Methods report on the development of the European S3 guidelines for the treatment of acne

TRASS: a global approach to assess the severity of truncal acne

INTRODUCTION

Only a small amount of published data regarding truncal acne is available and no proper tool to assess its severity exists.

AIM

to provide dermatologists with an easy-to-use tool to assess truncal acne (TRASS, truncal acne severity scale) using a global approach.

METHODS

A scoring tool that assesses the severity of acne (based on GEA and ECLA scales) on the trunk using a global approach was built, including three subscores: family history, clinical signs and quality of life (QoL). In order to test TRASS, the experts used photos of 47 patients attending their clinics with truncal acne. The ROP (Regression OPtimized) model was applied to assess the diagnosis performance of TRASS and to identify items contributing to the classification of the patients. Internal testing was made to demonstrate the robustness of the model. Correlation analyses between the different items were performed to evaluate the interaction between the different items and their impact on the severity grading of truncal acne.

RESULTS

Patients with the most severe acne were identified by TRASS. The error level was 6.6% after internal validation and 10.4% when using the median value or the centile 75^th (6.6% and 10.4%). Correlation was significant between systemic treatment and scars (p=0.0025) and nodules (p=0.01988) and between location and QoL (p=0.0095).

CONCLUSION

TRASS is the first global, patient-centred approach to evaluate truncal acne by scoring the importance of each factor independently from its clinical severity. TRASS may allow the practitioner to choose and validate the most suitable therapy together with the patient in order to treat his or her truncal acne successfully and to limit treatment failure.

Efficacy and tolerability of short contact therapy with tretinoin, clindamycin, and glycolic acid gel in acne: A randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded two-center trial: The MASCOTTE study

Retinoids and antibiotics topical treatments are commonly used as first line therapy in mild to moderate acne. However, irritant contact dermatitis is a common side effect of topical retinoids. A strategy to increase local tolerability is the "short contact therapy" (SCT) approach, consisting in the application of the product with the complete removal after 30 to 60 minutes using a non-aggressive cleanser. A gel containing tretinoin 0.02%, clindamycin 0.8%, and glycolic acid 4% in polyvinyl alcohol (MP-gel) has shown to be effective as monotherapy in mild to moderate acne with a tolerability profile similar to other topical retinoids. So far, no trials have been performed with this gel comparing the tolerability profile of SCT with standard application therapy (SAT). We conducted a 2-center randomized parallel groups, controlled, assessor-blinded study, comparing MP-gel applied as SCT in comparison with MP-gel used as SAT (The "MASCOTTE" trial). Forty-six subjects (nine men and 37 women, mean age 23 ± 4 years, range 18-31 years) with mild-to-moderate acne were enrolled, after their written informed consent in a randomized, parallel groups controlled, assessor-blinded 8-week trial. Twenty-three were assigned to MP-gel once daily (evening application) using the SCT approach (ie, complete removal of product after 1 hour using a gentle cleanser), and 23 were randomized to the SAT approach with the same gel. The primary endpoint was the evolution of the tolerability score (TS) assessed evaluating four items: erythema, dryness, stinging, and burning, using a 4-point score scale (from 0: no symptom to 3: severe symptom). Secondary endpoints were the evolution of global acne grading system (GAGS) score (range: from 0 to >39) and the investigator global assessment (IGA of acne severity) score (range from 0 to 4). TS was evaluated at 2, 4, and 8 weeks. GAGS and IGA scores were evaluated at baseline and at week eight. At week eight, an efficacy global score (EGS) (from 1: no efficacy to 4: very good efficacy) and a tolerability global score (TGS) (from 1: very low tolerability to 3: very good tolerability) evaluation were also done. All the evaluations were performed by an investigator unaware of treatment groups allocation (SCT or SAT). Thirty-eight subjects (83%) completed the 8-week treatment period. Eight subjects (two in the SCT group and six in the SAT group) dropped out prematurely due to low skin tolerability. In the SCT the TS at week two was 1.3 ± 1.7, in the SAT group TS was significantly higher (3.1 ± 1.7) (P = .028). TS was significantly lower in SCT group vs SAT also at weeks four and eight (P = .01; ANOVA test). The GAGS score at baseline was 19 ± 7 in the SCT group and 23 ± 4 in the SAT group (NS). At week 8 the GAGS score in SCT was significantly reduced to 8.5 ± 2.8 (-55%) (P = .001 vs baseline) and was also significantly lower in comparison with SAT group (8.5 vs 15; P = .0054). The IGA scores at baseline were 1.9 ± 0.6 in SCT and 2.4 ± 0.7 in SAT group. At week eight, in comparison with baseline values IGA score was reduced significantly by 48% in SCT and by 30% in SAT. EGS and TGS were significantly higher (better clinical efficacy and better tolerability) in SCT in comparison with SAT (3.6 ± 0.5 and 2.9 ± 0.3 vs 2.7 ± 0.6 and 1.5 ± 0.7; respectively). This tretinoin, clindamycin, glycolic acid gel, applied as SCT, has shown a better skin tolerability and at least a comparable clinical efficacy in comparison with the standard application modality in the treatment of mild-to-moderate acne. The SCT therefore could be an effective treatment strategy which could improve subjects' compliance and adherence.

