Evaluation of the efficacy of a sunscreen containing ultra-long UVA1 and other UVR broad-spectrum filters on skin barrier protection and melanin content reduction in Chinese adults: A single-center study

Background and Aims

The protection for ultra-long UVA1 is lacked in the market, posing potential damage from ultra-long UVA1 irradiation. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a sunscreen containing multiple components, especially Mexoryl® 400 for improving skin barrier function and reducing melanin content.

Methods

This single-center study included adults with sensitive and normal skin in China in November 2022. Participants received the test sunscreen for 4 weeks. Melanin and hemoglobin content, sebum secretion skin hydration, and trans-epidermal water loss were evaluated at T0d, T7d, and T28d. The self-assessment was done at T15min, T7d, and T28d.

Results

Sixty participants were included, including 30 self-claimed sensitive skin in the sunscreen group. The sunscreen demonstrated significant improvements in skin parameters. Skin redness reduced by 9.84% at T28d, sebum content in the forehead area decreased by 22.70% at T28d, and skin stratum corneum hydration increased by 38.44% at T28d, p < 0.001 respectively. Most notably, skin melanin content significantly reduced by 13.49% after 4 weeks' usage (p < 0.001). No adverse reactions were reported in either group.

Conclusions

The study sunscreen improved the skin condition by decreasing the melanin content, regulating skin barrier function, and achieving a balance of skin hydration and sebum secretion.

Clinical, histopathological and immunohistochemical evaluation of ultraviolet A1 treatment in early-stage mycosis fungoides

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common variant of cutaneous T-cell lymphomas primarily involving the skin. Early-stage MF is characterised by non-specific skin lesions and non-diagnostic biopsies. While skin-focused treatments, such as PUVA and narrowband UVB (nbUVB), are the most frequently recommended treatments, the UVA1 efficacy has been researched in recent years. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical, histopathological and immunohistochemical aspects of UVA1 treatment in patients with early-stage MF.

METHODS

The modified severity weighted assessment scale (mSWAT) was used for total skin body scoring before and after treatment. Skin punch biopsies were taken from the patients before and after treatment. UVA1 therapy was performed five times each week.

RESULTS

This study included 26 patients with early-stage MF. The total number of UVA1 sessions varied between 15 and 34. Complete response was observed in 8 (30.8%) of 26 patients (30.8%). The median mSWAT score decreased statistically significantly from 7.1 to 2.0 after treatment (p < .001). Histopathological complete response was observed in 2 (9.5%) of 21 patients. A statistically significant decrease in dermal interstitial infiltrate was observed on histopathological examination after treatment (p = .039). Epidermal CD4/CD8 levels decreased statistically significantly higher from a median of 2.5-1.2 in the complete clinical response group after treatment (p = .043).

CONCLUSION

According to our results, UVA1 treatment has an effect on early-stage MF in terms of clinical, histopathological and immunohistochemistry.

UVA1 irradiation attenuates collagen production via Ficz/AhR/MAPK signaling activation in scleroderma

Scleroderma is an autoimmune disease mainly characterized by progressive fibrosis of the skin. There are two types of scleroderma, namely localized scleroderma (LS) and systemic sclerosis (SSc); skin lesions in both types of scleroderma are histologically identical. Progressive skin sclerosis induces psychological and ecological burden for scleroderma patients. However, there is no effective treatment for scleroderma due to its unclear etiology. Aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) is recognized as an environmental chemical effector that can respond to ultraviolet radiation, which has been demonstrated to participate in the pathogenesis of SSc in our previous study. In this study, we verify whether the anti-fibrosis effect of ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) phototherapy could be partially induced through Ficz/AhR/MAPK signaling activation for fibrotic lesions in both SSc and LS patients. This is the first study to show the association between the AhR pathway and the anti-fibrotic mechanism of UVA1 phototherapy, which provides additional evidence of the role of AhR in the fibrotic mechanism of systemic scleroderma from different perspectives. Ficz and other AhR agonists may replace UVA1 phototherapy as anti-fibrotic agents in scleroderma.

