Background/Aim: Alopecia areata (AA) is a common autoimmune hair disorder which is characterized by noncicatricial hair loss. AA commonly presents with localized patches on the scalp and face but may affect any hair-bearing region of the body leading to even more generalized involvement. AA may affect any age group, gender, and race. The current study investigates the demographic characteristics of the patients with AA and subgroups of AA including alopecia totalis (AT) and alopecia universalis (AU) and the prevalence of disease, sex, and age distribution and seasonal variation retrospectively in a tertiary dermatology clinic in Turkey. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, 1,641 patients diagnosed with AA, AT, and AU in the dermatology clinic of a public university hospital were included. The dermatology outpatient database was reviewed retrospectively. The diagnosis of AA was based on patient history, clinical examinations, and histopathologic findings. Results: Fifty-four thousand one hundred sixty-eight patients were admitted to our outpatient clinic in 4 years time, and 1,641 were diagnosed as having AA, AT, and AU. One thousand three hundred ninety-two patients (84.8%) had AA, 81 (4.9%) had AT, and 168 (10.2%) had AU. Among the 1,641 patients included in the study, 877 were females (53.4%) and 764 were males (46.6%). The mean age was 29.86 ± 14.48 years in AA, 29.50 ± 16.18 in AT, and 32.81 ± 14.48 in AU; 77.4, 72.8, and 68.5% of patients were aged under 40 years in AA, AT, and AU. There was no statistically significant difference in seasonal presentation times. Conclusion: AA is affecting approximately 2% of the general population without any sex, race, or age group predilection. In this study, we found a lower prevalence of AA in the pediatric age group in comparison with adults. This finding may support the hypothesis of the increasing prevalence of AA over time. The higher ratio of AA regarding this study may support that the frequency of AA and subtypes varies between regions.

There is widespread concern about treatment of psoriasis in COVID‐19 pandemic. We aimed to evaluate the epidemiological data, clinical characteristics, treatment features of the psoriasis patients during the pandemic period. We conducted a study in dermatology clinics of seven different tertiary centers. All adult psoriasis patients who were followed up between 11 March 2020 and 28 June 2020, were phone called or questioned in their visit to their follow‐up clinics. A semistructured questionnaire was applied and patients' demographics and disease characteristics were recorded. Of 1322 patients, 52.4% were male, and 47.6% were female. According to the questionnaire responses, 964 (72.9%) of these patients could not communicate with their physician during this period, remained 358 (27.1%) patients contacted the physician by phone, email, or hospital visit. From the patients diagnosed as probable/confirmed COVID‐19, 14 were female, and 9 were male. Nine of 23 (39.1%) patients were using biologic treatment. There was no statistically significant difference in terms of hospitalization from COVID‐19 between the patients using biologics (n = 9) and those who did not (n = 14) (P = 1.00). No mortality was observed among them. Obesity, smoking, age, and accompanying psoriatic arthritis were not among the risk factors affecting the frequency of COVID‐19. We only encountered an increased risk in diabetic patients. Also, an exacerbation of psoriasis was observed with the infection. No difference was found in patients with psoriasis in terms of COVID‐19 infection in patients who use biologics and those who don't.

Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets CD20, a B‐lymphocyte antigen; that leads to a decline in the B‐cell counts for at least a year. The patients who have received rituximab treatment in the previous 5 years with the diagnosis of pemphigus group of diseases at CerrahpaŞa Medical Faculty were questioned for COVID‐19 infection. A total of 48 patients were included in this study; only one male patient had COVID‐19 infection which had a mild course. There is no significant difference in the total number of lymphocytes between patients who have received rituximab within the previous 5 years or last year. The number of lymphocytes is independent of the number of courses of rituximab treatment received. Therefore, we suggest that all pemphigus patients who have received rituximab treatment within the previous 5 years should be careful of the preventive measures against the COVID‐19 infection irrespective of the number of treatment courses or the number of years which has passed since the treatment. The disease course was mild in the only infected patient. Thus, rituximab may be used in the treatment of pemphigus vulgaris during the COVID‐19 pandemic if its use is necessary.