-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE when topical treatments, such as corticosteroids, are insufficient or poorly tolerated.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of phototherapy for treating AE.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov to January 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in adults or children with any subtype or severity of clinically diagnosed AE. Eligible comparisons were any type of phototherapy versus other forms of phototherapy or any other treatment, including placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methodology. For key findings, we used RoB 2.0 to assess bias, and GRADE to assess certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes were physician-assessed signs and patient-reported symptoms. Secondary outcomes were Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety (measured as withdrawals due to adverse events), and long-term control.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 trials with 1219 randomised participants, aged 5 to 83 years (mean: 28 years), with an equal number of males and females. Participants were recruited mainly from secondary care dermatology clinics, and study duration was, on average, 13 weeks (range: 10 days to one year). We assessed risk of bias for all key outcomes as having some concerns or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information to assess selective reporting. Assessed interventions included: narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB; 13 trials), ultraviolet A1 (UVA1; 6 trials), broadband ultraviolet B (BB-UVB; 5 trials), ultraviolet AB (UVAB; 2 trials), psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA; 2 trials), ultraviolet A (UVA; 1 trial), unspecified ultraviolet B (UVB; 1 trial), full spectrum light (1 trial), Saalmann selective ultraviolet phototherapy (SUP) cabin (1 trial), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy; 1 trial), and excimer laser (1 trial). Comparators included placebo, no treatment, another phototherapy, topical treatment, or alternative doses of the same treatment. Results for key comparisons are summarised (for scales, lower scores are better): NB-UVB versus placebo/no treatment There may be a larger reduction in physician-assessed signs with NB-UVB compared to placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (mean difference (MD) -9.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.62 to -15.18; 1 trial, 41 participants; scale: 0 to 90). Two trials reported little difference between NB-UVB and no treatment (37 participants, four to six weeks of treatment); another reported improved signs with NB-UVB versus no treatment (11 participants, nine weeks of treatment). NB-UVB may increase the number of people reporting reduced itch after 12 weeks of treatment compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.69; 1 trial, 40 participants). Another trial reported very little difference in itch severity with NB-UVB (25 participants, four weeks of treatment). The number of participants with moderate to greater global improvement may be higher with NB-UVB than placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.10 to 7.17; 1 trial, 41 participants). NB-UVB may not affect rates of withdrawal due to adverse events. No withdrawals were reported in one trial of NB-UVB versus placebo (18 participants, nine weeks of treatment). In two trials of NB-UVB versus no treatment, each reported one withdrawal per group (71 participants, 8 to 12 weeks of treatment). We judged that all reported outcomes were supported with low-certainty evidence, due to risk of bias and imprecision. No trials reported HRQoL. NB-UVB versus UVA1 We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to UVA1 to be very low certainty for all outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (MD -2.00, 95% CI -8.41 to 4.41; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 108), or patient-reported itch after six weeks (MD 0.3, 95% CI -1.07 to 1.67; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 10). Two split-body trials (20 participants, 40 sides) also measured these outcomes, using different scales at seven to eight weeks; they reported lower scores with NB-UVB. One trial reported HRQoL at six weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI -9.57 to 15.37; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 30 to 150). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events over 12 weeks (13 participants). No trials reported IGA. NB-UVB versus PUVA We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to PUVA (8-methoxypsoralen in bath plus UVA) to be very low certainty for all reported outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (64.1% reduction with NB-UVB versus 65.7% reduction with PUVA; 1 trial, 10 participants, 20 sides). There was no evidence of a difference in marked improvement or complete remission after six weeks (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 7.89; 1 trial, 9/10 participants with both treatments). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events in 10 participants over six weeks. The trials did not report patient-reported symptoms or HRQoL. UVA1 versus PUVA There was very low-certainty evidence, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision, that PUVA (oral 5-methoxypsoralen plus UVA) reduced physician-assessed signs more than UVA1 after three weeks (MD 11.3, 95% CI -0.21 to 22.81; 1 trial, 40 participants; scale: 0 to 103). The trial did not report patient-reported symptoms, IGA, HRQoL, or withdrawals due to adverse events. There were no eligible trials for the key comparisons of UVA1 or PUVA compared with no treatment. Adverse events Reported adverse events included low rates of phototoxic reaction, severe irritation, UV burn, bacterial superinfection, disease exacerbation, and eczema herpeticum.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared to placebo or no treatment, NB-UVB may improve physician-rated signs, patient-reported symptoms, and IGA after 12 weeks, without a difference in withdrawal due to adverse events. Evidence for UVA1 compared to NB-UVB or PUVA, and NB-UVB compared to PUVA was very low certainty. More information is needed on the safety and effectiveness of all aspects of phototherapy for treating AE.
