Methotrexate for the Treatment of Recalcitrant Erosive Lichen Planus of the Vulva

Lichen Planus: What is New in Diagnosis and Treatment?

Lichen planus (LP), an idiopathic, multifaceted chronic inflammatory disease with a heterogeneous clinical presentation, affects approximately 0.5-1% of the population. The various clinical manifestations of LP fall into three broad categories, namely cutaneous, appendageal, and mucosal, with further subclassification depending on the morphology and distribution patterns of individual lesions. There is mounting evidence that LP has systemic associations, including autoimmune conditions, glucose intolerance, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disorders. Cutaneous hypertrophic and mucosal forms of LP are at a heightened risk for malignant transformation. Familiarity with these potential associations in conjunction with long-term follow-up and regular screening could lead to a timely diagnosis and management of concomitant conditions. In addition, the frequent quality of life (QoL) impairment in LP underscores the need for a comprehensive approach including psychological evaluation and support. Several treatment strategies have been attempted, though most of them have not been adopted in clinical practice because of suboptimal benefit-to-risk ratios or lack of evidence. More recent studies toward pathogenesis-driven treatments have identified Janus kinase inhibitors such as tofacitinib, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors such as apremilast, and biologics targeting the interleukin-23/interleukin-17 pathway as novel therapeutic options, resulting in a dramatic change of the treatment landscape of LP. This contemporary review focuses on the diagnosis and management of LP, and places emphasis on more recently described targeted treatment options.

Integrative Approaches for the Diagnosis and Management of Erosive Oral Lichen Planus

Erosive oral lichen planus (EOLP) represents a significant challenge in dental and medical management due to its chronic inflammatory nature, painful symptoms, and impact on quality of life. This study aims to evaluate the current diagnostic approach with novel non-invasive techniques, such as dermoscopy, and also the landscape of treatment options for EOLP, focusing on its efficacy, safety, and the challenges that it present in clinical practice. Through a comprehensive literature review, we explored the use of topical corticosteroids, systemic immunosuppressants, biologics, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in treating EOLP, alongside examining patient compliance, psychological impacts, and the risk of adverse effects and recurrence. Our findings reveal that while topical corticosteroids are the cornerstone of EOLP treatment, offering symptomatic relief, their long-term use is limited by side effects and tolerance development. Systemic therapies and biologics provide alternatives for refractory cases but necessitate careful adverse effect monitoring. JAK inhibitors show promise as an innovative treatment avenue but require more evidence on long-term safety and efficacy. This study highlights the necessity of personalized treatment approaches due to the variable disease course and response to treatment, underscoring the importance of a multidisciplinary strategy in managing EOLP. The complexity of EOLP treatment, compounded by its psychological and quality of life impacts, demands ongoing research into targeted therapies, the establishment of standardized treatment protocols, and the development of effective outcome measures to improve patient care and treatment outcomes.

The efficacy and safety of deucravacitinib compared to methotrexate, in patients with vulvar lichen planus who have failed topical therapy with potent corticosteroids: a study protocol for a single-centre double-blinded randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Vulvar lichen planus (VLP) is a chronic vulvar dermatosis that is difficult to treat and can severely impair quality of life in the absence of adequate treatment. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to direct therapy for VLP. This randomised controlled trial will be the first double-blinded study comparing systemic treatments in VLP and aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of deucravacitinib compared to methotrexate, in patients with VLP who have failed treatment with potent topical corticosteroids.

METHODS

A total of 116 women aged ≥ 18 years with moderate to severe VLP (Genital Erosive Lichen Planus (GELP) score ≥ 5) will be recruited. All participants will initially be treated with Diprosone® OV daily, and their outcome will be assessed using the GELP score. At 8 weeks' follow-up, responders (GELP < 5) will be continued on Diprosone® OV. Non-responders (GELP ≥ 5) will be randomised 1:1 in a blinded fashion to receive (i) methotrexate 10 mg weekly + placebo tablet twice daily + folic acid 5 mg weekly or (ii) deucravacitinib 6 mg twice daily + placebo tablet weekly + folic acid 5 mg weekly. The primary endpoint is the difference in the mean change of GELP scores from baseline to week 32 between deucravacitinib and methotrexate groups.

DISCUSSION

High-quality evidence guiding the management of women with VLP is lacking. Once completed, this will be the first double-blinded RCT to compare systemic treatments in VLP. The results of this study will provide valuable, high-quality data to guide second-line therapy options for VLP that is recalcitrant to potent topical corticosteroids.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12623000682640. Registered on 26 June 2023.

Successful Treatment of Erosive Lichen Planus With Tofacitinib: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

Lichen planus (LP) is an inflammatory disease that affects the skin, hair, nails and mucous membranes. Erosive LP is a chronic and difficult-to-treat subtype of lichen planus, characterized by lesions on mucosal surfaces, particularly in the oral and genital areas. The prevalence of erosive LP has not been determined. To date, treatment has consisted of surgical intervention, photodynamic therapy, laser therapy, and systemic or topical drugs, including steroids and immunomodulatory agents. LP usually need longer periods of treatment and are known as precancerous lesions with a 0.4% to 12% conversion rate. In addition, nearly 25% of patients who develop erosive LP of the vulva are resistant to topical corticosteroids, which are the first choice of treatment. This study reports 6 cases with a mean age of 3.33 years, who were diagnosed with erosive LP lesions and previously failed in treatment with local, intralesional, and systemic steroids, and hydroxychloroquine. These patients were then treated with 10 mg of tofacitinib per day. Interestingly, with the new treatment, the patients' mean overall satisfaction score was 9.16 out of 10 (range: 8-10), the mean pain relief score was 9.16 out of 10 (range: 9-10) and patients' symptom improvement also began an average of 1.33 months after starting treatment (range: 1-2.5 months).

Vulvovaginal erosive lichen planus refractory to topical therapies: What's next? A case report

A 60-year-old woman was referred for progressive and severe vulvovaginal pain characterized by erosions and Wickham's stria for the past 7 months. Her condition had not responded to oral fluconazole, topical estrogen cream, and topical clobetasol cream. Vulvar and vaginal biopsies were obtained under general anesthesia to verify the diagnosis of erosive lichen planus given the failed response to ultrapotent topical steroids. Tacrolimus cream was added but not tolerated. Oral and cutaneous lesions of lichen planus also developed. In the absence of evidence-based guidelines, three different systemic treatments were administered sequentially (hydroxychloroquine, mycophenolate, and finally cyclosporin) before a satisfactory, well-tolerated, and sustained clinical response was obtained. Topical betamethasone ointment in a taper was continued to assist in sustaining a vulvovaginal response after cyclosporin was discontinued.

Identifying predictors of systemic immunosuppressive treatment of vulvovaginal lichen planus: A retrospective cohort study of 122 women

BACKGROUND

Between 20% and 40% of women with vulvovaginal lichen planus (VLP) fail to respond to first-line ultra-potent topical corticosteroid treatment and require systemic immunosuppression to control disease. No data exist regarding risk factors for patients with severe VLP requiring systemic immunosuppression. We aimed to identify clinical features that predict women with VLP who are at risk of severe, recalcitrant disease requiring eventual escalation to systemic treatment.

METHODS

A chart review was performed on a cohort of 122 adult women with VLP followed prospectively for 15 years by the same clinician in a private dermatology practice in Australia between 1 January 2004 and 1 October 2021. Uni- and multivariable binary logistical regression analyses were performed to identify clinical features distinguishing women eventually requiring systemic treatment of VLP against those whose VLP was controlled with topical corticosteroids alone.

RESULTS

The mean age at diagnosis of VLP was 61 years, with 35 women (28.7%) requiring systemic treatment of VLP. A multivariable regression model utilising 'Age at Diagnosis' (adjusted OR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.99), 'Non-Caucasian Ethnicity' (adjusted OR = 10.3, 95% CI 2.27-73.9) and 'Vulvar Pruritus' (adjusted OR = 2.69, 95% CI 1.11-6.86) demonstrated moderate predictive capacity, with specificity and sensitivity for predicting whether a patient will require systemic treatment for VLP of 95.3% and 40.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings may indicate women with VLP who are younger, of non-Caucasian ethnicity, and presenting with vulval pruritus are the highest risk of severe disease requiring systemic immunosuppressive treatment and may benefit most from earlier initiation of systemic treatment.

Retrospective analysis of the clinical characteristics and patient-reported outcomes in vulval lichen planus: Results from a single-center study

Vulval lichen planus (VLP) is a rare, but often chronic, inflammatory disease whose symptoms include genital pain, discomfort, and dyspareunia. The clinical manifestations include erythema, erosions, and scarring. The aim of this study was to longitudinally investigate patient-reported outcomes and clinical findings in patients with VLP. Patients (>18 years) with histologically confirmed VLP were included in the retrospective analysis. Patient demographics, clinical features, symptomatology, quality of life, management, clinical outcomes, and comorbidities associated with VLP were analyzed. Twenty-four patients were identified with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) follow-up time of 19.3 (13.8) months. Classical VLP with glazed erythema was found in seven (29.2%) patients, erosive VLP was present in 15 (62.5%) patients, and hypertrophic VLP in two (8.3%). Seven patients had additional cutaneous involvement, while six patients had both vulval and oral mucosal involvement. The labia minora was the most frequently affected anatomical site (83.3%), followed by the clitoris (58.3%). Scarring lesions were found in 62.5% (n = 15) of patients. All study participants received treatment with potent and/or superpotent topical corticosteroids but 50% required systemic therapy (acitretin, corticosteroids, or hydroxychloroquine). Five (20.8%) patients underwent surgery due to adhesions and scarring resulting from VLP. One patient was diagnosed with a vulval squamous cell carcinoma during long-term follow-up. The mean (SD) Dermatology Life Quality Index score was 8.4 (5.5) at presentation and 8.9 (6.8) at the end of follow-up. In conclusion, VLP was associated with moderate quality of life impairments which persisted despite treatment, suggesting that current treatments for VLP are inadequate.