Definition of the Clinical Characteristics of Patients with Moderate and Severe Atopic Dermatitis for Whom Narrow-Band UVB (NB-UVB) and Medium-Dose UVA1 Phototherapies Are Still Valuable Treatment Options at the Age of Biologics

The realistic positioning of UVA1 phototherapy after 25 years of clinical experience and the availability of new biologics and small molecules: a retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Since the early 1990s, Ultraviolet (UV) A1 phototherapy has been described as an effective and safe treatment of a multitude of skin disorders. However, after 30 years, its use has remained limited to few dermatological centers.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the changes over the years and the current position of UVA1 phototherapy through a Real-World Evidence (RWE) study at a single tertiary referral center.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical files of 740 patients treated between 1998 and 2022. Treatment results were collected, efficacy was assessed by a grading scale and acute adverse effects were registered.

RESULTS

We treated patients with 26 different diseases. We registered marked improvement (MI) or complete remission (CR) in 42.8% of patients with morphea, 50% with Urticaria Pigmentosa, 40.7% with Granuloma annulare and 85.7% with skin sarcoidosis. Good results were obtained also in the treatment of chronic Graft Versus Host Disease (GVHD), Eosinophilic Fasciitis, Sclero-atrophic Lichen, skin manifestations of systemic lupus erythematosus and psoriasis of HIV+ patients. Systemic Sclerosis, Romberg's Syndrome, Bushke's Scleredema, Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy, REM Syndrome, Follicular Mucinosis, Pretibial Myxedema, Scleromyxedema, pemphigus foliaceus, chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus, erythroderma of Netherton Syndrome and Necrobiosis Lipoidica were no or poorly responsive. In clinical indications where UVA1 was used as a second line phototherapy after narrow-band (NB)-UVB, we saw good MI or CR rates in Mycosis Fungoides (57% of patients), Atopic Dermatitis (33.9%), Pitiryasis Lichenoides chronica (50%), Pityriasis Lichenoides et varioliformis acute (75%) and Lymphomatod Papulosis (62.5%). Short-term adverse events were uncommon and mild.

CONCLUSION

Over the past decade, the annual number of treated patients has progressively declined for several reasons. Firstly, UVA1 phototherapy has taken a backseat to the cheaper and more practical NB-UVB phototherapy, which has proven effective for common indications. Secondly, the emergence of new, safe, and effective drugs for conditions such as atopic dermatitis, GVHD, and connective tissue disorders. Finally, our research has shown that UVA1 therapy is often ineffective or minimally effective for some rare diseases, contrary to previous case reports and small case series. Nonetheless, UVA1 continues to be a valuable treatment option for patients with specific skin disorders.

Narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy for pityriasis lichenoides: A real-life experience

INTRODUCTION

Pityriasis lichenoides (PL) is a papulosquamous disease affecting both children and adults, for which narrowband-UVB (NB-UVB) phototherapy is regarded as a commonly used treatment option. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of NB-UVB phototherapy in the management of PL and to compare response rates in pediatric and adult age groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational, retrospective study included 20 PL patients (12 pityriasis lichenoides chronica; PLC, 8 pityriasis lichenoides et varioliformis acuta; PLEVA) who failed to respond to other treatment modalities. The data for this study were collected retrospectively from patient follow-up forms in the phototherapy unit.

RESULTS

A complete response (CR) was obtained in all pediatric patients with PL, while 53.8% of adult patients had achieved CR. The mean cumulative dose required to achieve the CR was higher in pediatric patients than adult patients with PL (p < .05). The CR was achieved in 6 (75%) of 8 PLEVA patients, while 8 (66.7%) of 12 PLC patients had reached to CR. The mean number of exposures for patients with PLC to achieve a CR was higher than patients with PLEVA (p < .05). Erythema was the most common adverse effect during phototherapy particularly in 5 (35.7%) of the patients with PL who had achieved CR.

CONCLUSIONS

NB-UVB is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for PL especially in diffuse types. A higher response can be obtained in children with higher cumulative dose. Patients with PLC may require more exposures for CR than patients with PLEVA.