Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Trichoepithelioma is a rare benign adnexal neoplasm that can occur in various forms including solitary, multiple, familial or nonfamilial. Multiple facial trichoepithelioma can be associated with significant psychosocial burden. Conventional treatment modalities such as surgical excision and ablative laser have variable results and can be associated with unacceptable complications and tumour regrowth. Pharmacological interventions such as topical and systemic agents are potentially effective but clinical data are limited and treatments are poorly standardised. We review the available evidence to determine the role of pharmacological therapies in the management of multiple trichoepithelioma. Demographic and clinical data were retrospectively collected from the available English literature. Majority of cases treated with pharmacological therapies (93.75%) had a positive treatment outcome, achieving partial lesion response. Adverse effects associated with pharmacological therapies were generally well tolerated and did not interrupt treatment. There are limitations as to how our results can be interpreted owing to the paucity of good quality evidence, spectrum of disease severity, and diversity of study designs utilised in the included articles. Nonetheless, the results of our study indicate that while most pharmacological interventions for multiple trichoepithelioma produce a partial response, they can be employed as effective suppressive therapies, either alone or in conjunction with conventional treatments. The current evidence for pharmacological therapies remains largely anecdotal justifying the need for further clinical studies in this area.
Trichoepithelioma is a rare benign adnexal neoplasm that can occur in various forms including solitary, multiple, familial or nonfamilial. Multiple facial trichoepithelioma can be associated with significant psychosocial burden. Conventional treatment modalities such as surgical excision and ablative laser have variable results and can be associated with unacceptable complications and tumour regrowth. Pharmacological interventions such as topical and systemic agents are potentially effective but clinical data are limited and treatments are poorly standardised. We review the available evidence to determine the role of pharmacological therapies in the management of multiple trichoepithelioma. Demographic and clinical data were retrospectively collected from the available English literature. Majority of cases treated with pharmacological therapies (93.75%) had a positive treatment outcome, achieving partial lesion response. Adverse effects associated with pharmacological therapies were generally well tolerated and did not interrupt treatment. There are limitations as to how our results can be interpreted owing to the paucity of good quality evidence, spectrum of disease severity, and diversity of study designs utilised in the included articles. Nonetheless, the results of our study indicate that while most pharmacological interventions for multiple trichoepithelioma produce a partial response, they can be employed as effective suppressive therapies, either alone or in conjunction with conventional treatments. The current evidence for pharmacological therapies remains largely anecdotal justifying the need for further clinical studies in this area.
Context Topical sirolimus is increasingly utilised off-license to manage various dermatological conditions whilst avoiding typical adverse effects associated with systemic sirolimus. However, widespread use is limited by a highly heterogeneous evidence base of mixed quality. Objective to evaluate the current evidence base for the indications, efficacy and safety profile for topical sirolimus in dermatology. Data sources A literature search was conducted from 2005 to July 4th, 2023, of English language studies, with the following databases consulted: MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and EBSCO. Key words included ‘topical’, ‘rapamycin’, ‘sirolimus’ and ‘dermatology’. Data extraction Data on drug efficacy, concentration, side effects, co-interventions and follow up were extracted. Results The search identified 202 studies; 71 studies met the inclusion criteria. Efficacy of topical sirolimus was demonstrated in facial angiofibromas (799 patients) compared to placebo across multiple randomised controlled trials with a predominant concentration of 0.1%. Evidence was mixed for sirolimus use in port-wine stains (61 patients), with evidence of effectiveness in combined sirolimus and pulsed-dye laser. Multiple case reports demonstrated clinical improvement with topical sirolimus use in cutaneous vascular abnormalities (33 patients) at a higher concentration of 1%. Other applications of topical sirolimus were predominantly case reports demonstrating generally favourable outcomes. Topical sirolimus was generally well tolerated – most reported adverse effects were localised irritation and pruritus. Ointment-based preparations and once-daily dosing appeared to confer a better side effect profile. Conclusion Most high-quality data pertain to the efficacy of topical sirolimus in treating facial angiofibromas in tuberous sclerosis. Outcomes are generally promising in other indications and good tolerability, but data quality is mixed.
Sirolimus is a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORI) with anti-proliferative, antiangiogenic and immunosuppressive properties. While approved in Australia as an anti-rejection medication for renal transplant patients, there is mounting evidence regarding the utility of oral and topical sirolimus in treating a plethora of dermatological conditions or conditions with cutaneous manifestations. Our aim was to present an overview of the evidence for current usage and breadth of the application of sirolimus in dermatology. We carried out a systematic review of all the literature published up to 31 August 2019 on oral and topical sirolimus with respect to dermatological conditions or conditions otherwise relevant to dermatology. While 3368 papers were initially produced in our search, 238 papers met our inclusion criteria and were examined in our review. The conditions examined were categorised into genodermatoses (9 conditions), infection (1 condition), inflammatory/autoimmune (10 conditions), neoplasm (3 conditions) and vascular (17 conditions). We extracted data on first author, publication year, journal, characteristics of the study and study patients, condition, drug modalities, drug efficacy, side effects, blood level of mTORI, co-interventions and follow-up. While there is level 1 evidence for the efficacy of sirolimus in conditions such as tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) and GVHD prophylaxis, for many other conditions, the evidence is limited to level 4 evidence. Regarding oral systemic therapy, dosing regimens varied with the most common for children 0.8mg/m 2 twice daily and for adults 1 mg twice daily. Doses were often adjusted to reach a typical trough level of between 5 and 15 ng/mL, though targets often varied. In the overall majority of cases, side effects were minimal or tolerable, including mucositis, cytopenias, lipid abnormalities and nausea/vomiting, and only a few cases had to stop due to adverse effects. Regarding topical therapy, concentration of formulations varied from 0.1% to 1% and were compounded into creams, ointments or gels and administered typically once or twice per day. The most common side effect was skin irritation. There were a number of limitations to our study. In particular, many of the published studies were case reports or case series with no comparator arm, leading to susceptibility of bias in conclusions drawn, in particular a high likelihood of publication bias. Given the heterogeneity amongst studies, comparisons or aggregation of results was difficult. There continues to be growing use of oral and topical sirolimus in dermatological conditions. It provides new therapeutic options to patients where previous therapies have either failed or are limited due to toxicity. However, further studies are warranted.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.