Tools
Discoid Lupus Erythematosus
Introduction
Lupus erythematosus is a multisystem disorder that predominantly affects the skin. There are several types of cutaneous lupus. The most common types are acute cutaneous lupus (ACLE), subacute cutaneous lupus (SCLE), and discoid lupus (DLE). Dr. James Gilliam described the most commonly used classification of cutaneous lesions in lupus erythematosus. Gilliam segregated skin lesions into those that are specific and those that are not specifically based upon whether an interface dermatitis was seen on histopathologic examination. Within the category of specific cutaneous lesions, he subdivided these into acute cutaneous lupus erythematosus, subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus, and chronic cutaneous erythematosus.[1][2]
The most common subset of chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus is DLE. These patients may or may not report photosensitivity, but lesions are frequently photo distributed and tend to have secondary atrophy or scarring. Most patients with DLE do not have significant systemic disease. DLE can also occur as a manifestation of SLE in approximately 20% of patients. Other less common forms of chronic cutaneous lupus erythematosus include hypertrophic lupus erythematosus, tumid lupus erythematosus, lupus erythematosus panniculitis (LEP or lupus profundus), chilblain LE, oral DLE, as well as DLE lesions on the palms and/or soles.[3][4]
Etiology
Register For Free And Read The Full Article
Search engine and full access to all medical articles- 10 free questions in your specialty
- Free CME/CE Activities
- Free daily question in your email
- Save favorite articles to your dashboard
- Emails offering discounts
Learn more about a Subscription to StatPearls Point-of-Care
Etiology
Lupus erythematosus is an inflammatory, connective-tissue disease of generalized autoimmunity characterized by pathogenic autoantibodies and immune complexes, attributed to a loss of immune tolerance. For discoid lupus erythematosus without associated SLE (CDLE), the evidence does not show whether circulating inflammatory cells and autoantibodies are involved in the pathogenesis, but it is evident that the cutaneous inflammatory infiltrates are dominated by Th1, but not Th17, cells in contrast to systemic lupus erythematosus.[5][6]
Epidemiology
Lupus can occur in all age groups, but DLE occurs more frequently in women in their fourth and fifth decades of life. Twenty-five percent of patients with SLE may develop typical discoid lesions at some point during their illness, and 1% to 5% of patients with discoid lupus may develop SLE.
Ethnicity is also a major risk factor for developing LE, and its effect in some populations is almost as strong as that of gender. SLE prevalence is four-fold higher in African-American women than White-race American women (4 in 1000 versus 1 in 1000). In addition, African-Americans tend to develop the disease at an earlier age and have a higher mortality rate.[7][8]
Pathophysiology
The pathogenesis of cutaneous lupus erythematosus is multifactorial, with an interplay between genetic and environmental factors. Some contributing environmental factors include ultraviolet radiation (UVR), medications, cigarette smoking, and possibly, viruses. The interaction between these multiple factors triggers an inflammatory cascade of cytokine, chemokine, and inflammatory cell responses. Genes previously associated with SLE are TYK2, IRF5, and CTLA4 and confer an increased risk of developing DLE.
An analysis of 405 patients by Bockle et al. found that smoking is highly associated with discoid lupus erythematosus. Bockle et al. hypothesized that smoking might play a pathogenic role in cutaneous lupus erythematosus variants (DLE, tumid lupus) by inducing apoptosis, stimulating T-cell proliferation, and increasing photosensitivity. Another explanation might be that smoking provokes DNA damage, resulting in the formation of DNA adducts and the production of ds-DNA antibodies. Keratinocytes may also participate in lupus skin damage by increasing the apoptotic rate and the production of proinflammatory cytokines such as IFN-alpha and IL-6 for SLE and IFN-lambda for DLE.[9][10]
Histopathology
The findings of histopathologic examination in cutaneous lupus vary based on the subtype. Overlap can be seen in the histologic findings among the various clinical phenotypes, particularly ACLE, SCLE, and discoid lesions. In cutaneous LE, basal cell damage (also referred to as vacuolar degeneration, hydropic change, or interface dermatitis) and lymphohistiocytic inflammatory infiltrates are commonly seen. In discoid lupus lesions, periadnexal inflammation, follicular plugging, and hyperkeratosis are primarily seen in addition to the interface dermatitis.[11]Dermal mucinosis along with thickened basement membrane is usually noted.
