A MULTI-CENTER, DOUBLE-BLIND CLINICAL TRIAL TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF TWO ACNE CREAMS IN SUBJECTS WITH MILD TO MODERATE ACNE VULGARIS
Overview
- Phase
- N/A
- Intervention
- BenzaClin
- Conditions
- Acne Vulgaris
- Sponsor
- Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
- Enrollment
- 66
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Treatment Tolerability Assessment: Erythema
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 6 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
This research is being done to find out the safety and efficacy of two acne creams, Effaclar and Benzaclin when used twice daily with a topical retinoid. Effaclar and Benzaclin are FDA approved for the treatment of acne.
Detailed Description
There are many products on the market to treat facial acne. The medication that this study will be evaluating, Benzaclin and Retin-A have been approved by the FDA and is available by prescription, Effaclar is an over the counter product. This study will hopefully recognize a treatment combination that is effective in reducing acne vulgaris in adults 18-50.
Investigators
Amy Longenecker
RN, CCRC
Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •males and females ages 18-50, mild to moderate acne vulgaris with \> or equal to 15 inflammatory lesions, \> or equal to 20 non-inflammatory lesions, avoid excessive sun exposure or tanning beds throughout the study
Exclusion Criteria
- •Participants who have another skin condition that will interfere with lesion counting or assessments
Arms & Interventions
BenzaClin
Evaluate and compare tolerance and efficacy of two anti-acne creams, Effaclar and Benzaclin over a twelve week period.Inclusion- males and females ages 18-50, mild to moderate acne vulgaris with \> or equal to 15 inflammatory lesions, \> or equal to 20 non-inflammatory lesions, avoid excessive sun exposure or tanning beds throughout the study, . Exclusion- Participants who have another skin condition that will interfere with lesion counting or assessments
Intervention: BenzaClin
effaclar
Evaluate and compare tolerance and efficacy of two anti-acne creams, Effaclar and Benzaclin over a twelve week period.Inclusion- males and females ages 18-50, mild to moderate acne vulgaris with \> or equal to 15 inflammatory lesions, \> or equal to 20 non-inflammatory lesions, avoid excessive sun exposure or tanning beds throughout the study, . Exclusion- Participants who have another skin condition that will interfere with lesion counting or assessments
Intervention: Effaclar
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Treatment Tolerability Assessment: Erythema
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for Erythema on a 4-point ordinal scale where 0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; and 3= severe. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Inflammatory Lesions
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial inflammatory lesions and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Treatment Tolerability Assessment: Edema
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for Edema on a 4-point ordinal scale where 0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; and 3= severe. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Treatment Tolerability Assessment: Dryness
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for Dryness on a 4-point ordinal scale where 0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; and 3= severe. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Treatment Tolerability Assessment: Peeling
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for Peeling on a 4-point ordinal scale where 0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; and 3= severe. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Skin Tone (Clarity)
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for skin tone (clarity) on a 10-point visual analog scale with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Skin Smoothness
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for skin smoothness on a 10-point visual analog scale with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Skin Brightness
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for skin brightness on a 10-point visual analog scale with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Appearance of Pores
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for the appearance of pores on a 10-point visual analog scale,with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Overall Appearance
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for overall appearance on a 10-point visual analog scale with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Skin Assessment: Global Acne Assessment
Time Frame: 16 weeks
The facial skin was assessed for global acne assessment on a 10-point visual analog scale with 0 indicating a favorable rating and 9 indicating an unfavorable rating. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Open Comedones
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial open comedomes and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Closed Comedones
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial closed comedomes and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Papules
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial open comedomes and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Pustules
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial pustules and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Noninflammatory Lesions
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for facial noninflammatory lesions and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Facial Lesion Counts: Total Lesion
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Participants were assessed for all facial lesions and the total number present was recorded. Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Subjective Tolerability of Irritation Assessment (Participant Assessed): Stinging
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Irritation stinging was subjectively reported by participants and captured on a 4 point ordinal scale (0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe). Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Subjective Tolerability of Irritation Assessment (Participant Assessed): Tingling
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Irritation tingling was subjectively reported by participants and captured on a 4 point ordinal scale (0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe). Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Subjective Tolerability of Irritation Assessment (Participant Assessed): Itching
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Irritation itching was subjectively reported by participants and captured on a 4 point ordinal scale (0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe). Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.
Subjective Tolerability of Irritation Assessment (Participant Assessed): Burning
Time Frame: 16 weeks
Irritation burning was subjectively reported by participants and captured on a 4 point ordinal scale (0= none; 1= mild; 2= moderate; 3= severe). Assessments were made at baseline and weeks, 2, 4, 8, and 12, with the regression phase assessment at week 16.