A Phase 3 interventional study of Dupilumab SAR231893 and Placebo in Cold Urticaria, sponsored by Sanofi. Completed at 33 sites in 5 countries. Open to participants aged 12 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-09-10.
Sponsored by Sanofi · Phase 3, Interventional, and Treatment
Primary Objective:
To demonstrate the efficacy of dupilumab in adult and adolescent participants with primary acquired chronic inducible cold urticaria (ColdU) who remain symptomatic despite the use of an H1-antihistamine
Secondary Objectives:
To demonstrate the efficacy of dupilumab on primary acquired chronic inducible ColdU disease control To demonstrate the efficacy of dupilumab on primary acquired chronic inducible ColdU local signs and symptoms (hives/wheals, itch, burning sensation and pain) after provocation test To demonstrate the efficacy of dupilumab on primary acquired chronic inducible ColdU disease activity To demonstrate improvement in health-related quality-of-life and overall disease status and severity To evaluate the ability of dupilumab in reducing the proportion of participants who require rescue therapy To evaluate the proportion of participants with cold exposure triggered urticaria To evaluate safety outcome measures To evaluate immunogenicity of dupilumab
The duration of study for each participant included 2-4 weeks of screening period, 24 weeks of treatment period and 12 weeks of post treatment period.
Sanofi is the lead sponsor of 1,508 studies on the registry; 90 are open to participants now.
Of its 198 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 118 (60%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Participants meeting at least 1 of the following criteria despite regular/daily or as needed use of H1-antihistamine (AH):
Exclusion Criteria:
Participants were excluded from the study if any of the following criteria applied:
The above information was not intended to contain all considerations relevant to a patient's potential participation in a clinical trial.
Dose regimens, on top of regular or as needed non-sedating H1-antihistamine
Drug: Dupilumab SAR231893 · Drug: Non sedating H1-antihistamine
Placebo, on top of regular/as needed non-sedating H1-antihistamine
Drug: Placebo · Drug: Non sedating H1-antihistamine
Pharmaceutical form: Injection solution Route of administration: Subcutaneous
Pharmaceutical form: Injection solution Route of administration: Subcutaneous
Pharmaceutical form: Tablet Route of administration: Oral
Percentage of Participants With Negative Ice Cube Provocation Test at Week 24
The ice cube provocation test is the most frequently used provocation method for cold urticaria (ColdU). A negative ice cube provocation test was defined as the absence of confluent hives/wheal at the entire skin site of exposure after ice cube provocation test. Ice cube was applied on forearm skin for 5 minutes. Provocation test reading time was 10 minutes after removal of ice cube.
Time frame: Week 24
Change From Baseline in Urticaria Control Test (UCT) Scale Scores at Week 24
UCT is validated patient reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. UCT has been developed and validated with participants Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria (CSU) and Chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU). It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); quality of life (QoL) impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranged from 0 (high disease activity) to 4 (low disease activity). The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores,ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity, complete disease control, and vice-versa. Least square (LS) mean and standard error (SE) were analyzed using Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 24
Percentage of Participants With Urticaria Control Test Score >=12 at Week 24
The UCT is a validated PRO questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. The questionnaire has been developed and validated with participants with CSU and CIndU. It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); QoL impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 4, with low score indicating high disease activity and low disease control, and vice-versa. The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores, which ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity and complete disease control, and vice-versa. A score of \>=12 on the scale indicates well-controlled urticaria. Percentage of participants with UCT score \>=12 (i.e., well controlled urticaria) at Week 24 are reported in this endpoint.
