Noninvasive objective skin measurement methods for rosacea assessment: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rosacea assessment and therapy monitoring can be challenging to standardize, as most clinical evaluation systems are prone to interobserver variability and not always validated. Therefore, objective, reliable and preferably noninvasive measurement tools are needed. OBJECTIVES: To give insight into available noninvasive imaging techniques and biophysical methods in rosacea by performing a systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched until 1 September 2018 in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies providing original data about objective noninvasive imaging and/or biophysical skin measurement techniques for diagnosis, assessing severity or therapy monitoring of adult patients with cutaneous facial rosacea. Risk of bias of included articles was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, Quality in Prognosis Studies tool, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: A total of 78 studies were included, describing 14 imaging and biophysical methods. Widespread information about (sub)surface cutaneous morphology and functionality was obtained. Methodological study quality was relatively low and interstudy outcome variability was large. Several tools show promising value in research settings: for treatment follow-up Demodex mites are countable with reflectance confocal microscopy, spectrometry can quantify erythema, and rosacea severity could be objectified with skin hydration- and transepidermal water loss measurements. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review describes the spectrum of noninvasive imaging and biophysical methods in rosacea assessment, giving multifaceted information about structure and properties of rosacea skin, especially useful for research purposes. Larger studies with good methodological quality are needed to create validated protocols for further implementation into research. What's already known about this topic? Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a variety of clinical manifestations. Most clinical evaluation systems are subjective, not always validated, and subsurface skin processes remain unnoticed. Currently, different types of noninvasive measurement tools are available for rosacea assessment and therapy monitoring, but a comprehensive overview is lacking. What does this study add? Seventy-eight publications were included, describing 14 imaging and biophysical tools, providing a wide range of information about rosacea skin morphology and functionality. Reflectance confocal microscopy and spectrometry are especially promising in therapy monitoring and skin barrier measurements for rosacea severity assessment. Larger studies with better methodological quality are needed to create validated protocols for implementation into research.

Pharmacokinetics, Tolerability, and Bacteriological Response of Rifampin Administered at 600, 900, and 1,200 Milligrams Daily in Patients with Pulmonary Tuberculosis.

In a multiple-dose-ranging trial, we previously evaluated higher doses of rifampin in patients for 2 weeks. The objectives of the current study were to administer higher doses of rifampin for a longer period to compare the pharmacokinetics, safety/tolerability, and bacteriological activity of such regimens. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II clinical trial, 150 Tanzanian patients with tuberculosis (TB) were randomized to receive either 600 mg (approximately 10 mg/kg of body weight), 900 mg, or 1,200 mg rifampin combined with standard doses of isoniazid, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol administered daily for 2 months. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling occurred in 63 patients after 6 weeks of treatment, and safety/tolerability was assessed. The bacteriological response was assessed by culture conversion in liquid and solid media. Geometric mean total exposures (area under the concentration-versus-time curve up to 24 h after the dose) were 24.6, 50.8, and 76.1 mg · h/liter in the 600-mg, 900-mg, and 1,200-mg groups, respectively, reflecting a nonlinear increase in exposure with the dose (P < 0.001). Grade 3 adverse events occurred in only 2 patients in the 600-mg arm, 4 patients in the 900-mg arm, and 5 patients in the 1,200-mg arm. No significant differences in the bacteriological response were observed. Higher daily doses of rifampin (900 and 1,200 mg) resulted in a more than proportional increase in rifampin exposure in plasma and were safe and well tolerated when combined with other first-line anti-TB drugs for 2 months, but they did not result in improved bacteriological responses in patients with pulmonary TB. These findings have warranted evaluation of even higher doses of rifampin in follow-up trials. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT00760149.).