ESSENCE Study: Efficacy and Safety of SD-101 Cream in Participants With Epidermolysis Bullosa

April 1, 2020 updated by: Scioderm, Inc.

A Phase 3, Multi-center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Study of the Efficacy and Safety of SD-101 Cream in Patients With Epidermolysis Bullosa

The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of SD-101-6.0 cream versus Placebo (SD-101-0.0) cream in the treatment of skin lesions in participants with Epidermolysis Bullosa. Funding Source - United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Orphan Products Development (OOPD).

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

This was a Phase 3, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy and safety of SD-101-6.0 cream versus placebo (SD-101-0.0) cream on skin lesions in participants with Simplex, Recessive Dystrophic, or Junctional non-Herlitz Epidermolysis Bullosa. Epidermolysis Bullosa is a rare group of inherited disorders that typically manifest at birth as blistering and lesion formation on the skin in response to little or no apparent trauma. In this study, SD-101-6.0 cream or placebo (SD-101-0.0) cream was to be applied topically, once a day to the entire body for a period of 90 days. Participants had 1 target wound selected at baseline by the investigator. The selected target wound was required to have been present for at least 21 days. Photographic confirmation of the target wound location was collected at baseline, and the picture saved from the first visit was used to confirm location of the target wound at subsequent visits. The participant returned to the study site for Visit 2 (approximately 14 days from baseline), Visit 3 (approximately 30 days from baseline), Visit 4 (approximately 60 days from baseline), and Visit 5 (approximately 90 days from baseline) to have the target wound assessed for the level of healing. In addition, itching, pain, body surface area, target wound closure, and scarring of healed target wound were assessed at each visit. The ARANZ SilhouetteStar™ was used to measure the target wound at all visits.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
169

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Australia
    • New South Wales
      • Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia, 2217
    • Victoria
      • Parkville, Victoria, Australia, 3050
      • Parkville, Victoria, Australia, 3052
  • Austria
      • Salzburg, Austria, 5020
  • France
      • Nice, France, 0-06200
      • Paris, France, 75015
      • Toulouse, France
  • Germany
      • Freiburg, Germany
      • Hannover, Germany
  • Israel
      • Tel Aviv, Israel
  • Italy
      • Milano, Italy, 20122
  • Lithuania
      • Kaunas, Lithuania
  • Netherlands
      • Groningen, Netherlands, 9713 GZ
  • Poland
    • Koszykowa
      • Warszawa, Koszykowa, Poland
  • Serbia
      • Belgrade, Serbia
  • Spain
      • Madrid, Spain
  • United Kingdom
      • London, United Kingdom, WC1N 3JH
  • United States
    • Arizona
      • Phoenix, Arizona, United States, 85016
    • California
      • Redwood City, California, United States, 94063
    • Colorado
      • Aurora, Colorado, United States, 80045
    • District of Columbia
      • Washington, District of Columbia, United States, 20016
    • Florida
      • Miami, Florida, United States, 33136
      • Miami, Florida, United States, 33155
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60611
    • Minnesota
      • Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States, 55455
    • Missouri
      • Columbia, Missouri, United States, 65212
      • Saint Louis, Missouri, United States, 63110
    • New Hampshire
      • Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States, 03756
    • New Jersey
      • Hackensack, New Jersey, United States, 07601
    • New York
      • East Setauket, New York, United States, 11733
      • New York, New York, United States, 10032
    • North Carolina
      • Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States, 27516
    • Ohio
      • Cincinnati, Ohio, United States, 45229-3039
    • Pennsylvania
      • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19104
    • South Carolina
      • Charleston, South Carolina, United States, 29425-5780
    • Texas
      • Austin, Texas, United States, 78723
      • San Antonio, Texas, United States, 78218
    • Washington
      • Seattle, Washington, United States, 98105

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

1 month and older (Child, Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Informed Consent form signed by the participant or participant's legal representative; if the participant was under the age of 18 but capable of providing assent, signed assent from the participant.
  • Participant (or caretaker) must have been willing to comply with all protocol requirements.
  • Diagnosis of Simplex, Recessive Dystrophic, or Junctional non-Herlitz EB.
  • Participant must have had 1 target wound (size 10 to 50 cm^2) at study entry.
  • Participants 1 month and older.
  • Target wound must have been present for at least 21 days.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Participants who did not meet the entry criteria outlined above.
  • Selected target wound did not have clinical evidence of local infection.
  • Use of any investigational drug within the 30 days before enrollment.
  • Use of immunotherapy or cytotoxic chemotherapy within the 60 days before enrollment.
  • Use of systemic or topical steroidal therapy within the 30 days before enrollment. (Inhaled steroids and ophthalmic drops containing steroids were allowed).
  • Use of systemic antibiotics within the 7 days before enrollment.
  • Current or former malignancy.
  • Arterial or venous disorder resulting in ulcerated lesions.
  • Pregnancy or breastfeeding during the study. (A urine pregnancy test was performed at screening and every 30 days until the final visit for female participants of childbearing potential).
  • Females of childbearing potential who were not abstinent and not practicing a medically acceptable method of contraception.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: SD-101-6.0 cream
SD-101-6.0 cream applied topically, once a day to the entire body for a period of 90 days
Drug: SD-101-6.0 cream
applied topically once a day for 90 days
Other Names:
  • SD-101
Placebo Comparator: Placebo (SD-101-0.0) cream
SD-101-0.0 (placebo) cream applied topically, once a day to the entire body for a period of 90 days
Drug: Placebo (SD-101-0.0) cream
applied topically once a day for 90 days
Other Names:
  • placebo

