grade A recommendation. No conventional systemic treatments are approved for pediatric psoriasis. Adalimumab is approved by the European Medicines Agency as a first-line treatment for severe chronic plaque psoriasis in children (≥ 4 years old) and adolescents. Etanercept and ustekinumab are approved as second-line therapy in children ≥ 6 and ≥ 12 years, respectively.
CONCLUSION
A treatment algorithm as well as practical tools (i.e., tabular summaries of differential diagnoses, treatment mechanism of actions, dosing regimens, control parameters) are provided to assist in therapeutic reasoning and decision-making for individual patients. These treatment recommendations are endorsed by major Italian Pediatric and Dermatology Societies. What is Known: • Guidelines for the treatment of severe pediatric psoriasis are lacking and most traditional systemic treatments are not approved for use in young patients. Although there has been decades of experience with some of the traditional agents such as phototherapy, acitretin, and cyclosporine in children, there are no RCTs on their pediatric use while RCTs investigating new biologic agents have been performed. What is New: • In this manuscript, an Italian multidisciplinary team of experts focused on treatment recommendations for severe forms of psoriasis in children based on an up-to-date review of the literature and experts' opinions.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Child; Combined Modality Therapy; Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Italy; Phototherapy; Psoriasis; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 28836064
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-017-2985-x -
JAMA Dermatology Aug 2017The notion that systemic isotretinoin taken within 6 to 12 months of cutaneous surgery contributes to abnormal scarring or delayed wound healing is widely taught and... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
The notion that systemic isotretinoin taken within 6 to 12 months of cutaneous surgery contributes to abnormal scarring or delayed wound healing is widely taught and practiced; however, it is based on 3 small case series from the mid-1980s.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the body of literature to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the safety of procedural interventions performed either concurrently with, or immediately following the cessation of systemic isotretinoin therapy.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A panel of national experts in pediatric dermatology, procedural/cosmetic dermatology, plastic surgery, scars, wound healing, acne, and isotretinoin was convened. A systematic PubMed review of English-language articles published from 1982 to 2017 was performed using the following search terms: isotretinoin, 13-cis-retinoic acid, Accutane, retinoids, acitretin, surgery, surgical, laser, ablative laser, nonablative laser, laser hair removal, chemical peel, dermabrasion, wound healing, safety, scarring, hypertrophic scar, and keloid. Evidence was graded, and expert consensus was obtained.
FINDINGS
Thirty-two relevant publications reported 1485 procedures. There was insufficient evidence to support delaying manual dermabrasion, superficial chemical peels, cutaneous surgery, laser hair removal, and fractional ablative and nonablative laser procedures for patients currently receiving or having recently completed isotretinoin therapy. Based on the available literature, mechanical dermabrasion and fully ablative laser are not recommended in the setting of systemic isotretinoin treatment.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Physicians and patients may have an evidence-based discussion regarding the known risk of cutaneous surgical procedures in the setting of systemic isotretinoin therapy. For some patients and some conditions, an informed decision may lead to earlier and potentially more effective interventions.
Topics: Cicatrix; Dermatologic Agents; Dermatologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Isotretinoin; Skin; Time Factors; Wound Healing
PubMed: 28658462
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.2077 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) is a chronic form of cutaneous lupus, which can cause scarring. Many drugs have been used to treat this disease and some (such as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) is a chronic form of cutaneous lupus, which can cause scarring. Many drugs have been used to treat this disease and some (such as thalidomide, cyclophosphamide and azathioprine) are potentially toxic. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2000, and previously updated in 2009. We wanted to update the review to assess whether any new information was available to treat DLE, as we were still unsure of the effectiveness of available drugs and how to select the most appropriate treatment for an individual with DLE.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of drugs for discoid lupus erythematosus.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to 22 September 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We also searched five trials databases, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant trials. Index Medicus (1956 to 1966) was handsearched and we approached authors for information about unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of drugs to treat people with DLE in any population group and of either gender. Comparisons included any drug used for DLE against either another drug or against placebo cream. We excluded laser treatment, surgery, phototherapy, other forms of physical therapy, and photoprotection as we did not consider them drug treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two reviewers independently extracted data onto a data extraction sheet, resolving disagreements by discussion. We used standard methods to assess risk of bias, as expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
Five trials involving 197 participants were included. Three new trials were included in this update. None of the five trials were of high quality.'Risk of bias' assessments identified potential sources of bias in each study. One study used an inappropriate randomisation method, and incomplete outcome data were a concern in another as 15 people did not complete the trial. We found most of the trials to be at low risk in terms of blinding, but three of the five did not describe allocation concealment.The included trials inadequately addressed the primary outcome measures of this review (percentage with complete resolution of skin lesions, percentage with clearing of erythema in at least 50% of lesions, and improvement in patient satisfaction/quality of life measures).One study of fluocinonide cream 0.05% (potent steroid) compared with hydrocortisone cream 1% (low-potency steroid) in 78 people reported complete resolution of skin lesions in 27% (10/37) of participants in the fluocinonide cream group and in 10% (4/41) in the hydrocortisone group, giving a 17% absolute benefit in favour of fluocinonide (risk ratio (RR) 2.77, 95% CI 0.95 to 8.08, 1 study, n = 78, low-quality evidence). The other primary outcome measures were not reported. Adverse events did not require discontinuation of the drug. Skin irritation occurred in three people using hydrocortisone, and one person developed acne. Burning occurred in two people using fluocinonide (moderate-quality evidence).A comparative trial of two oral agents, acitretin (50 mg daily) and hydroxychloroquine (400 mg daily), reported two of the outcomes of interest: complete resolution was seen in 13 of 28 participants (46%) on acitretin and 15 of 30 participants (50%) on hydoxychloroquine (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.59, 1 study, n = 58, low-quality evidence). Clearing of erythema in at least 50% of lesions was reported in 10 of 24 participants (42%) on acitretin and 17 of 25 (68%) on hydroxychloroquine (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.06, 1 study, n = 49, low-quality evidence). This comparison did not assess improvement in patient satisfaction/quality of life measures. Participants taking acitretin showed a small increase in serum triglyceride, not sufficient to require withdrawal of the drug. The main adverse effects were dry lips (93% of the acitretin group and 20% of the hydroxychloroquine group) and gastrointestinal disturbance (11% of the acitretin group and 17% of the hydroxychloroquine group). Four participants on acitretin withdrew due to gastrointestinal events or dry lips (moderate-quality evidence).One trial randomised 10 people with DLE to apply a calcineurin inhibitor, pimecrolimus 1% cream, or a potent steroid, betamethasone 17-valerate 0.1% cream, for eight weeks. The study reported none of the primary outcome measures, nor did it present data on adverse events.A trial of calcineurin inhibitors compared tacrolimus cream 0.1% with placebo (vehicle) over 12 weeks in 14 people, but reported none of our primary outcome measures. In the tacrolimus group, five participants complained of slight burning and itching, and for one participant, a herpes simplex infection was reactivated (moderate-quality evidence).Topical R-salbutamol 0.5% cream was compared with placebo (vehicle) over eight weeks in one trial of 37 people with DLE. There was a significant improvement in pain and itch in the salbutamol group at two, four, six, and eight weeks compared to placebo, but the trial did not record a formal measure of quality of life. None of the primary outcome measures were reported. Changes in erythema did not show benefit of salbutamol over placebo, but we could not obtain from the trial report the number of participants with clearing of erythema in at least 50% of lesions. There were 15 events in the placebo group (experienced by 12 participants) and 24 in the salbutamol group (experienced by nine participants). None of the adverse events were considered serious (moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Fluocinonide cream may be more effective than hydrocortisone in clearing DLE skin lesions. Hydroxychloroquine and acitretin appear to be of equal efficacy in terms of complete resolution, although adverse effects might be more frequent with acitretin, and clearing of erythema in at least 50% of lesions occurred less often in participants applying acitretin. Moderate-quality evidence found adverse events were minor on the whole. There is not enough reliable evidence about other drugs used to treat DLE. Overall, the quality of the trials and levels of uncertainty were such that there is a need for further trials of sufficient duration comparing, in particular, topical steroids with other agents.
Topics: Acitretin; Albuterol; Calcineurin Inhibitors; Dermatologic Agents; Fluocinonide; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Hydroxychloroquine; Lupus Erythematosus, Discoid; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tacrolimus; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28476075
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002954.pub3 -
Journal of Alternative and... Mar 2016Psoriasis vulgaris is a chronic disease that significantly affects patient's quality of life and poses an economic burden. Acitretin is a second-generation retinoid used... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Psoriasis vulgaris is a chronic disease that significantly affects patient's quality of life and poses an economic burden. Acitretin is a second-generation retinoid used for psoriasis in clinical practice. Orally administered Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), alone or combined with acitretin, has been used for the clinical management of psoriasis vulgaris. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of oral CHM in comparison with acitretin and the add-on effect of oral CHM to acitretin.
METHODS
Five English databases and four Chinese databases were searched from their inceptions to May 2014. Included randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were published in English or Chinese, compared oral CHM or the combination of oral CHM and acitretin with acitretin, and used Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) as the outcome measure.
RESULTS
A total of 25 RCTs were included in this review: 8 studies compared oral CHM with acitretin, 12 compared the combination with acitretin alone, and 5 were three-arm studies that compared both with acitretin.
CONCLUSION
The meta-analysis indicated that oral CHM was effective for psoriasis vulgaris as follows: (1) Oral CHM is neither superior nor inferior to acitretin, and (2) oral CHM could produce add-on effects when combined with acitretin. Oral CHM itself appeared safe for treating psoriasis vulgaris and possibly could reduce the common adverse events seen with acitretin. However, the long-term effect and safety of oral CHM could not be assessed. Further research should consider including a placebo control and using outcome measures according to international guidelines to evaluate CHM, as well as include follow-ups to monitor longer-term efficacy and safety.
Topics: Acitretin; Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Female; Humans; Keratolytic Agents; Male; Middle Aged; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Young Adult
PubMed: 26919330
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2014.0212 -
Acta Dermato-venereologica May 2016The efficacy of biologic or conventional systemic therapies for psoriasis has been shown in randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness, however, has been studied in... (Review)
Review
The efficacy of biologic or conventional systemic therapies for psoriasis has been shown in randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness, however, has been studied in daily practice cohorts, and no aggregation of effectiveness data is available. This systematic review searched PubMed and EMBASE and summarized the real-world evidence on effectiveness of biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab and ustekinumab) and conventional systemic therapies (acitretin, cyclosporine, fumarates and methotrexate) for the treatment of plaque psoriasis in adults. Thirty-two studies were included. Few data were available on infliximab, ustekinumab and conventional systemics. Results show that biologics and conventional systemics were effective in real-life treatment of psoriasis, with large ranges in the percentage of patients reaching 75% improvement in psoriasis area and severity index score compared with baseline, especially for etanercept and adalimumab treatment. Combination therapies of biologics with conventional systemics, and dose adjustments of biologics were frequently applied strategies and may explain the large range in improvements between cohorts.
Topics: Adult; Biological Products; Chronic Disease; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Psoriasis; Remission Induction; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26537336
DOI: 10.2340/00015555-2276 -
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology Feb 2016Cutaneous lichen planus (CLP) is an inflammatory dermatosis. Its chronic relapsing course and frequently spontaneous regression hamper the assessment of treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Cutaneous lichen planus (CLP) is an inflammatory dermatosis. Its chronic relapsing course and frequently spontaneous regression hamper the assessment of treatment effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the efficacy of available treatment modalities for CLP.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov registry.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the current literature. All randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized case-control studies, and cohort studies with more than one treatment arm were included. The primary outcomes were complete response and time to complete response. The secondary outcomes were partial response, relapse, time to relapse, reduction of itch, the adverse event rate, and withdrawal due to adverse events.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 11 were randomized controlled trials. Most trials had a small sample size. In the rare studies in which variants other than generalized or classic lichen planus were included, they could not be analyzed separately. Body-of-evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. Acitretin, sulfasalazine, and griseofulvin were associated with increased overall response rates in comparison with placebo. Narrow-band ultraviolet B radiation (NBUVB) was more effective than 6 weeks' low-dose prednisolone in achieving a complete response, and prednisolone was more effective than enoxaparin. Hydroxychloroquine was more effective than griseofulvin in achieving an overall response. Betamethasone valerate 0.1% ointment had comparable efficacy to calcipotriol ointment. Methotrexate was effective, with a nonsignificant difference in the complete response rate in comparison with oral betamethasone. In nonrandomized controlled trials, oral psoralen plus ultraviolet A photochemotherapy (PUVA) had comparable efficacy to a PUVA bath and NBUVB. Psoralen plus sunlight exposure (PUVASOL) and betamethasone dipropionate 0.05% cream were effective relative to a short course of oral metronidazole.
