A first prospective randomized controlled trial on the efficacy and safety of synchronous balneophototherapy vs. narrow-band UVB monotherapy for atopic dermatitis

Bathing in Atopic Dermatitis in Pediatric Age: Why, How and When

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease. The treatment plays an important role in influencing the patients' quality of life. The basic management consists of appropriate skin cleansing, including bathing and eventually using bathing additives. Recommendations regarding frequency and duration of bathing, water temperature and usefulness of bathing additives are widely different, often leading to confusion among patients. This review aims to give insights into the best bathing practices and the use of bathing additives in atopic dermatitis in children. Several bathing additives, including bleach baths, commercial baby cleansers, bath baby oils and bath salt, appear to be promising adjunctive therapies for atopic dermatitis due to their anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, anti-pruritus and skin barrier repair properties through different mechanisms of action. However, their efficacy and safety are not fully understood in some cases. The usefulness of other bath additives, such as acidic and more natural substances (green tea extracts, pine tar, sodium bicarbonate), is still under investigation. Further studies are needed to determine their optimal use to achieve clinical benefit safely.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna).

RESULTS

The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Narrative review on the management of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis in pediatric age of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP), of the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP) and of the Italian Society of Pediatrics (SIP)

Currently, there are a few detailed guidelines on the overall management of children and adolescents with moderate-severe atopic dermatitis. AD ​​is a complex disease presenting with different clinical phenotypes, which require an individualized and multidisciplinary approach. Therefore, appropriate interaction between primary care pediatricians, pediatric allergists, and pediatric dermatologists is crucial to finding the best management strategy. In this manuscript, members of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP), the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP), and the Italian Society of Pediatrics (SIP) with expertise in the management of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis have reviewed the latest scientific evidence in the field. This narrative review aims to define a pathway to appropriately managing children and adolescents with moderate-severe atopic dermatitis.

[Narrow-band medium-wave ultraviolet therapy in patients with atopic dermatitis: efficacy and safety]

For the treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis of moderate and heavy severity level, narrow-band medium-wave ultraviolet therapy (narrow-band phototherapy) can be used. An analysis of the results of studies of the efficacy and safety of narrow-band medium-wavelength ultraviolet therapy in patients with atopic dermatitis is presented, and a characteristic of the regimens of the phototherapy carried out is given. It has been shown that narrow-band phototherapy is an effective and safe method of treating patients with atopic dermatitis, but its effectiveness varies widely. Data were obtained on the absence of an increase in the effect during therapy with higher doses of radiation, about the higher efficiency of narrow-band phototherapy with concurrent medication, with an increase in the number of irradiation procedures, as well as in patients with a higher minimum erythemal dose, which indicates the possible existence of factors characterizing the individual characteristics of the response of patients to narrow-band phototherapy.

Phototherapy for atopic eczema

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.

Cold Argon Plasma as Adjuvant Tumour Therapy on Progressive Head and Neck Cancer: A Preclinical Study

Investigating cold argon plasma (CAP) for medical applications is a rapidly growing, innovative field of research. The controllable supply of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species through CAP has the potential for utilization in tumour treatment. Maxillofacial surgery is limited if tumours grow on vital structures such as the arteria carotis. Here CAP could be considered as an option for adjuvant intraoperative tumour therapy especially in the case of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Further preclinical research is necessary to investigate the efficacy of this technology for future clinical applications in cancer treatment. Initially, a variety of in vitro assays was performed on two cell lines that served as surrogate for the squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and healthy tissue, respectively. Cell viability, motility and the activation of apoptosis in SCC cells (HNO97) was compared with those in normal HaCaT keratinocytes. In addition, induction of apoptosis in ex vivo CAP treated human tissue biopsies of patients with tumours of the head and neck was monitored and compared to healthy control tissue of the same patient. In response to CAP treatment, normal HaCaT keratinocytes differed significantly from their malignant counterpart HNO97 cells in cell motility only whereas cell viability remained similar. Moreover, CAP treatment of tumour tissue induced more apoptotic cells than in healthy tissue that was accompanied by elevated extracellular cytochrome c levels. This study promotes a future role of CAP as an adjuvant intraoperative tumour therapy option in the treatment of head and neck cancer. Moreover, patient-derived tissue explants complement in vitro examinations in a meaningful way to reflect an antitumoral role of CAP.

