throbber
Therapy
`
`Janusz MARCINKIEWICZ 1
`Anna WOJAS-PELC 2
`Maria WALCZEWSKA 1
`Sylwia LIPKO-GODLEWSKA2
`Renata JACHOWICZ3
`Aldona MACIEJEWSKA3
`Anna BIALECKA 4
`Andrzej KASPROWICZ4
`
`1 Department oflmmunology Jagiellonian
`University Medical College, 18 Czysta St..
`31-121 Cracow. Poland
`2 Department of Dermatology Jagiellonian
`University Medical College
`3 Department of Pharmaceutical Technology
`and Biopharmaceutics Jagiellonian
`University Medical College
`4 Center of Microbiological Research and
`Autovaccines Ltd. Cracow, Poland
`
`Reprints: J. Marcinkiewicz
`<rnrnmarcin@cyf-kr.edu .pl>
`
`Article accepted on 18/3/2008
`
`Eur J Dermatol 2008; 18 (4): 433-9
`
`Topical taurine bromamine, a new candidate
`in the treatment of moderate inflammatory acne
`vulgaris - A pilot study
`
`Taurine bromamine (TauBr), the product oftaurine and hypobromous acid
`(HOBr), exe1ts anti-inflammatory and antibacterial properties. Recently
`we have shown that Propionibacterium acnes, a potential pathogenic
`agent of acne, is extremely sensitive to TauBr. As topical antibiotics are
`associated with the emergence of resistant bacteria, TauBr seems to be a
`good candidate for topical therapy for acne vulgaris. In our double blind
`investigation, the efficacy and safety of 3.5 mM TauBr cream was evalu(cid:173)
`ated. 1 % Clindamycin gel (Clindacin T), one of the most common topical
`agents in the treatment of acne vulgaris, was used as a control. Forty
`patients with mild to moderate inflammatory facial acne vulgaris were
`randomly treated with either TauBr or clindamycin for 6 weeks, twice-a(cid:173)
`day. More than 80% of the patients markedly improved with both treat(cid:173)
`ments, without any adverse effects observed. Both TauBr and clindamycin
`produced a significant reduction in inflammatory skin lesion counts
`(papules/ pustules). After 6 weeks, comparable reductions of acne lesions,
`65 % and 68%, were observed in the TauBr and clindamycin groups,
`respectively. In conclusion, these data support our concept that TauBr can
`be used as a topical agent in the treatment of acne vulgaris, especially in
`patients who have already developed antibiotic resistance.
`Key words: acne vulgaris, clindamycin, Propionibacterium acnes,
`taurine bromamine (N-bromotaurine), topical treatment
`
`A cne vulgaris is the most common inflammatory
`
`skin disorder that widely affects adolescents and
`young adults. Pathogenesis of acne is complex,
`involving multiple abnormalities of the pilosebaceous unit,
`including hyperkeratinisation, sebum production, bacterial
`proliferation and inflammation (1-3]. One of the pathogenic
`factors of acne is the proliferation of normal flora and,
`especially, of Propionibacterium acnes. Acne is not an
`infectious disease, but the role of P. acnes is outlined by
`much data [ 4-6]. Many oral and topical agents are available
`nowadays to treat acne vulgaris. These include topical
`antibiotics known for
`their anti-bacterial and anti(cid:173)
`inflammatory properties, such as clindamycin, the principle
`antibiotic used (7-11] . However, an increasing number of
`isolated P. acnes strains with unidentified resistance
`mechanisms indicate the need to develop new strategies to
`minimize the use of antibiotics in acne therapy (12-15].
`Taurine bromamine (N-bromotaurine, TauBr) and taurine
`chloramine (TauCl), the physiological products of reactions
`between taurine and HOBr or HOCl, are major haloamines
`generated at the site of inflammation (16, 17]. Both haloam(cid:173)
`ines exert anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant and microbicidal
`properties (18-20]. TauBr, similarly toTauCl, decreases the
`production of proinflammatory mediators (20, 21]. The
`cytoprotective activity of taurine haloamines relates to their
`antioxidant properties. In addition, both induce the genera-
`
`EJD, vol. 18, n° 4, July-A ugust 2008
`
`tion of heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1 ), a stress-inducible en(cid:173)
`zyme, which also has antioxidant and anti-inflammatory
`capacity (22]. TauCl and TauBr reduce generation of reac(cid:173)
`tive oxygen species (ROS) (19, 23] . However, only TauBr,
`but not TauCl, neutralizes hydrogen peroxide, the major
`oxygen species generated at a site of inflammation (21]. On
`the other hand, TauBr shows strong antibacterial. activity at
`physiological, non~cytotoxic concentrations. From a clini(cid:173)
`cal point of view, it is interesting that the susceptibility of
`P. acnes to TauBr appeared to be significantly higher than
`that of Staphylococcus epidermidis, as we have recently
`shown (24] . Both species, P. acnes and S. epidermidis,
`belong to the bacterial flora of the skin, but only P. acnes is
`considered to be involved in the pathogenesis of chronic
`skin inflammation in acne vulgaris [1, 4, 6]. Therefore,
`TauBr, due to its ability to selectively kill P. acnes, seems to
`be a promising candidate as a topical agent in acne.
