Comparison of Efficacy of Dapsone 5% Gel Vs Clindamycin 1% Gel in Mild to Moderate Acne Vulgaris
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i1.458Keywords:
Acne Vulgaris, Dapsone 5% Gel, Clindamycin 1% Gel, EfficacyAbstract
Background and Aim: Acne vulgaris is the most prevalent dermatology condition causing pleomorphic disorder that usually affects individual aged 12 to 25 years with varying prevalence from 50% to 95% in various countries. It can have a significant psychological impact on young people as it primarily affects their face. The present study aimed measure the efficacy of clindamycin 1% versus dapsone 5% gel in patients with mild to moderate acne vulgaris. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial investigated 64 acne vulgaris cases (mild-moderate) in the outpatient department of Dermatology, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Center (JPMC), Karachi from April 2024 to September 2024. Acne vulgaris patients of either gender having age 20 to 65 years enrolled. Patients were categorized into two groups: Group-I (CLINDAMYCIN 1% GEL) (N=32) and Group-II (DAPSONE 5% GEL) (N=32). Each group received clindamycin 1% gel or dapsone 5% gel once daily night for 12 weeks (about 3 months). Global Acne Grading Scale used for improved efficacy in both groups. Patients achieving post-treatment score ≤ 18 referred as efficacy. Data analysis done using SPSS version 27. Results: The overall mean age of Group-I and Group-II patients was 25.64±6.50 years and 23.96±4.82 years, respectively. Of the total 64 patients, there were 29 (45.3%) male and 35 (54.7%) female. Female patients dominated both groups. Clindamycin group showed promising outcomes in terms of efficacy than Dapsone group. A significant variance in efficacy observed in stratification by age and gender, particularly among patients with duration of acne onset ≤ 3 months. Conclusion: Clindamycin 1% gel showed promising results in terms of effectiveness and efficacy in treating acne vulgaris as compared to Dapsone 5% gel, allowing for once-daily topical application for 12 weeks (3 months).
Downloads
References
Verma, R., Yadav, P., Chudhari, M., Patel, J., & Umrigar, D. (2022). Comparison of efficacy of two topical drug therapy of acne vulgaris – 1% clindamycin versus 5% dapsone: A split face comparative study. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology, (0), 1. https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2022.12.03100202221042022
Sanawar, P., Ghafoor, R., Jabeen, N., Asadullah, K., Qadir, M., & Siddiqui, F. I. (2024). Comparison of the efficacy of clindamycin phosphate gel 1% versus once-daily dapsone gel 5% in the treatment of moderate acne vulgaris at the tertiary care hospital, Karachi. Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 157-162. https://doi.org/10.53555/jptcp.v31i1.3947
Brar, B. K., Kumar, S., & Sethi, N. (2016). Comparative evaluation of dapsone 5% gel vs. clindamycin 1% gel in mild to moderate acne vulgaris. Gulf J Dermatol Venereol, 23(1), 34-9. https://www.gulfdermajournal.net/pdf/2016-04/6.pdf
Tan, A., Schlosser, B., & Paller, A. (2018). A review of diagnosis and treatment of acne in adult female patients. International Journal of Women's Dermatology, 4(2), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijwd.2017.10.006
Stotland, M., Shalita, A. R., & Kissling, R. F. (2009). Dapsone 5% gel. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 10(4), 221-227. https://doi.org/10.2165/00128071-200910040-00002
Draelos, Z. D., Carter, E., Maloney, J. M., Elewski, B., Poulin, Y., Lynde, C., & Garrett, S. (2007). Two randomized studies demonstrate the efficacy and safety of dapsone gel, 5% for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 56(3), 439.e1-439.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2006.10.005
AL-mosawi, R. O., Hassan, J. K., & AL-tameemi, F. F. (2022). Comparative evaluation of topical antibiotics in treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DRUG DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY, 12(04), 1924-1927. https://doi.org/10.25258/ijddt.12.4.74
Mansour Al-Ani, Y. (2019). Assessment of efficacy and safety of dapsone gel 5% in the treatment of acne vulgaris. AL-Kindy College Medical Journal, 15(1), 136-162.
Pickert, A., & Raimer, S. (2009). An evaluation of dapsone gel 5% in the treatment of acne vulgaris. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 10(9), 1515-1521. https://doi.org/10.1517/14656560903002097
Tuchayi, S. M., Alexander, T., Nadkarni, A., & Feldman, S. R. (2016). Interventions to increase adherence to acne treatment. Patient Preference and Adherence, 10, 2091-2096. https://doi.org/10.2147/ppa.s117437
Dhaher, S., & Jasim, Z. (2018). The adjunctive effect of desloratadine on the combined azithromycin and isotretinoin in the treatment of severe acne: Randomized clinical trial. Journal of Dermatology and Dermatologic Surgery, 22(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.4103/jdds.jdds_7_18
Del Rosso, J. Q., Kircik, L., & Tanghetti, E. (2018). Management of truncal acne vulgaris with topical dapsone 7.5% gel. The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 11(8), 45.
Kakpovbia, E. E., Young, T., Milam, E. C., Qian, Y., Yassin, S., Nicholson, J., Hu, J., Troxel, A. B., & Nagler, A. R. (2024). Efficacy of topical treatments for mild‐to‐moderate acne: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized control trials. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.20154
Tan, S. T., Yohanes Firmansyah, Hendsun Hendsun, Alicia Sarijuwita, William Gilbert Satyanegara, Joshua Kurniawan, & Dean Ascha Wijaya. (2024). Cross-sectional study of efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of combination creams (Tretinoin 0.05%, clindamycin 3%, and Dexamethasone 0.05%) anti-acne – An online study. Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research, 8(4), 4192-4200. https://doi.org/10.37275/bsm.v8i4.956
Yang DJ, Quan LT, Hsu S. (2007). Topical antibacterial agents. In: Wolverton SE, editor. comprehensive dermatologic drug therapy. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier. pp. 525-46.
Shalita, A. R., Myers, J. A., Krochmal, L., & Yaroshinsky, A. (2005). The safety and efficacy of clindamycin phosphate foam 1% versus clindamycin phosphate topical gel 1% for the treatment of acne vulgaris. Journal of drugs in dermatology: JDD, 4(1), 48-56. https://europepmc.org/article/med/15696985
Jr, O. M., Thornsberry, C., Cardin, C. W., Smiles, K. A., & Leyden, J. J. (2002). Bacterial Resistance and Therapeutic Outcome Following Three Months of Topical Acne Therapy with 2% Erythromycin Gel Versus Its Vehicle. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 82(4), 260–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/000155502320323216
Chatterjee, S., Choudhury, S., Sarkar, D., & Dutta, R. (2011). Efficacy and safety of topical nadifloxacin and benzoyl peroxide versus clindamycin and benzoyl peroxide in acne vulgaris: A randomized controlled trial. Indian Journal of Pharmacology, 43(6), 628. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.89815
Piette, W. W., Taylor, S., Pariser, D., Jarratt, M., Sheth, P., & Wilson, D. (2008). Hematologic safety of dapsone gel, 5%, for topical treatment of acne vulgaris. Archives of Dermatology, 144(12). https://doi.org/10.1001/archdermatol.2008.518
Islam R., Islam, M. N., & Mosharraf Hossain, M. (2021). An assessment of the efficacy and safety of dapsone gel: Study in a local setting. Scholars Journal of Applied Medical Sciences, 9(4), 549-553. https://doi.org/10.36347/sjams.2021.v09i04.012
Ramrakha, S., Fergusson, D., Horwood, L., Dalgard, F., Ambler, A., Kokaua, J., Milne, B., & Poulton, R. (2016). Cumulative mental health consequences of acne: 23-year follow-up in a general population birth cohort study. British Journal of Dermatology, 175(5), 1079-1081. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.13786
Al-Salama, Z. T., & Deeks, E. D. (2016). Dapsone 7.5% gel: A review in acne vulgaris. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology, 18(1), 139-145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40257-016-0242-0
Hatem, A. S., Fatma, M. M., Amal, K. H., Hossam, M. A., & Maha, H. R. (2018). Dapsone in topical niosomes for treatment of acne vulgaris. African Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 12(18), 221-230. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajpp2018.4925
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
