Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DFD-29, a low-dose, modified-release minocycline formulation, compared to doxycycline for the treatment of rosacea.</p> Methods <p>RCTs comparing oral DFD-29 with doxycycline in adults with papulopustular rosacea were identified through systematic searches of major databases up to Mar 13, 2025. Primary outcome was Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) treatment success; secondary outcome was treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.</p> Results <p>Three RCTs (n = varied) were included. DFD-29 significantly improved IGA treatment success at 16&#xa0;weeks compared to doxycycline (pooled OR = 2.51; 95% CI: 1.81–3.48). Although DFD-29 showed a slightly higher incidence of TEAEs (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.93–1.89), the difference was not statistically significant.</p> Conclusions <p>DFD-29 demonstrated superior efficacy and comparable safety to doxycycline; however, given the limited number of available trials and short follow-up duration, these findings should be considered preliminary. Larger, long-term randomized studies are warranted to confirm these results and establish the role of DFD-29 in rosacea management.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Efficacy and Safety of Oral DFD-29 Versus Doxycycline in Rosacea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月30日

查看全文
  • Chia Siang Kow,
  • Syed Shahzad Hasan,
  • Kaeshaelya Thiruchelvam

摘要

Purpose

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DFD-29, a low-dose, modified-release minocycline formulation, compared to doxycycline for the treatment of rosacea.

Methods

RCTs comparing oral DFD-29 with doxycycline in adults with papulopustular rosacea were identified through systematic searches of major databases up to Mar 13, 2025. Primary outcome was Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) treatment success; secondary outcome was treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

Results

Three RCTs (n = varied) were included. DFD-29 significantly improved IGA treatment success at 16 weeks compared to doxycycline (pooled OR = 2.51; 95% CI: 1.81–3.48). Although DFD-29 showed a slightly higher incidence of TEAEs (OR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.93–1.89), the difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

DFD-29 demonstrated superior efficacy and comparable safety to doxycycline; however, given the limited number of available trials and short follow-up duration, these findings should be considered preliminary. Larger, long-term randomized studies are warranted to confirm these results and establish the role of DFD-29 in rosacea management.