Tools for Practice Outils pour la pratique

#241 “Who’s the fairest of them all?”: Topical treatments for rosacea

Which topical agents provide the best patient reported improvements for rosacea?

For moderate-severe papulopustular rosacea, topical metronidazole, azelaic acid, and ivermectin have similar benefit with ~65-75% achieving patient reported improvement compared to ~40% with placebo over 2-3 months. In head-to-head trials, azelaic acid and ivermectin may be slightly better than metronidazole. Cost may assist choice.  

CFPCLearn Logo

Reading Tools for Practice Article can earn you MainPro+ Credits

La lecture d'articles d'outils de pratique peut vous permettre de gagner des crédits MainPro+

Join Now S’inscrire maintenant

Already a CFPCLearn Member? Log in

Déjà abonné à CMFCApprendre? Ouvrir une session

Compared to placebo: 
  • Systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) with patient orientated outcomes.1 Patients age ~50 years, ~65% female (unless stated). 
    • Metronidazole: Focusing on 2 similar RCTs of metronidazole 1% daily, 178 patients.2,3 After two months: 
      • Patient perceived symptom improvement (meta-analyzed by PEER):  
        • 75% versus 37% placebo; Number needed to treat (NNT)=3. 
    • Ivermectin 1% daily: 2 RCTs, 1371 patients.4 After three months: 
      • Good to excellent improvement (meta-analyzed by PEER): 
        • 68% versus 37% placebo; NNT=4. 
    • Azelaic acid 15-20% BID: 4 RCTs, 1226 patients.5-7 After three months: 
      • Good to excellent improvement:  
        • 63% versus 42% placebo; NNT=5.1 
Direct comparisons:  
  • Ivermectin 1% daily versus metronidazole 0.75% BID: 1 RCT; 962 patients.8 After 4 months: 
    • Good to excellent improvement: 
      • 86% ivermectin, 75% metronidazole; NNT=10.  
  • Azelaic acid 15% BID versus metronidazole 0.75% BID: 
    • Highest quality, largest RCT9; 251 patients, mean age 67. After 15 weeks: 
      • Good to excellent improvement:  
        • 78% azelaic acid, 64% metronidazole; NNT=8. 
      • 2 smaller, lower quality RCTs favour azelaic acid or show no difference.10,11 
Adverse events (primarily burning and stinging): 
  • Metronidazole, ivermectin, and azelaic acid: similar to placebo1.  
  • In one head-to-head trial,9 more patients on azelaic acid had adverse events than metronidazole (26% versus 7%). 
Limitations: most trials industry sponsored.  Context: 
  • Canadian guidelines first-line recommendations: topical metronidazole, azelaic acid, or ivermectin.12 
  • Estimated 90-day cost (Alberta)13:  
    • Azelaic acid 15% BID (FinaceaTM): $92  
    • Metronidazole 1% OD (MetrogelTM): $54 
    • Ivermectin 1% OD (RosiverTM): $220 
    • Metronidazole 0.75% BID (MetrogelTM): $440 
  • No clinical difference between 0.75% and 1% metronidazole.1 
  • Other topicals have less evidence1 or not currently recommended.12 
  • Oral medications reserved for severe symptoms or topical failure.12 

Latest Tools for Practice
Derniers outils pour la pratique

#370 Antibiotics or no antibiotics for acute diverticulitis, that is the question!

Do antibiotics change clinical outcomes for patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#369 Remind me, do medications that target brain amyloid improve my dementia?

Are amyloid-targeting monoclonal antibodies safe and effective for mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s dementia?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

#368 Sodium Restriction in Heart Failure: Beneficial or pouring salt in the wound?

Does sodium restriction improve outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure?
Read Lire 0.25 credits available Crédits disponibles

This content is certified for MainPro+ Credits, log in to access

Ce contenu est certifié pour les crédits MainPro+, Ouvrir une session

  • Paul Fritsch MD CCFP
  • Michael R Kolber MD CCFP MSc
  • Christina Korownyk MD CCFP

1. Van Zuuren EJ, Fedorowicz Z, Carter B, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;4:CD003262.

2. Bjerke JR, Nyfors A, Austad J, et al. Clin Trials J. 1989; 26(3):187-94.

3. Nielsen PG. Br J Dermatol. 1983; 108(3):327-32.

4. Stein L, Kircik L, Fowler J, et al. J Drugs Dermatol. 2014; 13(3):316-23.

5. Bjerke R, Fyrand O, Graupe KL. Acta Derm Venereol. 1999; 79:456-9.

6. Draelos ZD, Elewski B, Staedtler G, et al. Cutis. 2013; 92(6):306-17.

7. Thiboutot D, Thieroff-Ekerdt R, Graupe K. J Am Acad Derm. 2003; 48(6):836-45.

8. Taieb A, Ortonne JP, Ruzicka T, et al. Br J Dermatol. 2015; 172(4):1103-10.

9. Elewski BE, Fleischer AB, Pariser DM. Arch Dermatol. 2003; 139(11):1444-50.

10. Maddin S. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1999; 40(6):961-5.

11. Wolf JJ, Kerrouche N, Arsonnaud S. Cutis. 2006; 77(4 Suppl):3-11.

12. Asai Y, Tan J, Baibergenova A, et al. J Cut Med Surg. 2016; 20(5):432-45.

13. Calculations using data from Alberta Health Interactive Drug Benefit List. Available at: Accessed June 7, 2019.

Authors do not have any conflicts of interest to declare.

Les auteurs n’ont aucun conflit d’intérêts à déclarer.