CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-08-26. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v0.8.
Verdict No. 2886 · Search date 2026-08-26 · Methodology v0.8

Berdazimer gel 10.3%,
does it really help with Complete molluscum lesion clearance at week 12?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 54 · Safety caution
Clearance increased, but natural resolution and the surrogate endpoint matter
Local application-site pain, erythema, and other skin reactions warrant caution.
What the
research shows
Grade C. Complete clearance occurred in 144/444 (32.4%) versus 88/447 (19.7%), an absolute difference of +12.7 points; adjusted OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.5-2.8), P<.001. The endpoint was lesion count and the pivotal evidence is one Novan-sponsored trial.
What the
ads claim
Zelsuvmi was approved in the US in 2024; Korean approval and sale could not be confirmed. Molluscum is treated in Korea, which is not evidence of domestic product availability.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Once-daily treatment for 12 weeks was tested at 55 US sites.
  • Molluscum may resolve naturally; 19.7% cleared with vehicle.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2886 · C 54
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Axis 6 B0 evidence ① Allocation concealment: "The randomization schedule was generated by an independent statistician." ② Blinding: "double-blind" with matching study gels. ③ Analysis set and missingness: "patients with missing lesion count data at week 12 were counted as nonresponders." ④ Prespecified primary endpoint: "The primary efficacy end point was complete clearance of all MC lesions at week 12." - consistent with NCT04535531

Four gates: ① Defect: none. ② Listed item: none. ③ Evidence: independent schedule, double blinding, nonresponder imputation, and registered primary outcome. ④ Avoidability: no confirmed avoidable defect.

02

Why this is classified as C (54)

A positive large double-blind RCT is limited by a surrogate endpoint, manufacturer funding, and no independent replication, giving C with 54 points.

Counterpoint. Local pain and erythema and natural history matter to individual decisions.

Rejudgment record. Source verified — Positive large double-blind RCT with a lesion-count surrogate and manufacturer-only evidence

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointSSurrogate marker - laboratory or imaging measures
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI0Evidence comes only from manufacturer studies
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (C).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Complete lesion clearance at week 12CThe absolute difference was +12.7 points.

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 155-site double-blind vehicle-controlled phase 3 randomized trial447Sponsored by Novan Inc; multiple authors were employees or equity holdersComplete clearance of all lesions at week 12144/444 (32.4%) versus 88/447 (19.7%), absolute difference +12.7 points, adjusted OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.5-2.8), P<.001Single manufacturer-sponsored confirmatory trial
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-26).

Browning JC, Cartwright M, Truong A, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Topical Nitric Oxide-Releasing Berdazimer Gel in Patients With Molluscum Contagiosum: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2022;158(8):871-879. PMID: 35830173.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Verification cutoff: 2026-08-26 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Benefit of Berdazimer Gel for Complete Lesion Clearance in Molluscum Contagiosum at Week 12, a Surrogate Outcome Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Benefit of Berdazimer Gel for Complete Lesion Clearance in Molluscum Contagiosum at Week 12, a Surrogate Outcome — Evidence Grade C·54. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/skin-hair/berdazimer-gel-molluscum-complete-clearance-week-12/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.