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document. Section IV: Treatment Options for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis

The objectives of therapy for atopic dermatitis (AD) are to reduce skin inflammation and pruritus, restore skin barrier function, and improve quality of life (QoL). Treatments can be classified as moisturizing and basic care, topical therapy, phototherapy, and systemic therapy. In this review, we summarize the treatments for AD and recommendations for their use.

Bathing and Associated Treatments in Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common complaints presenting to dermatologists, and patients typically inquire as to appropriate bathing recommendations. Although many dermatologists, allergists, and primary-care practitioners provide explicit bathing instructions, recommendations regarding frequency of bathing, duration of bathing, and timing related to emollient and medication application relative to bathing vary widely. Conflicting and vague guidelines stem from knowledge related to the disparate effects of water on skin, as well as a dearth of studies, especially randomized controlled trials, evaluating the effects of water and bathing on the skin of patients with atopic dermatitis. We critically review the literature related to bathing and associated atopic dermatitis treatments, such as wet wraps, bleach baths, bath additives, and balneotherapy. We aim to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the impact of water and related therapies on atopic dermatitis as well as recommendations based upon the published data.

Phototherapy in Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common chronic inflammatory skin diseases. Currently management of AD includes avoidance of triggering factors, skin care aiming to compensate the skin barrier defects, anti-inflammatory therapy (mostly topical corticosteroids and topical calcineurin inhibitors). When these first-line approaches are unsuccessful, systemic treatment or phototherapy ought to be carried out as next line of defence. Current phototherapy modalities for AD include broadband UVB (290-320 nm), narrowband UVB (311-313 nm), UVA-1 therapy (340-400 nm), UVA therapy plus 8-methoxypsoralens (PUVA), 308 nm excimer laser (EL) and Full spectrum light (FSL).

Complementary and Alternative Medicine for Atopic Dermatitis: An Evidence-Based Review

BACKGROUND

Complementary and alternative interventions are becoming increasingly utilized as adjuncts to conventional treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). While the number of studies continues to grow, the vastness of the subject coupled with the relatively poor quality and small size of the studies limit their usefulness to clinicians.

PURPOSE

Our aim was to comprehensively review randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of complementary and alternative therapies for AD.

METHODS

Searches were performed on PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and the Global Resource for EczemA Trial (GREAT) databases, focusing on RCTs of alternative or complementary AD therapies, with a sample size of ≥10, through March 2015 and limited to the English language. A total of 70 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis.

RESULTS

There is at least some level I evidence to support the use of acupuncture and acupressure, stress-reducing techniques such as hypnosis, massage, and biofeedback, balneotherapy, herbal preparations (with many important caveats), certain botanical oils, oral evening primrose oil, vitamin D supplementation, and topical vitamin B₁₂. Many other therapies either have sufficient data to suggest that they are ineffective, or simply do not have enough evidence to formulate a verdict.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful review of the literature reveals several promising therapies in this domain; such findings may help direct further research that is necessary to bolster clinical recommendations for alternative or complementary treatments of AD.

Scoping systematic review of treatments for eczema

Background

Eczema is a very common chronic inflammatory skin condition.

Objectives

To update the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) systematic review of treatments for atopic eczema, published in 2000, and to inform health-care professionals, commissioners and patients about key treatment developments and research gaps.

Data sources

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched from the end of 2000 to 31 August 2013. Retrieved articles were used to identify further randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Review methods

Studies were filtered according to inclusion criteria and agreed by consensus in cases of uncertainty. Abstracts were excluded and non-English-language papers were screened by international colleagues and data were extracted. Only RCTs of treatments for eczema were included, as other forms of evidence are associated with higher risks of bias. Inclusion criteria for studies included availability of data relevant to the therapeutic management of eczema; mention of randomisation; comparison of two or more treatments; and prospective data collection. Participants of all ages were included. Eczema diagnosis was determined by a clinician or according to published diagnostic criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. We used a standardised approach to summarising the data and the assessment of risk of bias and we made a clear distinction between what the studies found and our own interpretation of study findings.

