Background: Inflammatory dermatologic conditions suitable for topical treatments benefit from a hydrating vehicle that improves the skin barrier without irritation.
Objective: This research was designed to assess skin barrier effects and aesthetic attributes of the vehicle for topical roflumilast cream (vehicle) vs a currently marketed ceramide-containing moisturizing cream (moisturizer).
Methods: This was a single-site, randomized, intraindividual, double-blind, controlled study conducted over 17 days. Patients (aged 18 years or older) with mild, symmetric asteatotic eczema of the lower extremities were enrolled to receive lower leg applications of the vehicle on one leg and moisturizer on the other. The primary efficacy endpoint was a change in transepidermal water loss (TEWL) from baseline to day 15. Secondary efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in TEWL at other study visits, change from baseline in hydration as assessed via corneometry, and patient- and investigator-rated assessments of the products. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.
Results: A total of 40 patients enrolled in the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was met for both treatments. A statistically significant difference in TEWL on day 1 favored the moisturizer, but no difference was seen between vehicle and moisturizer at any other timepoint. Both vehicle and moisturizer also met the secondary efficacy endpoint of change from baseline in hydration.
Limitations: The sample size was small.
Conclusions: The vehicle for roflumilast cream performed similarly to a leading, currently marketed, dermatologist-recommended, ceramide-containing moisturizer across all patient- and investigator-rated assessments of efficacy, tolerability, and aesthetic properties in patients with mild asteatotic eczema. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(10):834-840. doi:10.36849/JDD.7958  .