Treatment of Multiple-Resistant and/or Recurrent Cutaneous Warts With Squaric Acid Dibutylester: A Randomized, Double-blind, Vehicle-controlled Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contact immunotherapy with squaric acid dibutylester (SADBE) for cutaneous warts has been reported to be effective, although no controlled studies are available so far. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of SADBE on cutaneous warts by a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, clinical trial. METHODS: Thirty-six patients were randomly assigned to SADBE (18 cases) or vehicle (18 cases) group. At 8 weeks, subjects were clinically evaluated for number/size reduction rate and for Investigator Global Assessment. Those who showed improvement extended therapy up to 40 weeks, whereas those who showed unresponsiveness were either switched to SADBE application for up to 48 weeks (if in the vehicle group) or withdrawn from the study (if under SADBE). RESULTS: At 8 weeks, a significant reduction in wart number (P = 0.020) and size (P = 0.010) in the SADBE group, with clearing rates of 41.2% versus 12.5% in the SADBE and vehicle groups, respectively, was observed. Nine remaining SADBE responders who underwent treatment extension up to 40 weeks achieved clearing versus 2 patients of the vehicle group who remained unresponsive. Clearing was obtained in 81.8% of patients who underwent previous ineffective vehicle treatment and had been switched to SADBE. CONCLUSIONS: Squaric acid dibutylester is an effective therapeutic option and is significantly more effective than vehicle.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".