Comparative Efficacy of Pharmacological and Nonpharmacological Interventions for Acne Vulgaris: A Network Meta-Analysis

Comparison of the Efficacy of Clascoterone, Trifarotene, and Tazarotene for the Treatment of Acne: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Acne vulgaris, a chronic inflammatory condition, is associated with significant physical and psychosocial burden. Since 2019, three new topical agents for acne vulgaris have been approved in the USA and Canada. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy between twice-daily clascoterone cream 1%, once-daily trifarotene 0.005% cream, and once-daily tazarotene 0.045% lotion for acne treatment.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing clascoterone, trifarotene, or tazarotene with vehicle in patients with moderate-to-severe acne were identified from a systematic literature review and included in a meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were percentage reduction in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion count (ILC and NILC, respectively) and treatment success rate (≥ 2-grade improvement in Investigator's Global Assessment or Evaluator's Global Severity Score and a rating of clear or almost clear) at week 12. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with the inverse variance method were used to calculate the mean difference (MD) for percentage reduction in ILC and NILC, and odds ratios (ORs) for the rate of treatment success.

RESULTS

Six Phase 3 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The analyses showed robust differences favoring the interventions for ILC (MD: - 11.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 14.39, - 8.62), NILC (MD: - 12.25; 95% CI: - 15.21, - 9.29), and treatment success rate (OR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.81, 2.53). No differences were observed between clascoterone, trifarotene, and tazarotene for ILC (MD: - 12.8, - 11.2, and - 10.1, respectively), NILC (MD: - 11.6, - 13.9, and - 12.8, respectively), or treatment success rate (OR: 2.9, 1.9, and 2.1, respectively (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

No significant differences in efficacy were observed between clascoterone, trifarotene, and tazarotene after 12 weeks of treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe acne. Differences in application frequency and safety profile should also be taken into consideration when making treatment decisions.

A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Targeted Therapies on the Total Length of Hospital Stay in Children with Drug-Induced Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis Syndrome

Background: Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are rare potentially life-threatening hypersensitivity disorders characterized by widespread skin and mucosal involvement. However, there is no standardized evidence-based treatment to reduce the complications of SJS/TEN. This article aims to compare the efficacy of different treatments for pediatric SJS/TEN in terms of length of hospital stay (LOS) using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). A Bayesian NMA is used to compare and combine evidence from multiple studies and allows clinicians to estimate the relative effectiveness of different treatments/interventions while accounting for heterogeneity in the available evidence. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive electronic database search for studies compatible with our inclusion criteria. Six studies with 103 patients were included in the NMA; of them, 37 patients were treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), 37 with systemic corticosteroids (CS), 23 with IVIG + CS, and 3 with Etanercept (ET) + CS. Patients with a median age of 10 years were included in the study. Results: CS had the highest probability of being the most optimal treatment for SJS/TEN in terms of shorter LOS based on the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve levels, and CS + IVIG was associated with a statistically nonsignificant trend toward shorter LOS than IVIG alone. Remarkably, none of the treatments showed a significant benefit over the other interventions in terms of LOS. Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that coadministration of CS and IVIG may be associated with a shorter LOS than IVIG alone. Further research with larger randomized controlled trials is needed to reach a definitive conclusion about the efficacy of specific therapy on LOS in pediatric SJS/TEN and to establish more definitive treatment guidelines.

Data visualisation approaches for component network meta-analysis: visualising the data structure

BACKGROUND

Health and social care interventions are often complex and can be decomposed into multiple components. Multicomponent interventions are often evaluated in randomised controlled trials. Across trials, interventions often have components in common which are given alongside other components which differ across trials. Multicomponent interventions can be synthesised using component NMA (CNMA). CNMA is limited by the structure of the available evidence, but it is not always straightforward to visualise such complex evidence networks. The aim of this paper is to develop tools to visualise the structure of complex evidence networks to support CNMA.

