-
Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease Jan 2024Lichen sclerosus (LS) is a chronic, inflammatory process affecting predominantly anogenital skin, with extragenital involvement in up to 20% of cases. The mainstay of...
BACKGROUND
Lichen sclerosus (LS) is a chronic, inflammatory process affecting predominantly anogenital skin, with extragenital involvement in up to 20% of cases. The mainstay of therapy for anogenital LS is topical immunosuppression. However, in treatment-refractory cases, severe, or hypertrophic disease, systemic modalities may be used. Currently, there are no guidelines for systemic therapy in LS.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to provide a review of the current literature on use of systemic therapies for LS, including demographic and clinical features of LS, as well as reported outcomes.
METHODS
A primary literature search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science, from the year the journal was published until June 2022.
RESULTS
Ultimately, 71 studies consisting of 392 patients were included. Of these, 65% (n = 254) had anogenital disease, 9% (n = 36) had extragenital disease, and 19% (n = 73) had both anogenital and extragenital disease, and in 7% (n = 29) of cases, location was not specified. The most frequent therapies, stratified by total cases, included oral retinoids (n = 227), methotrexate (n = 59), hydroxychloroquine (n = 36), and systemic steroids (prednisone, methylprednisolone, prednisolone, oral triamcinolone, and other systemic steroids) (n = 60). Overall, 76% (n = 194) of anogenital, 94% (n = 34) of extragenital, and 81% (n = 59) of patients with both anogenital and extragenital involvement were reported to have clinical or symptomatic improvement.
CONCLUSION
Overall, we found many therapies that have been used with reported success for extragenital and genital LS. However, future studies are needed to better define treatment outcomes and directly compare efficacy of different therapies for LS.
Topics: Humans; Lichen Sclerosus et Atrophicus; Methotrexate; Treatment Outcome; Skin; Steroids
PubMed: 37924260
DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000775 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023New reports suggest that anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to treat respiratory tract infections caused by SARS-CoV-2. Anti-inflammatory drugs were the most... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
New reports suggest that anti-inflammatory drugs are widely used to treat respiratory tract infections caused by SARS-CoV-2. Anti-inflammatory drugs were the most frequently used treatment for the COVID-19-related cytokine storm in China. However, the efficacy of anti-inflammatory drugs has yet to be systematically analyzed, and clinicians are often uncertain which class of anti-inflammatory drug is the most effective in treating patients with respiratory tract infections caused by SARS-CoV-2, especially those with severe disease.
METHODS
From 1 October 2022, relevant studies were searched in the PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. A total of 16,268 publications were retrieved and collated according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and sensitivity analyses were performed using STATA 14 software. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger's test. Study quality was assessed using the PEDro scale, and the combined advantage ratio was expressed as a 95% confidence interval (CI). In total, 19 randomized controlled trials were included in the study. STATA 14 software was used for all random effects model analyses, and the results are expressed as relative risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI.
RESULTS
Quantitative analyses were performed on 14,514 patients from 19 relevant randomized controlled clinical trials. Pooled estimates (RR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.44-0.80) revealed that the use of anti-inflammatory drugs resulted in a significant reduction in mortality in patients with respiratory tract infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 compared with controls, and methylprednisolone (RR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.56) was more effective than other anti-inflammatory drugs. Anti-inflammatory drugs were effective in reducing mortality in critically ill patients (RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-0.98) compared with non-critically ill patients (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.76); however, more clinical evidence is needed to confirm these findings.
CONCLUSION
The use of anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with respiratory infections caused by SARS-CoV-2 reduces patient mortality, especially in severe cases. In individual studies, methylprednisolone was more effective than other drugs.
