Sustained efficacy and safety of pimecrolimus cream 1% when used long-term (up to 26 weeks) to treat children with atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, inflammatory condition affecting up to 20% of children. Here, we report the long-term extension study of previously published pivotal phase III studies with pimecrolimus cream 1%. Two identical, 26-week studies (6-week, double-blind, followed by 20-week, open-label phases) were conducted in children aged 2 to 17 years with atopic dermatitis. Pooled efficacy and safety analyses were performed. At day 43, 34.8% pimecrolimus-treated patients versus 18.4% in the vehicle group (p < 0.001) were clear/almost clear (Investigators' Global Assessment 0/1) of disease, with significant differences (p < 0.05) between treatment groups for all double-blind visits in all parameters. Pimecrolimus was significantly more effective (based on the Eczema Area and Severity Index) in treating the face and neck versus the rest of the body (p < 0.0001) and versus vehicle (p < 0.0001) in the double-blind phase. Disease control was sustained in the pimecrolimus group throughout the whole study. Patients treated with vehicle during the double-blind phase experienced rapid, marked improvement when switched to pimecrolimus in the open-label phase. The incidence of adverse events was low and comparable between treatment groups. In conclusion, pimecrolimus cream 1% is effective and well tolerated in the long-term control of children with mild to moderately severe atopic dermatitis.

Pimecrolimus cream 1%: a potential new treatment for chronic hand dermatitis.

A multicenter, randomized, vehicle-controlled, 3-week study was conducted in patients with chronic hand dermatitis (HD) of various etiologies and locations to identify subgroups particularly responsive to twice-daily application of pimecrolimus cream 1% with overnight occlusion. A total of 294 patients were randomized to the study. By the final visit on day 22, there was a trend toward greater clearance in patients who received pimecrolimus than in those treated with vehicle cream. An analysis of treatment success by various stratification factors was performed, and it was found that palmar involvement had notable impact on response (P = .033). Patients in the pimecrolimus group continued to improve throughout the study; however, in the vehicle group, improvement plateaued after 15 days. Pimecrolimus was well tolerated, with a low rate of application-site reactions such as burning. Pimecrolimus cream 1%, when used twice daily with overnight occlusion, may be of benefit in the management of chronic HD.

Safety and efficacy of pimecrolimus (ASM 981) cream 1% in the treatment of mild and moderate atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The ascomycin derivative pimecrolimus (ASM 981) is a cell-selective cytokine inhibitor, specifically developed for the treatment of inflammatory skin diseases. OBJECTIVE: When applied topically, pimecrolimus cream 1% has shown promise as a treatment for inflammatory skin conditions, including atopic dermatitis (AD) in children and adults, allergic contact dermatitis, and chronic contact irritant hand dermatitis in adults. METHODS: In two independent 6-week, randomized, multicenter studies of identical design, the efficacy and safety of pimecrolimus cream 1% in children with predominantly moderate AD were compared with vehicle. Pooled data from a total of 403 patients were used in the analysis. The primary efficacy parameter was the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score. Secondary parameters included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and severity of pruritus scores. Subjects were also asked to assess their disease control as uncontrolled, limited, good, or complete. RESULTS: Significant therapeutic benefits relative to vehicle were observed in the pimecrolimus-treated group at the first efficacy assessment, 8 days after initial application of the study medication (eg, relief of pruritus). At each subsequent postbaseline visit, pimecrolimus-treated patients showed significant improvement relative to controls in all efficacy measures. The medication was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Pimecrolimus cream 1% appears to be a safe and effective alternative to currently used therapies for AD.

Safety and efficacy of nonsteroid pimecrolimus cream 1% in the treatment of atopic dermatitis in infants.

OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of a 1% cream formulation of pimecrolimus, a selective, nonsteroid immunomodulator, was studied in infants with atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: During a 6-week double-blind phase, 186 infants with mild/moderate AD were randomly assigned to twice-daily pimecrolimus cream 1% or vehicle. All patients were subsequently treated with open-label pimecrolimus for 20 weeks. RESULTS: At the end of the double-blind phase, 54.5% and 23.8% of patients in the pimecrolimus and vehicle groups, respectively, were clear or almost clear of AD (P <.001). Similar improvements were observed in the Eczema Area and Severity Index, pruritus assessment, and the care giver's assessment. By the first return visit, 69.9% and 36.5% of pimecrolimus and vehicle-treated patients, respectively, achieved absent or mild pruritus. Efficacy during the double-blind phase was maintained throughout the open-label phase. Vehicle-treated patients transferring to open-label pimecrolimus rapidly achieved disease control comparable to those receiving continuous pimecrolimus. There were no significant differences between groups in application site reactions or skin infections. Most adverse events were mild or moderate and unrelated to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Pimecrolimus was safe in infants with AD, with rapid and sustained efficacy. Pimecrolimus holds promise as a valuable new treatment option for the youngest patients with AD.

Efficacy and safety of pimecrolimus cream in the long-term management of atopic dermatitis in children.

