Topical and Systemic Retinoids for the Treatment of Genital Warts: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dermatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Meital Oren-Shabtai ◽  
Igor Snast ◽  
Moshe Lapidoth ◽  
Shany Sherman ◽  
Yehonatan Noyman ◽  
...  

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Genital warts, caused by the human papillomavirus, are a common sexually transmitted disease. The warts can regress spontaneously or exhibit a persistent clinical course. Various therapeutic modalities are available, yet none is curative, and there may be recurrences. Retinoids are considered the mainstay of therapy in many dermatologic diseases. Data on their use for genital warts are limited. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To systematically review the published evidence on the efficacy and safety of retinoids for the treatment of genital warts. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A systematic review and meta-analysis of all publications evaluating topical or systemic retinoids for the treatment of genital warts was performed. The primary outcome was complete response (CR); the secondary outcomes were recurrence rate and adverse events. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Six publications were evaluated, three randomized controlled trials and three prospective cohort studies, including a total of 141 patients with genital warts treated exclusively with retinoids (90% with isotretinoin). CR rates were 100% for systemic etretinate (3 out of 3 patients, 95% CI 28–81%) and 56% for isotretinoin (95% CI 28–81%; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 84%). Topical etretinate did not induce CR. The most common side effect of topical agents was irritant contact dermatitis (36%) and that of systemic agents mucocutaneous disorders (80%). The relapse rate was 12% for oral isotretinoin and was unavailable for the other modalities. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Current data suggest that unlike topical retinoids, systemic retinoids are an effective and safe treatment for genital warts. Further studies are required to determine their specific role and the most effective regimen for each derivative.

Dermatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 236 (6) ◽  
pp. 493-499
Author(s):  
Igor Snast ◽  
Eran Sharon ◽  
Ran Kaftory ◽  
Yehonatan Noyman ◽  
Meital Oren-Shabtai ◽  
...  

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Surgery is commonly regarded as the mainstay of treatment of extramammary Paget disease (EMPD)<b><i>;</i></b> however, nonsurgical approaches have gained popularity in recent years. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> To review the published evidence for the efficacy and safety of nonsurgical modes of therapy for EMPD. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A systematic review and meta-analysis of nonsurgical EMPD treatments was performed. The primary outcome was complete response (CR); secondary outcomes were clinical regression by ≥50%, adverse events, and recurrence rate. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The systematic review included 43 observational studies (341 patients; 7 prospective cohort studies, 19 retrospective cohort studies, and 17 cases series) evaluating 5 treatment modalities. Imiquimod (13 studies, 110 patients) administered at variable doses ranging from daily to twice weekly for 2–56 weeks demonstrated CR of 54% (95% CI, 40–67%; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 37%) and had a satisfactory safety profile. In 14 heterogeneous studies (122 patients) evaluating photodynamic therapy (PDT), only 36% (95% CI, 22–53%; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 52%) of patients achieved CR. Radiotherapy (12 studies, 67 patients) showed CR of 97%, but was associated with local and systemic side effects. Ablative lasers and topical fluorouracil and calcipotriene lacked adequate evidence of efficacy. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Imiquimod and radiotherapy are the most appropriate nonsurgical modalities for EMPD treatment given their good efficacy and safety profile. PDT has limited efficacy but may be appropriate in selected clinical settings.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040997
Author(s):  
Varo Kirthi ◽  
Paul Nderitu ◽  
Uazman Alam ◽  
Jennifer Evans ◽  
Sarah Nevitt ◽  
...  

IntroductionThere is growing evidence of a higher than expected prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes. This paper presents the protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of retinopathy in prediabetes. The aim of the review is to estimate the prevalence of retinopathy in prediabetes and to summarise the current data.Methods and analysisThis protocol is developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic bibliographic search will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report prevalence data for retinopathy on fundus photography in adults with prediabetes. No time restrictions will be placed on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. Disagreements between the reviewers will be resolved by discussion, and if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate.The primary outcome is the prevalence of any standard features of diabetic retinopathy (DR) on fundus photography, as per International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (ICDRSS) classification. Secondary outcomes are the prevalence of (1) any retinal microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography that are not standard features of DR as per ICDRSS classification and (2) any macular microvascular abnormalities on fundus photography, including but not limited to the presence of macular exudates, microaneurysms and haemorrhages. Risk of bias for included studies will be assessed using a validated risk of bias tool for prevalence studies. Pooled estimates for the prespecified outcomes of interest will be calculated using random effects meta-analytic techniques. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review and no primary data are to be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international meetings including Diabetes UK, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, American Diabetes Association and International Diabetes Federation conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020184820.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Andrea Kokorovic ◽  
Mary E. Westerman ◽  
Kate Krause ◽  
Mike Hernandez ◽  
Nathan Brooks ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of non-invasive (mucosal and/or ductal) urothelial carcinoma of the prostate remains elusive and there is a paucity of data to guide treatment. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to systematically review and synthesize treatment responses to conservative management of non-invasive prostatic urothelial carcinoma using intravesical therapy. METHODS: A systematic literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases from inception to November 2019 was performed. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for non-randomised studies. Pooled estimates of complete response in the bladder and prostate and prostate only were performed using a random effects model. Pre-specified subgroup analyses were generated to assess differences in complete responses for: BCG therapy vs other agents, ductal vs mucosal involvement, CIS vs papillary tumors and TURP vs no TURP. RESULTS: Nine studies including 175 patients were identified for inclusion in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All were retrospective case series and most evaluated response to BCG therapy. The pooled global complete response rate for intravesical therapy was 60%(95%CI: 0.48, 0.72), and for prostate 88%(95%CI: 0.81, 0.96). Pre-specified analyses did not demonstrate statistically significant differences between subgroups of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Management of non-invasive prostatic urothelial carcinoma using intravesical therapy yields satisfactory results. Caution should be taken in treating patients with papillary tumors and ductal involvement, as data for these populations is limited. TURP may not improve efficacy, but is required for staging. Current recommendations are based on low quality evidence, and further research is warranted.