Topics: Humans; SARS-CoV-2; COVID-19; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Methylprednisolone; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 37920591
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1198987 -
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 -
Biomedicines Sep 2023The clinical response to classical immunosuppressant drugs (cIMDs) is highly variable among individuals. We performed a systematic review of published evidence... (Review)
Review
The clinical response to classical immunosuppressant drugs (cIMDs) is highly variable among individuals. We performed a systematic review of published evidence supporting the hypothesis that gut microorganisms may contribute to this variability by affecting cIMD pharmacokinetics, efficacy or tolerability. The evidence that these drugs affect the composition of intestinal microbiota was also reviewed. The PubMed and Scopus databases were searched using specific keywords without limits of species (human or animal) or time from publication. One thousand and fifty five published papers were retrieved in the initial database search. After screening, 50 papers were selected to be reviewed. Potential effects on cIMD pharmacokinetics, efficacy or tolerability were observed in 17/20 papers evaluating this issue, in particular with tacrolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolic acid and corticosteroids, whereas evidence was missing for everolimus and sirolimus. Only one of the papers investigating the effect of cIMDs on the gut microbiota reported negative results while all the others showed significant changes in the relative abundance of specific intestinal bacteria. However, no unique pattern of microbiota modification was observed across the different studies. In conclusion, the available evidence supports the hypothesis that intestinal microbiota could contribute to the variability in the response to some cIMDs, whereas data are still missing for others.
PubMed: 37761003
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11092562 -
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology... Mar 2024Due to ethical considerations, antenatal dose finding for prednisolone and dexamethasone in pregnant women is limited, leading to a knowledge gap.
CONTEXT
Due to ethical considerations, antenatal dose finding for prednisolone and dexamethasone in pregnant women is limited, leading to a knowledge gap.
OBJECTIVE
In order to guide the clinician in weighing benefits vs risks, the aim is to systematically review the current literature on the side effects of antenatal predniso(lo)ne and dexamethasone use on the fetus, newborn, and (pre)pubertal child.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase using prespecified keywords and Medical Subject Headings. This systematic review investigated studies published until August 2022, with the following inclusion criteria: studies were conducted in humans and assessed side effects of long-term antenatal predniso(lo)ne and dexamethasone use during at least one of the trimesters on the child during the fetal period, neonatal phase, and during childhood.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
In total, 328 papers in PubMed and 193 in Embase were identified. Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Seven records were added through references. Antenatal predniso(lo)ne use may be associated with lower gestational age, but was not associated with miscarriages and stillbirths, congenital abnormalities, differences in blood pressure or low blood glucose levels at birth, or with low bone mass, long-term elevated cortisol and cortisone, or high blood pressure at prepubertal age. Increased risks of antenatal dexamethasone use include association with miscarriages and stillbirths, and from age 16 years, associations with disturbed insulin secretion and higher glucose and cholesterol levels.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the limited evidence found, predniso(lo)ne may have less side effects compared with dexamethasone in short- and long-term outcomes. Current literature shows minimal risk of side effects in the newborn from administration of a prenatal predniso(lo)ne dose of up to 10 mg per day.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Child; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Adolescent; Stillbirth; Abortion, Spontaneous; Prenatal Care; Dexamethasone; Fetus
PubMed: 37715964
DOI: 10.1210/clinem/dgad547 -
Current Rheumatology Reviews 2024Henoch-Schönlein purpura (IgA vasculitis) is the most common childhood vasculitis, one of its complications is renal involvement. However, several treatment regimens...
BACKGROUNDS
Henoch-Schönlein purpura (IgA vasculitis) is the most common childhood vasculitis, one of its complications is renal involvement. However, several treatment regimens have been proposed to improve renal function in the long term, but which drug regimen can be most effective is still controversial.
METHODS
This study was a systematic review. In order to find evidence related to the purpose of this study, databases including Google Scholar, Web of Science, ProQuest and Medline via PubMed, and Scopus were searched with the appropriate keywords. QUADAS-2 (a Quality Assessment tools for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) checklist was also used to evaluate the quality of studies. Based on the keywords used in reviewing the information sources of scientific articles, in the first stage, 86 studies were included in the review. Taking into account characteristics such as lack of homogeneity with the objectives of the present study, finally, 11 studies were selected for analysis and final evaluation.
