CA2697978C - Lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations and short dosing regimens for treating genital warts - Google Patents

Abstract

Pharmaceutical formulations and methods for the topical or transdermal delivery of 1isobutyl-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropyl)-1H- imidazo[4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine, i.e., imiquimod, to treat genital warts with shorter durations of therapy than currently prescribed for the commercially available Aldara® 5% imiquimod cream, as now approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration ("FDA"), are disclosed and described. More specifically, lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations to deliver an efficacious dose of imiquimod for treating genital warts with an acceptable safety profile and dosing regimens that are shorter and more convenient for patient use than the dosing regimen currently approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration ("FDA") for Aldara® 5% imiquimod cream to treat genital warts are also disclosed and described.

Description

LOWER DOSAGE STRENGTH IMIQUIMOD FORMULATIONS AND SHORT
DOSING REGIMENS FOR TREATING GENITAL WARTS
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to pharmaceutical formulations and methods for the topical or transdermal delivery of 1-isobuty1-111-imidan[4,5-c-quinolin-4-amine, also known as (a.k.a) 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidwo[4,5-elquinolin-4-arnine, aka imiquimod, to treat genital and perianal warts with shorter durations of therapy, than currently prescribed for the commercially available Aldara* 5% imiquimod cream, as now approved by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration ("FDA"). More specifically, the present invention is directed to lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations to deliver an efficacious dose for treating genital and perianal warts with an acceptable safety profile, but with a dosing regimen that is shorter and more convenient for patient use than the dosing regimen currently approved by the FDA for Aldara.
5% imiquimod cream.
BACKGROUND
External Genital Warts (EGW), or condylomata acuminate, are caused by infection with human papilloma virus (HPV), the most common sexually transmitted virus in the Western world (LAtle 1994, Mayeaux 1995, Shah 1990). Approximately 1% of the sexually active population between 15 and 49 years of age in the US is estimated to have EGW
(1Coutsky 1988, Koutsky 1997). Most EGWs are associated with HPV types 6 and 11 (Phelps 1995).
In 1997, imiquimod 5% cream (Mara) was approved for the treatment of EGW and perianal warts. Imiquimod, an immune response modifier that stimulates the innate and adaptive immune response, has been demonstrated to be an effective and safe treatment for EOWs.
Stimulation of the immune response has been shown to decrease HPV viral load (Kreuter 2006) and may decrease the recurrence rate of visible warts, although observed rates after treatments do vary.

Imiquimod, however, has no direct antiviral activity in cell culture. A study in 22 patients with genital/perianal warts comparing Aldara 5% imiquimod cream and vehicle shows that Aldara 5% imiquirnod cream induces mRNA encoding cytokines including interferon-a at the treatment site. In addition, HF'VL1 mRNA and HPV DNA are significantly decreased following treatment. However, the clinical relevance of these findings is unknown.
Specific antiviral therapy for the treatment of EGW is lacking, but drug and other therapies have been used. Ablative treatment modalities include procedures such as surgical excision, laser therapy, and cryotherapy. Other approaches include topical treatments, such as acetic acid, podophylline, podophyllotoxin, and 5-fluorouracil, which are cytodestructive, and sinecatechins, whose mechanism of action is unknown. Each of these therapies has disadvantages such as inconvenient regimens, pain or burning associated with the therapy, scarring, itching, or high recurrence rates.
Aldara' 5% imiquimod cream is approved for the treatment of external genital and perianal warts (condylomata acuminata) in individuals 12 years old and above (Aldara Package Insert). The approved dosing regimen is 3 times per week, for up to 16 weeks of treatment.
The compound characterized as 1-isobuty1-1H-imidaz,o[4,5-ej-quinolin-4-amine or 142-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine, and known as imiquirnod, is disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 4,689,338 and described therein as an antiviral agent and as an interferon inducer. A variety of formulations for topical administration of imiquimod are also described therein. This U.S. Patent No. 4,68,338.
U.S. Patent No. 4,751,087 discloses the use of a combination of ethyl oleate and glyceryl monolaurate as a skin penetration enhancer for nitroglycerin, with all three components being contained in the adhesive layer of a transdenTud patch.
U.S. Patent No. 4,411,893 disdoses the use of N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide as a skin penetration enhancer in aqueous systems.

U.S. Patent No. 4,722,941 discloses readily absorbable pharmaceutical compositions that comprise a pharmacologically active agent distributed in a vehicle comprising an absorption-enhancing amount of at least one fatty acid containing 6 to 12 carbon atoms and optionally a fatty acid monoglyceride. Such compositions are said to be particularly useful for increasing the absorption of pharmacologically active bases.
U.S. Patent No. 4,746515 discloses a method of using glyceryl monolaurate to enhance the transderrnal flux of a transdermally deliverable drug through intact skin, U.S. Patent No. 5,238,944, U.S. Patent No. 7,038,051, U.S. Patent No.
6,693,113, U.S.
Patent No. 6,894,060, U.S. Patent No. 7,655,672, U.S. Patent Publication No.
2009/0093514 Al.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2007/0123558, U.S. Patent Publication No.
2004/087614, U.S.
Patent Publication No, 2002/147210, pa Publication 'No. W02008082381 and PCT
Publication No. W020081JS53522 disclose topical formulations and/or topical and iransdem-tal delivery systems containing 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1/1-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine Currently, the FDA has approved a 5% imiquimod cream, commercially available under the brand name Aldare, to treat certain dermal and mucosal associated conditions, such as (1) the topical treatment of clinically typical, nonhyperkeratotic actinic keratosis (AK) on the face or scalp in inununocompetent adults, (2) topical treatment of biopsy confirmed, primary superficial basal cell carcinoma (sBCC) in immunocompetent adults, and (3) the topical treatment of external genital and perianal warts/condyloma acuminate (hereinafter, individually or jointly "EGWs") in patients 12 years or older.
Aldare is the brand name for an FDA-approved 5% imiquimod cream, which is an immune response modifier. Each gram of the Mare 5% imiquimod cream contains 50 mg of imiquimod in an off-white oil-in-water vanishing cream base consisting of isostearic acid, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, white petrolatum, polysorbate 60, sorbitan monostearate, glycerin, xanthan gum, purified water, benzyl alcohol, methylparaben, and propylparaben.
The Aldare 5% imiquimod cream is packaged in single-use packets or sachets, each containing 250 mg of cream, equivalent to 12.5 mg of imiquimod.
Chemically, imiquimod, as indicated above, is known as 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo [4,5-c]quinolin-4- amine or 1 -isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine .
Imiquimod has a molecular formula of C14H161\14 and a molecular weight of 240.3. The chemical structural formula for imiquimod is as follows:

ONN) N\L......(eC H 3 Notwithstanding FDA approval, Aldara 5% imiquimod cream treatment for EGWs is not without limitation, including an unsimplified and lengthy dosing regimen (administration three times per week until total clearance of EGWs is achieved, or up to 16 weeks). According to the FDA-approved label for Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, the median time to complete wart cleance is 10 weeks. The eccentric dosing schedule is not easy to remember, which could lead to reduced compliance with resulting reduced efficacy. If applied too thickly or generously, Aldara 5% imiquimod cream can cause site or local skin reactions, such as erosions or ulcerations, causing pain or dysfunction (e.g., of the foreskin or urethra).
In addition, efficacy of treatment with Aldara 5% imiquimod cream may be limited, especially in men, in patients with longstanding or recurrent disease, or for treatment of keratinized areas (e.g., inguinal). In some cases, a rest period from scheduled dosing with Aldara 5% imiquimod cream may be needed, and consultation or reevaluation by healthcare provider may also be required.
Other symptoms, such as perianal itching or systemic effects such as flu-like symptoms, may also occur in some cases after treatment with Aldara 5% imiquimod cream.
In view of the above, there is a need for improved EGW topical treatment that overcomes the current limitations associated with the current FDA-approved topical treatment regimen for EGWs, i.e., administration until there is total clearance of the EGWs, for up to 16 weeks, three days per week, with FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention addresses the above-mentioned limitations associated with the treatment of EGWs with FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream through the discovery of novel and improved imiquimod treatment regimens of short duration, lower dosage strength imiquimod pharmaceutical formulations, and simplified dosing regimens to treat EGWs.
Generally speaking, the present invention provides for new and improved substantially less-irritating lower dosage strength imiquimod pharmaceutical formulations, which are suitable for daily application in connection with substantially condensed treatment regimens, for topical and/or transdermal administration of an effective amount of imiquimod to treat subjects who are diagnosed with external genital and perianal warts/condyloma acuminate (EGWs).
In addition, the present invention provides for new and improved EGW treatments, wherein:
(1) treatment periods of the present invention are substantially shorter in duration, i.e., up to eight weeks and preferably up to six weeks or four weeks, than the current FDA-approved up-to-16-week treatment regimen for EGWs treatment; (2) dosing regimens of the present invention are substantially simpler, i.e., one application daily each day for up to eight weeks and preferably up to six weeks or four weeks, than the current dosing regimen, as compared to the once-a-day but only three times per week for up to 16 weeks regimen for the current FDA-approved Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream for EGWs treatment; (3) less-irritating imiquimod pharmaceutical formulations of the present invention are formulated with a lower dosage strength, i.e., between about 1% and about 4.25% imiquimod, than the current FDA-approved Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream for EGWs treatment; and (4) lower subject incidence of application site reactions is experienced in accordance with the present invention, as compared with higher subject incidence of application site reactions experienced with the current FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream and treatment regimen for EGWs treatment.
In other words, the present invention provides for new and improved EGWs treatments that have short durations of therapies, use lower imiquimod dosage strengths, have simplified daily dosing regimens, and have a lower incidence of application site reactions, as compared to treatment of EGWs with Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, as currently approved by the FDA.
The present invention thus provides numerous surprising advantages over current FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream therapy for EGWs treatment. For example, the present invention provides for (1) a shortened treatment regimen, i.e., up to about 8 weeks, or preferably up to about 6 weeks and preferably up to about 4 weeks, (2) a simplified dosing regimen, i.e., once daily on each day of the treatment period, (3) low systemic imiquimod blood levels even though the dosing frequency is increased, and (4) a lower subject incidence of application site reactions during the topical treatment regimen of EGWs, than currently associated with FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream therapy.
Thus, the present invention overcomes certain of the limitations associated with the treatment of EGWs with FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream and addresses current medical needs for (1) a shorter treatment period, (2) a more intuitive dosing regimen (daily dosing vs. thrice weekly dosing for Aldara 5% imiquimod cream) and (3) less or a lower incidence of application site reactions.
The less-irritating lower dosage strength imiquimod pharmaceutical formulations of the present invention may comprise:
1. a lower dosage strength of 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine (imiquimod) for delivering an effective amount of imiquimod; and 2. a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle for imiquimod, which vehicle comprises a fatty acid, such as isostearic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, unrefined oleic acid, refined oleic acid, such as Super Refined oleic acid NF (e.g., a highly purified oleic acid, i.e., an oleic acid which has low polar impurities, such as peroxides, a low peroxide value and is marketed by CRODA; see e.g., www.crodausa.com) and a combination thereof, in a total amount of about 3 percent to about 45 percent by weight based on the total weight of the formulation.
The lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, especially those wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, are uniquely designed to have physical and chemical stability, solubility, emollient properties and dose proportionate delivery similar to or better than Aldara 5% imiquimod cream. More specifically, the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, especially those wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, are believed to generally have similar or improved skin emolliency at the application site and dose proportionate release rates as to both the release rates of the imiquimod and the total amount of imiquimod released, relative to the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream. In other words, the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention are concentration influenced and have similar release rates to the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream. Additionally, the greater the amount of imiquimod in the formulation, the faster and the greater the total amount of imiquimod is released, evidencing that the amount in and the rate of release from the formulations are imiquimod concentration dependent. Thus, while the lower dose strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention deliver different cumulative amounts to the stratum corneum and epidermis, i.e., local skin delivery, than the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, such lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations are believed to have a proportional and linear relationship that is similar with the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream as to both the rate of imiquimod release and the total amount of imiquimod released and delivered locally to the skin over time, so that the imiquimod concentrations in the formulations of the present invention, the imiquimod release rates and the amount of imiquimod unabsorbed and delivered to the stratum corneum and epidermis, which has been released from the formulations, are generally proportional and linear to the Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream.
In addition, the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, especially those wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, are uniquely designed to be stable and fall within the range of the specifications for the commercially available Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, such as to viscosity, pH, and stability, including microscopic and macroscopic stability. More specifically, the imiquimod present in the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, especially those wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, (monograph range: 90 to 110%) and benzyl alcohol (monograph range: 50 to 105%) remain within limits at both about 25 C and about 40 C over about a one month period and within limits at both about 25 C
and about 40 C
over about a six month period. Furthermore, the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, especially those wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, remain stabile for about six months at about 25 C and about 40 C, and also remain stable with respect to macroscopic and microscopic appearance, viscosity (monograph range:
2,000 to 35000 cPs) and pH (monograph range 4.0 to 5.5). In addition, the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention are uniquely designed to meet the requirements specified in both United States Pharmacopeia ("USP") and the European Pharmacopeia ("EP") as to preservative efficacy and remain free of degradation products when stored at about 25 C/60%RH, about 30 C/65%RH and about 40 C/75%RH over about one, about two, about three and about six months and analyzed at about 318 nm wavelength.
The present invention also contemplates lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations that have unique pharmacokinetic profiles when used, for example, in connection with the short durations of therapy to treat EGWs in accordance with the present invention.
By way of example, a 3.75% imiquimod lower dosage strength formulation of the present invention, when approximately 250 mg of such a formulation (about 9.375 mg imiquimod) or less is applied daily for 21 days to EGWs in the genital/perianal area with a total wart area of greater than or equal to 100 mm2, achieves steady state by about Day 7, and provides an in-vivo serum profile selected from one or more of the following:
(a) a Day 21 mean Trnax of about 9.7 hours with a standard deviation ("SD") of about 4.0, a median Trnax of about 12 hours and a geometric mean Tmax of about 8.3 hours and a coefficient of variation ("CV") of about 41%;
(b) a Day 21 mean Crnax of about 0.488 ng/ml with a standard deviation of about 0.368, a median Cm ax of about 0.45 and a geometric mean Cm ax of about 0.39 ng/mL and a coefficient of variation of about 75%;
(c) a Day 21 T. of from about 6.8 to about 54 hours and preferably a mean Ty, of about 24.1 hours with a standard deviation of about 12, a median T. of about 22.8 hours and a geometric mean T1/2 of about 21 hours and a coefficient of variation of about 51%;
(d) a Day 21 AUC0_24 of from about 1.9 to about 14 ng-hr/mL and preferably a mean AUC0_24 of about 6.8 ng.hr/mL with a standard deviation of about 3.6, a median AUC0_24 of about 6.6 ng.hr/mL and a geometric mean AUC0_24 of about 5.8 ng-hr/mL and a coefficient of variation of about 53%;
(e) a Day 21 Az of from about 0.013 hfl to about 0.102 hi-4 and preferably a mean Xz of about 0.037 hr-1 with a standard deviation of about 0.02, a median Az of about 0.03 hr4 and a geometric mean Az of about 0.03 hr4 and a coefficient of variation of about 60%;
a Day 21 Cam, of from about 0.025 to about 0.47 and preferably a mean Cmm of about 0.158 with an SD of about 0.121, a median Cam, of about 0.14 and a geometric mean Cma, of about 0.11 and a coefficient of variation of about 77%;
(g) at Day 14/7 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 14 over the trough concentration at Day 7), a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 1.13 with a 90%
confidence interval ( "CI") within a range of between about 0.7 and about 1.7;
(h) at Day 21/14 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 21 over the trough concentration at Day 14), a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 0.84 with a 90%
confidence interval ("CI") within a range of between about 0.5 and about 1.3;
(i) at Day 22/21 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 22 over the trough concentration at Day 21) a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 1.12 with a 90%
confidence interval ("CI") within a range of between about0.7 and about 1.6;
(j) a mean peak imiquimod serum concentration of about 0.488 ng/mL at Day 21;
(k) a Day 21 RAUC of from about 0.6 to about 7 and preferably a mean RAUC
of about 2.2 with a standard deviation of about 1.8, a median RAUC of about 1.8 and a geometric mean RAUC of about 1.7 and a coefficient of variation of about 81%;
(1) a Day 21 RCmax of from about 0.5 to about 5 and preferably a mean RCm of about 2.3 with a standard deviation of about 1.6, a median RCmax of about 1.7 and a geometric mean RCmax of about 1.8 and a coefficient of variation of about 70%;
(m) a Day 21 LAzeff of from about 0.006 hr-1 to about 0.09 hr-1 and preferably a mean LXzeff of about 0.04 hr-1 with a standard deviation of about 0.03, a median LAzaff of about 0.03 hr-and a geometric mean LAzeff of about 0.03 hr-1 and a coefficient of variation of about 69%;
(n) a Day 21 'Oaf of from about 8 hr to about 111 hr and preferably a mean TY2eff of about 31 hr with a standard deviation of about 30, a median T14effof about 22 hr and a geometric mean T1/2eff of about 23 hr-1 and a coefficient of variation of about 97%;
(o) a Day 21 Cm ax in female patients about 61% higher in female subjects than in male subjects (0.676 versus 0.420 ng/mL) and total systemic exposure AUC 0-24 8% higher in female subjects than in male subjects (7.192 versus 6.651 ng-hr/mL) when data is not dose normalized;
(p) a Day 21 Cmax in female patients about 35% higher than in male subjects (0.583 versus 0.431 ng/mL) and AUC 0-24 about 6% lower in female subjects than in male subjects (6.428 versus 6.858 ng-hr/mL) when using dose normalization to adjust for differences in dosage and reported without subjects who missed an application of study drug during the last week of dosing; and/or (q) a median Trnax occurring approximately twice as quickly in female subjects (about 6.50 hours) as in male subjects (about 12.0 hours).
In accordance with the present invention, a mean peak serum concentration is achieved with a 3.75% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26.
More specifically, a mean peak serum concentration of about 0.488 ng/mL is achieved with a 3.75%
lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26 after about 9.4 mg of imiquimod is applied to the affected treatment area each day for up to 8 weeks.
Furthermore, this invention provides the following evidence of clinical efficacy: The wart area decreased by 45% from a mean of 108.3 mm 2 at baseline to 43.2 mm 2 at Day 21 (Table 14.1.2.1). The P value of <.0001 for this change from baseline indicated a statistically significant (<0.050) decrease in wart area after 3 weeks of treatment.
In accordance with the present invention, a mean peak serum concentration is achieved with a 3.75% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26.
More specifically, a mean peak serum concentration of about 0.488 ng/ml is achieved with a 3.75%
lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26 after about 9.4 mg of imiquimod is applied to the affected treatment area, i.e., the external genital/perianal warts, each day until completely cleared or for up to eight weeks.
In addition, the present invention contemplates lower dosage strength formulations that are pharmaceutically equivalent, therapeutically equivalent, bioequivalent and/or interchangeable, regardless of the method selected to demonstrate equivalents or bioequivalence, such as dermatopharmacokinetic and pharmacokinetic methodologies, microdialysis, in vitro and in vivo methods and/or clinical endpoints. Thus, the present invention contemplates lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations that are bioequivalent, pharmaceutically equivalent and/or therapeutic equivalent, especially, 2.5% and 3.75% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations that are bioequivalent, pharmaceutically equivalent and/or therapeutically equivalent, when used daily in accordance with the short durations of therapy of the present invention to treat EGWs, e.g., used on treatment areas, on a daily basis until complete wart clearance or for up to about eight weeks, six weeks, or up to about 4 weeks, optionally including a rest (no drug application) period.
Thus, the present invention contemplates: (a) pharmaceutically equivalent lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations which contain the same amount of imiquimod in the same dosage form; (b) bioequivalent lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations which are chemically equivalent and which, when administered to the same individuals in the same dosage regimens, result in comparable bioavailabilities; (c) therapeutic equivalent lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations which, when administered to the same individuals in the same dosage regimens, provide essentially the same efficacy and/or toxicity; and (d) interchangeable lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention which are pharmaceutically equivalent, bioequivalent and therapeutically equivalent.
By the term "lower dosage strength(s)", as used herein, it refers to a pharmaceutical formulation containing imiquimod in an amount of between about 1.0 percent and about 4.25 percent by weight based on the total weight of the formulation and preferably a pharmaceutical formulation containing imiquimod in an amount of about 2.5% or about 3.75%.
By the term "short duration(s)" of therapy, as used herein, it refers to the daily topical application of an effective amount of imiquimod to a defined treatment area diagnosed with EGWs for a total on-treatment period of up to about 8 weeks, 6 weeks, or 4 weeks, depending upon which lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention is selected for daily application, and more preferably a total on-treatment period of up to about 8, 6, or 4 weeks to treat EGWs. In addition, the "short durations" of therapy may also include an 8 week examination period (no further treatment) following the treatment period.
As indicated above, when the short durations of therapy are used in combination with the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, it is surprisingly found that (1) simplified daily dosing regimens can be used, (2) the therapy is better tolerated than standard therapy with 5% imiquimod (Aldara8), resulting in effective treatment with lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations without inducing significant local skin reactions or irritation in the treatment area or treatment limiting adverse events which could result in premature therapy termination or significant voluntary rest periods of several days that are generally associated with higher concentrations of imiquimod therapy. It is also surprisingly found that as much as between about 250 mg of a low dosage strength imiquimod formulation may be used per application in accordance with the present invention, especially when the short durations of therapy are used in combination with the low dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention.
Also quite surprisingly, the efficacy achieved by the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations when used in either of the short durations of therapy, e.g., an up to 8-week treatment regimen, of the present invention for treatment of EGWs as to total clearance, partial clearance and a reduction in the number of warts is statistically significant over placebo, e.g., when a 3.75% imiquimod cream is used.
It should be noted that the efficacy P value that is achieved for a percent reduction in the number of warts for a 3.75% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation versus a 2.5% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation that is utilized in accordance with a treatment regimen of the present invention is not always statistically significant.
It should be understood that the short durations of therapy and lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention are believed to be optimized to treat EGWs. By "optimized", it is meant herein that the short durations of therapy and lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention are designed to achieve efficacy, stability and release rates profiles that are at least essentially equivalent to and linear with Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream, respectively, but with an improved acceptable safety profile.
In this context, it should be appreciated that the primary efficacy variable used in the studies of the short durations of therapy and lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention (complete clearance of all warts, both Baseline and newly emerged, in all assessed anatomic areas) was very conservative (see, e.g., Example 24), when compared to reported studies of Aldara 5% imiquimod cream.

By the term "acceptable safety profile", it is meant herein to mean that treatment of EGWs with a short duration of therapy and a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation in accordance with the present invention, does not cause treatment limiting side effects or rest periods in an appreciable number of subjects undergoing therapy for EGWs to a level that causes premature termination of treatment. The term "acceptable safety profile" also refers to treatment of EGWs with a short duration of therapy and a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention with a lower subject incidence of application site reactions as compared with treatment of EGWs with Aldara 5% imiquimod cream.
The salient elements of a pharmaceutical formulation according to the present invention are (a) imiquimod and (b) a fatty acid, e.g., isostearic, palmitic, stearic, linoleic, unrefined oleic acid or refined oleic acid, such as Super Refined oleic acid NF (e.g., a highly purified oleic acid, i.e., an oleic acid which has low polar impurities, such as peroxides, a low peroxide value and is marketed by CRODA; see e.g., www.crodausa.com) and mixtures thereof. A
pharmaceutical formulation of the invention can be in any form known to the art, including semi-solid dosage forms, such as a cream, an ointment, a foam, a gel, a lotion or a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition, each form containing the necessary elements in particular amounts and further containing various additional elements.
A cream of the invention contains an effective amount of imiquimod, such as between about greater than 1 percent and about 4.25 percent by weight of imiquimod, based on the total weight of the cream; about 5 percent to about 30 percent by weight of fatty acid, based on the total weight of the cream; and optional ingredients such as emollients, emulsifiers, thickeners, and/or preservatives.
An ointment of the invention contains an ointment base in addition to imiquimod and fatty acid. An ointment of the invention contains an effective amount of imiquimod, such as between about greater than 1 percent and about 4.25 percent by weight of imiquimod; about 3 percent to about 45 percent, more preferably about 3 percent to about 30 percent by weight fatty acid; and about 40 percent to about 95 percent by weight ointment base, all weights being based on the total weight of the ointment. Optionally, an ointment of the invention can also contain emulsifiers, emollients and thickeners.

A pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention contains imiquimod, fatty add, and an adhesive. The adhesives utilized in a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention are preferably substantially chemically inert to imiquimod. A
pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention preferably contains an effective amount of imiquimod, such as between about greater than 1 percent and about 4.25 percent by weight of imiquimod;
about 10 percent to about 40 percent by weight, more preferably of about 15 percent to about 30 percent by weight, and most preferably about 20 percent to about 30 percent by weight of fatty acid; all weights being based on the total weight of the pressure sensitive adhesive composition.
Optionally, pressure sensitive adhesive compositions of the invention can also contain one or more skin penetration enhancers. The total amount of skin penetration enhancer(s) present in a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention is preferably about 3 percent to about 25 percent by weight, and more preferably about 3 percent to about 10 percent by weight based on the total weight of the pressure sensitive adhesive composition.
A pressure-sensitive adhesive coated sheet material of the invention can be made from a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention in the form of an article such as a tape, a patch, a sheet, or a dressing.
A lower dosage strength formulation of the present invention may be used to topically and/or transdermally administer an effective amount of imiquimod to effectively treat EGWs with short durations of therapy and with an acceptable safety profile. Thus, lower dosage strength formulations according to the present invention can be applied to any suitable location, for example, topically to dermal, lip and/or mucosal surfaces. In the case of dermal application, for example, depending on the concentration, formulation composition, and dermal surface, the therapeutic effect of imiquimod may extend only to the superficial layers of the dermal surface or to tissues below the dermal surface.
It should be understood that while lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention containing, by weight based on the total weight of the formulation, between about 1%
and about 4.25% imiquimod are contemplated, preferably between about 1.5%, 1.75%, 2.0%, 2.25%, 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5%, 3.75%, 4.0% and 4.25% (between about 1.5% and about 4.25%), and even more preferably between about 2.0%, 2.25%, 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5%, 3.75% and 4.0% (between about 2.0% and about 4.0%), and still even more preferably between about 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5% and 3.75% (between about 2.5% and about 3.75%) are contemplated. Lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention that contain about 2.5% imiquimod or about 3.75% imiquimod by weight based on the total weight of the formulation are most preferred. It should also be understood that lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention, which have dose proportionate release rates as to both the release rates of the imiquimod and the total amount of imiquimod released, relative to the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, are also preferred.
Thus, it should be understood by those versed in this art that an amount of imiquimod present in a formulation of the present invention will be an effective amount when a formulation of the present invention is applied daily in accordance with a short duration of therapy as described herein to a targeted area diagnosed with EGWs and permitted following each individual application to remain in contact with the targeted area for a sufficient time to allow an effective amount of imiquimod to clear such a disease or warts of the disease, to partially clear the number of warts of such a disease, to reduce the number of warts, to prevent the recurrence of such a disease without inducing treatment limiting local skin reactions or adverse events, including unscheduled rest periods caused by such treatment limiting local skin reactions or adverse events, in an appreciable number of people undergoing treatment. For example, when treating EGWs in accordance with the present invention, an effective amount will achieve a partial clearance in warts as a targeted endpoint, e.g., at least about 40%
and preferably at least about 50% and more preferably at least about 60% and still more preferably at least about 70%
and most preferably at least about a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with baseline, or at least about 60% and preferably at least about 70% and even more preferably at least about 80% and most preferably at least about 90% median reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with baseline as a secondary endpoint, or at least about 25% complete clearance and preferably at least about 30% complete clearance and even more preferably at least about 35% complete clearance and most preferably at least about 45%
complete clearance of the warts as a primary endpoint. See, e.g., FIGS. 15-36.
By "complete clearance", as used herein, the term means the absence of clinically visible warts in the treatment area.

Results from use of the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations in accordance with the short durations of therapy of the present invention demonstrate that lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations dosed once daily until complete wart clearance or for up to an eight week treatment period is effective and well-tolerated treatments for EGWs. The condensed dosing regimens of the present invention allows for short treatment periods, minimizing exposure to imiquimod and further supporting an improved benefit-risk profile, as compared with FDA-approved Aldara 5% imiquimod cream 16 week, thrice-weekly therapy.
Benefits of treatment with the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations in accordance with the short durations of therapy of the present invention include complete clearance or partial clearance (>30%, preferably >40%, preferably >50%, preferably >60%, even more preferably >70% even more preferably >80% and even more preferably >95%) of EGWs for a majority of the subjects that are treated. See Example 24.
While the present invention has identified what it believes to be preferred concentrations of imiquimod formulations, numbers of applications per week and durations of therapy, it should be understood by those versed in this art that any effective concentration of imiquimod in a formulation that delivers an effective amount of imiquimod and any numbers of application per week during a short duration of therapy, as described herein, that can effectively treat EGWs, without causing treatment limiting local skin reactions or related adverse events, including too many rest periods, is contemplated by the present invention.
The above summary of the present invention is not intended to describe each disclosed embodiment or every implementation of the present invention. The description that follows more particularly exemplifies illustrative embodiments. In several places throughout the application, guidance is provided through lists of examples, which examples can be used in various combinations. In each instance, the recited list serves only as a representative group and should not be interpreted as an exclusive list.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
The foregoing and other objects, advantages and features of the present invention, and the manner in which the same are accomplished, will become more readily apparent upon consideration of the following detailed description of the invention taken in conjunction with the accompanying figure and examples, which illustrate an embodiment, wherein:
FIG. 1 shows a schematic representation of a Franz cell;
FIG. 2 shows a summary of microscope pictures of eight 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations, i.e., formulations 113, 246, 247, 248, 249, 251, 252 and 253 (the formulations continued into the stability program are included for the 1 kg batches in TABLE 18 and FIG. 9);
FIG. 3 shows a comparison of the mean cumulative amount of imiquimod released (ps/cm2) after about 3 h for the membrane release studies (for all the formulations selected for Full thickness skin permeation and stability studies) (mean sd, where n=4);
FIG. 4 shows a comparison of the average total cumulative report released (ig/cm2) after 3 h for each concentration of imiquimod in the formulations that are tested (mean sd, where n=4 for 1%, n=16 for 2.5%, n=20 for 3.75% and n=12 for 5%);
FIG. 5 shows a total amount of imiguimod that is recovered following mass balance for each formulation (See also Tables 35-40 for statistical analysts) (mean sd, refer to Table 34 for n numbers of each sample);
FIG. 6 shows a total amount of imiquimod recovered for each formulation in the receiver fluid, epidermis and dermis combined (mean sd, refer to Table 34 for n numbers of each sample);
FIG. 7 shows a total amount of imiquimod recovered for the averages of each imiquimod concentration from each of the skin matrices.
FIGS. 8A-C show microscopic depiction of 13 imiquimod formulations, i.e., 3M
Aldara imiquimod cream lkg batch, Graceway 3M Aldara imiquimod cream I kg batch and formulations 110, 123, 125, 126, 182, 183, 195, 197, 250, 256 and 257 (t=0, I., 2, 3 and 6 months) - x400 magnification;
FIG. 9 shows microscopic depiction of placebo formulations Pbol-Pbo4 (t=0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) - x400 magnification;
FIGS. 10A-B show microscopic depiction of 10 imiquimod formulations, i.e., formulations, 116, 117, 254, 120, 235, 188, 189, 184, 255, 124, after 1 month stability (t=0 and 1 month) - x400 magnification;
FIG. 11 shows a comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod that is released ( g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for the 3M Aldara imiquimod cream lkg batch, the 3M
Aldara imiquimod cream sachet, the Graceway 3M Aldara imiquimod cream 1 kg batch and formulation 257, a 1% Imiquimod formulation (mean sd, where n=4);
FIG. 12 shows a comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod that is released (ug/cm2) over a 3 hour period for four 2.5% imiquimod formulations, i.e., formulations 110, 123, 125 and 250 (mean sd, where n=4).
FIG. 13 shows a comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod that is released (pg/cm2) over a 3 hour period for five 3.75% imiquimod formulations, i.e., formulations 182, 183, 195, 197 and 256 (mean sd, where n=4); and FIG. 14 shows a comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod released (pg/cm2) over a 3 hour period for the 2.5% ( = ), 3.75% (.), 3M Aldara imiquimod cream batch (M), Graceway Aldara imiquimod cream 1 kg batch (M) and formulation 257 Imiquimod formulations (mean sd, where n=4).
FIG. 15 shows complete clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 16 shows complete clearance rates observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 17 shows complete clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 18 shows complete clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 19 shows partial (>75%) clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 20 shows partial (>75%) clearance rates observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 21 shows >50% clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 22 shows >50% clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.

FIG. 23 shows mean percent change from baseline in wart count vs. analysis week observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 24 shows mean local skin reaction sum score by analysis week, safety population, in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 25 shows complete clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 26 shows complete clearance rates observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 27 shows complete clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 28 shows complete clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 29 shows partial (>75%) clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 30 shows partial (>75%) clearance rates observed in the Per Protocol (PP) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 31 shows >50% clearance rates observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population at the end of one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 32 shows >50% clearance rates vs analysis week during the evaluation period observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 33 shows mean percent change from baseline in wart count vs. analysis week observed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 34 shows mean local skin reaction sum score by analysis week, safety population, in one study of a lower-dose imiquimod treatment of genital warts.
FIG. 35 shows mean serum concentrations of imiquimod and imiquimod metabolites on Day 1 (linear and semi-log scale).

FIG. 36 shows mean serum concentrations of imiquimod and imiquimod metabolites on Day 21 (linear and semi-log scale).
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TIIE INVENTION
By way of illustrating and providing a more complete appreciation of the present invention and many of the attendant advantages thereof, the following detailed description and examples are given concerning the novel methods and compositions.
In one aspect, the present invention relates to a pharmaceutical composition comprising imiquimod and a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle for imiquimod, which vehicle comprises a fatty acid. While the present invention may be embodied in many different forms, several specific embodiments are discussed herein with the understanding that the present disclosure is to be considered only as an exemplification of the principles of the invention, and it is not intended to limit the invention to the embodiments described or illustrated.
As used in the specification and claims, the phrase "substantially less-irritating"
designates formulations that do not cause unacceptable skin irritation in conventional repeat skin irritation tests in albino rabbits such as that described in Draize et al., "Appraisal of the Safety of Chemicals in Food, Drugs and Cosmetics", prepared by the Division of Pharmacology of the Food and Drug Administration, published originally in 1959 by the Association of Food and Drug Officials of the United States, Topeka, Kans. (2nd printing 1965).
Unless otherwise indicated, all numbers expressing quantities, ratios, and numerical properties of ingredients, reaction conditions, and so forth used in the specification and claims are to be understood as being modified in all instances by the term "about".
All parts, percentages, ratios, etc. herein are by weight unless indicated otherwise.
As used herein, the singular forms "a" or "an" or "the" are used interchangeably and intended to include the plural forms as well and fall within each meaning, unless expressly stated otherwise. Also as used herein, "at least one" is intended to mean "one or more" of the listed element. Singular word forms are intended to include plural word forms and are likewise used herein interchangeably where appropriate and fall within each meaning, unless expressly stated otherwise. Except where noted otherwise, capitalized and non-capitalized forms of all terms fall within each meaning.
By the term "bioequivalence or bioequivalent", as used herein, it refers to lower dosage strength formulations in which they are pharmaceutically equivalent and their bioavailibilities (rate and extent of absorption) after administration in the same molar dosage or amount are similar to such a degree that their therapeutic effects, as to safety and efficacy, are essentially the same. In other words, bioequivalence or bioequivalent means the absence of a significant difference in the rate and extent to which imiquimod becomes available from such formulations at the site of imiquimod action when administered at the same molar dose under similar conditions, e.g., the rate at which imiquimod can leave such a formulation and the rate at which imiquimod can either cross the stratum corneum and/or become available at the site of action to treat external genital or perineal warts (EGWs). In other words, there is a high degree of similarity in the bioavailabilities of two imiquimod pharmaceutical products (of the same galenic form) from the same molar dose, that are unlikely to produce clinically relevant differences in therapeutic effects, or adverse reactions, or both. The terms "bioequivalence", as well as "pharmaceutical equivalence" and "therapeutic equivalence" are also used herein as defined and/or used by (a) the FDA, (b) the Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R."), Title 21, and/or (c) Health Canada.
By the term "bioavailability or bioavailable", as used herein, it means generally the rate and extent of absorption of imiquimod into the systemic circulation and, more specifically, the rate or measurements intended to reflect the rate and extent to which imiquimod becomes available at the site of action or is absorbed from a drug product and becomes available at the site of action. In other words, and by way of example, the extent and rate of imiquimod absorption from a lower dosage strength formulation of the present invention as reflected by a time-concentration curve of imiquimod in systemic circulation.
By "pharmaceutical equivalence or pharmaceutically equivalent", as used herein, it refers to lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention that contain the same amount of imiquimod, in the same dosage forms, but not necessarily containing the same inactive ingredients, for the same route of administration and meeting the same or comparable compendia or other applicable standards of identity, strength, quality, and purity, including potency and, where applicable, content uniformity and /or stability.
By "therapeutic equivalence or therapeutically equivalent", it is meant herein to mean those lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations which (a) will produce the same clinical effect and safety profile when practicing the short durations of therapy to treat EGWs in accordance with the present invention and (b) are pharmaceutical equivalents, e.g., they contain imiquimod in the same dosage form, they have the same route of administration;
and they have the same imiquimod strength. In other words, therapeutic equivalence means that a chemical equivalent of an imiquimod lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention (i.e., containing the same amount of imiquimod in the same dosage form) when administered to the same individuals in the same dosage regimen will provide essentially the same efficacy and toxicity.
By "Tmax", it is meant herein to mean the time when the maximum imiquimod serum concentration is reached at steady state following topical application of a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention, i.e., when the rate of imiquimod absorption equals the rate of imiquimod elimination. In other words, the time that Cm ax is observed for imiquimod.
By "Cmax", it is meant herein to refer to the maximum imiquimod serum concentration that is reached at steady state following topical application of a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention, i.e., when the rate of imiquimod absorption equals the rate of imiquimod elimination. In other words, it is the maximum serum concentration; the highest serum concentration observed during the imiquimod dosing or sampling interval.
By "Cmin", it is meant herein to refer to the minimum measurable imiquimod serum concentration; e.g., imiquimod serum concentration that is observed immediately prior to dosing on Days 7, 14, 21 and 22 (24 hours post-dose).
By "T112", it is meant herein to mean the time required for half of the quantity of maximum imiquimod serum concentration to be eliminated once steady state is achieved following topical application of a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention. For example, the apparent elimination half-life for imiquimod, that is calculated as about 0.693a7 in accordance with Example 24.
By "AUC0-24", it is meant herein to mean the area under the serum imiquimod concentration versus a 24 hour time curve following topical application of a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention, i.e., a measure of imiquimod exposure over a 24 hour period. For example, the area under the imiquimod serum concentration versus time curve, from 0 to 24 hours, that is calculated using the linear trapezoid rule or extrapolated to 24 hours in cases where reportable values are not obtainable up to that time point.
By "AUCo_t", it is meant herein to mean the area under the imiquimod serum concentration versus time curve, from 0 to the time of the last non-zero concentration on Day 1;
that is calculated using the linear trapezoid rule.
By "RAuc", it is meant herein to mean the accumulation ratio; that are calculated as the AUC0_24 value during multiple-imiquimod dose administration divided by the AUC0_24 value following the first dose (i.e., Day 21/Day 1); or the accumulation ratios that are calculated for an imiquimod metabolite only if sufficient non-zero time points are available to reasonably estimate AUCo-24.
By "AUCo-inf", it is meant herein to mean the area under the imiquimod serum concentration versus time curve, from 0 to infinity; AUCo-inf that is calculated on Day 1 as AUC(o-m0 = AUC(o_t) + Ct/Ket (where Ct = the fitted last non-zero concentration, AUC04 = the AUC from time zero to the time of the last non-zero concentration and Ket =
the elimination rate constant).
By "Rcmax", it is meant herein to mean the accumulation ratio; calculated as the Cm.
value during multiple-dose administration divided by the Cm ax value following the first dose (i.e., Day 21/Day 1).
By "A, EFF", it is meant herein to mean the effective elimination rate constant, calculated as ¨In(1 -1 /RAuc)/tau.

