Roflumilast Cream 0.15% in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis: Individual Patient Response from the Pooled INTEGUMENT-1 and INTEGUMENT-2 Phase 3 Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Roflumilast cream 0.15% is a highly selective phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor under investigation as a once-daily, nonsteroidal treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD). Pooled safety and efficacy results of two Phase 3 clinical trials (INTEGUMENT-1 and INTEGUMENT-2) in patients with AD have been presented previously. Here we present individual patient responses on the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), which is used to assess disease severity in clinical trials. Methods: INTEGUMENT-1 and INTEGUMENT-2 were identical, randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, 4-week trials of once-daily roflumilast cream 0.15% in patients aged ≥6 with AD (body surface area [BSA] affected: ≥3%). Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to roflumilast cream 0.15% or vehicle cream. The primary efficacy endpoint was Validated Investigator Global Assessment for AD (vIGA-AD) Success (score of 0 [Clear] or 1 [Almost Clear] plus ≥2-point improvement from baseline, assessed on a five-point scale ranging from 0 to 4 [Severe]) at Week 4. EASI was assessed as a secondary endpoint. Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. Results: In total, 884 patients received roflumilast 0.15% cream and 453 patients received vehicle cream. Baseline characteristics and demographics were similar between treatment groups. Significantly more roflumilast- than vehicle-treated patients achieved vIGA-AD Success (31.3% versus 14.1%; P<0.0001) and vIGA-AD of Clear or Almost Clear (41.1% vs. 21.4%; P<0.0001) at Week 4. Roflumilast treatment significantly improved itch by 24 hours after first application (P<0.0001). At the first post-treatment timepoint evaluated (Week 1), 84.9% of roflumilast-treated patients had a measurable improvement in EASI. By Week 4, 91.5% of patients had a measurable improvement in EASI. Differences favoring roflumilast were also observed at Week 4 for percentages of patients achieving a 50% reduction in EASI (69.2% vs. 44.4%; P<0.0001), 75% reduction (44.5% vs. 21.2%, P<0.0001), 90% reduction (22.4% vs 8.6%; P<0.0001), and 100% reduction (9.8% vs 4.8%; P<0.002). Roflumilast cream had low rates of application-site adverse events (AEs), treatment-related AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs, comparable with vehicle. On local tolerability assessments, >95% of investigators reported no evidence of irritation at any time point and >90% of patients reported no or mild sensation after applying roflumilast cream on patient-rated local tolerability assessments. Conclusions: Roflumilast cream 0.15% provided greater improvement in vIGA-AD Success, vIGA-AD of Clear or Almost Clear, itch, and EASI versus vehicle in patients with AD in two Phase 3 trials. Among patients treated with roflumilast cream 0.15%, 91.5% demonstrated an improvement in EASI score by Week 4. Safety and tolerability were favorable, with >90% of roflumilast- and vehicle-treated patients reporting no or mild sensation at the application site at any timepoint. Sponsored by Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".