Topics: Adult; Child; Dermatitis, Atopic; Eczema; Female; Humans; Male; Phototherapy; Quality of Life; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 34709669
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013870.pub2 -
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics : the... Nov 2017Blue-blocking (BB) spectacle lenses, which attenuate short-wavelength light, are being marketed to alleviate eyestrain and discomfort when using digital devices, improve... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Blue-blocking (BB) spectacle lenses, which attenuate short-wavelength light, are being marketed to alleviate eyestrain and discomfort when using digital devices, improve sleep quality and potentially confer protection from retinal phototoxicity. The aim of this review was to investigate the relative benefits and potential harms of these lenses.
METHODS
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), recruiting adults from the general population, which investigated the effect of BB spectacle lenses on visual performance, symptoms of eyestrain or eye fatigue, changes to macular integrity and subjective sleep quality. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and clinical trial registers, until 30 April 2017. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool.
RESULTS
Three studies (with 136 participants) met our inclusion criteria; these had limitations in study design and/or implementation. One study compared the effect of BB lenses with clear lenses on contrast sensitivity (CS) and colour vision (CV) using a pseudo-RCT crossover design; there was no observed difference between lens types (log CS; Mean Difference (MD) = -0.01 [-0.03, 0.01], CV total error score on 100-hue; MD = 1.30 [-7.84, 10.44]). Another study measured critical fusion frequency (CFF), as a proxy for eye fatigue, on wearers of low and high BB lenses, pre- and post- a two-hour computer task. There was no observed difference between low BB and standard lens groups, but there was a less negative change in CFF between the high and low BB groups (MD = 1.81 [0.57, 3.05]). Both studies compared eyestrain symptoms with Likert scales. There was no evidence of inter-group differences for either low BB (MD = 0.00 [-0.22, 0.22]) or high BB lenses (MD = -0.05 [-0.31, 0.21]), nor evidence of a difference in the proportion of participants showing an improvement in symptoms of eyestrain or eye fatigue. One study reported a small improvement in sleep quality in people with self-reported insomnia after wearing high compared to low-BB lenses (MD = 0.80 [0.17, 1.43]) using a 10-point Likert scale. A study involving normal participants found no observed difference in sleep quality. We found no studies investigating effects on macular structure or function.
CONCLUSIONS
We find a lack of high quality evidence to support using BB spectacle lenses for the general population to improve visual performance or sleep quality, alleviate eye fatigue or conserve macular health.
Topics: Circadian Rhythm; Contrast Sensitivity; Eye Pain; Eyeglasses; Humans; Light; Macula Lutea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 29044670
DOI: 10.1111/opo.12406 -
Skin Pharmacology and Physiology 2017One of the most important dermatologic side effects of doxycycline is photosensitivity. As doxycycline is important for malaria prophylaxis and malaria is mainly spread... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
One of the most important dermatologic side effects of doxycycline is photosensitivity. As doxycycline is important for malaria prophylaxis and malaria is mainly spread in countries with high sun radiation, special attention should be paid to this adverse effect. While there are many publications on the phototoxicity of tetracyclines in general, only a few exist focusing on doxycycline. The objective of this systematic review was to summarize all available reports on clinical manifestations, influencing factors like UV dose or dose of medication, and the possibilities of prevention by sun protection.
METHODS
This review is based on a systematic search in PubMed for articles in English and German and a manual search between 1990 and 2015.
RESULTS
The number of publications is low. Clinical symptoms vary from light sunburn-like sensation (burning, erythema) to large-area photodermatitis. Also, onycholysis is possible. The triggering UV spectrum seems to consist mainly of UVA1 (340-400 nm), so UV-protective products should be used that cover this range. Travelers to tropical countries taking doxycycline for malaria prophylaxis need thorough medical counseling to avoid possibly severe phototoxic reactions.
CONCLUSION
Evidence base must be improved for giving advice on appropriate prevention measures to travelers taking doxycycline and having a risk of significant sun exposure.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Doxycycline; Humans; Malaria; Onycholysis; Photosensitivity Disorders; Sunlight; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 28291967
DOI: 10.1159/000458761 -
Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational... 2021Vitiligo is disfiguring and devastating condition that can humans feel stigmatic and devalued. Melasma is a general condition of hyperpigmentation particularly involving... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Vitiligo is disfiguring and devastating condition that can humans feel stigmatic and devalued. Melasma is a general condition of hyperpigmentation particularly involving the face. The pigmentation disorders of vitiligo (hypopigmentation or de-pigmentation) and melasma (Hypermelanosis) are common among the world's population (around 1% for vitiligo).
OBJECTIVE
The identification of medicinal plants used in the treatment of vitiligo and hypermelanosis. A systematic literature review on harms associated with the medicinal plants used in the treatment of vitiligo and hypermelanosis. To review and summarize information on reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) associated with these medicinal plants contained in (where access is available) national and global individual case safety report databases.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature with special reference to all types of clinical trial and case reports using biomedical databases including Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and so forth to identify medicinal plants alone or as an adjuvant with other treatments and their safety/tolerability in the treatment of vitiligo and Hypermelanosis. Other sources of this search were medicinal plants text books, pharmacopoeias and authentic websites discussing possible treatments for vitiligo/hypermelanosis. It also included databases such as VigiAccess containing data from spontaneous reporting schemes for ADRs.
RESULTS
A total of 55 articles (47 clinical trials and 8 case reports) met the inclusion criteria. Some trials did not reported safety information, some did report, but not very well. Reports of blistering, erythema, acute hepatitis and mutagenesis with . Adverse effects of erythema (mild to severe), phototoxic reactions, mild raise in liver transaminases, gastrointestinal disturbances, burns, itching, scaling, depigmented macules, pruritis, and giddiness with the use of psoralens. Khellin-related erythema, perilesional hyperpigmentation, gastrointestinal disturbances, mild raise in liver transaminases and orthostatic complaints. Infrequent side effects with Ginkgo biloba. Lower grade of erythema and edema reported with the use of
CONCLUSION
Primarily the retrieved clinical studies were efficacy oriented and safety parameters were secondary in priority whilst the general protocol of clinical trials requires the screening of drugs/medicinal plants on the basis of safety studies before testing the clinical aspects of efficacy. Thereby it is recommended that efficacy studies may be followed once the safety has been established for a particular medicinal plant in treating vitiligo and hypermelanosis.
PubMed: 33790609
DOI: 10.2147/CCID.S298342 -
African Journal of Traditional,... 2012Claims of benefits of aromatherapy for cancer patients include reduced anxiety levels and relief of emotional stress, pain, muscular tension and fatigue. The objective... (Review)
Review
Claims of benefits of aromatherapy for cancer patients include reduced anxiety levels and relief of emotional stress, pain, muscular tension and fatigue. The objective of this paper is to provide an updated descriptive, systematic review of evidence from pre-clinical and clinical trials assessing the benefits and safety of aromatherapy for cancer patients. Literature databases such as Medline (via Ovid), the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Cochrane Central were searched from their inception until October 2010. Only studies on cancer cells or cancer patients were included. There is no long lasting effect of aromatherapy massage, while short term improvements were reported for general well being, anxiety and depression up to 8 weeks after treatment. The reviewed studies indicate short-term effects of aromatherapy on depression, anxiety and overall wellbeing. Specifically, some clinical trials found an increase in patient-identified symptom relief, psychological wellbeing and improved sleep. Furthermore, some found a short-term improvement (up to 2 weeks after treatment) in anxiety and depression scores and better pain control. Although essential oils have generally shown minimal adverse effects, potential risks include ingesting large amounts (intentional misuse); local skin irritation, especially with prolonged skin contact; allergic contact dermatitis; and phototoxicity from reaction to sunlight (some oils). Repeated topical administration of lavender and tea tree oil was associated with reversible prepubertal gynecomastia.
Topics: Anxiety; Aromatherapy; Depression; Health; Humans; Neoplasms; Oils, Volatile; Pain; Plant Extracts; Sleep
PubMed: 23983386
DOI: 10.4314/ajtcam.v9i4.7 -
Frontiers in Bioengineering and... 2020Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO NPs) are regularly used in sunscreens because of their photoprotective capacity. The advantage of using TiO on the nanometer scale is...
Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO NPs) are regularly used in sunscreens because of their photoprotective capacity. The advantage of using TiO on the nanometer scale is due to its transparency and better UV blocking efficiency. Due to the greater surface area/volume ratio, NPs become more (bio)-reactive giving rise to concerns about their potential toxicity. To evaluate the irritation and corrosion of cosmetics, 3D skin models have been used as an alternative method to animal experimentation. However, it is not known if this model is appropriate to study skin irritation, corrosion and phototoxicity of nanomaterials such as TiO NPs. This systematic review (SR) proposed the following question: Can the toxicity of TiO nanoparticles be evaluated in a 3D skin model? This SR was conducted according to the Preliminary Report on Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The protocol was registered in CAMARADES and the ToxRTool evaluation was performed in order to increase the quality and transparency of this search. In this SR, 7 articles were selected, and it was concluded that the 3D skin model has shown to be promising to evaluate the toxicity of TiO NPs. However, most studies have used biological assays that have already been described as interfering with these NPs, demonstrating that misinterpretations can be obtained. This review will focus in the possible efforts that should be done in order to avoid interference of NPs with biological assays applied in 3D culture.
PubMed: 32587852
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00575 -
Phytomedicine : International Journal... Jul 2019Photoactivity, though known for centuries, is only recently shifting back into focus as a treatment option against cancer and microbial infections. The external factor...
