6533b855fe1ef96bd12b0a9b

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Comparative effect of tacrolimus 0.1% ointment and clobetasol 0.05% ointment in patients with oral lichen planus.

Stefano GelioDomenico BiasiGiovanni CorrocherNicola MartinelliPasquale MansuetoMaria Luisa PacorRoberto CorrocherGabriele Di LorenzoGiorgio LombardoPier Francesco NociniAndrea FiorLisa Maria Bambara

subject

AdultMalemedicine.medical_specialtySettore MED/09 - Medicina Internamedicine.drug_classAnti-Inflammatory Agentstacrolimus ointment; clobetasol ointment; oral lichen planuslaw.inventionOintment Basesoral lichen planusRandomized controlled triallawOral administrationFacial PainmedicineHumanstacrolimus ointmentSalivatacrolimusbusiness.industryclobetasol ointmentclobetasol; tacrolimus; oral lichen planusmedicine.diseaseDermatologyTacrolimusCalcineurinstomatognathic diseasesclobetasolOintment BasesPeriodonticsCorticosteroidOral lichen planusFemaleClobetasol propionatebusinessEpidemiologic MethodsImmunosuppressive Agentsmedicine.drugLichen Planus Oral

description

Background Oral lichen planus (OLP) is considered to be an autoimmune disease of unknown aetiology that affects the mucosae, especially the oral cavity. Objective We compared tacrolimus 0.1% ointment and clobetasol 0.05% ointment for the treatment of OLP. Patients and methods A total of 32 patients (20 females and 12 males; all white, Italian origin, mean age of 43.6+/-18.4 years; 16 patients per treatment group) were treated with tacrolimus or clobetasol ointment for 4 weeks in a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. Pain severity, burning sensation, and mucosal lesion extension were assessed using a four-point scale. Results At the end of the treatment period, symptom scores were significantly lower in the tacrolimus group than in the clobetasol group. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that tacrolimus 0.1% ointment is more effective than clobetasol propionate 0.05% ointment in the treatment of OLP. However, other studies are needed to confirm the effectiveness of this treatment before it can be recommended for use in clinical practice.

yearjournalcountryeditionlanguage
2008-01-01
http://hdl.handle.net/10447/16036