Ultraviolet A phototherapy for sclerotic skin diseases: a systematic review.

Department of Dermatology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (Impact Factor: 5). 11/2008; 59(6):1017-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2008.07.042
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Ultraviolet (UV) A-1 phototherapy is now available for a variety of skin diseases. Increasingly since 1995, there have been investigations of the efficacy of UVA-1 (340-400 nm) therapy for sclerotic skin diseases. Most studies undertaken treated patients who had localized scleroderma, but UVA-1 phototherapy is currently also used for other sclerotic skin conditions.
We sought to assess the efficacy, biological effects, and side effects of UVA-1 in a variety of sclerotic skin diseases (localized scleroderma, eosinophilic fasciitis, chronic graft-versus-host disease, lichen sclerosus et atrophicus, scleredema adultorum, necrobiosis lipoidica, POEMS disease, pansclerotic porphyria cutanea tarda, and drug-induced scleroderma-like disorders).
The authors searched for publications dated between January 1996 and November 2007 in the computerized bibliographic database, PubMed. PubMed was searched using medical subject heading terms and open searches to retrieve the latest reports.
The evidence based on research concerning the effect of full-spectrum UVA (320-400 nm) and UVA-1 on these skin diseases is still growing, and appears promising. Up until now, good results are shown for all different doses (low, medium, and high) UVA-1 and UVA. There are insufficient data regarding use of high-dose UVA-1 and there are no comparative studies to make a clear assessment regarding the superiority of low-, medium-, or high-dose UVA-1 therapy. Although UVA-1 has various effects on, for instance, fibroblasts and inflammatory cells, the precise mode of action remains obscure. The main short-term side effects of UVA-1 therapy are erythema, pruritus, xerosis cutis, tanning, and recrudescence of herpes simplex infection. More studies are warranted to investigate the potential long-term risk of photoaging and skin cancer. Currently, UVA-1 is considered to be less carcinogenic than psoralen plus UVA (PUVA).
Because of the limited availability of randomized controlled trials and large cohort studies, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions on the long-term efficacy, optimum dose, and best treatment regimens for UVA-1 when administered to patients with sclerosing skin disorders.
Full-spectrum UVA and UVA-1 phototherapy seem effective in the treatment of sclerotic skin diseases based on data retrieved from the literature. UVA-1 treatment can shorten the active period of localized scleroderma and pseudoscleroderma and prevent further disease progression, including contractures. Further investigations will be needed to determine any additional biological effects of UVA-1. Although long-term side effects are not yet known, UVA-1 might develop into a promising beneficial and well-tolerated treatment in the therapeutic armamentarium for sclerotic skin diseases. Long-term studies in large groups of patients are clearly needed.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Wound care is an important area of medicine considering the increasing age of the population who may have diverse comorbidities. Light-based technology comprises a varied set of modalities of increasing relevance to wound care. While low-level laser (or light) therapy and photodynamic therapy both have wide applications in wound care, this review will concentrate on the use of ultraviolet (UV) radiation. UVC (200-280 nm) is highly antimicrobial and can be directly applied to acute wound infections to kill pathogens without unacceptable damage to host tissue. UVC is already widely applied for sterilization of inanimate objects. UVB (280-315 nm) has been directly applied to the wounded tissue to stimulate wound healing, and has been widely used as extracorporeal UV radiation of blood to stimulate the immune system. UVA (315-400 nm) has distinct effects on cell signaling, but has not yet been widely applied to wound care. Penetration of UV light into tissue is limited and optical technology may be employed to extend this limit. UVC and UVB can damage DNA in host cells and this risk must be balanced against beneficial effects. Chronic exposure to UV can be carcinogenic and this must be considered in planning treatments. New high-technology UV sources, such as light-emitting diodes, lasers, and microwave-generated UV plasma are becoming available for biomedical applications. Further study of cellular signaling that occurs after UV exposure of tissue will allow the benefits in wound healing to be better defined.
    10/2013; 2(8):422-437. DOI:10.1089/wound.2012.0366
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Morphoea is a localized inflammatory disorder of the dermis and subcutaneous fat and radiotherapy is a rarely reported cause (estimated incidence of 2 per 1000). Morphoea is commonly mistaken for an inflammatory recurrence of breast cancer, resulting in unnecessary investigations and treatment. We report the case of a 40-year-old woman who developed radiation-induced morphoea of the breast 7 months following adjuvant radiotherapy. She was treated with topical and systemic steroids as well as psoralen plus ultraviolet (UV)A before proceeding to UVA1 phototherapy. We also review the literature and discuss other management options.
    Clinical and Experimental Dermatology 05/2014; 39(5). DOI:10.1111/ced.12345 · 1.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE Topical corticosteroids are the current first-line therapy for vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS). UV-A1 phototherapy may be a promising alternative treatment option, but controlled studies are lacking. OBJECTIVE To compare the efficacy of high-potent topical corticosteroids with UV-A1 phototherapy in the treatment of VLS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A 2-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted at a university hospital dermatology department according to the intention-to-treat principle with last observation carried forward. The study population comprised 30 female patients with VLS. INTERVENTIONS Treatment of VLS with clobetasol propionate, 0.05%, ointment applied once daily for 3 months or medium-dose UV-A1 (50 J/cm2) home-based phototherapy, performed 4 times weekly for 3 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Mean relative reduction of the total clinician's score (TCS) was considered the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcome measures included the reduction of pruritus and burning and/or pain according to a visual analog scale (VAS), a health-related quality of life score (Skindex-29), 20-MHz ultrasonography, and histopathological analysis before and after 3 months of therapy. RESULTS Fifteen patients were randomized in each treatment arm, and 2 patients dropped out in both treatment arms. After therapy, both therapies resulted in a significant decrease in mean TCS (51.4% [95% CI, 39.7% to 63.0%] for clobetasol ointment [P < .001] and 35.6% [95% CI, 18.2% to 53.1%] for UV-A1 phototherapy [P = .006]). No significant difference was found between both treatments (P > .05). The Skindex-29 (mean difference [MD], 29.6 [95% CI, 7.9 to 51.2] [P = .009]) and the VAS score for pruritus (MD, 4.6 [95% CI, 1.5 to 7.7] [P = .005]) and burning and/or pain (MD, 4.2 [95% CI, 1.9 to 6.6] [P = .001]) significantly decreased after clobetasol treatment. After UV-A1 phototherapy, the VAS score for burning and/or pain (MD, 3.2 [95% CI, 0.7 to 5.7] [P = .01]) was also significantly reduced; however, there was no significant reduction in pruritus (MD, 2.1 [95% CI, 0.5 to 3.7] [P = .16]) and in the Skindex-29 score (MD, 4.9 [95% CI, -12.6 to 22.4] [P > .99]). A significant reduction of the corium thickness and a significant increase in dermal density in 20-MHz ultrasonography as well as significant histopathological reduction of the inflammatory infiltrate was observed after clobetasol treatment but not after UV-A1 phototherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although resulting in a significant clinical improvement, UV-A1 phototherapy was inferior to the current gold standard treatment with topical high-potent corticosteroids with respect to practicability, relief of itch, and improvement in quality of life. UV-A1 phototherapy may be considered a potential second-line treatment for VLS. TRIAL REGISTRATION Identifier: NCT01400022.
    04/2014; 150(6). DOI:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.7733


Available from