Atopic DermatitisPhase 3NCT02755649
A Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Participants With Severe Atopic Dermatitis (AD) That Are Not Controlled With Oral Cyclosporine A (CSA) or for Those Who Cannot Take Oral CSA Because it is Not Medically Advisable
A Phase 3 study testing Dupilumab in people with Atopic Dermatitis, run by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals at 73 sites in 10 countries.
Trial summary
The main objective of the trial is to evaluate the efficacy of 2 dose regimens of dupilumab compared to placebo, administered with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS), in adult patients with severe AD who are not adequately controlled with, or are intolerant to, oral Cyclosporine A (CSA), or when this treatment… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Atopic Dermatitis
- What is being tested?
- Dupilumab
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 325 participants
- Where
- 73 sitesin 10 countries
- Study dates
- 31 Jan 2016to 31 Mar 2017
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Male or female, 18 years or older
- Severe, Chronic AD, (according to American Academy of Dermatology Consensus Criteria [Eichenfield 2014]) for whom treatment with potent TCS is indicated
- EASI score ≥20 at the screening and baseline visits
- IGA score ≥3 (on the 0 to 4 IGA scale) at the screening and baseline visits
- ≥10% body surface area (BSA) of AD involvement at the screening and baseline visits
- Documented recent history (within 6 months before the screening visit) of inadequate response to treatment with TCS
Show all 18Show fewer
- Have applied a stable dose of topical emollient (moisturizer) twice daily for at least the 7 consecutive days immediately before the baseline visit
- Documented history by a physician of either:
- No prior CSA exposure and not currently a candidate for CSA treatment due to:
- medical contraindications (eg, uncontrolled hypertension on medication), or
- use of prohibited concomitant medications (eg, statins, digoxin, macrolide, antibiotics, barbiturates, anti-seizure, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, diuretics, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, St John's Wort, etc), or
- increased susceptibility to CSA-induced renal damage (elevated creatinine) and liver damage (elevated function tests), or
- increased risk of serious infections, or
- hypersensitivity to CSA active substance or excipients OR
- Previously exposed to CSA, and CSA treatment should not be continued or restarted due to:
- intolerance and/or unacceptable toxicity (eg, elevated creatinine, elevated liver function tests, uncontrolled hypertension, paraesthesia, headache, nausea, hypertrichosis, etc), or
- inadequate response to CSA (defined as flare of AD on CSA tapering after a maximum of 6 weeks of high dose [5 mg/kg/day] to maintenance dose [2 to 3 mg/kg/day] or a flare after a minimum of 3 months on maintenance dose). Flare is defined as increase in signs and/or symptoms leading to escalation of therapy, which can be an increase in dose, a switch to a higher-potency class of TCS, or the start of another systemic non-steroidal immunosuppressive drug or
- requirement for CSA at doses >5 mg/kg/day, or duration beyond those specified in the prescribing information (>1 year)
Who cannot join
- Participation in a prior dupilumab clinical study
- Treatment with an investigational drug within 8 weeks or within 5 half-lives (if known), whichever is longer, before the screening visit
- Hypersensitivity and/or intolerance to corticosteroids or to any other ingredients contained in the TCS product used in the study
- Systemic CSA, systemic corticosteroids, or phototherapy within 4 weeks prior to screening, and azathioprine (AZA), methotrexate (MTX), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors within 8 weeks prior to screening
- Treatment with TCI within 1 week before the screening visit
- Treatment with biologics as follows:
Show all 19Show fewer
- Any cell-depleting agents including but not limited to rituximab: within 6 months before the screening visit, or until lymphocyte count returns to normal, whichever is longer
- Other biologics: within 5 half-lives (if known) or 16 weeks prior to the screening visit, whichever is longer
- Regular use (more than 2 visits per week) of a tanning booth/parlor within 4 weeks of the screening visit
- Treatment with a live (attenuated) vaccine within 12 weeks before the screening
- Active chronic or acute infection requiring treatment with systemic antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics, antiprotozoals, or antifungals within 2 weeks before the screening or superficial skin infections within 1 week before the screening visit. NOTE: patients may be rescreened no sooner than 2 weeks after infection resolves
- Known or suspected history of immunosuppression, including history of invasive opportunistic infections (eg, tuberculosis [TB], histoplasmosis, Listeriosis, coccidioidomycosis, pneumocystosis, aspergillosis) despite infection resolution; or unusually frequent, recurrent, or prolonged infections, per investigator judgment
- Presence of any 1 of the following TB criteria:
- A positive tuberculin skin test at the screening visit
- A positive blood QuantiFERON®-TB or T-Spot test at the screening visit
- Chest x-ray (posterior-anterior and lateral views) at screening or within 3 months before the screening visit (radiology report must be available) with results consistent with prior TB infection (including but not limited to apical scarring, apical fibrosis, or multiple calcified granuloma). This does not include non-caseating granulomata.
