Search

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is often the first step in the atopic march leading to the development of asthma or allergic rhinitis. The goal of this study was to determine whether early intervention with pimecrolimus limits the atopic march in infants with AD and to evaluate its efficacy and safety., Methods: This was a 3-year double-blind study in which patients were randomized to pimecrolimus or vehicle and then open-label pimecrolimus for a planned further 3 years. Rescue topical corticosteroid was permitted if 3 days of study medication led to no improvement; investigators made decisions on rescue medication until week 14 and caregivers thereafter. Efficacy assessments included disease-free days, Eczema Area and Severity Index, and body surface area affected., Results: Infants ages 3 to 18 months with recent-onset AD (≤3 months) were observed for a mean of 2.8 years (N = 1,091). No significant differences between pimecrolimus- and placebo-treated groups were found in the percentage of patients with AD who developed asthma (10.7%) or other allergic conditions (allergic rhinitis, 22.4%; food allergy, 15.9%; allergic conjunctivitis, 14.1%; one or more atopic comorbidities, 37.0%) by study end. Allergic rhinitis, food allergy, and having one or more atopic comorbidities (but not asthma or allergic conjunctivitis alone) developed significantly more often in infants with greater AD severity at baseline. Pimecrolimus was significantly more effective than vehicle for AD treatment at week 14. Adverse event incidences were similar., Conclusions: This longitudinal observation of infants with AD provides evidence of the atopic march. Pimecrolimus was safe and effective in infants with mild to moderate AD., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a distressing dermatological disease, which is highly prevalent during infancy, can persist into later life and requires long-term management with anti-inflammatory compounds. The introduction of the topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs), tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, more than 10 yr ago was a major breakthrough for the topical anti-inflammatory treatment of AD. Pimecrolimus 1% is approved for second-line use in children (≥2 yr old) and adults with mild-to-moderate AD. The age restriction was emphasized in a boxed warning added by the FDA in January 2006, which also highlights the lack of long-term safety data and the theoretical risk of skin malignancy and lymphoma. Since then, pimecrolimus has been extensively investigated in short- and long-term studies including over 4000 infants (<2 yr old). These studies showed that pimecrolimus effectively treats AD in infants, with sustained improvement with long-term intermittent use. Unlike topical corticosteroids, long-term TCI use does not carry the risks of skin atrophy, impaired epidermal barrier function or enhanced percutaneous absorption, and so is suitable for AD treatment especially in sensitive skin areas. Most importantly, the studies of pimecrolimus in infants provided no evidence for systemic immunosuppression, and a comprehensive body of evidence from clinical studies, post-marketing surveillance and epidemiological investigations does not support potential safety concerns. In conclusion, the authors consider that the labelling restrictions regarding the use of pimecrolimus in infants are no longer justified and recommend that the validity of the boxed warning for TCIs should be reconsidered., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background and Objectives: Atopic dermatitis (AD) primarily affects infants and young children. Although topical corticosteroids (TCSs) are often prescribed, noncorticosteroid treatments are needed because compliance with TCSs is poor due to concerns about their side effects. In this longest and largest intervention study ever conducted in infants with mild-to-moderate AD, pimecrolimus 1% cream (PIM) was compared with TCSs., Methods: A total of 2418 infants were enrolled in this 5-year open-label study. Infants were randomized to PIM (n = 1205; with short-term TCSs for disease flares) or TCSs (n = 1213). The primary objective was to compare safety; the secondary objective was to document PIM's long-term efficacy. Treatment success was defined as an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear)., Results: Both PIM and TCSs had a rapid onset of action with >50% of patients achieving treatment success by week 3. After 5 years, >85% and 95% of patients in each group achieved overall and facial treatment success, respectively. The PIM group required substantially fewer steroid days than the TCS group (7 vs 178). The profile and frequency of adverse events was similar in the 2 groups; in both groups, there was no evidence for impairment of humoral or cellular immunity., Conclusions: Long-term management of mild-to-moderate AD in infants with PIM or TCSs was safe without any effect on the immune system. PIM was steroid-sparing. The data suggest PIM had similar efficacy to TCS and support the use of PIM as a first-line treatment of mild-to-moderate AD in infants and children., (Copyright © 2015 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Persistent pruritus, or itch, is one of the earliest symptoms of atopic dermatitis (AD). When pruritus is untreated, the incessant scratching response by the patient can increase the inflammatory response, resulting in aggravation of disease symptoms and severity, increasing flares and worsening patient quality of life. Therefore, it is essential that pruritus be treated effectively, rapidly and safely for optimal management of AD. In this article, the authors review clinical trials using tacrolimus ointment, a topical calcineurin inhibitor, to treat adult and pediatric patients with AD over a wide range of disease severity focusing on its efficacy in rapidly reducing pruritus. Furthermore, the authors evaluate trials in which tacrolimus ointment was directly compared with topical corticosteroids, the mainstay of AD treatment, and pimecrolimus cream, another topical calcineurin inhibitor, as well as long-term safety trials in which patients applied tacrolimus ointment for extended periods.