`The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical effective(cid:173)
`ness of taurine bromamine as a topical agent in the treat(cid:173)
`ment of moderate, inflammatory, facial acne vulgaris. In
`this paper we also discuss the rationale of acne therapy with
`TauBr, related to its anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidant and
`anti-bacterial properties. As P. acnes resistance has become
`a worldwide problem, the lack of evidence of bacteria
`resistance against TauCl and TauBr [24, 25] supports the
`idea of using TauBr for acne therapy. This approach is also
`
`_433
`
`ci
`
`1 of 7
`
`Almirall EXHIBIT 2061
`
`Amneal v. Almirall
`IPR2019-00207
`
`

`

`in accordance with the need to develop strategies to mini(cid:173)
`mize the use of antibiotics in the therapy of acne.
`
`Materials and methods
`
`Synthesis and determination of TauBr
`Taurine bromamine (TauBr) was prepared as described by
`Thomas et al. [26], with small modifications (Patent No. EP
`1663195). The presence and concentration of TauBr was
`determined by UV spectra (A= 200 to 400 nm, molar ex(cid:173)
`tinction coefficient 430 M- 1cm- 1 at A329). Stock solution of
`TauBr in a phosphate buffer, containing 40-fold excess of
`taurine, was kept at 4 °C before use.
`
`Preparation of TauBr in a cream
`formulation
`
`TauBr cream was obtained by emulsifying an aqueous
`solution ofTauBr to Cetomacrogol Cream, according to the
`formula of The Extra Pharmacopoeia (Twenty-ninth Edi(cid:173)
`tion, 1989). Formulations were prepared in aseptic areas
`according to the standards of Good Manufacturing Practice
`for Pharmaceutical Products. The final concentration of
`TauBr in a cream formulation was 3.5 mM.
`
`' Evaluation of bactericidal activity of TauBr in vitro
`Propioniacterium acnes (ATCC 11827) strain was grown
`in a Schaedler Agar Base (Difeo, USA) at 35 °C for 72
`hours in anaerobic conditions. Staphylococcus epidermidis
`(ATCC 12228) was grown in a Tryptic Soy Broth (Difeo,
`USA) at 35 °C for 18 hours in aerobic conditions. Bacteria
`were centrifuged at 1800 x g, washed twice with 0.9%
`NaCl and diluted in saline to a concentration of 1 x 108
`c.f.u./mL. Before use, bacteria were diluted in a phosphate
`buffer (PBS) (pH 7.4) to achieve a final concentration of
`1 x 105 c.f.u./mL and then incubated with different concen(cid:173)
`trations of TauBr (1 - 3500 µM). Immediately after the
`incubation (30 min.), aliquots were removed and the viable
`cell count was determined by the pour-plate method, as
`described previously [24].
`
`Clinical study design
`This was a double-blind, randomized, parallel group evalu(cid:173)
`ation of topical taurine bromamine (3.5 mM TauBr cream)
`and 1 % clindamycin gel (Clindacin T, Polfarma -Tra(cid:173)
`chomin, Poland). The study was conducted in the Depart(cid:173)
`ment of Dermatology, Jagiellonian University Medical
`College in Krakow, Poland. The study was approved by the
`appropriate regulatory and ethics committees in Poland and
`was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Hel(cid:173)
`sinki (South Africa, 1996 amendment) and Good Clinical
`Practice guidelines. Subjects aged 18 years or older pro(cid:173)
`vided written informed consent to participate.
`
`Patient selection
`40 patients ( 14 men and 26 women), at least 18 years of age,
`with a mean age of 22.7 years, with mild to moderate
`inflammatory acne vulgaris on the face were enrolled in this
`study. Mild to moderate inflammatory acne was defined
`
`434_
`
`according to the Leeds Revised Acne Grading System [27].