Time frame: Week 24
Percentage of Participants With an Improvement of >=3 Points From Baseline in Urticaria Control Test Score at Week 24
The UCT is a validated PRO questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. The questionnaire has been developed and validated with participants with CSU and CIndU. It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); QoL impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (high disease activity) to 4 (low disease activity), with low score indicating high disease activity and low disease control, and vice-versa. The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores, which ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity and complete disease control, and vice-versa.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 24
Change From Baseline in Local Wheal Intensity Likert Scale Score at Weeks 12 and 24
Wheal intensity Likert scale (ranging from 0 to 5) is a clinician-reported endpoint completed at the study visit, 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube from the participants' arm. The scale comprised of a single item assessing the intensity of participants' cutaneous reaction rated as follows: 0 = no wheals; 1 = numerous small, non-coalescent wheals; 2 = a large, regular, slightly edematous, coalescent wheal; 3 = a large and moderately edematous wheal; 4 = a large, regular, and significantly edematous wheal without pseudopodia; and 5 = a large, very edematous wheal with pseudopodia. Higher score indicated greater severity. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24
Change From Baseline in Local Itch Severity Scale Score at Weeks 12 and 24
Local itch (pruritus) severity was assessed using the peak pruritus numerical rating scale (NRS). Peak pruritus NRS is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No itch") to 10 ("Worst itch imaginable"), where higher scores indicated worse itch. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of their worst local site itch (pruritus) 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24
Change From Baseline in Local Skin Burning Sensation Scale Score at Weeks 12 and 24
Local skin burning sensation was assessed using peak burning sensation NRS which is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No burning sensation") to 10 ("Worst imaginable burning sensation"). Higher score indicated worst burning sensation. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of the worst local site burning sensation of their skin 10 minutes after the removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24
Change From Baseline in Local Pain Severity Scale Score at Weeks 12 and 24
Local pain severity was assessed using peak pain NRS. The peak pain NRS is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No pain") to 10 ("Worst imaginable pain"). Higher score indicated worst pain. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of their worst local site pain 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE was analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 12 and Week 24
Percentage of Participants With Negative Ice Cube Provocation Test at Week 12
The ice cube provocation test is the most frequently used provocation method for ColdU. A negative ice cube provocation test was defined as the absence of confluent hives/wheal at the entire skin site of exposure after ice cube provocation test. Ice cube was applied on forearm skin for 5 minutes. Provocation test reading time was 10 minutes after removal of ice cube.
Time frame: Week 12
Change From Baseline in Cold Urticaria Signs and Symptoms Severity Scale Score at Week 24
Cold Urticaria Activity Score (ColdUAS) is disease-specific PRO questionnaire designed to determine cold urticaria disease activity. Intended for participants with cold urticaria aged 12 years old and above; developed and comprehensively tested with adults and adolescent participants with cold urticaria. Disease activity assessment was based on daily documentation of cold-induced skin reactions (wheals and swelling), skin sensations (itching, burning, pain or feeling hot), avoidance behavior and trigger exposure, and overall symptoms severity. Skin reaction, skin sensations, exposition to cold temperatures that usually cause ColdU symptoms and overall symptom severity were rated on a 4-point scale ranged from 0 (less severe) to 4 (more severe), where higher score indicated more signs and symptoms. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes/No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Percentage of Cold Urticaria Sign and Symptom-Free Days at Week 24
ColdUAS: disease-specific PRO questionnaire to determine cold urticaria disease activity in adults and adolescents with cold urticaria. For change from Baseline in percentage of cold urticaria sign and symptom-free days, responses to ColdUAS question (Q) 1 (rating severity of signs: wheals and swelling) and ColdUAS, Q2 (rating severity of symptoms: itch, burning, pain, or feeling hot) on days exposed to cold (ColdUAS Q3 responded Yes) were used. Within 14-day interval before each visit the number of sign and symptom-free days (ColdUAS Q1=0 and Q2=0) on days exposed to cold (ColdUAS Q3 greater than \>0) was counted and divided by total number of days exposed to cold in this interval. Percentage of cold urticaria sign and symptom free days = sign and symptom free days/cold exposure days in 14 days window\*100. LS mean and SE by ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamines regular/daily use (Yes/No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Health-related Quality-of-life (HRQoL) as Measured by Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scale Scores at Week 24
