Atopic DermatitisPhase 2NCT03736967
Efficacy and Safety of REGN3500 Monotherapy and Combination of REGN3500 Plus Dupilumab in Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
A Phase 2 study testing REGN3500, Dupilumab and REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo in people with Atopic Dermatitis, run by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals at 66 sites in 7 countries.
Trial summary
The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of REGN3500 monotherapy compared with placebo treatment in adult patients with moderate-to-severe Atopic dermatitis (AD). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Atopic Dermatitis
- What is being tested?
- REGN3500, Dupilumab and REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 206 participants
- Where
- 66 sitesin 7 countries
- Study dates
- 12 Nov 2018to 28 Jul 2020
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 75 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 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
- ≥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 topical AD medication(s) or for whom topical treatments are medically inadvisable
Who cannot join
- Prior participation in an anti-Interleukin (IL)-33 class antibody (including but not limited to REGN3500) or anti-IL-4Rα class antibody (including but not limited to dupilumab) clinical study; past treatment with or current treatment with dupilumab or another anti-IL-4Rα treatment
- Active chronic or acute infection requiring treatment with systemic antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics, antiprotozoals, or antifungals 2 weeks before the baseline visit, or superficial skin infections within 1 week before the baseline visit
- Known or suspected history of immunosuppression, including history of invasive opportunistic infections (eg, 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), hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb), or hepatitis C virus antibody (HCV Ab) at the screening visit
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women, or women planning to become pregnant or breastfeed during the study
- Note: Other protocol defined Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria apply
Trial locations and contacts
66 sites in 7 countries.
66 sites in 7 countries
United States22 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Arlington, Texas, 76014
Regeneron Research Site
Bay City, Michigan, 48706
Regeneron Research Site
Davie, Florida, 33328
Regeneron Research Site
Forest Hills, New York, 11375
Regeneron Research Site
Fountain Valley, California, 92708
Regeneron Research Site
High Point, North Carolina, 27262
Regeneron Research Site
Long Beach, California, 90808
Regeneron Research Site
Los Angeles, California, 90025
Regeneron Research Site
Los Angeles, California, 90033
Regeneron Research Site
New York, New York, 10022
Regeneron Research Site
New York, New York, 10029
Regeneron Research Site
Norman, Oklahoma, 73071
Regeneron Research Site
Phoenix, Arizona, 85259
Regeneron Research Site
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15213
Regeneron Research Site
Portland, Oregon, 97239
Regeneron Research Site
Richmond, Virginia, 23220
Regeneron Research Site
Rockville, Maryland, 20850
Regeneron Research Site
Sacramento, California, 95815
Regeneron Research Site
Saint Joseph, Michigan, 49085
Regeneron Research Site
Sandy Springs, Georgia, 30328
Regeneron Research Site
The Bronx, New York, 10467
Regeneron Research Site
Troy, Michigan, 48084
Germany14 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Bad Bentheim, 48455
Regeneron Research Site
Berlin, 12459
Regeneron Research Site
Halle, 06120
Regeneron Research Site
Hamburg, 20537
Regeneron Research Site
Hamburg, 22391
Regeneron Research Site
Hanau, 63450
Regeneron Research Site
Leipzig, 04103
Regeneron Research Site
Lübeck, 23538
Regeneron Research Site
Mahlow, 15831
Regeneron Research Site
München, 80337
Regeneron Research Site
Münster, 48149
Regeneron Research Site
Quedlinburg, 06484
Regeneron Research Site
Tübingen, 72076
Regeneron Research Site
Witten, 58453
South Korea12 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Gyeonggi-do, 13496
Regeneron Research Site
Gyeonggi-do, 13620
Regeneron Research Site
Gyeonggi-do, 14584
Regeneron Research Site
Gyeonggi-do, 16499
Regeneron Research Site
Gyeonggi-do, 18450
Regeneron Research Site
Incheon, 21431
Regeneron Research Site
Incheon, 21565
Regeneron Research Site
Incheon, 22332
Regeneron Research Site
Seoul, 03080
Regeneron Research Site
Seoul, 03722
Regeneron Research Site
Seoul, 06591
Regeneron Research Site
Seoul, 07441
Belgium6 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Anderlecht, 1070
Regeneron Research Site
Antwerp, 2650
Regeneron Research Site
Brussels, 1090
Regeneron Research Site
Brussels, 1200
Regeneron Research Site
Liège, 4000
Regeneron Research Site
Loverval, 6280
Poland6 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Bydgoszcz, 85-065
Regeneron Research Site
Bydgoszcz, 85-796
Regeneron Research Site
Iwonicz-Zdrój, 38-440
Regeneron Research Site
Krakow, 30-033
Regeneron Research Site
Lodz, 90-436
Regeneron Research Site
Wroclaw, 51-685
Czechia4 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Brno, 602 00
Regeneron Research Site
Pardubice, 530 02
Regeneron Research Site
Prague, 110 00
Regeneron Research Site
Prague, 130 00
Spain2 sites
Regeneron Research Site
Barakaldo, 48903
Regeneron Research Site
Santiago de Compostela, 15706
About this study
Official title: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2a Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of REGN3500 Monotherapy and Combination of REGN3500 Plus Dupilumab in Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of REGN3500 monotherapy compared with placebo treatment in adult patients with moderate-to-severe Atopic dermatitis (AD).
