Effectiveness of spironolactone for women with acne vulgaris (SAFA) in England and Wales: pragmatic, multicentre, phase 3, double blind, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of oral spironolactone for acne vulgaris in adult women. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, phase 3, double blind, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Primary and secondary healthcare, and advertising in the community and on social media in England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Women (≥18 years) with facial acne for at least six months, judged to warrant oral antibiotics. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 50 mg/day spironolactone or matched placebo until week six, increasing to 100 mg/day spironolactone or placebo until week 24. Participants could continue using topical treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was Acne-Specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) symptom subscale score at week 12 (range 0-30, where higher scores reflect improved QoL). Secondary outcomes were Acne-QoL at week 24, participant self-assessed improvement; investigator's global assessment (IGA) for treatment success; and adverse reactions. RESULTS: From 5 June 2019 to 31 August 2021, 1267 women were assessed for eligibility, 410 were randomly assigned to the intervention (n=201) or control group (n=209) and 342 were included in the primary analysis (n=176 in the intervention group and n=166 in the control group). Baseline mean age was 29.2 years (standard deviation 7.2), 28 (7%) of 389 were from ethnicities other than white, with 46% mild, 40% moderate, and 13% severe acne. Mean Acne-QoL symptom scores at baseline were 13.2 (standard deviation 4.9) and at week 12 were 19.2 (6.1) for spironolactone and 12.9 (4.5) and 17.8 (5.6) for placebo (difference favouring spironolactone 1.27 (95% confidence interval 0.07 to 2.46), adjusted for baseline variables). Scores at week 24 were 21.2 (5.9) for spironolactone and 17.4 (5.8) for placebo (difference 3.45 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 4.75), adjusted). More participants in the spironolactone group reported acne improvement than in the placebo group: no significant difference was reported at week 12 (72% v 68%, odds ratio 1.16 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.91)) but significant difference was noted at week 24 (82% v 63%, 2.72 (1.50 to 4.93)). Treatment success (IGA classified) at week 12 was 31 (19%) of 168 given spironolactone and nine (6%) of 160 given placebo (5.18 (2.18 to 12.28)). Adverse reactions were slightly more common in the spironolactone group with more headaches reported (20% v 12%; p=0.02). No serious adverse reactions were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Spironolactone improved outcomes compared with placebo, with greater differences at week 24 than week 12. Spironolactone is a useful alternative to oral antibiotics for women with acne. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12892056.

A practical guide to implementing a successful social media recruitment strategy: lessons from the Eczema Monitoring Online trial.

BACKGROUND: Participant recruitment into clinical trials remains challenging. The global increase in the number of social media users has accelerated the use of social media as a modality of recruitment, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when traditional recruitment methods were reduced. However, there is limited evidence on the performance of social media recruitment strategies into eczema clinical trials. METHODS: From September 2021 to January 2022, we recruited participants with eczema into an online randomised controlled trial using free advertising on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Reddit (unpaid methods), followed by paid Facebook advertisements (paid method). Unpaid methods were used periodically for 63 days, whilst the paid method for 16 days. Interested individuals who clicked on the advertisement link were directed to the study website, where they could sign up to participate. Consenting, randomisation and data collection occurred exclusively online, using a database management web platform. Evaluation of the social media recruitment methods was performed, including the number of expression of interests, enrolment yield, cost, baseline characteristics and retention. RESULTS: Our multi-platform based social media recruitment strategy resulted in 400 expressions of interests, leading to 296 participants. Unpaid methods accounted for 136 (45.9%) of participants, incurring no financial cost. Paid Facebook adverts reached 154,370 individuals, resulting in 123 (41.6%) trial participants for a total cost of £259.93 (£2.11 per participant) and other recruitment methods resulted in 37 (12.5%) enrolments. Paid advertisements predominantly attracted younger participants below the age of 20, whereas unpaid methods mainly drew in participants between 20-29 years of age. The social media platforms recruited an ethnically diverse participant population. Completion rate of follow-up was slightly higher for the paid method (n = 103, 83.7%) compared with the unpaid methods (n = 111, 81.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Unpaid social media posts recruited the most participants; however, it was time consuming for the researcher. Paid Facebook adverts rapidly recruited a large number of participants for a low cost and provided flexibility to target specific audiences. Our findings indicate that social media is an efficient tool that can potentially support recruitment to clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN45167024. Registered on 29 June 2021.