Pimecrolimus cream 1% for treatment of vulvar lichen simplex chronicus: an open-label, preliminary trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate efficacy and safety of pimecrolimus cream 1% twice daily for treatment of vulvar lichen simplex chronicus (LSC). METHODS: Patients in this 12-week, open-label study had biopsy-proven vulvar LSC. Inclusion criteria were patient-reported Visual Analog Scale for Pruritus Relief > or = 3 (VAS-PR, 0 cm = no itching to 10 cm = severe itching) and Investigator's Global Assessment > or = 2 (IGA, 0 = no disease to 3 = severe disease). Safety was evaluated by adverse event reports and pimecrolimus blood level measurements. RESULTS: Twelve women aged 25-53 years were enrolled. The median pruritus score (VAS-PR) decreased from 6 (min. 4.9, max. 9.0) at baseline to 0 cm at week 4 (max. 4.2), week 8 (max. 3.1) and week 12 (max. 2.1). Seven patients reported complete resolution of pruritus by week 4. Median IGA decreased from 2.5 (min. 2, max. 3) at baseline to 0 (min. 0, max. 2) at week 12. Erythema, excoriation, and lichenification improved for all patients. Pimecrolimus blood concentration for all samples was below the limit of quantification, 0.3 ng/ml. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory study, signs and symptoms of vulvar LSC improved for all women and pimecrolimus cream showed a favorable safety profile. Larger prospective studies are needed to further evaluate pimecrolimus for treatment of vulvar LSC.

Retrospective analysis of pimecrolimus cream 1% for treatment of facial vitiligo.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the effectiveness of pimecrolimus cream 1% used twice daily (BID) for the treatment of facial vitiligo. METHODS: Patients who had used pimecrolimus cream 1% monotherapy BID for at least 3 months and who had photographs taken at baseline and after initiation of therapy were analyzed in a retrospective study. The total affected surface area (cm2) of facial vitiligo in the baseline and follow-up photographs was compared. The extent of facial depigmentation was scored using a 7-point scale (0 = no disease to 6 = 100% involvement). RESULTS: Eight patients met study entry criteria. Mean time from initiation of treatment to the final follow-up visit was 11 months (SD +/- 7.5 months). Mean affected surface area at baseline and follow-up were 79.40 cm2 and 17.96 cm2, respectively, (P = .012) with a mean percent improvement 72.5% (SD +/- 20.4%). Mean depigmentation score decreased from 2.8 at baseline to 1.4 at follow-up. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Pimecrolimus cream 1% may be a viable alternative to current therapies for the treatment of facial vitiligo.

An exploratory study to evaluate the efficacy of pimecrolimus cream 1% for the treatment of pityriasis alba.

BACKGROUND: Use of topical corticosteroids for the treatment of pityriasis alba is limited by their potential side-effects, such as skin atrophy especially with long-term use on the face. Pimecrolimus cream 1% is a topical calcineurin inhibitor that has anti-inflammatory properties, lacks the cutaneous side-effects associated with steroids, and provide a potential benefit for the treatment of pityriasis alba. METHODS: This 10-patient, prospective, single-arm, open-label, single-center, 12-week, investigator-initiated proof of concept study assessed the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptance of pimecrolimus cream 1% twice daily. In addition to pimecrolimus cream, patients used facial emollient containing SPF 15 sunscreen and mild soap-free cleanser. Efficacy assessments were Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) of disease severity and evaluation of uneven skin color, scaling, eczema, follicular keratosis, and pruritus. All efficacy assessments were reported on a 4-point scale (0 = none to 3 = severe). RESULTS: Of the 10 patients enrolled (aged: 12-35 years), all had intensive sun-exposure, 90% had skin type IV-V, and 80% completed the 12-week treatment. At baseline, mean IGA was 1.20 (mild-moderate), uneven skin color was 2.3 (moderate-severe) and scaling was 1.2 (mild). IGA decreased to 0.25 by week 12, uneven skin color improved by week 3 with near complete resolution by week 12 (mean = 0.38) and scaling resolved at week 3. Pruritus, eczema, and follicular keratosis remained at low levels from baseline throughout the course of the study. Patients consistently reported satisfaction with the treatment ("satisfied" or "very satisfied"). No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Pimecrolimus cream 1% may represent an alternative for the treatment of pityriasis alba.

Results of a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled efficacy trial of pimecrolimus cream 1% for the treatment of moderate to severe facial seborrheic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Seborrheic dermatitis is commonly treated with anti-inflammatory products, including topical corticosteroids. Pimecrolimus cream 1% also exerts anti-inflammatory activity by inhibiting T-cell cytokine production. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of twice-daily pimecrolimus for treatment of moderate to severe facial seborrheic dermatitis. METHODS: This double-blind, vehicle-controlled, 4-week trial randomized patients with seborrheic dermatitis to pimecrolimus or vehicle (1:1). Clinical assessments (erythema [0-3] and scaling [0-3] combined for a total area score [0-6]) were performed at weeks 0, 2, and 4. Inclusion criteria included total area score 4 or greater and erythema 2 or greater. The prespecified primary variable, change from baseline in total area score at week 4, was analyzed using a two-sample t test for intent-to-treat and per protocol populations. RESULTS: In all, 96 adults of mean age 59.6 years, 88.5% male, were randomized (n = 47 pimecrolimus; 49 vehicle). At week 4, the mean change from baseline in total area score was 3.7 versus 3.3 for pimecrolimus and vehicle groups, respectively (intent-to-treat: P = .1913; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference [-0.195, 0.961]). Per protocol analysis (n = 41 pimecrolimus; 46 vehicle) indicated a significant difference between groups (mean change 3.9 pimecrolimus vs 3.2 vehicle; P = .0156; CI [0.129, 1.197]). The superiority of pimecrolimus was observed as early as week 2 (intent-to-treat: P = .0062; CI [0.132, 0.777]; per protocol: P = .0012; CI [0.410, 1.593]). No drug-related serious adverse events occurred. The most frequent drug-related adverse events were local, mild, and transient (pimecrolimus = 26%; vehicle = 12%). LIMITATIONS: Generalizability is limited by the elderly male study population. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that pimecrolimus cream 1% is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for moderate to severe facial seborrheic dermatitis.

Renal effects of etoricoxib and comparator nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Based on the experience with selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors, including rofecoxib, valdecoxib, and celecoxib, it was anticipated that etoricoxib, a new selective COX-2 inhibitor, would display mechanism-based, dose-dependent renal adverse effects (AEs) similar to those observed with nonselective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in long-term treatment. OBJECTIVE: The present analysis examined pooled safety data from the etoricoxib clinical development program with the aim of comparing the renal AE profiles of etoricoxib 60, 90, and 120 mg/d with those of approved therapeutic dosages of the comparator nonselective NSAIDs, naproxen 1000 mg/d and ibuprofen 2400 mg/d, and with that of placebo. METHODS: The etoricoxib program database included data from 8 placebo-controlled Phase III studies of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and chronic low back pain. As part of the program-wide assessment of etoricoxib, the investigator-reported incidence of and discontinuations due to renal AEs, including hypertension, lower-extremity edema (LEE), elevated serum creatinine concentration (SCC), and congestive heart failure (CHF) were examined. RESULTS: Data from 4770 patients were included in the analysis. Most patients were women (69.0%-80.3%), and most were white (68.0%-83.3%). The mean (SD) age at baseline ranged from 53.6 (12.1) to 62.2 (8.4) years. Overall, the incidence of renal AEs was low and generally similar between the active-treatment groups. In the placebo; etoricoxib 60-, 90-, and 120-mg; naproxen, and ibuprofen groups, the incidences of hypertension were 2.0%, 4.0%, 3.4%, 4.7%, 2.9%, and 6.6%, respectively, and the incidences of LEE were 1.9%, 3.2%, 1.5%, 1.3%, 2.3%, and 1.8%, respectively. The only significant difference found was the incidence of hypertension with etoricoxib 90 mg/d versus that with placebo (P=0.001); however, the rates of hypertension observed with etoricoxib at any dosage were not clinically meaningfully different versus comparator NSAIDs. Also, LEE was rarely of clinical significance with etoricoxib or comparator NSAIDs; related discontinuations were infrequent in all treatment groups. In addition, the incidences of elevated SCC and CHF were low among active-treatment groups (0.0% to 0.8% and 0.0% to 0.2%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this combined data review, the risks for renal AEs (i.e., hypertension, LEE, elevated SCC changes, and CHF) with etoricoxib 60, 90, and 120 mg/d were low, with a shallow dose response, and were generally similar to those found with the comparator NSAIDs naproxen 1000 mg/d and ibuprofen 2400 mg/d.

A multinational randomized, controlled, clinical trial of etoricoxib in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis [ISRCTN25142273].

BACKGROUND: Etoricoxib is a highly selective COX-2 inhibitor which was evaluated for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Double-blind, randomized, placebo and active comparator-controlled, 12-week study conducted at 67 sites in 28 countries. Eligible patients were chronic NSAID users who demonstrated a clinical worsening of arthritis upon withdrawal of prestudy NSAIDs. Patients received either placebo, etoricoxib 90 mg once daily, or naproxen 500 mg twice daily (2:2:1 allocation ratio). Primary efficacy measures included direct assessment of arthritis by counts of tender and swollen joints, and patient and investigator global assessments of disease activity. Key secondary measures included the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire, patient global assessment of pain, and the percentage of patients who achieved ACR20 responder criteria response (a composite of pain, inflammation, function, and global assessments). Tolerability was assessed by adverse events and routine laboratory evaluations. RESULTS: 1171 patients were screened, 891 patients were randomized (N = 357 for placebo, N = 353 for etoricoxib, and N = 181 for naproxen), and 687 completed 12 weeks of treatment (N = 242 for placebo, N = 294 for etoricoxib, and N = 151 for naproxen). Compared with patients receiving placebo, patients receiving etoricoxib and naproxen showed significant improvements in all efficacy endpoints (p<0.05). Treatment responses were similar between the etoricoxib and naproxen groups for all endpoints. The percentage of patients who achieved ACR20 responder criteria response was 41% in the placebo group, 59% in the etoricoxib group, and 58% in the naproxen group. Etoricoxib and naproxen were both generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, etoricoxib 90 mg once daily was more effective than placebo and similar in efficacy to naproxen 500 mg twice daily for treating patients with RA over 12 weeks. Etoricoxib 90 mg was generally well tolerated in RA patients.