October 2024 in “Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology” This study reported that ritlecitinib 50 mg and baricitinib 4 mg showed similar efficacy in treating severe alopecia areata, with no significant difference in hair regrowth outcomes at Week 24, but there remains considerable uncertainty and a need for further research.
September 2024 in “Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology” This study found that baricitinib significantly reduced hair loss in patients with severe alopecia areata, decreasing the mean SALT score from 96.6 to 48 over 24 weeks, with no patients dropping out and only mild adverse events in 12.7% of participants.
20 citations
,
January 2024 in “Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology” This study conducted a meta-analysis and found that among therapies for alopecia areata, baricitinib_4 mg was most likely to be effective, followed by ritlecitinib and ivarmacitinib, while other treatments like dupilumab and secukinumab were less effective.
October 2023 in “The Cochrane library” This review identified that baricitinib increases both short- and long-term hair regrowth in patients with alopecia areata compared to placebo, but found inconclusive results for serious adverse effects, while evidence for other treatments remains very uncertain.
49 citations
,
October 2023 in “Journal of Dermatological Science” 227 citations
,
April 2023 in “The Lancet” Ritlecitinib effectively treats alopecia areata and is well-tolerated.
290 citations
,
August 2021 in “Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology” JAK inhibitors show promise for treating alopecia areata, but more research is needed.
56 citations
,
August 2020 in “American Journal of Clinical Dermatology” This study concluded that the ClinRO and PRO measures, along with their photoguides, offer clear and meaningful assessments for patients with alopecia areata concerning eyebrow, eyelash, and nail appearance, as well as eye irritation.
39 citations
,
November 2017 in “Journal of The American Academy of Dermatology” This review presents standardized methods for assessing and tracking hair loss in alopecia areata but reports no clinical results, with the authors noting time limitations in clinical practice.
