4.6 Review

Risk factors for frontal fibrosing alopecia: A case-control study in a multiracial population

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.08.076

关键词

case-control; frontal fibrosing alopecia; risk factors; sunscreens; tobacco

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found an increased association with the use of hair straightening with formalin, ordinary facial soap, and facial moisturizer, while a negative association with the use of antiresidue/clarifying shampoo, suggesting that exogenous particles may trigger FFA.
Background: Frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is a chronic cicatricial alopecia with unknown etiology and a worldwide rising incidence. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of FFA with demographic and exposure factors in a Brazilian multiracial population. Methods: A multicenter case-control study was conducted in 11 referral centers throughout Brazil. The study was a case-control study that prospectively recruited 902 participants (451 patients with FFA and 451 sex-matched control individuals). Study participants completed a thorough questionnaire comprising variables grouped as baseline demographics, environmental exposure, diet, hormonal factors, allergies, and hair and skin care. Results: When adjusted by sex, age, menopause, and skin color, FFA was associated with hair straightening with formalin (odds ratio [OR], 3.18), use of ordinary (nondermatologic) facial soap (OR, 2.09) and facial moisturizer (OR, 1.99), thyroid disorders (OR, 1.69), and rosacea (OR, 2.08). Smokers (OR, 0.33) and users of antiresidue/clarifying shampoo (OR, 0.35) presented a negative association with FFA. There was no association with the use of sunscreen. Limitations: Recall bias . Conclusions: The association with moisturizers, ordinary facial soap, and hair straightening with formalin and the negative association with antiresidue/clarifying shampoo reinforce the possibility of an exogenous particle triggering FFA. ( J Am Acad Dermatol 2021;84:712-8.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据