Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria: a review of published evidence

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewfagfællebedømt

Standard

Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria : a review of published evidence. / Holm, Jesper Gronlund; Ivyanskiy, Ilya; Thomsen, Simon Francis.

I: Journal of Dermatological Treatment, Bind 29, Nr. 1, 2018, s. 80-97.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Holm, JG, Ivyanskiy, I & Thomsen, SF 2018, 'Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria: a review of published evidence', Journal of Dermatological Treatment, bind 29, nr. 1, s. 80-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505

APA

Holm, J. G., Ivyanskiy, I., & Thomsen, S. F. (2018). Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria: a review of published evidence. Journal of Dermatological Treatment, 29(1), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505

Vancouver

Holm JG, Ivyanskiy I, Thomsen SF. Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria: a review of published evidence. Journal of Dermatological Treatment. 2018;29(1):80-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505

Author

Holm, Jesper Gronlund ; Ivyanskiy, Ilya ; Thomsen, Simon Francis. / Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria : a review of published evidence. I: Journal of Dermatological Treatment. 2018 ; Bind 29, Nr. 1. s. 80-97.

Bibtex

@article{64fceef78a704f71a5c3b9a64887f4c3,
title = "Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria: a review of published evidence",
abstract = "Background: Knowledge of effectiveness and safety of the nonbiologic, nonantihistamine treatments used for chronic urticaria is important as in some cases the principal guideline-recommended drug; omalizumab, has limited effect, side effects or is too expensive or unavailable. Herein, we systematically review the evidence for the use of the nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria.Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Webofscience and identified studies that reported use of one or more of the nonbiological, nonantihistamine treatment options for chronic urticaria. The studies were evaluated based on study design, number of patients, effect of treatment and safety.Results: We identified 118 studies or case series with 13 different treatments (azathioprine, chloroquine, colchicine, cyclosporine, dapsone, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), methotrexate, montelukast, mycophenolate mofetil, plasmapheresis, sulfasalazine, tranexamic acid and ultraviolet light (UV) A, UVB) totaling 1682 patients. There was a paucity of controlled trials for most of the treatments reviewed albeit the strongest evidence in favor of a beneficial effect in chronic urticaria was, apart from montelukast and cyclosporine, seen for UV therapy and dapsone followed by IVIG.Conclusion: The treatment options reviewed should be seen as potential alternatives in treatment-resistant chronic urticaria where guideline-based selections have failed. However, larger controlled trials are warranted to advance the level of evidence, possibly supporting some treatments' future recommendation in selected patients.",
keywords = "Azathioprine, chloroquine, colchicine, cyclosporine, dapsone, immunoglobulin, methotrexate, montelukast, mycophenolate mofetil, sulfasalazine, tranexamic acid, UV, chronic urticaria",
author = "Holm, {Jesper Gronlund} and Ilya Ivyanskiy and Thomsen, {Simon Francis}",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "80--97",
journal = "Journal of Dermatological Treatment",
issn = "0954-6634",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria

T2 - a review of published evidence

AU - Holm, Jesper Gronlund

AU - Ivyanskiy, Ilya

AU - Thomsen, Simon Francis

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Background: Knowledge of effectiveness and safety of the nonbiologic, nonantihistamine treatments used for chronic urticaria is important as in some cases the principal guideline-recommended drug; omalizumab, has limited effect, side effects or is too expensive or unavailable. Herein, we systematically review the evidence for the use of the nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria.Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Webofscience and identified studies that reported use of one or more of the nonbiological, nonantihistamine treatment options for chronic urticaria. The studies were evaluated based on study design, number of patients, effect of treatment and safety.Results: We identified 118 studies or case series with 13 different treatments (azathioprine, chloroquine, colchicine, cyclosporine, dapsone, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), methotrexate, montelukast, mycophenolate mofetil, plasmapheresis, sulfasalazine, tranexamic acid and ultraviolet light (UV) A, UVB) totaling 1682 patients. There was a paucity of controlled trials for most of the treatments reviewed albeit the strongest evidence in favor of a beneficial effect in chronic urticaria was, apart from montelukast and cyclosporine, seen for UV therapy and dapsone followed by IVIG.Conclusion: The treatment options reviewed should be seen as potential alternatives in treatment-resistant chronic urticaria where guideline-based selections have failed. However, larger controlled trials are warranted to advance the level of evidence, possibly supporting some treatments' future recommendation in selected patients.

AB - Background: Knowledge of effectiveness and safety of the nonbiologic, nonantihistamine treatments used for chronic urticaria is important as in some cases the principal guideline-recommended drug; omalizumab, has limited effect, side effects or is too expensive or unavailable. Herein, we systematically review the evidence for the use of the nonbiologic treatments in antihistamine-refractory chronic urticaria.Methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Webofscience and identified studies that reported use of one or more of the nonbiological, nonantihistamine treatment options for chronic urticaria. The studies were evaluated based on study design, number of patients, effect of treatment and safety.Results: We identified 118 studies or case series with 13 different treatments (azathioprine, chloroquine, colchicine, cyclosporine, dapsone, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), methotrexate, montelukast, mycophenolate mofetil, plasmapheresis, sulfasalazine, tranexamic acid and ultraviolet light (UV) A, UVB) totaling 1682 patients. There was a paucity of controlled trials for most of the treatments reviewed albeit the strongest evidence in favor of a beneficial effect in chronic urticaria was, apart from montelukast and cyclosporine, seen for UV therapy and dapsone followed by IVIG.Conclusion: The treatment options reviewed should be seen as potential alternatives in treatment-resistant chronic urticaria where guideline-based selections have failed. However, larger controlled trials are warranted to advance the level of evidence, possibly supporting some treatments' future recommendation in selected patients.

KW - Azathioprine

KW - chloroquine

KW - colchicine

KW - cyclosporine

KW - dapsone

KW - immunoglobulin

KW - methotrexate

KW - montelukast

KW - mycophenolate mofetil

KW - sulfasalazine

KW - tranexamic acid

KW - UV

KW - chronic urticaria

U2 - 10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505

DO - 10.1080/09546634.2017.1329505

M3 - Review

C2 - 28513247

VL - 29

SP - 80

EP - 97

JO - Journal of Dermatological Treatment

JF - Journal of Dermatological Treatment

SN - 0954-6634

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 216162475