Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obervation Letter
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
View/Download PDF
Letter to the Editor
2011:77:2;190-191
doi: 10.4103/0378-6323.77462
PMID: 21393952

Dexamethasone pulse therapy: Evidence for no benefit in pemphigus

Marcel F Jonkman
 Center for Blistering Diseases, Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Gronngen, The Netherlands

Correspondence Address:
Marcel F Jonkman
Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB Groningen
The Netherlands
How to cite this article:
Jonkman MF. Dexamethasone pulse therapy: Evidence for no benefit in pemphigus. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2011;77:190-191
Copyright: (C)2011 Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology

Sir,

I wish to refer to the paper of Pasricha and Poonam who claim that dexamathasone-cyclophosphamide pulse therapy can cure pemphigus, [1] the comment of Singh and Chaudhary who found this conclusion unacceptable since evidence was very poor due to lack of randomized controlled trials (RCT) addressing this issue, [2] the reaction of Kanwar and De who support the claim, [3] and the response of Singh, who had to defend on misquoting and personal critisism, explaining that faith is insufficient to accept such a claim. [4] The basis of the discussion is that Pasricha and his followers do not feel the need to perform an RCT on pulse therapy on pemphigus since it works in their experience and in different centers in India. [1],[3]

What surprises me is that all authors missed the RCT on dexamethasone pulse therapy in pemphigus published by my group in 2006 in the Archives of Dermatology. [5] In this double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we compared oral dexamethasone in 300-mg pulses (D/A) or placebo pulses (P/A) three days per month for one year in 20 pemphigus vulgaris patients. During the intervention, the D/A and P/A groups received conventional treatment with prednisolone, 80 mg/d, which was quickly tapered across 19 weeks, and azathioprine sodium, 3 mg/kg per day, until the end of the study. Monthly pulses were continued until prednisolone treatment was tapered to 0 mg. We found that eight of the 11 D/A-treated patients and all 9 P/A-treated patients achieved remission. Mean time to remission was 173 days with D/A and 176 days with P/A. The mean duration of remission within the first year was 151 days for D/A and 141 days for P/A. Mean cumulative prednisolone dose after one year was 5300 mg for D/A and 4882 mg for P/A. We found no statistically significant difference (P>.05) of an adjuvant effect of dexamethasone pulse therapy on remission of pemphigus vulgaris on top of what was achieved with prednisolone with azathioprine alone.

The results of this randomized controlled trial cannot directly be compared with those of the open patient series of Pasricha and Poonam in which dexamethasone was given intravenously in 100 mg doses. However, the bioavailability of 300 mg oral dexamethasone is equivalent to 168 mg given intravenously. [6] Pasricha also combined dexamethasone pulses with cyclophosphamide (D/C). In D/C therapy, patients receive 500 mg of cyclophosphamide intravenously on the second pulse day, and daily oral cyclophosphamide, 50 mg/d with "adequate daily oral dose of betamethasone". [1] We did not continue the pulses for nine months after remission (phase II), but monitored the patients until one year after start of therapy for diseases free period and steroid intake. One could still claim that the combination of dexamethasone with cyclophosphamide may be doing the trick. However, we provided a steroid sparing agent, azathioprine, in high dose for the complete period of the trial, to give the pulse therapy a level playing field for comparison to placebo that was found a prerequisite condition by Singh and Chaudhary. [2] Moreover, in a randomized controlled open-label trial in pemphigus vulgaris by Chams-Davatchi et al, [7] azathioprine appeared as more effective to reduce steroid dosage than cyclophosphamide.

Taken all together, I conclude that in patients with new pemphigus vulgaris disease activity, there is some evidence that dexamethasone pulse therapy has no benefit in addition to daily oral corticosteroids with azathioprine. The Indian collegues need to perform RCTs to convince the scientific world of their claim on dexamethasone-cyclophosphamide pulse therapy in pemphigus.

References
1.
Pasricha JS, Poonam. Current regimen of pulse therapy for pemphigus: Minor modifications, improved results. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2008;74:217-21.
[Google Scholar]
2.
Singh S, Chaudhary R. Pulse therapy for pemphigus: The burden of proof. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2009;75:83-4.
[Google Scholar]
3.
Kanwar AJ, De D. Pulse therapy: Credibility of evidence. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2010;76:182-3.
[Google Scholar]
4.
Singh S. Pulse therapy: Evidence versus faith and unconditional other acceptance. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2010;76:183-4.
[Google Scholar]
5.
Mentink LF, Mackenzie, Tóth GG, Laseur M, Lambert FP, Veeger NJ, et al. Randomized controlled trial of adjuvant oral dexamethasone pulse therapy in pemphigus vulgaris: PEMPULS trial. Arch Dermatol 2006;142:570-6.
[Google Scholar]
6.
Tóth GG, Jonkman MF. Dexamethasone pharmacokinetics after high-dose oral therapy for pemphigus. Ann Pharmacother 2002;36:1108-9.
[Google Scholar]
7.
Chams-Davatchi C, Esmaili N, Daneshpazhooh M, Valikhani M, Balighi K, Hallaji Z, et al. Randomized controlled open-label trial of four treatment regimens for pemphigus vulgaris. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007;57:622-8.
[Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
66

PDF downloads
56
Show Sections