Results

Of 7198 references screened, 287 new trials were identified spanning 92 treatments. Trial reporting was generally poor (randomisation method: 2% high, 36% low, 62% unclear risk of bias; allocation concealment: 3% high, 15% low, 82% unclear risk of bias; blinding of the intervention: 15% high, 28% low, 57% unclear risk of bias). Only 22 (8%) trials were considered to be at low risk of bias for all three criteria. There was reasonable evidence of benefit for the topical medications tacrolimus, pimecrolimus and various corticosteroids (with tacrolimus superior to pimecrolimus and corticosteroids) for both treatment and flare prevention; oral ciclosporin; oral azathioprine; narrow band ultraviolet B (UVB) light; Atopiclair™ and education. There was reasonable evidence to suggest no clinically useful benefit for twice-daily compared with once-daily topical corticosteroids; corticosteroids containing antibiotics for non-infected eczema; probiotics; evening primrose and borage oil; ion-exchange water softeners; protease inhibitor SRD441 (Serentis Ltd); furfuryl palmitate in emollient; cipamfylline cream; andMycobacterium vaccaevaccine. Additional research evidence is needed for emollients, bath additives, antibacterials, specialist clothing and complementary and alternative therapies. There was no RCT evidence for topical corticosteroid dilution, impregnated bandages, soap avoidance, bathing frequency or allergy testing.

Limitations

The large scope of the review coupled with the heterogeneity of outcomes precluded formal meta-analyses. Our conclusions are still limited by a profusion of small, poorly reported studies.

Conclusions

Although the evidence base of RCTs has increased considerably since the last NIHR HTA systematic review, the field is still severely hampered by poor design and reporting problems including failure to register trials and declare primary outcomes, small sample size, short follow-up duration and poor reporting of risk of bias. Key areas for further research identified by the review include the optimum use of emollients, bathing frequency, wash products, allergy testing and antiseptic treatments. Perhaps the greatest benefit identified is the use of twice weekly anti-inflammatory treatment to maintain disease remission. More studies need to be conducted in a primary care setting where most people with eczema are seen in the UK. Future studies need to use the same core set of outcomes that capture patient symptoms, clinical signs, quality of life and the chronic nature of the disease.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Consensus Conference on Clinical Management of pediatric Atopic Dermatitis

The Italian Consensus Conference on clinical management of atopic dermatitis in children reflects the best and most recent scientific evidence, with the aim to provide specialists with a useful tool for managing this common, but complex clinical condition. Thanks to the contribution of experts in the field and members of the Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology (SIAIP) and the Italian Society of Pediatric Dermatology (SIDerP), this Consensus statement integrates the basic principles of the most recent guidelines for the management of atopic dermatitis to facilitate a practical approach to the disease. The therapeutical approach should be adapted to the clinical severity and requires a tailored strategy to ensure good compliance by children and their parents. In this Consensus, levels and models of intervention are also enriched by the Italian experience to facilitate a practical approach to the disease.

The Safety and Efficacy of Narrow Band Ultraviolet B Treatment in Dermatology: A Review

Narrow-band ultraviolet B (NBUVB) phototherapy is an important treatment modality in dermatology. The most common dermatological indications for NBUVB include psoriasis, atopic dermatitis and vitiligo; however, it has been found to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment option in various other dermatoses. The efficacy of NBUVB phototherapy compares favorably with other available photo(chemo)therapy options and its efficacy is further augmented by a number of topical and systemic adjuncts. The long-term safety of NBUVB phototherapy remains to be fully elucidated; however, available data now suggest that it is safe and well-tolerated. The objective of this review was to summarize the current understanding of the safety and efficacy of NBUVB phototherapy in dermatology.

