暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Lichen planopilaris (LPP) and discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) are primary scarring alopecias that pose diagnostic challenges clinically, where trichoscopy features may provide benefit in delineating these two cicatricial alopecia, and also helps in assessing the evolution and therapeutic response. To date, there are few reviews on dermoscopic findings in differentiating these two alopecias.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases. The search terms included for scalp DLE were \'lupus\' OR \'discoid lupus\' OR \"scalp lupus\" and for scalp LPP were \"lichen planopilaris\" OR \"scalp follicular lichen planus\" OR \"lichen planus follicularis\" and were combined with \"dermoscopy\" OR \"dermatoscopy\" OR \"videodermoscopy\" OR \"video dermatoscopy\" OR \"trichoscopy\". The differences in the prevalence of dermoscopic features in scalp DLE and LPP were calculated using the Chi-square test.
UNASSIGNED: Of 52 articles, 36 (17 LPP, 19 DLE) were eligible for quantitative analysis. We found predominant peripilar tubular casts and perifollicular erythema with the presence of arborizing vessels in the vicinity of these changes, indicating early LPP. In contrast, follicular red dots, speckled brown pigmentation, and hair diameter variability indicated active DLE. Shiny white areas were common in both the groups in late stages. The target pattern of distribution of blue-grey dots, milky red areas, and irregular white fibrotic dots were seen in LPP, and pink-white background, follicular plugs, perifollicular and interfollicular scale, rosettes, chrysalides, and red spider on yellow dots were detected in DLE. Features such as yellow dots and blue-grey structureless areas were nonspecific and did not have a major role in differentiating DLE from LPP.
UNASSIGNED: This article provides a comprehensive review of the literature and delineates the trichoscopic differences and peculiarities of scalp DLE and LPP, including the correlation of dermoscopic features with histopathological findings.

暂无摘要。

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer therapies. Their mechanism promotes a cytotoxic T-cell activation against the tumor cells, but as a consequence, immune-mediated toxicities are increasingly being identified. Cutaneous immune-mediated adverse events (AE) occur in 32% of patients, with possible higher grade AEs seen with anti-programmed cell death protein 1, such as nivolumab. A 67-year-old woman with metastatic melanoma, previously treated for 2 years on dual ICI (ipilimumab and nivolumab), had her treatment interrupted due to grade-3 hepatitis. She was subsequently recommenced on single-agent nivolumab with good response, before discontinuation due to remission. She reported worsening scalp pruritus with associated erythema, scaling, and global hair thinning. On examination, she had significant erythema throughout the scalp with perifollicular scaling and evidence of scarring. She reported severe distress from her symptoms. Her scalp biopsy demonstrated features of scarring alopecia with infundibular and isthmic inflammation and interface change in keeping with lichen planopilaris. Follicular toxicities are rarely reported, possibly due to imprecise AE phenotyping or underreporting. However, growing evidence suggests that patients can develop follicular pigmentary changes and nonscarring alopecia. To our knowledge, this is the first case of scarring alopecia reported with nivolumab. Current treatments for ICI-induced toxicities are limited.

Lichen planus (LP) is a common inflammatory skin disorder with multiple variants. The coexistence of lichen planus pigmentosus (LPPigm) and frontal fibrosing alopecia is well-established in the literature. However, the coexistence of LPPigm and classic lichen planopilaris (LPP) is rare. We report a case of LPPigm and classic LPP in a postmenopausal woman with a literature review.

