**7. Considerations and conclusions**

Recent studies have revealed some difficulties in predicting and assessing the efficacy of therapies in treating burn wounds. For example, the drugs Atorvastatin and Losartan, originally developed to lower cholesterol levels, showed promise in reducing fibrosis and inflammation in a number of conditions. However, when applied to partial and full thickness burn wounds, it was found that whilst Atrovastatin improved healing of full thickness burns, Losartan was detrimental, but found to be beneficial when applied to partial thickness burns [90]. This highlights the complexities of the immune response and progression through the healing cascade in burn injury and demands that careful consideration be paid during the development of any new therapy to the specific use of a treatment. Moreover, it is not yet known if dampening the immune response by any of these approaches would result in a heightened risk of infection. Therefore investigations into the effect of local versus systemic delivery methods, a thorough understanding of the dose-response effect and confounding effects due to the severity of the injury itself, combined with a careful evaluation of timing of treatments is required. Nevertheless, research into methods, which modulate the immune response, to avoid the complications of a dysregulated immune response and the formation of excess scarring and fibrosis following severe burns remains of critical importance for the future developments of new therapeutic approaches for the treatment of burns.