Management of atopic dermatitis: safety and efficacy of phototherapy

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease that can affect all age groups. It is characterized by a relapsing course and a dramatic impact on quality of life for patients. Environmental interventions together with topical devices represent the mainstay of treatment for AD, in particular emollients, corticosteroids, and calcineurin inhibitors. Systemic treatments are reserved for severe cases. Phototherapy represents a valid second-line intervention in those cases where non-pharmacological and topical measures have failed. Different forms of light therapy are available, and have showed varying degrees of beneficial effect against AD: natural sunlight, narrowband (NB)-UVB, broadband (BB)-UVB, UVA, UVA1, cold-light UVA1, UVA and UVB (UVAB), full-spectrum light (including UVA, infrared and visible light), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy), Goeckerman therapy (coal tar plus UVB radiation), psoralen plus UVA (PUVA), and other forms of phototherapy. In particular, UVA1 and NB-UVB have gained importance in recent years. This review illustrates the main trials comparing the efficacy and safety of the different forms of phototherapy. No sufficiently large randomized controlled studies have been performed as yet, and no light modality has been defined as superior to all. Parameters and dosing protocols may vary, although clinicians mainly refer to the indications included in the American Academy of Dermatology psoriasis guidelines devised by Menter et al in 2010. The efficacy of phototherapy (considering all forms) in AD has been established in adults and children, as well as for acute (UVA1) and chronic (NB-UVB) cases. Its use is suggested with strength of recommendation B and level of evidence II. Home phototherapy can also be performed; this technique is recommended with strength C and level of evidence III. Phototherapy is generally considered to be safe and well tolerated, with a low but established percentage of short-term and long-term adverse effects, with the most common being photodamage, xerosis, erythema, actinic keratosis, sunburn, and tenderness. A carcinogenic risk related to UV radiation has not been excluded. Phototherapy also has some limitations related to costs, availability, and patient compliance. In conclusion, phototherapy is an optimal second-line treatment for AD. It can be used as monotherapy or in combination with systemic drugs, in particular corticosteroids. It must be performed conscientiously, especially in children, and must take into account the patient's features and overall condition.

Alternative, Complementary, and Forgotten Remedies for Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis, perhaps more than other dermatologic diseases, has garnered much attention in the realm of alternative medicine. This may be because its etiopathogenesis is incompletely understood, it is increasingly common, and it waxes and wanes often without clear precipitants, opening up many opportunities for misinterpretation. Herein we explore the evidence for a number of different alternative and complementary therapies, from textiles to vitamin supplements. By definition, none have enough data to be deemed "effective" in a conventional sense, but it is hopeful that some show promising evidence that may one day lead to mainstream acceptance with further research.

Alternative, Complementary, and Forgotten Remedies for Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis, perhaps more than other dermatologic diseases, has garnered much attention in the realm of alternative medicine. This may be because its etiopathogenesis is incompletely understood, it is increasingly common, and it waxes and wanes often without clear precipitants, opening up many opportunities for misinterpretation. Herein we explore the evidence for a number of different alternative and complementary therapies, from textiles to vitamin supplements. By definition, none have enough data to be deemed “effective” in a conventional sense, but it is hopeful that some show promising evidence that may one day lead to mainstream acceptance with further research.

A review of the use of tanning beds as a dermatological treatment

Introduction

In-office phototherapy is an effective treatment for many dermatologic conditions, however, many patients are unable to adhere to the rigorous travel and time commitments sometimes needed. Tanning bed facilities are nearly ubiquitous in modern society and could represent a more convenient means to obtain ultraviolet (UV) exposure when office phototherapy is not feasible. The purpose of this study was to review available evidence on the use of tanning facilities as a treatment for dermatologic conditions.

Methods

PubMed was searched on February 2015 for “tanning beds” and “phototherapy”, and with some dermatologic conditions sensitive to UV light, including “psoriasis”, “mycosis fungoides”, “acne”, “atopic dermatitis” and “eczema”. From there, further articles were found using the reference sections of the initial papers. A similar methodology was used with the Google Scholar search engine. Only articles in English and prospective studies were included in this review.

Results

We found studies validating the use of tanning facilities for psoriasis treatment. Use as a treatment option for atopic dermatitis, mycosis fungoides, acne, scleroderma, vitiligo, and pruritus, as well as other UV sensitive dermatoses, may also be beneficial. This study is limited by the lack of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, long-term follow-up studies, and meta-analyses for tanning facility use in dermatologic phototherapy, and by the lack of standardization of both tanning facilities and exposure dosing.

Conclusion

Unsupervised sun exposure is a standard recommendation for some patients to obtain phototherapy. Selected use of commercial tanning beds in the treatment of dermatologic conditions may be another useful and effective treatment for those patients with an inability to access office-based or home-based phototherapy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13555-015-0071-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Phototherapy in atopic dermatitis: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Phototherapy is a treatment option for atopic dermatitis recommended by several guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the efficacy of different modalities of phototherapy and photochemotherapy in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We considered all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) performed in patients with atopic dermatitis, and accepted all outcome measures. Articles were identified via an online search of the MEDLINE (via Ovid) and Embase databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We also searched for clinical trials registered in Current Controlled Trials and in the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

RESULTS

Twenty-one RCTs (961 patients) were included in the qualitative analysis. Two of the trials included children and adolescents (32 patients). The efficacy of narrow-band UV-B and UV-A1 phototherapy was similar for the different outcome measures contemplated. Two RCTs assessed the efficacy of psoralen plus UV-A therapy (PUVA). No serious adverse events were described. In general, the publications reviewed were characterized by a high risk of bias and poor reporting of methodology and results.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence for the use of narrow-band UV-B and UV-A1 phototherapy in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Evidence supporting the use of PUVA in atopic dermatitis is scarce and there is little information on the use of phototherapy in childhood. For the purpose of future studies, it would be advisable to use comparable criteria and scales for the evaluation of disease severity and patients, to standardize radiation methods, and to establish a minimum follow-up time.

Atopic dermatitis: an evidence-based treatment update

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory disorder of skin with significant comorbidities. AD care often requires a combination of treatment approaches, including emollients, topical steroids, systemic immunosuppressants and/or phototherapy.

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to review recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) and systematic reviews of AD treatments.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search was performed focusing on RCTs of AD treatments, with a sample size ≥ 15, and systematic reviews published from 2011 to 2013, limited to the English language. A total of 53 manuscripts met the inclusion/exclusion criteria, including 44 RCTs and nine systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Investigator-initiated RCTs support the use of the systemic agents cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil. In one RCT, petrolatum was found to be as effective as creams containing ceramides or glycyrrhetinic acid. Additional therapeutic approaches supported by RCTs include balneotherapy, oral and/or topical probiotics, nutritional interventions, vitamin D with or without vitamin E supplementation, as well as several new topical and complementary medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

Advances have been made with respect to AD treatment in the past few years through the use of well designed RCTs and comparative efficacy studies. However, more well designed RCTs and investigator-initiated studies are needed in order to improve the care of AD patients.

Non-pharmacologic therapies for atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) continues to present significant therapeutic challenges, especially in severe cases. Navigating the line between risk and benefit can be difficult for more powerful medications such as immunosuppressants, but non-pharmacologic treatments are often overlooked and underutilized. Creative application of these more physical therapies can serve to minimize the pharmacologic treatments and their side effects, and possibly even create synergy between modalities, to maximize benefit to the patient.

From the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation: The risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals with psoriasis and the potential impact of current therapies

BACKGROUND

Many studies have identified cardiovascular risk factors in patients with psoriasis. Some psoriasis therapies may increase cardiovascular disease (CVD) and others may decrease CVD.

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the literature to define the impact of common psoriasis therapies on cardiovascular measures and outcomes.

RESULTS

Phototherapy has no major cardiovascular impact and may reduce levels of proinflammatory cytokines. Acitretin increases serum lipids and triglycerides, but has not been shown to increase cardiovascular risk. Cyclosporine A increases blood pressure, serum triglycerides, and total cholesterol. Methotrexate is associated with a decreased risk of CVD morbidity and mortality. Among the biologics, data for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors suggest an overall reduction in cardiovascular events. Most data on short-term ustekinumab use suggest no effect on major adverse cardiovascular events, however some authorities remain concerned. Nevertheless, ustekinumab use over a 4-year period shows a decrease in major adverse cardiovascular events when compared both with the general US population and with psoriatics in Great Britain.

LIMITATIONS

Most studies lack the power and randomization of large clinical trials and long-term follow-up periods. In addition, the increased risk of CVD associated with psoriasis itself is a confounding factor.

CONCLUSION

Some therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis, including methotrexate and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, may reduce cardiovascular events in psoriatic patients. Ustekinumab appears to be neutral but there may be a long-term benefit. Appropriate patient counseling and selection and clinical follow-up are necessary to maximize safety with these agents. Further long-term study is necessary to quantify the benefits and risks associated with biologic therapies.