A randomized, open-label, multicenter trial of topical tacrolimus for the treatment of pruritis in patients with atopic dermatitis

Topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema: network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema (atopic dermatitis) is the most burdensome skin condition worldwide and cannot currently be prevented or cured. Topical anti-inflammatory treatments are used to control eczema symptoms, but there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and safety of different topical anti-inflammatory treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of topical anti-inflammatory treatments for people with eczema using a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and trial registries on 29 June 2023, and checked the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included within-participant or between-participant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people of any age with eczema of any severity, but excluded trials in clinically infected eczema, seborrhoeic eczema, contact eczema, or hand eczema. We included topical anti-inflammatory treatments used for at least one week, compared with another anti-inflammatory treatment, no treatment, or vehicle/placebo. Vehicle is a 'carrier system' for an active pharmaceutical substance, which may also be used on its own as an emollient for dry skin. We excluded trials of topical antibiotics used alone, complementary therapies, emollients used alone, phototherapy, wet wraps, and systemic treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were patient-reported eczema symptoms, clinician-reported eczema signs and investigator global assessment. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, long-term control of eczema, withdrawal from treatment/study, and local adverse effects (application-site reactions, pigmentation changes and skin thinning/atrophy were identified as important concerns through patient and public involvement). We used CINeMA to quantify our confidence in the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 291 studies involving 45,846 participants with the full spectrum of eczema severity, mainly conducted in high-income countries in secondary care settings. Most studies included adults, with only 31 studies limited to children aged < 12 years. Studies usually included male and female participants, multiple ethnic groups but predominantly white populations. Most studies were industry-funded (68%) or did not report their funding sources/details. Treatment duration and trial participation were a median of 21 and 28 days (ranging from 7 days to 5 years), respectively. Interventions used were topical corticosteroids (TCS) (172), topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) (134), phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors (55), janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (30), aryl hydrocarbon receptor activators (10), or other topical agents (21). Comparators included vehicle (170) or other anti-inflammatory treatments. The risk of bias was high in 242 of the 272 (89.0%) trials contributing to data analyses, most commonly due to concerns about selective reporting. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was only possible for short-term outcomes. Patient-reported symptoms NMA of 40 trials (6482 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a binary outcome ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 6.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 32.98), potent TCS (OR 5.99, 95% CI 2.83 to 12.69), and ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 5.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 25.25) as the most effective, all with low confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, and crisaborole 2% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and was more effective than mild TCI and PDE-4 inhibitors. NMA of 29 trials (3839 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome ranked very potent TCS (SMD -1.99, 95% CI -3.25 to -0.73; low confidence) and tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -1.57, 95% CI -2.42 to -0.72; moderate confidence) the highest. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial of 60 participants at high risk of bias. Roflumilast 0.15%, delgocitinib 0.25% or 0.5%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and mild/moderate TCS was less effective than mild TCI. A further 50 trials (9636 participants) reported patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Clinician-reported signs NMA of 32 trials (4121 participants) reported clinician signs as a binary outcome and ranked potent TCS (OR 8.15, 95% CI 4.99, 13.57), tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 8.06, 95% CI 3.30, 19.67), ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 7.72, 95% CI 4.92, 12.10), and delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 7.61, 95% CI 3.72, 15.58) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, crisaborole 2%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS more effective than potent TCI, mild TCI, JAK inhibitors, PDE-4 inhibitors; and mild TCS and PDE-4 inhibitors had similar effectiveness. NMA of 49 trials (5261 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome and ranked tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -2.69, 95% CI -3.36, -2.02) and very potent TCS (SMD -1.87, 95% CI -2.69, -1.05) as most effective, both with moderate confidence; roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and tapinarof 1% were ranked as least effective. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial in 60 participants with a high risk of bias. For some sensitivity analyses, potent TCS, tacrolimus 0.1%, ruxolitinib 1.5%, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% became some of the most effective treatments. Class-level analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors, and moderate/mild TCS was more effective than mild TCI. A further 100 trials (22,814 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Investigator Global Assessment NMA of 140 trials (23,383 participants) reported IGA as a binary outcome and ranked ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 9.34, 95% CI 4.8, 18.18), delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 10.08, 95% CI 2.65, 38.37), delgocitinib 0.25% (OR 6.87, 95% CI 1.79, 26.33), very potent TCS (OR 8.34, 95% CI 4.73, 14.67), potent TCS (OR 5.00, 95% CI 3.80, 6.58), and tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.59, 7.13) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, crisaborole 2%, pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and 1%, and tacrolimus 0.03% were the least effective. In a sensitivity analysis of low risk of bias information (12 trials, 1639 participants), potent TCS, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% were most effective, and pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 1% and difamilast 0.3% least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and were more effective than PDE-4 inhibitors; mild/moderate TCS were less effective than potent TCI and had similar effectiveness to mild TCI. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 12 months showed a possible increase in effectiveness for pimecrolimus 1% versus vehicle (4 trials, 2218 participants) in a pairwise meta-analysis, and greater treatment success with mild/moderate TCS than pimecrolimus 1% (based on 1 trial of 2045 participants). Local adverse effects NMA of 83 trials (18,992 participants, 2424 events) reporting application-site reactions ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.53, 3.17; moderate confidence), crisaborole 2% (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.18, 3.81; high confidence), tacrolimus 0.03% (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.10, 2.09; low confidence), and pimecrolimus 1% (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01, 2.04; low confidence) as most likely to cause site reactions. Very potent, potent, moderate, and mild TCS were least likely to cause site reactions. NMA of eight trials (1786 participants, 3 events) reporting pigmentation changes found no evidence for increased pigmentation changes with TCS and crisaborole 2%, with low confidence for mild, moderate or potent TCS and moderate confidence for crisaborole 2%. NMA of 25 trials (3691 participants, 36 events) reporting skin thinning found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term (median 3 weeks, range 1-16 weeks) use of mild TCS (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.12, 4.31), moderate TCS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.16, 5.33), potent TCS (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.21, 4.43) or very potent TCS (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.31, 2.49), all with low confidence. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 60 months showed increased skin thinning with mild to potent TCS versus TCI (3 trials, 4069 participants, 6 events with TCS).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Potent TCS, JAK inhibitors and tacrolimus 0.1% were consistently ranked as amongst the most effective topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema and PDE-4 inhibitors as amongst the least effective. Mild TCS and tapinarof 1% were ranked amongst the least effective treatments in three of five efficacy networks. TCI and crisaborole 2% were ranked most likely to cause local application-site reactions and TCS least likely. We found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term TCS but an increase with longer-term TCS.

