Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1406
Title: Systemic treatments for alopecia areata: a systematic review.
Epworth Authors: Sinclair, Rodney
Other Authors: Lai, Vivien
Chen, Gang
Keywords: Alopecia Areata
AA
Systemic Treatments
Alopecia Totalis
AT
Alopecia Universalis
AU
Treatment Outcome
Systemic Thearpies
Oral Prednisolone Pulse Therapy
Relapse Rates
Oral Inosiplex
Disease Management
Head & Neck Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: Jun-2018
Conference: Epworth HealthCare Research Week 2018
Conference Location: Epworth Research Institute, Victoria, Australia
Abstract: BACKGROUND: A range of systemic treatments are used for alopecia areata (AA) with variable evidence supporting efficacy. In this systematic review, we evaluated the evidence surrounding systemic treatments used in the management of alopecia areata, alopecia totalis (AT) and alopecia universalis (AU). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted of the peer-reviewed literature published between 1946 and March 2018 via Medline, Embase, Amed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsychINFO and Lilacs. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of systemic treatments for individuals with AA, AT or AU were included. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were included with a total of 768 participants. We found 8 placebo-controlled RCTs, 3 RCTs comparing 2 systemic treatments and 5 RCTs comparing 3 treatments. A total of 15 different systemic therapies were investigated. The most frequently investigated therapy was oral prednisolone pulse therapy and oral inosiplex in 3 studies each. There was significant variability in the definition of treatment success. Only 3 studies included psychometric questionnaires. Adverse events were reported in 13 studies and were corticosteroid-related or otherwise well tolerated. Relapse rates were considerable in the 4 studies that reported this outcome. CONCLUSION: There is currently no particular systemic therapy that is supported by robust body of evidence from RCTs. The current evidence suggests efficacy of oral prednisolone pulse therapy and oral inosiplex. Evidence does not support the use of oral zinc sulphate, alefacept and efalizumab. Future RCTs should be adequately powered and employ clearly defined clinical response endpoints to allow future meta-analyses.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1406
Type: Conference Poster
Affiliated Organisations: Monash School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC Australia
Centre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Clayton, VIC Australia
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Systematic Reviews
Appears in Collections:Dermatology

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in EKB are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.