Adapalene 0.3% / Benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel

Acne vulgaris is a common skin condition that significantly impacts both physical appearance and mental well-being. Acne, being a chronic skin condition, often requires continuous treatment. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/benzoyl peroxide 3% compared to clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/adapalene 0.1% combinations for treating acne vulgaris. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were carried out following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and three databases were searched to identify RCTs comparing CLIN/BPO with CLIN/ADAP. Primary outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events, inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesion counts, and application site side effects. Statistical analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.3. The study included a total of 800 participants across three RCTs. The meta-analysis of three RCTs demonstrated a significantly lower risk of TEAEs with CLIN/BPO (OR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.35-0.86, p < 0.001). CLIN/BPO also resulted in fewer application site side effects (OR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23-0.47, p < 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed between the groups for reducing inflammatory (MD = 1.34, 𝑝 = 0.121) or non-inflammatory lesion counts (MD = 0.04, 𝑝 = 0.98). The study concluded that although CLIN/BPO was associated with fewer side effects, both treatments were equally effective in reducing acne lesions. The favorable safety profile of CLIN/BPO, particularly regarding treatment-emergent and application-site adverse events, suggests it may be the more tolerable option for patients. Future studies with larger, more diverse populations are recommended to confirm these findings and explore long-term efficacy.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Acne Vulgaris is a common dermatological condition, having adverse effects on both physical and mental health. This study compares the efficacy of topical Adapalene (0.1% gel) given as Monotherapy versus its combination with 2.5% Benzoyl Peroxide in patients with mild Acne. A randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Dermatology Unit of Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar, involving 162 patients divided into two equal treatment arms. Group A patients received Adapalene Monotherapy, while Group B patients received the combination of both drugs. Efficacy was gauged through the use of Global Acne scores and the Chi-square approach for determining statistical significance of the outcomes. The findings from this study indicated that the rate of improvement among those receiving the combination was significantly higher (72.8%) when compared with Monotherapy (51.9%), with a p-value of 0.006. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that combination therapy resulted in better outcomes for females, patients within the younger age group, and non-obese individuals. The synergistic anti-inflammatory and bactericidal action of the dual regimen is highlighted in the test results, which support the adoption of the dual regimen as one of the more successful treatment options for mild Acne. The implication of this study would be of significant importance for the region-specific evidence in dermatological practice in Pakistan, impacting clinical care procedures and improving the quality of life of such patients.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Acne treatments often cause mucocutaneous side effects. This study compared a bioactive moisturizer (containing 4-t-butylcyclohexanol, licochalcone A, ceramide, and panthenol) with a traditional moisturizer in Asian patients using adapalene/benzoyl peroxide gel or oral isotretinoin. Forty participants applied each moisturizer to one side of the face. Assessments at weeks 0, 2, and 4 included hydration, trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), pH, erythema, acne lesion counts, Investigator Global Evaluation of Acne (IGEA), and patient satisfaction. Hydration increased on both sides, with greater improvement from the bioactive moisturizer (p=0.001). TEWL increased more with the traditional moisturizer; skin pH decreased on both sides. Acne lesions decreased equally. Both moisturizers reduced burning sensations, but dryness scores were higher with the traditional product (p=0.021). Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for the bioactive side (p=0.004). The bioactive moisturizer significantly improves hydration and reduces dryness, supporting its role as an adjunct to acne therapy.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

BACKGROUND: Studies have found demographic differences in prescribing patterns for certain inflammatory conditions, including acne. OBJECTIVE: To investigate acne prescription patterns among patients seen in the private system (PS) and safety-net health care system (SNS) of the University of Southern California (USC). METHODS: This was a multisite, retrospective study of patients obtaining acne care at PS and SNS outpatient dermatology facilities in Los Angeles over a one-year period. RESULTS: Despite similar acne severity, SNS patients were less often prescribed azelaic acid, benzoyl peroxide/clindamycin, benzoyl peroxide/adapalene, sulfacetamide, topical dapsone, and salicylic acid than PS patients (p < 0.001). SNS patients received fewer prescriptions for oral medications including spironolactone, antibiotics, and isotretinoin (p < 0.001). Despite similar acne severity, non-White patients were less frequently prescribed topical retinoids (p = 0.003), benzoyl peroxide/clindamycin (p = 0.003), isotretinoin (p < 0.001) and spironolactone (p < 0.001) than White patients. Despite higher acne severity among Hispanics/Latinos, they were less often prescribed spironolactone and oral antibiotics than their non-Hispanic/Latino counterparts (p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study highlight differences in acne prescribing patterns by race/ethnicity and hospital system, which can impact the ability of patients to have successful treatment of their acne and its sequelae.

Abstract licence: CC BY