Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Systematic review on antipruritic therapies for patients with Epidermolysis bullosa.
Welponer, Tobias; Puttinger, Christian; Korte, Eva W H; van der Werf, Sjoukje; Prodinger, Christine; Bolling, Marieke C; Laimer, Martin.
Affiliation
  • Welponer T; Department of Dermatology and Allergology and EB House Austria, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
  • Puttinger C; Department of Dermatology and Allergology and EB House Austria, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
  • Korte EWH; Department of Dermatology, UMCG Center of Expertise for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • van der Werf S; Central Medical Library, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Prodinger C; Department of Dermatology and Allergology and EB House Austria, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
  • Bolling MC; Department of Dermatology, UMCG Center of Expertise for Blistering Diseases, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Laimer M; Department of Dermatology and Allergology and EB House Austria, University Hospital of the Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
J Dermatolog Treat ; 35(1): 2381762, 2024 Dec.
Article de En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39069296
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Itch is one of the most burdensome symptoms in epidermolysis bullosa (EB), indicating a hitherto unmet therapeutic need. This review leverages existing data on efficacy of itch treatment in EB to support sound decision making.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search was performed on 29 March 2022. Studies written later than 1991 and reporting outcomes in patients with EB treated for itch were considered.

RESULTS:

Of the 3,099 articles screened, 21 studies met eligibility criteria, comprising 353 patients (65.9%) diagnosed for recessive dystrophic EB. Only two studies (9.5%) evaluated itch as primary endpoint, of which solely one revealed a significant relief of self-reported itch upon topical skin care. In those studies assessing itch as secondary endpoint (19/21, 90.5%), only 36.8% studies (n = 7/19) revealed a statistically significant itch reduction of up to 42%. Methodological limitations (heterogeneity of outcomes, inconsistent data assessment) in addition to limited superiority over control were implicated to account for low treatment efficacy observed in most studies.

CONCLUSION:

Current data quality impairs comparative efficacy analyses of itch treatments in EB. Large scale randomized clinical trials and more personalized approaches applying validated measurement instruments for core outcomes are needed to substantiate evidence-based treatment approaches for EB-associated itch.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Prurit / Épidermolyse bulleuse / Antiprurigineux Limites: Humans Langue: En Journal: J Dermatolog Treat Sujet du journal: DERMATOLOGIA Année: 2024 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: Autriche

Texte intégral: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Base de données: MEDLINE Sujet principal: Prurit / Épidermolyse bulleuse / Antiprurigineux Limites: Humans Langue: En Journal: J Dermatolog Treat Sujet du journal: DERMATOLOGIA Année: 2024 Type de document: Article Pays d'affiliation: Autriche