BACKGROUND: Lichen planopilaris (LPP) is a primary chronic lymphocytic cutaneous disorder that selectively destroys the hair follicles, resulting in scarring alopecia. Unfortunately, current available treatments are not fully effective to stop hair loss, and the level of evidence for medical interventions is weak.
OBJECTIVE: The present article aimed to determine the efficacy of the different medical interventions in LPP through a network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed including randomized trials that report the outcomes of lichen planopilaris activity index (LPPAI). These articles were pooled and a NMA was conducted.
RESULTS: A total of seven studies were identified and included in meta-analysis, comprising 251 LPP patients. The NMA showed the mean difference in LLPAI was significantly superior with the combination of clobetasol plus N-acetylcysteine (mean difference: -2.0, 95% CI = -3.43 to -0.51) and the combination of clobetasol plus pentoxifylline (mean difference: -1.62, 95% CI = -3.0 to -0.25) compared to the treatment of reference (clobetasol). The NMA showed cyclosporine (mean difference: 2.05 95% CI = 0.68-3.49), methotrexate (mean difference: 1.95 95% CI = 1.23-3.17), the combination of methotrexate plus prednisolone (mean difference: 1.56 95% CI = 0.25-2.96) were significantly worse than hydroxychloroquine according to the differences in LLPAI.
CONCLUSIONS: This work is the first NMA in LPP and hence, it can be helpful in serving as an initial step toward better evidence-based decisions in the treatment of this challenging condition. We propose a triple-combined approach consisting of topical clobetasol, hydroxychloroquine, and N-acetylcysteine as resulted in the most effective approach. Considering the poor outcomes observed with pioglitazone, mycophenolate mofetil, and cyclosporine, it is advisable to contemplate the use of these medications in patients who have not responded adequately to more efficacious alternatives.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is a cicatricial alopecia affecting the frontotemporal hairline. Given that this scarring, immune-mediated follicular destruction most commonly affects postmenopausal Caucasian women, researchers have postulated that there are hormonal and genetic components; however, the etiology of FFA is still unknown. Recently, dermatologists have reported cases of FFA as being potentially caused by cosmetic products, such as sunscreen and shampoo. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis intend to be the first to analyze the relationship between FFA and cosmetic/personal care products and treatments, including sunscreen, moisturizer, foundation, shampoo, conditioner, hair mousse, hair gel, hair dye, hair straightening/rebonding, chemical/laser facial resurfacing, aftershave, and facial cleanser.
METHODS: The Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline (Ovid) databases were searched for the relevant studies from the date of inception to August 2022. Case-control, cross-sectional, and cohort studies examining the effects of cosmetic/personal care product use on FFA, available in English full-text, were included. Analyses were performed using Review Manager, version 5.4. Results were reported as an odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI); p values < 0.05 were considered significant.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in our quantitative analyses, totaling 1,248 FFA patients and 1,459 controls. There were significant positive associations found for FFA and sunscreen (OR 3.02, 95% CI 1.67-5.47; p = 0.0003) and facial moisturizer (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.51-3.20; p < 0.0001) use. Gender sub-analyses demonstrated a positive association for FFA and facial moisturizer in men (OR 5.07, 95% CI 1.40-18.32; p = 0.01), but not in women (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.83-2.98; p = 0.16). Both gender sub-analyses were significantly positive for the association with facial sunscreen (Male OR 4.61, 95% CI 1.54-13.78, p = 0.006; Female OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.32-5.70, p = 0.007). There was no association found for a facial cleanser (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.33-1.52; p = 0.51), foundation (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.83-1.55; p = 0.21), shampoo (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22-1.10; p = 0.08), hair conditioner (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.52-1.26; p = 0.35), hair mousse (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.75-2.51; p = 0.31), and hair gel (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.48-1.69; p = 0.74), hair dye (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.69-1.64; p = 0.77), hair straightening/rebonding (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08-9.32; p = 0.92), hair perming (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.89-2.23; p = 0.14), facial toner (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.12-2.21; p = 0.37), or aftershave (OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.28-9.49; p = 0.58).
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis strongly suggests that leave-on facial products, facial sunscreen and moisturizer, are associated with FFA. While the association with facial moisturizer did not persist when stratifying for female populations, gender sub-analyses remained significant for a facial sunscreen. There was no significant relationship found with hair products or treatments. These findings suggest a potential environmental etiology in the development of FFA, particularly UV-protecting chemicals.

UNASSIGNED: Immune-mediated alopecias (IMAs), a group of hair disorders associated with immunological reactions, remain a therapeutic challenge since available treatments are generally unfavorable with potential side effects. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been recently proposed as a treatment option based on several limited-quality studies; however, there is no systematic evaluation of PRP efficacy on IMAs in the literature.
UNASSIGNED: To assess PRP\'s effects in treating IMAs using a systematic review.
UNASSIGNED: Electronic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. A search strategy was designed to retrieve all studies exploring PRP in treating IMAs, including alopecia areata (AA) and primary cicatricial alopecias (PCAs). In addition, all randomized and non-randomized studies reporting subjective and/or objective outcomes of alopecia treatment with PRP were included.
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-two studies were included, comprising 621 patients with AA and 19 patients with PCAs. PRP had superior efficacy as monotherapy in five studies, comparable to intralesional corticosteroids in six studies in AA treatment. In addition, in the analysis of PCAs, including lymphocytic and neutrophilic subtypes, PRP was efficacious in alleviating disease progression in nine studies.
UNASSIGNED: PRP is considered a promising treatment for AA and PCAs in patients who experienced unfavorable outcomes from conventional treatment. However, its clinical application remains to be standardized, and its recommendation as a treatment for IMAs could not be ascertained due to a lack of high-quality evidence.
UNASSIGNED: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=353859], identifier [CRD42022353859].