Clinical Trial Intelligence

Which Endpoints Dominate European Phase II & III Dermatology Trials?

5 July 2026

Across 217 unique European CTIS dermatology Phase II & III trials authorized in 2024–2026, endpoint measurement is dominated by safety, clinician global assessment, and patient-reported outcomes. Safety or treatment-emergent adverse event endpoints appear in 142/217 trials (65.4%), investigator global assessment endpoints in 106/217 (48.8%), and quality-of-life or patient-reported outcome endpoints in 96/217 (44.2%). Secondary endpoints carry most of the endpoint payload, accounting for 1,785/2,140 endpoint entries (83.4%).

Unique trials
217
European CTIS dermatology Phase II & III trials
Endpoint entries
2,140
348 primary, 1,785 secondary, 7 exploratory
Top any-role endpoint
65.4%
Safety / TEAE endpoints in 142 of 217 trials
Explicit exploratory use
1.4%
Exploratory/other endpoints in 3 of 217 trials

Safety, global assessment, and PRO endpoints define the EU dermatology endpoint core

Safety / treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) endpoints are the most frequent endpoint family, appearing in 142/217 trials (65.4%). Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) endpoints appear in 106/217 trials (48.8%), while quality-of-life or patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints appear in 96/217 trials (44.2%).

Trial-level frequency by endpoint family, any role
Safety / TEAEs 142/217 · 65.4%
Investigator global assessment 106/217 · 48.8%
Quality of life / PRO 96/217 · 44.2%
Biomarker / laboratory 84/217 · 38.7%
Survival / event-time 65/217 · 30.0%
Body surface / lesion extent 52/217 · 24.0%
Pain score 49/217 · 22.6%
Pharmacokinetics / exposure 41/217 · 18.9%
Pruritus / itch score 40/217 · 18.4%
mRSS / systemic sclerosis 34/217 · 15.7%
EASI / eczema severity 28/217 · 12.9%
Oncology response / RECIST 25/217 · 11.5%
Denominator: 217 unique CTIS dermatology Phase II & III trials authorized in Europe, 2024–2026.
Interpretation

For EU/CTIS dermatology submissions, endpoint planning is not limited to one disease-specific severity scale. A competitive endpoint package usually needs a safety backbone, a clinician-rated activity or clearance scale, and a PRO/QoL layer.

Primary endpoints are concentrated; secondary endpoints carry the measurement burden

Primary endpoint entries account for 348/2,140 endpoint entries (16.3%), secondary endpoints account for 1,785/2,140 (83.4%), and exploratory/other endpoints account for 7/2,140 (0.3%). At the trial level, 206/217 trials (94.9%) list primary endpoints, 180/217 (82.9%) list secondary endpoints, and only 3/217 (1.4%) list exploratory/other endpoints.

Endpoint entries by primary, secondary, and exploratory role
Primary endpoint entries 348/2140 · 16.3%
Secondary endpoint entries 1785/2140 · 83.4%
Exploratory / other entries 7/2140 · 0.3%
Endpoint-entry denominator: 2,140 endpoint entries across 217 unique trials.
Most frequent primary and secondary endpoint families
Top primary familiesPrimary frequencyTop secondary familiesSecondary frequency
Safety / TEAEs46/217 · 21.2%Safety / TEAEs116/217 · 53.5%
Investigator global assessment41/217 · 18.9%Quality of life / PRO95/217 · 43.8%
EASI / eczema severity23/217 · 10.6%Investigator global assessment92/217 · 42.4%
Biomarker / laboratory22/217 · 10.1%Biomarker / laboratory68/217 · 31.3%
Survival / event-time19/217 · 8.8%Survival / event-time58/217 · 26.7%
Hidradenitis response18/217 · 8.3%Pain score46/217 · 21.2%
Oncology response / RECIST16/217 · 7.4%Body surface / lesion extent46/217 · 21.2%
PASI / psoriasis severity13/217 · 6.0%Pruritus / itch score38/217 · 17.5%
Frequencies are trial-level presence by endpoint role; trials may include more than one endpoint family.
Interpretation

The primary endpoint layer is built around safety, global assessment, EASI, biomarker/lab measures, survival/time-to-event, and disease-specific response scales. The secondary layer is broader and more patient-centered: safety appears in 116/217 trials (53.5%), QoL/PRO in 95/217 (43.8%), and IGA in 92/217 (42.4%).

Endpoint choice is disease-specific once trial counts are sufficient

The largest disease groups are atopic dermatitis/eczema with 34/217 trials (15.7%), dermatologic oncology with 25/217 (11.5%), psoriasis/psoriatic disease with 23/217 (10.6%), and hidradenitis suppurativa with 22/217 (10.1%). Within these groups, the dominant endpoint families are disease-specific: EASI/IGA in atopic dermatitis, PASI/IGA in psoriasis, HiSCR/IHS4 in hidradenitis suppurativa, and RECIST/objective response in dermatologic oncology.

Largest disease groups in the endpoint dataset
Atopic dermatitis / eczema 34/217 · 15.7%
Dermatologic oncology 25/217 · 11.5%
Psoriasis / psoriatic disease 23/217 · 10.6%
Hidradenitis suppurativa 22/217 · 10.1%
Other dermatology 14/217 · 6.5%
Rare / severe skin disease 12/217 · 5.5%
Urticaria / angioedema 12/217 · 5.5%
Systemic sclerosis 12/217 · 5.5%
Wounds / burns / ulcers 11/217 · 5.1%
Autoimmune skin disease 10/217 · 4.6%
Denominator: 217 unique trials; groups with at least 10 trials shown in the chart.
Disease groups with at least 11 trials
Disease groupTrialsMost frequent familySecond familyThird family
Atopic dermatitis / eczema34IGA: 30/34 · 88.2%EASI: 26/34 · 76.5%Safety: 25/34 · 73.5%
Dermatologic oncology25Oncology response / RECIST: 15/25 · 60.0%Safety: 15/25 · 60.0%Survival/event-time: 12/25 · 48.0%
Psoriasis / psoriatic disease23PASI: 20/23 · 87.0%IGA: 16/23 · 69.6%BSA / lesion extent: 12/23 · 52.2%
Hidradenitis suppurativa22HiSCR / IHS4: 19/22 · 86.4%Safety: 18/22 · 81.8%Pain: 13/22 · 59.1%
Urticaria / angioedema12UAS / HSS: 12/12 · 100.0%Safety: 9/12 · 75.0%Pruritus: 8/12 · 66.7%
Systemic sclerosis12mRSS / SSc endpoints: 10/12 · 83.3%QoL / PRO: 9/12 · 75.0%Safety: 8/12 · 66.7%
Rare / severe skin disease12Biomarker / laboratory: 9/12 · 75.0%Safety: 9/12 · 75.0%QoL / PRO: 6/12 · 50.0%
Wounds / burns / ulcers11Wound closure / detachment: 8/11 · 72.7%Safety: 6/11 · 54.5%Biomarker/lab: 5/11 · 45.5%
Endpoint family frequency is counted as presence anywhere in the trial endpoint hierarchy.
Sub-diseases where the number of trials supports comparison
Sub-diseaseTrialsDominant endpoint signal
Atopic dermatitis29Primary EASI in 21/29 · 72.4%
Hidradenitis suppurativa22Primary HiSCR/IHS4 in 18/22 · 81.8%
Plaque psoriasis13Primary PASI in 10/13 · 76.9%
Chronic spontaneous urticaria11Primary UAS/HSS in 9/11 · 81.8%
Melanoma10Any oncology response in 6/10 · 60.0%
Psoriatic arthritis10Primary ACR/JIA response in 7/10 · 70.0%
Alopecia / hair disorders9Primary hair/SALT endpoint in 7/9 · 77.8%
Systemic sclerosis9Primary mRSS/SSc endpoint in 5/9 · 55.6%
Vitiligo8Primary VASI endpoint in 7/8 · 87.5%
Skin infection / infestation8Primary infection success in 7/8 · 87.5%
Basal cell carcinoma / Gorlin6Primary oncology response in 4/6 · 66.7%
Sub-diseases with at least 6 trials shown.
Interpretation

Disease-specific severity scales are the clearest endpoint anchors in CTIS dermatology submissions. Atopic dermatitis relies on EASI/IGA, plaque psoriasis on PASI/IGA, hidradenitis on HiSCR/IHS4, urticaria on UAS/HSS, vitiligo on VASI, and systemic sclerosis on mRSS/SSc measures.

Phase III endpoint packages are larger and more PRO-heavy than Phase II packages

Phase II-containing records include 109 CTIS phase records and Phase III-containing records include 114; six explicit Phase II/III trials contribute to both phase buckets. Phase III carries 1,262 endpoint entries across 114 records, or 11.1 per record, compared with 926 endpoint entries across 109 Phase II records, or 8.5 per record.

