Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Efficacy of topical treatments for mild-to-moderate acne: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
Kakpovbia, Efe E; Young, Trevor; Milam, Emily C; Qian, Yingzhi; Yassin, Sallie; Nicholson, Joey; Hu, Jiyuan; Troxel, Andrea B; Nagler, Arielle R.
Afiliação
  • Kakpovbia EE; The Ronald O. Perelman Department of Dermatology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Young T; Department of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Milam EC; The Ronald O. Perelman Department of Dermatology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Qian Y; Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Yassin S; Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Nicholson J; NYU Health Sciences Library, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Hu J; Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Troxel AB; Department of Population Health, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
  • Nagler AR; The Ronald O. Perelman Department of Dermatology, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38943431
ABSTRACT
Acne is a common skin condition, but little data exist on the comparative efficacy of topical acne therapies. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of topical therapies for mild-to-moderate acne. Searches in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL via Ovid, Embase via Ovid and Web of Science were conducted on 29 November 2021. Randomized controlled trials examining ≥12 weeks of topical treatments for acne vulgaris in subjects aged 12 and older were included. Main outcomes were absolute or percent change in acne lesion count and treatment success on the Investigator's Global Assessment scale. Thirty-five randomized clinical trials with 33,472 participants comparing nine different topical agents were included. Adapalene-benzoyl peroxide (BPO), clindamycin-BPO and clindamycin-tretinoin demonstrated the greatest reduction in non-inflammatory (ratio of means [RoM] 1.76; 95% CI [1.46; 2.12], RoM 1.70; 95% CI [1.44; 2.02] and RoM 1.87; 95% CI [1.53; 2.30], respectively), inflammatory (RoM 1.56; 95% CI [1.44; 1.70], RoM 1.49; 95% CI [1.39; 1.60] and RoM 1.48; 95% CI [1.36; 1.61], respectively) and total lesion count (ROM 1.67; 95% CI [1.47; 1.90], RoM 1.59; 95% CI [1.42; 1.79] and RoM 1.64; 95% CI [1.42; 1.89], respectively) compared to placebo. All single agents outperformed placebo except tazarotene, which did not significantly outperform placebo for inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesion count reduction. Most combination agents significantly outperformed their individual components in lesion count reduction and global assessment scores, except for clindamycin-tretinoin and clindamycin-BPO, which did not significantly outperform tretinoin (RoM 1.13; 95% CI [0.94; 1.36]) and BPO (RoM = 1.15, 95% CI [0.98; 1.36]), respectively, for non-inflammatory lesion reduction. There was no significant difference amongst most single agents when evaluating lesion count reduction. Combination agents are generally most effective for mild-to-moderate acne; however for non-inflammatory acne, the addition of clindamycin in topical regimens is unnecessary and should be avoided.

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article