Long-Term Safety of Spironolactone in Acne: Results of an 8-Year Followup Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spironolactone has been used for over 20 years as an antiandrogen in the treatment of acne and hirsutism. No long-term studies of the safety of spironolactone used in this manner have been published. We present a study of the long-term safety and tolerance of spironolactone in 91 women with acne who were followed for up to 8 years. METHODS: A survey questionnaire was sent to 210 patients, and a comparison chart review of all patients to whom the survey was sent was made. RESULTS: Ninety-one completed surveys were analyzed, comprising 506 person-years of followup and 200 person-years of spironolactone exposure. Mean treatment length was 28.5 months (range = 0.5-122 months). During the 8-year followup period, there were no cases of serious illness attributable to spironolactone use. Side effects were present in 59% and resulted in cessation of the drug in 15%. Diuretic effect and menstrual irregularities were the most common adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: After 200 person-years of exposure to spironolactone and 506 person-years of followup over 8 years, no serious illnesses thought to be attributed to spironolactone were reported. The long-term use of spironolactone in the treatment of acne in women appears to be safe. Side effects, however, are common, although not usually a cause for stopping the drug.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".