Severe Herpes Zoster Secondary to Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Successfully Treated with Ultraviolet A1 Phototherapy: A Case Report

Background: The incidence of herpes zoster (HZ) in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients is high, and the symptoms are usually severe and resistant to treatment, and the prognosis is poor. Ultraviolet (UV) A1 is a band of UV light, and UVA1 phototherapy has been widely used to treat various inflammatory skin diseases. Objective: At present, UVA1 has been considered as a potential adjuvant therapy for HZ in SLE patients. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report concerning the successful application of UVA1 in the treatment of HZ secondary to SLE. Methods: In this article, a clinical case report is presented, wherein the patient did not respond to conventional treatment, but was markedly responsive to the treatment of UVA1 phototherapy, and well tolerated. Results: A 29-year-old woman with severe HZ secondary to SLE was successfully treated with UVA1 phototherapy. Conclusions: UVA1 phototherapy can be used as an effective adjuvant treatment for HZ secondary to SLE.

Concentrations of metalloproteinase-1 in patients with morphea treated with phototherapy: a preliminary study

INTRODUCTION

Morphea (localized scleroderma) is a rare, chronic, inflammatory connective tissue disease, characterized by immune system dysfunction, vasculopathy and skin fibrosis. One of the most effective treatments is phototherapy. Phototherapy has been found to be effective in treating localized scleroderma by inducing the expression of metalloproteinase-1.

AIM

To compare the concentrations of metalloproteinase (MMP-1) before psoralen and ultraviolet A (PUVA) and ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) treatments in the serum of patients with morphea.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The observational study was conducted in one research centre and included patients with generalised morphea who were treated with PUVA and UVA1 phototherapies. The mean age of all morphea patients included in the study was 55.7 years. The levels of MMP-1 were examined by ELISA (The Biorbyt Human MMP-1 ELISA - Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay).

RESULTS

The study showed that patients treated with PUVA and UVA1 had an improvement based on clinical measures, resulting in a reduction of clinical score. However, we did not observe statistically significant differences in MMP-1 concentrations before and after treatment. Limitations: The study sample was relatively small. Further studies on a larger group of patients would be beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that there is a possible correlation between MMP-1 concentrations and phototherapy. MMP-1 levels were found to be increased following phototherapy treatment, which may suggest a correlation with better response to treatment in patients with morphea. However, further research is needed.

The Damaging Effects of Long UVA (UVA1) Rays: A Major Challenge to Preserve Skin Health and Integrity

Within solar ultraviolet (UV) light, the longest UVA1 wavelengths, with significant and relatively constant levels all year round and large penetration properties, produce effects in all cutaneous layers. Their effects, mediated by numerous endogenous chromophores, primarily involve the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). The resulting oxidative stress is the major mode of action of UVA1, responsible for lipid peroxidation, protein carbonylation, DNA lesions and subsequent intracellular signaling cascades. These molecular changes lead to mutations, apoptosis, dermis remodeling, inflammatory reactions and abnormal immune responses. The altered biological functions contribute to clinical consequences such as hyperpigmentation, inflammation, photoimmunosuppression, sun allergies, photoaging and photocancers. Such harmful impacts have also been reported after the use of UVA1 phototherapy or tanning beds. Furthermore, other external aggressors, such as pollutants and visible light (Vis), were shown to induce independent, cumulative and synergistic effects with UVA1 rays. In this review, we synthetize the biological and clinical effects of UVA1 and the complementary effects of UVA1 with pollutants or Vis. The identified deleterious biological impact of UVA1 contributing to clinical consequences, combined with the predominance of UVA1 rays in solar UV radiation, constitute a solid rational for the need for a broad photoprotection, including UVA1 up to 400 nm.

Light- and laser-based treatments for granuloma annulare: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Granuloma annulare (GA) is challenging to treat, especially when generalized. A systematic review to support the use of light- and laser-based treatments for GA is lacking.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review by searching Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase. Title, abstract, full-text screening, and data extraction were done in duplicate. Quality appraisal was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for case series.

