nach oben

Erschienen in:

Open Access 01.12.2024 | Original Article

Excimer light effect on neurogenic inflammation in active versus stable psoriasis lesions

verfasst von: Marwa S. El-Mesidy, Yomna A. Metwally, Zeinab A. Nour, Maha F. Elmasry

Erschienen in: Lasers in Medical Science | Ausgabe 1/2024

Abstract

Neurogenic inflammation, mediated by T helper 17 cell (Th17) and neurons that release neuropeptides such as substance P (SP), is thought to play a role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Excimer light is used in the treatment of psoriasis via induction of T cell apoptosis. The objective of this study is to study the effect of excimer light on active versus stable psoriasis and investigate the levels of substance P and its receptor in both groups. The study included 27 stable and 27 active psoriatic patients as well as 10 matched healthy controls. Clinical examination (in the form of local psoriasis severity index (PSI) and visual analogue scale (VAS)) was done to determine disease severity, level of itching, and quality of life. Tissue levels of SP and neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1R) were measured by ELISA before and after 9 excimer light sessions in 43 patients. A statistically significant lower levels of PSI and VAS were reached after therapy with no significant difference between the stable and active groups. The mean tissue levels of SP before therapy were significantly higher than the control group. Lower levels of SP and NK-1 receptor were found after treatment overall and in each group. Excimer therapy can be effective for both stable and active plaque psoriasis and this effect could be partly through its role on ameliorating the neurogenic inflammation.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Introduction

Psoriasis shows an altered expression of various neuropeptides and their receptors [1] such as substance P (SP), histamine, serotonin, calcitonin gene–related peptide, adenosine, glucagon like peptide, and somatostatin [2].

SP is secreted by nerves and inflammatory cells and acts by binding to the neurokinin-1 receptor (NK-1 R) having a proinflammatory effect in psoriasis [2] and stimulates chemotaxis of lymphocytes and neutrophils [3] and promotes T helper 17 (Th17) to produce interleukin-17 (IL-17) [4].

Neuropeptides regulate transducing nerve impulses to signals read by the immune cells thus exacerbating the inflammatory reaction. The enhancement of neurotrophin expression in psoriasis supports this phenomenon.

SP also affects the vascular and cellular inflammatory components. It translocates P-selectin to endothelial cell membranes and enhances the expression of E-selectin thus intensifying the inflammation. Moreover, it helps in the migration and adhesion of leukocytes to endothelial cells. It binds to NK-1R on different cells and this linkage between neuropeptides and immune cells plays a role in modulating the inflammation [5].

Treatment of psoriasis includes topical treatments, systemic therapy, phototherapy, biologics, and immune modulators. However, it is usually challenging due to the side effects encountered, resistance to treatment, high expenses, and variable responses encountered. By addressing these challenges, therapy may be optimized for everyone improving their lives [6].

Excimer light decreased cytokine expression in psoriasis and led to clinical remission and so could be an effective treatment for psoriasis [7].

It induces apoptosis in keratinocytes and T lymphocytes [8] as well as reduces the numbers of pathogenic memory/effector T cells infiltrating lesional epidermis and dermis [9] and promotes the degeneration of dorsal root nerve fibers proving its effect on neurogenic inflammation [10].

The aim of this work was to examine the effect of excimer light on active versus stable psoriasis plaques to detect the ideal patient whose life may benefit more from this form of therapy. Also, it aimed at investigating the levels of substance P and its receptor before and after the excimer light sessions, in a trial to detect its effect on neurogenic inflammation.

Patients and methods

The study was conducted on 54 psoriasis patients and 10 healthy controls, during the time interval from May 2022 to October 2022 in a university hospital after approval by the Research Ethical Committee (REC) with code MS-66–2022 on 17–4-2022. Written informed consents were obtained from all participants.

Included patients were plaque psoriasis patients, more than 18 years old, of both genders, and with psoriasis affecting less than 10% of the body surface area. Patients were divided into two groups: 27 patients in each group. The stable group included patients with psoriasis lesions for three or more months. The active group had developing psoriasis lesions arising within 1 month, enlarging plaques, annular lesions, or any lesion arising at sites of trauma within 10–20 days^.

