4.6 Article

Randomized comparison of the type 4 phosphodiesterase inhibitor cipamfylline cream, cream vehicle and hydrocortisone 17-butyrate cream for the treatment of atopic dermatitis

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 147, Issue 2, Pages 299-307

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2002.04894.x

Keywords

atopic dermatitis; cipamfylline; hydrocortisone 17-butyrate

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Therapeutic options to treat atopic dermatitis are limited. Leukocytes from atopic patients have an abnormally high activity of cyclic adenosine monophosphate (AMP)-phosphodiesterase (PDE), which can be normalized in vitro by PDE inhibitors. Cipamfylline is a new potent and selective inhibitor of PDE-4. Objectives To compare the efficacy and safety of up to 14 days' topical treatment with cipamfylline (0.15%) cream with vehicle and with hydrocortisone 17-butyrate (0.1%) cream. Patient and methods International, multicentre, prospective, randomized double-blind, left-right studies of cipamfylline vs. vehicle and cipamfylline vs. hydrocortisone 17-butyrate in adult patients with stable symmetrical atopic dermatitis on the arms. Results Both cipamfylline and hydrocortisone 17-butyrate reduced the Total Severity Score significantly (P < 0.001). The reduction with cipamfylline was significantly greater than that with vehicle (difference vehicle-cipamfylline 1.67 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06, 2.28; P < 0.001) and was significantly less than with hydrocortisone 17-butyrate (difference hydrocortisone-cipamfylline -2.10 95% CI -2.93, -1.27; P < 0.001). Investigator and patient assessments of the overall treatment response showed a similar picture. Conclusions Cipamfylline cream is significantly more effective than vehicle, but significantly less effective than hydrocortisone 17-butyrate cream in the treatment of atopic dermatitis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available