Long-Term Safety and Efficacy with Roflumilast Cream 0.15% in Patients Aged ≥6 Years with Atopic Dermatitis: A Phase 3 Open-Label Extension Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Background: Safety and efficacy of roflumilast cream 0.15% for atopic dermatitis (AD) were demonstrated in two 4-week phase 3 trials. Objective: Evaluate long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of roflumilast cream 0.15% in AD. Methods: In this open-label extension (OLE) trial (INTEGUMENT-OLE; NCT04804605), patients aged ≥6 years who completed one of the 4-week phase 3 trials applied roflumilast for up to 52 weeks. After 4 weeks of once-daily application, patients who achieved Validated Investigator Global Assessment for AD (vIGA-AD) of clear (0) switched to twice-weekly (BIW) application to normal-appearing flare-prone areas (proactive treatment). Results: Among 657 patients treated, 36.7% reported adverse events, including 4.7% that were treatment related. Application site pain and stinging/burning that caused definite discomfort at any visit were reported for 0.5% and 0.4%–2.1% of patients, respectively. Patients who achieved vIGA-AD 0 and switched to proactive BIW application maintained vIGA-AD 0/1 (almost clear) for a median of 281 days (Kaplan–Meier estimate). Conclusion: Roflumilast cream 0.15% was well tolerated for up to 56 weeks. BIW application to normal-appearing flare-prone sites maintained improvement in AD signs and symptoms, showing that proactive treatment represents an alternative to the current standard practice of reactive treatment.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".