Trial Outcomes & Findings for Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in Atopic Dermatitis Study 1 (TRuE AD1) - An Efficacy and Safety Study of Ruxolitinib Cream in Adolescents and Adults With Atopic Dermatitis (NCT NCT03745638)
NCT ID: NCT03745638
Last Updated: 2023-09-28
Results Overview
The IGA is an overall eczema severity rating on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear skin) to 4 (severe disease). The score is based on an overall assessment of the degree of erythema, induration/papulation, and oozing/crusting. The IGA-TS is defined as an IGA score of 0 (clear skin) or 1 (almost clear skin) with ≥ 2 grade improvement from Baseline.
COMPLETED
PHASE3
631 participants
Baseline to Week 8
2023-09-28
Participant Flow
A total of 631 participants took part in the study at 78 sites, 48 in North America and 30 in Europe from December 20, 2018 to December 01, 2020.
Participants who completed Week 8 assessments of the Vehicle Control (VC) Period with no safety concerns continued in the 44-week Long Term Safety (LTS) Period. Participants who were on active treatment during the VC Period continued with the same treatment regimen in the LTS Period and those who applied vehicle cream during the VC Period were equally randomized into 1 of the 2 active treatment groups: ruxolitinib 0.75%, ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during the LTS Period.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film twice daily (BID) from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Vehicle Cream to Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
Participants who applied vehicle cream BID during the VC Period, were randomized to apply ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Vehicle Cream to Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Participants who applied vehicle cream BID during the VC Period, were randomized to apply ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 0.75% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
STARTED
|
126
|
252
|
253
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
COMPLETED
|
95
|
222
|
225
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
NOT COMPLETED
|
31
|
30
|
28
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
STARTED
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
48
|
47
|
222
|
225
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
37
|
38
|
176
|
174
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
11
|
9
|
46
|
51
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film twice daily (BID) from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Vehicle Cream to Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
Participants who applied vehicle cream BID during the VC Period, were randomized to apply ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Vehicle Cream to Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Participants who applied vehicle cream BID during the VC Period, were randomized to apply ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 0.75% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Adverse Event
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Lack of Efficacy
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Lost to Follow-up
|
5
|
12
|
8
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Physician Decision
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Pregnancy
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Protocol Violation
|
0
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Withdrawal by Subject
|
17
|
11
|
19
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Vehicle Control Period (Day 1 to Week 8)
Reason Not Specified
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Adverse Event
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
6
|
1
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Lack of Efficacy
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Lost to Follow-up
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
3
|
5
|
13
|
24
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Physician Decision
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
3
|
0
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Protocol Violation
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Withdrawal by Subject
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
7
|
3
|
17
|
21
|
|
Long-Term Safety Period (Weeks 8 to 52)
Reason Not Specified
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
4
|
3
|
Baseline Characteristics
Topical Ruxolitinib Evaluation in Atopic Dermatitis Study 1 (TRuE AD1) - An Efficacy and Safety Study of Ruxolitinib Cream in Adolescents and Adults With Atopic Dermatitis
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
Total
n=631 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
35.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.11 • n=99 Participants
|
36.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 19.06 • n=107 Participants
|
33.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.15 • n=206 Participants
|
35.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.15 • n=7 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
79 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
154 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
158 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
391 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
47 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
98 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
95 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
240 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
21 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
30 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
37 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
88 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
104 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
218 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
212 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
534 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
1 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
9 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
0 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
|
8 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
10 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
32 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
0 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
3 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
3 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
|
29 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
55 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
56 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
140 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
|
85 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
173 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
177 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
435 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
|
4 Participants
n=99 Participants
|
9 Participants
n=107 Participants
|
6 Participants
n=206 Participants
|
19 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
|
Body Mass Index (BMI)
|
26.92 Kilograms per square metre (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.245 • n=99 Participants
|
27.33 Kilograms per square metre (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.745 • n=107 Participants
|
27.47 Kilograms per square metre (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.077 • n=206 Participants
|
27.30 Kilograms per square metre (kg/m^2)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.212 • n=7 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
The IGA is an overall eczema severity rating on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear skin) to 4 (severe disease). The score is based on an overall assessment of the degree of erythema, induration/papulation, and oozing/crusting. The IGA-TS is defined as an IGA score of 0 (clear skin) or 1 (almost clear skin) with ≥ 2 grade improvement from Baseline.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Investigator's Global Assessment - Treatment Success (IGA-TS) at Week 8
|
15.1 percentage of participants
Interval 9.3 to 22.5
|
50.0 percentage of participants
Interval 43.7 to 56.3
|
53.8 percentage of participants
Interval 47.4 to 60.0
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
EASI scoring system examines 4 areas of the body and weights them for participants of at least 8 years of age. Each of the 4 body regions is assessed separately for erythema (E), induration/papulation/edema (I), excoriations (Ex), and lichenification (l) for an average degree of severity of each sign in each region. The severity strata for the EASI are as follows: 0 = clear; 0.1 to 1.0 = almost clear; 1.1 to 7.0 = mild; 7.1 to 21.0 = moderate; 21.1 to 50.0 = severe; 50.1 to 72.0 = very severe. An EASI75 responder was defined as a participant achieving 75% or greater improvement from Baseline in EASI score.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 (EASI75)
|
24.6 percentage of participants
Interval 17.4 to 33.1
|
56.0 percentage of participants
Interval 49.6 to 62.2
|
62.1 percentage of participants
Interval 55.8 to 68.1
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline Itch NRS score ≥ 4.