Chronic Pruritus: A Review

Importance

Chronic pruritus, defined as itch experienced for 6 weeks or longer, affects approximately 22% of people in their lifetime. Approximately 1% of physician visits are for the chief concern of chronic pruritus. Chronic pruritus is associated with adverse outcomes, including impaired sleep and reduced quality of life.

Observations

Chronic pruritus can be categorized by etiology into inflammatory, neuropathic, or a combination of inflammatory and neuropathic pruritus. Chronic pruritus is due to inflammation in approximately 60% of patients and may be caused by eczema, psoriasis, or seborrheic dermatitis. Chronic pruritus is due to a neuropathic or mixed etiology in approximately 25% of patients. Neuropathic causes of chronic pruritus include postherpetic neuralgia and notalgia paresthetica and are typically due to localized or generalized nerve dysregulation. Approximately 15% of people with chronic pruritus have other causes including systemic diseases with secondary itch, such as uremic pruritus and cholestatic pruritus, medication-induced pruritus such as pruritus due to immunotherapy, and infectious etiologies such as tinea corporis and scabies. When few primary changes are present, a thorough history, review of symptoms, and laboratory evaluation should be performed, particularly for people with chronic pruritus lasting less than 1 year. Clinicians should consider the following tests: complete blood cell count, complete metabolic panel, and thyroid function testing to evaluate for hematologic malignancy, liver disease, kidney disease, or thyroid disease. First-line treatment for inflammatory chronic pruritus includes topical anti-inflammatory therapies such as hydrocortisone (2.5%), triamcinolone (0.1%), or tacrolimus ointment. Approximately 10% of patients do not respond to topical therapies. In these patients, referral to dermatology and systemic oral or injectable treatments such as dupilumab or methotrexate may be considered. When no underlying systemic disease associated with pruritus is identified, patients are likely to have neuropathic chronic pruritus or mixed etiology such as chronic pruritus of unknown origin. In these patients, neuropathic topical treatments such as menthol, pramoxine, or lidocaine can be used either alone or in combination with immunomodulatory agents such as topical steroids. Other effective therapies for neuropathic pruritus include gabapentin, antidepressants such as sertraline or doxepin, or opioid receptor agonist/antagonists such as naltrexone or butorphanol.

Conclusions and Relevance

Chronic pruritus can adversely affect quality of life and can be categorized into inflammatory, neuropathic, or a combined etiology. First-line therapies are topical steroids for inflammatory causes, such as hydrocortisone (2.5%) or triamcinolone (0.1%); topical neuropathic agents for neuropathic causes, such as menthol or pramoxine; and combinations of these therapies for mixed etiologies of chronic pruritus.

Topical Treatments in Atopic Dermatitis: An Expansive Review

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory skin condition found worldwide. It impacts patient quality of life (QoL) and is thought to arise as an inflammatory response to epidermal barrier dysfunction and hypersensitivity. AD can lead to large out-of-pocket costs and increased healthcare expenses over a lifetime. An analysis of all randomized control trials conducted since 1990 on topical therapies for AD were reviewed, including 207 trials in the final analysis. It was found that an average of 226 patients were enrolled over 2.43 arms. Common topical treatments included corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, JAK inhibitors, and phosphodiesterase inhibitors. The most utilized tools to identify treatment efficacy were the EASI, IGA, SCORAD, and PGA. There was a paucity of data on trials that evaluated efficacy, QoL, and cost of treatment simultaneously. This review highlights the need for comprehensive trials that evaluate multiple aspects of treatment, including financial cost and QoL impact, to ensure each patient has the best treatment modality for the management of their AD.

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

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical 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, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. 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. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s).

