4.6 Article

The effect of tacrolimus compared with betamethasone valerate on the skin barrier in volunteers with quiescent atopic dermatitis

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 170, 期 4, 页码 914-921

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjd.12778

关键词

-

资金

  1. Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin disease arising as a result of immune system and skin barrier defects. Topical corticosteroids are safe and effective treatments for AD, when used in short courses. Prolonged use is associated with skin barrier damage. Topical calcineurin inhibitors are alternative immune-modulating treatments for AD purported to have no negative effects on the skin barrier. Objectives To compare the effects of betamethasone valerate 0.1% cream (BMVc) and tacrolimus 0.1% ointment (TACo) on the skin barrier. Methods Twenty volunteers with quiescent AD (no active signs for 6 months) participated in a randomized observer-blind study, wherein BMVc was applied to one forearm and TACo to the other, twice daily for 4 weeks. The biophysical/biological properties of the stratum corneum were assessed before and after treatment. Nine volunteers with active disease and 10 with healthy skin were assessed at untreated sites. Results BMVc significantly reduced skin barrier function, integrity and cohesion, and the levels of pyrrolidone carboxylic acid (PCA) and urocanic acid (UCA) towards the subclinical barrier defect observed in patients with AD (nonlesional sites). TACo preserved skin barrier function, integrity, cohesion and PCA and UCA levels, while significantly increasing skin hydration to levels comparable with healthy skin. Both treatments reduced skin surface pH and trypsin-like protease activity, with TACo doing so to a significantly greater degree. Conclusion In quiescent AD, 4 weeks of BMVc treatment adversely affected the biophysical properties of the skin and reduced the levels of natural moisturizing factor, whereas TACo improved the condition of the skin barrier.

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