Use of pimecrolimus cream in disorders other than atopic dermatitis

Topical treatments for scalp psoriasis

BACKGROUND

People with chronic plaque psoriasis often have lesions on the scalp. Hair makes the scalp difficult to treat and the adjacent facial skin is particularly sensitive to topical treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topical treatments for scalp psoriasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to August 2015: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2015, Issue 7), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974) and LILACS (from 1982). We also searched five trials registers, screened abstracts of six psoriasis-specific conferences and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a parallel-group, cross-over or within-patient design of topical treatments for people of all ages with scalp psoriasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment. Disagreements were settled by reference to a third author.To assess the quality of evidence, we focused on the following outcomes: 'clearance' or 'response' as assessed by the investigator global assessment (IGA), improvement in quality of life, adverse events requiring withdrawal of treatment and 'response' as assessed by the patient global assessment (PGA).We expressed the results of the single studies as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. If studies were sufficiently homogeneous, we meta-analysed the data by using the random-effects model. Where it was not possible to calculate a point estimate for a single study, we described the data qualitatively. We also presented the number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB).We categorised topical corticosteroids according to the German classification of corticosteroid potency as mild, moderate, high and very high.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 59 RCTs with a total of 11,561 participants. Thirty studies were either conducted or sponsored by the manufacturer of the study medication. The risk of bias varied considerably among the included studies. For instance, most authors did not state the randomisation method and few addressed allocation concealment. Most findings were limited to short-term treatments, since most studies were conducted for less than six months. Only one trial investigated long-term therapy (12 months). Although we found a wide variety of different interventions, we limited the grading of the quality of evidence to three major comparisons: steroid versus vitamin D, two-compound combination of steroid and vitamin D versus steroid monotherapy and versus vitamin D.In terms of clearance, as assessed by the IGA, steroids were better than vitamin D (RR 1.82; 95% CI 1.52 to 2.18; four studies, 2180 participants, NNTB = 8; 95% CI 7 to 11; moderate quality evidence). Statistically, the two-compound combination was superior to steroid monotherapy, however the additional benefit was small (RR 1.22; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.36; four studies, 2474 participants, NNTB = 17; 95% CI 11 to 41; moderate quality evidence). The two-compound combination was more effective than vitamin D alone (RR 2.28; 95% CI 1.87 to 2.78; four studies, 2008 participants, NNTB = 6; 95% CI 5 to 7; high quality evidence).In terms of treatment response, as assessed by the IGA, corticosteroids were more effective than vitamin D (RR 2.09; 95% CI 1.80 to 2.41; three studies, 1827 participants; NNTB = 4; 95% CI 4 to 5; high quality evidence). The two-compound combination was better than steroid monotherapy, but the additional benefit was small (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.25; three studies, 2444 participants, NNTB = 13; 95% CI 9 to 24; moderate quality evidence). It was also more effective than vitamin D alone (RR 2.31; 95% CI 1.75 to 3.04; four studies, 2222 participants, NNTB = 3; 95% CI 3 to 4; moderate quality evidence).Reporting of quality of life data was poor and data were insufficient to be included for meta-analysis.Steroids caused fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than vitamin D (RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.42; four studies, 2291 participants; moderate quality evidence). The two-compound combination and steroid monotherapy did not differ in the number of adverse events leading withdrawal (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.42 to 1.88; three studies, 2433 participants; moderate quality evidence). The two-compound combination led to fewer withdrawals due to adverse events than vitamin D (RR 0.19; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.36; three studies, 1970 participants; high quality evidence). No study reported the type of adverse event requiring withdrawal.In terms of treatment response, as assessed by the PGA, steroids were more effective than vitamin D (RR 1.48; 95% CI 1.28 to 1.72; three studies, 1827 participants; NNTB = 5; 95% CI 5 to 7; moderate quality evidence). Statistically, the two-compound combination was better than steroid monotherapy, however the benefit was not clinically important (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.20; two studies, 2226 participants; NNTB = 13; 95% CI 9 to 26; high quality evidence). The two-compound combination was more effective than vitamin D (RR 1.76; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.12; four studies, 2222 participants; NNTB = 4; 95% CI 3 to 6; moderate quality evidence).Common adverse events with these three interventions were local irritation, skin pain and folliculitis. Systemic adverse events were rare and probably not drug-related.In addition to the results of the major three comparisons we found that the two-compound combination, steroids and vitamin D monotherapy were more effective than the vehicle. Steroids of moderate, high and very high potency tended to be similarly effective and well tolerated. There are inherent limitations in this review concerning the evaluation of salicylic acid, tar, dithranol or other topical treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The two-compound combination as well as corticosteroid monotherapy were more effective and safer than vitamin D monotherapy. Given the similar safety profile and only slim benefit of the two-compound combination over the steroid alone, monotherapy with generic topical steroids may be fully acceptable for short-term therapy.Future RCTs should investigate how specific therapies improve the participants' quality of life. Long-term assessments are needed (i.e. 6 to 12 months).

Diagnosis of Atopic Dermatitis: Mimics, Overlaps, and Complications

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common skin diseases affecting infants and children. A smaller subset of adults has persistent or new-onset AD. AD is characterized by pruritus, erythema, induration, and scale, but these features are also typical of several other conditions that can mimic, coexist with, or complicate AD. These include inflammatory skin conditions, infections, infestations, malignancies, genetic disorders, immunodeficiency disorders, nutritional disorders, graft-versus-host disease, and drug eruptions. Familiarity of the spectrum of these diseases and their distinguishing features is critical for correct and timely diagnosis and optimal treatment.