- NOTE: Any of these 3 TB tests will be performed on a country-by-country basis according to local guidelines only if required by regulatory authorities or ethics boards.
- History of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or positive HIV serology at screening
- Positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B core antibody (HBc Ab), or hepatitis C antibody (HCV Ab) at the screening visit
Trial locations and contacts
73 sites in 10 countries.
73 sites in 10 countries
Germany30 sites
Site 1
Berlin
Site 2
Berlin
Site 3
Berlin
Site 4
Berlin
Site 5
Berlin
Site 6
Berlin
Site 7
Berlin
Study site
Bochum
Site 1
Dresden
Site 2
Dresden
Site 3
Dresden
Study site
Erlangen
Study site
Frankfurt am Main
Site 1
Hamburg
Site 2
Hamburg
Study site
Heidelberg
Study site
Kiel
Study site
Langenau
Study site
Leipzig
Study site
Lübeck
Study site
Magdeburg
Study site
Mahlow
Study site
Mainz
Site 1
München
Site 2
München
Study site
Münster
Study site
Osnabrück
Study site
Selters
Study site
Stuttgart
Study site
Tübingen
Poland21 sites
Site 1
Bialystok
Site 1
Bydgoszcz
Site 2
Bydgoszcz
Study site
Gdansk
Site 1
Katowice
Site 2
Katowice
Site 3
Katowice
Study site
Kielce
Site 1
Krakow
Site 2
Krakow
Site 1
Lodz
Site 2
Lodz
Site 3
Lodz
Study site
Lublin
Study site
Szczecin
Site 1
Warsaw
Site 2
Warsaw
Study site
Warsaw
Site 1
Wroclaw
Site 2
Wroclaw
Study site
Zgierz
Russia5 sites
Study site
Chelyabinsk
Study site
Kazan'
Study site
Moscow
Study site
Ryazan
Study site
Saint Petersburg
United Kingdom5 sites
Site 1
London
Site 2
London
Study site
Oxford
Study site
Portsmouth
Study site
Sheffield
About this study
Official title: A Phase 3 Study Investigating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Dupilumab Administered to Adult Patients With Severe Atopic Dermatitis Who Are Not Adequately Controlled With or Are Intolerant to Oral Cyclosporine A, or When This Treatment is Not Medically Advisable
The main objective of the trial is to evaluate the efficacy of 2 dose regimens of dupilumab compared to placebo, administered with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS), in adult patients with severe AD who are not adequately controlled with, or are intolerant to, oral Cyclosporine A (CSA), or when this treatment is currently not medically advisable.
The secondary objective is to assess the safety and tolerability of 2 dose regimens of dupilumab compared to placebo, administered with concomitant TCS, in adult patients with severe AD who are not adequately controlled with, or are intolerant to, oral CSA, or when this treatment is currently not medically advisable.
- Conditions
- Atopic Dermatitis
- Being tested
- Dupilumab, Matching Placebo
- Medical subject headings
- Dermatitis, Atopic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
DupilumabDrug
Also called DUPIXENT®, REGN668, SAR231893
Matching PlaceboDrug
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo QW + TCS | Experimental | Participants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab matching placebo once per week (QW) (following two SC injections on day 1) from Week 1 to Week 15. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). Receives: Drug: Matching Placebo |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q2W + TCS | Experimental | Participants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) from Week 1 to Week 15 (following a SC loading dose of 600 mg on day 1). During weeks in which dupilumab was not administered, participants received matching placebo. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). Receives: Drug: Dupilumab |
| Dupilumab 300 mg QW + TCS | Experimental | Participants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab 300 mg once per week (QW) (following an SC loading dose of 600 mg on day 1) from Week 1 to Week 15. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). Receives: Drug: Dupilumab |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75 (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI score is used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the Full Analysis Set (FAS) which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Secondary outcomes (18)
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16
The EASI score is used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "number of participants analyzed" = participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at Week 16
The Pruritus NRS is an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 - 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants Analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score at Week 16
The SCORAD is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD. Extent and intensity of eczema as well as subjective signs (insomnia, etc.) are assessed and scored. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS From Baseline to Week 16
Pruritus NRS is an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would a participant rate his itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 - 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). Participants achieving a reduction of ≥4 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of participants analyzed" = participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline to Week 16
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement With Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16
BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body (the possible highest score for each region was: head and neck [9%], anterior trunk [18%], back [18%], upper limbs [18%], lower limbs [36%], and genitals [1%]). It was reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "number of participants analyzed" = participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 4 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 16
IGA is an assessment scale used to determine severity of AD and clinical response to treatment on a 5 point scale (0 = clear; 1 = almost clear; 2 = mild; 3 = moderate; 4 = severe) based on erythema and papulation/infiltration. Therapeutic response is an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with IGA score of "0" or "1" and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points at Week 16 were reported. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 16
The DLQI is a 10-item, validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials to assess the impact of AD disease symptoms and treatment on quality of life (QOL). The 10 questions assessed QOL over the past week, with an overall scoring of 0 (absent disease) to 30 (severe disease); a high score is indicative of a poor QOL. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants Analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16
The POEM is a 7-item questionnaire that assesses disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) with a scoring system of 0 (absent disease) to 28 (severe disease) (high score indicative of poor quality of life [QOL]). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants Analyzed" = participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 for Participants With Prior CSA Use
The EASI score is used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants Analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Use During Treatment Period
The type, amount, frequency, and potency of topical products used during the study were recorded at home by participants in a medication diary. Participants returned TCS tubes at each clinic visit up until week 16, and these tubes were weighed by the site staff to determine the actual amount of TCS used. During the 16-week placebo-controlled study treatment period, medium-potency TCS dosing frequency was symptom-based (IGA score) adjusted every 4 weeks per the protocol-specified tapering algorithm. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number Analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline to week 16
Change From Baseline in Total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score at Week 16
The HADS is a 14-item scale, with 7 items relating to anxiety and 7 relating to depression. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0-3, for possible scores ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 21 (severe symptoms) for each of the anxiety and depression subscales. Recommended cut-off scores for both subscales to identify psychiatric distress are: 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression. Scores less than 7 do not indicate psychiatric distress. Total score is the sum of the two sub-scores.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants Achieving SCORAD 50 (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The SCORAD is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD. Extent and intensity of eczema as well as subjective signs (insomnia, etc.) are assessed and scored. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in the Total Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) at Week 16 (Erythema, Infiltration/ Papulation, Excoriations, Lichenification)
Individual components of the AD lesions (erythema, infiltration/ papulation, excoriations, and lichenification) were rated globally (each assessed for the whole body, not by anatomical region) on a 4-point scale (0= none, 1= mild, 2= moderate and 3= severe) using the EASI severity grading criteria. Total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 12 (severe disease). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Full Analysis Set (FAS) included all randomized. Here "Number of Participants Analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 2
Pruritus NRS is an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours (for maximum itch intensity on a scale of 0 - 10 [0 = no itch; 10 = worst itch imaginable]). The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the FAS. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized). Here "Number of Participants analyzed" = Participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline, Week 2
Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) From Baseline Through Treatment Period
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug to the last study dose (Week 16). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Safety analysis set (SAF) included all randomized participants who received any study drug; it was based on the treatment received (as treated).
Measured: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Treatment Period
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug to the last study dose (Week 16). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. SAF included all randomized participants who received any study drug; it was based on the treatment received (as treated).
Measured: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Leading to Treatment Discontinuation Through Treatment Period
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug to the last study dose (Week 16). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. SAF included all randomized participants who received any study drug; it was based on the treatment received (as treated).
Measured: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Through Treatment Period
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as AEs that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug to the last study dose (Week 16). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. SAF included all randomized participants who received any study drug; it was based on the treatment received (as treated).