History of physical trauma preceding the lesion within 10–20 days was recorded, and itching assessment was done by visual analogue scale [11] in addition to the 4-item itch questionnaire [12]. Assessments of psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) [13] and psoriasis severity index for the single targeted plaque (PSI) [14] as well as digital photography were done. Tissue levels of human SP and NK-1 R were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay technique (ELISA) in 43 patients.

A 3-mm punch skin biopsy was taken from the edge of a psoriatic plaque of 43 patients and from 10 healthy controls under local anesthesia using Lidocaine®. The skin biopsies were stored at – 20 °C in Eppendorf tubes with 900 µl phosphate buffer saline (PBS) added to each Eppendorf tube. Tissue samples with PBS were homogenized by a grinder, then centrifuged for 5 min at 10,000 revolutions per minute (rpm) speed. The supernatant was removed to be stored at − 80 °C till use for measuring the levels of human substance P and neurokinin-1 R by ELISA. Kits were supplied by ELK Biotech Co., LTD (China) (Human Substance P Catalogue Number ELK1039 and Human Neurokinin-1 R Catalogue Number ELK1512).

Admission for excimer light

Regarding the used excimer light, Excilite-µ handpiece, MEL@308 nm (DEKA, Italy), was used in the study. It has a monochromatic source able to emit a non-coherent light with a narrow band centered on 308 nm in the UVB. The emission is a continuous wave of 1–90 s and is uniform on the area where the treatment can take place, 30 cm² at maximum (5 × 6 cm) with power density 50 mW/cm^2.

Two sessions were performed weekly for a total of 9 sessions. The starting dose ranged from 300 to 900 mJ/cm² according to the skin type and induration of the plaque. For an induration score of 1, the initial dose was 300–400 mJ/cm² according to the site and skin type; for a score of 2: 500–600 mJ/cm²; and for a score of 3: 700–900 mJ/cm². If mild or no erythema occurred, dose was increased by 30%. If moderate erythema, warmth, or skin sensitivity occurred, dose was increased by 20%. Then, the dose was further increased by 10–20% until discomfort prevented further increase, followed by dose maintenance. In case of blistering, treatment was postponed until resolution and subsequent dose was reduced by 20% (PHAROS EX-308 Operations Guide)⁵. One day after the last session, itching and PSI as well as levels of SP and NK-1 R were reassessed. Then, patients were followed up clinically for 1 and 3 months.

Statistical methods

Data were coded and entered using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 28 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Data were summarized using mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, and maximum in quantitative data and using frequency (count) and relative frequency (percentage) for categorical data. Comparisons between quantitative variables were done using the non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests. For comparison of serial measurements within each patient, the non-parametric Friedman test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used.

For comparing categorical data, chi-square (χ²) test was performed. Exact test was used instead when the expected frequency was less than 5. Correlations between quantitative variables were done using Spearman correlation coefficient. ROC curve was constructed with area under curve analysis performed to detect the best cutoff value of substance P and receptor level for detection of cases. P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Fifty-four patients were enrolled in the study as well as ten controls. Patients and controls were matched homogenously regarding age, sex, and skin type (P > 0.05). Demographic and clinical data of patients and controls are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Demographic and clinical data of patients and controls