RESULTS

The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Dual effect of tacrolimus on mast cell-mediated allergy and inflammation through Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2

BACKGROUND

Topical tacrolimus, although widely used in the treatment of dermatoses, presents with an immediate irritation on initial application resembling a pseudo-allergic reaction. Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) in mast cells (MCs) mediates drug-induced pseudo-allergic reaction and immunoglobulin E (IgE)-independent pruritis in chronic skin diseases. However, the immunosuppression mechanism of tacrolimus on MCs via MRGPRX2 has not been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of MRGPRX2 and the mechanism of action of tacrolimus on its short-term and long-term applications.

METHODS

Wild-type mice, KitW-sh/W-sh mice, and MrgprB2-deficient (MUT) mice were used to study the effect of tacrolimus on in vivo anaphylaxis model. LAD2 cells and MRGPRX2-knockdown LAD2 cells were specifically used to derive the associated mechanism of the tacrolimus effect.

RESULTS

Short-term application of tacrolimus triggers IgE-independent activation of MCs via MRGPRX2/B2 in both in vivo and in vitro experiments. Tacrolimus binds to MRGPRX2, which was verified by fluorescently labeled tacrolimus in cells. On long-term treatment with tacrolimus, the initial allergic reaction fades away corresponding with the downregulation of MRGPRX2, which leads to decreased release of inflammatory cytokines (P < 0.05 to P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Short-term treatment with tacrolimus induces pseudo-allergic reaction via MRGPRX2/B2 in MCs, whereas long-term treatment downregulates expression of MRGPRX2/B2, which may contribute to its potent immunosuppressive effect in the treatment of various skin diseases.

Intermittent or Sequential Topical Tacrolimus in Atopic Dermatitis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) and topical corticosteroids (TCS) are the mainstays of flare management for atopic eczema or atopic dermatitis (AD). Tacrolimus (an immunomodulator), belongs to the class of calcineurin inhibitors, with promising efficacy in AD. We performed this systematic review to obtain an up-to-date coverage map of controlled clinical trials of sequential or intermittent treatments with TCI as a therapeutic intervention for AD. Articles of interest were retrieved from PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE published between between January 2000 and March 2023. Key words were "calcineurin inhibitors," "corticosteroids," "atopic dermatitis," "pruritus," "sequential," "intermittent" and "consecutive" while fixed language search consisted of "Intermittent topical calcineurin inhibitors AND topical corticosteroids AND atopic dermatitis OR eczema" AD patients who were administered sequential and/or intermittent applications of TCI for management of atopic eczema were included. Outcome measures included but were not limited to Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) and the Eczema Area Severity Score (EASI). Four clinical trials were considered for the purpose of review. A total of 101 patients with AD were analysed. The risk of bias was low in two studies, while the other two had an unclear risk of bias. Overall, pooled data from two trials revealed that sequential therapy with TCS/TCI was comparable to monotherapy or emollients, as the test for overall effect determined was non-significant with a p-value of 0.33. The two studies were highly heterogeneous, as indicated by a very high I2 of 92% and an extremely significant p-value (p=0.0005). Sequential therapy with TCS and TCIs was effective and well tolerated in the management of AD and it may be considered an important treatment approach during the initial period.

Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis in adults with topical therapies

BACKGROUND

New evidence has emerged since the 2014 guidelines that further informs the management of atopic dermatitis (AD) with topical therapies. These guidelines update the 2014 recommendations for management of AD with topical therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations related to management of AD in adults using topical treatments.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a systematic review and applied the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) approach for assessing the certainty of evidence and formulating and grading recommendations.

RESULTS

The workgroup developed 12 recommendations on the management of AD in adults with topical therapies, including nonprescription agents and prescription topical corticosteroids (TCS), calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs), Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors (PDE-4), antimicrobials, and antihistamines.

LIMITATIONS

The pragmatic decision to limit the literature review to English-language randomized trials may have excluded data published in other languages and relevant long-term follow-up data.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations are made for the use of moisturizers, TCIs, TCS, and topical PDE-4 and JAK inhibitors. Conditional recommendations are made for the use of bathing and wet wrap therapy and against the use of topical antimicrobials, antiseptics, and antihistamines.

Shedding light on key pharmacological knowledge and strategies for pediatric atopic dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory disease affecting over 20% of the pediatric population, with 85% of cases presenting before the age of five. Recently, therapeutic options in pediatric patients have evolved rapidly, following extensive development in adult treatments.

AREAS COVERED

This review will encompass relevant molecular drivers, along with an overlook on treatment modalities in pediatric AD, as well as a summary of pipeline treatments in clinical trials for pediatric patients from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov up to July 2022. Topical corticosteroids are the mainstay for AD flares in adults and children. Topical approved agents in pediatric AD are calcineurin inhibitors, crisaborolecrisaborole, and ruxolitinib. Dupilumab is the only FDA approved biologic for patients with AD from six months of age. A Janus kinase inhibitor, upadacitinib, is a systemic treatment approved for pediatric AD patients (age >12 years). Systemic immunosuppressants used in pediatric AD include methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporinecyclosporine, and mycophenolate mofetil.

EXPERT OPINION

Data regarding disease prevention are conflicting, however, an abundance of research has transpired regarding amelioration of symptoms and induction of disease clearance by targeting numerous pathological mechanisms. Understanding the pediatric AD phenotype will further advance the field and the development of improved therapeutics.

Cancer risk with topical calcineurin inhibitors, pimecrolimus and tacrolimus, for atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis is a prevalent condition in children and can be effectively managed with medications such as topical calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus or tacrolimus). A key unresolved safety concern is whether use of topical calcineurin inhibitors is associated with cancer. We systematically reviewed the risk of cancer in patients with atopic dermatitis exposed to topical calcineurin inhibitors.

METHODS

As part of the 2022 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters atopic dermatitis guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, the Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências da Saúde database, the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database, WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the US Food and Drug Administration database, the European Medicines Agency database, company registers, and relevant citations from inception to June 6, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials and comparative and non-comparative non-randomised studies in any language addressing cancer risk in patients with atopic dermatitis using topical calcineurin inhibitors. We excluded split-body studies and studies with less than 3 weeks of follow-up. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias in duplicate. We used Bayesian models to estimate the probability for cancer due to topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure and the GRADE approach to determine the certainty of the evidence. Patients, advocacy groups, and care providers set a priori thresholds of important effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/v4bfc.

FINDINGS

We identified and analysed 110 unique studies (52 randomised controlled trials and 69 non-randomised studies [11 were non-randomised study extensions of randomised controlled trials]) including 3·4 million patients followed up for a mean of 11 months (range 0·7-120). The absolute risk of any cancer with topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure was not different from controls (absolute risk 4·70 per 1000 with topical calcineurin inhibitors vs 4·56 per 1000 without; odds ratio 1·03 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·11]; moderate certainty). For all age groups and using data from observational studies and randomised controlled trials, the use of pimecrolimus (OR 1·05 [95% credible interval 0·94-1·15]) or tacrolimus (0·99 [0·89-1·09]) is likely to have had little to no association with cancer compared with no topical calcineurin inhibitor exposure. For pimecrolimus versus tacrolimus, the finding was similar (0·95 [95% credible interval 0·83-1·07]). Findings were similar in infants, children, and adults, and robust to trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.

INTERPRETATION

Among individuals with atopic dermatitis, moderate-certainty evidence shows that topical calcineurin inhibitors do not increase the risk of cancer. These findings support the safe use of topical calcineurin inhibitors in the optimal treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis.

FUNDING

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology via the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters.

Effect of acupuncture treatment in patients with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis: a randomized, participant- and assessor-blind sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic recurrent inflammatory skin disease that affects 1-3% of adults worldwide. Currently, it is not possible to completely cure AD; therefore, alternative treatments need to be developed to meet the patients' needs. Here, based on our previous pilot study, we conducted the first confirmatory randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effect of acupuncture in patients with mild to moderate AD.

METHODS

A randomized, participant- and assessor-blinded, sham-controlled trial was designed with an intervention period twice-weekly for 4 weeks and a 4-week follow-up. We equally allocated 36 participants to the verum acupuncture (VA) and sham acupuncture (SA) groups. The main outcome measure was the change in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis index (SCORAD) score before and after treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 36 participants, aged 19 to 38 years, were enrolled, and 35 were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. The mean change in total SCORAD score differed significantly among the two groups at 4 weeks after randomization (P < .0001): the mean difference was - 11.83 (7.05) in the VA group and 0.45 (7.77) in the SA group. The mean SCORAD score substantially decreased 2-weeks after starting the acupuncture treatment and continued to improve for at least 4 weeks after the end of the treatment in the VA group compared to the SA group (each P < .0001). No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Twice-weekly acupuncture treatment was effective in reducing AD symptoms in patients with mild to moderate AD without serious adverse events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0002796 .

An Open-Label Prospective Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Topical Fluticasone Versus Tacrolimus in the Proactive Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

Background

Atopic dermatitis (AD), a chronic, recurrent inflammatory skin condition primarily affects children. Topical treatment, systemic treatment, and phototherapy are mainstays of treatment. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are first-line therapy for AD but are associated with various adverse effects. Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) can be used as an alternative to TCS.

Objective

The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of topical preparations of fluticasone and tacrolimus in reducing the severity of disease and, to assess the quality of life (QoL), and to estimate if any association exists between severity of disease and QoL.

Methods

Thirty-seven children with AD randomly received one of the 2 topical treatments, with daily application for the first 4 weeks in the acute phase and twice weekly for next 4 weeks in the maintenance phase. The severity of disease was assessed using SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), and QoL was assessed using the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI).

Results

At the end of the acute phase, there was a reduction in SCORAD score of 69.29% in the fluticasone group and 64.2% in the tacrolimus group (P < 0.001). In the maintenance phase, the score had risen in the fluticasone group by a mean difference of 0.81, while in the tacrolimus group it decreased by 0.99. Both fluticasone and tacrolimus groups improved in children's QoL (P < 0.001). Positive correlation (r = 0.4668) exists between SCORAD and QoL. The most common adverse skin reaction noted was skin burning with tacrolimus.

Conclusions

Fluticasone and tacrolimus are equally efficacious in the treatment of AD and have similar benefits with children's QoL. Tacrolimus is better than fluticasone at reducing the extent of lesions.

Acupuncture Treatment for Symptom Management in Atopic Dermatitis: A Study Protocol for a Randomized, Participant- and Assessor-Blind, Sham-Controlled Trial

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with persistent itching, which impairs quality of life (QoL). Although various conventional treatments for AD exist, patients with AD often seek complementary and alternative therapies when conventional therapy has failed to relieve their AD symptoms or has had adverse effects. Acupuncture treatment may relieve AD symptoms, but controlled trials are needed to confirm this. Following our pilot study, which found that acupuncture treatment improves AD symptoms in mild-to-moderate AD patients, we will assess the effect of acupuncture treatment for symptom relief of AD using a trial with a complemented protocol. This is a two-arm, randomized, participant- and assessor-blinded, sham-controlled trial. A total of 36 mild-to-moderate AD patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive eight sessions twice weekly of either verum acupuncture (VA) or nonpenetrating sham acupuncture (SA) over four weeks. The primary outcome measured will be the change in the total Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) score. Secondary outcomes will be (1) changes in AD symptoms, QoL, dyspepsia symptoms, and electroencephalography (EEG) between baseline and week 4 and (2) changes in AD symptoms and QoL at baseline and at weeks 2, 4, and 8. This study will assess acupuncture treatment for the alleviation of AD symptoms in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. This clinical trial gas been registered in Korean Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: KCT0002796; date of registration: April 13, 2018).

Tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of adult and pediatric atopic dermatitis: Review on safety and benefits

Atopic dermatitis (AD) requires long-term management, mainly with topical anti-inflammatory agents. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) and tacrolimus ointment (TAC-O) are recommended as first-line treatments for AD. However, the long-term use of TCS is limited by cutaneous adverse events such as skin atrophy. For TAC-O, Japanese and US labelings were updated in 2003 and 2006, respectively, to include a boxed warning about a theoretical risk of skin cancer and lymphoma in patients treated with topical calcineurin inhibitors. However, TAC-O has been used worldwide for longer than 15 years to treat adult and pediatric patients with AD. Available data suggest that TAC-O is effective and well tolerated, and can improve quality of life. TAC-O has successfully been used in the proactive management of AD consisting of long-term intermittent use to prevent, delay or reduce the occurrence of AD flares. Systemic drug absorption after TAC-O application is negligible and unlikely to result in systemic immunosuppression. There is currently no strong evidence of an increased rate of malignancy in treated patients, and observational data from postmarketing surveillance studies have shown no safety concerns. In the absence of robust evidence, the warning about the carcinogenic potential in the Japanese labeling for TAC-O does not appear justified and should be reconsidered. This mitigation of description would allow adult and pediatric patients with AD to receive the effective treatment more appropriately.

Mechanistic insights into topical tacrolimus for the treatment of atopic dermatitis

More than 15 years have passed since the clinical launch of topical tacrolimus for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Its efficacy and safety have been clearly demonstrated in many global and domestic short-term and long-term clinical trials. Although the prolonged external application of steroids causes many adverse reactions including cutaneous atrophy, no such reactions occur with the use of topical tacrolimus. Therefore, the therapeutic guidelines recommend a combined topical treatment with tacrolimus and steroids. Tacrolimus is a potent immunosuppressant. However, recent studies have revealed its diverse action on the cardinal pathomechanisms of atopic dermatitis. In this review, we summarize the mechanistic role of tacrolimus in various aspects of allergic inflammation including mast cell activation, innate allergic response, pruritus, sensory nerve activation, and skin barrier dysfunction.

Antipruritic Effect of Acupuncture in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis: Feasibility Study Protocol for a Randomised, Sham-Controlled Trial

This study aims to test the feasibility of a randomised clinical trial to evaluate how acupuncture affects atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms and quality of life and to explore potential biomarkers that may be associated with AD. It is a sham-controlled trial in which 30 eligible patients will be randomly allocated in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to one of three groups: verum acupuncture (VA) group 1 (3 times weekly for 4 weeks); VA group 2 (twice weekly for 4 weeks); or sham acupuncture group (SA; twice weekly for 4 weeks). SA will consist of nonpenetrating acupuncture. Outcome measures will include the Visual Analogue Scale for itch, SCORing Atopic Dermatitis, and Eczema Area and Severity Index to evaluate AD symptoms improvement along with the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure and Dermatology Life Quality Index to assess quality of life. Measures will be collected at baseline, once weekly during the treatment period, and after a 4-week follow-up period. Blood collection will be at baseline and 4 and 8 weeks after treatment and compared with healthy controls. Illumina sequencing will be used to profile microRNA expression in each group to explore candidate microRNA biomarkers for specific effects of acupuncture in patients with AD. This trial is registered via US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) on 15 July 2016, identifier: NCT02844452.