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Time To Complete Target Wound Closure Within 3 Months
Time Frame: From baseline to Month 3 visit
Target wounds were monitored at each study visit for complete closure, defined as skin re-epithelialization without drainage. Time to target wound closure was measured from the date of the first administration of the study drug to the date of target wound closure. Participants were censored if they did not have a response within 3 months, or withdrew earlier before the confirmation of their target wound closing. This primary end point displays the mean time to complete target wound closure, analyzed using a Kaplan-Meier approach.
From baseline to Month 3 visit
The Percentage Of Participants Experiencing Complete Closure Of Their Target Wound Within 3 Months
Time Frame: From baseline to Month 3 visit
Target wounds were monitored at each study visit for complete closure, defined as skin re-epithelialization without drainage. Participants were considered responders if they experienced complete wound closure at the Week 2 or Months 1, 2, or 3 visits. If a target wound was documented to have closed at a given visit, it was considered closed at all subsequent visits. This primary end point displays the percentage of participants from the ITT population who had complete target wound closure by the end of the study period (that is, 3 months). Analysis was performed on participants with post-baseline wound closure data.
From baseline to Month 3 visit

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percentage Of Participants Experiencing Complete Closure Of Their Target Wound At Month 1 And Month 2 Visits
Time Frame: From baseline to Month 1 and Month 2 visits
Target wounds were monitored at each study visit for complete closure, defined as skin re-epithelialization without drainage. The percentage of participants who completed target wound closure at the Month 1 and Month 2 study visits is displayed. If a target wound was documented to have closed at a given visit, it was considered closed at all subsequent visits.
From baseline to Month 1 and Month 2 visits
Change From Baseline In Body Surface Area Index (BSAI) Of Lesional Skin At Month 3 Visit
Time Frame: Baseline, Month 3 visit
Lesional skin was defined as areas that contained any of the following: blisters, erosions, ulcerations, scabbing, bullae, or eschars, as well as areas that were weeping, sloughing, oozing, crusted, or denuded. BSAI was calculated as a percentage, ranging from 0% to 100%, of affected body surface area, recorded for each defined body region (that is, head/neck, upper limbs, trunk [includes groin], and lower limbs), multiplied by the weighting factor, then summed for all body regions.
Baseline, Month 3 visit
Change From Baseline In BSAI Of Total Body Wound Burden At Month 3 Visit
Time Frame: Baseline, Month 3 visit
Total body wound burden was calculated using BSAI. A wound defined as an open area on the skin (that is, epidermal covering disrupted). BSAI was calculated as a percentage, ranging from 0% to 100%, of affected body surface area, recorded for each defined body region (that is, head/neck, upper limbs, lower limbs, trunk [includes groin]), and multiplied by the weighting factor, then summed for all body regions.
Baseline, Month 3 visit
Change From Baseline In Itching Score At Day 7
Time Frame: Baseline, Day 7
Itching was assessed using the 5-point Itch Man Pruritus Assessment Tool. For participants up to 5 years of age, itching was assessed using caretaker's response and participants 6 years of age and older self-reported their itching assessments based on the following scores: 0=Comfortable, no itch; 1=itches a little, does not interfere with activity; 2=itches more, sometimes interferes with activity; 3=itches a lot, difficult to be still, concentrate; 4=itches most terribly, impossible to sit still or concentrate. Itching scores were categorized into 3 groups based on improvement; Improved or No Itching, Not Improved, and Missing. An itching score reduction from baseline greater than or equal to 1 point on the scale was classed as improved.
Baseline, Day 7
Change From Baseline In Pain Score At Day 7
Time Frame: Baseline, Day 7
Change in pain assessed at Day 7 compared to baseline was measured using the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, and Consolability (FLACC) behavioral scale for participants 1 month to 3 years of age. Each of the 5 FLACC categories was scored from 0 to 2, which resulted in a total score between 0 and 10 with 0=Relaxed and comfortable, 1 to 3=Mild discomfort, 4 to 6=Moderate pain, and 7 to 10=Severe discomfort/pain. For participants 4 years of age and older, the "Wong Faces Pain Scale" was used. This scale shows a series of faces ranging from a happy face at 0, which represents "no hurt," to a crying face at 10, which represents "hurts worst". Pain scores were categorized into 3 groups based on improvement: Improved or No Pain, Not Improved, and Missing. A pain score reduction from baseline greater than or equal to 2 points on the scale was classed as improved.
Baseline, Day 7

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Scioderm, Inc.

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Amicus Therapeutics

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
March 11, 2015

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
July 5, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
July 5, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 13, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 9, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
March 10, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
April 9, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
April 1, 2020

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
April 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • SD-005
  • 2014-002288-14 (EudraCT Number)
  • R01-005095-01 (Other Identifier: Orphan Product Grant)

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings