Add-on Psoralea corylifolia mother tincture external application to individualized homeopathic medicines in treatment of vitiligo: Open, randomized, pragmatic, pilot trial

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Plant Extracts as Add-On Therapeutics in Homeopathy: An Open-Label, Randomized Trial Using Mother Tinctures in Prediabetes

Objectives: Prediabetes is a major public health concern. Different plant extracts are used in homeopathy as mother tinctures (MTs) for the treatment of prediabetes as an adjunct to individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs); however, their effectiveness remains under-researched. Design: Open-label, randomized (1:1), active-controlled, pragmatic, exploratory trial. Setting: Mahesh Bhattacharyya Homoeopathic Medical College and Hospital, Howrah, West Bengal, India. Subjects: Eighty-nine patients with prediabetes. Interventions: Group 1 (n = 45; IHMs plus any one of the following MTs: Cephalandra indica, Gymnema sylvestre, and Syzygium jambolanum; experimental/verum) versus Group 2 (n = 44; IHMs only; control). Outcome measures: Blood parameters, including-the fasting blood sugar (FBS) level, blood sugar level 2 h after ingestion of 75 g of glucose (oral glucose tolerance test [OGTT] result), and glycosylated hemoglobin percentage (HbA1c%), and symptoms, including the Diabetes Symptom Checklist-Revised (DSC-R) score; all of them were measured at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. Results: Although recruitment of 140 patients was initially planned, the target sample size could not be achieved because of coronavirus disease pandemic-related restrictions. Only 89 patients could be enrolled, and the trial had to be terminated prematurely owing to the time constraints of the project. The data of 82 patients (Group 1, n = 40; Group 2, n = 42) were analyzed using a modified intention-to-treat approach. Improvements in all outcomes were greater in Group 1 than in Group 2, but without a significant difference: FBS level (F_{1, 80} = 4.095, p = 0.046), OGTT result (F_{1, 80} = 2.399, p = 0.125), HbA1c% (F_{1, 80} = 1.612, p = 0.208), and DSC-R score (F_{1, 80} = 0.023, p = 0.880). Conclusions: A promising but nonsignificant trend favored the combination of MTs and IHMs compared with IHMs alone among the patients with prediabetes, especially in FBS. Therefore, further studies are required. Clinical Trial Registration number: CTRI/2018/08/015319; secondary identifier (UTN): U1111-1218-6016.

Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in Treatment of Vitiligo: Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Trial

Objective: The feasibility of a definitive trial was tested to evaluate individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs) for the treatment of vitiligo. Design: This was a double-blind randomized (1:1) placebo-controlled pilot trial conducted at the National Institute Homeopathy, India. Sixty patients with vitiligo were included in the study. Interventions: IHMs and identical-looking placebos at 50-millesimal (LM) potencies. Outcome measures: Feasibility issues and scores from the Vitiligo Area Scoring Index (VASI), Vitiligo-specific Quality-of-life instrument (VitiQoL), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) were measured at baseline and after 3 and 6 months. Results: The recruitment and retention rates were satisfactory. Mean reductions in the outcome measures were higher in the IHM group than placebo. Conclusions: Definitive efficacy trials are warranted. Clinical Trials Registry-India: CTRI/2018/10/016160; secondary identifier UTN: U1111-1221-7704.