Quality assurance and characterization of narrowband ultraviolet B devices for use at home: lessons from the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial

Phototherapy for vitiligo: A narrative review on the clinical and molecular aspects, and recent literature

BACKGROUND

Vitiligo is characterized by depigmented patches resulting from loss of melanocytes. Phototherapy has emerged as a prominent treatment option for vitiligo, utilizing various light modalities to induce disease stability and repigmentation.

AIMS AND METHODS

This narrative review aims to explore the clinical applications and molecular mechanisms of phototherapy in vitiligo.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The review evaluates existing literature on phototherapy for vitiligo, analyzing studies on hospital-based and home-based phototherapy, as well as outcomes related to stabilization and repigmentation. Narrowband ultra-violet B, that is, NBUVB remains the most commonly employed, studied and effective phototherapy modality for vitiligo. Special attention is given to assessing different types of lamps, dosimetry, published guidelines, and the utilization of targeted phototherapy modalities. Additionally, the integration of phototherapy with other treatment modalities, including its use as a depigmenting therapy in generalized/universal vitiligo, is discussed. Screening for anti-nuclear antibodies and tailoring approaches for non-photo-adapters are also examined.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this review provides a comprehensive overview of phototherapy for vitiligo treatment. It underscores the evolving landscape of phototherapy and offers insights into optimizing therapeutic outcomes and addressing the challenges ahead. By integrating clinical evidence with molecular understanding, phototherapy emerges as a valuable therapeutic option for managing vitiligo, with potential for further advancements in the field.

Prescribing and using vitiligo treatments - lessons from a nested Process Evaluation within the HI-Light Vitiligo Randomised Controlled Trial

Background

The HI‐Light Trial demonstrated that for active, limited vitiligo, combination treatment with potent topical corticosteroid (TCS) and handheld narrowband ultraviolet B offers a better treatment response than potent TCS alone. However, it is unclear how to implement these findings.

Aim

We sought to answer three questions: (i) Can combination treatment be used safely and effectively by people with vitiligo?; (ii) Should combination treatment be made available as routine clinical care?; and (iii) Can combination treatment be integrated within current healthcare provision?

Methods

This was a mixed‐methods process evaluation, including semi‐structured interviews with a purposive sample of trial participants, structured interviews with commissioners, and an online survey and focus groups with trial staff. Transcripts were coded by framework analysis, with thematic development by multiple researchers.

Results

Participants found individual treatments easy to use, but the combination treatment was complicated and required nurse support. Both participants and site investigators felt that combination treatment should be made available, although commissioners were less certain. There was support for the development of services offering combination treatment, although this might not be prioritized above treatment for other conditions. A ‘mixed economy’ model was suggested, involving patients purchasing their own devices, although concerns regarding the safe use of treatments mean that training, monitoring and ongoing support are essential. The need for medical physics support may mean that a regional service is more practical.

Conclusion

Combination treatment should be made available for people seeking treatment for vitiligo, but services require partnership with medical physics and ongoing training and support for patients.

Clinical Features, Immunopathogenesis, and Therapeutic Strategies in Vitiligo

Vitiligo is an autoimmune disease of the skin characterized by epidermal melanocyte loss resulting in white patches, with an approximate prevalence of 0.5-2% worldwide. Several precipitating factors by chemical exposure and skin injury present commonly in patients with vitiligo. Although the diagnosis appears to be straightforward for the distinct clinical phenotype and specific histological features, vitiligo provides many challenges including chronicity, treatment resistance, frequent relapse, associated profound psychosocial effect, and negative impact on quality of life. Multiple mechanisms are involved in melanocyte disappearance, including genetics, environmental factors, and immune-mediated inflammation. Compelling evidence supports the melanocyte intrinsic abnormalities with poor adaptation to stressors leading to instability and release of danger signals, which will activate dendritic cells, natural killer cells, and innate lymphoid cells to initiate innate immunity, ultimately resulting in T-cell mediated adaptive immune response and melanocyte destruction. Importantly, the cross- talk between keratinocytes, melanocytes, and immune cells, such as interferon (IFN)-γ signaling pathway, builds inflammatory loops that give rise to the disease deterioration. Improved understanding of the immune pathogenesis of vitiligo has led to the development of new therapeutic options including Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors targeting IFN-γ signaling pathways, which can effectively reverse depigmentation. Furthermore, definition of treatment goals and integration of comorbid diseases into vitiligo management have revolutionized the way vitiligo is treated. In this review, we highlight recent developments in vitiligo clinical aspects and immune pathogenesis. Our key objective is to raise awareness of the complexity of this disease, the potential of prospective therapy strategies, and the need for early and comprehensive management.