	Variable	Patients n = 54	Controls n = 10
Age	Range	19–66	19–42
Age	Mean ± SD	33.33 ± 14.34	30.1 ± 8.76
Sex (No. (%))	Males	24 (44.4%)	5 (50%)
Sex (No. (%))	Females	30 (55.6%)	5 (50%)
Skin type (No. (%))	Type III	10 (18.5%)	1 (10%)
	Type IV	38 (70.4%)	7 (70%)
	Type V	6 (11.1%)	2(20%)
Activity (No. (%))	Stable	27 (50%)
Activity (No. (%))	Active	27 (50%)
Stress (No. (%))	Yes	38 (70.4%)
Stress (No. (%))	No	16 (29.6%)
Treatments other than topicals (No. (%))	Yes	15 (27.8%)
Treatments other than topicals (No. (%))	No	39 (72.2%)
Treatments other than topicals details (No. (%))	Narrow band UVB	2 (3.7%)
	Methotrexate	7 (13%)
	Acitretin	2 (3.7%)
	Methotrexate and narrow band UVB and acitretin	2 (3.7)
	Yes	2 (3.7%)
	No	39 (72.2%)
Trauma (No. (%))	Yes	10 (18.5%)
Trauma (No. (%))	No	44 (81.5%)

n number, SD standard deviation; *P value < 0.05 is significant

Twenty-seven patients (50%) were active psoriasis patients and the other twenty-seven (50%) were stable psoriasis patients. The duration of disease among patients ranged from 0.4 to 180 months with a mean of 46.08 ± 49.32 months. The duration of disease ranged from 0.96 to 120 months in the stable group and from 0.48 to 180 months in the active group, with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

The body surface area (BSA) affected by psoriasis ranged from 0.5 to 7% with a mean of 3.30 ± 1.93%. The BSA ranged from 0.5 to 5% in the stable group with a mean of 2.37 ± 1.49 and from 1 to 7% with a mean of 4.22 ± 1.89 in the active group, with a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P < 0.001), with more affected body surface area in the active group. PASI score ranged from 2 to 11 with a mean of 5.54 ± 1.85.

PSI score ranged from 2 to 11 with a mean of 5.54 ± 1.85 with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). VAS score ranged from 2 to 10 with a mean of 6.69 ± 2.22. Comparisons between the results of both groups with statistical significance are shown in Table 2 and Figs. 1 and 2.

Table 2

Comparison between stable and active groups regarding clinical scores before and after treatment

	Stable group			Active group			P value
	Mean ± SD	Median	Range	Mean ± SD	Median	Range
PSI before	5.11 ± 1.80	5.00	2.00–9.00	5.63 ± 2.11	5.00	2.00–11.00	0.400
PSI after	2.11 ± 1.89	2.00	0.00–6.00	2.19 ± 1.62	2.00	0.00–6.00	0.745
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
VAS before	6.56 ± 2.10	7.00	2.00–10.00	6.81 ± 2.37	6.00	3.00–10.00	0.694
VAS after	2.70 ± 2.09	2.00	0.00–9.00	3.22 ± 2.82	2.00	0.00–9.00	0.674
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
4-item before	9.67 ± 3.68	9.00	3.00–15.00	9.63 ± 3.09	9.00	3.00–16.00	0.827
4-item after	5.30 ± 3.53	5.00	0.00–16.00	5.37 ± 3.63	6.00	0.00–16.00	0.752
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
Erythema before	1.85 ± 0.46	2.00	1.00–3.00	2.07 ± 0.68	2.00	1.00–3.00	0.171
Erythema after	1.00 ± 0.83	1.00	0.00–3.00	1.07 ± 0.62	1.00	0.00–2.00	0.600
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
Induration before	1.56 ± 0.85	2.00	0.00–3.00	1.70 ± 0.99	2.00	0.00–4.00	0.620
Induration after	0.48 ± 0.64	0.00	0.00–2.00	0.52 ± 0.75	0.00	0.00–2.00	0.976
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
Scaling before	1.70 ± 0.78	2.00	0.00–3.00	1.85 ± 0.82	2.00	1.00–4.00	0.621
Scaling after	0.63 ± 0.74	0.00	0.00–2.00	0.59 ± 0.57	1.00	0.00–2.00	0.946
P value	< 0.001			< 0.001
PSI% change	− 56.59 ± 43.42	− 60.00	− 100.00–100.00	− 56.04 ± 39.29	-60.00	− 100.00–50.00	0.965
VAS% change	− 57.15 ± 28.97	− 60.00	− 100.00–0.00	− 51.46 ± 37.13	-57.14	− 100.00–0.00	0.639
Item% change	− 38.88 ± 37.00	− 28.57	− 100.00–60.00	− 38.71 ± 38.48	− 28.57	− 100.00–60.00	0.842

P value > 0.05 is non-significant. PSI psoriasis severity index, VAS visual analogue scale

Thirteen patients (24.1%) showed a remaining annular edge of the psoriatic plaque after treatment: 3 (11.1%) stable patients and 10 (37%) active patients with a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P < 0.05) favoring the active group (Fig. 3).

