Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
Phase 3 Completed N=131 Randomized Single-blind Treatment

Phase 3b Study of Metvix NDL-PDT Versus Metvix c-PDT in Subjects With Actinic Keratoses

Actinic Keratoses
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01821391 ↗
Enrolled (actual)
131
Serious AEs
1.5%
Results posted
Dec 2020
Primary outcomePrimary: Percentage (%) Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Complete Response at Week 12 in Group 1 — 68.4; 71.5 percentage change from baseline — p==0.2665
◆ Published Evidence
No publication linked

No peer-reviewed publication reporting this trial's results has been linked yet. This can indicate results are unpublished — a known publication-bias signal. We re-check periodically.

Summary

This study was to be conducted as a multi-centre, randomized, investigator-blinded, active and vehicle-controlled, intra-individual (split-face/scalp) non-inferiority (regarding efficacy) and superiority (regarding pain) study. The primary purpose of this study is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of NDL-PDT compared to c-PDT in terms of lesion complete response rate.

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Percentage (%) Change From Baseline in Total Lesion Complete Response at Week 12 in Group 1
68.4; 71.5 =0.2665

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Clinical diagnosis of mild (Grade 1) and/or moderate (Grade 2) AKs on the face or the scalp on treated areas
  • Subject with two symmetrical treated areas half scalps or two half faces excluding ears, chin, bridge of the nose, eyelids and lips inside the vermillion border): no more than a twofold difference in terms of total number of lesions between the two TAs

Exclusion Criteria

  • Subject with clinical diagnosis of at least one severe (Grade 3) AK on treated areas
  • Subject with pigmented AK on the treated areas
  • Immuno-compromised Subject for idiopathic, disease specific or therapeutic reasons
  • Subject with porphyria,
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01821391). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication. Informational only — not medical advice.

Back to search