固定剂量三联克林霉素磷酸1.2%/过氧化苯甲酰3.1%/阿达帕烯0.15%凝胶对健康受试者的皮肤刺激、致敏和安全性

Z. Draelos, E. Tanghetti, L. Stein Gold, L. Kircik, N. Bhatia, J. Zeichner, Jeffrey Sugarman
{"title":"固定剂量三联克林霉素磷酸1.2%/过氧化苯甲酰3.1%/阿达帕烯0.15%凝胶对健康受试者的皮肤刺激、致敏和安全性","authors":"Z. Draelos, E. Tanghetti, L. Stein Gold, L. Kircik, N. Bhatia, J. Zeichner, Jeffrey Sugarman","doi":"10.25251/skin.7.supp.227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: IDP-126 polymeric mesh gel (clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/benzoyl peroxide [BPO] 3.1%/adapalene 0.15%) is the first triple-combination, fixed-dose topical acne product in development and it addresses major acne pathophysiological processes. IDP-126 demonstrated superior efficacy to vehicle and component dyads, with good safety/tolerability in a phase 2 study of participants with moderate-to-severe acne. The objectives of this study were to assess dermal irritation/sensitization and safety of IDP-126 gel in two phase 1 studies and to compare irritancy of IDP-126 gel and commercially available BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel in one phase 1 study of healthy participants. \nMethods: Two phase 1, randomized, evaluator-blinded, within-participant, dermal safety studies enrolled healthy participants aged ≥18 years (N=234, repeat insult patch test [RIPT]; N=45, cumulative irritation patch test [CIPT]). Patches were applied to the upper back multiple times over 6-8 weeks (RIPT) or every 24 hours for 21 days (CIPT). Patches contained: IDP-126 gel, vehicle gel, saline 0.9% (RIPT/CIPT), sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) 0.5% (CIPT), or branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel (CIPT). Participants in each study received all treatments. Endpoints comprised sensitization potential (RIPT), mean cumulative/total irritation scores, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). \nResults: Overall, irritation with IDP-126 was moderate and not clinically significant. CIPT: IDP-126 was “moderately irritating” (mean score: 1.29), which was significantly less irritating than BPO/adapalene (1.96; P<0.001), statistically similar to SLS (1.17), and more irritating than saline or vehicle (~0.30; P<0.001). RIPT: no participants had investigator-confirmed sensitization to any treatments. In both studies, no TEAEs were related to treatment. \nConclusions: In two phase 1 studies, fixed-dose, triple-combination clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/ BPO 3.1%/adapalene 0.15% polymeric mesh gel had moderate irritancy and no confirmed sensitization in healthy participants. Additionally, IDP-126 demonstrated significantly less irritation versus commercially available, branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel. IDP-126 demonstrated good safety/tolerability, mirroring the phase 2 study results. \n  \nFunding: Ortho Dermatologics","PeriodicalId":74803,"journal":{"name":"Skin (Milwood, N.Y.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dermal Irritation, Sensitization, and Safety of Fixed-Dose Triple-Combination Clindamycin Phosphate 1.2%/Benzoyl Peroxide 3.1%/Adapalene 0.15% Gel in Healthy Participants\",\"authors\":\"Z. Draelos, E. Tanghetti, L. Stein Gold, L. Kircik, N. Bhatia, J. Zeichner, Jeffrey Sugarman\",\"doi\":\"10.25251/skin.7.supp.227\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: IDP-126 polymeric mesh gel (clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/benzoyl peroxide [BPO] 3.1%/adapalene 0.15%) is the first triple-combination, fixed-dose topical acne product in development and it addresses major acne pathophysiological processes. IDP-126 demonstrated superior efficacy to vehicle and component dyads, with good safety/tolerability in a phase 2 study of participants with moderate-to-severe acne. The objectives of this study were to assess dermal irritation/sensitization and safety of IDP-126 gel in two phase 1 studies and to compare irritancy of IDP-126 gel and commercially available BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel in one phase 1 study of healthy participants. \\nMethods: Two phase 1, randomized, evaluator-blinded, within-participant, dermal safety studies enrolled healthy participants aged ≥18 years (N=234, repeat insult patch test [RIPT]; N=45, cumulative irritation patch test [CIPT]). Patches were applied to the upper back multiple times over 6-8 weeks (RIPT) or every 24 hours for 21 days (CIPT). Patches contained: IDP-126 gel, vehicle gel, saline 0.9% (RIPT/CIPT), sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) 0.5% (CIPT), or branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel (CIPT). Participants in each study received all treatments. Endpoints comprised sensitization potential (RIPT), mean cumulative/total irritation scores, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). \\nResults: Overall, irritation with IDP-126 was moderate and not clinically significant. CIPT: IDP-126 was “moderately irritating” (mean score: 1.29), which was significantly less irritating than BPO/adapalene (1.96; P<0.001), statistically similar to SLS (1.17), and more irritating than saline or vehicle (~0.30; P<0.001). RIPT: no participants had investigator-confirmed sensitization to any treatments. In both studies, no TEAEs were related to treatment. \\nConclusions: In two phase 1 studies, fixed-dose, triple-combination clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/ BPO 3.1%/adapalene 0.15% polymeric mesh gel had moderate irritancy and no confirmed sensitization in healthy participants. Additionally, IDP-126 demonstrated significantly less irritation versus commercially available, branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel. IDP-126 demonstrated good safety/tolerability, mirroring the phase 2 study results. \\n  \\nFunding: Ortho Dermatologics\",\"PeriodicalId\":74803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Skin (Milwood, N.Y.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Skin (Milwood, N.Y.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25251/skin.7.supp.227\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Skin (Milwood, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25251/skin.7.supp.227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:IDP-126聚合物网状凝胶(克林霉素磷酸酯1.2%/过氧化苯甲酰[BPO]3.1%/阿达帕林0.15%)是开发中的第一种三重组合、固定剂量的局部痤疮产品,它解决了主要的痤疮病理生理过程。在一项针对中度至重度痤疮参与者的2期研究中,IDP-126显示出优于载体和组件二元组的疗效,具有良好的安全性/耐受性。本研究的目的是在两项第一阶段研究中评估IDP-126凝胶的皮肤刺激性/致敏性和安全性,并在一项针对健康参与者的第一阶段研究中将IDP-126凝胶和市售BPO 2.5%/阿达帕林0.3%凝胶的刺激性进行比较。方法:两项1期、随机、评估者盲法、参与者内的皮肤安全性研究招募了年龄≥18岁的健康参与者(N=234,重复刺激性贴剂试验[RIPT];N=45,累积刺激性贴片试验[CIPT])。在6-8周内(RIPT)或每24小时在21天内(CIPT)在上背部多次施用贴片。贴片包含:IDP-126凝胶、载体凝胶、0.9%生理盐水(RIPT/CIPT)、0.5%十二烷基硫酸钠(SLS)(CIPT)或品牌BPO 2.5%/阿达帕林0.3%凝胶(CIPT)。每项研究的参与者都接受了所有的治疗。终点包括致敏潜能(RIPT)、平均累积/总刺激评分和治疗突发不良事件(TEAE)。结果:总体而言,IDP-126的刺激性为中度,无临床意义。CIPT:IDP-126具有“中度刺激性”(平均得分:1.29),其刺激性明显低于BPO/阿达帕林(1.96;P<0.001),在统计学上与SLS(1.17)相似,并且比生理盐水或赋形剂更具刺激性(~0.30;P<0.001。在这两项研究中,没有TEAE与治疗有关。结论:在两项1期研究中,固定剂量、三重组合克林霉素磷酸酯1.2%/BPO 3.1%/阿达帕林0.15%聚合物网状凝胶对健康参与者具有中度刺激性,未证实致敏。此外,与市售的品牌BPO 2.5%/阿达帕林0.3%凝胶相比,IDP-126的刺激性显著降低。IDP-126表现出良好的安全性/耐受性,反映了2期研究结果。资助:Ortho Dermatologics
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Dermal Irritation, Sensitization, and Safety of Fixed-Dose Triple-Combination Clindamycin Phosphate 1.2%/Benzoyl Peroxide 3.1%/Adapalene 0.15% Gel in Healthy Participants
Introduction: IDP-126 polymeric mesh gel (clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/benzoyl peroxide [BPO] 3.1%/adapalene 0.15%) is the first triple-combination, fixed-dose topical acne product in development and it addresses major acne pathophysiological processes. IDP-126 demonstrated superior efficacy to vehicle and component dyads, with good safety/tolerability in a phase 2 study of participants with moderate-to-severe acne. The objectives of this study were to assess dermal irritation/sensitization and safety of IDP-126 gel in two phase 1 studies and to compare irritancy of IDP-126 gel and commercially available BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel in one phase 1 study of healthy participants. Methods: Two phase 1, randomized, evaluator-blinded, within-participant, dermal safety studies enrolled healthy participants aged ≥18 years (N=234, repeat insult patch test [RIPT]; N=45, cumulative irritation patch test [CIPT]). Patches were applied to the upper back multiple times over 6-8 weeks (RIPT) or every 24 hours for 21 days (CIPT). Patches contained: IDP-126 gel, vehicle gel, saline 0.9% (RIPT/CIPT), sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) 0.5% (CIPT), or branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel (CIPT). Participants in each study received all treatments. Endpoints comprised sensitization potential (RIPT), mean cumulative/total irritation scores, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: Overall, irritation with IDP-126 was moderate and not clinically significant. CIPT: IDP-126 was “moderately irritating” (mean score: 1.29), which was significantly less irritating than BPO/adapalene (1.96; P<0.001), statistically similar to SLS (1.17), and more irritating than saline or vehicle (~0.30; P<0.001). RIPT: no participants had investigator-confirmed sensitization to any treatments. In both studies, no TEAEs were related to treatment. Conclusions: In two phase 1 studies, fixed-dose, triple-combination clindamycin phosphate 1.2%/ BPO 3.1%/adapalene 0.15% polymeric mesh gel had moderate irritancy and no confirmed sensitization in healthy participants. Additionally, IDP-126 demonstrated significantly less irritation versus commercially available, branded BPO 2.5%/adapalene 0.3% gel. IDP-126 demonstrated good safety/tolerability, mirroring the phase 2 study results.   Funding: Ortho Dermatologics
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信