- Vitiligo is a long-term skin condition in which pigment-making cells (melanocytes) are lost from patches of skin. The most common form, non-segmental vitiligo, is thought to be autoimmune (NHS). No treatment cures it. Some treatments can restore pigment, and the Cochrane review says none can cure the disease (Whitton et al., Cochrane 2015).
- The British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) guideline recommends potent topical steroids as first-line treatment. It lists tacrolimus cream as an alternative and narrowband UVB (NB-UVB) phototherapy for people who respond poorly to creams, or who have extensive or progressive disease (BAD guideline, BJD 2022). The BAD guideline reports no funding and lists no supplement it recommends.
- NB-UVB works best on the face and neck. In a 29-study meta-analysis of phototherapy, 35.7% of patients had a marked response (75% or more repigmentation) at 12 months, and none of the hands or feet responded after at least six months (Bae et al., JAMA Dermatology 2017). The pooled figures are response rates, not a comparison with untreated patients.
- Ruxolitinib cream (Opzelura, Incyte) was approved in the US in July 2022 for non-segmental vitiligo in people aged 12 and over, and in the EU in April 2023 for non-segmental vitiligo with facial involvement. In the two pivotal trials, about 30% of people using it reached a 75% improvement in the facial vitiligo score (F-VASI75) at 24 weeks, versus 7% to 11% on vehicle cream (Rosmarin et al., NEJM 2022). The trial record lists Incyte as the funder.
- Ginkgo biloba and oral vitamin D are marketed for vitiligo. The only randomised ginkgo trial we found had 47 people, was published in 2003, and reported a benefit in stopping spread (Parsad et al. 2003). BAD says vitamin D levels can be checked in people who avoid all sun, and that there is insufficient evidence for any complementary therapy (BAD guideline).
- Money trail: The pivotal ruxolitinib trials were funded by Incyte, which makes the cream (NEJM 2022). A broad review of psychological burden in vitiligo was also funded by Incyte, and four of its seven authors were Incyte-affiliated (Ezzedine et al. 2021; full text). The regulators and the BAD guideline have no funding link to the maker that we could find.
- Evidence grade: Moderate for potent topical steroids, tacrolimus and NB-UVB as established options. Weak for ruxolitinib cream, which rests on maker-run trials to 52 weeks. Insufficient for ginkgo, oral vitamin D and other supplements. Risk for long steroid use on thin skin and for the JAK-class warnings on ruxolitinib.
Independent evidence review · Skin condition · Prescription treatments and supplements
The independent evidence supports a standard set of treatments for vitiligo: potent topical steroids, tacrolimus cream and narrowband UVB, with the aim of slowing spread and regaining some pigment. None of these cures the condition, and results vary by body site. Ruxolitinib cream is a newer option with real but modest benefit in facial vitiligo over 24 weeks, but almost all of its trial data come from the company that makes it. No supplement has enough independent evidence to recommend. Our confidence: moderate for the established treatments; low for ruxolitinib beyond the trial period; high that supplements are unproven.
