Trial Outcomes & Findings for A Study to Assess Efficacy and Tolerability of Topical Skincare Products on Psoriasis Patients (NCT NCT06357221)

46 subjects met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and were enrolled in the study.

A Study to Assess Efficacy and Tolerability of Topical Skincare Products on Psoriasis Patients

Body Surface Area is a measure of how much skin is impacted by psoriasis using the following measurement.7 One handprint is equal approximately to 1% of Body Surface Area. A decrease in scores indicated an improvement.

Target lesion severity was measured by the Target Lesion Severity Score. Target Lesion Severity Score assessed erythema, induration, and scaling separately on a scale of 0-8, with 0 meaning no evidence of the parameter and 8 meaning very severe presence of the parameter. Target Lesion Severity Score was calculated as cumulative total of all 3 parameters, which a maximum score of 24 (8 x 3) and minimum score of 0. Total scale range is 0-24, where higher scores are worse outcomes. A decrease in scores indicated an improvement.

Physician Global Assessment assessed overall severity of psoriasis on a scale of 0 to 5, with 0 meaning no presence of psoriasis and 5 meaning very severe presence of psoriasis. A decrease in scores indicated an improvement.

Macroscopic imaging was performed using Visioscan® VC 20plus to take an image of the target lesion. The Visioscan software was used to calculate the analyze the images for skin scaliness (a decrease in values indicates an improvement in roughness).

Macroscopic imaging was performed using Visioscan® VC 20plus to take an image of the target lesion. The Visioscan software was used to calculate the analyze the images for skin smoothness (a decrease in values indicates an improvement in skin smoothness).

Subjects were asked about their perception, satisfaction, and preference with each study treatment using a self-assessment questionnaire. Questionnaires were tabulated; and the number of all response options was reported for each question and time point. Favorable responses (i.e., strongly agree and agree, yes), neutral responses (i.e., neither agree nor disagree, no difference), and unfavorable responses (i.e., strongly disagree and disagree, no) were tabulated as appropriate. Number of participants with favorable responses was provided for each question.

Subjects were asked about their perception, satisfaction, and preference with each study treatment using a self-assessment questionnaire. Questionnaires were tabulated; and the number of all response options was reported for each question and time point. Favorable responses (i.e., strongly agree and agree, yes), neutral responses (i.e., neither agree nor disagree, no difference), and unfavorable responses (i.e., strongly disagree and disagree, no) were tabulated and reported as appropriate. Number of participants with favorable responses was provided for each question.

Subjects were asked about their perception, satisfaction, and preference with each study treatment using a self-assessment questionnaire. Questionnaires were tabulated; and the number of all response options was reported for each question and time point. Favorable responses (i.e., strongly agree and agree, yes), neutral responses (i.e., neither agree nor disagree, no difference), and unfavorable responses (i.e., strongly disagree and disagree, no) were tabulated and reported as appropriate. Number of participants with favorable responses was provided for each question.

Tolerability assessment was performed by the Investigator (parameter: dryness) using a 4-point analog scale (with half-point scores used as necessary to better describe the clinical condition). Investigator graded the degree of irritation of target lesion areas on a scale of 0 to 3, with 0 meaning parameter is not present, and 3 meaning parameter is severely present. A decrease in scores or lack of significant increase indicated tolerability/safety of the treatment products.

Tolerability assessment was performed by subjects (parameters: burning/stinging) using a 4-point analog scale (with half-point scores used as necessary to better describe the clinical condition). subjects graded the degree of irritation of target lesion areas on a scale of 0 to 3, with 0 meaning parameter is not present, and 3 meaning parameter is severely present. A decrease in scores or lack of significant increase indicated tolerability/safety of the treatment products.

Tolerability assessment was performed by subjects (parameters: itching) using a 4-point analog scale (with half-point scores used as necessary to better describe the clinical condition). Subjects graded the degree of irritation of target lesion areas on a scale of 0 to 3, with 0 meaning parameter is not present, and 3 meaning parameter is severely present. A decrease in scores or lack of significant increase indicated tolerability/safety of the treatment products.

Subjects were asked about their life quality by completing a Quality of Life questionnaire of 10 questions. Each question is scored from 0-3, with 0 being "not at all" or "not relevant" and 3 being "very much". All scores were summed to determine the Dermatology Quality of Life Index with score range 0-30: 0-1 (no effect at all on patient's life), 2-5 (small effect), 6-10 (moderate effect), 11-20 (very large effect), 21-30 (extremely large effect). A decrease in score totals from baseline to Week 8 indicated an improvement. A higher score indicates a greater impairment of quality of life.