RESULTS
A total of 11 studies, including 722 patients in the age range of 5.5 to 9.9 years with HSP were included in the study. The follow-up period of the patients varied from 6 months to 16 years in terms of examining the treatment process. In terms of study type, 7 studies were conducted as prospective or retrospective (non-interventional) cohorts and 4 studies as randomized clinical trials. The treatment regimen of injectable methylprednisolone followed by oral prednisolone resulted in a long-term recovery of 79.2% (95% confidence interval between 0.66% and 88.2%); however, the need for additional immunosuppressive in two studies was mentioned as 38% and 46.1%, respectively. In the therapeutic regimen of oral methylprednisolone alone, a significant improvement in long-term renal function was achieved in comparison with placebo. Administration of injectable methylprednisolone followed by cyclosporine A had the highest effectiveness in terms of improving renal function in the long term.
CONCLUSION
Regimes based on the administration of prednisolone (either oral or injectable, either as a single drug or as a combination) lead to long-term improvement of renal function in patients with HSP, but the use of other immunosuppressive drugs such as cyclosporine A, of course, with optimizing the drug dose can lead to a significant improvement in the clinical performance.
Topics: Humans; Child; Child, Preschool; Kidney; IgA Vasculitis; Cyclosporine; Retrospective Studies; Prospective Studies; Immunosuppressive Agents; Methylprednisolone
PubMed: 37698064
DOI: 10.2174/1573397119666230825163008 -
Medicine Sep 2023Methylprednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) are commonly prescribed hormone drugs for treating coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, but conflicting... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Methylprednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) are commonly prescribed hormone drugs for treating coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, but conflicting results from previous studies and meta-analyses on their efficacy and safety necessitate further investigation. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to enhance the level of evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of MP and DXM in COVID-19 patients.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve randomized clinical trials. Our primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including admission to the intensive care unit, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, and adverse events.
RESULTS
This study analyzed six randomized controlled trials involving 1403 patients (MP group: 704; DXM group: 699). The results of the analysis showed no significant differences in mortality rates, admission to intensive care units, hospitalization time, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between the MP and DXM groups (P > .05). However, a significant difference was observed in the incidence of hyperglycemia between these 2 groups (RR = 1.78, 95% CI [1.09, 2.89], P = .02, I2 = 78%).
CONCLUSION
The results of this meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in mortality, ICU admission rate, hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between MP and DXM in the treatment of COVID-19. The incidence of hyperglycemia with methylprednisolone was higher than that with dexamethasone.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Drug Treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Hyperglycemia; Methylprednisolone; Dexamethasone
PubMed: 37682199
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034738 -
Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics &... Sep 2023There is limited safety data on the use of everolimus during pregnancy. In this study, we present the maternal and neonatal outcomes of everolimus used throughout the...
OBJECTIVE
There is limited safety data on the use of everolimus during pregnancy. In this study, we present the maternal and neonatal outcomes of everolimus used throughout the course of pregnancy and conducted a systematic review of reports of everolimus use after organ transplantation during pregnancy.
CASE REPORT
A woman with type 1 diabetes who underwent kidney transplantation was treated with tacrolimus, everolimus, and prednisolone. Two years later, she became pregnant. At 27 weeks of gestation, an emergent cesarean delivery was performed owing to severe preeclampsia and fetal distress. No congenital malformation was noted in the baby at a corrected age of 4 months, and the maternal renal function remained stable.
