Protocol for the Phase 2 EDELIFE Trial Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of Intra-Amniotic ER004 Administration to Male Subjects with X-Linked Hypohidrotic Ectodermal Dysplasia.

X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED) is a rare genetic disorder characte-rised by abnormal development of the skin and its appendages, such as hair and sweat glands, the teeth, and mucous glands of the airways, resulting in serious, sometimes life-threatening complications like hyperthermia or recurrent respiratory infections. It is caused by pathogenic variants of the ectodysplasin A gene (EDA). Most affected males are hemizygous for EDA null mutations that lead to the absence or inactivity of the signalling protein ectodysplasin A1 (EDA1) and, thus, to the full-blown phenotype with inability to perspire and few if any teeth. There are currently no long-term treatment options for XLHED. ER004 represents a first-in-class protein replacement molecule designed for specific, high-affinity binding to the endogenous EDA1 receptor (EDAR). Its proposed mechanism of action is the replacement of missing EDA1 in yet unborn patients with XLHED. Once bound to EDAR, ER004 activates the EDA/NFκB signalling pathway, which triggers the transcription of genes involved in the normal development of multiple tissues. Following preclinical studies, named-patient use cases demonstrated significant potential of ER004 in affected males treated in utero during the late second and third trimesters of pregnancy. In order to confirm these results, we started the EDELIFE trial, a prospective, open-label, genotype-match controlled, multicentre clinical study to investigate the efficacy and safety of intra-amniotic ER004 administration as a prenatal treatment for male subjects with XLHED. This article summarises the rationale, the study protocol, ethical issues of the trial, and potential pitfalls.

Cutaneous neurofibromas: patients' medical burden, current management and therapeutic expectations: results from an online European patient community survey.

BACKGROUND: Neurofibromatosis type 1 is an inherited condition with variable phenotypic expression and a high medical and social burden. The objectives of this patient survey were to better understand the real-world experiences of patients living with cutaneous neurofibromas (cNF), to perceive their satisfaction and feelings about cNF current management (only laser and surgery are currently available), and to highlight their expectations of new therapeutic modalities. RESULTS: One hundred seventy patients from 4 European countries took part in the study, 65% (n = 110) were women and mean age was 39 years old. 96% (n = 164) of respondents have cNF on visible parts of the body and the survey confirmed that total number of cNF and visibility increase with age. Patients reported that cNF mainly impacts everyday mood, general daily life and social life. The visibility of cNF had a higher impact than their number. 92% (n = 156) of patients have a regular and multidisciplinary medical follow-up. The dermatologist is one of the most consulted healthcare professionals. 76% (n = 130) of respondents have treated their cNF: 65% (n = 111) had surgery and 38% (n = 64) had multiple laser sessions. Frequency of operations and regrowth of cNF were the two most unsatisfactory aspects with both treatments for patients. Indeed, after removal, new cNF appear in more than 75% (n = 128) of cases. As a future treatment, patients expected a topical (30%, n = 51) or oral medication (29%, n = 50). Around 2 out of 3 patients would agree to take it at least once a day or more for life but they would like a well-tolerated treatment. According to patients, the most important effectiveness criteria of a new treatment are to block cNF growth and reduce their number. 70% (n = 119) of patients would consider a future treatment moderately effective to very effective if it could clear 30% of cNF. CONCLUSIONS: This first cNF European patient community survey confirmed that the visible stigma and unaesthetic aspect of cNF have an important impact on patients' quality of life. The survey highlighted that patients were not entirely satisfied with the actual surgery and laser treatments and revealed their clear and realistic expectations for future treatment of cNF.

Efficacy and safety of a new 5% minoxidil formulation in male androgenetic alopecia: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, noninferiority study.

BACKGROUND: Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is the most common cause of hair loss in men. Topical minoxidil solutions can help to treat AGA but have to be applied continuously to be effective. OBJECTIVES: A new minoxidil formulation with improved cosmetic characteristics (DC0120, Pierre-Fabre Dermatologie) was tested for noninferiority vs a comparator minoxidil product (ALOSTIL® , Johnson & Johnson) in stimulating hair growth in men with AGA. METHODS: Two 10 cm2 areas on the scalp of each subject were randomized to receive DC0120, the comparator, or one of their corresponding vehicles, applied twice per day for 16 weeks. Nonvellus target area hair count (TAHC) was measured within treatment areas at baseline (day 1) and after 8 and 16 weeks by digital phototrichogram. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty subjects were included and randomized, of which 210 completed the study. The mean change in nonvellus TAHC between baseline and week 16 was +22.0 hairs/cm2 (95% CI: 18.1; 25.9) in the DC0120 group and +20.5 hairs/cm2 (95% CI: 16.6; 24.4) in the comparator group. The adjusted mean difference in TAHC changes between the two treatments was +1.5 hairs/cm2 (95% CI -2.3; 5.2), with the lower 95% confidence interval above the noninferiority threshold of -7 hairs/cm2 . This indicated that DC0120 was noninferior to the comparator. Both minoxidil treatments also increased nonvellus TAHC compared to vehicle groups at 8 and 16 weeks. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: DC0120 was as safe and effective as a similar marketed minoxidil product for stimulating hair growth in men with AGA.

Efficacy of Propranolol Between 6 and 12 Months of Age in High-Risk Infantile Hemangioma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus on optimal treatment duration for propranolol in infantile hemangioma (IH). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral propranolol solution administered for a minimum of 6 months up to a maximum of 12 months of age in high-risk IH. METHODS: This single-arm, open-label, phase 3 study was conducted in patients aged 35 to 150 days with high-risk IH in 10 hospitals between 2015 and 2017. The study comprised a 6-month initial treatment period (ITP) plus continuation up to 12 months of age if complete success was not achieved, a follow-up, and a retreatment period. Patients received oral propranolol twice daily (3 mg/kg per day). The primary end point was the success rate at the end of the ITP. Furthermore, the persistence of IH response and efficacy of retreatment was evaluated. RESULTS: The success rate after 6 months of treatment was 47%, increasing to 76% at the end of the ITP. Of the patients who achieved success, 68% sustained success for 3 months without treatment, and 24% required retreatment. Of the 8 patients who were retreated, 7 achieved success. Adverse events, reported by 80% of patients, were mild, which were expected in this population or known propranolol side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Oral propranolol administered beyond 6 months and up to 12 months of age meaningfully increases the success rate in high-risk IH. Success was sustained in most patients up to 3 months after stopping treatment. Retreatment was efficacious, and the safety profile satisfactory.

Pain relief of sore throat with a new anti-inflammatory throat lozenge, ibuprofen 25 mg: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international phase III study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a new oromucosal ibuprofen form, ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge, in single and repeat dosing for up to 4 days, to the matched placebo, in the treatment of acute sore throat pain in adults. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients with non-streptococcal sore throat and signs of moderate-to-severe associated pain (≥5 on the objective Tonsillo-Pharyngitis Assessment 21-point scale and ≥60 mm on the subjective 0-100 mm visual analogue Sore Throat Pain Intensity Scale [STPIS]) were assigned ibuprofen 25 mg (n=194) or matching placebo (n=191) lozenge treatment. Efficacy was assessed (at the investigating centre up to 2 hours after first dosing, then on an ambulatory basis) by parameters derived from patient's scores on scales of pain relief, pain intensity, and global efficacy assessment. The primary efficacy end-point was the time-weighted TOTal PAin Relief (TOTPAR) over 2 hours after first dosing using the Sore Throat Relief Scale (STRS). Safety and local tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Ibuprofen 25 mg was superior to placebo on numerous pain relief parameters; TOTPAR was significantly higher with ibuprofen 25 mg over 2 hours after first dosing (P<.05), the effect being apparent from the first evaluation at 15 minutes (P<.05). The STPIS reduction in favour of ibuprofen 25 mg was not significant vs placebo. Mean STRS scores and patient's global efficacy assessment both reflected a higher efficacy of ibuprofen 25 mg over the 4-day treatment period with tests of statistical significance up to day 1 evening (P<.05), and, in patients with still clinically significant pain (n=128), after an average 4 days (P<.01). Ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to placebo. CONCLUSION: Low-dose ibuprofen 25 mg lozenge in repeat dosing provides in adults more efficacious and rapid relief of sore throat pain and is as well tolerated as placebo. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01785862.

Longterm therapeutic response to milnacipran treatment for fibromyalgia. A European 1-year extension study following a 3-month study.

OBJECTIVE: This double-blind, 1-year extension study investigated the longterm efficacy and safety of milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day in the treatment of fibromyalgia (FM) in completers of a 3-month European double-blind lead-in study of milnacipran 200 mg/day versus placebo. METHODS: A total of 468 patients with FM successfully completing the lead-in study were either blindly maintained on milnacipran 200 mg/day (MLN200:MLN200, n = 198) or (if previously receiving placebo) rerandomized to milnacipran 100 mg/day (PBO:MLN100, n = 91), 150 mg/day (PBO:MLN150, n = 92), or 200 mg/day (PBO:MLN200, n = 87) for an additional 12 months (including a 4-week dose escalation). The main efficacy endpoint was a 2-measure composite responder rate (relative to lead-in study baseline) incorporating the weekly-recall pain score recorded on a visual analog scale and the Patient Global Impression of Change score. A panel of other assessments including the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire explored the multidimensional aspects of FM. Descriptive analyses using the last observation carried forward approach were performed. RESULTS: At the 1-year endpoint, the proportion of composite responders (relative to the lead-in study baseline) ranged from 27.5% (PBO:MLN100) to 35.9% (MLN200:MLN200), and had increased from the extension study baseline by 15.2% (PBO:MLN150) to 20.7% (PBO:MLN200 and MLN200:MLN200). At endpoint, an improvement from both baselines was shown in all groups on pain, fatigue, sleep, and quality of life measures. Up to 1 year, all doses of milnacipran were safe and well tolerated. The most common drug-related adverse events were hyperhidrosis and nausea. CONCLUSION: Over 1 year, milnacipran 100, 150, and 200 mg/day exhibited sustained and safe therapeutic effects on predominant symptoms of FM. Registered as trial no. NCT00757731.