Cosmeceuticals Containing Herbs: Fact, Fiction, and Future

Background. Modern medicine is rooted in ethnobotanical traditions using indigenous flora to treat symptoms of human diseases or to improve specific aspects of the body condition. Herbal medicine is now used by over half of the American population. Yet the American medical community generally lacks knowledge of the function, metabolism, interaction, adverse reactions, and preparation of herbal products.
Objective. Because over 60 botanicals are marketed in cosmeceutical formulations, dermatologists need to obtain working knowledge of the major botanicals. The preparation, traditional uses, mechanisms of action, human clinical data, adverse reactions, and interactions all impact herbal efficacy and are discussed below.
Method. English-language medical journal and symposium searches.
Results. The most important botanicals pertaining to dermatologic uses, such as cosmeceuticals, include teas, soy, pomegranate, date, grape seed, Pycnogenol, horse chestnut, German chamomile, curcumin, comfrey, allantoin, and aloe. All are documented to treat dermatologic conditions. Only green and black tea, soy, pomegranate, and date have published clinical trials for the treatment of parameters of extrinsic aging.
Conclusions. Preparation of botanical-based cosmeceuticals is complex. Very few of these products are supported by evidence-based science.
CARL THORNFELDT, MD, FAAD, HAS INDICATED NO SIGNIFICANT INTEREST WITH COMMERCIAL SUPPORTERS.     

Reduction of Immunosuppression for Transplant-Associated Skin Cancer: Rationale and Evidence of Efficacy

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant recipients may develop numerous or life-threatening skin cancers. In addition to aggressive standard treatment of skin cancer, reduction of immunosuppression has been considered an adjuvant therapeutic strategy, albeit without direct proof of efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To review the rationale for and evidence supporting the efficacy of reduction of immunosuppression for severe skin cancer in transplant recipients. METHODS: Review of the literature regarding direct and indirect evidence on reduction of immunosuppression for transplant-associated skin cancer. RESULTS: Although there are no randomized controlled trials of reduction of immunosuppression as a therapeutic intervention for transplant patients with skin cancer, multiple lines of evidence suggest that this strategy may be an effective adjuvant therapy. A randomized trial has demonstrated a lower incidence of skin cancer in transplant recipients after reduction of immunosuppression, albeit in a cohort not previously affected by skin cancer. Case series of reduction or cessation of immunosuppression demonstrate a lower incidence of skin cancer or improved outcomes of preexisting skin cancer. Lower overall immunosuppression is associated with a lower incidence of skin cancer. Multiple cancers affecting the skin have been shown to regress with reduction of immunosuppression. CONCLUSIONS: Reduction of immunosuppression may be an effective adjuvant therapeutic strategy when confronting severe transplant-associated skin cancer. The risks of reduction of immunosuppression must be better defined, and randomized trials of this strategy are necessary.