Efficacy and safety of oral methotrexate versus oral mini pulse betamethasone therapy in the treatment of lichen planus: a comparative study.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Journal of Dermatological Treatment Pub Date : 2022-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-07-31 DOI:10.1080/09546634.2022.2104446
Nour Alhuda Gamal Alsakaan, Sherief Abd-Elsalam, Mohamed M Fawzy, Nagwa Mohammad Elwan
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of oral methotrexate versus oral mini pulse betamethasone therapy in the treatment of lichen planus: a comparative study.","authors":"Nour Alhuda Gamal Alsakaan,&nbsp;Sherief Abd-Elsalam,&nbsp;Mohamed M Fawzy,&nbsp;Nagwa Mohammad Elwan","doi":"10.1080/09546634.2022.2104446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic inflammatory mucocutaneous disease. Systemic corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for generalized LP but their use is limited due to side effects. Oral mini pulse (OMP) therapy represents a good alternative. Also, Methotrexate (MTX) can be used as an alternative and safe modality in LP.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of oral MTX versus OMP betamethasone in the treatment of different types of LP.</p><p><strong>Patients and method: </strong>The study included 40 patients presenting with LP who were randomly divided into two groups. Group A for oral MTX 7.5 mg weekly & group B for OMP betamethasone 3 mg weekly for a maximum of 12 weeks. Basic laboratory investigations were done on both groups. Follow-up investigations were done on the 2nd, 4th, 8th and 12th weeks. The percentage of improvement in each patient was calculated on a scale according to the appearance of new lesions, degree of pruritus/pain, subsidence of cutaneous lesions and clearance of the oral lesion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the MTX group, 55% of patients showed excellent improvement, 25% showed good improvement and 20% showed partial improvement. In the OMP group, 85% of patients showed excellent improvement, 10% showed good improvement and 5% showed partial improvement. The reported clinical and laboratory adverse effects were tolerable and didn't lead to the discontinuation of treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OMP betamethasone and low dose MTX may be considered effective and safe lines of treatment for different types of LP and may represent good and safe alternative options for conventional daily corticosteroid therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15639,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dermatological Treatment","volume":" ","pages":"3039-3046"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dermatological Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2022.2104446","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Lichen planus (LP) is a chronic inflammatory mucocutaneous disease. Systemic corticosteroids are the treatment of choice for generalized LP but their use is limited due to side effects. Oral mini pulse (OMP) therapy represents a good alternative. Also, Methotrexate (MTX) can be used as an alternative and safe modality in LP.

Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of oral MTX versus OMP betamethasone in the treatment of different types of LP.

Patients and method: The study included 40 patients presenting with LP who were randomly divided into two groups. Group A for oral MTX 7.5 mg weekly & group B for OMP betamethasone 3 mg weekly for a maximum of 12 weeks. Basic laboratory investigations were done on both groups. Follow-up investigations were done on the 2nd, 4th, 8th and 12th weeks. The percentage of improvement in each patient was calculated on a scale according to the appearance of new lesions, degree of pruritus/pain, subsidence of cutaneous lesions and clearance of the oral lesion.

Results: In the MTX group, 55% of patients showed excellent improvement, 25% showed good improvement and 20% showed partial improvement. In the OMP group, 85% of patients showed excellent improvement, 10% showed good improvement and 5% showed partial improvement. The reported clinical and laboratory adverse effects were tolerable and didn't lead to the discontinuation of treatment.

Conclusion: OMP betamethasone and low dose MTX may be considered effective and safe lines of treatment for different types of LP and may represent good and safe alternative options for conventional daily corticosteroid therapy.

口服甲氨蝶呤与口服小脉冲倍他米松治疗扁平苔藓的疗效和安全性比较研究。
背景:扁平苔藓是一种慢性炎症性皮肤粘膜疾病。全身性皮质类固醇是全身性LP的治疗选择,但由于其副作用,其使用受到限制。口服小脉冲(OMP)治疗是一个很好的选择。此外,甲氨蝶呤(MTX)可以作为LP的替代和安全的方式。目的:比较口服甲氨蝶呤与OMP倍他米松治疗不同类型LP的疗效和安全性。患者和方法:本研究纳入40例LP患者,随机分为两组。A组口服MTX每周7.5毫克;B组口服OMP倍他米松每周3毫克,最多12周。两组均进行基础实验室检查。随访时间分别为第2、4、8、12周。每个患者的改善百分比根据新病变的出现、瘙痒/疼痛程度、皮肤病变的下沉和口腔病变的清除来计算。结果:MTX组55%的患者表现为极好改善,25%的患者表现为良好改善,20%的患者表现为部分改善。OMP组85%的患者表现为极好改善,10%表现为良好改善,5%表现为部分改善。报告的临床和实验室不良反应是可容忍的,并没有导致停止治疗。结论:OMP倍他米松和低剂量MTX可被认为是治疗不同类型LP的有效和安全的方法,可能是常规每日皮质类固醇治疗的良好和安全的替代选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
145
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Dermatological Treatment covers all aspects of the treatment of skin disease, including the use of topical and systematically administered drugs and other forms of therapy. The Journal of Dermatological Treatment is positioned to give dermatologists cutting edge information on new treatments in all areas of dermatology. It also publishes valuable clinical reviews and theoretical papers on dermatological treatments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信