Evidence Hub

A systematic review of placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of treatments used in oral lichen planus

Zakrzewska JM, Chan ES, Thornhill MH

The British journal of dermatology, 2005

223 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oral lichen planus (OLP) is one of the commoner conditions seen in oral medicine clinics. Current treatments are palliative rather than curative. Numerous treatments have been tried but many have not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

OBJECTIVES: To review the effectiveness and safety of any therapy compared with placebo for the treatment of symptomatic OLP.

METHODS: A systematic review of 11 RCTs, totalling 223 patients was done. The main outcome measures used were improvement of signs (erythema, reticulation, ulceration) and symptoms (pain, discomfort) usually after 8 weeks of therapy.

RESULTS: Eleven interventions were grouped into four therapeutic classes (topical ciclosporins, topical or systemic retinoids, topical steroids and phototherapy) for comparison. No therapy was replicated exactly. Trials recording the same outcomes in each therapeutic class were pooled. The largest number of pooled trials was four. Small odds ratios with very wide confidence intervals indicating statistically significant but imprecisely known treatment benefits were seen in all but one trial. Only systemic agents were associated with treatment toxicities; all other side-effects were mild and mainly local.

CONCLUSIONS: The results are tempered by the small study sizes, lack of replication, lack of standardized outcome measures and the very high likelihood of publication bias. Therefore this review provides only circumstantial evidence for the superiority of the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 223 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free