search
Back to results

Study of Dupilumab Monotherapy Administered to Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis (SOLO 1)

Primary Purpose

Dermatitis, Atopic

Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 3
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Dupilumab
Placebo (for Dupilumab)
Sponsored by
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Dermatitis, Atopic

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Male or female, 18 years or older
  2. Chronic AD (according to American Academy of Dermatology Consensus Criteria Eichenfield 2014) that has been present for at least 3 years before the screening visit;
  3. Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score ≥16 at the screening and baseline visits;
  4. Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score ≥3 (on the 0 to 4 IGA scale, in which 3 is moderate and 4 is severe) at the screening and baseline visits;
  5. ≥10% body surface area (BSA) of AD involvement at the screening and baseline visits;
  6. Documented recent history (within 6 months before the screening visit) of inadequate response to treatment with topical medications or for whom topical treatments are otherwise medically inadvisable (e.g, because of important side effects or safety risks).

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Participation in a prior Dupilumab clinical study;
  2. Treatment with an investigational drug within 8 weeks or within 5 half-lives (if known), whichever was longer, before the baseline visit;
  3. Having used any of the following treatments within 4 weeks before the baseline visit, or any condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, was likely to require such treatment(s) during the first 4 weeks of study treatment:

    • Immunosuppressive/ immunomodulating drugs (e.g, systemic corticosteroids, cyclosporine, mycophenolate-mofetil, IFN-γ, Janus kinase inhibitors, azathioprine, methotrexate, etc.);
    • Phototherapy for AD
  4. Treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) within 1 week before the baseline visit;
  5. Treatment with biologics as follows:

    • Any cell-depleting agents including but not limited to rituximab: within 6 months before the baseline visit, or until lymphocyte count returns to normal, whichever was longer
    • Other biologics: within 5 half-lives (if known) or 16 weeks prior to baseline visit, whichever was longer
  6. Regular use (more than 2 visits per week) of a tanning booth/ parlor within 4 weeks of the screening visit;
  7. Planned or anticipated use of any prohibited medications and procedures during study treatment;
  8. Treatment with a live (attenuated) vaccine within 12 weeks before the baseline visit;
  9. Active chronic or acute infection requiring treatment with systemic antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics, antiprotozoals, or antifungals within 2 weeks before the baseline visit, or superficial skin infections within 1 week before the baseline visit. NOTE: Participants might be rescreened after infection resolves;
  10. Known or suspected history of immunosuppression, including history of invasive opportunistic infections (e.g, tuberculosis [TB], histoplasmosis, listeriosis, coccidioidomycosis, pneumocystosis, aspergillosis) despite infection resolution: or unusually frequent, recurrent, or prolonged infections, per investigator judgment;
  11. History of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or positive HIV serology at screening;
  12. Positive with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) or hepatitis C antibody at the screening visit;
  13. Participant was a member of the investigational team or his/her immediate family;
  14. Pregnant or breastfeeding women, or women planning to become pregnant or breastfeed during the study;
  15. Women unwilling to use adequate birth control, if of reproductive potential and sexually active.

Note: The information listed above is not intended to contain all considerations relevant to a participant's potential participation in this clinical trial therefore not all inclusion/ exclusion criteria are listed.

Sites / Locations

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm Type

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Arm Label

Placebo

Dupilumab 300 mg once weekly (qw)

Dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)

Arm Description

Two subcutaneous injections of Placebo (for Dupilumab) as a loading dose on Day 1 followed by a single injection once weekly (qw) from Week 1 to Week 15.

Two subcutaneous injections of Dupilumab 300 mg (for a total of 600 mg) as a loading dose on Day 1, followed by a single 300 mg injection of Dupilumab qw from Week 1 to Week 15.

