Assessment of Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures for Alopecia Areata: A Systematic Scoping Review

Abstract Clinician-reported outcome measures (ClinROMs) are an important part of disease assessment in daily practice and clinical trials. There is a broad disagreement on the most appropriate ClinROM for a comprehensive assessment of alopecia areata (AA) severity. This paper aims to identify the currently available ClinROMs for AA through a systematic literature search, address their practical strengths and weaknesses, and identify the road ahead for future research. A search was conducted of the published, peer-reviewed literature via PubMed (Medline) and EMBASE (via Ovid) databases. Articles published in English within the last 23 years (post-2000) that objectively measured AA severity were included. We did not select scoring systems that were solely based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The literature search identified 1376 articles, of which 27 were chosen for full-text review. Based on our eligibility criteria, fourteen articles were identified, describing sixteen different ClinROMs. Five ClinROMs solely measured scalp hair loss (SALT, SALTⅡ, ALODEX, pSALT, and AA-IGA). Three trichoscopy-based ClinROMs assessed disease activity (AAPI, AAPS, and Coudability hair score). Six ClinROMs exclusively assessed non-scalp areas (BETA, BELA, ALBAS, ClinRO for Eyelash, Eyebrow, and Nail assessment). Two ClinROMs assessed both the scalp and beyond-scalp areas (AASI and AASc). The practical strengths and weaknesses of each assessment tool were described. Various practical limitations associated with established tools have impeded their universal implementation in routine clinical practice. There is a significant need for a holistic clinical severity scoring system to capture all the key severity identifiers beyond the involvement of the scalp.