No abstract

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a multifactorial disease characterized by the progression of nodules to deep-seated lesions, with subsequent scarring and suppuration. [1][2][3][4] The exact etiology of HS is still unproven.Multiple therapies have been described, including topical, systemic, surgical, and physical treatments. 1,5,6 At present, topical HS therapy include cleansers, keratolytic agents, and antibiotics. 7 Androgens are implicated in skin physiology and may have a role in HS worsening. 8 Consequently, the administration of systemic antiandrogen therapy were described in a small population. 5,8 To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that describes topical antiandrogen therapy in HS. Here we describe 4 patients that received a commercially available topical finasteride on 2-3 HS affected sites at dosage 50 μl of 2275 mg/ml for each area (Table 1). Patients did not alter their hygiene or antiseptic habits during topical finasteride application.Case 1: A 28-year-old man affected by HS for 12 years, with lesions in axillae, gluteal and inguinal region. He received multiple HS treatments with disease recurrence and discontinuation (Table 1).Recently he experienced frequent inflammatory episodes of three nodules in the left axilla and one nodule in the right axilla. Disease severity 1,9 was: Hurley II, international HS severity (IHS4): 6, dermatology life quality index (DLQI): 16. Daily topical finasteride was introduced on both axillae. Three months later, a significant improvement was observed (IHS4: 2, DLQI: 8, Figure 1A-D).

Background Recent events highlight how emerging and re-emerging pathogens are actually becoming global challenges for public health. In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged. This has suddenly turned out into a global health concern which has led to a very high number of papers published in the scientific literature. Aim of this research is to focus on the bibliometric aspects in order to give researchers a glimpse on what is published in the first 30-days of a global epidemic outbreak. Methods We searched MEDLINE (PubMed) electronic database in order to find all relevant studies in the first 30-days from the first publication (which appeared on Pubmed at 14/01/2020), meaning the period 15/01/2020-13/02/2020. We used the following search string: coronavirus* OR Pneumonia of Unknown Etiology OR Covid-19 OR nCoV. We placed a language restriction for English, but no publication status or study design limit was put in place for our search. Results From the initial 462 identified articles, 234 articles were found as pertinent and read in extenso in order to classify them. The vast majority of papers come from China, UK and USA. 66.2% of the papers were Editorials, comments, letters or other kind of mainly reported data. 10.7% of papers were secondary literature papers (mainly narrative reviews). The remaining 23.1% were original primary studies. Only 17.5% of the sources used data which were directly collected on the field. Conclusions Almost all of data came from China. Even if some preferential channels were guaranteed for publishing those results in the most important journals, it appears that the vast majority of publication in scientific literature in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak is based more on reported data and comments, and only a small fraction of the papers have primary data collected in the field. Nevertheless the whole international literature depends on that type of data sources in the early days of the epidemic. Key messages This is the first bibliometric research in Pubmed Database on the first 30 days of publications regarding the novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak of 2019. The vast majority of publication in the first 30-days of an epidemic outbreak are reported data or comments, and only a small fraction of the papers has directly collected data.