The Itch NRS is a daily participant-reported measure (24-hour recall), using a diary, of the worst level of itch intensity. Participants were asked to rate the itching severity because of their AD in the daily diary by selecting a number from 0 (no itch) to 10 (worst imaginable itch) that best described their worst level of itching in the past 24 hours.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=78 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=156 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=161 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 4-Point Improvement in Itch Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Score
|
15.4 percentage of participants
|
40.4 percentage of participants
|
52.2 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline score ≥ 6.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of sleep quality, sleep depth, and restoration associated with sleep. It is a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep disturbance. Each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep disturbance.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=116 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=233 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=238 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b - 24-Hour Recall) Score
|
9.5 percentage of participants
|
21.0 percentage of participants
|
22.3 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline score ≥ 6.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of alertness, sleepiness, and tiredness during usual waking hours and the perceived functional impairments during wakefulness associated with sleep problems or impaired alertness. The questionnaire has 8 simple questions with a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep-related impairment. Each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=114 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=233 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=245 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a - 24-Hour Recall)
|
13.2 percentage of participants
|
20.2 percentage of participants
|
21.6 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: From first dose up to Week 8Population: Safety population included all randomized participants who applied at least 1 application of ruxolitinib cream or vehicle cream.
An AE is any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not considered drug-related. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of study treatment. A SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or an important medical event may be considered serious when, based on appropriate medical judgment, the event may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. A TEAE or treatment emergent SAE is any AE or SAE either reported for first time or worsening of a pre-existing event after first dose of study drug.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With at Least One Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) and Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Event (SAE)
TEAE
|
34.9 percentage of participants
|
29.0 percentage of participants
|
29.2 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With at Least One Treatment-Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) and Treatment-Emergent Serious Adverse Event (SAE)
Treatment Emergent SAE
|
1.6 percentage of participants
|
0.4 percentage of participants
|
0.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: From first dose date in LTS Period (Week 8) until last follow-up visit (up to 52 weeks)Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period.
An AE is any untoward medical occurrence associated with the use of a drug in humans, whether or not considered drug-related. An AE can therefore be any unfavorable and unintended sign (including an abnormal laboratory finding), symptom, or disease (new or exacerbated) temporally associated with the use of study treatment. A SAE is defined as any untoward medical occurrence that, at any dose results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, is a congenital anomaly/birth defect or an important medical event may be considered serious when, based on appropriate medical judgment, the event may jeopardize the participant and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above. A TEAE or treatment emergent SAE is any AE or SAE either reported for first time or worsening of a pre-existing event after first dose of study drug.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants With at Least One TEAE and Treatment Emergent SAE
TEAE
|
47.9 percentage of participants
|
48.9 percentage of participants
|
54.5 percentage of participants
|
53.3 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants With at Least One TEAE and Treatment Emergent SAE
Treatment Emergent SAE
|
6.3 percentage of participants
|
2.1 percentage of participants
|
2.3 percentage of participants
|
1.3 percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Weeks 2 and 4Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
The IGA is an overall eczema severity rating on a 0 (clear skin) to 4 (severe disease) scale. The score is based on an overall assessment of the degree of erythema, induration/papulation, and oozing/crusting. The IGA-TS is defined as an IGA score of 0 (clear skin) or 1 (almost clear skin) with ≥ 2 grade improvement from Baseline.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an IGA-TS at Weeks 2 and 4
Week 2
|
3.2 percentage of participants
|
22.2 percentage of participants
|
27.3 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Who Achieved an IGA-TS at Weeks 2 and 4
Week 4
|
6.3 percentage of participants
|
42.5 percentage of participants
|
46.6 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
The IGA is an overall eczema severity rating on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear skin) to 4 (severe disease). The score is based on an overall assessment of the degree of erythema, induration/papulation, and oozing/crusting. IGA score signifies 0 (clear skin) and 1 (almost clear skin).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 4
|
15.1 percentage of participants
|
53.2 percentage of participants
|
54.9 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 8
|
23.8 percentage of participants
|
58.7 percentage of participants
|
62.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 2
|
6.3 percentage of participants
|
32.5 percentage of participants
|
34.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The IGA is an overall eczema severity rating on a 0 (clear skin) to 4 (severe disease) scale. The score is based on an overall assessment of the degree of erythema, induration/papulation, and oozing/crusting. IGA score signifies 0 (clear skin) and 1 (almost clear skin).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 20
|
63.6 percentage of participants
|
67.4 percentage of participants
|
62.4 percentage of participants
|
73.5 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 24
|
71.4 percentage of participants
|
78.6 percentage of participants
|
67.0 percentage of participants
|
76.7 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 28
|
64.9 percentage of participants
|
74.4 percentage of participants
|
67.3 percentage of participants
|
77.3 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 48
|
72.2 percentage of participants
|
76.3 percentage of participants
|
74.3 percentage of participants
|
73.8 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 52
|
76.3 percentage of participants
|
73.7 percentage of participants
|
76.9 percentage of participants
|
75.4 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 8
|
18.8 percentage of participants
|
38.3 percentage of participants
|
65.3 percentage of participants
|
68.4 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 12
|
55.6 percentage of participants
|
65.2 percentage of participants
|
62.7 percentage of participants
|
66.5 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 16
|
60.5 percentage of participants
|
62.2 percentage of participants
|
66.5 percentage of participants
|
68.9 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 32
|
77.1 percentage of participants
|
81.4 percentage of participants
|
71.5 percentage of participants
|
75.9 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 36
|
73.5 percentage of participants
|
82.1 percentage of participants
|
74.5 percentage of participants
|
71.7 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 40
|
81.3 percentage of participants
|
79.5 percentage of participants
|
73.5 percentage of participants
|
75.5 percentage of participants
|
|
LTS Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving IGA Scores of 0 or 1
Week 44
|
84.8 percentage of participants
|
86.5 percentage of participants
|
74.3 percentage of participants
|
76.2 percentage of participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline to Weeks 2 and 4Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed includes participants in the ITT population with a Baseline Itch NRS score ≥ 4.
The Itch NRS is a daily participant-reported measure (24-hour recall), using a diary, of the worst level of itch intensity. Participants are asked to rate the itching severity because of their AD by selecting a number from 0 (no itch) to 10 (worst imaginable itch) that best describes their worst level of itching in the past 24 hours.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=78 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=156 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=161 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 4-Point Improvement in Itch NRS Score From Baseline to Weeks 2 and 4
Week 2
|
5.1 percentage of participants
|
26.3 percentage of participants
|
33.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a ≥ 4-Point Improvement in Itch NRS Score From Baseline to Weeks 2 and 4
Week 4
|
11.5 percentage of participants
|
38.5 percentage of participants
|
51.6 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
EASI scoring system examines 4 areas of the body and weights them for participants of at least 8 years of age. Each of the 4 body regions is assessed separately for erythema (E), induration/papulation/edema (I), excoriations (Ex), and lichenification (l) for an average degree of severity of each sign in each region. The severity strata for the EASI are as follows: 0 = clear; 0.1 to 1.0 = almost clear; 1.1 to 7.0 = mild; 7.1 to 21.0 = moderate; 21.1 to 50.0 = severe; 50.1 to 72.0 = very severe. An EASI50 responder was defined as a participant achieving 50% or greater improvement from Baseline in EASI score.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI50
Week 2
|
19.8 percentage of participants
|
53.2 percentage of participants
|
62.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI50
Week 4
|
27.8 percentage of participants
|
68.7 percentage of participants
|
75.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI50
Week 8
|
43.7 percentage of participants
|
69.4 percentage of participants
|
77.9 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2 and 4Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
EASI scoring system examines 4 areas of the body and weights them for participants of at least 8 years of age. Each of the 4 body regions is assessed separately for erythema (E), induration/papulation/edema (I), excoriations (Ex), and lichenification (l) for an average degree of severity of each sign in each region. The severity strata for the EASI are as follows: 0 = clear; 0.1 to 1.0 = almost clear; 1.1 to 7.0 = mild; 7.1 to 21.0 = moderate; 21.1 to 50.0 = severe; 50.1 to 72.0 = very severe. An EASI75 responder was defined as a participant achieving 75% or greater improvement from Baseline in EASI score.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI75
Week 2
|
5.6 percentage of participants
|
30.2 percentage of participants
|
36.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI75
Week 4
|
14.3 percentage of participants
|
51.6 percentage of participants
|
58.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study.
EASI scoring system examines 4 areas of the body and weights them for participants of at least 8 years of age. Each of the 4 body regions is assessed separately for erythema (E), induration/papulation/edema (I), excoriations (Ex), and lichenification (l) for an average degree of severity of each sign in each region. The severity strata for the EASI are as follows: 0 = clear; 0.1 to 1.0 = almost clear; 1.1 to 7.0 = mild; 7.1 to 21.0 = moderate; 21.1 to 50.0 = severe; 50.1 to 72.0 = very severe. An EASI90 responder was defined as a participant achieving 90% or greater improvement from Baseline in EASI score.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI90
Week 8
|
9.5 percentage of participants
|
38.1 percentage of participants
|
44.3 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI90
Week 4
|
4.0 percentage of participants
|
30.6 percentage of participants
|
36.4 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants Achieving EASI90
Week 2
|
2.4 percentage of participants
|
12.7 percentage of participants
|
19.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
EASI scoring system examines 4 areas of the body and weights them for participants of at least 8 years of age. Each of the 4 body regions is assessed separately for erythema (E), induration/papulation/edema (I), excoriations (Ex), and lichenification (l) for an average degree of severity of each sign in each region. The severity strata for the EASI are as follows: 0 = clear; 0.1 to 1.0 = almost clear; 1.1 to 7.0 = mild; 7.1 to 21.0 = moderate; 21.1 to 50.0 = severe; 50.1 to 72.0 = very severe. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline in EASI Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-16.34 percent change
Standard Error 3.42
|
-51.82 percent change
Standard Error 2.36
|
-56.62 percent change
Standard Error 2.35
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline in EASI Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-23.03 percent change
Standard Error 3.90
|
-68.04 percent change
Standard Error 2.66
|
-71.08 percent change
Standard Error 2.64
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline in EASI Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-37.88 percent change
Standard Error 3.72
|
-71.01 percent change
Standard Error 2.52
|
-77.40 percent change
Standard Error 2.49
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The SCORAD is a tool to assess extent and severity of eczema. To determine the extent, the rule of nines or handprint method is used to assess eczema affected area (A). To determine disease severity (B) it evaluates 6 clinical characteristics: 1. redness, 2. swelling, 3. oozing/crusting, 4. scratch marks, 5. lichenification, and 6. dryness on a 4-point scale of 0 to 3 (0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe), added to give B with maximum score of 18. Subjective symptoms (C) of itch and sleeplessness are assessed using a visual analogue scale where 0 is no itch (or no sleeplessness) and 10 is the worst imaginable itch (or sleeplessness), added to give C with maximum score of 20. These 3 aspects: extent of disease (A: 0-1-2), disease severity (B: 0-18), \& subjective symptoms (C: 0-20) combined using A/5 + 7\*B/2+ C to give a maximum possible score of 103, where 0 = no disease and 103 = severe disease. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline In SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-16.67 percent change
Standard Deviation 34.152
|
-43.96 percent change
Standard Deviation 28.548
|
-49.32 percent change
Standard Deviation 31.878
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline In SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-27.68 percent change
Standard Deviation 34.518
|
-57.80 percent change
Standard Deviation 28.635
|
-61.33 percent change
Standard Deviation 30.113
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percent Change From Baseline In SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score
Percent Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-37.00 percent change
Standard Deviation 36.392
|
-62.14 percent change
Standard Deviation 31.108
|
-67.24 percent change
Standard Deviation 28.711
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The Itch NRS is a daily participant-reported measure (24-hour recall), using a diary, of the worst level of itch intensity. Participants are asked to rate the itching severity because of their AD by selecting a number from 0 (no itch) to 10 (worst imaginable itch) that best describes their worst level of itching in the past 24 hours. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Itch NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.89 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.20
|
-2.28 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.14
|
-2.53 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.13
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Itch NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-1.08 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.23
|
-2.79 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.16
|
-3.16 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.15
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Itch NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-1.54 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.25
|
-3.14 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.17
|
-3.53 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.16
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Up to Week 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline Itch NRS score ≥ 2, ≥ 3 or ≥ 4 and a daily Itch NRS assessment during the VC Period.
