Alopecia encompasses diverse conditions that vary by etiology, progression, and clinical presentation, including androgenetic alopecia, alopecia areata, telogen effluvium, and scarring alopecias such as lichen planopilaris and central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia. Managing these conditions requires tailored therapeutic approaches, with topical treatments emerging as effective first-line interventions. This literature review examines topical therapies across alopecia types, assessing mechanisms of action, clinical efficacy, and safety profiles to guide evidence-based clinical practice. Methods involved a comprehensive search across PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases, focusing on clinical research published within the past five years. Articles were screened based on relevance to alopecia management, excluding abstracts, non-English studies, and ongoing research. Topics covered include commonly used agents such as minoxidil, corticosteroids, and emerging options like Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. Topicals for trichotillomania, such as capsaicin and numbing creams, are highlighted for their behavioral conditioning potential, while treatments like minoxidil and adenosine are explored for telogen effluvium. Findings indicate that topicals provide symptom relief, promote hair regrowth, and often serve as adjuncts to systemic therapies. Minoxidil and corticosteroids demonstrate efficacy in multiple alopecia types, while JAK inhibitors show promise in alopecia areata. This review underscores the value of topical treatments in alopecia management and highlights areas for future research, advocating for individualized approaches to enhance therapeutic outcomes in patients experiencing hair loss.

Chronic inflammatory disorders of the apocrine gland (CIDAP), such as hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), are characterized by painful, recurrent lesions in apocrine gland-rich areas. First-line treatments—including retinoids and antibiotics—often fail to prevent recurrence and biofilm formation, necessitating the use of targeted biologic therapies. This review evaluated U.S.-based randomized controlled trials and cohort studies published between 2014 and 2024 on the efficacy of such therapies in adult HS patients. A total of 13 studies met inclusion criteria. Agents targeting interleukins (IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-23, IL-1α, IL-36) and TNF-α were assessed, with outcomes including HiSCR, Sartorius scores, DLQI, and patient-reported measures. IL-17 inhibitors (secukinumab, bimekizumab) and IL-1 inhibitors (bermekimab, anakinra) demonstrated promising reductions in inflammatory burden and improved quality of life. TNF-α inhibitors, particularly adalimumab and infliximab, consistently achieved HiSCR and HSS improvements. Guselkumab (IL-23) showed limited efficacy in HiSCR but modest pain relief. Safety profiles were generally acceptable across agents, with few serious adverse events. Limitations across studies included small sample sizes, lack of control arms, and short follow-up durations. These findings underscore the therapeutic potential of biologic agents in managing HS. A greater emphasis on biomarker-guided treatment selection and interdisciplinary collaboration is warranted to optimize long-term outcomes for patients.

A 57‐year‐old male was evaluated for a smooth cystic nodule on his left upper chest that appeared clinically to be a cyst, yet histopathology and confirmatory immunohistochemistry revealed invasive malignant melanoma. Histopathologic evaluation and immunohistochemical staining (i.e., SOX‐10 and MART‐1) are useful diagnostic tools for invasive malignant melanoma that, albeit rare, can present without known or cutaneous primary. This case illustrates the variability with which metastatic melanoma can present, calling attention to the importance of careful evaluation of benign‐appearing and asymptomatic lesions.

BACKGROUND Patient Education Materials (PEMs) are vital for helping patients understand their health conditions, treatments, and prevention strategies. Effective PEMs are especially crucial in populations with limited access to follow-up care. However, most PEMs in the U.S. are written in English, disadvantaging non-fluent speakers and contributing to poorer health outcomes. Given the prominence of Spanish in the U.S. and globally, evaluating the translation quality of PEMs into Spanish is essential. This study assesses GPT-4's ability to translate dermatological PEMs from English to Spanish. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the accuracy and quality of GPT-4's translations of dermatological PEMs from English to Spanish. METHODS Data from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study identified atopic dermatitis as the most burdensome dermatological condition worldwide. Three PEMs on atopic dermatitis from JAMA Dermatology were translated by GPT-4. The original English articles, JAMA’s Spanish translations, and GPT-4 translations were analyzed. A bilingual social worker rated translation quality on a Likert scale for fluency, adequacy, meaning, severity, and preference. Readability was assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease score for English and the Fernández-Huerta score for Spanish translations. RESULTS Both GPT-4 and original translations received perfect scores in adequacy, meaning, and severity. However, GPT-4 translations scored lower in fluency, with average scores of 4 compared to 4.67 for original translations. Preference varied, with GPT-4 preferred for one article. Readability analysis showed the original PEMs were difficult to read, with an average Flesch-Kincaid score of 33.2 and grade level of 13.67. GPT-4 and original translations had Fernández-Huerta scores of 50.65 and 52.76, respectively, indicating similar readability levels. CONCLUSIONS GPT-4 shows significant potential in translating PEMs, effectively conveying health information without compromising patient outcomes. Despite receiving slightly lower fluency scores, GPT-4 translations were preferred in some cases. Readability analysis indicated that both English and Spanish PEMs are challenging to read, underscoring the need for more accessible patient education. Future studies should expand the sample size, include multiple raters, and test translations with Spanish-speaking patients to further validate these findings. Artificial intelligence translation tools like GPT-4 could improve dermatological care for Spanish-speaking populations by providing equitable access to health information. CLINICALTRIAL N/A