Hydroxychloroquine for the management of recalcitrant oral lichen planus

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to describe the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in patients with oral lichen planus (OLP) refractory to conventional therapy.

STUDY DESIGN

In this single-center retrospective study, patients were prescribed HCQ 200 mg twice daily. Pain, reticulation, erythema, and ulceration scores were recorded. Two-sample and paired t tests were used to evaluate mean and paired pain scores and paired t test to determine substantial differences in paired REU scores, at HCQ initiation visit and final follow-up at 12 to 24 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (69.4% female) with a median age of 70 ± 12.0 (range 48-99) were initiated on HCQ. Only 30 patients were evaluable because pruritus developed in 5 patients (13.9%) and gastrointestinal symptoms in 1 (2.8%). The mean follow-up was 23.2 months (range 1-74). In 19 patients, there was a significant decline in the worst pain score from a mean of 3.9 (SD± 2.8, n = 19) to 1.9 (SD ± 2.4, n = 19) (t = 2.837, P < .006). Paired reticulation, erythema, and ulceration (REU scores) decreased from a weighted mean score of 16.0 (SD ± 8.0, n = 12) to 12.0 (SD ± 6.3, n = 12) (t = 2.07, P < .032).

CONCLUSION

Hydroxychloroquine was a suitable option and effective in reducing symptoms and disease severity in patients with recalcitrant OLP who do not adequately respond to standard therapy.

Use of oral devices in the management of oral dysesthesia: case reports and literature review

Oral dysesthesia (OD) is a diagnosis of exclusion that manifests as an unpleasant and abnormal sensation of the oral mucosa without any noticeable oral lesions. Burning sensation is one of the manifestations of OD which may advocate for similar pharmacotherapeutic options to burning mouth syndrome (BMS), resulting in possible adverse events. The aim of these case reports was to illustrate the significance and rationale for the use of oral devices as a mechanical/physical barrier and a safe approach in the management of OD, without experiencing any antagonistic effects from pharmacotherapeutic agents. Two patients with spontaneous and evoked (following dental procedures) OD symptoms in the right posterior mandibular quadrant and anterior hard palatal areas were evaluated. Additionally, their OD symptoms were associated with hyposalivation and taste changes. A thorough history and complete head and neck examination, with the exclusion of oral lesions and systemic conditions, were performed. These patients were previously prescribed topical clonazepam rinses. An in-office trial, with application of orthodontic wax to the affected area, was performed as a preliminary test in order to justify the fabrication of an oral device for possible symptomatic relief. Conclusion: The case reports demonstrated significant improvement of OD symptoms and amelioration of pain following fabrication of oral devices in two patients with no undesirable effects from pharmacotherapy. Additionally, the oral devices aided as a mechanical/physical barrier, potentially exerting a placebo effect while facilitating an improved quality of life. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness and ease of fabricating the oral device has been advantageous over other systemic medications. This encourages the need for a detailed prospective study.

Oral lichen planus: comparative efficacy and treatment costs-a systematic review

Objective

To compare the reported efficacy and costs of available interventions used for the management of oral lichen planus (OLP).

Materials and methods

A systematic literature search was performed from database inception until March 2021 in MEDLINE via PubMed and the Cochrane library following PRISMA guidelines. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing an active intervention with placebo or different active interventions for OLP management were considered.

Results

Seventy (70) RCTs were included. The majority of evidence suggested efficacy of topical steroids (dexamethasone, clobetasol, fluocinonide, triamcinolone), topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus, pimecrolimus, cyclosporine), topical retinoids, intra-lesional triamcinolone, aloe-vera gel, photodynamic therapy, and low-level laser therapies for OLP management. Based on the estimated cost per month and evidence for efficacy and side-effects, topical steroids (fluocinonide > dexamethasone > clobetasol > triamcinolone) appear to be more cost-effective than topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus > pimecrolimus > cyclosporine) followed by intra-lesional triamcinolone.

Conclusion

Of common treatment regimens for OLP, topical steroids appear to be the most economical and efficacious option followed by topical calcineurin inhibitors. Large-scale multi-modality, prospective trials in which head-to-head comparisons interventions are compared are required to definitely assess the cost-effectiveness of OLP treatments.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-022-02168-4.