BACKGROUND
Photoactivity, though known for centuries, is only recently shifting back into focus as a treatment option against cancer and microbial infections. The external factor light is the ingenious key-component of this therapy: Since light activates the drug locally, a high level of selectivity is reached and side effects are avoided. The first reported photoactive medicines were plant extracts. Synthetic entities (so-called photosensitizers PSs), however, paved the route towards the clinical approval of the so-called photodynamic therapy (PDT), and thus natural PSs took a backseat in the past.
HYPOTHESIS
Many isolated bioactive phytochemicals hold a hidden photoactive potential, which is overlooked due to the reduced common awareness of photoactivity.
METHODS
A systematic review of reported natural PSs and their supposed medicinal application was conducted by employing PubMed, Scifinder, and Web of Science. The identified photoactive natural products were compiled including information about their natural sources, their photoyield, and their pharmacological application. Furthermore, the common chemical scaffolds of natural PS are shown to enable the reader to recognize potentially overlooked natural PSs.
RESULTS
The literature review revealed over 100 natural PS, excluding porphyrins. The PSs were classified according to their scaffold. Thereby it was shown that some PS-scaffolds were analyzed in a detailed way, while other classes were only scarcely investigated, which leaves space for future discoveries. In addition, the literature revealed that many PSs are phytoalexins, thus the selection of the starting material significantly matters in order to find new PSs.
CONCLUSION
Photoactive principles are ubiquitous and can be found in various plant extracts. With the increasing availability of light-irradiation setups for the identification of photoactive natural products, we anticipate the discovery of many new natural PSs in the near future. With the accumulation of chemically diverse PSs, PDT itself might finally reach its clinical breakthrough as a promising alternative treatment against multi-resistant microbes and cancer types.
Topics: Biological Products; Humans; Neoplasms; Photochemotherapy; Photosensitizing Agents; Phytochemicals; Sesquiterpenes; Phytoalexins
PubMed: 31257117
DOI: 10.1016/j.phymed.2019.152985 -
JAMA Dermatology Mar 2019Phototherapy is one of the mainstays of treatment for early mycosis fungoides (MF). The most common modalities are psoralen-UV-A (PUVA) and narrowband UV-B (NBUVB). (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Phototherapy is one of the mainstays of treatment for early mycosis fungoides (MF). The most common modalities are psoralen-UV-A (PUVA) and narrowband UV-B (NBUVB).
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of PUVA vs NBUVB in early-stage MF.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic review was performed by searching Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, American College of Physicians ACP Journal Club, and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness from inception to March 30, 2018. UV A, PUVA, mycosis fungoides, Sézary syndrome, cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, UV B, and UVB were used as either key words or MeSH terms.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies of cohorts with histologically confirmed early-stage MF, defined as stages IA, IB, and IIA, that compared PUVA vs NBUVB, had at least 10 patients in each comparator group, and reported outcomes of response to therapy. Exclusion criteria were studies with patients with stage IIB or higher MF, pediatric patients, fewer than 10 in each comparator group, noncomparative studies, case reports, and abstract studies.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. Data were pooled using a random-effects model with odds ratio (OR) as effect size.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Main outcomes were complete response rate, partial response rate, disease recurrence, and adverse effects, including erythema, nausea, pruritus, phototoxic effects, dyspepsia, and pain.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included with a total of 778 patients (405 of 724 [55.9%] men; mean age, 52 years); 527 were treated with PUVA and 251 with NBUVB. Most of the included studies were of poor to moderate quality. Any response was found in 479 of the 527 (90.9%) patients treated with PUVA vs 220 of 251 (87.6%) treated with NBUVB (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.84-2.34; P = .20). Complete response was found in 389 of 527 (73.8%) patients who received PUVA vs 156 of 251 (62.2%) who received NBUVB, which was statistically significant (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.02-2.76; P = .04). Partial response was similar (90 of 501 [18.0%] vs 64 of 233 [27.5%]; OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.33-1.04; P = .07). No significant difference was found between PUVA and NBUVB in terms of adverse effects of erythema (38 of 527 [7.2%] vs 17 of 251 [6.7%]; P = .54), nausea (10 of 527 [1.9%] vs 3 of 251 [1.2%]; P = .72), pruritus (2 of 527 [0.4%] vs 4 of 251 [1.7%]; P = .26), phototoxic effects (7 of 527 [1.4%] vs 2 of 251 [0.9%]; P = .72), dyspepsia (6 of 527 [1.2%] vs 0 of 251 [0%]; P = .59), or pain (0 of 527 [0%] vs 2 of 251 [0.9%]; P = .50).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings suggest that PUVA is a potential alternative to NBUVB in the management of early-stage MF. These findings have implications for clinicians involved in the management of early-stage MF.
Topics: Aged; Female; Ficusin; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mycosis Fungoides; PUVA Therapy; Prognosis; Skin Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Ultraviolet Therapy
PubMed: 30698622
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.5204