4.6 Review

Benefit and risk profile of tofacitinib for the treatment of alopecia areata: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.15937

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Recent insights showed the possibility of using JAK inhibitors for the treatment of alopecia areata (AA). Most of the previous articles evaluated the overall efficacy of existing JAK inhibitors rather than evaluating one of them alone. Currently, the benefit and risk profile of tofacitinib for the treatment of AA is still not clear. Objective To estimate the safety and efficacy of tofacitinib in patients with AA based on summarizing the clinical outcomes. Methods The systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions) was used for quality assessment. Results We enrolled 14 studies including six clinical trials and eight observational studies with 275 patients. The result of meta-analysis showed that tofacitinib has reasonable effectiveness in patients with AA. The pooled good/complete hair regrowth rate of tofacitinib treating patient with AA was 54.0% (95% CI: 46.3%-61.5%), and the pooled rate of partial response in patients with AA taking tofacitinib was 26.1% (20.7-32.2%). Approximately a quarter of patients had experience of relapse, most of which was reported due to discontinuation of tofacitinib. In terms of toxicity, reported adverse effects included only mild symptoms. Upper respiratory infection, headache and acne were the most common adverse events. Conclusion Tofacitinib seems to be a promising drug for the treatment of AA with only mild adverse effects. More thorough larger sized randomized clinical trials are required to further assess the safety and clinical efficacy of tofacitinib for the treatment of AA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available