The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Influence of Treatment of Erosive Lichen Planus of the Vulva on Its Prognosis
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To record the clinical features, symptomatic response to treatment, and resolution of clinical signs in a large cohort of women with erosive lichen planus of the vulva. DESIGN: Descriptive, prospective cohort study with a mean follow-up of 72 months. SETTING: The vulval clinics of a teaching and district general hospital in Oxfordshire, England. PATIENTS: One hundred fourteen adult women with a definite clinical diagnosis of erosive lichen planus of the vulva.Interventions Patients received topical corticosteroids with or without other topical preparations and systemic treatments as part of their normal care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Symptomatic response to individual treatments (good, partial, or poor), overall symptomatic response to treatment and with time (good, partial, no change, or worse), response of the vulval signs (total, partial, moderate, minor, same, or worse), and the presence or absence of moderate or severe scarring. RESULTS: The mean age at onset of vulval symptoms was 56.9 years. First-line therapy was an ultrapotent topical corticosteroid in 89 women (78%), of whom 63 (71%) were symptom free while receiving treatment. Overall and with time, 86 women (75%) improved with treatment, including 62 (54%) who were symptom free (good response) and 24 (21%) who had a partial response. Eighteen (16%) had no change and 10 (9%) were worse. Overall response of the vulval signs was recorded in 113 patients. Only 10 (9%) of these had complete resolution of clinical signs excepting scarring, with 57 (50%) showing resolution of erosions. Squamous cell carcinoma developed in 3 women (3%). CONCLUSIONS: Topical ultrapotent corticosteroid is an effective treatment for erosive lichen planus of the vulva, giving relief of symptoms in 71%. With time and treatment, three quarters of patients can expect overall improvement of symptoms and one half, healing of erosions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Gorouhi, F., Davari, P., & Fazel, N. (2014) · The Scientific World Journal · doi:10.1155/2014/742826 · Cited by 521
Le Cleach, L., & Chosidow, O. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmcp1103641 · Cited by 356
2016 European guideline for the management of vulval conditions
van der Meijden, W. I., Boffa, M. J., ter Harmsel, W. A., Kirtschig, G., Lewis, F. M., Moyal‐Barracco, M., Tiplica, G. S., & Sherrard, J. (2017) · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · doi:10.1111/jdv.14096 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Cooper, S. M., & Wojnarowska, F.
- Venue
- Archives of Dermatology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2006-03-01
- Volume
- 142
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 289-94
- ISSN
- 0003-987X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2012719654
- Cited by
- 178
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Influence of Treatment of Erosive Lichen Planus of the Vulva on Its Prognosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archderm.142.3.289
- The paper
- Cooper, S. M., & Wojnarowska, F. (2006). Influence of Treatment of Erosive Lichen Planus of the Vulva on Its Prognosis. Archives of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.142.3.289
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.