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review did not identify evidence of teratogenicity in babies exposed to everolimus as an immunosuppressant after transplantation. To better assess the risk of exposure to everolimus during pregnancy, all cases of new pregnancies occurring in transplant recipients receiving treatment with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor inhibitors should be reported.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Everolimus; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney; Kidney Transplantation; Sirolimus
PubMed: 37679013
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2023.07.026 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2023Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Oral steroids are the standard treatment. We have updated this review, which was first... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common autoimmune blistering disease. Oral steroids are the standard treatment. We have updated this review, which was first published in 2002, because several new treatments have since been tried.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of treatments for bullous pemphigoid.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated searches of the following databases to November 2021: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched five trial databases to January 2022, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs of treatments for immunofluorescence-confirmed bullous pemphigoid.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors, working independently, evaluated the studies against the review's inclusion criteria and extracted data from included studies. Using GRADE methodology, we assessed the certainty of the evidence for each outcome in each comparison. Our primary outcomes were healing of skin lesions and mortality.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 14 RCTs (1442 participants). The main treatment modalities assessed were oral steroids, topical steroids, and the oral anti-inflammatory antibiotic doxycycline. Most studies reported mortality but adverse events and quality of life were not well reported. We decided to look at the primary outcomes 'disease control' and 'mortality'. Almost all studies investigated different comparisons; two studies were placebo-controlled. The results are therefore based on a single study for each comparison except azathioprine. Most studies involved only small numbers of participants. We assessed the risk of bias for all key outcomes as having 'some concerns' or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information. Clobetasol propionate cream versus oral prednisone Compared to oral prednisone, clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body probably increases skin healing at day 21 (risk ratio (RR 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.13; 1 study, 341 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Skin healing at 21 days was seen in 99.8% of participants assigned to clobetasol and 92.4% of participants assigned to prednisone. Clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body compared to oral prednisone may reduce mortality at one year (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.01; 1 study, 341 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death occurred in 26.5% (45/170) of participants assigned to clobetasol and 36.3% (62/171) of participants assigned to oral prednisone. This study did not measure quality of life. Clobetasol propionate cream may reduce risk of severe complications by day 21 compared with oral prednisone (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.86; 1 study, 341 participants; low-certainty evidence). Mild clobetasol propionate cream regimen (10 to 30 g/day) versus standard clobetasol propionate cream regimen (40 g/day) A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen probably does not change skin healing at day 21 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.03; 1 study, 312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Both groups showed complete healing of lesions at day 21 in 98% participants. A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen may not change mortality at one year (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.32; 1 study, 312 participants; low-certainty evidence), which occurred in 118/312 (37.9%) participants. This study did not measure quality of life. A mild regimen of topical clobetasol propionate applied over the whole body compared to the standard regimen may not change adverse events at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.14; 1 study, 309 participants; low-certainty evidence). Doxycycline versus prednisolone Compared to prednisolone (0.5 mg/kg/day), doxycycline (200 mg/day) induces less skin healing at six weeks (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.92; 1 study, 213 participants; high-certainty evidence). Complete skin healing was reported in 73.8% of participants assigned to doxycycline and 91.1% assigned to prednisolone. Doxycycline compared to prednisolone probably decreases mortality at one year (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.89; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 14; 1 study, 234 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Mortality occurred in 2.4% (3/132) of participants with doxycycline and 9.7% (11/121) with prednisolone. Compared to prednisolone, doxycycline improved quality of life at one year (mean difference 1.8 points lower, which is more favourable on the Dermatology Life Quality Index, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.58 lower; 1 study, 234 participants; high-certainty evidence). Doxycycline compared to prednisolone probably reduces severe or life-threatening treatment-related adverse events at one year (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.99; 1 study, 234 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Prednisone plus azathioprine versus prednisone It is unclear whether azathioprine plus prednisone compared to prednisone alone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from two trials (98 participants). These studies did not measure quality of life. Adverse events were reported in a total of 20/48 (42%) participants assigned to azathioprine plus prednisone and 15/44 (34%) participants assigned to prednisone. Nicotinamide plus tetracycline versus prednisone It is unclear whether nicotinamide plus tetracycline compared to prednisone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from one trial (18 participants). This study did not measure quality of life. Fewer adverse events were reported in the nicotinamide group. Methylprednisolone plus azathioprine versus methylprednisolone plus dapsone It is unclear whether azathioprine plus methylprednisolone compared to dapsone plus methylprednisolone affects skin healing or mortality because there was only very low-certainty evidence from one trial (54 participants). This study did not measure quality of life. A total of 18 adverse events were reported in the azathioprine group and 13 in the dapsone group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body is probably similarly effective as, and may cause less mortality than, oral prednisone for treating bullous pemphigoid. Lower-dose clobetasol propionate cream applied over the whole body is probably similarly effective as standard-dose clobetasol propionate cream and has similar mortality. Doxycycline is less effective but causes less mortality than prednisolone for treating bullous pemphigoid. Other treatments need further investigation.
Topics: Humans; Azathioprine; Prednisone; Clobetasol; Pemphigoid, Bullous; Doxycycline; Methylprednisolone; Dapsone; Niacinamide
PubMed: 37572360
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002292.pub4