4.6 Review

Alopecia areata: a review on diagnosis, immunological etiopathogenesis and treatment options

期刊

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 2, 页码 215-230

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s10238-020-00673-w

关键词

Alopecia areata; Dendritic cells; Immunology; Langerhans cells; Treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patients with alopecia areata may experience hair loss in various regions of the body, and the exact pathology is still unknown. Available treatment options have limited effectiveness and potential side effects, with high relapse rates. Prognosis is uncertain and influenced by subtype and associated characteristics.
Patients suffering from alopecia areata (AA) can lose hair in focal regions, the complete scalp, including eyelashes and eyebrows, or even the entire body. The exact pathology is not yet known, but the most described theory is a collapse of the immune privilege system, which can be found in some specific regions of the body. Different treatment options, local and systemic, are available, but none of them have been proven to be effective in the long term as well for every treatment there should be considered for the possible side effects. In many cases, treated or non-treated, relapse often occurs. The prognosis is uncertain and is negatively influenced by the subtypes alopecia totalis and alopecia universalis and characteristics such as associated nail lesions, hair loss for more than 10 years and a positive familial history. The unpredictable course of the disease also makes it a mental struggle and AA patients are more often associated with depression and anxiety compared to the healthy population. Research into immunology and genetics, more particularly in the field of dendritic cells (DC), is recommended for AA as there is evidence of the possible role of DC in the treatment of other autoimmune diseases such as multiple Sclerosis and cancer. Promising therapies for the future treatment of AA are JAK-STAT inhibitors and PRP.

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