SynthesisClinical drug investigation2026
Topical Antibiotic Monotherapy Only Provides Mild Benefit for Patients with Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical drug investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTopical antibiotics have long been used in acne management owing to their antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties. However, the comparative efficacy and safety profiles of antibiotic monotherapy have not been systematically synthesized. The network meta-analysis aims to determine the relative efficacy and safety of topical antibiotics for acne vulgaris.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov from 1 January, 2000, to 22 August, 2023, with an updated search on 21 October, 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing topical antibiotic monotherapy with placebo or other topical antibiotics in patients with acne vulgaris were included. Efficacy outcomes include mean absolute reduction in inflammatory lesions, non-inflammatory lesions, and total lesions, and treatment success (defined as a 2-grade reduction in the Investigator's Global Assessment). The primary safety outcome was discontinuation because of adverse events.
resultsThis review included 32 studies comprising 34 randomized controlled trials with 22,645 patients. Compared with placebo, only dapsone 5% [- 29.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 55.4 to - 4.1)] and erythromycin 2% [- 24.0 (95% CI - 45.7 to - 2.1)] significantly reduced inflammatory lesion counts. For non-inflammatory lesion counts, azithromycin 2% [- 58.9 (95% CI - 85.5 to - 31.7)], erythromycin 2% [- 42.0 (95% CI - 69.8 to - 14.0)], metronidazole 2% [- 14.6 (95% CI - 20.8 to - 8.6)], and minocycline 4% [- 5.1 (95% CI - 9.2 to - 2.2)] showed a significant reduction. However, no treatment showed a significant improvement in total lesion counts compared to placebo. Regarding Investigator's Global Assessment improvement, analysis was limited to three drugs because of inconsistent reporting; results showed that clindamycin 1% [1.6 (95% CI 1.1 to 2.3)], GDC 268 lotion (clindamycin phosphate topical lotion 1%) [2.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 4.4)], and minocycline 4% [2.2 (95% CI 1.5 to 3.5)] were superior to placebo. Data on discontinuation because of adverse events showed significant heterogeneity, which needs cautious interpretation.
conclusionsCurrent evidence indicates that topical antibiotic monotherapies yield inconsistent efficacy and uncertain safety across different lesion types. Given the lack of robust evidence for consistent superiority over placebo and the global concern for antibiotic resistance, routine antibiotics monotherapy should be limited in the management of acne vulgaris. CLINICAL
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42022297060.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42105175What 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.