The safety and efficacy of autologous adipose-derived stromal vascular fraction for nonscarring alopecia: A systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Nonscarring alopecia, including androgenetic alopecia and alopecia areata, are common and can negatively impact quality of life. Recent clinical studies have investigated autologous, adipose-derived stromal vascular fraction (SVF) as a potentially beneficial treatment option. OBJECTIVE: To assess the available evidence on the utility and safety of SVF for nonscarring alopecia. EVIDENCE REVIEW: A systematic review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and CENTRAL from inception to November 2020. Included articles were prospective, observational or interventional studies of SVF for nonscarring alopecia in humans. FINDINGS: Six studies of 188 patients were identified, including three randomized controlled trials. There were no reported severe adverse events. All studies found improved hair density with SVF compared to control or pre-treatment baseline. One study reported that improvement in hair density varied based on time for follow-up, severity of hair loss, and concentration of adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) within the SVF. Two studies reported an increase in hair diameter from baseline, and two studies reported an improvement in hair pull test outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: SVF may be safe and effective for nonscarring alopecia in the appropriate patients. Hair loss severity, method of SVF preparation and frequency of treatment, and adjunctive therapies may be important considerations for treatment success. Additional studies evaluating appropriate patient selection and treatment methods are needed.

Inter-rater reliability of cutaneous sarcoidosis assessment tools via remote photographic assessment.

Background: Recently two outcome instruments have been developed and validated for assessing cutaneous sarcoidosis in a live, in-person setting. Teledermatology is a rapidly growing field; yet, to date, no instrument has been validated for use in a remote setting, which could ultimately impact clinical trial design. Objective: To assess the interrater reliability of these outcome instruments for store-and-forward teledermatology. Methods: Seven sarcoidosis experts, including both pulmonologists and dermatologists, scored photographs of cutaneous sarcoidosis lesions in 13 patients utilizing the Cutaneous Sarcoidosis Activity and Morphology Index (CSAMI), the Sarcoidosis Activity and Severity Index (SASI) and the Physician Global Assessment (PGA). Interrater reliability was assessed for each instrument and was compared to results obtained from a prior study involving sarcoidosis experts evaluating the same patient population in an in-person setting. Results: Interrater reliability (presented as ICC [95%CI]) was poor for the CSAMI Activity scale (0.36 [0.16 - 0.65]) and the CSAMI Damage scale (0.17 [0.04 - 0.43]) and was fair for the Modified Facial SASI (0.59 [0.36 - 0.82]) and the PGA (0.47 [0.23 - 0.74]). All results were inferior to those obtained from the prior studies validating these instruments for in-person use. Conclusions: Given the superiority of these instruments when utilized in person, it is recommended to have an on-site sarcoidosis expert evaluate cutaneous sarcoidosis lesions whenever possible. (Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis 2017; 34: 165-169).