Don't neglect fluorouracil
I think that Gibbs et al are a bit harsh about the benefits of
fluorouracil in the treatment of warts when they describe it as 'more of
historical interest'. As far as I can tell, the trials they identified
seemed mostly positive about its effects.
I can certainly testify personally to its efficacy. I once endured a
large and painful plantar wart for about 5 years, which resisted copious
amounts of salicylic acid and many excruciatingly painful sessions of
cryotherapy. It disappeared, never to return, within a month of starting
I entirely accept the authors conclusions that salicylic acid is a
good treatment for warts, but what about the warts that don't respond to
it? Surely fluorouracil is a reasonable option in those cases?
Competing interests: No competing interests