Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus ointment compared with that of hydrocortisone butyrate ointment in adult patients with atopic dermatitis

Allergic contact dermatitis in dental professionals: effective diagnosis and treatment

BACKGROUND

Like other health care workers, dental professionals are at risk of developing allergic contact dermatitis, or ACD, after exposure to allergenic chemicals. Common allergens include antimicrobials, preservatives, rubber additives and methacrylates.

CASE DESCRIPTION

The authors describe an orthodontic assistant with severe skin disease, whose symptoms included redness, cracking and bleeding that persisted for 10 years. The patient had previously received an incomplete diagnosis. After performing patch testing, assessing symptoms and evaluating the patient's medical history, the authors diagnosed ACD resulting from exposure to several dental allergens. The patient received appropriate treatment and counseling to better manage her allergies; this resulted in resolution of all symptoms and averted permanent occupational disability.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Not all skin reactions are related to gloves or natural rubber latex. Dental professionals should be aware of common chemical allergens, symptoms of ACD and the appropriate treatment of occupational skin disease.

Atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is a highly pruritic chronic inflammatory skin disorder affecting 10-20% of children worldwide. Symptoms can persist or begin in adulthood. It is also the most common cause of occupational skin disease in adults. This disease results from an interaction between susceptibility genes, the host's environment, pharmacological abnormalities, skin barrier defects, and immunological factors. New management approaches have evolved from advances in our understanding of the pathobiology of this common skin disorder.

Topical noncorticosteroid immunomodulation in the treatment of atopic dermatitis

At present, the first-line drugs for treating atopic dermatitis are topical corticosteroids. They are effective when used short-term; however, long-term use of the corticosteroids is associated with suppressive effects on the connective tissue, seen as skin atrophy or resistance to therapy. Currently, two topical noncorticosteroid immunomodulators tacrolimus (FK506) and pimecrolimus (SDZ ASM 981) are under development, or already on the market in some countries for atopic dermatitis. These two compounds show structural similarity. In T lymphocytes they bind to the same cellular receptor, the FK-binding protein (FKBP) or macrophilin-12. Tacrolimus shows a 3-fold greater affinity to FKBP compared with pimecrolimus. The tacrolimus/ pimecrolimus-FKBP complex further binds to calcineurin, an enzyme vital for the early activation of T cells. The consequence of calcineurin binding is a lack of activation of both T helper cell types 1 and 2. Further effects of these compounds have been suggested on other inflammatory cells, such as Langerhans cells and mast cells/basophils. In contrast to corticosteroids, no suppressive effects on connective tissue cells have been observed. Taken together, treatment of inflammation results in healing of the barrier function of the skin. This again results in reduced bioavailability of the drug, as compared with systemic use. Placebo-controlled studies have shown the efficacy of both tacrolimus (at 0.03 and 0.1%) and pimecrolimus (at 0.6 and 1%). The main adverse event in these studies has been a burning sensation and increased pruritus at the site of application. Typically, these adverse events are observed only during the first days of treatment. Long-term safety studies, of up to one year, have not revealed any new adverse events. So far, long-term use of topical noncorticosteroid compounds has not been associated with signs of immune deficiency. Although there is currently no evidence for clinically relevant, prolonged adverse effects, some of these, such as an increased risk of photocarcinogenesis, need to be monitored. There is evidence from tacrolimus studies that monotherapy results in better long-term results when compared with combination therapy with corticosteroids. Tacrolimus and pimecrolimus could replace topical corticosteroids as the first-line treatment of atopic dermatitis.

Atopic diseases of childhood

The atopic diseases of childhood consist of the triad of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. All share a common pathogenesis, being mediated by IgE, and are frequently present together in the same individual and family. These disorders and their comorbidities comprise a large component of general pediatric practice and their incidence in developed countries has been increasing over the past few decades. They are a leading reason for clinic and emergency room visits, as well as hospital admissions. They have the potential to interfere with education, physical activity, socialization, and self-esteem. Fortunately, we now have a reasonable armamentarium of maintenance medications available to help control these disorders and improve the quality of life for children suffering from them. In addition, early diagnosis and aggressive management of these disorders seem to offer the possibility of altering their natural history. As such, developing a sensible approach to the diagnosis and treatment of these disorders in an outpatient setting is essential. In this review, I summarize the most current literature and provide a framework for effectively diagnosing and managing these disorders.

Azathioprine in severe adult atopic dermatitis: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial

BACKGROUND

There is a limited range of treatments for severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Azathioprine has often been used but there has been no randomized controlled trial of this drug to confirm its efficacy in AD.

OBJECTIVES

To establish or refute the efficacy of azathioprine in severe AD. To investigate the safety and tolerability of azathioprine in this patient population.

METHODS

We performed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of azathioprine in adult patients with severe AD. Each treatment period was of 3 months' duration. Treatments were azathioprine 2.5 mg kg(-1) day(-1) and matched placebo. Disease activity was monitored using the SASSAD sign score. In addition, severity of pruritus, sleep disturbance and disruption of work/daytime activity were monitored using visual analogue scales. Adverse events were recorded and haematological and biochemical monitoring was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven subjects were enrolled, mean age 38 years (range 17-73). Sixteen were withdrawn, 12 during azathioprine treatment and four during placebo treatment. The SASSAD score fell by 26% during treatment with azathioprine vs. 3% on placebo (P < 0.01). Pruritus, sleep disturbance and disruption of work/daytime activity all improved significantly on active treatment but not on placebo. The difference in mean improvement between azathioprine and placebo was significant for disruption of work/daytime activity (P < 0.02) but not for pruritus or sleep disturbance. Gastrointestinal disturbances were reported by 14 patients during azathioprine treatment and four were withdrawn as a result of severe nausea and vomiting. Leukopenia was observed in two patients and deranged liver enzymes in eight during treatment with azathioprine.

CONCLUSIONS

Azathioprine is an effective and useful drug in severe AD although it is not always well-tolerated. Monitoring of the full blood count and liver enzymes is advisable during treatment.