Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014 Feb;133(2):429-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2013.07.049. Epub 2013 Oct 24.

Efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review.

Author information

1
Department of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Centre for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Institute for Occupational and Social Medicine, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
3
Centre for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Institute for Occupational and Social Medicine, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. Electronic address: jochen.schmitt@uniklinikum-dresden.de.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Many patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) require systemic immunomodulating treatment to achieve adequate disease control.

OBJECTIVE:

We sought to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS:

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (until June 2012). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating systemic immunomodulating treatments for moderate-to-severe AD were included. Selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and generation of treatment recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life, and the course of AD. Safety data were compared by calculating the weekly incidence rates (as percentages) for adverse events.

RESULTS:

Thirty-four RCTs with 12 different systemic treatments and totaling 1653 patients were included. Fourteen trials consistently indicate that cyclosporin A efficaciously improves clinical signs of AD. Cyclosporin A is recommended as first-line treatment for short-term use. A second-line treatment option is azathioprine, but efficacy is lower, and evidence is weaker. Methotrexate can be considered a third-line treatment option. Recommendations are impossible for mycophenolate, montelukast, intravenous immunoglobulins, and systemic glucocorticosteroids because of limited evidence. A meta-analysis was not performed because of a lack of standardization in outcome measures.

CONCLUSION:

Although 12 different interventions for moderate-to-severe AD have been studied in 34 RCTs, strong recommendations are only possible for the short-term use of cyclosporin A. Methodological limitations in the majority of trials prevent evidence-based conclusions. Large head-to-head trials evaluating long-term treatments are required.

KEYWORDS:

AD; AE; AZA; Adverse event; Atopic dermatitis; Azathioprine; CsA; Cyclosporin A; EASI; EC-MPS; Eczema Area and Severity Index; Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium; GRADE; Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; IVIG; Intravenous immunoglobulin; MTX; Methotrexate; RCT; Randomized controlled trial; SAE; Serious adverse event; TCHM; TP-5; Thymopentin; Traditional Chinese herbal medicine; evidence-based medicine/systematic review; immunomodulator; immunosuppressive therapy; recommendations; systemic treatment

PMID:
24269258
DOI:
10.1016/j.jaci.2013.07.049
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center