Efficacy of ultraviolet A1 phototherapy for inflammatory, sclerotic and neoplastic dermatological diseases: A 10-year tertiary referral center experience.

BACKGROUND: Ultraviolet (UV) A1 phototherapy is considered a beneficial treatment for various inflammatory, sclerotic, malignant, and other skin conditions. However, the available data regarding its efficacy for different indications, the potential side effects, and the recommended treatment protocols are sparse. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of UVA1 phototherapy and identify correlation between different indications and treatment protocols to response rates. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of a cohort of 335 patients treated with UVA1 phototherapy at the Department of Dermatology at Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel, between 2008 and 2018. RESULTS: The study population included 163 patients with inflammatory diseases (mainly atopic dermatitis and other types of eczema), 67 patients with sclerotic diseases (morphea and graft versus host disease), nine patients with neoplastic diseases (cutaneous T cell lymphoma), and 188 patients with other cutaneous disorders. Response rates ranged between 85% and 89% across indications, without differences in response rates among the indication groups (p = .941). In a multivariant logistic regression model, increased number of treatments and higher maximal dosages were associated with response to treatment (p < .001). Using ROC analysis, a cut-off of 8 UVA1 phototherapy treatments was chosen as predictive for beneficial response (86.4% sensitivity, 78% specificity). A cut-off of 40 J/cm2 was chosen as an optimal maximal dosage for differentiating between responders and non-responders (51.1% sensitivity, 83.1% specificity). CONCLUSIONS: UVA1 phototherapy is an effective treatment for a variety of skin conditions. In most patients, at least eight treatments of a medium-high dosage are required for clinical response.

The Alopecia Areata Consensus of Experts (ACE) study: Results of an international expert opinion on treatments for alopecia areata.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review failed to identify any systemic therapy used in alopecia areata (AA) where use is supported by robust evidence from high-quality randomized controlled trials. OBJECTIVE: To produce an international consensus statement on the use and utility of various treatments for AA. METHODS: Fifty hair experts from 5 continents were invited to participate in a 3-round Delphi process. Agreement of 66% or greater was considered consensus. RESULTS: In the first round, consensus was achieved in 22 of 423 (5%) questions. After a face-to-face meeting in round 3, overall, consensus was achieved for only 130 (33%) treatment-specific questions. There was greater consensus for intralesional treatment of AA (19 [68%]) followed by topical treatment (25 [43%]). Consensus was achieved in 45 (36%) questions pertaining to systemic therapies in AA. The categories with the least consensus were phototherapy and nonprescription therapies. LIMITATIONS: The study included a comprehensive list of systemic treatments for AA but not all treatments used. CONCLUSION: Despite divergent opinions among experts, consensus was achieved on a number of pertinent questions. The concluding statement also highlights areas where expert consensus is lacking and where an international patient registry could enable further research.

Phototherapy decreases red blood cell deformability in patients with psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Alternations in erythrocyte deformability (ED), namley, the ability of erythrocytes to change shape under flow in the microcirculation, can contribute to cardiovascular diseases. Psoriasis, a systemic inflammatory skin disorder, is associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. The effect of psoriasis and psoriasis treatment on ED was only scarcely evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate ED changes in psoriasis patients following narrow band-ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) treatment. METHODS: Erythrocyte deformability was determined using a computerized cell flow properties analyzer in 9 patients with psoriasis before and after a course of Goeckerman regimen. ED was quantified using two parameters: average elongation ratio (AER) in the cell population, and the fraction of low deformable cells (% LDFC). RESULTS: All 9 patients showed decreased ED (i.e. impaired deformability) following NB-UVB treatment. There was a significant (p = 0.003) decrease in AER after treatment (AER±SD; 1.58±0.06) compared to the starting values (1.69±0.1). Additionally, there was a significant (p = 0.002) increase in the fraction of low deformable cells (% LDFC±SD; 60.00±9.05) compared to their fraction before treatment (34.86±11.44). CONCLUSIONS: The decreased ED observed following phototherapy could have clinical influences on psoriasis patients, and may partially explain why phototherapy does not decrease the cardiovascular risk in psoriasis compared to other treatments.