The Itch NRS is a daily participant-reported measure (24-hour recall), using a diary, of the worst level of itch intensity. Participants were asked to rate the itching severity because of their AD by selecting a number from 0 (no itch) to 10 (worst imaginable itch) that best describes their worst level of itching in the past 24 hours. Kaplan-Meier estimation method was used for analyses.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Time to Achieve Itch NRS Score Improvement of at Least 2, 3, or 4 Points
≥ 2-Point Improvement in Itch NRS Score
|
15.0 days
Interval 10.0 to 22.0
|
4.0 days
Interval 3.0 to 5.0
|
3.0 days
Interval 3.0 to 4.0
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Time to Achieve Itch NRS Score Improvement of at Least 2, 3, or 4 Points
≥ 4-Point Improvement in Itch NRS Score
|
NA days
Interval 28.0 to
The median time and upper limit of CI was not estimable due to low number of participants with data.
|
14.0 days
Interval 9.0 to 19.0
|
13.0 days
Interval 9.0 to 15.0
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Time to Achieve Itch NRS Score Improvement of at Least 2, 3, or 4 Points
≥ 3-Point Improvement in Itch NRS Score
|
27.0 days
Interval 13.0 to 69.0
|
8.0 days
Interval 7.0 to 11.0
|
6.0 days
Interval 5.0 to 9.0
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The Skin Pain NRS is a daily patient-reported measure (24-hour recall), using a diary, of the worst level of pain intensity from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). Participants will be asked, "Rate the pain severity from your atopic dermatitis skin changes by selecting a number that best describes your worst level of pain in the past 24 hours." A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Skin Pain NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.70 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.746
|
-1.90 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.950
|
-2.07 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.164
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Skin Pain NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-0.84 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.307
|
-2.36 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.217
|
-2.72 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.513
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Skin Pain NRS Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-1.16 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.610
|
-2.55 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.360
|
-2.84 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.743
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2 and 4Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline score ≥ 6.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of sleep quality, sleep depth, and restoration associated with sleep. This questionnaire is completed in the morning by the participant where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep disturbance. It is a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep disturbance.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=116 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=233 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=238 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 24-Hour Recall Score
Week 2
|
5.2 percentage of participants
|
13.7 percentage of participants
|
14.7 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 24-Hour Recall Score
Week 4
|
6.9 percentage of participants
|
19.3 percentage of participants
|
21.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2 and 4Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed included participants in the ITT population with a Baseline score ≥ 6.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of alertness, sleepiness, and tiredness during usual waking hours and the perceived functional impairments during wakefulness associated with sleep problems or impaired alertness. The questionnaire is filled in the evening where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep impairment. It has 8 simple questions with a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep-related impairment.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=114 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=233 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=245 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 24-Hour Recall Score
Week 2
|
8.8 percentage of participants
|
16.3 percentage of participants
|
13.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Clinically Meaningful (≥ 6-Point) Improvement in the PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 24-Hour Recall Score
Week 4
|
13.2 percentage of participants
|
20.6 percentage of participants
|
19.2 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of sleep quality, sleep depth, and restoration associated with sleep. This questionnaire is completed in the morning by the participant where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep disturbance. It is a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep disturbance. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.18 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.45
|
-1.72 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.31
|
-2.49 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.30
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-0.25 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.50
|
-2.58 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.34
|
-3.10 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.33
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-0.43 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.59
|
-2.97 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.39
|
-3.62 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.39
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of alertness, sleepiness, and tiredness during usual waking hours and the perceived functional impairments during wakefulness associated with sleep problems or impaired alertness. The questionnaire is filled in the evening where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep impairment. It has 8 simple questions with a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep-related impairment. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-1.22 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.62
|
-3.34 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.41
|
-3.52 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.40
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.58 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.49
|
-1.76 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.33
|
-2.25 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.33
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 24-Hour Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-1.06 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.55
|
-2.71 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.37
|
-2.97 score on a scale
Standard Error 0.36
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of alertness, sleepiness, and tiredness during usual waking hours and the perceived functional impairments during wakefulness associated with sleep problems or impaired alertness. The questionnaire is filled in the evening where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep impairment. It has 8 simple questions with a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep-related impairment. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-1.51 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.739
|
-2.22 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.305
|
-0.39 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.984
|
-0.39 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.907
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-0.97 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.085
|
-2.81 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.005
|
-0.37 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.775
|
-0.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.511
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep-Related Impairment (8a) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-0.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.211
|
-2.66 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.268
|
0.11 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.929
|
0.02 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.584
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) questionnaire assesses participant's self-reported perceptions of sleep quality, sleep depth, and restoration associated with sleep. This questionnaire is completed in the morning by the participant where each item asks the participant to rate the severity of the participant's sleep disturbance. It is a 5-point scale with a range in score from 8 to 40, with higher scores indicating greater severity of sleep disturbance. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-1.93 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.284
|
-2.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.160
|
-0.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.575
|
-0.66 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.865
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-1.22 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.681
|
-3.15 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.242
|
0.02 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.536
|
0.51 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.563
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in PROMIS Short Form - Sleep Disturbance (8b) 7-Day Recall Score
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-1.95 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.876
|
-3.31 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.082
|
-0.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.506
|
-0.07 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.918
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
Body surface area affected by AD was assessed for 4 separate body regions and is collected as part of the EASI assessment: head and neck, trunk (including genital region), upper extremities, and lower extremities (including the buttocks). Each body region was assessed for disease extent ranging from 0% to 100% involvement. The overall total percentage was reported based off of all 4 body regions combined, after applying specific multipliers to the different body regions to account for the percent of the total BSA represented by each of the 4 regions. Used the percentage of skin affected for each region (0 to 100%) in EASI as follows: BSA Total = 0.1\*BSA head and neck + 0.3\*BSA trunk + 0.2\* BSA upper limbs + 0.4\*BSA lower limbs. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted Percentage of Body Surface Area (%BSA)
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.43 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.559
|
-3.69 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.230
|
-3.76 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.238
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted Percentage of Body Surface Area (%BSA)
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-1.56 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.088
|
-5.29 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.969
|
-5.25 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.190
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted Percentage of Body Surface Area (%BSA)
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-2.51 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.722
|
-6.30 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.378
|
-6.54 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.967
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