Secondary Objectives are to:
- Evaluate the efficacy of REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab compared with placebo treatment in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
- Assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of subcutaneous (SC) doses of REGN3500 monotherapy and REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
- Evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) of REGN3500 monotherapy and REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
- Conditions
- Atopic Dermatitis
- Being tested
- REGN3500, Dupilumab, REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo, Placebo
- Keywords
- Moderate, Severe
- Medical subject headings
- Dermatitis, Atopic, Lymphoma, Follicular
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
REGN3500Drug
Administered subcutaneous (SC) every 2 weeks (q2w)
DupilumabDrug
Also called REGN668, Dupixent
Administered SC q2w
REGN3500 + Dupilumab ComboDrug
Also called REGN668, Dupixent
Administered SC q2w
PlaceboDrug
Administered SC q2w
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| REGN3500 | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: REGN3500 |
| Dupilumab | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: Dupilumab |
| Combo | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo |
| Placebo | Experimental | Not described Receives: Drug: REGN3500; Drug: Dupilumab; Drug: Placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measures erythema, induration, 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. Percent change from baseline in EASI score at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment was reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Secondary outcomes (25)
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures erythema, induration, 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. Percent change from baseline in EASI score at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (Greater Than or Equal to [≥] 50 Percent [%] Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-50 (≥50% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-50 (≥50% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 were based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment were reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-75 (≥75% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders. Percentage of participants who achieved EASI-75 (>= 75% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-75 (≥75% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment were reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-90 (≥90% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures 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 who achieved EASI-90 (≥90% Improvement from baseline) at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment were reported.
Measured: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures erythema, induration, 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. Absolute change from baseline in EASI score at Week 16 was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of AD and measures erythema, induration, 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. Absolute change from baseline in EASI score at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Both Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 5 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
IGA was 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 was an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with both IGA score of "0" or "1" and a reduction from baseline of >= 2 points at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing IGA score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Both IGA Score 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 5 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
IGA was 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 was an IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear). Participants with both IGA score of "0" or "1" and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment were reported.
Measured: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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]). Absolute change from baseline in weekly average of daily Peak Pruritus NRS score at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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]). Absolute change from baseline in weekly average of daily Peak Pruritus NRS score at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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 weekly average of daily peak pruritus NRS score at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment was reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing NRS score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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 weekly average of daily peak pruritus NRS score at Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment was reported.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS ≥4 Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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 of weekly average of daily peak pruritus NRS from baseline to Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment were reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing NRS at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
Measured: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS ≥4 Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Pruritus NRS was an assessment tool used to report the intensity of a participant's pruritus (itch), both maximum and average intensity, using an electronic questionnaire (e-diary). Participants were asked the following question: how would you rate your 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 of weekly average of daily peak pruritus NRS from baseline to Week 16 based on all observed values regardless of rescue treatment were reported.
Measured: Week 16
Time to Onset of Effect on Pruritus (≥4-point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS From Baseline)
Peak Pruritus NRS is an assessment tool used by participants to report intensity of pruritus (itch) during a 24-hour recall period. Participants were asked the following question: For maximum itch intensity: "On a scale of 0 to 10, with 0 being 'no itch' and 10 being the 'worst itch imaginable,' how would you rate your itch at the worst moment during the previous 24 hours?"
Due to study discontinuation, not all planned participants were enrolled. For those already enrolled, the study drug was discontinued and participants were transitioned to post-treatment follow-up period. A large amount of data remained uncollected as not all enrolled participants completed all planned study visits and procedures for assessments for some endpoints. Therefore, this endpoint was removed and no data was collected for this outcome measure.
Measured: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16
The SCORAD index is a clinical tool for assessing the severity of atopic dermatitis (AD). 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).
Due to study discontinuation, not all planned participants were enrolled. For those already enrolled, the study drug was discontinued and participants were transitioned to post-treatment follow-up period. A large amount of data remained uncollected as not all enrolled participants completed all planned study visits and procedures for assessments for some endpoints. Therefore, this endpoint was removed and no data was collected for this outcome measure.
