Letter to Editor: Oral Isotretinoin in Recalcitrant Facial Flat Warts—Methodological and Reporting Gaps Undermine Generalizability

IF 2.1 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ruba Javed, Javed Iqbal
{"title":"Letter to Editor: Oral Isotretinoin in Recalcitrant Facial Flat Warts—Methodological and Reporting Gaps Undermine Generalizability","authors":"Ruba Javed,&nbsp;Javed Iqbal","doi":"10.1002/hsr2.71042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We read with great interest the recent randomized controlled trial by Olguín-García et al., which evaluated the impact of two doses of oral isotretinoin on recalcitrant facial flat warts and associated psychosocial outcomes in adult patients [<span>1</span>]. The authors should be commended for addressing a clinically relevant dermatologic condition that is often resistant to standard therapies. However, several methodological limitations merit consideration.</p><p>Firstly, the study was terminated early due to an interim analysis, yet there was no mention of a pre-specified stopping rule or alpha adjustment. This omission increases the risk of type I error and could inflate the observed treatment effect. Unlike other robust RCTs such as the multicenter trial by Ramanan et al., which followed predefined protocols without early stopping, the current trial lacks transparency in its interim analysis plan, undermining the credibility of its conclusions [<span>2</span>].</p><p>Secondly, the absence of a placebo or active comparator group restricts the ability to attribute observed improvements solely to isotretinoin. Donnez et al. in the EDELWEISS 3 trial, incorporated a placebo control and double-dummy design, enabling clearer interpretation of treatment effects while minimizing placebo-related confounding—a critical element when evaluating conditions prone to spontaneous resolution [<span>3</span>].</p><p>Thirdly, the single-center nature of the trial limits external validity. The study population was drawn exclusively from a dermatology clinic in Mexico City, without stratification for demographic or geographic variables. In contrast, Eng et al. enhanced generalizability in their malaria RCT by accounting for regional and host-related confounders through relocation and stratification strategies [<span>4</span>].</p><p>Moreover, adherence was assessed solely via pill count, which is a subjective and often inflated measure. There were no efforts to corroborate adherence with biochemical monitoring or digital tracking. This parallels concerns raised by Gordon et al. in their Cochrane review, where missing data on implementation metrics like adverse event-related withdrawals compromised the interpretability of multiple RCTs [<span>5</span>].</p><p>In conclusion, while the study by Olguín-García et al. provides encouraging data on isotretinoin's efficacy in treating recalcitrant flat warts, the methodological concerns—including lack of placebo control, single-center design, subjective adherence monitoring, and unclear interim analysis practices—limit the strength of its conclusions. Future trials should address these issues by implementing rigorous design standards to improve validity and reproducibility.</p><p><b>Ruba Javed:</b> conceptualization, methodology, software, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. <b>Javed Iqbal:</b> conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing.</p><p>The authors have nothing to report.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":36518,"journal":{"name":"Health Science Reports","volume":"8 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/hsr2.71042","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Science Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hsr2.71042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We read with great interest the recent randomized controlled trial by Olguín-García et al., which evaluated the impact of two doses of oral isotretinoin on recalcitrant facial flat warts and associated psychosocial outcomes in adult patients [1]. The authors should be commended for addressing a clinically relevant dermatologic condition that is often resistant to standard therapies. However, several methodological limitations merit consideration.

Firstly, the study was terminated early due to an interim analysis, yet there was no mention of a pre-specified stopping rule or alpha adjustment. This omission increases the risk of type I error and could inflate the observed treatment effect. Unlike other robust RCTs such as the multicenter trial by Ramanan et al., which followed predefined protocols without early stopping, the current trial lacks transparency in its interim analysis plan, undermining the credibility of its conclusions [2].

Secondly, the absence of a placebo or active comparator group restricts the ability to attribute observed improvements solely to isotretinoin. Donnez et al. in the EDELWEISS 3 trial, incorporated a placebo control and double-dummy design, enabling clearer interpretation of treatment effects while minimizing placebo-related confounding—a critical element when evaluating conditions prone to spontaneous resolution [3].

Thirdly, the single-center nature of the trial limits external validity. The study population was drawn exclusively from a dermatology clinic in Mexico City, without stratification for demographic or geographic variables. In contrast, Eng et al. enhanced generalizability in their malaria RCT by accounting for regional and host-related confounders through relocation and stratification strategies [4].

Moreover, adherence was assessed solely via pill count, which is a subjective and often inflated measure. There were no efforts to corroborate adherence with biochemical monitoring or digital tracking. This parallels concerns raised by Gordon et al. in their Cochrane review, where missing data on implementation metrics like adverse event-related withdrawals compromised the interpretability of multiple RCTs [5].

In conclusion, while the study by Olguín-García et al. provides encouraging data on isotretinoin's efficacy in treating recalcitrant flat warts, the methodological concerns—including lack of placebo control, single-center design, subjective adherence monitoring, and unclear interim analysis practices—limit the strength of its conclusions. Future trials should address these issues by implementing rigorous design standards to improve validity and reproducibility.

Ruba Javed: conceptualization, methodology, software, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. Javed Iqbal: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing.

The authors have nothing to report.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

致编辑的信:口服异维甲酸治疗顽固性面部扁平疣-方法和报告的差距破坏了普遍性
我们饶有兴趣地阅读了Olguín-García等人最近的一项随机对照试验,该试验评估了两种剂量口服异维甲酸对成人患者顽固性面部扁平疣的影响和相关的社会心理结局。作者应该受到赞扬,因为他们解决了临床相关的皮肤病,通常对标准治疗有抵抗力。然而,一些方法上的局限性值得考虑。首先,由于中期分析,研究提前终止,但没有提到预先规定的停止规则或alpha调整。这种遗漏增加了I型错误的风险,并可能夸大观察到的治疗效果。不同于其他稳健的随机对照试验,如Ramanan等人的多中心试验,该试验遵循预先确定的方案而不提前停止,目前的试验在其中期分析计划中缺乏透明度,从而破坏了其结论的可信度。其次,缺乏安慰剂或活性比较组限制了将观察到的改善仅仅归因于异维甲酸的能力。Donnez等人在EDELWEISS 3试验中采用安慰剂对照和双假人设计,能够更清楚地解释治疗效果,同时最大限度地减少安慰剂相关的混淆,这是评估容易自发消退的条件时的关键因素。第三,该试验的单一中心性质限制了外部效度。研究人群完全来自墨西哥城的皮肤科诊所,没有人口统计学或地理变量的分层。相比之下,Eng等人通过重新定位和分层策略bbb考虑了区域和宿主相关的混杂因素,从而增强了疟疾随机对照试验的普遍性。此外,依从性仅通过药片数量来评估,这是一个主观且经常夸大的衡量标准。没有努力证实生化监测或数字跟踪的依从性。这与Gordon等人在Cochrane综述中提出的担忧相似,在Cochrane综述中,缺乏诸如不良事件相关退出等实施指标的数据,损害了多个随机对照试验的可解释性[10]。总之,虽然Olguín-García等人的研究为异维甲酸治疗顽固性扁平疣的疗效提供了令人鼓舞的数据,但方法学上的担忧——包括缺乏安慰剂对照、单中心设计、主观依从性监测和不明确的中期分析实践——限制了其结论的强度。未来的试验应该通过实施严格的设计标准来解决这些问题,以提高有效性和可重复性。Ruba Javed:概念,方法,软件,写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。Javed Iqbal:概念,方法论,写作-原稿,写作-审查和编辑。作者没有什么可报告的。作者声明无利益冲突。
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
Health Science Reports
Health Science Reports Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
458
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信