Oral lichen planus (OLP) is one of the most common chronic diseases; however, its etiology remains unknown. More and more studies have revealed that emotional instability is one of the risk factors for the onset and expansion of OLP, especially in patients suffering from depression, anxiety disorder, and acute stress. In this case report, we had a 32-year-old female OLP patient who had no obvious response to conventional OLP drugs. Then we switched to a combination of psychotropic drugs and psychotherapies. By regulating mood through drugs and psychological counseling, the patient's oral disease was alleviated. Our case shows that clinicians should consider the mental problems of OLP patients. It also emphasizes the importance of medications and psychological counseling in the treatment of somatic diseases.

Summary Oral lichen planus (OLP) is a skin disease affecting the mouth, which can cause a burning or stinging discomfort in the mouth when eating or drinking. Ulcers may occur and these are especially painful. The cause of oral lichen planus is not known in most instances, but it is likely to be related to the body's immune system. In this study, the authors from China aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of drugs called topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) with medicines applied to the skin called topical corticosteroids (TCS), in the treatment of OLP. The authors looked at globally published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting TCI (tacrolimus, pimecrolimus, and cyclosporine) compared with TCS for OLP from eight medical databases. Twenty‐one RCTs with a total of 965 patients published between 1995 and 2017 were included (tacrolimus‐TCS: 12 studies, 578 patients; pimecrolimus‐TCS: 3 studies, 98 patients; cyclosporine‐TCS: 6 studies, 289 patients). The authors found that TCI including tacrolimus, pimecrolimus and cyclosporine were similar to TCS in efficacy for the short‐term treatment of OLP (3‐8 weeks). In addition, tacrolimus 0.1% was similar to TCS in relapse rate. The blood levels of tacrolimus and cyclosporine were usually extremely low, while the few cases of patients with high levels may have been caused by swallowing the drug accidentally. Although a few adverse events (unwanted side effects) were observed in the tacrolimus and cyclosporine groups, no serious events were found. Therefore, TCI may be an alternative approach when OLP does not improve with use of TCS. Due to the limited trials of pimecrolimus and cyclosporine, as well as a few adverse events and high cost of cyclosporine, tacrolimus 0.1% should be the first drug of choice in TCI for the short‐term treatment of OLP that is not improving with TCS. More well‐designed RCTs are needed to evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of TCI compared with TCS.