Examination of the skin for deposits of immunoreactants is called direct immunofluorescence (DIF). DIF of lesional skin can be useful in establishing a diagnosis of cutaneous LE in cases where routine histopathology is equivocal. DIF does not replace routine histologic staining as the method of choice for establishing a diagnosis. In active lesions of DLE, DIF of lesional skin is positive in the majority of cases. The most characteristic DIF finding in cutaneous LE is antibody deposition at the dermal-epidermal junction and around hair follicles. These deposits are typically granular, and they are composed primarily of IgG and/or IgM.[12][13]
The lupus band test (LBT) is a diagnostic procedure used to detect deposits of immunoglobulins and complement components along the dermo-epidermal junction in patients with lupus erythematosus (LE). LBT can help distinguish systemic lupus erythematosus from chronic lupus erythematosus because, in SLE patients, the LBT is frequently positive in both uninvolved and involved skin, whereas in CLE patients, only the involved skin is positive.[14][15] The LBT is positive on the lesional skin in 75% of patients. Ideal lesions for LBT for DLE are on the head and neck that have been present for at least a few months.
History and Physical
DLE is the most common form of chronic cutaneous erythematosus and can occur as localized form (80%) with lesions on the face, ears, and scalp or as disseminated DLE (20%) with lesions above and below the neck. The disseminated form of DLE, especially when involving the trunk, is associated with an increased risk of progression to SLE up to 28%.[16]
It is unusual for discoid lesions to present below the neck without lesions also being present above the neck. Occasionally, discoid lesions develop on mucosal surfaces, including the lips, nasal mucosa, conjunctivae, and genital mucosa.[5] Some patients with discoid lesions exhibit a photodistribution. Sun exposure seems to play a role in the development of lesions. However, patients can have discoid lesions on the sun-protected skin, and there is no clear association between sun exposure and their development.
The first morphological sign of DLE is a well-defined, annular erythematous patch or plaque of varying size followed by follicular hyperkeratosis, which is adherent to the skin. By removing the adherent scale, follicle-sized keratotic spikes similar to carpet tacks can be seen (“carpet tack sign”).[17] The lesions slowly expand with active inflammation and hyperpigmentation at the periphery, leaving depressed central atrophy, scarring, telangiectasia, and hypopigmentation.[18] DLE can progress to irreversible scarring alopecia on the scalp. Although uncommon, a squamous cell carcinoma can develop in a longstanding discoid lesion at 2 to 3 percent and is often associated with a poor prognosis.[19]
Patients who present with discoid lesions may have associated arthralgias, but, over time, only approximately 10% to 20% of these patients eventually meet the classification criteria for SLE. Hyperkeratotic plaques that are verrucous are noted in hypertrophic DLE, a rare entity of DLE.[20]
Evaluation
In the evaluation of DLE, the dermatologist should take a directed history, perform a cutaneous examination looking for signs of possible systemic disease. The diagnosis of DLE is made based on clinical features, but histology may be required to confirm the diagnosis.[21][22]
Autoantibodies to SSA/Ro, SSB/La, U1RNP, histones, and ssDNA, are common in patients with SLE, but they are not disease-specific. There are no other specific autoantibodies to differentiate the subtypes of CLE that are routinely used in practice. One further possible target of auto-antibodies is annexin 1, which has been suggested to play an important role in preventing autoimmune diseases. A recent study found a significantly higher level of anti-annexin 1 antibodies in DLE patients, suggesting that anti-annexin 1 antibodies might be a new diagnostic marker for DLE. Anti-annexin 1 antibodies level in the serum did not correlate with DLE activity.[23]
Treatment / Management
Early treatment of discoid lupus lesions may lead to the total clearing of skin lesions, but treatment failure results in permanent scarring. Hair loss, depressed scars, and pigmentary changes are often disfiguring, particularly in darker-skinned people. Some general measures, such as sun avoidance, avoidance of photosensitizing medications, and liberal application of sunscreen are encouraged because cutaneous lesions are known to be exacerbated by sunlight.[24] Smoking cessation is encouraged, as smoking can increase DLE disease activity. Studies demonstrate a statistically significant decrease in the efficacy of antimalarial medication in individuals who have currently or ever smoked.[25][26][27]
Current first-line treatment for DLE consists of photoprotection in conjunction with topical or intralesional corticosteroids and topical calcineurin inhibitors.[28] Chronic DLE lesions that are not responsive to topical therapy or have a widespread disease involvement are candidates for systemic therapy. When DLE is refractory to these measures, other agents with varying degrees of proven efficacy are used. Currently, no medications have been approved specifically, and many of the drugs described in the literature were developed for use in other autoimmune disorders.(A1)
Acute exacerbations of DLE are treated with the application of a super high or high potency topical corticosteroid.[29] Clinical improvement is usually observed within 2 weeks of therapy. Treatment can be stopped when lesions are erythema or scale-free (signs of disease inactivity). Cutaneous atrophy is the major adverse effect with chronic use of topical corticosteroids. If the DLE lesion is refractory to high potency topical corticosteroid use for 2 to 4 weeks, alternative therapy with intralesional corticosteroid or topical calcineurin inhibitor should be initiated. Topical calcineurin inhibitors such as tacrolimus 0.1% or 0.03% ointment, pimecrolimus 1% cream are mostly utilized for facial lesions, as they do not cause atrophy.[30] They are more expensive and have a slow onset of action. Clinical improvement is typically noted within 4 weeks of therapy. Low potency topical corticosteroids or topical calcineurin inhibitors are typically used to maintain the DLE lesions in remission once the acute flare resolves.[31] Burning sensation after application that resolves within 1 to 2 weeks is the most common adverse effect of topical calcineurin inhibitors. Topical lesions that do not respond to the above therapy are treated with intralesional triamcinolone acetonide of 0.1 ml (3 to 5 mg/ml strength). Multiple injections into the lesion 1 cm apart should be given. Injections can be repeated every 3 to 4 weeks. If there is no clinical improvement after 2 to 3 injections, alternative treatment should be initiated. Dyspigmentation and atrophy of the skin are the common side effects of intralesional corticosteroids. (A1)
Antimalarials are immunotherapeutic and are considered first-line systemic therapy for CLE. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and chloroquine with or without quinacrine are currently utilized in the treatment of DLE. HCQ is preferred over chloroquine due to the lower risk of side effects, specifically retinal toxicity. Quinacrine is known to cause hematological abnormalities. Hydroxychloroquine is usually started at 200 mg/day and increased to 200 mg two times a day in 1 to 2 weeks if there are no side effects. The maximum dose of hydroxychloroquine should not exceed 5 mg/kg of real body weight per day, given its association with retinal toxicity.[32] 6 to 8 weeks of therapy is required to assess the effectiveness. Quinacrine at a dose of 100 mg/day is added to hydroxychloroquine if no clinical improvement is noted with hydroxychloroquine alone.[33] Chloroquine dose should not exceed 2.3 mg/kg of real body weight per day due to the risk of retinopathy.[32]Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine should not be utilized together, given the cumulative retinal toxicity. Patients should receive baseline and periodic eye exams while on therapy. Blue-gray discoloration of face, shins, palate, and bleaching of light-colored hair may occur. Quinacrine use may lead to generalized yellow pigmentation of the skin, secretions, and sclera. (B2)