Body surface area affected by AD was assessed for 4 separate body regions and is collected as part of the EASI assessment: head and neck, trunk (including genital region), upper extremities, and lower extremities (including the buttocks). Each body region was assessed for disease extent ranging from 0% to 100% involvement. The overall total percentage was reported based off of all 4 body regions combined, after applying specific multipliers to the different body regions to account for the percent of the total BSA represented by each of the 4 regions. Used the percentage of skin affected for each region (0 to 100%) in EASI as follows: BSA Total = 0.1\*BSA head and neck + 0.3\*BSA trunk + 0.2\* BSA upper limbs + 0.4\*BSA lower limbs. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-4.23 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.849
|
-2.84 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.907
|
-6.84 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.852
|
-6.96 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.989
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 16
|
-4.96 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.194
|
-2.98 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.429
|
-7.36 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.875
|
-7.26 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.080
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-5.32 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.964
|
-3.85 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.223
|
-7.64 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.998
|
-7.64 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.737
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 28
|
-4.56 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.486
|
-4.43 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.995
|
-7.66 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.029
|
-7.62 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.913
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 32
|
-5.17 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.472
|
-4.53 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.399
|
-7.80 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.011
|
-7.61 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.261
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 36
|
-5.21 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.972
|
-4.39 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.509
|
-8.18 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.111
|
-7.97 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.010
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 40
|
-4.67 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.519
|
-4.75 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.337
|
-8.07 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.899
|
-8.11 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.997
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 48
|
-5.65 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.128
|
-4.58 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.696
|
-8.39 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.023
|
-7.96 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.993
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-5.72 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.481
|
-4.93 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.771
|
-8.58 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.013
|
-8.14 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.906
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 44
|
-5.28 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.173
|
-4.56 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.609
|
-8.14 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.789
|
-8.02 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.939
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in Atopic Dermatitis Afflicted %BSA
Change From Baseline at Week 20
|
-4.78 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.095
|
-3.75 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.321
|
-7.69 % BSA
Standard Deviation 4.901
|
-7.49 % BSA
Standard Deviation 5.012
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The POEM is a 7-question quality-of-life assessment that asks how many days the participant has been bothered by various aspects of their skin condition during the past 7 days. It assesses disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) on a scale ranging from 0-4 (0 = no days, 1 = 1-2 days, 2 = 3-4 days, 3 = 5-6 days, 4 = everyday). The sum of the 7 items gives the total POEM score of 0 (clear or almost clear) to 28 (very severe eczema). High scores are indicative of more severe disease and poor quality of life. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-4.30 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.044
|
-10.60 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.262
|
-11.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.931
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-2.25 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.779
|
-9.47 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.212
|
-10.60 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.670
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-3.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.685
|
-10.12 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.380
|
-11.53 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.891
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The POEM is a 7-question quality-of-life assessment that asks how many days the participant has been bothered by various aspects of their skin condition during the past 7 days. It assesses disease symptoms (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding and weeping) on a scale ranging from 0-4 (0 = no days, 1 = 1-2 days, 2 = 3-4 days, 3 = 5-6 days, 4 = everyday). The sum of the 7 items gives the total POEM score of 0 (absent disease) to 28 (severe disease). High scores are indicative of more severe disease and poor quality of life. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in POEM Score
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-5.95 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.607
|
-6.89 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.730
|
-10.74 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.653
|
-11.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.710
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in POEM Score
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-4.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.185
|
-7.26 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.189
|
-10.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.655
|
-11.44 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.689
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in POEM Score
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-4.61 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.868
|
-7.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.752
|
-10.51 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.396
|
-10.61 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.057
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Participants in the ITT population with age \>= 16 were included. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The DLQI is a simple, 10 question (Q) validated quality-of-life questionnaire to measure how much the skin problem has affected the participant. It covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings (Q1 and Q2), daily activities (Q3 and Q4), leisure (Q5 and Q6), work and school (Q7), personal relationships (Q8 and Q9), and treatment(Q10). The recall Period of this scale is over the last week. Response categories include 0-not at all, 1-a little, 2-a lot, and 3-very much, and unanswered or not relevant responses scored as 0. Scores range from 0 ("no impact on participant's life") to 30 ("extremely large effect on participant's life"), and a 4-point change from Baseline is considered as the minimal clinically important difference threshold. A negative change from Baseline indicates less impact of the skin problem on participant's life.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=107 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=215 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=223 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-1.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.618
|
-6.18 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.740
|
-6.90 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.980
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-2.50 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.101
|
-6.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.867
|
-7.15 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.565
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-2.83 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.722
|
-7.28 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.907
|
-7.72 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.152
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Participants in the LTS evaluable population with age \>= 16 were included. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The DLQI is a simple, 10 question (Q) validated quality-of-life questionnaire to measure how much the skin problem has affected the participant. It covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings (Q1 and Q2), daily activities (Q3 and Q4), leisure (Q5 and Q6), work and school (Q7), personal relationships (Q8 and Q9), and treatment(Q10). The recall Period of this scale is over the last week. Response categories include 0-not at all, 1-a little, 2-a lot, and 3-very much, and unanswered or not relevant responses scored as 0. Scores range from 0 ("no impact on participant's life") to 30 ("extremely large effect on participant's life"), and a 4-point change from Baseline is considered as the minimal clinically important difference threshold. A negative change from Baseline indicates less impact of the skin problem on participant's life.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=40 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=38 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=189 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=200 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in DLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-3.65 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.602
|
-4.53 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.246
|
-7.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.855
|
-7.79 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.240
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in DLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-3.21 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.814
|
-5.32 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.304
|
-7.87 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.080
|
-7.75 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.277
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in DLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-3.35 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.438
|
-4.81 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.720
|
-7.95 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.589
|
-7.70 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.443
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Participants in the ITT population with age \< 16 were included. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