METHODS

We performed a citation review of two key CNMA methods papers to identify existing published CNMA analyses and reviewed how they graphically represent intervention complexity and comparisons across trials. Building on identified shortcomings of existing visualisation approaches, we propose three approaches to standardise visualising the data structure and/or availability of data: CNMA-UpSet plot, CNMA heat map, CNMA-circle plot. We use a motivating example to illustrate these plots.

RESULTS

We identified 34 articles reporting CNMAs. A network diagram was the most common plot type used to visualise the data structure for CNMA (26/34 papers), but was unable to express the complex data structures and large number of components and potential combinations of components associated with CNMA. Therefore, we focused visualisation development around representing the data structure of a CNMA more completely. The CNMA-UpSet plot presents arm-level data and is suitable for networks with large numbers of components or combinations of components. Heat maps can be utilised to inform decisions about which pairwise interactions to consider for inclusion in a CNMA model. The CNMA-circle plot visualises the combinations of components which differ between trial arms and offers flexibility in presenting additional information such as the number of patients experiencing the outcome of interest in each arm.

CONCLUSIONS

As CNMA becomes more widely used for the evaluation of multicomponent interventions, the novel CNMA-specific visualisations presented in this paper, which improve on the limitations of existing visualisations, will be important to aid understanding of the complex data structure and facilitate interpretation of the CNMA results.

Comparative Efficacy of Pharmacological Treatments for Acne Vulgaris: A Network Meta-Analysis of 221 Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Acne is an extremely common skin disease with an estimated global prevalence of 9.4%. We aim to provide comprehensive comparisons of the common pharmacological treatments for acne.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of pharmacological therapies for acne vulgaris in patients of any age and sex and with a treatment duration of >2 weeks were included. PubMed and Embase databases were searched from inception until February 2022. Our prespecified primary end points were mean percentage reduction in total, inflammatory, and noninflammatory lesions. Treatment ranking was determined by P values.

RESULTS

There were 210 articles describing 221 trials and 37 interventions included in the analysis. Our primary analysis of percentage reduction in total lesion count had 65,601 patients enrolled. Across all trials, the mean age was 20.4 years. The median duration of treatment was 12 weeks. The median total, inflammatory, and noninflammatory lesion counts were 72, 27, and 44, respectively. The most effective treatment was oral isotretinoin (mean difference [MD] = 48.41; P = 1.00), followed by triple therapy containing a topical antibiotic, a topical retinoid, and benzoyl peroxide (BPO) (MD = 38.15; P = .95) and by triple therapy containing an oral antibiotic, a topical retinoid, and BPO (MD = 34.83; P = .90). For monotherapies, oral or topical antibiotics or topical retinoids have comparable efficacy for inflammatory lesions, while oral or topical antibiotics have less effect on noninflammatory lesions.

CONCLUSION

The most effective treatment for acne is oral isotretinoin, followed by triple therapies containing a topical retinoid, BPO, and an antibiotic. We present detailed comparisons of each intervention to serve as a practical database.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of topical pharmacological, oral pharmacological, physical and combined treatments for acne vulgaris

BACKGROUND

Various treatments for acne vulgaris exist, but little is known about their comparative effectiveness in relation to acne severity.

OBJECTIVES

To identify best treatments for mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe acne, as determined by clinician-assessed morphological features.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing topical pharmacological, oral pharmacological, physical and combined treatments for mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe acne, published up to May 2020. Outcomes included percentage change in total lesion count from baseline, treatment discontinuation for any reason, and discontinuation owing to side-effects. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and bias adjustment models. Effects for treatments with ≥ 50 observations each compared with placebo are reported below.