By "T112 EFF", it is meant herein to mean the effective half-life for accumulation;
calculated as 0.693/X, EFF.
By "Xz", it is meant to refer to an elimination rate constant, i.e., the rate at which imiquimod disappears from the site of measurement once steady state is achieved following topical application of a lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention.
In other words, the apparent elimination rate constant; that is calculated using linear regression on the terminal portion of the In concentration versus time profile.
By "geometric mean", it refers a statistical average of a set of transformed numbers often used to represent a central tendency in highly variable data. It is calculated from data transformed using powers or logarithms and then transformed back to original scale after averaging.
By "geometric mean ratio", it refers to a ratio of two geometric means, where the "geometric LS mean test" is the numerator of the geometric mean ratio, and the "geometric LS
mean reference" is the denominator of the geometric mean ratio.
By "RH", it refers herein to relative humidity.
By "cPs, it refers herein to centipoise.
By "h", it refers herein to hours.
By "ITT'", it refers to an intent-to-treat population.
By "Pbo, it refers to placebo.
By "EOS", it refers to End of Study.
By "V", it refers to vehicle.
By "AE", it refers herein to adverse events.
The present invention provides pharmaceutical formulations such as creams, ointments, foams, gels, lotions and adhesive coatings that contain imiquimod and a fatty acid such as isostearic, linoleic, unrefined oleic acid, refined oleic acid, such as Super Refined oleic acid NF
(e.g., a highly purified oleic acid, i.e., an oleic acid which has low polar impurities, such as peroxides, a low peroxide value and is marketed by CRODA; see e.g., wwvv.crodausa.com) and mixtures thereof The formulations of the invention provide desirable skin penetrability of the imiquimod.
The compound imiquimod is a known antiviral agent that is also known to induce interferon biosynthesis. It can be prepared using the method disclosed in U.S.
Pat. No.
4,689,338, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. The compound can be used to treat external genital and perineal wart (EGWs). The amount of imiquimod present in a formulation of the present invention will be an effective amount to treat EGWs to achieve total wart clearance or partial wart reduction or clearance, to prevent the recurrence of such a disease and/or to promote immunity against such a disease with an acceptable safety profile. An example of an effective amount of imiquimod in a formulation of the present invention is between about 1.0 percent and about 4.25 percent by weight based on the total weight of a formulation, more preferably between about 1.5%, 1.75%, 2.0%, 2.25%, 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5%, 3.75%, 4.0% and 4.25%, even more preferably between about 2.0%, 2.25%, 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5%, 3.75% and 4.0%, and still even more preferably between about 2.5%, 2.75%, 3.0%, 3.25%, 3.5% and 3.75%. Imiquimod formulations of the present invention that contain about 2.5% imiquimod or about 3.75% imiquimod by weight based on the total weight of the formulation are most preferred.
Likewise, a shortened period or duration, as contemplated by the present invention, will be for reduced periods of time effective to treat EGWs as discussed herein above, e.g., up to eight weeks, again depending upon the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of the present invention that is selected for daily application, and preferably up to six weeks or up to four weeks. By way of example, short periods of treatment with lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations for treating EGWs, include:
applying an effective amount of imiquimod, such as via the lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations of the present invention to the area affected with EGWs, as follows: applying an effective amount once per day until complete clearance is achieved, for example, between about 28 doses and 56 doses applied once per day, such as applying an effective amount once per day up to about eight weeks or less, up to about six weeks or less, or up to about four weeks or less to thereby treat EGWs.
A fatty acid such as isostearic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, refined oleic acid, such as Super Refined oleic acid NF (e.g., a highly purified oleic acid, i.e., an oleic acid which has low polar impurities, such as peroxides, a low peroxide value and is marketed by CRODA; see e.g., www.crodausa.com), an unrefined oleic acid blended with effective amounts of antioxidants or mixtures thereof are incorporated into formulations of the present invention.
The total amount of fatty acid present in a formulation is preferably between about 3 percent and about 45 percent by weight based on the total weight of a formulation. It should be understood that when oleic acid is selected as a fatty acid, that stability may present issue. Thus, stabilizers, such as anti-oxidants and the like, may be required to preserve pharmaceutical elegance and stability over the life of the oleic acid formulation.
A pharmaceutical formulation of the invention can be in a form such as a cream, an ointment, a foam, a gel, a lotion, a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition, or other forms known to those skilled in the art, each particular form containing imiquimod and fatty acid in particular amounts, and optionally containing various additional elements. The preferred amounts of drug and fatty acid, and the amounts and types of optional elements used in formulations of the invention are discussed below with particular reference to creams, ointments and adhesive compositions.
A cream according to the invention contains 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine and fatty acid.
The amount of 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine present in a cream is preferably about 0.5 percent to about 9 percent by weight, and more preferably about 1 percent to about 5 percent by weight, and more preferably about 2.5% to about 3.75%, based on the total weight of the cream.

The total amount of fatty acid present in a cream of the invention is preferably about 3 percent to about 45 percent by weight, and more preferably about 5 percent to about 25 percent by weight, based on the total weight of the cream.
Optionally, a cream of the present invention can contain emollients, emulsifiers, thickeners, and/or preservatives.
Emollients such as long chain alcohols, e.g., cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol and cetearyl alcohol; hydrocarbons such as petrolatum and light mineral oil; or acetylated lanolin can be included in a cream of the invention. A cream can contain one or more of these emollients. The total amount of emollient in a cream of the invention is preferably about 5 percent to about 30 percent, and more preferably about 5 percent to about 10 percent by weight based on the total weight of the cream.
Emulsifiers such as nonionic surface active agents, e.g., polysorbate 60 (available from ICI Americas), sorbitan monostearate, polyglycery1-4 oleate, and polyoxyethylene(4)1auryl ether or trivalent cationic a cream of the invention. A cream can contain one or more emulsifiers.
Generally the total amount of emulsifier is preferably about 2 percent to about 14 percent, and more preferably about 2 percent to about 6 percent by weight based on the total weight of the cream.
Pharmaceutically acceptable thickeners, such as Xanthum gum, Guar gum, Veegum gumTMK (available from R. T. Vanderbilt Company, Inc.), and long chain alcohols (i.e. cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol or cetearyl alcohol) can be used. A cream can contain one or more thickeners. The total amount of thickener present is preferably about 3 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the cream.
Preservatives such as methylparaben, propylparaben and benzyl alcohol can be present in a cream of the invention. The appropriate amount of such preservative(s) is known to those skilled in the art.
Optionally, an additional solubilizing agent such as benzyl alcohol, lactic acid, acetic acid, stearic acid, salicylic acid, any alpha-hydroxy acid such as glycolic acid, or hydrochloric acid can be included in a cream of the invention.

If an additional solubilizing agent is used, the amount present is preferably about 1 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the cream.
Optionally, a cream of the invention can contain a humectant such as glycerin, skin penetration enhancers such as butyl stearate, and additional solubilizing agents.
Generally, a cream consists of an oil phase and a water phase mixed together to form an emulsion. Preferably, the amount of water present in a cream of the invention is about 45 percent to about 85 percent by weight based on the total weight of the cream.
The oil phase of a cream of the invention can be prepared by first combining the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo [4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine and the fatty acid (if the cream contains benzyl alcohol it can also be added at this point) and heating with occasional stirring to a temperature of about 50 C. to 85 C. When the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4- amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo [4,5-c]
quinolin-4-amine appears to be completely dissolved, the remaining oil phase ingredients are added and heating is continued until dissolution appears to be complete.
The water phase can be prepared by combining all other ingredients and heating with stirring until dissolution appears to be complete.
The creams of the invention are generally prepared by adding the water phase to the oil phase with both phases at a temperature of about 65 C to 75 C. The resulting emulsion is mixed with a suitable mixer apparatus to give the desired cream.
An ointment of the invention contains an ointment base in addition to 1-isobuty1-1H-itnidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine and fatty acid.
The amount of 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine present in an ointment of the invention is preferably about 0.5 percent to about 9 percent, and more preferably about 0.5 percent to about 5 percent by weight based on the total weight of the ointment.
The total amount of fatty acid present in an ointment of the invention is preferably about 3 percent to about 45 percent, and more preferably about 3 percent to about 25 percent based on the total weight of the ointment.

A pharmaceutically acceptable ointment base such as petrolatum or polyethylene glycol 400 (available from Union Carbide) in combination with polyethylene glycol 3350 (available from Union Carbide) can be used. The amount of ointment base present in an ointment of the invention is preferably about 60 percent to about 95 percent by weight based on the total weight of ointment.
Optionally, an ointment of the invention can also contain emollients, emulsifiers and thickeners. The emollients, emulsifiers, and thickeners and the preferred amounts thereof described above in connection with creams are also generally suitable for use in an ointment of the invention.
An ointment according to the invention can be prepared by combining 1-isobuty1-imida7o[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine with fatty acid and heating with occasional stirring to a temperature of about 65 C. When the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine appears to be completely dissolved, the remaining ingredients are added and heated to about 65 C. The resulting mixture is mixed with a suitable mixer while being allowed to cool to room temperature.
A pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention contains 1-isobuty1-imidazo [4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine, fatty acid, and a pressure sensitive adhesive polymer.
The amount of 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine present in a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention is preferably about 0.5 percent to about 9 percent by weight, and more preferably about 3 percent to about 7 percent by weight based on the total weight of the adhesive composition.
The amount of fatty acid present is preferably about 10 percent to about 40 percent by weight, more preferably about 15 percent to about 30 percent by weight, and most preferably about 20 percent to about 30 percent by weight, based on the total weight of the adhesive composition.
Preferably, the adhesive polymer utilized in a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention is substantially chemically inert to 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-0-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine. The adhesive polymer is preferably present in an amount of about 55 percent to about 85 percent by weight based on the total weight of the composition. Suitable adhesive polymers include acrylic adhesives that contain, as a major constituent (i.e., at least about 80 percent by weight of all monomers in the polymer), a hydrophobic monomeric acrylic or methacrylic acid ester of an alkyl alcohol, the alkyl alcohol containing 4 to 10 carbon atoms. Examples of suitable monomers are those discussed below in connection with the "A Monomer". These adhesive polymers can further contain minor amounts of other monomers such as the "B Monomers" listed below.
Preferred adhesives include acrylic pressure-sensitive adhesive copolymers containing A
and B Monomers as follows: Monomer A is a hydrophobic monomeric acrylic or methacrylic acid ester of an alkyl alcohol, the alkyl alcohol containing 4 to 10 carbon atoms, preferably 6 to carbon atoms, more preferably 6 to 8 carbon atoms, and most preferably 8 carbon atoms.
Examples of suitable A Monomers are n-butyl, n-pentyl, n-hexyl, isoheptyl, n-nonyl, n-decyl, isohexyl, 2-ethyloctyl, isooctyl and 2-ethylhexyl acrylates. The most preferred A Monomer is isooctyl acrylate.
Monomer B is a reinforcing monomer selected from the group consisting of acrylic acid;
methacrylic acid; alkyl acrylates and methacrylates containing 1 to 3 carbon atoms in the alkyl group; acrylamide; methacrylamide; lower alkyl-substituted acrylamides (i.e., the alkyl group containing 1 to 4 carbon atoms) such as tertiary-butyl acrylamide; diacetone acrylamide; n-viny1-2-pyrrolidone; vinyl ethers such as vinyl tertiary-butyl ether; substituted ethylenes such as derivatives of maleic anhydride, dimethyl itaconate and monoethyl formate and vinyl perfluoro-n-butyrate. The preferred B Monomers are acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, the above-described alkyl acrylates and methacrylates, acrylamide, methacrylamide, and the above-described lower alkyl substituted acrylamides. The most preferred B Monomer is acrylamide.
In one embodiment of a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention, the pressure-sensitive adhesive copolymer containing A and B Monomers as set forth above preferably contains the A Monomer in an amount by weight of about 80 percent to about 98 percent of the total weight of all monomers in the copolymer. The A Monomer is more preferably present in an amount by weight of about 88 percent to about 98 percent, and is most preferably present in an amount by weight of about 91 percent to about 98 percent. The B

Monomer in such a copolymer is preferably present in the pressure-sensitive adhesive copolymer in an amount by weight of about 2 percent to about 20 percent, more preferably about 2 percent to about 12 percent, and most preferably 2 to 9 percent of the total weight of the monomers in the copolymer.
In another embodiment of a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention, the adhesive copolymer comprises about 60 to about 80 percent by weight (and preferably about 70 to about 80 percent by weight) of the above-mentioned hydrophobic monomeric acrylic or methacrylic acid ester of an alkyl alcohol (i.e., Monomer A described above) based on the total weight of all monomers in the copolymer; about 4 to about 9 percent by weight based on the total weight of all monomers in the copolymer of a reinforcing monomer selected from the group consisting of acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, an alkyl acrylate or methacrylate containing 1 to 3 carbon atoms in the alkyl group, acrylamide, methacrylamide, a lower alkyl-substituted acrylamide, diacetone acrylamide and N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone; and about 15 to about 35 percent by weight (and preferably about 15 to about 25 percent by weight) of vinyl acetate based on the total weight of all monomers in the copolymer. In this embodiment the preferred acrylic or methacrylic acid ester is isooctyl acrylate and the preferred reinforcing monomer is acrylamide.
The above described adhesive copolymers are known, and methods of preparation therefore are well known to those skilled in the art, having been described for example, in U.S.
Pat. No. 24,906 (Ulrich), the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. The polymerization reaction can be carried out using a free radical initiator such as an organic peroxide (e.g., benzoylperoxide) or an organic azo compound (e.g., 2,2'-azobis(2,4-dimethylpentanenitrile), available under the trade designation "Vazo 52" from DuPont).
Since pressure-sensitive adhesives such as those described above are inherently rubbery and tacky and are suitably heat and light stable, there is no need to add tackifiers or stabilizers.
However, such can be added if desired.
Optionally, a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention can also contain one or more skin penetration enhancers such as glyceryl monolaurate, ethyl oleate, isopropyl myristate, diisopropyl adipate and N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide, either as a single ingredient or as a combination of two or more ingredients. The skin penetration enhancer(s) preferably form a substantially homogeneous mixture with the pressure sensitive adhesive polymer or copolymer. The total amount of skin penetration enhancer(s) present in a pressure sensitive adhesive composition of the invention is preferably about 3 percent to about 25 percent by weight, more preferably about 3 percent to about 10 percent by weight based on the total weight of the adhesive composition.
When the skin penetration enhancer is a single ingredient, it is preferably a skin penetration enhancer such as isopropyl myristate, diisopropyl adipate, ethyl oleate, or glyceryl monolaurate.
When a combination skin penetration enhancer is used, it is preferably a combination such as: ethyl oleate with glyceryl monolaurate; ethyl oleate with N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide; glyceryl monolaurate with N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide; and ethyl oleate with both glyceryl monolaurate and N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide.
A pressure-sensitive adhesive composition of the invention can be prepared by combining dry adhesive, 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine, fatty acid, and skin penetration enhancer(s) with an organic solvent. The preferred organic solvents are methanol and ethyl acetate. The total solids content of the adhesive coating is preferably in the range of about 15 percent to about 40 percent, and more preferably in the range of about 20 to about 35 percent based on the total weight of the adhesive coating. The resulting mixture is shaken or mixed for a period of about 20 to 72 hours. When this method is used it is preferred that the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine be in micronized form (i.e., particle size of 1-2 microns in diameter). Optionally, the mixture can be heated during shaking.
In a preferred method, the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine is combined with the fatty acid and shaken at 40 C. until there appears to be complete dissolution. The remaining ingredients are added and the mixture is shaken for a period of about 20 to 72 hours.
The pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions described above are preferably coated onto one surface of a suitable backing of sheet material, such as a film, to form a pressure-sensitive adhesive coated sheet material. A pressure-sensitive adhesive coated sheet material of the invention can be prepared by knife coating a suitable release liner to a predetermined uniform thickness with a wet adhesive formulation. This adhesive coated release liner is then dried and laminated onto a backing using conventional methods. Suitable release liners include conventional release liners comprising a known sheet material, such as a polyester web, a polyethylene web, or a polystyrene web, or polyethylene-coated paper, coated with a suitable silicone-type coating such as that available under the trade designation Daubert 164Z, from Daubert Co. The backing can be occlusive, non-occlusive or a breathable film as desired. The backing can be any of the conventional materials for pressure-sensitive adhesive tapes, such as polyethylene, particularly low density polyethylene, linear low density polyethylene, high density polyethylene, randomly-oriented nylon fibers, polypropylene, ethylene-vinylacetate copolymer, polyurethane, rayon and the like. Backings that are layered, such as polyethylene-aluminum-polyethylene composites are also suitable. The backing should be substantially non-reactive with the ingredients of the adhesive coating. The presently preferred backing is low density polyethylene.
The pressure-sensitive adhesive coated sheet material of the invention can be made in the form of an article such as a tape, a patch, a sheet, a dressing or any other form known to those skilled in the art.
Preferably, an article in the form of a patch is made from an adhesive coated sheet material of the invention and applied to the skin of a mammal. The patch is replaced as necessary with a fresh patch to maintain the particular desired therapeutic effect of the 1- isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine.
The inherent viscosity values reported in the examples below were obtained by the conventional method used by those skilled in the art. The measurement of the viscosity of dilute solutions of the adhesive, when compared to controls run under the same conditions, clearly demonstrates the relative molecular weights. It is the comparative values that are significant;
absolute figures are not required. In the examples, the inherent viscosity values were obtained using a Cannon-Fenske #50 viscometer to measure the flow time of 10 ml of a polymer solution (0.2 g polymer/deciliter tetrahydrofuran, in a water bath controlled at 25 C.). The examples and the controls were run under identical conditions. The test procedure followed and the apparatus used are explained in detail in the Textbook of Polymer Science, F. W.
Billmeyer, Wiley-Interseience, 2nd Edition, 1971 under: Polymer chains and their characterization, D. Solution Viscosity and Molecular Size, pp 84-85, As indicated herein above, and in accordance with the present invention, the present invention contemplates bioequivalent or interchangeable lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations By way of an example, bioequivalent or interchangeable 3.75%
lower dosage strength imiquimod topical formulations, as contemplated by the present invention, include those 3.75% imiquimod formulations that have comparable in-vivo serum profiles, i.e., wherein the following in-vivo parameters are either the same or may vary up to about +25%
or more, when such 335% formulations are topically administered daily to the same individuals in the same dosage regimen in accordance with the short durations of therapy of the present invention:
By way of example, a 3.75% imiquimod lower dosage strength formulation of the present invention, when approximately 250 mg of such a formulation (about 9.375 mg imiquimod) or less is applied daily for 21 days to EGWs in the genital/paianal area with a total wart area of greater than or equal to 100 rnm2, achieves steady state by about Day 7, and provides an in-vivo serum profile selected from one or more of the following:
(a) a Day 21 mean Tõ,õõ of about 9.7 hours with a standard deviation ("SD") of about 4.0, a median T. of about 12 hours and a geometric mean Tinax of about 8.3 hours and a coefficient of variation ("Cr) of about 41%;
(b) a Day 21 mean C, of about 0.488 rtg/m1 with a standard deviation of about 0.368, a median Cõ,õõ of about 0.45 and a geometric Meall Cr. of about 0.39 zig/mL and a coefficient of variation of about 75%;
(c) a Day 21 T1/2 of from about 6.8 to about 54 hours and preferably a mean T1/2 of -about 24.1 hours with a standard deviation of about 12, a median T1/2 of about 22.8 hours and a geometric mean T1/2 of about 21 hours and a coefficient of variation of about 51%;
(d) a Day 21 ALIC0.24 of from about 1.9 to about 14 tig-hrinth and preferably a mean AtiC0.24 of about 6.8 ng.hr/rnL with a standard deviation of about 3.6, a median AUC0.24 of about 6.6 ng.hr/mL and a geometric mean AUC0.24 of about 5.8 ng-hr/mL and a coefficient of variation of about 53%;

(e) a Day 21 Az of from about 0.013 hr-1 to about 0.102 hr-1 and preferably a mean Az of about 0.037 hr1 with a standard deviation of about 0.02, a median Az of about 0.03 1111 and a geometric mean Az of about 0.03 hr-1 and a coefficient of variation of about 60%;
(0 a Day 21 Cmm of from about 0.025 to about 0.47 and preferably a mean Cmin of about 0.158 with an SD of about 0.121, a median Cmin of about 0.14 and a geometric mean Cmm of about 0.11 and a coefficient of variation of about 77%;
(g) at Day 14/7 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 14 over the trough concentration at Day 7), a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 1.13 with a 90%
confidence interval ( "CI") within a range of between about 0.7 and about 1.7;
(h) at Day 21/14 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 21 over the trough concentration at Day 14), a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 0.84 with a 90%
confidence interval ("CI") within a range of between about 0.5 and about 1.3;
at Day 22/21 (a ratio of the trough concentration at Day 22 over the trough concentration at Day 21) a trough concentration geometric mean ratio of about 1.12 with a 90%
confidence interval ("CI") within a range of between about0.7 and about 1.6;
(i) a mean peak imiquimod serum concentration of about 0.488 ng/mL at Day 21;
(k) a Day 21 RAUC of from about 0.6 to about 7 and preferably a mean RAUC of about 2.2 with a standard deviation of about 1.8, a median RAUC of about 1.8 and a geometric mean RAUC of about 1.7 and a coefficient of variation of about 81%;
(1) a Day 21 RCmax of from about 0.5 to about 5 and preferably a mean RCm of about 2.3 with a standard deviation of about 1.6, a median RCmax of about 1.7 and a geometric mean RCm of about 1.8 and a coefficient of variation of about 70%;
(m) a Day 21 LAzeff of from about 0.006 hr-1 to about 0.09 hr1 and preferably a mean LAzeff of about 0.04 hr-1 with a standard deviation of about 0.03, a median LAzeff of about 0.03 hr-and a geometric mean LAzeff of about 0.03 hr-1 and a coefficient of variation of about 69%;
(n) a Day 21 tAeff of from about 8 hr to about 111 hr and preferably a mean TY2eff of about 31 hr with a standard deviation of about 30, a median TY2effof about 22 hr and a geometric mean TIAeff of about 23 hr1 and a coefficient of variation of about 97%;
(o) a Day 21 Cm ax in female patients about 61% higher in female subjects than in male subjects (0.676 versus 0.420 ng/mL) and total systemic exposure AUC 0-24 8% higher in female subjects than in male subjects (7.192 versus 6.651 ng-hr/mL) when data is not dose normalized;
(p) a Day 21 Cmax in female patients about 35% higher than in male subjects (0.583 versus 0.431 ng/mL) and AUC 0-24 about 6% lower in female subjects than in male subjects (6.428 versus 6.858 ng-hr/mL) when using dose normalization to adjust for differences in dosage and reported without subjects who missed an application of study drug during the last week of dosing; and/or (q) a median Tmax occurring approximately twice as quickly in female subjects (about 6.50 hours) as in male subjects (about 12.0 hours).
In accordance with the present invention, a mean peak serum concentration is achieved with a 3.75% lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26.
More specifically, a mean peak serum concentration of about 0.488 ng/mL is achieved with a 3.75%
lower dosage strength imiquimod formulation of Examples 23-26 after about 9.4 mg of imiquimod is applied to the affected treatment area each day for up to 8 weeks.
Furthermore, this invention provides the following evidence of clinical efficacy: the wart area decreased by about 45% from a mean of about 108.3 mm 2 at baseline to about 43.2 mm 2 at Day 21 (Table 14.1.2.1). The P value of <.0001 for this change from baseline indicated a statistically significant (<0.050) decrease in wart area after 3 weeks of treatment.
While the lower dosage strength imiquimod pharmaceutical formulations of the present invention can be formulated into any form known to the art, such as a cream, an ointment, a foam, a gel, a lotion or a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition or patch, it should be understood that the creams, ointments, foams, gels and lotions may be packaged into any suitable container, such as unit-dose sachets or packets or multi-dose tubes or containers. A packaged amount of an imiquimod pharmaceutical formulation contemplated by the present invention includes any suitable amount, such as about 250 mg to about 500 mg or more, and preferably about 250 mg, about 300 mg, about 350 mg, about 400 mg, about 450 mg or about 500 mg unit-dose sachets or packets.
Examples of various embodiments of the present invention will now be further illustrated with reference to the following examples. Thus, the following examples are provided to illustrate the invention, but are not intended to be limiting thereof. Parts and percentages are by weight unless otherwise specified. Examples of creams, ointments and pressure sensitive adhesive compositions contemplated by the present invention are described in U.S. Patent No.
4,689,338 and U.S. Patent No. 5,238,944.
Percent modifications for, e.g., imiquimod and vehicle, to generate imiquimod formulations as described herein are likewise contemplated by the present invention. In addition, the formulations described and disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 7,655,672, U.S.
Patent Publication No. 2007/0123558, Serial No. 11/276,324, US. Patent Publication No.
2007/0264317, US.
Serial No. 11/433,471, and US2007/09005505 Publication No. W02008098232 (Al), are also contemplated by the present invention and are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
PREPARATIVE METHOD I
Laboratory Scale Preparation of Isooetylacrylate/Acrylamide Copolymer To a 114 gram narrow-mouth glass bottle were added: 18,6 g isooctyl acrylate, 1.4 g acrylamide, 0.04 g benzoyl peroxide, 27.0 g ethyl acetate and 3.0 g methanol.
The solution was purged for thirty five seconds with nitrogen at a flow rate of one liter per minute. The bottle was sealed and placed in a rotating water bath at 55 C for twenty-four hours to effect essentially complete polymerization. The polymer was diluted with ethyl acetate/methanol (90/10) to 23.2 percent solids and had a measured inherent viscosity of 1.26 dl/g in ethyl acetate.

Pilot Plant Scale Preparation of lsooctylacrylate/Acrylamide Copolymer 155 kg isooetylacrylate, 11.6 kg acrylamide, 209.1 kg ethyl acetate and 23.2 kg methanol were charged to a clean, dry reactor. Medium agitation was applied. The batch was deoxygenated vvith nitrogen while heating to an induction temperature of 55 C.
114 g LucidolTM
70 initiator (available from Pennwalt Corp.) mixed with 2.3 kg ethyl acetate was charged to the reactor. The temperature was maintained at 55 C. throughout the reaction.
After 5.5 hours reaction time, 114 g Lucidoirm 70 mixed with 2.3 kg ethyl acetate were charged to the reactor.
After 9.0 hours reaction time, an additional 114 g LucidolTm 70 initiator mixed with 2.3 kg ethyl acetate were charged to the reactor. The reaction was continued until the percent conversion was greater than 98 percent as measured by gas chromatographic evaluation of residual monomer concentration. The resulting polymer solution was diluted to 25-28 percent solids with ethyl acetate/methanol (90/10) and had a measured Brookfield viscosity of 17,000-21,000 centipoises using spindle #4 at 12 rpm. The polymer had a measured inherent viscosity of 1.3-1.4 dllg in ethyl acetate.
The above-mentioned procedure was found to provide a pressure-sensitive adhesive that is equivalent in the practice of the present invention to a pressure-sensitive adhesive prepared according to Preparative Method 1.
A 25-30 percent solids solution of the isooctyl acrylate:acrylamide (93:7) adhesive copolymer in ethyl acetate/methanol (90:10) was coated onto a two-sided release liner using a knife-coater and coating at 0.5 mm in thickness. The adhesive-coated laminate was dried first at 82 C for 3 minutes and then at 116 C for 3 minutes. The dried adhesive coating was then stripped off the release liner and placed in a glass bottle. The foregoing procedure results in a reduction of the amount of any residual monomer in the adhesive copolymer.

Preparation of Isooctyl Acrylate: Acrylamide: Vinyl Acetate (75:5:20) Copolymer The procedure of Preparative Method 1 above acrylate, 8.0 g acrylamide, 32.0 g vinyl acetate, 0.32 g benzoyl peroxide, 216.0 g ethyl acetate and 24.0 g methyl alcohol. The resulting polymer was diluted with the ethyl acetate/methyl alcohol mixture to 21.52%
solids. The adhesive polymer had a measured inherent viscosity of 1.40 dl/g in ethyl acetate at a concentration of 0.15 g/dl. Its Brookfield viscosity was 2,300 centipoise.

Preparation of Isooctyl Acrylate Acrylamide: Vinyl Acetate (75:5:20) Copolymer A master batch was prepared by combining 621.0 g of isooctyl acrylate, 41.4 g of acrylamide, 165.6 g of vinyl acetate, 1.656 g of 2,2'-azobis(2,4-dimethylpentanenitrile) (available from the DuPont Company as Vazo.TM.52), 884.52 g of ethyl acetate and 87.48 g of methanol. A 400 g portion of the resulting solution was placed in an amber quart bottle. The bottle was purged for two minutes with nitrogen at a flow rate of one liter per minute. The bottle was sealed and placed in a rotating water bath at 45 C for twenty-four hours to effect essentially complete polymerization. The copolymer was diluted with 250 g of ethyl acetate/methanol (90/10) to 26.05% solids and had a measured inherent viscosity of 1.27 dl/g in ethyl acetate at a concentration of 0.15 g/dl. Its Brookfield viscosity was 5580 centipoise.

A cream according to the present invention is prepared from the following ingredients:
% by Weight Amount Oil Phase 1 -i sobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] -quinolin-4-amine 1.0 40.0 g Isostearic acid 10.0 400.0 g Benzyl alcohol 2.0 80.0 g Cetyl alcohol 2.2 88.0 g Stearyl alcohol 3.1 124.0 g Polysorbate 60 2.55 102.0 g Sorbitan monostearate 0.45 18.0 g Aqueous Phase Glycerin 2.0 80.0 g Methylparaben 0.2 8.0 g Propylparaben 0.02 0.8 g Purified water 76.48 3059.2g The materials listed above were combined according to the following procedure:
The glycerin, methylparaben, propylparaben and water were weighed into a 4 liter glass beaker then heated on a hot plate with stirring until the parabens isostearic acid and 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine were weighed into an 8 liter stainless steel beaker and heated on a hot plate until the amine was in solution (the temperature reached 69 C.). The benzyl alcohol, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate were added to the isostearic acid solution and heated on a hot plate until all material was dissolved (the temperature reached 75 C.). With both phases at approximately the same temperature (65 -75 C.), the water phase was added to the oil phase. The mixture was mixed with a homogenizer for 13 minutes then put into a cool water bath and mixed with a 3 inch propeller for 40 minutes (the temperature was 29 C.). The resulting cream was placed in glass jars.

Using the general method of Example 1, the cream formulations shown in Tables 1 and 2 are prepared.
Table 1 % by Weight Example Example Example Example 5 Oil Phase 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo- [4,5- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 c]quinolin-4-amine Isostearic acid 10.0 10.0 5.0 5.0 Benzyl alcohol 2.0 Cetyl alcohol 1.7 Stearyl alcohol 2.3 Cetearyl alcohol 6.0 6.0 6.0 Polysorbate 60 2.55 2.55 2.55 2.55 Sorbitan monostearate 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Brij lm 30a 10.0 Aqueous Phase Glycerin 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Methylparaben 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Purified water 77.78 77.78 82.78 72.78 a BrijTM 30 (polyoxyethylene(4) lauryl ether) is available from ICI Americas, Inc.
Table 2 % by Weight Example Example Example Example Oil Phase 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo-[4,5- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 c]quinolin-4- amine Isostearic acid 10.0 25.0 10.0 6.0 Benzyl alcohol 2.0 2.0 Cetyl alcohol 2.2 1.7 Stearyl alcohol 3.1 2.3 Cetearyl alcohol 6.0 6.0 Polysorbate 60 2.55 3.4 2.55 2.55 Sorbitan monostearate 0.45 0.6 0.45 = 0.45 BrijTM 3 Oa 10.0 Aqueous Phase Glycerin 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Methylparaben 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Purified water 67.78 60.48 79.78 79.78 BrijTM 30 (polyoxyethylene(4) lauryl ether) is available from ICI Americas, Inc.

A cream according to the present invention is prepared from the following ingredients in the following Table 3:
Table 3 % by Weight Amount Oil Phase 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5- 1.0 3.00 g c]quinolin-4-amine Isostearic acid 5.0 15.0 g White petrolatum 15.0 45.0 g Light mineral oil 12.8 38.4g Aluminum stearate 8.0 24.0 g Cetyl alcohol 4.0 12.0 g WitconolTM 14a 3.0 9.00 g Acetylated lanolin 1.0 3.0 g Propylparaben 0.063 0.19 g Aqueous Phase VeegumTM Kb 1.0 3.0 g Methylparaben 0.12 0.36 g Purified water 49.017 147.05g a WitconolTM 14 (polyglycery14 oleate) is available from Witco Chemical Corp.
Organics Division VeegumTM K (colloidal magnesium aluminum silicate) is available from R. T.
Vanderbilt Company Inc.
The materials listed above were combined according to the following procedure:

The 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine and the isostearic acid were weighed into a glass jar and heated with occasional stirring until the amine was dissolved (the temperature reached 68 C.). To this solution was added, the petrolatum, mineral oil, aluminum stearate, cetyl alcohol, WitconolTM 14, acetylated lanoline and propylparaben. The mixture was heated to 75 C. In a separate beaker, the methylparaben and water were combined and heated until the paraben dissolved (the temperature reached 61 C.). The VeegumTM K was added to the aqueous solution and heated at 75 C. for 30 minutes while mixing with a homogenizer.
With both phases at 75 C., the aqueous phase was slowly added to the oil phase while mixing with a homogenizer.
Mixing was continued for 30 minutes while maintaining a temperature to about 80 C. The jar was then capped and the formulation was allowed to cool.

An ointment according to the present invention is prepared from the ingredients in the following Table 4:
Table 4 % by Weight Amount 1-i sobutyl-1H- imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4- 1.0 0.20 g amine Isostearic acid 5.0 1.00 g Mineral oil 12.8 2.56g White petrolatum 65.2 13.04g Cetyl alcohol 4.0 0.80g Acetylated lanolin 1.0 0.20 g WitconolTM 143.0 0.60 g Aluminum stearate 8.0 1.60 g The materials listed above are combined according to the following procedure:
The 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine and the isostearic acid were placed in a glass jar and heated with stirring until the amine was dissolved. The remaining ingredients were added and the resulting mixture was heated to 65 C. and then mixed while being allowed to cool to room temperature.

Using the general procedure of Example 11 an ointment containing the ingredients in the following Table 5 is prepared.
Table 5 % by Weight Amount 1-Tsobutyl -1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4- 1.0 0.20 g amine Isostearic acid 6.0 1.20 g Polyethylene Glycol 400 55.8 11.16 g Polyethylene Glycol 3350 32.6 6.52 g Stearyl alcohol 4.6 0.92 g Creams of the present invention are prepared using the ingredients shown in Table 6.
The Example 1 except that benzyl alcohol was used with the isostearic acid to dissolve the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4- amine.

