Topical cyclosporine versus emulsion vehicle for the treatment of brittle nails: a randomized controlled pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Limited options are available for the treatment of brittle nail syndrome. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topical cyclosporine emulsion (CsAE) versus emulsion (vehicle) alone in the treatment of brittle nail syndrome. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were randomized to topical CsAE emulsion or emulsion (vehicle) for 24 weeks. Four fingernails of each patient were included; the 2 most severe brittle nails and the second most normal nail were treated with the same medication. The fourth nail, the most normal nail, remained untreated and was used to assess nail growth. The prespecified primary endpoint was change from baseline in Physician Global Assessment (PGA) score (0 to 5 scale) at each follow-up visit. Safety evaluations were conducted at each visit. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat population (n=12 for each treatment arm), the PGA score for treated nails improved from baseline (CsAE, 0.7 to 1.4; emulsion, 0.7 to 1.5; P<0.05 for each), with no significant between-group differences. Untreated nails did not improve in overall appearance (0.0 to 0.3 grade; P>0.05). Statistically and clinically significant improvement from baseline was reported for nail length/appearance in both CsAE and vehicle groups. LIMITATIONS: Sample size was relatively small. The difference in PGA between treated and untreated nails was not analyzed. Baseline disease severity may have been too mild, limiting detection of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Both CsAE and emulsion vehicle applied topically appeared to improve signs and symptoms of brittle nail syndrome and were well tolerated. These findings warrant corroboration in a larger population and inclusion of comparison with an inactive control and a higher concentration of CsAE, the former which may help in distinguishing the efficacy of vehicle emulsion from CsAE.

Inhibiting the hedgehog pathway in patients with the basal-cell nevus syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Dysregulated hedgehog signaling is the pivotal molecular abnormality underlying basal-cell carcinomas. Vismodegib is a new orally administered hedgehog-pathway inhibitor that produces objective responses in locally advanced and metastatic basal-cell carcinomas. METHODS: We tested the anti-basal-cell carcinoma efficacy of vismodegib in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with the basal-cell nevus syndrome at three clinical centers from September 2009 through January 2011. The primary end point was reduction in the incidence of new basal-cell carcinomas that were eligible for surgical resection (surgically eligible) with vismodegib versus placebo after 3 months; secondary end points included reduction in the size of existing basal-cell carcinomas. RESULTS: In 41 patients followed for a mean of 8 months (range, 1 to 15) after enrollment, the per-patient rate of new surgically eligible basal-cell carcinomas was lower with vismodegib than with placebo (2 vs. 29 cases per group per year, P<0.001), as was the size (percent change from baseline in the sum of the longest diameter) of existing clinically significant basal-cell carcinomas (-65% vs. -11%, P=0.003). In some patients, all basal-cell carcinomas clinically regressed. No tumors progressed during treatment with vismodegib. Patients receiving vismodegib routinely had grade 1 or 2 adverse events of loss of taste, muscle cramps, hair loss, and weight loss. Overall, 54% of patients (14 of 26) receiving vismodegib discontinued drug treatment owing to adverse events. At 1 month, vismodegib use had reduced the hedgehog target-gene expression by basal-cell carcinoma by 90% (P<0.001) and diminished tumor-cell proliferation, but apoptosis was not affected. No residual basal-cell carcinoma was detectable in 83% of biopsy samples taken from sites of clinically regressed basal-cell carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: Vismodegib reduces the basal-cell carcinoma tumor burden and blocks growth of new basal-cell carcinomas in patients with the basal-cell nevus syndrome. The adverse events associated with treatment led to discontinuation in over half of treated patients. (Funded by Genentech and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00957229.).

Efficacy and safety study of tazarotene cream 0.1% for the treatment of brittle nail syndrome.

Brittle nail syndrome refers to nails that exhibit surface roughness, raggedness, and peeling. It is a common problem, with a higher prevalence among elderly patients. The goal of this study was to determine if tazarotene cream 0.1% ameliorates the signs and symptoms of brittle nails. In this open-label, single-center trial, participants applied tazarotene cream to the nails twice daily for 24 weeks. Signs and symptoms were rated by the investigators and by the participants during treatment and 12 weeks after discontinuation. Twenty participants were enrolled in the study; 1 participant withdrew prior to the 4-week followup visit. Of the 18 participants available for analysis (1 participant was excluded because baseline photographs were not available) for the primary end point of improvement in the physician global improvement assessment (PGIA), all 18 participants achieved improvement of the target nails at week 12 as well as 16 participants (88.9%) at week 24. All 18 participants had improvement in the PGIA score 12 weeks posttreatment at week 36. The physician global assessment (PGA) improved for 14 of 19 participants (73.7%) at both weeks 12 and 24; at week 24, 4 of 19 participants had achieved a PGA score of none. At week 36, 17 of 19 participants (89.5%) agreed that their nails had improved overall. Only 1 participant (5.3%) reported mild local irritation. This study demonstrated that tazarotene improves some of the changes noted in conjunction with brittle nail syndrome with minimal to no irritation.

A randomized, double-blind comparison of two topical anesthetic formulations prior to electrodesiccation of dermatosis papulosa nigra.

BACKGROUND: Liposomal lidocaine 4% (L.M.X.4 cream, Ferndale Laboratories Inc., Ferndale, MI, USA) has been proposed as a more rapidly acting topical anesthetic than the eutectic mixture of lidocaine 2.5% and prilocaine 2.5% (EMLA cream, AstraZeneca LP, Wilmington, DE, USA) for venipuncture and laser procedures. However, their anesthetic efficacy has not been previously compared for electrosurgical destruction of superficial skin lesions. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that L.M.X.4 and EMLA differ in anesthetic efficacy when applied under occlusion for 30 minutes prior to electrodesiccation of papules of dermatosis papulosa nigra. METHODS: Forty adults were randomly assigned to treatment with either agent for 30 minutes under Tegaderm. The study drug was administered for an additional 30 minutes if the electrodesiccation of the first few papules was too painful. RESULTS: One subject treated with EMLA versus none treated with L.M.X.4 experienced complete anesthesia after a single 30-minute application. Nineteen of 20 (95%) subjects treated with EMLA versus 18 of 20 (90%) subjects treated with L.M.X.4 required only a single application (p = .49). Pain scores after the initial 30-minute application (scale: 0 = none to 10 = very severe) were EMLA 3.3 +/- 2.2 (mean +/- SD) versus L.M.X. 4 2.9 +/- 2.0 (p = .46). CONCLUSION: EMLA and L.M.X.4 provide comparable levels of anesthesia after a single 30-minute application under occlusion prior to electrodesiccation of superficial skin lesions.