OBJECTIVE: Pimecrolimus cream (SDZ ASM 981), a nonsteroid inhibitor of inflammatory cytokines, is effective in atopic dermatitis (AD). We assessed whether early treatment of AD signs/symptoms with pimecrolimus could influence long-term outcome by preventing disease flares. METHODS: Early intervention with pimecrolimus was compared with a conventional AD treatment strategy (ie, emollients and topical corticosteroids). In this 1-year, controlled, double-blind study, 713 AD patients (2-17 years) were randomized 2:1 to a pimecrolimus-based or conventional regimen. Both groups used emollients for dry skin. Early AD signs/symptoms were treated with pimecrolimus cream or, in the conventional treatment group, vehicle to prevent progression to flares. If flares occurred, moderately potent topical corticosteroids were mandated. The primary efficacy endpoint was ranked flares at 6 months. Safety was monitored clinically, and a skin recall-antigen test was performed at study completion. RESULTS: BASELINE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PATIENTS: The mean age for both groups was approximately 8 years, and the majority of patients had moderate disease at baseline. PATIENT FOLLOW-UP AND EXPOSURE TO STUDY MEDICATION: The mean duration of follow-up (+/-standard error) was 303.7 (+/-5.30) days in the pimecrolimus group and 235.2 (+/-9.40) days in the control group. The discontinuation rate was significantly higher in the control group than in the pimecrolimus group (51.5% vs 31.6% at 12 months), and proportionately more patients with severe or very severe disease discontinued in the control group. The main reason for the higher discontinuation rate in the control group was unsatisfactory therapeutic effect (30.4% vs 12.4%). This resulted in a substantially higher mean number of study medication treatment days in the pimecrolimus group compared with the control group: 211.9 (69.8% of study days) versus 156.0 (66.3% of study days). Of those patients who completed 12 months on study, 14.2% and 7.0% of patients in the pimecrolimus and vehicle groups, respectively, used study medication continuously. EFFICACY: Patients in the pimecrolimus group experienced significantly fewer AD flares than those in the control group, according to the primary efficacy analysis on ranked flares of AD (Van Elteren test). The proportion of patients who completed 6 or 12 months with no flares was approximately twice as high in the pimecrolimus group compared with control (61.0% vs 34.2% at 6 months; 50.8% vs 28.3% at 12 months). Fewer flares were observed in the pimecrolimus group regardless of baseline disease severity, so even severe patients derived benefit from the treatment. The analysis of time to first flare showed that treatment with pimecrolimus was associated with a significantly longer flare-free period (log- rank test). Covariate analysis indicated a statistically significant effect on time to first flare of baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index score, and whether patients had "severe" or "very severe" disease at baseline according to the Investigators' Global Assessment, although patients in all baseline disease severity subgroups benefited from treatment. Age had no significant effect. Fewer patients in the pimecrolimus group required topical corticosteroid therapy compared with control (35.0% vs 62.9% at 6 months; 42.6% vs 68.4% at 12 months), and patients in the pimecrolimus group spent fewer days on topical corticosteroid therapy (57.4% vs 31.6% [pimecrolimus vs control, respectively] spent 0 days on topical corticosteroid therapy, 17.1% vs 27.5% 1-14 days, and 25.5% vs 41.0% >14 days over the 12 months of the study). This steroid-sparing effect of pimecrolimus was evident despite pimecrolimus-treated patients being on study longer than patients in the control group. The average proportion of study days spent on second-line corticosteroids was 4.08% in the pimecrolimus group and 9.10% in the control group. Analysis of Eczema Area and Severity Index over time showed significantly lower median scores, thus indicating better disease control in the pimecrolimus group compared with the control group. Similar results were obtained from analysis of the Investigators' Global Assessment (not shown). The treatment groups were well balanced with respect to the number of patients using antihistamines during the study (57.2% vs 62.9%, pimecrolimus vs control, respectively). SAFETY: There were no appreciable differences between treatment groups in the overall incidence of adverse events. The most frequent adverse events were common childhood infections and ailments, including nasopharyngitis, headache, and cough. The incidence of suspected drug-related adverse events was not significantly different in the pimecrolimus group (24.7% vs 18.7%--pimecrolimus vs control), and the incidence of serious adverse events was low (8.3% vs 5.2%--pimecrolimus vs control). Life-table analysis of incidence of adverse events revealed no significant differences between the treatment groups, except for cough. Local tolerability was good in both treatment groups. The most common application site reaction reported was sensation of burning (10.5% vs 9.3%--pimecrolimus vs control). There were no major differences between treatment groups in the duration or severity of application site reactions, most of which were mild-to-moderate and transient, occurring within the first week of treatment. Skin infections were reported in both groups. There were no between-group differences in the life-table analysis of time to first occurrence of bacterial skin infections nor in the adjusted incidence of bacterial skin infections. Although there were no significant differences between treatment groups in the incidence of individual viral skin infections, the incidence of grouped viral skin infections (12.4% vs 6.3%--pimecrolimus vs control) showed a slightly higher incidence in the pimecrolimus group. Laboratory values and vital signs showed no significant between-group differences. There were no significant differences between treatment groups in response to recall antigens in those patients who remained on study for 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of early AD signs/symptoms with pimecrolimus was effective in preventing progression to flares in more than half the patients, reducing or eliminating the need for topical corticosteroids. The benefits were consistently seen at 6 months across important disease severity subgroups and with respect to the various predefined efficacy endpoints. Furthermore, these benefits were sustained for 12 months, providing evidence that long-term treatment with pimecrolimus leads to better control of AD. Treatment with pimecrolimus was well tolerated and was not associated with clinically relevant adverse events compared with the conventional treatment group. The results reported here offer the prospect of effective long-term management of AD with reduced need for topical corticosteroids.