The comparison of treatment with clobetasol propionate 0.05% and topical pimecrolimus 1% treatment in the treatment of alopecia areata

Use of Topical Corticosteroids in the Treatment of Noninfectious Inflammatory Dermatoses of the Scalp: A Survey of Practicing Dermatologists and Dermatology Residents Using Delphi Methodology

Background

Noninfectious inflammatory dermatoses of the scalp are common, and their symptomsin particular, those affecting appearance, can have a psychological effect that may be disproportionate to their clinical severity. Effective, cosmetically acceptable treatments are important to manage these conditions. Topical corticosteroids form the cornerstone of acute treatment for many of these conditions. We surveyed practicing dermatologists and dermatology residents to determine the current clinical practice in prescribing topical corticosteroids for these disorders in their various preparation formats.

Methods

A Delphi method was used, consisting of 2 questionnaire rounds. The first round contained 34 questions and was completed by 612 dermatologists and dermatology residents via email. The first round of responses was analyzed, and points that had > 70% agreement were used to form a second questionnaire of 21 statements. This second round was completed by 346 participants, and their responses were used to generate a final report. Participants were practicing in both public and private practices.

Results

Clobetasol propionate 0.05% topical solution was considered to be the most appropriate treatment for noninfectious inflammatory scalp dermatoses in general, with 75.1% agreement in the second round of questionnaire. The main advantages of clobetasol propionate over other topical corticosteroids were reported as potency, effectiveness, and broad action spectrum (94.8% agreement). The preferred pharmaceutical format was the solution of clobetasol propionate.

Conclusion

Clobetasol propionate was the preferred topical treatment for the management of scalp dermatoses, usually as first-line treatment; solution was the preferred preparation.

Alopecia areata: review of epidemiology, pathophysiology, current treatments and nanoparticulate delivery system

Alopecia areata (AA) is a kind of alopecia that affects hair follicles and nails. It typically comes with round patches and is a type of nonscarring hair loss. Various therapies are accessible for the management and treatment of AA, including topical, systemic and injectable modalities. It is a very complex type of autoimmune disease and is identified as round patches of hair loss and may occur at any age. This review paper highlights the epidemiology, clinical features, pathogenesis and new treatment options for AA, with a specific emphasis on nanoparticulate drug-delivery systems. By exploring these innovative treatment approaches, researchers aim to enhance the effectiveness and targeted delivery of therapeutic agents, ultimately improving outcomes for individuals living with AA.

Treatments for alopecia areata: a network meta-analysis

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.

Review on Alopecia Areata in the Middle East and Africa: Landscape and Unmet Needs

BACKGROUND

Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by non-scarring hair loss in adults and children. Clinical manifestations range from hair loss in small, well-circumscribed patches to total hair loss on the scalp or any other hair-bearing areas. Although the exact pathogenesis of AA is not fully understood, it is thought that loss of immune privilege caused by immunological dysregulation of the hair follicle is key. Genetic susceptibility also plays a role. Response to currently available treatments is widely variable, causing patient dissatisfaction and creating an unmet need. AA is frequently associated with multiple comorbidities, further affecting patient quality of life.

AIMS AND FINDINGS

AA causes a significant burden on dermatologists and healthcare systems in the Middle East and Africa. There is a lack of data registries, local consensus, and treatment guidelines in the region. Limited public awareness, availability of treatments, and patient support need to be addressed to improve disease management in the region. A literature review was conducted to identify relevant publications and highlight regional data on prevalence rates, diagnosis, quality of life, treatment modalities, and unmet needs for AA in the Middle East and Africa.

Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Alopecia Areata in Korea: Part I Topical and Device-based Treatment

BACKGROUND

Alopecia areata (AA) is a chronic disease with an unpredictable disease course and severe psychological impact.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence- and consensus-based insights regarding the treatment of patients with AA in Korea.

METHODS

We searched for relevant studies on the topical and device-based treatment of AA in the literature from inception until May 2021. Evidence-based recommendations were also prepared. The evidence for each statement was graded and classified according to the strength of the recommendations. Hair experts from the Korean Hair Research Society (KHRS) voted on the statements, and an agreement of 75% or greater was considered as consensus.

RESULTS

Currently, there remains a scarcity of topical treatments, which is supported by robust evidence from a number of high-quality randomized controlled trials. Current evidence supports the efficacy of topical corticosteroids, corticosteroid intralesional injection, and contact immunotherapy in AA patients. Topical corticosteroids and contact immunotherapy are recommended for pediatric AA. A consensus was achieved in 6 out of 14 (42.8%), and 1 out of 5 (20.0%) statements pertaining to topical and device-based treatments in AA, respectively. The expert consensus was from a single country, and the study may not cover all the treatments used.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides up-to-date, evidence-based treatment guidelines for AA based on the consensus reached among experts after considering regional healthcare circumstances, adding diversity to the previous guidelines.

Off-label Uses of Topical Pimecrolimus

Pimecrolimus is a topical calcineurin inhibitor currently approved for second-line use in the management of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis in patients age 2 years and older. Given the safety profile and nonsteroidal mechanism of pimecrolimus, there has been significant interest in its use in the treatment of a variety of dermatological conditions. This article reviews research that has been published on the off-label uses of topical pimecrolimus, with a focus on published RCTs. Convincing evidence exists supporting pimecrolimus' efficacy in oral lichen planus and seborrheic dermatitis. For other conditions studied to date, pimecrolimus may prove to be a useful treatment alternative when conventional agents fail. Adverse events seen with its off-label use were typically application site reactions, the most common being a transient burning sensation. In summary, pimecrolimus appears to be an effective agent in the treatment of multiple dermatological conditions and may be worth considering as a pharmacologic alternative in several conditions when first-line treatment fails, or for areas that are more susceptible to the adverse effects of topical corticosteroids.

Treating Alopecia Areata: Current Practices Versus New Directions

Alopecia areata (AA) is non-scarring hair loss resulting from an autoimmune disorder. Severity varies from patchy hair loss that often spontaneously resolves to severe and chronic cases that can progress to total loss of scalp and body hair. Many treatments are available; however, the efficacy of these treatments has not been confirmed, especially in severe cases, and relapse rates are high. First-line treatment often includes corticosteroids such as intralesional or topical steroids for mild cases and systemic steroids or topical immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone or squaric acid dibutylester in severe cases. Minoxidil and bimatoprost may also be recommended, usually in combination with another treatment. Ongoing research and new insights into mechanisms have led to proposals of innovative therapies. New directions include biologics targeting immune response as well as lasers and autologous platelet-rich plasma therapy. Preliminary data are encouraging, and it is hoped this research will translate into new options for the treatment of AA in the near future.

The role of lymphocytes in the development and treatment of alopecia areata

Alopecia areata (AA) development is associated with both innate and adaptive immune cell activation, migration to peri- and intra-follicular regions, and hair follicle disruption. Both CD4(+) and CD8(+) lymphocytes are abundant in AA lesions; however, CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocytes are more likely to enter inside hair follicles, circumstantially suggesting that they have a significant role to play in AA development. Several rodent models recapitulate important features of the human autoimmune disease and demonstrate that CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocytes are fundamentally required for AA induction and perpetuation. However, the initiating events, the self-antigens involved, and the molecular signaling pathways, all need further exploration. Studying CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocytes and their fate decisions in AA development may reveal new and improved treatment approaches.

Selective hair therapy: bringing science to the fiction

Investigations on carrier-based drug delivery systems for higher selectivity in hair therapy have clearly evolved from dye release and model studies to highly sophisticated approaches, many of which specifically tackle hair indications and the delivery of hair-relevant molecules. Here, we group recent hair disease-oriented work into efforts towards (i) improved delivery of conventional drugs, (ii) delivery of novel drug classes, for example biomolecules and (iii) targeted delivery on the cellular/molecular level. Considering the solid foundation of experimental work, it does not take a large step outside the current box of thinking to follow the idea of using large carriers (>500 nm, unlikely to penetrate as a whole) for follicular penetration, retention and protection of sensitive compounds. Yet, reports on particles <200 nm being internalized by keratinocytes and dendritic cells at sites of barrier disruption (e.g., hair follicles) combined with recent advances in nanodermatology add interesting new facets to the possibilities carrier technologies could offer, for example, unprecedented levels of selectivity. The authors provide thought-provoking ideas on how smart delivery technologies and advances in our molecular understanding of hair pathophysiology could result in a whole new era of hair therapeutics. As the field still largely remains in preclinical investigation, determined efforts towards production of medical grade material and truly translational work are needed to demonstrate surplus value of carrier systems for clinical applications.

New aspects of the treatment of alopecia areata

Alopecia areata (AA) is a disease involving non-scarring hair loss determined by autoimmune disorders and inflammation. The disease affects hair on the scalp and/or other parts of the body. The AA occurs in people of all ages and affects 1–2% of humans. The purpose of this paper is to present the latest knowledge on the treatment of AA. The decision on the type of treatment depends on the type of hair loss, extent of changes, general health status, the patient's age, and his/her motivation. Treatment methods should be chosen individually for each patient.

Alopecia areata: an evidence-based treatment update

BACKGROUND

There is no cure for alopecia areata, nor is there any universally proven therapy that induces and sustains remission. Treatment choices are frequently based on disease duration, extent, and activity as well as the age of the patient.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to review all randomized controlled studies on the treatment of alopecia areata.

METHODS

We performed a search in the biomedical literature database PubMed, and used the terms 'alopecia areata treatment' and article type 'randomized controlled trials'.

RESULTS

Following this algorithm, we reviewed, analyzed, and reported on 29 trials that examined the efficacy of anthralin, antidepressants, biologics, calcineurin inhibitors, corticosteroids (topical and systemic), minoxidil, prostaglandin analogs, sensitizers, and a miscellaneous group of topical and oral drugs with less scientific evidence (aromatherapy, photodynamic therapy, azelaic acid, garlic gel, bexarotene, triiodothyronine, inosiplex, and total glucosides of paeony).

CONCLUSION

Using the American College of Physicians Guideline grading system, our assessment is that the majority of published randomized controlled studies of alopecia areata are only of moderate quality. A number of treatments were found to be effective, for example, topical and oral corticosteroids and the sensitizing agents diphenylcyclopropenone and dinitrochlorobenzene; however, most studies had major limitations that hinder the interpretation of these results.

Clinical application of development of nonantibiotic macrolides that correct inflammation-driven immune dysfunction in inflammatory skin diseases

BACKGROUND

Inflammation-driven immune dysfunction supports the development of several chronic human disorders including skin diseases. Nonantibiotic macrolides have anti-inflammatory and/or immunomodulatory activity that suggests the exploitation of these in the treatment of skin diseases characterized by inflammatory disorders.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed an extensive review of the nonantibiotic macrolide literature published between 2005 and 2012, including cross-references of any retrieved articles. We also included some data from our own experience.

RESULTS

Calcineurin antagonists such as tacrolimus and ascomycins (e.g., pimecrolimus) act by inhibiting the activation of the nuclear factor for activated T cells (NFAT). There are new applications for these macrolides that have been available for several years and have been applied to skin and hair disorders such as atopic dermatitis, oral lichen planus, vitiligo, chronic autoimmune urticaria, rosacea, alopecia areata, pyoderma gangrenosum, Behcet's disease, neutrophilic dermatosis, and lupus erythematosus. We also reviewed new macrolides, like rapamycin, everolimus, and temsirolimus. In addition to the literature review, we report a novel class of nonantibiotic 14-member macrocycle with anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper summarizes the most important clinical studies and case reports dealing with the potential benefits of nonantibiotic macrolides which have opened new avenues in the development of anti-inflammatory strategies in the treatment of cutaneous disorders.