Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38585192›Full record

ReviewJID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health2024

Systematic Review of Intralesional Therapies for Cutaneous Warts.

Sarah A Mullen, Emma L Myers, Rebecca L Brenner, Kim T Nguyen, Tara A Harper, Darby Welsh, Storm Keffer, Jenna Mueller, Melodi Javid Whitley

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sarah A MullenCollege of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
Emma L MyersUniversity of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Rebecca L BrennerCollege of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
Kim T NguyenCollege of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
Tara A HarperFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Darby WelshFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Storm KefferCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA.
Jenna MuellerFischell Department of Bioengineering, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA.
Melodi Javid WhitleyDepartment of Dermatology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

Medical Scientist Training Program Training GrantT32GM145449 · NIGMS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Christopher D Kontos · 2022 to 2026
$6.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM145449
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intralesional therapies are used for recalcitrant warts, but no Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment exists nor is there consensus regarding the most efficacious therapy. Therefore, this systematic review aims to summarize efficacy and adverse events reported in 62 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intralesional therapies for cutaneous warts. The most studied intralesional therapies included measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine (n = 24 studies), purified protein derivative (PPD) (n = 19 studies), vitamin D3 (n = 15 studies), and Candida antigen (n = 14 studies). Most studies included adult and pediatric patients or adults alone, with only 4 studies on pediatric patients alone. MMR vaccine was the most studied treatment (n = 853 patients). MMR had a complete response rate of 27-90%. The next most common treatment, PPD, had a complete response rate of 45-87%. Other treatments included Candida antigen and vitamin D3, with complete response rates of 25-84% and 40-96%, respectively. The most frequent side effects were injection-site reactions and flu-like symptoms. This systematic review represents a useful summary of intralesional therapy RCTs for clinician reference. This study also highlights the lack of large multi-institutional RCTs, despite many patients being treated for this widespread problem.

Indexed as

Cutaneous wartsIntralesional therapySystematic reviewVerrucaWart

Identifiers

PMID38585192
PMCPMC10990969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.