These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A Phase 2, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Vehicle-Controlled Clinical Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Tazarotene 0.045% Lotion and Tazarotene 0.1% Cream in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Acne Vulgaris.
    Author: Tanghetti EA, Kircik LH, Green LJ, Guenin E, Harris S, Martin G, Pillai R.
    Journal: J Drugs Dermatol; 2019 Jun 01; 18(6):542. PubMed ID: 31251546.
    Abstract:
    Background: Tazarotene has been extensively studied in clinical trials and is widely used to treat acne vulgaris (acne). Irritation potential has limited its use. Objective: To compare efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel formulation tazarotene 0.045% lotion based on polymeric emulsion technology, and tazarotene 0.1% cream in patients with moderate-to-severe acne. Methods: A total of 210 patients, 12 years and older were randomized to receive tazarotene 0.045% lotion, tazarotene 0.1% cream, or respective vehicle in double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled, 12-week study evaluating safety and efficacy (inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion counts and using Evaluator Global Severity Scores [EGSS]). In addition, patients completed a patient satisfaction survey (PSS), and acne-specific quality of life (QoL) questionnaire. Safety and cutaneous tolerability were assessed throughout. Results: A novel tazarotene 0.045% lotion demonstrated statistically significant superiority to vehicle in reducing inflammatory and noninflammatory lesion counts (P=.006 and P<.001) and clearly more effective in treatment success at week 12. In addition, at less than half the concentration, tazarotene 0.045% lotion was numerically more effective than tazarotene 0.1% cream. Mean percent reductions in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions were 63.8% and 56.9%, compared with 60.0% and 54.1% with tazarotene 0.1% cream at week 12. Treatment success assessed by the investigator or patients’ self-assessment was also numerically greater with tazarotene 0.045% lotion. There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction or QoL between the two active treatments. Both were well-tolerated, however, there were more treatment-related adverse events with tazarotene 0.1% cream (5.6% versus 2.9%); most common being application site pain. Limitations: This study was primarily designed to direct the phase 3 program and some of the results are post hoc analyses. Conclusions: A novel tazarotene 0.045% lotion provides statistically significant greater efficacy than vehicle in terms of lesion reduction, and numerically better treatment success than tazarotene 0.1% cream; with a highly favorable safety and tolerability profile in moderate-to-severe acne patients. J Drugs Dermatol. 2019;18(6):542-548.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]