Efficacy and adverse events of oral isotretinoin for acne: a systematic review

Despite many years of clinical use of isotretinoin, a comprehensive review of evidence for isotretinoin therapy in patients with acne is lacking. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, relevant web pages and bibliographies for randomized controlled trials in acne evaluating isotretinoin vs. control (placebo or other therapy). Data were extracted and summarized descriptively. Eleven trials were identified (total 760 patients randomized), containing mostly men. Mean treatment ages ranged from 18 to 47·9 years and participants generally had moderate-to-severe acne. Across all trials, isotretinoin therapy reduced acne lesion counts by a clinically relevant amount, and always by a greater amount than control, which was either placebo (two studies), oral antibiotics (seven studies) or other control (two studies). Across trials with an overall low risk of bias, two of three demonstrated statistically significant differences between isotretinoin and control. The frequency of adverse events was twice as high with isotretinoin (751 events) than with control (388 events). More than half of all adverse events were dermatological and related to dryness. Adverse events from isotretinoin causing participant withdrawal from trials (12 patients) included Stevens-Johnson syndrome, cheilitis, xerosis, acne flare, photophobia, elevated liver enzymes, decreased appetite, headaches and depressed mood. This review suggests that isotretinoin is effective in reducing acne lesion counts, but adverse events are common. This study was registered with PROSPERO number CRD42015025080.

Light therapies for acne: abridged Cochrane systematic review including GRADE assessments

We undertook a Cochrane review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects of light-based interventions for acne vulgaris. We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, ISI Web of Science and grey literature sources (September 2015). We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group approach to assess the quality of evidence (QoE). We included 71 RCTs (4211 participants, median sample size 31). Results from a single study (n = 266, low QoE) showed little or no difference in effectiveness on participants' assessment of improvement between 20% aminolaevulinic acid (ALA) photodynamic therapy (PDT), activated by blue light, vs. vehicle plus blue light, whereas another study (n = 180) comparing ALA-PDT (red light) concentrations showed that 20% ALA-PDT was no more effective than 15% ALA-PDT but better than 10% and 5% ALA-PDT. Pooled data from three studies (n = 360, moderate QoE) showed that methyl aminolaevulinate PDT, activated by red light, had a similar effect on changes in lesion counts vs. placebo cream with red light. Several studies compared yellow light with placebo or no treatment, infrared light with no treatment, gold microparticle suspension with vehicle and clindamycin/benzoyl peroxide (C/BPO) combined with pulsed dye laser with C/BPO alone. None of these showed any clinically significant effects. Most studies reported adverse effects, but inadequately, with scarring reported as absent, and blistering only in studies on intense pulsed light, infrared light and PDT (very low QoE). Carefully planned studies, using standardized outcome measures and common acne treatments as comparators, are needed.

Lasers and ancillary treatments for scar management Part 2: Keloid, hypertrophic, pigmented and acne scars

The formation of a wide range of excessive scars following various skin injuries is a natural consequence of healing. Scars resulting from surgery or trauma affect approximately 100 million people per annum in the developed world and can have profound physical, aesthetic, psychological and social consequences. Thus, scar treatment is a priority for patient and physician alike. Laser treatment plays an important role in scar management with additional support from ancillary modalities. Subsequent to part 1: Burns scars, part 2 focuses on our strategies and literature review of treatment of keloid, hypertrophic, pigmented and acne scars where lasers are used in conjunction with other measures, and illustrated with case studies.

Fixed-Combination Gels of Adapalene and Benzoyl Peroxide Provide Optimal Percutaneous Absorption Compared to Monad Formulations of These Compounds: Results from Two In Vitro Studies

Introduction

Adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% (0.1% A/BPO) and adapalene 0.3%/BPO 2.5% (0.3% A/BPO) gels are fixed-combination options for the topical treatment of acne. However, the active compounds of these combinations are also available as monads, to be used in association or as monotherapy. These two in vitro studies determined the effect of different treatment regimens on the percutaneous absorption of adapalene (0.1% and 0.3%) gels and BPO 2.5% gel in ex vivo human skin.

Methods

In vitro percutaneous absorption studies were conducted using full-thickness human skin from six donors. Treatment regimens included the application of 0.1% A/BPO, 0.3% A/BPO, or four free-combination regimens of the monads. Skin samples were incubated for 24 h. Concentrations of adapalene and BPO equivalent (BPO-eq) (i.e. benzoic acid after chemical transformation of BPO) were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Comparison of regimens was performed using a bioequivalence criterion (estimated ratio bewteen 0.8 and 1.25).

Results

The fixed combination 0.3% A/BPO regimen demonstrated more than three times higher absorption of adapalene versus the fixed-combination 0.1% A/BPO. Based on the bioequivalence acceptance criterion, all four free-combination regimens were different from 0.1% A/BPO and 0.3% A/BPO, with higher adapalene release delivered by the fixed combinations versus the free combinations. For BPO-eq, the results showed that the free-combination regimens where adapalene 0.1% was applied first were different from 0.1% A/BPO, with lower BPO-eq release delivered by these regimens compared to the fixed combination. The regimen adapalene 0.3% for 10 h followed by BPO 2.5% delivered lower BPO-eq release compared to the fixed combination.

Conclusion

The fixed-combination A/BPO gels provide optimal percutaneous absorption of the active compounds compared to free combinations of adapalene 0.1%, adapalene 0.3%, and BPO 2.5%. The higher concentration of adapalene in the 0.3% A/BPO gel and the resulting higher absorption may explain higher clinical efficacy.

Moderate and Severe Inflammatory Acne Vulgaris Effectively Treated with Single-Agent Therapy by a New Fixed-Dose Combination Adapalene 0.3 %/Benzoyl Peroxide 2.5 % Gel: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Controlled Study

Background

A need exists for topical treatments in managing more severe inflammatory acne.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adapalene 0.3 %/benzoyl peroxide 2.5 % (0.3 % A/BPO) topical gel in subjects with moderate and severe inflammatory acne.

Methods

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Randomization was stratified by acne severity (50 % moderate and 50 % severe). Subjects received 0.3 % A/BPO, 0.1 % A/BPO (benchmark), or vehicle (comparator) once daily for 12 weeks. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were success rate at week 12 (the percentage of subjects rated ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’ with at least a 2-grade improvement on Investigator’s Global Assessment [IGA]) and change in inflammatory (IN) and noninflammatory (NIN) lesion counts from baseline to week 12. Secondary efficacy endpoints were percent changes in IN and NIN lesion counts. Safety endpoints were incidence of adverse events (AEs) and local tolerability signs/symptoms.

Results

A total of 503 subjects were randomized: 217, 217, and 69 subjects in the 0.3 % A/BPO, 0.1 % A/BPO, and vehicle groups, respectively. For success rate (subjects rated ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’ with ≥2-grade improvement in IGA), 0.3 % A/BPO was superior to vehicle, with a treatment difference of 22.7 % (33.7 vs. 11.0 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 12.8–32.6, p < 0.001). At week 12, 0.3 % A/BPO was superior to vehicle for mean reduction from baseline in IN (27.0 vs. 14.4) and NIN lesion counts (40.2 vs. 18.5), as well as for percentage reduction from baseline in IN (68.7 vs. 39.2 %) and NIN lesion counts (68.3 vs. 37.4 %) (all p < 0.001). Among subjects with severe inflammatory acne (IGA = 4), 0.1 % A/BPO did not reach statistical significance for success rate compared with vehicle (p = 0.443), whereas 0.3 % A/BPO demonstrated significantly greater efficacy (p = 0.029, requiring ≥3-point IGA improvement). Additionally, 0.3 % A/BPO was safe and well-tolerated.

Conclusions

Results of this clinical trial demonstrate the significantly greater efficacy of adapalene 0.3 % A/BPO topical gel compared with vehicle as well as a good safety profile in the treatment of moderate to severe inflammatory non-nodulocystic acne, which increases patients’ treatment options.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier

NCT01880320.

Acne treatment in the field: how guidelines and other sources can be included in daily practice

BACKGROUND

Acne is a complex disease ranging from mild to very severe. Quality of life can be considerably affected although the impact on the quality of life does not necessarily correlate with the severity of the disease.

AIM

To show how good external evidence can be used in individual treatment decisions.

METHODS

Description of four typical case secenarios usining the recommendation of the recent evidence based guidelines and other sources.

RESULTS

The four quite typical patients presented here (i) a young boy with comedonal acne; (ii) a young black girl with papulopustular acne; (iii) an older boy with conglobate acne; and (iv) a young women with postadolescent papulopustular acne give a range of the possible challenges a dermatologist may face.

CONCLUSION

How can the best treatment be selected for our patients? By keeping a clear mind, using the available best evidence and taking of course into account individual factors.