User login
Sporting an Old Lesion
The lesion on this 12-year-old girl’s trunk has been present since birth, growing slowly as she has. Recently, an abrasion sustained during a basketball game caused the lesion to become swollen and tender. It has since returned to its original size and nontender state, but the change in appearance raised enough concern to prompt dermatologic consultation.
The child is otherwise healthy and reports having had very few sunburns, tanning easily (though seldom).
EXAMINATION
The lesion—an oval, nevoid, hair-bearing, uniformly brown plaque with a mammilated surface—is located on the right lower anterior abdominal wall and measures just short of 3 cm x 2 cm. It bears no sign of the recent trauma. The margins are clearly defined, and the lesion is nontender on palpation. No increased warmth is detected.
Overall, the patient’s type III skin has little, if any, evidence of excessive sun exposure.
What is the diagnosis?
DISCUSSION
Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) affect about 1% of newborns, appearing within months after birth. There is no unanimity in opinion regarding their origin, although they appear to be hereditary in some cases.
About 50% of CMNs occur on the trunk and 15% on the head or neck; the rest are scattered about on the extremities. The distinctive morphologic appearance of the lesion helps to distinguish it from other items in the differential, such as warts or cancer.
Only rarely do CMNs raise concern for malignant potential. (Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.) So-called “giant” CMNs (> 20 cm) appear to be associated with the greatest risk, though the incidence of melanoma in children younger than 9 is only about 0.7 cases per million. Of particular concern are “bathing trunk” CMNs, which occasionally cover more than half of the body; affected patients need special attention from pediatric dermatologists who have the appropriate experience.
Neither “small” (< 2 cm) nor “medium” CMNs (> 2 cm, < 20 cm) are particularly worrisome in terms of malignancy. But depending on the location and original size, CMNs can become the object of unwanted attention or ridicule from peers—a little 1-cm lesion on an infant’s neck can grow four to six times its original size by puberty. And at that point, excision becomes much more problematic due to the likelihood of scarring.
Therefore, many experts advise excising some lesions early on, while the lesion and resulting scar are small—and before the child has a chance to develop any anxiety over it. If not excised, CMNs simply need to be watched for change (size, uniformity of color, and border).
TAKE-HOME LEARNING POINTS
- Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) < 20 cm in diameter are generally quite safe but can grow much larger—often becoming a source of ridicule.
- Depending on the size, location, and appearance of the lesion, excision is justifiable before it has a chance to grow and become problematic.
- Children younger than 10 almost never develop melanoma (the rate is 0.7 cases per million)—and even when they do, it is almost never related to malignant transformation of a CMN.
- Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.
The lesion on this 12-year-old girl’s trunk has been present since birth, growing slowly as she has. Recently, an abrasion sustained during a basketball game caused the lesion to become swollen and tender. It has since returned to its original size and nontender state, but the change in appearance raised enough concern to prompt dermatologic consultation.
The child is otherwise healthy and reports having had very few sunburns, tanning easily (though seldom).
EXAMINATION
The lesion—an oval, nevoid, hair-bearing, uniformly brown plaque with a mammilated surface—is located on the right lower anterior abdominal wall and measures just short of 3 cm x 2 cm. It bears no sign of the recent trauma. The margins are clearly defined, and the lesion is nontender on palpation. No increased warmth is detected.
Overall, the patient’s type III skin has little, if any, evidence of excessive sun exposure.
What is the diagnosis?
DISCUSSION
Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) affect about 1% of newborns, appearing within months after birth. There is no unanimity in opinion regarding their origin, although they appear to be hereditary in some cases.
About 50% of CMNs occur on the trunk and 15% on the head or neck; the rest are scattered about on the extremities. The distinctive morphologic appearance of the lesion helps to distinguish it from other items in the differential, such as warts or cancer.
Only rarely do CMNs raise concern for malignant potential. (Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.) So-called “giant” CMNs (> 20 cm) appear to be associated with the greatest risk, though the incidence of melanoma in children younger than 9 is only about 0.7 cases per million. Of particular concern are “bathing trunk” CMNs, which occasionally cover more than half of the body; affected patients need special attention from pediatric dermatologists who have the appropriate experience.
Neither “small” (< 2 cm) nor “medium” CMNs (> 2 cm, < 20 cm) are particularly worrisome in terms of malignancy. But depending on the location and original size, CMNs can become the object of unwanted attention or ridicule from peers—a little 1-cm lesion on an infant’s neck can grow four to six times its original size by puberty. And at that point, excision becomes much more problematic due to the likelihood of scarring.
Therefore, many experts advise excising some lesions early on, while the lesion and resulting scar are small—and before the child has a chance to develop any anxiety over it. If not excised, CMNs simply need to be watched for change (size, uniformity of color, and border).
TAKE-HOME LEARNING POINTS
- Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) < 20 cm in diameter are generally quite safe but can grow much larger—often becoming a source of ridicule.
- Depending on the size, location, and appearance of the lesion, excision is justifiable before it has a chance to grow and become problematic.
- Children younger than 10 almost never develop melanoma (the rate is 0.7 cases per million)—and even when they do, it is almost never related to malignant transformation of a CMN.
- Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.
The lesion on this 12-year-old girl’s trunk has been present since birth, growing slowly as she has. Recently, an abrasion sustained during a basketball game caused the lesion to become swollen and tender. It has since returned to its original size and nontender state, but the change in appearance raised enough concern to prompt dermatologic consultation.
The child is otherwise healthy and reports having had very few sunburns, tanning easily (though seldom).
EXAMINATION
The lesion—an oval, nevoid, hair-bearing, uniformly brown plaque with a mammilated surface—is located on the right lower anterior abdominal wall and measures just short of 3 cm x 2 cm. It bears no sign of the recent trauma. The margins are clearly defined, and the lesion is nontender on palpation. No increased warmth is detected.
Overall, the patient’s type III skin has little, if any, evidence of excessive sun exposure.
What is the diagnosis?
DISCUSSION
Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) affect about 1% of newborns, appearing within months after birth. There is no unanimity in opinion regarding their origin, although they appear to be hereditary in some cases.
About 50% of CMNs occur on the trunk and 15% on the head or neck; the rest are scattered about on the extremities. The distinctive morphologic appearance of the lesion helps to distinguish it from other items in the differential, such as warts or cancer.
Only rarely do CMNs raise concern for malignant potential. (Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.) So-called “giant” CMNs (> 20 cm) appear to be associated with the greatest risk, though the incidence of melanoma in children younger than 9 is only about 0.7 cases per million. Of particular concern are “bathing trunk” CMNs, which occasionally cover more than half of the body; affected patients need special attention from pediatric dermatologists who have the appropriate experience.
Neither “small” (< 2 cm) nor “medium” CMNs (> 2 cm, < 20 cm) are particularly worrisome in terms of malignancy. But depending on the location and original size, CMNs can become the object of unwanted attention or ridicule from peers—a little 1-cm lesion on an infant’s neck can grow four to six times its original size by puberty. And at that point, excision becomes much more problematic due to the likelihood of scarring.
Therefore, many experts advise excising some lesions early on, while the lesion and resulting scar are small—and before the child has a chance to develop any anxiety over it. If not excised, CMNs simply need to be watched for change (size, uniformity of color, and border).
TAKE-HOME LEARNING POINTS
- Congenital melanocytic nevi (CMNs) < 20 cm in diameter are generally quite safe but can grow much larger—often becoming a source of ridicule.
- Depending on the size, location, and appearance of the lesion, excision is justifiable before it has a chance to grow and become problematic.
- Children younger than 10 almost never develop melanoma (the rate is 0.7 cases per million)—and even when they do, it is almost never related to malignant transformation of a CMN.
- Trauma cannot cause a benign lesion to undergo malignant transformation.
Growth lateral to right eye
The FP noted a horn-like growth on the patient's face with some scaling around it. He recommended a shave biopsy. His differential diagnosis included actinic keratosis and Bowen’s disease (also known as squamous cell carcinoma in situ).
A biopsy was performed with a DermaBlade using a shave technique deep enough to get the base of the horn and a good sampling of the abnormal-looking tissue. (See the Watch & Learn video on “Shave biopsy.”) The pathology report revealed a cutaneous horn in a squamous cell carcinoma in situ.
The patient was referred to Dermatology for further treatment. Options included treatment with topical 5-fluorouracil (over weeks to months), standard excision, or Mohs surgery.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Smith M. Cutaneous horn. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:985-988.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
The FP noted a horn-like growth on the patient's face with some scaling around it. He recommended a shave biopsy. His differential diagnosis included actinic keratosis and Bowen’s disease (also known as squamous cell carcinoma in situ).
A biopsy was performed with a DermaBlade using a shave technique deep enough to get the base of the horn and a good sampling of the abnormal-looking tissue. (See the Watch & Learn video on “Shave biopsy.”) The pathology report revealed a cutaneous horn in a squamous cell carcinoma in situ.
The patient was referred to Dermatology for further treatment. Options included treatment with topical 5-fluorouracil (over weeks to months), standard excision, or Mohs surgery.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Smith M. Cutaneous horn. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:985-988.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
The FP noted a horn-like growth on the patient's face with some scaling around it. He recommended a shave biopsy. His differential diagnosis included actinic keratosis and Bowen’s disease (also known as squamous cell carcinoma in situ).
A biopsy was performed with a DermaBlade using a shave technique deep enough to get the base of the horn and a good sampling of the abnormal-looking tissue. (See the Watch & Learn video on “Shave biopsy.”) The pathology report revealed a cutaneous horn in a squamous cell carcinoma in situ.
The patient was referred to Dermatology for further treatment. Options included treatment with topical 5-fluorouracil (over weeks to months), standard excision, or Mohs surgery.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Smith M. Cutaneous horn. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:985-988.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
Dupilumab positive in phase 3 study for treating adolescent atopic dermatitis
PARIS – Dupilumab scorched its way through a landmark pivotal phase 3 clinical trial in adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD), achieving unprecedented clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of the disease along with important quality of life benefits, Eric L. Simpson, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Indeed, akin to that previously shown in adults with moderate to severe AD in phase 3 trials that earned the biologic U.S. and European regulatory approval in the adult population, noted Dr. Simpson, professor of dermatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
This positive phase 3 study represents a major development in pediatric dermatology because of the pressing unmet need for better treatments for teens with moderate to severe AD whose disease can’t be controlled with topical therapies. The adolescent years are, after all, a critical period in growth and development, and a debilitating, uncontrolled disease can reshape that experience in unwelcome ways.
“Atopic dermatitis profoundly affects quality of life in adolescents and their family: The itching affects mood and sleep, these patients commonly have anxiety and depression, and the chronic and relapsing nature of the disease adversely affects the family,” the dermatologist observed.
Currently, no systemic agent is approved for pediatric patients with AD because evidence demonstrating a favorable benefit-to-risk profile has been lacking. The dupilumab study was the first-ever phase 3 trial of a biologic in such a population.
The phase 3 adolescent trial was a 16-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of 251 patients aged 12-17 years with moderate to severe AD, which could not be adequately controlled with topical therapies. Participants averaged 14 years of age, with a 12-year history of AD. “These patients had the disease basically their whole life,” Dr. Simpson noted.
They were more severely affected than participants in the adult clinical trials, with mean Eczema Area And Severity Index (EASI) scores in the mid-30s and an average 56% involved body surface area. The adolescent AD patients had a heavy burden of comorbid allergic type 2 immune comorbidity: Fully 92% of them had documented asthma, food allergy, allergic rhinitis, and/or some other form of allergic comorbidity. The majority of the teens were categorized as having severe AD, whereas most participants in the adult phase 3 trials of dupilumab had moderate disease. That distinction becomes relevant in comparing the trial results.
Participants were randomized to once-monthly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab at 300 mg, following a 600-mg loading dose, or to an injection of 200 mg or 300 mg every 2 weeks with an initial dose of 400 mg or 600 mg based upon a body weight cutoff of 60 kg, or to biweekly placebo injections.
The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved an EASI 75 response at week 16 and achievement of an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, on a 5-point scale at week 16.
This trial introduced an important new design feature that physicians can expect to see more of in the future: regulatory agencies now want to see the effects of monotherapy in pivotal studies in AD. Previously, participants in AD studies of systemic agents could also utilize topical steroids as needed. No longer. In the adolescent dupilumab study, resort to rescue topical steroids led to exclusion from inclusion in the primary outcome results. Not surprisingly, this lack of access to rescue medication resulted in a 60% dropout rate by 16 weeks in placebo-treated controls, a 30% dropout rate in teens on dupilumab every 4 weeks, and a 20% dropout rate with biweekly dupilumab.
The EASI 75 rate at week 16 was 8.2% with placebo, 38.1% with monthly dupilumab, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing. The other coprimary endpoint – an IGA of 0 or 1 at 16 weeks – was achieved in 2.4% of controls, 17.9% with dupilumab at 300 mg every 4 weeks, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing.
Turning to secondary endpoints, Dr. Simpson reported that baseline peak pruritus Numeric Rating Scale scores dropped by 19% with placebo at 16 weeks, compared with reductions of 45.5% and 47.9% with monthly and biweekly dupilumab, respectively.
An EASI 50 response,while not as impressive as an EASI 75, is nonetheless considered clinically meaningful improvement. It was attained in 12.9% on placebo and 54.8% and 61% on monthly and biweekly dupilumab.