2022 ◽  
pp. 105566562110707
Author(s):  
Elina Kapoor ◽  
Esperanza Mantilla-Rivas ◽  
Md Sohel Rana ◽  
Marudeen Aivaz ◽  
Daniela Duarte-Bateman ◽  
...  

Objective Robin Sequence (RS), characterized by micrognathia, glossoptosis, and upper airway obstruction, is an increasingly recognized diagnosis. An effective surgical intervention is mandibular distraction osteogenesis (MDO). This study analyzes published evidence regarding facial nerve dysfunction (FND) associated with MDO. Design and Setting According to PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was carried out with databases queried in June 2019 using MESH terms, or equivalent terms, as follows: “distraction osteogenesis” and “Robin Sequence”. A review of original Spanish and English articles, were included. Outcome measures included the prevalence of FND; the affected branches; the rate of permanent vs. transient FND; the use of an internal vs. external device; the daily distraction rate; and finally, the overall distraction length. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was conducted to collate results regarding the prevalence of FND and the factors associated with it. Results Of 239 unique studies identified, 19 studies with 729 patients met inclusion criteria; 52 patients developed FND after MDO. A random-effects meta-analysis yielded a pooled prevalence of FND of 6.40%, with moderately heterogeneous studies (I2 = 41%, τ2 = 0.006). Marginal mandibular nerve involvement was most commonly noted. Nine studies reported transient FND, six permanent, one both, and two unspecified. Internal distractors were used in 8 studies and external in 3 and both in 2. Distraction rate was 1.00 to 2.00 mm/day and total distraction length ranged from 13.00 to 22.3 mm. Sample size was the only parameter inversely associated with rate of FND (p = 0.04). Conclusion This analysis of FND associated with MDO for patients with RS demonstrates a lack of consistent documentation. MDO-associated FND does not appear to be uncommon, and permanent dysfunction can occur. This review underscores the importance of thorough documentation to elucidate the mechanism of FND.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 4319-4336 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Hoendervangers ◽  
J. P. M. Burbach ◽  
M. M. Lacle ◽  
M. Koopman ◽  
W. M. U. van Grevenstein ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pathological complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) is associated with better survival, less local recurrence, and less distant failure. Furthermore, pCR indicates that the rectum may have been preserved. This meta-analysis gives an overview of available neoadjuvant treatment strategies for LARC and analyzes how these perform in achieving pCR as compared with the standard of care. Methods Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central bibliographic databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials in which patients received neoadjuvant treatment for MRI-staged nonmetastatic resectable LARC were included. The primary outcome was pCR, defined as ypT0N0. A meta-analysis of studies comparing an intervention with standard fluoropyrimidine-based chemoradiation (CRT) was performed. Results Of the 17 articles included in the systematic review, 11 were used for the meta-analysis. Addition of oxaliplatin to fluoropyrimidine-based CRT resulted in significantly more pCR compared with fluoropyrimidine-based CRT only (OR 1.46), but at the expense of more ≥ grade 3 toxicity. Other treatment strategies, including consolidation/induction chemotherapy and short-course radiotherapy (SCRT), did not improve pCR rates. None of the included trials reported a benefit in local control or OS. Five-year DFS was significantly worse after SCRT-delay compared with CRT (59% vs. 75.1%, HR 1.93). Conclusions All included trials fail to deliver high-level evidence to show an improvement in pCR compared with standard fluoropyrimidine-based CRT. The addition of oxaliplatin might result in more pCR but at the expense of more toxicity. Furthermore, this benefit does not translate into less local recurrence or improved survival.


2020 ◽  
Vol 84 ◽  
pp. 101965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Schettini ◽  
Tomás Pascual ◽  
Benedetta Conte ◽  
Nuria Chic ◽  
Fara Brasó-Maristany ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 134 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunhong Hu ◽  
Chao Deng ◽  
Wen Zou ◽  
Guangsen Zhang ◽  
Jingjing Wang

Background: The current standard therapy for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (RCHOP). The role of radiotherapy (RT) after complete response (CR) to RCHOP in patients with DLBCL remains unclear. This systematic review with a meta-analysis is an attempt to evaluate this role. Methods: Studies that evaluated RT versus no-RT after CR to RCHOP for DLBCL patients were searched in databases. Hazard ratios (HR) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. Results: A total of 4 qualified retrospective studies (633 patients) were included in this review. The results suggested that RT improved overall survival (OS; HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.77) and progression-free/event-free survival (PFS/EFS; HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.11-0.50) in all patients compared with no-RT. In a subgroup analysis of patients with stage III-IV DLBCL, RT improved PFS/EFS (HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07-0.51) and local control (HR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.44), with a trend of improving OS (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-1.05). Conclusion: Consolidation RT could significantly improve outcomes of DLBCL patients who achieved a CR to RCHOP. However, the significance of these results was limited by these retrospective data. Further investigation of the role of consolidation RT in the rituximab era is needed.


2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. A534
Author(s):  
C. Burudpakdee ◽  
Z.M. Khan ◽  
S. Gala ◽  
M. Nanavaty ◽  
S. Kaura

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document