Premium
A systematic literature review of the human skin microbiome as biomarker for dermatological drug development
Author(s) -
Niemeyer van der Kolk T.,
Wall H. E. C.,
Balmforth C.,
Van Doorn M. B. A.,
Rissmann R.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
british journal of clinical pharmacology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.216
H-Index - 146
eISSN - 1365-2125
pISSN - 0306-5251
DOI - 10.1111/bcp.13662
Subject(s) - microbiome , hidradenitis suppurativa , medicine , atopic dermatitis , psoriasis , acne , dermatology , biomarker , clinical trial , tazarotene , systematic review , seborrhoeic dermatitis , disease , medline , bioinformatics , biology , biochemistry
Aims To explore the potential of the skin microbiome as biomarker in six dermatological conditions: atopic dermatitis (AD), acne vulgaris (AV), psoriasis vulgaris (PV), hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), seborrhoeic dermatitis/pityriasis capitis (SD/PC) and ulcus cruris (UC). Methods A systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Two investigators independently reviewed the included studies and ranked the suitability microbiome implementation for early phase clinical studies in an adapted GRADE method. Results In total, 841 papers were identified and after screening of titles and abstracts for eligibility we identified 42 manuscripts that could be included in the review. Eleven studies were included for AD, five for AV, 10 for PV, two for HS, four for SD and 10 for UC. For AD and AV, multiple studies report the relationship between the skin microbiome, disease severity and clinical response to treatment. This is currently lacking for the remaining conditions. Conclusion For two indications – AD and AV – there is preliminary evidence to support implementation of the skin microbiome as biomarkers in early phase clinical trials. For PV, UC, SD and HS there is insufficient evidence from the literature. More microbiome‐directed prospective studies studying the effect of current treatments on the microbiome with special attention for patient meta‐data, sampling methods and analysis methods are needed to draw more substantial conclusions.