We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Mycophenolate mofetil and lichen planopilaris: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Dermatological Treatment 2022 Februrary
BACKGROUND: For severe cases of lichen planopilaris (LPP), unresponsive to first line therapy, systemic or potent agents may be required for disease control. There have been several reports of the off-label use of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in patients with LPP or have developed adverse effects to initial agents.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to recommended Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies with ≥5 cases reporting the outcomes of MMF in LPP were pooled and a meta-analysis of proportion was performed. Case reports were excluded from analysis.
RESULTS: A total of six studies were identified and included for meta-analysis, comprising 94 LPP patients. The pooled proportion of any good response (partial or complete) was 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 47.8-77). The pooled proportion of complete response was 20% (95% CI: 10.1-36.3). The pooled proportion of partial responses was 49.2% (95% CI: 30.5-63.7). Side effects occurred in 16.9% (95% CI: 17.6-33.2). of cases, which included elevated LFTs, edema, hyperlipidemia, anemia, herpes zoster infection, photosensitivity, and urinary tract infection.
CONCLUSION: The current evidence for MMF remains limited. However, it appears to be a potential treatment option for patients with severe or recalcitrant LPP who have failed hydroxychloroquine and other immunosuppressants.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to recommended Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies with ≥5 cases reporting the outcomes of MMF in LPP were pooled and a meta-analysis of proportion was performed. Case reports were excluded from analysis.
RESULTS: A total of six studies were identified and included for meta-analysis, comprising 94 LPP patients. The pooled proportion of any good response (partial or complete) was 69.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 47.8-77). The pooled proportion of complete response was 20% (95% CI: 10.1-36.3). The pooled proportion of partial responses was 49.2% (95% CI: 30.5-63.7). Side effects occurred in 16.9% (95% CI: 17.6-33.2). of cases, which included elevated LFTs, edema, hyperlipidemia, anemia, herpes zoster infection, photosensitivity, and urinary tract infection.
CONCLUSION: The current evidence for MMF remains limited. However, it appears to be a potential treatment option for patients with severe or recalcitrant LPP who have failed hydroxychloroquine and other immunosuppressants.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app