`Mild inflammatory acne was defined by the presence of not
`more than 15 papules and/or pustules and moderate inflam(cid:173)
`matory acne by the presence of 15-50 papules and/or pus(cid:173)
`tules and not more than three nodules on the face. Patients
`with a predominantly comedonal acne were excluded. All
`concomitant treatments were withdrawn according to the
`following schedule: topical acne preparations, topical anti(cid:173)
`microbial agents, medicated cosmetics, soaps, or shampoos
`at least 2 weeks before entry, systemic anti-microbials at
`least 3 months before entry, and oral isotretinoin at least 2
`years before entry. Exclusion criteria included: pregnant
`and lactating women, patients with more than three nodular
`lesions on the face, patients with any other type of acne than
`vulgaris, patients with any active skin disease other than
`inflammatory acne vulgaris, patients with a history of al(cid:173)
`lergy to clindamycin. At the initial visit, a medical history
`was obtained and patients were given a dermatological
`examination to determine their eligibility for the study. The
`face lesion count was taken, noting the number of papules,
`pustules, and nodules. Additionally, the investigator deter(cid:173)
`mined an acne severity grade.
`
`Treatment regiment
`Patients who met all eligibility criteria were assigned to
`receive either 1 % clindamycin gel or taurine bromamine in
`a double-blind, randomized manner (There was no agree(cid:173)
`ment to include a placebo group). Each patient was in(cid:173)
`structed to apply the medication to the face twice a day.
`Patients were required to return for a control visit at weeks:
`1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of therapy, to assess clinical improvement
`and to exclude the presence of adverse effects. At each visit,
`the investigator repeated the acne lesion count and patients
`were supplied with appropriate amounts of the study medi(cid:173)
`cation for the next week.
`
`Study assessments
`Treatment efficacy was determined by inflammatory lesion
`counts - noting the number of papules and pustules on the
`whole face. Macules, comedones and deep inflammatory
`lesions were not included in the lesion counts. At each visit,
`the physician assessed the global change from the baseline.
`Adverse events were recorded throughout the study and
`their severity and relationship to the treatment was as(cid:173)
`sessed. To optimise the consistency of subjective evalua(cid:173)
`tions, the same physician saw the patients at each visit.
`
`Statistical analysis
`Demographic data were analyzed using Student's T-test.
`Percent changes from the baseline in the acne lesion count
`were analyzed using analysis of covariance. Statistical sig(cid:173)
`nificance was defined asp:::; 0.05. Results are expressed as
`Mean± SEM. Statistical differences in the susceptibility to
`TauBr between P. acnes and S. epidermidis were analyzed
`using the Mann - Whitney U test.
`
`Results
`
`Stability of taurine bromamine (TauBr)
`To determine the stability of TauBr in the solution used for
`preparation ofTauBr cream, the stock solution ofTauBr was
`
`EJD, vol. 18, n° 4, July-August 2008
`
`2 of 7
`
`

`

`A)
`...
`cc
`::::,
`~ ....
`3.0
`o
`2.5
`C: .....
`o:i!:
`:;:; E 2.0
`C'CI
`.....
`1.5
`l:;
`C: 8
`
`4.0
`
`3.5
`
`------. ~------.
`
`1.0
`0.5
`0 .0 - t - - - - -~ - - - -~ - - -~
`0
`14
`7
`21
`
`Days
`
`C:
`0
`(.)
`
`B)
`
`•- -•- - ·---
`
`¾ 4°c
`-(cid:127)-
`RT
`-----------...
`
`4.0
`
`3.5
`
`::::,
`
`.....
`
`... cc
`~ ....
`3.0
`o
`2.5
`C: .....
`~ ~ 2.0
`C'CI
`1.5
`l:;
`C: 8
`·c:
`0
`(.)
`
`1.0
`0.5
`0.0 + - - -~ -~ -~ -~ -~ -~ -~~
`2
`3
`0
`6
`7
`8
`4
`5
`Days
`
`Figure 1. Stability of TauBr in phosphate buffer (pH.7.4).
`TauBr was monitored by UV absorption spectra and the con(cid:173)
`centration of TauBr (taurine monobromamine) was estimated
`as described in Methods. The figure shows the results of one of
`3 independent experiments. A) 3 weeks observation at 4 °C; B)
`7 days observation at room temperature (RT) and 4 °C.
`
`stored at different temperatures, for 3 weeks. The decompo(cid:173)
`sition of TauBr was time and temperature dependent. As
`shown in figure 1, the concentration of Tau Br stored at the
`temperature of 4 °C decreased significantly (> 30%) on day
`21, while the same degree of decomposition of TauBr
`stored at room temperature was observed on day 7.