From a mean baseline score of 13.6 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, scores improved over the course of 16 weeks by a mean of 5.1 points with placebo, 8.5 points with monthly dupilumab, and 8.8 points with biweekly biologic therapy. The same pattern was noted with regard to the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure or POEM.
Adverse events mirrored those documented in the pivotal trials in adults: increased rates of mild to moderate conjunctivitis: 4.7% with placebo, 10.8% with monthly dupilumab, and 9.8% with biweekly dupilumab, along with single-digit rates of injection-site reactions. As in adult AD patients, however, these side effects were counterbalanced by significantly reduced rates of skin infections in the adolescent group: 20% during 16 weeks with placebo, and 13.3% and 11% with monthly and biweekly biologic therapy, respectively.
Study participants had a mean baseline score of 12.5 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, which is categorized as clinically significant psychiatric disease. The impact of dupilumab therapy on those scores will be the topic of a future presentation, Dr. Simpson said.
Across the board, specific outcomes were consistently numerically better in patients who received dupilumab biweekly than monthly, albeit not statistically significantly so. Dr. Simpson thinks he knows why: Lab studies showed that the mean serum concentration of functional dupilumab in patients who got the biologic biweekly was nearly twice that for the group with monthly dosing.
At first glance, the IGA “clear” or “almost clear” response rates seen with dupilumab in the adolescent study appeared to be less robust than in the adult pivotal phase 3 trials, such as the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials (N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 15;375[24]:2335-48), also led by Dr. Simpson.
“I think that’s because of the greater severity of that baseline adolescent population,” he commented. “It made for a much lower placebo response rate. But when you correct for the placebo-subtracted difference, the rates are actually pretty similar, and a lot of the other endpoints are the same or even better than in SOLO.”
After his presentation, Dr. Simpson commented, “This is huge. This is the study we’ve been waiting for.”
Elsewhere at the EADV congress, Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, deemed the pivotal phase 3 trial in adolescent AD patients one of the meeting’s highlights. And it’s a harbinger of more good things to come, because the investigational drug pipeline for AD is full of promising candidates addressing the disease from a variety of novel directions. The long therapeutic drought in AD appears to have finally ended, observed Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of the department of dermatology at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.
That’s welcome news because AD is the most common inflammatory skin disease, both in adults, where the latest data puts the prevalence at 7%-10%, and in children, where the global rate is 15%-25%.
And while at the EADV congress only the 16-week data were reported in the new adolescent study, there is reason to be optimistic that the benefits will remain durable over time. Dr. Guttman-Yassky cited the published 52-week data from the large phase 3 CHRONOS trial in adults with moderate to severe AD. In that trial, in which patients could use concomitant topical steroids, the EASI 75 rates at week 16 were 69% in patients on dupilumab at 300 mg every 2 weeks, 64% with 300 mg weekly, and 23% with placebo. Reassuringly, at 52 weeks the EASI 75 response rates were essentially unchanged: 65%, 64%, and 22% (Lancet. 2017 Jun 10;389[10086]:2287-303).
“This is what we are seeking: not just treatment that is able to quickly modify disease, but we want the treatment to be sustained, and of course we want it to be safe for our patients because we know we cannot use cyclosporine for a long time,” Dr. Guttman-Yassky said.
Dr. Simpson reported serving as a consultant to and recipient of research grants from Sanofi and Regeneron, which sponsored the adolescent study, as well as more than a dozen other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Guttman-Yassky reported serving as an advisor and consultant, and has received grants/research funding from Regeneron, and multiple other companies.
PARIS – Dupilumab scorched its way through a landmark pivotal phase 3 clinical trial in adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD), achieving unprecedented clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of the disease along with important quality of life benefits, Eric L. Simpson, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Indeed, akin to that previously shown in adults with moderate to severe AD in phase 3 trials that earned the biologic U.S. and European regulatory approval in the adult population, noted Dr. Simpson, professor of dermatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
This positive phase 3 study represents a major development in pediatric dermatology because of the pressing unmet need for better treatments for teens with moderate to severe AD whose disease can’t be controlled with topical therapies. The adolescent years are, after all, a critical period in growth and development, and a debilitating, uncontrolled disease can reshape that experience in unwelcome ways.
“Atopic dermatitis profoundly affects quality of life in adolescents and their family: The itching affects mood and sleep, these patients commonly have anxiety and depression, and the chronic and relapsing nature of the disease adversely affects the family,” the dermatologist observed.
Currently, no systemic agent is approved for pediatric patients with AD because evidence demonstrating a favorable benefit-to-risk profile has been lacking. The dupilumab study was the first-ever phase 3 trial of a biologic in such a population.
The phase 3 adolescent trial was a 16-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of 251 patients aged 12-17 years with moderate to severe AD, which could not be adequately controlled with topical therapies. Participants averaged 14 years of age, with a 12-year history of AD. “These patients had the disease basically their whole life,” Dr. Simpson noted.
They were more severely affected than participants in the adult clinical trials, with mean Eczema Area And Severity Index (EASI) scores in the mid-30s and an average 56% involved body surface area. The adolescent AD patients had a heavy burden of comorbid allergic type 2 immune comorbidity: Fully 92% of them had documented asthma, food allergy, allergic rhinitis, and/or some other form of allergic comorbidity. The majority of the teens were categorized as having severe AD, whereas most participants in the adult phase 3 trials of dupilumab had moderate disease. That distinction becomes relevant in comparing the trial results.
Participants were randomized to once-monthly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab at 300 mg, following a 600-mg loading dose, or to an injection of 200 mg or 300 mg every 2 weeks with an initial dose of 400 mg or 600 mg based upon a body weight cutoff of 60 kg, or to biweekly placebo injections.
The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved an EASI 75 response at week 16 and achievement of an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, on a 5-point scale at week 16.
This trial introduced an important new design feature that physicians can expect to see more of in the future: regulatory agencies now want to see the effects of monotherapy in pivotal studies in AD. Previously, participants in AD studies of systemic agents could also utilize topical steroids as needed. No longer. In the adolescent dupilumab study, resort to rescue topical steroids led to exclusion from inclusion in the primary outcome results. Not surprisingly, this lack of access to rescue medication resulted in a 60% dropout rate by 16 weeks in placebo-treated controls, a 30% dropout rate in teens on dupilumab every 4 weeks, and a 20% dropout rate with biweekly dupilumab.
The EASI 75 rate at week 16 was 8.2% with placebo, 38.1% with monthly dupilumab, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing. The other coprimary endpoint – an IGA of 0 or 1 at 16 weeks – was achieved in 2.4% of controls, 17.9% with dupilumab at 300 mg every 4 weeks, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing.
Turning to secondary endpoints, Dr. Simpson reported that baseline peak pruritus Numeric Rating Scale scores dropped by 19% with placebo at 16 weeks, compared with reductions of 45.5% and 47.9% with monthly and biweekly dupilumab, respectively.
An EASI 50 response,while not as impressive as an EASI 75, is nonetheless considered clinically meaningful improvement. It was attained in 12.9% on placebo and 54.8% and 61% on monthly and biweekly dupilumab.
From a mean baseline score of 13.6 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, scores improved over the course of 16 weeks by a mean of 5.1 points with placebo, 8.5 points with monthly dupilumab, and 8.8 points with biweekly biologic therapy. The same pattern was noted with regard to the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure or POEM.
Adverse events mirrored those documented in the pivotal trials in adults: increased rates of mild to moderate conjunctivitis: 4.7% with placebo, 10.8% with monthly dupilumab, and 9.8% with biweekly dupilumab, along with single-digit rates of injection-site reactions. As in adult AD patients, however, these side effects were counterbalanced by significantly reduced rates of skin infections in the adolescent group: 20% during 16 weeks with placebo, and 13.3% and 11% with monthly and biweekly biologic therapy, respectively.
Study participants had a mean baseline score of 12.5 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, which is categorized as clinically significant psychiatric disease. The impact of dupilumab therapy on those scores will be the topic of a future presentation, Dr. Simpson said.
Across the board, specific outcomes were consistently numerically better in patients who received dupilumab biweekly than monthly, albeit not statistically significantly so. Dr. Simpson thinks he knows why: Lab studies showed that the mean serum concentration of functional dupilumab in patients who got the biologic biweekly was nearly twice that for the group with monthly dosing.
At first glance, the IGA “clear” or “almost clear” response rates seen with dupilumab in the adolescent study appeared to be less robust than in the adult pivotal phase 3 trials, such as the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials (N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 15;375[24]:2335-48), also led by Dr. Simpson.
“I think that’s because of the greater severity of that baseline adolescent population,” he commented. “It made for a much lower placebo response rate. But when you correct for the placebo-subtracted difference, the rates are actually pretty similar, and a lot of the other endpoints are the same or even better than in SOLO.”
After his presentation, Dr. Simpson commented, “This is huge. This is the study we’ve been waiting for.”
Elsewhere at the EADV congress, Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, deemed the pivotal phase 3 trial in adolescent AD patients one of the meeting’s highlights. And it’s a harbinger of more good things to come, because the investigational drug pipeline for AD is full of promising candidates addressing the disease from a variety of novel directions. The long therapeutic drought in AD appears to have finally ended, observed Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of the department of dermatology at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.
That’s welcome news because AD is the most common inflammatory skin disease, both in adults, where the latest data puts the prevalence at 7%-10%, and in children, where the global rate is 15%-25%.
And while at the EADV congress only the 16-week data were reported in the new adolescent study, there is reason to be optimistic that the benefits will remain durable over time. Dr. Guttman-Yassky cited the published 52-week data from the large phase 3 CHRONOS trial in adults with moderate to severe AD. In that trial, in which patients could use concomitant topical steroids, the EASI 75 rates at week 16 were 69% in patients on dupilumab at 300 mg every 2 weeks, 64% with 300 mg weekly, and 23% with placebo. Reassuringly, at 52 weeks the EASI 75 response rates were essentially unchanged: 65%, 64%, and 22% (Lancet. 2017 Jun 10;389[10086]:2287-303).
“This is what we are seeking: not just treatment that is able to quickly modify disease, but we want the treatment to be sustained, and of course we want it to be safe for our patients because we know we cannot use cyclosporine for a long time,” Dr. Guttman-Yassky said.
Dr. Simpson reported serving as a consultant to and recipient of research grants from Sanofi and Regeneron, which sponsored the adolescent study, as well as more than a dozen other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Guttman-Yassky reported serving as an advisor and consultant, and has received grants/research funding from Regeneron, and multiple other companies.
PARIS – Dupilumab scorched its way through a landmark pivotal phase 3 clinical trial in adolescents with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD), achieving unprecedented clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of the disease along with important quality of life benefits, Eric L. Simpson, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Indeed, akin to that previously shown in adults with moderate to severe AD in phase 3 trials that earned the biologic U.S. and European regulatory approval in the adult population, noted Dr. Simpson, professor of dermatology at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
This positive phase 3 study represents a major development in pediatric dermatology because of the pressing unmet need for better treatments for teens with moderate to severe AD whose disease can’t be controlled with topical therapies. The adolescent years are, after all, a critical period in growth and development, and a debilitating, uncontrolled disease can reshape that experience in unwelcome ways.
“Atopic dermatitis profoundly affects quality of life in adolescents and their family: The itching affects mood and sleep, these patients commonly have anxiety and depression, and the chronic and relapsing nature of the disease adversely affects the family,” the dermatologist observed.
Currently, no systemic agent is approved for pediatric patients with AD because evidence demonstrating a favorable benefit-to-risk profile has been lacking. The dupilumab study was the first-ever phase 3 trial of a biologic in such a population.
The phase 3 adolescent trial was a 16-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of 251 patients aged 12-17 years with moderate to severe AD, which could not be adequately controlled with topical therapies. Participants averaged 14 years of age, with a 12-year history of AD. “These patients had the disease basically their whole life,” Dr. Simpson noted.
They were more severely affected than participants in the adult clinical trials, with mean Eczema Area And Severity Index (EASI) scores in the mid-30s and an average 56% involved body surface area. The adolescent AD patients had a heavy burden of comorbid allergic type 2 immune comorbidity: Fully 92% of them had documented asthma, food allergy, allergic rhinitis, and/or some other form of allergic comorbidity. The majority of the teens were categorized as having severe AD, whereas most participants in the adult phase 3 trials of dupilumab had moderate disease. That distinction becomes relevant in comparing the trial results.
Participants were randomized to once-monthly subcutaneous injections of dupilumab at 300 mg, following a 600-mg loading dose, or to an injection of 200 mg or 300 mg every 2 weeks with an initial dose of 400 mg or 600 mg based upon a body weight cutoff of 60 kg, or to biweekly placebo injections.
The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved an EASI 75 response at week 16 and achievement of an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, on a 5-point scale at week 16.
This trial introduced an important new design feature that physicians can expect to see more of in the future: regulatory agencies now want to see the effects of monotherapy in pivotal studies in AD. Previously, participants in AD studies of systemic agents could also utilize topical steroids as needed. No longer. In the adolescent dupilumab study, resort to rescue topical steroids led to exclusion from inclusion in the primary outcome results. Not surprisingly, this lack of access to rescue medication resulted in a 60% dropout rate by 16 weeks in placebo-treated controls, a 30% dropout rate in teens on dupilumab every 4 weeks, and a 20% dropout rate with biweekly dupilumab.