Two subcutaneous injections of Dupilumab 300 mg (for a total of 600 mg) as a loading dose on Day 1, followed by a placebo alternating with single 300 mg injection of Dupilumab qw from Week 1 to Week 15.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of "0" or "1" and 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. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing IGA scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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. Values after first rescue treatment use were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥3 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 ≥3 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Percent Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 4
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 4 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and subjects with missing peak NRS at Week 4 were considered as non-responders.
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 2
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 2 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 2 were considered as non-responders.
Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score to Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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.
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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-50 responders were the participants who achieved ≥50% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-50 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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-90 responders were the participants who achieved ≥90% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-90 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) to 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.
Percent Change From Baseline in the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score to Week 16
SCORAD is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD developed by the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index). Consensus Report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology (Basel) 186 (1): 23-31. 1993. 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).
Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to 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 was indicative of a poor QOL.
Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) to 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]).
Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) to Week 16
HADS is a fourteen item scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven items relate to depression. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0 (minimum score) - 3 (maximum score) and this means that a person can score between 0 (no symptoms) and 21 (severe symptoms) for either anxiety or depression. Cut-offs for identifying psychiatric distress has been reported as 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression.
Percent Change From Baseline in Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) to Week 16
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).
Percent Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus NRS Score to Week 2
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Requiring Systemic Treatment
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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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. Statistical significance in the hierarchical testing of secondary hypotheses was broken at this endpoint. Therefore, subsequent secondary efficacy endpoints were not tested for statistical significance.
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs) From Baseline Through Week 16
Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. 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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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.
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Leading to Treatment Discontinuation From Baseline Through Week 16
Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. 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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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.

Full Information

First Posted
October 27, 2014
Last Updated
November 17, 2017
Sponsor
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
Collaborators
Sanofi
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02277743
Brief Title
Study of Dupilumab Monotherapy Administered to Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Acronym
SOLO 1
Official Title
A Phase 3 Confirmatory Study Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab Monotherapy Administered to Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
November 2017
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
October 2014 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
November 2015 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
February 2016 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
Collaborators
Sanofi

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
Yes
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.
Yes
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study to confirm the efficacy and safety of Dupilumab monotherapy in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD).

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Dermatitis, Atopic

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
671 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Placebo
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Two subcutaneous injections of Placebo (for Dupilumab) as a loading dose on Day 1 followed by a single injection once weekly (qw) from Week 1 to Week 15.
Arm Title
Dupilumab 300 mg once weekly (qw)
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Two subcutaneous injections of Dupilumab 300 mg (for a total of 600 mg) as a loading dose on Day 1, followed by a single 300 mg injection of Dupilumab qw from Week 1 to Week 15.
Arm Title
Dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w)
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Two subcutaneous injections of Dupilumab 300 mg (for a total of 600 mg) as a loading dose on Day 1, followed by a placebo alternating with single 300 mg injection of Dupilumab qw from Week 1 to Week 15.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Dupilumab
Other Intervention Name(s)
REGN668, SAR231893, DUPIXENT®
Intervention Description
Subcutaneous injection alternated among the different quadrants of the abdomen, upper thighs and upper arms
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Placebo (for Dupilumab)
Intervention Description
Subcutaneous injection alternated among the different quadrants of the abdomen, upper thighs and upper arms
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score of "0" or "1" and Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points at Week 16
Description
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. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing IGA scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Week 16
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
Description
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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. Values after first rescue treatment use were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥3 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 16
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 ≥3 points from baseline in weekly average of peak daily pruritus NRS score at Week 16 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percent Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 4
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 4 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and subjects with missing peak NRS at Week 4 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 4
Title
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction ≥4 Points) of Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score From Baseline to Week 2
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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 2 were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing peak NRS at Week 2 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 2
Title
Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score to Week 16
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score to Week 16
Description
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
Description
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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-50 responders were the participants who achieved ≥50% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-50 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
Description
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of 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-90 responders were the participants who achieved ≥90% overall improvement in EASI score from baseline to Week 16. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI-90 scores at Week 16 were considered as non-responders.
Time Frame
Week 16
Title
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) to Week 16
Description
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.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percent Change From Baseline in the SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score to Week 16
Description
SCORAD is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of AD developed by the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis (Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index). Consensus Report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology (Basel) 186 (1): 23-31. 1993. 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).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to Week 16
Description
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 was indicative of a poor QOL.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) to Week 16
Description
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]).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Change From Baseline in Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) to Week 16
Description
HADS is a fourteen item scale. Seven of the items relate to anxiety and seven items relate to depression. Each item on the questionnaire is scored from 0 (minimum score) - 3 (maximum score) and this means that a person can score between 0 (no symptoms) and 21 (severe symptoms) for either anxiety or depression. Cut-offs for identifying psychiatric distress has been reported as 7 to 8 for possible presence, 10 to 11 for probable presence, and 14 to 15 for severe anxiety or depression.
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percent Change From Baseline in Global Individual Signs Score (GISS) to Week 16
Description
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).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 16
Title
Percent Change From Baseline in Peak Daily Pruritus NRS Score to Week 2
Description
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool that was 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]).
Time Frame
Baseline to Week 2
Title
Percentage of Participants With Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Requiring Systemic Treatment
Description
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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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. Statistical significance in the hierarchical testing of secondary hypotheses was broken at this endpoint. Therefore, subsequent secondary efficacy endpoints were not tested for statistical significance.
Time Frame
Baseline up to Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs) From Baseline Through Week 16
Description
Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. 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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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.
Time Frame
Baseline up to Week 16
Title
Percentage of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) Leading to Treatment Discontinuation From Baseline Through Week 16
Description
Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received investigational medicinal product (IMP) was considered an AE without regard to possibility of causal relationship with this treatment. 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 up to the end of study [Week 28]). 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.
Time Frame
Baseline up to Week 16

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Male or female, 18 years or older Chronic AD (according to American Academy of Dermatology Consensus Criteria Eichenfield 2014) that has been present for at least 3 years before the screening visit; Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score ≥16 at the screening and baseline visits; Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score ≥3 (on the 0 to 4 IGA scale, in which 3 is moderate and 4 is severe) 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 topical medications or for whom topical treatments are otherwise medically inadvisable (e.g, because of important side effects or safety risks). Exclusion Criteria: Participation in a prior Dupilumab clinical study; Treatment with an investigational drug within 8 weeks or within 5 half-lives (if known), whichever was longer, before the baseline visit; Having used any of the following treatments within 4 weeks before the baseline visit, or any condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, was likely to require such treatment(s) during the first 4 weeks of study treatment: Immunosuppressive/ immunomodulating drugs (e.g, systemic corticosteroids, cyclosporine, mycophenolate-mofetil, IFN-γ, Janus kinase inhibitors, azathioprine, methotrexate, etc.); Phototherapy for AD Treatment with topical corticosteroids (TCS) or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) within 1 week before the baseline visit; Treatment with biologics as follows: Any cell-depleting agents including but not limited to rituximab: within 6 months before the baseline visit, or until lymphocyte count returns to normal, whichever was longer Other biologics: within 5 half-lives (if known) or 16 weeks prior to baseline visit, whichever was longer Regular use (more than 2 visits per week) of a tanning booth/ parlor within 4 weeks of the screening visit; Planned or anticipated use of any prohibited medications and procedures during study treatment; Treatment with a live (attenuated) vaccine within 12 weeks before the baseline visit; Active chronic or acute infection requiring treatment with systemic antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics, antiprotozoals, or antifungals within 2 weeks before the baseline visit, or superficial skin infections within 1 week before the baseline visit. NOTE: Participants might be rescreened after infection resolves; Known or suspected history of immunosuppression, including history of invasive opportunistic infections (e.g, tuberculosis [TB], histoplasmosis, listeriosis, coccidioidomycosis, pneumocystosis, aspergillosis) despite infection resolution: or unusually frequent, recurrent, or prolonged infections, per investigator judgment; History of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection or positive HIV serology at screening; Positive with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) or hepatitis C antibody at the screening visit; Participant was a member of the investigational team or his/her immediate family; Pregnant or breastfeeding women, or women planning to become pregnant or breastfeed during the study; Women unwilling to use adequate birth control, if of reproductive potential and sexually active. Note: The information listed above is not intended to contain all considerations relevant to a participant's potential participation in this clinical trial therefore not all inclusion/ exclusion criteria are listed.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Clinical Trial Management
Organizational Affiliation
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
City
Birmingham
State/Province
Alabama
Country
United States
City
Fort Smith
State/Province
Arkansas
Country
United States
City
Rogers
State/Province
Arkansas
Country
United States
City
Clovis
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Lomita
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Los Angeles
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Oceanside
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Palmdale
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Rolling Hills Estates
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
San Diego
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Santa Monica