Example 13 Example 14 Example 15 Amount % by Amount % by Amount % by Oil Phase Weight Weight Weight 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin- 50 5.0 4.85 4-amine Isostearic acid 25.0 25.0 24.3 Benzyl alcohol 2.0 2.0 1.94 Cetyl alcohol 2.2 2.2 1.16 Stearyl alcohol 3.1 3.1 1.75 Petrolatum 3.0 2.91 Polysorbate 60 3.4 3.4 4.13 Sorbitan monostearate 0.6 0.6 0.73 Stearic acid 9.71 Aqueous Phase Glycerin 2.0 2.0 1.94 Methylparaben 0.2 0.2 0.19 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 , 0.02 A cream according to the present invention is prepared from the ingredients in the following Table 7:
Table 7 % by Weight % by Weight Amount Amount Oil Phase 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4- 4.0 0.80 g amine Isostearic acid 20.0 4.00 g Benzyl alcohol 2.0 0.40 g Cetyl alcohol 2.2 0.49 g Stearyl alcohol 3.1 0.62 g Polysorbate 60 3.4 0.68 g Sorbitan monostearate 0.6 0.12 g Aqueous Phase 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c]quinolin-4- 1.0 0.2 g amine Glycerin 2.0 0.4 g 85% Lactic acid 1.0 0.22g Methylparaben 0.2 0.04 g Propylparaben 0.02 0.004 g Purified water 60.48 12.0 g The materials listed above are combined according to the following procedure:
The isostearic acid and 0.8 g of 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine were combined in a glass jar and heated with stirring until the amine had dissolved. The remaining oil phase ingredients were added to this solution and the mixture was heated to about 70 C. The aqueous phase ingredients were weighed into a separate beaker and heated with stirring until the amine and the parabens had dissolved. With both phases at about 70 C., the water phase was added to the oil phase and mixed with a propeller until the mixture cooled to room temperature.

A mixture of 5.9415 g of the 93:7 isooctyl acrylate:acrylamide adhesive copolymer prepared in PREPARATIVE METHOD 2 above, 1.5126 g isostearic acid, 2.0075 g ethyl oleate, 0.3021 g glyceryl monolaurate, 0.2936 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine (micronized) and 23.7 g of 90:10 ethyl acetate: methanol was placed in a small glass jar. The jar was placed on a horizontal shaker and shaken at room temperature for about 13 hours. The formulation was coated at a thickness of 20 mils onto a 5 mil Daubert 164Z
liner. The laminate was oven dried for 3 minutes at 105 F., for 2 minutes at 185 F., and for 2 minutes at 210 F. The resulting adhesive coating contained 59.1 percent 93:7 isooctyl acrylate:acylamide adhesive copolymer, 15.0 percent isostearic acid, 20.0 percent ethyl oleate, 3.0 percent glyceryl monolaurate and 2.9 percent 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine. The material was then laminated with 3 mil low density polyethylene backing and die cut into 2.056 cm² patches.

Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive Coated Sheet Materials Prepared Using Unmicronized 1 -i sobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine .
Using the general method of Example 17 the formulations shown below are prepared. 1-Isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine or 1 -(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine that had been ground with a mortar and pestle was used. The adhesive was the 93:7 isooctyl acrylate:acrylamide copolymer prepared in Preparative Method 1 above.
The solvent was 90:10 ethyl acetate:methanol. All formulations in the following Table 8 were mixed at room temperature.
Table 8 Example 18 Example 19 Example 20 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin- 5.0 3.0 3.0 4-amine Ethyl oleate 5.1 5.0 8.0 Isostearic acid 10.0 10.0 6.0 Oleic acid 20.0 20.0 13.0 Glyceryl monolaurate 1.5 1.5 1.5 N,N-dimethyldodecylamine- 1.0 1.1 3.0 N-oxide Adhesive 57.4 59.3 65.4 A formulation with the same components in the same proportions as Example 18 is prepared using a different method. The 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine was combined with the oleic and isostearic acids and shaken at 40 C. until there was complete dissolution of the 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo-[4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo [4,5-c] quinolin-4-amine . The remaining ingredients were added and shaken a 40 C. for 72 hours. Patches measuring 2.056 cm² were prepared by the general method of Example 17.

A mixture of 2.4734 g 1-isobuty1-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]-quinolin-4-amine or 1-(2-methylpropy1)-1H-imidazo[4,5-c]quinolin-4-amine, 3.3315 g isostearic acid and 6.6763 g oleic acid is prepared. To 1.8738 g of the above mixture was added 2.8750 g of the 93:7 isooctyl acrylate:acryamide adhesive copolymer prepared in Preparative Method 2 above, 0.2548 g of ethyl oleate, 0.0510 g N,N-dimethyldodecylamine-N-oxide, 0.0820 g glyceryl monolaurate (from Lauricidin, Inc.) and 14.0457 g of 90:10 ethyl acetate/methanol. The above was shaken for 30 hours at room temperature on a horizontal shaker. Transdermal patches were then prepared generally according to the procedures of Example 17.

Topical Imiquimod Pharmaceutical Cream Formulations Creams are prepared in accordance with the present invention using the ingredients shown in this Example 23.
The materials listed below in this Example 23 are combined according to the following procedure to make cream formulations in the following Table 9 of this Example 23:

Table 9. Lower Dosage Strength Imiquimod Formulations Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 1 2 3 4 5 6 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 Purified water 68.98 66.98 64.98 61.98 60.73 60.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 7 8 9 10 11 12 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 66.98 60.98 60.98 57.08 58.98 55.78 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 lmiquimod 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 13 14 15 16 17 18 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 56.48 67.08 59.98 58.98 56.98 61.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 , 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 19 20 21 22 23 24 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 , 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Mono stearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 Purified water 68.73 66.73 64.73 61.73 60.48 60.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 25 26 27 28 29 30 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 66.73 60.73 60.73 56.83 58.73 55.53 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 31 32 33 34 35 36 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Poly sorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 56.23 66.83 59.73 58.73 56.73 61.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 37 38 39 40 41 42 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 , Purified water 68.48 66.48 64.48 61.48 60.23 60.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 43 44 45 46 47 48 Fatty acid 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 . 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum . 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 66.48 60.48 60.48 56.58 58.48 55.28 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 i 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 49 50 51 52 53 54 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 _ Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 55.98 66.58 59.48 58.48 56.48 61.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 55 56 57 58 _ 59 60 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Mono stearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 Purified water 68.23 66.23 64.23 61.23 59.98 59.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 61 62 63 64 65 66 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 66.23 60.23 60.23 56.33 58.23 55.03 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 67 68 69 70 71 72 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 55.73 66.33 59.23 58.23 56.23 61.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 73 74 75 76 77 78 Fatty acid* 10.00 12.50 25.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.70 4.00 4.00 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.80 2.00 2.00 3.10 White petrolatum 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.40 2.80 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.80 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 5.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.30 0.70 0.75 Purified water 65.98 63.48 54.78 70.28 64.28 59.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 79 80 81 82 83 84 Fatty acid* 10.00 12.50 25.00 10.00 15.00 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.70 4.00 4.00 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.80 2.00 2.00 3.80 White petrolatum 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.40 2.80 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.80 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 0.60 Monostearate _ Glycerin 5.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.30 0.70 0.50 Purified water 65.98 63.48 54.78 70.28 64.28 54.78 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 85 86 87 88 89 90 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 55.48 66.08 58.98 57.98 55.98 60.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 91 92 93 94 95 96 Fatty acid* 15.00 12.50 25.00 15.00 10.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.00 2.00 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 2.40 3.10 White petrolatum 6.00 5.00 3.00 3.40 2.80 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.80 3.80 3.00 Sorbitan 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.20 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.30 0.30 0.75 Purified water 60.23 63.23 55.23 66.83 70.23 59.48 Benzyl alcohol 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w , %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 97 98 99 100 101 102 Fatty acid* 15.00 12.50 25.00 15.00 10.00 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.00 2.00 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 2.00 2.40 3.80 White petrolatum 6.00 5.00 3.00 3.40 2.80 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.80 3.80 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.20 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 5.00 5.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.30 0.30 0.50 Purified water 60.23 63.23 55.23 66.83 70.23 54.53 Benzyl alcohol 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 103 104 105 106 107 108 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 55.23 65.83 58.73 57.73 55.73 60.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 109 110 111 112 113 114 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 2.50 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 Purified water 65.98 65.48 63.48 60.48 59.23 59.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 115 116 117 118 119 120 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 65.48 59.48 59.48 55.58 57.48 54.28 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Total _ 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 121 122 123 124 125 126 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 54.98 65.58 58.48 57.48 55.48 60.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 127 128 129 130 131 132 Fatty acid* 15.00 18.00 15.00 20.00 12.50 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.40 2.40 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.40 2.80 3.40 2.80 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.80 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.00 Sorbitan 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.20 0.60 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.30 0.70 0.70 0.30 0.50 0.75 Purified water 65.08 62.48 67.08 61.08 61.48 58.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 133 134 135 136 137 138 Fatty acid* 15.00 18.00 15.00 20.00 12.50 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.40 2.40 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.40 2.80 3.40 2.80 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.80 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.20 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 3.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 6.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.30 0.70 0.70 0.30 0.50 0.50 Purified water 65.08 62.48 67.08 61.08 61.48 53.78 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 139 140 141 142 143 144 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 54.48 65.08 57.98 56.98 54.98 59.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 145 146 147 148 149 150 Fatty acid* 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 10.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 2.00 2.40 2.40 2.40 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.40 2.80 2.50 3.40 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.80 3.40 3.00 Sorbitan 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.60 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.70 0.50 0.75 Purified water 64.83 60.83 65.33 57.23 64.73 58.48 _ Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 .
Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 _ Propylparaben _ 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 _ Imiquimod 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 151 152 153 154 155 156 Fatty acid* 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 10.00 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 4.00 4.00 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 2.00 2.40 2.40 2.40 3.10 3.80 _ White petrolatum 3.40 2.80 2.50 3.40 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.80 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 3.00 3.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.70 0.50 0.50 Purified water 64.83 60.83 65.33 57.23 64.73 53.53 Benzyl alcohol , 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 157 158 159 160 161 162 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 54.23 64.83 59.98 56.73 54.73 59.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w _ Formulation 163 164 165 166 167 168 Fatty acid* 15.00 10.00 12.50 19.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 2.40 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.40 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.40 4.00 3.40 3.40 . 3.00 Sorbitan 0.20 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 6.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 Purified water 66.58 65.48 61.38 60.48 56.48 58.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 169 170 171 172 173 174 Fatty acid* 15.00 10.00 12.50 19.00 20.00 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 2.40 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.40 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.40 4.00 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.20 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 1.00 4.00 5.00 2.00 6.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 66.58 65.48 61.38 60.48 56.48 53.28 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 175 176 177 178 179 180 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 53.98 64.58 57.48 56.48 54.48 59.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 181 182 183 184 185 186 Fatty acid* 20.00 20.00 25.00 18.75 2000 21.25 Cetyl alcohol 4.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 2.40 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 2.80 3.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 3.75 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 1.00 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Xanthan gum 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 64.53 59.23 54.23 55.48 54.23 54.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 187 188 189 190 191 192 Fatty acid* 20.00 20.00 20.00 25.00 18.75 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan Monostearate 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 59.23 53.23 53.23 54.33 55.48 53.03 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 193 194 195 196 197 198 Fatty acid* 25.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 21.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 4.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.40 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 , Sorbitan 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.70 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 53.73 55.73 57.23 56.23 54.23 53.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 199 200 201 202 203 204 Fatty acid* 20.00 25.00 22.50 20.00 20.00 22.50 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.70 , 2.20 4.00 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.80 3.10 2.40 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 6.00 3.00 3.00 3.40 5.00 4.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 5.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.70 0.50 0.50 Purified water 52.98 52.78 55.98 55.48 56.98 55.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 205 206 207 208 209 210 Fatty acid* 20.00 25.00 22.50 20.00 20.00 22.50 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.70 2.20 4.00 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.80 3.10 2.40 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 6.00 3.00 3.00 3.40 5.00 4.00 Polysorbate 60 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 1.00 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 5.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.70 0.50 0.50 Purified water 52.98 52.78 55.98 55.48 56.98 55.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 lmiquimod 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 211 212 213 214 215 216 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 53.48 64.08 56.98 55.98 53.98 58.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipient %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 217 218 219 220 221 222 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 1.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 6.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.00 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.75 0.75 Purified water 65.73 63.73 61.73 58.73 57.48 57.48 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 223 224 225 226 227 228 Fatty acid* 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 18.0 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 63.73 57.73 57.73 53.83 55.73 52.53 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Excipients %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Formulation 229 230 231 232 233 234 Fatty acid* 25.00 15.00 20.00 20.00 20.0 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 2.00 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.40 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.80 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.20 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerin 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 1.00 0.30 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 53.23 63.83 56.73 55.73 53.73 58.73 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 _ Imiquimod 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 4.25 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 *The Fatty acid referenced in this Table 9 can be, for example, linoleic acid (la), stearic acid (sa), palmitic acid (pa), isostearic acid (isa), unrefined oleic acid, (uoa), refined oleic acid, such as super refined oleic acid (roa), or mixtures thereof.
The work area, all vessels and equipment is initially cleaned prior to commencing manufacture. A 2 L glass container and paddle stirrer blade are placed onto a balance and the weight is recorded. The paddle is then removed from the vessel. The isostearic acid and benzyl alcohol are weighed directly into the 2 L glass container. The imiquimod is then weighed into the 2 L glass container and a spatula is used to ensure the imiquimod is wetted with the isostearic acid and benzyl alcohol mixture. The 2 L container is then heated in a water bath to about 55 5 C while stirring with a Heidolph mixer (Note: aluminum foil is placed around the top of the vessel and the paddle for the mixer, to limit evaporation). The solution is visually inspected to confirm the imiquimod has fully dissolved prior to mixing with cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, white petrolatum, polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate. Cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, white petrolatum, polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate are then weighed directly into the 2 L container and mixing is continued at about 55 5 C until the oil phase is completely in solution. Separately, about 2 L of water are placed into a beaker and heated to 55 5 C while stirring with a magnetic follower. Briefly, about 500 ml of the heated water is transferred into a 1 L beaker and placed into the water bath maintained at about 55 5 C. Half of the amount of glycerin required for the final formulation is then weighed into the beaker along with the total amount of methylparaben and propylparaben to the water (where both methyl and propyl paraben are weighed into weighing boats first, a pipette is used to remove a portion of the heated water to wash out the weighing boats to ensure total transfer of both the propyl- and methylparaben into the aqueous phase). The mixture is continuously stirred at about 55 5 C
(this is the aqueous phase). The remaining glycerin is then added to a 28 ml vial and the xanthan gum is added and mixed using a small overhead mixer (1KA8-Werke Lab Egg) with paddle attachment for about 10 min. The glycerin and xanthan mixture are then added slowly into the vortex of the aqueous phase, and a further aliquot of about 20 ml of heated water is used to rinse the vessel out into the water phase to ensure complete transfer. The water phase is then heated and mixed at about 55 5 C until the xanthan gum mixture is fully and evenly dispersed into the aqueous phase. The temperatures of both the water phase and oil phase are both maintained at about 55 5 C. The aqueous phase is then transferred into the oil phase and the speed of the Heidolph mixer is increased during addition. The mixture is then homogenized on high speed for about 3 min and transferred immediately back to the Heidolph mixture;
however, the contents of the homogenized sample, about 2 L, are mixed at about room temperature and allowed to cool to about 35 C. The container and contents and the paddle from the overhead mixer are then re-weighed and the weight of the paddle and 2 L beaker, as determined above, are subtracted to determine the total weight of the formulation remaining. The total weight (about 1 kg) of the cream is then made up to weight with heated water (Note: water evaporated during heating, which needs to be corrected at this point). The mixture is then transferred back onto the Heidolph mixer at about room temperature and mixed until the temperature of the formulation is below about 28 C. The lid of the container is then placed onto the vessel and stored at room temperature.
The lower dosage strength formulations of this Example 23 are believed to be stable and consistent with the specifications for the commercially available Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream.
More preferably, low dosage formulations of this Example 23, especially as to those lower dosage strength formulations wherein the vehicle comprises an isostearic acid as the fatty acid, are believed to have the following:

(1) Stability. The imiquimod formulations of the present invention, when they are measured on HPLC at 25 C/60%RH, 30 C/65%RH and 40 C/75%RH over, one, two, three and six months, demonstrate stability consistent with the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream;
(2) Degradation Products. No degradation products are detected in the formulations of the present invention, at its current recommended storage temperatures of about 4-25 C. In addition, there are no degradation products detected at any of the temperatures or time points mentioned under "Stability" above, when analyzed at about 318 nm.
(3) Homogeneity. The amount of imiquimod that is recovered from the formulations at any of the above-mentioned temperatures and time points is between about 90 to about 110%
w/w thereby demonstrating good homogeneity;
(4) Benzyl Alcohol Content. The formulations of the present invention are also within specifications for the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, i.e., between 1.0 %w/w and 2.1 %w/w, at any of the above-mentioned temperatures and time points as to benzyl alcohol content.
(5) Microscopic Stability. There is no change in the particle size and no crystals are detected in the formulations of the present invention when they are stored at 25 C/60%RH and analyzed over a six month period;
(6) Macroscopic Stability. There are no obvious physical changes in the formulations of the present invention when they are stored at 25 C/60%RH and analyzed over a six month period;
(7) Viscosity. The formulations of the present invention are within the range of the specifications for the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, i.e., between 2000 cPs and 35,000 cPs, when they are stored at 25 C/60%RH and analyzed over a six month period; pH
Stability. The formulations of the present invention are within the range of the specifications for the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream, i.e., between pH 4.0 and pH 5.5) when they are stored at 25 C/60 %RH
and analyzed over a six month period;
(8) Preservative Efficacy Test ("PET"). The formulations of the present invention demonstrate sufficient reductions in colony forming unit counts for each of the organisms with which the formulations are inoculated, i.e., S. aureus, E. coli, Ps.
Aeruginosa, C. albicans, and A. niger, at 2-8 C and 40 C over a 28 day test period and meet the requirements specified in both the USP and EP.
(9) Imiquimod In vitro Release. The Aldara 5% imiquimod cream releases statistically significant (p<0.05) higher amounts of imiquimod over a 3 hour time period in comparison to the lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention through a synthetic membrane, e.g., Microporous polyethylene film 3M No. 9711 CoTranTm.
There is no statistical difference (p<0.05) in the total cumulative amount of imiquimod that is released from any of the 3.75% w/w imiquimod formulations. There is no statistical difference (p<0.05) in the total cumulative amount of imiquimod that is released from any of the 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations. The Aldara 5% imiquimod cream also statistically significantly (p<0.05) releases imiquimod at a faster rate over a 3 hour time period in comparison to the lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention through a synthetic membrane, e.g., Microporous polyethylene film 3M No. 9711 CoTranTm. There is no statistical difference (p<0.05) between the imiquimod release rates for any of the 3.75% w/w imiquimod formulations.
There is no statistical difference (p<0.05) between the imiquimod release rates for any of the 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations. Thus, the greater the amount of imiquimod in a formulation, the faster and greater the total amount of imiquimod that is released from such formulation that the amount and rate of release of imiquimod are concentration dependant and that the rates and amounts of release of imiquimod from the formulations of the present invention are linear and dose proportionate to the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream;

(10) Imiquimod In vitro Skin Permeation (Franz Cell Study). With respect to statistical analyses, there is no statistical difference between the lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention and the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream as to the amount of imiquimod recovered from the receiver fluid, epidermis and dermis combined.
Nonetheless, there is a statistically significant (p<0.05) dose proportionate difference between the amount of imiquimod recovered from each of the matrices with respect to the concentration of imiquimod in the lower dosage strength formulations of the present invention and the Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream for both un-absorbed and stratum corneum. Thus there is a linear dose release between the amount of imiquimod that is applied and recovered in each of the matrices, i.e., receiver fluid, unabsorbed dose, stratum corneum, epidermis and dermis.

ANOVA statistical analysis at 95% confidence level is used to analyze the stability data generated, including the data generated for the membrane and skin permeation experiments.
It is also believed that the formulations of the present invention, including the formulations identified in this Example 23, have Hydrophilic-lipophilic balance (HLB) values between about 12 and 15, and more preferably between about 12.4 and about 13.4.
I Physical Characterization and Testing The following is conducted for physical characterization of lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations, e.g, formulations identified in Table 12 and Table 18, and for testing lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations, e.g., imiquimod formulations identified in Tables 13-17.
(A) Analytical method-HPLC Assay A summary of an HPLC method is provided in Table 10.
Table 10. Summary of HPLC Methodology HPLC 9. Waters 265 (Alliance Separations module), Wati,996 (Photodiode array detector), CPU (Compaq), Software¨ Microsoft HPLC System WindowtNT Version 4.00.1381 and Analysis software -Millenium32 Version 4.00.00,00 .t Column Supelcostl LC-8-DB (5nun, 15 x 0A6 cm) Guard Column Supelguald LC-8-DB 2cm Detection UV at 258 am Sample Temperature 25 C
Column Temperature 25 C
Flow Rate 2 ml/min Mobile Phase 72:28 aqueous:ACN (1% TEA solution, 0.2% Octyl Sodium Sulfate, adjusted to pH 2.0 with 113PO4 Injection Volume 20 ul Run Time 12 min Needle Wash 10:90 0.1N HC1:water 70 *Tradvaak (B) Preparation of HPLC Reagents Mobile Phase:
About 2.0 g octyl sodium sulfate (OSS) is weighed into a large beaker and is mixed with about 990 ml milli-Q ultrapure water and about 10.0 ml of triethylamine (TEA).
The mixture is sonicated and stirred for about 5 min to dissolve the solids. A pH meter is then placed in the mixture and the pH of the OSS/TEA solution is adjusted to about 2.0 with concentrated H3PO4, stirring continuously during the adjusting procedure. The entire mixture is then filtered through a 0.2 gm filter. The filtrate is mixed with acetonitrile (HPLC grade) in the ratio of about 72:28 aqueous: acetonitrile by volume.
Sample Diluent About 250 ml acetonitrile (HPLC grade), about 740 ml purified water and about 10 ml of concentrated HCI are mixed together in a 1 L volumetric flask.
Receiver Fluid About 100 ml of a commercially available standardized 1N HCI solution is diluted to about 1000 ml with Milli-Q ultra pure water.
Standards Imiquimod standards are prepared, as described under Sample Diluent and Receiver Fluid, for stability test and receiver for membrane release tests. Initially, a stock solution of imiquimod is prepared by dissolving about 25 mg of imiquimod into about 50 ml of solvent (either Sample Diluent or Receiver Fluid) to give a concentration of about 500 gg/ml in Sample Diluent or Receiver Fluid.
A calibration range as shown in Table 11 is prepared for each HPLC run.

Table 11. Preparation of Calibration Standards Volume of stock Final concentration of Test solution Volume of diluent Item (ttg/m1) (ml) 0.5 9.5 25 0.2 9.8 10 0.1 9.9 5 Combination Standard The following combination standard solution is also prepared; whereby, about 500 mg of methylparaben and about 50 mg propylparaben are weighed into a single 250 ml volumetric flask and is diluted to volume with sample diluent above, to form the parabens solution. In addition, about 500 mg of imiquimod and about 200 mg benzyl alcohol are also weighed into a single 100 ml volumetric flask and about 10 ml of the parabens solution is then transferred into the imiquimod/benzyl alcohol volumetric which is made up to volume with diluent and is sonicated to dissolve fully.
Impurity standards Impurity standards are prepared separately at a concentration of about 50 p.g/m1 in Sample Diluent and are analyzed in each HPLC run. The impurity standards that are included in each HPLC run are as follows:
= N-propyl imiquimod = N-methyl imiquimod = 4-hydroxyimiquimod = 4-chloro imiquimod Table 12 2.5% Imiquimod Formulations 3.75% Imiquimod Formulations %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Excipients Isostearic acid 15 10 15 10 15 15 15 20 Cetyl alcohol 2 4 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 Stearyl alcohol 2 2 2 2.4 2.4 2.4 2 2 2.4 2.4 2.4 , 2.4 White petrolatum 3.4 3.4 2.8 2.8 3.4 2.8 3.4 2.8 3.4 2.8 2.8 3.4 Polysorbate 60 3.8 3.8 3 3.8 3 3.8 3 3.8 3 3 3 3.8 Sorbitan Monostearate 0.2 1 1 1 1 0.2 1 1 0.2 0.2 1 1 o Glycerine 3 1 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 Xanthan gum 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 "
0, Purified water 65.58 69.78 63.78 69.98 66.78 65.78 64.33 60.73 66.33 60.33 64.53 55.73 ko .4 Benzyl alcohol 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ko .4 Methylparaben 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 co iv Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0 1-, Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 0 w w Total amount (g) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 HLB Values 14.4 12.8 12.4 12.8 12.4 14.4 12.4 12.8 14.3 14.3 12.4 12.8 In Table 13, fifteen 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations are manufactured in 100 g batches. Each of the fifteen formulations are assessed for macroscopic and microscopic appearance, as discussed hereinafter.
Table 13 Imiquimod 246 110 116 247 117 248 249 250 113 Formulations 'Yow/w , %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w 'Yow/w %w/w %w/w %w/w 'Yow/w %w/w 'Yow/w 'Yow/w 'Yow/w 'Yow/w Excipients Isostearic acid 15.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 25.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 12.5 12.5 25.00 25.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 3.10 White petrolatum 15.50 3.00 6.00 8.50 6.00 6.00 _ 8.50 - 3.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.00 4.25 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan Monostearate 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.75_ 1.00 0.60 1.00 1.00 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 Glycerine 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 _ 0.50 0.50 0.75 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 co Purified water 52.98 65.48 59.48 61.98 59.48 58.48 61.98 55.48 59.23 58.98 65.48 62.98 62.98 54.28 54.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Total amount (g) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 HLB Values 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 12.4 12.4 13.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 13.4 Table 14 2.5% Imiquimod 110 116 117 250 254 120 121 , 235 _ Formulations %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Excipients . _ Isostearic acid 15.00 15.00 15.00 25.00 12.5 25.00 25.00 15 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 2.20 2 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10_ 3.10 3.10 3.80 3.10 2 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.4 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.8 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan Monostearate 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 0.2 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Glycerine 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 3 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 0.3 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 o Purified water 65.48 59.48 59.48 55.48 62.98 54.28 54.98 65.58 58.48 57.48 55.48 60.48 0 iv Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 cl, ko Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.2 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 --3 ko Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 --3 co F.., Imiquimod 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 0 1-, Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 w I-ILB Values 13.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 13.4 14.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 w Table 15 3.75% Imiquimod 182 188 189 183 184 255 193 245 195 Formulations %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Excipients Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.70 2.20 4 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.80 3.10 2.4 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 6.00 6.00 3.00 . 5.00 3.00 3.00 3.4 . 5.00 3.00 5.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.00 3.40 3.40 3.8 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.60 1.00 0.60 0.60 1 0.60 0.60 0.60 Monostearate Glycerine 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 2.00 2.00 3 2.00 5.00 5.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.7 0.50 0.50 0.50 Purified water 59.23 53.23 53.23 54.23 55.48 53.73 53.73 . 55.73 57.23 58.23 54.23 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 . 0.20 0.20 0.2 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 Imiquimod 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.75 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 HLB Values 13.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 12.4 13.4 13.4 12.8 13.4 13.4 13.4 In Table 16, compositions for Aldara 5% imiquimod cream and 1% imiquimod cream formulations are shown. Also shown in the Table 16, are four placebo formulations Pbol, Pbo2, Pbo3 and formulation Pbo4, Table 16 3M 257 Placebos Aldara (1%) Formulations (5% Pbol Pbo2 Pbo3 Pbo4 Bulk) %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Excipients Isostearic acid 25.00 25.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 Cetyl alcohol 2.20 2.40 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 Stearyl alcohol 3.10 3.40 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 White petrolatum 3.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 3.00 Polysorbate 60 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 3.40 Sorbitan 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Mono stearate Glycerin 2.00 ' 2.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 2.00 Xanthan gum 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.50 Purified water , 52.98 58.48 80.98 , 59.98 57.98 62.98 Benzyl alcohol 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Methylparaben 0.20 , 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Propylparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 lmiquimod 5.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 HLP Values 13.37 13.37 13.37 13.37 13.37 13.37 (C) Uniformity/homogeneity Following a 1 kg batch manufacturing process as described in this Example 23, 3 x 150 mg samples (top, middle and bottom) are removed from each 1 kg bulk batch using a positive displacement pipette and are extracted and are analyzed as described in Section, entitled "Imiquimod Content" described hereinafter.
(D) Preparation of Stability Samples Each of the 1 kg batches are sub-aliquoted individually into 21 x 60 ml glass powder jars, where:
(B) 5 x 50 g (25 C/60%RH t= 0 h, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months) (C) 5 x 50 g (30 /65%RH -1= 0 h, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months) (D) 5 x 50 g (40 C/75% RH - t= 0 h, 1 month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months) (E) 1 x 60 g (PET sample, placed at 2-8 C) (F) 1 x 20 g (placed at 2-8 C) (G) 1 x 20 g (placed at -20 C) (H) The remaining formulation, is divided into 3 additional aliquots and each is placed at 25 C/60%RH, 30 /65%RH and 40 C/75% RH.
All batches are characterised based on the protocols that are shown in Section entitled Protocol for the Assessment of Formulations. Once each aliquot is removed from the relevant stability conditions at each time point; the remaining aliquot from each sample is placed in a fridge at 2-8 C for future reference if required.
Following the 1 month stability time point, the benzyl alcohol content of the formulations are monitored; for all subsequent time points, the placebo formulations are analyzed by HPLC.
Thus, there are no t=0 measurements for benzyl alcohol content for placebo formulations Pbo 1 , Pbo2 and Pbo3.
(E) Protocol for the assessment of formulations The protocols that are used for the assessment of the formulations are as follows:
(1) Macroscopic Appearance Macroscopic appearance is determined by visual examination of the physical characteristics which include appearance and texture of each cream.
Macroscopic appearance is performed at each time point (t = 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) for the 25 C
stability samples, as follows:
(A) Using a medium Granton pallet knife, a small aliquot of sample (approximately 1 to 2 g) is removed from its container and is placed on the surface of a large Granton pallet knife.
(B) The medium Granton pallet knife is then used to smooth the cream over the surface of the large Granton pallet knife, by using a backward and forward motion of the spatula until a visually uniform layer of cream is obtained on the large Grantoe pallet knife.
(C) Visual observations of the cream are recorded which am based on, the presence of lumps, gradoRls or ease of spread over the surface of the spatula.
(2) Microscopic Appearance Formulations are viewed under a light microscope (Leica DME FD198536 Light Microscope), to determine particle size, uniformity and the absence of particulates. Digital images of each formulation are taken at each time point (t 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) for the 25 C
stability samples, as follows:

(A) The microscope is set up so that the camera (Nikkon Cool Pi x 4500 digital camera) is attached to the relay lens of the microscope and the 40x objective lens is set into place to view the sample. Camera settings: Image size 1280 x 960 pixels, Image quality: Fine.
(B) A small droplet of the formulation to be viewed is placed onto a microscope slide (Fisher-brand microscope slides, Cat No. 7101) using a micro-spatula. The microscope slide is then covered using a cover glass (Fisher-brand cover glass, width: 22 - 32 IBM, thickness: 0.13-0.17 nun).
(C) The microscope slide with the formulation is then placed under the 40x objective.
Using the fine adjustment knob of the light microscope, the slide is brought into sharper focus to get a clear view.
(D) Once a clear distinct view is obtained, pictures are taken (x400 magnification).
(E) The particle sizes of formulations prepared arc determined using a graticule (Olympus, Objective Micrometer, 0.01 mm). Overall uniformity and particle size are measured using the scale on a calibrated graticule. Five random locations on each slide for each formulation are chosen to assess uniformity and particle size.
(3) Imiquimod Content The imiquimod content of the formulations is measured at each time point (t 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) for the 25 C and 40 C stability samples. The 30 C stability samples are removed from the stability cabinet at each time point and placed at about 2-8 C for future reference, as follows:
79 *Trademark (2) About 150 mg of the formulation is removed from each sample and is transferred into a 50 ml volumetric flask.
(3) About 30 ¨ 40 ml of diluent (about 250 ml acetonitrile (HPLC grade), about 740 ml purified water and about 10 ml of concentrated HCI are mixed together in a volumetric flask) is then added to the volumetric flask containing the aliquot of the formulation.
(4) The sample is then vortex mixed for approximately 1 min or until the formulation has visibly completely dispersed into the diluent.
(5) The sample is then sonicated for about 5 min and then is left to cool to room temperature.
(6) The sample is then filled to volume with diluent and is mixed by inverting the volumetric flask.
(7) This step is followed by filtration through a 0.45 mm filter directly into a 2 ml HPLC vial and the cap crimped.
(8) The sample is then analysed on the HPLC using the method described in Section entitled Analytical Method ¨ HPLC Assay described above, with the standard solutions as described above in Sections entitled Standards Combination Standard and Impurity Standard. This method also allows for the detection and measurement of benzyl alcohol.
(4) Related Substances/ Degradation Products Following the extraction and analysis, as described above under Imiquimod Content, the chromatograms for each formulation are compared to those generated for the impurity standards, as described above under Impurity Standards, to identify if there are any degradation peaks present. As the preservatives have similar retention times as the degradation products, the chromatograms are viewed at an absorbance of 318 nm wavelength at which the preservatives do not absorb to confirm the absence of degradation products.
(5) pH measurements The pH of the formulations are measured at each time point (t = 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months).
The pH measurement protocol is as follows:
(4) A small sample of the formulation is applied on to the surface of a strip of pH
paper (Fisher-brand pH paper: FB33045, Range pH 0.5-5.5) and is spread evenly over the surface using a spatula.
(5) The pH paper with the formulation on it is then left for 10 min to ensure that the paper does absorb the cream (which is confirmed by a color change).
(6) The pH of the formulation is then determined by comparing the color on the strip of pH paper with a range of colors (color chart) that are provided with the Fisher-brand pH paper.
(6) Viscosity from Flow Curve (Rheology Bohlin CVO measurements) The rheology of the formulations are measured at each time point (t = 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) for the 25 C stability samples.
(7) Rheology Oscillation Methodology (Bohlin CVO) The Crossover and GI values of the ICH stability samples are measured for all the t=0 samples. See e.g., Tables 18 and 26. The 'crossover' point is an indication of the elastic structure of the formulation and a high cross over point indicates that more force is required to breakdown the formulation thus providing an indication for longer term stability of the cream formulations. The Gl value is a measurement of the elastic part of the formulation, whereby a high GI value indicates a more rigid formulation which 'recovers' more easily from applied shear stress.
(8) Viscosity (Brookfield) Measurements The viscosity of the formulations is measured at each time point (t = 0, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months) for the 25 C stability samples.
(9) Preservative Efficacy Test Protocol The preservative efficacy test is performed on formulations 110, 126, Pbo4 and which are stored at about 2 - 8 C and about 40 C for about 3 months.
Preservative efficacy testing is carried out according to the procedure described in line with the methodology described in the USP 2007 and EP 2007. The time points, at which the inoculated samples are tested are: Oh, 24h, 48h, 7 days, 14 days, 21 days and 28 days.

Method validation is performed using Staphylococcus aureus cultures to confirm the neutralizing effect of DIE broth, for this purpose 110 and 182 are used to confirm neutralization of the preservatives.
II Test Item Release Studies through Synthetic Membranes (A) In vitro screening of release profiles through synthetic membranes The release of imiquimod from 13 formulations (n=4 for each) are compared using methodology based on the principles of the FDA, SUPAC-SS guidelines. The formulations that are tested included: 3M's Aldan. 5% imiquimod cream 1 kg bulk sample, Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream sachet (commercial product), Graceway's Aldara 5% imiquimod cream 1 kg batch, and formulations 257(1%), 123, 250, 125, 110, 182, 195, 256, 197 and 183. The protocol for the investigation is as follows:
A synthetic membrane (Microporous polyethylene film 3M No. 9711 CoTranTm) is mounted in a small Franz cell (refer to FIG. 1) with a receiver fluid (0.1 N
HCI) to ensure sink conditions (is equilibrated for a minimum of 30 min prior to dosing). An infinite dose of formulation (230 to 250 p.1 is dispensed using a calibrated positive displacement pipette) is applied to the membrane (using the pipette tip to gently spread over the surface) and the diffusion of imiquimod that is measured over time (n=4 per formulation).
Briefly 200 1 of the receiver fluid is removed using a 250 IA Hamilton syringe at each time point (0, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 240 min) and is analysed on the HPLC using the method, as described under Analytical Method ¨ HPLC Assay. The sample of receiver fluid is removed at each time point and is replaced with fresh pre-warmed (32 C) receiver fluid.
III In vitro Skin Permeation Study (A) Analytical Methods (1) Liquid Scintillation Method Details Samples are added to a scintillation vial and about 4 ml of scintillation cocktail (Hionic-fluor) is added. The vial is capped and is shaken using a vortex mixer until the sample is mixed with the scintillation cocktail. The scintillation vials are then loaded into racks before analysing on the scintillation counter, using the settings listed as follows.

Model of scintillation counter: Beckman* LS 5000 CE
Isotope setting: C14 Counting time: 5 min Calculation mode: SL DPM
Count samples: 1 times Replicates:
Quench monitor: Yes (B) Radioactive purity of Imiquiniod NC
(1) Preparation of Stock The radio-labelled material is as follows:
Irniquimod stock (c14): Specific activity of about 57 maIrnmol with a radiochemical purity of about 99.2% is supplied as a powder in a borosilicate multi-dose vial with additional screw cap.
Working stock solutions are prepared by addition of I ml isostearic acid to the imiquimod powder using a needle and syringe inserted through the septum of the vial. The screw cap is then replaced securely and the vial shaken on a vortex mixer until all the irniquimod dissolves in the isostearic acid. The homogeneity is also confirmed. This results in a stock solution containing about 1000 Ciiml.
(C) Preparation of Formulations = The method for the preparation of about a 100g radioactive batch is as follows:
The glass container and mixer paddle attachment are placed onto a balance and the weight is recorded before the container and paddle are removed.
= The amount of imiquirnod required for the formulation is added by weight and the remaining isostearic acid (minus 1.38 g) and benzyl alcohol are added to the container.
= The entire mixture is heated in a water bath at about 55 5 C while stirring with a small over head mixer (IKAO-Werke Lab Egg) and paddle attachment.
83 *Trademark = Cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, white petrolatum, polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate are added into the beaker and mixed at about 55 5 C until the oil phase is completely in solution.
= Separately, about 200 ml of water is heated in a beaker to about 55 5 C while stirring with a magnetic follower.
= About 50 ml of the heated water is transferred into a beaker and is placed in a water bath maintained at about 55 5 C and half the glycerine, methyl hydroxyparabens and propyl hydroxyparabens are added (where both methyl and propyl parabens are weighed into weighing boats first) to the water and is stirred at about 55 5 C (this is the aqueous phase).
= The remaining glycerine is added to a 28 mi vial with the xanthan gum and is mixed using a small over head mixer (IKAS-Werke Lab Egg) with paddle attachment for about min.
= The glycerine and xanthan mixture are then added into the vortex of the aqueous phase, using about a 5 ml aliquot of heated water to rinse the vessel out into the water phase.
= Mixing of the water phase is continued for at least about 5 min.
= The aqueous phase is transferred into the oil phase, increasing the stirring speed during addition.
= The mixture is stirred on high speed maintaining the temperature at about 55 5 C for 30 min.
= The vessel is removed from the mixer and is homogenised using the 1 cm head for about 3 min.
= Mixing is continued while cooling to about 35 C and the total weight of the cream is made up to weight with heated water. The mixture is transferred to the overhead stirrer and cooling and stirring is continued to about 25 C.
= The formulations are then aliquoted in to screw top vials and are sealed with Parafilm placed around the screw top lid.
= About 9.862 g of the formulation is weighed into a vial and is placed in a water bath at about 5 C. About 138 mg of radio-labelled working stock solution is then added to the formulation and the formulation is thoroughly mixed using a spatula while cooling.
(D) Homogeneity Control Following manufacturing of the formulations, the following test is performed:
For each of the formulations, three aliquots (top, middle and bottom of batch) of approximately 5 mg is exactly weighed directly into a scintillation vial, where about 4 ml of scintillation cocktail is added. All of the samples are then directly quantified on the Liquid Scintillation Counter ("LSC") to confirm homogeneity within 10%.

(E) Franz cell study The method involves the use of full thickness human skin that is mounted in a Franz cell with about a 0.01 N hydrochloric acid as receiver fluid to ensure sink conditions. A dose of formulation equivalent to about 10 mg/cm2 is applied to the membrane and the diffusion of imiquimod is measured over time. Human skin from cosmetic reduction surgery is used.
Subcutaneous fat is removed mechanically prior to preparation of the skin section for the study.
The formulations (61,t) are applied to the surface of the membrane using a positive displacement pipette. The investigation is performed in several experiments. Two skin donors are used randomly and are assigned across all experiments so that each formulation is tested on both skin donors. Each experiment consists of two randomly assigned formulations (n---.6 cells per formulation) and two comparator formulations (n=6 cells per comparator). The receptor compartment of the Franz cells is then filled with the receiver fluid and the cells are fixed in a water bath maintained at about 37 C. The receptor compartment contents are continuously agitated by small magnetic followers. At t=1, 8 and 24 h, samples of receiver fluid are taken from the receptor compartment, and are replaced with fresh receiver fluid and are assayed by scintillation counting.
(F) Mass balance At the end of the experiment, a mass balance experiment is carried out, where the amount of 14Cimiquimod remaining in the donor compartment, surface residue, Stratum corneum (SC), remaining epidermis, dermis and receiver compartment is quantified. This method involves removal of the SC by tape stripping and processing of the remaining epidermal layer and dermis using standard procedures. The protocol for the mass balance is as follows:
Unabsorbed dose: The surface of each Franz cell donor chamber is wiped gently with a cotton bud using 5 clockwise and anti-clockwise movements. This procedure is repeated on 4 occasions using alternate wet (receiver fluid) and dry cotton buds. The cotton buds are added to scintillation cocktail before analysis. Two tape strips are removed from the skin and these are regarded as unabsorbed formulation and included in the total surface activity.
The Stratum corneum) (SC) is removed by carefully tape stripping the membrane ten times using Scotch adhesive tape. Collectively, each tape is placed into a scintillation vial to which 4 ml of scintillation cocktail are added before analysis. Epidermal layer: The remaining section of the epidermis (following tape stripping) is carefully removed from the dermis with a scalpel. The epidermis is placed into a glass vial containing 2 ml of Soluene 350 and is incubated at about 50 C for about 72 h before analysis by LSC. The remaining dermal layer is placed in to a glass vial containing about 2 ml of Soluene 350 and is incubated at about 50 C for about 72 h before analysis by LSC.
(G) Analysis of Data ANOVA statistical analysis at a 95% confidence level is used to analyse the data generated for the membrane release and skin permeation experiments.
An example of the ANOVA statistical analysis is as follows:
Individual 95% Cis For Mean Base on Pooled StDev Level N Mean StDev Formulation X 4 4605.5 626.9 (---*---) Formulation Y 4 1862.8 185.9 (---*---) Formulation Z 4 1845.6 206.4 (---*---) Whereby, no significance (p>0.05) is shown by two overlapping histograms (e.g.
Y and Z), whereas a significant difference (P<0.05) can be identified by two histograms which don't overlap (e.g. X and Y and X and Z). The width of the each histogram is a reflection of the pooled standard deviation from all data sets.
IV Results and Discussion (A) Degradation Product Analysis It is discovered that the preservatives (benzyl alcohol, methylparaben and propylparaben) at about 318 in the imiquimod formulations can not be detected. Thus, by analysing the imiquimod formulations at this wavelength, it permits the detection of degradation products, if any, in the presence of preservatives. However, no degradation products are identified at about 318 nm for any of the imiquimod formulations tested up to and including the 6 month stability time point at about 25 C and about 40 C.
In Table 17 and FIG. 2, they show a summary of the findings, whereby simple microscopic analysis of the imiquimod formulations identify formulations with inconsistent particle size and large aggregation of material. Summary and composition of lower dosage strength imiquimod formulations are listed in Table 13 and Table 14.

Table 17 %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Viscosity Medium- very medium-high High high high high high high low high high high high high high low (visual) Appearance slightly matt, matt, (spatula) lumpy Smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth textured Textured smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth p, PH 5 5 5 5 4.5 4.5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 4.5 4.5 N.) 0, ko .4 G1 (Pa) 3639 1150.5 1504 1093 1740.5 5235 1364.5 171.5 642 943 626.5 567 2285.5 5231 304.5 ko .4 co Crossover 29.5 14.5 20.5 16 21.5 nonc 21.5 13 21.5 29.25 19 15 21.5 20.5 29.75 <ND' (01) O
w Microscope v. bad Ok good bad good v.bad bad good bad bad ok bad ok ok good I
`8).

Table 18. Physical Characteristics of 12 Lower Dosage Strength Imiquimod Formulations, i.e., Formulations 181, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244 and 245.

_ -%w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w %w/w Excipients -Isostearic acid 15 10 15 10 15 15 15 Cetyl alcohol 2 4 _ 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 , 4 4 _ - -Stearyl alcohol 2 2 2 2.4 2.4 2.4 2 2 2.4 2.4 2,4 2.4 White petroleum 3.4 3.4 2.8 , 2.8 3.4 2.8 3.4 2.8- 3.4 2.8 2.8 3.4 -Polysorbate 60 3.8 3.8 3 38 3 3.8 3 3.8 3 3 3 3.8 Sorbitan Monostearate 0.2 1 I 1 1 0.2 1 1 0.2 0.2 1 1 Glycerin 3 1 3 3 1 1 , 3 Xanthan gum 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.7 Purified water 65.58 69.78 63.78 69.98 66.78 65.78 64.33 60.73 66.33 60.33 86.53 55.73 Benzyl alcohol 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2_ 2 2 2 0 Methylparaben 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 o Propyiparaben 0.02 0.02 0.02 0,02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 n.) o) l0 _ Imiquimod I 2.50 I 2.50 I 2.50 I 2.50 I 2.50 I 2.50 I 3.75 I 3.75 I 3.75 T 3.75 I
3.75 I 3.75 l0 CO
Total amount (g) 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 , 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 n.) HLB Values 14.39 12.78 12.35 12.78 12.35 14.39 12.35 12.78 14.26 14.26 12.35 12.78 o Modification: multi multi multi multi multi multi multi multi multi multi multi multi o o1 Viscosity low/med high high medium med/high high Medium-High Medium Medium-Low Medium-high Very High _ High w w1 1,1-1 , 4.7 4.7 4.7 6 4.7 _ 4.7 5.0 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.5 G 294.37 1527.65 639.345 467.78 552.61 924.075 116.18 416.65 8767 65.425 2514.25_ 1280.05 o crossover 9.5 , 25.25 10.5 17.75 12 25.5 13.75 18.5 none 11.75 36 22.5 microscope v. good ok, but bad good, but bad bad - good with very good ok good very good good particles? particles? particles?
bubbles -Appearance/Spatula glossy, v slight smooth, matt, slight texture, glossy, slightly glossy, glossy, slightly glossy, very smooth with a glossy, texture, matt, v. glossy & v.
slightly matt does glossy, smooth smooth, matt textured with textured with textured, very slightly matt smooth, with does smooth smooth aerated smooth out some aeration some aeration aerated textured appearance some aeration out (B) Scale-up and ICH stability (1) Homogeneity In Table 19, formulations 245, 121 and 193 show signs of phase separation. All the other formulations in Table 19 show good homogeneity, and are subsequently sub-aliquoted and placed on stability as described above under Preparation of Stability Samples.
Table 19. Homogeneity Results from 1 kg batches, where Samples are Removed from Top Middle and the Bottom of the Batch for Comparison of Homogeneity.
Formulation % Recovery %CV
3M Aldaraw 5% Batch 102.69 2.29 2.23 257 (1%) 100.29 0.68 0.68 197 96.81 2.15 2.22 183 97.56 0.48 0.50 245 91.08 12.80 14.06 182 97.68 0.73 0.75 189 98.32 0.92 0.94 184 98.37 1.61 1.63 193 97.21 0.22 0.23 188 98.95 2.48 2.51 195 99.66 0.70 0.70 255 99.46 0.49 0.49 256 98.80 0.75 0.76 Graceway Aldare 5%
102.74 1.26 1.23 Imiquimod 110 101.43 0.63 0.62 116 100.39 0.18 0.18 117 100.49 0.64 0.64 250 99.98 0.37 0.37 254 98.70 0.21 0.21 120 100.02 0.34 0.34 121 106.22 0.09 0.09 235 101.04 0.21 0.21 123 101.75 0.28 0.28 124 95.00 0.32 0.34 125 101.12 0.12 0.12 126 102.37 0.58 0.57 Pbol N/A N/A
Pbo2 N/A N/A
Pbo3 N/A N/A
Pbo4 N/A N/A

(C) Stability (1) Stability of Imiquimod in Formulations In Table 20, imiquimod in the formulations is stable at both about 25 C and about 40 C
over an about six month period, although the results for three and six months at both about 25 C
and about 40 C look consistently higher than previous time points. This could be attributed to a small amount of water evaporation from the containers. In addition, all samples are consistent with the commercially supplied Aldara 5% imiquimod cream sample. There are no degradation products detected in any of the samples in Table 20 at any of the temperatures and time points when analyzed at about 318 nm. With reference to formulation specification, the specification amount of imiquimod that is recovered from the samples in Table 20 is between about 90%-110% w/w, thereby confirming that the samples fall within their target specification. In other words, and by way of example, the specification amount of imiquimod that is recovered from preferred 2.5% imiquimod formulations of the present invention will fall within between about 2.25% and about 2.75% w/w and the amount of imiquimod that is recovered from preferred 3.7.5% imiquimod formulations of the present invention will fall within between about 3.38% and about 4.12% w/w. Thus, in accordance with the present invention, the amount of imiquimod recovery from preferred formulations will fall within about the 100%
10% w/w specification of their target concentrations.

Table 20. Percentage of Imiquimod that is Recovered from the Formulations as Compared to Theoretical when the Formulations are Stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 Month Period. Highlighted Grey Areas Indicate Time Points Which Are Not Tested Due To Rejection/Omission Of Formulations (n=3 sd).
, _______________________________________________________________________________ __________________________ Imiquimod TO T-1 month 25 C T-1 month 40 C 1.2 months 25 C T-2 months 40 C 1-3 month 25 C 1-3 month 40 C T-6 month 25 C T-6 month 40 C
-Formulations wan SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean sp Mean Si) Mean Si) _ Mean SD Mean Si) Aldaral 5% 100.38 9 0.25 ' 100.60 ' 9 0.10 100.41 9 0.04 - 100.58 - 0.10 - 101.40 9 0.29- 104.12 9 . 0.23 104,12 9 0.79 106.78 - 4 - 4.64 105.41 9 0.60 =,- __ _ . _ 297(4%) 100.29 0.12 104.36 0.18 104.98 9 2.41 102.31 * 0,46 102.42 +
0.10 103.16 4 0.37 105.79 9 0,27 407.09 9 1.63 103.76 9 3.59 . - _ _ _ 197 96.81 4 0.17 97.74 0.20 99.22 1 0.33 99.28 + 0.14 10147 4 0.22 102,69 9 092 102.69 0.92 100.39 1.04 101.11 2.66 183 97.69 9 021 9973 032 99.43 9 2.77 99.61 * 0.33 100.01 - 0.05-4 100.80 4 1.07 103.70 1.58 100.75 1.82 102.19 1.33 - . _ . . . -245 *
-182 96,76 9 0.25 102,01 4 0.01 98.46 9 0.15 99.00 4 0.12 98.07 0,10 101.48 0.27 104.39 1.55 102.91 1.16 99.21 4.25 _ 189 98.73 9 0.19 , 100.72 4 017 99.20 9 0.25 , . .
.
. . - 0 184 100.09 0.08 101.71 4 0.14 9686 9 0.20 .
.
,.. .
- - .... -.
-. _ . = . 0 188 100.28 4 0.02 - 99.39 + 0.17 97.04 . 6 0.21- N)_ ON
195 99.39 0.32 99.33 * 0.07 97.84 9 0.25 101.13 4 0.10 103.13 0.10 103.00 0.15 106.25 4 0.99 106.84 1.38 106.28 * 1.22 t.C.
- . .._ ...1 255 98.87 9 0.42 100.67 0.02 98.73 * 0.13 - - tO
256 97.58 0,03 100.06 4 0.22 98.05 + 0.12 99.74 9 0.07 99.28 9 0.24 101,74 4 0.37 101,71 9 0.44 105.42 * 2.10 105.55 3.20 -...1 - - CO
Graceway 98.62 4 0,11 102.32 4 028 96.66 9 0.18 101.65 4 0.06 101,02 9 0.10 103,58 9 0.19 103,64 9 0,15 101.70 4 0.79 103.20 1.85 Aldara 5%
tv Imiquimod -_ 110 101.06 * 0.35 102.17 4 0.95 99.48 9 0.19 101.46 9 0.09 99.03 4 0.14 102.73 4 0.64 103.36 0.38 _ 102.42 1.16 102.38 9 2.82. 0 - - -, - .... -I
116 98.63 0.25 99.15 * 0.13 96,87 9 0,09 .
.
.
, ., - . _ 0 .
1 La 117 99.00 9 0.73 102,06 0.10 98.42 ._, . 0 - - ..... ..
.00 _ _ _ _ 250 97.67 9 0.11 101.88 4 0,06 99.37 1.05 99.43 0.20 99.74 0.13 101 57 4 0.35 105.32 242 102.45 C150 101.14 4 2.23 (A) .., . -... 0 254 96.29 9 _ 0. , 27 99.75 * 0.09 97,11 _ 0.25 .
- -120 99.79 9 0,27 100.61 4 0.03 98.82 9 017 . .
_ , -= .. - , - . - = .-' '=
. .
235 99.25 9 0 = .25 102.80 4 0.20 1007s 4 0.11 . .
123 09,71 4 0.17 101.49 9 0,10 99.52 4 0.34 40208 9 0.34 101.11 4 0.27 103.27 4 0.31 102.35 4 0.47 105.49 9 1.11 103.34 4 1.44 124 93.17 4 0,07 94.26 0.04 92.93 0.14 _. .
125 98,37 4 0.23 102.33 _ 0.29 99.14 9 0.14 99.99 i 9 0.21 I 100.38 9 0.09 1 103.28 4 0,76 - 104.87 4 2,65 102.48 _- _ 1,27 103.87 . 9 , 1.37 .
126 102.37 0.58 102.84 4 0.45 104. /1 4 0.04 100.02 0.95 101.32 4 0.40 99.28 3.25 98.43 *
0.55 101.95 0.37 103.02 1 1.89 _ - -Pbo4 0 0 0 9 0 0 4 0 0 -4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 , 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 Pbol 0 4 0 o 9 o o + o o + o _ o + o o + o o + o o + o o 9 o Pbo2 It 4 0 o 9 0 o + o o 9 0 o +
0 , o 9 o 0 9 0 o 9 _ 0 o o _ Pb03 o 9 o ..o 9 a o 4 0 ' o 9 o 0 + o 0 9 0 0 9 o o 9 0 0 4 0 _ *30 C sample analysed, as 40 C had shown signs of phase separation.

(2) Stability of Benzyl Alcohol in Formulations In Table 21, Benzyl alcohol content is found to fall over the duration of the stability tests.
The greatest loss observed is in the placebo's; Pbo4 (1.08 0.02% w/w), Pbo 1 (1.01 0.03%w/w), Pbo2 (1.04 0.08% w/w) and Pbo3 (1.11 0.00% w/w) and the active formulation 257 (1%) (1.37 0.01% w/w) which shows a loss in benzyl alcohol at about 40 C
for about 6 months down from 2.0% w/w. The specified range for benzyl alcohol in the Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream formulations (1.0 to 2.1% w/w), are within specification for Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream. The decrease in benzyl alcohol content from the formulations is possibly the result of the formation of an ester (benzyl isostearate), whereby there is a reaction between the excipients of benzyl alcohol and isostearic acid.

Table 21. Amount of Benzyl Alcohol that is Recovered from the Formulations when the formulations that are Stored at 25 C
and 40 C over a 6 Month Period. Highlighted Grey Areas Indicate Time Points Which Are Not Tested Due To Rejection/Omission Of Formulations (N=3 Sd).
Imiquimod T-0 T-1 month 25 C 1-1 month 40 C 1-2 months 25 C T-2 months 40 C T-3 month 25 C T-3 month 40 C T-6 month 25 C
T-6 month 40 C
Formulations Mean SD_ Mean SD Mean SD Mean _ SD
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Aldarag 5% 2.11 0.02 204 0.01 1.86 0.01 2.04 0.01 1.84 0.06 1.88 0.02 1.67 0.02 1.76 4 0.05 1.41 0.00 - -_ 257(1%) 2.06 0.01 2.01 4 0.01 1.74 0.02 2.00 + 0.04 1,07 4 0.03 1.74 0.01 1.37 4 0.01 1.58 ,. 4 0.01 1.02 0.08 _- -197 2.06 0.00 2.06 0.01 1.86 0.01 2.05 + 0.00 1.91 0.02 1.85 0,01 1.70 0.02 1.74 4 0.05 1.47 4 0.02 183 205 0.01 201 4 0.01 1.85 4 0.12 2.00 _ 0.01 1.81 0.00 1,78 + . 0.01 1.56 4 0.02 1.66 4 004 1.24 001 245 _ 182 217 0.00 2.17 0.00 1.95 001 2.11 4 0,04 1.97 + 000 1.94 4 0.01 1.82 0.04 1.85 4 0.03 1.48 + 0.05 189 211 0.01 206 0.02 , 1.88 4 0.02 ..
, 184 2.13_ 0.01 2.09 + 0.01 .
1.86 + 0.01 =

188 2.15 0.02 2.05 + 0.02 1.84 + 0.01 ' _ -195 2.12 4 002 2.04 0.01 , 1.85 + 0.02 2.07 4 0.03 1.95 0.03 1.88 0.01 1.74 0.02 1 80 4 0.01 1,48 4 0.01 255 2.09 0.01 , 2.04 4 , 0.00 1.81 + 0.02 -256 2.07 _ + 0.01 2.05 0.00 1.85 + 0.00 2.06 + 0.02 1.87 4 0.03 1.84 + 0.01 1.88 1.68 0.01 1.76 I 0.01 1.46 + 0.01 -Graceway 2.06 0.01 2.06 0.00 1.80 4 0.00 2.05 +
0.00 1.91 0.02 1.87 ' 0.02 1.65 4 001 1.73 0.00 1.38 + 0.03 C) Aldarag 5%
Imiquimod 110 2.09 0.01 2.04 0.01 1.84 4 0,01 2.04 0.02 1.91 0.02 1 97 4 , 0.02 1.75 001 1.78 004 1.72 + 0.02 IV
116 2.08 0.01 2.05 , . 0,01 1.87 + 0.01, C71 -1.0 117 2,11 - + 0.01 2.06 + 0.01 1.82 0.05 , - . .,,, .

250 2.03 0.01 2.00 + 0.01 1.78 0.07 1.96 0.02 , 1.70 + 0.01 1.74 0.01 1.47 _ 4 0.03 1.59 4 002 1.12 , 0.02 1.0 -254 2.07 4 0.01 2.04 + 0.01 1.89 0,01 .. .4-. .
CO
120 211 0.00 .. 2.00 - +
0.01 , 1.77 0.02 .. ..
.
=
. - , = IV
-, .

235 2.10 0.00 2.10 + 0.02 1.92 0.02 . = = = =
..
- - -I-`
123 2.11 + 0.01 2,05 + 0.00 1.82 0,01 2.06_ . . + 001 1.85 0.01 1.84 + 0.01 1,59 0.00 1.73 - 0.02 1.34 + 0 01 0 - ,-124 1.96 0.01 1.89 0.01 1.71 0.00 I
- -125 2.08 ., 0.01 2.06 + 0.01 1.82 0.00 2.02+
0.01 1.82 + 0.01 1.85 0.00 1.63 , 0.04 1.73 0.02 1.32 + 0,02 ,,, _ W
126 2.00 + , 0.02 2.02 + 0.01 1.89 0.01 1.86 _ 0.02 1.65 0.02 2.00 + 0.04 1.70 +
0.04 2.01 , 0.03 1.55 0,02 1 PB04 1.93 0.02 1.83 0.08 1.90 + 0.03 1.91 + 0.01 1.53 + 0.00 1.81 , 0.01 1.39 4 0.01 1.71 ., 0.01 1.08 4 0.02 W
-PBOI 1.82 + 0.01 1.65 0.00 1.85 0.09 1.54 0.10 1.93 + 0.03 1.55 0.04 1.58 0.02 1.01 0.03 0 _ PB02 1.83 0.01 1.65 0 87 _ 0.19 .01 1 . 1.70 + 0.09 2.01 0.13 1.61 0.08 _ 1.65 4 0.05 1.04 0.08 PB03 _ 1,97 + 0.00 1.81 0.01 2.09 0.00 1.81 0.00 2.12 4 0.04 1.70 0.00 1.73 0.01 1.11 4 0.00 *30 C sample analysed, as 40 C had shown signs of phase separation (D) Microscopic stability of the formulations In Table 22, there is no change in the particle size in any of the formulations tested at about 25 C over about a 6 month period. In addition, and with reference to the microscopic photographs presented in FIGS. 8A-C and 9; no crystals are detected. For completeness and reference, the pictures of the formulations rejected after one month stability are shown in FIGS. 10A-B.
Table 22. Results of Particle Size of the Formulations when viewed under a Microscope at 25 C over a 6 Month Period.
Particle size (AM) Formulation T = 0 t=1 Month t=2 Months t=3 Months t=6 Months 3M Aldara 5% <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 GRACE WAY
Aldara 5% <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 257 (1%) <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 110 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 250 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 182 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 126 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Pbol <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Pbo2 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Pbo3 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Pbo4 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 (E) Macroscopic stability of the formulations In Table 23, there are no obvious physical changes in the formulations that are tested over the six month stability program, with the exception of the placebos, which become notably less viscous. See also Tables 24-26.
Table 23. Macroscopic Appearance when Imiquimod Formulations are stored at about 25 C over about a 6 Month Period.
Appearance spatula Test (25 C sample only) Visual Viscosity (25 C sample only) Imiquimod Formulation t = 0 t=1 month t=2 months t=3 months t=6 months t=0 t=1 month t=2 months t=3 months t=6 months 3M Alder? Medium- Medium-5% Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Imiquimod smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth High High Medium High Medium Graceway Aided' 5% Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Medium-Imiquimod smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth High High High High Medium Medium- and Glossy and Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, very Me Medium- Medium-Low 257(1%) smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth Medium High High High viscosity Glossy, very Glossy, very Glossy, Glossy, Glossy, slightly slightly slightly slightly slightly 110 textured texturedtextured textured textured High High High High Medium Glossy and Glossy, Very Glossy, Very Glossy, Very Medium-smooth, some Glossy and slightly slightly slightly Medium- Medium-250 aeration textured textured textured textured Medium High High High Medium Medium- Medium-Very glossy Very glossy Very glossy Very glossy Very glossy Medium-182 and smooth and smooth and smooth and smooth and smooth High High High High High Glossy, Glossy, Glossy, very Glossy, Glossy, Medium-slightly slightly slightly slightly slightly Medium-High Glossy, Glossy, slightly Glossy, slightly Glossy, Medium- Medium- Medium-Glossy and slightly textured, textured, slightly 123 smooth textured smoothed out smoothed out textured High High High High Medium Glossy, smooth with Glossy, Glossy and Glossy and slight Glossy, slightly Medium-124 smooth smooth smooth textured Medium Medium Medium High Low aeration Glossy, Glossy, Glossy, Glossy, Glossy, Medium- Medium- Medium- Medium-slightly slightly slightly slightly slightly High High High High High textured textured textured textured textured Glossy, Glossy, very Glossy and Glossy and slightly slightly Glossy and slightly slightly Medium-197 textured textured Medium High High High High textured textured textured Glossy, smooth Glossy and Glossy and Glossy and Glossy and Medium- Medium- Medium-slight 183 smooth smooth smooth smooth High High High High Low aeration Glossy, very Smooth, 126 Slightly slightly slightly Glossy and textured, Low textured sheen viscosity , Very glossy Pbo 1 and smooth Very glossy Very glossy Glossy and Low Medium- Medium- Low Low Glossy and xrifl pnooth and cmnoth smooth 1 mu 1 ow smooth Imiquimod Appearance spatula Test (25 C sample only) Visual Viscosity (25 C sample only) Formulation t = 0 1=1 month 1=2 months 1=3 months 1=6 months t=0 t=1 month t=2 months 1=3 months t=6 months v Glossy and Glossy and Glossy and Glossy,tlery slighy Glossy and Medium- Medium- Medium-Pbo2 smooth smooth smooth textured smooth Low Medium Low low Low Glossy, very Glossy, very slightly textured slightly textured but smoothed out but smoothed Glossy and Glossy and Glossy and Medium- Medium-Medium-out Pbo3 smooth smooth smooth Low Low Low Low Medium Smooth Glossy and Glassy and Glossy and Glossy and cream high Medium-Medium-Pbo4 smooth smooth smooth smooth sheen Low Medium Low Low Low Table 24. Stability Data for 10 Formulations, i.e., Formulations 116, 117, 120, 124, 188, 184, 189, 235, 254 and 255, rejected after 1 Month Stability, with respect to the Spatula Test, Visual Viscosity and Particle Size (as determined by microscopy).
Formulation Spatula Test Visual Viscosity Majority of particle size ( M) T= 0 T=1 T= 0 T=1 T= 0 T=1 Month Month Month 116 Glossy, Glossy, Medium Medium- 10 10 textured textured High 117 Glossy, Glossy, Medium- Medium- <10 <10 slightly slightly High High textured textured 254 Smooth with Smooth, High Medium-<10 <10 matt matt High appearance 120 Smooth, Smooth, Very High Very High <10 <10 matt matt appearance, some aeration 235 Glossy, Glossy, Medium- Medium <50 <50 textured but very slightly Low does textured but smooth out does smooth out Formulation Spatula Test Visual Viscosity Majority of particle size ( M) T= 0 T=1 T= 0 T=1 T= 0 T=1 Month Month Month 188 Glossy and Glossy Medium- High <10 <10 textured and Low textured 189 Glossy, very Glossy, High Very High <10 <10 slightly slightly textured textured 184 Glossy, Glossy, High High <10 <10 slightly slightly textured textured 255 Glossy and Glossy High High 10 <10 smooth and smooth 124 Glossy, very Glossy, very Medium- Medium- <10 <10 slightly slightly High High textured textured Table 25. pH Stability Data for 10 Imiquimod Formulations, i.e., Formulations 116, 117, 120, 124, 188, 184, 189, 235, 254 and 255, Rejected after 1 Month Stability.
pH
Formulation Identity T = 0 T = 1 Month 116 5.0 4.7 117 4.5 4.5 254 4.7 4.7 120 4.5 4.5 235 4.5 4.5 188 4.7 4.7 189 4.7 4.7 Formulation pH
Identity T = 0 T = 1 Month 184 4.7 4.7 255 4.5 4.5 124 4.5 4.5 Table 26. Viscosity Stability Data for 10 Imiquimod Formulations, i.e., Formulations 116, 117, 120, 124, 188, 184, 189, 235, 254 and 255, Rejected after 1 Month Stability Crossover G' Brookfield (cps) Bohlin Viscosity (cps) Formulation Identity T= 0 T= 0 T= 0 T= 1 T = 0 T = 1 Month Month 116 9.0 478 601867 63500 15350 13300 117 14.0 1151 1216667 1281000 254 10.3 1399 1476667 1423000 120 15.3 884 1416667 1393000 235 6.0 134 245333 313000 188 14.0 708 1141333 1254000 20350 20750 189 34.8 1037 1344333 1463000 184 23.0 1054 1475667 1350000 255 16.0 1488 2483333 1334000 124 7.0 561 849000 663000 (F) Brookfield Viscosity Stability Results of Formulations In Table 27, Brookfield viscosity measurements are notoriously variable and, as such, there are fluctuations in the measurements of the formulations over about a 6 month period when stored at about 25 C. Variations in results are further observed if the spindle or the speed of the spindle rotation is altered. Although the majority of the formulations are measured using the same settings and spindle; the placebo formulations (Pbol, Pbo2, Pbo3 and Pbo4) result in torque measurements below the threshold required for accurate measurements and subsequently readings are inaccurate. Attempts are made to change the settings and spindles; however, results are vastly different and thus unreliable. See also Tables 24-26.

Table 27. Viscosity and Rheology Measurements of Imiquimod Formulations stored at 25 C over a 6 Month Period.
Crossover G(Pa) , (ol Brookfield (cps Bohlin Viscosity (cPs) (basedon3Mmethod) Formulation t=1 t=2 t=3 t=6 t=1 t=2 1=3 t=6 Identity 1=0 t=0 t=0 Month Months Months Months t=0 Month Months Months Months 3MAIdarag5% 507 123 660333 623000 337000 428833 166233 Imiquimod Graceay Aldarag 716 10.5 1108667 1109000 587667 768566 5% Imiquimod 257(1%) 352 10.52 642667 600000 220333 351566 . 13600 110 782 11.5 87100 119000 , 782333 619300 366067 16400 14950 10587 , 5890 182 702 8.5 693067 1097000 904667 523033 273233 195 692 15 1141333 ,1293000 779333 618133 381700 17000 17600 123 510 10.8 804000 773000 386333 701500 199933 125 485 8.5 603000 707000 429667 412133 127067 256 667 7.3, 1126000 958000 697667 757523 249500 19400 197 646 14 1082667 1377000 613667 607366 274400 , 17750 183 719 10.3 693333 839000 596000 332900 188000 12739 14749 10856.5 8789.5 PBOI 306 11 85000 = = = 12100 14450 7500 7969 2508.3 6452.5 2617.6 PB03 305 11.5 117000 12200 13850 9000 8395 3256.5 PB04 227800 = 10350 7953 5511 3550 results un-reliable and not presented as the torque was out of range (due to low viscosity) for the Brookfield viscometer using the settings and spindle used for all the other samples. Alternative spindles and settings were investigated; however, the results were vastly different than previous readings.
** no recorded measurements, as test was only required for initial formulations choice and development.

(G) Bohlin viscosity Results Also as shown in Table 27, the Bohlin viscosity results are in contrast to the results of the Brookfield viscosity and appear to be more consistent for all formulations. A
fall in the viscosity is observed for 257 (1%) and placebo formulations, Pbo 1 -4, over the 6 month stability study, whereby the viscosity falls by approximately 50%. All formulations are within the range of the specifications for the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream formulation (2000 to 35,000 cps). See also Tables 24-26.
(H) pH Stability of Formulations In Table 28, it reports that the specification for all formulations that are tested, fall within the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream specifications (pH 4.0 to 5.5). A slight variation in pH is observed over the 6 month period for all of the formulations. See also Tables 24-26.
Table 28. ph for Imiquimod Formulations when Stored at about 25 C and about 40 C over a 6 Month Period. Grey Areas Indicate No Test Is Performed.
PH
Formulation t= 0 t=1 month t=-2 months t=3 months t=6 months 3M Aldara 5%
4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.3 4.1 Imiquimod Graceway Aldara 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.5 5% Imiquimod 257(1%) 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.1 4.1 3.9 ' 110 5 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.4 4.5 4.3*
250 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.2 4 4.2 4.1 182 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.3 4.3 195 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.5 4.5 123 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.3 4.1 4.3 125 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.1 4.1 256 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.4 4.3 4.3 197 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.3 183 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.1 126 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1 4.1 PH
Formulation t= 0 t=1 month t=2 months t=3 months t=6 months Pbol 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.0 4.0 , Pbo2 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 Pbo3 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 Pbo4 4.5 4.2 4.5 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0 * 30 C sample analyzed as the 40 C sample had phase separated (I) Preservative efficacy test Table 29 reports final viable counts of organism inoculations that are added to the formulations.
Table 29. Total Viable Counts that are obtained for the Organism Inoculates into the Imiquimod Formulations Mimi for 182 and Cfu/ml for 126 and Organism 110 Pbo4 Staphylococcus aureus 2.4E+08 3.1E+08 Escherichia coli 1.7E+08 2.1E+08 Pseudomonas 9.0E+07 1.1E+08 aeruginosa Candida albicans 1.0E+08 1.1E+08 Aspergillus niger 1.7E+07 1.6E+08 Table 30 shows colony forming unit count (cfu) for Staphylococcus aureus after PET
validation is performed on two formulations stored at about 2 - 8 C.

Table 30. Viable counts that are obtained for Staphylococcus aureus that are Inoculated Formulations after PET Validation Imiquimod Suspension Dilution Viable count (cfu/m1) Formulation fluid 1 ml in 9 ml 2.20E+08 DIE broth 0.1 ml in 0.9 ml 2.80E+08 1 ml in 9 ml 1.00E+03 Ringer's solution 0.1 ml in 0.9 ml 1.50E+03 1 ml in 9 ml 2.30E+08 D/E broth 0.1 ml in 0.9 ml 2.60E+08 1 ml in 9 ml 1.00E+03 Ringer's solution 0.1 ml in 0.9 ml 1.40E+03 The preservative efficacy test ("PET") is a procedure used to demonstrate antimicrobial activity of a formulation with respect to the preservative system used. In Table 31, cell counts that are recovered from the inoculated formulations at various time points are reported. The data shows that sufficient log reductions are present in the formulations at about 2-8 C and about 40 C and meet the requirements that are specified in both the USP and EP.

Table 31. Colony Forming Unit Counts that are recovered (Cfu/MI) for Each Organism from the Imiquimod Formulations, over 28 Days Organisms recovered- (cfu/ml) Pass/
Formulation Organism 0 h 24 h 48 h 7 days 19 days 21 days 28 days Fail .. , S. aureus 3.10E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
Pbo4 E. coil 5.00E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
STORAGE: Ps. aeruginosa 9.00E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

a alhicans 5.00E+04 1.80E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
A. niger 1.60E+05 6.00E+03 2.50E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 ,.._ 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
S. aureus 1.70E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
E. coil 6.00E+03 0.00E+00 G.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
Pbo4 STORAGE: 40 C Ps. aeruginosa 1.30E+04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
_ C. albicans 2.60E+04 4.10E+03 1.30E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
A niger 3.00E+05 1.70E+04 3.30E+03_ 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS C1 S. aureus 5.70E+04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
_ 126 E. coil 1.20E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS n.) a) STORAGE: Ps. aeruginasa 1.40E+04 0.00E+00 , 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 , 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS lt7 -.3 C. albicans 3.50E-W4 _ 5.00E+03 4.00E+02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS l0 A. niger 1.00E+05 2.10E+04 2.50E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E-F00 0.00E+00 PASS ---.3 CO
S. aureus 2.10E+04 0.00E+00 _ 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 _ 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
n.) E. coil 5.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS 0 126 ' STORAGE 40 C Ps. aeruginosa 1.50E+04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

:
i C- albicans 3.80E+04 3.60E+03 2.50E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS 0 W
A. niger 1.00E+05 2.90E+03 1.60E+03 , 0.00E+00 , 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 , .
W
S. aureus 1.00E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS 0 110 E. soli 7.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 , 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
STORAGE: Ps. aeruginosa 8.00E+04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

C. albi cans 8.00E+05 2.60E+04 7.00E+03 7.00E+01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 , 0.00E+00 PASS
A. niger 6.00E+04 9.00E+04 2.30E+04 7.00E+03 3.70E+02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 , PASS
_ S. aureus 6.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 ., 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
E. coil 8.00E+04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00_ 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

STORAGE: 40 C Ps. aeruginosa 7.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
C. alhicans 1.60E+05 1.50E+04 4.00E+03 2.20E+02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
A. niger 7.00E+04 6.00E+04 2.50E+04 1.90E+04 1.90E+02 0.00E+00 0.043E+00 PASS
S. aureus 1.70E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
182 E colt 1.70E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
STORAGE: Ps. aeruginosa 7.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
2 - 8 C C. alhicans 3.00E+05 2.10E+04 1.90E+03 3.00E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
_ A. niger 4.00E+05 5.00E+03 2.40E+03 3.00E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
S aureus 1.50E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+130 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

STORAGE.* 40 C E coil 1.10E+06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS

Organisms recovered- (cfu/ml) Pass/
Formulation Organism Oh 24 h 48 h 7 days 19 days 21 days 28 days Fail Ps. aeruginosa 6.00E+05 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+OG PASS
C. albicans 7.00E+05 3.00E+04 3.00E+03 7.00E+03 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
A. niger 7.00E+05 6.00E+03 2.70E+03 1.70E-4-03 1.20E+02 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 PASS
ci n.) IfCO
n.) (J) Test Item Release Studies through Synthetic Membranes In FIG. 3, it indicates that there is a trend between the concentrations of imiquimod present in the formulation as compared to the amount that is released. This is supported by the results presented in FIG. 4 and the corresponding statistical analysis, where it can be seen that that the higher the imiquimod concentration in the formulation, the greater the release of imiquimod. However, formulation 183 (3.75% w/w imiquimod) gives a statistically (at a 95%
confidence level) greater cumulative release of imiquimod when it is compared to the 2.5% w/w formulations. All of the 5% w/w formulations, i.e., Aldara 5% imiquimod cream batch, Aldara 5% imiquimod cream Graceway batch, and Aldara 5% imiquimod cream Sachet), result in significantly (p<0.05) higher amounts of imiquimod released over a 3 h time period in comparison to 1%, 2.5% and 3.75% w/w imiquimod formulations. There is no statistical difference (p>0.05) in the total cumulative amount of imiquimod that is released from any of the 3.75% w/w imiquimod formulations; likewise there is also no statistical difference (p>0.05) from the 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations.
ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): mean total cumulative amount that is released ( /cm2) after 3 h (from results that are presented in FIG. 3):
Source DF SS MS
Formulation 12 86439222 7203268 19.40 0.000 Error 39 14484370 371394 Total 51 100923592 S = 609.4 R-Sq = 85.65% R-Sq (adj) = 81.23%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev ---- +
Aldara 3M 5% 4 5332.8 734.2 (----*---) Aldara sachet 4 4605.5 626.9 (---*---) 110 4 1862.8 185.9 250 4 1845.6 206.4 182 4 3161.3 774.9 (---*---) 195 4 3046.2 988.2 (---*---) 123 4 2094.9 674.6 125 4 2134.1 369.0 (---*---) 256 4 2918.7 59.5 (---*----) 197 4 2766.0 929.1 (---*----) 183 4 3453.2 564.4 (---*---) MedPharm Aldara 4 4813.3 660.7 (---*---) 257% 4 586.9 170.2 (---*---) + ---------------------------------------------- + ------- + ------- + --Pooled StDev = 609.4 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): mean total cumulative amount that is released ( g/cm2) after 3 h for each concentration of imiquimod in the formulations that are tested (from results that are presented in FIG. 4):
Source DF SS MS F P
Formulation 3 83957708 27985903 79.18 0.000 Error 48 16965878 353456 Total 51 100923586 S = 594.5 R-Sq = 83.19% R-Sq (adj) = 82.14%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev ---- + ------- + ------- + -- +

1% 4 586.9 170.2 (---*---) 2.50% 16 1984.4 389.9 3.75% 20 3069.1 702.3 (*-) 5.00% 12 4917.2 689.4 (--*-) + ---------------------------------------------- ------- ------- --Pooled StDev = 594.5 The result for the rate of release presented in Table 32, indicate that the higher the amount of imiquimod in the formulation, the faster the rate of release of imiquimod. Similar to the results of the cumulative amount permeated, there is no statistical difference (p>0.05) between the results for the 2.5% w/w imiquimod formulations (Table 32 and FIG.
12) and likewise for the 3.75% w/w imiquimod formulations (Table 32 and FIG. 13). See also FIGS. 11 and 14.
Table 32. Comparison of Mean Flux of Imiquimod (pg/Cm2) over a 3 H Period for Membrane Release Tests (Mean Sd, Where N=4) that are Presented as a Function of Time from 15 Min To 3 H.
Flux Vtime Formulations Mean sd Graceway Aldara 5%
3720.65 569.38 imiquimod 3M Aldara 5% Imiquimod 3873.38 479.64 Cream Bulk 3M Aldara 5% Imiquimod 3319.56 494.32 Cream sachet 257 (1%) 504.40 148.43 123 (2.5%) 1539.39 482.36 250 (2.5%) 1396.68 173.65 125 (2.5%) 1592.98 324.51 110(2.5%) 1518.29 151.17 182 (3.75%) 2410.03 599.08 195 (3.75%) 2310.06 597.59 256 (3.75%) 2424.87 28.09 197(3.75%) 2116.53 723.60 183 (3.75%) 2516.84 357.41 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): mean amount of imiquimod released ( g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for the membrane release studies (mean sd, where n=4) presented as a function of Vtime from 15 min to 3 h (from results presented in Table 32):
Source DF SS MS F P
Formulation 12 45353042 3779420 19.05 0.000 Error 39 77392670 198443 Total 51 53092309 S = 445.5 R-Sq = 85.42% R-Sq (adj) = 80.94%
Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev --- + -------- + ----- + ---- +

3M Aldan. 5% 4 3873.4 479.6 (--*---) Imiquimod Cream Bulk 3M Aldara 5% 4 3319.6 494.3 (---*--) Imiquimod Cream Sachet 110 4 1518.3 151.2 (---*--) 250 4 1396.7 173.6 (---*--) 182 4 2410.0 599.1 (---*---) 195 4 2310.1 597.6 (---*---) 123 4 1539.4 482.4 (---*---) 125 4 1593.0 324.5 (--*----) 256 4 2424.9 28.1 (---*---) 197 4 2116.5 723.6 (---*--) 183 4 2516.8 357.4 (---*---) Graceway 5% 4 3720.6 569.4 (---*----) Imiquimod Cream 257 1% 4 504.4 148.4 (---*---) + --------------------------------------------- + -------- + ----- + ----Pooled StDev = 445.5 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod released ( g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for the 3M Aldan. 5%
imiquimod cream lkg batch, the 3M Aldara 5% imiquimod cream sachet, the Graceway Aldara 5%
imiquimod cream lkg batch and 257, 1% Imiquimod formulation (mean sd, where n=4) -refer to FIG. 11:
Source DF SS MS F P
Formulation 3 57378855 19126285 54.74 0.000 Error 12 4192460 349372 Total 15 61571315 S = 591.1 R-Sq = 93.19% R-Sq (adj) = 91.49%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St.Dev + ---------------- + ------ + ------- + ---3M Aldara 5% 4 5332.8 734.2 (---* ) Aldara sachet 4 4605.5 626.9 (---*---) MedPharm Aldara 4 4813.3 660.7 (---*---) U2F 1% 4 586.9 170.2 (---*---) + ----------------------------------------------- + ------ + ------- + ---Pooled StDev = 591.1 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod released (j.1g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for 2.5% imiquimod formulations 123, 250, 125 and 110 (mean sd, where n=4) - refer to FIG. 12:
Source DF SS MS F P
Formulation 3 274778 91593 0.55 0.659 Error 12 2004990 167083 Total 15 2279769 S = 408.8 R-Sq = 12.05% R-Sq (adj) = 0.00%
Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St.Dev -+ -- + -- + -- +
GW002 4 1862.8 185.9 -- ( ------ * ) GW008 4 1845.6 206.4 -- ( ------ * ) GW037 4 2094.9 674.6 -- ( ----- * ) GW039 4 2134.1 369.0 -- ( ------ * ) -+ -- + -- + --- + --Pooled StDev = 408.8 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Comparison of the mean amount of imiquimod released ( g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for 3.75% imiquimod formulations 182, 195, 256, 197 and 183 (mean sd, where n=4) - refer to FIG. 13:
Source DF SS MS F P
Formulation 4 1084063 271016 0.49 0.743 Error 15 8286917 552461 Total 19 9370981 S = 743.3 R-Sq = 11.57% R-Sq (adj) = 0.00%
Individual 95% Cis For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St.Dev -- + -- + -- + +-GW030 4 3161.3 774.9 -- ( --- * ) GW033 4 3046.2 988.2 -- ( -- * ) GW040 4 2918.7 59.5 ( -- * ---- ) GW041 4 2766.0 929.1 -- ( ---- * ) GW042 4 3453.2 -------- 564.4 -- + -- + -- + +-Pooled StDev = 743.3 As discussed under FIG. 14 in the Brief Description of the Drawings, FIG. 14 shows a comparison of the mean amount of imiguimod released (p.g/cm2) over a 3 hour period for the 2.5% ( A), 3.75% (.), 3M Aldara imiquimod cream batch (a), Graceway Aldara imiquimod cream 1 kg batch (a) and formulation 257 Imiquimod formulations (a) (mean sd, where n=4).
Based on the results; it appears that the greater the amount of imiquimod in the formulation, the faster and greater the total amount of imiquimod that is released, suggesting that the amount and rate of release are concentration dependant.
(K) In vitro Skin Permeation Study (1) Homogeneity Manufacture of the formulations (about 100g batches) is first performed, which batches are then mixed with the radioactive labelled material. The batches are prepared by omitting about 1.38g of isostearic acid which is added with the radio-labelled imiquimod. The homogeneity of the test formulations, see Table 33, is measured as described in under Homogeneity Control above and all compositions are confirmed to meet the criterion (<10%
CV).
Table 33. Homogeneity of Radioactivity for Imiquimod Formulations Formulation % CV
Graceway Aldara 5% Imiquimod Cream 0.93 3M Aldara 5% Imiquimod Cream 1.50 182 0.80 195 2.39 256 1.17 197 0.07 183 1.54 110 0.71 250 2.53 123 1.89 125 1.53 126 2.55 257 (1%) 2.30 (2) Franz cell study The data that is shown in Table 34 is the actual amount of imiquimod that is recovered for each formulation from the various matrices, which is also represented graphically in FIG. 5.

FIG. 6 represents the total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for each formulation in the epidermis, dermis and receiver fluid combined.

Table 34. Amount of Imiquimod that is Recovered following Mass Balance Investigation Amount of imiquimod recovered SEM (4) Percentage Replicate Percentage total Formulations . imiquimod s (n) Receiver Fluid Unabsorbed Dose Stratum Comeum Epidermis Dennis recovered Graceway Aldara 5%
Imiquimod Cream 5% 6 0.03 0.01 127.06 + 9.58 80.78 11.67 2.90 0.72 2.76 + 0.70 85.24 + 5.15 3M Aldara 5% Imiquimod +
Cream 5% 4 0.05 0.03 132.75 , 17.62 74.37 , +
10.59 6.60 + 1.91 . 3.96 0.41 86.92 + 4.16 1823.75% 3.75% 6 0.08 + 0.06 85.75 + 3.93 46.85 +
5.51 3.65 1 0.85 6.94 2.22 76.25 1.82 1953.75% 3.75% 4 0.08 0.07 74.19 6.90 57.41 +
11.46 7.06 2.29 2.47 0.87 75.16 5.12 2563.75% . 3.75% 5 0.16 0.06 71.73 7.22 33.41 +4.77 1.99 0.71 9.03 2.37 , 61.91 3.95 1973.75% 3.75% 5 0.06 + 0.03 110.54 6.22 41.61 + 6.54 2.21 + 0.36 2.53 + 0.91 83.54 + 3.92 o N.) cn 1833.75% 3.75% 4 0.02 0.01 113.84 11.63 40.99 6.99 3.26 0.53 5.11 2.32 86.88 6.68 l0 l0 1102.5% 2.5% 6 0.00 0.00 52.92 3.96 33.96 3.43 3.25 0.70 2.32 *0.44 73.82 +4.64 co 250 2.5% 2.5% 5 0.00 + 0.00 82.46 + 2.94 28.30 3.67 2.35 0.68 1.17 + 0.30 91.25 + 3.93 N.) , 123 2.5% 2.5% 5 0.01 + 0.01 68.33 3.18 35.93 + 10.40 4.20 + 1.69 1.80 0.32 88.04 7.95 1-, 125 2.5% 2.5% 6 0.02 +0.01 72.82 3.92 28.88 4.41 1.12 0.42 1.52 0.42 83.32 2.44 0 o1 126 2.5% 2.5% 5 0.01 +0.00 64.00 5.27 29.59 4.97 2.36 0.40 4.44 1.62 80.15 6.61 w w1 257 1% 1% 4 0.01 0.00 28.88 4.60 12.49 3.75 0.42 0:14 1.54 1.05 86.98 3.40 o The only data rejected from that presented in Table 34, FIG 5 and FIG. 6 are obvious outliers that are observed on the basis of cell failure.
The average data for the 5%, 1%, 3.75% and 2.5% w/w formulations showing the amount of imiquimod that is recovered from the unabsorbed fraction, in the Stratum corneum and in the epidermis, dermis and receiver fluid combined are shown in FIG. 7. This data shows that there is a linear dose release between the amount of imiquimod applied and recovery in each of the matrices. See also Table 35 for stability of calibration standards in spent receiver fluid and Tables 36-40-for statistical analysis.
Table 35. Stability of Calibration Standards in Spent Receiver Fluid (Stored In HPLC
Crimp Top Vials at Each Temperature (Where Recovery was Compared To T=0) 48h % recovered in Spent receiver fluid Standard (ug/ml) Spent receiver fluid: Fridge RT 37 C
105.5 88.242 88.546 91.704 84.4 84.561 84.421 85.629 52.75 91.776 92.027 93.779 42.2 Full thickness + placebo 83.976 84.144 86.439 21.1 84.584 85.162 88.000 10.55 88.307 86.897 90.798 5.275 90.260 87.973 86.134 105.5 90.545 92.275 92.278 84.4 98.841 99.790 101.010 52.75 92.317 92.152 95.282 42.2 Full thickness 95.103 95.805 95.939 21.1 91.876 91.968 93.847 10.55 94.989 93.522 97.826 5.275 94.586 95.232 90.611 105.5 83.833 84.515 84.903 84.4 95.620 96.033 98.178 52.75 85.635 88.169 86.906 42.2 Epidermal sheet + placebo 93.077 92.904 95.095 21.1 101.831 105.389 105.213 10.55 84.046 85.095 89.945 5.275 88.881 86.540 86.828 105.5 90.465 92.089 91.501 84.4 81.350 82.276 82.694 52.75 87.669 89.096 90.943 42.2 Epidermal sheet 85.716 86.340 89.641 21.1 95.828 97.098 97.470 10.55 93.180 94.971 97.099 5.275 88.938 91.447 85.995 Tables 36-40. Statistical Analysis for Amount of Imiquimod that is Recovered following Mass Balance Test ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Amount of imiquimod that is recovered following mass balance test from receiver fluid (from results that are presented in FIG. 5) is shown in Table 36:
Table 36 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 14 0.12075 0.01006 1.84 0.066 Error 52 0.28455 0.00547 Total 64 0.40530 S = 0.07397 R-Sq = 29.79% R-Sq (adj) = 13.59%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev ----- + ---- + ---- + -- +
3M Aldara 5% 4 0.05250 0.05909 ( --- * ---- ) Imiquimod Cream 110 2.5% 6 0.00000 0.00000 ( -- * -- ) 250 2.5% 5 0.00400 0.00894 ( -- * -- ) 182 3.75% 6 0.07833 0.14400 ( --- * ---- ) 195 3.75% 4 0.08250 0.14500 ( --- * --- ) 123 2.5% 5 0.01200 0.01095 ( -- * -- ) 125 2.5% 6 0.02333 0.02503 ( -- * -- ) 256 3.75% 5 0.15600 0.14064 ( ---- * -- ) 197 3.75% 5 0.05800 0.06611 ( --- * -- ) 183 3.75% 4 0.01750 0.01708 ( -- * -- ) 126 5 0.00600 0.00894 ( ---- * ---- ) Graceway Aldara 6 0.02833 0.03312 ( ---- * ---- ) 5% Imiquimod Cream 257 (1%) 4 0.00500 0.00577 ( -- * -- ) -------------------------------------------- + --- + ---- + -- +
0.000 0.080 0.160 0.240 Pooled StDev = 0.07397 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Amount of imiquimod that is recovered following mass balance test from unabsorbed dose (from results that are presented in FIG. 5) is shown in Table 37:
Table 37 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 12 50777 4231 16.85 0.000 Error 52 13071 251 Total 64 63848 S = 15.85 R-Sq = 79.53% R-Sq (adj) = 74.80%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + -- + ---- + ------ +-3M Aldara 5% 4 132.75 35.25 ( -- *----) Imiquimod Cream 1102.5% 6 52.93 9.69 (---*---) 250 2.5% 5 82.46 6.57 (----*---) 182 3.75% 6 85.75 9.63 (--*---) 195 3.75% 4 74.19 13.80 (---*----) 123 2.5% 5 68.33 7.10 (----*---) 125 2.5% 6 72.82 9.61 (---*---) 256 3.75% 5 71.73 16.15 (---*----) 1973.75% 5 110.54 13.91 (---*---) 183 3.75% 4 113.85 23.27 (----*---) 126 5 63.98 11.78 (---s---) Graceway Aldara 6 127.06 23.46 (--*---) 5% Imiquimod Cream 257 (1%) 4 28.88 9.20 (---*----) -------------------------------------------- + ----- + ---- + ------ +-Pooled StDev = 15.85 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Amount of imiquimod that is recovered following mass balance test from Stratum corneum (from results that are presented in FIG. 5) is shown in Table 38:
Table 38 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 12 21479 1790 6.72 0.000 Error 52 13848 266 Total 64 35327 S = 16.32 R-Sq = 60.80% R-Sq (adj) = 51.75%
Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev + ----- + ------ + ------ + -----3M Aldara 5% 4 74.38 21.17 ( -- * -- ) Imiquimod Cream 1102.5% 6 33.96 8.41 (----*----) 250 2.5% 5 28.30 8.21 ( -- * -- ) 182 3.75% 6 46.85 13.50 ( -- * -- ) 195 3.75% 4 57.41 22.92 ( -- * -- ) 123 2.5% 5 35.93 23.25 ( -- * -- ) 125 2.5% 6 28.88 10.80 ( -- * -- ) 256 3.75% 5 33.41 10.67 ( -- * -- ) 197 3.75% 5 41.61 14.62 ( -- * -- ) 183 3.75% 4 41.00 13.97 ( -- * -- ) 126 5 29.59 11.11 ( -- * -- ) Graceway Aldara 6 80.78 28.60 ( -- * -- ) 5% Imiquimod Cream 257 (1%) 4 12.49 7.49 ( -- * -- ) -+ --------------------------------------------- + ------ + ------- + ----Pooled StDev = 16.32 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Amount of imiquimod that is recovered following mass balance test from epidermis (from results that are presented in FIG. 5) is shown in Table 39:
Table 39 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 12 187.78 15.65 3.26 0.002 Error 52 249.79 4.80 Total 64 437.57 S = 2.192 R-Sq = 42.91% R-Sq (adj) = 29.74%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + ---- + --- + ---- +
3M Aldara 5% 4 6.600 3.823 ( -- * -- ) Imiquimod Cream 1102.5% 6 3.248 1.717 ( -- * -- ) 250 2.5% 5 2.350 1.514 ( -- * -- ) 182 3.75% 6 3.643 2.083 ( -- * -- ) 195 3.75% 4 7.055 4.580 ( -- * -- ) 123 2.5% 5 4.196 3.782 ( -- * -- ) 125 2.5% 6 1.123 1.039 ( -- * -- ) 256 3.75% 5 1.990 1.588 ( -- * -- ) 197 3.75% 5 2.208 0.797 ( -- * -- ) 183 3.75% 4 3.260 1.053 ( -- * -- ) 126 5 2.360 0.903 ( -- * -- ) Graceway Aldara 6 2.895 1.752 ( -- * -- ) 5% Imiquimod Cream 257 (1%) 4 0.415 0.273 ( -- * ) -------------------------------------------- + ----- + --- + --- +-0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 Pooled StDev = 2.192 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Amount of imiquimod that is recovered following mass balance test from dermis (from results that are presented in FIG. 5) is shown in Table 40:
Table 40 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 12 340.72 28.39 3.29 0.001 Error 52 448.34 8.62 Total 64 789.06 S = 2.936 R-Sq = 43.18% R-Sq (adj) = 30.07%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + ---- + ----- + ------ +-3M Aldara 5% 4 3.960 0.825 ( --- * -- ) Imiquimod Cream 1102.5% 6 2.323 1.068 ( -- * -- ) 250 2.5% 5 1.164 0.663 ( -- * -- ) 182 3.75% 6 6.937 5.445 ( -- * -- ) 195 3.75% 4 2.473 1.733 ( --- * -- ) 123 2.5% 5 1.796 0.715 ( -- * -- ) 125 2.5% 6 1.518 1.020 ( -- * -- ) 256 3.75% 5 9.030 5.305 ( -- * -- ) 197 3.75% 5 2.532 2.036 ( --- * -- ) 183 3.75% 4 5.110 4.638 ( -- * -- ) 126 5 4.436 3.626 ( -- * -- ) Graceway Aldara 6 2.758 1.721 ( -- * -- ) 5% Imiquimod Cream 257 (1%) 4 1.533 2.099 ( -- * ) ------------------------------------------- + ---- ----- + --- +-0.0 3.5 7.0 10.5 Pooled StDev = 2.936 The results that are presented in FIG. 6, indicate that the delivery of the imiquimod into the receiver fluid, epidermis and dermis combined from formulations 182, 195 and 256 are similar to the Aldara 5% imiquimod cream formulation when comparing averages.
With respect to the statistical analysis, there is no statistical difference (p>0.05) between 110 (2.5%), 126 (2.5%), 123 (2.5%), 182, (3.75%), 195 (3.75%), 256 (3.75%), 197 (3.75%) and 183 (3.75%) when compared to Aldara 5% imiquimod cream formulation in the amount of imiquimod that is recovered from the receiver fluid, epidermis and dermis combined.
In Table 41, ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level) are presented:
Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for each formulation in the receiver fluid, epidermis and dermis combined (from the results that are presented in FIG. 6:
Table 41 Source DF SS MS
Cl 12 340.72 28.39 3.29 0.001 Error 52 448.34 8.62 Total 64 789.06 S = 3.819 R-Sq = 43.05% R-Sq (adj) = 29.91%
Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean --------------------------- St. Dev +-257 (1%) 4 1.958 2.357 -- ( -- * ) 1102.5% 6 5.572 2.706 --- * -- ) 250 2.5% 5 3.524 1.445 -- * -- ) 123 2.5% 5 6.010 4.296 ---- * -- ) 125 2.5% 6 2.663 0.837 -- ( -- * ) 126 2.5% 5 6.804 3.538 ------ * -- ) 182 3.75% 6 10.662 -------------------- 6.441 -- * -- ) 195 3.75% 4 9.608 5.392 --------- * -- ) 256 3.75% 5 11.180 --------------------- 5.770 -- * -- ) 197 3.75% 5 4.800 1.749 --- * -- ) 183 3.75% 4 8.388 3.666 -------- * -- ) Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev ---------------- -+ +-Graceway Aldara 6 5.682 2.671 5% Imiquimod Cream 257(1%) 4 10.613 4.211 -+ --------------------------------------------0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 Pooled StDev = 3.819 The results that are presented in FIG. 7 and statistical analysis in Tables 42-46 indicate that there is a distinct dose proportionate trend between the amount of imiquimod that is recovered from each of the matrices with respect to the concentration of imiquimod in the formulation for both unabsorbed and Stratum comeum. The trend in this data, is also observed for the epidermis (with respect to average values in the statistical analysis).
In Tables 42-46, statistical analysis for the total amount of imiquimod recovered from each of the matrices (1%, 2.5%, 3.75% and 5% w/w formulations) ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for imiquimod concentration combined from each of the matrices from unabsorbed dose (from results presented in FIG. 7) in Table 42:
Table 42 Source DF SS MS
Cl 3 44198 14733 35.53 0.000 Error 61 25293 415 Total 64 69491 S = 20.36 R-Sq = 63.60% R-Sq (adj) = 61.81%

Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + ---- + ---- + ----- +-1% 4 28.88 9.20 -- ( -- * ) 2.5% 27 64.08 16.24 (-*--) 3.75% 24 90.75 22.48 (-*-) 5% 10 129.33 26.99 (---*---) ---------------------------------------------- + ----- + ---- + ----- +-Pooled StDev = 20.36 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for imiquimod concentration combined from each of the matrices from Strateum corneum (from results presented in FIG. 7) in Table 43:
Table 43 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 3 19744 6581 25.76 0.000 Error 61 15583 255 Total 64 35327 S = 15.98 R-Sq = 55.89% R-Sq (adj) = 53.72%
Individual 95% C1s For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev --- -+ ---- + ---- + ----- +
1% 4 12.49 7.49 -- ( -- * ) 2.5% 27 3L34 12.57 (--*-) 3.75% 24 43.74 15.85 (-*--) 5% 10 78.22 24.79 (---*---) -+ --------------------------------------------- + ---- + ---- + -----Pooled StDev = 15.98 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for imiquimod concentration combined from each of the matrices from epidermis (from results presented in FIG. 7) in Table 44:
Table 44 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 3 55.25 18.42 2.94 0.040 Error 61 382.32 6.27 Total 64 437.57 S = 2.504 R-Sq = 12.63% R-Sq (adj) = 8.33%
Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + -- + --- + -- +-1% 4 0.415 0.273 ---- ( ---- * ) 2.5% 27 2.621 2.137 (--*---) 3.75% 24 3.505 2.729 (---*---) 5% 10 4.37 3.200 ( -- * -- ) -------------------------------------------- + --- + ---- + -- +
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Pooled StDev = 2.504 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for imiquimod concentration combined from each of the matrices from dermis (from results presented in FIG. 7) in Table 45:
Table 45 Source DF SS MS F P
Cl 3 147.4 49.1 4.67 0.005 Error 61 641.7 10.5 Total 64 789.1 S = 3.243 R-Sq = 18.68% R-Sq (adj)= 14.68%

Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -- + ----- + ---- + --- +-1% 4 1.533 2.099 ------ ( -------- * ) 2.5% 27 2.223 1.974 (----*----) 3.75% 24 5.407 4.694 ( -- * --) 5% 10 3.239 1.502 ( -- * -- ) ------------------------------------------ + ------ + ---- + --- +-0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 Pooled StDev = 3.243 ANOVA statistical analysis (95% confidence level): Total amount of imiquimod that is recovered for imiquimod concentration combined from each of the matrices from receiver fluid (from results presented in FIG. 7) in Table 46:
Table 46 Source DF SS MS F P
CI 3 0.07047 0.02349 4.28 0.008 Error 61 0.33483 0.00549 Total 64 0.40530 S = 0.07409 R-Sq = 17.39% R-Sq (adj) = 13.32%
Individual 95% Cls For Mean Based on Pooled StDev Level N Mean St. Dev -+ -- + -- + -- +
1% 4 0.00500 0.00577 ---- ( -------- * ) 2.5% 27 0.00926 0.01542 ( -- * -- ) 3.75% 24 0.08083 0.11632 ( -- * -- ) 5% 10 0.03800 0.04392 ( -- * -- ) ---------------------------------------- + ------- + --- + --- +--0.050 0.000 0.050 0.100 Pooled StDev = 0.07409 The following Tables 47-59 summarize results for formulations 126, 182 and Pbo4.
Table 47. Stability of Imiquimod in the Formulations. Percentage of imiquimod that is recovered from each formulation compared to theoretical when stored at 25 C
and 40 C
over a 6 month period.
t = 1 month t = 2 months t = 3 months t = 6 months Formulations t = Oh 25 C 40 C 25 C 40 C 25 C 40 C

96.76 0 102.01 98.46 99.00 98.07 101.48 104.39 102.91 182 25 0.01 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.27 1.55 1.16 99.12 0.45 102.37 102.84 104.11 100.02 101.32 99.28 98.43 101.95 + 0 126 0.58 0.45 0.04 0.95 040 3.25 0.55 37 103.02 1.89 Table 48. Stability of Imiquimod in the Formulations. Identification of Imiquimod when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period (confirmed by HPLC).
T = 1 month T = 2 months T = 3 months T = 6 months Formulations T = 0 182 Complies Complies Complies Complies Compiles Complies Complies Compiles Complies 126 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies GWO3OP Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Table 49. Stability of Benzyl Alcohol in the Formulations. Amount of benzyl alcohol that is recovered from each of the formulations when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period.
i = 1 month t = 2 months t = 3 months t = 6 months Formulations t = 0 h 182 2.17 + 0.00 2.17 0.00 1.95 0.01 2.11 0.04 1.97 0.00 1.94 0.01 , 1.82 + 0.04 1.85 + 0.03 1.48 + 0.05 _ PB04 1.93 0.02 1.83 0.06 1.90 0.03 1.91 + 0.01 1.53 0.00 1.81 + 0.01 1.39 0.01 1.71 0.01 1.08 0.02 126 2.00 0.02 2.02 + 0.01 1.89 + 0.01 1.86 + 0.02 1.65 0.02 2.00 + 0.04 1.70 + 0.04 2.01 0.03 1.55 + 0.02 Table 50. Stability of Benzyl Alcohol in the Formulations. Identification of Benzyl alcohol when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period (confirmed by HPLC).
T = 1 month T = 2 months T = 3 months T = 6 months Formulations T = 0 182 Complies Complies Complies Complies Compiles Complies Complies Compiles Complies 126 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies PB04 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Table 51. Stability of Methylparabens in the Formulations. Amount of Methylparabens that are recovered from each of the formulations when the formulations are stored at 25 C
and 40 C over a 6 month period.
t = 1 month t = 2 months t = 3 months t =
6 months Formulations t = 0 h 182 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.002 PB04 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 126 0.20 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.00 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.001 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Table 52. Stability of Methylparabens in the Formulations. Identification of Methylparabens when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period (confirmed by HPLC).
T = 1 month T = 2 months T = 3 months T
= 6 months Formulations T = 0 182 Complies Complies Complies Complies Compiles Complies Complies Compiles Complies 126 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies PB04 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Table 53. Stability of Propylparabens in the Formulations. Amount of Propylparabens that are recovered from each of the formulations when the formulations are stored at 25 C
and 40 C over a 6 month period.
t = 1 month t = 2 months I t = 3 months t = 6 months Formulations t = Oh 25 C 40 C 25 C 40 C 25 C 40 C 25 C

0.019 0.020 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.021 0.022 0.019 0.019 0.0010 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.018 0.018 0.16 0.19 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.018 0020 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.002 0.000 0.018 0.019 0021 0.018 0.019 0.020 0010 0.020 0020 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 Table 54. Stability of Propylparabens in the Formulations.
Identification of Propylparabens when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period (confirmed by HPLC).
T = 1 month T = 2 months T = 3 months T
= 6 months Formulations T = 0 182 Complies Complies Complies Complies Compiles Complies Complies Compiles Complies 126 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies P804 Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Complies Table 55. Microscopic Stability of the Formulations. The results of the particle size for each formulation which is determined by optical microscopy at 25 C over a 6 month period.
Particle size ( M) Formulation t = 0 t=1 Month t=2 Months t=3 Months t=6 Months 182 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PB04 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 126 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Table 56. pH stability of the Formulations. The results of the pH test for each of the formulations when the formulations are stored at 25 C and 40 C over a 6 month period.
Grey area indicate no test was performed.
pH
Formulation t=0 t=1 month I t=2 months t=3 months t=6 months 182 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.3 4.3 PB04 4.5 4.2 4.5 I 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.0 126 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.1 4A
Table 57. Macroscopic stability of the Formulations. The results of the macroscopic appearance test when the formulations are stored at 25 C over a 6 month period.
Appearance spatula Test (25 C sample only) Visual Viscosity (25 C sample only) Formulation t=0 1=1 t=2 1=3 1=6 1=1 1=2 t= 1=6 month months months months t = 0month months months months Very Very Very Very Very glossy Medium- Medium- Medium-182 glossy and glossy and glossy and glossy and High High and High High High smooth smooth smooth smooth smooth Glossy, Smooth, very slightly Glassy Slightly and textured, Glossy Medium Medium Medium Medium .Low.
slightly textured, viscosity smooth sheen textured glossy Smooth Glossy Glossy Glossy Glossy cream Medium Medium-PB04 and and and and Medium Low Low smooth smooth smooth smooth high - Low Low sheen Table 58. Brookfield and Bohlin Viscosity. The results of the viscosity and rheology measurements for the formulations that are stored at 25 C over a 6 month period.
Crossover G*(Pa ) Brookfield (cps) Bohlin Viscosity (cps) (based on 3M method) (0*) Formulation Identity t=2 t-3 t=-6 t=1 t=1 t=2 t=3 t=6 1--3 1-:) t=0 Month Month Month t=0 Month Month Months Months Months S s s 182 702 8.5 693067 18550 16820 126 ** 430100 235066 22810 21250 10572 1678 1273 14749 10856. 8789.
**

p 4** ** 227800 * * * * 1035 7953 5511 * Results not presented as the torque is out of range (due to low viscosity) for the Brookfields viscometer based on the setting and spindle that are used for all the other samples. Alternative spindles and settings are investigated; however, the results are vastly different compared to previous readings.
** no recorded measurements.
Table 59. Identification of 4-hydroxy Imiquimod when the formulations are stored at 25 C
and 40 C over a 6 month period (confirmed by HPLC at 318 nm).
1=13 t=1 month 1=2 months 1=3 months 1=6 months Formulations 182 NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT
0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1%
w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT
0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1%

w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT
0.1% NMT 0.1% NMT 0.1%

w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w w/w Two Phase 3, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multi-center, Efficacy and Safety Studies of 2.5% and 3.75% lmiquimod Creams in the Treatment of External Genital Warts This Example 24 will study a shorter duration treatment regimen utilizing lower concentrations of imiquimod to allow for more frequent dosing. The lower concentrations of imiquimod should permit daily dosing such that the overall short treatment regimen (up to 8 weeks of treatment) could still provide adequate clearing of external genital/perianal warts.
The clinical development program for the formulations of lower strengths of imiquimod will investigate a patient population similar to that evaluated in the development program for Aldara . In addition to lower strengths, the key modification is to the treatment regimen itself, as the treatment with the 2.5% and 3.75% imiquimod creams will be once daily for a maximum of 8 weeks, rather than the currently approved regimen of 3 times per week with Aldara for up to 16 weeks. Each strength will be evaluated vs. placebo to determine the benefit-risk profile with each of these treatment regimen.
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The primary objective of this Example is to compare the efficacy and safety of 2.5%
imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream to placebo cream, applied once daily for up to 8 weeks, in the treatment of external genital warts (EGW).
The secondary objective of this study is to provide information on recurrence of EGW.
DESCRIPTION OF STUDY
This is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter Phase 3 study of 2.5% and 3.75% imiquimod creams in the treatment of EGW. Two investigational treatments will be studied: 2.5% imiquimod cream once-a-day application for a maximum of 8 weeks and 3.75% imiquimod cream once-a-day for a maximum of 8 weeks. The study will consist of a Screening visit and an Evaluation Period including a maximum 8-week Treatment Period and a maximum 8-week No-treatment Period. Subjects with complete clearance at the end of study (EOS) will be followed for a maximum of 12 weeks for recurrence. During the Evaluation Period, subjects will be followed until they have achieved complete clearance of all warts. Any subject determined to have achieved complete wart clearance at any time through the Week 16 visit will enter the maximum 12-week Follow-up Period for evaluation of recurrence. The total study duration is a maximum of 28 weeks from randomization.

Approximately 450 subjects with at least 2 and up to 30 external genital /
perianal warts will be randomized. Subjects will be screened for study eligibility during the 4 weeks prior to randomization. During the Screening Period, the medical history, including genital / perianal wart history and wart treatment history, and demographic information, including sex, age, and race will be recorded. In addition, a physical examination, including vital signs and clinical safety laboratory tests, will be performed for each subject. If clinically indicated, a sexually transmitted diseases (STD) screen may be performed. Subjects with a positive screen for STD
may participate in the study if they otherwise meet the required Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria.
For female subjects, a pelvic exam/Pap smear will be performed unless a normal (negative) Pap smear result is available and was performed within 6 months of enrollment.
Qualified subjects will be randomized to receive one of 3 treatments: 2.5%
imiquimod cream, 3.75% imiquimod cream, or placebo cream. Subjects will apply study cream once daily for a maximum of 8 weeks. Subjects will be stratified by gender and will be randomized to treatment with an allocation ratio of 2:2:1 in favor of the active treatments.
All subjects will be seen every 2 weeks for up to 16 weeks, depending on complete clearance of all baseline and new warts.
In the Evaluation Period, subjects will apply investigative cream to the identified treatment area for a maximum of 8 weeks. If the subject has not achieved complete wart clearance by the Week 8 visit (end of treatment, EOT), the subject will be followed for an additional maximum of 8 weeks. Subjects determined to have achieved clearance of all warts at any time through Week 16 will complete procedures for the EOS visit and will immediately enter the Follow-up Period for determination of recurrence. In the Follow-up Period, subjects will be followed every 4 weeks for up to 12 weeks or until the recurrence of warts. The 2.5%
and 3.75% imiquimod creams that will be used this Example 24 have the same formulations as the 2.5% and 3.75% imiquimod creams that were used in the EGWs studies reported in Examples 23-26, which are described in application for U.S. patent, Serial No._12/636,613 filed December 11, 2009, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.

Clinical evaluations, including count of warts and assessment of local skin reactions, and recording of adverse events (AEs) and concomitant medications will be performed. Safety laboratory tests will also be performed prior to treatment and at the EOS
visit.
Study Number: GW01-0805 Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream with that of placebo cream, applied once daily for up to 8 weeks, in the treatment of EGW. The secondary objective of this study was to provide information on the recurrence of EGW.
Methodology: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study that compared the efficacy and safety of 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream with that of placebo in the treatment of EGW. The study consisted of a screening visit and an evaluation period that included a maximum 8-week treatment period and a maximum 8-week no-treatment period. Subjects who achieved complete clearance at End of Study (EOS) entered a maximum 12-week follow-up period for evaluation of recurrence. The total study duration was a maximum of 28 weeks from randomization.
Subjects determined to be eligible during the screening period were stratified by gender and randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to 2.5% imiquimod cream, 3.75% imiquimod cream, or placebo cream. Subjects were scheduled for 1 prestudy screening visit, and then were scheduled for visits every 2 weeks for up to 16 weeks during the evaluation period, depending on complete clearance of all baseline and new warts. During the evaluation period, subjects applied investigative cream to the identified treatment area for a maximum of 8 weeks.
If the subject did not achieve complete wart clearance by the Week 8 visit (End of Treatment, EOT), the subject was monitored for an additional maximum of 8 weeks. Subjects determined to have achieved clearance of all warts at any time through Week 16 completed procedures for the EOS visit and were eligible to immediately enter the follow-up period for determination of recurrence. During the follow-up period, subjects were monitored every 4 weeks for up to 12 weeks or until the recurrence of warts.
Clinical evaluations included counts of the number of warts, assessments of local skin reactions (LSRs), and recordings of adverse events (AEs) and concomitant medications. At selected centers, photography was performed at designated visits. Laboratory tests were also performed prior to treatment and at the EOS visit to assess safety.
The study design is presented schematically in Tables 60 and 61 below.

Table 60 Study Design ¨ Evaluation Period Screening Treatment Period No-treatment Period Week Week Week 2 Week 4 Week 6 Week Week Week Week Week -4 to 0 0 8/ 10 12 14 16/
Day 1 EOT EOS
Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 4 Visit 5 Visit 6 Visit 7 Visit 8 Visit 9 Visit 10 Note: At any time during the Evaluation Period (ie, any time after Visit 2), a subject who achieved clearance of all warts concluded the evaluation period and was eligible to enter the Follow-up for Recurrence Period.
Table 61 Study Design ¨ Follow-up for Recurrence Period Follow-up Period (Only in subjects with clearance of all warts) Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Post-EOS Post-EOS Post-EOS
Follow-up Visit 1 Follow-up Visit 2 Follow-up Visit 3 Discussion of Study Design, Including the Choice of Control Groups This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. In order to assess the effect of imiquimod in the treatment of EGW, a placebo-control group was included in the study design. The study medications were identical with the exception of the absence of imiquimod in the placebo cream and the concentration of imiquimod (2.5% or 3.75%) in the active formulations.
The double-blind study design, in which the treatment assignment was concealed from the subjects, investigators, and all individuals involved in study execution, monitoring, and data collection, was chosen to provide an unbiased evaluation of the study medications. Comparison of each imiquimod group to the placebo group provides an unbiased test of the effect of imiquimod.
The 8-week treatment period was selected based on market experience of the use of Aldara to treat EGW, in which treatment duration greater than 8 weeks appears to be rare. Subjects who did not experience clearance during the treatment period were observed for an additional no-treatment period of up to 8 weeks. Once clearance was achieved at any time during the study, subjects were observed during a 12-week follow-up period to determine if the EGW recurred.
Selection of Study Population It was planned to enroll approximately 450 subjects in a 2:2:1 ratio:
approximately 180 in each active-treatment group and 90 in the placebo group. Forty-five investigative study centers in the United States (US) participated in the study, although 2 centers did not enroll any subjects.
Study centers could enroll a maximum of 30 subjects per center. Enrollment was stopped at all centers when the study enrollment goal was reached.
Inclusion Criteria Subjects could participate in the study if they met the following inclusion criteria:
1. Were willing and able to give informed consent -- for subjects under 18, the parent/legal guardian was required to give written informed consent and the subject was required to provide written assent in accordance with local regulations;
2. Were at least 12 years of age at the time of initial screening;
3. Were willing and able to participate in the study as outpatients, making frequent visits to the study center during the treatment and follow-up periods, and to comply with all study requirements;
4. Had a diagnosis of external genital / perianal warts with at least 2 warts and no more than 30 warts located in one or more of the following anatomic locations:
= In both sexes: inguinal, perineal, and perianal areas;
= In men: over the glans penis, penis shaft, scrotum, and foreskin;
= In women: on the vulva;
5. Had total wart areas of at least 10 mm2;
6. Were judged to be in good health based upon the results of a medical history, physical examination, and safety laboratory profile;
7. If female and of childbearing potential, had a negative serum pregnancy test at Screening and a negative urine pregnancy test prior to randomization and were willing to use effective contraception; and 8. If male or a male partner of a female subject, were willing to use condoms for sexual activities during the study.
Exclusion Criteria Subjects were excluded from the study if they met any of the following criteria:

9. Had received any topical and/or destructive treatments for external genital warts within 4 weeks (within 12 months for imiquimod, and within 12 weeks for sinecatechins) prior to enrollment (ie, the randomization visit);
10. Had received any of the following treatments within the indicated time intervals prior to enrollment:
Medication/Treatment Washout Interval Any marketed or investigational HPV vaccines 12 months Imiquimod 12 months Sinecatechins (Veregen ) 12 weeks Interferon/ Interferon inducer 4 weeks Cytotoxic drugs 4 weeks Immunomodulators or immunosuppressive therapies 4 weeks Oral antiviral drugs (with the exception of oral 4 weeks acyclovir and acyclovir related drugs for suppressive or acute therapy herpes; or oseltamivir for prophylaxis or acute therapy of influenza) Topical antiviral drugs (including topical acyclovir and 4 weeks acyclovir related drugs) in the wart areas Podophyllotoxin / Podofilox in the wart areas 4 weeks Oral and parenteral corticosteroids (inhaled/intranasal 4 weeks steroids are permitted) Any topical prescription therapy for any conditions in 4 weeks the wart areas Dermatologic/cosmetic procedures or surgeries in the 4 weeks wart areas 11. Had any evidence (physical or laboratory) of clinically significant or unstable disease and/or any condition that might have interfered with the response to the study treatment or altered the natural history of EGW;

12. Were currently participating in another clinical study or had completed another clinical study with an investigational drug or device within the past 4 weeks;

13. Had known or active chemical dependency or alcoholism as assessed by the investigator;

14. Had known allergies to study drug or any excipient in the study cream;

15. Were currently immunosuppressed or had a history of immunosuppression;

16. Had a planned surgery that would cause an interruption of study treatment;

17. Had sexual partners currently in treatment with an approved or investigational treatment for EGW;

18. Had any current or recurrent malignancies in the genital or treatment area;

19. Had any untreated or unstable genital infections (other than genital warts);

20. Had any of the following conditions:
= known human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection;
= current or past history of high risk HPV infection (eg, HPV 16, 18, etc);
= an outbreak of herpes genitalis in the wart areas within 4 weeks prior to enrollment;
= internal (rectal, urethral, vaginal/cervical) warts that required or were undergoing treatment;
= a dermatological disease (eg, psoriasis) or skin condition in the wart areas which may have caused difficulty with examination;

21. If female, had clinically significant abnormalities on pelvic examination or had laboratory test results showing high-grade pathology (eg, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, moderate or severe dysplasia, squamous cell carcinoma);

22. If female, were nursing or pregnant or planned to become pregnant during the study.
Removal of Patients from Therapy or Assessment Subjects could withdraw from the study or be withdrawn by the investigator at any time without prejudice to their future medical care. Any subject who did not comply with the inclusion/exclusion criteria could be withdrawn from further participation in the study.
Subjects could also be discontinued if the investigator determined that LSRs or AEs were of such severe intensity, serious events, or of a duration sufficient to warrant discontinuation, or if a subject required treatment for a suspected malignancy or other condition within the treatment or surrounding area. If a subject discontinued due to an LSR, the LSR was recorded as an AE, and the subject was monitored until the AE resolved to the investigator's satisfaction.
Any subject who received study drug and discontinued prematurely from the study was to return to the study center for EOS procedures. Subjects who discontinued prematurely from the study for any reasons were not replaced.
Treatments Administered The test products were 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream. The reference therapy was placebo cream. Subjects applied the study drug in a thin layer once daily to each wart identified at Baseline and any new wart that appeared during the treatment period.
A maximum of 1 packet (250 mg) of study drug was applied for a given dose (250 mg of 3.75%
cream is equivalent to 9.375 mg imiquimod, and 250 mg of 2.5% cream is equivalent to 6.25 mg imiquimod). Study drug was applied prior to normal sleeping hours and removed approximately 8 hours later with mild soap and water. Subjects were to continue to apply study cream to all identified wart/wart areas until all warts were cleared.
The investigational products, 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream, contained imiquimod, isostearic acid, benzyl alcohol, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, polysorbate 60, sorbitan monostearate, white petrolatum, glycerin, methyl paraben, propyl paraben, purified water, and xanthan gum. The placebo cream contained the same ingredients as the active formulations with the exception of imiquimod.
Method of Assigning Patients to Treatment Groups Subjects were randomly assigned to study treatments in a 2:2:1 ratio (2.5%
imiquimod cream: 3.75% imiquimod cream: placebo cream).
Selection of Doses in the Study The approved dosing regimen for Aldara (imiquimod) Cream, 5% for EGW is 3 times per week until warts are cleared, up to 16 weeks of treatment. This protocol studied a treatment regimen shorter in duration, and used lower concentrations of imiquimod to allow for more frequent dosing. The lower concentrations of imiquimod used in this study were chosen to permit daily dosing such that the overall shortened treatment regimen (8 weeks compared with a 16-week treatment regimen for Aldara) could still provide adequate clearing of EGW.

Selection and Timing of Dose for Each Patient Subjects meeting all inclusion and no exclusion criteria were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to 1 of the 3 treatment groups (2.5% imiquimod cream: 3.7%
imiquimod cream : or placebo cream).
Each dose of study drug was to be applied by the subject at approximately the same time of day. To reduce the risk of study drug removal from daily hygienic or physical activities, study drug was to be applied just prior to the subject's normal sleeping hours.
Subjects were to wash the treatment area with mild soap and water before applying the study medication, allow the area to dry thoroughly, and then apply the study medication once daily. Subjects were to apply a thin layer of study cream to each wart identified at Baseline and any new wart that appeared during the treatment period. Only up to one packet of study cream was to be applied per application.
The subjects were encouraged to leave study cream on for approximately 8 hours, preferably during normal sleeping hours, and were not to wash the treatment area, swim, shower or bathe, or have sexual contacts while the study medication was on the skin.
Subjects could wash the study cream off with soap and water any time after approximately 8 hours of application. Subjects were to continue applying the study cream for a maximum of 8 weeks or until the investigator determined that they had achieved complete clearance of all (baseline and new) warts. Subjects were not to make up any missed doses.
Rest periods, or temporary interruptions of dosing due to intolerable local skin reactions, were allowed during the study if the investigator or subject (or legal parent or guardian) decided that study drug application should be interrupted. Subjects who were placed on a rest period were to be seen by the investigator prior to resuming treatment with study drug in order to assess if the recovery of the treatment site was sufficient. Doses missed due to a rest period were not counted as missed doses in the assessment of subject compliance with the treatment regimen.
The study visit schedule and procedures were not to be altered due to missed doses or rest periods. If a subject experienced a strong local reaction in one treatment area but not in other treated areas, the subject could temporarily stop applying study cream in that affected area while continuing study treatment in the other areas.
Treatment of New Warts During treatment period, any new warts appearing in any of the protocol-defined anatomic locations were treated with the study cream. Neither the warts present at Baseline nor new warts were allowed to be treated during the no-treatment period (ie, from the Week 8/EOT
visit to the Week 16 visit).
Blinding This study was conducted as a double-blind study, ie, the treatment assignment was concealed from the subjects, the investigators and their staff, and the clinical research team.
Treatment supplies for each subject included treatment kits for 8 weeks of treatment.
Each treatment kit contained 4 supply boxes of study cream and one emergency box, each box containing a 2-week supply of study cream. At the randomization/Day 1 visit, a randomization number was assigned to each subject. Each subject was assigned the next available treatment kit number available at the site, starting from the lowest number for each gender and proceeding in numerical order to the highest number.
The randomization code for each subject could be accessed via the double-blind tear-off label, but was to be broken for an individual subject only in an emergency situation such as a serious adverse event (SAE). The study monitor or project manager was to be informed prior to any emergency unblinding. If the code for a subject was broken, the investigator was to document promptly the premature unblinding of the investigational product in the electronic case report form (eCRF) system.
No premature unblinding was performed. The treatment assignments were unblinded approximately 3 months after the last subject contact after all data queries had been answered and the database had been locked.
Prior and Concomitant Therapy At each visit, prior and concomitant medications and therapies were reviewed.
The name of the medication (trade or generic name), indication for use, and start and stop dates were recorded for any medication used.
Restricted Medications/Treatments. The following medications, preparations, and treatments that could potentially affect the study results were prohibited during the study:
1. Imiquimod 5% cream (Aldara8);
2. Any marketed or investigational HPV vaccines;
3. Sinecatechins (Veregen);

4. Interferon or interferon inducers;
5. Cytotoxic drugs;
6. Immunomodulators or immunosuppressive therapies;
7. Oral or parenteral corticosteroids (inhaled/intranasal steroids are permitted);
8. Oral antiviral drugs (with the exception of oral acyclovir and acyclovir related drugs for suppressive or acute therapy herpes; or oseltamivir for prophylaxis or acute therapy of influenza);
9. Topical antiviral drugs (including topical acyclovir and acyclovir related drugs) in the treatment areas;
10. Podophyllotoxin/Podofilox in the treatment areas;
11. Any topical prescription medications in the treatment areas;
12. Dermatologic/cosmetic procedures or surgeries in the treatment areas.
Treatment Compliance Study center personnel carefully queried each subject and reviewed the study diary at each treatment study visit to make sure the subject was dosing with study drug as indicated. The numbers of returned used and unused study packets were counted and recorded, and any discrepancies were discussed with the subject. During the treatment period, the study center personnel continued to instruct the subject on dosing procedures until the subject demonstrated compliance with study drug application. If at any time the investigator felt that a subject had missed a significant number of doses (exclusive of rest periods) or was not compliant with the study requirements, the investigator was to contact the project manager or study monitor to review the subject's compliance status and to determine a course of action.
Efficacy and Safety Variables Efficacy and Safety Measurements Assessed A schedule of study visits and procedures is presented in the Table below.
Source documentation was completed at each subject's visit, and the data captured in the source documents was subsequently entered into eCRFs by the investigator or designee.
The evaluator who performed the EGW count and LSR assessment at Baseline was to perform these assessments at the subsequent visits if possible.

Photographs were taken of the treatment area at selected centers, for informational purposes only. Only subjects who had signed a photographic consent form were to be photographed. No subjects under the age of 18 years (19 in Nebraska, Alabama, Alaska, or Wyoming) were photographed. The majority of subjects who participated in this trial did not have photographs of the treatment area taken. Cameras, detailed instructions on taking the photographs, and related items for photography were provided to the study centers by Canfield Scientific, Inc.
Criteria for evaluation:
Efficacy Assessments COUNT OF EXTERNAL GENITAL/PERIANAL WARTS (EGWS) In order to qualify for this study, subjects had to have at least 2 warts and no more than 30 warts in the genital/perianal area at the screening and randomization /Day 1 visits.
At each study visit including Screening, the number of warts, including new warts, was documented on the source documents and eCRF for each of the following anatomic locations:
= In both sexes: inguinal, perineal, and perianal areas;
= In men: over the glans penis, penis shaft, scrotum, and foreskin (if circumcised, the foreskin area was marked as "not applicable");
= In women: on the vulva.
Any warts that were visible to the naked eye were included in the lesion count as separate lesions.
In the event that the margins or boundaries of some warts could not be discerned due to local skin reactions obscuring the field, the best estimate by clinical assessment of the number of warts in each anatomic location was made and the count included.
If possible, the same investigator who counted the warts at Baseline completed wart counts at subsequent study visits.
MEASUREMENT OF BASELINE WART AREA
At the screening and randomization/Day 1 visits, the size of each wart or wart cluster was measured by length and width. The total wart areas were to equal at least 10 mm2 in order to qualify for this study. The investigator measured the total baseline wart area to be treated in mm2. The total baseline wart area was the sum of individual areas for each wart or cluster of warts. It was preferred that each subject's wart areas be measured by the same investigator at both visits. If the wart areas were not continuous, the total areas were to be calculated and recorded on the source documents and eCRF.
TREATMENT OF NEW WARTS
During the treatment period, any new warts that appeared in any of the protocol-defined anatomic locations were treated with study cream. Treatment for any warts, Baseline or new, was not allowed during the no-treatment period (ie, from the EOT visit to the Week 16 visit).
Safety Assessments Safety assessments included visual assessments of local skin reactions (LSRs) at each study visit after the screening visit, including any temporary interruptions of dosing (ie, rest periods) required in response to LSRs; all reports of AEs and SAEs, with their severity and relationship to study drug; results of clinical laboratory tests (including urine pregnancy tests for women of childbearing potential); pelvic examinations with Pap smears in women;
findings of a general physical examination at the screening visit, and intercurrent dermatologic conditions occurring within or outside of the treatment area.
Full information about the definition of AEs and SAEs, the procedure for reporting them, and the assessment of other safety parameters is given in the protocol.
ADVERSE EVENTS
Subjects were queried indirectly regarding AEs during each study visit. All AEs that occurred during the study period were recorded on the appropriate eCRF. The description of the AE
included the dates of onset and resolution (duration), severity, relationship to study treatment or other therapy, action taken (if any), and outcome. If the investigator considered it necessary, he or she was to contact the sponsor with regard to any AE that occurred after a subject ended study participation. Any treatment-related AEs or LSRs that were ongoing at the end of the study were followed to the investigator's satisfaction. The study period for the purpose of AE reporting was defined as the period from the prestudy screening or the initiation of any study procedures to the end of the follow-up period.
An adverse event was defined as any untoward medical occurrence in a patient or clinical investigation subject that was temporally related to protocol procedures, including the administration of a pharmaceutical product at any dose, but that did not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment. Laboratory values or results of other diagnostic procedures considered by the investigator to be clinically significant were captured as AEs and summarized accordingly.
Local skin reactions were not recorded as AEs unless they extended beyond the anatomic treatment area, if they required any medical interventions, or if the LSR
resulted in subject discontinuation from the study. Application site reactions other than those described as LSRs (eg, vesicles, burning, itching, bleeding, soreness, and induration) were recorded as AEs.
Severity: Terms used to describe the severity of an AE were mild, moderate, and severe. These terms were defined as follows:
= Mild ¨ The subject was aware of the signs and symptoms but the signs and symptoms were easily tolerated.
= Moderate ¨ The signs and symptoms were sufficient to restrict, but did not prevent, usual daily activity for the subject.
= Severe ¨ The subject was unable to perform usual daily activity.
Serious Adverse Events: An SAE was any AE that, at any dose, resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening AE, inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or a congenital anomaly/birth defect.
An event was considered serious when, based upon appropriate medical judgment, it jeopardized the subject and may have required medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes listed above.
A life-threatening AE was any AE that, at any dose, placed the subject, in the view of the investigator, at immediate risk of death from the reaction as it occurred. It did not include a reaction or event that, had it occurred in a more severe form, might have caused death.
LOCAL SKIN REACTIONS
Local skin reactions in the treatment and/or immediate surrounding area were clinically identified by the following categories: erythema, edema, weeping/exudate, flaking/scaling/dryness, scabbing/crusting, and erosion/ulceration. At each study visit after the screening visit, the investigator visually assessed the treatment and immediate surrounding areas and graded the intensity of each LSR category using the scales in Tables 62 and 63.

Table 62 Local Skin Reaction Scale Local Skin Severity Definitions Reaction 0 1 (Mild) 2 (Moderate) 3 (Severe) Erythema None Faint to mild redness Moderate redness Intense redness Edema Mild visible or barely Easily palpable Gross None palpable swelling/induration swelling/induration swelling/induration Weeping/exudate None Minimal exudate Moderate exudate Heavy exudate Flaking/scaling/dryness Moderate None Mild dryness/flaking aking Severe dryness/flaking dryness/fl Scabbing/crusting None Crusting Serous scab Eschar Table 63 Local Skin Reaction Scale (erosion/ulceration) Local Skin Severity Definitions Reactions 0 2 3 Erosion/ ulceration None Erosion Ulceration Erosion/ulceration intensity was originally collected as 0 = None, 1 =
Erosion, and 2 =
Ulceration. For consistency in the analysis of LSR intensities and sum score, these were recoded as 0 = None, 2 = Erosion, and 3 = Ulceration.
Local skin reactions were assessed independently from AEs, and were recorded as AEs only if they extended beyond the immediate surrounding area, if they required any medical interventions, or if the LSR resulted in subject discontinuation from the study. Other application site reactions not listed above (eg, vesicles, burning, itching, bleeding, soreness, and induration) were recorded as AEs.

INTERCURRENT DERMATOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Occurring Within the Treatment Area = Dermatological Conditions ¨ Subjects who experienced dermatological conditions within the treatment area that were unrelated to or may have been exacerbated by study cream could be discontinued from the study if these conditions impaired wart count and LSR assessments. In such a circumstance, the EOS procedures were to be completed.
= Herpes Genitalis - A subject who had an outbreak of herpes genitalis that required treatment during the study in the genital wart areas could remain in the study but was to stop dosing with study cream. If the outbreak of herpes was distal from the wart areas and did not interfere with study drug application or wart evaluation, the subject was to remain in the study and could continue dosing with study cream. Subjects could receive treatment for herpes genitalis with oral acyclovir, famciclovir, and valaciclovir.
Occurring Outside the Treatment Area = Dermatological Conditions ¨ Subjects who experienced dermatological conditions outside the treatment area or area immediately surrounding the treatment area could receive treatments for these conditions with the exception of treatments listed above.
= Vaginal and/or Cervical Warts ¨ During the study, subjects who developed vaginal and/or cervical warts were to be monitored by the investigator throughout the treatment period. These diseases could be treated after the subject exited the study.
= Vulvar Intraepithelial Neoplasia or Vaginal Intraepithelial Neoplasia ¨
If vulvar or vaginal intraepithelial neoplasia was diagnosed during the study, the investigator was to consult with the medical monitor regarding the subject's continued participation in the study.
= Rectal Mucosal or Urethral Warts - Rectal and urethral warts could be treated with conventional therapy only after the subject exited the study.

REST PERIODS
A rest period was a temporary interruption of dosing due to intolerable LSRs.
Doses that were missed due to a subject's noncompliance with the treatment regimen were not considered a rest period. Rest periods from daily treatment were instituted by the investigator as needed, with resumption of treatment at the investigator's discretion.
CLINICAL LABORATORY TESTS
Laboratory Tests: Subjects had samples taken at the prestudy screening visit and at the EOS
visit for analysis of the following parameters:
= Hematology: hemoglobin, hematocrit, red blood cell count (RBC), white blood count (WBC) with differential, and platelet count;
= Serum chemistry: glucose (non-fasting), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, cholesterol, total bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), alkaline phosphatase (AP), potassium, sodium, calcium, chloride, total protein, albumin, and phosphorous;
= Serum pregnancy test: females of childbearing potential underwent a serum pregnancy test at the screening visit, and the test result had to be negative for the subject to participate in the study;
= Urinalysis: color/appearance, glucose, pH, ketones, specific gravity, microscopic examination, and protein;
The samples were analyzed at a central laboratory, Covance Central Laboratory Services, 8211 Scicor Drive, Indianapolis, Indiana 46214. Any laboratory test result that the investigator considered to be clinically significant was recorded as an AE.
Urine Pregnancy Tests: Females of childbearing potential underwent a urine pregnancy test (UPT) at Screening (in addition to a serum pregnancy test), the randomization/Day 1 visit, every 4 weeks during the evaluation period, and at the EOT visit. If either the UPT
or the serum pregnancy test was positive prior to randomization, the subject was not permitted to enroll in the study. Any subject who became pregnant during treatment was discontinued from further treatment. If there was a suspicion of pregnancy at any time during the treatment period, a urine sample was obtained and tested. All pregnancies were to be immediately reported to the medical monitor and followed through to resolution. Subjects were to continue with follow-up visits.

Sexually transmitted disease (STD) Screen: If applicable or if clinically indicated, an STD
screen was performed at the screening visit. This was not considered part of the protocol.
GENERAL PHYSICAL EXAMINATION
At the screening visit, the investigator completed a general physical examination that included measurement of blood pressure, pulse rate, temperature, weight, and respiration rate.
PELVIC EXAMINATION AND PAP SMEAR
For female subjects, a pelvic examination including a Pap smear was performed at the screening visit unless a normal (negative) Pap smear result was available and had been performed within 6 months of enrollment. Subjects with Pap smear results which were negative (normal) could be enrolled. Subjects with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) may have been eligible for enrollment if per usual clinical follow-up there was no suspicion of high grade pathology. Subjects with results showing high-grade pathology were not to be enrolled in the study and were to be followed appropriately or referred to their primary care physician for further care. The ThinPrep Pap (ie, Papanicolaou) test was the only test that was performed in this study.
The samples were analyzed at a central laboratory, South Bend Medical Foundation, Inc., 530 N.
Lafayette Blvd., South Bend, IN 46601. Subjects with a (negative/normal) Pap smear result obtained within 6 months prior to enrollment did not need to have the test repeated.
Appropriateness of Measurements External genital warts are clinically diagnosed and treated in North America and elsewhere. A
count of the number of clinically visible EGWs by a qualified investigator is an appropriate measurement of the efficacy of a treatment for EGW. The safety assessments, which included AE monitoring and clinical laboratory testing and which followed standard medical practice guidelines, are accepted measures that provide general health assessments.
Because imiquimod therapy has been known to be associated with LSRs, the type and severity of these were monitored separately from other AEs. These measures are generally recognized as appropriate for the purposes of this study.

Efficacy Analyses PRIMARY EFFICACY VARIABLE
The primary efficacy variable was the subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts (baseline and new) in all anatomic areas at EOS (Week 16), as determined by the investigator.
SECONDARY AND TERTIARY EFFICACY VARIABLES
Secondary efficacy variables were the following:
= Subject status with respect to partial clearance of baseline warts, defined as at least a 75%
reduction in the number of baseline warts, at EOS/Week 16.
= Percent change from Baseline to EOS in the total number of warts.
= Subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts at EOS and remained cleared in all anatomic areas, as determined by the investigator, through the end of the follow-up for recurrence period.
= Time from Baseline to complete clearance of all warts, as determined by the investigator.
The tertiary efficacy variables are the following:
= Subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts (baseline and new) in all anatomic areas, at EOT/Week 8.
= Subject status with respect to at least a 50% reduction in the number of baseline warts at EOS/Week 16.
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR EFFICACY ANALYSES
Efficacy analyses were conducted on the ITT population and on the PP
population. For the primary efficacy variable, imputations were made for missing data points using last observation carried forward (LOCF, primary analysis), taking all missed observations as failure (sensitivity analysis), and using observed cases (supportive analysis). For the ITT
population, subjects who had no post-baseline data were included in the analysis carrying forward the baseline data. The PP population analysis used observed cases, except for complete clearance and for recurrence.

Analysis of the Primary Efficacy Variable The primary efficacy endpoint, complete clearance rate at the EOS, was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying by gender and site.
All pairwise comparisons of active treatment versus placebo were made using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. If either test was significant at a 0.025 level of significance, then that test was considered significant. Otherwise, if both tests were significant at 0.05, then both tests were considered significant. The 3.75% and 2.5% treatment groups were compared to each other at the 0.05 level of significance if at least one of these treatment groups was found to be different than the placebo using the Hochberg's test.
In the primary analysis of complete clearance rate, the Breslow-Day statistic was tested at the 10% level for heterogeneity of the odds ratios across analysis sites. A
finding of statistical significance in this test was followed by exploratory analyses to characterize the source of the heterogeneity.
Analysis of Secondary Efficacy Variables The secondary efficacy variable partial clearance rate was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying by gender and site. The percent change from baseline to EOS in wart count was analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for baseline wart count, gender, and analysis site. The proportion of subjects who were clear prior to or at EOS and remained clear at the end of the follow-up for recurrence period was summarized by frequency count and 95% confidence interval. The time to complete clearance was analyzed using the log rank test in the context of a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.
For analysis of secondary efficacy variables, only the LOCF method was used for the ITT
population, and observed cases for the PP population. All data from interim visits were analyzed using visit windows.
The secondary efficacy variables were compared pairwise using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
= If at least one of the active arms was found to be superior to placebo in the primary efficacy variable of complete clearance according to Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure, the secondary efficacy variable of partial (>75%) clearance was compared between each of the active arms and placebo.

= If the secondary efficacy variable of partial (>75%) clearance was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of percent change from Baseline to EOS in wart count was tested.
= If the secondary efficacy variable of percent change from Baseline to EOS
in wart count was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of complete clearance at EOS and remained clear at the end of follow-up for recurrence period was tested.
= If the secondary efficacy variable of complete clearance at EOS and remained clear at the end of follow-up for recurrence period was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of time from Baseline to complete clearance was tested.
The percent change from Baseline in EGW count at each post-baseline visit was summarized by mean, standard deviation, median, and range by treatment group. The recurrence rate of warts was summarized by treatment group and study visit using visit windows.
Analysis of Tertiary Efficacy Variables The tertiary efficacy endpoints, complete clearance rate at EOT and subject status with respect to at least a 50% reduction in baseline wart count, were analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying on gender and site.
Visit Windows For the analysis of wart counts, the data were summarized by analysis visits.
Analysis visits were assigned according to the actual study day of the evaluation as illustrated in Table 64.
Table 64 Visit Windows Evaluation Period Target Analysis Visit Study Day Day Range Baseline 1 Study Day 1 Week 2 15 1 < Study Day < 22 Week 4 29 22 < Study Day < 36 Week 6 43 36 < Study Day < 50 Week 8 57 50 < Study Day < 64 End of Treatment (EOT) Study Day 64 Week 10 71 64 < Study Day 78 Week 12 85 78 < Study Day 92 Week 14 99 92 < Study Day < 106 Week 16 113 106 < Study Day < 127 End of Study (EOS) Study Day 127 Follow-up Period Target Analysis Visit Study Day Day Range Post EOS
Follow-up Week 4 29 1 < Study Day 43 Follow-up Week 8 57 43 < Study Day 71 Follow-up Week 12 85 71 < Study Day 99 All visits (scheduled or unscheduled) were mapped to an analysis visit. If more than 1 evaluation was assigned to an analysis visit, the evaluation with the lowest wart count within the window was used for analysis. Study day was calculated as the date of evaluation minus the date of randomization plus one except for the follow up visits. For the follow up visits, study day was calculated as the date of evaluation minus the date of End of Study (EOS) visit plus one.
Safety Analyses All safety variables were analyzed using the safety population. Safety variables included the following:
= Local skin reactions.
= Rest periods during the treatment period:
o The number and percentage by treatment group of subjects who required a rest period (1 or more).
o The number of dosing days missed due to rest periods.
o The number of dosing days prior to the beginning of the first rest period.
= Adverse events.
= Clinical laboratory test results.

ADVERSE EVENTS
Adverse events were coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA, version 11.0) terminology. A treatment-emergent AE was defined as an AE that began or worsened in severity after Day 1 and no more than 30 days after the last application of study drug. If an AE had a completely missing start date, it was considered a "treatment emergent"
event, unless the stop date was prior to the date of randomization.
Treatment-emergent AEs and all AEs were summarized for each treatment group by the overall incidence of at least one event, incidence by system organ class, and incidence by system organ class and preferred term. Each subject contributed only once to each of the rates, regardless of the number of occurrences (events) the subject experienced.
Treatment-emergent AEs were summarized by severity (mild, moderate, or severe) and by relationship to study product (related, not related). Events were considered not related to study product if the relationship was "not related" or "probably not related".
Similarly, related events were those that were "probably related" or "related". An AE was assumed to be related to study drug if the relationship to study drug was unknown. For AEs that occurred more than once, the AE that was most related to study drug in that period was used in the summary of AEs by relationship to study drug categories. Similarly, the AE
with the maximum intensity in that period was used in the summary of AEs by severity.
If severity was missing or unknown, it was assumed to be severe.
The incidence of AEs was summarized for subgroup analysis by gender, by age subgroup, and by number of anatomic locations (ie, one location versus multiple). Serious AEs (SAEs) and AEs that led to discontinuation from the study were listed by subject.
LOCAL SKIN REACTIONS
The LSR intensities were summarized by frequency counts and mean score by treatment group and study visit for each LSR type. The LSRs were graded as follows:
= Erythema (0¨None, 1¨Faint to mild redness, 2=Moderate redness, 3¨Intense redness), = Edema (0¨None, 1¨Mild visible or barely palpable swelling/ induration, 2¨Easily palpable swelling/indurationõ 3=Gross swelling/induration), = Weeping/Exudate (0¨None, 1¨Minimal exudate, 2=Moderate exudate, 3¨Heavy exudate), = Flaking/Scaling/Dryness (0=None, 1=Mild dryness/flaking, 2=Moderate dryness/flaking, 3=Severe dryness/flaking), = Scabbing/Crusting (0=None, 1=Crusting, 2=Serous scab, 3=Eschar), = Erosion/Ulceration (0=None, 2=Erosion, 3=Ulceration).
Erosion/ulceration intensity was originally collected as 0 = None, 1 =
Erosion, and 2 ¨
Ulceration. For consistency in the analysis of LSR intensities and sum score, these were recoded as 0 = None, 2 = Erosion, and 3 = Ulceration.
The most intense reaction (post-baseline) and incidence of any reaction (post-baseline) for each LSR type were also presented by frequency distribution and mean score by treatment group.
Data were analyzed using visit windows.
The LSR sum score (addition of 6 scores) was computed and summarized by treatment group at each study visit.
REST PERIODS
A rest period was a temporary interruption of dosing due to intolerable LSRs or other AEs.
Doses missed due to a subject's noncompliance with the treatment regimen were not considered a rest period. The start of a rest period was the first date on which the study medication was not applied for the reason of "rest period". The end of the rest period was the first date of application following the start of the rest period. The number and percentage of subjects who required a rest period (1 or more) were analyzed by treatment group using CMH
statistics. The number of dosing days missed due to rest periods and the number of dosing days prior to the beginning of the first rest period were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test. In this analysis, only subjects who experienced a rest period were included.
STUDY PATIENTS
Disposition of Subjects Evaluation Period Subject disposition for the evaluation period is displayed in Table 65 below.

Table 65 Subject Disposition - Evaluation Period (ITT Population) Imiquimod Cream Total Subjects, n (%) 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall Randomized 204 202 105 511 Completed evaluation perioda 149 (73.0) 139 (68.8) 77 (73.3) 365 (71.4) Not Cleared 89 (43.6) 90 (44.6) 68 (64.8) 247 (48.3) Cleared, Ended Study 7 (3.4) 6 (3.0) 2 (1.9) 15 (2.9) Cleared, Entered Follow-up 53 (26.0) 43 (21.3) 7 (6.7) 103 (20.2) Discontinued evaluation 55 (27.0) 63 (31.2) 28 (26.7) 146 (28.6) period Reasons for discontinuation during evaluation period, n (%) Safety reasons (AEs) 3(1.5) 4(2.0) 0 7(1.4) Investigator's request 2 (1.0) 0 1(1.0) 3 (0.6) Subject's request (not AE) 11(5.4) 10 (5.0) 4 (3.8) 25 (4.9) Lack of efficacy 0 0 0 0 Noncompliance 2 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 3 (2.9) 8 (1.6) Use of concomitant therapy 0 1(0.5) 0 1(0.2) Lost to follow-up 35 (17.2) 40 (19.8) 19 (18.1) 94 (18.4) Other (not AE)b 2(1.0) 5(2.5) 1(1.0) 8(1.6) AE = adverse event.
a Based on investigator assessment (CRF page 31), includes subjects who (1) cleared prior to or at EOS/Week 16, (2) not cleared at Week 16.
One subject in 2.5% treatment group had a wart count of zero at EOS but reason for discontinuation was 'Subject's request' due to concomitant cryotherapy. Another subject in the 2.5% treatment group had a wart count of zero at Week 8 visit but not cleared at EOS. One subject was randomized to the 2.5%
treatment group, but included in the 3.75% group for safety analysis.
One subject in the 2.5% imiquimod group, who discontinued from the study at the subject's request was also recorded as discontinued from the study due to an adverse event.
Of 911 subjects who were screened, 511(56.1%) were randomized and 400 (43.9%) failed screening. The most frequent reason for screen failure (194 subjects [48.5% out of 400 screen failures]) was that the subject did not have a clinical diagnosis of external genital/perianal warts and did not have between 2 and 30 warts located in the inguinal, perineal and perianal areas.
Two hundred and four (204) subjects were randomized into the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 202 subjects were randomized into the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 105 subjects were randomized into the placebo group. Overall, 71.4% of the subjects completed the evaluation study, and in the individual treatment groups 73.0%, 68.8%, and 73.3% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively, completed the study.