Top endpoint families and endpoint load by phase bucket
Phase II-containing
Safety / TEAEs82/109 · 75.2%
Biomarker / laboratory54/109 · 49.5%
IGA / global assessment47/109 · 43.1%
8.5
mean endpoint entries per phase record
Phase III-containing
Safety / TEAEs64/114 · 56.1%
IGA / global assessment62/114 · 54.4%
QoL / PRO56/114 · 49.1%
11.1
mean endpoint entries per phase record
Phase buckets are based on CTIS phase grouping; explicit Phase II/III trials are counted in both phase-specific buckets.
Numeric phase comparison
Endpoint measurePhase II-containingPhase III-containing
Any-role safety / TEAEs82/109 · 75.2%64/114 · 56.1%
Any-role IGA / global assessment47/109 · 43.1%62/114 · 54.4%
Any-role QoL / PRO44/109 · 40.4%56/114 · 49.1%
Any-role biomarkers / laboratory54/109 · 49.5%32/114 · 28.1%
Any-role PK / exposure29/109 · 26.6%12/114 · 10.5%
Endpoint entries per record926/109 · mean 8.51,262/114 · mean 11.1
Secondary endpoint entries748/109 · mean 6.91,078/114 · mean 9.5
Endpoint family frequencies are any-role trial-level frequencies within each phase bucket.
Interpretation

Phase II endpoint design is more translational: biomarkers/lab measures appear in 54/109 records (49.5%) and PK/exposure in 29/109 (26.6%). Phase III shifts toward confirmatory clinical and patient-centered measurement, with IGA in 62/114 records (54.4%) and QoL/PRO in 56/114 (49.1%).

Endpoint patterns differ by modality where trial counts are large enough

Small molecules appear in 107/217 trials (49.3%), monoclonal antibodies in 69/217 (31.8%), peptide/protein/enzyme products in 36/217 (16.6%), and other modalities in 21/217 (9.7%). Safety endpoints remain the most consistent modality-agnostic endpoint family, ranging from 21/36 peptide/protein/enzyme trials (58.3%) to 15/21 other-modality trials (71.4%).

Modalities with at least 20 trials
Modality groupTrialsMost frequentSecondThird
Small molecule107Safety 70/107 · 65.4%IGA 56/107 · 52.3%QoL/PRO 47/107 · 43.9%
Monoclonal antibody69Safety 43/69 · 62.3%QoL/PRO 39/69 · 56.5%IGA 32/69 · 46.4%
Peptide/protein/enzyme36Safety 21/36 · 58.3%IGA 19/36 · 52.8%PK/exposure 11/36 · 30.6%
Other21Safety 15/21 · 71.4%QoL/PRO 10/21 · 47.6%Biomarker/lab 10/21 · 47.6%
Trials with combination products can contribute to more than one modality group.
Interpretation

For CTIS endpoint planning, modality mainly changes the supporting endpoint layer. Peptide/protein/enzyme trials show a larger PK/exposure footprint at 11/36 (30.6%), while monoclonal antibody trials show more QoL/PRO use at 39/69 (56.5%).

Adjacent insight: patient-reported and symptom endpoints are present in most dermatology trials

A combined patient-reported or symptom endpoint layer—QoL/PRO, pruritus/itch, or pain—appears in 123/217 trials (56.7%). This layer is most common in urticaria/angioedema at 10/12 trials (83.3%), rare/severe skin disease at 9/12 (75.0%), systemic sclerosis at 9/12 (75.0%), hidradenitis suppurativa at 16/22 (72.7%), and atopic dermatitis/eczema at 23/34 (67.6%).

Disease groups with the highest PRO / symptom endpoint presence
Urticaria / angioedema 10/12 · 83.3%
Rare / severe skin disease 9/12 · 75.0%
Systemic sclerosis 9/12 · 75.0%
Hidradenitis suppurativa 16/22 · 72.7%
Atopic dermatitis / eczema 23/34 · 67.6%
Autoimmune skin disease 6/10 · 60.0%
Wounds / burns / ulcers 5/11 · 45.5%
PRO/symptom layer includes QoL/PRO, itch/pruritus, or pain endpoint families.
Interpretation

The strongest adjacent operational signal is eCOA/PRO readiness. More than half of the EU dermatology CTIS trial set includes patient-reported, itch, or pain endpoints, making validated instruments and multilingual patient-facing workflows central to Phase II & III execution.

Definitions used in the endpoint analysis

CTIS means the European Clinical Trials Information System. TEAE means treatment-emergent adverse event. IGA means Investigator Global Assessment. EASI means Eczema Area and Severity Index. PASI means Psoriasis Area and Severity Index. HiSCR means Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response. UAS7 means weekly Urticaria Activity Score. VASI means Vitiligo Area Scoring Index. mRSS means modified Rodnan Skin Score. PRO means patient-reported outcome. PK means pharmacokinetics.