4.3 Article

A fixed-dose combination of adapalene 0.1%-BPO 2.5% allows an early and sustained improvement in quality of life and patient treatment satisfaction in severe acne

Journal

JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGICAL TREATMENT
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages 26-34

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/09546634.2011.643221

Keywords

patient-related outcomes; Acne-QoL; patient satisfaction questionnaire

Categories

Funding

  1. Galderma RD

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Acne has a significant negative impact on quality of life (QoL): lack of self-confidence, depressive symptoms and suicidal thoughts. The objective was to assess the impact of an initial and continued therapy in severe acne patients through patient-related outcomes (PRO). Methods: In two sequential double-blind randomized studies, patients received either adapalene 0.1% and benzoyl peroxide 2.5% (A-BPO) or vehicle, associated with doxycycline 100 mg for 12 weeks. Patients having obtained at least a good improvement according to investigator global assessment were re-randomized for a 24-week therapy with A-BPO or vehicle. PROs were assessed using the Acne-QoL and a patient treatment satisfaction questionnaire. Results: QoL was improved at week 12 in all domains with a significant difference for the Acne-symptoms domain (p < 0.001) in favor of the A-BPO regimen. Additional 24-week A-BPO treatment showed a sustained improvement, significant (p < 0.001) for all domains except for Acne-symptoms. In the vehicle arm, QoL significantly worsened for all domains (p < 0.03). At weeks 12 and 36, a significantly higher proportion of patients receiving A-BPO vs. vehicle reported high satisfaction for five out of six treatment satisfaction items. Conclusions: The early and sustained improvement of these PROs is correlated to the fast onset of action of A-BPO, the treatment effectiveness and a good safety profile.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available