Table of contents
- Evidence summary
- What vitiligo is, and how it is diagnosed
- How the treatments work
- What works and what does not
- Benefits by treatment and claim
- Psychological impact
- Risks and all side effects
- All interactions
- Who should avoid these treatments
- Doses studied and label doses
- Follow the money: who makes it and who funded the evidence
- Related research
- Frequently asked questions
- Sources and funding notes
Evidence summary
| Claim | Evidence | Source | Funding / conflict | Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Potent topical steroids restore some pigment | BAD recommends a potent or very potent steroid once daily as first-line treatment (strong recommendation; no certainty grade is shown in the text we read). Cochrane found that most trials across all treatments were small (most under 50 people), and that none assessed whether repigmentation lasts two years. | BAD guideline; Cochrane 2015 | BAD: "Funding sources: None" declared; several authors declare ties to other drug makers (for example Genus, AbbVie, LEO and Novartis). Cochrane: funding not verified. | Moderate |
| Tacrolimus 0.1% is an alternative to steroids, especially on the face | BAD makes a weak recommendation to consider tacrolimus 0.1% twice daily for facial vitiligo, and for non-facial sites on photoexposed skin under occlusion. | BAD guideline | BAD: as above. | Moderate |
| NB-UVB phototherapy restores pigment, mostly on the face and neck | Pooled data from 29 NB-UVB studies (1,201 patients): at least mild response 74.2% at 6 months and 75.0% at 12 months; marked response 19.2% at 6 months and 35.7% at 12 months. Face and neck: marked response 44.2% after 6 months; hands and feet: none. Pooled response rates; the abstract reports no comparator group. | Bae et al. 2017 | Academic (Korea). Public grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea. "Conflict of interest: none reported." | Moderate |
| Ruxolitinib cream improves facial vitiligo score at 24 weeks | Two phase 3 trials, more than 600 people. F-VASI75 at week 24: 29.8% vs 7.4% vehicle (TRuE-V1, relative risk 4.0, 95% CI 1.9 to 8.4); 30.9% vs 11.4% (TRuE-V2, relative risk 2.7, 95% CI 1.5 to 4.9). The 52-week figures describe people who continued the cream. | Rosmarin et al., NEJM 2022 | "Funded by Incyte" (funder record in Europe PMC). Trials run by the maker; author affiliations not checked in this pass. | Weak (maker-run) |
| Ruxolitinib cream is less risky for the body than oral ruxolitinib | EMA says the serious systemic side effects of oral ruxolitinib are not expected with the cream, provided the area limits are respected. The US label includes a boxed warning based on oral JAK-inhibitor data (summarised by secondary drug sources; the label text was not extracted). | EMA EPAR | EMA: public regulator. Safety rationale comes from the maker's data package. | Risk (long-term unknown) |
| Ginkgo biloba slows spread of vitiligo | One randomised, placebo-controlled trial: 52 enrolled, 47 analysed; 40 mg three times daily. Progression stopped (P=0.006); marked to complete repigmentation in 10 ginkgo patients vs 2 placebo patients. Cochrane notes the result rests on one study of 47 people. | Parsad et al. 2003; Cochrane 2015 | Academic (India). Funding statement not verified. | Insufficient |
| Oral vitamin D helps repigmentation | BAD: insufficient evidence to recommend any complementary therapy. BAD suggests checking vitamin D only in people who avoid all sun exposure, and considering D3 10 to 25 micrograms daily if levels are low. | BAD guideline | BAD: as above. | Insufficient |
| Vitiligo carries a high psychological burden | Systematic review of 168 studies: depression-related disorders reported in 41 studies (0.1% to 62.3%), anxiety in 20 studies (1.9% to 67.9%). Stigma was reported in eight studies (17.3% to 100%). | Ezzedine et al. 2021 | Funded by Incyte. Four of seven authors Incyte-affiliated (two current employees; two were employees at the time of the study). One author (Pandya) lists investigator and consultant roles that include Incyte. | Strong (direction) / wide ranges |
| Vitiligo cannot be cured | Cochrane (search to October 2013): some treatments restore pigment, but none cure the disease. NHS: treatment does not usually last. | Cochrane 2015; NHS | Cochrane and NHS: public sources, no product. | Moderate |
Independent evidence and credibility scorecard
Independence tiers: 1 = regulator or government body; 2 = academic, professional-society or Cochrane team with no declared commercial funding for the work; 3 = independent authors analysing mostly manufacturer-run trials, or minor declared industry ties; 4 = manufacturer-funded or manufacturer-authored. Credibility runs from A (highest) to D.