`
`Antimicrobial activity of TauBr to skin bacteria
`The stock solution of TauBr was stored for 3 weeks at 4 °C
`and bactericidal activity of TauBr to P. acnes and S. epider(cid:173)
`midis was tested at different time points, as described in
`Methods. Concentrations of the agent ranged from 1 to
`3500 µM. TauBr shows strong bactericidal activity against
`both strains. However, significant differences between
`P. acnes and S. epidermidis in their susceptibility to TauBr
`have been observed. MBC (minimal bactericidal concen(cid:173)
`tration) of TauBr to P. acnes was ~ 10 µM and to S. epider(cid:173)
`midis ~220 µM (figure 2). The MBC value of TauBr to
`S. epidermidis was similar to IC50 of TauBr for cytokine
`production [21]. To analyse the effect of TauBr storage on
`its bactericidal potential, TauBr was diluted to a concentra(cid:173)
`tion of 200 µM. As shown in figure 2B, the solution of
`TauBr stored for 21 days lost 50% of activity against
`S. epidermidis, but only 10% against P. acnes. On the other
`
`£JD, vol. 18, n° 4, July-August 2008
`
`A)
`
`B)
`
`250
`
`200
`
`:i' 150
`3
`(.)
`CC 100
`:!!:
`
`50
`
`0
`
`150
`
`C'CI
`"i:
`
`Q) -~ 100
`
`.c
`"O
`~
`:i: 50
`....
`0
`~ 0
`
`P. acnes
`
`S. epidermidis
`
`+
`P. acnes
`....- S. epidermidis
`
`0
`
`0
`
`7
`
`14
`Days
`
`21
`
`28
`
`Figure 2. Susceptibility of P. acnes (PA) and S. epidermidis
`(SE) to TauBr. A) Minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC)
`ofTauBr to P. acnes and S. epidermidis. Bacteria (1 x 105/mL)
`were incubated at different concentrations of TauBr in a phos(cid:173)
`phate buffer (pH 7.4) for 30 minutes. The reduction of bacteria
`growth was determined as described in Methods. Data are
`expressed as MBC values (the concentrations of TauBr that
`cause 100% inhibition of bacteria growth) and represent the
`mean (± SE) calculated from 5 separate experiments.
`the differences be(cid:173)
`P = 0.000003 (Mann-Whitney U test) -
`tween P. acnes versus S. epidermidis ba<;terial strains in their
`susceptibility to Tau Br. B) Effect of the preservation of Tau Br
`solution on its bactericidal activity. The stock solution of
`TauBr (3.5 mM) was.stored for 3 weeks. Bactericidal activity
`of Tau Br against P. acnes and S. epidermidis was tested on day
`0, 7, 14 and 21. On the indicated day, TauBr was diluted to a
`final concentration of 222 µM (equal to MBC ofTauBr to SE)
`and incubated with bacteria as described above. The results are
`expressed as % of killed bacteria and represent. one of 3
`independent experiments.
`
`hand, after 7 days, the agent did not alter its bactericidal
`activity against either bacterial strain tested. Therefore, in
`our clinical study, to maintain a bactericidal effect of Tau Br
`in vivo, TauBr cream was prepared weekly and used twice(cid:173)
`a-day, for 7 consecutive days, in the topical therapy of acne
`vulgaris. In the preliminary study, 3.5 mM solution of
`TauBr, applied on the skin of healthy volunteers for just
`30 minutes, decreased the number of skin bacteria more
`than 1000 times. On the contrary, the effect of vehicle
`(plecebo) on skin bacteria was negligible ( data not shown).
`No adverse effects were observed.
`
`_435
`
`3 of 7
`
`

`

`Table 1. Subject disposition and the baseline data
`
`Gender
`Male
`Female
`Age
`Total lesion counts
`Papule counts
`Pustule counts
`Nodule counts
`
`N(%)
`N(%)
`Mean
`Mean± SD
`Mean±SD
`Mean±SD
`Mean±SD
`
`Clinical study
`
`Clindamycin 1 % (N= 18)
`
`TauBr (N = 22)
`
`Total (N = 40)
`
`33%
`67%
`22.9
`20.l ± 13.6
`17.8 ± 9.4
`3.8 ± 1.6
`1.2 ± 0.8
`
`36%
`64%
`22.5
`22.8 ± 16.4
`18.4 ± 7.3
`1.0 ± 0.5
`0.7 ± 0.5
`
`35%
`65%
`22.7
`20.4 ± 13.6
`18.2 ± 11.5
`2.2 ± 3.6
`0.9 ± 2.0
`
`!
`
`Baseline characteristic of subjects
`A total of 40 subjects (14 male; 26 female) were included in
`the study: 22 subjects (8 male: 14 female) in the TauBr
`group, 18 subjects (6 male: 12 female) in the I% clindamy(cid:173)
`cin gel group. The mean age of the whole group of 40
`patients was 22.7 years of age, in the TauBr group - 22.5,
`and in the clindamycin group - 22.9. All subjects in both
`groups were white/Caucasians. Both groups were compa(cid:173)
`rable in terms of gender and age distribution (table I).
`38subjects completed the study.
`
`Efficacy evaluation
`: Both TauBr and clindamycin treatments were associated
`with a progressive reduction in acne lesion count after 4 and
`6 weeks of the therapy. At the baseline, in both groups of
`patients, the mean number of papules was 18.2, pustules 2.2
`and nodules 0.9 (table I). The improvement in lesion
`counts (absolute values) is shown in.figure 3 and.figure 4.
`At the baseline in the TauBr group, the mean number of
`pa pules was 18.4, of pustules it was 1.0 and of nodules 0. 7,
`in the clindamycin group the mean number of papules was
`17.9, of pustules - 3.8 and of nodules - 1.2. After 6 weeks
`
`25
`
`20
`
`D Baseline
`
`- Week4
`
`- Week6
`
`t/1
`C:
`
`0 ·;;; 15
`
`~ -0 ... Q)
`
`.c
`E
`::::, z
`
`10
`
`5
`
`0
`
`*
`
`Nodules
`
`Pustules
`
`Papules
`
`treatment in the TauBr group the mean number of papules
`was 6.3, of pustules - 0.6 and of nodules - 0.4 and in the
`clindamycin group the mean number of papules was 5.8, of
`pustules - 1.1 and of nodules - 0.4. A significant (p < 0.01)
`reduction in the number of papules was observed in TauBr(cid:173)
`treated patients at week 4 and week 6 (figure 3 ). Similarly,
`a statistically significant reduction of the number of pa pules
`(P < 0.01) was observed in the clindamycin treated patients
`(figure 4). In both experimental groups (TauBr- and
`clindamycin- treated patients) a progressive reduction of
`total acne lesion numbers was observed after 4 and 6 weeks
`of the therapy (figures 3 and 4).
`The percentage of patients with at least 40% improvement
`after 4-week therapy is shown in.figure 5A. The percentage
`was notably greater for TauBr at week 4 (81 % - TauBr
`group; 71 % - clindamycin group). On the other hand, at
`week 6, the percentage of subjects markedly improved or
`almost cleared after treatment with 1 % clindamycin was
`higher than that after treatment with TauBr. However, the
`difference between the groups was numerical but not sta(cid:173)
`tistically significant (figure 5B).
`The results of the percentage reduction from the baseline in
`inflammatory lesions (papules and pustules together) at
`week 4 were 60% in the whole TauBr group and 49% in the
`clindamycin group (figure 6). Importantly, the efficacy of
`
`t/1
`C:
`0 ·;;;
`
`~ -0
`
`... Q)
`.c
`E
`::::, z
`
`25
`
`20
`
`15
`
`10
`
`5
`
`0
`
`(cid:143)
`
`Baseline
`
`- Week4
`
`- Week6
`
`*
`
`Nodules
`
`Pustules
`
`Papules
`
`Figure 3. The mean numbers of papules, pustules and nodules
`at the baseline, week 4 and week 6 in TauBr-treated patients.
`The asterisks indicate a significant difference (P < 0.05) in
`lesion counts between the baseline and week 4 *(P 1 4 ) and
`between the baseline and week 6 **(P 1,6).
`•
`
`Figure 4. Clindamycin-treated patients. The mean numbers of
`pa pules, pustules and nodules at the baseline, week 4 and week
`6. The asterisks indicate a significant difference (P < 0.05) in
`lesion counts between the baseline and week 4 *(P1,4 ) and
`between the baseline and week 6 **(P 1_6).
`
`436-
`
`EJD, vol. I 8, n° 4, July-August 2008
`
`4 of 7
`
`

`

`A)
`
`Week4
`
`D Clindamycin
`•
`TauBr
`
`C:
`0
`:;. 20
`()
`::s
`'t,
`Cl)
`;: 40
`C:
`Cl)
`()
`
`~ 60
`
`.
`~
`~~
`-.-
`""
`" " " "
`" " " -------
`
`TauBr
`Clindamycin
`
`#
`
`*
`
`u, -C:
`
`Cl)
`:;.
`n,
`a.
`....
`0
`~ 0
`
`u, -C:
`
`Cl)
`:;.
`n,
`a.
`....
`0
`~ 0
`
`70
`65
`60
`55
`50
`45
`40
`35
`30
`25
`20
`15
`10
`5
`0
`
`70
`65
`60
`55
`50
`45
`40
`35
`30
`25
`20
`15
`10
`5
`0
`
`B)
`
`C:
`n,
`Cl)
`::!!: 80+ - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - -~
`Baseline
`Week4
`Week6
`
`No change
`
`Clear
`
`Moderate/
`marked
`
`Week6
`
`Figure 6. Mean percent reduction of total inflammatory lesion
`counts (pustules plus papules) from the baseline at week 4 and
`week 6. There was no statistical significant difference between the
`TauBr-treated group and the Clindamycin-treated group. Clinda(cid:173)
`mycin vs TauBr: * at week 4 - p:::::0.77; # at week 6 - p:::::0.33.
`
`D Clindamycin
`•
`TauBr
`
`Discussion
`
`A variety of agents are available today to treat acne vulgaris.
`Current clinical strategies in cases of mild to moderate in(cid:173)
`flammatory acne involve the combination of a topical retin(cid:173)
`oid, topical benzoyl peroxide and topical antibiotics [8, 9, 11,
`28, 29]. Topical antibiotics are known for their anti-bacterial,
`anti-oxidant properties and their capacity to inhibit inflam(cid:173)
`mation caused by bacteria. During the last few years benzoyl
`peroxide and clindamycin have been the two most widely
`prescribed topical drugs in the treatment of acne [4, 30-33].
`Benzoyl peroxide shows antibacterial activity and decreases
`inflammatory damage by inhibiting the release of reactive
`oxygen species (ROS), due to the killing of neutrophils [ 10].
`Clindamycin, a bactericidal antibiotic, suppresses the
`complement-derived chemotaxis of neutrophils, thereby re(cid:173)
`ducing the potential for inflammation [10]. Several topical
`formulations of clindamycin are currently marketed. One
`of them, 1 % clindamycin gel, has demonstrated efficacy
`and good overall tolerability in several well designed clini(cid:173)
`cal studies on the topical treatment of patients with mild to
`moderately severe acne vulgaris [12, 34, 35].
`However, P. acnes -resistance to anti-acne antibiotics is
`being increasingly reported, and the emergence of resistant
`strains, the primary factor in the pathogenesis of acne
`vulgaris, can be associated with the therapeutic failure of
`topical treatment [ 13, 36, 37]. Searching for an alternative
`topical anti-acne drug, we have chosen taurine bromamine.
`Is TauBr a good candidate for topical therapy in treating
`acne vulgaris? We have previously shown thatTauBr is well
`tolerated by mice when applied locally up to a concentra(cid:173)
`tion of 5 mM (Koprowski, Ph. D Thesis 2005). /n vitro, at
`non-cytotoxic
`concentrations, TauBr
`exerts
`anti(cid:173)
`inflammatory properties by induction of heme oxygenase-1
`expression and by inhibition of inflammatory mediator
`generation by activated macrophages, with effectiveness
`similar to a well documented activity of taurine chloramine
`(TauCl) [20-22]. Moreover, TauBr showed antioxidant
`properties by inhibition of ROS generation, mainly by
`degradation of hydrogen peroxide [24]. The latter proper(cid:173)
`ties of TauBr may enhance its therapeutic potential in the
`topical treatment of acne vulgaris, as detrimental overpro-
`
`-437
`
`No change
`
`Moderate/
`marked
`
`Clear
`
`Figure 5. Total improvement after 4 weeks (A) and after 6
`weeks (B) of the treatment. Results are shown as a percentage
`of patients with the indicated reduction of inflammatory lesion
`counts: (i) "no change" -
`the reduction< 40% (the effect
`considered as not satisfactory); (ii) "moderate/marked" - the
`reduction of 40-90% lesions; (iii) "clear" - patients with no
`more than 1 papule/pustule left.
`
`both TauBr and clindamycin was more pronounced in pa(cid:173)
`tients with mild than moderate acne (table 2).
`After 6 weeks of such treatment the percent reduction in
`total inflammatory lesions from the baseline was 65% in the
`TauBr group and 68% in the clindamycin group (figure 6).
`There was no statistically significant difference between
`the groups. The above results demonstrate that the efficacy
`of topical TauBr is similar to that of 1 % clindamycin
`(Clindacin T).
`
`Safety evaluation
`40 subjects experienced a total of 4 adverse events (AEs):
`2 patients in the clindamycin-treated group and 2 in the
`TauBr-group. Both active treatments were well tolerated.
`No non-dermatological AEs were reported. All dermato(cid:173)
`logical AEs were classified by investigators as being very
`mild (table 3 ). None of the subjects discontinued the study
`due to the drug related AEs.
