Free shipping

What Did Japanese and US Difamilast Trials Find?

A Japanese trial found benefit. An early-stopped US trial was inconclusive.

Woman examining her elbow beside a bedroom window and a closed notebook.
In this article
  1. Which trials were compared?
  2. What counted as improvement?
  3. How should the contrast be read?
  4. What does the current US prescription cover?

Which trials were compared?

Double-blind trials compared 1% difamilast twice daily for four weeks with vehicle, the ointment without difamilast, for mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis. Japan randomized 364 participants, eligible ages 15–70; the US randomized 153, aged two or older.1

What counted as improvement?

Week-four success required clear or almost clear skin plus at least a two-grade improvement on the clinician’s scale. FDA’s1 review reports:1

TrialDifamilastVehicle
Japan70/18223/182
US11/947/59

Adjusted differences were 25.9 percentage points (95% CI 17.5–34.4) in Japan and −0.2 (−13.2 to 9.0) in the US. Missing scores counted as failures. US results do not establish equivalence.1

How should the contrast be read?

US recruitment stopped for business reasons at 153 of 336 planned. Definitions and populations differed; the reasons remain unclear. FDA1 accepted other Japanese and multinational results while acknowledging US uncertainty. Sponsors were drug companies; investigator financial disclosures were missing at 16 sites.1

What does the current US prescription cover?

The ADQUEY label, revised February 2026, covers mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis in adults and children aged two or older. It specifies a thin layer twice daily, washing hands afterward, and avoiding infected skin. It is not for eyes, mouth or vaginal use. Have the prescriber check a new rash before treating it as eczema.2

The label reports nose-and-throat symptoms and less common local reactions including contact dermatitis, folliculitis and rash. Application-site swelling has been reported after approval; voluntary reports cannot establish its frequency or prove causation. New swelling or irritation belongs in the prescribing review.2

Pregnancy data are insufficient to assess risk. During breastfeeding, do not apply directly to the nipple or areola, and prevent the baby’s skin contacting treated areas. Discuss pregnancy plans and feeding with the clinician.2

In “Your First Thirty Days, and the Next Twelve Weeks,” Skin, Head to Toe puts the clinician’s plan first. Its Skin Log dates product starts, photographs and irritation. Use that record for the agreed prescription review; the book’s calendar for self-chosen products does not replace it.

This article is educational. A clinician must confirm the diagnosis and prescribing plan. Research application schedules are not personal treatment instructions.

Read our health disclaimer

Girl Playbook sells this book. It provides education and worksheets, not individualized medical care.

Sources

The research behind this article, in the order it’s cited. How we source our articles.

  1. FDA, 2026Original difamilast clinical and statistical review (opens in a new tab)abcdef
  2. DailyMed, 2026Current US ADQUEY prescribing information (opens in a new tab)abc

Spotted something out of date? Tell us and we’ll check it.

Private questions deserve good answers.

Ten Playbooks, one for each of the problems women rarely talk about.

Shop the Playbooks