DLQI is a PRO developed to measure dermatology-specific HRQoL in adults. It comprises 10 items assessing the impact of skin disease on participant's HRQoL over the previous week. The items cover symptoms, leisure activities, work/school or holiday time, personal relationships including intimate, side effects of treatment, and emotional reactions to having a skin disease. It is a validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials. For 9-items; response scale was a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = "Not at all" to 3 = "Very much", where higher score=more impact of QoL, and vice-versa. The remaining 1 item about work/studying was rated on a 3-point Likert scale ranged from 0="Not at all" to 2="A lot". DLQI total score was the sum of score of all the items and ranged from 0 to 30, with a high score indicated poor HRQoL, and vice-versa. LS mean and SE from ANCOVA model.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Change From Baseline in Cold Urticaria Quality of Life (ColdU-QoL) Scale Score at Week 24
The ColdU-QoL questionnaire is a disease-specific PRO questionnaire designed to assess the impact of cold urticaria on participant's HRQoL. It has been developed and comprehensively tested with adults and adolescent participants with cold urticaria. The questionnaire contains 19 items, each rated using a 5-point Likert scale ranged from 0 (Not at all / Never) to 4 (Very much / Very often). The total raw score of the ColdU-QoL was transformed to a 0 to 100 score for analysis using the formula: ColdU-QoL total score = Sum of the score of all completed items/Maximum possible sum of the score of all completed items\*100. Higher scores indicated higher ColdU-related QoL impairment, and vice-versa. LS mean and SE were analyzed from ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 24
Percentage of Participants Receiving Rescue Therapy for Primary Acquired Chronic Inducible Cold Urticaria
Rescue therapy included additional doses of H1-antihistamines and short course of oral corticosteroids (OCS).
Time frame: From first investigational medicinal product (IMP) administration (Day 1) up to Week 24
Percentage of Participants With Cold Exposure Triggered Urticaria That Required Hospitalization/Emergency Medical Care Visit or Treatment With Epinephrine
Percentage of participants with cold exposure triggered urticaria that required hospitalization/emergency medical care visit or treatment with epinephrine are reported in this endpoint.
Time frame: From first IMP administration (Day 1) up to 14 weeks after last IMP administration (i.e., up to Week 36)
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) and Treatment-emergent Serious Adverse Events (TESAEs)
An Adverse Event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug and did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. Serious adverse events (SAEs) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or was a medically important event. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed, worsened or became serious during the treatment-emergent period (from the first IMP administration to the last IMP administration + 14 weeks).
Time frame: From first IMP administration (Day 1) up to 14 weeks after last IMP administration (i.e., up to Week 36)
Number of Participants With Treatment-emergent Antidrug Antibodies (ADA) Response
ADA response was categorized as: Treatment-emergent and Treatment-boosted. Treatment-emergent ADAs were defined as a positive response in the ADA assay post-first dose, when baseline results were negative or missing. Treatment-boosted ADAs: defined as an ADA positive response in the assay post first dose that was \>=4-fold over baseline titer levels, when Baseline results were positive. Titer values were defined as low titer (\< 1,000); moderate (1,000 less than or equal to \[\<=\] titer \<=10,000) and high titer (\> 10,000).
Time frame: From first IMP administration (Day 1) up to 14 weeks after last IMP administration (i.e., up to Week 36)
Study was conducted at 32 active sites in 5 countries. A total of 123 participants were screened between 10 December 2020 and 22 June 2022, of which 41 were screen failures. Screen failures were mainly due to not meeting eligibility criteria.
| Milestone | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 40 | 42 |
| Completed | 30 | 31 |
| Not completed | 10 | 11 |
| Withdrew: Lack of efficacy | 2 | 2 |
| Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject | 8 | 9 |
The ice cube provocation test is the most frequently used provocation method for cold urticaria (ColdU). A negative ice cube provocation test was defined as the absence of confluent hives/wheal at the entire skin site of exposure after ice cube provocation test. Ice cube was applied on forearm skin for 5 minutes. Provocation test reading time was 10 minutes after removal of ice cube.
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Negative Ice Cube Provocation Test at Week 24 | 37.5 | 40.5 |
UCT is validated patient reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. UCT has been developed and validated with participants Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria (CSU) and Chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU). It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); quality of life (QoL) impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranged from 0 (high disease activity) to 4 (low disease activity). The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores,ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity, complete disease control, and vice-versa. Least square (LS) mean and standard error (SE) were analyzed using Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Urticaria Control Test (UCT) Scale Scores at Week 24 | 3.75 ± 0.89 | 4.36 ± 0.80 |
The UCT is a validated PRO questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. The questionnaire has been developed and validated with participants with CSU and CIndU. It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); QoL impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 4, with low score indicating high disease activity and low disease control, and vice-versa. The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores, which ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity and complete disease control, and vice-versa. A score of \>=12 on the scale indicates well-controlled urticaria. Percentage of participants with UCT score \>=12 (i.e., well controlled urticaria) at Week 24 are reported in this endpoint.
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Urticaria Control Test Score >=12 at Week 24 | 27.5 | 33.3 |
The UCT is a validated PRO questionnaire used for assessing urticaria control. The questionnaire has been developed and validated with participants with CSU and CIndU. It comprised of 4 items: severity of physical symptoms of urticaria (itch, hives and/or swelling); QoL impairment; frequency of treatment being not sufficient to control urticaria; overall urticarial control. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (high disease activity) to 4 (low disease activity), with low score indicating high disease activity and low disease control, and vice-versa. The UCT total score was calculated as sum of all 4 individual item scores, which ranged from 0 to 16. Higher scores indicated low disease activity and complete disease control, and vice-versa.
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With an Improvement of >=3 Points From Baseline in Urticaria Control Test Score at Week 24 | 30.0 | 45.2 |
Wheal intensity Likert scale (ranging from 0 to 5) is a clinician-reported endpoint completed at the study visit, 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube from the participants' arm. The scale comprised of a single item assessing the intensity of participants' cutaneous reaction rated as follows: 0 = no wheals; 1 = numerous small, non-coalescent wheals; 2 = a large, regular, slightly edematous, coalescent wheal; 3 = a large and moderately edematous wheal; 4 = a large, regular, and significantly edematous wheal without pseudopodia; and 5 = a large, very edematous wheal with pseudopodia. Higher score indicated greater severity. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Week 12 | -1.49 ± 0.23 | -1.19 ± 0.23 |
| Week 24 | -1.52 ± 0.28 | -1.55 ± 0.27 |
Local itch (pruritus) severity was assessed using the peak pruritus numerical rating scale (NRS). Peak pruritus NRS is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No itch") to 10 ("Worst itch imaginable"), where higher scores indicated worse itch. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of their worst local site itch (pruritus) 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Week 12 | -2.12 ± 0.58 | -2.52 ± 0.59 |
| Week 24 | -2.18 ± 0.63 | -2.43 ± 0.62 |
Local skin burning sensation was assessed using peak burning sensation NRS which is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No burning sensation") to 10 ("Worst imaginable burning sensation"). Higher score indicated worst burning sensation. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of the worst local site burning sensation of their skin 10 minutes after the removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Week 12 | -1.60 ± 0.60 | -2.43 ± 0.61 |
| Week 24 | -1.76 ± 0.69 | -2.04 ± 0.68 |
Local pain severity was assessed using peak pain NRS. The peak pain NRS is a PRO comprised of a single item rated on a scale ranged from 0 ("No pain") to 10 ("Worst imaginable pain"). Higher score indicated worst pain. Participants were asked to rate the intensity of their worst local site pain 10 minutes after removal of the ice cube. LS mean and SE was analyzed using ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Week 12 | -1.82 ± 0.54 | -2.14 ± 0.55 |
| Week 24 | -1.60 ± 0.58 | -2.28 ± 0.57 |
The ice cube provocation test is the most frequently used provocation method for ColdU. A negative ice cube provocation test was defined as the absence of confluent hives/wheal at the entire skin site of exposure after ice cube provocation test. Ice cube was applied on forearm skin for 5 minutes. Provocation test reading time was 10 minutes after removal of ice cube.
