Background Lebrikizumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds with high affinity to interleukin (IL)-13, thereby blocking the downstream effects of IL-13 with high potency. Objectives To report integrated safety of lebrikizumab in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis from phase 2 and 3 studies. Methods Five double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled studies; one randomized open-label study; one adolescent open-label, single-arm study; and one long-term safety study were summarized in two datasets: (1) placebo-controlled week 0–16 (All-PC Week 0–16) in patients who received lebrikizumab 250 mg every 2 weeks (LEBQ2W) versus placebo and (2) patients who received any dose of lebrikizumab at any time during the studies (All-LEB). Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (IR)/100 patient-years (PY) are provided. Results A total of 1720 patients received lebrikizumab (1637.0 PY exposure). In All-PC Week 0–16, the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between treatment groups; most events were nonserious and mild or moderate in severity. The most frequently reported TEAEs were atopic dermatitis (placebo) and conjunctivitis (LEBQ2W). Frequencies of conjunctivitis cluster were 2.5% (placebo) and 8.5% (LEBQ2W), and all events were mild or moderate (All-LEB 10.6%, IR, 12.2). Frequencies of injection site reactions were 1.5% (placebo) and 2.6% (LEBQ2W; All-LEB 3.1%, IR, 3.3). Frequencies of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were 1.4% (placebo) and 2.3% (LEBQ2W; All-LEB 4.2%, IR, 4.5). Conclusion The safety profile for lebrikizumab consisted of TEAEs that were mostly nonserious, mild or moderate in severity, and did not lead to treatment discontinuation. The safety profile was similar in both adults and adolescents. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02465606, NCT02340234, NCT03443024, NCT04146363, NCT04178967, NCT04250337, NCT04250350, NCT04392154 Video abstract Safety of lebrikizumab in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: an integrated analysis of eight clinical trials (MP4 34165 KB)

A topical vehicle is a ‘carrier system’ for an active pharmaceutical (or cosmetic) substance, referred to hereafter as the drug, but a vehicle may also be used on its own as an emollient to ameliorate dry skin. It is well established that the vehicle plays an important role in determining the bioavailability of a given drug at its ultimate target within the skin. Yet in the treatment of atopic eczema/dermatitis (AD), wherein the structure and function of the skin's outer barrier play a pivotal role in the development and course of the condition, the interaction of the vehicle with this barrier carries a particular importance. It is now clear that the often-considered inert excipients of a vehicle bring about changes within the skin at the molecular level that promote barrier restoration and enhance innate immune defenses with therapeutic value to AD patients. Moreover, the vehicle control in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) increasingly displays significant efficacy. In light of this, we consider the implications of vehicle design in relation to AD pathophysiology and the role vehicles play as controls in RCTs of new drug treatments for this condition.

Background A need exists for topical treatments in managing more severe inflammatory acne. Objectives The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.3 %/benzoyl peroxide 2.5 % (0.3 % A/BPO) topical gel in subjects with moderate and severe inflammatory acne. Methods This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Randomization was stratified by acne severity (50 % moderate and 50 % severe). Subjects received 0.3 % A/BPO, 0.1 % A/BPO (benchmark), or vehicle (comparator) once daily for 12 weeks. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were success rate at week 12 (the percentage of subjects rated ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’ with at least a 2-grade improvement on Investigator’s Global Assessment [IGA]) and change in inflammatory (IN) and noninflammatory (NIN) lesion counts from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy endpoints were percent changes in IN and NIN lesion counts. Safety endpoints were incidence of adverse events (AEs) and local tolerability signs/symptoms. Results A total of 503 subjects were randomized: 217, 217, and 69 subjects in the 0.3 % A/BPO, 0.1 % A/BPO, and vehicle groups, respectively. For success rate (subjects rated ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’ with ≥2-grade improvement in IGA), 0.3 % A/BPO was superior to vehicle, with a treatment difference of 22.7 % (33.7 vs. 11.0 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 12.8–32.6, p < 0.001). At week 12, 0.3 % A/BPO was superior to vehicle for mean reduction from baseline in IN (27.0 vs. 14.4) and NIN lesion counts (40.2 vs. 18.5), as well as for percentage reduction from baseline in IN (68.7 vs. 39.2 %) and NIN lesion counts (68.3 vs. 37.4 %) (all p < 0.001). Among subjects with severe inflammatory acne (IGA = 4), 0.1 % A/BPO did not reach statistical significance for success rate compared with vehicle (p = 0.443), whereas 0.3 % A/BPO demonstrated significantly greater efficacy (p = 0.029, requiring ≥3-point IGA improvement). Additionally, 0.3 % A/BPO was safe and well-tolerated. Conclusions Results of this clinical trial demonstrate the significantly greater efficacy of adapalene 0.3 % A/BPO topical gel compared with vehicle as well as a good safety profile in the treatment of moderate to severe inflammatory non-nodulocystic acne, which increases patients’ treatment options. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01880320.

Background A three-pronged approach to acne treatment—combining an antibiotic, antibacterial, and retinoid—could provide greater efficacy and tolerability than single or dyad treatments, while potentially improving patient compliance and reducing antibiotic resistance. Objectives We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple-combination, fixed-dose topical clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/benzoyl peroxide (BPO) 3.1%/adapalene 0.15% (IDP-126) gel for the treatment of acne. Methods In a phase II, double-blind, multicenter, randomized, 12-week study, eligible participants aged ≥ 9 years with moderate-to-severe acne were equally randomized to once-daily IDP-126, vehicle, or one of three component dyad gels: BPO/adapalene; clindamycin phosphate/BPO; or clindamycin phosphate/adapalene. Coprimary endpoints were treatment success at week 12 (participants achieving a ≥ 2-grade reduction from baseline in Evaluator’s Global Severity Score and clear/almost clear skin) and least-squares mean absolute changes from baseline in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion counts to week 12. Treatment-emergent adverse events and cutaneous safety/tolerability were also assessed. Results A total of 741 participants were enrolled. At week 12, 52.5% of participants achieved treatment success with IDP-126 vs vehicle (8.1%) and dyads (range 27.8–30.5%; P ≤ 0.001, all). IDP-126 also provided significantly greater absolute reductions in inflammatory (29.9) and noninflammatory (35.5) lesions compared with vehicle or dyads (range inflammatory, 19.6–26.8; noninflammatory, 21.8–30.0; P < 0.05, all), corresponding to > 70% reductions with IDP-126. IDP-126 was well tolerated, with most treatment-emergent adverse events of mild-to-moderate severity. Conclusions Once-daily treatment with the novel fixed-dose triple-combination clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/BPO 3.1%/adapalene 0.15% gel demonstrated superior efficacy to vehicle and all three dyad component gels, and was well tolerated over 12 weeks in pediatric, adolescent, and adult participants with moderate-to-severe acne. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03170388 (registered 31 May, 2017).

Rosacea is a common chronic skin condition that manifests as recurrent inflammatory lesions. Long-term treatment is required to control symptoms and disease progression, with topical treatments being the first-line choice. Ivermectin 1 % cream is a new once-daily (QD) topical treatment for the inflammatory lesions of rosacea, and it is important to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ivermectin with other currently available topical treatments. A systematic literature review was performed from January 2011 to June 2015, with articles published prior to 2011 retrieved from a Cochrane review on rosacea. Randomized controlled trials of the topical treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe papulopustular rosacea were identified from electronic databases and trial registers, and supplemented with data from clinical study reports. Mixed treatment comparisons (MTCs) were conducted to compare different treatments according to Bayesian methodology. 57 studies were identified, with 19 providing data suitable for MTC. Ivermectin 1 % cream QD led to a significantly greater likelihood of success compared with azelaic acid 15 % gel twice-daily (BID) [relative risk (95 % credible interval): 1.25 (1.14–1.37)], and metronidazole 0.75 % cream BID [1.17 (1.08–1.29)] at 12 weeks. Ivermectin 1 % cream QD also demonstrated a significant reduction in inflammatory lesion count compared with azelaic acid 15 % gel BID [−8.04 (−12.69 to −3.43)] and metronidazole 0.75 % cream BID [−9.92 (−13.58 to −6.35)] at 12 weeks. Ivermectin 1 % cream QD led to a significantly lower risk of developing any AE or TRAE compared with azelaic acid 15 % gel BID [0.83 (0.71–0.97) and 0.47 (0.32–0.67), respectively]. Ivermectin 1 % cream QD appears to be a more effective topical treatment than other current options for the inflammatory lesions of rosacea, with at least an equivalent safety and tolerability profile, and could provide physicians and dermatologists with an alternative first-line treatment option.