Search

Introduction: Chronic urticaria is common and distressing dermatosis where the search for newer agents with improved effectiveness and tolerability profile is a felt need. Bepotastine, a second-generation antihistamine, with added effect on suppression of eosinophil migration has a prospect in the management of chronic urticaria. Aims: To assess and compare effectiveness and safety of bepotastine versus levocetirizine in chronic urticaria. Materials and Methods: Single-center, investigator-blind, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group phase IV trial (CTRI REF/2018/04/019692) conducted on adult patients of chronic urticaria of either sex. Patients were randomized into receiving either bepotastine besilate 10 mg tablet twice daily or levocetirizine 5 mg tablet once daily with fortnightly follow-up for 6 follow-up visits after thebaseline evaluation. The primary outcome measures were Urticaria Activity Score 7 (UAS7) and Urticaria Total Severity Score (TSS). Routine hematological, biochemical tests, treatment-emergent adverse events were monitored for safety. Results: Thirty patients in the bepotastine group and 29 patients in the levocetirizine group were analyzed by modified-intention-to-treat criteria. The study groups were comparable at the baseline with respect to the severity of chronic urticaria. UAS7 and TSS reduced significantly (P < 0.001, Friedman's ANOVA) in both treatment groups from 1st follow-up visit and 2nd follow-up visits (P < 0.05, Post Hoc Dunn's test) At the test-of-cure visit, UAS7 (5.13 ± 8.21 vs 7.48 ± 8.96) and TSS (5.10 ± 4.06 vs 7.07 ± 4.48) were less with bepotastine than levocetirizine although not statistically significant (P = 0.188 and 0.073, respectively, Mann–Whitney U test). Sedation during daytime was found to be significantly more (P < 0.001, Fischer's exact test) with levocetirizine than bepotastine (73.3% vs 17.2%). Conclusion: Bepotastine is comparable to levocetirizine with respect to its effectiveness with an edge in terms of side-effect (sedation during day time); thus, it offers a new therapeutic option in chronic urticaria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Well‑designed and rigorously conducted randomized controlled trial (RCT) can produce most valid and precise scientific evidence. Any intervention, be it systemic or topical medicine, dermatology procedure needs to be tested for its efficacy in improving particular disease condition and RCT should come into mind of investigator. The biggest strength of RCT lies in two self‑explanatory factors; they are randomized and controlled. Randomization of study subjects eliminates selection and confounding bias and controlling of study condition improves the internal and external validity of findings. “Blinding” eliminates assessment bias. If one starts a comparative study without stating proper hypothesis, he/she would end up collecting lots of data which does not make sense. PICOT format helps in formulating research question. Writing a detailed protocol based on hypothesis describing in detail methodology, sample size calculation, randomization method, and blinding procedure up to statistical analysis plan is very important step in planning of RCT. Trials registered prospectively contribute to transparency of the trial and are considered to reduce the publication bias by reducing selective publication of positive outcomes. Adverse events can occur at any time during conduct of an RCT and should be reported and kept track of. Physical injury resulting from clinical trial participation is entitled to financial compensation. During preparation of final manuscript of study, the CONSORT guidelines must be followed to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. Clinical trials provide evidence‑based approach in medicine and a designed and well‑implemented trial can alter clinical dermatology practice for a healthier tomorrow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Trophic ulcers secondary to leprosy pose a great stigma to patients and remain a challenge to the treating dermatologists. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) introduces growth factors directly into the wound and aids in rapid healing. The role of PRP in the treatment of trophic ulcers in leprosy patients has not yet been established by randomized controlled trials.Aims: To study the effectiveness and safety of autologous PRP therapy with total contact casting versus total contact casting alone in the treatment of trophic ulcers in leprosy.Methods: In an observer-blind, randomized (1:1) controlled study, 118 patients were enrolled. PRP was prepared by the manual double-spin method (1600 rpm for 10 min followed by 4000 rpm for 10 min). After wound bed preparation, activated PRP was injected intra- and perilesionally, and platelet-poor plasma gel was applied over the ulcer bed. Occlusive dressings and total contact casting were then applied in Group A, and only total contact casting was applied in Group B. The same procedure was repeated every 2 weeks for 8 weeks.Results: In all, 56 patients were analyzable in Group A and 52 in Group B. The surface area of the ulcer decreased significantly from first follow-up onward in both the groups (P < 0.001 in both the groups). Intergroup comparison showed that the reduction in the surface area of the ulcer was significantly more in Group A than in Group B from the first follow-up onward (P = 0.038) and the difference was maintained till the fifth follow-up (P < 0.001). At the end of the study, 91.10 ± 9.65% ulcer surface area reduction had occurred in Group A, whereas it was 79.77 ± 17.91% in Group B (P < 0.001). Trophic ulcers healed completely more often in paucibacillary leprosy patients (P < 0.001) and in those with a lower initial surface area of the ulcer (P < 0.001).Limitation: Short duration of treatment (8 weeks).Conclusion: PRP combined with total contact casting accelerates the healing of trophic ulcers of leprosy and is more effective than total contact casting alone. Complete remission is more likely to occur when the duration and surface area of ulcer are less and in the paucibacillary spectrum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Present day therapeutic modalities for viral warts are mostly ablative in nature, limited by high recurrence rates and are unsuitable for numerous lesions. Immunotherapy has the potential to overcome these limitations.Aims: This study aimed at comparing efficacy and safety of and quality of life changes with intradermal purified protein derivative (PPD) of tuberculin antigen and Mycobacterium w (Mw) vaccine in immunotherapy of warts.Methods: Patients with multiple (≥5) warts were randomized (1:1) into two groups (PPDand, Mw vaccine groups). Fortnightly, 0.1 ml of either medicine was injected intradermally over the deltoidregion till complete resolution or a maximum of six doses. Patients were followed-up for another 3 months for recurrence.Results: Sixty-four participants received either PPD or Mw vaccine. The number of warts were comparable at baseline (P = 0.089, Mann-Whitney test), and reduced significantly with treatment in both groups (P < 0.001, Friedman's ANOVA), as seen from the fourth follow-up onwards with Mw and fifth follow-up onwards with PPD (P < 0.05, Post hoc Dunn's test). Intergroup comparison showed significantly more (P < 0.05, Mann-Whitney test) reduction with Mw than PPD at the sixth and seventh follow-up. The size of warts also reduced significantly (P < 0.001) in both groups from the third follow-up onwards. Complete remission was more (P = 0.539, Fischer's exact test) in the Mw group (68.8%) than the PPD group (50%); and was significantly higher (P = 0.049, Mann-Whitney test) in patients having shorter duration of warts. Adverse events were significantly more (P < 0.001) with Mw including ulceration (50%), discharge (15.6%), pain-swelling-induration and scar at the injection site (97% each), whereas some of those receiving PPD noted erythema and scaling at the injection site (18.8%), and post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation (12.5%). No recurrence was seen till the end of the study.Limitation: Unicentric trial.Conclusion: Intradermal injection of Mw vaccine was more effective but had a higher incidence of adverse effects compared to PPD of tuberculin antigen in patients with warts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: It is a challenge to treat onychomycosis due to frequent treatment failures and relapses. Systemic and topical therapies need to be combined to improve cure rates. Antifungal susceptibility might play a role in the treatment resistance of onychomycosis. Aims: To compare the safety and effectiveness of amorolfine 5% nail lacquer + oral fluconazole versus only oral fluconazole in the treatment of fingernail onychomycosis. Methodology: In this double-blind trial (CTRI/2015/02/005369), patients were randomized (1:1) into amorolfine 5% nail lacquer + fluconazole and dummy lacquer + fluconazole. Treatment was given for 3 months with monthly follow-ups. Antifungal sensitivity was carried out for Candida. Effectiveness was assessed by reduction in the number and percentage area of nails involved and mycological cure. At the end of 3-month treatment period, the association between drug sensitivity and treatment response was explored for the Candida infections. Results: Among 30 study participants, the combination group showed significantly lower number of nail involvement (P = 0.004) and percentage nail involvement (P = 0.005) than only fluconazole group. Pretreatment fungal culture showed a comparable number of dermatophytes, Candida, Aspergillus in both the groups. Sensitivity testing was done for the isolated Candida species. Antifungal sensitivity for Candida (n = 11) was tested, and 