CONCLUSIONS
Several effective treatment options are available for CLP. Further well-designed studies are warranted to investigate the efficacy of topical glucocorticoids-the current first-line therapy-as well as other treatment modalities, and the treatment of different variants of CLP.
Topics: Acitretin; Administration, Cutaneous; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antifungal Agents; Calcitriol; Dermatologic Agents; Enoxaparin; Female; Fibrinolytic Agents; Ficusin; Glucocorticoids; Griseofulvin; Humans; Keratolytic Agents; Lichen Planus; Male; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; PUVA Therapy; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfasalazine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26507510
DOI: 10.1007/s40257-015-0160-6 -
The British Journal of Dermatology Oct 2015As a chronic disease psoriasis often requires long-term treatment. Successful continuation of therapy during a maintenance phase is therefore important. A systematic... (Review)
Review
As a chronic disease psoriasis often requires long-term treatment. Successful continuation of therapy during a maintenance phase is therefore important. A systematic review was performed on the efficacy of psoriasis drugs during maintenance treatment in patients who had achieved sufficient treatment success during the induction period. Maintenance therapy is defined as treatment during the period after successful induction therapy. Inclusion criteria were prospective studies with systemic therapies recommended by the 2009 European psoriasis guidelines (plus ustekinumab), and a study population that had achieved a defined treatment response criterion after induction therapy within a period of ≥ 6 months. Maintenance studies on conventional treatments were identified for ciclosporin (CSA) only (no studies investigating acitretin, methotrexate or ustekinumab were found). Compared with placebo, CSA was shown to be effective in maintenance therapy, yet CSA 1·5 mg kg(-1) seems to be insufficient to maintain disease control. Based on the evidence, it is uncertain whether there is any difference between daily or intermittent treatment. For biologics, maintenance data were available for adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab. No differences in 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) response were identified between adalimumab 40 mg once and twice a month. Continuous infliximab treatment was shown to be superior to as-needed treatment. For etanercept, only observational postrandomized controlled trial data were available, indicating a maintained PASI 75 response in approximately three-quarters of patients during long-term treatment. Only limited evidence is available for a conclusion on how patients with an adequate response should be optimally treated during the maintenance period. A clear ranking of the available treatments is not yet possible.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Dermatologic Agents; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26280365
DOI: 10.1111/bjd.14077 -
International Journal of Dermatology Nov 2014Clinically, oral Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) is widely used in the treatment of psoriasis. This review evaluates the effects of oral CHM in combination with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Clinically, oral Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) is widely used in the treatment of psoriasis. This review evaluates the effects of oral CHM in combination with pharmacotherapy for psoriasis vulgaris. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI, and CQVIP were searched from their inceptions to November 2012. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating CHM plus pharmacotherapy compared to pharmacotherapy were included. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.1.0. Seventeen RCTs were included, conducted in China, and employed a diversity of both herbal medicines and pharmacotherapies. When the meta-analyses were restricted to studies that used a well-known pharmacotherapy as the comparator with 60% or greater clinical improvement in psoriasis as the outcome, five studies used oral acitretin, one used topical calcipotriol, and one used topical clobetasol propionate as control interventions. At the end of treatment, there was a benefit for the pooled result of the five studies that compared CHM plus acitretin with acitretin alone and no serious adverse events were reported. However, none of these studies was blind, so there is considerable risk of bias in this result. In addition, there was inadequate reporting of longer-term results, so it remains unclear whether the reported effect could be maintained or whether the prolonged use of the CHM in conjunction with acitretin would be safe. The main plants used in these studies, Rehmannia glutinosa root, Salvia miltiorrhiza root, and Lithospermum erythrorhizon root, have shown anti-inflammatory and/or antiproliferative effects in experimental studies. These actions may at least partially explain the observed results.
Topics: Acitretin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Humans; Keratolytic Agents; Lithospermum; Phytotherapy; Plant Roots; Psoriasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rehmannia; Salvia miltiorrhiza
PubMed: 25208594
DOI: 10.1111/ijd.12607