Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of montelukast versus finasteride for the treatment of moderate acne in women: A prospective, randomized, single‐blinded, active‐controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acne is a chronic inflammatory skin disease which involves the pilosebaceous unit. Tissue inflammation isone of the crucial mechanisms, amongst others. Of the various cytokines, leukotriene B4 (LT-B4) is the most potentleucocyte chemotactic mediator. Montelukast is an antagonist of the LT-B4 receptor. Finasteride is an antiandrogen whichspecifically inhibits the 5α-reductase enzyme. AIMS: This study aimed at comparing the efficacy, tolerability and safety of montelukast versus finasteride in the treatmentof moderate acne in women. PATIENTS/METHOD: This randomized, single-blinded, prospective trial over 12 weeks recruited 65 female subjects with moderate acne vulgaris (Global Acne Grading System Scale) for evaluation. One group (n = 30) received oral montelukast (10 mg PO daily), while the second group (n = 25) received oral finasteride (2.5 mg PO daily) in combination with topical clindamycin 2% solution. Lesion count and acne severity were evaluated at time intervals of 0 (baseline), 4, 8, and 12 weeks. Adverse effects of the drugs were noted. RESULTS: Both lesion count and severity of acne decreased significantly after treatment in both the groups as compared to the baseline. The acne severity score reached from 33.93 in time zero to 20.6 in the 12th week and 35.71 at baseline to 16.43 at the end of treatment in the Montelukast and Finasteride groups, respectively. Side effects were noted in 3 patients and 2 patients in the monteleukast and finasteride group, respectively, which were transient and non-serious in nature proving the satisfactory tolerability and safety of these two drugs. CONCLUSION: The results of this study show that both montelukast and finasteride have good efficacy in the treatment of acne. Finasteride has more efficacy than montelukast for treating moderate acne in normo-androgenic women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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".