4.3 Article

Positive and negative effects of thalidomide on refractory cutaneous lupus erythematosus

Journal

AUTOIMMUNITY
Volume 38, Issue 7, Pages 549-555

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08916930500285790

Keywords

thalidomide; lupus erythematosus; peripheral neuropathy; neurotoxicity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Thalidomide is used in cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) refractory to conventional therapies. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is the most severe side effect, but the incidence of PN and its relation to thalidomide dose are still unclear. Objective: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy as well as the occurrence of PN in CLE patients treated with thalidomide, and to assess whether PN, when occurs, correlates with thalidomide dose and/or length of treatment. Methods: Fourteen female patients with CLE in low-dose thalidomide therapy were followed for up to 24 months. Prior to, and regularly during treatment patients underwent rheumatological, dermatological, neurological and electrophysiological evaluations. A decline in sural SNAP of 50% or more from baseline value was considered as criterion of sensory axonal PN. Results: All patients showed a dramatic improvement of skin manifestations. Ten patients (71.4%) developed a sensory axonal PN. The median time free from this complication was 14 months. No correlations were found between age of the patients nor thalidomide cumulative dose and occurrence of PN (Mann-Whitney U Test; p > 0.16). Other adverse effects were: tremor, paresthesias, somnolence, amenhorrea, constipation and thoracic pain. Conclusions: Low does thalidomide is efficacious in treating CLE, but PN is a common complication whose occurrence does not seem to correlate with total thalidomide dose, whereas with the duration of therapy. A closer electrophysiological follow-up is therefore recommended in the long-term treatment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available