ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2018
Efficacy of diphenylcyclopropenone in alopecia areata: a comparison of two treatment regimens.
Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- MAFF as a potential novel protective factor against Parkinson's disease: evidence from Mendelian randomization and single-cell RNA sequencing.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Article
- A consensus-based treatment algorithm for alopecia areata in adolescents and adults: integrating severity, quality of life, and disease dynamics.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Baricitinib Against Traditional Therapies in Severe Alopecia Areata: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Alopecia areata: from immunopathogenesis to emerging therapeutic approaches.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Preparation, solubility, and anti-inflammatory effects of a complex of diphenylcyclopropenone/β-cyclodextrin derivatives as the treatment of alopecia areata.Journal of pharmacy & pharmaceutical sciences : a publication of the Canadian Society for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Societe canadienne des sciences pharmaceutiques · 2024Article
- Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Alopecia Areata in Korea: Part I Topical and Device-based Treatment.Annals of dermatology · 2023Article
- Treatment satisfaction and response in patients with severe alopecia areata under treatment with diphenylcyclopropenone.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Application of Topical Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Alopecia Areata: A Review and Update.Drug design, development and therapy · 2021Review
- Alopecia Areata: An Autoimmune Disease of Multiple Players.ImmunoTargets and therapy · 2021Review
- Topical diphenylcyclopropenone plus topical 0.5% anthralin versus topical diphenylcyclopropenone alone for the treatment of chronic extensive alopecia areata: A split-scalp, double-blind, controlled study.International journal of trichologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlopecia areata (AA) is a skin disease of unclear etiology. In AA, topical immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone (DPCP) is considered the most effective treatment; however, the most common therapies give unsatisfactory results.
aimTo assess the efficacy of a topical application of a solution of DPCP based on the intensity, duration and number of exacerbations of AA and to compare the efficacy of two treatment regimens. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this prospective study, 39 patients with AA were enrolled. Group A was treated at weekly intervals and group B at 3-week intervals. Hair loss was assessed by independent dermatologists and documented by photography and dermoscopy.
resultsAfter 6 months' therapy, hair regrowth greater than 50% was observed in 21 patients, while worsening, no regrowth, or regrowth of less than 50% was seen in 18 patients. Regrowth exceeding 50% of initial loss was observed in 12 of 17 patients with baseline hair loss < 50%, in 9 of 22 patients with severe alopecia, and in 4 of 9 patients with alopecia totalis. Both groups showed significant improvement with higher efficacy in group B (54%) than group A (46%).
conclusionsTreatment at longer intervals may be safer and more comfortable for patients; however, further research is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.