Investigator- and Patient-Rated Local Tolerability in Phase 3 Trials of Topical Roflumilast in Patients With Psoriasis, Seborrheic Dermatitis, and Atopic Dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigator- and patient-rated local tolerability in phase 3 trials of topical roflumilast in patients with psoriasis, seborrheic dermatitis, and atopic dermatitis Christopher G. Bunick1 on behalf of the authors INTRODUCTION: Formulating a topical medication that does not irritate the skin is an important factor contributing to patient treatment adherence and satisfaction. Many topical prescription products use penetration enhancers (including propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and ethanol) to overcome barrier properties of the skin. However, these excipients may irritate the skin causing tolerability reactions such as burning and stinging, which can reduce patient treatment adherence. Topical roflumilast is a highly potent (Kd~0.7 nM) phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor formulated as a water-based cream or foam that does not contain penetration enhancers or fragrances. We present prospectively assessed investigator- and patient-rated local tolerability from Phase 3 trials of topical roflumilast for patients with psoriasis (DERMIS-1, DERMIS-2, ARRECTOR) seborrheic dermatitis (SD; STRATUM), and atopic dermatitis (AD; INTEGUMENT-1, INTEGUMENT-2). METHODS: Patients were randomized to apply topical roflumilast (DERMIS: 0.3% cream; ARRECTOR and STRATUM: 0.3% foam; INTEGUMENT: 0.15% cream) or vehicle once daily for 8 weeks (DERMIS, ARRECTOR, and STRATUM) or 4 weeks (INTEGUMENT). Investigators assessed local tolerability on an 8-point scale (0 [no evidence of irritation] to 7 [strong reaction spreading beyond application site]) in the clinic before investigational product (IP) application. Patients reported local tolerability on a 4-point scale (0 [none: no sensation] to 3 [severe: hot, tingling/stinging sensation that has caused definite discomfort]) in the clinic 10-15 minutes after IP application. Tolerability was also assessed by reviewing documented adverse events. RESULTS: As assessed by investigators, ≥96.5% of patients in the roflumilast-treated groups had no evidence of irritation at the application site across all trials at all timepoints. Patient-rated local tolerability was favorable and improved with treatment: across all trials, 1% of roflumilast-treated patients reported a score of 3 (severe; defined as a “hot tingling/stinging sensation that has caused definite discomfort”) after the first application (day 1) and <1% at each subsequent assessment. Rates of adverse events, including those at the application site, were low for all trials and <0.5% of roflumilast-treated patients discontinued due to adverse events at the application site across all trials. CONCLUSION: Roflumilast cream and foam formulations demonstrated favorable local tolerability based on investigator- and patient-rated assessments in patients with psoriasis, SD, and AD, including application to sensitive areas such as the face and intertriginous areas. Sponsored by Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: DERMIS-1: NCT04211363; DERMIS-2: NCT04211389; ARRECTOR: NCT05028582; STRATUM: NCT04973228; INTEGUMENT-1: NCT04773587; INTEGUMENT-2: NCT04773600
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".