`
`EJD, vol. 18, n° 4, July-August 2008
`
`5 of 7
`
`

`

`Table 2. Mean percent reduction of inflammatory lesion counts (pustules plus papules) from the baseline at week 4 and week 6
`
`Treatment
`
`TauBr
`
`Clindamycin I%
`
`* Acne severity
`
`Mild(n 11)
`Moderate (n 10)
`Mild(n = 8)
`Moderate (n = 9)
`
`Mean percent reduction of inflammatory lesions ( % )
`4 week 6 week
`
`62%
`60%
`59%
`46%
`
`74%
`60%
`88%
`67%
`
`*The improvement in patients with mild ( < 15 inflammatory lesion counts) versus moderate (15-50 inflammatory lesion counts) acne. There was no
`significant difference between the TauBr-group and Clindamycin-groups.
`
`duction of hydrogen peroxide in acne inflammatory lesions
`has been documented [38, 39].
`In addition, TauBr at micromolar, non-cytotoxic concentra(cid:173)
`tions, exerts bactericidal activity in vitro, which is signifi(cid:173)
`cantly stronger than that of TauCI [21, 24]. Since P. acnes,
`a pathogenic factor of acne, is more susceptible to TauBr
`than S. epidermidis, it supports the concept of using TauBr
`as a selective topical disinfectant in treatment of acne
`vulgaris, without affecting non pathogenic skin flora. ([40],
`Patent No. EP 1663195).
`To prove this hypothesis, a double blind, randomised 6-week
`pilot study was performed to assess the clinical efficacy of
`TauBr cream in a twice-a-day topical therapy. C1indacin T
`( 1 % clindamycin
`formulation) was used as a reference
`agent commonly used in topical acne therapy [JO]. TauBr
`cream formulation contained 3.5 mM ofTauBr, the concen-
`. tration 350 times higher than the MBC of TauBr for P. ac(cid:173)
`nes. The addition of taurine in excess to TauBr (taurine
`monobromamine ), enables the formation of toxic taurine
`dibromamine (TauBr2) and enhances the antioxidant poten(cid:173)
`tial of the formulation [ 16, 26]. Taurine alone does not exert
`any anti-bacterial properties. In this pilot study a placebo
`group was not included, however, in the preliminary in vivo
`experiments, we have shown that TauBr, but not vehicle,
`significantly reduced the number of skin bacteria.
`The results from this study demonstrate an improvement in
`the inflammatory lesions of acne over a 6-week treatment
`period with the two topical therapies used. Basically, the
`efficacy evaluation at the end point shows no difference
`between TauBr and Clindacin T treatment. However, after
`the first 4 weeks of the treatment, a greater improvement
`(reduction) in total lesion counts was observed in the TauBr
`group than in the Clindacin T group. In our study, after the
`
`6-week treatment, the inflammatory lesion counts de(cid:173)
`creased by 65% for both active treatments. The results
`concerning the efficacy of I% clindamycin are in agree(cid:173)
`ment with other reports. For example, M.Alirezai et al. [32]
`demonstrated a 65% reduction from the baseline in the
`inflammatory lesion count in patients with moderate acne
`(the majority of subjects) treated topically with 1 % clinda(cid:173)
`mycin gel for 12 weeks. In our experimental design, a
`similar improvement was already observed after 6 weeks.
`This may be explained by the fact that approximately 50%
`of our subjects suffered from mild acne and were more
`susceptible to the clindamycin treatment than the subjects
`with moderate acne. Greater effects(> 70% improvement)
`have been observed in trials in which patients were treated
`with c1indamycin + benzoyl peroxide [30]. These results
`support the commonly accepted opinion that the combina(cid:173)
`tion products confer specific advantages over single-agent
`topical therapy ofacne [10, 15, 28, 31]. It also suggests that
`a therapeutic effect of TauBr may be improved by using
`TauBr in combination with other topical anti-acne agents.
`Further studies are necessary to evaluate this problem.
`Importantly, the TauBr cream was well tolerated and there
`were no local adverse effects reported during the study.
`In conclusion, these data demonstrate that the taurine bro(cid:173)
`mamine cream formulation is of efficacy comparable to that
`of 1 % clindamycin gel formulation in the topical treatment
`of acne vulgaris. However, topical clindamycin, like other
`antimicrobials, is associated with the emergence of resis(cid:173)
`tant microorganisms. By contrast, TauBr provides potent
`anti-bacterial and anti-inflammatory activity without the
`risk of inducing bacterial resistance. Therefore, TauBr used
`in monotherapy or in a combination with other medicine
`may be a desirable alternative treatment for acne vulgaris.