| Source | Who funds it | Country | Independence tier (1–4) | Credibility (A–D) | Why it would tell the truth / residual bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NHS condition page | UK public funding (NHS) | UK | 1 | A | No product to sell, and it is accountable for public health advice. Brief overview only; treatment detail sits on separate pages we did not open. |
| EMA public assessment report (Opzelura) | EU public agency; its fee model was not checked for this review | EU (agency based in Amsterdam) | 1 | A | Legal duty to assess benefit against risk. It relies on the maker's trial data, so it inherits the trials' design and sponsorship. |
| BAD vitiligo guideline (BJD 2022) | "Funding sources: None"; authors declare ties to several drug makers, none to Incyte in the part of the declarations we read | UK | 2 | B | Professional society with a transparent grading system. Published in January 2022, before ruxolitinib cream was approved, so it cannot judge the drug. |
| Whitton et al., Cochrane review (2015) | Funding statement not verified in this review; no conflicts reviewed in the abstract | UK and France (review authors) | 2 | B | Systematic method, 96 trials and 4,512 people. Most trials small, and search ends October 2013, so newer trials are missing. One co-author (Ezzedine) also co-authored the Incyte-funded 2021 review; the 2015 declarations were not checked. |
| Bae et al., JAMA Dermatology (2017) | Academic (Korea); public grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea; "Conflict of interest: none reported" | South Korea | 2 | B | Systematic search of NB-UVB studies. Pools response rates with no comparator in the abstract, so the rates cannot isolate the treatment effect. |
| Parsad et al., ginkgo trial (2003) | Academic; funding statement not verified | India | 2 | C | Placebo-controlled, but one small study with 47 analysed. Not replicated in the sources we found, and the 2003 design is dated. |
| Rosmarin et al., TRuE-V1 and TRuE-V2 (NEJM 2022) | "Funded by Incyte"; three authors Incyte-affiliated | US (Incyte is based in Wilmington, DE); trial sites in North America and Europe | 4 | D | Peer-reviewed, and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04052425 and NCT04057573), so the data are reported in full. But the maker designed, ran and analysed the trials. Treat as the maker's evidence for the drug's efficacy, not as independent proof. |
| Ezzedine et al., psychosocial review (2021) | Funded by Incyte; four of seven authors Incyte-affiliated; | Funder listed as Incyte; author countries not checked | 4 | C | Broad search of 168 studies, so the range of findings is useful. The sponsor's interest in the disease burden is a reason to read the framing with care, and the review's burden figures are wide because of design differences. |
Note on convergence and clustering: The independent guideline (BAD) and the Cochrane review point in the same direction for steroids, tacrolimus and phototherapy. They do not cover ruxolitinib cream, because BAD's search ended before the drug was studied. The ruxolitinib evidence therefore comes only from the company's own trials and the regulators who reviewed them. Most of the sources are from the UK, US and EU, so the verdict reflects those regulatory and clinical systems. Only the Korean and Indian studies come from outside that group, and both are small or pooled without a control.
Research funding at a glance
8 sources graded. The counts below are the independence tiers assigned in the scorecard above. They count sources, not funding amounts or evidence quality.
Public funding alone does not prove independence, and commercial funding alone does not prove a claim false. Named funders, countries and relationships are in the scorecard and source notes.
What vitiligo is, and how it is diagnosed
Vitiligo causes patches of skin to lose colour. The NHS describes non-segmental vitiligo, the most common type, as thought to be autoimmune: the immune system destroys melanocytes, the cells that make melanin (NHS). Segmental vitiligo, which affects one side of the body, is thought to be linked to chemicals released from nerve endings instead. The NHS page does not give a prevalence figure. The Cochrane review describes it as affecting people of any age or ethnicity, with more than half developing it before age 20 (Cochrane 2015).
A GP diagnoses vitiligo by looking at the skin, and may use a Wood's lamp, check thyroid function and ask about other autoimmune conditions (NHS). The autoimmune link matters because the condition is more common in people with other autoimmune diseases, and because the same immune pathways are the target of some newer drugs.
How the treatments work
The treatments act on different parts of the problem. Steroids and tacrolimus reduce local inflammation. Phototherapy with NB-UVB is thought to dampen the immune attack and to stimulate pigment cells that remain. Ruxolitinib is a JAK inhibitor that blocks the Janus kinase 1 and 2 enzymes. The mechanism is plausible, but the trials show clinical response, not proof of how any single treatment works in a given patient.
Depigmentation is a different approach. It removes the remaining pigment so the skin is more even. BAD says it can be considered for people with extensive vitiligo on visible sites where the condition has a negative psychological impact, and only after adequate psychological assessment or intervention (BAD guideline).
