Efinaconazole 10% Solution in the Treatment of Onychomycosis of the Toenails
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Efinaconazole 10% solution is a new triazole antifungal agent developed for the topical treatment of onychomycosis. This article reviews the pooled results of the two pivotal clinical trials of this drug that have been performed in the United States, Canada, and Japan. METHODS: The two studies of 1,655 patients were both double-blind, vehicle-controlled, parallel-group, randomized, multicenter studies designed to determine the efficacy and safety of efinaconazole 10% solution in the treatment of mild-to-moderate onychomycosis of the toenails caused by dermatophytes. Treatment was provided once daily for 48 weeks, and the primary end point was at week 52. RESULTS: The combined results show a 56% mycologic cure rate compared with 17% for vehicle at week 52. Clinical treatment success was achieved in 43% of patients treated with efinaconazole 10% solution at follow-up (week 52). Clinical treatment success was achieved in 47% of patients. As expected for a topical agent, the use of efinaconazole 10% solution was found to be safe, with mild, transient irritation at the site of application reported as the most common adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety profile of efinaconazole 10% solution suggests that it may represent an important advance in the topical treatment of onychomycosis. Further studies will help us better understand the role of this agent for the treatment of this widespread podiatric medical condition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".