At 1 month follow-up, PSI scores ranged from 0 to 8 with a mean of 2.02 ± 2.33. PSI scores ranged from 0 to 8 with a mean of 1.76 ± 2.31 in the stable group and from 0 to 8 with a mean of 2.3 ± 2.36 in the active group with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

At 3 months follow-up, PSI scores ranged from 0 to 8 with a mean of 2.28 ± 2.39. PSI scores ranged from 0 to 7 with a mean of 2.42 ± 2.24 in the stable group and from 0 to 8 with a mean of 2.14 ± 2.59 in the active group with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

Upon comparing PSI scores after treatment and 1 month later, there was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) overall or in each group (P > 0.05) and no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Upon comparing PSI scores after treatment and 3 months later, there was no statistically significant difference.

Erythema occurred in 26 patients (48.14%): 15 stable (55.5%) and 11 active (40.7%) patients with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Blistering occurred in 4 patients (7.4%): 2 stable (7.4%) patients and 2 active (7.4%) patients with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation occurred in 36 patients (66.6%): 17 stable (62.9%) and 19 active (70.3%) patients with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

Increased size of the targeted plaque occurred in 7 patients (12.96%): 4 stable (14.8%) and 3 active (11.1%) patients with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Eruption of new plaques far from the treated area was noticed in 5 patients (9.2%): 3 stable (11.1%) and 2 active (7.4%) patients with no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

Biochemical assessment

Biochemical assessment was done on 43 patients (22 stable and 21 active) in comparison to 10 controls (elaborated in Table 3). Confidence interval of SP tissue level ranged from 0.75 to 0.96, cutoff level at 67.77 ng/ml with 86% sensitivity and 100% specificity, while confidence interval of NK-1 receptor tissue level ranged from 0.43 to 0.72. Biochemical assessment in all patients before and after treatment is shown in Table 4.

Table 3

Comparison of SP and NK-1 receptor tissue level before treatment between patients and controls

	Cases			Controls			P value
	Mean ± SD	Median	Range	Mean ± SD	Median	Range	P value
Conc SP before ng/ml	116.89 ± 96.07	83.56	51.77–521.61	66.42 ± 0.53	66.55	65.50–67.10	< 0.001
Conc R before pg/ml	18.40 ± 23.42	3.24	0.74–58.50	2.56 ± 0.49	2.55	1.89–3.24	0.426
Conc SP after ng/ml	82.17 ± 31.28	72.80	52.58–181.81	66.42 ± 0.53	66.55	65.50–67.10	0.065
Conc R after pg/ml	6.21 ± 13.94	1.99	0.64–56.50	2.56 ± 0.49	2.55	1.89–3.24	0.342

Value in bold indicates highly significant result

Conc concentration; P value < 0.001 is highly significant

Table 4

Comparison of SP and NK-1 receptor levels before and after treatment in all patients

	Cases			P value
	Mean ± SD	Median	Range	P value
Conc SP before ng/ml	116.89 ± 96.07	83.56	51.77–521.61	0.004
Conc SP after ng/ml	82.17 ± 31.28	72.80	52.58–181.81	0.004
Optic density SP before	0.14 ± 0.11	0.11	0.07–0.74	0.004
Optic density SP after	0.11 ± 0.03	0.10	0.07–0.20	0.004
Conc R before pg/ml	18.40 ± 23.42	3.24	0.74–58.50	0.026
Conc R after pg/ml	6.21 ± 13.94	1.99	0.64–56.50	0.026
Optic density R before	0.96 ± 0.28	0.90	0.54–1.70	0.019
Optic density R after	0.81 ± 0.20	0.80	0.50–1.40	0.019

Values in bold indicate significant results

* P value < 0.05 is significant; Conc concentration

There was no statistically significant difference between the active and stable groups regarding substance P (SP) tissue level either before or after treatment (P > 0.05). Also, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding neurokinin-1 (NK-1 R) tissue level either before or after treatment (P > 0.05).

