For people with vitiligo and their caregivers
What this page helps you do
Understand why face, trunk, hands, feet, and other areas should not inherit the same repigmentation expectation from a single study result.
- Your task
- Separate what the evidence supports from what it does not establish for an individual.
- The clinician boundary
- Diagnosis, assessment of activity and body sites, prescribing, monitoring, and personalized treatment decisions belong to a qualified clinician.
Why does body area matter?
Vitiligo repigmentation outcomes vary by body area, so one whole-body percentage or one before-and-after image can hide important differences. Your goal should name the area that matters to you and the evidence that applies to it. Evidence Evidence
What is known
Guidelines and pooled studies describe stronger average response in some areas and more limited response in others. Body area is one of several factors used in a treatment conversation.
What is uncertain
A site-level average cannot predict one patch, and body area alone cannot select a treatment or device.
Can I use a facial result to judge my hands or feet?
No. Facial outcomes should not be transferred to hands, feet, or another site without site-specific evidence and clinical context. A treatment may be worthwhile for one priority area even when another area has a different expectation. Evidence
What is known
Clinical studies often report facial and total-body outcomes separately, and reviews report variation by anatomic site.
What is uncertain
Study categories may group areas differently, and participation criteria may not match you. “Harder to repigment” is not the same as impossible.
What about eyelids, genitals, or other sensitive areas?
A patch on a private area is not something you need to hide from your dermatologist. Sensitive or difficult-to-shield areas need an exact clinician and device conversation. Do not infer protection, exposure, or medicine safety from another body area. Evidence Evidence
What is known
Phototherapy guidance treats eye protection and treatment around the eyes as specific safety questions. Product labels also contain site- and medicine-specific precautions. You can ask for privacy, a chaperone, and a plain explanation during the exam.
What is uncertain
Whether an area should be treated, exposed, covered, or excluded belongs in the clinical and device plan.
How should I photograph more than one area?
Create a repeatable view for each priority area instead of forcing several areas into one image. Keep angle, distance, framing, background, and lighting as consistent as practical, and label setup differences honestly. Evidence Evidence
What is known
Medical photography can support follow-up, while validated clinical measures require trained use and defined methods. A consistent personal record can prepare a conversation without becoming a score.
What is uncertain
Phone cameras process images differently, and ordinary photographs cannot establish activity, response, or cause.
Evidence and update context
This optional layer shows the evidence boundary reviewed for this page as of 2026-08-03.
- What this evidence supports
- Guidelines and pooled studies describe stronger average response in some areas and more limited response in others. Body area is one of several factors used in a treatment conversation.
- What it does not establish
- A site-level average cannot predict one patch, and body area alone cannot select a treatment or device.
Applicability check
Who was studied?
These fields show what the cited evidence reports about the people and body sites behind outcome or safety claims. “Not reported” means the reviewed source omitted the field; “Pending exact source review” means SteadySkin has not made that determination yet.
Vitiligo repigmentation outcomes vary by body area, so one whole-body percentage or one before-and-after image can hide important differences. Your goal should name the area that matters to you and the evidence that applies to it.
- Age range
- Pending exact source review
- Condition subtype
- Pending exact source review
- Severity or extent
- Pending exact source review
- Sample size
- Pending exact source review
- Geography and care setting
- Pending exact source review
- Skin tone or phototype
- Pending exact source review
- Race
- Pending exact source review
- Ethnicity
- Pending exact source review
- Body sites
- Pending exact source review
What that means for this page: The claim is explicitly gated as body-site evidence, but exact population and site extraction is still pending. It cannot publish or support transfer of one site’s result to another site until that review is complete.
No. Facial outcomes should not be transferred to hands, feet, or another site without site-specific evidence and clinical context. A treatment may be worthwhile for one priority area even when another area has a different expectation.
- Age range
- Pending exact source review
- Condition subtype
- Pending exact source review
- Severity or extent
- Pending exact source review
- Sample size
- Pending exact source review
- Geography and care setting
- Pending exact source review
- Skin tone or phototype
- Pending exact source review
- Race
- Pending exact source review
- Ethnicity
- Pending exact source review
- Body sites
- Pending exact source review
What that means for this page: The claim is explicitly gated as body-site evidence, but exact population and site extraction is still pending. It cannot publish or support transfer of one site’s result to another site until that review is complete.
A patch on a private area is not something you need to hide from your dermatologist. Sensitive or difficult-to-shield areas need an exact clinician and device conversation. Do not infer protection, exposure, or medicine safety from another body area.
- Age range
- Pending exact source review
- Condition subtype
- Pending exact source review
- Severity or extent
- Pending exact source review
- Sample size
- Pending exact source review
- Geography and care setting
- Pending exact source review
- Skin tone or phototype
- Pending exact source review
- Race
- Pending exact source review
- Ethnicity
- Pending exact source review
- Body sites
- Pending exact source review
What that means for this page: This is explicitly gated as a safety claim, but exact population extraction is still pending. It cannot publish or support an estimate of individual risk until that review is complete.
Evidence behind this page
Sources
Each evidence badge opens the source and its limits. The full list stays available here.
- JAMA Dermatology (Ezzedine K, et al.)Supporting research · not independentIndependence not established
- Published
- 2024-10-30
- SteadySkin last checked
- 2026-07-31
What this source can and cannot tell you
What this source supports
Supports defined research use and psychometric evaluation of facial and total VASI measures and the need to interpret score change in the studied context.
What it does not support
The analysis used sponsor trial data and included AbbVie authors; it does not establish one personally meaningful outcome, validate untrained home scoring or provide a treatment-change rule.
Automated draft claim mapping withheld from reader-facing evidence details until clinical or editorial review is recorded. This page is not yet approved for indexing.
- DailyMed, U.S. National Library of MedicineRegulatory / guideline · not independentRelevant relationship disclosed
- Published
- 2026-01-28
- SteadySkin last checked
- 2026-07-31
What this source can and cannot tell you
Why the independence label says this: The National Library of Medicine hosts DailyMed. The product company submits the label to FDA, so it is authoritative for product labeling but not independent efficacy evidence.
What this source supports
It establishes the US atopic-dermatitis indication, boxed warning, local effects, long-term-use precaution, and ultraviolet instructions for this product.
What it does not support
It does not approve tacrolimus for vitiligo, establish vitiligo efficacy, or resolve off-label guideline discussion of supervised combinations.
Automated draft claim mapping withheld from reader-facing evidence details until clinical or editorial review is recorded. This page is not yet approved for indexing.
- JAMA Dermatology (Lee JH, et al.)Clinical research · independentIndependent source
- Published
- 2019-05-29
- SteadySkin last checked
- 2026-07-31
What this source can and cannot tell you
What this source supports
Supports pooled group-level repigmentation outcomes for topical calcineurin inhibitors alone and with phototherapy, including variation by body area.
What it does not support
Considerable study heterogeneity limits product-specific and individual inference, and the review does not override current product labels or prove one medicine superior.
Automated draft claim mapping withheld from reader-facing evidence details until clinical or editorial review is recorded. This page is not yet approved for indexing.
- British Journal of Dermatology (Eleftheriadou V, et al.)Regulatory / guideline · independentIndependent source
- Published
- 2022-01-01
- SteadySkin last checked
- 2026-07-31
What this source can and cannot tell you
What this source supports
Supports the clinical history and assessment domains, evaluation of associated autoimmune conditions, its recommendation for thyroid function and antithyroid antibody screening, current classification context, treatment-option map, psychosocial assessment, medical photography and the limits of pediatric evidence.
What it does not support
It was designed for UK care and reviewed literature through May 2019; it does not establish a universal testing plan, prescribe an individual plan, or establish current US labeling or coverage.
Automated draft claim mapping withheld from reader-facing evidence details until clinical or editorial review is recorded. This page is not yet approved for indexing.
- British Journal of Dermatology (Goulden V, et al.)Regulatory / guideline · independentIndependent source
- Published
- 2022-09-01
- SteadySkin last checked
- 2026-07-29
What this source can and cannot tell you
What this source supports
It supports that traditional NB-UVB fluorescent lamps emit a narrow UVB band peaking around 311 nanometres, plus clinical uses, comparisons with other ultraviolet treatments, and safety boundaries including sunburn-type reactions.
What it does not support
It does not provide a personal treatment plan or establish any home-use setting. SteadySkin never reproduces its treatment schedules.
Automated draft claim mapping withheld from reader-facing evidence details until clinical or editorial review is recorded. This page is not yet approved for indexing.