Search

Several studies have focused on treating atopic dermatitis (AD) using topical antifungal drugs. However, their findings are inconsistent. This meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of topical antifungal drugs for the treatment of AD. We searched prominent databases such as EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), and Wanfang Database to retrieve all RCTs on the use of topical antifungal drugs for the treatment of AD. The two authors independently performed screening, extraction, and quality evaluation of data based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. In addition, quantitative synthesis and qualitative description of the results were performed using Review Manager 5.3. Nine studies with a total of 785 subjects were included in the meta‐analysis. Based on intervention measures, data were divided into three groups: topical antifungal drugs versus placebo, topical antifungal drugs versus topical glucocorticoids, and topical antifungal drugs plus topical glucocorticoids versus topical glucocorticoids. Risk‐of‐bias assessments revealed that the random distribution methods and allocation concealment were not ideal; further, some studies had incomplete data and reported selective results. Quantitative analysis revealed that in terms of effective rate, topical antifungal drugs are superior to topical glucocorticoids (p = 0.003), and topical antifungal drugs plus topical glucocorticoids are superior to topical glucocorticoids (p = 0.001). However, no significant differences in adverse reactions were observed between the three groups (p > 0.05). The safety and efficacy of topical antifungal drugs for treating AD cannot be accurately evaluated with existing data. Therefore, additional high‐quality and large‐sample prospective RCTs are required for further validation to determine the appropriateness of topical antifungal drug use for the treatment of AD in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little real‐work data regarding the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) is available at present. To assess the efficacy and safety of dupilumab at 12 weeks in the treatment of AD in clinical routine clinical practice. A retrospective, single‐centre study of adult patients with moderate to severe AD treated with dupilumab for 12 weeks in China. In total, 60 patients (48 male, 12 female; mean age: 53.2 ± 15.6) were enrolled in this retrospective study. These patients exhibited a mean AD disease course of 10.6 years (6.0), 30% exhibited a family history of allergies, and 31 (51.7%) had one or more allergic comorbidities. Following dupilumab treatment for 12 weeks, 83.3% and 42% of patients had achieved EASI‐50 and EASI‐75, respectively. Overall, adverse events (AEs) were reported by 15% of patients, with the most common being conjunctivitis, injection site reactions, and herpes simplex virus infections. Laboratory testing after 12 weeks revealed pronounced decreases in both circulating eosinophil counts (from 0.6 (0.1–2.8) to 0.3 (0.1–9.7) 109/L) and total IgE concentrations (from 327 (2.46–2500) to 230 (47.6–2200) U/ml) in these patients. These real‐world data reaffirm the safety and efficacy of dupilumab as a treatment for moderate‐to‐severe AD among Chinese patients in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]