The EASI 75 rate at week 16 was 8.2% with placebo, 38.1% with monthly dupilumab, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing. The other coprimary endpoint – an IGA of 0 or 1 at 16 weeks – was achieved in 2.4% of controls, 17.9% with dupilumab at 300 mg every 4 weeks, and 41.5% with biweekly dosing.
Turning to secondary endpoints, Dr. Simpson reported that baseline peak pruritus Numeric Rating Scale scores dropped by 19% with placebo at 16 weeks, compared with reductions of 45.5% and 47.9% with monthly and biweekly dupilumab, respectively.
An EASI 50 response,while not as impressive as an EASI 75, is nonetheless considered clinically meaningful improvement. It was attained in 12.9% on placebo and 54.8% and 61% on monthly and biweekly dupilumab.
From a mean baseline score of 13.6 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, scores improved over the course of 16 weeks by a mean of 5.1 points with placebo, 8.5 points with monthly dupilumab, and 8.8 points with biweekly biologic therapy. The same pattern was noted with regard to the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure or POEM.
Adverse events mirrored those documented in the pivotal trials in adults: increased rates of mild to moderate conjunctivitis: 4.7% with placebo, 10.8% with monthly dupilumab, and 9.8% with biweekly dupilumab, along with single-digit rates of injection-site reactions. As in adult AD patients, however, these side effects were counterbalanced by significantly reduced rates of skin infections in the adolescent group: 20% during 16 weeks with placebo, and 13.3% and 11% with monthly and biweekly biologic therapy, respectively.
Study participants had a mean baseline score of 12.5 on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, which is categorized as clinically significant psychiatric disease. The impact of dupilumab therapy on those scores will be the topic of a future presentation, Dr. Simpson said.
Across the board, specific outcomes were consistently numerically better in patients who received dupilumab biweekly than monthly, albeit not statistically significantly so. Dr. Simpson thinks he knows why: Lab studies showed that the mean serum concentration of functional dupilumab in patients who got the biologic biweekly was nearly twice that for the group with monthly dosing.
At first glance, the IGA “clear” or “almost clear” response rates seen with dupilumab in the adolescent study appeared to be less robust than in the adult pivotal phase 3 trials, such as the SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 trials (N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 15;375[24]:2335-48), also led by Dr. Simpson.
“I think that’s because of the greater severity of that baseline adolescent population,” he commented. “It made for a much lower placebo response rate. But when you correct for the placebo-subtracted difference, the rates are actually pretty similar, and a lot of the other endpoints are the same or even better than in SOLO.”
After his presentation, Dr. Simpson commented, “This is huge. This is the study we’ve been waiting for.”
Elsewhere at the EADV congress, Emma Guttman-Yassky, MD, PhD, deemed the pivotal phase 3 trial in adolescent AD patients one of the meeting’s highlights. And it’s a harbinger of more good things to come, because the investigational drug pipeline for AD is full of promising candidates addressing the disease from a variety of novel directions. The long therapeutic drought in AD appears to have finally ended, observed Dr. Guttman-Yassky, professor and vice-chair of the department of dermatology at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York.
That’s welcome news because AD is the most common inflammatory skin disease, both in adults, where the latest data puts the prevalence at 7%-10%, and in children, where the global rate is 15%-25%.
And while at the EADV congress only the 16-week data were reported in the new adolescent study, there is reason to be optimistic that the benefits will remain durable over time. Dr. Guttman-Yassky cited the published 52-week data from the large phase 3 CHRONOS trial in adults with moderate to severe AD. In that trial, in which patients could use concomitant topical steroids, the EASI 75 rates at week 16 were 69% in patients on dupilumab at 300 mg every 2 weeks, 64% with 300 mg weekly, and 23% with placebo. Reassuringly, at 52 weeks the EASI 75 response rates were essentially unchanged: 65%, 64%, and 22% (Lancet. 2017 Jun 10;389[10086]:2287-303).
“This is what we are seeking: not just treatment that is able to quickly modify disease, but we want the treatment to be sustained, and of course we want it to be safe for our patients because we know we cannot use cyclosporine for a long time,” Dr. Guttman-Yassky said.
Dr. Simpson reported serving as a consultant to and recipient of research grants from Sanofi and Regeneron, which sponsored the adolescent study, as well as more than a dozen other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Guttman-Yassky reported serving as an advisor and consultant, and has received grants/research funding from Regeneron, and multiple other companies.
REPORTING FROM THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Dupilumab gets solid green-light evidence for use in teens with atopic dermatitis (AD).
Major finding: Dupilumab was as safe and effective in adolescents with moderate to severe AD as previously established in adult patients.
Study details: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 16-week pivotal phase 3 trial included 251 adolescents with moderate to severe AD.
Disclosures: The presenter reported serving as a consultant to and recipient of research grants from Sanofi and Regeneron, which sponsored the adolescent study, as well as more than a dozen other pharmaceutical companies.
Topical cyclosporine safely tamed atopic dermatitis in 4-week study
PARIS – A first-of-its-kind Ana M. Giménez-Arnau, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
The 5% cyclosporine topical spray, known as Cyclatop, showed significantly better results across the board than its vehicle, even during the first week of treatment in the 4-week, multicenter, Spanish, double-blind, randomized trial, which included 44 patients with mild or moderate atopic dermatitis (AD), according to Dr. Giménez-Arnau, a dermatologist at Hospital del Mar and the Autonomous University of Barcelona.
“Besides the clinical efficacy, the study also demonstrated that, when cyclosporine was detectable in the blood, the highest blood level was at least 200-fold less than after systemic administration of cyclosporine at therapeutic doses,” she noted.
The motivation to develop a topical formulation of cyclosporine stemmed from the need to find substitutes for topical corticosteroids, especially in the pediatric population, where steroid phobia is rampant among parents. And while systemic cyclosporine is approved by European regulators for treatment of difficult cases of AD and is widely utilized off label for this purpose in the United States, the fact is that it is an immunosuppressant that paints with a broad brush and is best utilized for a matter of weeks as induction therapy.
But developing a topical formulation of cyclosporine suitable for long-term use posed many challenges. Lack of stability in cream and ointment formulations was a recurring issue. “Cyclosporine is a very big molecule, which is not easy to work with topically,” she explained. “The challenge was to find a stable formulation with good skin penetration, but without systemic absorption.”
Indeed, researchers at Barcelona-based Spherium Biomed evaluated more than 100 prototype compounds in animal models before settling on a proprietary oil emulsion formulation of 5% cyclosporine delivered via a spray without propellant gas.
Key study findings
The 44 study participants had a mean baseline of 8.3% body surface area involvement. As a condition of participation, they needed to have similar lesional areas bilaterally. They treated involved areas on one side of the body twice daily with Cyclatop, while they sprayed those on the opposite side with its vehicle.
From a mean baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of 5.5, EASI scores improved by an average of 3.2 points after 28 days of cyclosporine spray, compared with 1.7 points with vehicle. Atopic Dermatitis Area and Severity Index (ADSI) scores improved from a mean baseline of 6.5 by 3.6 points with topical cyclosporine versus 2.4 points with vehicle.
At week 3, an EASI 75 response – that is, at least a 75% reduction from baseline EASI scores – was achieved at 44.4% of actively treated sites, compared with 25.9% of control sites. ADSI 75 rates at 3 weeks were 33.3% and 11.1%, respectively. An Investigator’s Global Assessment of clear or almost clear was reached at week 4 at 61.5% of active treatment sites, compared with 42.3% of vehicle-treated sites.
Itching responded dramatically to topical cyclosporine. From a mean baseline score of 3.3 on a standard 10-point pruritus visual analog scale, cyclosporine spray–treated areas showed a mean 1.2-point decrease at week 4, compared with a 0.4-point reduction at vehicle-treated areas. About 50% of the reduction in pruritus scores was achieved within the first week of active treatment. Moreover, among patients with moderate as opposed to mild itching scores at baseline, who had a mean pruritus score of 5.6, topical cyclosporine spray resulted in a mean 3.3-point reduction at week 4, Dr. Giménez-Arnau continued.
No safety signals emerged in this initial study. Side effects associated with the cyclosporine spray were the same as with its vehicle, and in exit interviews, more than 85% of patients indicated they were satisfied with the comfort and practicality of topical cyclosporine.
Session chair DeDee Murrell, MD, professor of dermatology at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, noted that the study was restricted to patients with less than 10% body surface area of involvement.
“Are you concerned that if you use this product over widespread areas, as is quite common in eczema, that you might get positive blood levels?” she asked.
“We don’t know. We should check that,” Dr. Giménez-Arnau replied. She added that more studies need to be done before cyclosporine spray is ready for the market. These studies will need to address the optimal dosing schedule and duration, the spectrum of disease severity where the topical spray works best, and other key issues.
Cyclatop is being developed by Spherium Biomed, which sponsored the study. Dr. Giménez-Arnau reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to roughly half a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
PARIS – A first-of-its-kind Ana M. Giménez-Arnau, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
The 5% cyclosporine topical spray, known as Cyclatop, showed significantly better results across the board than its vehicle, even during the first week of treatment in the 4-week, multicenter, Spanish, double-blind, randomized trial, which included 44 patients with mild or moderate atopic dermatitis (AD), according to Dr. Giménez-Arnau, a dermatologist at Hospital del Mar and the Autonomous University of Barcelona.
“Besides the clinical efficacy, the study also demonstrated that, when cyclosporine was detectable in the blood, the highest blood level was at least 200-fold less than after systemic administration of cyclosporine at therapeutic doses,” she noted.
The motivation to develop a topical formulation of cyclosporine stemmed from the need to find substitutes for topical corticosteroids, especially in the pediatric population, where steroid phobia is rampant among parents. And while systemic cyclosporine is approved by European regulators for treatment of difficult cases of AD and is widely utilized off label for this purpose in the United States, the fact is that it is an immunosuppressant that paints with a broad brush and is best utilized for a matter of weeks as induction therapy.
But developing a topical formulation of cyclosporine suitable for long-term use posed many challenges. Lack of stability in cream and ointment formulations was a recurring issue. “Cyclosporine is a very big molecule, which is not easy to work with topically,” she explained. “The challenge was to find a stable formulation with good skin penetration, but without systemic absorption.”
Indeed, researchers at Barcelona-based Spherium Biomed evaluated more than 100 prototype compounds in animal models before settling on a proprietary oil emulsion formulation of 5% cyclosporine delivered via a spray without propellant gas.
Key study findings
The 44 study participants had a mean baseline of 8.3% body surface area involvement. As a condition of participation, they needed to have similar lesional areas bilaterally. They treated involved areas on one side of the body twice daily with Cyclatop, while they sprayed those on the opposite side with its vehicle.
From a mean baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of 5.5, EASI scores improved by an average of 3.2 points after 28 days of cyclosporine spray, compared with 1.7 points with vehicle. Atopic Dermatitis Area and Severity Index (ADSI) scores improved from a mean baseline of 6.5 by 3.6 points with topical cyclosporine versus 2.4 points with vehicle.
At week 3, an EASI 75 response – that is, at least a 75% reduction from baseline EASI scores – was achieved at 44.4% of actively treated sites, compared with 25.9% of control sites. ADSI 75 rates at 3 weeks were 33.3% and 11.1%, respectively. An Investigator’s Global Assessment of clear or almost clear was reached at week 4 at 61.5% of active treatment sites, compared with 42.3% of vehicle-treated sites.
Itching responded dramatically to topical cyclosporine. From a mean baseline score of 3.3 on a standard 10-point pruritus visual analog scale, cyclosporine spray–treated areas showed a mean 1.2-point decrease at week 4, compared with a 0.4-point reduction at vehicle-treated areas. About 50% of the reduction in pruritus scores was achieved within the first week of active treatment. Moreover, among patients with moderate as opposed to mild itching scores at baseline, who had a mean pruritus score of 5.6, topical cyclosporine spray resulted in a mean 3.3-point reduction at week 4, Dr. Giménez-Arnau continued.
No safety signals emerged in this initial study. Side effects associated with the cyclosporine spray were the same as with its vehicle, and in exit interviews, more than 85% of patients indicated they were satisfied with the comfort and practicality of topical cyclosporine.
Session chair DeDee Murrell, MD, professor of dermatology at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, noted that the study was restricted to patients with less than 10% body surface area of involvement.
“Are you concerned that if you use this product over widespread areas, as is quite common in eczema, that you might get positive blood levels?” she asked.
“We don’t know. We should check that,” Dr. Giménez-Arnau replied. She added that more studies need to be done before cyclosporine spray is ready for the market. These studies will need to address the optimal dosing schedule and duration, the spectrum of disease severity where the topical spray works best, and other key issues.
Cyclatop is being developed by Spherium Biomed, which sponsored the study. Dr. Giménez-Arnau reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to roughly half a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
PARIS – A first-of-its-kind Ana M. Giménez-Arnau, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
The 5% cyclosporine topical spray, known as Cyclatop, showed significantly better results across the board than its vehicle, even during the first week of treatment in the 4-week, multicenter, Spanish, double-blind, randomized trial, which included 44 patients with mild or moderate atopic dermatitis (AD), according to Dr. Giménez-Arnau, a dermatologist at Hospital del Mar and the Autonomous University of Barcelona.
“Besides the clinical efficacy, the study also demonstrated that, when cyclosporine was detectable in the blood, the highest blood level was at least 200-fold less than after systemic administration of cyclosporine at therapeutic doses,” she noted.
The motivation to develop a topical formulation of cyclosporine stemmed from the need to find substitutes for topical corticosteroids, especially in the pediatric population, where steroid phobia is rampant among parents. And while systemic cyclosporine is approved by European regulators for treatment of difficult cases of AD and is widely utilized off label for this purpose in the United States, the fact is that it is an immunosuppressant that paints with a broad brush and is best utilized for a matter of weeks as induction therapy.
But developing a topical formulation of cyclosporine suitable for long-term use posed many challenges. Lack of stability in cream and ointment formulations was a recurring issue. “Cyclosporine is a very big molecule, which is not easy to work with topically,” she explained. “The challenge was to find a stable formulation with good skin penetration, but without systemic absorption.”
Indeed, researchers at Barcelona-based Spherium Biomed evaluated more than 100 prototype compounds in animal models before settling on a proprietary oil emulsion formulation of 5% cyclosporine delivered via a spray without propellant gas.
Key study findings
The 44 study participants had a mean baseline of 8.3% body surface area involvement. As a condition of participation, they needed to have similar lesional areas bilaterally. They treated involved areas on one side of the body twice daily with Cyclatop, while they sprayed those on the opposite side with its vehicle.
From a mean baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of 5.5, EASI scores improved by an average of 3.2 points after 28 days of cyclosporine spray, compared with 1.7 points with vehicle. Atopic Dermatitis Area and Severity Index (ADSI) scores improved from a mean baseline of 6.5 by 3.6 points with topical cyclosporine versus 2.4 points with vehicle.
At week 3, an EASI 75 response – that is, at least a 75% reduction from baseline EASI scores – was achieved at 44.4% of actively treated sites, compared with 25.9% of control sites. ADSI 75 rates at 3 weeks were 33.3% and 11.1%, respectively. An Investigator’s Global Assessment of clear or almost clear was reached at week 4 at 61.5% of active treatment sites, compared with 42.3% of vehicle-treated sites.
Itching responded dramatically to topical cyclosporine. From a mean baseline score of 3.3 on a standard 10-point pruritus visual analog scale, cyclosporine spray–treated areas showed a mean 1.2-point decrease at week 4, compared with a 0.4-point reduction at vehicle-treated areas. About 50% of the reduction in pruritus scores was achieved within the first week of active treatment. Moreover, among patients with moderate as opposed to mild itching scores at baseline, who had a mean pruritus score of 5.6, topical cyclosporine spray resulted in a mean 3.3-point reduction at week 4, Dr. Giménez-Arnau continued.
No safety signals emerged in this initial study. Side effects associated with the cyclosporine spray were the same as with its vehicle, and in exit interviews, more than 85% of patients indicated they were satisfied with the comfort and practicality of topical cyclosporine.
Session chair DeDee Murrell, MD, professor of dermatology at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, noted that the study was restricted to patients with less than 10% body surface area of involvement.
“Are you concerned that if you use this product over widespread areas, as is quite common in eczema, that you might get positive blood levels?” she asked.
“We don’t know. We should check that,” Dr. Giménez-Arnau replied. She added that more studies need to be done before cyclosporine spray is ready for the market. These studies will need to address the optimal dosing schedule and duration, the spectrum of disease severity where the topical spray works best, and other key issues.
Cyclatop is being developed by Spherium Biomed, which sponsored the study. Dr. Giménez-Arnau reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to roughly half a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
REPORTING FROM THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Cyclosporine 5% topical spray shows promise for atopic dermatitis.
Major finding: About 62% of patients with mild to moderate atopic dermatitis were clear or almost clear after 4 weeks of twice-daily cyclosporine 5% topical spray.
Study details: This prospective, multicenter, double-blind, vehicle-controlled study included 44 children and adults with mild or moderate atopic dermatitis.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Spherium Biomed. The presenter reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to that and roughly half a dozen other pharmaceutical companies.
Nonablative laser adds benefits to low-dose isotretinoin as treatment for moderate to severe acne
A combination of low-dose isotretinoin and nonablative fractional laser (NAFL) was a safe and effective treatment for moderate to severe acne and also improved acne scars in a small Chinese study, investigators reported.
In the randomized, split-face, controlled study of 18 adult Asian patients with moderate to severe acne, low-dose isotretinoin alone effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas NAFL had the additional effect of reducing the number of comedones and improving boxcar atrophic scars, reported Weihui Zeng, MD, and associates from the department of dermatology at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Shanxi, China.
The authors noted that many patients seen at their clinic cannot tolerate a 20 mg/day dose of isotretinoin because of severe mucocutaneous side effects and that treatment with nonablative lasers, which – in contrast to ablative lasers – use infrared radiation to penetrate the skin deeply and thereby selectively heat dermal tissue while sparing the epidermis, could be a treatment option for these patients.
Therefore, they set out to investigate a treatment plan combining 1,550-nm NAFL with low-dose isotretinoin (10 mg/day) in the 18 patients (mean age, 24 years; skin types II-IV) attending their outpatient dermatology clinic. Three laser treatments were administered at monthly intervals to one side of the face, with the other side of the face serving as a control. Each patient was on low-dose isotretinoin for 30-45 days before laser treatment. A revised Leeds acne-grading system was used.
At follow-up after the third treatment – 3 months after the first laser treatment – both sides of the face showed significant recovery in all participants, but there was greater improvement on the laser-treated side. The mean Leeds acne-grading scores decreased from 10.6 at baseline to 5.8 on the control side of the face, and from 10.4 at baseline to 3.5 on the laser-treated side. The changes in scores differed significantly between sides (P less than .05), and the number of comedones decreased more on the laser-treated side of the face than it did the control side.
Significant improvements were also seen with superficial scars (P less than .05) and deep boxcar atrophic scars (P less than .01) on the laser-treated sides of patients’ faces, compared with the control sides, but significant improvements were not seen with the number of papules and nodules or with icepick or rolling scars.
Patients reported discomfort after NAFL treatment, including pain (100%), sensation of heat (100%), erythema (94.5%), and edema (88.9%), which resolved spontaneously within 24 hours.
Most of the patients (n = 12; 66.7%) were satisfied after the last treatment, two (11.1%) were “very satisfied,” and four (22.2%) were neutral; none were dissatisfied.
“Low-dose isotretinoin effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas use of 1,550-nm Er:glass NAFL may significantly reduce the number of comedones and improve boxcar atrophic scars,” the authors wrote.
They authors reported no significant interest with commercial supporters.
SOURCE: Xia J et al. Dermatol Surg. 2018 Sep;44(9):1201-8.
A combination of low-dose isotretinoin and nonablative fractional laser (NAFL) was a safe and effective treatment for moderate to severe acne and also improved acne scars in a small Chinese study, investigators reported.
In the randomized, split-face, controlled study of 18 adult Asian patients with moderate to severe acne, low-dose isotretinoin alone effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas NAFL had the additional effect of reducing the number of comedones and improving boxcar atrophic scars, reported Weihui Zeng, MD, and associates from the department of dermatology at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Shanxi, China.
The authors noted that many patients seen at their clinic cannot tolerate a 20 mg/day dose of isotretinoin because of severe mucocutaneous side effects and that treatment with nonablative lasers, which – in contrast to ablative lasers – use infrared radiation to penetrate the skin deeply and thereby selectively heat dermal tissue while sparing the epidermis, could be a treatment option for these patients.
Therefore, they set out to investigate a treatment plan combining 1,550-nm NAFL with low-dose isotretinoin (10 mg/day) in the 18 patients (mean age, 24 years; skin types II-IV) attending their outpatient dermatology clinic. Three laser treatments were administered at monthly intervals to one side of the face, with the other side of the face serving as a control. Each patient was on low-dose isotretinoin for 30-45 days before laser treatment. A revised Leeds acne-grading system was used.
At follow-up after the third treatment – 3 months after the first laser treatment – both sides of the face showed significant recovery in all participants, but there was greater improvement on the laser-treated side. The mean Leeds acne-grading scores decreased from 10.6 at baseline to 5.8 on the control side of the face, and from 10.4 at baseline to 3.5 on the laser-treated side. The changes in scores differed significantly between sides (P less than .05), and the number of comedones decreased more on the laser-treated side of the face than it did the control side.
Significant improvements were also seen with superficial scars (P less than .05) and deep boxcar atrophic scars (P less than .01) on the laser-treated sides of patients’ faces, compared with the control sides, but significant improvements were not seen with the number of papules and nodules or with icepick or rolling scars.
Patients reported discomfort after NAFL treatment, including pain (100%), sensation of heat (100%), erythema (94.5%), and edema (88.9%), which resolved spontaneously within 24 hours.
Most of the patients (n = 12; 66.7%) were satisfied after the last treatment, two (11.1%) were “very satisfied,” and four (22.2%) were neutral; none were dissatisfied.
“Low-dose isotretinoin effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas use of 1,550-nm Er:glass NAFL may significantly reduce the number of comedones and improve boxcar atrophic scars,” the authors wrote.
They authors reported no significant interest with commercial supporters.
SOURCE: Xia J et al. Dermatol Surg. 2018 Sep;44(9):1201-8.
A combination of low-dose isotretinoin and nonablative fractional laser (NAFL) was a safe and effective treatment for moderate to severe acne and also improved acne scars in a small Chinese study, investigators reported.
In the randomized, split-face, controlled study of 18 adult Asian patients with moderate to severe acne, low-dose isotretinoin alone effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas NAFL had the additional effect of reducing the number of comedones and improving boxcar atrophic scars, reported Weihui Zeng, MD, and associates from the department of dermatology at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Shanxi, China.
The authors noted that many patients seen at their clinic cannot tolerate a 20 mg/day dose of isotretinoin because of severe mucocutaneous side effects and that treatment with nonablative lasers, which – in contrast to ablative lasers – use infrared radiation to penetrate the skin deeply and thereby selectively heat dermal tissue while sparing the epidermis, could be a treatment option for these patients.
Therefore, they set out to investigate a treatment plan combining 1,550-nm NAFL with low-dose isotretinoin (10 mg/day) in the 18 patients (mean age, 24 years; skin types II-IV) attending their outpatient dermatology clinic. Three laser treatments were administered at monthly intervals to one side of the face, with the other side of the face serving as a control. Each patient was on low-dose isotretinoin for 30-45 days before laser treatment. A revised Leeds acne-grading system was used.
At follow-up after the third treatment – 3 months after the first laser treatment – both sides of the face showed significant recovery in all participants, but there was greater improvement on the laser-treated side. The mean Leeds acne-grading scores decreased from 10.6 at baseline to 5.8 on the control side of the face, and from 10.4 at baseline to 3.5 on the laser-treated side. The changes in scores differed significantly between sides (P less than .05), and the number of comedones decreased more on the laser-treated side of the face than it did the control side.
Significant improvements were also seen with superficial scars (P less than .05) and deep boxcar atrophic scars (P less than .01) on the laser-treated sides of patients’ faces, compared with the control sides, but significant improvements were not seen with the number of papules and nodules or with icepick or rolling scars.
Patients reported discomfort after NAFL treatment, including pain (100%), sensation of heat (100%), erythema (94.5%), and edema (88.9%), which resolved spontaneously within 24 hours.
Most of the patients (n = 12; 66.7%) were satisfied after the last treatment, two (11.1%) were “very satisfied,” and four (22.2%) were neutral; none were dissatisfied.
“Low-dose isotretinoin effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas use of 1,550-nm Er:glass NAFL may significantly reduce the number of comedones and improve boxcar atrophic scars,” the authors wrote.
They authors reported no significant interest with commercial supporters.
SOURCE: Xia J et al. Dermatol Surg. 2018 Sep;44(9):1201-8.
FROM DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY
Key clinical point: Adding nonablative fractional laser (NAFL) treatment to low-dose isotretinoin may reduce comedones and improve boxcar atrophic scarring in people with moderate to severe acne .
Major finding: Low-dose isotretinoin effectively controlled papule and pustule acne lesions, whereas nonablative laser also reduced the number of comedones and improved boxcar atrophic scars.
Study details: A prospective randomized, controlled, split-face study of 18 Asian adult patients with moderate to severe acne vulgaris, treated with low-dose isotretinoin, as well as NAFL to one side of the face.
Disclosures: The authors reported no significant interests with commercial supporters.
Source: Xia J et al. Dermatol Surg. 2018 Sep;44(9):1201-8.
What is the Diagnosis - September 2018
At the visit, the girl’s skin scrapings were analyzed under the microscope with potassium hydroxide (KOH) and no fungal elements were seen. A culture from one of the lesions was positive for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus.
She was diagnosed with bullous impetigo (BI).
Impetigo is the most common superficial skin infection and can present as a nonbullous (most common) and bullous (least common) form.1 Nonbullous impetigo is usually caused the Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes and tends to occur at sites of prior trauma like insect bites, scratches, atopic dermatitis, or varicella. On the other hand, bullous impetigo is caused by the local production of exfoliative toxins (ETA or ETB) by phage group II of Staphylococcus aureus. The exfoliative toxin binds to desmoglin-1, one of the desmosomal proteins of the skin, causing acantholysis at the level of the granular layer and blister formation. Different from nonbullous impetigo, bullous impetigo tends to occur in normal, undamaged skin. Lesions are more common in neonates and young infants but children also can be affected.
The characteristic lesions in bullous impetigo are small blisters that enlarge to 1-cm to 5-cm bullae that easily rupture, leaving an erythematous plaque with a collarette of scale or “double ring scale,” with minimal crust and mild erythema. They commonly occur on the face, trunk, buttocks, and intertriginous areas. The lesions heal within 4-6 weeks, leaving no scarring. Associated systemic symptoms are rare but some patients can present with weakness, fever, and diarrhea. The toxin can disseminate and cause staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome in neonates or older patients with renal failure or immunodeficiency.
The transmission of Staphylococcus aureus can occur from colonized or infected family members, children in contact sports, as well as contact with animals such as dogs, cattle, and poultry.2 Transmission from a pet rabbit also has been reported. In our patient, transmission from her pet hamster could have occurred as the areas on the body where there were lesions were areas where she was holding and cuddling her new pet.
The differential diagnosis of the type of lesions our patient presented with includes tinea corporis, and bullous tinea, which also can be transmitted by animals such as kittens. A KOH analysis ruled out this diagnosis. Tinea skin lesions tend to be more scaly than bullous impetigo lesions, which are more inflamed and crusted. Bullous arthropod reactions should be considered in the differential diagnosis as well. Bullous bite reaction lesions present with tense bullae, as they are subepidermal in nature and are pruritic. Subacute cutaneous lupus lesions present as annular scaly plaques with an erythematous border and central clearing usually in sun exposed areas similar to the distribution of our patient. Severe contact dermatitis reactions also can blister and form similar lesions as seen in our patient but with the difference that our patient didn’t complain of pruritus, which is a characteristic feature of allergic contact dermatitis. In neonates or young infants with bullous lesions other conditions such as herpes simplex infection, epidermolysis bullosa, bullous pemphigoid, linear IgA bullous dermatosis, bullous mastocytosis, and bullous erythema multiforme should be considered in the differential diagnosis.
First line treatment for impetigo consists of the use of topical application of mupirocin (Bactroban) 2% ointment, retapamulin (Altabax) 1% ointment, or fusidic acid 2% cream. A Cochrane review compared systemic versus topical treatment for impetigo concluding that topical treatment with either mupirocin or retapamulin is equally if not more effective than oral antibiotics.3 Ozenoxacin (Xepi), a new nonfluorinated topical quinolone has recently been Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of localized impetigo in patients 2 months of age and older.4 When there is treatment failure with topical antibiotics, widespread disease, or systemic symptoms, oral antimicrobials should be consider, such as beta-lactamase–resistant penicillin, first-generation cephalosporins, or clindamycin. The use of bleach baths and general hygiene measures for 4 months can reduce the risks of recurrence in 20% of the patients as noted by a study by Kaplan et al.5
Our patient was treated with oral cephalexin for 7 days as well as topical mupirocin with fast resolution of the lesions. Sadly, the parents gave her hamster pet away.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. Email her at [email protected]
References
1. Am Fam Physician. 2014 Aug 15;90(4):229-35.
2. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A. 1987 Jun;265(1-2):218-26.
3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1:CD003261.
4. Ann Pharmacother. 2018 Jun 1:1060028018786510.
5. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Mar;58(5):679-82.
At the visit, the girl’s skin scrapings were analyzed under the microscope with potassium hydroxide (KOH) and no fungal elements were seen. A culture from one of the lesions was positive for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus.
She was diagnosed with bullous impetigo (BI).
Impetigo is the most common superficial skin infection and can present as a nonbullous (most common) and bullous (least common) form.1 Nonbullous impetigo is usually caused the Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes and tends to occur at sites of prior trauma like insect bites, scratches, atopic dermatitis, or varicella. On the other hand, bullous impetigo is caused by the local production of exfoliative toxins (ETA or ETB) by phage group II of Staphylococcus aureus. The exfoliative toxin binds to desmoglin-1, one of the desmosomal proteins of the skin, causing acantholysis at the level of the granular layer and blister formation. Different from nonbullous impetigo, bullous impetigo tends to occur in normal, undamaged skin. Lesions are more common in neonates and young infants but children also can be affected.
The characteristic lesions in bullous impetigo are small blisters that enlarge to 1-cm to 5-cm bullae that easily rupture, leaving an erythematous plaque with a collarette of scale or “double ring scale,” with minimal crust and mild erythema. They commonly occur on the face, trunk, buttocks, and intertriginous areas. The lesions heal within 4-6 weeks, leaving no scarring. Associated systemic symptoms are rare but some patients can present with weakness, fever, and diarrhea. The toxin can disseminate and cause staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome in neonates or older patients with renal failure or immunodeficiency.
The transmission of Staphylococcus aureus can occur from colonized or infected family members, children in contact sports, as well as contact with animals such as dogs, cattle, and poultry.2 Transmission from a pet rabbit also has been reported. In our patient, transmission from her pet hamster could have occurred as the areas on the body where there were lesions were areas where she was holding and cuddling her new pet.
The differential diagnosis of the type of lesions our patient presented with includes tinea corporis, and bullous tinea, which also can be transmitted by animals such as kittens. A KOH analysis ruled out this diagnosis. Tinea skin lesions tend to be more scaly than bullous impetigo lesions, which are more inflamed and crusted. Bullous arthropod reactions should be considered in the differential diagnosis as well. Bullous bite reaction lesions present with tense bullae, as they are subepidermal in nature and are pruritic. Subacute cutaneous lupus lesions present as annular scaly plaques with an erythematous border and central clearing usually in sun exposed areas similar to the distribution of our patient. Severe contact dermatitis reactions also can blister and form similar lesions as seen in our patient but with the difference that our patient didn’t complain of pruritus, which is a characteristic feature of allergic contact dermatitis. In neonates or young infants with bullous lesions other conditions such as herpes simplex infection, epidermolysis bullosa, bullous pemphigoid, linear IgA bullous dermatosis, bullous mastocytosis, and bullous erythema multiforme should be considered in the differential diagnosis.
First line treatment for impetigo consists of the use of topical application of mupirocin (Bactroban) 2% ointment, retapamulin (Altabax) 1% ointment, or fusidic acid 2% cream. A Cochrane review compared systemic versus topical treatment for impetigo concluding that topical treatment with either mupirocin or retapamulin is equally if not more effective than oral antibiotics.3 Ozenoxacin (Xepi), a new nonfluorinated topical quinolone has recently been Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of localized impetigo in patients 2 months of age and older.4 When there is treatment failure with topical antibiotics, widespread disease, or systemic symptoms, oral antimicrobials should be consider, such as beta-lactamase–resistant penicillin, first-generation cephalosporins, or clindamycin. The use of bleach baths and general hygiene measures for 4 months can reduce the risks of recurrence in 20% of the patients as noted by a study by Kaplan et al.5
Our patient was treated with oral cephalexin for 7 days as well as topical mupirocin with fast resolution of the lesions. Sadly, the parents gave her hamster pet away.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. Email her at [email protected]
References
1. Am Fam Physician. 2014 Aug 15;90(4):229-35.
2. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A. 1987 Jun;265(1-2):218-26.
3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1:CD003261.
4. Ann Pharmacother. 2018 Jun 1:1060028018786510.
5. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Mar;58(5):679-82.
At the visit, the girl’s skin scrapings were analyzed under the microscope with potassium hydroxide (KOH) and no fungal elements were seen. A culture from one of the lesions was positive for methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus.
She was diagnosed with bullous impetigo (BI).
Impetigo is the most common superficial skin infection and can present as a nonbullous (most common) and bullous (least common) form.1 Nonbullous impetigo is usually caused the Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes and tends to occur at sites of prior trauma like insect bites, scratches, atopic dermatitis, or varicella. On the other hand, bullous impetigo is caused by the local production of exfoliative toxins (ETA or ETB) by phage group II of Staphylococcus aureus. The exfoliative toxin binds to desmoglin-1, one of the desmosomal proteins of the skin, causing acantholysis at the level of the granular layer and blister formation. Different from nonbullous impetigo, bullous impetigo tends to occur in normal, undamaged skin. Lesions are more common in neonates and young infants but children also can be affected.
The characteristic lesions in bullous impetigo are small blisters that enlarge to 1-cm to 5-cm bullae that easily rupture, leaving an erythematous plaque with a collarette of scale or “double ring scale,” with minimal crust and mild erythema. They commonly occur on the face, trunk, buttocks, and intertriginous areas. The lesions heal within 4-6 weeks, leaving no scarring. Associated systemic symptoms are rare but some patients can present with weakness, fever, and diarrhea. The toxin can disseminate and cause staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome in neonates or older patients with renal failure or immunodeficiency.
The transmission of Staphylococcus aureus can occur from colonized or infected family members, children in contact sports, as well as contact with animals such as dogs, cattle, and poultry.2 Transmission from a pet rabbit also has been reported. In our patient, transmission from her pet hamster could have occurred as the areas on the body where there were lesions were areas where she was holding and cuddling her new pet.
The differential diagnosis of the type of lesions our patient presented with includes tinea corporis, and bullous tinea, which also can be transmitted by animals such as kittens. A KOH analysis ruled out this diagnosis. Tinea skin lesions tend to be more scaly than bullous impetigo lesions, which are more inflamed and crusted. Bullous arthropod reactions should be considered in the differential diagnosis as well. Bullous bite reaction lesions present with tense bullae, as they are subepidermal in nature and are pruritic. Subacute cutaneous lupus lesions present as annular scaly plaques with an erythematous border and central clearing usually in sun exposed areas similar to the distribution of our patient. Severe contact dermatitis reactions also can blister and form similar lesions as seen in our patient but with the difference that our patient didn’t complain of pruritus, which is a characteristic feature of allergic contact dermatitis. In neonates or young infants with bullous lesions other conditions such as herpes simplex infection, epidermolysis bullosa, bullous pemphigoid, linear IgA bullous dermatosis, bullous mastocytosis, and bullous erythema multiforme should be considered in the differential diagnosis.
First line treatment for impetigo consists of the use of topical application of mupirocin (Bactroban) 2% ointment, retapamulin (Altabax) 1% ointment, or fusidic acid 2% cream. A Cochrane review compared systemic versus topical treatment for impetigo concluding that topical treatment with either mupirocin or retapamulin is equally if not more effective than oral antibiotics.3 Ozenoxacin (Xepi), a new nonfluorinated topical quinolone has recently been Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of localized impetigo in patients 2 months of age and older.4 When there is treatment failure with topical antibiotics, widespread disease, or systemic symptoms, oral antimicrobials should be consider, such as beta-lactamase–resistant penicillin, first-generation cephalosporins, or clindamycin. The use of bleach baths and general hygiene measures for 4 months can reduce the risks of recurrence in 20% of the patients as noted by a study by Kaplan et al.5
Our patient was treated with oral cephalexin for 7 days as well as topical mupirocin with fast resolution of the lesions. Sadly, the parents gave her hamster pet away.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. Email her at [email protected]
References
1. Am Fam Physician. 2014 Aug 15;90(4):229-35.
2. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A. 1987 Jun;265(1-2):218-26.
3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1:CD003261.
4. Ann Pharmacother. 2018 Jun 1:1060028018786510.
5. Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Mar;58(5):679-82.
On physical exam, the girl is in no acute distress. Her vital signs are stable, and she has no fever.
On skin examination, she has several erythematous, crusted scaly plaques with double ring of scale on the nose, ears, neck, upper chest, and few on the abdomen. On her left abdomen, there is a small blister. Her seborrheic dermatitis is well controlled with mild erythema behind her ears and minimal scale on her scalp.
Pediatric data on novel axillary hyperhidrosis treatment reported
PARIS – Two compelling reasons exist to take excessive sweating in children and adolescents more seriously, Lawrence J. Green, MD, asserted at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
One is that this is a surprisingly common and embarrassing medical condition that can have a profound adverse developmental impact in young people at a time when they are engaged in forming their self-image.
The other reason to get serious about addressing primary axillary hyperhidrosis in pediatric patients is the recent approval of glycopyrronium tosylate as a topical therapy, Dr. Green, a dermatologist at George Washington University, Washington. The treatment, glycopyrronium pads (Qbrexza), was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the topical treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis in patients aged 9 years and older in June 2018, and will be available in October 2018.
He presented new data from a 44-week, open-label extension of two pivotal 4-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials known as ATMOS-1 and ATMOS-2. The new post hoc analysis from the extension study, known as the ARIDO study, provides reassurance that the product remains both safe and durably effective with longterm use.
Dr. Green’s analysis focused on the 44 pediatric participants aged 9-16 years. That’s because even though primary axillary hyperhidrosis affects people of all ages, with an estimated 4.8% prevalence in the U.S. population – 5.3 million people – it is more common in children and adolescents than adults. And it hits them particularly hard.
“Hyperhidrosis is largely underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly among pediatric patients,” he said. “The impact on quality of life is comparable to or greater than acne, psoriasis, or eczema.”
The glycopyrronium pad is self-applied as a once-daily wipe. Glycopyrronium is an anticholinergic agent, which blocks sweat production by inhibiting the receptors that activate sweat glands.
Dr. Green noted several key findings from the 44-week ARIDO analysis, presented for the first time at the EADV congress.
The median absolute decrease in sweat production in pediatric patients at 44 weeks as measured gravimetrically was 50.3 mg per 5 minutes from a baseline of 150 mg per 5 minutes, comparable with the mean 75 mg reduction from a baseline of 175 mg in the 507-patient older cohort. However, Dr. Green advised not to make too much of this endpoint, as sweat production is notoriously difficult to measure accurately. In addition, an individual’s sweat rate can vary widely depending upon a multitude of factors, including ambient temperature and even what a patient is thinking about. The FDA recognizes this and therefore elevated several validated patient-reported outcomes to the status of coprimary endpoints in the clinical trials.
A positive result on one such patient-reported outcome, the Hyperhidrosis Severity Scale, was achieved in 57% of pediatric patients and 64% of adults at week 44 of open-label therapy. This required at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline, when roughly 60% of youths had a score of 3 and the remainder scored 4 on the 1-4 point scale.
From a mean baseline score of 9.2 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, the pediatric group averaged a mean 6.2-point improvement at week 44, while adults experienced a mean 8.7-point improvement on the Dermatology Life Quality Index from a baseline of 11.25.
There was no diminution in treatment efficacy through 44 weeks, Dr. Green noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events consisted largely of transient mild to moderate anticholinergic effects, which seldom led to study discontinuation.
Dilated pupils and blurred vision were more common in children than adults (7.9% and 10.5% vs. 5.1% and 6.4%, respectively). “Why that is I can only speculate. Kids do tend to touch their eyes more often than adults. Pretty much everything else was the same. The adverse events can be worked around by educating people to use the pads appropriately. We saw the anticholinergic side effects more often in the first 4 weeks of the double-blind trials than in the longterm extension because once patients learned how to use the pad and not touch themselves afterwards, the adverse events came down,” he said.
The studies were sponsored by Dermira. Dr. Green has received research funding from and been a consultant to the company.
PARIS – Two compelling reasons exist to take excessive sweating in children and adolescents more seriously, Lawrence J. Green, MD, asserted at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
One is that this is a surprisingly common and embarrassing medical condition that can have a profound adverse developmental impact in young people at a time when they are engaged in forming their self-image.
The other reason to get serious about addressing primary axillary hyperhidrosis in pediatric patients is the recent approval of glycopyrronium tosylate as a topical therapy, Dr. Green, a dermatologist at George Washington University, Washington. The treatment, glycopyrronium pads (Qbrexza), was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the topical treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis in patients aged 9 years and older in June 2018, and will be available in October 2018.
He presented new data from a 44-week, open-label extension of two pivotal 4-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials known as ATMOS-1 and ATMOS-2. The new post hoc analysis from the extension study, known as the ARIDO study, provides reassurance that the product remains both safe and durably effective with longterm use.
Dr. Green’s analysis focused on the 44 pediatric participants aged 9-16 years. That’s because even though primary axillary hyperhidrosis affects people of all ages, with an estimated 4.8% prevalence in the U.S. population – 5.3 million people – it is more common in children and adolescents than adults. And it hits them particularly hard.
“Hyperhidrosis is largely underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly among pediatric patients,” he said. “The impact on quality of life is comparable to or greater than acne, psoriasis, or eczema.”
The glycopyrronium pad is self-applied as a once-daily wipe. Glycopyrronium is an anticholinergic agent, which blocks sweat production by inhibiting the receptors that activate sweat glands.
Dr. Green noted several key findings from the 44-week ARIDO analysis, presented for the first time at the EADV congress.
The median absolute decrease in sweat production in pediatric patients at 44 weeks as measured gravimetrically was 50.3 mg per 5 minutes from a baseline of 150 mg per 5 minutes, comparable with the mean 75 mg reduction from a baseline of 175 mg in the 507-patient older cohort. However, Dr. Green advised not to make too much of this endpoint, as sweat production is notoriously difficult to measure accurately. In addition, an individual’s sweat rate can vary widely depending upon a multitude of factors, including ambient temperature and even what a patient is thinking about. The FDA recognizes this and therefore elevated several validated patient-reported outcomes to the status of coprimary endpoints in the clinical trials.
A positive result on one such patient-reported outcome, the Hyperhidrosis Severity Scale, was achieved in 57% of pediatric patients and 64% of adults at week 44 of open-label therapy. This required at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline, when roughly 60% of youths had a score of 3 and the remainder scored 4 on the 1-4 point scale.
From a mean baseline score of 9.2 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, the pediatric group averaged a mean 6.2-point improvement at week 44, while adults experienced a mean 8.7-point improvement on the Dermatology Life Quality Index from a baseline of 11.25.
There was no diminution in treatment efficacy through 44 weeks, Dr. Green noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events consisted largely of transient mild to moderate anticholinergic effects, which seldom led to study discontinuation.
Dilated pupils and blurred vision were more common in children than adults (7.9% and 10.5% vs. 5.1% and 6.4%, respectively). “Why that is I can only speculate. Kids do tend to touch their eyes more often than adults. Pretty much everything else was the same. The adverse events can be worked around by educating people to use the pads appropriately. We saw the anticholinergic side effects more often in the first 4 weeks of the double-blind trials than in the longterm extension because once patients learned how to use the pad and not touch themselves afterwards, the adverse events came down,” he said.
The studies were sponsored by Dermira. Dr. Green has received research funding from and been a consultant to the company.
PARIS – Two compelling reasons exist to take excessive sweating in children and adolescents more seriously, Lawrence J. Green, MD, asserted at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
One is that this is a surprisingly common and embarrassing medical condition that can have a profound adverse developmental impact in young people at a time when they are engaged in forming their self-image.
The other reason to get serious about addressing primary axillary hyperhidrosis in pediatric patients is the recent approval of glycopyrronium tosylate as a topical therapy, Dr. Green, a dermatologist at George Washington University, Washington. The treatment, glycopyrronium pads (Qbrexza), was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the topical treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis in patients aged 9 years and older in June 2018, and will be available in October 2018.
He presented new data from a 44-week, open-label extension of two pivotal 4-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials known as ATMOS-1 and ATMOS-2. The new post hoc analysis from the extension study, known as the ARIDO study, provides reassurance that the product remains both safe and durably effective with longterm use.
Dr. Green’s analysis focused on the 44 pediatric participants aged 9-16 years. That’s because even though primary axillary hyperhidrosis affects people of all ages, with an estimated 4.8% prevalence in the U.S. population – 5.3 million people – it is more common in children and adolescents than adults. And it hits them particularly hard.
“Hyperhidrosis is largely underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly among pediatric patients,” he said. “The impact on quality of life is comparable to or greater than acne, psoriasis, or eczema.”
The glycopyrronium pad is self-applied as a once-daily wipe. Glycopyrronium is an anticholinergic agent, which blocks sweat production by inhibiting the receptors that activate sweat glands.
Dr. Green noted several key findings from the 44-week ARIDO analysis, presented for the first time at the EADV congress.
The median absolute decrease in sweat production in pediatric patients at 44 weeks as measured gravimetrically was 50.3 mg per 5 minutes from a baseline of 150 mg per 5 minutes, comparable with the mean 75 mg reduction from a baseline of 175 mg in the 507-patient older cohort. However, Dr. Green advised not to make too much of this endpoint, as sweat production is notoriously difficult to measure accurately. In addition, an individual’s sweat rate can vary widely depending upon a multitude of factors, including ambient temperature and even what a patient is thinking about. The FDA recognizes this and therefore elevated several validated patient-reported outcomes to the status of coprimary endpoints in the clinical trials.
A positive result on one such patient-reported outcome, the Hyperhidrosis Severity Scale, was achieved in 57% of pediatric patients and 64% of adults at week 44 of open-label therapy. This required at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline, when roughly 60% of youths had a score of 3 and the remainder scored 4 on the 1-4 point scale.
From a mean baseline score of 9.2 on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, the pediatric group averaged a mean 6.2-point improvement at week 44, while adults experienced a mean 8.7-point improvement on the Dermatology Life Quality Index from a baseline of 11.25.
There was no diminution in treatment efficacy through 44 weeks, Dr. Green noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events consisted largely of transient mild to moderate anticholinergic effects, which seldom led to study discontinuation.
Dilated pupils and blurred vision were more common in children than adults (7.9% and 10.5% vs. 5.1% and 6.4%, respectively). “Why that is I can only speculate. Kids do tend to touch their eyes more often than adults. Pretty much everything else was the same. The adverse events can be worked around by educating people to use the pads appropriately. We saw the anticholinergic side effects more often in the first 4 weeks of the double-blind trials than in the longterm extension because once patients learned how to use the pad and not touch themselves afterwards, the adverse events came down,” he said.
The studies were sponsored by Dermira. Dr. Green has received research funding from and been a consultant to the company.
REPORTING FROM THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Glycopyrronium tosylate pads address a common and undertreated medical condition in children: primary axillary hyperhidrosis.
Major finding: Mean scores on the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index improved by an average of 6.2 points from a baseline of 9.2 in children aged 9-16 years with primary axillary hyperhidrosis treated with once-daily glycopyrronium tosylate pads during an open-label, 44-week study.
Study details: This was a post hoc analysis of 44 patients aged 9-16 years and 507 patients aged 17 years and older who participated in a 44-week, open-label extension study of once-daily glycopyrronium tosylate pads for treatment of primary axillary hyperhidrosis.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Dermira. The presenter has received research funding from and been a consultant to the company.
Adjuvant Pembrolizumab Improves Progression-Free Survival in Stage III Melanoma
Study Overview
Objective. To evaluate pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma.
Design. International randomized phase 3 trial.
Setting and participants. This multicenter international trial enrolled patients who had histologically confirmed cutaneous melanoma with regional lymph node metastasis (stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC with no in-transit metastases). Patients had to have undergone a complete regional lymphadenectomy within 13 weeks before the start of treatment. Exclusion criteria were: ECOG performance status score > 1, autoimmune disease, current steroid use, and prior systemic therapy for melanoma. All tumor samples from melanoma-positive lymph nodes were required to be sent to the central lab for evaluation of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression; PD-L1 positivity was defined as a tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1%.
Intervention. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion and stratified according to stage and geographic region. Local pharmacies were aware of trial-group assignments. Patients received either an intravenous infusion of pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity occurred. If recurrence was detected, patients were able to cross over.
Main outcome measures. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the intention-to-treat population and in the subgroup of PD-L1–positive patients. Secondary endpoints included distant metastasis–free survival, overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life.
Results. A total of 1019 patients were recruited from 123 centers in 23 countries: 514 were assigned to the pembrolizumab group and 505 were assigned to the placebo group. In the pembrolizumab group, 70 patients (13.8%) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event; in 66 patients of these patients the event was deemed drug-related. In the placebo group, 11 (2.2%) patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. Discontinuation due to disease recurrence was seen in 109 (21%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 179 (35.7%) patients in the placebo group. The median duration of follow up was 15 months. In the overall intention-to-treat population, the 12-month RFS rate was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab group versus 61% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). At 18 months the RFS rates were 71.4% and 53.2%, respectively. The 18-month incidence of distant metastasis at recurrence was lower in the pembrolizumab group (16.7% vs. 29.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.76). In those who were PD-L1–positive (n = 853), the 12-month RFS rate was 77.1% in the pembrolizumab group versus 62.6% in the placebo group. PD-L1 status had no impact on pembrolizumab efficacy. The benefit of pembrolizumab was noted across all subgroups, and no difference was seen in patients with stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC disease. The benefit of pembrolizumab was similar in those with macroscopic or microscopic nodal metastasis. BRAF status did not influence RFS between the pembrolizumab and placebo groups.
Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were seen in 14.7% and 3.4% of the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. Immune-related adverse events of any grade were noted in 37% of patients in the pembrolizumab group. There was 1 pembrolizumab-related death secondary to myositis. Grades 3 or 4 immune-related events in the pembrolizumab group occurred at a low rate, including colitis (2% and 0.2%), hypophysitis (0.6% and 0%), and type 1 diabetes mellitus (1% and 0%).
Conclusion. Adjuvant pembrolizumab for patients with high-risk stage III melanoma significantly improved RFS compared with placebo and should be considered as an option for adjuvant therapy in this patient population.
Commentary
Prior to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, high-dose interferon alfa was the sole option for adjuvant therapy in high-risk melanoma. Although adjuvant interferon alfa is associated with improvements in disease-free survival [1], it is also associated with significant toxicity, including myelosuppression, neurologic adverse effects, and hepatotoxicity. The development of checkpoint inhibition represents an important advancement in the management of patients with melanoma. In the previously reported EORTC 18071 trial, Eggermont and colleagues demonstrated that adjuvant therapy with the CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab improved both RFS (41% vs. 30%) and OS (65% vs. 54%) at 5 years in patients with stage III melanoma [2]. In 2017, Weber and colleagues demonstrated superior RFS (70% vs. 60%) and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events with adjuvant nivolumab compared to ipilimumab in the CheckMate-238 trial [3].
In the current article, Eggermont and colleagues present the results of the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study comparing the use of the PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab to placebo in the adjuvant setting for stage III melanoma. This study demonstrated a 43% reduced risk of recurrence or death favoring the pembrolizumab group (HR 0.57; P < 0.001). The 12-month RFS was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab arm versus 61% in the placebo arm. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred more commonly in the pembrolizumab arm (14.7% vs. 3.4%), with approximately 7% of these patients experiencing a grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse event. The results of this study corroborate prior data on the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in melanoma. Also, the investigators assessed RFS based on patient’s PD-L1 status (positivity defined as TPS ≥ 1% ) as a co-primary endpoint, and found consistent efficacy regardless of PD-L1 expression, with a hazard ratio of 0.47 in the 116 patients who had no PD-L1 expression.
Although the results of this study demonstrate a significant increase in RFS associated with adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy, an OS benefit has not yet been demonstrated. As noted, the only adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor trial to demonstrate an OS advantage thus far is the EORTC 18071 study of ipilimumab. However, the toxicity profile of adjuvant ipilimumab makes it an unattractive option compared to the PD-1 inhibitors. Which of the PD-1 inhibitors should be the treatment of choice for adjuvant therapy remains unclear, although it is worth noting that only nivolumab was compared to the best alternate therapy, ipilimumab [3]. It is also important to note that EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 included patients with stage IIIA disease (N1a disease with at least 1 micrometastasis > 1 mm) or stage IIIB or IIIC without in-transit metastases, while CheckMate-238 did not include stage IIIA patients. Thus, for stage IIIA patients pembrolizumab remains the only PD-1 inhibitor with randomized data demonstrating a benefit.
Applications for Clinical Practice
The results from the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study demonstrate a 43% reduction in the risk of progression or death with the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with stage III melanoma. As of now, the only checkpoint inhibitor to demonstrate an improvement in OS is ipilimumab, and whether the RFS benefit of both pembrolizumab and nivolumab will translate into an OS benefit is yet to be demonstrated.
—Daniel Isaac, DO, MS
1. Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, et al. Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST 1684. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:7–17.
2. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1845–55.
3. Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1824–35.
Study Overview
Objective. To evaluate pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma.
Design. International randomized phase 3 trial.
Setting and participants. This multicenter international trial enrolled patients who had histologically confirmed cutaneous melanoma with regional lymph node metastasis (stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC with no in-transit metastases). Patients had to have undergone a complete regional lymphadenectomy within 13 weeks before the start of treatment. Exclusion criteria were: ECOG performance status score > 1, autoimmune disease, current steroid use, and prior systemic therapy for melanoma. All tumor samples from melanoma-positive lymph nodes were required to be sent to the central lab for evaluation of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression; PD-L1 positivity was defined as a tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1%.
Intervention. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion and stratified according to stage and geographic region. Local pharmacies were aware of trial-group assignments. Patients received either an intravenous infusion of pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity occurred. If recurrence was detected, patients were able to cross over.
Main outcome measures. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the intention-to-treat population and in the subgroup of PD-L1–positive patients. Secondary endpoints included distant metastasis–free survival, overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life.
Results. A total of 1019 patients were recruited from 123 centers in 23 countries: 514 were assigned to the pembrolizumab group and 505 were assigned to the placebo group. In the pembrolizumab group, 70 patients (13.8%) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event; in 66 patients of these patients the event was deemed drug-related. In the placebo group, 11 (2.2%) patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. Discontinuation due to disease recurrence was seen in 109 (21%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 179 (35.7%) patients in the placebo group. The median duration of follow up was 15 months. In the overall intention-to-treat population, the 12-month RFS rate was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab group versus 61% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). At 18 months the RFS rates were 71.4% and 53.2%, respectively. The 18-month incidence of distant metastasis at recurrence was lower in the pembrolizumab group (16.7% vs. 29.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.76). In those who were PD-L1–positive (n = 853), the 12-month RFS rate was 77.1% in the pembrolizumab group versus 62.6% in the placebo group. PD-L1 status had no impact on pembrolizumab efficacy. The benefit of pembrolizumab was noted across all subgroups, and no difference was seen in patients with stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC disease. The benefit of pembrolizumab was similar in those with macroscopic or microscopic nodal metastasis. BRAF status did not influence RFS between the pembrolizumab and placebo groups.
Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were seen in 14.7% and 3.4% of the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. Immune-related adverse events of any grade were noted in 37% of patients in the pembrolizumab group. There was 1 pembrolizumab-related death secondary to myositis. Grades 3 or 4 immune-related events in the pembrolizumab group occurred at a low rate, including colitis (2% and 0.2%), hypophysitis (0.6% and 0%), and type 1 diabetes mellitus (1% and 0%).
Conclusion. Adjuvant pembrolizumab for patients with high-risk stage III melanoma significantly improved RFS compared with placebo and should be considered as an option for adjuvant therapy in this patient population.
Commentary
Prior to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, high-dose interferon alfa was the sole option for adjuvant therapy in high-risk melanoma. Although adjuvant interferon alfa is associated with improvements in disease-free survival [1], it is also associated with significant toxicity, including myelosuppression, neurologic adverse effects, and hepatotoxicity. The development of checkpoint inhibition represents an important advancement in the management of patients with melanoma. In the previously reported EORTC 18071 trial, Eggermont and colleagues demonstrated that adjuvant therapy with the CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab improved both RFS (41% vs. 30%) and OS (65% vs. 54%) at 5 years in patients with stage III melanoma [2]. In 2017, Weber and colleagues demonstrated superior RFS (70% vs. 60%) and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events with adjuvant nivolumab compared to ipilimumab in the CheckMate-238 trial [3].
In the current article, Eggermont and colleagues present the results of the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study comparing the use of the PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab to placebo in the adjuvant setting for stage III melanoma. This study demonstrated a 43% reduced risk of recurrence or death favoring the pembrolizumab group (HR 0.57; P < 0.001). The 12-month RFS was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab arm versus 61% in the placebo arm. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred more commonly in the pembrolizumab arm (14.7% vs. 3.4%), with approximately 7% of these patients experiencing a grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse event. The results of this study corroborate prior data on the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in melanoma. Also, the investigators assessed RFS based on patient’s PD-L1 status (positivity defined as TPS ≥ 1% ) as a co-primary endpoint, and found consistent efficacy regardless of PD-L1 expression, with a hazard ratio of 0.47 in the 116 patients who had no PD-L1 expression.
Although the results of this study demonstrate a significant increase in RFS associated with adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy, an OS benefit has not yet been demonstrated. As noted, the only adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor trial to demonstrate an OS advantage thus far is the EORTC 18071 study of ipilimumab. However, the toxicity profile of adjuvant ipilimumab makes it an unattractive option compared to the PD-1 inhibitors. Which of the PD-1 inhibitors should be the treatment of choice for adjuvant therapy remains unclear, although it is worth noting that only nivolumab was compared to the best alternate therapy, ipilimumab [3]. It is also important to note that EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 included patients with stage IIIA disease (N1a disease with at least 1 micrometastasis > 1 mm) or stage IIIB or IIIC without in-transit metastases, while CheckMate-238 did not include stage IIIA patients. Thus, for stage IIIA patients pembrolizumab remains the only PD-1 inhibitor with randomized data demonstrating a benefit.
Applications for Clinical Practice
The results from the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study demonstrate a 43% reduction in the risk of progression or death with the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with stage III melanoma. As of now, the only checkpoint inhibitor to demonstrate an improvement in OS is ipilimumab, and whether the RFS benefit of both pembrolizumab and nivolumab will translate into an OS benefit is yet to be demonstrated.
—Daniel Isaac, DO, MS
Study Overview
Objective. To evaluate pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma.
Design. International randomized phase 3 trial.
Setting and participants. This multicenter international trial enrolled patients who had histologically confirmed cutaneous melanoma with regional lymph node metastasis (stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC with no in-transit metastases). Patients had to have undergone a complete regional lymphadenectomy within 13 weeks before the start of treatment. Exclusion criteria were: ECOG performance status score > 1, autoimmune disease, current steroid use, and prior systemic therapy for melanoma. All tumor samples from melanoma-positive lymph nodes were required to be sent to the central lab for evaluation of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression; PD-L1 positivity was defined as a tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1%.
Intervention. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion and stratified according to stage and geographic region. Local pharmacies were aware of trial-group assignments. Patients received either an intravenous infusion of pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity occurred. If recurrence was detected, patients were able to cross over.
Main outcome measures. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the intention-to-treat population and in the subgroup of PD-L1–positive patients. Secondary endpoints included distant metastasis–free survival, overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life.
Results. A total of 1019 patients were recruited from 123 centers in 23 countries: 514 were assigned to the pembrolizumab group and 505 were assigned to the placebo group. In the pembrolizumab group, 70 patients (13.8%) discontinued treatment because of an adverse event; in 66 patients of these patients the event was deemed drug-related. In the placebo group, 11 (2.2%) patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. Discontinuation due to disease recurrence was seen in 109 (21%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 179 (35.7%) patients in the placebo group. The median duration of follow up was 15 months. In the overall intention-to-treat population, the 12-month RFS rate was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab group versus 61% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). At 18 months the RFS rates were 71.4% and 53.2%, respectively. The 18-month incidence of distant metastasis at recurrence was lower in the pembrolizumab group (16.7% vs. 29.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.53; 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.76). In those who were PD-L1–positive (n = 853), the 12-month RFS rate was 77.1% in the pembrolizumab group versus 62.6% in the placebo group. PD-L1 status had no impact on pembrolizumab efficacy. The benefit of pembrolizumab was noted across all subgroups, and no difference was seen in patients with stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC disease. The benefit of pembrolizumab was similar in those with macroscopic or microscopic nodal metastasis. BRAF status did not influence RFS between the pembrolizumab and placebo groups.
Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were seen in 14.7% and 3.4% of the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. Immune-related adverse events of any grade were noted in 37% of patients in the pembrolizumab group. There was 1 pembrolizumab-related death secondary to myositis. Grades 3 or 4 immune-related events in the pembrolizumab group occurred at a low rate, including colitis (2% and 0.2%), hypophysitis (0.6% and 0%), and type 1 diabetes mellitus (1% and 0%).
Conclusion. Adjuvant pembrolizumab for patients with high-risk stage III melanoma significantly improved RFS compared with placebo and should be considered as an option for adjuvant therapy in this patient population.
Commentary
Prior to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, high-dose interferon alfa was the sole option for adjuvant therapy in high-risk melanoma. Although adjuvant interferon alfa is associated with improvements in disease-free survival [1], it is also associated with significant toxicity, including myelosuppression, neurologic adverse effects, and hepatotoxicity. The development of checkpoint inhibition represents an important advancement in the management of patients with melanoma. In the previously reported EORTC 18071 trial, Eggermont and colleagues demonstrated that adjuvant therapy with the CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab improved both RFS (41% vs. 30%) and OS (65% vs. 54%) at 5 years in patients with stage III melanoma [2]. In 2017, Weber and colleagues demonstrated superior RFS (70% vs. 60%) and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events with adjuvant nivolumab compared to ipilimumab in the CheckMate-238 trial [3].
In the current article, Eggermont and colleagues present the results of the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study comparing the use of the PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab to placebo in the adjuvant setting for stage III melanoma. This study demonstrated a 43% reduced risk of recurrence or death favoring the pembrolizumab group (HR 0.57; P < 0.001). The 12-month RFS was 75.4% in the pembrolizumab arm versus 61% in the placebo arm. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred more commonly in the pembrolizumab arm (14.7% vs. 3.4%), with approximately 7% of these patients experiencing a grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse event. The results of this study corroborate prior data on the efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors in melanoma. Also, the investigators assessed RFS based on patient’s PD-L1 status (positivity defined as TPS ≥ 1% ) as a co-primary endpoint, and found consistent efficacy regardless of PD-L1 expression, with a hazard ratio of 0.47 in the 116 patients who had no PD-L1 expression.
Although the results of this study demonstrate a significant increase in RFS associated with adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy, an OS benefit has not yet been demonstrated. As noted, the only adjuvant checkpoint inhibitor trial to demonstrate an OS advantage thus far is the EORTC 18071 study of ipilimumab. However, the toxicity profile of adjuvant ipilimumab makes it an unattractive option compared to the PD-1 inhibitors. Which of the PD-1 inhibitors should be the treatment of choice for adjuvant therapy remains unclear, although it is worth noting that only nivolumab was compared to the best alternate therapy, ipilimumab [3]. It is also important to note that EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 included patients with stage IIIA disease (N1a disease with at least 1 micrometastasis > 1 mm) or stage IIIB or IIIC without in-transit metastases, while CheckMate-238 did not include stage IIIA patients. Thus, for stage IIIA patients pembrolizumab remains the only PD-1 inhibitor with randomized data demonstrating a benefit.
Applications for Clinical Practice
The results from the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 study demonstrate a 43% reduction in the risk of progression or death with the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in patients with stage III melanoma. As of now, the only checkpoint inhibitor to demonstrate an improvement in OS is ipilimumab, and whether the RFS benefit of both pembrolizumab and nivolumab will translate into an OS benefit is yet to be demonstrated.
—Daniel Isaac, DO, MS
1. Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, et al. Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST 1684. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:7–17.
2. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1845–55.
3. Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1824–35.
1. Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, et al. Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST 1684. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:7–17.
2. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1845–55.
3. Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med 2017;377:1824–35.
Trifarotene cream for acne meets all endpoints in twin phase 3 trials
PARIS – A novel kinder, gentler topical retinoid met all of its primary and secondary endpoints in two identical phase 3 randomized trials totaling 2,420 patients with moderate acne vulgaris on both the face and trunk.
Trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g selectively targets the gamma retinoic acid receptor. This unique selectivity for just one of the three retinoic acid receptors results in less of the classic retinoid side effects – redness, scaling, dryness, stinging, burning – that can limit the clinical utility of existing retinoids. This was borne out by the high completion rates in trifarotene-treated participants in the two 12-week trials: 88.2% in the PERFECT 1 trial and 92.7% in PERFECT 2, compared with rates of 89.8% and 93.9% in vehicle-treated controls, Jerry K.L. Tan, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“Most adverse events involved local intolerance occurring at application sites and were mild and transient,” Dr. Tan, a dermatologist at the University of Western Ontario, Windsor, and head of Windsor Clinical Research, reported.
PERFECT 1 and 2 were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled, 12-week phase 3 trials. Of note, these were the first-ever large-scale randomized trials to simultaneously evaluate a topical therapy for treatment of both facial and truncal acne. This ambitious goal created some unique challenges, which Dr. Tan described.
Participants, all of whom had moderate acne vulgaris on the face and trunk, ranged in age from 9 to 58 years, with a mean age of 19 years. They were randomized to once-daily application of trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g or its vehicle in the evening.
Primary and secondary outcomes
One major efficacy endpoint on the face was achievement of Investigator Global Assessment success as defined by a score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, coupled with at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline to week 12. In PERFECT 1 and 2 this was achieved by 29.7% and 42.8% of trifarotene cream-treated patients, response rates significantly better than the 20% and 25.8% in vehicle-treated controls.
Another endpoint for facial therapy were the absolute reductions from baseline in facial inflammatory and noninflammatory acne lesions. The mean reduction in inflammatory lesion count in trifarotene-treated patients was 19.6% in PERFECT 1 and 24.6% in PERFECT 2, both significantly better than the mean 15.8% and 19.6% decreases in controls. Noninflammatory facial lesion counts dropped by 26.7% and 30.4% with trifarotene, versus 18.9% and 22.3% with vehicle.
The efficacy yardsticks utilized on the trunk were the same as on the face except that Physician Global Assessment was the terminology utilized in lieu of Investigator Global Assessment. Physician Global Assessment success on the trunk was achieved by 35.8% and 41.1% of trifarotene-treated patients in the two trials, as compared with 25.7% and 30.1% of controls.
The mean reductions in truncal inflammatory lesion count obtained with trifarotene cream were 22% and 26.1%, both significantly better than the 18.8% and 20.3% rates with vehicle.
Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study discontinuation occurred in 1.9% of trifarotene-treated patients in one trial and 1% in the other.
One audience member commented that the vehicle response rates looked too strong for that compound to be inert. Dr. Tan agreed. “The vehicle looks really good. One of the issues with vehicles is that many of them have to contain products to prevent decay, fermentation, and proliferation of yeast and bacteria. So I quite agree: I think many of our vehicles do have active ingredients,” he replied. “If you look at the topical dapsone trials, the vehicles look amazing.”
“The other possibility is that there’s what we call ‘investigator creep,’” the dermatologist continued. “It’s the notion that you have no idea what the patients are getting, but they look like maybe they’re getting better, so you grade it as better.”
Dr. Tan reported serving as an advisor and consultant to, speaker for, and recipient of research grants from Galderma, which sponsored the two phase 3 trials. The company is also developing trifarotene for the treatment of lamellar ichthyosis.
PARIS – A novel kinder, gentler topical retinoid met all of its primary and secondary endpoints in two identical phase 3 randomized trials totaling 2,420 patients with moderate acne vulgaris on both the face and trunk.
Trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g selectively targets the gamma retinoic acid receptor. This unique selectivity for just one of the three retinoic acid receptors results in less of the classic retinoid side effects – redness, scaling, dryness, stinging, burning – that can limit the clinical utility of existing retinoids. This was borne out by the high completion rates in trifarotene-treated participants in the two 12-week trials: 88.2% in the PERFECT 1 trial and 92.7% in PERFECT 2, compared with rates of 89.8% and 93.9% in vehicle-treated controls, Jerry K.L. Tan, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“Most adverse events involved local intolerance occurring at application sites and were mild and transient,” Dr. Tan, a dermatologist at the University of Western Ontario, Windsor, and head of Windsor Clinical Research, reported.
PERFECT 1 and 2 were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled, 12-week phase 3 trials. Of note, these were the first-ever large-scale randomized trials to simultaneously evaluate a topical therapy for treatment of both facial and truncal acne. This ambitious goal created some unique challenges, which Dr. Tan described.
Participants, all of whom had moderate acne vulgaris on the face and trunk, ranged in age from 9 to 58 years, with a mean age of 19 years. They were randomized to once-daily application of trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g or its vehicle in the evening.
Primary and secondary outcomes
One major efficacy endpoint on the face was achievement of Investigator Global Assessment success as defined by a score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, coupled with at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline to week 12. In PERFECT 1 and 2 this was achieved by 29.7% and 42.8% of trifarotene cream-treated patients, response rates significantly better than the 20% and 25.8% in vehicle-treated controls.
Another endpoint for facial therapy were the absolute reductions from baseline in facial inflammatory and noninflammatory acne lesions. The mean reduction in inflammatory lesion count in trifarotene-treated patients was 19.6% in PERFECT 1 and 24.6% in PERFECT 2, both significantly better than the mean 15.8% and 19.6% decreases in controls. Noninflammatory facial lesion counts dropped by 26.7% and 30.4% with trifarotene, versus 18.9% and 22.3% with vehicle.
The efficacy yardsticks utilized on the trunk were the same as on the face except that Physician Global Assessment was the terminology utilized in lieu of Investigator Global Assessment. Physician Global Assessment success on the trunk was achieved by 35.8% and 41.1% of trifarotene-treated patients in the two trials, as compared with 25.7% and 30.1% of controls.
The mean reductions in truncal inflammatory lesion count obtained with trifarotene cream were 22% and 26.1%, both significantly better than the 18.8% and 20.3% rates with vehicle.
Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study discontinuation occurred in 1.9% of trifarotene-treated patients in one trial and 1% in the other.
One audience member commented that the vehicle response rates looked too strong for that compound to be inert. Dr. Tan agreed. “The vehicle looks really good. One of the issues with vehicles is that many of them have to contain products to prevent decay, fermentation, and proliferation of yeast and bacteria. So I quite agree: I think many of our vehicles do have active ingredients,” he replied. “If you look at the topical dapsone trials, the vehicles look amazing.”
“The other possibility is that there’s what we call ‘investigator creep,’” the dermatologist continued. “It’s the notion that you have no idea what the patients are getting, but they look like maybe they’re getting better, so you grade it as better.”
Dr. Tan reported serving as an advisor and consultant to, speaker for, and recipient of research grants from Galderma, which sponsored the two phase 3 trials. The company is also developing trifarotene for the treatment of lamellar ichthyosis.
PARIS – A novel kinder, gentler topical retinoid met all of its primary and secondary endpoints in two identical phase 3 randomized trials totaling 2,420 patients with moderate acne vulgaris on both the face and trunk.
Trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g selectively targets the gamma retinoic acid receptor. This unique selectivity for just one of the three retinoic acid receptors results in less of the classic retinoid side effects – redness, scaling, dryness, stinging, burning – that can limit the clinical utility of existing retinoids. This was borne out by the high completion rates in trifarotene-treated participants in the two 12-week trials: 88.2% in the PERFECT 1 trial and 92.7% in PERFECT 2, compared with rates of 89.8% and 93.9% in vehicle-treated controls, Jerry K.L. Tan, MD, said at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“Most adverse events involved local intolerance occurring at application sites and were mild and transient,” Dr. Tan, a dermatologist at the University of Western Ontario, Windsor, and head of Windsor Clinical Research, reported.
PERFECT 1 and 2 were multicenter, double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled, 12-week phase 3 trials. Of note, these were the first-ever large-scale randomized trials to simultaneously evaluate a topical therapy for treatment of both facial and truncal acne. This ambitious goal created some unique challenges, which Dr. Tan described.
Participants, all of whom had moderate acne vulgaris on the face and trunk, ranged in age from 9 to 58 years, with a mean age of 19 years. They were randomized to once-daily application of trifarotene cream 50 mcg/g or its vehicle in the evening.
Primary and secondary outcomes
One major efficacy endpoint on the face was achievement of Investigator Global Assessment success as defined by a score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or almost clear, coupled with at least a 2-grade improvement from baseline to week 12. In PERFECT 1 and 2 this was achieved by 29.7% and 42.8% of trifarotene cream-treated patients, response rates significantly better than the 20% and 25.8% in vehicle-treated controls.
Another endpoint for facial therapy were the absolute reductions from baseline in facial inflammatory and noninflammatory acne lesions. The mean reduction in inflammatory lesion count in trifarotene-treated patients was 19.6% in PERFECT 1 and 24.6% in PERFECT 2, both significantly better than the mean 15.8% and 19.6% decreases in controls. Noninflammatory facial lesion counts dropped by 26.7% and 30.4% with trifarotene, versus 18.9% and 22.3% with vehicle.
The efficacy yardsticks utilized on the trunk were the same as on the face except that Physician Global Assessment was the terminology utilized in lieu of Investigator Global Assessment. Physician Global Assessment success on the trunk was achieved by 35.8% and 41.1% of trifarotene-treated patients in the two trials, as compared with 25.7% and 30.1% of controls.
The mean reductions in truncal inflammatory lesion count obtained with trifarotene cream were 22% and 26.1%, both significantly better than the 18.8% and 20.3% rates with vehicle.
Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study discontinuation occurred in 1.9% of trifarotene-treated patients in one trial and 1% in the other.
One audience member commented that the vehicle response rates looked too strong for that compound to be inert. Dr. Tan agreed. “The vehicle looks really good. One of the issues with vehicles is that many of them have to contain products to prevent decay, fermentation, and proliferation of yeast and bacteria. So I quite agree: I think many of our vehicles do have active ingredients,” he replied. “If you look at the topical dapsone trials, the vehicles look amazing.”
“The other possibility is that there’s what we call ‘investigator creep,’” the dermatologist continued. “It’s the notion that you have no idea what the patients are getting, but they look like maybe they’re getting better, so you grade it as better.”
Dr. Tan reported serving as an advisor and consultant to, speaker for, and recipient of research grants from Galderma, which sponsored the two phase 3 trials. The company is also developing trifarotene for the treatment of lamellar ichthyosis.
REPORTING FROM THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study discontinuation occurred in 1.9% of trifarotene cream–treated patients in one trial and 1% in the other.
Study details: PERFECT 1 and PERFECT 2 were identically designed 12-week phase 3 randomized trials including 2,420 patients with moderate facial and truncal acne.
Disclosures: The study presenter reported serving as an advisor, consultant to, speaker for, and recipient of research grants from Galderma, which sponsored the two phase 3 trials.
Brown spot on cheek
The FP noted that the patient had a dominant brown patch on her right cheek that was larger and darker than the other light brown spots found on her face. Fortunately, he had a dermatoscope and examined the spot closely, finding only features of a benign solar lentigo. There were no suspicious features for melanoma.
The FP gave the patient a choice between a broad shave biopsy that day, or having the lesion monitored (safe with a flat lesion) using photography and dermoscopy.
The patient didn’t want a biopsy on her face and was willing to have the area monitored. The clinical and dermoscopic photographs were taken and stored. The patient was given a follow-up appointment in 4 to 6 months and instructions to avoid the sun as much as possible. She was also told to use sunscreen and hats when out in the sun.
After 5 months, the previous photos were compared with the new photos on a computer screen and there were no changes. Everyone was reassured, and the patient indicated that she was being careful about her sun exposure.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Mayeaux, EJ, Usatine, R. Lentigo maligna. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:981-984.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
The FP noted that the patient had a dominant brown patch on her right cheek that was larger and darker than the other light brown spots found on her face. Fortunately, he had a dermatoscope and examined the spot closely, finding only features of a benign solar lentigo. There were no suspicious features for melanoma.
The FP gave the patient a choice between a broad shave biopsy that day, or having the lesion monitored (safe with a flat lesion) using photography and dermoscopy.
The patient didn’t want a biopsy on her face and was willing to have the area monitored. The clinical and dermoscopic photographs were taken and stored. The patient was given a follow-up appointment in 4 to 6 months and instructions to avoid the sun as much as possible. She was also told to use sunscreen and hats when out in the sun.
After 5 months, the previous photos were compared with the new photos on a computer screen and there were no changes. Everyone was reassured, and the patient indicated that she was being careful about her sun exposure.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Mayeaux, EJ, Usatine, R. Lentigo maligna. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:981-984.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
The FP noted that the patient had a dominant brown patch on her right cheek that was larger and darker than the other light brown spots found on her face. Fortunately, he had a dermatoscope and examined the spot closely, finding only features of a benign solar lentigo. There were no suspicious features for melanoma.
The FP gave the patient a choice between a broad shave biopsy that day, or having the lesion monitored (safe with a flat lesion) using photography and dermoscopy.
The patient didn’t want a biopsy on her face and was willing to have the area monitored. The clinical and dermoscopic photographs were taken and stored. The patient was given a follow-up appointment in 4 to 6 months and instructions to avoid the sun as much as possible. She was also told to use sunscreen and hats when out in the sun.
After 5 months, the previous photos were compared with the new photos on a computer screen and there were no changes. Everyone was reassured, and the patient indicated that she was being careful about her sun exposure.
Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Mayeaux, EJ, Usatine, R. Lentigo maligna. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:981-984.
To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/.
You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com.