Lost to follow-up, was the most common reason for discontinuation from the evaluation period and accounted for withdrawal of at least 17% of the subjects in each treatment group.
There was no appreciable difference in the percentages of subjects who were lost to follow-up or the times at which they became lost to follow-up. Of the subjects who withdrew from the study, a sizable number of subjects discontinued early, ie, had no post-Baseline visit: 16 of 55 (29.1%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 21 of 63 (33.3%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 7 of 28 (25%) in the placebo group. No subjects were discontinued from the study due to lack of efficacy.
Of the 511 subjects randomized into treatment groups, 222 were male and 289 were female. Similar percentages of subjects of males and females in each treatment group completed the evaluation period. With the exception of subjects showing EGW clearance (a higher percentage of females compared with males cleared of EGW), disposition characteristics within genders were similar to those in the overall population.
Follow-up for Recurrence Period Subject disposition for the follow-up period is displayed in Table 66 below.

Table 66 Subject Disposition ¨ Follow-Up Period (ITT Population) Imiquimod Cream Total Subjects, n (/0) 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall Entered follow-up period 53 (100) 43 (100) 7 (100) 103 (100) Completed study, no recurrence 36 (67.9) 30 (69.8) 7 (100) 73 (70.9) Subjects with EGW recurrence 11 (20.8) 8(18.6) 0 19 (18.4) Discontinued follow-up perioda Reasons for discontinuation during follow-up, n (c/o) Subject's request (not AE) 1(1.9) 1(2.3) 0 2 (1.9) Lost to follow-up 5 (9.4) 3 (7.0) 0 8 (7.8) Other (not AE) b 0 1 (2.3) 0 1 (1.0) AE = adverse event.
a Excludes subjects discontinued due to recurrence of external genital warts.
Overall, 103 subjects entered the follow-up for recurrence period, 53 subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 43 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 7 subjects in the placebo group.
Overall, 11 subjects were discontinued from the follow-up period. Of the 6 (11.3%) subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 5 (9.4%) subjects were lost to follow-up and 1 (1.9%) was due to the subject's request. Five subjects were discontinued from the follow-up period in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, 3 (7.0%) subjects were lost to follow-up, and 1 (2.3%) each were due to the subject's request or 'other' (both non-AE). No subjects in the placebo group discontinued from the follow-up period.
Protocol Deviations Final determination of each subject's status with respect to inclusion in the PP evaluation was made in a joint data review by clinical and statistical staff prior to unblinding the treatment codes.
A total of 142 subjects had major protocol deviations and were excluded from the PP
population; 60 in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 58 in the 2.5%
imiquimod treatment group, and 24 in the placebo group). A total of 140 subjects were excluded due to lost to follow-up (accounting for approximately two-thirds of the subjects excluded from the PP population) and treatment noncompliance. Three subjects who were noncompliant were also excluded from the PP population for additional reasons: one subject (2.5% imiquimod group) had taken exclusionary medication, one subject (3.75%) had a wart area <10 mm2 and one subject (placebo) had used imiquimod as a prior EGW treatment within the exclusionary period. One subject was excluded from the PP population because the subject received kits from each of the imiquimod treatment groups and 1 subject was excluded because they had taken exclusionary medication.
A total of 4 subjects (all females) received study medication kits from the incorrect gender strata. Subject 10-001 received study medication kit # M5341 (2.5%), Subject 10-009 received study medication kit # M5426 (placebo), Subject 10-011 received study medication kit M5427 (3.75%), and Subject 22-013 received study medication kit M5314 (3.75%) instead of the next available female kit. For all analyses, these 4 subjects were analyzed according to their actual gender (female).
EFFICACY EVALUATION
Datasets Analyzed The number of subjects in each analysis population is presented in Table 67below.
Table 67 Number (%) of Subjects in Analysis Populations Imiquimod Cream Populations 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall ITT population 204 202a 105 511 PP population 144 144 81 369 Safety population 205a 201a 105 511 Follow-up for 53 43 7 103 Recurrence population a Subject 04/025 was originally randomized to the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group; however, at Week 2, the subject incorrectly received a 3.75% imiquimod treatment group kit assigned to another subject. For the safety analysis the highest dose received (3.75%) is used and for the efficacy analysis, the original randomized treatment of 2.5% is used.
A total of 511 subjects were included in the ITT and safety population. Of these, 369 subjects were included in the PP population. A total of 103 subjects elected to enter the follow-up period and comprised the follow-up for recurrence population.

Demographic and Other Baseline Characteristics Prestudy/Baseline Demographics Demographic and baseline characteristics for the ITT population are presented in Table 68 below.
Table 68 Demographic Summary by Treatment Group - ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) (N=511) Age in years Mean (SD) 32.8 (11.0) 33.1 (10.1) 33.3 (10.8) 33.1 (10.6) Median 29.5 31.0 30.0 30.0 Minimum, Maximum 15.0, 70.0 18.0, 60.0 19.0, 66.0 15.0, 70.0 Sex, n (%) Male 88 (43.1) 85 (42.1) 49 (46.7) 222 (43.4) Female 116 (56.9) 117 (57.9) 56 (53.3) 289 (56.6) Race, n (%) White 141 (69.1) 133 (65.8) 76 (72.4) 350 (68.5) Black/African American 55 (27.0) 66 (32.7) 27 (25.7) 148 (29.0) Other 8(4.0%) 3(1.5%) 2(2.0%) 13 (2.5%) Ethnicity, n (%) Hispanic 12 (5.9) 21 (10.4) 8 (7.6) 41(8.0) Non-Hispanic 192 (94.1) 181 (89.6) 97 (92.4) 470 (92.0) SD = standard deviation.
Demographic characteristics were similar among the 3 treatment groups.
Slightly more than half of the subjects were female. Overall, 68.5% of the subjects were White and more than 89% of the subjects in every treatment group were non-Hispanic. The mean age ranged from 32.8 years in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group to 33.3 years in the placebo group.
Demographic characteristics in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population.
Medical History The most frequently reported conditions were hypertension (53 subjects), depression (42 subjects), and seasonal allergies (35 subjects).

External Genital Warts Treatment History Previous EGW treatment was reported by 50.5%, 52.5%, and 47.6% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively.
Cryotherapy, the most frequently reported treatment, had been performed in 51(25.0%) subjects in the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, in 46 (22.8%) of the subjects in the 2.5% treatment group, and in 22 (21.0%) of the subjects in the placebo group. Other treatments included imiquimod (in a total of 45 subjects), acetic acid (in a total of 33 subjects), laser therapy (in a total of 29 subjects), "other" treatments (in 24 subjects), podophyllin (in 23 subjects), podophyllotoxin (in 21 subjects) and surgical excision (23 subjects), and electrodessication (13 subjects).
Prior and Concomitant Medications Seventeen subjects (8.3%) in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 20 subjects (9.9%) in the 2.5% treatment group, and 6 subjects (5.7%) in the placebo group were taking prior medications, ie, medications that were discontinued prior to the date of randomization. The most common prior medications were antibacterials for systemic use in 2.9% of the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 2.5% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 3.8% of the placebo group.
One hundred thirty-four (65.4%) subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 121 (60.2%) subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 63 (60.0%) subjects in the placebo group received one or more concomitant medications during this study. The following classes of concomitant medication were received by more than 10% of the subjects in one or more of the treatment groups:
= Analgesics, received by 20.5% of the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 20.4% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 20.0% of the placebo group;
= Antibacterials for systemic use, received by 15.1% of the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 17.4% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 14.3% of the placebo group;
= Anti-inflammatory and anti-rheumatic products, received by 14.1% of the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 11.9% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 13.3% of the placebo group;
= Sex hormones and modulators of the genital system, received by 12.7% of the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 10.0% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 12.4% of the placebo group;

= Psychoanaleptics, received by 10.2% of the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 8.0%
of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 8.6% of the placebo group.
Baseline Number of External Genital Warts A summary of the external genital wart counts at Baseline and other baseline data relevant to subjects' EGW are presented in the Table 69 for the ITT population.
Table 69 Baseline External Genital Warts Data by Treatment Group -ITT
Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) (N=511) Total wart area (mm2) Mean (SD) 150.2 (321.9) 161.1 (367.4) 200.7 (374.9) 164.9 (351.4) Median 61 53 61 57 Minimum, Maximum 9, 3419 10, 4000 10, 1950 9, Total wart count Mean (SD) 8.7 (7.5) 7.7 (6.3) 7.7 (6.3) 8.1 (6.8) Median 6 5 6 6 Minimum, Maximum 2, 48 2, 30 2, 29 2, 48 Years Since Diagnosis Mean 4.9 5.8 5.5 5.4 Standard Deviation 7.4 7.6 7.9 7.6 Median 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.2 Minimum, Maximum 0.0, 39.4 0.0, 33.4 0.0, 33.4 0.0, 39.4 Anatomic location, Malesa, n 88 85 49 222 Inguinal 24 (27.3) 17 (20.0) 19 (38.8) 60 (27.0) Perineal 6 (6.8) 8 (9.4) 3 (6.1) 17 (7.7) Perianal 8(9.1) 6(7.1) 5(10.2) 19(8.6) Glans Penis 9(10.2) 11 (12.9) 5 (10.2) 25 (11.3) Penis Shaft 71 (80.7) 76 (89.4) 39 (79.6) 186 (83.8) Scrotum 19 (21.6) 16 (18.8) 14 (28.6) 49 (22.1) Foreskin 0 2(2.4) 2(4.1) 4(1.8) Anatomic location, Females", n 116 117 56 289 Inguinal 11(9.5) 19 (16.2) 4(7.1) 34 (11.8) Perineal 61 (52.6) 53 (45.3) 29 (51.8) 143 (49.5) Perianal 53 (45.7) 51 (43.6) 26 (46.4) 130 (45.0) Vulva 86 (74.1) 78 (66.7) 31 (55.4) 195 (67.5) Number of treatment anatomic areas, n (%)--Malesa Total Males 88 (100) 85 (100) 49 (100) 222 (100) Table 69 Baseline External Genital Warts Data by Treatment Group -ITT
Population imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) (N=511) 1 49 (55.7) 48 (56.5) 25 (51.0) 122 (55.0) 2 30 (34.1) 25 (29.4) 12 (24.5) 67 (30.2) 3 8(9.1) 10 (11.8) 10 (20.4) 28 (12.6) 4 1(1.1) 2(2.4) 2(4.1) 5(2.3) (Continued) Number of treatment anatomic areas, n (%)--Femalesb Total Females 116 (100) 117 (100) 56 (100) 289 (100) 1 47 (40.5) 53 (45.3) 28 (50.0) 128 (44.3) 2 46 (39.7) 48 (41.0) 23 (41.1) 117 (40.5) 3 20 (17.2) 12 (10.3) 4 (7.1) 36 (12.5) 4 3 (2.6) 4(3.4) 1(1.8) 8 (2.8) SD = standard deviation.
a Denominator based on the number of males in treatment group.
b Denominator based on the number of females in treatment group.
The mean total wart area was 164.9 mm2 overall, and ranged from 150.2 mm2 in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group to 200.7 mm2 in the placebo group. The mean total wart count was 8.1 overall, and ranged from 7.7 in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group and placebo to 8.7 in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group.
In males, the most commonly affected areas were the penis shaft (83.8%), the inguinal area (27.0%), and the scrotum (22.1%). In females, the most commonly-affected areas were the vulva (67.5%), the perineal area (49.5%), and the perianal area (45.0%). More than 50% of subjects in the female subgroup and more than 40% of subjects in the male subgroup had two or more anatomic locations affected with warts at Baseline.
Measurements of Treatment Compliance Compliance was based on the number of applications received (where a rest period day was counted as an application) divided by the number of intended applications, or by the number of packets used (where a rest period day was counted as a packet used) divided by the number of packets intended to be used per the protocol-defined treatment regimen, whichever was greater.
Noncompliance with the treatment regimen was defined as compliance less than 75% or greater than 125%.
The overall mean treatment compliance was 83.2% in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 86.5% in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 91.1% in the placebo group). Of the 142 subjects excluded from the PP population, 140 were the result of noncompliance with the treatment regimen, including many subjects who were lost to follow-up.
Compliance rates were slightly higher in subjects who cleared their EGW during the study (87.7%, 91.8%, and 97.8% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo group, respectively) compared with subjects who did not clear (81.1%, 84.5%, and 90.4% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo group, respectively).
Analysis of Efficacy Complete Clearance Rate of All Warts COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF STUDY
The primary efficacy variable in this study was the proportion of subjects with complete clearance of all warts (those present at Baseline and new warts) at EOS (ie, 8 weeks after EOT).
The primary analysis was performed on the ITT population with imputation (LOCF) for missing data points. The PP population analysis used observed cases only. The results of these analyses for the ITT population are shown in Table 70. Results are presented graphically for the ITT
population in Figure 15.

Table 70 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at the Week 16/End of Study Visit Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) n/Na (%) 60/204 (29.4) 50/202 (24.8) 9/105 (8.6) 95% CI 23.3, 36.2 19.0,31.3 4.0,15.6 P value vs placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.187 Males rilNa (%) 15/88(17.0) 13/85(15.3) 2/49(4.1) 95% CI 9.9, 26.6 8.4, 24.7 0.5, 14.0 P value vs placebo 0.019** 0.034**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.639 Females niNzi (%) 45/116 (38.8) 37/117 (31.6) 7/56 (12.5) 95% CI 29.9,48.3 23.3, 40.9 5.2, 24.1 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.012**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.204 LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups, taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial statistics.
Breslow-Day P values for ITT Population (LOCF,) males, are 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.933, 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.691, and 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream = 0.773.
Breslow-Day P values for ITT Population (LOCF), females, are 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.731, 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.757, and 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream = 0.942.
In the ITT population, the rate of complete clearance of EGW at EOS was significantly higher (P<0.001) in the active treatment groups; 29.4% in the 3.75% imiquimod group and 24.8% in the 2.5% imiquimod group, compared with placebo (8.6%). As shown in the Table above, subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group had a higher rate of complete clearance than subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group. However, the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant (P=0.187).
Results were similar in the by-gender analyses. The complete clearance rates at EOS
were statistically significantly higher in the 2 active treatment groups compared with placebo for both genders. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
Due to deviations from GCP, an additional analysis was run in which 2 study sites (Sites 13 and 18) were excluded from the primary analysis. Removal of the efficacy data from these 2 sites does not materially impact the results: the primary analyses, complete clearance rates of actives compared to placebo are numerically increased.
Rates of complete clearance at EOS in the ITT population are illustrated in Figure 15.
The primary efficacy variable was analyzed for the PP population, overall and by gender, using observed cases (OC). Results for the PP population are shown in Table 71.

Table 71 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at the Week 16 /End of Study Visit -PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP population (OC), at EOS
niNa (%) 49/144(34.0) 43/144(29.9) 9/81 (11.1) 95% confidence interval 26.3, 42.4 22.5, 38.0 5.2, 20.0 P value vs placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.243 Males n/Na (%) 12/59 (20.3) 12/64 (18.8) 2/36 (5.6) 95% confidence interval 11.0, 32.8 10.13, 30.5 0.7, 18.7 P value vs placebo 0.026** 0.011**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.568 Females niNa (%) 37/85(43.5) 31/80(38.8) 7/45(15.6) 95% confidence interval 32.8, 54.7 28.1, 50.3 6.5, 29.5 P value vs placebo 0.002** 0.009**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.424 95% Cl = 95% confidence interval, OC=observed cases.
a:
n/N = number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups, taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
Complete clearance was carried forward once achieved.
In the PP population, overall, the complete clearance rates at EOS were higher than those in the ITT population for all treatment groups: 34.0% in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 29.9% in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 11.1% in the placebo group. The larger responses in the active treatment groups were statistically significant compared with placebo (P
<0.001 for the active treatment groups). As was the case in the ITT population, the rate of complete clearance was larger in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group, but the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
Results were similar in the by-gender analyses. In all treatment groups in the PP
population, the complete clearance rates at EOS were consistently higher in females than in males. Complete clearance rates were statistically significantly higher in the 2 active treatment groups compared with placebo for both genders.

Rates of complete clearance at EOS in the PP population are illustrated in Figure 16.
COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF TREATMENT
A summary of the complete clearance rate at EOT for the ITT population, overall and by gender, is provided in Table 72.
Table 72 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at End of Treatment--ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) n/Na (%) 32/204 (15.7) 28/202 (13.9) 4/105 (3.8) 95% CI 11.0, 21.4 9.4, 19.4 1.0,9.5 P value vs placebo 0.002** 0.012**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.460 Males niNa (%) 8/88(9.1) 6/85(7.1) 1/49(2.0) 95% CI 4.0, 17.1 2.6, 14.7 0.1, 10.9 P value vs placebo 0.092 0.222 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.547 Females niNa (%) 24/116(20.7) 22/117 (18.8) 3/56 (5.4) 95% CI 13.7, 29.2 12.2,27.1 1.1, 14.9 P value vs placebo 0.009** 0.028**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.616 LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
At Week 8/EOT, 15.7% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 13.9% of subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 3.8% of subjects in the placebo group had attained complete clearance. The overall complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group (P = 0.002) and in the 2.5% imiquimod group (P = 0.012) compared with the placebo group. The clearance rate in the 3.75% imiquimod group was slightly higher than in the 2.5% imiquimod group; however, the difference was not statistically significant.

The complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the active treatment groups compared with placebo only in the female subgroup. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
Slightly higher percentages of males in the 3.75% imiquimod group achieved complete clearance than those in the 2.5% imiquimod group.
A summary of the complete clearance at EOT for the PP population is provided in Table 73.
Table 73 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at End of Treatment - PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC), at EOT
niNa (0/0) 26/144(18.1) 24/144(16.7) 4/81 (4.9) 95% CI 12.1, 25.3 11.0, 23.8 1.4, 12.2 P value vs placebo 0.010** 0.019**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.602 Males (%) 7/59 (11.9) 6/64 (9.4) 1/36 (2.8) 95% CI 4.9, 22.9 3.5, 19.3 0.1, 14.5 P value vs placebo 0.206 0.250 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.400 Females niNa (%) 19/85 (22.4) 18/80 (22.5) 3/45 (6.7) 95% CI 14.0,32.7 13.9, 33.2 1.4, 18.3 P value vs placebo 0.024** 0.041**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.934 95% CI = 95% confidence interval, OC=observed cases a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
Complete clearance was carried forward once achieved.
In the PP population, the EOT complete clearance rate was significantly higher in both active treatment groups compared with placebo (P=0.010 for 3.75% imiquimod vs placebo; and P=0.019 for 2.5% imiquimod vs placebo). The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
In the PP population, complete clearance rates for males and females were higher than those in the ITT population. Complete clearance rates in the female subgroup in both active treatment groups were essentially the same and were significantly higher compared with those in the placebo group. A slightly higher percentage of males in the 3.75%
imiquimod group achieved complete clearance than those in the 2.5% imiquimod group. In both treatment groups in males, the difference in clearance rate was not statistically significant when compared to placebo. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES BY VISIT WEEK
A by-visit summary of complete clearance rates in the ITT population during the evaluation period is shown graphically in Figure 17.
As shown in Figure 17, the complete clearance rate was higher in the imiquimod treatment groups compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 4, and the differences were statistically significant at Week 8 (EOT) and thereafter. This includes the Week 8/end of treatment assessment and the Week 16/end of study assessment.
In female subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 6. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 2.5% imiquimod group compared with placebo at Weeks 8, 10 and 16. The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant at any time point during the evaluation period. In male subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75% group compared with placebo at all assessment time point from Week 10 to Week 16. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 2.5% imiquimod group compared with placebo at Weeks 14 and 16.
The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant at any time point during the evaluation period.
A by-visit summary of complete clearance rates in the PP population during the evaluation period is shown in Figure 18.

Results in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the active treatment groups compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 6. The difference in clearance rate between the 2 active treatments was not statistically significant.
In female subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups compared with placebo at Week 8 and Week 16. The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant at any time point during the evaluation period. In male subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75% group compared with placebo at Week 10, Week 14 and Week 16. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 2.5% imiquimod group compared with placebo at Week 16. The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant at any time point during the evaluation period.
Partial Clearance Rates PARTIAL (>75%) CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF STUDY
The proportion of subjects, overall and by gender, who had a partial clearance (>75%
reduction from Baseline in wart count) during the study is summarized in Table 74 for the ITT
population. Partial clearance was defined as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline.

Table 74 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (>75%) Clearance at End of Study, ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) at EOS
iilNa (%) 79/204 (38.7) 63/202 (31.2) 11/105(10.5) 95% CI 32.0, 45.8 24.9, 38.1 5.3, 18.0 P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.078 Males niNa (%) 21/88 (23.9) 19/85 (22.4) 3/49 (6.1) 95% CI 15.4, 34.1 14.0, 32.7 1.3, 16.9 P value vs Placebo 0.008** 0.013**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.776 Females 58/116(50.0) 44/117(37.6) 8/56(14.3) 95% CI 40.6, 59.4 28.8, 47.0 6.4, 26.2 P value vs Placebo <0.001** 0.002**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.050**
95% CI = 95% confidence interval a: nJN=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defined as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (gender subgroups), or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups) taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
In the ITT population, the difference in the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant (P<0.001). The partial (>75%) clearance rate was higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, but the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
In the by-gender analyses, the >75% clearance rate at EOS was significantly higher in both of the active treatment groups compared with placebo for both males and females. The >75% clearance rate in the female subgroup was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group. In all treatment groups, the >75%
clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.

Rates of partial (>75%) clearance at EOS in the ITT population are illustrated in Figure 19.
A summary of the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS for the PP population, overall and by gender, is presented in Table 75. The >75% clearance rates at EOS are presented graphically in Figure 20 for the PP population.
Table 75 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (>75%) Clearance at End of Study¨PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC), at EOS
iilNa (%) 65/144 (45.1) 55/144 (38.2) 11/81 (13.6) 95% CI 36.8, 53.6 30.2, 46.7 7.0, 23.0 P value vs placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.128 Males niNa (%) 16/59(27.1) 18/64(28.1) 3/36(8.3) 95% CI 16.4,40.3 17.6, 40.8 1.8, 22.5 P value vs placebo 0.011** 0.014**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.696 Females niNa (%) 49/85 (57.6) 37/80 (46.3) 8/45 (17.8) 95% CI 46.4, 68.3 35.0, 57.8 8.0, 32.1 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.112 95% CI = 95% confidence interval, OC = observed cases a: n/N¨number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defmed as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution statistics.
In the PP population, the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS was higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. The difference between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant (P<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in partial (>75%) clearance rate between the active treatment groups. The partial (>75%) clearance rates were statistically significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo at all analysis time points after Week 4; results of the analysis over time are presented below.
As in the overall PP population, the 275% clearance rate was significantly higher with 3.75% imiquimod and with 2.5% imiquimod versus placebo in either gender. There was no statistically significant difference between the active treatment groups in either gender.
Rates of partial (275%) clearance at EOS in the PP population are illustrated in Figure 20.
PARTIAL (275%) CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF TREATMENT
The proportion of subjects who had a 75% or greater reduction from Baseline in wart count at EOT is summarized in Table 76 for the ITT population.

Table 76 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (>75%) Clearance at End of Treatment ¨ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) at EOT
n/Na (%) 60/204 (29.4) 44/202 (21.8) 8/105 (7.6) 95% CI 23.3, 36.2 16.3, 28.1 3.3, 14.5 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.003**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.054 Males n/Isla (%) 19/88(21.6) 11/85(12.9) 1/49(2.0) 95% CI 13.5, 31.6 6.6, 22.0 0.1, 10.9 P value vs placebo 0.002** 0.029**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.134 Females "a (%) 41/116 (35.3) 33/117 (28.2) 7/56 (12.5) 95% CI 26.7,44.8 20.3,37.3 5.2,24.1 P value vs placebo 0.001** 0.027**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.193 LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defmed as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial statistics.
In the overall ITT population, the >75% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
The >75% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher with both active treatment groups compared with placebo in either gender. There was no significant difference between 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod in either gender subgroup.
The partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOT for the PP population is provided in Table 77.

Table 77 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (275%) Clearance at End of Treatment-PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC), EOT
niNa (%) 51/144 (35.4) 39/144 (27.1) 8/81 (9.9) 95% CI 27.6, 43.8 20.0, 35.1 4.4, 18.5 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.003**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.047**
Males "a (%) 16/59(27.1) 11/64(17.2) 1/36(2.8) 95% CI 16.4, 40.3 8.9, 28.7 0.1, 14.5 P value vs placebo 0.007** 0.031**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.090 Females n/Na (%) 35/85 (41.2) 28/80 (35.0) 7/45 (15.6) 95% CI 30.6, 52.4 24.7, 46.5 6.5, 29.5 P value vs placebo 0.003** 0.036**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.220 95% CI = 95% confidence interval, OC=observed cases, EOT = end of treatment a:
n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defmed as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution statistics.
In the overall PP population, the >75% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. The partial (>75%) clearance rate in the 3.75% imiquimod group was significantly higher (P=0.047) than that in the 2.5%
imiquimod treatment group.
The >75% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher with both active treatment groups compared with placebo for both genders. There was no significant difference between 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups in either gender.

PARTIAL (>75%) CLEARANCE RATES BY ANALYSIS VISIT
Over the course of the study, the partial (>75%) clearance rates were statistically significantly higher in the 3.75% and 2.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo at all analysis time points after Week 6, and were significantly higher for 3.75%
compared with 2.5%
imiquimod at Weeks 6, 12, and 14.
In both genders, the difference between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant at Week 16. In the female subgroup, the difference between the active treatment groups was statistically significant (P = 0.050).
The partial (>75%) clearance rates were statistically significantly higher in the 3.75% and 2.75% imiquimod groups compared with placebo at all analysis time points after Week 8, and were significantly higher for 3.75% imiquimod group compared with 2.5%
imiquimod at Weeks 6 and 10.
SUBJECTS WITH AT LEAST A 50% REDUCTION IN WART COUNT AT END OF
STUDY
Table 78 provides a summary of the >50% clearance rate at EOS for the ITT
population (overall and by gender). The results are presented graphically in Figure 21.

Table 78 Proportion of Subjects with 250% Clearance at End of Study-ITT
Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) at EOS
n/I=la (%) 101/204 (49.5) 87/202 (43.1) 21/105 (20.0) 95% CI 42.5, 56.6 36.1, 50.2 12.8, 28.9 P value vs placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.154 Males nThr (%) 27/88 (30.7) 29/85 (34.1) 5/49 (10.2) 95% CI 21.3,41.4 24.2,45.2 3.4,22.2 P value vs placebo 0.007** 0.002**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.617 Females niNa (%) 74/116(63.8) 58/117 (49.6) 16/56 (28.6) 95% Cl 54.4, 72.5 40.2, 59.0 17.3, 42.2 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.009**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.027**
LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a: n/N¨number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
50% clearance is defined as at least a 50% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution statistics.
In the overall ITT population, the rate of >50% clearance of EGW at EOS was significantly higher in each of the imiquimod treatment groups compared with placebo. The >50% clearance rate was higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, but the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
The >50% clearance rate at EOS was significantly higher with both active treatment groups compared with placebo for both genders. The >50% clearance rate at EOS
was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with the 2.5%
imiquimod group for females only. In males, the >50% clearance rate was higher in the 2.5%
imiquimod group than in the 3.75% imiquimod group. However, the difference was not statistically significant.

Results in the PP population (overall and by gender) were similar to results in the ITT
population.
SUBJECTS WITH >50% REDUCTION IN WART COUNT AT END OF TREATMENT
Table 79 provides a summary of the >50% clearance rate at EOT for the ITT
population (overall and by gender).
Table 79 Proportion of Subjects with >50% Clearance at End of Treatment--ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) at EOT
nnsia (%) 89/204 (43.6) 74/202 (36.6) 18/105 (17.1) 95% CI 36.7, 50.7 30.0, 43.7 10.5, 25.7 P value vs placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.103 Males niNa (%) 31/88 (35.2) 25/85 (29.4) 5/49 (10.2) 95% CI 25.3, 46.1 20.0, 40.3 3.4, 22.2 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.012**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.412 Females n/Na (%) 58/116 (50.0) 49/117 (41.9) 13/56 (23.2) 95% CI 40.6, 59.4 32.8, 51.4 13.0, 36.4 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.016**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.152 LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a:
n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
50% clearance was defined as at least a 50% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution statistics.
In the overall ITT population, the >50% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. The difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant. The >50% clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher with both active treatment groups compared with placebo for both gender subgroups. There was no significant difference between 3.75% and 2.5%
imiquimod in either gender. In all treatment groups, the >50% clearance rates at EOT were higher in females than in males.
Results were similar in the PP population. In the overall PP population, the rate of >50%
clearance of EGW at EOT was significantly higher in the active treatment groups compared to placebo. In both the male and female subgroups, the >50% clearance rate was significantly higher in both of the active treatment groups compared with placebo.
SUBJECTS WITH > 50% REDUCTION IN WART COUNT BY ANALYSIS WEEK
As shown in Figure 22 for the overall ITT population, the difference between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant at Week 16 (P<0.001 for 3.75% imiquimod and 2.5% imiquimod vs placebo), and at all post-Baseline assessment time points after Week 4. The >50% clearance rate in the 3.75% imiquimod group was higher than that in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group at End of Study however the difference was not statistically significant.
In both genders, the difference between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant at Week 16. In the female subgroup, the difference between the active treatment groups was statistically significant (P = 0.027).
Results in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population.
Compared with placebo, the >50% clearance rate was significantly higher in both active treatment groups at all analysis time points after Week 4. The >50% clearance rate in the 3.75%
imiquimod group was higher than that in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group at End of Study however the difference was not statistically significant.
Wart Counts and Change and Percent Change from Baseline in Wart Counts Summaries of the EGW counts, change from Baseline in EGW counts, and percent change from Baseline in EGW counts over the course of the study are presented in Table 80 below. The mean percent changes in EGW counts over time are presented graphically in Figure 23.

Table 80 Summary of External Genital Wart Count from Baseline to End of Treatment/End of Study-ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N = 204) (N = 202) (N = 105) Baseline Mean 8.7 (7.5) 7.7 (6.3) 7.7 (6.3) Median 6 5 6 Min, Max 2, 48 2, 30 2, 29 P value vs Placebo 0.180 0.727 P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.158 Week 8/EOT
Mean 5.5 (7.2) 5.3 (5.6) 7.2 (6.6) Median 3 3 5 Min, Max 0, 51 0, 25 0, 30 Week 16/EOS
Mean 5.0 (7.3) 4.7 (5.7) 7.1 (6.8) Median 3 3 4 Min, Max 0, 65 0, 29 0, 31 Change from Baseline to EOS
Mean -3.7 (7.1) -3.0 (4.9) -0.6 (3.7) Median -2 -1 0 Min, Max -43, 40 -30, 7 -15, 11 P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.643 Percent Change from Baseline to EOS
Mean -40.9 (56.9) -37.7 (46.2) -7.8 (46.8) Median -46.8 -19.1 0.0 Min, Max -100,160 -100,67 -100,183 P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.641 P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site, taking 2 treatment groups at a time.
Change from Baseline is calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Change from Baseline P values are from analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for Baseline wart count, gender, and analysis site. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
The mean EGW count at Baseline was similar between all the treatment groups for the ITT population. At EOT the EGW counts were lowest in the 3.75% imiquimod group and highest in the placebo group. At EOS the EGW counts were lowest in the 2.5%
imiquimod group and highest in the placebo group. At EOS, the mean change from Baseline was significantly greater in the active treatment groups compared with placebo.
The difference in mean change between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
In the gender subgroups, the Baseline EGW counts were higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group and 2.75% imiquimod group in both genders compared with placebo however the difference was not statistically significant. The mean change and mean percent change from Baseline in EGW count was significantly larger for both active treatment groups versus placebo in males and in females.
As shown in Figure 23 for the ITT population, the mean percent decrease from Baseline in wart count in the 2 active treatment groups was consistently larger than placebo, and the differences between the 2 active treatment groups compared with placebo were statistically significant at all post-Baseline analysis time points after Week 4. The differences between the 3.75% imiquimod and 2.5% imiquimod groups were not statistically significant at any time during the study.
For the PP population, summaries of the EGW counts, change from Baseline in EGW
counts, and percent change from Baseline in EGW counts over the course of the study are presented in Table 81.

Table 81 Summary of External Genital Wart Count from Baseline to End of Treatment and End of Study-PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo Baseline Mean 8.4 (7.2) 7.6 (6.4) 7.8 (6.3) Median 6 5 6 Min, Max 2, 32 2, 30 2, 29 P value vs Placebo 0.174 0.726 P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.340 End of Treatment (EOT) Mean 5.3 (7.7) 4.7 (5.2) 7.3 (6.3) Median 3 3 5 Min, Max 0, 51 0, 25 0, 23 End of Study (EOS) Mean 6.4 (9.0) 5.2 (5.8) 7.8 (7.0) Median 4 3 6 Min, Max 0, 65 0, 29 0, 31 Change from Baseline at EOS

Mean -3.1 (7.3) -3.0 (5.5) 0.2 (3.7) Median -2 -1 0 Min, Max -25, 40 -30, 5 -15, P value vs Placebo 0.024** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.208 Percent Change from Baseline at EOS

Mean -30.6 (56.2) -28.9 (40.8) 2.9 (45.9) Median -33.3 -20.8 0.0 Min, Max -100, 160 -100, 67 -100, P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod 0.346 P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site, taking 2 treatment groups at a time.
Change from Baseline is calculated as the post-Baseline value minus the Baseline value. Change from Baseline P values are from analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for Baseline wart count, gender, and analysis site. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.

The mean EGW count at Baseline was similar across the treatment groups for the PP
population. At both EOT and EOS, the EGW counts were lowest in the 2.5%
imiquimod group and highest in the placebo group in the PP population. At EOS, the mean change and mean percent change from Baseline in EGW count was significantly greater in the active treatment groups compared with placebo, however the difference between the active treatment groups was not statistically significant.
In the female subgroup only, the mean change and mean percent change from Baseline in EGW count at EOS was significantly lower in both active treatment groups compared with placebo, and there was no significant difference between the active treatment groups. In males, the mean change and mean percent change was lower in both active treatment groups compared with placebo; the difference in mean change was significant only for the 2.5%
imiquimod group, but the difference in mean percent change was significant for both the 3.75%
and 2.5%
imiquimod groups.
The mean percent decrease from Baseline in wart count in the 2 active treatment groups was consistently larger than placebo. The differences between the active treatment groups and placebo were statistically significant at all post-Baseline time points after Week 4 with the exception of the 2.5% imiquimod group at Week 12. The differences between the 3.75%
imiquimod and 2.5% imiquimod groups were not statistically significant at any analysis time point.
Time to Complete Clearance Summaries of the time to complete clearance are shown in Table 82 below.

Table 82 Time to Clearance (days) for the ITT population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) All Subjects (Kaplan-Meier) 1st Quartile 71.0 101.0 >57 Median time to complete clearance, including all 123.0 >101 >112.0 subjects, days P value vs Placebo <0.001 <0.001 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.474 Only Subjects Who Attained Clearance 1st Quartile 47.0 43.0 34.0 Median time to complete clearance, including only 60.0 63.0 71.0 subjects who attained clearance, days 3rd Quartile 81.5 100.0 91.0 P values are from the log rank test comparing survival curves in the Kaplan-Meier framework, taking 2 treatment groups at a time.
Although the median time to complete clearance for the ITT treatment group was not reached, the median time to complete clearance in the ITT population was statistically significantly shorter in the 2 active treatment groups compared with placebo (P<0.001 using the log-rank test). The difference between the 2 imiquimod treatment groups was not statistically significant (P=0.474).
For those subjects who attained complete clearance, the median time to complete clearance was 60 days in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 63 days in the 2.75%
imiquimod group, and 71 days in the placebo group.
Results in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population.
Among the subset of subjects who achieved complete clearance in the PP population, the median time to clearance was 64 days in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 63 days in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, and 71 days in the placebo group.
Complete clearance was achieved more rapidly in female subjects compared with males in both the ITT and PP populations.