Other treatment modalities, such as retinoids, vitamin A analogs with anti-keratinizing and anti-inflammatory effects, are sometimes used in CLE, but documentation in the literature is limited. Topical retinoids such as tretinoin 0.05% cream or tazarotene 0.05% gel are utilized to treat hypertrophic DLE.[34] Topical retinoids are pregnancy category X drugs, and cutaneous irritation is a commonly observed adverse effect. Immunomodulators and Immunosuppressive agents such as methotrexate, systemic retinoids, dapsone, mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine, intravenous immune globulin (IVIG), cyclophosphamide, and cyclosporine, have all been trialed in the treatment of DLE but thought to be second-line when refractory to other treatments.[35](B3)
Methotrexate at a dose range of 10 to 25 mg/week is utilized for DLE lesions. Clinical improvement is noted within 2 to 4 weeks of use, with the resolution of the lesions in about 6 to 8 weeks.[36] A dose of 5 to 10 mg of methotrexate is given as a test dose to assess if the patient can tolerate the drug. Liver function tests and complete blood count are followed 5 to 6 days after the drug administration to ensure no untoward side effects or intolerance to the medication. The most common side effects are gastrointestinal upset, hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, teratogenicity, pulmonary fibrosis, bone marrow suppression, and oral ulcers. Folic acid supplements daily may minimize gastrointestinal side effects.[37] Mycophenolate mofetil is administered in doses of 1 to 3 gm/day. Gastrointestinal upset, cytopenias, and teratogenicity are some of the side effects of mycophenolate mofetil.(A1)
Thalidomide, a potent teratogen, has been used in the treatment of DLE. An early report of its use in treating DLE of 60 individuals treated with 50 to 100 mg per day found complete or marked regression in 54 individuals (90%) with disease relapse in 71% of individuals with medication discontinuation.[38] Side effects apart from teratogenicity include drowsiness, constipation, rash, edema, xeroderma, peripheral neuropathy, and thromboembolism.[39] Lenalidomide is a thalidomide analog that may also prove useful in the treatment of DLE. Evidence suggests lenalidomide effectively treats DLE and has a less severe side effect profile than thalidomide but may be similarly limited by a tendency to relapse once discontinued. IVIG is given at a 2 g/kg dose and repeated every 4 to 8 weeks.[40] IVIG is expensive, and CLE lesions tend to recur with its use. Headache, renal failure, hypersensitivity reactions, thrombosis, vasculitis, and aseptic meningitis are some of the adverse effects of IVIG therapy.(A1)
Differential Diagnosis
Differential diagnoses of DLE include granuloma faciale, tinea faciei, cutaneous tuberculosis, cutaneous leishmaniasis, lymphoproliferative disorders, and sarcoidosis. DLE-induced scarring alopecia can be confused with lichen planopilaris, tinea capitis, and central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia. Hypertrophic DLE may be confused with keratoacanthoma, squamous cell cancer, hypertrophic lichen planus, and prurigo nodularis.
Prognosis
DLE lesions heal with scarring, atrophy, and dyspigmentation, causing more morbidity than mortality. Psychological functioning is affected by DLE lesions.[41] Exacerbations are associated with sun exposure and often occur in spring and summer. Localized DLE involving the scalp may lead to cicatricial alopecia. Generalized DLE is associated with the risk of progression to SLE in about 28 percent.[16] Chronic DLE lesions in about 2 to 3 percent can progress to squamous cell carcinoma, which is usually associated with a poor prognosis.[19] Early detection and treatment of DLE lesions can minimize the associated morbidity.
Complications
DLE and progression to SLE are associated with complications like
- Cicatricial alopecia
- Pancytopenia
- Thromboembolism
- Arthritis
- Myositis
- Hypertension
- Renal failure
- Neuropsychiatric manifestations like seizures, depression
- Pleuropericarditis
- Pancreatitis, mesenteric vasculitis
- Optic neuritis
- Therapy-related adverse effects
- Vitamin D deficiency
Periodic surveillance of DLE lesions and therapy-related side effects is crucial to avoid complications and promote clinical resolution.
Deterrence and Patient Education
Patients should be educated about photoprotection and the possibility of developing skin lesions up to 3 weeks after sun exposure.[42] Using protective clothing and wide-brimmed hats, avoiding sun exposure in peak hours of 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM, generous application of sunscreen with at least sun protection factor of 30 against both UVA and UVB solar light, avoidance of photosensitizing medications, and avoiding outdoor occupations are highly recommended. Cessation of smoking and avoidance of alcohol is encouraged. Educating patients that nicotine interferes with antimalarial therapy uptake and hastens their metabolism helps them understand the rationale behind tobacco cessation.[43] Smoking cessation without nicotine replacement therapy is ideal. Patients are prone to vitamin D deficiency by minimizing sun exposure and sunscreen application; hence, it is recommended to counsel them on annual screening for vitamin D deficiency.[44]
Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes
Lupus is best managed by an interprofessional team of healthcare workers because the disorder can affect almost every organ in the body. Besides physicians, the role of the nurse, pharmacist, therapist, social worker, and mental health counselor is vital. The key is to stress the importance of medication compliance. Patients should be educated about the importance of seeking help early when symptoms arise. At the first sign of renal dysfunction, medical help should be sought. Once renal failure is established, the only treatment is transplantation or dialysis. Patients should be told to avoid sunlight, stop smoking, eat healthily and remain active. Women of childbearing age should consult with an obstetrician before getting pregnant. Finally, joining a support group and/or following up with a mental health counselor is highly recommended.[45][46] [Level 5]
Outcomes
Discoid lupus is an unpredictable and highly variable disorder. While the condition is benign, it can cause devastating complications, often leading to high morbidity and a poor quality of life. The disorder frequently waxes and wanes. The outcome is much improved for patients with only skin and musculoskeletal involvement. The outcomes are worst for patients with CNS and renal involvement. Today, with treatment, there is an 80% survival at ten years, but failure to comply with treatment can lead to early death. At some point in time, the majority of lupus patients will develop hypertension, lipid disorders, diabetes, infections, osteoporosis, and malignancies like lymphomas and liver cancer. [47][48] [Level 5]
Media
(Click Image to Enlarge)
(Click Image to Enlarge)
Linear Discoid Lupus Erythematosus Contributed by Dr. Shyam Verma, MBBS, DVD, FRCP, FAAD, Vadodara, India
References
Udompanich S, Chanprapaph K, Suchonwanit P. Hair and Scalp Changes in Cutaneous and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. American journal of clinical dermatology. 2018 Oct:19(5):679-694. doi: 10.1007/s40257-018-0363-8. Epub [PubMed PMID: 29948959]
Dammacco R, Procaccio P, Racanelli V, Vacca A, Dammacco F. Ocular Involvement in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: The Experience of Two Tertiary Referral Centers. Ocular immunology and inflammation. 2018:26(8):1154-1165. doi: 10.1080/09273948.2018.1501495. Epub 2018 Aug 10 [PubMed PMID: 30096011]
Abadías-Granado I, Sánchez-Bernal J, Felipo-Berlanga F, Ara-Martín M. Coexistence of Tumid Lupus Erythematosus and Discoid Lupus Erythematosus. Actas dermo-sifiliograficas. 2019 Apr:110(3):253-255. doi: 10.1016/j.ad.2018.02.023. Epub 2018 Jul 30 [PubMed PMID: 30072022]
Sontheimer RD. The lexicon of cutaneous lupus erythematosus--a review and personal perspective on the nomenclature and classification of the cutaneous manifestations of lupus erythematosus. Lupus. 1997:6(2):84-95 [PubMed PMID: 9061656]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceSalah E. Clinical and dermoscopic spectrum of discoid lupus erythematosus: novel observations from lips and oral mucosa. International journal of dermatology. 2018 Jul:57(7):830-836. doi: 10.1111/ijd.14015. Epub 2018 Apr 27 [PubMed PMID: 29700807]
