Efficacy and safety of topical dapsone versus topical tetracycline in mild to moderate acne vulgaris: a retrospective analysis

Abstract

Objective: In this study,we compared the efficacy and side effects of topical 7.5% dapsone and 3% tetracycline in patients with mild and moderate acne. Methods: The study was approved by the hospital’s clinical Ethics Committee.A total of 100 subjects aged 12-40 years were enrolled in the study and each group contained 50 subjects who applied to the dermatology clinic with the complaint of acne on 01.09.22-30.11.22,were diagnosed with mild and moderate acne,and were treated with topical 7.5% dapsone or 3% tetracycline for at least 12 weeks. Results: A statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of acne scores and lesion numbers at the end of the treatment (p=0.006 for acne score,0.002 for open comedones and <0.001 for other types of lesions).There was also a significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of patients with an acne score of 0 or 1 after 12 weeks of treatment (p=0.007).At the end of the first month,there was a difference between the 2 groups in terms of erythema,dryness and burning/stinging side effects (respectively p=0.009, 0.009 and <0.001). Conclusion: Our results suggest that topical 7.5% dapsone is effective in the treatment of mild to moderate acne and is safe in terms of side effects compared to topical 3% tetracycline.

Keywords

• topical dapsone
• acne and dapsone
• tetracycline and dapsone
• topical tetracycline

References

1. 1. Zhou M, Yang M, Zheng Y, Dong K, Song L, He C, et al. Skin surface lipidomics revealed the correlation between lipidomic profile and grade in adolescent acne. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19:3349–56.
2. 2. Poli F, Auffret N, Leccia MT, Claudel J-P, Dréno B. Truncal acne, what do we know? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34:2241–6.
3. 3. Dréno B, Araviiskaia E, Kerob D, Andriessen A, Anfilova M, Arenbergerova M, et al. Nonprescription acne vulgaris treatments: Their role in our treatment armamentarium-An international panel discussion. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2020;19:2201–11.
4. 4. Wozel G, Blasum C. Dapsone in dermatology and beyond. Arch Dermatol Res. 2014;306(2):103–24.
5. 5. Sago J, Hall RP. Dapsone. Dermatol Ther. 2002;15:340–51.
6. 6. Paniker U, Levine N. Dapsone and sulfapyridine. Dermatol Clin. 2001;19:79–86, viii.
7. 7. Schmitdt E, Reimer S, Kruse N, Bröcker EB, Zillikens D. The IL-8 release from human keratinocytes, mediated by anti-bodies to bullous pemphigoid autoantigen 180, is inhibited by dapsone. Clin Exp Immunol. 2001;124:157–62.
8. 8. Wozel G, Lehmann B. Dapsone inhibits the generation of 5-lipoxygenase products in human polymorphonuclear. Skin Pharmacol. 1995;8:196–202.

9. 9. Stein Gold LF, Jarratt MT, Bucko AD, Grekin SK, Berlin JM, Bukhalo M, et al. Efficacy and safety of once-daily dapsone gel, 7. 5% for treatment of adolescents and adults with acne vulgaris: first of two identically designed, large, multicenter, randomized, vehicle-controlled trials. J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(5):553–61.
10. 10. Eichenfield LF, Lain T, Frankel EH, Jones TM, Chang-Lin J-E, Berk DR, et al. Efficacy and safety of oncedaily dapsone gel 7. 5% for treatment of adolescents and adults with acne vulgaris: second of two identically designed, large, multicenter, randomized, vehicle-controlled trials. J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(8):962–9.
11. 11. Draelos ZD, Carter E, Maloney JM, Elewski B, Poulin Y, Lynde C, et al. Two randomized studies demonstrate the effi cacy and safety of dapsone gel, 5% for the treatment of acne vulgaris. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;56:439.e1–10.
12. 12. Faghihi G, Rakhshanpour M, Abtahi-Naeini B, Nilforoushzadeh MA. The effi cacy of 5% dapsone gel plus oral isotretinoin versus oral isotretinoin alone in acne vulgaris: A randomized double-blind study. Adv Biomed Res. 2014;3:177.
13. 13. Lucky AW, Maloney MJ, Roberts J, Taylor S, Jones T, Ling M, et al. Dapsone gel 5% for the treatment of acne vulgaris: safety and efficacy of long-term (1 year) treatment. J Drugs Dermatol. 2007;6:981–7.