RESULTS

Thirty-one case series met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 336 patients. Overall, psoralen ultraviolet light A (PUVA) showed the greatest frequency of cases with complete response (59%, n = 77/131), followed by photodynamic therapy (PDT) (52%, n = 13/25), ultraviolet light B (UVB)/narrowband UVB (nbUVB)/excimer laser (40%, n = 19/47), UVA1 (31%, n = 27/86), and lasers (29%, n = 8/28). Overall across treatment modalities, higher response rates were seen in localized GA compared to generalized GA.

CONCLUSIONS

The body of evidence for light- and laser-based treatment of GA is sparse. Our results suggest that PUVA has a high clearance rate for GA but its use may be limited by concerns of carcinogenesis. Although PDT has the second highest clearance rate, adverse effects, small sample sizes, impractical treatment delivery (especially with generalized disease), and long-term concerns of carcinogenesis may limit its use. Although UVB/nbUVB/excimer laser appeared slightly less effective than other light therapies, we recommend UVB/nbUVB/excimer laser therapy as a first-line treatment for patients with generalized GA given wider availability and a favorable long-term safety profile.

Utility of phototherapy in patients with systemic sclerosis: systematic review

Phototherapy is a recommended treatment regimen for different scleroderma spectrum disorders, but so far it has been included neither by European nor by worldwide experts committee in recommendations for the treatment of systemic sclerosis (SSc). The aim of the study was to revisit the utility of dermatological phototherapy in patients with SSc. PubMed using medical subject headings was searched to identify studies evaluating response to dermatological phototherapy in SSc patients. Both UVA1 (340-400 nm) and PUVA (psoralen plus UVA) treatments were found to reduce skin thickening and increase skin elasticity, therefore allowing for the improvement of joint tension mobility, especially in hands. At least several papers showed efficacy of phototherapy in patients who remained non-responsive to previous immunosuppressive therapies. The most probable mechanisms of action of phototherapy in SSc include inhibition of T-cells and prevention from dermal fibrosis. Although most data on the efficacy of phototherapy come from small experimental studies and case reports, phototherapy based on UVA of wavelength manifests relatively mild spectrum of side effects and this should be considered as a treatment option for SSc with dominant cutaneous involvement. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Investigation of the HelioVital filter foil revealed protective effects against UVA1 irradiation-induced DNA damage and against UVA1-induced expression of matrixmetalloproteinases (MMP) MMP1, MMP2, MMP3 and MMP15

The damaging effects of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure to human skin are well known and can reach from accelerated skin aging (photoaging) to skin cancer. Much of the damaging effects of solar UVA (320-400 nm) radiation is associated with the induction of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are capable to cause oxidative damage to DNA like the oxidized guanosine 8-hydroxy-2' -deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG). Therefore, new UV protective strategies, have to be tested for their efficiency to shield against UV induced damage. We investigated the protective effects of HelioVital sun protection filter foil against UVA1 irradiation in skin cells. It could be shown, that HelioVital sun protection filter foil has protective effects against UVA1 irradiation induced changes in matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) expression. Furthermore a UVA1-dependant regulation of MMP15 in human fibroblasts could be shown for the first time in this context. In addition, this study demonstrated the protective effect of the HelioVital filter film against UVA1-induced ROS production and DNA damage. These results could pave the way for clinical studies with HelioVital filter foil shielding against the damaging effects of phototherapy and other forms of irradiation therapy, thereby increasing the safety and treatment opportunities of these forms of therapy.

The impact of medium dose UVA1 phototherapy on pruritus, DLQI and SCORAD index in patients with atopic dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is featured by pruritus, which causes diminished quality of life. Little clinical data exists concerning the use, efficacy and side effects of UVA1 phototherapy in AD patients.

AIM

To determine the effectiveness of medium-dose UVA1 phototherapy in AD treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-six patients with AD were irradiated with medium-dose UVA1 (45 J/cm2) as monotherapy for 4 weeks for a total of 20 sessions (daily irradiations during weekdays only). Clinical status was evaluated with the visual analogue scale for pruritus, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) for evaluating general well-being and the SCORAD index. All parameters were measured twice: before and after phototherapy.

RESULTS

UVA1 phototherapy resulted in a significant (p < 0.001) decrease in pruritus, improvement in DLQI (p < 0.001) and SCORAD (p < 0.001). Before phototherapy, the intensity of pruritus and SCORAD index correlated with DLQI (r = 0.34, p < 0.05 and r = 0.61, p < 0.05, respectively). Similarly, after irradiation, pruritus correlated with DLQI, and SCORAD index correlated with DLQI (r = 0.51, p < 0.05 and r = 0.55, p < 0.05, respectively). No severe adverse effects were noted during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Phototherapy with medium-dose UVA1 irradiation exerts a significant antipruritic effect, decreases the severity of the disease and improves the quality of life of AD patients. This technique can therefore be used as a safe and effective treatment method.

A retrospective review of UVA1 treatment: An Australian experience from a single centre

BACKGROUND

The therapeutic value of ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) phototherapy has been acknowledged for many years. Initially developed predominately for experimental and diagnostic purposes, it was subsequently recognised as a beneficial therapeutic modality in atopic dermatitis and localised scleroderma, and more recently a variety of sclerosing and fibrosing dermatoses, T-lymphocyte mediated disorders, both inflammatory and infiltrative, and several predominately dermal processes previously unresponsive to current therapies.

METHODS

We present a retrospective evaluation of outcomes and treatment tolerability in adult patients using a low dose (30 joules/cm² ), regimen administered in our private dermatologic practice, between 2006 and December 2019.

RESULTS

Major clinical groups represented include atopic dermatitis, localised and systemic sclerodermas, mycosis fungoides, urticarial dermatitis, generalised pruritus and granuloma annulare. Eighty-seven patients are included in this study with 92% of all patients experiencing a beneficial result, 54% having complete and 38% partial relief of presenting signs and/or symptoms. UVA1 therapy was well tolerated, with no patients ceasing treatment due to adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultraviolet A1 is an effective and safe treatment option in many hitherto recalcitrant cutaneous conditions.

Distinguishing Myth from Fact: Photocarcinogenesis and Phototherapy

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation contributes to the development of skin cancer through direct and indirect DNA damage, production of reactive oxygen species, and local immunomodulation. The association between UV radiation and skin cancer has raised concern for the risk of carcinogenesis following phototherapy. The photocarcinogenic impact of psoralen and UVA radiation (PUVA) has been extensively studied, whereas limited safety studies exist for other phototherapy modalities, such as broadband and narrowband UVB and UVA1. Because of the as of yet unclear risk, patients who have undergone any type of phototherapy should be followed for age-appropriate skin cancer screening.

The efficacy of UVA1 phototherapy in psoriasis: Clinical and histological aspects

BACKGROUND

Although ultraviolet A1 (UVA1) phototherapy is available for nearly 30 years, only few studies have been conducted for plaque-type psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of UVA1 phototherapy in psoriasis by assessing the clinical and histological outcomes.

METHODS

This open study enrolled 15 patients with moderate to severe plaque-type psoriasis. All of the patients had skin type IV. A whole-body UVA1 device consisting of 24 lamps, was irradiated at a medium dose of 50 J/cm² three-times weekly for 30 sessions. Topical and systemic psoriasis treatments were discontinued before and during treatment; patients could only use emollients and antihistamines until 1-month post-completion. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores were determined at baseline; at sessions 10th, 20th and 30th; and 1 month after treatment. Four-millimetre punch biopsies were obtained from the same psoriasis lesion at baseline and session 30th. Changes in histopathological gradings and polymorphonuclear, lymphocyte and Langerhans cell numbers were monitored.

RESULTS

Twelve patients completed the study. The mean age was 41.3 years (range: 25-71). The median PASI scores at baseline, session 30th and 1-month post-treatment were 16 (8.2, 43.3), 11 (4.4, 43.3) and 9.2 (2.7, 36.4), respectively. Although the PASI scores had improved significantly by 1-month post-treatment (P = .006), the histological parameters demonstrated minimal changes. All patients tolerated the phototherapy well and the most common side effect was skin tanning.