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Stockton
State/Province
California
Country
United States
City
Boca Raton
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Clearwater
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Fort Lauderdale
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Miami Lakes
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Miami
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Pensacola
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Tampa
State/Province
Florida
Country
United States
City
Newnan
State/Province
Georgia
Country
United States
City
Chicago
State/Province
Illinois
Country
United States
City
Normal
State/Province
Illinois
Country
United States
City
Evansville
State/Province
Indiana
Country
United States
City
Indianapolis
State/Province
Indiana
Country
United States
City
Louisville
State/Province
Kentucky
Country
United States
City
Boston
State/Province
Massachusetts
Country
United States
City
Troy
State/Province
Michigan
Country
United States
City
Saint Louis
State/Province
Missouri
Country
United States
City
Newington
State/Province
New Hampshire
Country
United States
City
East Windsor
State/Province
New Jersey
Country
United States
City
Buffalo
State/Province
New York
Country
United States
City
Corning
State/Province
New York
Country
United States
City
New Hyde Park
State/Province
New York
Country
United States
City
Rochester
State/Province
New York
Country
United States
City
High Point
State/Province
North Carolina
Country
United States
City
Bethlehem
State/Province
Pennsylvania
Country
United States
City
Upland
State/Province
Pennsylvania
Country
United States
City
Chattanooga
State/Province
Tennessee
Country
United States
City
Knoxville
State/Province
Tennessee
Country
United States
City
San Antonio
State/Province
Texas
Country
United States
City
Waco
State/Province
Texas
Country
United States
City
Ogden
State/Province
Utah
Country
United States
City
Newport News
State/Province
Virginia
Country
United States
City
Norfolk
State/Province
Virginia
Country
United States
City
Spokane
State/Province
Washington
Country
United States
City
Dupnitsa
Country
Bulgaria
City
Plovdiv
Country
Bulgaria
City
Sofia
Country
Bulgaria
City
Winnepeg
State/Province
Manitoba
Country
Canada
City
Bathurst
State/Province
New Brunswick
Country
Canada
City
Hamilton
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Mississauga
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Newmarket
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Ottawa
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Richmond Hill
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Toronto
State/Province
Ontario
Country
Canada
City
Copenhagen
Country
Denmark
City
Hellerup
Country
Denmark
City
Tallinn
Country
Estonia
City
Tartu
Country
Estonia
City
Helsinki
Country
Finland
City
Tampere
Country
Finland
City
Turku
Country
Finland
City
Berlin
Country
Germany
City
Bielefed
Country
Germany
City
Blaubeuren
Country
Germany
City
Erlangen
Country
Germany
City
Halle
Country
Germany
City
Hamburg
Country
Germany
City
Hannover
Country
Germany
City
Muenster
Country
Germany
City
Munchen
Country
Germany
City
Osnabruck
Country
Germany
City
Schwerin
Country
Germany
City
Stuttgart
Country
Germany
City
Kurume
State/Province
Fukuoka
Country
Japan
City
Fukuyama
State/Province
Hiroshima
Country
Japan
City
Inashiki
State/Province
Ibaraki
Country
Japan
City
Yokohama
State/Province
Kanagawa
Country
Japan
City
Habikino
State/Province
Osaka
Country
Japan
City
Neyagawa
State/Province
Osaka
Country
Japan
City
Sakai
State/Province
Osaka
Country
Japan
City
Takatsuki
State/Province
Osaka
Country
Japan
City
Hamamatsu
State/Province
Shizuoka
Country
Japan
City
Bunkyo-ku
State/Province
Tokyo
Country
Japan
City
Chuo-ku
State/Province
Tokyo
Country
Japan
City
Nerima-ku
State/Province
Tokyo
Country
Japan
City
Shinagawa
State/Province
Tokyo
Country
Japan
City
Shinjuku
State/Province
Tokyo
Country
Japan
City
Kofu
State/Province
Yamanashi
Country
Japan
City
Gifu
Country
Japan
City
Hiroshima
Country
Japan
City
Kyoto
Country
Japan
City
Osaka
Country
Japan
City
Singapore
Country
Singapore
City
Alcaniz
Country
Spain
City
Alicante
Country
Spain
City
Barcelona
Country
Spain
City
Madrid
Country
Spain
City
Sevilla
Country
Spain
City
Valencia
Country
Spain

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
27690741
Citation
Simpson EL, Bieber T, Guttman-Yassky E, Beck LA, Blauvelt A, Cork MJ, Silverberg JI, Deleuran M, Kataoka Y, Lacour JP, Kingo K, Worm M, Poulin Y, Wollenberg A, Soo Y, Graham NM, Pirozzi G, Akinlade B, Staudinger H, Mastey V, Eckert L, Gadkari A, Stahl N, Yancopoulos GD, Ardeleanu M; SOLO 1 and SOLO 2 Investigators. Two Phase 3 Trials of Dupilumab versus Placebo in Atopic Dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2016 Dec 15;375(24):2335-2348. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610020. Epub 2016 Sep 30.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
36269503
Citation
Silverberg JI, Boguniewicz M, Hanifin J, Papp KA, Zhang H, Rossi AB, Levit NA. Dupilumab Treatment in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis is Efficacious Regardless of Age of Disease Onset: a Post Hoc Analysis of Two Phase 3 Clinical Trials. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2022 Dec;12(12):2731-2746. doi: 10.1007/s13555-022-00822-x. Epub 2022 Oct 21.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
35636689
Citation
Wechsler ME, Klion AD, Paggiaro P, Nair P, Staumont-Salle D, Radwan A, Johnson RR, Kapoor U, Khokhar FA, Daizadeh N, Chen Z, Laws E, Ortiz B, Jacob-Nara JA, Mannent LP, Rowe PJ, Deniz Y. Effect of Dupilumab on Blood Eosinophil Counts in Patients With Asthma, Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps, Atopic Dermatitis, or Eosinophilic Esophagitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022 Oct;10(10):2695-2709. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2022.05.019. Epub 2022 May 28.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
34897582
Citation
Armstrong A, Blauvelt A, Simpson EL, Smith CH, Herranz P, Kataoka Y, Seo SJ, Ferrucci SM, Chao J, Chen Z, Rossi AB, Shumel B, Tomondy P. Continued Treatment with Dupilumab is Associated with Improved Efficacy in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis Not Achieving Optimal Responses with Short-Term Treatment. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2022 Jan;12(1):195-202. doi: 10.1007/s13555-021-00643-4. Epub 2021 Dec 13.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
34726270
Citation
Paller AS, Tan JKL, Bagel J, Rossi AB, Shumel B, Zhang H, Abramova A. IGAxBSA composite for assessing disease severity and response in patients with atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol. 2022 Mar;186(3):496-507. doi: 10.1111/bjd.20872. Epub 2022 Feb 25.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
34142350
Citation
Griffiths 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.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
34037993
Citation
Hamilton JD, Harel S, Swanson BN, Brian W, Chen Z, Rice MS, Amin N, Ardeleanu M, Radin A, Shumel B, Ruddy M, Patel N, Pirozzi G, Mannent L, Graham NMH. Dupilumab suppresses type 2 inflammatory biomarkers across multiple atopic, allergic diseases. Clin Exp Allergy. 2021 Jul;51(7):915-931. doi: 10.1111/cea.13954. Epub 2021 Jun 26.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
33453450
Citation
Boguniewicz 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.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
33165005
Citation
Silverberg 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.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
31424712
Citation
Alexis AF, Rendon M, Silverberg JI, Pariser DM, Lockshin B, Griffiths CE, Weisman J, Wollenberg A, Chen Z, Davis JD, Li M, Eckert L, Gadkari A, Shumel B, Rossi AB, Graham NM, Ardeleanu M. Efficacy of Dupilumab in Different Racial Subgroups of Adults With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Three Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trials. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019 Aug 1;18(8):804-813.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
31407311
Citation
Wollenberg A, Beck LA, Blauvelt A, Simpson EL, Chen Z, Chen Q, Shumel B, Khokhar FA, Hultsch T, Rizova E, Rossi AB, Graham NMH, Pirozzi G, Lu Y, Ardeleanu M. Laboratory safety of dupilumab in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: results from three phase III trials (LIBERTY AD SOLO 1, LIBERTY AD SOLO 2, LIBERTY AD CHRONOS). Br J Dermatol. 2020 May;182(5):1120-1135. doi: 10.1111/bjd.18434. Epub 2019 Dec 1.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
30791102
Citation
Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Ardeleanu M, Thaci D, Barbarot S, Bagel J, Chen Z, Eckert L, Chao J, Korotzer A, Rizova E, Rossi AB, Lu Y, Graham NMH, Hultsch T, Pirozzi G, Akinlade B. Dupilumab provides important clinical benefits to patients with atopic dermatitis who do not achieve clear or almost clear skin according to the Investigator's Global Assessment: a pooled analysis of data from two phase III trials. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Jul;181(1):80-87. doi: 10.1111/bjd.17791. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
Results Reference
derived
PubMed Identifier
28503712
Citation
Simpson EL. Dupilumab Improves General Health-Related Quality-of-Life in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Pooled Results from Two Randomized, Controlled Phase 3 Clinical Trials. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2017 Jun;7(2):243-248. doi: 10.1007/s13555-017-0181-6. Epub 2017 May 13.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Study of Dupilumab Monotherapy Administered to Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs