The efficacy of diphencyprone immunotherapy for the treatment of cutaneous warts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Use of Contact Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Skin Diseases Other than Alopecia Areata

For decades, contact immunotherapy with dinitrochlorobenzene, diphencyprone, and squaric acid dibutylester has played an important role in both clinical practice and scientific research. It is listed as the first-line treatment for extensive alopecia areata and was more recently approved for melanoma treatment as an orphan drug in the USA. Moreover, owing to the relative low cost and safety, topical immunotherapy has also been used in many infectious, neoplastic, and inflammatory dermatological diseases. It is especially valuable in vulnerable groups, for cosmetic/pain sensitive areas, or for multiple lesions. In this review, we summarize the current evidence supporting the use of contact immunotherapy for treatment of skin diseases, from articles collected from PubMed database. Owing to space limitation and already numerous studies focusing on alopecia areata, we include only skin diseases other than alopecia areata. In addition to diseases that have been reported to be treated by contact immunotherapy, the hypothesized mechanism, prognosis prediction, efficacy, and safety of these topical agents are discussed.

Intralesional measles-mumps-rubella is associated with a higher complete response in cutaneous warts: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial including GRADE qualification

INTRODUCTION

Warts can be difficult to treat and progressing to chronic and resistant disease. Several studies have reported the successful application of mumps-measles-rubella (MMR) vaccine resulting in clearance of warts via immunomodulation and induction of immune system.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search on the role of intralesional MMR in warts from several electronic databases. Complete response is defined as complete clearance of warts lesion.

RESULTS

There were a total of 425 subjects from five studies. Intralesional injection of MMR was associated with an increased complete response (OR 9.43 [5.78, 15.37], p < .001; I²: 5%, p = .38). Subgroup analysis on patients receiving injection for every 2 weeks for a maximum of five injections revealed an OR of 11.70 [6.40, 21.38], p < .001; I²: 20%, p = .29. Patients receiving intralesional MMR were associated with a lower partial response (OR 0.54 [0.33, 0.88], p = .01; I²: 0%, p = .66). Intralesional MMR was associated with a reduced no-response (OR 0.16 [0.06, 0.43], p < .001; I²: 69%, p = .01). Funnel plot analysis for complete response was asymmetrical, indicating the risk of publication bias. There were statistically significant small-study effects for intralesional MMR on complete response upon analysis using Harbord's test (p = .047). Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment showed that intralesional MMR injection has high level of certainty (quality of evidence) for complete response in warts with an absolute increase of 505 per 1000.

CONCLUSION

Intralesional MMR injection was associated with a higher complete response and lower no-response with a high level of certainty.