514 - Tapinarof cream 1% once daily: significant efficacy in the treatment of atopic dermatitis in two pivotal phase 3 trials in adults and children down to 2 years of age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Tapinarof cream 1% once daily (QD) demonstrated efficacy versus vehicle and was well tolerated in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in a previously reported phase 2 trial. Objective Here, we report pivotal phase 3 efficacy and safety results for tapinarof cream 1% QD in the treatment of adults and children down to 2 years of age with AD. Materials and Methods ADORING 1 and 2 were two identical phase 3, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled trials. Eligibility criteria included a Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic DermatitisTM (vIGA-ADTM) score of ≥3, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of ≥6, and body surface area (BSA) involvement of 5–35%. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive tapinarof cream 1% or vehicle cream QD for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was vIGA-ADTM response, defined as a score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) and ≥2-grade improvement from baseline at Week 8. Secondary efficacy endpoints included ≥75% improvement in EASI score (EASI75) and proportion of patients (aged ≥12 years) with a baseline Peak Pruritus-Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) score of ≥4 who achieved a ≥4-point reduction at Week 8. Adverse events (AEs) included rates of AEs of special interest (AESIs): contact dermatitis, follicular event, and headache. Results 407 and 406 patients aged 2–81 years were randomized in ADORING 1 and 2, respectively. At baseline, 84.0–89.9% of patients had a vIGA-ADTM score of 3 (moderate), mean EASI score of 12.5–13.3, and mean BSA affected of 16.7–16.9% across trials. At Week 8, both the primary and all secondary efficacy endpoints were met with statistical significance in the tapinarof groups versus vehicle: vIGA-ADTM response rates were 45.4% vs 13.9% and 46.4% vs 18.0% (both P<0.0001); EASI75 response rates were 55.8% vs 22.9% and 59.1% vs 21.2% (both P<0.0001); and a ≥4-point reduction in PP-NRS was achieved by 55.8% vs 34.2% (P=0.0366) and 52.8% vs 24.1% (P=0.0015), in ADORING 1 and 2, respectively. AEs were mostly mild or moderate; the most frequent (≥5% in any group) were folliculitis, headache, and nasopharyngitis. Trial discontinuation rates due to AEs were lower with tapinarof versus vehicle (ADORING 1: 1.9% vs 3.6%; ADORING 2: 1.5% vs 3.0%, respectively). Rates of AESIs with tapinarof versus vehicle were: contact dermatitis 1.5% vs 2.2% and 1.1% vs 1.5%; follicular events 10.0% vs 0.7% and 8.9% vs 1.5%; and headache 7.0% vs 2.2% and 1.5% vs 0%, in each trial, respectively. Conclusions Tapinarof cream 1% QD demonstrated statistically significant efficacy compared with vehicle for primary and secondary efficacy endpoints in adults and children down to 2 years of age with AD. Tapinarof was well tolerated, with no new safety or tolerability signals. AEs were mostly mild to moderate and led to low rates of trial discontinuation, demonstrating the predictable safety profile of tapinarof cream 1% QD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".