Treatment of External Genital Warts in Men Using 5% Imiquimod Cream Applied Three Times a Week, Once Daily, Twice Daily, or Three Times a Day
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Medical therapy for genital warts remains suboptimal. The topical interferon and cytokine inducer, imiquimod, has been proved effective for the treatment of external genital and perianal warts, but there is a substantial difference in the response rates between men and women. When 5% imiquimod cream is applied three times a week up to 16 weeks, approximately two thirds of women treated with imiquimod achieve complete clearance of genital warts, whereas only about one third of men clear completely. GOAL: This study was undertaken to determine whether more frequent application of topical imiquimod cream would improve the rate of genital wart clearance in men. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized treatment trial involving adult men with biopsy-proven genital warts was conducted at nine centers in the United States and Canada using four different application frequencies. RESULTS: Complete clearance rates during the 16-week treatment period were as follows for the different imiquimod treatment frequencies: three times a week (35 %), once daily (28 %), twice daily (24%), and three times a day (27%)(P = 0.88). The four treatment groups all showed comparable reductions in the total lesion area, with a median of more than a 90% reduction in the lesion area by the end of treatment. There was a significant increase in the incidence and severity of local skin reactions including erythema, vesicle formation, ulceration, and excoriation as the dosing frequency increased from three times a week to three times a day. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the optimal dosage regimen was the approved three times a week regimen. More frequent application (up to three times a day) did not improve clearance and was associated with an increase in local adverse events.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".