8 (72.7%) of the organisms were sensitive to fluconazole (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] 1.25 ± 1.19 μg/ml), 100% were sensitive to itraconazole (MIC 0.0726 ± 0.021 μg/ml), and 3 (27.3%) were susceptible-dose dependent (S-DD) to fluconazole (MIC 16 μg/ml). Fluconazole only group patients with Candida who showed resistance to fluconazole did not respond to therapy; however, patients in the combination group showed moderate improvement (reduction in area involvement = 55.56 ± 35.36%). Conclusion: The combination of amorolfine/fluconazole achieved a higher cure rate not only for sensitive fungus but also for those which were S-DD to fluconazole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acanthosis nigricans has been associated with conditions of insulin resistance such as obesity, polycystic ovary syndrome, and type 2 diabetes. Metformin and alpha-lipoic acid, two types of insulin-sensitizing agents, have been demonstrated to reduce insulin levels and improve insulin sensitivity. Alpha-lipoic acid is available as a fixed-dose combination with biotin, calcium pantothenate, and zinc sulfate as Canthex™. Aims: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness, safety, and improvement of the insulin resistance profile of Canthex™ and metformin in acanthosis nigricans. Materials and Methods: In this double-blind, randomized (1:1), active-controlled trial (CTRI/2017/02/007880), participants received either metformin 500 mg BD or Canthex™ BD for 12 weeks. Effectiveness parameters were improvement of severity of neck lesions and neck texture. Serum fasting insulin level, glucose, lipids, body weight, waist circumference, body mass index (BMI), and homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) were also assessed at baseline and at the end of the study. Adverse effects and changes in routine laboratory parameters were taken as safety parameters. Results: Thirty-three patients were analyzed by modified-intention-to-treat criteria. Severity of neck lesions and texture were comparable at baseline and it showed significant reduction (P<0.001) in both the treatment arms from the first follow-up onward. No intergroup variation was observed in any of the follow-ups. There was reduction in the values of fasting insulin, blood sugar, total cholesterol, and thyroid-stimulating hormone in both the groups. Weight, BMI, and waist circumference and BMI reduced significantly in both the groups. HOMA-IR decreased significantly in metformin group (P<0.001). Conclusion: Canthex™ is as effective and safe as metformin in the management of acanthosis nigricans and associated features of insulin resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic urticaria is a vexing problem for patients and treating physicians alike. The EAACI/GA[2]LEN/EDF/WAO guidelines advocate an increased antihistamine dosage up to four times the standard, before adding leukotriene receptor antagonists. Patients are frequently intolerant of these higher dosages. We conducted this study to determine whether the addition of leukotriene receptor antagonists to the standard antihistamine dose was comparable to higher dosages of antihistamines alone, in terms of efficacy, safety and quality of life changes. We compared levocetirizine 10 mg (double dose of standard) versus a combination of levocetirizine 5 mg and montelukast 10 mg in cases of chronic urticaria not responding to single daily dose of 5 mg levocetirizine.Methods: A single-center, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled, parallel group phase IV trial (CTRI/2014/12/005261) was conducted on 120 patients of chronic urticaria of either sex not responding to 5 mg levocetirizine. Patients were randomized into receiving either levocetirizine 10 mg or levocetirizine 5 mg + montelukast 10 mg for 4 weeks. Primary outcome measures were Urticaria Activity Score (UAS) and Urticaria Total Severity Score (TSS). Routine hematological and biochemical tests and treatment-emergent adverse events were monitored for safety.Results: Fifty-two patients on levocetirizine 10 mg group and 51 patients on levocetirizine 5 mg + montelukast 10 mg group were analyzed. UAS and TSS reduced significantly in both treatment groups and reduction of score were comparable in between the groups (P = 0.628, P = 0.824, respectively). Among adverse effects, sedation was noted significantly more (P = 0.013) in levocetirizine 10 mg group. Quality of life was significantly improved in levocetirizine 5 mg + montelukast 10 mg group (P = 0.031).Limitations: The limitation of the study was that the follow-up period was 4 weeks.Conclusion: EAACI/GA[2]LEN/EDF/WAO guidelines need to be more flexible in allowing usage of montelukast before escalation of anti-histamine dosage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current therapeutic modalities for viral warts are mostly ablative and are limited by high recurrence rates besides being unsuitable for numerous lesions. Immunotherapy has the potential to overcome these limitations.Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine versus tuberculin purified protein derivative in the immunotherapy of warts.Methods: Patients received three doses of 0.1 ml of Bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine or tuberculin purified protein derivative intradermally over the deltoid region at 4-weekly intervals. They were followed-up for another month. Number of warts, complete cure rates and quality of life were assessed.Results: A total of 60 patients were included. Complete clearance was noted in 16 (48.5%) out of 33 patients in the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin group and in 5 (18.5%) out of 27 in the tuberculin purified protein derivative group (P = 0.121). The number of lesions reduced statistically significantly from baseline in both the groups (P < 0.001) from the first follow-up visit onward (P < 0.05). The reduction was statistically significantly more in the Bacillus Calmette-Guerin group than in the tuberculin purified protein derivative group from the second follow-up onward. Dermatologic life quality index improved statistically significantly with both treatments. Adverse events (pain during injection, abscess formation and scarring at injection site) were more frequent with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin. No recurrence was seen after lesions cleared.Limitations: Patients were not followed up for more than 4 weeks after treatment. We could not estimate the cytokine levels or the peripheral blood mononuclear cell proliferation in response to Bacillus Calmette-Guerin/tuberculin purified protein derivative injections.Conclusion: Both intradermal Bacillus Calmette-Guerin and tuberculin purified protein derivative hold promise in the treatment of viral warts. Bacillus Calmette-Guerin may be more effective, though it had more adverse events in our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In spite of the availability of multiple treatment options, viral warts are known for their persistence and recurrence, causing frustration to patients and treating physicians. Aims: To study the effectiveness and safety of autoinoculation as a treatment modality in cutaneous warts. Methods: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out. In the treatment group, full-thickness warty tissue was excised, minced and implanted in a small dermal pocket. In the control group, warty tissue was only excised and not implanted, though a dermal pocket was made. Patients were evaluated every four weeks with lesion counts. The procedure was repeated at 4 and 8 weeks. Response was assessed at each visit and at 12 weeks. Results: Forty-eight patients with cutaneous warts (male: female = 32:16) were randomized into autoinoculation and control groups. The number of warts at baseline was comparable in both groups (P = 0.293). Reduction in the number of warts was significantly more in the autoinoculation group (8.50 ± 13.88) than in the control group (10.04 ± 5.80) from 8 weeks onwards (P = 0.010). Complete resolution occurred only in the autoinoculation group, in 62.5% of cases. Adverse effects were seen in 11 patients, including infection of the donor site (5 cases), keloid formation (3) and hypopigmentation (3). Conclusion: Autoinoculation may be an effective therapeutic modality for cutaneous warts and two sessions may be required for optimum results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Chronic urticaria (CU) is characterized by frequent appearance of wheals for ≥6 weeks. This study was undertaken to compare effectiveness and safety of olopatadine, a newer antihistamine with additional anti-inflammatory properties, in treating CU in comparison to the established second-generation antihistamine levocetirizine. Methods: A single center, assessor-blind, randomized (1:1), active-controlled, parallel group, Phase IV trial (CTRI/2011/08/001965) was conducted with 120 adult CU patients of either sex. Subjects received either olopatadine (5 mg b.i.d.) or levocetirizine (5 mg/day) for 9 weeks, continuously for first 4 weeks and then on demand basis for last 5 weeks. Primary outcome measures were urticaria activity score (UAS) and urticaria total severity score (TSS). Routine hematological and biochemical tests and treatment-emergent adverse events were monitored for safety. Results: Data from 54 subjects on olopatadine and 51 on levocetirizine were analyzed for effectiveness. UAS and TSS values declined significantly with both drugs over the treatment period but the reduction was greater with olopatadine. Adverse event profiles were comparable with sedation being the commonest complaint. Conclusions: Olopatadine is a safe and more effective alternative to levocetirizine in the treatment of CU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]