RESULTS

We included 179 RCTs with approximately 35 000 observations across 49 treatment classes. For mild-to-moderate acne, the most effective options for each treatment type were as follows: topical pharmacological - combined retinoid with benzoyl peroxide (BPO) [mean difference 26·16%, 95% credible interval (CrI) 16·75-35·36%]; physical - chemical peels, e.g. salicylic or mandelic acid (39·70%, 95% CrI 12·54-66·78%) and photochemical therapy (combined blue/red light) (35·36%, 95% CrI 17·75-53·08%). Oral pharmacological treatments (e.g. antibiotics, hormonal contraceptives) did not appear to be effective after bias adjustment. BPO and topical retinoids were less well tolerated than placebo. For moderate-to-severe acne, the most effective options for each treatment type were as follows: topical pharmacological - combined retinoid with lincosamide (clindamycin) (44·43%, 95% CrI 29·20-60·02%); oral pharmacological - isotretinoin of total cumulative dose ≥ 120 mg kg-1 per single course (58·09%, 95% CrI 36·99-79·29%); physical - photodynamic therapy (light therapy enhanced by a photosensitizing chemical) (40·45%, 95% CrI 26·17-54·11%); combined - BPO with topical retinoid and oral tetracycline (43·53%, 95% CrI 29·49-57·70%). Topical retinoids and oral tetracyclines were less well tolerated than placebo. The quality of included RCTs was moderate to very low, with evidence of inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence. Uncertainty in findings was high, in particular for chemical peels, photochemical therapy and photodynamic therapy. However, conclusions were robust to potential bias in the evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Topical pharmacological treatment combinations, chemical peels and photochemical therapy were most effective for mild-to-moderate acne. Topical pharmacological treatment combinations, oral antibiotics combined with topical pharmacological treatments, oral isotretinoin and photodynamic therapy were most effective for moderate-to-severe acne. Further research is warranted for chemical peels, photochemical therapy and photodynamic therapy for which evidence was more limited. What is already known about this topic? Acne vulgaris is the eighth most common disease globally. Several topical, oral, physical and combined treatments for acne vulgaris exist. Network meta-analysis (NMA) synthesizes direct and indirect evidence and allows simultaneous inference for all treatments forming an evidence network. Previous NMAs have assessed a limited range of treatments for acne vulgaris and have not evaluated effectiveness of treatments for moderate-to-severe acne. What does this study add? For mild-to-moderate acne, topical treatment combinations, chemical peels, and photochemical therapy (combined blue/red light; blue light) are most effective. For moderate-to-severe acne, topical treatment combinations, oral antibiotics combined with topical treatments, oral isotretinoin and photodynamic therapy (light therapy enhanced by a photosensitizing chemical) are most effective. Based on these findings, along with further clinical and cost-effectiveness considerations, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance recommends, as first-line treatments, fixed topical treatment combinations for mild-to-moderate acne and fixed topical treatment combinations, or oral tetracyclines combined with topical treatments, for moderate-to-severe acne.

Efficacy and safety of N-acetyl-GED-0507-34-LEVO gel in patients with moderate-to severe facial acne vulgaris: a phase IIb randomized double-blind, vehicle-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Preliminary in vitro and in vivo studies have supported the efficacy of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPARγ) modulator N-acetyl-GED-0507-34-LEVO (NAC-GED) for the treatment of acne-inducing sebocyte differentiation, improving sebum composition and controlling the inflammatory process.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of NAC-GED (5% and 2%) in patients with moderate-to-severe facial acne vulgaris.

METHODS

This double-blind phase II randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at 36 sites in Germany, Italy and Poland. Patients aged 12-30 years with facial acne, an Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 3-4, and an inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion count of 20-100 were randomized to topical application of the study drug (2% or 5%) or placebo (vehicle), once daily for 12 weeks. The co-primary efficacy endpoints were percentage change from baseline in total lesion count (TLC) and IGA success at week 12; the safety endpoints were adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. This study was registered with EudraCT (2018-003307-19).