Emollients and moisturizers for eczema: abridged Cochrane systematic review including GRADE assessments

Eczema is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder with considerable impact on quality of life. Emollients or moisturizers are widely recommended, but are these effective and safe? We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Skin Register, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the GREAT database and five trial registers to December 2015. We included 77 RCTs with 6603 participants. Seven studies (9%) were at low risk of bias, 34 (44%) had unclear risk and 36 (47%) were at high risk. The quality of the evidence was mainly low or moderate for the prespecified outcomes. The most important comparison, 'moisturizer vs. no moisturizer', showed improved Scoring Atopic Dermatitis values in the moisturizer group compared with no moisturizer [mean difference -2·42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4·55 to -0·28], but did not meet the minimal important difference of 8·7. Fewer flares were seen (risk ratio 0·40, 95% CI 0·23-0·70) and the rate of flares was reduced (hazard ratio 3·74, 95% CI 1·86-7·50). The groups applying moisturizer used less topical corticosteroids over 6-8 weeks (mean difference -9·30 g, 95% CI 15·3 to -3·27). Glycyrrhetinic acid-, urea- and glycerol-containing creams worked better than their controls (vehicle, placebo or no moisturizer) according to both participants and physicians. More flares were reported with moisturizer alone than when combined with twice-weekly fluticasone propionate (risk ratio 2·17, 95% CI 1·55-3·11). Adding moisturizers to topical anti-inflammatory treatment was more effective than anti-inflammatory treatment alone and resulted in fewer flares.

Emollients and moisturisers for eczema

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a chronic skin disease characterised by dry skin, intense itching, inflammatory skin lesions, and a considerable impact on quality of life. Moisturisation is an integral part of treatment, but it is unclear if moisturisers are effective.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of moisturisers for eczema.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases to December 2015: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the GREAT database. We searched five trials registers and checked references of included and excluded studies for further relevant trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in people with eczema.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 77 studies (6603 participants, mean age: 18.6 years, mean duration: 6.7 weeks). We assessed 36 studies as at a high risk of bias, 34 at unclear risk, and seven at low risk. Twenty-four studies assessed our primary outcome 'participant-assessed disease severity', 13 assessed 'satisfaction', and 41 assessed 'adverse events'. Secondary outcomes included investigator-assessed disease severity (addressed in 65 studies), skin barrier function (29), flare prevention (16), quality of life (10), and corticosteroid use (eight). Adverse events reporting was limited (smarting, stinging, pruritus, erythema, folliculitis).Six studies evaluated moisturiser versus no moisturiser. 'Participant-assessed disease severity' and 'satisfaction' were not assessed. Moisturiser use yielded lower SCORAD than no moisturiser (three studies, 276 participants, mean difference (MD) -2.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.55 to -0.28), but the minimal important difference (MID) (8.7) was unmet. There were fewer flares with moisturisers (two studies, 87 participants, RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.70), time to flare was prolonged (median: 180 versus 30 days), and less topical corticosteroids were needed (two studies, 222 participants, MD -9.30 g, 95% CI -15.3 to -3.27). There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events (one study, 173 participants, risk ratio (RR) 15.34, 95% CI 0.90 to 261.64). Evidence for these outcomes was low quality.With Atopiclair (three studies), 174/232 participants experienced improvement in participant-assessed disease severity versus 27/158 allocated to vehicle (RR 4.51, 95% CI 2.19 to 9.29). Atopiclair decreased itching (four studies, 396 participants, MD -2.65, 95% CI -4.21 to -1.09) and achieved more frequent satisfaction (two studies, 248 participants, RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.89), fewer flares (three studies, 397 participants, RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.31), and lower EASI (four studies, 426 participants, MD -4.0, 95% CI -5.42 to -2.57), but MID (6.6) was unmet. The number of participants reporting adverse events was not statistically different (four studies, 430 participants, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.33). Evidence for these outcomes was moderate quality.Participants reported skin improvement more frequently with urea-containing cream than placebo (one study, 129 participants, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.53; low-quality evidence), with equal satisfaction between the two groups (one study, 38 participants, low-quality evidence). Urea-containing cream improved dryness (investigator-assessed) more frequently (one study, 128 participants, RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.71; moderate-quality evidence) with fewer flares (one study, 44 participants, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.92; low-quality evidence), but more participants in this group reported adverse events (one study, 129 participants, RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.34; moderate-quality evidence).Three studies assessed glycerol-containing moisturiser versus vehicle or placebo. More participants in the glycerol group noticed skin improvement (one study, 134 participants, RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.48; moderate-quality evidence), and this group saw improved investigator-assessed SCORAD (one study, 249 participants, MD -2.20, 95% CI -3.44 to -0.96; high-quality evidence), but MID was unmet. Participant satisfaction was not addressed. The number of participants reporting adverse events was not statistically significant (two studies, 385 participants, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.19; moderate-quality evidence).Four studies investigated oat-containing moisturisers versus no treatment or vehicle. No significant differences between groups were reported for participant-assessed disease severity (one study, 50 participants, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.46; low-quality evidence), satisfaction (one study, 50 participants, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.52; very low-quality evidence), and investigator-assessed disease severity (three studies, 272 participants, standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.23, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.21; low-quality evidence). In the oat group, there were fewer flares (one study, 43 participants, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.7; low-quality evidence) and less topical corticosteroids needed (two studies, 222 participants, MD -9.30g, 95% CI 15.3 to -3.27; low-quality evidence), but more adverse events were reported (one study, 173 participants; Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.26, 95% CI 1.76 to 29.92; low-quality evidence).All moisturisers above were compared to placebo, vehicle, or no moisturiser. Participants considered moisturisers more effective in reducing eczema (five studies, 572 participants, RR 2.46, 95% CI 1.16 to 5.23; low-quality evidence) and itch (seven studies, 749 participants, SMD -1.10, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.38) than control. Participants in both treatment arms reported comparable satisfaction (three studies, 296 participants, RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.26; low-quality evidence). Moisturisers led to lower investigator-assessed disease severity (12 studies, 1281 participants, SMD -1.04, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.51; high-quality evidence) and fewer flares (six studies, 607 participants, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.62; moderate-quality evidence), but there was no difference in adverse events (10 studies, 1275 participants, RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; moderate-quality evidence).Topical active treatment combined with moisturiser was more effective than active treatment alone in reducing investigator-assessed disease severity (three studies, 192 participants, SMD -0.87, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.57; moderate-quality evidence) and flares (one study, 105 participants, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.93), and was preferred by participants (both low-quality evidence). There was no statistically significant difference in number of adverse events (one study, 125 participants, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.19; very low-quality evidence). Participant-assessed disease severity was not addressed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most moisturisers showed some beneficial effects, producing better results when used with active treatment, prolonging time to flare, and reducing the number of flares and amount of topical corticosteroids needed to achieve similar reductions in eczema severity. We did not find reliable evidence that one moisturiser is better than another.

