Non-antistreptococcal interventions for acute guttate psoriasis or an acute guttate flare of chronic psoriasis.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 04 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 9 4 2019
medline: 29 5 2019
entrez: 9 4 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Guttate psoriasis displays distinctive epidemiological and clinical features, making it a separate entity within the heterogeneous group of cutaneous psoriasis types. It is associated with genetic, immune, and environmental factors (such as stress and infections) and usually arises in younger age groups (including children, teenagers, and young adults). There is currently no cure for psoriasis, but various treatments can help to relieve the symptoms and signs. The objectives of treatment when managing an acute flare of guttate psoriasis are to reduce time to clearance and induction of long-term remission after resolution. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2000; since then, new treatments have expanded the therapeutic spectrum of systemic treatments used for psoriasis. To assess the effects of non-antistreptococcal interventions for acute guttate psoriasis or an acute guttate flare of chronic psoriasis. We searched the following databases up to June 2018: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. We checked the proceedings of key dermatology conferences from 2004 to 2018, and also searched for trials in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database for drug registration. All randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of treatments for acute guttate psoriasis or an acute guttate flare of chronic psoriasis clinically diagnosed in children and adults. This included all topical and systemic drugs, biological therapy, phototherapy (all forms: topical and systemic), and complementary and alternative therapies. We compared these treatments against placebo or against another treatment. We did not include studies on drugs that aim to eradicate streptococcal infection. We did not include studies when separate results for guttate psoriasis participants were not available. Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and methodological quality and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were 'percentage of participants clear or almost clear (i.e. obtaining Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 100/90 and/or Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of 0 or 1)' and 'percentage of participants with adverse effects and severe adverse effects'. Our secondary outcomes were 'number of relapses of guttate psoriasis or flares within a period of six months after the treatment has finished', 'percentage of participants achieving a PASI 75 or PGA of 1 or 2', and 'improvement in participant satisfaction measures and quality of life assessment measures'. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome. This review included only one trial (21 participants), which compared fish oil-derived (n-3) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (50 mL per infusion (1.05 g eicosapentaenoic and 10.5 g docosahexaenoic acid)) (10 participants) to soya oil-derived (n-6) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (50 mL per infusion (1.05 g eicosapentaenoic and 10.5 g docosahexaenoic acid)) (11 participants) administered intravenously twice daily for 10 days, with a total follow-up of 40 days. The study was conducted in a single centre in Germany in 18 men and three women, aged between 21 and 65 years, who were in hospital with acute guttate psoriasis and had mean total body surface involvement of 25.7% ± 20.4% (range 10 to 90). The study was funded by a company that produces the oil emulsions. We found no other evidence regarding non-antistreptococcal interventions used in clinical practice for guttate psoriasis, such as topical treatments (corticosteroids, vitamin D₃ analogues), systemic drugs, biological therapy, and phototherapy.The primary outcomes of the review were not measured, and only one of our secondary outcomes was measured: improvement in participant satisfaction measures and quality of life assessment measures. However, the study authors did report that there was rare skin irritation at the site of peripheral intravenous route, but the number of affected participants was not provided.Improvement between baseline and day 10, using a non-validated score assessed by participants themselves daily based on five items (appearance of lesions, impairment of daily life, pruritus, burning, and pain), was greater in the group that received the fish oil-derived (n-3) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (75%) than in the group receiving the soya oil-derived (n-6) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (18%) (one trial, 21 participants). However, these results are uncertain as they are based on very low-quality evidence. There is no evidence regarding topical and systemic drugs, biotherapy, or phototherapy in guttate psoriasis (we did not consider drugs that aimed to eradicate streptococcal infection because these are assessed in another Cochrane Review). We are uncertain of the effect of intravenously administered lipid emulsion on guttate psoriasis because the quality of the evidence is very low, due to risk of bias (unclear risk of bias for all domains), indirectness (the trial only included adults, and the follow-up from baseline was only 10 days), and imprecision (small number of participants).This review highlights the need for trials assessing the efficacy and safety of phototherapy and topical and systemic drugs for guttate psoriasis. There is also a need for studies that clearly distinguish the specific population with guttate psoriasis from the larger group of people with chronic plaque psoriasis, and children and young adults should be assessed as a distinct group.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Guttate psoriasis displays distinctive epidemiological and clinical features, making it a separate entity within the heterogeneous group of cutaneous psoriasis types. It is associated with genetic, immune, and environmental factors (such as stress and infections) and usually arises in younger age groups (including children, teenagers, and young adults). There is currently no cure for psoriasis, but various treatments can help to relieve the symptoms and signs. The objectives of treatment when managing an acute flare of guttate psoriasis are to reduce time to clearance and induction of long-term remission after resolution. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2000; since then, new treatments have expanded the therapeutic spectrum of systemic treatments used for psoriasis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of non-antistreptococcal interventions for acute guttate psoriasis or an acute guttate flare of chronic psoriasis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to June 2018: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. We checked the proceedings of key dermatology conferences from 2004 to 2018, and also searched for trials in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) database for drug registration.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of treatments for acute guttate psoriasis or an acute guttate flare of chronic psoriasis clinically diagnosed in children and adults. This included all topical and systemic drugs, biological therapy, phototherapy (all forms: topical and systemic), and complementary and alternative therapies. We compared these treatments against placebo or against another treatment. We did not include studies on drugs that aim to eradicate streptococcal infection. We did not include studies when separate results for guttate psoriasis participants were not available.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility and methodological quality and extracted data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were 'percentage of participants clear or almost clear (i.e. obtaining Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 100/90 and/or Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) of 0 or 1)' and 'percentage of participants with adverse effects and severe adverse effects'. Our secondary outcomes were 'number of relapses of guttate psoriasis or flares within a period of six months after the treatment has finished', 'percentage of participants achieving a PASI 75 or PGA of 1 or 2', and 'improvement in participant satisfaction measures and quality of life assessment measures'. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included only one trial (21 participants), which compared fish oil-derived (n-3) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (50 mL per infusion (1.05 g eicosapentaenoic and 10.5 g docosahexaenoic acid)) (10 participants) to soya oil-derived (n-6) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (50 mL per infusion (1.05 g eicosapentaenoic and 10.5 g docosahexaenoic acid)) (11 participants) administered intravenously twice daily for 10 days, with a total follow-up of 40 days. The study was conducted in a single centre in Germany in 18 men and three women, aged between 21 and 65 years, who were in hospital with acute guttate psoriasis and had mean total body surface involvement of 25.7% ± 20.4% (range 10 to 90). The study was funded by a company that produces the oil emulsions. We found no other evidence regarding non-antistreptococcal interventions used in clinical practice for guttate psoriasis, such as topical treatments (corticosteroids, vitamin D₃ analogues), systemic drugs, biological therapy, and phototherapy.The primary outcomes of the review were not measured, and only one of our secondary outcomes was measured: improvement in participant satisfaction measures and quality of life assessment measures. However, the study authors did report that there was rare skin irritation at the site of peripheral intravenous route, but the number of affected participants was not provided.Improvement between baseline and day 10, using a non-validated score assessed by participants themselves daily based on five items (appearance of lesions, impairment of daily life, pruritus, burning, and pain), was greater in the group that received the fish oil-derived (n-3) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (75%) than in the group receiving the soya oil-derived (n-6) fatty acid-based lipid emulsion (18%) (one trial, 21 participants). However, these results are uncertain as they are based on very low-quality evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence regarding topical and systemic drugs, biotherapy, or phototherapy in guttate psoriasis (we did not consider drugs that aimed to eradicate streptococcal infection because these are assessed in another Cochrane Review). We are uncertain of the effect of intravenously administered lipid emulsion on guttate psoriasis because the quality of the evidence is very low, due to risk of bias (unclear risk of bias for all domains), indirectness (the trial only included adults, and the follow-up from baseline was only 10 days), and imprecision (small number of participants).This review highlights the need for trials assessing the efficacy and safety of phototherapy and topical and systemic drugs for guttate psoriasis. There is also a need for studies that clearly distinguish the specific population with guttate psoriasis from the larger group of people with chronic plaque psoriasis, and children and young adults should be assessed as a distinct group.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30958563
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011541.pub2
pmc: PMC6452774
doi:

