Efficacy and safety of crisaborole in patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis and other atopic comorbidities.

Background: Crisaborole is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor that is approved for the treatment of patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD); however, the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in patients with AD and other atopic comorbidities have not been investigated. Objective: This post hoc pooled analysis of the pivotal phase III studies (CrisADe CORE 1 and CORE 2) assessed the efficacy and safety of crisaborole versus vehicle in patients aged ≥ 2 years with mild-to-moderate AD and other atopic comorbidities. Methods: Patients with mild-to-moderate AD and a medical history of asthma, allergic rhinitis, or food allergies were identified. Efficacy assessments included the proportion of patients who achieved Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success at day 29, ISGA clear or almost clear at day 29, and improvement in the Severity of Pruritus Scale score at week 4. Safety was assessed via treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: This analysis included 1522 patients (crisaborole, 1016; vehicle, 506); 26.2, 15.9, and 16.5% had a medical history of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and food allergies, respectively. The mean age was 12.2 years. A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with crisaborole achieved ISGA success at day 29 compared with patients treated with vehicle for most subgroups analyzed. Furthermore, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with crisaborole achieved ISGA clear or almost clear at day 29 across all subgroups and demonstrated improvement in the Severity of Pruritus Scale score at week 4 versus patients treated with vehicle in most of the subgroups. Overall, most TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity; the most common treatment-related TEAE in patients with atopic comorbidities was application-site pain (crisaborole, 5.1%; vehicle, 1.7%). Conclusion: Crisaborole was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate AD and other atopic comorbidities, which suggested that crisaborole should be considered for the management of AD in this population. Clinical Trials NCT02118766 (CrisADe CORE 1) and NCT02118792 (CrisADe CORE 2), www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Crisaborole and atopic dermatitis skin biomarkers: An intrapatient randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Crisaborole ointment 2% is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). The mechanism of action of crisaborole and its effects on lesional measures of disease severity are not yet well defined. OBJECTIVE: This phase 2a, single-center, vehicle-controlled, intrapatient study was designed to further characterize the mechanism of action of crisaborole through evaluation of clinical efficacy and changes in skin biomarkers in adults (n = 40) with mild-to-moderate AD. METHODS: Two target lesions were randomized in an intrapatient (1:1) manner to double-blind crisaborole/vehicle applied twice daily for 14 days. Patients then applied crisaborole (open-label) to all affected areas for 28 days. Punch biopsy specimens were collected for biomarker analysis at baseline, day 8 (optional), and day 15. RESULTS: Crisaborole treatment resulted in early improvement in lesional signs/symptoms versus vehicle, with improvement in pruritus (pruritus numeric rating scale) observed as early as 24 hours after the first application. Crisaborole-treated lesions showed significant percentage improvement from baseline in lesional transcriptomic profile compared with vehicle at day 8 (91.15% vs 36.02%, P < 10-15) that was sustained until day 15 (92.90% vs 49.59%, P < 10-15). Crisaborole significantly modulated key AD biomarkers versus vehicle, including TH2 and TH17/TH22 pathways and epidermal hyperplasia/proliferation. Molecular profiles and epidermal pathology normalized toward nonlesional skin and correlated with clinical changes in lesion severity and barrier function. CONCLUSION: Crisaborole reversed biomarker profiles of skin inflammation and barrier function, with associated improvements in clinical efficacy measures, highlighting the therapeutic utility of targeting phosphodiesterase 4 in patients with AD.

Impact of Crisaborole on Sleep Outcomes in Pediatric Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Using data from three clinical trials, the effect of crisaborole treatment on sleep outcomes for pediatric patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) and their families was examined. METHODS: This analysis comprised patients aged 2 to < 16 years from the double-blind phase 3 CrisADe CORE 1 (NCT02118766) and CORE 2 (NCT02118792) studies, families of patients aged 2 to < 18 years from CORE 1 and CORE 2, and patients aged 3 months to < 2 years from the open-label phase 4 CrisADe CARE 1 study (NCT03356977), all with mild-to-moderate AD who received crisaborole ointment 2% twice daily for 28 days. Sleep outcomes were assessed via the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index and Dermatitis Family Impact questionnaires in CORE 1 and CORE 2 and the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure questionnaire in CARE 1. RESULTS: In CORE 1 and CORE 2, a significantly lower proportion of crisaborole-treated patients than vehicle-treated patients reported sleep disruption at day 29 (48.5% versus 57.7%, p = 0.001). The proportion of families whose sleep was affected by their child's AD in the preceding week was also significantly lower in the crisaborole group (35.8% versus 43.1%, p = 0.02) at day 29. At day 29 in CARE 1, the proportion of crisaborole-treated patients who experienced ≥ 1 night of disturbed sleep in the previous week decreased by 32.1% from baseline. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that crisaborole improves sleep outcomes in pediatric patients with mild-to-moderate AD and their families.

