SynthesisDermatology and therapy2026
Adverse Effects of Treatments for Anogenital Warts in Non-immunocompromised Adults: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Dermatology and therapy, 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
introductionInternational guidelines for the management of anogenital warts (AGWs) propose multiple first-line options but do not prioritize treatments based on safety or tolerability. This study aimed to compare the safety profiles of topical, systemic, and ablative treatments used for external AGWs in immunocompetent adults.
methodsA systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published through August 2025 was performed. Adverse events (AEs) were classified as low-, moderate-, or high-grade local AEs (LGL, MGL, HGL) and low-grade general AEs (LGG). Relative risks were estimated using random-effects models with placebo as the reference.
resultsWe included 107 RCTs involving 12,423 participants. Ablative procedures were associated with higher rates of moderate-to-severe local AEs compared with topical therapies. Among topical treatments, imiquimod 5% and cidofovir cream were associated with lower rates of severe AEs, whereas podophyllotoxin was more often associated with LGL. SUCRA rankings placed topical treatments above ablative therapies in terms of tolerability. Cidofovir cream demonstrated the best safety profile, followed by imiquimod 5%.
conclusionThis network meta-analysis highlights significant differences in tolerability across AGW treatments and offers a comparative framework for patient-centered therapeutic decision-making. It also emphasizes the need for standardized AE reporting in future trials.
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.