Substances chimiques

Immunosuppressive Agents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD011541

Références

J Invest Dermatol. 1993 Mar;100(3):225-8
pubmed: 8440891
Arch Dermatol. 1996 Jun;132(6):717-8
pubmed: 8651734
J Dermatol. 2005 Feb;32(2):91-6
pubmed: 15906537
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002 Dec;47(6):821-33
pubmed: 12451365
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001 Mar;44(3):433-8
pubmed: 11209111
Lancet. 1988 Feb 20;1(8582):378-80
pubmed: 2893189
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015 Feb;72(2):261-75
pubmed: 25455609
Br J Dermatol. 2001 Dec;145(6):891-4
pubmed: 11899141
Br J Dermatol. 2013 May;168(5):954-67
pubmed: 23413913
Cell Mol Immunol. 2012 Jul;9(4):302-9
pubmed: 22705915
Br J Dermatol. 1976 Aug;95(2):163-7
pubmed: 952752
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 May;48(5):760-7
pubmed: 12734506
Croat Med J. 2002 Dec;43(6):707-12
pubmed: 12476481
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010 Jan;62(1):114-135
pubmed: 19811850
Br J Dermatol. 2016 Feb;174(2):287-95
pubmed: 26779929
Dermatol Online J. 2004 Oct 15;10(2):4
pubmed: 15530294
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 05;3:CD011571
pubmed: 30835819
J Dermatol. 2005 Jun;32(6):436-41
pubmed: 16043915
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Jan;58(1):106-15
pubmed: 17936411
Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh). 1979;59(85):133-6
pubmed: 393035
Arch Dermatol. 2003 Jun;139(6):719-27
pubmed: 12810502
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1992 Dec;27(6 Pt 1):983-8
pubmed: 1479106
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001976
pubmed: 10796842
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 08;4:CD011541
pubmed: 30958563
J Invest Dermatol. 1977 Jun;68(6):328-35
pubmed: 864273
Br J Dermatol. 2010 Jul;163(1):48-56
pubmed: 20222932
Arch Dermatol. 1992 Jan;128(1):39-42
pubmed: 1739285
Br J Dermatol. 2008 Mar;158(3):558-66
pubmed: 18047523
Dermatology. 2004;209(2):126-31
pubmed: 15316166
Int J Dermatol. 1998 Jul;37(7):524-31
pubmed: 9679694
Hautarzt. 1980 Jun;31(6):315-23
pubmed: 6893320
J Invest Dermatol. 2010 Apr;130(4):933-43
pubmed: 20043014
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1995 Jan;32(1):67-72
pubmed: 7822519
J Invest Dermatol. 2005 Mar;124(3):499-504
pubmed: 15737189
Br J Dermatol. 1989 Jun;120(6):801-7
pubmed: 2667615
Br J Dermatol. 2010 Jan;162(1):137-46
pubmed: 19903183
J Dermatol. 2010 Oct;37(10):894-9
pubmed: 20860740
Int J Dermatol. 2006 Mar;45(3):245-50
pubmed: 16533223
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001213
pubmed: 10796758
J Dermatol. 2012 Mar;39(3):260-4
pubmed: 22211370
Arch Dermatol Res. 2011 Jan;303(1):1-10
pubmed: 20857129
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 23;(10):CD009481
pubmed: 24151011
N Engl J Med. 2003 Nov 20;349(21):2014-22
pubmed: 14627786
Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1996 Dec;21(6):546-7
pubmed: 9118579
Br J Dermatol. 1998 Jul;139(1):88-95
pubmed: 9764154
J Invest Dermatol. 2003 Apr;120(4):627-32
pubmed: 12648227
Arch Dermatol Res. 2009 Jan;301(1):1-13
pubmed: 18777031
Br J Dermatol. 1992 Jul;127(1):5-9
pubmed: 1637696
Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1996 Sep;80(3 Pt 2):S40-5
pubmed: 8811062
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001 Apr;44(4):643-51
pubmed: 11260540
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1992 Jan;26(1):86-90
pubmed: 1732342
Lancet. 2001 Jun 9;357(9271):1842-7
pubmed: 11410193
Clin Investig. 1993 Aug;71(8):634-43
pubmed: 8219661
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Dec;40(3):233-40
pubmed: 20580412
J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Aug;63(8):834-40
pubmed: 20346629
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1988 Apr;18(4 Pt 1):655-62
pubmed: 2967310
J Am Acad Dermatol. 1997 Jul;37(1):85-92
pubmed: 9216528

Auteurs

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH