SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2004
Combined oral contraceptive pills for treatment of acne.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Efficacy and metabolic safety of long-term treatment with ethinyl oestradiol/cyproterone and desogestrel/ethinyl oestradiol tablets in women with polycystic ovary syndrome].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2018Trial
- The use of hormonal contraceptives in high performance Brazilian female swimmers: a cross-sectional study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025Observational
- Evaluating Dermatology Residents Combined Oral Contraceptive Pill Prescribing Practices, Knowledge, and Comfort Level in the Management of Acne Vulgaris: A Cross-sectional Survey Study.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Article
- Risk of venous thromboembolism in users of oral contraceptives containing drospirenone or levonorgestrel: nested case-control study based on UK General Practice Research Database.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Article
- How to measure "short-term hormonal effects"?Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2009Article
- Acne.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006Review
- [Systemic acne therapy].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2005Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcne is a common skin disorder among women. Although no uniform approach to the management of acne exists, combination oral contraceptives (COCs), which contain an estrogen and a progestin, often are prescribed for women.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness of COCs for the treatment of facial acne compared to placebo or other active therapies. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the computerized databases Cochrane Skin Group trial register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, Biological Abstracts and LILACS for randomized controlled trials of COCs and acne. We wrote to authors of identified trials to seek any unpublished or published trials that we might have missed. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials reported in any language that compare the effectiveness of a COC containing an estrogen and a progestin to placebo or another active therapy for acne in women were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on total and specific (i.e. open or closed comedones, papules, pustules and nodules) facial lesion counts; acne severity grades; global assessments by the clinician or the participant and discontinuation due to adverse events. Data were entered and analyzed in RevMan 4.2. MAIN
resultsThe search yielded five placebo-controlled trials that made three different comparisons and 14 trials that made nine comparisons between two COC regimens. An additional trial compared a COC to an antibiotic. COCs reduced acne lesion counts, severity grades and self-assessed acne compared to placebo. Differences in the comparative effectiveness of COCs containing varying progestin types and dosages, though, were less clear. COCs that contained chlormadinone acetate or cyproterone acetate improved acne better than levonorgestrel although this apparent advantage was based on limited data. A COC with cyproterone acetate might result in better acne outcomes than one with desogrestrel; however, the three studies comparing these COCs produced conflicting results. Likewise, levonorgestrel showed a slight improvement over desogestrel in acne outcomes in one trial, but a second trial found no difference between the COCs. REVIEWERS'
conclusionsThe three COCs evaluated in placebo-controlled trials are effective in reducing inflammatory and non-inflammatory facial acne lesions. Few differences were found in acne effectiveness between COC types. How COCs compare to alternative acne treatments is unknown since limited data were available regarding this question.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.