ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2022
Epidermal barrier function in patients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation - a pilot study.
Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The skin is the typically and predominantly affected organ in patients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT). The supportive therapy in patients after alloHSCT includes especially ultraviolet protection and the use of emollients. Aim: Due to the lack of studies regarding epidermal barrier function in patients with alloHSCT, our aims were to monitor dermatologically patients 1 year after the procedure with special emphasis on epidermal barrier function and to evaluate the properties of epidermal barrier function in patients with confirmed chronic GvHD (cGvHD). Material and methods: Our pilot study included 30 patients after alloHSCT and 20 healthy controls. In the group of patients after alloHSCT there were 10 individuals who were monitored dermatologically (including evaluation of skin, mucosae, nails and hair) within 1 year after the procedure (subgroup 1) and 20 patients with previously confirmed cGvHD (subgroup 2). We evaluated transepidermal water loss (TEWL), skin hydration and skin color. The clinical assessment and all noninvasive evaluations in patients included in subgroup 1 were performed before (at baseline) and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after the procedure, while in subgroup 2 they were performed once. Results: In subgroup 1 we did not observe significant differences between baseline results and periods of assessments in TEWL values or corneometry, erythema and melanin measurements. In subgroup 2 the highest TEWL values and the lowest corneometry results were observed in patients with sclerodermoid chronic cutaneous GvHD in comparison to patients with lichenoid chronic cutaneous GvHD and patients with cGvHD but without skin lesions. TEWL values and melanin level were significantly higher in patients with cGvHD than in controls. Conclusions: Our pioneer observations proved the disturbed epidermal barrier function among patients after alloHSCT. Therefore it seems that proper skin care, including photoprotection, should be recognized as a crucial component in long-term management of these patients.
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.