A Randomized Controlled Double-Blinded Split-Face Prospective Clinical Trial to Assess the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of a Novel 3-Step Routine Compared to Benzyl Peroxide for the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Acne Vulgaris - Gern, Alison; Walter, Jessica; Xu, Shuai; Vakharia, Paras P. (medRxiv, 2024)
Adult acne vulgaris affects up to 43-51% of individuals. While there are numerous treatment options for acne including topical, oral, and energy-based approaches, benzoyl peroxide (BPO) is a popular over the counter (OTC) treatment. Although BPO monotherapy has a long history of efficacy and safety, it suffers from several disadvantages, most notably, skin irritation, particularly for treatment naïve patients. In this prospective, randomized, controlled, split-face study, we evaluated the comparative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel 3-step azelaic acid, salicylic acid and graduated retinol regimen (Geologie Clear System) versus a common OTC BPO-based regimen (Proactiv Solution) over 12 weeks. A total of 37 adult subjects with self-reported mild to moderate acne vulgaris were recruited. A total of 21 subjects underwent a 2-week washout period and completed the full study with 3 dropping out due to product irritation from the BPO routine, and 13 being lost to follow-up. Detailed tolerability surveys were conducted at Week 4. Additional surveys on tolerability and product preferences were collected monthly, at Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12. A blinded board-certified dermatologist objectively scored the presence and type of acne lesions (open or closed comedones, papules, pustules, nodules, and cysts) at baseline, Week 4, Week 8, and Week 12. Patients photographed themselves and uploaded the images using personal mobile phones. Detailed Week 4 survey results showed across 25 domains of user-assessed product performance, Geologie outperformed the BPO routine in 19 (76%) which included domains in preference (e.g. “I would use this in the future), performance (“my skin improved” and “helped my acne clear up faster”). Geologie users reported less facial redness, itching, and burning, though differences did not reach statistical significance. In terms of efficacy, both products performed similarly, reducing total acne lesions by 36% (Geologie) and 40% (BPO routine) by Week 12. Overall, accounting for user preferences and tolerability Geologie was more preferred than the BPO routine in 79% of domains (22/28). Differences in objective acne lesion reduction were not statistically significant (p=0.97). In a randomized split-face study, a 3-step azelaic acid, salicylic acid, and graduated retinol regimen delivered similar acne lesion reduction, fewer user dropouts, greater user tolerability, and higher use preference compared to a 3-step BPO routine based in a cohort of participants with mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris.Competing Interest StatementSX has stock options and is a consultant of Regimen - the manufacturer of one of the products studied here. JRW has a spouse with stock options and a consultant of Regimen - the manufacturer of one of the products studied here.Clinical TrialNCT05446402Funding StatementThis study was funded by RegimenAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics committee/IRB of Feinberg School of Medicine gave ethical approval for this workI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors