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