Assessment of the Vehicle for Roflumilast Cream Compared to a Ceramide-Containing Moisturizing Cream in Mild Eczema

October 2024 | Volume 23 | Issue 10 | 834 | Copyright © October 2024


Published online September 17, 2024

doi:10.36849/JDD.7958  

Zoe Diana Draelos MDa, Robert C. Higham MPASb, David W. Osborne PhDb, Melissa S. Seal PhDb, Patrick Burnett MD PhDb, David R. Berk MDb

aDermatology Consulting Services, PLLC, High Point, NC
bArcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc., Westlake Village, CA

Abstract
Background: Inflammatory dermatologic conditions suitable for topical treatments benefit from a hydrating vehicle that improves the skin barrier without irritation.
Objective: This research was designed to assess skin barrier effects and aesthetic attributes of the vehicle for topical roflumilast cream (vehicle) vs a currently marketed ceramide-containing moisturizing cream (moisturizer).
Methods: This was a single-site, randomized, intraindividual, double-blind, controlled study conducted over 17 days. Patients (aged 18 years or older) with mild, symmetric asteatotic eczema of the lower extremities were enrolled to receive lower leg applications of the vehicle on one leg and moisturizer on the other. The primary efficacy endpoint was a change in transepidermal water loss (TEWL) from baseline to day 15. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in TEWL at other study visits, change from baseline in hydration as assessed via corneometry, and patient- and investigator-rated assessments of the products. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.
Results: A total of 40 patients enrolled in the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was met for both treatments. A statistically significant difference in TEWL on day 1 favored the moisturizer, but no difference was seen between vehicle and moisturizer at any other timepoint. Both vehicle and moisturizer also met the secondary efficacy endpoint of change from baseline in hydration.
Limitations: The sample size was small.
Conclusions: The vehicle for roflumilast cream performed similarly to a leading, currently marketed, dermatologist-recommended, ceramide-containing moisturizer across all patient- and investigator-rated assessments of efficacy, tolerability, and aesthetic properties in patients with mild asteatotic eczema.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(10):834-840. doi:10.36849/JDD.7958
 

INTRODUCTION

The role of the vehicle in topical prescription treatments is to deliver therapeutic concentrations of an active drug to a designated skin target site to support patient adherence and satisfaction, ideally without skin irritation. To achieve a pharmacological effect, the drug must be able to penetrate through the stratum corneum (SC) into the viable epidermis and dermis. The skin barrier is composed of terminally differentiated keratinocyte cells (corneocytes) and lipid lamellae, which prevent the movement of water out of the skin.1,2 Most topical prescription treatments use penetration enhancers, such as propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and ethanol, to overcome the barrier properties of the skin by intentionally disrupting lipids in the SC to enhance drug permeability, inducing skin irritation.2,3 For example, ruxolitinib, crisaborole, pimecrolimus, and tapinarof creams contain propylene glycol, mupirocin ointment contains polyethylene glycol, and clobetasol propionate spray contains ethanol.4-9 While they are useful for increasing drug penetration and enhancing drug delivery, these vehicles can also inhibit epidermal repair and contribute to local tolerability issues.10,11
 
Skin barrier dysfunction is present in atopic dermatitis (AD) and other inflammatory skin diseases, resulting in water loss, penetration of irritants and allergens, and skin microbiome disruption.12 The defective skin barrier of patients with AD is worsened by penetration enhancers, possibly delaying disease resolution. Patients who use topical prescription medications for AD frequently experience exacerbation of stinging, itching, and burning.13 Ideally, these unwanted side effects should be minimized while optimizing topical drug absorption and limiting systemic drug absorption. This highlights the need for prescription topical formulations that maintain and repair the skin barrier function without the use of irritating or sensitizing excipients.14 The effect of a formulation on the skin barrier can be assessed through noninvasive