Topical calcineurin inhibitors in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a meta-analysis of current evidence

Safety of topical corticosteroids in atopic eczema: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVE

An umbrella review summarising all safety data from systematic reviews of topical corticosteroids (TCS) in adults and children with atopic eczema.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology map of eczema systematic reviews were searched until 7 November 2018 and Epistemonikos until 2 March 2021. Reviews were included if they assessed the safety of TCS in atopic eczema and searched >1 database using a reproducible search strategy. Review quality was assessed using version 2 of 'A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews' (AMSTAR 2 tool).

RESULTS

38 systematic reviews included, 34 low/critically low quality. Treatment and follow-up were usually short (2-4 weeks).

KEY FINDINGS

TCS versus emollient/vehicle: No meta-analyses identified for skin-thinning. Two 2-week randomised controlled trials (RCTs) found no significant increased risk with very potent TCS (0/196 TCS vs 0/33 vehicle in children and 6/109 TCS vs 2/50 vehicle, age unknown). Biochemical adrenal suppression (cortisol) was 3.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 5.8%) in a meta-analysis of 11 uncontrolled observational studies (any potency TCS, 522 children). Effects reversed when treatment ceased.TCS versus topical calcineurin inhibitors: Meta-analysis showed higher relative risk of skin thinning with TCS (4.86, 95% CI 1.06 to 22.28, n=4128, four RCTs, including one 5-year RCT). Eight cases in 2068 participants, 7 using potent TCS. No evidence of growth suppression.Once daily versus more frequent TCS: No meta-analyses identified. No skin-thinning in one RCT (3 weeks potent TCS, n=94) or biochemical adrenal suppression in two RCTs (up to 2 weeks very potent/moderate TCS, n=129).TCS twice/week to prevent flares ('weekend therapy') versus vehicle: No meta-analyses identified. No evidence of skin thinning in five RCTs. One RCT found biochemical adrenal suppression (2/44 children, potent TCS).

CONCLUSIONS

W e found no evidence of harm when TCS were used intermittently 'as required' to treat flares or 'weekend therapy' to prevent flares. However, long-term safety data were limited.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018079409.

Differences in therapeutic effects of topically applied corticosteroid and tacrolimus on atopic dermatitis-like symptoms in NC/Nga mice

BACKGROUND

Topical corticosteroid and calcineurin inhibitor have similar therapeutic benefits in atopic dermatitis (AD), but the differences in therapeutic mechanisms of action of these agents against AD symptoms are not fully understood.

OBJECTIVE

This study was performed to examine the different effects of topical betamethasone valerate (BMV), clobetasol propionate (CBP), and tacrolimus (TAC) on itch-related behavior and dermatitis in NC/Nga mice with AD-like symptoms.

METHODS

AD-like dermatitis was induced in the dorsal skin of NC/Nga mice by repeated topical application of Dermatophagoides farinae body (Dfb) ointment twice weekly for three weeks. Mice with dermatitis scores over 5 were divided into five groups with equal dermatitis scores and treated with BMV, CBP, TAC, or Vaseline (Vas) once daily for two consecutive days, or were not treated (NT). Scratching behavior was analyzed using a SCLABA^®-Real system. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) before and after treatment was measured using a Tewameter^® TM210. Skin collected from each group was analyzed histologically.

RESULTS

After the second treatment, dermatitis showed significantly greater improvement in the CBP and TAC-treated groups than in the Vas-treated and NT groups. The numbers of scratching bouts were significantly lower in CBP and TAC-treated mice than in Vas-treated mice. TEWL was significantly lower in TAC-, but not in CBP-, treated mice than in Vas-treated mice. Immunohistochemical examination showed that BMV, CBP and TAC did not reduce the increased densities of epidermal protein gene product 9.5- and substance P-immunoreactive fibers. The numbers of dermal CD4-immunoreactive T cells were significantly lower in BMV and CBP-treated mice than in Vas-treated and NT mice. The numbers of dermal eosinophils were significantly lower in BMV, CBP and TAC-treated mice than in Vas-treated and NT mice, with CBP showing the strongest effect. CBP significantly reduced epidermal thickness compared with Vas and NT. There were no significant differences in the numbers of interleukin-31-immunoreactive cells and mast cells, or in expression of epidermal thymic stromal lymphopoietin among all five groups.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic potency of TAC against AD-like symptoms, including pruritus, is equal to that of the corticosteroid CBP. Epidermal innervation of sensory nerves itself might not be related to the therapeutic effects of topical tacrolimus and corticosteroids in its early phase.

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 calcineurin inhibitors for atopic dermatitis: review and treatment recommendations

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin disease commonly affecting children and managed by pediatricians, primary care physicians, allergists, and dermatologists alike. For many years, the only available topical pharmacological treatment was topical corticosteroids. This changed in 2000-2001, when topical formulations of two calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and pimecrolimus) were approved for short-term or chronic intermittent treatment of AD in patients ≥ 2 years of age, in whom other treatments have been ineffective or contraindicated. These topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) quickly became a popular treatment option due at least in part to concerns over adverse events associated with prolonged topical corticosteroid use, especially in children. However, based on theoretical concerns about a possible risk of lymphoma associated with TCI use, a Boxed Warning was placed on both products in 2006. Since then, despite an extensive body of evidence, no causal relationship has been demonstrated between TCI use and an increased risk of lymphoma; however, the US FDA has concluded that a link cannot be ruled out. In fact, based on post-marketing surveillance of spontaneous, literature, and solicited reports, we report here that the lymphoma incidence in the topical pimecrolimus-exposed population is up to approximately 54-fold less than that seen in the general US population. This review summarizes the mechanism of action of TCIs, the factors that prompted the Boxed Warning, and recent TCI safety and efficacy data. Based on these data, both topical corticosteroids and TCIs should have defined roles in AD management, with TCIs favored for sensitive skin areas (e.g., face) and instances where topical corticosteroids have proven ineffective, thereby minimizing the risk of adverse effects with both drug classes.

Diagnosis and treatment of hand dermatitis

PURPOSE

To enhance the learner's competence with knowledge of hand dermatitis.

TARGET AUDIENCE

: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care.

OBJECTIVES

After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to: 1. Demonstrate knowledge of the pathophysiology and assessment of, and diagnostic testing for, hand dermatitis. 2. Apply knowledge of hand dermatitis to patient care scenarios for treatment recommendations and patient education. Hand dermatitis is a common disorder with different clinical presentations. Contact (irritant and allergic) dermatitis is the most common subtype with atopic dermatitis and dyshidrotic eczema as common differential diagnoses. The exact diagnosis and differential diagnoses (psoriasis, fungal infections) are important for specific investigations and treatment plans.

Transcriptional gene silencing of kallikrein 5 and kallikrein 7 using siRNA prevents epithelial cell detachment induced by alkaline shock in an in vitro model of eczema

Eczema is widely considered to be an exacerbation of alkaline stress to the skin. Epidermal barrier dysfunction is a feature of eczema pathology, which predisposes affected individuals to distressing morbid symptoms. At least two serine proteases, stratum corneum chymotryptic enzyme (kallikrein 7 [KLK7]) and stratum corneum tryptic enzyme (kallikrien 5 [KLK5]), have increased activity levels in eczematous lesions and both have been implicated in the destruction of corneodesomosomes, which are crucial to epidermal integrity. The present in vitro study investigated whether transcriptional gene silencing after siRNA transfection could influence the activity of these signature enzymes in an in vitro model of eczema induced by alkaline shock. HaCaT epithelial cells were subjected to alkaline stress by the addition of 1,1,3,3-tetramethyl guanidine "superbase" (TMG) to the culture media. The culture media were subsequently tested for chymotryspin, trypsin, plasmin, and urokinase activity using colorimetric peptide assays and for reactive oxygen species using WST1 cell viability reagent. Cells that had been transfected with small interfering ribonucleic acid (siRNA) against KLK5 and KLK7 for 24 h before alkaline shock did not exhibit the increase in serine protease levels observed in untreated controls. Moreover, an endpoint MTT assay (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide) confirmed that detachment of cells from the culture substrate observed in alkaline-stressed cells did not occur in siRNA-treated cells. This in vitro study has established the proof-of-principle that siRNA therapy appears to mitigate the consequences of alkaline shock to the serine protease-associated fragility of epithelial cells that is characteristic of eczema.

A systematic review of tacrolimus ointment compared with corticosteroids in the treatment of atopic dermatitis

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the efficacy and tolerability of tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) compared with topical corticosteroids.

METHODS

Electronic searches were performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library, as well as relevant conference proceedings. Two researchers independently selected trials investigating the efficacy and/or safety of tacrolimus ointment in the treatment of AD. No language restrictions were applied. Relevant outcome data from included trials were extracted by two independent reviewers. Direct meta-analysis to calculate relative risks (RR) (95% confidence intervals (CIs)) was conducted on dichotomous efficacy/safety outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Seventeen trials comparing tacrolimus ointment with topical corticosteroids in both paediatric (n = 2328) and adult (n = 2849) patients were identified. No studies comparing tacrolimus ointment with class IV topical corticosteroids were identified. Tacrolimus 0.1% ointment was found to be of similar efficacy to class I/II and class III topical corticosteroids. In three individual trials (comparing tacrolimus 0.1% ointment to a topical corticosteroid), evaluation of the Physician's Global Evaluation of Clinical Response (PGECR) resulted in RRs of 0.95 (95% CI 0.78-1.16), 3.09 (95% CI 2.14-4.45) and 1.35 (95% CI 0.86-2.12), where values above one favour tacrolimus ointment. With the exception that tacrolimus ointment caused more skin burning than comparator treatments (tacrolimus 0.03% versus a class III topical corticosteroid, the RR was 3.00 (95% CI 1.21-7.43) in favour of the corticosteroid), no significant differences with regards to side-effects and withdrawals due to AEs were found. Quality of life data were reported in two studies. While one study reported greater improvements in tacrolimus-treated adult patients compared with topical steroids, the second reported greater improvements in paediatric patients treated with steroids compared with tacrolimus ointment.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review and meta-analysis showed tacrolimus ointment to be of similar efficacy to corticosteroids. The interpretation of available data is limited by heterogeneity in outcome measures between trials. Further trials are needed to assess the impact of treatments on patient reported outcomes.

[Safety information for tacrolimus: present and future]

In this article there were regarded the most frequent side effects that appear in the patients who have been treated with topical tacrolimus, and the association between topical tacrolimus and the development of tumors is unfolded. The irritation in the site of application of the tacrolimus can manifiest as pruritus, sensation of burning and/or eritema located to the area of the application. It is the most frequent side effect, independently of the duration of the study. The cutaneous infections, especially the viral ones, tend to be more numerous in patients with atopic dermatitis that receive topic tacrolimus. After reviewing the medical literature one concludes that nowadays there doesn t exist scientific evidence of an increase of skin cancer, lymphomas or systemic immunosuppression in those patients that use or have used topical tacrolimus. Nevertheless, it is not possible to exclude the possibility that there appear cutaneous and/or systemic long-term side effects.

Role of bacterial pathogens in atopic dermatitis

The skin of atopic dermatitis (AD) patients exhibits a striking susceptibility to colonization and infection with Staphylococcus aureus. This review summarizes our understanding about the role of S. aureus in AD. Indeed, S. aureus colonization is both a cause and a consequence of allergic skin inflammation. The mechanisms that allergic skin inflammation of AD promotes the increase of S. aureus colonization include skin barrier dysfunction, increased synthesis of the extracellular matrix adhesins for S. aureus, and defective innate immune responses due to decreased production of endogenous antimicrobial peptides. On the other hand, the exotoxins secreted by S. aureus are superantigens. Staphylococcal superantigens (SsAgs) may penetrate the skin barrier and contribute to the persistence and exacerbation of allergic skin inflammation in AD through the stimulation of massive T cells, the role of allergens, direct stimulation of antigen-presenting cells and keratinocytes, the expansion of skin-homing cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen-positive T cells, and the augmentation of allergen-induced skin inflammation. SsAgs also induce corticosteroid resistance. In therapeutic interventions, anti-inflammatory therapy alone is very effective in reducing S. aureus colonization on the skin, but antibiotic treatment alone is unable to improve the allergic skin inflammation of AD. Therefore, we recommend the combination therapy of anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics in the AD patients with secondary bacterial infection, exacerbated AD, or poorly controlled AD. However, when AD is well controlled by anti-inflammatory drugs alone, we do not recommend the antibiotic therapy.