Geriatric dermatoses: a clinical review of skin diseases in an aging population

Geriatric dermatoses are a challenging job for the physician in terms of diagnosis, management, and followup. Since skin of the elderly population is going through a lot of changes from both an intrinsic and extrinsic point of view, it is imperative for the physician to have a better understanding of the pathophysiology of geriatric skin disorders and their specific management, which differs slightly from an adult population. This review focuses on a brief introduction to the pathophysiological aspects of skin disorders in elderly, the description of some common geriatric skin disorders and their management and the new emerging role of psychodermatological aspects of geriatric dermatoses is also discussed. At the end, ten multiple choice questions are also added to further enhance the knowledge base of the readers.

Diagnosis and treatment of ocular chronic graft-versus-host disease: report from the German-Austrian-Swiss Consensus Conference on Clinical Practice in chronic GVHD

PURPOSE

Ocular chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) is one of the most frequent long-term complications after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and is often associated with significant morbidity and reduced quality of life.

METHODS

The German/Austrian/Swiss Consensus Conference on Clinical Practice in cGVHD aimed to summarize the currently available evidence for diagnosis and (topical) treatment and to summarize different treatment modalities of ocular cGVHD. The presented consensus was based on a review of published evidence and a survey on the current clinical practice including transplant centers from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

RESULTS

Ocular cGVHD often affects the lacrimal glands, the conjunctiva, the lids (including meibomian glands), and the cornea but can also involve other parts of the eye such as the sclera. Up to now, there have been no pathognomonic diagnostic features identified. The main therapeutic aim in the management of ocular cGVHD is the treatment of inflammation and dryness to relieve patients' symptoms and to maintain ocular integrity and function. Therapy should be chosen in the context of the patient's overall condition, systemic immunosuppressive therapy, symptoms, ocular surface integrity, and inflammatory activity. The consensus conference proposed new grading criteria and diagnostic recommendations for general monitoring of patients with graft-versus-host-disease for use in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The evidence levels for diagnosis and treatment of ocular cGVHD are low, and most of the treatment options are based on empirical knowledge. Topical immunosuppression, for example, with cyclosporine, represents a promising strategy to reduce inflammation and dryness in ocular cGVHD. Further clinical trials are necessary to elucidate risk factors for eye manifestation, complications, and visual loss and to evaluate staging criteria and diagnostic and therapeutic measures for ocular cGVHD.

Innovative use of topical calcineurin inhibitors

Topical tacrolimus and pimecrolimus are indicated for treatment of atopic dermatitis, but they have been studied in many off-label uses. Double-blind and open studies have shown favorable results with topical tacrolimus and pimecrolimus in oral lichen planus. In 1 study of oral lichen planus, blood tacrolimus was detected in 54% of patients, but there were no signs of systemic toxicity. Double-blind and open studies of vitiligo have shown favorable results with tacrolimus in combination with excimer laser, especially for lesions over bony prominences and on extremities. Similarly, double-blind studies of vitiligo have shown favorable results when pimecrolimus is combined with narrow-band UVB, especially for facial lesions. Double-blind and open studies of psoriasis have shown favorable results for tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, especially for inverse psoriasis. Topical calcineurin inhibitors have been effective in many other cutaneous disorders, and further studies would help clarify their roles.

[Treatment of chronic blepharokeratoconjunctivitis with local calcineurin inhibitors]

Topical calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporin A 1%, FK506, pimecrolimus) can be useful for treating chronic blepharokeratoconjunctivitis in addition to lid hygiene and lubricants. This treatment leads to an improvement of dry eye symptoms and reduces inflammation.

Periorbital dermatitis: causes, differential diagnoses and therapy

Periorbital dermatitis is common and frequently difficult to treat. Patients with periorbital dermatitis often suffer severely because their disease is in such a visible location. Because of the variety of clinical appearance, the differential diagnostic considerations are often difficult. We examined the causes of periorbital dermatitis and compared the data of 88 patients from the Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erlangen to those of the German IVDK (Information Network of the Departments of Dermatology). Between 1999 and 2004, predominant causes of periorbital dermatitis were allergic contact dermatitis (Erlangen 44%, IVDK 32%), atopic eczema (Erlangen 25%, IVDK 14%), airborne contact dermatitis (Erlangen 10%, IVDK 2%) and irritant contact dermatitis (Erlangen 9%, IVDK 8%). Less frequent causes for secondary eczematous periocular skin lesions were periorbital rosacea, allergic conjunctivitis or psoriasis vulgaris. Female gender, atopic skin diathesis and age of 40 years and older were identified as risk factors for periocular dermatitis. Common elicitors of periorbital allergic contact dermatitis were leave-on cosmetic products (face cream, eye shadow) and eye drops with the usual allergens being fragrances, preservatives and drugs. Exact identification of relevant contact allergens and allergen elimination are essential for successful treatment. Calcineurin inhibitors are the first-line therapy for facial atopic eczema. They may be also effective in periocular eczematous lesions of other origins although they are not approved for such use.