Evaluation of the efficacy of ciclopirox 0.77% gel in the treatment of tinea pedis interdigitalis (dermatophytosis complex) in a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ciclopirox is an antifungal agent and is effective against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. These properties may give ciclopirox an advantage over other antifungal agents in the treatment of interdigital tinea pedis with secondary bacterial infection (dermatophytosis complex). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of ciclopirox 0.77% gel in the treatment of tinea pedis interdigitalis with secondary bacterial infection in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: One hundred subjects were enrolled in this 8-week study (twice-daily ciclopirox, 40 subjects; once-daily ciclopirox, 40 subjects; twice-daily vehicle, 20 subjects). Mycologic sampling, bacterial swabs, and evaluations for symptoms and signs of tinea pedis were performed on a target webspace at baseline and at weeks 2, 4, and 8. Global evaluations were made by both investigator and subject at each visit. RESULTS: Ciclopirox gel applied once or twice daily significantly reduced the signs and symptoms at week 8, compared with vehicle (P<0.0036). The mycologic cure and complete cure rates were much higher for the ciclopirox regimens than for the vehicle regimen. Early reduction of bacterial counts was noted with the ciclopirox regimens. There was no significant difference in the adverse event rate between the ciclopirox groups and the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Ciclopirox 0.77% gel, applied once or twice daily, is effective and safe in the treatment of tinea pedis interdigitalis with concomitant bacterial infection (dermatophytosis complex).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".