Efficacy and Safety of Tazarotene 0.1% Plus Clindamycin 1% Gel Versus Adapalene 0.1% Plus Clindamycin 1% Gel in Facial Acne Vulgaris: A Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial.

Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. rituparnamaiti@gmail.com. Department of Dermatology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India. Institute of Medical Sciences and Sum Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.

Clinical drug investigation. 2017;(11):1083-1091
Full text from:

Abstract

BACKGROUND Acne vulgaris is a multifactorial disorder which is ideally treated with combination therapy with topical retinoids and antibiotics. OBJECTIVES The present study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of tazarotene plus clindamycin against adapalene plus clindamycin in facial acne vulgaris. METHODS This study is a randomized, open-label, parallel design clinical trial conducted on 60 patients with facial acne at the outpatient dermatology department in a tertiary healthcare center. The main outcome measures were change in the acne lesion count, Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) score, Global Acne Grading System (GAGS) score, and Acne-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (Acne-QoL) at the end of 4 weeks of therapy. After randomization one group (n = 30) received tazarotene 0.1% plus clindamycin 1% gel and another group (n = 30) received adapalene 0.1% plus clindamycin 1% gel for 1 month. At follow-up, all the parameter were reassessed. RESULT In both treatment regimens the total number of facial acne lesions decreased significantly. The difference in the change in the total count between the two combination regimens was also significant [6.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.91-11.09, p = 0.007]. A ≥50% reduction in the total lesion count from the baseline levels was achieved by 71% of patients in the tazarotene plus clindamycin group and 22% of patients in the adapalene plus clindamycin group (p = 0.0012). The difference in the change of inflammatory (p = 0.017) and non-inflammatory (p = 0.039) lesion counts in the tazarotene plus clindamycin group were significantly higher than the adapalene plus clindamycin group. The difference in change of the GAGS score was also significantly higher in the tazarotene plus clindamycin group (p = 0.003). The ISGA score improved in 17 patients in the tazarotene plus clindamycin group versusnine patients in the adapalene plus clindamycin group (p = 0.04). The change of total quality-of-life score was found to be significantly (p = 0.027) higher in the tazarotene plus clindamycin group. CONCLUSIONS Both treatment regimens were efficacious, but tazarotene plus clindamycin was found to be superior to adapalene plus clindamycin. The tolerability profile of both regimens was comparable. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02721173.

Methodological quality

Metadata

MeSH terms : Acne Vulgaris