RESULTS

Between Q1 in 2019 and Q1 in 2020 450 patients [n = 418 (92·9%) IGA 3; n = 32 (7·1%) IGA 4] were randomly assigned to NAC-GED 5% (n = 150), NAC-GED 2% (n = 150) or vehicle (n = 150). The percentage change in TLC reduction was statistically significantly higher in both the NAC-GED 5% [-57·1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -60·8 to -53·4; P < 0·001] and NAC-GED 2% (-44·7%, 95% CI -49·1 to -40·1; P < 0·001) groups compared with vehicle (-33·9%, 95% CI -37·6 to -30·2). A higher proportion of patients treated with NAC-GED 5% experienced IGA success (45%, 95% CI 38-53) vs. the vehicle group (24%, 95% CI 18-31; P < 0·001). The IGA success rate was 33% in the NAC-GED 2% group (P = not significant vs. vehicle). The percentage of patients who had one or more AEs was 19%, 16% and 19% in the NAC-GED 5%, NAC-GED 2% and vehicle groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The topical application of NAC-GED 5% reduced TLC, increased the IGA success rate and was safe for use in patients with acne vulgaris. Thus, NAC-GED, a new PPARγ modulator, showed an effective clinical response. What is already known about this topic? Acne vulgaris, one of the most common dermatological diseases, affects more than 85% of adolescents. There is a medical need for innovative and safe treatment of acne vulgaris. The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPARγ) is involved in lipid metabolism and specifically in cell differentiation, sebum production and the inflammatory reaction. What does this study add? N-acetyl-GED-0507-34-LEVO (NAC-GED 5%), a PPARγ modulator, significantly improves acne manifestations in patients with moderate-to-severe acne and is safe and well tolerated. The results suggest that the PPARγ receptor is a novel therapeutic target for acne. The results provide a basis for a large phase III trial to assess the effectiveness and safety profile of NAC-GED in combating a disease that afflicts 80-90% of adolescents.

Clinical study on acupuncture treatment of gastrointestinal damp-heat acne

BACKGROUND

Acne is a common inflammatory disease of sebaceous glands, which brings extensive emotional and psychological distress to patients. Although acupuncture has certain advantages in the treatment of acne, the curative effect is not exact. The purpose of this trial is to evaluate the feasibility, preliminary efficacy, and safety of the "Spleen and Stomach Guiyuan Acupuncture Method" (SSGA) in the treatment of gastrointestinal damp-heat acne.

METHODS

The proposed protocol is planned as a randomized, assessor-blind, conventional-treatment-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of SSGA on gastrointestinal damp-heat acne. Seventy six gastrointestinal damp-heat acne patients will be randomly divided into 2 groups and receive SSGA or conventional acupuncture treatment. The entire study period is 12 weeks, including an 8-week treatment period and a 4-week follow-up period. All patients will receive 16 sessions of acupuncture treatment over 8 weeks. The primary outcome is the investigation global assessment (IGA) at week 8, which is an overall assessment of the degree of the inflammatory and non-inflammatory lesion. The secondary outcomes include IGA, the total facial lesion count (Total Lesion Count), the acne-specific quality of life, etc at weeks 8 and 12. The Expectation and Credibility of treatment rating scale will be used to measure the patients' attitudes to acupuncture after the first treatment. Adverse events will also be recorded.

DISCUSSION

This study is helpful to evaluate the feasibility, preliminary efficacy, and safety of SSGA in the treatment of gastrointestinal damp-heat acne. The results will be used in sample size calculations for subsequent large-scale studies.Trial registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100047363. Registered on June 13, 2021.

Dermatology: how to manage acne vulgaris

Background

Acne vulgaris is the most common skin disease that can lead to disfigurement and psychological distress. This article aims to provide a narrative updated review on the management of acne vulgaris.

Methods

A PubMed search was performed with Clinical Queries using the key term “acne”. The search strategy included clinical trials, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, observational studies and reviews. The search was restricted to articles published in English.

Results

Treatments of acne include proper skin care, topical medications, oral medications and procedural therapies. Topical agents are the first-line treatment for mild-to-moderate acne and can be used as combination therapy for more severe acne. Systemic therapies are usually prescribed for the initial treatment of moderate-to-severe acne as well as for acne that is refractory to topical therapies.

Conclusion

Topical retinoids are the drugs of choice for the treatment and maintenance therapy of patients with mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris. Depending on the severity of the acne, topical retinoids may be used alone or in combination with benzoyl peroxide and topical or oral antibiotics. Oral antibiotics are an important therapy for inflammatory acne unresponsive to topical therapy. Neither topical nor oral antibiotics should be used as monotherapy. Oral contraceptives and/or spironolactone are useful for many women with acne. Oral isotretinoin is the drug of choice for severe, extensive, nodular acne vulgaris but is also often used in moderate cases where scarring is evident, acne-related psychosocial distress is significant or other treatment modalities have failed.

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of Anti-inflammatory Agents on Major Depressive Disorder: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background: With the growing importance of research about the association between neuroinflammation and major depressive disorder (MDD), anti-inflammatory agents have been used as a new antidepressant therapy in clinical practice. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) with up-to-date evidence to compare different anti-inflammatory agents for improving the treatment of MDD patients.

Methods: To identify eligible randomized clinical trials, four databases (i.e, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed and Embase) were searched from inception date to May 31, 2020. Anti-inflammatory agents were defined as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, cytokine inhibitors, statins, pioglitazone, minocycline, N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and omega-3 fatty acid (Omega-3 FA). The main outcomes of this NMA were efficacy, acceptability and remission rate. Risk ratio (RR) was adopted for dichotomous outcomes, and the confidence interval (CI) was set at 95%. STATA 14.0 and R 3.6.3 were used to conduct the NMA. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020182531).

Results: A total of 39 studies, involving 2871 participants, were included in quantitative data synthesis. For efficacy, NSAIDs (RR=0.50, 95%CI: 0.26-0.73) and pioglitazone (RR=0.45, 95%CI: 0.20-0.84) were more favorable than placebo. With respect to acceptability, NSAIDs were more acceptable than placebo (RR=0.89, 95%CI: 0.77-0.99) and minocycline (RR=1.22, 95%CI: 1.03-1.49). For remission, NSAIDs were more superior than placebo (RR=0.48, 95%CI: 0.27-0.79) and Omega-3 FA (RR=2.01, 95%CI: 1.09-3.90), while NACs were more favorable than placebo (RR=0.39, 95%CI: 0.13-0.99). Based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value, corticosteroids (0.86) were the best anti-inflammatory agent for MDD patients in terms of efficacy, but the head-to-head comparisons for the efficacy of glucocorticoids and other agents were not statistically significant. As for acceptability, NSAIDs (0.81) were much better than other anti-inflammatory agents. Besides, NAC (0.80) was the best anti-inflammatory agent in the terms of remission.

Conclusions: In summary, we found that corticosteroids were more superior than other agents in terms of efficacy according to the SUCRA value. However, this result must be interpreted with caution because the head-to-head comparisons for the efficacy of glucocorticoids and other agents did not reach statistical significance. NSAIDs were recommended for acceptability and NAC for remission rate.

Human cell receptors: potential drug targets to combat COVID-19

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organization (WHO) has announced that COVID-19 is a pandemic having a higher spread rate rather than the mortality. Identification of a potential approach or therapy against COVID-19 is still under consideration. Therefore, it is essential to have an insight into SARS-CoV-2, its interacting partner, and domains for an effective treatment. The present study is divided into three main categories, including SARS-CoV-2 prominent receptor and its expression levels, other interacting partners, and their binding domains. The first section focuses primarily on coronaviruses' general aspects (SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronaviruses (MERS-CoV)) their structures, similarities, and mode of infections. The second section discusses the host receptors which includes the human targets of coronaviruses like dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4), CD147, CD209L, Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2 (ACE2), and other miscellaneous targets (type-II transmembrane serine proteases (TTSPs), furin, trypsin, cathepsins, thermolysin, elastase, phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate 5-kinase, two-pore segment channel, and epithelium sodium channel C-α subunit). The human cell receptor, ACE2 plays an essential role in the Renin-Angiotensin system (RAS) pathway and COVID-19. Thus, this section also discusses the ACE2 expression and risk of COVID-19 infectivity in various organs and tissues such as the liver, lungs, intestine, heart, and reproductive system in the human body. Absence of ACE2 protein expression in immune cells could be used for limiting the SARS-CoV-2 infection. The third section covers the current available approaches for COVID-19 treatment. Overall, this review focuses on the critical role of human cell receptors involved in coronavirus pathogenesis, which would likely be used in designing target-specific drugs to combat COVID-19.