Measured: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) Involvement at Week 16
BSA affected by AD will be assessed for each section of the body using the rule of nines (the possible highest score for each region is: head and neck [9%], anterior trunk [18%], back [18%], upper limbs [18%], lower limbs [36%], and genitals [1%]) and will be reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined. The proportion assigned to different body regions is different in younger children as compared to older children (head and neck area is assigned a higher proportion in younger children as compared to older children).
Due to study discontinuation, not all planned participants were enrolled. For those already enrolled, the study drug was discontinued and participants were transitioned to post-treatment follow-up period. A large amount of data remained uncollected as not all enrolled participants completed all planned study visits and procedures for assessments for some endpoints. Therefore, this endpoint was removed and no data was collected for this outcome measure.
Measured: Week 16
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) From Baseline up to Week 16
Adverse Event (AE): any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a study drug which may/may not have a causal relationship with study drug. Serious AE (SAE): any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial/prolonged in-participant hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect/considered as medically important event. TEAE: AEs starting/worsening after first intake of study drug. TEAEs included: SAEs and Non-SAEs. AESI included: Anaphylactic reactions; Systemic/severe hypersensitivity reactions; Malignancy; Helminthic infections; Suicide-related events; Severe injection site reactions; Mycosis fungoides/other forms of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma; any clinical endoparasitosis; Conjunctivitis and significant Alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation. Number of participants with TEAEs, Serious TEAES and AESIs from baseline up to Week 16 were reported.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 16
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) From Baseline up to Week 36
AE: any untoward medical occurrence in a participant administered a study drug which may/may not have a causal relationship with study drug. SAE: any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial/prolonged in-participant hospitalization, persistent/significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect/considered as medically important event. TEAE: AEs starting/worsening after first intake of study drug. TEAEs included both SAEs and Non-SAEs. AESI included: Anaphylactic reactions; Systemic/severe hypersensitivity reactions; Malignancy; Helminthic infections; Suicide-related events; Severe injection site reactions; Mycosis fungoides/other forms of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma; any clinical endoparasitosis; Conjunctivitis and significant ALT elevation. Number of participants with TEAEs, Serious TEAES and AESIs from baseline up to Week 36 were reported.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 36
Number of Participants With Positive Treatment-Emergent Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to REGN3500 and Dupilumab
Treatment-Emergent (TE) ADA: any positive post baseline assay response when baseline results were negative/missing. TE ADA responses were further classified as: - persistent (treatment-emergent positive ADA response detected in at least 2 consecutive post baseline samples separated by at least a 16-week post baseline period [based on nominal sampling time], with no ADA-negative samples in-between, regardless of any missing samples or a positive response at the last ADA sampling time point),- indeterminate (a positive assay response at the last collection time point only, regardless of any missing samples), - transient (not persistent/indeterminate, regardless of any missing samples). Here, "Number of Participants Analysed" signifies those participants who were evaluable for this endpoint.
Measured: Baseline up to Week 36
Serum Concentration of Functional REGN3500
Serum Concentration of Functional REGN3500 was reported. Data was reported for REGN3500 300 mg Q2W and REGN3500 300 mg + Dupilumab 300 mg Q2W arms only
Measured: Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36
Serum Concentration of Functional Dupilumab
Serum Concentration of Functional Dupilumab was reported.
Measured: Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Nov 2018
- Study start12 Nov 2018
- Primary completion13 Mar 2020
- Study completion28 Jul 2020
Why it stopped: Lack of efficacy
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Atopic DermatitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Regeneron PharmaceuticalsThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 206 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Sanofi
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Clinical Trial Management, Study director, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03736967
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R3500-AD-1798
- Other IDs
- 2018-001543-30, 2018
- Status last verified
- Oct 2021
- First submitted
- 7 Nov 2018
- Last updated
- 1 Nov 2021
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- Yes
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Kosloski MP, Guttman-Yassky E, Cork MJ, Worm M, Nahm DH, Zhu X, Ruddy MK, Harel S, Kamal MA, Goulaouic H, Xu CR, Avetisova E, Davis JD, Nivens MC, Shabbir A, Radin A. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of itepekimab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from two terminated phase II trials. Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Aug;17(8):e13874. doi: 10.1111/cts.13874.
PubMed 39077906
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Nov 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 2a Study to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of REGN3500 Monotherapy and Combination of REGN3500 Plus Dupilumab in Adult Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03736967
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- R3500-AD-1798
- Conditions
- Atopic Dermatitis
- Keywords
- Moderate, Severe
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Lack of efficacy
- Enrolment
- 206 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Regeneron PharmaceuticalsIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Sanofi
- Study start
- 12 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 13 Mar 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 28 Jul 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 1 Nov 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of REGN3500 monotherapy compared with placebo treatment in adult patients with moderate-to-severe Atopic dermatitis (AD).
Secondary Objectives are to:
- Evaluate the efficacy of REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab compared with placebo treatment in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
- Assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of subcutaneous (SC) doses of REGN3500 monotherapy and REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
- Evaluate the Pharmacokinetic (PK) of REGN3500 monotherapy and REGN3500 in combination with dupilumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| REGN3500 | Experimental | Drug: REGN3500 |
| Dupilumab | Experimental | Drug: Dupilumab |
| Combo | Experimental | Drug: REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo |
| Placebo | Experimental | Drug: REGN3500, Drug: Dupilumab, Drug: Placebo |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- 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
- ≥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 topical AD medication(s) or for whom topical treatments are medically inadvisable
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Prior participation in an anti-Interleukin (IL)-33 class antibody (including but not limited to REGN3500) or anti-IL-4Rα class antibody (including but not limited to dupilumab) clinical study; past treatment with or current treatment with dupilumab or another anti-IL-4Rα treatment
- Active chronic or acute infection requiring treatment with systemic antibiotics, antivirals, antiparasitics, antiprotozoals, or antifungals 2 weeks before the baseline visit, or superficial skin infections within 1 week before the baseline visit
- Known or suspected history of immunosuppression, including history of invasive opportunistic infections (eg, 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), hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb), or hepatitis C virus antibody (HCV Ab) at the screening visit
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| REGN3500Administered subcutaneous (SC) every 2 weeks (q2w) | Drug | Placebo, REGN3500 |
| DupilumabAlso: REGN668, DupixentAdministered SC q2w | Drug | Dupilumab, Placebo |
| REGN3500 + Dupilumab ComboAlso: REGN668, DupixentAdministered SC q2w | Drug | Combo |
| PlaceboAdministered SC q2w | Drug | Placebo |
Primary outcome
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
The EASI score was used to measure the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD) and measures erythema, induration, 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. Percent change from baseline in EASI score at Week 16 based on observed values set to missing after rescue treatment was reported. Values after first rescue treatment were set to missing and participants with missing EASI score at Week 16 were counted as non-responders.
25 secondary outcomes
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (Greater Than or Equal to [≥] 50 Percent [%] Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-50 (EASI-50) (≥50% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) (≥75% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index-90 (EASI-90) (≥90% Improvement From Baseline) Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Both Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) Score 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 5 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Both IGA Score 0 or 1 (on the 0 to 5 IGA Scale) and a Reduction From Baseline of ≥2 Points Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in in Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS Score Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS ≥4 Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) in Weekly Average of Peak Daily Pruritus NRS ≥4 Based on All Observed Values Regardless of Rescue Treatment at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Time to Onset of Effect on Pruritus (≥4-point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Peak Pruritus NRS From Baseline)
Time frame: Week 16
Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Absolute Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) of Atopic Dermatitis (AD) Involvement at Week 16
Time frame: Week 16
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) From Baseline up to Week 16
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 16
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs), Serious TEAEs and Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) From Baseline up to Week 36
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 36
Number of Participants With Positive Treatment-Emergent Anti-drug Antibodies (ADA) to REGN3500 and Dupilumab
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 36
Serum Concentration of Functional REGN3500
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36
Serum Concentration of Functional Dupilumab
Time frame: Baseline (Week 0), Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 Nov 2021.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39077906Kosloski MP, Guttman-Yassky E, Cork MJ, Worm M, Nahm DH, Zhu X, Ruddy MK, Harel S, Kamal MA, Goulaouic H, Xu CR, Avetisova E, Davis JD, Nivens MC, Shabbir A, Radin A. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of itepekimab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from two terminated phase II trials. Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Aug;17(8):e13874. doi: 10.1111/cts.13874.
Related trials for Atopic Dermatitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
RecruitingObservational study
Blood, Urine, and Tissue Collection for Cutaneous Lymphoma, Eczema, and Atopic Dermatitis Research
Cutaneous T-cell Lymphoma, Sezary Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Study of HSK60002 Tablets in Participants With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Dermatitis Atopic
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study to Learn About the Study Medicine Called Tilrekimig in People With Moderate-to Severe Eczema
Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Clinical Trial Management study director
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
66 sites in 7 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing REGN3500, Dupilumab and REGN3500 + Dupilumab Combo in people with Atopic Dermatitis, run by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals at 66 sites in 7 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Nov 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 66 sites in United States, Germany, South Korea, Belgium, Poland and 2 more countries. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 1 Nov 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score Based on Observed Values Set to Missing After Rescue Treatment at Week 16 (time frame: Week 16). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03736967, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 Nov 2021.