O.Q.J. Swinkels

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a psoriasis care instruction programme with dithranol compared with UVB phototherapy and inpatient dithranol treatment

Background This study was part of a large national cost‐effectiveness analysis, and was funded by the National Fund for Investigational Medicine of the Health Care Insurance Board.

A comparison of twice-daily calcipotriol ointment with once-daily short-contact dithranol cream therapy: a randomized controlled trial of supervised treatment of psoriasis vulgaris in a day-care setting.

Background  Calcipotriol has become a first‐line treatment for psoriasis. Its efficacy and safety have been shown in many comparative clinical trials carried out in outpatients. In a comparative study in patients visiting the outpatient department once every 14 days, it was shown that calcipotriol was more effective and better tolerated compared with dithranol.

Combining lesional short-contact dithranol therapy of psoriasis with a potent topical corticosteroid.

Summary Background Since its introduction, the effectiveness of dithranol in treating psoriasis has been unequalled by other topical treatments. Out‐patient short‐contact dithranol treatment is effective with regard to clinical response rate and relapse rate after 1 year. A drawback, however, is the relatively long treatment duration.

The influence of a topical corticosteroid on short-contact high-dose dithranol therapy

Background Dithranol (anthralin) has been known to be effective in the treatment of psoriasis for more than 80 years. However, perilesional and uninvolved skin often show irritation during dithranol treatment, which limits its use. As the relapse rate of psoriasis is worsened by adding corticosteroids to a dithranol regimen, the use of topical corticosteroids to reduce dithranol irritation is controversial.

Dithranol in a Cream Preparation: Disperse or Dissolve?

In the search for the ideal dithranol cream preparation for short-contact treatment of psoriasis, we investigated the clinical efficacy, side effects and patient appreciation of two dithranol cream preparations (cream A and B) in a double-blind left-right comparing study. Dithranol was dissolved at preparation in cream A and dispersed in cream B. Cream A is known to have a shelf life of 1 year, while cream B has a much shorter shelf life (several months). Ten patients with chronic plaque-type psoriasis were treated during 7 weeks in a short-contact regimen. The clinical efficacy was monitored by scoring of erythema, induration, scaling and involved area (PASI); skin irritation was scored visually, and patient appreciation was evaluated by means of a multiple-choice questionnaire. Dispersion of dithranol in a cream was associated with less irritation and less discoloration of the skin, and its efficacy was comparable with that of the cream in which the dithranol was dissolved. As the dispersed dithranol formulation is easier to be manufactured, its quality will be less depending on the pharmacist’s experience and equipment, and so more reliable. Besides, it will be less expensive to prepare. We advise to use this formulation for short-contact treatment.

The response of normal human skin to single and repeated applications of dithranol cream: an immunohistochemical assessment.

The irritative response of uninvolved skin is a serious limitation of dithranol therapy in psoriasis. A characterisation in cell biological terms may be helpful in finding an effective counteraction to this well-known irritation. Therefore, we studied the effect of single and repeated applications of dithranol on normal human skin. Besides a clinical evaluation, we studied aspects of epidermal proliferation, differentiation and inflammation. On day 2, after single dithranol challenge, we observed an induction of both the cornified envelope precursor protein involucrin and the cross-linking enzyme transglutaminase I. Subsequently, epidermal hyperproliferation was observed with a maximum on day 8. The epidermal response to dithranol appears to be a reinforcement of the barrier function. Remarkably, however, filaggrin was found to be decreased. Profilaggrin breakdown might be an attempt to compensate for xerosis of uninvolved skin that accompanies dithranol therapy. T lymphocytes and to a lesser extent polymorphonucleocytes were found to be significantly increased. The reduction of Langerhans cells suggests a dose-dependent toxic effect of dithranol or one of its metabolites on Langerhans cells. The dynamics in the induction of changes after repeated challenge are comparable with those after single challenge. However, the induction of hyperproliferation following repeated application appeared to continue between day 8 and 12. Based on the dynamics of dithranol-induced irritation, it may be of interest to study the efficacy of intermittent dithranol treatment. Our results indicate that an optimal timing for biopsies in future dithranol irritation studies lies between 4 and 8 days after the first dithranol challenge.

An Immunohistochemical Assessment of the Response of the Psoriatic Lesion to Single and Repeated Applications of High-Dose Dithranol Cream

Dithranol, although a time-honoured treatment and from the beginning of the previous century still going strong, remains an empirical treatment. There is growing evidence that the biochemical basis for the mechanism of action of dithranol at the molecular level is related to the redox activity leading to the production of active oxygen species, which include singlet oxygen, superoxide anion radical and hydroxyl radical. Some authors suggest that epidermal proliferation and/or keratinisation may be the target for dithranol, while others refer to aspects of cutaneous inflammation as crucial in the antipsoriatic effect of dithranol. The present study aims to analyse the effect of single and repeated applications of dithranol on aspects of epidermal proliferation, keratinisation and inflammation in the psoriatic plaque. The most marked effect of dithranol proved to be that on epidermal proliferation (the number of Ki-67-positive nuclei) with an early reduction already 1 day following the single application. This reduction lasted for 16 days. However, such an application induced only a modest clinical improvement. Repeated challenges, resulting in a decrease in the number of Ki-67-positive nuclei of 66%, led to a substantial clinical improvement after 12 days. Repeated challenges resulted in a significant reduction of the number of polymorphonuclear leucocytes. However, this reduction was less pronounced as compared to the effect on epidermal proliferation. It is concluded that epidermal proliferation is a sensitive marker to demonstrate an early effect of dithranol. The dynamics of the cell-biological responses suggest that intermittent applications might be a promising new approach. As dithranol does not reduce the number of T lymphocytes, it is attractive to speculate that the combination of dithranol with immunosuppressive treatments might be a very effective combination.

SKIN IRRITATION BY DITHRANOL CREAM. A BLIND STUDY TO ASSESS THE ROLE OF THE CREAM FORMULATION

In connection with a national cost-effective evaluation study of short contact dithranol therapy for psoriasis, the question arose whether dithranol cream irritation is influenced by constituents of the vehicle. To establish the role of the different components of the vehicle in the mechanism of dithranol irritation, the dithranol 3% cream used in the evaluation study and its vehicle with nine different combinations of its components were tested in a blind study. The creams were applied for 15, 30 and 45 min on the backs of 12 healthy volunteers. Irritation was scored as erythema by visual and colorimeter scoring. The dithranol creams with salicylic acid among their stabilizers showed 42% more irritation than the dithranol creams with only sorbic acid or no stabilizers at all. Stability tests showed no significant degradation of dithranol in the two less irritating creams when kept at 4 degrees C for 11 months. Salicylic acid in the cream aggravates dithranol-induced erythema.

The Effects of Topical Corticosteroids and a Coal Tar Preparation on Dithranol-Induced Irritation in Patients with Psoriasis

Dithranol has been a mainstay in the treatment of psoriasis for more than 80 years. Although a safe approach, the irritation of the clinically uninvolved perilesional skin remains a major limitation of this treatment. Corticosteroids and coal tar solution have an anti-inflammatory potential. The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical and cell-biological effects of two topical corticosteroids and a coal tar preparation on dithranol-irritated skin. During 4 consecutive days, 2% dithranol cream was applied to six uninvolved skin sites (3 cm in diameter) on the lower back of 9 patients with psoriasis. Dithranol was left on the skin for 1 h, subsequently removed with water and soap and the skin was dried with a towel. Subsequently, Site 1 was treated with 0.05% clobetasol-17-propionate ointment (CP), Site 2 with unguentum cetomacrogolis (vehicle 1), Site 3 with 0.005% fluticasonpropionate ointment (FP), Site 4 with 10% coal tar solution in lanettewax cream (CTS), Site 5 was left untreated (control) and Site 6 was treated with lanettewax cream (vehicle 2). Erythema, oedema and vesicle formation was scored every day. On day 5, punch biopsies were taken from the six sites. The expression of epidermal proliferation, differentiation and inflammation markers and the clinical irritation scores indicate that the application of a high potency corticosteroid (CP) is the best approach to minimise dithranol irritation, whereas CTS had virtually no effect on dithranol irritation during this 4-day experimental model.

The Response of Uninvolved Skin of Patients with Psoriasis to Single and Repeated Applications of Dithranol Cream: An Immunohistochemical Assessment

Dithranol is one of the most effective topical treatments for patients with psoriasis. The well-known irritation is a serious limitation. In an earlier study we investigated the inflammatory response to single and repeated applications with dithranol 2% cream in skin from healthy volunteers. In the present study, we assessed the clinical and cell-biological response of single and repeated challenges with dithranol 2% cream in uninvolved skin of patients with psoriasis. A striking difference between the two studies is the late phase in the single-challenge group after 8 days, showing a longer-lasting response in the uninvolved skin compared to normal skin with respect to proliferation and inflammation markers. A controlled and synchronised irritation by dithranol might induce anti-inflammatory processes and as such constitute an antipsoriatic principle. It is attractive to speculate that in psoriasis the induction of anti-inflammatory responses is defective. Following repeated applications of dithranol, a more uniform course of proliferation, differentiation and inflammation markers was observed in the uninvolved psoriatic skin as compared to the skin of healthy volunteers. Again a defect in the induction of anti-inflammatory responses might account for this event. In view of these differences between normal skin and psoriatic uninvolved skin, it may be advisable to use the uninvolved skin of patients with psoriasis in further studies on the interference between dithranol irritancy and various anti-inflammatory agents.