Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 22;2017(12):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub2
Methods RCT, active/placebo‐controlled, double blind
Date of study: April 2006‐May 2007
Location: multicentre (30) in Canada, the Czech Republic, and Germany
Participants Randomised: 260 participants (mean age 46 years, 163 male)
Inclusion criteria
  • Participants with moderate‐severe psoriasis (PASI ≥ 12, BSA > 10%)

  • Age ≥ 18 years


Exclusion criteria
  • History of clinically significant medical or psychiatric diseases

  • Pregnancy or lactation

  • History of active Mycobacterium TB infection

  • HIV, hepatitis B or C, history of malignancy within 5 years of screening or evidence of skin conditions

  • Current erythrodermic, guttate or pustular psoriasis


Dropouts and withdrawals
  • 47/260 (18%) at 12w;

  • Apremilast (28): AE (8), lack efficiency (8), withdrew consent (4), lost to follow‐up (3), protocol violation (3), other (2)

  • Placebo (19): AE (7), lack efficiency (5), withdrew consent (2), lost to follow‐up (1), protocol violation (2), other(2)

Interventions Intervention
A. Apremilast (n = 173), orally, 10‐20 mg, twice a day, 12 weeks
Control intervention
B. Placebo (n = 87)
Outcomes Assessments at 12 weeks
Primary outcomes of the trial
  • PASI 75


Secondary outcomes of the trial
  • PGA

  • PASI 50/90

  • BSA

  • AEs

Notes Funding source quote (p 27): "This study was sponsored by Celgene Corporation"
Declarations of interest (p27): "Dr Papp is a consultant and investigator for Celgene Corporation, Abbott, Amgen, Centocor, Janssen‐Ortho, Merck, Novartis and Pfizer and an investigator for Astellas, Leo Pharma and Galderma, receiving honoraria and grants. Dr Kaufmann is an investigator for Abbott, Centocor, Leo, Novartis, Wyeth and Celgene Corporation, but has not received financial compensation. The Department of Dermatology received investigator fees for performing the clinical trials. He served as a speaker for Basilea and Allmiral and received honoraria from each. Dr Thac ¸ i is on the advisory board of and is a consultant, investigator and speaker for Abbott, Leo, Novartis, Pfizer, Biogen‐Idec, Janssen‐Cilag and MSD, and received honoraria from each. He is also an investigator for Celgene Corporation. The Department of Dermatology received honoraria ⁄ compensation for conducting studies; no direct compensation was received. Ms Hu receives a salary as an employee of Celgene Corporation. Ms Sutherland receives a salary, stocks and stock options as an employee of Celgene Corporation. Dr Rohane received a salary and stock options as a former employee of Celgene Corporation. "
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote (p 377): " investigators randomised subjects 1 : 1 : 1 to double‐blind treatments for 12 weeks with placebo, apremilast 20 mg QD or apremilast 20 mg twice daily"
Comment: no description of the method to guarantee the random sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Quote (p 377): "Using an interactive voice response system, investigators randomised subjects 1 : 1 : 1 to double‐blind treatments"
Comment: probably done
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Low risk Quote (p 377): "One capsule of placebo or apremilast was taken orally in the morning before meals, and one capsule of placebo or apremilast was taken in the evening"
Comment: probably done, placebo‐controlled
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Low risk Quote (p 377): "One capsule of placebo or apremilast was taken orally in the morning before meals, and one capsule of placebo or apremilast was taken in the evening"
Comment: probably done, placebo controlled
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk 260 included / 260 analysed
Management of missing data were not stated and substantial number lost to follow‐up (18%)
Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk Comment: the protocol for the study was available on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00606450).
The pre‐specified outcomes listed on ClinicalTrials.gov were not detailed, the choice of the primary outcome was not clearly defined. In the methods section, PASI 75 was defined as the primary outcome, no QoL outcomes were listed in the methods section although they were in the protocol on clinicaltrilas.gov