Comparison of the Efficacy of Clascoterone, Trifarotene, and Tazarotene for the Treatment of Acne: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Acne vulgaris, a chronic inflammatory condition, is associated with significant physical and psychosocial burden. Since 2019, three new topical agents for acne vulgaris have been approved in the USA and Canada. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy between twice-daily clascoterone cream 1%, once-daily trifarotene 0.005% cream, and once-daily tazarotene 0.045% lotion for acne treatment. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing clascoterone, trifarotene, or tazarotene with vehicle in patients with moderate-to-severe acne were identified from a systematic literature review and included in a meta-analysis. Primary outcomes were percentage reduction in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion count (ILC and NILC, respectively) and treatment success rate (≥ 2-grade improvement in Investigator's Global Assessment or Evaluator's Global Severity Score and a rating of clear or almost clear) at week 12. DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models with the inverse variance method were used to calculate the mean difference (MD) for percentage reduction in ILC and NILC, and odds ratios (ORs) for the rate of treatment success. RESULTS: Six Phase 3 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The analyses showed robust differences favoring the interventions for ILC (MD: - 11.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 14.39, - 8.62), NILC (MD: - 12.25; 95% CI: - 15.21, - 9.29), and treatment success rate (OR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.81, 2.53). No differences were observed between clascoterone, trifarotene, and tazarotene for ILC (MD: - 12.8, - 11.2, and - 10.1, respectively), NILC (MD: - 11.6, - 13.9, and - 12.8, respectively), or treatment success rate (OR: 2.9, 1.9, and 2.1, respectively (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: No significant differences in efficacy were observed between clascoterone, trifarotene, and tazarotene after 12 weeks of treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe acne. Differences in application frequency and safety profile should also be taken into consideration when making treatment decisions.
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 | 0.012 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".