Complementary and alternative medicine for alopecia areata: A systematic review.
Elizabeth Tkachenko, Jean-Phillip Okhovat, Priya Manjaly, Kathie P Huang, Maryanne M Senna, Arash Mostaghimi
Author Information
Elizabeth Tkachenko: University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jean-Phillip Okhovat: Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Priya Manjaly: Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Kathie P Huang: Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Maryanne M Senna: Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Arash Mostaghimi: Department of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: amostaghimi@bwh.harvard.edu.
BACKGROUND: Despite high use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for alopecia areata (AA), efficacy and safety remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To identify all CAM therapies studied for treatment of AA. Outcomes of interest included disease course and psychologic well-being. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched to identify English articles containing original data investigating CAM in individuals with AA from 1950-2018. Quality was assessed with Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine criteria. RESULTS: Of 1015 initial citations, 16 articles met inclusion criteria: 5 randomized controlled trials, 5 prospective controlled cohorts, 4 prospective noncontrolled cohorts, 1 retrospective cohort, and 1 case series. CAM therapies with best evidence and efficacy for hair growth in AA include essential oil aromatherapy, topical garlic, and oral glucosides of peony with compound glycyrrhizin. Hypnosis and mindfulness psychotherapy represent low-quality evidence for improvement of psychologic and quality of life outcomes. Adverse events were rare and mild for all therapies evaluated. LIMITATIONS: Inconsistent or poorly reported study methodology and nonstandardized outcomes limit the conclusions that can be made from these studies. CONCLUSIONS: This work serves to inform physician treatment of patients with AA seeking CAM while encouraging further investigation into these therapies to address some of the therapeutic challenges of AA.
