Systematic Review of Systemic Treatments for Tinea Versicolor and Evidence-Based Dosing Regimen Recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extensive or recurrent tinea versicolor (TV) can be treated with systemic antifungal therapies, but no dosing regimens have been approved for this indication. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for dosing regimens. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify trials reporting mycologic cure. All trials were included and assessed for quality. Correlation and statistical analyses were used to evaluate the effects of different dosing regimen parameters on efficacy. RESULTS: Fifty-seven trials investigating itraconazole, ketoconazole, fluconazole, and pramiconazole were included. Cumulative dose, treatment duration, and daily/weekly concentrations were shown to significantly influence mycologic cure rates for ketoconazole and pramiconazole but not for itraconazole and fluconazole. CONCLUSION: Based on the efficacy evidence and potential safety concerns, this review supports the following dosing regimens: 200 mg/d for 5 or 7 days of itraconazole, 300 mg/wk for 2 weeks of fluconazole, and 200 mg/d for 2 days of pramiconazole.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".