`
`Table 3. Overview of adverse events occurred during the study
`Clindamycin 1 % (N = 18)
`N
`
`Adverse events (AEs)
`Dryness or peeling of the skin
`Feeling of warmth
`Tingling
`Burning
`Blistering
`Itching
`Redness
`Swelling
`Eczema
`All dermatological AEs
`Non-dermatological AEs
`
`TauBr (N = 22)
`N
`
`Total (N 40)
`N
`2
`
`1
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`2
`0
`
`1
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`4
`0
`
`0
`
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`2
`0
`
`438-
`
`EJD, vol. I 8, n° 4, July-August 2008
`
`6 of 7
`
`

`

`Further 8 -12 week, active and placebo-controlled clinical
`studies, performed on a greater number of subjects, are
`necessary to confirm the clinical efficacy of TauBr in the
`treatment of acne vulgaris. (cid:127)
`
`Acknowledgments. Financial suppon: This study was
`supported by Jagiellonian University Medical College
`( grant number WU29 l/PIL) and partly by Center of
`Microbiological Research and Autovaccines Ltd., Krakow,
`Poland. Conflict of Interest: None.
`
`References
`
`1. Burkhart CG, Burkhart CN, Lehmann PF. Acne: a review of immu(cid:173)
`nologic and microbiologic factors. Postgrad Med J 1999; 75:
`328-31.
`2. Jeremy AH, Holland DB, Roberts SG, Thomson KF, Cunliffe WJ.
`Inflammatory events are involved in acne lesion initiation. J Invest
`Dermatol 2003; 1 21 : 20-7.
`3. Koreck A, Pivarcsi A, Dobozy A, Kemeny L The role of innate
`immunity in the pathogenesis of acne. Dermatology 2003; 206:
`96-105.
`4. Leyden J, Kaidbey K, Levy SF. The combination formulation of
`clindamxcin 1 % plus benzoyl peroxide 5% versus 3 different formu(cid:173)
`lations of topical clindamycin alone in the reduction of Propionibac(cid:173)
`terium acnes. An in vivo comparative study. Am J Clin Dermatol
`2001;2:263-6.
`5. Jappe U, Ingham E, Henwood J, Holland KT. Propionibacterium
`acnes and inflammation in acne; P. acnes has T-cell mitogenic
`activity Br J Dermatol 2002; 146(2): 202-9.
`6. Nishijima S, Kurokawa I, Katoh N, Watanabe K. The bacteriol(cid:173)
`ogy of acne vulgaris and antimicrobial susceptibility of Propionibac(cid:173)
`terium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis isolated from acne
`lesions. J Dermatol 2000; 27(5): 318-23.
`7. Guay DR. Topical clindamycin in the management of acne vul(cid:173)
`garis. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2007; 8(15): 2625-64.
`8. Toyoda M, Morohashi M. An overview of topical antibiotics for
`acne treatment. Dermatology 1998; 196(1 ): 130-4.
`9. Tan HH. Topical antibacterial treatments for acne vulgaris: com(cid:173)
`parative review and guide to selection. Am J Clin Dermatol 2004;
`5(2): 79-84.
`10. Warner GT Plosker GL. Clindamycin/benzoyl peroxide gel: a
`review of its use in the management of acne. Am J Clin Dermatol
`2002; 3: 349-60.
`11. Dreno B. Topical antibacterial therapy for acne vulgaris. Drugs
`2004; 64: 2389-97.
`12. Leyden JJ. Antibiotic resistance in the topical treatment of acne
`vulgaris. Cutis 2004; 73: 6-10.
`13. Eady EA, Gloor M, Leyden JJ. Propionibacterium acnes resis(cid:173)
`tance: a worldwide problem. Dermatology 2003; 206(1 ): 54-6.
`14. Ross JI, Snelling AM, Carnegie E, Coates P, Cunliffe WJ, Bet(cid:173)
`toll V, Tosti G, Katsambas A, Galvan Perez Del Pulgar JI, Rollman 0,
`Torok L, Eady EA, Cove JH. Antibiotic -resistant acne: lessons from
`Europe. Br) Dermatol 2003; 148(3): 467-78.
`15. Taylor GA, Shalita AR. Benzoyl peroxide-based combination
`therapies for acne vulgaris: a comparative review. Am J Clin Derma(cid:173)
`tol 2004; 5(4): 261-5.
`16. Thomas EL, Bozeman PM, Jefferson MM, King CC. Oxidation
`of bromide by the human leukocyte enzymes myeloperoxidase and
`eosinophil peroxidase. J Biol Chem 1995; 270: 2906-13.
`17. Henderson JP, Byun J, Williams MY, Mueller DM, McCor(cid:173)
`mick ML, Heine

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket