Efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.3%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% topical gel in moderate and severe acne vulgaris
Recommended Citation
Weiss J, Stein Gold LF, Tanghetti E, Bouvresse S, Yao M, Dujols C, Leoni M. Efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.3%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% topical gel in moderate and severe acne vulgaris. J Am Acad Dermatol 2015; 72(5):AB7-AB7.
Document Type
Conference Proceeding
Publication Date
5-2015
Publication Title
J Am Acad Dermatol
Abstract
This study compared the efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.3%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% (0.3% A/BPO) topical gel vs vehicle in subjects with moderate and severe acne (overall population [OP]), and in a subpopulation of the OP (severe acne subjects only) (severe population [SP]). The study also compared 0.3% A/BPO vs adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% (0.1% A/BPO) topical gel in the SP. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, vehicle- and active-controlled study included a total of 503 subjects. Subjects were randomized to apply 0.3% A/BPO (n = 217), 0.1% A/BPO (n = 217) or vehicle (n = 69) once daily for 12 weeks. The OP included subjects with moderate (investigator global assessment [IGA] = 3) and severe (IGA = 4) acne, while the SP consisted only of subjects with severe disease (IGA = 4). Coprimary efficacy endpoints included success rate (at least 2-grade improvement on IGA) and change in inflammatory (IN) and noninflammatory (NIN) lesion count from baseline to week 12. In the OP, 0.3% A/BPO was superior to vehicle in success rate (33.7% vs 11.0%), and changes in IN (-27.0 vs -14.4) and NIN lesion counts (-40.1 vs -18.4), as well as percent changes in IN (-68.7% vs -39.2%) and NIN lesion counts (-68.3% vs -37.3%, respectively; all P < .001). Similarly, in the SP, 0.3% A/BPO was superior to vehicle in success rate (31.9% vs 11.8%; P = .029), and changes in IN (-35.1 vs -15.4) and NIN lesion counts (-45.6 vs -17.2), as well as percent changes in IN (-74.4% vs -33.0%) and NIN lesion counts (-72.0% vs -30.7%, respectively; all P < .001). Of note, 0.3% A/BPO showed nonstatistically significant but positive numerical differences over 0.1% A/BPO in the SP of 11.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.5%, 23.2%) in success rate, and -3.25 [CI: -7.15, 0.64] and -2.51 [CI: -8.08, 3.06] for changes in IN and NIN lesion counts. In terms of safety, 0.3% A/BPO was well tolerated, with a similar local tolerability profile to that of 0.1% A/BPO. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (15 AEs in 12 subjects [5.5%] vs 2 AEs in 1 subject [0.5%], respectively) were mild to moderate in severity. Only 1 subject (0.2%) in the 0.3% A/BPO group discontinued treatment due to an AE (atopic dermatitis flare) and no serious AEs were reported. The 0.3% A/BPO topical gel showed superior efficacy to vehicle in the general population, with greater efficacy shown in subjects with severe acne. The safety profile of 0.3% A/BPO was acceptable and comparable to that observed for 0.1% A/BPO.
Volume
72
Issue
5
First Page
AB7
Last Page
AB7