Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is designed to compare the effectiveness and safety of test head lice shampoo (Test product) versus Goldgeist® Forte (reference product) following two applications.
The primary objective was to show, that the cure rate after local application of Test head lice shampoo is better than a predefined limit. It had to be shown, that the Test head lice shampoo achieved a cure rate superior to 70% (cure rate at the end of day 10, corrected for re-infestation).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silcap Shampoo | Experimental | Subjects with head lice were treated with Silcap Shampoo at visit 1 (day 0) and at visit 3 (day 7). |
|
| Goldgeist® Forte | Active Comparator | Subjects with head lice were treated with Goldgeist® Forte at visit 1 (day 0) and at visit 3 (day 7). |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pyrethrum Extract | Drug | Treatment with Goldgeist® Forte |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Cure Rate superior to 70% for the test product | The primary objective was to show, that the cure rate after local application of Test head lice shampoo is better than a predefined limit. It had to be shown, that the Test head lice shampoo achieved a cure rate superior to 70% (cure rate at the end of day 10, corrected for re-infestation). | Day 10 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Cure Rate superior to 70% for the reference product | The secondary objective was the comparison of the cure rate of the test product with the reference product by using different endpoints. It should be shown that the cure rate on day 10 for the reference product for all baseline infestations is better than the pre-defined limit of 70%. | Day 10 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Severity of the lice infestation | The severity of head lice infestation was judged on a 4-point severity scale:
| Day 0 (before and after treatment),Day 1, Day 7 (before and after treatment), Day 10 |
Inclusion Criteria:
are women of childbearing potential who test negative for pregnancy and agree to use a reliable method of birth control or remain abstinent duringthe study. Methods of contraception considered acceptable include oral contraceptives, contraceptive patch, intrauterine device, vaginal ring, diaphragm with contraceptive gel, or condom with contraceptive gel
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Dörte Wolf, PhD | CardioSec Clinical Research GmbH | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CardioSec Clinical Research GmbH | Erfurt | 99084 | Germany |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Silcap Shampoo |
| Device |
Treatment with Silcap Shampoo |
|
|
| Superior cure rate to the reference | The secondary objective was the comparison of the cure rate of the test product with the reference product by using different endpoints. It should be shown that the test head lice shampoo has a cure rate superior to the reference. | Day 10 |
| Non-inferiority rate to the reference | The secondary objective was the comparison of the cure rate of the test product with the reference product by using different endpoints. It should be shown that in case, that superiority could not be shown, the test head lice shampoo is at least not-inferior to the reference. A non-inferiority margin of 7.5% was defined. | Day 10 |
| Local tolerability | Subjective symptoms (burning, paraesthesia, pruritus) after administration of the investigational products were rated by the patients on a 4-category scale on day 0 and day 7 (0h, 1h p.a.) directly after study drug application as well as on day 1 and day 10 p.a.: Score 1 = no Score 2 = mild Score 3 = moderate Score 4 = severe | Day 0 (at start and after treatment), Day 1, Day 7 (at start and after treatment), Day 10 |
| Global tolerability | Global tolerability was assessed by blinded study staff and by the patient or his/her guardian at day 10. The study staff performed the rating in each case prior to the assessment by the patient to avoid bias. Afterwards, the patient self-assessed the global tolerability. The global tolerability was rated on a 4-category scale with: Score 1 = very good Score 2 = good Score 3 = moderate Score 4 = poor | Day 10 |
| Skin irritation assessment | To investigate a potential irritation of the eyes due to the treatment, the trained and blinded study staff assessed the severity of redness of both eyes within 1 hour before first treatment (baseline), as well as directly after study drug application and after the end of treatment on study day 0, day 1, day 7 (pre-treatment, 0h and 1h p.a.) and on day 10. For the assessment of eyes the following 4-category scale as mentioned above were used. Score 1 = no Score 2 = mild Score 3 = moderate Score 4 = severe | Day 0 (before, at start and after treatment),Day 1, Day 7 (before, at start and after treatment), Day 10 |
| Eye irritation assessment | Skin irritation (secondary infection, erythema, excoriation) was assessed by blinded and trained study staff within 1 hour before first treatment (baseline), as well as directly after study drug application and after the end of treatment on study day 0, day 1, day 7 (pre-treatment, 0h and 1h p.a.) and on day 10 . For the assessment of skin irritation the following 4-category scale as mentioned above were used. Score 1 = no Score 2 = mild Score 3 = moderate Score 4 = severe | Day 0 (before, at start and after treatment),Day 1, Day 7 (before, at start and after treatment), Day 10 |
| Esthetical effect of the anti-lice products | The esthetical properties of the investigational products were evaluated to determine the satisfaction by the patients with the product after application using a questionnaire about hair and scalp feeling, greasiness, hair look, shininess and volume. The questioning was performed on day 0 and day 7 after treatment and drying the hair. Six questions al with Score 1-4: Score 1 = strongly agree Score 2 = agree Score 3 = disagree Score 4 = strongly disagree | Day 0 (after treatment); day 7 (after treatment) |
| Adverse Events (AEs) | An Adverse Event (AE) is any unintended or unfavourable sign (including an abnormal finding), symptom or disease occurring in a subject after signing the informed consent until the last study visit, whether or not the event is believed to be causally related to study medication (IMP) or comparative compound. This definition includes any worsening of conditions that were present at the time of entry into the study (signing of the informedconsent) (see International Conference on Harmonization (ICH-E2A). AEs occurring after signing the informed consent but before administration of study medication are defined as non-treatment-emergent events. Those events are evaluated separately because in these cases a causal relationship with the study medication can be excluded. | Day 0 (at start and after treatment),Day 1, Day 7 (at start and after treatment), Day 10 |