Table 82Evidence profile comparing narrowband UVB two times vs three times weekly

Quality assessmentSummary of findings
No of patientsEffectQuality
No of studiesDesignLimitationsInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionOther considerationsNBUVB 2xNBUVB 3xRelative (95% CI)Absolute
Clearance (follow-up until clear or minimal residual activity maintained for at least 4 treatment visits)
1
Cameron 2002
randomised trialsseriousano serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious imprecisionnone40/44 (90.0% )44/48 (91.7%)RR 0.99 (0.87 to 1.13)9 fewer per 1000 (from 119 fewer to 119 more)⊕⊕⊕○
MODERATE
Mean days to clearance; better indicated by lower values (follow-up until clear or minimal residual activity maintained for at least 4 treatment visits)
1
Cameron 2002
randomised trialsseriousano serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessseriousbnone5855-2-times: 88 (48–150) days
3-times: 58 (32–112) days
P <0.0001
⊕⊕○○
LOW
Median time to relapse; better indicated by higher values (follow-up 12 months post-treatment)
1
Cameron 2002
randomised trialsserious ano serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessvery seriouscnone5855-Relapse defined as requiring topicals other than emollients:
2-times: 4.7 months
3-times: 3.8 months
P =0.53 from log rank testd

Relapse defined as requiring phototherapy or other second line:
2-times: 21.3 months
3-times: 17.0 months
P =0.73 from log rank test d
⊕○○○
VERY LOW
Withdrawal due to toxicity (follow-up until clear or minimal residual activity for at least 4 treatment visits)
1
Cameron 2002
randomised trialsserious ano serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessvery seriousenone2/42 (4.8%)1/45 (2.2%)RR 2.14 (0.2 to 22.77)25 more per 1000 (from 18 fewer to 484 more)⊕○○○
VERY LOW
Burn (follow-up until clear or minimal residual activity for at least 4 treatment visits)
1
Cameron 2002
randomised trialsserious ano serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessvery seriousenone10/58 (17.2% )12/55 (21.8% )RR 0.79 (0.37 to 1.68)46 fewer per 1000 (from 137 fewer to 148 more)⊕○○○
VERY LOW
a

High drop-out rate (25.7%)

b

No SD given

c

No measure of variance and read from graph

d

Event rate not available so hazard ratio could not be calculated

e

Confidence interval crosses the boundary for clinical significance in favour of both treatments, as well as line of no effect

From: 9, Phototherapy

Cover of Psoriasis
Psoriasis: Assessment and Management of Psoriasis.
NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 153.
National Clinical Guideline Centre (UK).
Copyright © National Clinical Guideline Centre - October 2012.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher or, in the case of reprographic reproduction, in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency in the UK. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the terms stated here should be sent to the publisher at the UK address printed on this page.

The use of registered names, trademarks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant laws and regulations and therefore for general use.

The rights of National Clinical Guideline Centre to be identified as Author of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.