ReviewInternational journal of women's dermatology2024
Clinicopathologic features, demographics, disease burden, and therapeutics in alopecic sarcoidosis: a case series and systematic review.
Review in International journal of women's dermatology, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alopecic sarcoidosis is an uncommon cutaneous manifestation of sarcoidosis. Scarring and nonscarring alopecic sarcoidosis have been reported; however, information on the epidemiology, systemic disease associations, and treatment efficacy is limited. Objective: To address these gaps, we conducted a retrospective chart review and systematic literature review of alopecic sarcoidosis cases. Methods: Full-text English publications from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar from inception to August 2023 were analyzed. Treatment evidence quality was assessed using the modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine rating scale. Three patients with biopsy-proven alopecic sarcoidosis were included as a case series, all demonstrating systemic sarcoidosis and 2 requiring multiple therapies. Among 1778 search results, 60 articles representing 77 cases of alopecic and scalp sarcoidosis were included. Patients were categorized into 4 distinct alopecic subgroups. Black patients constituted the majority of all subgroups. Results: Extracutaneous sarcoidosis burden was high across all alopecic subgroups, with ocular disease appearing overrepresented. Topical and oral corticosteroids were the main treatments. Though scarring alopecia patients had poor outcomes despite receiving immunomodulators/cx, limited data suggest potential efficacy of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors. Limitations: This study has a small sample size. Conclusion: Our findings underscore the importance of evidence-based strategies for improving alopecic sarcoidosis management. Prompt diagnosis and systemic evaluation, especially for scarring alopecia, are essential for timely intervention to optimize patient outcomes.
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.