Home-based narrowband UVB, topical corticosteroid or combination for children and adults with vitiligo: HI-Light Vitiligo three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews suggest that narrowband ultraviolet B light combined with treatments such as topical corticosteroids may be more effective than monotherapy for vitiligo.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topical corticosteroid monotherapy compared with (1) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light monotherapy and (2) hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light/topical corticosteroid combination treatment for localised vitiligo.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, three-arm, randomised controlled trial with 9 months of treatment and a 12-month follow-up.

SETTING

Sixteen UK hospitals - participants were recruited from primary and secondary care and the community.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active non-segmental vitiligo affecting ≤ 10% of their body area.

INTERVENTIONS

Topical corticosteroids [mometasone furoate 0.1% (Elocon®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) plus dummy narrowband ultraviolet B light]; narrowband ultraviolet B light (narrowband ultraviolet B light plus placebo topical corticosteroids); or combination (topical corticosteroids plus narrowband ultraviolet B light). Topical corticosteroids were applied once daily on alternate weeks and narrowband ultraviolet B light was administered every other day in escalating doses, with a dose adjustment for erythema. All treatments were home based.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was self-assessed treatment success for a chosen target patch after 9 months of treatment ('a lot less noticeable' or 'no longer noticeable' on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale). Secondary outcomes included blinded assessment of primary outcome and percentage repigmentation, onset and maintenance of treatment response, quality of life, side effects, treatment burden and cost-effectiveness (cost per additional successful treatment).

RESULTS

In total, 517 participants were randomised (adults, n = 398; and children, n =  119; 52% male; 57% paler skin types I-III, 43% darker skin types IV-VI). At the end of 9 months of treatment, 370 (72%) participants provided primary outcome data. The median percentage of narrowband ultraviolet B light treatment-days (actual/allocated) was 81% for topical corticosteroids, 77% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 74% for combination groups; and for ointment was 79% for topical corticosteroids, 83% for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 77% for combination. Target patch location was head and neck (31%), hands and feet (32%), and rest of the body (37%). Target patch treatment 'success' was 20 out of 119 (17%) for topical corticosteroids, 27 out of 123 (22%) for narrowband ultraviolet B light and 34 out of 128 (27%) for combination. Combination treatment was superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 10.9%, 95% confidence interval 1.0% to 20.9%; p = 0.032; number needed to treat = 10). Narrowband ultraviolet B light was not superior to topical corticosteroids (adjusted risk difference 5.2%, 95% confidence interval -4.4% to 14.9%; p = 0.290; number needed to treat = 19). The secondary outcomes supported the primary analysis. Quality of life did not differ between the groups. Participants who adhered to the interventions for > 75% of the expected treatment protocol were more likely to achieve treatment success. Over 40% of participants had lost treatment response after 1 year with no treatment. Grade 3 or 4 erythema was experienced by 62 participants (12%) (three of whom were using the dummy) and transient skin thinning by 13 participants (2.5%) (two of whom were using the placebo). We observed no serious adverse treatment effects. For combination treatment compared with topical corticosteroids, the unadjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £2328.56 (adjusted £1932) per additional successful treatment (from an NHS perspective).

LIMITATIONS

Relatively high loss to follow-up limits the interpretation of the trial findings, especially during the post-intervention follow-up phase.

CONCLUSION

Hand-held narrowband ultraviolet B light plus topical corticosteroid combination treatment is superior to topical corticosteroids alone for treatment of localised vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated, but was effective in around one-quarter of participants only. Whether or not combination treatment is cost-effective depends on how much decision-makers are willing to pay for the benefits observed.

FUTURE WORK

Development and testing of new vitiligo treatments with a greater treatment response and longer-lasting effects are needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17160087.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.