[quote="CeterumCenseo"][quote="Kube8"] if this has been around for years and years (that article looks like it was from 1989), why is it not used more regularly to treat even less invasive warts?[/quote]
Because it wasn't efficient in follow-up studies: e.g.: http://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0 ... ulast=Shah
And it is (was?) supposed to be carcinogenic. Actually i don't know the study, which should have proofed the opposite. But it seems like there is one?[/quote]
RE: carcinogenic potential:
Is DNCB A Worthwhile Treatment Option?
Dr. Lemont: Does anybody use DNCB?
Dr. Salk: I think the FDA looked at DNCB a few years back and recommended against its use due to possible teratogenic effects.
Here one can see eradication of the wart on the same foot three months after treatment with bleomycin.
Dr. Lemont: I think it failed an Ames test, but there was never any issue in terms of unit carcinogenicity. There have been a lot of articles written on its use. While there are times when it didnâ€™t work at all, I can tell you there have been times when I have gotten miraculous results. As far as I know, there has never been a case reported in the literature with DNCB having any carcinogenic potential in humans.
On a rare occasion in which I see an extensive amount of warts that are not perhaps associated with liver transplant or AIDS or something like that, I will use it.
A mother came in with her 3-month-old baby. The mother had AIDS, was immunosuppressed and had warts throughout her body. The warts were transmitted to the baby and it looked like the baby had a keratoderma of both soles. Using DNCB, we ended up getting sloughing of the warts week by week.