1,720,983 research outputs found

    Vulvar Lichen Sclerosus from Pathophysiology to Therapeutic Approaches: Evidence and Prospects

    No full text
    Vulvar lichen sclerosus (VLS) is a chronic, distressing, inflammatory disease with an enormous impact on quality of life. Treatment goals are relieving symptoms, reversing signs and preventing anatomical changes. Despite the availability of numerous therapeutic options, treatment outcome may not be entirely satisfactory and a definitive cure does not exist. This may be due to the fact that the exact VLS etiopathogenesis remains unknown. The objectives of this paper were to review the most up-to-date knowledge on VLS etiopathogenesis and to consider the available therapies through the lens of a plausible pathogenetic model. An electronic search on both VLS etiopathogenesis and its treatment was performed using the National Library of Medicine PubMed database. Based on current knowledge, it is conceivable that various, heterogeneous environmental factors acting on a genetic background trigger an autoimmune, Th-1 response, which leads to a chronic inflammatory state. This, in turn, can determine both tissue and micro-vascular injury and activation of signaling pathways involved in fibroblast and collagen metabolism. This pathogenetic sequence may explain the effectiveness of anti-inflammatory treatments, mostly topical corticosteroids, in improving VLS clinical-pathological changes. Further deepening of the disease pathways will presumably allow key mediators to become new therapeutic targets and optimize the available treatments

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore