SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2025
Efficacy and safety of topical minocycline preparations for papulopustular rosacea: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin condition. Papulopustular rosacea (PPR), one of the subtypes of rosacea, presents with papules and pustules (Pelle, 2008). Topical minocycline allow the delivery of high concentrations of the medication to the skin while decreasing systemic exposure thereby evading side effects (Jones et al., 2021, Webster et al., 2020). This study aims to review the literature to delineate the efficacy and safety of topical preparations of minocycline in the treatment of moderate to severe papulopustular rosacea. Methods: This systematic review included randomized clinical trials (RCT) only that compared the efficacy and safety of 1.5% minocycline foam and 1%, 3% minocycline gel versus placebo in patients with moderate to severe papulopustular rosacea. We performed a systematic search in Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Efficacy outcomes included the absolute change in inflammatory lesion counts, the percentage change in the inflammatory lesion count, the percentage of participants achieving Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) with improvement of at least two grades, and the proportion of individuals that achieved an IGA 0/1 score ("clear" or "almost clear"). This paper was conducted in adherence to PRISMA guidelines. Also, we have registered our protocol in PROSPERO (CRD42023447486). Quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using ROB-2 tool. Additionally, we have assessed the level of evidence using GRADE too. The analysis was performed using RevMan. Results: Five randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias were included in the quantitative synthesis with a total of 2,453 enrolled participants. Minocycline (FMX103) 1.5% foam yielded statistically significant results in terms of IGA score indicating treatment success [Risk Ratio (RR) = 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04-1.66, Conclusion: Our findings suggest that topical preparations of minocycline provide statistically significant results in reducing absolute inflammatory lesion count and having IGA treatment success among patients with moderate to severe papulopustular rosacea. Further studies, however, should assess the efficacy of different concentrations and combinations of minocycline to better delineate the effect of this drug in the clinical aspect. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023447486, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023447486.
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.