ArticleDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Clinical Insights and Prognostic Factors in Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia and Lichen Planopilaris: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLichen planopilaris (LPP) and frontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) share histopathology but differ in clinical presentation, disease course, and treatment patterns. This study aimed to compare clinical characteristics, treatments, outcomes, and prognostic factors between LPP and FFA.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at Sheba Medical Center, Israel (2010-2023). Patients with LPP or FFA followed for ≥1 year were included. Remission was categorized as early (≤12 months) or late (>12 months).
resultsA total of 141 patients were included (81 LPP, 60 FFA). FFA showed greater female predominance (96.7% vs. 80.2%, p = 0.004), older age at presentation (56.9 ± 12.2 vs. 49.1 ± 14.1 years, p = 0.0008) and higher postmenopausal proportion (81.8% vs. 44.4%, p = 0.004). LPP patients more frequently reported pain (50.6% vs. 6.7%) and pruritus (82.7% vs. 36.7%) (both p < 0.00001). Cumulative remission was higher in FFA than in LPP (68.3% vs. 45.7%, p = 0.022), whereas early remission rates and time to remission were similar (22.8 ± 17.6 vs. 22.9 ± 20.5 months, p = 0.98). Relapse rates were similar during treatment (22.0% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.59) and after discontinuation (29.3% vs. 27.0%, p = 0.83). Early remission was predicted by mild baseline severity in LPP (OR: 4.24), and by rural residence (OR: 7.00) and statin use (OR: 3.85) in FFA; tetracycline treatment was inversely associated (OR: 0.21). For late remission in LPP, older age at first visit was positively associated (OR: 1.06/year), whereas Ashkenazi Jewish ethnicity was inversely associated (OR: 0.33).
conclusionFFA had higher cumulative remission than LPP despite similar time to remission and relapse rates, with distinct remission predictors.
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.