Australas J DermSystematic review
A Systematic Review of Topical and Systemic Gentamicin for Wound Healing in Patients With Junctional and Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa.
Truong K, Joseph J, Poh D, Wargon O, Tatian A
Australasian Journal of DermatologyIn the feed 27 Jul 2026, published online 26 Jul 2026, issue 2026 Jul 26, added to PubMed 27 Jul 2026
Topics: Genetic skin diseaseWounds & scarsSkin biologyTopical treatments
Abstract
Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is an inherited mechanobullous genodermatosis caused by a mutation in genes encoding proteins integral to skin integrity. Premature termination codon readthrough therapies, such as gentamicin, have promise in facilitating full-length protein expression in patients with EB. We conducted a systematic review of the effectiveness and adverse effects of gentamicin for wound healing in EB. Six databases were searched to 01 September 2025 for clinical trials investigating gentamicin for EB. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool, and data were synthesised descriptively. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024496582). Five studies involving 24 patients with junctional EB or dystrophic EB were included; four were open-label and one was double-blinded. Nineteen of the 24 patients had a known nonsense mutation. Gentamicin was administered topically (two studies), intravenously (two studies) and both topically and intradermally (one study). Wound healing was heterogeneously measured across studies, with all but one showing improved outcomes. All patients demonstrated increased expression of glycoprotein or collagen in skin biopsy specimens after gentamicin treatment. No adverse events were noted. However, four of five studies were at serious risk of bias on ROBINS-I, primarily owing to lack of blinding and absence of control groups, increasing the risk of bias for subjective outcomes such as wound healing. The available evidence suggests gentamicin may improve wound healing in EB caused by nonsense mutations, but the small number of heterogeneous studies precludes high-level evidence. Larger, blinded, randomised trials are required to confirm efficacy and long-term safety.
Abstract from PubMed
PMID 42504002 · DOI 10.1111/ajd.70184