Apremilast NCT07352566 Clinical Landscape 2026

Explore the PatSnap Life Sciences MCP marketplace

This Clinical Landscape Report was built with PatSnap Life Sciences MCP workflows. Clinical Trials MCP supplies protocol and result records, Drug & Asset MCP adds asset context, and Company & Deal Intelligence MCP resolves sponsor background. Use the same structured MCP building blocks in your research workflow.

Data snapshot: 28 September 2026. This strategic research report is not medical, regulatory or investment advice. Trial status and dates can change.

Phase 4

Clinical phase

Not yet recruiting

Recruitment status

10

Planned enrollment

2030-06-01

Primary-completion proxy

Executive view

NCT07352566 evaluates Apremilast in Psoriasis. The disclosed sponsor is The University of California, San Francisco, the design is Interventional, and the geographic footprint is United States. The first listed primary endpoint is Number of participants with adverse events, assessed over 1 year.

The key landscape question is whether this protocol can generate a clinically interpretable signal relative to nearby programs. Phase alone is not a measure of evidence quality. Endpoint relevance, comparator choice, masking, enrollment feasibility, patient selection, country coverage and follow-up must be considered together.

PatSnap MCP Servers make this assessment reproducible by keeping protocol facts, result evidence, asset attributes and sponsor identity in separate structured calls.

How the MCP evidence stack was assembled

Clinical Trials MCP clinical_trial_fetch retrieved the design, outcomes, phase, status, enrollment, sponsor, countries and timing for NCT07352566 and selected peers. clinical_trial_result_fetch supplied detailed result records from the wider Psoriasis landscape. Drug & Asset MCP drug_fetch was queried for Apremilast, while Company & Deal Intelligence MCP organization_fetch was queried for The University of California, San Francisco.

This separation reduces a common diligence error: treating a registry label, a company description or a result excerpt as if each represented the complete evidence package. Explore the source workflow at the PatSnap MCP marketplace.

Trial landscape table

Trial	Asset / intervention	Phase / status	Sponsor	Geography	Primary endpoint	Readout proxy
NCT07352566	Apremilast	Phase 4 / Not yet recruiting	The University of California, San Francisco	United States	Number of participants with adverse events 1 year	2030-06-01
NCT07453602	DS-234	Phase 1 / Recruiting	Arcutis Biotherapeutics, Inc.	United States	Number and percentage of participants who experience an adverse event (AE) or serious adverse event (SAE) From screening to the last follow up visit for each study part (Part…	2028-04-01
NCT07455578	S-4321	Phase 1 / Recruiting	Seismic Therapeutic, Inc.	Australia	Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) Through Week 31	2027-09-01
NCT07441395	Soquelitinib	Phase 2 / Recruiting	Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	United States	Percent change from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score at Week 12 Baseline through Week 12	2027-06-01
NCT07437534	Tacrolimus	Phase 4 / Not yet recruiting	Sponsor not reported	Pakistan	≥50% Change in SCORAD score (SCORing Atopic Dermatitis)from baseline at 8 weeks with minimum score of 0 and maximum sco… 8 weeks	2026-04-25

The table aligns endpoints, sponsors, phases, geographies and readout proxies. It is descriptive, not a head-to-head efficacy comparison. Differences in population, baseline risk, intervention schedule and follow-up can dominate apparent cross-trial differences.

Reproduce the trial-to-asset workflow with PatSnap MCP

Protocol design and endpoint interpretation

NCT07352566 is a Phase 4, not yet recruiting study with 10 planned participants. Allocation is N/A, masking is None (Open Label), and the intervention model is Single Group Assignment.

The primary endpoint is “Number of participants with adverse events” over “1 year.” The retrieved endpoint description is: The safety of microdevice placement and removal will be based on assessment of adverse events..

Interpretation should test whether the endpoint captures a clinically meaningful change, whether its time horizon matches the proposed biology, and whether treatment discontinuation or missing data can bias the estimate. The planned enrollment of 10 should be assessed against expected effect size, event frequency, multiplicity, subgroup plans and attrition.

No named control drug was returned in the protocol field set. A placebo comparator can strengthen internal efficacy assessment, while an active comparator may better test clinical differentiation. Single-arm and open-label programs require greater weight on objective outcomes, independent assessment and external benchmarks.

Indexed readouts in the surrounding landscape

5 recent result records were selected as contextual evidence for Psoriasis. These records do not establish direct evidence for NCT07352566 unless the registration number matches.

Benefit–risk profile comparison between dupilumab and upadacitinib: a structured benefit–risk assessment of the Heads Up trial

Phase 3; n=385; Benefit-risk score = 61.0 point ; Benefit-risk score = 66.0 point Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42223292/

Sustained on/off-treatment disease control with abrocitinib for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

Phase 3; n=not reported; DLQI = 3.5 Point Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42165315/

A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase 2a Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of OpSCF in the Treatment of Adult Subjects With Moderate to Severe Atopic Derma…

Phase 2; n=50; Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) at Week 16(Least Squares Mean): Least Square (LS) Mean Difference = -20.484(90% CI, -40.6573 to -0.3103), P-Value = 0.095; Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) at Week 16(Least Squares Mean): Least Square (LS) Mean Difference = -20.484(90% CI, -40.6573 to -0.3103), P-Value = 0.095 Source: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/results/NCT06101823

Result fields should be reconciled with the source record before quantitative comparison. Population definitions, analysis sets, dose cohorts, estimands, confidence intervals, rescue therapy and follow-up can materially change the meaning of a numerical endpoint. Clinical Trials MCP supports repeatable refreshes as result records change.

Asset and sponsor context

Apremilast is indexed as Small molecule drug with PDE4 biology and a global stage of Approved. The asset profile lists Celgene Corp. as an originator or developer.

The University of California, San Francisco is indexed in United States with the website http://www.ucsf.edu. University of California, San Francisco is an educational institution that focuses on medical courses. The record lists 85 development-stage drug assets.

For execution diligence, monitor sponsor ownership, collaborator additions, site expansion, protocol amendments and enrollment revisions. A change in ownership or geography can alter operational confidence as well as the commercial meaning of a future readout.

Development white space

Endpoint white space. Determine whether a more patient-relevant outcome, longer durability window or blinded central assessment would resolve uncertainty left by the current endpoint.
Population white space. Test biomarker-defined, treatment-line or risk-stratified subgroups where effect size and unmet need could be clearer.
Comparator white space. Identify whether the study can support differentiation against the current standard of care rather than only activity against baseline or placebo.
Geographic white space. Assess whether the disclosed footprint supports recruitment, regulatory transferability and commercial generalizability.
Sequencing white space. Clarify whether Apremilast is intended for monotherapy, combination, maintenance, rescue or an earlier treatment line.

White space should be framed as an unanswered development question, not merely an unoccupied mechanism label. A credible program closes a measurable clinical uncertainty with a design that can be executed and interpreted.

Strategic implications and next readouts

For sponsors, the endpoint hierarchy, safety window, enrollment pace and protocol amendment history should all support the same target product profile. Advancement criteria should be set before the readout and tied to clinical effect, uncertainty, tolerability and operational feasibility.

For business-development teams, differentiation may come from a sharper population, stronger comparator, more durable benefit, simpler delivery or clearer sequencing role. For investors, the central risk is evidence quality relative to time and capital, not the phase label in isolation.

Track recruitment status, enrollment changes, primary-completion timing, endpoint revisions, new result records, sponsor ownership and collaborator changes. Re-run the PatSnap MCP workflow when a surrogate becomes a clinical outcome, a single-country study expands, the comparator changes or a new result materially shifts the competitive benchmark.

Source trail and bottom line

Anchor trial: NCT07352566
Protocol source: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07352566
MCP sources: Clinical Trials MCP (clinical_trial_fetch and clinical_trial_result_fetch); Drug & Asset MCP (drug_fetch); Company & Deal Intelligence MCP (organization_fetch).
Data snapshot: 28 September 2026.

Apremilast in Psoriasis is best understood through the interaction of protocol design, surrounding readouts, asset context and sponsor execution. The current record makes Number of participants with adverse events and 2030-06-01 the leading decision points.

Build and refresh clinical landscape reports with PatSnap MCP