ReviewJournal of medicine and life2026
Glutathione for skin lightening via intravenous, oral, and topical routes: a critical narrative review of current evidence, safety, and the evidence-practice gap.
Review in Journal of medicine and life, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous glutathione (IV GSH) has emerged as a prominent cosmetic skin-lightening treatment despite continuing uncertainty about its efficacy and safety. This narrative review critically appraises the available evidence on IV GSH, with special emphasis on its proposed mechanisms of action, clinical efficacy, safety profile, and knowledge gaps. We performed a structured literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar from inception through March 2026. We screened and included mechanistic, preclinical, and clinical trials assessing GSH for skin lightening in the final narrative synthesis. The biological hypothesis for GSH is that it can block the tyrosinase pathway, influence oxidative stress regulation, and direct melanogenesis toward pheomelanin synthesis. However, translating these mechanisms into clinically meaningful outcomes remains uncertain. Available literature provides limited evidence of modest, varied skin pigmentation improvements and is generally limited by small sample sizes, methodological differences, the absence of standardized outcomes, and limited follow-up. In addition, the regular co-administration of vitamin C has made it difficult to know the independent effect of IV GSH in such individuals. New safety concerns, such as hepatotoxicity, hypersensitivity reactivity, and potential renal and endocrine effects, may further complicate the risk-benefit relationship during IV GSH. Current evidence is too limited to justify routine use for cosmetic skin lightening, highlighting the necessity for sufficiently powered RCTs and prolonged safety studies.
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.