What works and what does not
| Option | Status in the independent evidence | What it does | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Potent or very potent topical steroid | Mixed | First-line; restores some pigment; response varies by site | BAD recommendation R10 (strong) |
| Tacrolimus 0.1% ointment | Mixed | Alternative to steroids, especially for the face | BAD R12 and R13 (weak) |
| Narrowband UVB phototherapy | Works (often) | Best in face and neck; response often lost when treatment stops | BAD R20 (strong); Bae et al. 2017 |
| Ruxolitinib 1.5% cream | Mixed | About 3 in 10 facial responders at 24 weeks in maker-run trials | Rosmarin et al. NEJM 2022; EMA EPAR |
| Depigmentation | Mixed | Makes the skin more even; does not restore pigment | BAD R16 (good practice) |
| Oral ginkgo biloba | Insufficient | One trial suggests slowed spread | Parsad et al. 2003; Cochrane 2015 |
| Oral vitamin D | Insufficient | Only recommended to check levels in people avoiding all sun | BAD R7 (good practice) |
| Any cure | Insufficient | No treatment is shown to cure vitiligo | Cochrane 2015; NHS |
Benefits by treatment and claim
Do topical steroids restore pigment?
BAD recommends a potent or very potent topical steroid once daily as first-line treatment, and advises avoiding the skin around the eyes (BAD guideline). It also suggests considering intermittent steroid regimens, especially on thin skin. The NHS notes steroid creams can restore some pigment (NHS). The Cochrane review found that most steroid trials were small, and that none assessed whether repigmentation lasts two years (Cochrane 2015).
Is tacrolimus cream as good as steroids?
BAD makes a weak recommendation to consider tacrolimus 0.1% twice daily for facial vitiligo as an alternative to potent steroids (BAD guideline). The recommendation is graded weak, which is BAD's grade for limited evidence of benefit over the alternatives.
Does narrowband UVB work?
NB-UVB is BAD's strong first-line phototherapy for people who respond inadequately to topical treatment, or who have extensive or progressive disease. The guideline advises counselling patients about significant loss of response after treatment stops (BAD guideline). In the Bae meta-analysis, which pooled 29 NB-UVB studies with 1,201 patients, at least mild response (25% or more) was 74.2% at 6 months and 75.0% at 12 months. Marked response was 19.2% at 6 months and 35.7% at 12 months. No hands or feet responded after at least six months (Bae et al. 2017). The pooled figures are response rates, so they cannot show how much of this would have happened without treatment.
The Cochrane review found that most studies assessed combination therapies, which generally reported better results (Cochrane 2015).
Does ruxolitinib cream work?
Ruxolitinib 1.5% cream was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in July 2022 (Incyte announced the approval on 18 July 2022) for non-segmental vitiligo in people aged 12 and over, based on the TRuE-V trials. In the EU, the EMA records the marketing authorisation as valid from 19 April 2023 (Incyte announced it on 20 April 2023) for non-segmental vitiligo with facial involvement in adults and adolescents from 12. The EMA's committee gave a positive opinion in February 2023 (EMA EPAR).
The two phase 3 trials enrolled more than 600 people and randomised them 2:1 to the cream or vehicle twice daily for 24 weeks. At week 24, 29.8% reached a 75% improvement in the facial score on the cream, versus 7.4% on vehicle in TRuE-V1, and 30.9% versus 11.4% in TRuE-V2. Conference presentations of the same trials report slightly different vehicle figures, so we use the paper's numbers (Rosmarin et al. NEJM 2022). The primary endpoint was facial; the paper's body-area results were not checked for this article.
The 52-week data describe people who continued applying the cream. No independent head-to-head trial against steroids, tacrolimus or NB-UVB was found. BAD's guideline was published in January 2022, before the cream's approvals, so it does not assess ruxolitinib (BAD guideline). England's NHS funding decision for the cream was reported in the news, but NICE's guidance page could not be opened for this review, so we have not verified it.
Can ginkgo biloba or vitamin D help?
The only placebo-controlled ginkgo trial we found enrolled 52 people with limited, slowly spreading vitiligo, and analysed 47. Patients took 40 mg three times daily. The trial reported a significant halt in progression (P=0.006), and marked to complete repigmentation in 10 patients on ginkgo versus 2 on placebo (Parsad et al. 2003). The Cochrane review included this study and noted the result is based on one trial of 47 people (Cochrane 2015). We did not find a larger placebo-controlled ginkgo trial; a 2011 open-label pilot is the only later study we saw.
For vitamin D, BAD says the evidence is insufficient to recommend any complementary therapy. It suggests measuring vitamin D only in people who avoid all sun exposure, and considering D3 at 10 to 25 micrograms daily if levels are low (BAD guideline). Several small trials of oral vitamin D with phototherapy or tacrolimus report better results, but we did not open the primary reports, and their sizes and designs are small. Topical vitamin D analogues have a larger evidence base than oral supplements, but they are not covered by the sources we opened for this article.
Can depigmentation help?
Depigmentation is not a repigmentation treatment. BAD suggests considering it only for extensive vitiligo on visible sites where the condition has a negative psychological impact, after adequate psychological assessment (BAD guideline). The NHS page we opened does not mention it as a treatment option (NHS).
Psychological impact
The psychosocial review of 168 studies found that depression-related disorders were reported in 41 studies, with prevalence from 0.1% to 62.3%, and anxiety in 20 studies, ranging from 1.9% to 67.9%. Feelings of stigmatisation were reported in eight studies (17.3% to 100%). The review's subgroup and coping findings were not checked in this pass, so we do not rely on them here. These ranges are wide, and the review's design details were not checked in this pass (Ezzedine et al. 2021).
The review was funded by Incyte, which makes ruxolitinib cream, and four of its seven authors were Incyte-affiliated. The sponsor's interest in the disease burden is a reason to read its framing with care (full text). BAD says psychological assessment or intervention should come before depigmentation (BAD guideline). Speak to a GP about how vitiligo affects mood or daily life. A clinician can also refer to a psychological service.
Risks and all side effects
Phototherapy: NB-UVB adds to lifetime UV exposure. Depigmented skin is more vulnerable to sunburn, so sunscreen is advised (NHS).
Ruxolitinib cream: in the US label, the most common reactions in vitiligo are application-site acne, application-site itching, nasopharyngitis, headache and urinary tract infection (US prescribing information, checked through label summaries). The EMA says the systemic serious effects seen with oral ruxolitinib are not expected with the cream, provided the area limit is respected (EMA EPAR). The US prescribing information carries a boxed warning on serious infections, mortality, malignancy, major adverse cardiovascular events and thrombosis. Label summaries say this comes from class data on oral JAK inhibitors; we did not extract the label text to check its exact wording.
Other effects. Itching, redness and burning at the site of application are common with topical treatments. Treatment cannot always stop a patch spreading, and the skin may change colour unevenly during treatment (NHS). Any new fever, infection, persistent sore or unexplained bruising while on a JAK-inhibitor cream should prompt medical review.
All interactions
Interactions are rare for topical creams but matter more for systemic treatments. We could not verify the US label's list of drugs to avoid with ruxolitinib cream, so check the current label or ask a pharmacist. Ginkgo is often reported to affect blood clotting, but we did not verify this in a primary source. Anyone on blood thinners, immunosuppressants or systemic steroids should tell their clinician before starting any new treatment or supplement.
Who should avoid these treatments
People with thin skin need more caution with steroid creams, and BAD suggests intermittent regimens for them (BAD guideline). The BAD guideline makes no specific recommendations for children and young people, because the evidence base is limited to adults (BAD guideline). People with a history of skin cancer, or a high lifetime UV dose, should discuss phototherapy with a specialist first. Because the boxed warning covers serious infections, people with an active infection should not start ruxolitinib cream without medical advice. We could not check the pregnancy and breastfeeding wording against the label text, so pregnant or breastfeeding people should seek specialist advice.
Doses studied and label doses
These figures describe what was studied or stated in official sources. They are not instructions. Ruxolitinib cream was applied twice daily to affected skin, covering no more than 10% of body surface area at a time (FDA and EMA EPAR). In the BAD guideline, the suggested tacrolimus dose is 0.1% twice daily (BAD guideline). In the ginkgo trial, 40 mg was taken three times a day (Parsad et al. 2003). The BAD guideline's vitamin D suggestion (10 to 25 micrograms daily) applies only if levels are low.
Product quality. We did not review contamination or quality testing for supplements sold for vitiligo. Products sold online as vitiligo "cures" should be treated with caution, because no independent source we found supports them.
Follow the money: who makes it and who funded the evidence
Who makes the treatments
Ruxolitinib cream is made and sold by Incyte. Incyte Corporation is based in Wilmington, Delaware, USA (Ezzedine et al. 2021 author affiliations). The EU marketing authorisation is held by Incyte Biosciences Distribution B.V., in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (EMA EPAR).
We did not trace the manufacturers of generic steroid creams, tacrolimus or phototherapy equipment in this review. Ginkgo and vitamin D products are sold as supplements by many companies. We did not review their ownership, and we are not aware of documented integrity actions against them for vitiligo claims in the sources we opened.
Who paid for the evidence
- Ruxolitinib pivotal trials (Tier 4): "Funded by Incyte". Three authors list Incyte, Wilmington, DE, as their affiliation. The trial sites were in North America and Europe (NEJM 2022).
- Psychosocial review (Tier 4): funded by Incyte. Four of seven authors were Incyte-affiliated. One author (Pandya) lists investigator and consultant roles that include Incyte (full text).
- BAD guideline (Tier 2): no funding declared. Several authors declare payments or consultancy ties to other drug companies in dermatology, and the declarations we read did not list Incyte (BAD guideline).
- Cochrane review (Tier 2): funding statement not verified in this review.
- Phototherapy meta-analysis (Tier 2): "Conflict of interest: none reported". Funding statement not verified.
- Ginkgo trial (Tier 2): academic; funding statement not verified.
- Regulators (Tier 1): NHS and EMA are public bodies. We did not trace EMA's fee model in this review.
Documented integrity events
We searched for FDA warning letters, false-advertising actions and lawsuits about Opzelura marketing. We found none in the results we could check. For vitiligo supplements, we found no regulatory action in the sources we opened, but we did not search every product.
Money map: where the sources sit
Of the eight sources in the scorecard, two are tier 1 (government or regulator), four are tier 2 (academic or professional bodies with no declared funding for the work), and two are tier 4 (maker-funded). The maker-funded sources are the ones that report the newest efficacy data for ruxolitinib and the most recent psychosocial burden review. The independent guidance is older and does not assess ruxolitinib.
Related research
- Vitamin D: independent evidence
- Glutathione: independent evidence
- Eczema prevention guide
- Eczema supplements: independent evidence
- Basal cell carcinoma
- Melanoma
- Rheumatoid arthritis
- Autoimmune disease and the heart
- Body dysmorphic disorder
- Major depressive disorder
Frequently asked questions
Can vitiligo be cured?
No treatment is shown to cure vitiligo. The Cochrane review says some treatments restore pigment, but none cure the disease (Cochrane 2015). The NHS notes that treatment does not usually last (NHS).
What is the first treatment for vitiligo?
BAD recommends a potent or very potent topical steroid once daily as first-line treatment, with tacrolimus as an alternative for the face (BAD guideline).
Does narrowband UVB work for vitiligo?
It can restore pigment, most on the face and neck. In one pooled analysis, 35.7% of patients had a marked response at 12 months. That analysis pooled response rates rather than comparing with untreated patients, and found no response on the hands or feet after at least six months (Bae et al. 2017). BAD recommends it for people who respond poorly to creams or have extensive disease (BAD guideline).
Does ruxolitinib cream work, and who paid for the trials?
In two phase 3 trials, about 30% of people reached a 75% improvement in the facial vitiligo score (F-VASI75) at 24 weeks, compared with 7% to 11% on vehicle cream. The trials were funded by Incyte, which makes the cream (Rosmarin et al. NEJM 2022). The EMA authorised it for facial vitiligo in adults and adolescents from 12 (EMA EPAR).
Does ginkgo biloba help vitiligo?
The evidence is limited to one placebo-controlled trial of 47 people, published in 2003. It reported a benefit in stopping spread, and marked repigmentation in more patients on ginkgo than on placebo (Parsad et al. 2003). We found no larger placebo-controlled trial; a 2011 open-label pilot is the only later ginkgo study we saw.
Should people with vitiligo take vitamin D?
BAD does not recommend vitamin D as a treatment for vitiligo. It suggests checking levels in people who avoid all sun, and considering supplements only if levels are low (BAD guideline). A GP can check levels.
Does vitiligo affect mental health?
Yes, the evidence links vitiligo with depression, anxiety and stigma. The review that found this was funded by Incyte (Ezzedine et al. 2021). Talk to a GP about support, which can include talking therapies.
Is sun exposure safe with vitiligo?
The NHS recommends strong sunscreen because affected skin burns more easily (NHS). Phototherapy is a controlled, clinician-supervised use of UV, which is different from sunbathing.
Sources and funding notes
What we could not verify. In a second fact-check pass on 9 October 2026, we re-checked the BAD recommendations, the Bae figures, the Parsad trial, the Cochrane abstract, the Ezzedine funding and author declarations, the FDA approval date, and the EMA safety, authorisation and marketing-holder statements against publisher, PubMed, Europe PMC and regulator records. Still unverified, and therefore removed or hedged in the text above: the author affiliations on the Rosmarin NEJM paper (only the funder record was seen); the full ruxolitinib adverse-reaction percentages and the full US label text; the funding statement of the 2015 Cochrane review (its 2015 declarations were not checked); the Parsad author affiliations (India, per a secondary report); and the NICE and NHS England decisions, which could not be opened. A reported June 2026 Incyte and CMS Medicaid rebate matter was not verified and is excluded from the verdict.
- NHS: Vitiligo. Public health information; UK public funding; autoimmune cause, diagnosis, sun protection.
- British Association of Dermatologists, Vitiligo guideline, British Journal of Dermatology 2022. Professional guideline; "Funding sources: None"; author company ties listed in declarations; published January 2022.
- Whitton ME et al. Interventions for vitiligo. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;(2):CD003263. Systematic review; 96 trials, 4,512 people; funding not verified in this review.
- Bae JM et al. Phototherapy for vitiligo: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol 2017;153(7):666-674. Academic (Korea); public grant from the National Research Foundation of Korea; conflicts none reported; pooled response rates.
- Parsad D et al. Effectiveness of oral Ginkgo biloba in treating limited, slowly spreading vitiligo. Clin Exp Dermatol 2003;28(3):285-287. Academic placebo-controlled trial; 47 analysed; funding not verified.
- Rosmarin D et al. Two phase 3, randomized, controlled trials of ruxolitinib cream for vitiligo. N Engl J Med 2022;387(16):1445-1455. Maker-funded (Incyte, per the Europe PMC funder record); peer-reviewed; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04052425 and NCT04057573.
- European Medicines Agency: Opzelura EPAR. EU regulator; CHMP opinion February 2023; marketing authorisation valid from 19 April 2023 (Incyte announced it on 20 April 2023); marketing authorisation holder Incyte Biosciences Distribution B.V.
- Ezzedine K et al. Psychosocial effects of vitiligo: a systematic literature review. Am J Clin Dermatol 2021;22(6):757-774. Maker-funded (Incyte); four of seven authors Incyte-affiliated. Full text reviewed for funding.
Educational research reviewed 9 October 2026. This article is not medical advice; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist before starting, stopping or combining treatments.
Have a question — or want us to cover something?
Ask about anything on this page, or request the next deep dive: an ingredient, a supplement, or a health concern. We use published research, evidence syntheses, and regulatory guidance, with clear source links.
One daily research roundup
Get the topics, key findings and links from our new articles in one email. At most one digest a day, only when there is something new.