Abstract
Folliculitis decalvans (FD) represents a chronic and recurrent pustulofollicular scalp inflammation resulting in scarring alopecia. The presence of a bacterial bioflilm at the interface of the hair shaft may provide an explanation for the chronicity and high relapse rate of FD, even after prolonged systemic antibiotic treatments. We originally read with enthusiasm Melián-Olivera et al.'s retrospective study of patients with FD treated with topical dapsone published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. However, we experienced an unsuccessful trial of 5% dapsone gel in a patient with FD resulting in worsening of the disease with a pustular flareup and questioned why positive study reports with novel therapeutic options in dermatology often fail in practice. The authors admitted the limitations of their study: small sample size, retrospective, uncontrolled nature of the study, and concomitant use of other treatments. Clinical research ultimately aims at improving the patient outcome. For this purpose, trials must evaluate the outcomes that genuinely reflect the clinical utility of drugs. Therefore, we postulate stricter criteria for treatment trials and statistics in dermatology before publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals to avoid frustrations of physicians and patients alike.