MedPath

Safety and Efficacy Study of EXC 001 to Improve the Appearance of Scars From Prior Breast Surgery

Phase 2
Completed
Conditions
Scar Prevention
Interventions
Drug: Placebo
Registration Number
NCT01037413
Lead Sponsor
Pfizer
Brief Summary

This study will compare how well EXC 001 works to improve the appearance of scars in subjects undergoing breast scar revision surgery. The study will also evaluate the safety of EXC 001 in healthy adult subjects.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
Female
Target Recruitment
25
Inclusion Criteria
  • Subjects must have previously had breast surgery resulting in unacceptable scars
  • Subject has chosen to have the breast scars revised
  • Subjects must not be pregnant or lactating
Exclusion Criteria
  • Currently pregnant or pregnant during the 6 months prior to inclusion in the study, or lactating
  • Participation in another clinical trial within 30 days prior to the start of the study
  • Any other condition or prior therapy, which, in the opinion of the PI, would make the subject unsuitable for this study

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
Not specified
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
EXC 001EXC 001-
PlaceboPlacebo-
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Expert Panel Scar Assessment Score at Week 12Part B: Week 12

Scar assessment by an expert panel was done on blinded photographs using 100 millimeter (mm) visual analog scale (VAS) where a score of 0 mm = best possible scar and a score of 100 mm = worst possible scar, where higher scores indicate worse condition.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Expert Panel Scar Assessment Score at Week 8 and 24Part B: Week 8 and 24

Scar assessment by an expert panel was done on blinded photographs using 100 mm VAS where a score of 0 mm = best possible scar and a score of 100 mm = worst possible scar, where higher scores indicate worse condition.

Physician Observer Scar Assessment Score at Week 12 and 24Part B: Week 12 and 24

Physician observer assessment of scar was done using a valid published 10-point rating scale. Physician rated vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, surface area and overall opinion for a scar on a score of 1= normal skin to 10= worst scar imaginable, where higher scores indicate worse condition. Composite score was the sum of all the scores except the overall opinion score and range from 6 (best score) to 60 (worst score), where higher scores indicate worse condition.

Participant Observer Scar Assessment Score at Week 12 and 24Part B: Week 12 and 24

Participants rated pain, itching, color, stiffness, thickness, irregularity, and overall opinion of scar on 10-point scale. For pain and itching associated with scar: range =1 (no, not at all) to 10 (yes, worst imaginable) and for other parameters associated with scar compared to normal skin: range =1 (no, same as normal skin) to 10 (yes, very different), where higher scores indicate worse condition. Composite score = sum of all scores except overall opinion, range 6 (best) to 60 (worst), where higher scores indicate worse condition. Scar appearance composite score = sum of all scores except overall opinion, pain and itching, range 4 (best) to 40 (worst), where higher scores indicate worse condition.

Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs)Part A: Day 1; Part B, Active Dosing: Week 2 up to Week 13; Part B, Post Dosing: Week 13 to end of the study (Week 24)

An AE was any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug without regard to possibility of causal relationship. An SAE was an AE resulting in any of the following outcomes or deemed significant for any other reason: death; initial or prolonged inpatient hospitalization; life-threatening experience (immediate risk of dying); persistent or significant disability/incapacity; congenital anomaly. AEs included SAEs and all non-SAEs that occurred during the study.

Number of Participants With Abnormal Physical Examination FindingsScreening (up to Day 21 prior to Day 1 of Part A), Part B: Day 1, Week 12

Physical examination included the assessment of skin; head, ears, eyes, nose, and throat; respiratory; cardiovascular; abdomen; musculoskeletal; neurological; gastrointestinal; genitourinary; endocrine and lymph nodes. Abnormal physical examination findings was based on investigator's discretion.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Findings in Laboratory ExaminationsScreening (up to Day 21 prior to Day 1 of Part A), Part B: Day 1 up to Week 12

Laboratory analysis included hematology, biochemistry and urinalysis. Hematology range: basophils (bas) 0-0.2, eosinophils (eos) 0-0.4, leukocytes (leu) 4-10.5, lymphocytes (lym) 0.7-4.5, neutrophils (neu) 1.8-7.8, platelet 140-415, monocytes (mon) 0.1-1 in 10\^9 per liter; bas/leu 0-3, eos/leu 0-7, lym/leu 14-46, mon/leu 4-13, neu/leu and neu/leu 40-74 in percentage, erythrocytes 3.8-5.1 10\^12/L, hematocrit 0.34-0.44 L/L, hemoglobin 115-150 gram per liter (g/L). Biochemistry range: creatine kinase 24-173, alkaline phosphatase 25-150, alanine aminotransferase (AT) and aspartate AT 0-40 in International units per liter; creatinine 50-88, urate 89-399, bilirubin 2-21 in micromole per liter, glucose 3.6-5.5, potassium 3.5-5.5, sodium 135-148, blood urea nitrogen 1.8-9.3 in millimole/L, albumin 35-55 g/L. Urinalysis parameters: pH (5-7.5), specific gravity (1.005-1.03). Participants with clinically significant findings were reported.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Findings in Vital SignsScreening (up to Day 21 prior to Day 1 of Part A), Part B: Day 1 up to Week 12

Following vital sign parameters were assessed: diastolic blood pressure, systolic blood pressure, respiration rate, pulse rate, and temperature. Clinical significance was based on investigator's discretion.

Number of Participants With Clinically Significant Findings in Electrocardiogram (ECG)Screening (up to Day 21 prior to Day 1 of Part A), Part B: Week 12

Number of participants with clinically significant abnormality in ECG were reported. Clinical significance was based on investigator's discretion.

Number of Participants With Positive Skin Sensitivity ReactionPart A: Day 1, Part B: Week 2 up to Week 24

Participants were instructed to inform the investigator in case of any itching, redness, pain or any other symptom that appears to be a rash at the injection sites. Erythematous, raised (indurated) and edematous reactions were considered as positive skin sensitivity reactions.

Trial Locations

Locations (5)

Body Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

🇺🇸

Saint Louis, Missouri, United States

Scripps medical

🇺🇸

La Jolla, California, United States

Northwestern University,Division of Plastic Surgery

🇺🇸

Chicago, Illinois, United States

Jewell Plastic Surgery Center

🇺🇸

Eugene, Oregon, United States

Connall Consmetic Surgery

🇺🇸

Tualatin, Oregon, United States

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath