Intralesional measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine versus vitamin D for treatment of warts: A randomised clinical trial.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY
Manar Sallam, Amany Awad, Sara Hamdy, Ahmed State
{"title":"Intralesional measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine versus vitamin D for treatment of warts: A randomised clinical trial.","authors":"Manar Sallam, Amany Awad, Sara Hamdy, Ahmed State","doi":"10.25259/IJDVL_1669_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Warts are prevalent distressing skin growths caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV). These growths are commonly addressed using methods that destroy the tissue, including chemical cautery, electrocautery, or cryotherapy. These methods have many side effects in contrast to intralesional immunotherapy. Objectives This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of utilising the intralesional measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine compared to vitamin D in warts treatment. Methods This randomised clinical trial enrolled 112 participants presenting with multiple warts. The participants were sub-divided into two groups through a random allocation process. Group Ⅰ (n=56) was administered 0.3 mL intralesional MMR vaccine, whereas group Ⅱ (n=56) was administered 0.3 mL intralesional vitamin D3 (equivalent to 15000 IU cholecalciferol). The injection was administered every two weeks into the most noticeable wart, requiring no more than five sessions until improvement. A follow-up period of six months was conducted after the final treatment session. Results A significantly higher percentage of complete response was noticed in the MMR group (80.4%) as compared with the vitamin D group (66.1%). Both groups had an average of four sessions, showing no significant difference. Regarding adverse effects, the MMR group demonstrated a significantly greater incidence of mild pain (96.4%) and injection site itching (12.5%) compared with the vitamin D group. After 6 months of follow-up, no significant difference was noticed in recurrence rates in both groups (3 cases; 5.4% in the vitamin D vs. 2 cases; 3.6% in the MMR group). Conclusion Intralesional MMR demonstrates greater efficacy than vitamin D in treating warts but with a higher incidence of tolerable side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":50376,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Dermatology Venereology & Leprology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/IJDVL_1669_2024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background Warts are prevalent distressing skin growths caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV). These growths are commonly addressed using methods that destroy the tissue, including chemical cautery, electrocautery, or cryotherapy. These methods have many side effects in contrast to intralesional immunotherapy. Objectives This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of utilising the intralesional measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine compared to vitamin D in warts treatment. Methods This randomised clinical trial enrolled 112 participants presenting with multiple warts. The participants were sub-divided into two groups through a random allocation process. Group Ⅰ (n=56) was administered 0.3 mL intralesional MMR vaccine, whereas group Ⅱ (n=56) was administered 0.3 mL intralesional vitamin D3 (equivalent to 15000 IU cholecalciferol). The injection was administered every two weeks into the most noticeable wart, requiring no more than five sessions until improvement. A follow-up period of six months was conducted after the final treatment session. Results A significantly higher percentage of complete response was noticed in the MMR group (80.4%) as compared with the vitamin D group (66.1%). Both groups had an average of four sessions, showing no significant difference. Regarding adverse effects, the MMR group demonstrated a significantly greater incidence of mild pain (96.4%) and injection site itching (12.5%) compared with the vitamin D group. After 6 months of follow-up, no significant difference was noticed in recurrence rates in both groups (3 cases; 5.4% in the vitamin D vs. 2 cases; 3.6% in the MMR group). Conclusion Intralesional MMR demonstrates greater efficacy than vitamin D in treating warts but with a higher incidence of tolerable side effects.

麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹疹内疫苗与维生素D治疗疣:一项随机临床试验
背景:疣是由人乳头瘤病毒(HPV)引起的普遍的令人痛苦的皮肤生长。这些生长通常使用破坏组织的方法来处理,包括化学烧灼、电灼或冷冻疗法。与病灶内免疫治疗相比,这些方法有许多副作用。目的:本研究旨在评估麻疹、腮腺炎和风疹(MMR)疫苗与维生素D在疣治疗中的有效性、安全性和耐受性。方法:本随机临床试验纳入112例多发疣患者。通过随机分配过程,参与者被分成两组。Ⅰ组(n=56)注射0.3 mL局内MMR疫苗,而Ⅱ组(n=56)注射0.3 mL局内维生素D3(相当于15000 IU胆钙化醇)。每两周对最明显的疣进行一次注射,每次注射不超过5次,直到改善。最后一次治疗后进行了为期6个月的随访。结果MMR组的完全缓解率(80.4%)明显高于维生素D组(66.1%)。两组的平均疗程为4次,没有显著差异。关于不良反应,与维生素D组相比,MMR组表现出明显更高的轻度疼痛(96.4%)和注射部位瘙痒(12.5%)发生率。随访6个月,两组复发率无明显差异(3例;维生素D占5.4%对2例;MMR组3.6%)。结论瘤内MMR治疗疣的疗效优于维生素D,但其可耐受的副作用发生率较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
10.30%
发文量
247
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists & Leprologists (IADVL) is the national association of Indian medical specialists who manage patients with skin disorders, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) or leprosy. The current member strength of the association is about 3800. The association works for the betterment of the specialty by holding academic meetings, printing a journal and publishing a textbook. The IADVL has several state branches, each with their own office bearers, which function independently within the constitution of the IADVL. Established in 1940, the Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology (IJDVL, ISSN 0378-6323) is the official publication of the IADVL (Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists and Leprologists).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信