4.6 Article

Effects of topical treatment with the raft modulator miltefosine and clobetasol in cutaneous mastocytosis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 162, 期 1, 页码 185-190

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09434.x

关键词

mast cells; mastocytosis; miltefosine; rafts; urticaria

资金

  1. JADO Technologies, Dresden, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Background Mastocytosis is characterized by the accumulation and activation of mast cells in different organs, most commonly the skin. Miltefosine, a raft modulator, has recently been shown to inhibit the activation of mast cells and to reduce mast cell-driven skin inflammatory responses. Objectives To study the safety and efficacy of topical miltefosine treatment of skin lesions in patients with mastocytosis. Methods Thirty-nine adult patients with mastocytosis with skin involvement were treated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel trial with topical miltefosine and clobetasol for 2 weeks. Treatment areas were analysed for changes in skin lesions and symptoms following mechanical irritation using novel volumetric imaging techniques and quantitative histomorphometry. Results Miltefosine and clobetasol failed to reduce significantly weals and flare-type skin responses following mechanical provocation. Miltefosine showed a trend towards reducing the volume of weals. Clobetasol significantly decreased the volume of weals and the number of mast cells in the upper dermis. Treatment with miltefosine, but not with clobetasol, was often associated with eczematous skin irritation, which may, at least in part, be related to the formulation of miltefosine containing the potentially irritating alkanol propanediol as the vehicle. Conclusions Raft modulators such as miltefosine are promising candidates for novel therapeutic strategies in patients with cutaneous mastocytosis. Future studies should be performed with improved formulations using nonirritant vehicles.

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