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Negative Ice Cube Provocation Test at Week 12 | 35.0 | 31.0 |
Cold Urticaria Activity Score (ColdUAS) is disease-specific PRO questionnaire designed to determine cold urticaria disease activity. Intended for participants with cold urticaria aged 12 years old and above; developed and comprehensively tested with adults and adolescent participants with cold urticaria. Disease activity assessment was based on daily documentation of cold-induced skin reactions (wheals and swelling), skin sensations (itching, burning, pain or feeling hot), avoidance behavior and trigger exposure, and overall symptoms severity. Skin reaction, skin sensations, exposition to cold temperatures that usually cause ColdU symptoms and overall symptom severity were rated on a 4-point scale ranged from 0 (less severe) to 4 (more severe), where higher score indicated more signs and symptoms. LS mean and SE were analyzed using ANCOVA model with corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes/No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Cold Urticaria Signs and Symptoms Severity Scale Score at Week 24 | -1.04 ± 0.23 | -1.28 ± 0.22 |
ColdUAS: disease-specific PRO questionnaire to determine cold urticaria disease activity in adults and adolescents with cold urticaria. For change from Baseline in percentage of cold urticaria sign and symptom-free days, responses to ColdUAS question (Q) 1 (rating severity of signs: wheals and swelling) and ColdUAS, Q2 (rating severity of symptoms: itch, burning, pain, or feeling hot) on days exposed to cold (ColdUAS Q3 responded Yes) were used. Within 14-day interval before each visit the number of sign and symptom-free days (ColdUAS Q1=0 and Q2=0) on days exposed to cold (ColdUAS Q3 greater than \>0) was counted and divided by total number of days exposed to cold in this interval. Percentage of cold urticaria sign and symptom free days = sign and symptom free days/cold exposure days in 14 days window\*100. LS mean and SE by ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamines regular/daily use (Yes/No) as covariates.
| percentage of days | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Percentage of Cold Urticaria Sign and Symptom-Free Days at Week 24 | 15.66 ± 7.49 | 27.82 ± 7.26 |
DLQI is a PRO developed to measure dermatology-specific HRQoL in adults. It comprises 10 items assessing the impact of skin disease on participant's HRQoL over the previous week. The items cover symptoms, leisure activities, work/school or holiday time, personal relationships including intimate, side effects of treatment, and emotional reactions to having a skin disease. It is a validated questionnaire used in clinical practice and clinical trials. For 9-items; response scale was a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = "Not at all" to 3 = "Very much", where higher score=more impact of QoL, and vice-versa. The remaining 1 item about work/studying was rated on a 3-point Likert scale ranged from 0="Not at all" to 2="A lot". DLQI total score was the sum of score of all the items and ranged from 0 to 30, with a high score indicated poor HRQoL, and vice-versa. LS mean and SE from ANCOVA model.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Health-related Quality-of-life (HRQoL) as Measured by Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) Scale Scores at Week 24 | -4.70 ± 1.08 | -4.32 ± 1.00 |
The ColdU-QoL questionnaire is a disease-specific PRO questionnaire designed to assess the impact of cold urticaria on participant's HRQoL. It has been developed and comprehensively tested with adults and adolescent participants with cold urticaria. The questionnaire contains 19 items, each rated using a 5-point Likert scale ranged from 0 (Not at all / Never) to 4 (Very much / Very often). The total raw score of the ColdU-QoL was transformed to a 0 to 100 score for analysis using the formula: ColdU-QoL total score = Sum of the score of all completed items/Maximum possible sum of the score of all completed items\*100. Higher scores indicated higher ColdU-related QoL impairment, and vice-versa. LS mean and SE were analyzed from ANCOVA model with the corresponding Baseline value, intervention group, region and background H1-antihistamine regular/daily use (Yes or No) as covariates.
| score on a scale | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Cold Urticaria Quality of Life (ColdU-QoL) Scale Score at Week 24 | -20.12 ± 3.81 | -20.07 ± 3.65 |
Rescue therapy included additional doses of H1-antihistamines and short course of oral corticosteroids (OCS).
