Safety and efficacy of eblasakimab, an interleukin 13 receptor α1 monoclonal antibody, in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A phase 1b, multiple-ascending dose study.

BACKGROUND: Eblasakimab, an interleukin (IL)-13 receptor α1 antagonist, blocks IL-4 and IL-13 signaling through the type 2 receptor. OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of eblasakimab was evaluated in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: In this phase 1b randomized, double-blinded study, 52 patients with moderate-to-severe AD received weekly subcutaneous injections of eblasakimab 200, 400, or 600 mg, or placebo for 8 weeks. Primary outcome was the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Secondary outcomes included percentage change in the Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline; Eczema Area and Severity Index improvement of at least 50%, 75%, or 90% from baseline; and percentage change in the peak-pruritus numeric rating scale score from baseline. RESULTS: Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 47% placebo and 71% eblasakimab patients; most were considered mild or moderate and did not lead to study discontinuation. At week 8 eblasakimab 600 mg showed statistically significant improvement in mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index versus placebo (-65% vs -27%, P = .014). Other key secondary physician- and patient-reported end points were met. LIMITATIONS: Longer studies are required to confirm eblasakimab safety and efficacy in AD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe AD with eblasakimab was well-tolerated and associated with significant clinical improvements versus placebo.

Once-Daily Oral Sarecycline 1.5 mg/kg/day Is Effective for Moderate to Severe Acne Vulgaris: Results from Two Identically Designed, Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Side effects may limit the use of current tetracycline-class antibiotics for acne. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily sarecycline, a novel, narrow-spectrum tetracycline-class antibiotic, in moderate to severe acne. METHODS: Patients 9-45 years with moderate to severe facial acne (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] score ≥ 3, 20-50 inflammatory and ≤ 100 noninflammatory lesions, and ≤ 2 nodules) were randomized 1:1 to sarecycline 1.5 mg/kg/day or placebo for 12 weeks in identically designed phase 3 studies (SC1401 and SC1402). RESULTS: In SC1401 (sarecycline n=483, placebo n=485) and SC1402 (sarecycline n=519, placebo n=515), at week 12, IGA success (≥ 2-grade improvement and score 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear]) rates were 21.9% and 22.6% (sarecycline), respectively, versus 10.5% and 15.3% (placebo; P less than 0.0001 and P equals 0.0038). Onset of efficacy in inflammatory lesions occurred by the first visit (week 3), with mean percentage reduction in inflammatory lesions at week 12 in SC1401 and SC1402 of -51.8% and -49.9% (sarecycline), respectively, versus -35.1% and -35.4% (placebo; P less than 0.0001). Onset of efficacy for absolute reduction of noninflammatory lesion count occurred at week 6 in SC1401 (P less than 0.05) and week 9 in SC1402 (P less than 0.01). In SC1401, the most common TEAEs (in ≥ 2% of either sarecycline or placebo group) were nausea (4.6% [sarecycline]; 2.5% [placebo]), nasopharyngitis (3.1%; 1.7%), headache (2.7%; 2.7%), and vomiting (2.1%; 1.4%) and, in SC1402, nasopharyngitis (2.5%; 2.9%) and headache (2.9%; 4.9%). Most were not considered treatment-related. Vestibular (dizziness, tinnitus, vertigo) and phototoxic (sunburn, photosensitivity) TEAEs both occurred in ≤ 1% of sarecycline patients. Gastrointestinal TEAE rates for sarecycline were low. Among females, vulvovaginal candidiasis (SC1401: 1.1% [sarecycline] and 0 [placebo]; SC1402: 0.3% and 0) and mycotic infection (0.7% and 0; 1.0% and 0) rates were low. CONCLUSION: The narrow-spectrum antibiotic sarecycline was safe, well tolerated, and effective for moderate to severe acne, with low rates of side effects common with tetracycline antibiotics. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(9):987-996.

Efficacy and Safety of Sarecycline, a Novel, Once-Daily, Narrow Spectrum Antibiotic for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Facial Acne Vulgaris: Results of a Phase 2, Dose-Ranging Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for new oral antibiotics for acne with improved safety profiles and targeted antibacterial spectra. Sarecycline is a novel, tetracycline-class antibiotic specifically designed for acne, offering a narrow spectrum of activity compared with currently available tetracyclines, including less activity against enteric Gram-negative bacteria. This phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of three doses of sarecycline for moderate to severe facial acne vulgaris. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients aged 12 to 45 years were randomized to once-daily sarecycline 0.75 mg/kg, 1.5 mg/kg, 3.0 mg/kg, or placebo. Efficacy analyses included change from baseline in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion counts at week 12, with between-group comparisons using analysis of covariance. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratories, vital signs, electrocardiograms, and physical examinations. RESULTS: Overall, 285 randomized patients received at least one dose of study drug. At week 12, sarecycline 1.5 mg/kg and 3.0 mg/kg groups demonstrated significantly reduced inflammatory lesions from baseline (52.7% and 51.8%, respectively) versus placebo (38.3%; P=0.02 and P=0.03, respectively). Sarecycline was safe and well tolerated, with similar gastrointestinal AE rates in sarecycline and placebo groups. Vertigo and photosensitivity AEs occurred in less than 1% of patients when pooling sarecycline groups; no vulvovaginal candidiasis AEs occurred. Discontinuation rates due to AEs were low. No serious AEs occurred. CONCLUSION: Once-daily sarecycline 1.5 mg/kg significantly reduced inflammatory lesions versus placebo and was safe and well tolerated with low rates of AEs, including gastrointestinal AEs. Sarecycline 3.0 mg/kg did not result in additional efficacy versus 1.5 mg/kg. Sarecycline may represent a novel, once-daily treatment for patients with moderate to severe acne. It offers a narrow antibacterial spectrum relative to other tetracycline options, which may lead to less selective pressure on enteric Gram-negative bacteria, resulting in less disruption of commensal organisms and less potential for antibiotic resistance.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(3):333-338.

Treatment Response With Once-Daily Topical Dapsone Gel, 7.5% for Acne Vulgaris: Subgroup Analysis of Pooled Data from Two Randomized, Double-Blind Stu.

BACKGROUND: Acne vulgaris has varying physical and psychological effects in men and women of different ages, races, and ethnicities.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis assessed the relationship of age, sex, and race to treatment response with once-daily topical dapsone gel, 7.5%.

METHODS: We conducted a pooled subgroup analysis of 2 randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled clinical trials conducted in the US and Canada. The studies included patients with 20 to 50 inflammatory and 30 to 100 noninflammatory facial lesions, and a Global Acne Assessment Score (GAAS) of 3 (moderate). Pooled data (N=4340) were analyzed by age (12-17 and ≥18 years), sex, and race (Caucasian and non-Caucasian) for GAAS success (score of 0 [none] or 1 [minimal]) and mean percent change from baseline in inflammatory, noninflammatory, and total lesion counts. The impact of age and sex on treatment response was examined using multivariate analysis. Adverse events were analyzed by subgroups.

RESULTS: Treatment responses with dapsone gel, 7.5% were greater overall and for all subgroups versus vehicle. GAAS success rates and mean decrease in all lesion counts with dapsone gel, 7.5% were greater in older (aged ≥18 years) versus younger patients, and for females versus males. Treatment response with dapsone gel, 7.5% in racial subgroups was similar. Multivariate analysis showed statistical significance for age group and sex as predictors of GAAS success (P less than equal to .005) and reduction in lesion counts (P less than equal to .025). Adverse events were similar across subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS: Older age (≥18 years) and female sex were predictors of treatment response. These subgroups tended to have greater acne improvement in subgroup comparisons. Caucasian and non-Caucasian patients had similar responses. The safety profile of dapsone gel, 7.5% was similar across subgroups.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(6):591-598.

Efficacy, Safety, and Dermal Tolerability of Dapsone Gel, 7.5% in Patients with Moderate Acne Vulgaris: A Pooled Analysis of Two Phase 3 Trials.

Objective: Assess efficacy and safety of once-daily topical dapsone gel, 7.5% compared with vehicle for treating acne vulgaris (acne). Design: A pooled analysis of data from two identically designed, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, multicenter, 12-week clinical trials. Setting: Study sites in the United States and Canada. Participants: overall, 4,340 patients were randomized 1:1 to dapsone and vehicle. Criteria included age 12 years or older with acne diagnosis, 20 to 50 facial inflammatory lesions (papules and pustules), 30 to 100 facial noninflammatory lesions (open and closed comedones), and acne grade of 3 (moderate) on the Global Acne Assessment Score scale. Measurements: Efficacy assessments included the Global Acne Assessment Score success rate (proportion of patients with Global Acne Assessment Score of 0 [none] or 1 [minimal]) and percentage change from baseline in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions at Week 12. Results: Global Acne Assessment Score success rates were 29.8 percent and 21.1 percent for patients who received dapsone gel, 7.5% and vehicle, respectively (p<0.001). Patients receiving dapsone gel, 7.5% had greater percentage change in lesion counts than patients receiving vehicle (inflammatory lesions: -54.6% vs. -48.1%; p<0.001; -45.1 %; noninflammatory lesions: -39.4%; p<0.001). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Mean dermal tolerability scores for stinging/burning, dryness, scaling, and erythema were similarly low with dapsone gel, 7.5% and vehicle. Conclusion: Dapsone gel, 7.5%, with a 50-percent greater dapsone concentration than twice-daily dapsone gel, 5% formulation, is applied topically once daily for acne, is effective, safe, and well-tolerated over 12 weeks, and has local tolerability similar to that of vehicle. www.clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT01974141 and NCT01974323.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Once-Daily Dapsone Gel, 7.5% in Patients With Moderate Acne Vulgaris.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the dosing frequency of topical acne treatments to once daily may improve adherence. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and tolerability of 3 formulations of once-daily dapsone gel, 7.5% and of twice-daily dapsone gel, 5% over 28 days in patients with moderate acne vulgaris. METHODS: This phase 1, multicenter, parallel-group study randomized males and females aged 16 to 35 years to 1 of 3 dapsone gel, 7.5% formulations (DAP-11078, DAP-11079, or DAP-11080 double-blind; applied once daily) or to dapsone gel, 5% (investigator-blinded only, applied twice-daily). Blood samples were collected for PK assessments of dapsone and its metabolites, N-acetyl dapsone (NAD) and dapsone hydroxylamine (DHA), before the morning dose on days 1, 7, 14, 18, 21, 26, 27, and 28, and at several follow-up time points (days 29-32). Safety profile assessments included adverse events (AEs), physical examinations, laboratory tests, and local tolerability assessments. RESULTS: Steady-state dapsone, NAD, and DHA concentrations were reached within 7 days of the first dose in all treatment groups. Daily systemic exposures of the 3 dapsone gel, 7.5% formulations were approximately 25% to 40% lower than that for dapsone gel, 5%, and these differences were statistically significant. Among the 3 dapsone gel, 7.5% formulations, the highest daily exposure of dapsone (per the AUC) was observed with DAP-11080, with respective Cmax and AUC0-24 being approximately 28.6% and 28.7% lower relative to dapsone gel, 5%. Most AEs were mild to moderate in intensity. The safety profiles for all 3 formulations of once-daily dapsone, 7.5% gel and twice-daily dapsone gel, 5% were similar following 28 days of topical administration. All 4 dapsone formulations were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated lower systemic exposure with all 3 once-daily dapsone gel, 7.5% formulations than with twice-daily dapsone gel, 5%. All 4 formulations were well tolerated and demonstrated similar safety profiles.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(10):1250-1259.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Dapsone Gel, 7.5% for Treatment of Adolescents and Adults With Acne Vulgaris: Second of Two Identically Designed, Large, Multicenter, Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Dapsone gel, 5% is administered twice daily for the treatment of acne vulgaris, and some patients may find adherence challenging.
OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess the efficacy and safety, compared with vehicle, of acne treatment with a recently FDA-approved, once-daily formulation of dapsone gel, 7.5%, with a 50% greater concentration of dapsone.
METHODS: This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, multicenter clinical trial enrolled patients aged 12 years and older with 20-50 facial inflammatory lesions, 30-100 facial noninflammatory lesions, and an acne grade of 3 (moderate) on the Global Acne Assessment Score (GAAS). Patients were randomized (1:1 ratio) to topical dapsone gel, 7.5% or vehicle once daily for 12 weeks. Investigators assessed GAAS success rate (proportion of patients with a GAAS of 0 or 1) and percent change from baseline in inflammatory, noninflammatory, and total lesions.
RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 2238 patients (1118 in the dapsone gel, 7.5% group and 1120 in the vehicle group). The GAAS success rates were 29.8% for the dapsone gel, 7.5% group and 20.9% for the vehicle group (P<0.001) at week 12. At week 12, mean inflammatory lesions decreased from baseline by 53.8% and 47.3%, noninflammatory lesions decreased by 45.9% and 40.4%, and total lesions decreased by 48.9% and 43.2% for the dapsone gel, 7.5% group and the vehicle group, respectively (all, P<0.001). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar for dapsone gel, 7.5% (17.6%) and vehicle (17.1%). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. The most frequently reported increase in severity for all of the dermal tolerability scales was from "none" to "mild."
CONCLUSION: Dapsone gel, 7.5% applied topically once daily is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for acne vulgaris. Improvements in acne severity and lesions were observed over the 12-week course of treatment.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(8):962-969.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Dapsone Gel, 7.5% for Treatment of Adolescents and Adults With Acne Vulgaris: First of Two Identically Designed, Large, Multicenter, Randomized, Vehicle-controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acne vulgaris (acne) with dapsone gel, 5% requires twice-daily dosing, and some patients may not adhere to this regimen.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a new, once-daily formulation of dapsone gel, 7.5%, with a 50% higher dapsone concentration, versus vehicle over 12 weeks in patients with acne.
METHODS: This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, multicenter clinical trial enrolled patients with moderate acne aged 12 years and older with 20 to 50 inflammatory lesions and 30 to 100 noninflammatory lesions on the face, and an acne grade of 3 (moderate) on the Global Acne Assessment Score (GAAS). Patients were randomized to receive topical dapsone gel, 7.5% or vehicle once daily for 12 weeks. Investigators assessed GAAS success rate (proportion of patients with GAAS of 0 or 1) and percent change from baseline in inflammatory, noninflammatory, and total lesions.
RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population comprised 2102 patients, 1044 in the dapsone gel, 7.5% group and 1058 in the vehicle group. At week 12, 29.9% of patients in the dapsone gel, 7.5% group and 21.2% in the vehicle group (P<.001) had GAAS success. Mean inflammatory lesions decreased by 55.5% and 49.0%, noninflammatory lesions decreased by 44.4% and 38.4%, and total lesions decreased by 48.7% and 42.4% in the dapsone gel, 7.5% and vehicle groups (all P<.001), respectively, at week 12. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the dapsone gel, 7.5% (19.1%) and vehicle (20.6%) groups. Most events in both groups were mild or moderate in severity. Most patients receiving dapsone gel, 7.5% and vehicle had a severity rating of "none" for stinging/burning, dryness, scaling, and erythema scales at all time points.
CONCLUSIONS: Dapsone gel, 7.5% applied topically once daily is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for acne.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(5):553-561.

Adapalene gel 0.1% is better tolerated than tretinoin gel 0.025% among healthy volunteers of various ethnic origins.

BACKGROUND: The efficacious acne treatment adapalene gel 0.1% is significantly less irritating than tretinoin of various concentrations and formulations, according to several clinical studies conducted predominantly in Caucasian patients. OBJECTIVES: To confirm the lower irritation potential of adapalene gel 0.1% compared to tretinoin gel 0.025% among volunteers of various ethnic origins and to explore the difference in the irritant susceptibility among ethnic groups. METHODS: The study was a single-centre, randomized, investigator-masked and intra-individual comparison. Healthy volunteers applied adapalene and tretinoin daily to the face for 21 days and to the forearms for 4 days, and were then evaluated for the level of irritation. RESULTS: The irritation potential of adapalene gel 0.1% was significantly lower than that of tretinoin gel 0.025% in all tolerability assessments, irrespective of the volunteers' ethnic origins. The between-treatment differences were similar among various ethnic groups. Statistically significant but small inter-ethnicity differences were observed in the evaluation of facial signs, with Caucasians being less susceptible than Chinese, Asian Indians and Malays. CONCLUSION: Adapalene gel 0.1% was significantly better tolerated than tretinoin gel 0.025% among various ethnic groups. The patients' ethnic origins had no impact on the difference between adapalene and tretinoin treatments in terms of tolerability.