Adapalene-benzoyl peroxide, a unique fixed-dose combination topical gel for the treatment of acne vulgaris: a transatlantic, randomized, double-blind, controlled study in 1670 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combination therapy utilizing agents with complementary mechanisms of action is recommended by acne guidelines to help simultaneously target multiple pathogenic factors. A unique, topical, fixed-dose combination gel with adapalene 0.1% and benzoyl peroxide (BPO) 2.5% has recently been developed for the once-daily treatment of acne. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.1%-BPO 2.5% fixed-dose combination gel (adapalene-BPO) relative to adapalene 0.1% monotherapy (adapalene), BPO 2.5% monotherapy (BPO), and the gel vehicle (vehicle) in a large population for the treatment of acne vulgaris. METHODS: In total, 1670 subjects were randomized in a double-blind controlled trial to receive adapalene-BPO, adapalene, BPO or vehicle for 12 weeks (1 : 1 : 1 : 1 randomization). Evaluations included success rate (subjects 'clear' or 'almost clear'), percentage change in lesion count from baseline, cutaneous tolerability and adverse events. RESULTS: Adapalene-BPO was significantly more effective than corresponding monotherapies, with significant differences in percentage lesion count change observed as early as 1 week. Cutaneous tolerability profile was similar to adapalene. Adverse events were more frequent with the combination therapy (mainly due to an increase in mild-to-moderate dry skin), occurred early in the study, and were transient. CONCLUSIONS: Adapalene-BPO provides significantly greater and synergistic efficacy and a faster onset of action with an acceptable safety profile in the treatment of acne vulgaris when compared with the corresponding vehicle and the adapalene and BPO monotherapies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".