Drenkard C, Parker S, Aspey LD, Gordon C, Helmick CG, Bao G, Lim SS. Racial Disparities in the Incidence of Primary Chronic Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus in the Southeastern US: The Georgia Lupus Registry. Arthritis care & research. 2019 Jan:71(1):95-103. doi: 10.1002/acr.23578. Epub [PubMed PMID: 29669194]
Gaüzère L, Gerber A, Renou F, Ferrandiz D, Bagny K, Osdoit S, Yvin JL, Raffray L. [Epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus in Reunion Island, Indian Ocean: A case-series in adult patients from a University Hospital]. La Revue de medecine interne. 2019 Apr:40(4):214-219. doi: 10.1016/j.revmed.2018.07.004. Epub 2018 Jul 21 [PubMed PMID: 30041816]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceOh EH, Kim EJ, Ro YS, Ko JY. Ten-year retrospective clinicohistological study of cutaneous lupus erythematosus in Korea. The Journal of dermatology. 2018 Apr:45(4):436-443. doi: 10.1111/1346-8138.14233. Epub 2018 Feb 9 [PubMed PMID: 29423919]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceKahn JS, Deverapalli SC, Rosmarin DM. JAK-STAT signaling pathway inhibition: a role for treatment of discoid lupus erythematosus and dermatomyositis. International journal of dermatology. 2018 Aug:57(8):1007-1014. doi: 10.1111/ijd.14064. Epub 2018 Jun 5 [PubMed PMID: 29873082]
Two A, So JK, Paravar T. Discoid Lupus and Human Immunodeficiency Virus: A Retrospective Chart Review to Determine the Prevalence and Progression of Co-occurrence of these Conditions at a Single Academic Center. Indian journal of dermatology. 2017 Mar-Apr:62(2):226. doi: 10.4103/0019-5154.201750. Epub [PubMed PMID: 28400654]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidencePatel P, Werth V. Cutaneous lupus erythematosus: a review. Dermatologic clinics. 2002 Jul:20(3):373-85, v [PubMed PMID: 12170873]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceMutasim DF, Adams BB. Immunofluorescence in dermatology. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2001 Dec:45(6):803-22; quiz 822-4 [PubMed PMID: 11712024]
Dahl MV. Usefulness of direct immunofluorescence in patients with lupus erythematosus. Archives of dermatology. 1983 Dec:119(12):1010-7 [PubMed PMID: 6360051]
Harrist TJ, Mihm MC Jr. The specificity and clinical usefulness of the lupus band test. Arthritis and rheumatism. 1980 Apr:23(4):479-90 [PubMed PMID: 6989372]
George R, Kurian S, Jacob M, Thomas K. Diagnostic evaluation of the lupus band test in discoid and systemic lupus erythematosus. International journal of dermatology. 1995 Mar:34(3):170-3 [PubMed PMID: 7751090]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceChong BF, Song J, Olsen NJ. Determining risk factors for developing systemic lupus erythematosus in patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. The British journal of dermatology. 2012 Jan:166(1):29-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10610.x. Epub 2011 Dec 5 [PubMed PMID: 21910708]
Inamadar AC. Perforation of paper with pen: Simple technique to explain the carpet tack sign in discoid lupus erythematosus. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2019 Dec:81(6):e159-e160. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.03.039. Epub 2019 Mar 22 [PubMed PMID: 30905795]
Rowell NR. Laboratory abnormalities in the diagnosis and management of lupus erythematosus. The British journal of dermatology. 1971 Mar:84(3):210-6 [PubMed PMID: 4102091]
Zaalberg A, Moradi Tuchayi S, Ameri AH, Ngo KH, Cunningham TJ, Eliane JP, Livneh M, Horn TD, Rosman IS, Musiek A, Anadkat MJ, Demehri S. Chronic Inflammation Promotes Skin Carcinogenesis in Cancer-Prone Discoid Lupus Erythematosus. The Journal of investigative dermatology. 2019 Jan:139(1):62-70. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2018.06.185. Epub 2018 Jul 17 [PubMed PMID: 30030152]
