Trial reportArchives of dermatological research2024
Efficacy and safety of topical spironolactone versus topical dapsone in the treatment of acne vulgaris.
Trial report in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and Safety of Oral Spironolactone for Women With Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials With Trial Sequential Analysis.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of 577-nm diode laser versus 1064-nm Nd: YAG laser for inflammatory acne vulgaris: a split-face randomized study.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- Overview of the Efficacy and Safety of Topical Hormonal Therapies for the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris: A Narrative Review.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acne vulgaris is a common skin disease that greatly impacts the quality of life of affected individuals. Several treatment modalities are available for acne, with variable degrees of success. Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of topical spironolactone 5% gel and topical dapsone 5% gel as treatment modalities for acne vulgaris. The study included 28 patients with mild to moderate acne. They were randomly divided into two equal groups. Group I treated with topical spironolactone 5% gel, and group II treated with topical dapsone 5% gel. In both groups, the gel was applied twice daily for 12 weeks, and patients were evaluated using the acne severity index. Group I included 14 patients [11 (78.6%) females and 3 (21.4%) males]. More than one-half of this group (64.3%) had moderate acne severity. Group II included 14 patients [12 (85.7%) females and 2 (14.3%) males]. Half of patients had moderate acne severity. Therapeutic response was poor, moderate, good, and excellent (14.3%), (28.6%), (50%), (7.1%), respectively, in topical spironolactone group versus poor, moderate, and good (50%), (42.9%), (7.1%), respectively, in topical dapsone group. The therapeutic response between the studied groups was statistically significant in favor of the topical spironolactone group. Regarding adverse effects, burning sensation was evident after application of topical spironolactone while itching was significantly common with topical dapsone. The data provided by the current study support the use of topical spironolactone 5% gel in treating acne vulgaris in both male and female patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39485505What 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.