Comparative Effect of Tacrolimus and Betamethasone Valerate on the Passive Sustainable Hydration of the Stratum Corneum in Atopic Dermatitis

BACKGROUND

There is ample evidence that the skin barrier function is altered in atopic dermatitis. Little information is available about the effect of topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors on this function.

PURPOSE

To assess the water content and its rate of accumulation in the stratum corneum of atopic patients using an indirect electrometric method while on tacrolimus or betamethasone valerate treatment.

METHOD

Twenty-one patients with moderate atopic dermatitis affecting both forearms completed this double-blind randomized study. One forearm was treated twice daily for 3 weeks with 0.1% tacrolimus ointment. The other forearm was similarly treated with 0.12% betamethasone valerate ointment. Electrometric measurements were made under continuous occlusion secured by a Nova Dermal Phase Meter sensor probe. Assessments were performed at inclusion, after the 3-week treatment and after a further 3-week follow-up out of treatment.

RESULTS

During treatment, both compounds yielded a similar improvement in skin barrier function. Indeed, under probe occlusion, the rate of water accumulation was significantly decreased. This improvement was sustained after stopping the tacrolimus treatment. By contrast, the benefit was in part lost at the site that had been treated by betamethasone valerate.

CONCLUSION

The difference in the effect of the 2 compounds may be due to the negative influence of betamethasone valerate on the epidermal metabolism leading to progressive atrophy of the tissue. The better preservation of the skin barrier function after stopping tacrolimus treatment may help retarding relapses of atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis is an especially common and frustrating condition, and the prevalence is increasing. The disease can adversely affect the quality of life of patients and caregivers. Significant advances in our understanding of the pathogenesis have led to improvements in therapy. Patient and caregiver education, avoidance of potential triggering factors, optimal skin care, and pharmacotherapy offer the potential for good control for most patients.

Efficacy and tolerability of topical pimecrolimus and tacrolimus in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of topical pimecrolimus and tacrolimus compared with other treatments for atopic dermatitis.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials of topical pimecrolimus or tacrolimus reporting efficacy outcomes or tolerability.

EFFICACY

investigators' global assessment of response; patients' global assessment of response; proportions of patients with flares of atopic dermatitis; and improvements in quality of life. Tolerability: overall rates of withdrawal; withdrawal due to adverse events; and proportions of patients with burning of the skin and skin infections.

DATA SYNTHESIS

4186 of 6897 participants in 25 randomised controlled trials received pimecrolimus or tacrolimus. Both drugs were significantly more effective than a vehicle control. Tacrolimus 0.1% was as effective as potent topical corticosteroids at three weeks and more effective than combined treatment with hydrocortisone butyrate 0.1% (potent used on trunk) plus hydrocortisone acetate 1% (weak used on face) at 12 weeks (number needed to treat (NNT) = 6). Tacrolimus 0.1% was also more effective than hydrocortisone acetate 1% (NNT = 4). In comparison, tacrolimus 0.03% was more effective than hydrocortisone acetate 1% (NNT = 5) but less effective than hydrocortisone butyrate 0.1% (NNT = -8). Direct comparisons of tacrolimus 0.03% and tacrolimus 0.1% consistently favoured the higher strength formulation, but efficacy differed significantly between the two strengths only after 12 weeks' treatment (rate ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.99). Pimecrolimus was far less effective than betamethasone valerate 0.1% (NNT = -3 at three weeks). Pimecrolimus and tacrolimus caused significantly more skin burning than topical corticosteroids. Rates of skin infections in any of the comparisons did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Both topical pimecrolimus and topical tacrolimus are more effective than placebo treatments for atopic dermatitis, but in the absence of studies that show long term safety gains, any advantage over topical corticosteroids is unclear. Topical tacrolimus is similar to potent topical corticosteroids and may have a place for long term use in patients with resistant atopic dermatitis on sites where side effects from topical corticosteroids might develop quickly. In the absence of key comparisons with mild corticosteroids, the clinical need for topical pimecrolimus is unclear. The usefulness of either treatment in patients who have failed to respond adequately to topical corticosteroids is also unclear.