LUZU Cream, 1% Ref.[10128] Active ingredients: Luliconazole

Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of another drug and may not reflect the rates observed in practice.

In three Phase 3 clinical trials, 616 subjects were exposed to LUZU Cream, 1%: 305 with interdigital tinea pedis and 311 subjects with tinea cruris. Subjects with interdigital tinea pedis or tinea cruris applied LUZU Cream, 1% or vehicle cream once daily for 14 days or 7 days, respectively, to affected and adjacent areas. During clinical trials with LUZU Cream, 1%, the most common adverse reactions were application site reactions which occurred in less than 1% of subjects in both the LUZU and vehicle arms. Most adverse reactions were mild in severity.

A post-approval clinical trial was conducted in 75 subjects age 2 to <18 years old with tinea corporis. The adverse reactions in the LUZU Cream, 1% treated population were similar to the vehicle treated population.

The following adverse reactions have been identified during postmarketing use of luliconazole cream, 1%: contact dermatitis and cellulitis. Because these reactions are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequency or establish a causal relationship to drug exposure.

An in vivo study in adult subjects with moderate to severe interdigital tinea pedis and tinea cruris showed that LUZU Cream, 1% is mostly a weak inhibitor of CYP2C19. In a separate trial in adolescent subjects with tinea cruris, in vivo blood levels of LUZU Cream, 1%, were seen to approach those levels sufficient to show moderate inhibition of CYP2C19 [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].

Risk Summary

There are no available data with LUZU Cream, 1% use in pregnant women to inform a drug-associated risk for major birth defects and miscarriage. In animal reproduction studies with pregnant rats and rabbits, there were no adverse developmental effects observed with subcutaneous administration of luliconazole during organogenesis at doses up to 3 and 24 times, respectively, the maximum recommended human dose (MRHD) [see Data].

The background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage for the indicated population is unknown. All pregnancies have a background risk of birth defect, loss, or other adverse outcomes. In the U.S. general population, the estimated background risk of major birth defects and miscarriage in clinically recognized pregnancies is 2 to 4% and 15 to 20%, respectively.

Data

Animal Data

The animal multiples of human exposure calculations were based on daily dose body surface area (BSA) comparisons (mg/m²) for the reproductive toxicology studies described in this section and in Section 13.1. The maximum recommended human dose (MRHD) was set at 8 g 1% cream per day (1.33 mg/kg/day for a 60 kg individual, which is equivalent to 49.2 mg/m²/day).

Systemic embryofetal development studies were conducted in rats and rabbits. Subcutaneous doses of 1, 5 and 25 mg/kg/day luliconazole were administered during the period of organogenesis (gestational days 7-17) to pregnant female rats. No treatment-related effects on maternal toxicity or malformations were noted at 25 mg/kg/day (3 times the MRHD based on BSA comparisons). Increased incidences of skeletal variation (14 ^th rib) were noted at 25 mg/kg/day. No treatment-related effects on skeletal variation were noted at 5 mg/kg/day (0.6 times the MRHD based on BSA comparisons).

Subcutaneous doses of 4, 20 and 100 mg/kg/day luliconazole were administered during the period of organogenesis (gestational days 6-18) to pregnant female rabbits. No treatment-related effects on maternal toxicity, embryofetal toxicity or malformations were noted at 100 mg/kg/day (24 times the MRHD based on BSA comparisons).

In a pre- and postnatal development study in rats, subcutaneous doses of 1, 5 and 25 mg/kg/day luliconazole were administered from the beginning of organogenesis (gestation day 7) through the end of lactation (lactation day 20). In the presence of maternal toxicity, embryofetal toxicity (increased prenatal pup mortality, reduced live litter sizes and increased postnatal pup mortality) was noted at 25 mg/kg/day.

No embryofetal toxicity was noted at 5 mg/kg/day (0.6 times the MRHD based on BSA comparisons). No treatment effects on postnatal development were noted at 25 mg/kg/day (3 times the MRHD based on BSA comparisons).

Risk Summary

There is no information available on the presence of luliconazole in human milk, the effects of the drug on the breastfed infant, or the effects of the drug on milk production after topical application of LUZU Cream, 1% to women who are breastfeeding. LUZU Cream, 1% has low systemic absorption. The lack of clinical data during lactation precludes a clear determination of the risk of LUZU Cream, 1% to an infant during lactation. Therefore, the developmental and health benefits of breastfeeding should be considered along with the mother’s clinical need for LUZU Cream, 1% and any potential adverse effects on the breastfed infant from LUZU Cream, 1% or from the underlying maternal condition.

The safety and effectiveness of LUZU Cream, 1% in pediatric patients 12 to <18 years of age with tinea pedis and tinea cruris have been established by evidence from well-controlled trials in adult and pediatric subjects and a pharmacokinetic (PK) study in pediatric subjects [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3) and Clinical Studies (14)].

The safety and effectiveness of LUZU Cream, 1% in pediatric patients 2 to <18 years of age with tinea corporis have been established by evidence from a well-controlled trial in pediatric subjects [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3) and Clinical Studies (14)].

Of the total number of subjects in clinical studies of LUZU Cream, 1%, 8% were 65 and over, while 1.4% were 75 and over. No overall differences in safety or effectiveness were observed between these subjects and younger subjects, and other reported clinical experience has not identified differences in responses between the elderly and younger patients, but greater sensitivity of some older individuals cannot be ruled out.