Dataset Information

A randomized, controlled comparative study of the wrinkle reduction benefits of a cosmetic niacinamide/peptide/retinyl propionate product regimen vs. a prescription 0.02% tretinoin product regimen.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Tretinoin is considered the benchmark prescription topical therapy for improving fine facial wrinkles, but skin tolerance issues can affect patient compliance. In contrast, cosmetic antiwrinkle products are well tolerated but are generally presumed to be less efficacious than tretinoin. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of a cosmetic moisturizer regimen vs. a prescription regimen with 0.02% tretinoin for improving the appearance of facial wrinkles. METHODS: An 8-week, randomized, parallel-group study was conducted in 196 women with moderate to moderately severe periorbital wrinkles. Following 2 weeks washout, subjects on the cosmetic regimen (n = 99) used a sun protection factor (SPF) 30 moisturizing lotion containing 5% niacinamide, peptides and antioxidants, a moisturizing cream containing niacinamide and peptides, and a targeted wrinkle product containing niacinamide, peptides and 0.3% retinyl propionate. Subjects on the prescription regimen (n = 97) used 0.02% tretinoin plus moisturizing SPF 30 sunscreen. Subject cohorts (n = 25) continued treatment for an additional 16 weeks. Changes in facial wrinkling were assessed by both expert grading and image analysis of digital images of subjects' faces and by self-assessment questionnaire. Product tolerance was assessed via clinical erythema and dryness grading, subject self-assessment, and determinations of skin barrier integrity (transepidermal water loss) and stratum corneum protein changes. RESULTS: The cosmetic regimen significantly improved wrinkle appearance after 8 weeks relative to tretinoin, with comparable benefits after 24 weeks. The cosmetic regimen was significantly better tolerated than tretinoin through 8 weeks by all measures. CONCLUSIONS: An appropriately designed cosmetic regimen can improve facial wrinkle appearance comparably with the benchmark prescription treatment, with improved tolerability.

SUBMITTER: Fu JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2841824 | biostudies-other | 2010 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A randomized, controlled comparative study of the wrinkle reduction benefits of a cosmetic niacinamide/peptide/retinyl propionate product regimen vs. a prescription 0.02% tretinoin product regimen.

Fu J J J JJ Hillebrand G G GG Raleigh P P Li J J Marmor M J MJ Bertucci V V Grimes P E PE Mandy S H SH Perez M I MI Weinkle S H SH Kaczvinsky J R JR

The British journal of dermatology 20100301 3

<h4>Background</h4>Tretinoin is considered the benchmark prescription topical therapy for improving fine facial wrinkles, but skin tolerance issues can affect patient compliance. In contrast, cosmetic antiwrinkle products are well tolerated but are generally presumed to be less efficacious than tretinoin.<h4>Objectives</h4>To compare the efficacy of a cosmetic moisturizer regimen vs. a prescription regimen with 0.02% tretinoin for improving the appearance of facial wrinkles.<h4>Methods</h4>An 8- ...[more]

PMID: 20374604

Similar Datasets

Project description:IMPORTANCE:Prescription opioid dependence is increasing and creates a significant public health burden, but primary care physicians lack evidence-based guidelines to decide between tapering doses followed by discontinuation of buprenorphine hydrochloride and naloxone hydrochloride therapy (hereinafter referred to as buprenorphine therapy) or ongoing maintenance therapy. OBJECTIVE:To determine the efficacy of buprenorphine taper vs ongoing maintenance therapy in primary care-based treatment for prescription opioid dependence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:We conducted a 14-week randomized clinical trial that enrolled 113 patients with prescription opioid dependence from February 17, 2009, through February 1, 2013, in a single primary care site. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were randomized to buprenorphine taper (taper condition) or ongoing buprenorphine maintenance therapy (maintenance condition). The buprenorphine taper was initiated after 6 weeks of stabilization, lasted for 3 weeks, and included medications for opioid withdrawal, after which patients were offered naltrexone treatment. The maintenance group received ongoing buprenorphine therapy. All patients received physician and nurse support and drug counseling. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Illicit opioid use via results of urinanalysis and patient report, treatment retention, and reinitiation of buprenorphine therapy (taper group only). RESULTS:During the trial, the mean percentage of urine samples negative for opioids was lower for patients in the taper group (35.2% [95% CI, 26.2%-44.2%]) compared with those in the maintenance group (53.2% [95% CI, 44.3%-62.0%]). Patients in the taper group reported more days per week of illicit opioid use than those in the maintenance group once they were no longer receiving buprenorphine (mean use, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.60-1.94] vs 0.47 [95% CI, 0.19-0.74] days). Patients in the taper group had fewer maximum consecutive weeks of opioid abstinence compared with those in the maintenance group (mean abstinence, 2.70 [95% CI, 1.72-3.75] vs 5.20 [95% CI, 4.16-6.20] weeks). Patients in the taper group were less likely to complete the trial (6 of 57 [11%] vs 37 of 56 [66%]; P?<?.001). Sixteen patients in the taper group reinitiated buprenorphine treatment after the taper owing to relapse. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Tapering is less efficacious than ongoing maintenance treatment in patients with prescription opioid dependence who receive buprenorphine therapy in primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00555425.

Project description:There is growing support for characterizing ecosystem services in order to link conservation and human well-being. However, few studies have explicitly included ecosystem services within systematic conservation planning, and those that have follow two fundamentally different approaches: ecosystem services as intrinsically-important targeted benefits vs. substitutable co-benefits. We present a first comparison of these two approaches in a case study in the Central Interior of British Columbia. We calculated and mapped economic values for carbon storage, timber production, and recreational angling using a geographical information system (GIS). These 'marginal' values represent the difference in service-provision between conservation and managed forestry as land uses. We compared two approaches to including ecosystem services in the site-selection software Marxan: as Targeted Benefits, and as Co-Benefits/Costs (in Marxan's cost function); we also compared these approaches with a Hybrid approach (carbon and angling as targeted benefits, timber as an opportunity cost). For this analysis, the Co-Benefit/Cost approach yielded a less costly reserve network than the Hybrid approach (1.6% cheaper). Including timber harvest as an opportunity cost in the cost function resulted in a reserve network that achieved targets equivalently, but at 15% lower total cost. We found counter-intuitive results for conservation: conservation-compatible services (carbon, angling) were positively correlated with each other and biodiversity, whereas the conservation-incompatible service (timber) was negatively correlated with all other networks. Our findings suggest that including ecosystem services within a conservation plan may be most cost-effective when they are represented as substitutable co-benefits/costs, rather than as targeted benefits. By explicitly valuing the costs and benefits associated with services, we may be able to achieve meaningful biodiversity conservation at lower cost and with greater co-benefits.

Project description:PurposeTo compare the efficacy and safety of conbercept using a treat-and-extend (T&E) regimen vs. a pro re nata (PRN) regimen in Chinese patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD).MethodsThis was a randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority study. After an initial loading phase of three consecutive monthly intravitreal injections of 0.5 mg Conbercept, the patients were treated to PRN or T&E regimen. The prespecified retreatment criteria was defined as a more than 5-letter decrease in BCVA from the previous visit or any evidence of new retinal hemorrhages, or the presence of any IRF and any SRF of more than 200 μm in height at the sub-foveal center. The primary outcome was the mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from baseline to 24 months, with a prespecified non-inferiority limit of -5 letters.ResultsFrom July 2016 through August 2018, 141 participants were allocated and treated (T&E, n = 69; PRN, n = 72). About one fifth of the overall participants were dropped out during the 12-month follow-up (28/141, 19.9%), and about one thirds of the overall participants were lost during the 24-month follow-up (51/141, 36%). At 2 years, mean BCVA letter improvement was + 4.0 in the T&E group vs. + 5.1 in the PRN group, and T&E regimen was not non-inferior to PRN regimen [difference, -1.169 letters; 95% confidence interval (CI): -6.864 ∼ 4.526]. Subgroup analyses also demonstrate the similar results in PCV patients, naive patients and no-naive patients. The mean decrease in central subfield thickness were 180 ± 165 μm in the T&E group and 247 ± 230 μm in the PRN group, respectively. The patients in the PRN group had required significantly fewer injections than those in the T&E group (12.4 vs. 14.6 injections, P = 0.041). The types and rates of adverse events were comparable in the two treatment groups.ConclusionThese findings suggest that the T&E regimen was not non-inferior to the PRN regimen in patients with nAMD in terms of BCVA outcomes through 24 months.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02802657.

Dataset Information

A randomized, controlled comparative study of the wrinkle reduction benefits of a cosmetic niacinamide/peptide/retinyl propionate product regimen vs. a prescription 0.02% tretinoin product regimen.

Publications

A randomized, controlled comparative study of the wrinkle reduction benefits of a cosmetic niacinamide/peptide/retinyl propionate product regimen vs. a prescription 0.02% tretinoin product regimen.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets