ArticleIndian dermatology online journal2026
A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Tofacitinib Versus Methotrexate In Moderate-to-Severe Alopecia Areata.
Article in Indian dermatology online journal, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatments for moderate-to-severe alopecia areata (AA) have limited efficacy. Methotrexate, a conventional immunosuppressant, has been used for AA, while Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) inhibitors like tofacitinib have shown promising results.
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of tofacitinib and methotrexate in moderate-to-severe AA. PATIENTS AND
methodsThirty-six patients aged 18-60 years with a severity of alopecia tool (SALT) score >40 were randomized to receive either tofacitinib (5-10 mg twice daily) or methotrexate (0.3-0.5 mg/kg weekly) for 6 months, followed by 3-month follow-up. Primary outcomes measured the proportion achieving a SALT score ≤20 at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcome (PRO) on scalp hair assessment, dermatology life quality index (DLQI), patient health questionnaire (PHQ) scores, relapse rates, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity in scalp biopsies.
resultsAt 6 months, 50% of tofacitinib patients achieved a SALT score ≤20 vs. 33.3% with methotrexate ( P = 0.31). A ≥ 90% SALT improvement occurred in 33.3% of tofacitinib and 11.1% of methotrexate patients ( P = 0.10). The tofacitinib group had greater scalp hair PRO score reductions. Both groups showed significant DLQI and PHQ improvements, with no intergroup differences. Adverse events were reported in 38.8% of tofacitinib and 33.3% of methotrexate patients ( P = 1). ALP activity was inconclusive. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, open-label design, lack of stratification, and baseline imbalances that may affect achievable improvement and comparative interpretation.
conclusionIn this pilot trial, both tofacitinib and methotrexate improved SALT score, PRO score, and psychological outcomes, but the tofacitinib group showed greater efficacy. Larger studies are warranted to confirm findings and investigate ALP activity.
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.