Atopic dermatitis (AD), also known as eczema, is a chronic skin disease that causes red or flaky skin patches that can become infected and itch. Children with AD often experience sleep disturbance, including difficulty falling asleep, restless sleep, waking up more frequently, and daytime drowsiness. Problems with sleep quality negatively impact children with AD, as well as their caregivers. Crisaborole ointment is applied to the skin and has been shown to improve the symptoms of AD in children and adults. This study examined how treatment with crisaborole affected sleep quality for children and their caregivers in three clinical trials. Children in these studies took crisaborole for 28 days. Researchers found that crisaborole treatment improved sleep in children with mild-to-moderate AD and their caregivers. This was determined using four measures. First, a smaller proportion of children who were treated with crisaborole experienced sleep disruption compared with those to whom a vehicle was applied (an ointment with no drug). Second, a smaller proportion of caregivers of children with AD who were treated with crisaborole reported effects on their sleep, compared with children to whom a vehicle was applied. Third, a smaller proportion of children with AD who were treated with crisaborole, as well as their caregivers, had ≥ 1 night per week of disturbed sleep after treatment compared with before treatment. Fourth, the caregivers of children treated with crisaborole reported significantly less exhaustion and tiredness because of the child's AD. These results suggest that treatment with crisaborole improves sleep outcomes in children with mild-to-moderate AD and their caregivers.

Efficacy and Safety Trends with Continuous, Long-Term Crisaborole Use in Patients Aged ≥ 2 Years with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease often requiring long-term treatment. Crisaborole significantly improved global AD signs and symptoms in 28-day phase 3 studies of patients aged ≥ 2 years with mild-to-moderate AD (Investigator's Static Global Assessment [ISGA] 2 or 3). A post hoc analysis of a long-term, open-label extension study was conducted to assess efficacy and safety trends of crisaborole in patients stratified by the number of initial consecutive crisaborole treatment cycles, defined as the number of treatment cycles completed before achievement of ISGA 0 (clear)/1 (almost clear). METHODS: Patients completing phase 3 studies without drug-related safety issues that precluded further crisaborole treatment were analyzed. Patients with ISGA 0/1 at baseline (the end of a 28-day cycle) did not receive crisaborole for the next 28-day cycle (off-treatment), whereas patients with ISGA ≥ 2 received crisaborole for the next 28-day cycle (on-treatment). Patients were stratified by number of initial consecutive crisaborole treatment cycles. Efficacy was assessed by achievement and maintenance of ISGA 0/1, and safety was assessed by incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment-related AEs (TRAEs). RESULTS: Overall, 418 patients were included in exclusive cohorts based on number of consecutive on-treatment cycles (1 on-treatment cycle, n = 133; 2 consecutive on-treatment cycles, n = 106; 3 consecutive on-treatment cycles, n = 106; 4 consecutive on-treatment cycles, n = 73). After one to four initial consecutive on-treatment cycles, 77.6, 76.3, 59.4, and 43.1% of patients, respectively, achieved ISGA 0/1. Of these patients, 49.5, 37.8, 44.4, and 45.2%, respectively, maintained ISGA 0/1 at the end of a 28-day cycle off-treatment. Incidence of TRAEs was 4.5, 4.7, 3.8, and 1.4% for patients receiving one to four consecutive on-treatment cycles, respectively. One patient discontinued because of AEs. CONCLUSION: These results support the efficacious and safe continuous, long-term use of crisaborole for the management of mild-to-moderate AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02118766, NCT02118792.

Eczema is a skin disease that often requires long-term treatment. Crisaborole ointment improved mild-to-moderate eczema after 28 days of continuous use in two phase 3 clinical trials that included patients aged ≥ 2 years. In the study reported here we tested whether eczema improved with continuous crisaborole use after one to four back-to-back treatment periods, or 28­112 days. Patients who completed either of the aforementioned phase 3 clinical trials were included in this study. Patients received crisaborole for the next 28-day period if they had eczema rashes. Patients with clear or almost clear skin did not receive crisaborole for 28 days. Our study included a total of 418 patients. After one to four treatment periods, 78, 76, 59, and 43% of patients, respectively, had clear or almost clear skin. Of these patients, 50, 38, 44, and 45% still had clear or almost clear skin after stopping treatment for 28 days. Fewer than one in 20 patients had side effects related to crisaborole after one to four treatment periods. The most common side effect at the application site that was related to crisaborole was pain, particularly stinging and burning. Up to one in 50 patients had application site pain. One patient stopped taking crisaborole because of side effects. In conclusion, these results suggest that long-term crisaborole use is effective and safe.

Nonrestorative sleep as a distinct component of insomnia.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Explore characteristics of nonrestorative sleep (NRS) in prospectively defined subgroups of individuals with NRS symptoms, investigate whether NRS can occur independently of difficulties initiating and maintaining sleep (DIS/DMS), and determine its effect on waking function. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and longitudinal population-based study comparing patterns of daytime symptoms, and their persistence, in cohorts of subjects with NRS symptoms grouped according to presence or absence of DIS and DMS. SETTING: 28 sleep centers in the US. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects reporting awakening unrestored or unrefreshed at least 3 times weekly over the previous 3 months were classified, based on self-reported sleep problems, to DIS (n = 138), DMS (n = 44), DIS+DMS (n = 125), and NRS-only (no DIS or DMS; n = 192) cohorts. Eighty healthy volunteers formed a control group. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Polysomnography confirmed DIS and/or DMS in 56/138 (41%), 18/44 (41%), and 37/125 (30%) subjects in DIS, DMS, and DIS+DMS cohorts, respectively; and absence of DIS or DMS in 115/192 (60%) NRS-only subjects and 52/80 (65%) healthy volunteers. Multiple subject-reported endpoints including the Endicott Work Productivity Scale, Pittsburgh Insomnia Rating Scale, Restorative Sleep Questionnaire, and SF-36, showed that NRS-only subjects had significantly impaired daytime function relative to healthy volunteers, comparable to impairment affecting subjects with DIS and/or DMS. Symptoms persisted over 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that NRS can occur independently of other components of insomnia. Daytime symptoms were as severe in individuals with NRS-only as those whose NRS symptoms were combined with DIS or DMS.

Safety, Effectiveness, and Pharmacokinetics of Crisaborole in Infants Aged 3 to < 24 Months with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: A Phase IV Open-Label Study (CrisADe CARE 1).

BACKGROUND: Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of crisaborole in infants aged 3 to < 24 months with mild-to-moderate AD in an open-label study. METHODS: Infants (3 to < 24 months) with Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) of mild (2) or moderate (3) and percentage of treatable body surface area (%BSA) ≥ 5 received crisaborole twice daily for 28 days; a cohort with moderate AD per ISGA and %BSA ≥ 35 were included in a PK analysis. Endpoints included safety (primary), efficacy, and PK (exploratory). RESULTS: Included were 137 infants total (mean age [SD], 13.6 months [6.42]), with 21 in the PK cohort (12.7 months [6.58]). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported for 88 (64.2%) patients (98.9% rated as mild/moderate). TEAEs were considered treatment-related for 22 patients (16.1%); most frequently reported were application site pain (3.6%), application site discomfort (2.9%), and erythema (2.9%). ISGA clear/almost clear with ≥ 2-grade improvement at day 29 was achieved by 30.2% of patients. From baseline to day 29, mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index score was - 57.5%, and mean change in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure total score was - 8.5. Crisaborole systemic exposures in infants were characterized and, based on nonlinear regression analysis, were comparable with that in patients aged ≥ 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label study, crisaborole was well tolerated and effective in infants (3 to < 24 months) with mild-to-moderate AD with systemic exposures similar to patients aged ≥ 2 years. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03356977.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a skin disease that causes inflamed and itchy skin. Crisaborole is an ointment that is approved to treat patients aged 2 years and older with mild-to-moderate AD. This clinical trial studied crisaborole in infants with mild-to-moderate AD who were 3 to under 24 months old. These infants were treated with crisaborole twice a day for 28 days. The trial studied crisaborole's safety, effectiveness, and absorption into the bloodstream. In total, 137 infants were treated. Although side effects of some sort occurred in about two-thirds of patients, only 1 in 6 patients experienced side effects that were attributed to crisaborole. When these side effects did occur, these were mainly pain, discomfort, or redness where crisaborole was applied. Fewer than 1 in 25 patients experienced each side effect where crisaborole was applied. The doctors saw improvement in the AD symptoms of some patients at day 29 of the study compared to the beginning of the study. Crisaborole blood-level measurements in this age group were consistent with those seen in patients aged 2 years and older. Overall, crisaborole was considered well tolerated and effective in infants (3 to under 24 months old) with mild-to-moderate AD. Safety, Effectiveness, and Pharmacokinetics of Crisaborole in Infants Aged 3 to < 24 Months with Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: An Open-Label, Phase 4 Study (MP4 40891 MB).

Effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of PD 0200390, a novel ligand for the voltage-gated calcium channel alpha-2-delta subunit.

AIMS: To investigate the pharmacokinetics and safety of PD 0200390 in healthy subjects and subjects with renal impairment (RI) and to examine the relationship between oral and renal PD 0200390 clearance and estimated creatinine clearance (CLcr). METHODS: In this open-label study, 26 subjects were categorized into four groups based on renal function: no RI (CLcr >80 ml min(-1); n= 6); mild RI (CLcr 51 to < or =80 ml min(-1); n= 6); moderate RI (CLcr >30 to 50 ml min(-1); n= 6); and severe RI (CLcr < or =30 ml min(-1); n= 8). Subjects received a single, oral dose of PD 0200390 25 mg. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from plasma and urine concentration-time data. RESULTS: PD 0200390 was rapidly absorbed; mean time to maximum plasma concentration was 1.66-3.24 h. Mean half-life in subjects with normal renal function was 5.36 h, and increased with worsening RI. Oral (CL/F) and renal (CL(R)) clearance rates decreased with deteriorating renal function, whereas area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0-infinity)) values increased by 56, 117 and 436% in subjects with mild, moderate and severe RI, respectively, indicating increased PD 0200390 exposure. Regression analysis demonstrated that CL/F and CL(R) correlated with CLcr (r= 0.953 and 0.961, respectively). PD 0200390 was well tolerated in subjects with mild, moderate or no RI. The most common adverse events were somnolence, dizziness and headache; these occurred with greatest intensity in the severe RI group. CONCLUSIONS: PD 0200390 pharmacokinetic parameters (CL/F, CL(R) and AUC(0-infinity)) vary predictably with decreases in renal function; therefore dose adjustment may be required in individuals with RI.

A Phase II, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Biomarker Results of Subcutaneous Bapineuzumab in Patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Bapineuzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, targets amyloid-ß (Aß1-40/1 -42) that is believed to play a key role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of monthly subcutaneous (SC) bapineuzumab versus placebo on cerebral amyloid signal in amyloid-positive patients with mild to moderate AD. The incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities-edema/effusion (ARIA-E), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and other safety aspects of bapineuzumab were also evaluated. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind study, 146 patients were randomized (1 : 1:1 : 1) to SC bapineuzumab 2, 7, or 20 mg/month or placebo. Lack of efficacy of intravenous (IV) bapineuzumab in Phase III studies led to truncation of the treatment duration from 24 months to 12 months. Primary endpoint: change from baseline to month 12 in brain amyloid signal as measured by standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) using florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET). RESULTS: Florbetapir PET SUVR decreased significantly (p = 0.038) from baseline to month 12 for the bapineuzumab 7 mg/month group only; reductions versus placebo were not significant for any dosage. One patient each in bapineuzumab 2 mg/month and 20 mg/month groups had ARIA-E. The percentages of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in placebo (77.8%) and bapineuzumab 2 mg/month (78.4%) group, but higher in 7 mg/month (94.4%) and 20 mg/month (89.2%) groups. CONCLUSION: Bapineuzumab SC once-monthly did not demonstrate significant treatment difference over placebo on cerebral amyloid signal at one year but was well-tolerated. There was less ARIA-E than had been expected based on prior experience with comparable exposure on IV bapineuzumab.

Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale.

Pain intensity is frequently measured on an 11-point pain intensity numerical rating scale (PI-NRS), where 0=no pain and 10=worst possible pain. However, it is difficult to interpret the clinical importance of changes from baseline on this scale (such as a 1- or 2-point change). To date, there are no data driven estimates for clinically important differences in pain intensity scales used for chronic pain studies. We have estimated a clinically important difference on this scale by relating it to global assessments of change in multiple studies of chronic pain. Data on 2724 subjects from 10 recently completed placebo-controlled clinical trials of pregabalin in diabetic neuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia, and osteoarthritis were used. The studies had similar designs and measurement instruments, including the PI-NRS, collected in a daily diary, and the standard seven-point patient global impression of change (PGIC), collected at the endpoint. The changes in the PI-NRS from baseline to the endpoint were compared to the PGIC for each subject. Categories of "much improved" and "very much improved" were used as determinants of a clinically important difference and the relationship to the PI-NRS was explored using graphs, box plots, and sensitivity/specificity analyses. A consistent relationship between the change in PI-NRS and the PGIC was demonstrated regardless of study, disease type, age, sex, study result, or treatment group. On average, a reduction of approximately two points or a reduction of approximately 30% in the PI-NRS represented a clinically important difference. The relationship between percent change and the PGIC was also consistent regardless of baseline pain, while higher baseline scores required larger raw changes to represent a clinically important difference. The application of these results to future studies may provide a standard definition of clinically important improvement in clinical trials of chronic pain therapies. Use of a standard outcome across chronic pain studies would greatly enhance the comparability, validity, and clinical applicability of these studies.

How modeling and simulation have enhanced decision making in new drug development.

The idea of model-based drug development championed by Lewis Sheiner, in which pharmacostatistical models of drug efficacy and safety are developed from preclinical and available clinical data, offers a quantitative approach to improving drug development and development decision-making. Examples are presented that support this paradigm. The first example describes a preclinical model of behavioral activity to predict potency and time-course of response in humans and assess the potential for differentiation between compounds. This example illustrates how modeling procedures expounded by Lewis Sheiner provided the means to differentiate potency and the lag time between drug exposure and response and allow for rapid decision making and dose selection. The second example involves planning a Phase 2a dose-ranging and proof of concept trial in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The issue was how to proceed with the study and what criteria to use for a go/no go decision. The combined knowledge of AD disease progression, and preclinical and clinical information about the drug were used to simulate various clinical trial scenarios to identify an efficient and effective Phase 2 study. A design was selected and carried out resulting in a number of important learning experiences as well as extensive financial savings. The motivation for this case in point was the "Learn-Confirm" paradigm described by Lewis Sheiner. The final example describes the use of Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling and simulation to confirm efficacy across doses. In the New Drug Application for gabapentin, data from two adequate and well-controlled clinical trials was submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in support of the approval of the indication for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia. The clinical trial data was not replicated for each of the sought dose levels in the drug application presenting a regulatory dilemma. Exposure response analysis submitted in the New Drug Application was applied to confirm the evidence of efficacy across these dose levels. Modeling and simulation analyses showed that the two studies corroborate each other with respect to the pain relief profiles. The use of PK/PD information confirmed evidence of efficacy across the three studied doses, eliminating the need for additional clinical trials and thus supporting the approval of the product. It can be speculated that the work by Lewis Sheiner reflected in the FDA document titled "Innovation or Stagnation: Challenge and Opportunity on the Critical Path to New Medical Products" made this scientific approach to the drug approval process possible.

Efficacy of the novel anxiolytic pregabalin in social anxiety disorder: a placebo-controlled, multicenter study.

Pregabalin is a novel compound in development for the treatment of anxiety disorders. The safety and efficacy of pregabalin for the treatment of social anxiety disorder was evaluated in a double-blind, multicenter clinical trial in which 135 patients were randomized to 10 weeks of double-blind treatment with either pregabalin 150 mg/d. pregabalin 600 mg/d, or placebo. The primary efficacy parameter was change from baseline to end point in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score. Safety was assessed through clinical and laboratory monitoring, and recording spontaneously reported adverse events. Ninety-four patients (70%) completed the 11-week double-blind treatment phase. LSAS total score was significantly decreased by pregabalin 600 mg/d treatment compared with placebo (P = 0.024, analysis of covariance). Significant differences (P < or = 0.05) between pregabalin 600 mg/d and placebo were seen on several secondary measures including the LSAS subscales of total fear, total avoidance, social fear, and social avoidance, and the Brief Social Phobia Scale fear subscale. Pregabalin 150 mg/d was not significantly better than placebo on any measures. Somnolence and dizziness were the most frequently occurring adverse events among patients receiving pregabalin 600 mg/d. In conclusion, pregabalin 600 mg/d was an effective and well-tolerated treatment of social anxiety disorder.