Narrow band-ultraviolet B versus clobetasol propionate foam in the treatment of vitiligo: a retrospective study

INTRODUCTION: Several therapeutic options are available for the treatment of vitiligo; among these phototherapy and topical steroids are the most widely documented. A topical formulation of 0.05% clobetasol propionate foam (CPF) has been introduced in the market, but no data are available about the efficacy and tolerability of this new formulation in the treatment of vitiligo. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of CPF in the treatment of vitiligo, in comparison with narrowband-ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) phototherapy. METHODS: The medical records of the first 60 vitiligo patients treated with NB-UVB phototherapy or with CPF were selected. Response to the treatment was determined for each anatomic site (neck, upper and lower limbs, trunk, hands/wrists, feet/ankles). Based on the area of repigmentation, treatment outcome was calculated according to a scale ranging from 0 (absent) to 4 (excellent). The incidence of adverse effects was also noted as a secondary endpoint. Significance level was set at P = 0.05. RESULTS: For each anatomic site, statistical analyses demonstrated that the efficacy of CPF was significantly higher compared to NB-UVB. Side effects occurred in 4 patients (13.33%) in the CPF group compared to none in the NB-UVB group. DISCUSSION: Clobetasol propionate has been used in vitiligo in different vehicles, but never in foam. The data showed that CPF is effective and seems to be superior to NB-UVB phototherapy, with furthermore a good safety profile. CONCLUSION: This new foam formulation of clobetasol propionate may expand the options currently available for vitiligo therapy; however, further investigations are needed to confirm our preliminary observations. INTRODUCTION: Several therapeutic options are available for the treatment of vitiligo; among these phototherapy and topical steroids are the most widely documented. A topical formulation of 0.05% clobetasol propionate foam (CPF) has been introduced in the market, but no data are available about the efficacy and tolerability of this new formulation in the treatment of vitiligo. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of CPF in the treatment of vitiligo, in comparison with narrowband-ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) phototherapy. METHODS: The medical records of the first 60 vitiligo patients treated with NB-UVB phototherapy or with CPF were selected. Response to the treatment was determined for each anatomic site (neck, upper and lower limbs, trunk, hands/wrists, feet/ankles). Based on the area of repigmentation, treatment outcome was calculated according to a scale ranging from 0 (absent) to 4 (excellent). The incidence of adverse effects was also noted as a secondary endpoint. Significance level was set at P = 0.05. RESULTS: For each anatomic site, statistical analyses demonstrated that the efficacy of CPF was significantly higher compared to NB-UVB. Side effects occurred in 4 patients (13.33%) in the CPF group compared to none in the NB-UVB group. DISCUSSION: Clobetasol propionate has been used in vitiligo in different vehicles, but never in foam. The data showed that CPF is effective and seems to be superior to NB-UVB phototherapy, with furthermore a good safety profile. CONCLUSION: This new foam formulation of clobetasol propionate may expand the options currently available for vitiligo therapy; however, further investigations are needed to confirm our preliminary observations.