SynthesisJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Comparative Efficacy of Minoxidil and 5-Alpha Reductase Inhibitors Monotherapy for Male Pattern Hair Loss: Network Meta-Analysis Study of Current Empirical Evidence.
Synthesis in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative Efficacy of Minoxidil and 5-Alpha Reductase Inhibitors Monotherapy for Male Pattern Hair Loss: Network Meta-Analysis Study of Current Empirical Evidence.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Biomedical Technologies for Androgenic Alopecia Treatment: Advance, Mechanism and Future Direction.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTreatment options for male androgenetic alopecia (AGA) range from pharmacologic agents-such as minoxidil, finasteride, and dutasteride-to newer procedural and experimental therapies.
aimsWe determined the relative effect of the various dosages and administrative routes of minoxidil, finasteride and dutasteride through network meta-analysis (NMA) of relevant outcome measures.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review to identify eligible studies. Our NMAs included studies that investigated monotherapy with minoxidil, finasteride, and dutasteride of any dosage and route on the following 5 outcomes: 24- and 48-week changes in total and terminal hair density, and 24-week change in independent observer assessment (IOA). We assessed evidence quality and performed sensitivity and node-splitting analyses of inconsistency. Each NMA produced estimates for pairwise relative effects and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.
resultsOur search found 33 eligible studies across which 19 comparators (18 interventions and 1 control) were identified. The active comparators included minoxidil (oral, topical, sublingual), finasteride (oral, topical, mesotherapy) and dutasteride (oral, mesotherapy). The control node amalgamated placebo and vehicle arms.
conclusionsWe found dutasteride 0.5 mg/day to be the most effective option. Among FDA-approved treatments, topical minoxidil 5% was the most effective topical monotherapy, while finasteride 1 mg/day was the most effective oral option. Dutasteride mesotherapy appears significantly less effective than oral administration (0.5 mg/day).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.