Measured: Baseline to Week 16
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Apr 2016 (estimated)
- Study start31 Jan 2016
- Primary completion4 Jan 2017
- Study completion31 Mar 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Atopic DermatitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Regeneron PharmaceuticalsThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 325 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Sanofi
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Clinical Trial Management, Study director, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02755649
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R668-AD-1424
- Status last verified
- Aug 2020
- First submitted
- 2 Mar 2016
- Last updated
- 20 Aug 2020
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Silverberg JI, Lynde CW, Abuabara K, Patruno C, de Benedetto A, Zhang H, Thomas RB, Bego-Le-Bagousse G, Khokhar FA, Vakil J, Marco AR, Levit NA. Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab Maintained in Adults >/= 60 Years of Age with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Analysis of Pooled Data from Four Randomized Clinical Trials. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2023 May;24(3):469-483. doi: 10.1007/s40257-022-00754-4. Epub 2023 Feb 20.
PubMed 36808602Paller AS, Silverberg JI, Cork MJ, Guttman-Yassky E, Lockshin B, Irvine AD, Kim MB, Kabashima K, Chen Z, Lu Y, Bansal A, Rossi AB, Shabbir A. Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Patients With Erythrodermic Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of 6 Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Dermatol. 2023 Mar 1;159(3):255-266. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.6192.
PubMed 36723913Mickevicius T, Pink AE, Bhogal M, O'Brart D, Robbie SJ. Dupilumab-Induced, Tralokinumab-Induced, and Belantamab Mafodotin-Induced Adverse Ocular Events-Incidence, Etiology, and Management. Cornea. 2023 Apr 1;42(4):507-519. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000003162. Epub 2022 Dec 15.
PubMed 36525340Griffiths C, de Bruin-Weller M, Deleuran M, Fargnoli MC, Staumont-Salle D, Hong CH, Sanchez-Carazo J, Foley P, Seo SJ, Msihid J, Chen Z, Cyr SL, Rossi AB. Dupilumab in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis and Prior Use of Systemic Non-Steroidal Immunosuppressants: Analysis of Four Phase 3 Trials. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2021 Aug;11(4):1357-1372. doi: 10.1007/s13555-021-00558-0. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
PubMed 34142350Boguniewicz M, Beck LA, Sher L, Guttman-Yassky E, Thaci D, Blauvelt A, Worm M, Corren J, Soong W, Lio P, Rossi AB, Lu Y, Chao J, Eckert L, Gadkari A, Hultsch T, Ruddy M, Mannent LP, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Chen Z, Ardeleanu M. Dupilumab Improves Asthma and Sinonasal Outcomes in Adults with Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Mar;9(3):1212-1223.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.12.059. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
PubMed 33453450Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Guttman-Yassky E, Cork MJ, de Bruin-Weller M, Yosipovitch G, Eckert L, Chen Z, Ardeleanu M, Shumel B, Hultsch T, Rossi AB, Hamilton JD, Orengo JM, Ruddy M, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Gadkari A. Dupilumab Significantly Modulates Pain and Discomfort in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of 5 Randomized Clinical Trials. Dermatitis. 2021 Oct 1;32(1S):S81-S91. doi: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000698.
PubMed 33165005Eichenfield LF, Bieber T, Beck LA, Simpson EL, Thaci D, de Bruin-Weller M, Deleuran M, Silverberg JI, Ferrandiz C, Folster-Holst R, Chen Z, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Akinlade B, Yancopoulos GD, Ardeleanu M. Infections in Dupilumab Clinical Trials in Atopic Dermatitis: A Comprehensive Pooled Analysis. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2019 Jun;20(3):443-456. doi: 10.1007/s40257-019-00445-7.
PubMed 31066001de Bruin-Weller M, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Shumel B. Could conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab be caused by colonization with Demodex and increased interleukin-17 levels?: reply from the authors. Br J Dermatol. 2018 May;178(5):1220-1221. doi: 10.1111/bjd.16348. Epub 2018 Mar 2. No abstract available.
PubMed 29336016
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Aug 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Phase 3 Study Investigating the Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Dupilumab Administered to Adult Patients With Severe Atopic Dermatitis Who Are Not Adequately Controlled With or Are Intolerant to Oral Cyclosporine A, or When This Treatment is Not Medically Advisable
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02755649
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R668-AD-1424
- Conditions
- Atopic Dermatitis
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 325 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Regeneron PharmaceuticalsIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Sanofi
- Study start
- 31 Jan 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 4 Jan 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Mar 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Apr 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 20 Aug 2020
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The main objective of the trial is to evaluate the efficacy of 2 dose regimens of dupilumab compared to placebo, administered with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS), in adult patients with severe AD who are not adequately controlled with, or are intolerant to, oral Cyclosporine A (CSA), or when this treatment is currently not medically advisable.
The secondary objective is to assess the safety and tolerability of 2 dose regimens of dupilumab compared to placebo, administered with concomitant TCS, in adult patients with severe AD who are not adequately controlled with, or are intolerant to, oral CSA, or when this treatment is currently not medically advisable.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo QW + TCS | Experimental | Drug: Matching PlaceboParticipants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab matching placebo once per week (QW) (following two SC injections on day 1) from Week 1 to Week 15. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q2W + TCS | Experimental | Drug: DupilumabParticipants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) from Week 1 to Week 15 (following a SC loading dose of 600 mg on day 1). During weeks in which dupilumab was not administered, participants received matching placebo. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). |
| Dupilumab 300 mg QW + TCS | Experimental | Drug: DupilumabParticipants received one subcutaneous (SC) injection of dupilumab 300 mg once per week (QW) (following an SC loading dose of 600 mg on day 1) from Week 1 to Week 15. All participants were required to undergo treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) using a standardized regimen that continued through the end of the treatment period (Week 16). Starting at week 16, participants could roll over into an open-label extension (OLE) study (R668-AD-1225), if they were considered eligible. Participants who did not enter the OLE study were followed for up to an additional 12 weeks for safety ([Week 28, end of study (EOS) period]). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (18 listed)
- Male or female, 18 years or older
- Severe, Chronic AD, (according to American Academy of Dermatology Consensus Criteria [Eichenfield 2014]) for whom treatment with potent TCS is indicated
- EASI score ≥20 at the screening and baseline visits
- IGA score ≥3 (on the 0 to 4 IGA scale) at the screening and baseline visits
- ≥10% body surface area (BSA) of AD involvement at the screening and baseline visits
Key exclusion criteria (19 listed)
- Participation in a prior dupilumab clinical study
- Treatment with an investigational drug within 8 weeks or within 5 half-lives (if known), whichever is longer, before the screening visit
- Hypersensitivity and/or intolerance to corticosteroids or to any other ingredients contained in the TCS product used in the study
- Systemic CSA, systemic corticosteroids, or phototherapy within 4 weeks prior to screening, and azathioprine (AZA), methotrexate (MTX), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors within 8 weeks prior to screening
- Treatment with TCI within 1 week before the screening visit
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| DupilumabAlso: DUPIXENT®, REGN668, SAR231893 | Drug | Dupilumab 300 mg Q2W + TCS, Dupilumab 300 mg QW + TCS |
| Matching Placebo | Drug | Placebo QW + TCS |
Primary outcome
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75 (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
The EASI score is used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measured erythema, infiltration, excoriation and lichenification on 4 anatomic regions of the body: head, trunk, upper and lower extremities. The total EASI score ranges from 0 (minimum) to 72 (maximum) points, with the higher scores reflecting the worse severity of AD. EASI-75 responders were the participants who achieved ≥75% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. The analysis population for efficacy analyses is the Full Analysis Set (FAS) which included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated (as randomized).
18 secondary outcomes
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS From Baseline to Week 16
Time frame: Baseline to Week 16
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Involvement With Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 4 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 for Participants With Prior CSA Use
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Change From Baseline in Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Use During Treatment Period
Time frame: Baseline to week 16
Change From Baseline in Total Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Score at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percentage of Participants Achieving SCORAD 50 (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in the Total Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) at Week 16 (Erythema, Infiltration/ Papulation, Excoriations, Lichenification)
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score at Week 2
Time frame: Baseline, Week 2
Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) From Baseline Through Treatment Period
Time frame: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Treatment Period
Time frame: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Leading to Treatment Discontinuation Through Treatment Period
Time frame: Baseline to Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Through Treatment Period
Time frame: Baseline to Week 16
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Aug 2020.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36808602Silverberg JI, Lynde CW, Abuabara K, Patruno C, de Benedetto A, Zhang H, Thomas RB, Bego-Le-Bagousse G, Khokhar FA, Vakil J, Marco AR, Levit NA. Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab Maintained in Adults >/= 60 Years of Age with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Analysis of Pooled Data from Four Randomized Clinical Trials. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2023 May;24(3):469-483. doi: 10.1007/s40257-022-00754-4. Epub 2023 Feb 20.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36723913Paller AS, Silverberg JI, Cork MJ, Guttman-Yassky E, Lockshin B, Irvine AD, Kim MB, Kabashima K, Chen Z, Lu Y, Bansal A, Rossi AB, Shabbir A. Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Patients With Erythrodermic Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of 6 Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Dermatol. 2023 Mar 1;159(3):255-266. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.6192.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36525340Mickevicius T, Pink AE, Bhogal M, O'Brart D, Robbie SJ. Dupilumab-Induced, Tralokinumab-Induced, and Belantamab Mafodotin-Induced Adverse Ocular Events-Incidence, Etiology, and Management. Cornea. 2023 Apr 1;42(4):507-519. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000003162. Epub 2022 Dec 15.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 34142350Griffiths C, de Bruin-Weller M, Deleuran M, Fargnoli MC, Staumont-Salle D, Hong CH, Sanchez-Carazo J, Foley P, Seo SJ, Msihid J, Chen Z, Cyr SL, Rossi AB. Dupilumab in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis and Prior Use of Systemic Non-Steroidal Immunosuppressants: Analysis of Four Phase 3 Trials. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2021 Aug;11(4):1357-1372. doi: 10.1007/s13555-021-00558-0. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33453450Boguniewicz M, Beck LA, Sher L, Guttman-Yassky E, Thaci D, Blauvelt A, Worm M, Corren J, Soong W, Lio P, Rossi AB, Lu Y, Chao J, Eckert L, Gadkari A, Hultsch T, Ruddy M, Mannent LP, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Chen Z, Ardeleanu M. Dupilumab Improves Asthma and Sinonasal Outcomes in Adults with Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Mar;9(3):1212-1223.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.12.059. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33165005Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Guttman-Yassky E, Cork MJ, de Bruin-Weller M, Yosipovitch G, Eckert L, Chen Z, Ardeleanu M, Shumel B, Hultsch T, Rossi AB, Hamilton JD, Orengo JM, Ruddy M, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Gadkari A. Dupilumab Significantly Modulates Pain and Discomfort in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of 5 Randomized Clinical Trials. Dermatitis. 2021 Oct 1;32(1S):S81-S91. doi: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000698.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31066001Eichenfield LF, Bieber T, Beck LA, Simpson EL, Thaci D, de Bruin-Weller M, Deleuran M, Silverberg JI, Ferrandiz C, Folster-Holst R, Chen Z, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Akinlade B, Yancopoulos GD, Ardeleanu M. Infections in Dupilumab Clinical Trials in Atopic Dermatitis: A Comprehensive Pooled Analysis. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2019 Jun;20(3):443-456. doi: 10.1007/s40257-019-00445-7.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29336016de Bruin-Weller M, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Shumel B. Could conjunctivitis in patients with atopic dermatitis treated with dupilumab be caused by colonization with Demodex and increased interleukin-17 levels?: reply from the authors. Br J Dermatol. 2018 May;178(5):1220-1221. doi: 10.1111/bjd.16348. Epub 2018 Mar 2. No abstract available.
Related trials for Atopic Dermatitis
RecruitingObservational study
Blood, Urine, and Tissue Collection for Cutaneous Lymphoma, Eczema, and Atopic Dermatitis Research
Cutaneous T-cell Lymphoma, Sezary Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 2
Effects of Treatments on Atopic Dermatitis
Eczema, Dermatitis
RecruitingPhase 1
Evaluating the Safety and Tolerability of Baricitinib in Patients With Job Syndrome With Lupus-Like Disease and/or Atopic Dermatitis
Hyper IgE Syndrome From STAT3 Mutation, Job s Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Learn About the Study Medicine Called Tilrekimig in People With Moderate-to Severe Eczema
Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Clinical Trial Management study director
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
73 sites in 10 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Dupilumab in people with Atopic Dermatitis, run by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals at 73 sites in 10 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 18 inclusion and 19 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Aug 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 73 sites in Germany, Poland, Russia, United Kingdom, Belgium and 5 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 20 Aug 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75 (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 (time frame: Baseline, Week 16). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02755649, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 20 Aug 2020; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.