Farley-Loftus R, Elmariah SB, Ralston J, Kamino H, Franks AG Jr. Hypertrophic discoid lupus erythematosus. Dermatology online journal. 2010 Nov 15:16(11):1 [PubMed PMID: 21163152]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceFlynn A, Gilhooley E, O'Shea F, Wynne B. The use of SLICC and ACR criteria to correctly label patients with cutaneous lupus and systemic lupus erythematosus. Clinical rheumatology. 2018 Mar:37(3):817-818. doi: 10.1007/s10067-018-3999-0. Epub 2018 Feb 1 [PubMed PMID: 29392510]
Xie HH, Shen H, Zhang L, Cui MY, Xia LP, Lu J. Elevated Serum Interleukin-34 Level in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Is Associated with Disease Activity. Scientific reports. 2018 Feb 22:8(1):3462. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21859-z. Epub 2018 Feb 22 [PubMed PMID: 29472590]
Kretz CC, Norpo M, Abeler-Dörner L, Linke B, Haust M, Edler L, Krammer PH, Kuhn A. Anti-annexin 1 antibodies: a new diagnostic marker in the serum of patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. Experimental dermatology. 2010 Oct:19(10):919-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0625.2010.01145.x. Epub [PubMed PMID: 20701627]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceCallen JP. Discoid lupus erythematosus--variants and clinical associations. Clinics in dermatology. 1985 Jul-Sep:3(3):49-57 [PubMed PMID: 3880023]
Muangchan C, van Vollenhoven RF, Bernatsky SR, Smith CD, Hudson M, Inanç M, Rothfield NF, Nash PT, Furie RA, Senécal JL, Chandran V, Burgos-Vargas R, Ramsey-Goldman R, Pope JE. Treatment Algorithms in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. Arthritis care & research. 2015 Sep:67(9):1237-1245. doi: 10.1002/acr.22589. Epub [PubMed PMID: 25777803]
Powers DB. Systemic lupus erythematosus and discoid lupus erythematosus. Oral and maxillofacial surgery clinics of North America. 2008 Nov:20(4):651-62. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2008.07.001. Epub [PubMed PMID: 18940631]
Francès C, Barète S, Piette JC. [Dermatologic manifestations in lupus erythematosus]. La Revue de medecine interne. 2008 Sep:29(9):701-9. doi: 10.1016/j.revmed.2008.04.021. Epub 2008 Jun 17 [PubMed PMID: 18562046]
Bjornberg A, Hellgren L. Topical treatment of chronic discoid lupus erythematosus with betamethason-17-valerate and fluocinolone acetonie-a double blind study. Indian journal of dermatology. 1966 Oct:12(1):17-8 [PubMed PMID: 5341750]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceJessop S, Whitelaw DA, Delamere FM. Drugs for discoid lupus erythematosus. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2009 Oct 7:(4):CD002954. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002954.pub2. Epub 2009 Oct 7 [PubMed PMID: 19821298]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceTzellos TG, Kouvelas D. Topical tacrolimus and pimecrolimus in the treatment of cutaneous lupus erythematosus: an evidence-based evaluation. European journal of clinical pharmacology. 2008 Apr:64(4):337-41 [PubMed PMID: 18157526]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceSárdy M, Ruzicka T, Kuhn A. Topical calcineurin inhibitors in cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Archives of dermatological research. 2009 Jan:301(1):93-8. doi: 10.1007/s00403-008-0894-6. Epub 2008 Sep 17 [PubMed PMID: 18797893]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceMarmor MF, Kellner U, Lai TY, Melles RB, Mieler WF, American Academy of Ophthalmology. Recommendations on Screening for Chloroquine and Hydroxychloroquine Retinopathy (2016 Revision). Ophthalmology. 2016 Jun:123(6):1386-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.058. Epub 2016 Mar 16 [PubMed PMID: 26992838]
Cavazzana I, Sala R, Bazzani C, Ceribelli A, Zane C, Cattaneo R, Tincani A, Calzavara-Pinton PG, Franceschini F. Treatment of lupus skin involvement with quinacrine and hydroxychloroquine. Lupus. 2009 Jul:18(8):735-9. doi: 10.1177/0961203308101714. Epub [PubMed PMID: 19502270]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceSeiger E, Roland S, Goldman S. Cutaneous lupus treated with topical tretinoin: a case report. Cutis. 1991 May:47(5):351-5 [PubMed PMID: 2070657]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceKuhn A, Ruland V, Bonsmann G. Cutaneous lupus erythematosus: update of therapeutic options part II. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2011 Dec:65(6):e195-213. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2010.06.017. Epub 2010 Aug 30 [PubMed PMID: 20800319]
Wenzel J, Brähler S, Bauer R, Bieber T, Tüting T. Efficacy and safety of methotrexate in recalcitrant cutaneous lupus erythematosus: results of a retrospective study in 43 patients. The British journal of dermatology. 2005 Jul:153(1):157-62 [PubMed PMID: 16029342]
Level 2 (mid-level) evidenceOrtiz Z, Shea B, Suarez-Almazor ME, Moher D, Wells GA, Tugwell P. The efficacy of folic acid and folinic acid in reducing methotrexate gastrointestinal toxicity in rheumatoid arthritis. A metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. The Journal of rheumatology. 1998 Jan:25(1):36-43 [PubMed PMID: 9458200]
Level 1 (high-level) evidencePelle MT, Werth VP. Thalidomide in cutaneous lupus erythematosus. American journal of clinical dermatology. 2003:4(6):379-87 [PubMed PMID: 12762830]
Chasset F, Tounsi T, Cesbron E, Barbaud A, Francès C, Arnaud L. Efficacy and tolerance profile of thalidomide in cutaneous lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2018 Feb:78(2):342-350.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2017.09.059. Epub 2017 Oct 5 [PubMed PMID: 28989111]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceGénéreau T, Chosidow O, Danel C, Chérin P, Herson S. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Archives of dermatology. 1999 Sep:135(9):1124-5 [PubMed PMID: 10490126]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceChen P, Broadbent E, Coomarasamy C, Jarrett P. Illness perception in association with psychological functioning in patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. The British journal of dermatology. 2015 Sep:173(3):824-6. doi: 10.1111/bjd.13709. Epub 2015 Jul 20 [PubMed PMID: 25639859]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceKuhn A, Sonntag M, Richter-Hintz D, Oslislo C, Megahed M, Ruzicka T, Lehmann P. Phototesting in lupus erythematosus: a 15-year experience. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2001 Jul:45(1):86-95 [PubMed PMID: 11423840]
Wozniacka A, Carter A, McCauliffe DP. Antimalarials in cutaneous lupus erythematosus: mechanisms of therapeutic benefit. Lupus. 2002:11(2):71-81 [PubMed PMID: 11958581]
Cusack C, Danby C, Fallon JC, Ho WL, Murray B, Brady J, O'Kelly P, Ambrose N, Kearns G, Murphy GM. Photoprotective behaviour and sunscreen use: impact on vitamin D levels in cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Photodermatology, photoimmunology & photomedicine. 2008 Oct:24(5):260-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0781.2008.00373.x. Epub [PubMed PMID: 18811868]
Kuhn A, Landmann A, Wenzel J. Advances in the treatment of cutaneous lupus erythematosus. Lupus. 2016 Jul:25(8):830-7. doi: 10.1177/0961203316641771. Epub [PubMed PMID: 27252259]
Level 3 (low-level) evidenceMeller S, Homey B, Ruzicka T. Socioeconomic factors in lupus erythematosus. Autoimmunity reviews. 2005 Apr:4(4):242-6 [PubMed PMID: 15893719]
Jessop S, Whitelaw DA, Grainge MJ, Jayasekera P. Drugs for discoid lupus erythematosus. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2017 May 5:5(5):CD002954. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002954.pub3. Epub 2017 May 5 [PubMed PMID: 28476075]
Level 1 (high-level) evidenceDrucker AM, Su J, Mussani F, Siddha SK, Gladman DD, Urowitz MB. Prognostic implications of active discoid lupus erythematosus and malar rash at the time of diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus: Results from a prospective cohort study. Lupus. 2016 Apr:25(4):376-81. doi: 10.1177/0961203315610645. Epub 2015 Oct 8 [PubMed PMID: 26453664]