CONCLUSIONS

While medium-dose UVA1 phototherapy demonstrated some efficacy in moderate to severe plaque-type psoriasis. However, it might not be an excellent choice.

Ultraviolet A1 Phototherapy for Fibrosing Conditions

In this article we describe efficacy and safety aspects of ultraviolet A1 (UV-A1) phototherapy in fibrosing conditions. UV-A1 is a specific phototherapeutic modality that is defined by a selective spectral range (340–400 nm). UV-A1 includes distinct modes of action qualifying this method for therapy of a variety of conditions, in particular fibrosing skin diseases. Concerning efficacy of UV-A1 phototherapy in fibrosing conditions, the best evidence obtained from randomized controlled trials exists for localized scleroderma. Moreover, fibrosing disorders such as lichen sclerosus and graft-vs.-host disease can be treated successfully by means of UV- A1. Regarding the optimal dosage regimen medium-dose UV-A1 seems to be linked to the best benefit/risk ratio. Possible acute adverse events of UV-A1 phototherapy include erythema and provocation of photodermatoses. Skin ageing and skin cancer formation belong to the chronic adverse events that may occur after long-term UV-A1 phototherapy.

Efficacy assessment of UVA1 and narrowband UVB for treatment of scalp psoriasis

To compare the efficacy and safety of UVA1 and narrowband UVB (NB-UVB) therapy in the treatment of scalp psoriasis. Patients with scalp psoriasis were randomly assigned to either UVA1 or NB-UVB therapy. Both treatments were performed three times weekly for 6 weeks. Clinical efficacy was evaluated by using Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI), and patient-reported quality of life (QoL) was assessed by Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Totally 68 patients completed the study. Both UVA1 and NB-UVB phototherapy achieved a statistically significant reduction of PSSI and DLQI scores at the end of the treatment period. Compared with the NB-UVB group, the significantly greater improvements occurred in UVA1 treatment group at week 3, although differences declined thereafter through week 10. Both UVA1 and NB-UVB therapy were well-tolerated in this study, and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) was uncommon. Both UVA1 and NB-UVB phototherapy could offer relief of scalp symptoms in patients with scalp involvement. Furthermore, UVA1 treatment could improve the clinical manifestations and QoL more quickly than NB-UVB therapy.

Successful Treatment with UVA 1 Laser of Non - Responder Vitiligo Patients

The Authors discuss their experience in treating non-responder vitiligo patients with a UVA-1 laser. Laser Alba 355® is an innovative device of target UVA - 1 phototherapy. The present report suggests that UVA1 laser could be an applicable therapeutic option in patients with vitiligo, also for the ones who did not respond to the more conventional phototherapies.

Management of atopic dermatitis: safety and efficacy of phototherapy

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease that can affect all age groups. It is characterized by a relapsing course and a dramatic impact on quality of life for patients. Environmental interventions together with topical devices represent the mainstay of treatment for AD, in particular emollients, corticosteroids, and calcineurin inhibitors. Systemic treatments are reserved for severe cases. Phototherapy represents a valid second-line intervention in those cases where non-pharmacological and topical measures have failed. Different forms of light therapy are available, and have showed varying degrees of beneficial effect against AD: natural sunlight, narrowband (NB)-UVB, broadband (BB)-UVB, UVA, UVA1, cold-light UVA1, UVA and UVB (UVAB), full-spectrum light (including UVA, infrared and visible light), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy), Goeckerman therapy (coal tar plus UVB radiation), psoralen plus UVA (PUVA), and other forms of phototherapy. In particular, UVA1 and NB-UVB have gained importance in recent years. This review illustrates the main trials comparing the efficacy and safety of the different forms of phototherapy. No sufficiently large randomized controlled studies have been performed as yet, and no light modality has been defined as superior to all. Parameters and dosing protocols may vary, although clinicians mainly refer to the indications included in the American Academy of Dermatology psoriasis guidelines devised by Menter et al in 2010. The efficacy of phototherapy (considering all forms) in AD has been established in adults and children, as well as for acute (UVA1) and chronic (NB-UVB) cases. Its use is suggested with strength of recommendation B and level of evidence II. Home phototherapy can also be performed; this technique is recommended with strength C and level of evidence III. Phototherapy is generally considered to be safe and well tolerated, with a low but established percentage of short-term and long-term adverse effects, with the most common being photodamage, xerosis, erythema, actinic keratosis, sunburn, and tenderness. A carcinogenic risk related to UV radiation has not been excluded. Phototherapy also has some limitations related to costs, availability, and patient compliance. In conclusion, phototherapy is an optimal second-line treatment for AD. It can be used as monotherapy or in combination with systemic drugs, in particular corticosteroids. It must be performed conscientiously, especially in children, and must take into account the patient's features and overall condition.

Scleromyxedema, a therapeutic dilemma

Scleromyxedema is characterized by indurated erythematous papules disseminated on the face, chest and limbs. About twenty cases treated with thalidomide, stem cells, melphalan and immunoglobulin with varying results have been described. We present the case of a 28-year-old male patient diagnosed with scleromyxedema not associated with monoclonal gammopathy, multi-treated with anti-leprosy drugs, UVA1, and thalidomide for 4 years with no improvement.

Efficacy of ultraviolet A1 phototherapy in recalcitrant skin diseases

BACKGROUND

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation has been used for decades to treat a variety of skin diseases. UVA1 was used initially as an effective treatment for acute exacerbated atopic dermatitis. Since then, UVA1 has been attempted for recalcitrant skin diseases.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the efficacy of UVA1 phototherapy in three recalcitrant skin diseases.

METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed the efficacy and follow-up of 26 patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), mycosis fungoides (MF) and localized scleroderma (LS). SUPUVASUN 3000 (Mutzhas Co., Munich, Germany) and SELLAMED 3000 (Sellas Medizinische Gerate GmbH, Gevelsberg, Germany) were the UVA1 equipment used. Irradiation was performed in accordance with the disease. Low-dose (20 J/cm(2)), medium-dose (65 J/cm(2)) and high-dose regimens (100 J/cm(2)) of UVA1 therapy were employed. The frequency of the therapy ranged from 3 to 5 times weekly. The therapeutic effectiveness was assessed according to the clinical examination before and after the last treatment.

RESULTS

In patients with AD, complete and partial remission was achieved in four (80%) and one (20%) patient, respectively. In patients with MF, complete and partial remission was observed in thirteen (86.7%) and two (13.3%) patients, respectively. In patients with LS, complete and partial remission was observed in three (50%) and three (50%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

UVA1 phototherapy is an effective treatment modality for acute exacerbated AD, MF and LS.

Low-dose Ultraviolet A1 Phototherapy for Treating Pityriasis Rosea

BACKGROUND

UVA1 phototherapy has recently demonstrated high levels of efficacy and tolerability for treating a variety of inflammatory and neoplastic skin diseases.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to assess the clinical efficacy of UVA1 (340~400 nm) phototherapy for treating pityriasis rosea and to assess the course of the disease after treatment.

METHODS

Fifteen patients with extensive pityriasis rosea were treated with low-dose UVA1 phototherapy (starting at 10~20 J/cm(2) and then it was increased to 30 J/cm(2)). The treatments were given 2~3 times a week until complete clearance of lesions was achieved or until there was partial improvement without further amelioration, in spite of 5 additional treatments. The rate of clearing was monitored by estimating the pityriasis rosea severity (PRSS) score and the pruritus score.

RESULTS

The extent of disease (PRSS) in all 15 patients lessened during the study (30.1+/-3.6 vs. 2.0+/-1.6, respectively, p<0.05). The overall reduction of the PRSS showed a significant improvement after the second or third treatment. The pruritus of 12 of 15 patients lessened during the treatment period, and it was unchanged in the remaining 3 patients. The mean previous duration of disease was 11.2+/-4.9 days and this did not interfere with the successful outcome of UVA1 phototherapy.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that UVA1 phototherapy is a useful, well-tolerated treatment option for patients suffering from pityriasis rosea with extensive eruptions and considerable pruritus.