Discussion

Excimer devices are used for treatment of psoriasis [14] usually in patients having a suboptimal response to topical treatments [15]. They are indicated for treatment of mild, moderate, or severe localized psoriasis [14]. It is particularly beneficial in patients having a suboptimal response or contraindications to topical or intralesional treatments [15]. Excimer therapy has also proven efficacy in treating difficult psoriasis subtypes such as scalp, nail, and palmoplantar psoriasis [14].

The results of the current study come in agreement with Feldman et al. who conducted excimer laser sessions on stable mild to moderate plaque psoriasis, where 72% of patients achieved at least 75% clearing in an average of 6.2 treatments [16]. Another study performed excimer laser therapy on 26 patients with chronic psoriasis, where PSI score improved > 50% in 90% of patients [17]. Better achieved results could be due to the use of laser not light.

Also, in agreement with the current study, one study conducted 10 excimer light sessions on severe (PSI ≥ 6) localized chronic plaque psoriasis in Japanese patients where 83% improvement in PSI was reached [18].

Maximum improvement was less than the current study, which could be related to the different ethnicity, skin type, or the higher severity.

The explanation of itching decrease could be attributed to the decrease in nerve fibers following phototherapy [19].

In the current study, clinical improvement in the active psoriasis group was comparable to that in the stable group. Most side effects occurred in the lighter skin type (III). This indicates that excimer light is both effective and safe in active localized plaque psoriasis, with caution in lighter skin types.

Remaining annular edge could be explained by the difference of physical properties between lasers and lamps. Light devices do not produce a strict monochromatic wavelength [20] and is also divergent, which means that the periphery of lesion receives less intensity than the center [21]. Another explanation could be due to the activity in the margin that expands peripherally, which explains why it remains resistant to therapy.

Side effects in the active group (such as erythema, blistering, increased size of the targeted plaque, or appearance of new plaques) were less than the stable group, but post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation was more in the active group, with no statistically significant difference in the 2 groups regarding side effects. Most side effects (apart from hyperpigmentation) occurred in the lighter skin type (III). This indicates that excimer light is both effective and safe in active localized plaque psoriasis, with caution in lighter skin types.

Neurogenic inflammation, mediated by nociceptive neurons and T helper 17 cell (Th17) responses, plays a major role in the immune pathogenesis of psoriasis [3]. Nerve fibers release various types of neuropeptides that act on receptors on cells in different layers of the skin [2].

Effect on neurogenic inflammation was investigated in this study. The mean tissue levels of SP in the current study were significantly higher than the control group (P < 0.001) denoting its role in psoriasis pathogenesis.

This comes in accordance with Chan et al. who found out that SP-positive nerve fibers are more abundant in psoriatic plaques [22]. Other studies as well reported that SP in mature psoriatic lesions was greater than in healthy controls which indicates its role in the maintenance of psoriatic lesions [23].

However, other studies denied a difference in the number of SP-positive nerve fibers between lesional and non-lesional psoriatic skin. They reported that SP expression in immune cells, not nerve fibers, is increased in lesional skin [24].

In our study, there was no statistically significant difference between the stable and active groups regarding SP tissue level either before or after treatment, though levels were lower in the active group. Similarly, Nour et al. reported that nerve endings are diminished in acutely inflamed psoriatic lesions explained by the scratching in acutely inflamed lesions that lead to destruction of cutaneous nerve fibers and depletion of SP [25].

On the contrary, Pergolizzi et al. reported that protein gene product 9.5 (PGP 9.5)–positive nerve endings are decreased in mature psoriatic lesions and even not detected in long-term psoriasis. They concluded that neuropeptides would thus be low in chronic lesions compared to newer ones. They attributed the degeneration of nerve fibers in chronic lesions to the persistent inflammation [26].

Further studies are essential to detect the level of neuropeptides chronologically during the evolution of the psoriatic plaque.

Also, there was no statistically significant difference between the stable and active groups regarding NK-1 receptor tissue level either before or after treatment. In one study, NK-1 levels were found insignificantly higher in the exacerbation than the remission phase [27].

Lower levels of SP and NK-1 receptor were found after treatment, overall and in the stable and active group (but insignificantly in the active group), suggesting the normalizing effect of excimer light on SP and hence on improving pruritus in psoriasis patients. The insignificant decrease in SP and NK-1 receptor levels in the active group could suggest a higher degree of neurogenic inflammation or a higher reactivity of immune cells to SP during the active phase.

Kamo et al. proved that excimer lamp irradiation to nerve fibers in atopic mice decreases the density of both intraepidermal and dermal nerve fibers [10].

The insignificant decrease in SP and NK-1 receptor levels in the active group could suggest a higher degree of neurogenic inflammation or a higher reactivity of immune cells to SP during the active phase.

In conclusion, excimer therapy can be effective and safe for both stable and active plaque psoriasis, considering the skin type, that lesions are localized, the patient does not demonstrate a history of photosensitive psoriasis, and the physician’s assessment of each case. In addition, SP is significantly overexpressed in psoriatic lesions indicating its role in psoriasis pathogenesis via its effect on T helper 17 differentiation and IL-17 release. Suppression of neurogenic inflammation via downregulation of SP may represent an additional mechanism through which excimer therapy exerts its effect.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval statement

The study was conducted at the Dermatology Outpatient Clinic, Kasr Al Ainy, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, after approval of the Research Ethical Committee (REC) with code MS-66–2022 on 17–4-2022.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Jetzt e.Med zum Sonderpreis bestellen!

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Jetzt bestellen und 100 € sparen!

Jetzt testen ¹

e.Dent – Das Online-Abo der Zahnmedizin

Online-Abonnement

Mit e.Dent erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen zahnmedizinischen Fortbildungen und unseren zahnmedizinischen und ausgesuchten medizinischen Zeitschriften.

Jetzt testen ²

Works MG, Yin F, Yin CC, Yiu Y, Shew K, Tran T-T, Dunlap N, Lam J, Mitchell T, Reader J, Stein PL, D’Andrea A (2014) Inhibition of TYK2 and JAK1 ameliorates imiquimod-induced psoriasis-like dermatitis by inhibiting IL-22 and the IL-23/IL-17 axis. J Immunol 193(7):3278–3287. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1400205CrossRefPubMed

Sandoval-Talamantes AK, Gómez-González BA, Uriarte-Mayorga DF, Martínez-Guzman MA, Wheber-Hidalgo KA, Alvarado-Navarro A (2020) Neurotransmitters, neuropeptides and their receptors interact with immune response in healthy and psoriatic skin. Neuropeptides 79:102004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npep.2019.102004CrossRefPubMed

Zhang X, He Y (2020) The role of nociceptive neurons in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Front iimunol 11:1984. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.01984CrossRef

Vilisaar J, Kawabe K, Braitch M, Aram J, Furtun Y, Fahey AJ, Chopra M, Tanasescu R, Tighe PJ, Gran B, Pothoulakis C, Constantinescu CS (2015) Reciprocal regulation of substance P and IL-12/IL-23 and the associated cytokines, IFNγ/IL-17: a perspective on the relevance of this interaction to multiple sclerosis. JNIP 10(3):457–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11481-015-9589-xCrossRefPubMed

Markez-Jozeowicz L, Nedoszytko B, Grochocka M, Zmijewski MA, Czajkowski R, Cubala WJ, Slominski AT (2023) Molecular mechanisms of neurogenic inflammation of the skin. Int J Mol Sci 24(5):5001CrossRef

Lee H, Kim M (2023) Challenges and future trends in the treatment of psoriasis. Int J Mol Sci 24(17):13313CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Cappugi P, Mavilla L, Mavilla C, Brazzini B, Rossi R, Hercogava J, Lotti TM, Campolmi P, Andreasi L (2002) 308 nm monochromatic excimer light in psoriasis: clinical evaluation and study of cytokine levels in the skin. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 13:14–19

Beggs S, Short J, Rengifo-Pardo M, Ehrlich A (2015) Applications of the excimer laser: a review. Dermatol Surg 41(11):1201–1211. https://doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000000485CrossRefPubMed

Kagen M, Cao LY, Oyetakin-White P, Tacastacas JD, Yan C, McCormick TS, Cooper KD (2012) Single administration of lesion-limited high-dose (TURBO) ultraviolet B using the excimer laser: clinical clearing in association with apoptosis of epidermal and dermal T cell subsets in psoriasis. Photodermatol, Photoimmunol Photomed 28(6):293–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0781.2012.00692.xCrossRefPubMed

10.

Kamo A, Tominaga M, Kamata Y, Kaneda K, Ko KC, Matsuda H, Kimura U, Ogawa H, Takamori K (2014) The excimer lamp induces cutaneous nerve degeneration and reduces scratching in a dry-skin mouse model. JID 134(12):2977–2984. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2014.256CrossRef

11.

Reich, A., Mędrek, K., & Szepietowski, J. (2012, October 27). Four-item itch questionnaire – validation of questionnaire. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Four-item-itch-questionnaire-%E2%80%93-validation-of-Reich-M%C4%99drek/ef5ce60cb2195e4485633b24332acbcb8afedf28

12.

Wittkowski KM, Leonardi C, Gottlieb A, Menter A, Krueger GG, Tebbey PW, Belasco J, Soltani-Arabshahi R, Gray J, Horn L, Krueger JG (2011) Clinical symptoms of skin, nails, and joints manifest independently in patients with concomitant psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. PLoS ONE 6:6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020279CrossRef

13.

Errichetti E, Croatto M, Arnoldo L, Stinco G (2020) Plaque-type psoriasis treated with calcipotriene plus betamethasone dipropionate aerosol foam: a prospective study on clinical and dermoscopic predictor factors in response achievement and retention. Dermatol Ther 10(4):757–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-020-00406-7CrossRef

14.

Abrouk M, Levin E, Brodsky M, Gandy JR, Nakamura M, Zhu TH, Farahnik B, Koo J, Bhutani T (2016) Excimer laser for the treatment of psoriasis: safety, efficacy, and patient acceptability. Psoriasis: Targets Therapy 6:165–173. https://doi.org/10.2147/PTT.S105047CrossRefPubMed

15.

Al-Suwaidan SN, Feldman SR (2000) Clearance is not a realistic expectation of psoriasis treatment. JAAD 42(5 Pt 1):796–802. https://doi.org/10.1067/mjd.2000.103983CrossRefPubMed

16.

Feldman SR, Mellen BG, Housman TS, Fitzpatrick RE, Geronemus RG, Friedman PM, Vasily DB, Morison WL (2002) Efficacy of the 308-nm excimer laser for treatment of psoriasis: results of a multicenter study. JAAD 46(6):900–906. https://doi.org/10.1067/mjd.2002.120454CrossRefPubMed

17.

Fikrle T, Pizinger K (2003) Die Anwendung des Excimerlasers 308 nm zur Psoriasis-Behandlung. JDDG: JDDG 1(7):559–563. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1610-0387.2003.03736.xCrossRefPubMed

18.

Niwa Y, Hasegawa T, Ko S, Okuyama Y, Ohtsuki A, Takagi A, Ikeda S (2009) Efficacy of 308-nm excimer light for Japanese patients with psoriasis. J Dermatol 36(11):579–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1346-8138.2009.00710.xCrossRefPubMed

19.

Wallengren J, Sundler F (2004) Phototherapy reduces the number of epidermal and CGRP-positive dermal nerve fibres. ActaDV 84(2):111–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00015550310022899CrossRef

20.

Le Duff F, Fontas E, Giacchero D, Sillard L, Lacour J-P, Ortonne J-P, Passeron T (2010) 308-nm excimer lamp vs. 308-nm excimer laser for treating vitiligo: a randomized study. BJD 163(1):188–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.09778.xCrossRef

21.

Section 1: laser fundamentals. (n.d.). Retrieved January 20, 2023, from https://ehs.princeton.edu/book/export/html/348

22.

Chan J, Smoller BR, Raychauduri SP, Jiang W-Y, Farber EM, Chan C (1997) Intraepidermal nerve fiber expression of calcitonin gene-related peptide, vasoactive intestinal peptide and substance P in psoriasis. Arch Dermatol Res 289(11):611–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004030050249CrossRefPubMed

23.

Kubanov AA, Katunina OR, Chikin VV (2015) Expression of neuropeptides, neurotrophins, and neurotransmitters in the skin of patients with atopic dermatitis and psoriasis. Bull Exp Biol Med 159(3):318–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10517-015-2951-4CrossRefPubMed

24.

Remröd C, Lonne-Rahm S, Nordlind K (2007) Study of substance P and its receptor neurokinin-1 in psoriasis and their relation to chronic stress and pruritus. Arch Dermatol Res 299(2):85–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00403-007-0745-xCrossRefPubMed

25.

El-Nour H, Santos A, Nordin M, Jonsson P, Svensson M, Nordlind K, Berg M (2009) Neuronal changes in psoriasis exacerbation. JEAD 23(11):1240–1245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03287.xCrossRef

26.

Pergolizzi S, Vaccaro M, Magaudda L, Mondello MR, Arco A, Bramanti P, Cannavò SP, Guarneri B (1998) Immunohistochemical study of epidermal nerve fibres in involved and uninvolved psoriatic skin using confocal laser scanning microscopy. Arch Dermatol Res 290(9):483–489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004030050340CrossRefPubMed

27.

Staniek V, Doutremepuich J-D, Schmitt D, Claudy A, Misery L (1999) Expression of substance P receptors in normal and psoriatic skin. Pathobiology 67(1):51–54. https://doi.org/10.1159/000028051CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Excimer light effect on neurogenic inflammation in active versus stable psoriasis lesions
verfasst von: Marwa S. El-Mesidy
Yomna A. Metwally
Zeinab A. Nour
Maha F. Elmasry
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2024
Verlag: Springer London
Erschienen in: Lasers in Medical Science / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0268-8921
Elektronische ISSN: 1435-604X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-024-04005-2

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Excimer light effect on neurogenic inflammation in active versus stable psoriasis lesions

Abstract

Publisher's Note

Introduction

Patients and methods

Admission for excimer light

Statistical methods

Results

Biochemical assessment

Discussion

Declarations

Conflict of interest

Ethical approval statement

Publisher's Note

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

e.Dent – Das Online-Abo der Zahnmedizin

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Publisher's Note

Introduction

Patients and methods

Admission for excimer light

Statistical methods

Results

Biochemical assessment

Discussion

Declarations

Conflict of interest

Ethical approval statement

Publisher's Note

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

e.Dent – Das Online-Abo der Zahnmedizin

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2024

Research on disease diagnosis based on teacher-student network and Raman spectroscopy

In vitro photoinactivation effectiveness of a portable LED device aimed for intranasal photodisinfection and a photosensitizer formulation comprising methylene blue and potassium iodide against bacterial, fungal, and viral respiratory pathogens

Phase-locked µPIV analysis of flow dynamics in a simulated root canal with different laser-activated irrigations

The effect of high-intensity laser therapy on pain and lower extremity function in patellofemoral pain syndrome: a single-blind randomized controlled trial

Simultaneous effect of medicinal plants as natural photosensitizers and low-level laser on photodynamic inactivation

Synergistic effect of mesoporous silica nanocarrier-assisted photodynamic therapy and anticancer agent activity on lung cancer cells