RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Atopic eczema (AE), also known as atopic dermatitis, is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that causes significant burden. Phototherapy is sometimes used to treat AE when topical treatments, such as corticosteroids, are insufficient or poorly tolerated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of phototherapy for treating AE. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov to January 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials in adults or children with any subtype or severity of clinically diagnosed AE. Eligible comparisons were any type of phototherapy versus other forms of phototherapy or any other treatment, including placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodology. For key findings, we used RoB 2.0 to assess bias, and GRADE to assess certainty of the evidence. Primary outcomes were physician-assessed signs and patient-reported symptoms. Secondary outcomes were Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), safety (measured as withdrawals due to adverse events), and long-term control. MAIN RESULTS: We included 32 trials with 1219 randomised participants, aged 5 to 83 years (mean: 28 years), with an equal number of males and females. Participants were recruited mainly from secondary care dermatology clinics, and study duration was, on average, 13 weeks (range: 10 days to one year). We assessed risk of bias for all key outcomes as having some concerns or high risk, due to missing data, inappropriate analysis, or insufficient information to assess selective reporting. Assessed interventions included: narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB; 13 trials), ultraviolet A1 (UVA1; 6 trials), broadband ultraviolet B (BB-UVB; 5 trials), ultraviolet AB (UVAB; 2 trials), psoralen plus ultraviolet A (PUVA; 2 trials), ultraviolet A (UVA; 1 trial), unspecified ultraviolet B (UVB; 1 trial), full spectrum light (1 trial), Saalmann selective ultraviolet phototherapy (SUP) cabin (1 trial), saltwater bath plus UVB (balneophototherapy; 1 trial), and excimer laser (1 trial). Comparators included placebo, no treatment, another phototherapy, topical treatment, or alternative doses of the same treatment. Results for key comparisons are summarised (for scales, lower scores are better): NB-UVB versus placebo/no treatment There may be a larger reduction in physician-assessed signs with NB-UVB compared to placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (mean difference (MD) -9.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.62 to -15.18; 1 trial, 41 participants; scale: 0 to 90). Two trials reported little difference between NB-UVB and no treatment (37 participants, four to six weeks of treatment); another reported improved signs with NB-UVB versus no treatment (11 participants, nine weeks of treatment). NB-UVB may increase the number of people reporting reduced itch after 12 weeks of treatment compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.72, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.69; 1 trial, 40 participants). Another trial reported very little difference in itch severity with NB-UVB (25 participants, four weeks of treatment). The number of participants with moderate to greater global improvement may be higher with NB-UVB than placebo after 12 weeks of treatment (RR 2.81, 95% CI 1.10 to 7.17; 1 trial, 41 participants). NB-UVB may not affect rates of withdrawal due to adverse events. No withdrawals were reported in one trial of NB-UVB versus placebo (18 participants, nine weeks of treatment). In two trials of NB-UVB versus no treatment, each reported one withdrawal per group (71 participants, 8 to 12 weeks of treatment). We judged that all reported outcomes were supported with low-certainty evidence, due to risk of bias and imprecision. No trials reported HRQoL. NB-UVB versus UVA1 We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to UVA1 to be very low certainty for all outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (MD -2.00, 95% CI -8.41 to 4.41; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 108), or patient-reported itch after six weeks (MD 0.3, 95% CI -1.07 to 1.67; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 0 to 10). Two split-body trials (20 participants, 40 sides) also measured these outcomes, using different scales at seven to eight weeks; they reported lower scores with NB-UVB. One trial reported HRQoL at six weeks (MD 2.9, 95% CI -9.57 to 15.37; 1 trial, 46 participants; scale: 30 to 150). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events over 12 weeks (13 participants). No trials reported IGA. NB-UVB versus PUVA We judged the evidence for NB-UVB compared to PUVA (8-methoxypsoralen in bath plus UVA) to be very low certainty for all reported outcomes, due to risk of bias and imprecision. There was no evidence of a difference in physician-assessed signs after six weeks (64.1% reduction with NB-UVB versus 65.7% reduction with PUVA; 1 trial, 10 participants, 20 sides). There was no evidence of a difference in marked improvement or complete remission after six weeks (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 7.89; 1 trial, 9/10 participants with both treatments). One split-body trial reported no withdrawals due to adverse events in 10 participants over six weeks. The trials did not report patient-reported symptoms or HRQoL. UVA1 versus PUVA There was very low-certainty evidence, due to serious risk of bias and imprecision, that PUVA (oral 5-methoxypsoralen plus UVA) reduced physician-assessed signs more than UVA1 after three weeks (MD 11.3, 95% CI -0.21 to 22.81; 1 trial, 40 participants; scale: 0 to 103). The trial did not report patient-reported symptoms, IGA, HRQoL, or withdrawals due to adverse events. There were no eligible trials for the key comparisons of UVA1 or PUVA compared with no treatment. Adverse events Reported adverse events included low rates of phototoxic reaction, severe irritation, UV burn, bacterial superinfection, disease exacerbation, and eczema herpeticum. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to placebo or no treatment, NB-UVB may improve physician-rated signs, patient-reported symptoms, and IGA after 12 weeks, without a difference in withdrawal due to adverse events. Evidence for UVA1 compared to NB-UVB or PUVA, and NB-UVB compared to PUVA was very low certainty. More information is needed on the safety and effectiveness of all aspects of phototherapy for treating AE.
Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Atópica , Eccema , Terapia Ultravioleta , Adulto , Niño , Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Fototerapia , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
Feeding preterm infants with mother's own milk is associated with a reduction in postnatal complications and an improved neurocognitive outcome. Therefore, the bioactive factor composition of human milk has been used as a tool for the development of nutritional supplements with a potential prophylactic or therapeutic effect. The aim of this systematic review was to provide an overview on bioactive factors which have been studied as supplement to enteral nutrition in randomized controlled trials, and to provide an overview of ongoing trials. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinical trial registers were searched. Studies on the antimicrobial protein lactoferrin were excluded as these were summarized very recently in three separate systematic reviews. Studies on vitamins D, K and iron were also excluded as they are already incorporated in most international guidelines. We identified 17 different bioactive factors, which were investigated in 26 studies. Despite the encouraging potential effects of several bioactive factors, more high-quality studies with a sufficient number of preterm infants are required before a certain factor may be implemented into clinical practice. Three large trials (n > 500) that investigate the effects of either enteral insulin or vitamin A are currently ongoing and could provide more definite answers on these specific supplements.
Asunto(s)
Suplementos Dietéticos , Fenómenos Fisiológicos Nutricionales del Lactante , Recien Nacido Prematuro/crecimiento & desarrollo , Desarrollo Infantil/efectos de los fármacos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Nutrición Enteral , Humanos , Lactante , Leche Humana , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
There is a range of methotrexate dosing regimens for psoriasis. This review summarizes the evidence for test-dose, start-dose, dosing scheme, dose adjustments, maximum dose and use of folic acid. A literature search for randomized controlled trials and guidelines was performed. Twenty-three randomized controlled trials (29 treatment groups) and 10 guidelines were included. Two treatment groups used a test-dose, 5 guidelines recommend it. The methotrexate start-dose in randomized controlled trials varied from 5 to 25 mg/week, most commonly being either 7.5 mg or 15 mg. Guidelines vary from 5 to 15 mg/week. Methotrexate was administered as a single dose or in a Weinstein schedule in 15 and 11 treatment-groups, respectively; both recommended equally in guidelines. A fixed dose (n = 18), predefined dose (n = 3), or dose adjusted on clinical improvement (n = 8) was used, the last also being recommended in guidelines. Ten treatment groups used folic acid; in 2 it was allowed, in 14 not mentioned, and in 3 no folic acid was used. Most guidelines recommend the use of folic acid. Authors' suggestions for methotrexate dosing are given.
Asunto(s)
Suplementos Dietéticos , Ácido Fólico/administración & dosificación , Inmunosupresores/administración & dosificación , Metotrexato/administración & dosificación , Psoriasis/tratamiento farmacológico , Esquema de Medicación , Cálculo de Dosificación de Drogas , Quimioterapia Combinada , Humanos , Inmunosupresores/efectos adversos , Metotrexato/efectos adversos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Psoriasis/diagnóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Many patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) require systemic immunomodulating treatment to achieve adequate disease control. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (until June 2012). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating systemic immunomodulating treatments for moderate-to-severe AD were included. Selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and generation of treatment recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life, and the course of AD. Safety data were compared by calculating the weekly incidence rates (as percentages) for adverse events. RESULTS: Thirty-four RCTs with 12 different systemic treatments and totaling 1653 patients were included. Fourteen trials consistently indicate that cyclosporin A efficaciously improves clinical signs of AD. Cyclosporin A is recommended as first-line treatment for short-term use. A second-line treatment option is azathioprine, but efficacy is lower, and evidence is weaker. Methotrexate can be considered a third-line treatment option. Recommendations are impossible for mycophenolate, montelukast, intravenous immunoglobulins, and systemic glucocorticosteroids because of limited evidence. A meta-analysis was not performed because of a lack of standardization in outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Although 12 different interventions for moderate-to-severe AD have been studied in 34 RCTs, strong recommendations are only possible for the short-term use of cyclosporin A. Methodological limitations in the majority of trials prevent evidence-based conclusions. Large head-to-head trials evaluating long-term treatments are required.
Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Atópica/tratamiento farmacológico , Inmunosupresores/uso terapéutico , Azatioprina/uso terapéutico , Ciclosporina/uso terapéutico , Glucocorticoides/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Interferón gamma/uso terapéutico , Metotrexato/uso terapéutico , Ácido Micofenólico/análogos & derivados , Ácido Micofenólico/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Epidemiologic studies have repeatedly associated a high intake of lycopene and vitamin E with reduced prostate cancer risk. The present study examined the ability of the 2 compounds to reduce tumor growth and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) plasma levels in the PC-346C orthotopic mouse model of human prostate cancer. Three days after intraprostatic tumor injection, NMRI nu/nu mice were administered a daily oral dose of synthetic lycopene [5 or 50 mg/kg body weight (BW)], vitamin E in the form of alpha-tocopheryl acetate (5 or 50 mg/kg BW), a mixture of lycopene and vitamin E (5 mg/kg BW each), or vehicle. Intraprostatic tumor volume and plasma PSA concentrations were measured at regular intervals. Mice were killed when the tumor load exceeded 1000 mm(3) or on d 95 when the study was terminated. Prostate and liver were analyzed by HPLC for lycopene isomers and alpha- and gamma, delta-tocopherol concentrations. None of the single treatments significantly reduced tumor volume. In contrast, combined treatment with lycopene and vitamin E, at 5 mg/kg BW each, suppressed orthotopic growth of PC-346C prostate tumors by 73% at d 42 (P < 0.05) and increased median survival time by 40% from 47 to 66 d (P = 0.02). The PSA index (PSA:tumor volume ratio) did not differ between experimental groups, indicating that PSA levels were not selectively affected. Lycopene was detected only in mice supplemented with lycopene. As in humans, most tissue lycopene was in the cis-isomer conformation, whereas 77% trans-lycopene was used in the dosing material. Liver alpha-tocopherol concentrations were increased in mice supplemented with both 50 mg/kg (226%, P < 0.05) and 5 mg/kg vitamin E (41%, P < 0.05), whereas prostate alpha-tocopherol concentrations were increased only by the higher dose (83%, P < 0.05). Our data provide evidence that lycopene combined with vitamin E may inhibit the growth of prostate cancer and that PSA can serve as a biomarker of tumor response for this treatment regimen.