Roflumilast foam 0.3% for adolescent and adult patients with seborrheic dermatitis: A randomized, double-blinded, vehicle-controlled, phase 3 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor roflumilast has been studied in several dermatologic conditions. OBJECTIVE: Roflumilast foam 0.3% is being investigated as a topical treatment for seborrheic dermatitis (SD). METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blinded trial, patients with SD were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to once-daily roflumilast foam 0.3% or vehicle foam for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Success at week 8, defined as IGA of 0 (Clear) or 1 (Almost Clear) plus ≥2-point improvement from baseline. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: 79.5% of roflumilast-treated and 58.0% of vehicle-treated patients met the primary endpoint (P < .001); statistically significant differences in IGA Success also favored roflumilast at week 2 (roflumilast: 43.0%; vehicle: 25.7%; P < .001) and week 4 (roflumilast: 73.1%; vehicle: 47.1%; P < .001). Roflumilast was well-tolerated with a low rate of treatment-emergent adverse events. LIMITATIONS: Study limitations include the 8-week treatment period for this chronic condition. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily roflumilast foam was superior to vehicle in leading to IGA of Clear or Almost Clear plus ≥2-point improvement from baseline at 8 weeks in patients with SD. Longer trials are needed to determine durability and safety of roflumilast foam in SD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".