New therapies for controlling atopic itch

Chronic itch in atopic dermatitis markedly diminishes the quality of life of affected individuals. Sleep disturbance and impaired productivity in work due to chronic itch impose a socioeconomic burden. Conventional therapies for atopic dermatitis are capable of reducing atopic itch. However, the majority of patients are not satisfied with the antipruritic capacity of conventional treatments. In this review, we summarize recent progress in itch signaling in the skin, dorsal root ganglion and spinal cord. New therapies for controlling atopic itch are also discussed.

Reutilization of Tacrolimus Extracted from Expired Prograf® Capsules: Physical, Chemical, and Pharmacological Assessment

In this study, we investigated whether tacrolimus extracted and purified from the commercial capsules (Prograf® 5 mg) have retained its original quality and activity beyond the capsules expiration date in order to be reused for research purposes after extraction. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) assay method was developed and validated for the quantification of tacrolimus, using cyclosporine A as an internal standard (IS). Moreover, a combination of analytical methods, including nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction (XRD), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) were used to assess the quality of extracted/purified tacrolimus. Suppression of murine peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) proliferation and the levels of interleukin-2 (IL-2) and interferon gamma (IFN-γ) were also assessed. The data obtained showed no detectable differences in the quality profile between the authentic sample and extracted drug. Also, the results showed that the extracted/purified tacrolimus was able to suppress T cell proliferation, induced by concanavalin A, indicating the retained pharmacological activity. We proved that tacrolimus extracted/purified from expired Prograf® capsuled retains its purity and immunosuppressive activity and can be reused for research and possibly in pharmaceutical manufacturing.

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.

Topical tacrolimus for atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) (or atopic eczema) is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that affects children and adults and has an important impact on quality of life. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) are the first-line therapy for this condition; however, they can be associated with significant adverse effects when used chronically. Tacrolimus ointment (in its 2 manufactured strengths of 0.1% and 0.03%) might be an alternative treatment. Tacrolimus, together with pimecrolimus, are drugs called topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topical tacrolimus for moderate and severe atopic dermatitis compared with other active treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 3 June 2015: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library (Issue 5, 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), LILACS (from 1982), and the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT database). We searched six trials registers and checked the bibliographies of included studies for further references to relevant trials. We contacted specialists in the field for unpublished data.A separate search for adverse effects of topical tacrolimus was undertaken in MEDLINE and EMBASE on 30 July 2013. We also scrutinised the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) websites for adverse effects information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (both children and adults) using topical tacrolimus at any dose, course duration, and follow-up time compared with other active treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened and examined the full text of selected studies for compliance with eligibility criteria, risk of bias, and data extraction. Our three prespecified primary outcomes were physician's assessment, participant's self-assessment of improvement, and adverse effects. Our secondary outcomes included assessment of improvement of the disease by validated or objective measures, such as SCORAD (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis), the EASI (Eczema Area and Severity Index), and BSA (Body Surface Area) scores.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies, with 5885 participants. The variability of drug doses, outcomes, and follow-up periods made it difficult to carry out meta-analyses.A single trial showed that tacrolimus 0.1% was better than low-potency TCS by the physician's assessment (risk ratio (RR) 3.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.14 to 4.45, 1 study, n = 371, moderate-quality evidence). It was also marginally better than low-potency TCS on face and neck areas and moderate-potency TCS on the trunk and extremities by the physician's assessment (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.49, 1 study, n = 972, moderate level of evidence) and for some of the secondary outcomes. Compared with pimecrolimus 1%, people treated with tacrolimus were almost twice as likely to improve by the physician's assessment (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.42, 2 studies, n = 506, moderate quality of evidence). Compared with the lower concentration of 0.03%, the tacrolimus 0.1% formulation reduced the risk of not having an improvement by 18% as evaluated by the physician's assessment (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.92, 6 studies, n = 1640, high-quality evidence). Tacrolimus 0.1% compared with moderate-to-potent TCS showed no difference by the physician's assessment, and 2 secondary outcomes (1 study, 377 participants) and a marginal benefit favouring tacrolimus 0.1% was found by the participant's assessment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.29, 1 study, n = 974, low quality of evidence) and SCORAD.Based on data from 2 trials, tacrolimus 0.03% was superior to mild TCS for the physician's assessment (RR 2.58, 95% CI 1.96 to 3.38, 2 studies, n = 790, moderate-quality evidence) and the participant's self-assessment (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.41 to 1.90, 1 study, n = 416, moderate quality of evidence). One trial showed moderate benefit of tacrolimus 0.03% compared with pimecrolimus 1% on the physician's assessment (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.98, 1 study, n = 139, low-quality evidence), but the effects were equivocal when evaluating BSA. In the comparison of tacrolimus 0.03% with moderate-to-potent corticosteroids, no difference was found in most of the outcomes measured (including physician's and participant's assessment and also for the secondary outcomes), but in two studies, a marginal benefit favouring the corticosteroid group was found for the EASI and BSA scores.Burning was more frequent in those using calcineurin inhibitors than those using corticosteroid tacrolimus 0.03% (RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.96 to 3.14, 5 studies, 1883 participants, high-quality evidence), but no difference was found for skin infections. Symptoms observed were mild and transient. The comparison between the two calcineurin inhibitors (pimecrolimus and tacrolimus) showed the same overall incidence of adverse events, but with a small difference in the frequency of local effects.Serious adverse events were rare; occurred in both the tacrolimus and corticosteroid groups; and in most cases, were considered to be unrelated to the treatment. No cases of lymphoma were noted in the included studies nor in the non-comparative studies. Cases were only noted in spontaneous reports, cohorts, and case-control studies. Systemic absorption was rarely detectable, only in low levels, and this decreased with time. Exception is made for diseases with severe barrier defects, such as Netherton's syndrome, lamellar ichthyosis, and a few others, with case reports of a higher absorption. We evaluated clinical trials; case reports; and in vivo, in vitro, and animal studies; and didn't find any evidence that topical tacrolimus could cause skin atrophy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus 0.1% was better than low-potency corticosteroids, pimecrolimus 1%, and tacrolimus 0.03%. Results were equivocal when comparing both dose formulations to moderate-to-potent corticosteroids. Tacrolimus 0.03% was superior to mild corticosteroids and pimecrolimus. Both tacrolimus formulations seemed to be safe, and no evidence was found to support the possible increased risk of malignancies or skin atrophy with their use. The reliability and strength of the evidence was limited by the lack of data; thus, findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. We did not evaluate costs.

Tryptase and protease-activated receptor-2 stimulate scratching behavior in a murine model of ovalbumin-induced atopic-like dermatitis

The aim of the current study was to investigate the involvement of tryptase and protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR2) in the pathogenesis of itch using a recently developed murine model of atopic dermatitis (AD) elicited by epicutaneous sensitization with ovalbumin (OVA). We also examined whether tacrolimus exerts an antipruritic effect. Epicutaneous sensitization of BALB/c mice with OVA led to a significant increase in the number of scratches. Notably, PAR2 mRNA and protein levels as well as cutaneous levels of tryptase were significantly enhanced in epicutaneously sensitized mice. Pretreatment with the protease inhibitor, leupeptin, PAR2 antibody, and tacrolimus significantly reduced the number of degranulated mast cells and tryptase content, and consequently alleviated scratching behavior. Cetirizine (10mg/kg) exerted a significant inhibitory effect on the scratching behavior of mice, but did not affect the number of degranulated mast cells and induction of tryptase. Our results collectively suggest that tryptase and PAR2 are involved in OVA allergy-induced scratching behavior.

New potential of the treatment of atopic dermatitis in children and adults

Goal. To study the efficacy and safety of local administration of Tacrolimus in the form of 0.03% and 0.1% ointment for patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Materials and methods. The study involved 32 patients suffering from atopic dermatitis and aged 2—64. The first group comprised 17 children aged 2—15 (7 girls and 10 boys). The second group comprised 15 patients (8 female and 7 male) aged 18—64. All of the patients suffered from moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Patients from both treatment groups received external therapy in the form of 0.03% of ointment for children and 0.1% of ointment for adults. The daily ointment amount was calculated as FTU (Finger Tip Units) for separate body parts. To ensure objective assessment of the severity of clinical manifestations of atopic dermatitis and treatment efficacy, SCORAD (Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis) score was used for all of the patients. Results. The treatment resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the medial SCORAD index from 67.2 (54.8; 70.4) points to 14.0 (3.5; 22.1) points (р < 0.0001), Group 1, and from 52 (43.5; 75.5) points to 11.7 (0.0; 26.2) points (р < 0.0001), Group 2. Clinical recovery was achieved in 30% of children and 40% of adults. Conclusion. Protopic ointment for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis proved to be highly efficient, which was confirmed by a positive therapeutic effect on the course of the disease. There were no adverse effects characteristic of topical corticosteroids, which widens horizons in terms of treating patients with this type of dermatosis.