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| H1-antihistamines | 32.5 | 45.2 |
| OCS | 2.5 | 0 |
Percentage of participants with cold exposure triggered urticaria that required hospitalization/emergency medical care visit or treatment with epinephrine are reported in this endpoint.
| percentage of participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Hospitalization/emergency medical care visit | 0 | 0 |
| Epinephrine treatment | 0 | 0 |
An Adverse Event (AE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a participant who received study drug and did not necessarily have to have a causal relationship with the treatment. Serious adverse events (SAEs) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: resulted in death, was life-threatening, required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, resulted in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, or was a medically important event. TEAEs were defined as AEs that developed, worsened or became serious during the treatment-emergent period (from the first IMP administration to the last IMP administration + 14 weeks).
| Participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| TEAEs | 27 | 23 |
| TESAEs | 0 | 1 |
ADA response was categorized as: Treatment-emergent and Treatment-boosted. Treatment-emergent ADAs were defined as a positive response in the ADA assay post-first dose, when baseline results were negative or missing. Treatment-boosted ADAs: defined as an ADA positive response in the assay post first dose that was \>=4-fold over baseline titer levels, when Baseline results were positive. Titer values were defined as low titer (\< 1,000); moderate (1,000 less than or equal to \[\<=\] titer \<=10,000) and high titer (\> 10,000).
| Participants | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Treatment-emergent ADAs | 0 | 4 |
| Treatment-boosted ADAs | 0 | 0 |
Collected over From first IMP administration (Day 1) up to 14 weeks after last IMP administration (i.e., up to Week 36). Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo | 0/39 (0%) | 0/39 (0%) | 16/39 (41%) |
| Dupilumab | 0/43 (0%) | 1/43 (2.3%) | 14/43 (32.6%) |
| Event | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Bipolar DisorderPsychiatric disorders | 0/39 | 1/43 |
| Event | Placebo | Dupilumab |
|---|---|---|
| Covid-19Infections and infestations | 8/39 | 5/43 |
| Injection Site ReactionGeneral disorders | 1/39 | 6/43 |
| Injection Site PainGeneral disorders | 1/39 | 4/43 |
| Suspected Covid-19Infections and infestations | 3/39 | 2/43 |
| Injection Site ErythemaGeneral disorders | 0/39 | 3/43 |
| PyrexiaGeneral disorders | 2/39 | 0/43 |
| Accidental OverdoseInjury, poisoning and procedural complications | 2/39 | 1/43 |
| HeadacheNervous system disorders | 2/39 | 1/43 |
| Eczema AsteatoticSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | 2/39 | 0/43 |
Randomized population consisted of all participants from the screened population who had been allocated to randomized intervention by interactive response technology regardless of whether the treatment kit was used or not.
| Age, Continuous(years) | Placebo | Dupilumab | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 37.9 ± 16.3 | 33.0 ± 13.1 | 35.4 ± 14.9 |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Placebo | Dupilumab | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 30 | 33 | 63 |
| Male | 10 | 9 | 19 |
| Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Placebo | Dupilumab | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Asian | 4 | 6 | 10 |
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Black or African American | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| White | 35 | 35 | 70 |
| More than one race | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: Yes — Qualified researchers may request access to patient level data and related study documents including the clinical study report, study protocol with any amendments, blank case report form, statistical analysis plan, and dataset specifications. Patient level data will be anonymized and study documents will be redacted to protect the privacy of trial participants. Further details on Sanofi's data sharing criteria, eligible studies, and process for requesting access can be found at: https://vivli.org
This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Cold Urticaria
Sanofi