CDLQI is the youth/children's version of the DLQI. The CDLQI is a simple 10 question (Q) validated quality-of-life questionnaire. It covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings (Q1 and Q2), leisure (Q4, Q5, and Q6), school or holidays (Q7), personal relationships (Q3 and Q8), sleep (Q9) and treatment (Q10). Response categories include 0-not at all, 1-a little, 2-a lot, and 3-very much, and unanswered or not relevant responses scored as 0. The total DLQI score is calculated by adding the score of each question resulting in a maximum score of 30 (extremely large effect on participant's life) and a minimum score of 0 (no impact on participant's life) and a 4-point change from Baseline is considered as the minimal clinically important difference threshold. A negative change from Baseline indicates less impact of the skin problem on participant's life.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=19 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=37 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=30 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Children Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-1.06 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.733
|
-5.06 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.937
|
-6.76 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.306
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Children Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-2.47 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.530
|
-4.35 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.683
|
-6.90 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.101
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Children Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-2.31 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.618
|
-5.88 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.524
|
-7.61 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.142
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Participants in the LTS evaluable population with age \< 16 were included. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
CDLQI is the youth/children's version of the DLQI. The CDLQI is a simple 10 question (Q) validated quality-of-life questionnaire. It covers 6 domains including symptoms and feelings (Q1 and Q2), leisure (Q4, Q5, and Q6), school or holidays (Q7), personal relationships (Q3 and Q8), sleep (Q9) and treatment (Q10). Response categories include 0-not at all, 1-a little, 2-a lot, and 3-very much, and unanswered or not relevant responses scored as 0. The total DLQI score is calculated by adding the score of each question resulting in a maximum score of 30 (extremely large effect on participant's life) and a minimum score of 0 (no impact on participant's life) and a 4-point change from Baseline is considered as the minimal clinically important difference threshold. A negative change from Baseline indicates less impact of the skin problem on participant's life.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=8 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=9 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=33 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=25 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in CDLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 12
|
-4.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.477
|
-1.13 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.097
|
-5.83 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.661
|
-8.86 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.532
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in CDLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 24
|
-2.71 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.155
|
-2.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.780
|
-6.72 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.640
|
-9.42 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.214
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in CDLQI Score
Change From Baseline at Week 52
|
-4.33 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.359
|
-0.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.928
|
-6.70 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.766
|
-9.71 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.262
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PGIC is a participants' self-reporting measure that reflects their belief about the efficacy of treatment. It is a 7-point scale where participants rate the questions as: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, and 7=very much worse. The lower score indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Mean Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2
|
3.53 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.500
|
2.06 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.937
|
1.94 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.911
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Mean Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4
|
3.30 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.434
|
1.78 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.903
|
1.68 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.843
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Mean Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Score at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8
|
3.08 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.489
|
1.76 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.913
|
1.61 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.914
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PGIC is a participants' self-reporting measure that reflects their belief about the efficacy of treatment. It is a 7-point scale where participants rate the questions as: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, and 7=very much worse. The lower score indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Minimally Improved: 3
|
37.2 percentage of participants
|
25.0 percentage of participants
|
16.9 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - No Change: 4
|
13.3 percentage of participants
|
4.2 percentage of participants
|
5.5 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Minimally Worse: 5
|
11.5 percentage of participants
|
0.4 percentage of participants
|
0.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Much Worse: 6
|
10.6 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Very Much Improved: 1
|
6.7 percentage of participants
|
48.5 percentage of participants
|
51.7 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Much Improved: 2
|
22.9 percentage of participants
|
29.5 percentage of participants
|
32.1 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Minimally Improved: 3
|
38.1 percentage of participants
|
18.1 percentage of participants
|
13.3 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - No Change: 4
|
11.4 percentage of participants
|
3.0 percentage of participants
|
2.1 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Minimally Worse: 5
|
11.4 percentage of participants
|
0.8 percentage of participants
|
0.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Much Worse: 6
|
6.7 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4 - Very Much Worse: 7
|
2.9 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Very Much Improved: 1
|
11.0 percentage of participants
|
48.4 percentage of participants
|
59.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Very Much Worse: 7
|
3.5 percentage of participants
|
0.4 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Very Much Improved: 1
|
5.3 percentage of participants
|
31.4 percentage of participants
|
36.7 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2 - Much Improved: 2
|
18.6 percentage of participants
|
38.6 percentage of participants
|
40.1 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Much Improved: 2
|
30.0 percentage of participants
|
33.2 percentage of participants
|
25.8 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Minimally Improved: 3
|
29.0 percentage of participants
|
14.8 percentage of participants
|
10.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - No Change: 4
|
12.0 percentage of participants
|
1.3 percentage of participants
|
2.2 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Minimally Worse: 5
|
7.0 percentage of participants
|
2.2 percentage of participants
|
2.2 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Much Worse: 6
|
10.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With Each Score on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8 - Very Much Worse: 7
|
1.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
0.0 percentage of participants
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The PGIC is a participants' self-reporting measure that reflects their belief about the efficacy of treatment. It is a 7-point scale where participants rate the questions as: 1=very much improved, 2=much improved, 3=minimally improved, 4=no change, 5=minimally worse, 6=much worse, and 7=very much worse. The lower score indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Score of Either 1 or 2 on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 2
|
23.9 percentage of participants
Interval 16.4 to 32.8
|
69.9 percentage of participants
Interval 63.6 to 75.7
|
76.8 percentage of participants
Interval 70.9 to 82.0
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Score of Either 1 or 2 on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 4
|
29.5 percentage of participants
Interval 21.0 to 39.2
|
78.1 percentage of participants
Interval 72.2 to 83.2
|
83.8 percentage of participants
Interval 78.5 to 88.2
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Percentage of Participants With a Score of Either 1 or 2 on the PGIC at Weeks 2, 4, and 8
Week 8
|
41.0 percentage of participants
Interval 31.3 to 51.3
|
81.6 percentage of participants
Interval 75.9 to 86.5
|
85.6 percentage of participants
Interval 80.4 to 89.9
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
EQ-5D-5L questionnaire has 2 parts: EQ-5D-5L descriptive system \& EQ-VAS. EQ-5D is a validated, self-administered, generic utility questionnaire wherein participants rate their current health state based on 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. 5L indicates that for each dimension, there are 5 levels:1=no problems,2=slight problems,3=moderate problems,4=severe problems, and 5=extreme problems. EQ-5D-5L score is assessed using VAS that ranges from 0 to 100 millimetres (mm), where 0 indicates "worst health you can imagine" and 100 indicates "best health you can imagine". The participant was asked to indicate his/her health state over past 7 days in each of the 5 dimensions. Digits for the 5 dimensions can be combined into a 5-digit number that describes the participant's health state. In the EQ-VAS, participants had to record their health state on a scale ranging from 0 to 100. A positive change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in EuroQuality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-0.94 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.046
|
6.93 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.690
|
8.21 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.770
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in EuroQuality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
1.76 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.618
|
8.73 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.494
|
7.10 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.697
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in EuroQuality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D-5L) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score
Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
1.74 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.376
|
9.12 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.871
|
7.98 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.813
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 2, 4, and 8Population: ITT population included all participants who were randomized to the study. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The WPAI-SHP is a 6-item participant questionnaire developed to measure the effect of overall health and specific symptoms on productivity at work and regular activities outside of it in the past 7 days. The WPAI-SHP consists of 6 questions as follows: 1=currently employed; 2=hours missed due to AD; 3=hours missed other reasons; 4=hours actually worked; 5=degree AD affected productivity while working; 6=degree AD affected regular activities and the computed percentage, range for each sub scale is from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=252 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=253 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
4.45 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.542
|
-3.89 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.223
|
1.19 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.954
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
14.09 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.660
|
1.22 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.898
|
3.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.242
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
5.07 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.253
|
-0.26 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.891
|
6.23 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.211
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-7.36 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.630
|
-15.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.494
|
-16.75 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.951
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-9.56 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.580
|
-16.86 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.417
|
-19.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.933
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-13.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.019
|
-19.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.878
|
-21.61 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.071
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-5.27 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.539
|
-15.04 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.812
|
-15.49 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.785
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-2.35 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.602
|
-13.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.207
|
-15.82 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.545
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-9.01 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 31.735
|
-18.09 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.718
|
-15.54 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.119
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 2
|
-6.32 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.434
|
-16.58 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.696
|
-21.56 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.695
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 4
|
-10.09 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.349
|
-20.80 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.107
|
-23.53 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.422
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Change From Baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem (WPAI-SHP) Version 2.0 (v2.0)
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline at Week 8
|
-11.70 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.992
|
-21.30 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.653
|
-24.06 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.682
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52Population: LTS evaluable population included all participants who applied ruxolitinib 0.75% or 1.5% cream at least once during the LTS Period. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
The WPAI-SHP is a 6-item participant questionnaire developed to measure the effect of overall health and specific symptoms on productivity at work and regular activities outside of it in the past 7 days. The WPAI-SHP consists of 6 questions as follows: 1=currently employed; 2=hours missed due to AD; 3=hours missed other reasons; 4=hours actually worked; 5=degree AD affected productivity while working; 6=degree AD affected regular activities and the computed percentage, range for each sub scale is from 0 to 100, with higher values indicating greater impairment and less productivity. A negative change from Baseline indicates improvement.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=48 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=222 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=225 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 24
|
-8.42 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.754
|
-16.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.697
|
-23.51 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.067
|
-23.66 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.396
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 12
|
-4.78 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.023
|
-2.02 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.902
|
-0.26 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.118
|
7.72 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.067
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 24
|
-0.39 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.466
|
4.77 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.899
|
-1.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.511
|
4.96 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.942
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 36
|
-3.92 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.687
|
-3.12 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.143
|
-0.32 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.115
|
8.93 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.916
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Work Time Missed Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 52
|
-8.11 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.718
|
3.23 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.008
|
1.81 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.094
|
2.38 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.245
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 12
|
-11.50 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.458
|
-18.64 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.668
|
-20.21 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.925
|
-20.65 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.844
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 36
|
-3.13 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.887
|
-8.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 33.378
|
-23.15 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.813
|
-22.72 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.185
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Impairment While Working Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 52
|
-10.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.166
|
-20.00 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.634
|
-23.42 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.597
|
-22.77 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.109
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 12
|
-12.18 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.763
|
-19.64 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.842
|
-18.21 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.345
|
-14.99 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.777
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 24
|
-7.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.254
|
-12.96 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 34.336
|
-20.26 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 31.191
|
-18.60 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.284
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 36
|
-5.70 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.040
|
-10.43 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 33.034
|
-20.52 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 31.307
|
-14.86 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.482
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 52
|
-16.36 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.721
|
-16.67 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 40.350
|
-19.42 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.878
|
-20.50 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.949
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 12
|
-12.20 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.273
|
-8.48 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.244
|
-21.50 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.470
|
-25.19 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.314
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 24
|
-11.46 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.517
|
-7.14 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.113
|
-22.83 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.440
|
-27.47 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.943
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 36
|
-6.39 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.997
|
-1.25 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.845
|
-24.48 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.203
|
-26.84 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.493
|
|
LTS Period: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0
Percent Activity Impairment Due to AD: Change From Baseline in WPAI-SHP v2.0 at Week 52
|
-11.05 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.910
|
-13.42 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.392
|
-22.91 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.669
|
-26.92 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.042
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Pre-dose at Weeks 2, 4 and 8Population: The pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluable population included all participants who applied at least 1 application of ruxolitinib cream and provided at least 1 postdose plasma sample (1 PK measurement) that complies with the instruction in the Protocol. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
Plasma samples were collected just before the morning application of study drug during each specified time point.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=236 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=241 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
VC Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 2
|
26.8 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 51.2
|
33.4 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 49.9
|
—
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 4
|
25.1 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 42.7
|
34.7 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 43.3
|
—
|
—
|
|
VC Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 8
|
24.0 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 39.7
|
33.3 nanomole per liter (nM)
Standard Deviation 49.5
|
—
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Pre-dose at Weeks 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, 48 and 52Population: The PK evaluable population included all participants who applied at least 1 application of ruxolitinib cream and provided at least 1 postdose plasma sample (1 PK measurement) that complies with the instruction in the Protocol. Number analyzed is the number of participants with data available for analyses at the specified time point.
Plasma samples were collected just before the morning application of study drug during each specified time point.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
VC Period: Vehicle Cream BID
n=44 Participants
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=47 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
VC Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=210 Participants
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 8 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
LTS Period: Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream
n=213 Participants
Participants who applied ruxolitinib 1.5% cream during VC Period, continued applying ruxolitinib 1.5% cream topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Week 8 to 52 during the LTS Period. Participants stopped treatment 3 days after lesions disappeared and restarted at the first sign of recurrence.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 44
|
14.3 nM
Standard Deviation 23.7
|
15.7 nM
Standard Deviation 32.6
|
17.3 nM
Standard Deviation 33.5
|
26.8 nM
Standard Deviation 58.6
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 12
|
13.8 nM
Standard Deviation 21.3
|
21.9 nM
Standard Deviation 34.4
|
16.5 nM
Standard Deviation 28.1
|
24.9 nM
Standard Deviation 45.4
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 16
|
11.9 nM
Standard Deviation 18.8
|
18.1 nM
Standard Deviation 34.6
|
19.7 nM
Standard Deviation 58.8
|
24.6 nM
Standard Deviation 51.0
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 20
|
13.0 nM
Standard Deviation 22.2
|
15.4 nM
Standard Deviation 32.0
|
16.1 nM
Standard Deviation 31.2
|
24.2 nM
Standard Deviation 46.1
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 24
|
13.0 nM
Standard Deviation 22.1
|
18.7 nM
Standard Deviation 31.6
|
18.8 nM
Standard Deviation 42.4
|
24.6 nM
Standard Deviation 51.8
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 28
|
18.5 nM
Standard Deviation 36.9
|
15.5 nM
Standard Deviation 24.6
|
16.2 nM
Standard Deviation 31.2
|
23.7 nM
Standard Deviation 45.3
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 32
|
17.8 nM
Standard Deviation 27.3
|
17.7 nM
Standard Deviation 33.3
|
21.4 nM
Standard Deviation 59.8
|
21.0 nM
Standard Deviation 35.3
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 36
|
21.1 nM
Standard Deviation 54.8
|
29.5 nM
Standard Deviation 84.0
|
15.7 nM
Standard Deviation 30.5
|
26.6 nM
Standard Deviation 51.2
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 40
|
14.9 nM
Standard Deviation 25.3
|
16.5 nM
Standard Deviation 31.0
|
14.7 nM
Standard Deviation 27.6
|
23.2 nM
Standard Deviation 64.1
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 48
|
15.6 nM
Standard Deviation 26.8
|
17.9 nM
Standard Deviation 56.0
|
15.3 nM
Standard Deviation 30.3
|
24.8 nM
Standard Deviation 55.3
|
|
LTS Period: Trough Plasma Concentrations of Ruxolitinib
Week 52
|
11.0 nM
Standard Deviation 17.9
|
14.2 nM
Standard Deviation 27.5
|
11.9 nM
Standard Deviation 20.5
|
21.0 nM
Standard Deviation 55.7
|
Adverse Events
Vehicle Cream BID
Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 participants at risk
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=300 participants at risk
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=300 participants at risk
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Acute abdomen
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Colitis
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Anaemia postoperative
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Femur fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Humerus fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Pelvic fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Radius fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Rib fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Ulna fracture
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Bronchitis
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Cholecystitis infective
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.67%
2/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Central nervous system lesion
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Cholangitis
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Cholelithiasis
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Jaundice cholestatic
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Dermatitis atopic
|
0.79%
1/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Hypovolaemia
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Nasal sinus cancer
|
0.79%
1/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
General disorders
Pyrexia
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
General disorders
Serositis
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Substance-induced psychotic disorder
|
0.00%
0/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.33%
1/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
0.00%
0/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Vehicle Cream BID
n=126 participants at risk
Participants received vehicle cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
Ruxolitinib 0.75% Cream BID
n=300 participants at risk
Participants received ruxolitinib 0.75% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
Ruxolitinib 1.5% Cream BID
n=300 participants at risk
Participants received ruxolitinib 1.5% cream, applied topically to the affected areas as a thin film BID from Day 1 to Week 52 during the VC Period. Participants applied cream BID to areas identified at Baseline even if the areas improved.
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
1.6%
2/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
6.0%
18/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
10.3%
31/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
3.2%
4/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
9.0%
27/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
12.0%
36/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
4.0%
5/126 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
3.7%
11/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
5.3%
16/300 • Up to 60 weeks
For safety analysis, participants who crossed over treatment from vehicle to active arm (0.75% BID and 1.5% BID Ruxolitinib cream) in LTS Period are counted both in vehicle arm and active arms in the number of participants summaries.
|
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Following the first publication, the Institution and/or Principal Investigator may publish data or results from the Study, provided, however, that the Institution and/or Principal Investigator submits the proposed publication to the Sponsor for review at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of the proposed publication. Sponsor may remove from the proposed publication any information that is considered confidential and/or proprietary other than Study data and results.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER