-
1.
Clinical assessment of topical erythromycin gel with and without zinc acetate for treating mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris.
Sayyafan, MS, Ramzi, M, Salmanpour, R
The Journal of dermatological treatment. 2020;(7):730-733
Abstract
Purpose: Erythromycin is an effective topical antibiotic for treating mild-to-moderate inflammatory acne vulgaris, especially papules acne during puberty as well as papules - pustular acne in adult women. Erythromycin is a macrolide antibiotic that has long been used as a topical dosage form to treat acne. It has favorable effects in resolving inflammatory acne lesions not only by reducing Propioni bacterium acnes density, but also by directly inhibiting neutrophil chemotactic factors and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. Zinc, a metallic element has bacteriostatic activity against Propioni bacterium acnes. Combining zinc with antibiotic (erythromycin) can reduce antibiotic resistance and increase antibiotic absorption in-to the skin.Material and methods: In the present study, erythromycin (2% w/v) with zinc acetate (1.2% w/v) as 'topical gel' and erythromycin (2% w/v) gel alone were evaluated for treating mild to moderate inflammatory acne vulgaris. This double-blind study was carried out on 102 patients 13-25 years of age, divided into two groups. The group A received erythromycin and group B received erythromycin with zinc acetate topical gels during 3 weeks. Acne grading and lesion counts for comedones, papules and pustules were performed during each visit zero, first, second and third weeks.Results: Erythromycin treatment (with zinc acetate) gel showed to be more effective than erythromycin (alone) gel with respect to reducing the number of acne lesions and severity grade of acne.Number of lesions and severity of acne were significantly reduced at the end of 3rd week in both groups (p < .001). Conclusions: In conclusion, it can be stated that erythromycin with and without zinc acetate was clinically effective, and both formulations produced a significant reductions in acne grading as well as inflamed and noninflamed lesion counts (p < .000). Statistically, there was no significant difference between formulation A and B.
-
2.
Efficacy and safety of moisturizer containing 5% panthenol, madecassoside, and copper-zinc-manganese versus 0.02% triamcinolone acetonide cream in decreasing adverse reaction and downtime after ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser resurfacing: A split-face, double-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.
Lueangarun, S, Srituravanit, A, Tempark, T
Journal of cosmetic dermatology. 2019;(6):1751-1757
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Fractional carbon dioxide (FrCO2 ) laser is effective for atrophic acne scar treatment, but unavoidable downtime. Meanwhile, postoperative topical steroid decreases the downtime, yet still possibly increases other steroid side effects. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of moisturizer containing 5% panthenol, madecassoside, and copper-zinc-manganese (experimental cream) versus 0.02% Triamcinolone acetonide (TA) cream in decreasing adverse effects and downtime after FrCO2 laser, with wound healing improvement and prevention of certain steroid-related side effects like postinflammatory hyperpigmentation (PIH). METHODS We conducted a double-blinded, split face, randomized controlled trial in 20 subjects receiving FrCO2 laser on both sides of the faces and randomly treated with two posttreatment regimens on each side for 7 days. Clinical, expert panel assessment of photography, downtime, side effects, and biometric evaluation for erythema and melanin were performed on baseline, immediately after treatment, day 3, 5, 7, 14, 30 and, 60 postoperatively. RESULTS Both experimental cream (EC) and 0.02% TA cream could significantly reduce postlaser downtime including swelling, redness, crusting, and scaling in 5-7 days, with comparable efficacies in decreasing downtime and adverse reactions, as well as wound healing improvement and lower PIH without statistically significant difference between the two treatments. The incidence of PIH was 60% in the EC treated group with minimal intensity. CONCLUSION The moisturizer with anti-inflammatory ingredients could be a novel treatment modality for reduction of postablative laser downtime by using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents to avoid adverse effects and improve wound healing process with lower PIH.
-
3.
[Light-based inflammatory acne treatments].
Salavastru, C, Tiplica, GS, Branisteanu, DE, Fritz, K
Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete. 2018;(1):27-34
Abstract
Light-based acne treatments may represent a new emerging treatment for acne that does not increase the risk of bacterial resistance and they may be potentially effective with a favorable safety profile. Current data show that photodynamic therapy reduces inflammatory lesions and significantly improves acne. However, there is no consensus on the optimal implementation in the treatment of acne. In addition to topically applied photodynamic therapy, intense pulsed light, pulsed dye lasers, potassium-titanyl-phosphate lasers, infrared diode lasers, broad-spectrum continuous-wave light sources (red light, blue-red light) have been introduced as alternative treatments. Since well-designed studies to evaluate their efficacy versus traditional medical therapies are lacking and standardized regimens have not been agreed upon, procedures including laser, intense pulsed light, and photodynamic therapy should currently not be considered first-line treatment for inflammatory acne.
-
4.
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.
Maiti, R, Sirka, CS, Ashique Rahman, MA, Srinivasan, A, Parida, S, Hota, D
Clinical drug investigation. 2017;(11):1083-1091
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.
-
5.
Recent advances in the use of adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% to treat patients with moderate to severe acne.
Leyden, J
The Journal of dermatological treatment. 2016;:S4-13
Abstract
The central role of inflammation in acne is now more clearly understood. Adapalene, a third-generation topical retinoid, down-regulates toll-like receptor 2 expression and inhibits activator protein-1 activity. In a fixed-dose combination, adapalene and benzoyl peroxide (BPO) act synergistically on inflammatory patterns through regulation of innate immunity. In addition to reducing inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesions, adapalene/BPO helps prevent lesion and microcomedone formation. The combination of a topical retinoid and antimicrobial agent remains the preferred approach for almost all patients with acne. In cases of more severe disease, there is a clinical benefit in combining adapalene/BPO with an oral antibiotic for 12 weeks. Most recently, adapalene/BPO plus doxycycline 200 mg was found to be highly effective when compared with isotretinoin in the treatment of patients with severe acne with nodules. Long-term maintenance therapy is needed for most patients. Retinoids are the preferred agents, with BPO added in patients with more severe disease if needed. Adapalene is anticomedogenic, reduces comedones and has anti-inflammatory properties, while BPO is a unique antimicrobial agent not shown to induce microbial resistance after more than 50 years of use. Maintenance therapy for 6 months with adapalene/BPO prevents relapse among patients with severe acne and continues to reduce disease symptoms.
-
6.
Prospective, randomized, open-label trial comparing the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of an acne treatment regimen with and without a probiotic supplement and minocycline in subjects with mild to moderate acne.
Jung, GW, Tse, JE, Guiha, I, Rao, J
Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgery. 2013;(2):114-22
Abstract
BACKGROUND Systemic antibiotics are an effective treatment for acne vulgaris. However, intolerable side effects may invariably occur. OBJECTIVE To determine whether probiotics reduce the side effects imparted by systemic antibiotics while working synergistically with the latter in treating inflammatory acne. METHODS Forty-five 18- to 35-year-old females were randomly assigned to one of three arms in this prospective, open-label study. Group A received probiotic supplementation, whereas group B received only minocycline. Group C was treated with both probiotic and minocycline. Clinical and subjective assessments were completed at baseline and during the 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-week follow-up visits. RESULTS All patients demonstrated a significant improvement in total lesion count 4 weeks after treatment initiation (p < .001), with continued improvement seen with each subsequent follow-up visit (p < .01). At the 8- and 12-week follow-up visits, group C had a significant decrease in total lesion count versus groups A (p < .001) and B (p < .01). Two patients (13%) from group B failed to complete the study secondary to vaginal candidiasis. CONCLUSION Probiotics may be considered a therapeutic option or adjunct for acne vulgaris by providing a synergistic antiinflammatory effect with systemic antibiotics while also reducing potential adverse events secondary to chronic antibiotic use.
-
7.
Efficacy and safety of adapalene gel 0.1% and 0.3% and tretinoin gel 0.05% for acne vulgaris: results of a single-center, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial on Mexican patients (skin type III-IV).
Tirado-Sánchez, A, Espíndola, YS, Ponce-Olivera, RM, Bonifaz, A
Journal of cosmetic dermatology. 2013;(2):103-7
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of topical retinoids is well known according to several clinical studies conducted predominantly among Caucasian patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of adapalene and tretinoin among Mexican patients. AIMS To compare adapalene 0.1 and 0.3% and tretinoin 0.05% in Mexican subjects with acne vulgaris. METHODS We enrolled 171 patients in this single-center, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The patients applied on the face either adapalene 0.1%, adapalene 0.3%, tretinoin 0.05%, or placebo for 90 days and were evaluated for the reduction in total lesion counts and for the level of irritation. RESULTS Tretinoin 0.05% and adapalene 0.3% were more effective than adapalene 0.1% and placebo in the reduction of both inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions. Most of adverse events to adapalene and many on tretinoin group were related to skin irritation, dry skin, scaling, pruritus, burning, and postinflammatory hyperpigmentation. CONCLUSION Adapalene 0.3% and tretinoin 0.05% are comparable in efficacy, and adapalene 0.1% offers a better safety profile in Mexican patients.
-
8.
Efficacy and tolerability of topical 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP for prevention and treatment of retinoid dermatitis in patients with mild to moderate acne.
Veraldi, S, Giovene, GL, Guerriero, C, Bettoli, V
Giornale italiano di dermatologia e venereologia : organo ufficiale, Societa italiana di dermatologia e sifilografia. 2012;(5):491-7
Abstract
AIM: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of an emulsion of 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP, compared with a simple emollient cream, in the treatment of retinoid dermatitis in patients with mild-to-moderate acne. METHODS This was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, non-randomised, parallel-group study. Patients (age 12-49 years; skin phototype I-IV) with mild-to-moderate acne, who were treated with a topical retinoid for at least one month and had developed skin irritation were assigned to one of the two following treatments: 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP (N.=116) or a simple emollient cream (N.=48). Both treatments were administered twice daily, 1-1.5 hours after the application of the topical retinoid. Study endpoints were improvement in signs and symptoms of retinoid dermatitis, global efficacy, reduction in acne severity, overall clinical outcome, patient satisfaction and tolerability. RESULTS At day 28, compared with the simple emollient cream, 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP significantly decreased signs (erythema, dryness/scaling, oedema, and roughness) and symptoms (itching, stinging, burning sensation and discomfort) of retinoid dermatitis (P<0.01). In addition, compared with the simple emollient cream, 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP decreased acne severity in a significantly greater proportion of patients (P=0.023) and was associated with a better clinical outcome (mild, intermediate, clinically relevant or global improvement; P<0.001). 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP was also associated with greater patient satisfaction and was better tolerated than the simple emollient cream. CONCLUSION 0.2% Myrtacine® and 4% vitamin PP was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of retinoid dermatitis in patients with mild-to-moderate acne and significantly improved acne severity and overall clinical outcome.
-
9.
Management of acne scarring, part II: a comparative review of non-laser-based, minimally invasive approaches.
Levy, LL, Zeichner, JA
American journal of clinical dermatology. 2012;(5):331-40
Abstract
Acne scarring is a commonly encountered yet extremely challenging problem to treat for the dermatologist. As acne scarring can lead to significant psychological distress and low self-esteem, it is of utmost importance to have effective and satisfying treatments in the physician's armamentarium. However, many treatments are unsatisfying, leading to patient disappointment and frustration. Although early treatment of acne lesions and inflammation with isotretinoin is beneficial in preventing acne scarring, many patients still present with troubling noticeable scars. Despite the advances in pharmacology and technology, scar treatment still remains suboptimal and is tainted with several adverse effects. However, some treatments can provide benefits. This review article exhaustively discusses and analyzes the various minimally invasive approaches to the treatment of acne scarring with an emphasis on pharmacologic agents, such as isotretinoin for atrophic acne scars and corticosteroids and chemotherapeutic drugs for hypertrophic scars. Intralesional injections of corticosteroids are efficacious in reducing keloid scar formation in addition to preventing recurrence following surgical excision. In-office and minimally invasive procedural management, including chemical peels, dermabrasion, tissue augmentation, and punch excision is also discussed. Superficial chemical peels are efficacious in treating atrophic scars with relatively few adverse effects and complications. Although dermabrasion is used less often with the advent of laser resurfacing, this technique remains as a viable option for those with atrophic scars. Post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation can be managed successfully with topical agents such as azelaic acid and hydroquinone. The efficacy of various treatment modalities is highlighted with a focus on choosing the correct modalities for specific scar types.
-
10.
Adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel: a review of its use in the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients aged ≥ 12 years.
Keating, GM
American journal of clinical dermatology. 2011;(6):407-20
Abstract
Adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel (Epiduo™, Tactuo™) is the only fixed-dose combination product available that combines a topical retinoid with benzoyl peroxide; it targets three of the four main pathophysiologic factors in acne. This article reviews the therapeutic efficacy and tolerability of topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel in the treatment of patients aged ≥ 12 years with acne vulgaris, as well as summarizing its pharmacologic properties. In three 12-week trials in patients aged ≥ 12 years with moderate acne, success rates were significantly higher with adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel than with adapalene 0.1% gel or benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel alone, and combination therapy had an earlier onset of action. In addition, significantly greater reductions in total, inflammatory, and noninflammatory lesion counts were seen in patients receiving adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel than in those receiving adapalene 0.1% gel or benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel alone. Adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel did not significantly differ from clindamycin 1%/benzoyl peroxide 5% gel in terms of the reduction in the inflammatory, noninflammatory, or total lesion counts in patients with mild to moderate acne, according to the results of a 12-week trial. Twelve-week studies showed that topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel in combination with oral lymecycline was more effective than oral lymecycline alone in patients with moderate to severe acne, and topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel in combination with oral doxycycline hyclate was more effective than oral doxycycline hyclate alone in patients with severe acne. In patients with severe acne who responded to 12 weeks' therapy with topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel plus oral doxycycline hyclate or oral doxycycline hyclate alone, an additional 6 months' therapy with adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel was more effective than vehicle gel at maintaining response, with further improvement seen in adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel recipients. A noncomparative study also demonstrated the efficacy of 12 months' therapy with adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel in patients with acne vulgaris. Topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel was generally well tolerated in patients with acne. In 12-week trials, the most commonly occurring treatment-related adverse events included erythema, scaling, dryness, and stinging/burning; these dermatologic treatment-related adverse events were usually of mild to moderate severity, occurred early in the course of treatment, and resolved without residual effects. Topical adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel was generally well tolerated in the longer term, with dry skin being the most commonly occurring treatment-related adverse event over 12 months of treatment. In conclusion, adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel is a valuable agent for the first-line treatment of acne vulgaris.