ABSTRACT
Background: Noninfectious inflammatory dermatoses of the scalp are common, and their symptomsin particular, those affecting appearance, can have a psychological effect that may be disproportionate to their clinical severity. Effective, cosmetically acceptable treatments are important to manage these conditions. Topical corticosteroids form the cornerstone of acute treatment for many of these conditions. We surveyed practicing dermatologists and dermatology residents to determine the current clinical practice in prescribing topical corticosteroids for these disorders in their various preparation formats. Methods: A Delphi method was used, consisting of 2 questionnaire rounds. The first round contained 34 questions and was completed by 612 dermatologists and dermatology residents via email. The first round of responses was analyzed, and points that had > 70% agreement were used to form a second questionnaire of 21 statements. This second round was completed by 346 participants, and their responses were used to generate a final report. Participants were practicing in both public and private practices. Results: Clobetasol propionate 0.05% topical solution was considered to be the most appropriate treatment for noninfectious inflammatory scalp dermatoses in general, with 75.1% agreement in the second round of questionnaire. The main advantages of clobetasol propionate over other topical corticosteroids were reported as potency, effectiveness, and broad action spectrum (94.8% agreement). The preferred pharmaceutical format was the solution of clobetasol propionate. Conclusion: Clobetasol propionate was the preferred topical treatment for the management of scalp dermatoses, usually as first-line treatment; solution was the preferred preparation.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A new water-soluble formulation with ciclopirox has shown a higher penetration than other ciclopirox nail lacquers currently marketed, thus providing a higher concentration of ciclopirox into the nail. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer compared with its vehicle and an active comparator (hydroxypropyl chitosan-based 80 mg/g ciclopirox nail lacquer) for the treatment of toenail fungal infection. METHODS: Phase III, multicenter, randomised, double-blind, clinical trial in patients with distal mild to moderate toenail onychomycosis due to dermatophyte fungi. Patients were randomised to apply topically a ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer, its vehicle or a reference product once daily for 48 weeks with a follow-up period of 4 weeks up to week 52. RESULTS: A total of 381 patients were included. No statistically significant differences were observed between patient groups in the proportion of subjects achieving a complete cure. At week 52, a higher percentage of patients in the ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer group achieved a mycological cure (negative for culture and DTS/KOH test, with results: 32.0% ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer, 23.2% vehicle and 27% reference product, respectively), and similar results were found for improvement (mycological cure and reduction of diseased nail ≥20%, with results: 27.2% ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer, 21.6% vehicle and 20.6% reference product, respectively). Regarding mycological results, only ciclopirox nail hydrolacquer demonstrated significant statistical superiority versus vehicle negativizing dermatophyte culture (p = .039) with no recurrences, relapses or re-infections in a four-week follow-up patients with complete cure. The safety profile was comparable to the vehicle and reference product and consistent with the previously reported. CONCLUSIONS: A new water-soluble formulation for a ciclopirox nail lacquer showed similar efficacy to the reference product to eradicate toenail onychomycosis and superiority in the mycological cure defined by negative culture, thus preventing reinfections and recurrences. Efficacy and safety data demonstrate the positive benefit-risk profile of this new topical antifungal preparation. [Correction added on 13 April 2023, after first online publication: The results and conclusions in the Abstract contained incorrect information and were revised in this version.].
