Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cyclosporine for moderate-to-severe alopecia areata: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of efficacy and safety.
Lai, Vivien Wai Yun; Chen, Gang; Gin, Douglas; Sinclair, Rodney.
Afiliação
  • Lai VWY; Monash School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: vivien.lai.wy@gmail.com.
  • Chen G; Centre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
  • Gin D; Dermatology Department, Alfred Hospital, Prahan, Victoria, Australia.
  • Sinclair R; Sinclair Dermatology, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Am Acad Dermatol ; 81(3): 694-701, 2019 Sep.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31048013
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Despite widespread use of steroid-sparing agents, particularly cyclosporine, for treatment of alopecia areata (AA), there are no clinical trials investigating the efficacy of these agents.

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the efficacy of cyclosporine compared with placebo at 3 months in patients aged 18 to 65 years with moderate-to-severe AA.

METHODS:

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted. Adults aged 18 to 65 years of age with moderate-to-severe AA were randomized in a 11 ratio to receive 3 months of cyclosporine (4 mg/kg/d) or matching placebo. Blinded assessments included physical examination, blood biochemistry, photography, quality of life measurements, and efficacy evaluation using Severity of Alopecia Tool score and eyelash and eyebrow assessment scales.

RESULTS:

The results obtained for 32 participants (16 who received cyclosporine and 16 who received placebo) were analyzed. Compared with the placebo group, the cyclosporine group had a greater proportion of participants achieving at least a 50% reduction in Severity of Alopecia Tool score (31.3% vs 6.3% [P = .07]) and greater proportion of participants achieving a 1-grade improvement in eyelash (18.8% vs 0% [P = .07]) and eyebrow (31.3% vs 0% [P = .02]) scale score.

LIMITATIONS:

Small sample size and single-institution trial may limit interpretation and generalizability of these results.

CONCLUSION:

Response approached but did not reach a statistically significant difference between cyclosporine and placebo.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ciclosporina / Fármacos Dermatológicos / Alopecia em Áreas Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Am Acad Dermatol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Ciclosporina / Fármacos Dermatológicos / Alopecia em Áreas Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Diagnostic_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Am Acad Dermatol Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article