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, inflammatory condition affecting up to 20% of children. Here, we report the long-term extension study of previously published pivotal phase III studies with pimecrolimus cream 1%. Two identical, 26-week studies (6-week, double-blind, followed by 20-week, open-label phases) were conducted in children aged 2 to 17 years with atopic dermatitis. Pooled efficacy and safety analyses were performed. At day 43, 34.8% pimecrolimus-treated patients versus 18.4% in the vehicle group (p < 0.001) were clear/almost clear (Investigators' Global Assessment 0/1) of disease, with significant differences (p < 0.05) between treatment groups for all double-blind visits in all parameters. Pimecrolimus was significantly more effective (based on the Eczema Area and Severity Index) in treating the face and neck versus the rest of the body (p < 0.0001) and versus vehicle (p < 0.0001) in the double-blind phase. Disease control was sustained in the pimecrolimus group throughout the whole study. Patients treated with vehicle during the double-blind phase experienced rapid, marked improvement when switched to pimecrolimus in the open-label phase. The incidence of adverse events was low and comparable between treatment groups. In conclusion, pimecrolimus cream 1% is effective and well tolerated in the long-term control of children with mild to moderately severe atopic dermatitis.

Objective: This study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of tacrolimus ointment 0.03% with vehicle ointment for the treatment of mild to moderate atopic dermatitis (AD) in pediatric patients., Methods: A total of 317 patients (2-15 years of age) with mild to moderate AD were randomized to receive tacrolimus ointment or vehicle ointment twice daily in a 6-week, multicenter, double-blind study. Efficacy evaluations, including the Investigators' Global Atopic Dermatitis Assessment, eczema area and severity index, percentage of total body surface area affected, and patient assessment of itch occurred at baseline, day 4, and weeks 2, 4, and 6. Cutaneous adverse events were recorded to evaluate safety., Results: At the end of study, 50.6% (80 of 158) of the patients were treated successfully with tacrolimus ointment based on Investigators' Global Atopic Dermatitis Assessment scores, a significant improvement compared with patients treated with vehicle ointment (25.8% [41 of 159]). The percent improvement from baseline in eczema area and severity index scores was also significantly greater in tacrolimus-treated patients (54.8%) compared with vehicle-treated patients (20.8%). There was also a significant improvement in the percentage of total body surface area affected of tacrolimus-treated patients (50.5% reduction from baseline) compared with vehicle-treated patients (16.4%). Patient itch scores were significantly lower in tacrolimus-treated patients (2.1) versus vehicle-treated patients (3.7). Overall, the incidence of cutaneous adverse events reported was similar for both treatment groups. There was no significant difference in the incidence of burning or stinging between treatment groups. Significantly fewer tacrolimus-treated patients prematurely discontinued from the study because of a cutaneous adverse event in the treatment area or experienced increased itching and erythema at the application site., Conclusion: Monotherapy with tacrolimus ointment 0.03% is a safe and effective treatment alternative for pediatric patients with mild to moderate AD.

Background/objective: Tacrolimus ointment is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD). We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus ointment 0.03% compared with vehicle in the treatment of patients with mild to moderate AD., Methods: Two identically designed, independent, randomized, double-blind, 6-week studies--one pediatric and one adult--in patients with mild to moderate AD were conducted. Combined data from 617 patients were used in the analysis. The primary efficacy end point was percentage of patients with treatment success (defined as "clear" or "almost clear" on the Investigator's Global AD Assessment) at end of study., Results: As early as day 4, treatment success occurred in 17.7% of patients treated with tacrolimus compared with 9.8% of patients treated with vehicle ( P = .003), and by study end had increased to 49.7% for tacrolimus versus 29.0% for vehicle (P < .0001). Tacrolimus was associated with significantly less application site pruritus than vehicle (29.0% vs 37.5%; P = .03). There was no difference between tacrolimus and vehicle in the incidence of application site skin burning and stinging., Conclusion: Tacrolimus ointment 0.03% is effective and safe for the management of mild to moderate AD in both adult and pediatric patients, and has a rapid onset of action.

Topical therapy of atopic dermatitis should incorporate an understanding of the underlying immune abnormalities of this complex chronic skin disease. Avoidance of irritants and proven allergens, skin hydration, and use of emollients and anti-inflammatory therapy help maintain a normal skin barrier. Topical calcineurin inhibitors have been added to the topical treatment armamentarium. Although the optimal treatment approach remains to be defined, several studies suggest the use of topical calcineurin inhibitors as early intervention therapy and topical corticosteroids as rescue therapy.

Objective: To evaluate pimecrolimus cream 1% and tacrolimus ointment 0.03% in pediatric patients with moderate atopic dermatitis (AD)., Methods: 141 patients (aged 2-17 years) were randomized to treatment with pimecrolimus cream 1% (n=71) or tacrolimus ointment 0.03% (n=70) twice daily for 6 weeks., Results: At day 4, local, application-site reactions were less common and of shorter duration with pimecrolimus than with tacrolimus. Incidence of erythema/irritation was 8% (6/71) with pimecrolimus compared with 19% (13/70) with tacrolimus (P=.039). Fewer patients receiving pimecrolimus (0%, 0/6) experienced erythema/irritation lasting >30 minutes, compared with those receiving tacrolimus (85%, 11/13; P <.001). Fewer patients reported itching with pimecrolimus (8%; 6/71) than with tacrolimus (20%; 14/70; P=.073). Incidence of warmth, stinging, and burning was similar in both groups; however, reactions lasting >30 minutes were fewer with pimecrolimus (0%, 0/14) than with tacrolimus (67%, 8/12; P <.001). More patients receiving pimecrolimus rated ease of application as 'excellent' or 'very good', compared with tacrolimus (76% vs 59%, respectively; P <.020). Efficacy was similar in both groups at day 43. Both treatments were generally well tolerated with no unexpected adverse events., Conclusion: Pimecrolimus cream 1% had better formulation attributes and local tolerability than tacrolimus ointment 0.03% while providing similar efficacy and overall safety in pediatric patients with moderate AD.

Background: Few cost-effectiveness analyses have been conducted on topical therapies for atopic dermatitis., Objective: We sought to compare cost-effectiveness of high-potency topical corticosteroids (HPTCs) and tacrolimus ointment for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis for patients who are not responsive to or not well controlled with mid-potency topical corticosteroids., Methods: A Markov model represented the cyclic nature of atopic dermatitis. Clinical outcomes were derived from published literature. "Efficacy" was defined as disease-controlled days on which patients experienced a greater than 75% improvement in their disease. Resource use and changes in management were on the basis of opinions of a physician panel; secondary treatment was an oral antibiotic with topical corticosteroids. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for all variables., Results: The model was sensitive to duration of continuous treatment with HPTCs. HPTCs, when limited to 2-week treatment cycles, were associated with the highest total costs ($1682 per year) and the least efficacy (185 disease-controlled days). HPTCs in 4-week treatment intervals and tacrolimus ointment were similar in total costs and efficacy ($1317 vs $1323 for 194 vs 190 disease-controlled days, respectively). Although primary drug costs were higher for patients treated with tacrolimus ointment, patients treated with regimens of HPTCs incurred higher secondary drug costs., Conclusion: In the base case analyses, tacrolimus ointment was more cost-effective than HPTCs administered in 2-week treatment cycles, and similar in cost-effectiveness to 4-week cycles of HPTCs.

Background: The ascomycin derivative pimecrolimus (ASM 981) is a cell-selective cytokine inhibitor, specifically developed for the treatment of inflammatory skin diseases., Objective: When applied topically, pimecrolimus cream 1% has shown promise as a treatment for inflammatory skin conditions, including atopic dermatitis (AD) in children and adults, allergic contact dermatitis, and chronic contact irritant hand dermatitis in adults., Methods: In two independent 6-week, randomized, multicenter studies of identical design, the efficacy and safety of pimecrolimus cream 1% in children with predominantly moderate AD were compared with vehicle. Pooled data from a total of 403 patients were used in the analysis. The primary efficacy parameter was the Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score. Secondary parameters included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and severity of pruritus scores. Subjects were also asked to assess their disease control as uncontrolled, limited, good, or complete., Results: Significant therapeutic benefits relative to vehicle were observed in the pimecrolimus-treated group at the first efficacy assessment, 8 days after initial application of the study medication (eg, relief of pruritus). At each subsequent postbaseline visit, pimecrolimus-treated patients showed significant improvement relative to controls in all efficacy measures. The medication was well tolerated., Conclusion: Pimecrolimus cream 1% appears to be a safe and effective alternative to currently used therapies for AD.

Atopic dermatitis is a common, chronic, relapsing inflammatory skin disease frequently affecting infants and children. The worldwide prevalence of atopic dermatitis is estimated to be 5–20% of the paediatric population. First-line therapy has generally consisted of dry skin care, avoidance of triggers, application of topical corticosteroids, and administration of antihistamines and oral antibacterials. Topical corticosteroids improve the lesions of atopic dermatitis; however, concern on the part of physicians and patients regarding adverse effects has led to reluctance to utilise topical corticosteroids early and especially for prolonged periods. Topical immunomodulators (TIMs), including tacrolimus ointment and pimecrolimus cream, were recently introduced for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Clinical data show that TIMs are effective in atopic dermatitis, yet do not cause the significant adverse effects associated with topical corticosteroids. Questions remain regarding the place of TIMs as a treatment for atopic dermatitis and how to use them most effectively, from both therapeutic and pharmacoeconomic standpoints. Specifically, two major issues remain unresolved: (i) how TIMs measure up to other therapies, especially topical corticosteroids; and (ii) how members of the TIM drug class compare against each other. Previous research has established that atopic dermatitis has a significant impact on quality of life (QOL) and carries a substantial economic burden. Some studies have also measured the utility of various atopic dermatitis disease states. While there is a need for further research, early economic studies provide evidence that TIMs positively affect the QOL of patients and families. In certain patients, TIMs may be cost effective and have an acceptable incremental cost utility compared with topical corticosteroids. Making cost-effectiveness comparisons between tacrolimus and pimecrolimus is challenging because there are limited head-to-head comparative data. Given currently available efficacy data, the results of one study suggest that tacrolimus may be more cost effective than pimecrolimus in paediatric patients with moderate atopic dermatitis. The full economic and QOL benefits of both agents are yet to be completely understood. The studies reviewed herein are the first to delineate the pharmacoeconomic benefits of TIMs in atopic dermatitis, and lay the foundation for future analyses. TIMs represent an exciting advance in the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Additional research will help determine the proper place of TIMs among the current array of therapeutic options for atopic dermatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]