Comparison effect of azithromycin gel 2% with clindamycin gel 1% in patients with acne

Mokhtari, Fatemeh; Faghihi, Gita; Basiri, Akram; Farhadi, Sadaf; Nilforoushzadeh, Mohammadali; Behfar, Shadi

Comparison effect of azithromycin gel 2% with clindamycin gel 1% in patients with acne

Authors

¹ Department of Dermatology, Skin Diseases and Leishmaniasis Research Center, Isfahan, Iran

² Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Acne vulgaris is the most common skin disease. Local and systemic antimicrobial drugs are used for its treatment. But increasing resistance of Propionibacterium acnes to antibiotics has been reported.
Materials and Methods: In a double-blind clinical trial, 40 patients with mild to moderate acne vulgaris were recruited. one side of the face was treated with Clindamycin Gel 1% and the other side with Azithromycin Topical Gel 2% BID for 8 weeks and then they were assessed.

Results: Average age was 21. 8 ± 7 years. 82.5% of them were female. Average number of papules, pustules and comedones was similarly reduced in both groups and, no significant difference was observed between the two groups (P > 0.05, repeated measurs ANOVA). The mean indexes of ASI and TLC also significantly decreased during treatment in both groups, no significant difference was observed between the two groups. (P > 0.05, repeated measurs ANOVA). Also, impact of both drugs on papules and pustules was 2-3 times greater than the effect on comedones. Average satisfaction score was not significant between the two groups (P = 0.6, repeated measurs ANOVA). finally, frequency distribution of complications was not significant between the two groups (P > 0.05, Fisher Exact test).
Conclusion: Azithromycin gel has medical impact at least similar to Clindamycin Gel in treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris, and it may be consider as suitable drug for resistant acne to conventional topical therapy.

Keywords

References

1.	Zaenglein A, Thiboutot D. Acne Vulgaris. In: Bolognia J, Jorizzo J, editors. Dermatology. 3^th ed. International. [Philadelphia]: Elsevier; 2012. p. 545-58.
2.	James W, Berger TG. Andrews Diseases of the Skin Clinical Dermatology. 11^th ed. International. [London] Elsevier Saunders; 2011. p. 231.
3.	Grove G, Zerweck C, Gwazdauskas J. Tolerability and irritation potential of four topical acne regimens in healthy subjects. J Drugs Dermatol 2013;12:644-9.
4.	Habif TP, Campbell JR, compbell Jl, chapman MS, Dinulos J. Skin Disease. 3^th ed. UK/USA: Eisevier; 2011. p. 104-5.
5.	Burns T, Breathnach S. Rook's Text book of Dermatology. 8^th ed. UK/USA: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. p. 41-2.
6.	Tan HH. Topical antibacterial treatments for acne vulgaris: Comparative review and guide to selection. Am J Clin Dermatol 2004;5:79-84.
7.	Schafer F, Fich F, Lam M, Gárate C, Wozniak A, Garcia P. Antimicrobial susceptibility and genetic characteristics of Propionibacterium acnes isolated from patients with acne. Int J Dermatol 2013;52:418-25.
8.	Brunton LL. Goodman and Gilman's. The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics. 12^th ed. International. New York: Mc Graw Hill Medical; 2011.
9.	Abdel Fattah NS, Darwish YW.In vitro antibiotic susceptibility patterns of Propionibacterium acnes isolated from acne patients: An Egyptian university hospital-based study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2013;27:1546-51.
10.	González R, Welsh O, Ocampo J, Hinojosa-Robles RM, Vera-Cabrera L, Delaney ML, et al. In vitro antimicrobial susceptibility of Propionibacterium acnes isolated from acne patients in northern Mexico. Int J Dermatol 2010;49:1003-7.
11.	Nakase K, Nakaminami H, Noguchi N, Nishijima S, Sasatsu M. First report of high levels of clindamycin-resistant Propionibacterium acnes carrying erm (X) in Japanese patients with acne vulgaris. J Dermatol 2012;39:794-6. [PUBMED]
12.	Trevor A, Katzung BG, Hall MK, Masters SB. Pharmacology Katzung and Trevor's. 10^th ed. International Edition. New York: Mc Graw Hill Medical; 2013. p. 391-395.
13.	Kong YL, Tey HL. Treatment of acne vulgaris during pregnancy and lactation. Drugs 2013;73:779-87.
14.	Pochi PE, Shalita AR, Strauss JS, Webster SE. report of the consensus conference on acne classification. J Am acad dermatol 1991;24:495-500.
15.	Adityan B, Kumari R, Thappa DM. Scoring systems in acne vulgaris. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2009;75:323-6. [PUBMED]
16.	Sandoval LF, Hartel JK, Feldman SR. Current and future evidence-based acne treatment: A review. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2014;15:173-92.
17.	Antonio JR, Pegas JR, Cestari TF, Do Nascimento LV. Azithromycin pulses in the treatment of inflammatory and pustular acne: Efficacy, tolerability and safety. J Dermatolog Treat 2008;19:210-5.
18.	Maleszka R, Turek-Urasinska K, Oremus M, Vukovic J, Barsic B. Pulsed azithromycin treatment is as effective and safe as 2-week-longer daily doxycycline treatment of acne vulgaris: A randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study. Skinmed 2011;9:86-94.
19.	Hasibur MR, Meraj Z. Combination of low-dose isotretinoin and pulsed oral azithromycin for maximizing efficacy of acne treatment. Mymensingh Med J 2013;22:42-8.
20.	McHugh RC, Rice A, Sangha ND, McCarty MA, Utterback R, Rohrback JM, et al. A topical azithromycin preparation for the treatment of acne vulgaris and rosacea. J Dermatolog Treat 2004;15:295-302.
21.	Shirazpour M, Firooz A, Pazooki H, Resaei S. Comparison of topical azithromycin and clindamycin in the treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris. Iran J Dermatol 2008;11:67-72.
22.	Hajiheydari Z, Mahmoudi M, Vahidshahi K, Nozari A. Comparison of efficacy of azithromycin vs. clindamaycin and erythromycin in the treatment of mild to moderate acne vulgaris. Pak J med sci 2011;27:68-72.
23.	Labro MT. Anti-inflammatory activity of macrolides: A new therapeutic potential? J Antimicrob Chemother 1998;41 Suppl B: 37-46.

Advanced Biomedical Research