Topicos en condilomas...

Systematic Review

Topically applied treatments for external genital warts in nonimmunocompromised patients: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis^†

J.M. Jung

C.J. Jung

W.J. Lee

C.H. Won

M.W. Lee

J.H. Choi

S.E. Chang

First published: 01 November 2019

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.18638

Citations: 2

^†

Funding sources None.

^‡

Conflicts of interest None to declare.

^§

Plain language summary available online

Summary

Selecting a topical treatment from among the numerous topical agents for external genital warts remains challenging without clear evidence. Our aim was to evaluate comparatively the efficacy and safety of topical agents for external genital warts using a network meta‐analysis. We included all randomized controlled trials that evaluated any topically applied treatment for external genital warts. Using the R package netmeta, network meta‐analyses were performed with a frequentist approach. We identified 41 relevant studies comprising 6371 patients. Among conventional agents, podophyllotoxin 0·5% solution (odds ratio 1·94, 95% confidence interval 1·02–3·71) was significantly more efficacious than imiquimod 5% cream for lesion clearance; however, it was associated with a higher overall adverse event rate. Sinecatechins 15% ointment (odds ratio 0·21, 95% confidence interval 0·12–0·34) was significantly less efficacious than imiquimod 5% cream. Idoxuridine, polyhexamethylene biguanide, cidofovir and SB 206 showed comparable therapeutic efficacies with conventional therapies. None of the treatments were significantly different from each other with respect to recurrence, patients with severe adverse events, or patients who withdrew because of treatment‐related adverse events. Conventional modalities were efficacious and well tolerated, although each of them had their advantages and disadvantages. Additional efficacy and safety studies are warranted for unconventional agents.