Sustained Complete Clearance Rate at Week 12 of the Follow-up for Recurrence Period The numbers of subjects who remained clear in the follow-up period or who had a recurrence of EGW are presented in Table 83 below.
Table 83 Wart Recurrence Rate ¨ Follow-up for Recurrence Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=53) (N=43) (N=7) Recurrence Follow-up - Week 12 Subjects who remained clear a, n/N (%) 34/53 (64.2) 29/43 (67.4) 7/7 (100.0) Subjects who had a recurrence, n/N (%) 10/53 (18.9) 7/43 (16.3) 0 Missed at Week 12 Visit 9/53 (17.0) 7/43 (16.3) 0/7 (0.0) 95% Confidence interval 9.4, 32.0 6.8, 30.7 a Includes those who had a visit within window with no warts Thirty-four subjects (64.2%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 29 subjects (67.4%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 7 subjects (100%) in the placebo group achieved complete clearance at EOS that was sustained throughout the 12-week follow-up period. Data were missing for 9 subjects (17.0%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group and 7 subjects (16.3%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group, so their recurrence status was not known, but at least 18.9% of the 3.75% imiquimod group and 16.3% of the 2.5% imiquimod group in the follow-up for recurrence population are known to have shown recurrence of EGW within 12 weeks of the initial clearance.
Statistical/Analytical Issues Adjustments for Covariates The primary efficacy analysis was based on a CMH test, stratified by gender and analysis site. Secondary analyses were performed in a number of subgroups. No other adjustments for covariates were planned.
Handling of Dropouts or Missing Data For the primary ITT analysis, missing observations due to early discontinuation were imputed using the LOCF. Screening data were carried forward if no baseline data existed for the subject. Baseline data were carried forward if no post-baseline data existed for the subject.
Additional analyses of the primary efficacy variable were performed in which (1) all missing observations were considered as failures and (2) using only observed cases, without imputations.
The results of these additional analyses are presented in the Table 84 below.
Table 84 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance at End of Study (Sensitivity and Supporting Analyses) ¨ ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N =204) (N =202) (N = 105) ITT Population (all subjects with missing data were counted as failures) n/Na (%) 60/204 (29.4) 51/202 (25.2) 9/105 (8.6) 95% CI 23.3, 36.2 19.4, 31.8 4.0, 15.6 P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.231 ITT Population (observed cases) niNa (%) 60/204 (29.4) 50/202 (24.8) 9/105 (8.6) 95% CI 23.3, 36.2 19.0,31.8 4.0, 15.6 P value vs Placebo <0.001** 0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.231 95% CI = 95% confidence interval a n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site, taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P-values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
Results of these additional analyses are identical to those obtained based upon LOCF for all treatment groups.
Multicenter Studies In order to obtain at least 6 subjects per site per active treatment group, investigational sites yielding fewer than 15 subjects were combined in order of geographic proximity. The exact composition of these "analysis sites" was determined and documented prior to breaking the study blind. The stratification for CMH analyses was based on the analysis sites, not on the actual investigational sites.

Multiple Comparison/Multiplicity The primary efficacy endpoint, complete clearance rate at the End of Study, was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying on gender and site. As mentioned above, all pairwise comparisons of active treatment versus placebo were made using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. If either test was significant at a 0.025 level of significance, then that test was considered significant. Otherwise, if both tests were significant at 0.05, then both tests were considered significant. The 3.75% and 2.5% treatment groups were compared to each other at the 0.05 level of significance if at least one of these treatment groups was found to be different than the placebo using the Hochberg's test.
The 4 secondary efficacy variables were to be tested hierarchically using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure to conserve Type 1 error. First, only if the primary endpoint showed statistical significant could the first secondary efficacy variable be tested. If the prior secondary efficacy variable showed statistical significance then the next secondary efficacy variable could be tested, etc.
Use of an "Efficacy Subset" of Subjects Efficacy variables were analyzed for a Per Protocol (PP) subset of subjects.
The PP
population included all subjects in the ITT population who had no major protocol violations: 144 subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 144 subjects in the 2.5%
imiquimod treatment group, and 81 subjects in the placebo group. The demographic and baseline characteristics in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population, although the mean total wart area decreased in the 3.75% imiquimod group.
In the analysis of the primary efficacy variable, the results in the PP
population were similar to those in the ITT population. The proportion of subjects with complete clearance at Week 16/EOS was statistically significantly greater in the active treatment groups compared with placebo.
Results in the PP population for the other efficacy variables were also similar to those from the ITT population.

Examination of Subgroups The primary efficacy variable was summarized without statistical testing by, investigator site, by analysis site, by investigator medical specialty, by gender, by age subgroup, by race subgroup, by baseline EGW count subgroup, by baseline wart areas, by anatomic locations (inguinal, perineal, perianal, glans penis, penis shaft, scrotum, foreskin, or vulva), by number of anatomic locations affected by EGW (ie, one location versus multiple), by whether first EGW
episode, by duration from first diagnosis of EGW, by rest periods (yes or no), and by previous treatment with imiquimod (yes or no).
In general, the complete clearance rates increased in a dose-dependent manner regardless of subgroup. The most striking subgroup effect was observed in the analysis by gender.
Complete clearance at EOS was attained by 17.0%, 15.3%, and 4.1% of male subjects, and by 38.8%, 31.6%, and 12.5% of females in the 3.75%, 2.5%, and placebo groups, respectively.
The complete clearance tended to be higher in the following subgroups:
= Females;
= Lower baseline wart count (<7 compared with >7);
= Baseline wart area <70mm2;
= Subjects with baseline warts in the perianal, perineal and glans penis;
= Subjects who took a rest period (noted in the imiquimod groups but not placebo);
= No previous imiquimod treatment (noted in the imiquimod groups but not placebo).
In the 3.75% imiquimod group, the complete clearance rate was higher in older subjects (>35 years) compared with younger subjects.
When analyzed by analysis site or investigative site subgroups, the complete clearance rate was highest in the 3.75% imiquimod group at 12/24 analysis sites and 17/43 investigative sites.
When analyzed by investigator site specialty subgroups, the highest overall complete clearance rates were observed at sites specializing in gynecology (sites where more females were enrolled) or infectious disease. At sites specializing in dermatology and urology, the clearance rates decreased with increasing imiquimod dose. Few subjects in any treatment group attained complete clearance at sites specializing in dermatology or urology (sites at which only male subjects were enrolled) or infectious disease.
Additional analysis by Gender Additional analyses of the data were performed to explore the possible effect of gender on efficacy. Of the 511 subjects randomized into the trial, 222 (43.4%) were male and 289 (56.6%) were female. Similar percentages of males and females completed the evaluation period. Lost to follow-up and subject's request were the most common reasons for study discontinuation in both genders. The time to loss of follow-up was similar in the active treatment groups for both genders. However, in males, the highest percentage of subjects lost to follow-up were in the 3.75% imiquimod group, and in females, the highest percentage of subjects lost to follow-up were in the 2.5% imiquimod group.
As in the overall population, the response with 3.75% imiquimod cream was significantly superior to that with placebo in both genders. The complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females compared with males in all treatment groups for both the ITT
and PP
populations, including the sensitivity and supporting analyses of the ITT
population.
A summary of complete clearance of all anatomic sites at EOS by baseline involvement of anatomic locations is presented in Table 85 below. Of note, a majority of subjects of each gender had involvement of more than one anatomic site at baseline.

Table 85 Complete Clearance at End of Study by Baseline Anatomic Location, --ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Baseline anatomic location (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) Both genders- n/N (%)a Inguinal 3/35 (8.6) 7/36 (19.4) 1/23 (4.3) Perineal 26/67 (38.8) 18/61 (29.5) 2/32 (6.3) Perianal 28/61 (45.9) 19/57 (33.3) 4/31 (12.9) Males- n/N (Na Inguinal 1/24(4.2) 2/17(11.8) 1/19(5.3) Perineal 1/6 (16.7) 1/8 (12.5) 0/3 (0.0) Perianal 3/8 (37.5) 0/6 (0.0) 0/5 (0.0) Glans Penis 4/9 (44.4) 3/11(27.3) 0/5 (0.0) Penis Shaft 10/71 (14.1) 12/76(15.8) 2/39(5.1) Scrotum 0/19 (0.0) 1/16 (6.3) 0/14 (0.0) Foreskin 0/2 (0.0) 0/2 (0.0) Females- n/N (%)a Inguinal 2/11 (18.2) 5/19(26.3) 0/4(0.0) Perineal 25/61 (41.0) 17/53 (32.1) 2/29 (6.9) Perianal 25/53 (47.2) 19/51 (37.3) 4/26 (15.4) Vulva 31/86 (36.0) 22/78 (28.2) 5/31 (16.1) a: Subjects with complete clearance are included in the numerator.
In the anatomic areas common to both genders, perineal and perianal involvements were relatively common in females: few males had baseline disease in those areas.
Females with perineal or perianal EGW at Baseline demonstrated relatively high rates of complete clearance at EOS. The third most common anatomic site, the inguinal area, was present in more males in the 3.75% imiquimod and placebo groups but comparable in both genders in the 2.5%
imiquimod group. Females in the active treatment groups had a higher rate of complete clearance than males. The lowest clearance rates occurred in subjects with inguinal area involvement (at Baseline) in all treatment groups. The complete clearance rates at EOS by baseline anatomic location for each gender are shown in Table 85.
The anatomic areas most commonly affected with EGW at Baseline in males were the penis shaft, inguinal, and scrotum area. The complete clearance rates were highest in the subjects whose EGW at Baseline was in the glans penis and perianal area for the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with the 2.5% imiquimod group and placebo. In females, the vulva, perineal, and perianal areas were the areas most commonly affected with EGW at Baseline. The complete clearance rates were highest with 3.75% imiquimod for all baseline anatomic areas with the exception of the inguinal area in females.
In both genders, complete clearance rates were higher in subjects who took a rest period from imiquimod treatment compared with those who did not take a rest period.
The complete clearance rates in males and females were higher for subjects >35 years of age than in younger subjects. Females with a first EGW diagnosis within one year had higher clearance rates than those with a longer EGW history. Males with a first EGW diagnosis after one year had higher clearance rates than those with a shorter EGW history.
Exploratory Analysis of Anatomic Specific Complete Clearance In this study, subjects applied study medication to individual warts in various anatomic areas identified at Baseline. Some subjects developed new warts during the study. These new warts may have appeared within anatomic areas already displaying EGW at Baseline and/or these new warts may have appeared in 'new' anatomic areas that had not been exposed to study medication at initiation of treatment. New warts were treated with study medication when they appeared, but received less than a full course of treatment, because treatment was not extended beyond 8 weeks from randomization.
An exploratory analysis of complete clearance within the specific anatomic areas affected with EGW at Baseline was performed for the overall ITT population and by gender.
Drug Dose, Drug Concentration, and Relationships to Response This study examined the efficacy of 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream, that was applied once daily for a maximum of 8 weeks. Subjects self-applied a maximum of 1 packet (250 mg) of study drug per application. No sample collection for pharmacokinetic determinations was planned in this study; therefore, no analysis of drug concentration was done.
A dose response was observed in this study. The 3.75% imiquimod cream consistently demonstrated higher efficacy rates compared with the 2.5% imiquimod cream for all primary and secondary efficacy measures, in both the ITT and PP populations. The difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant for primary efficacy analysis, secondary and tertiary efficacy variables.

Efficacy Conclusions The investigational products 3.75% imiquimod cream and 2.5% imiquimod cream met the criteria for efficacy as defined in this protocol.
= For the primary endpoint (the rate of complete clearance of EGW at Weekl 6/E0S), results with 3.75% imiquimod cream and 2.5% imiquimod cream were statistically significantly superior to results with the placebo cream (P<0.001). This effect was observed in both the ITT and PP populations. In the ITT population, the complete clearance rates were 29.4% and 24.8%, respectively, in the 3.75% and 2.5%
imiquimod treatment groups, compared with 8.6% in the placebo group. Results in the 3.75% imiquimod group were numerically but not statistically higher than in the 2.5% imiquimod group.
= The complete clearance rate at end of treatment (EOT) was statistically significantly superior with both active treatment groups compared with placebo overall and in the female subgroup in both the ITT and PP populations.
= Over the course of the study, the complete clearance rates were significantly superior with both active treatment groups compared with placebo at every analysis time point after Week 8 in both the ITT and PP populations. Clearance rates were higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group however the difference was not statistically significant at any time point during the evaluation period.
= The partial (>75%) clearance rate in both active treatment groups was statistically significantly superior to the placebo cream at Week 16/EOS for the ITT
population and PP population (overall and in both genders). Results were significantly higher for the active treatment groups at all analysis time points after Week 4 for the ITT and PP
populations.
= Over the course of the study, the partial (>75%) clearance rates were significantly superior with both active treatment groups at every analysis time point after Week 6 (ITT population) and Week 8 (PP population). Results were significantly higher for the 3.75% imiquimod vs 2.5% imiquimod at Weeks 6, 12, and 14.
= The >50% clearance rate at EOS was significantly greater in both active treatment groups compared with placebo in both the ITT and PP populations. Results were higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group vs 2.5% imiquimod however the difference was not statistically significant.

= Over the course of the study, the >50% clearance rates were significantly superior with both active treatment groups compared with placebo at every analysis time point after Week 4 in both the ITT and PP populations.
= The complete and partial clearance rates were consistently higher in the female subgroup compared with the male subgroup in all treatment groups. Mean change and percent change from Baseline in EGW counts were consistently higher in females compared with males in the active treatment groups.
= At EOS, the mean percent change from Baseline in wart count with 3.75%
imiquimod cream and 2.5% imiquimod cream was statistically significantly greater than with placebo (P<0.001) in the ITT and PP populations.
= Although the median time to complete clearance for the ITT treatment group was not reached, the median time to complete clearance in the ITT population was statistically significantly shorter in the 2 active treatment groups compared with placebo (P<0.001 using the log-rank test). The difference between the 2 imiquimod treatment groups was not statistically significant (P=0.474). For those subjects who attained complete clearance, the median time to complete clearance was 60 days in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 63 days in the 2.75% imiquimod group, and 71 days in the placebo group.
= Thirty-four of 53 subjects (64.2%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group remained completely clear of EGW through the 12-week follow-up period, while 10/53 subjects had wart recurrence. The status is unknown for 9/53 subjects. Twenty-nine of subjects (67.4%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group (with 7 missing subjects), and 7 of 7 subjects in the placebo group remained clear through the follow-up period.
Thus, at least 64.2% of the 3.75% imiquimod group and 67.4% of the 2.5% imiquimod group in the follow-up for recurrence population are known to have sustained clearance of all anatomic sites for at least 12 weeks from initial clearance.

SAFETY EVALUATION
Extent of Exposure An overall summary of study drug exposure for the ITT population is presented in Table 86 below. One subject was originally randomized to the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group;
however, at Week 2, the subject incorrectly received a 3.75% imiquimod treatment group kit assigned to another subject. For the safety analysis the highest dose received (3.75% imiquimod) was used and the subject was considered as part of the safety population instead of the ITT
population.

Table 86 Overall Study Drug Exposure - ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=204) (N=202) (N=105) Treatment duration, days' - All subjects Mean SD 50.0 (15.6) 50.8 (15.3) 54.7 (10.9) Median 56 56 56 MM, Max 1,89 3,97 13,73 Total number of packets used Mean SD 43.8 (14.4) 45.1 (14.2) 52.7 (9.5) Median 48 51 56 Min, Max 6,72 3,65 13,76 Number of days treated' Mean SD 43.7 (15.4) 45.6 (15.5) 52.0 (10.9) Median 50 52 55 Min, Max 1,74 3,92 13,69 Percent of Treatment Compliance c Mean SD 83.2 (26.7) 86.5 (23.2) 91.1 (20.8) Median 95 96 98 Min, Max 0,116 13, 118 25, SD=standard deviation, min=minimum, max-maximum.
a Duration of treatment is date of last dose minus date of first dose plus 1.
Last dose is defined as last date on study medication.
b Days treated is the duration of treatment minus rest period days and missed doses.
c Based on either packet use compliance or treatment days compliance whichever is greater.
The mean treatment duration, number of study medication packets, and number of days were numerically highest in the placebo group compared with the 3.75% and 2.5%
imiquimod treatment groups.
Based on the available data, on average, the subjects used 43.8 packets of 3.75%
imiquimod, 45.1 packets of 2.5% imiquimod, and 52.7 packets of placebo. Mean treatment duration was 50.0 days in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 50.8 days in the 2.5%
imiquimod treatment group, and 54.7 days in the placebo group. When rest periods and missed doses were subtracted, the total number of days treated was reduced to 43.7, 45.6, and 52.0 days in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively.
The mean number of packets used, number of days treated, and percent treatment compliance were higher in the males than in females in the active treatment groups in the ITT
and safety populations. Mean treatment duration was higher in males than in females for the 2.5% imiquimod group in the ITT population. There was no difference between genders in the placebo group.
Adverse Events (AEs) Brief Summary of Adverse Events A summary of the overall incidence of AEs is provided in Table 87 below for the safety population.
Table 87 Summary of Adverse Events-Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any AE, n (%) 103 (50.2) 101 (50.2) 43 (41.0) Number of AEs 286 227 75 Subjects with any:
Treatment-relatecr AE, n (%) 40 (19.5) 37 (18.4) 3 ( 2.9) SAE, n (%) 7 ( 3.4) 2 ( 1.0) 1 ( 1.0) AEs of severe intensity, n (%) 15 ( 7.3) 10 ( 5.0) 4 ( 3.8) AE leading to study 3 ( 1.5) 5 ( 2.5) 0 discontinuation, n (%) AE=adverse event, SAE=serious adverse event a: Includes "Probably related" and "Related" AEs.
Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more adverse events that map to the MedDRA system organ class. A subject may be counted once only in each row of the table. A treatment-emergent AE is an AE that began or worsened in severity after Day 1 and no more than 30 days after the last application of study drug.
Subject 03/012 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, who discontinued from the study at the subject's request (CRF
page 31) was also recorded as discontinued from the study due to an adverse event.
The number of subjects who experienced any AE (including those not considered treatment emergent) was similar in the active treatment groups (103 [50.2%]
and 101 [50.2%] in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively) and lower in the placebo group (43, [41.0%]). The number of subjects with AEs considered treatment-related or severe in intensity was similar in the active treatment groups and lower in the placebo group. Seven (3.4%) of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group experienced an SAE. The number of subjects with an SAE or who withdrew from the study due to an AE was low in the other 2 treatment groups.
An overall summary of the incidence of treatment-emergent AEs is provided in Table 88 below.
Table 88 Summary of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any AE, n (%) 91 (44.4) 82 (40.8) 34 (32.4) Number of AEs 216 167 51 Subjects with any:
Treatment-relateda AE, n (%) 40 (19.5) 37 (18.4) 3 (2.9) Application site AE, n (%) 35 (17.1) 33 (16.4) 3 ( 2.9) SAE, n (%) 6(2.9) 2(1.0) 1(1.0) AEs of severe intensity, n (%) 14 (6.8) 9 (4.5) 3 (2.9) AE leading to study 3 (1.5) 5(2.5) 0 discontinuation, n (%) AE=adverse event, SAE=serious adverse event a: Includes "Probably related" and "Related" AEs.
Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more adverse events that map to the MedDRA system organ class. A subject may be counted once only in each row of the table. A treatment-emergent AE is an AE that began or worsened in severity after Day 1 and no more than 30 days after the last application of study drug.
The number of subjects with treatment-emergent AEs was similar in the active treatment groups (91 [44.4%] and 82 [40.8%] in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively) and lower in the placebo group (34, [32.4%]). The number of subjects with AEs considered treatment-emergent or severe in intensity was similar in the active treatment groups and lower in the placebo group. A higher percentage of subjects in the active treatment groups had application site reactions compared with placebo. The number of subjects with an SAE or who withdrew from the study due to an AE was relatively low in all treatment groups.
Most Frequent Adverse Events A treatment-emergent AE was defined as an AE that began or worsened in severity after the first application of the study drug and no more than 30 days after the last application of the study drug. The incidence of the most commonly-occurring treatment-emergent AEs is presented by preferred term in Table 89 below.

Table 89 Number (%) of Subjects with Most Frequent Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (>1 /0 in any active treatment group) - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any AE, n (%) 91 (44.4) 82 (40.8) 34 (32.4) Application site pain 17 (8.3) 8 (4.0) 0 Application site pruritus 8 (3.9) 14 (7.0) 1(1.0) Application site irritation 12 (5.9) 8 (4.0) 1(1.0) Nasopharyngitis 4 (2.0) 7 (3.5) 6 (5.7) Upper respiratory tract infection 5 (2.4) 4 (2.0) 2 (1.9) Urinary tract infection 4 (2.0) 3 (1.5) 2 (1.9) Vaginal candidiasis 1(0.5) 7 (3.5) 1(1.0) Nasal congestion 2 (1.0) 5 (2.5) 1(1.0) Headache 3 (1.5) 3 (1.5) 1(1.0) Pruritus genital 4 (2.0) 2 (1.0) 1(1.0) Scrotal erythema 2 (1.0) 5 (2.5) 0 Influenza 1(0.5) 3 (1.5) 2 (1.9) Application site rash 2 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 0 Application site ulcer 2 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 0 Nausea 3 (1.5) 1(0.5) 1(1.0) Rash 3 (1.5) 1(0.5) 1(1.0) Scrotal ulcer 2 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 0 Sinusitis 3 (1.5) 0 2 (1.9) Application site infection 1(0.5) 3 (1.5) 0 Application site vesicles 3 (1.5) 1 (0.5) 0 Sinus congestion 3 (1.5) 1(0.5) 0 Anxiety 3(1.5) 0 0 Influenza like illness 0 3 (1.5) 0 Musculoskeletal pain 3 (1.5) 0 0 Scrotal pain 3(1.5) 0 0 AE-adverse event Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more adverse events that map to the MedDRA system organ class. A subject may be counted once only in each row of the table.
A treatment-emergent AE is an AE that began or worsened in severity after the first application of the study drug and no more than 30 days after the last application of the study drug.
The AE reported with the greatest overall incidence was application site pain, reported in 8.3% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 4.0% of subjects in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, and 0.0% of subjects in the placebo group.

Application site pruritus occurred with a higher frequency in the 2.5%
imiquimod group (7.0%) compared with the 3.75% imiquimod group (3.9%) and placebo 0.0% groups.

Nasopharyngitis occurred with a higher frequency in the placebo group (5.7%) compared with the 3.75% imiquimod group (2.0%), and 2.5% imiquimod group (3.5%). With these exceptions, the incidence of the individual AEs was similar in the 2 active treatment groups and lower in the placebo group.
Flu-like symptoms and certain other systemic effects have been reported with 5%
imiquimod treatment. The incidence of these AEs was very low in the current study. These events were reported in this study in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively, as follows:
= nausea was reported in 3 (1.5%), 1 (0.5%), and 1 (0.5%) subjects;
= influenza was reported in 1(0.5%), 3 (1.5%), and 2 (1.9%) subjects;
= influenza-like illness was reported in 0, 3 (1.5%), and 0 subjects;
= myalgia was reported in 1 (0.5%), 1 (0.5%), and 0 subjects;
= pyrexia was reported in 1 (0.5%), 1 (0.5%), and 0 subjects;
= chills were reported in 0, 1 (0.5), and 0 subjects.
Adverse Events by System Organ Class The incidence of AEs is presented by system organ class in Table 90 below.

Table 90 Number ("/0) of Subjects with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events by System Organ Class - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) General disorders and administration site disorders 42 (20.5) 37 (18.4) 5 (4.8) Infections and infestations 36 (17.6) 37 (18.4) 20 (19.0) Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders 11(5.4) 10 (5.0) 4 (3.8) Gastrointestinal disorders 11(5.4) 6 (3.0) 3 (2.9) Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders 11(5.4) 3 (1.5) 2 (1.9) Reproductive system and breast disorders 10 (4.9) 13 (6.5) 2 (1.9) Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders 7 (3.4) 4 (2.0) 1 (1.0) Injury, poisoning, and connective tissue disorders 6 (2.9) 3 (1.5) 4 (3.8) Psychiatric disorders 4 (2.0) 1(0.5) 1(1.0) Nervous system disorders 3 (1.5) 5 (2.5) 1(1.0) Investigations 2 (1.0) 0 1 (1.0) Renal and urinary disorders 2 (1.0) 0 1 (1.0) Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified (incl 2 (1.0) 0 0 cysts and polyps) Immune system disorders 1(0.5) 1(0.5) 1(1.0) Surgical and medical procedures 1(0.5) 1(0.5) 1(1.0) Endocrine disorders 1 (0.5) 0 0 Metabolism and nutrition disorders 1 (0.5) 0 0 Vascular disorders 1 (0.5) 0 0 Blood and lymphatic disorders 0 2 (1.0) 0 AE-adverse event Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more AEs that map to the MedDRA
system organ class. A subject was counted only once in each row of the table.
System organ classes in which AEs were reported with an incidence of >5% in at least one treatment group were general disorders and administrative site disorders, infections and infestations, gastrointestinal disorders, reproductive system and breast disorders, respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders, and skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders.
Adverse Events by Intensity Most of the AEs were of mild or moderate intensity. Four AEs were rated as severe in at least 2 subjects in any treatment group:

= application site pruritus, reported in 1 subject (0.5%) in the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and subjects in the placebo group;
= application site irritation, reported in 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and subjects in the placebo group;
= application site rash, reported in 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 0 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment and placebo groups;
= scrotal erythema, reported in 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 1 subject (0.5%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 0 subjects in the placebo group.
Adverse Events by Relationship to Treatment Treatment-emergent AEs are summarized by treatment group and relationship to study treatment in Table 91 below.

Table 91 Number (%) of Subjects with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Related to Treatment - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any treatment-related:
SAE, n (%) 0 0 0 AE of severe intensity, n (%) 9 ( 4.4) 9 ( 4.5) 1 ( 1.0) AE leading to study drug discontinuation, 1 ( 0.5) 3 ( 1.5) 0 n (%) Application site pain 16 ( 7.8) 8 ( 4.0) 0 Application site pruritus 7 ( 3.4) 14 ( 7.0) 1 ( 1.0) Application site irritation 11 ( 5.4) 8 ( 4.0) 1 ( 1.0) Application site rash 2 ( 1.0) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site ulcer 2 ( 1.0) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site bleeding 2 ( 1.0) 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 1.0) Application site vesicles 3 ( 1.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Secretion discharge 2 ( 1.0) 2 ( 1.0) 0 Application site reaction 1 ( 0.5) 2 ( 1.0) 0 Application site dermatitis 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site discharge 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site erythema 0 2 ( 1.0) 0 Application site erosion 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site paraesthesia 0 0 1 ( 1.0) Application site swelling 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Scrotal erythema 2 ( 1.0) 4 ( 2.0) 0 Scrotal ulcer 2 ( 1.0) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Scrotal oedema 2 ( 1.0) 2 ( 1.0) 0 Pruritus genital 2 ( 1.0) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Scrotal pain 3 ( 1.5) 0 0 Genital rash 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Pelvic pain 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Penis disorder 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Prostatitis 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Scrotal irritation 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Vulval disorder 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Vulval ulceration 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Vulvovaginal pruritus 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 (Continued) Table 91 Number (%) of Subjects with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Related to Treatment - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Application site infection 1 ( 0.5) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site cellulitis 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Application site pustules 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Cellulitis 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Folliculitis 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Fungal infection 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Influenza 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Scrotal infection 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Staphylococcal abscess 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Haemorrhoidal haemorrhage 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Haemorrhoids 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Nausea 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Groin pain 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Myalgia 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Pain in extremity 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Rash 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Scab 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Skin exfoliation 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Lymph node pain 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Burning sensation 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Dysuria 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 AE¨adverse event Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more AEs that map to the MedDRA
system organ class. A subject was counted only once in each row of the table.
Treatment-related includes Probably Related and Related.
Adverse events considered to be treatment-related were reported in 40 subjects (19.5%) in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 37 (18.4%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 3 (2.9%) in the placebo group. The most frequently reported treatment-related AEs were application site pain and application site pruritus. Application site AEs were the most frequently reported treatment-related AEs followed by AEs involving the scrotum.
Application site pruritus, application site irritation, application site bleeding and paraesthesia, each in 1 subject (1.0%), were the only treatment-related AEs reported in the placebo group.

Treatment-related AEs of severe intensity were reported by 9 subjects in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 9 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 1 subject in the placebo group.
The majority of the AEs were application site reactions and all resolved without sequelae.
Adverse Events by Subgroup Treatment-emergent AEs were analyzed by gender, by age, by number of anatomic areas affected by EGW, and by baseline wart count. As in the overall population, application site reactions were the most commonly-reported AEs and treatment-related AEs in all subgroups for all treatment groups.
Adverse Events by Gender: Summaries of the analysis by gender are provided in the Table below (table 92).
Table 92 Treatment-emergent Adverse Events by Gender-Safety Population Male Female 3.75% 2.5% 3.75% 2.5%
Imiquimod Imiquimod Placebo Imiquimod Imiquimod Placebo n=88 n=85 n=49 n=117 n=116 n=56 Subjects with any AE, n (%) 37 (42.0) 28 (32.9) 8 (16.3) 54 (46.2) 54 (46.6) 26 (46.4) Number of AEs 104 60 11 112 107 40 Number (%) of subjects with:
Any Treatment-related AE 16 (18.2) 13 (15.3) 0 ( 0.0) 24 (20.5) 24 (20.7) 3 ( 5.4) Any SAE 2 ( 2.3) 1 ( 1.2) 0 ( 0.0) 4 ( 3.4) 1 ( 0.9) 1 ( 1.8) Any Severe AE 10 (11.4) 2 ( 2.4) 0 ( 0.0) 4 ( 3.4) 7 ( 6.0) 3 ( 5.4) Any AE leading to Study 1 ( 1.1) 2 ( 2.4) 0 ( 0.0) 2 ( 1.7) 3 ( 2.6) 0 ( 0.0) Discontinuation Any Application site 14 (15.9) 9 (10.6) 0 ( 0.0) 21 (17.9) 24 (20.7) 3 ( 5.4) Reaction The overall incidence of AEs was higher in females than in males in all treatment groups.
Treatment-related AEs and SAEs were reported in a higher percentage of females than in males in the 3.75% imiquimod and placebo treatment groups but not in the 2.5%
imiquimod group.
Severe AEs were reported in a higher percentage of females in the 2.5%
imiquimod and placebo groups, but not in the 3.75% imiquimod group. The incidence of SAEs and AEs leading to study discontinuation was low in all treatment groups regardless of gender.
Application site reactions were the most commonly reported AEs in the 2 imiquimod treatment groups.
Severe AEs and application site reactions were each reported in 3 female subjects (5.4%) in the placebo group.

Adverse Events by Age:
As in the overall population, application site reactions were the most commonly-reported treatment-emergent AEs in both age groups for the 2 imiquimod treatment groups.
In the active treatment groups, the incidence of treatment-emergent AEs was similar in younger 35 years) and older (> 35 years) subjects within each treatment group.
Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 45.1%, 40.8%, and 31.8%, respectively, of younger subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups compared with 43.1%, 40.8%, and 33.3%, respectively, of the older subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5%
imiquimod, and placebo groups.
In the active treatment groups, the incidence of treatment-related AEs and application site reactions was slightly higher in younger subjects than in older subjects;
however, within each age subgroup, there was little difference between the active treatments. Few treatment-related AEs or application site reactions were reported in subjects in either age subgroup who received placebo.
Adverse Events by Number of Anatomic Areas:
As in the overall population, the most commonly-reported treatment-emergent AEs and treatment-related AEs in both subgroups for all treatment groups were application site reactions.
In the 2 active treatment groups, similar percentages of subjects in the single-area and multiple-area subgroups reported a treatment-emergent AE. In the placebo group, subjects in the multiple-area subgroup reported a higher percentage of treatment-emergent AEs than those in the single-area subgroup (36.5% versus 28.3%, respectively). For treatment-related AEs and application site reactions, there was little difference in AE incidence between the subgroups in any of the treatment groups.
Adverse Events by Baseline Wart Count:
In the subjects with 7 or fewer warts at Baseline, the incidence of AEs was 43.9%, 39.5%, and 32.8%, respectively, in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, whereas in subjects with more than 7 warts at Baseline, the incidence of AEs was 45.1%, 42.9%, and 31.6%, respectively, in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups.

In the subjects with 7 or fewer warts at Baseline, the incidence of treatment-related AEs was 19.5%, 16.9%, and 4.5%, respectively, in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5%
imiquimod, and placebo groups, whereas in subjects with more than 7 warts at Baseline, the incidence of treatment-related AEs was 19.5%, 20.8%, and 0%, respectively, in the 3.75%
imiquimod, 2.5%
imiquimod, and placebo groups.
There was little difference in the incidence of treatment-emergent AEs, treatment-related AEs, and application site reactions between the subgroups in any of the active treatment groups.
In the placebo group, subjects with 7 or fewer warts had a higher incidence of application site reactions than subjects with more than 7 warts.
Local Skin Reactions Local skin reactions were assessed by the investigator at each visit including Baseline (pretreatment). At Baseline, 5.4%, 6.0%, and 8.6% of subjects in the 3.75%
imiquimod, 2.5%
imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively, had at least one LSR reaction (LSR intensity score >0). The most intense post-Baseline LSRs (ie, those with the highest intensity rating) in the treatment area that were assessed by the investigator over the course of the study are summarized in the Table below (Table 93). The potential maximum sum of LSR scores was 18 (six types of LSRs each with maximum potential score of 3).

Table 93 Frequency Distribution of Most Intense Post-baseline Local Skin Reactions in the Treatment Area - Safety Population Number (%) of Subjects Imiquimod 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo Type of Reaction Intensity (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Erythema N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) 0=None 50 (26.5) 64 (35.6) 67 (68.4) 1=Faint to mild redness 49 (25.9) 49 (27.2) 19 (19.4) 2-Moderate redness 71 (37.6) 47 (26.1) 11 (11.2) 3-Intense redness 19 (10.1) 20 (11.1) 1(1.0) >0 (any reaction) 139 (73.5) 116 (64.4) 31 (31.6) Mean score (SD) 1.31 (0.97) 1.13 (1.02) 0.45 (0.73) Edema N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) 0=None 108 (57.1) 111 (61.7) 89 (90.8) 1-Mild visible/barely palpable swelling/ 59 (31.2) 47 (26.1) 8 (8.2) induration 2-Easily palpable swelling/induration 19 (10.1) 16 (8.9) 1(1.0) 3-Gross swelling/induration 3 (1.6) 6 (3.3) 0 >0 (any reaction) 81 (42.9) 69 (38.3) 9 (9.2) Mean score (SD) 0.56 (0.74) 0.54 (0.79) 0.10 (0.34) Weeping/Exudate N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) 0=None 124 (65.6) 125 (69.4) 95 (96.9) 1=Minimal exudate 49 (25.9) 41 (22.8) 3 (3.1) 2=Moderate exudate 12 (6.3) 12 (6.7) 0 3-1-leavy exudate 4(2.1) 2(1.1) 0 >0 (any reaction) 65 (34.4) 55 (30.6) 3 (3.1) Mean score (SD) 0.45 (0.71) 0.39 (0.66) 0.03 (0.17) Flaking/Scaling/ N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) Dryness 0=None 129 (68.3) 144 (80.0) 87 (88.8) 1=Mild dryness/flaking 52 (27.5) 28 (15.6) 11 (11.2) 2=Moderate dryness/flaking 8 (4.2) 6 (3.3) 0 3=Severe dryness/flaking 0 2 (1.1) 0 >0 (any reaction) 60 (31.7) 36 (20.0) 11 (11.2) Mean score (SD) 0.36 (0.56) 0.26 (0.57) 0.11(0.32) (Continued) Table 93 Frequency Distribution of Most Intense Post-baseline Local Skin Reactions in the Treatment Area - Safety Population Number (1)/0) of Subjects Imiquimod 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo Type of Reaction Intensity (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Scabbing/Crusting N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) 0=N one 141 (74.6) 141 (78.3) 93 (94.9) 1-Crusting 41 (21.7) 30 (16.7) 5 (5.1) 2=Serous scab 6 (3.2) 8 (4.4) 0 3-Eschar 1 (0.5) 1 (0.6) 0 >0 (any reaction) 48 (25.4) 39 (21.7) 5 (5.1) Mean score 0.30 (0.55) 0.27 (0.57) 0.05 (0.22) Erosion/Ulceration N 189 (100) 180 (100) 98 (100) 0=None 116 (61.4) 118 (65.6) 92 (93.9) 2=Erosion 51 (27.0) 40 (22.2) 5 (5.1) 3=Ulceration 22 (11.6) 22 (12.2) 1(1.0) >0 (any reaction) 73 (38.6) 62 (34.4) 6 (6.1) Mean score (SD) 0.89 (1.16) 0.81 (1.16) 0.13 (0.53) SD = Standard deviation.
Note: For purposes of analysis, 'Erosion' is categorized as 2 = Moderate, and 'Ulceration is categorized as 3 = Severe.
Denominator for the most intense reaction is the number of subjects with at least one post-baseline assessment.
As displayed in the Table above, the incidence of each type of LSR was higher in the active treatment groups compared with placebo. For each LSR, the percentage of subjects with any reaction and the mean intensity score were highest in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, somewhat lower in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and lowest in the placebo group.
The incidence of severe LSRs was similar between the active treatment groups within each LSR
category, and lower in the placebo group.
Erythema was the LSR reported with the greatest frequency and the greatest mean intensity in all 3 treatment groups. Severe erythema was reported in 10.1% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 11.1% of subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 1.0%
of subjects in the placebo group. The mean intensity score was higher in the active treatment group (1.31 and 1.13 in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively) compared with placebo.
Edema rated as severe was reported in 1.6% and 3.3% of subjects in the 3.75%
and 2.5%
imiquimod groups, respectively, compared with no subjects in the placebo group. The mean intensity scores were higher in the active treatment groups (0.56 and 0.54 in the 3.75% and 2.5%
imiquimod groups, respectively) compared with 0.10 in the placebo group.
For erosion/ulceration severe reactions (ulceration) were in reported in 11.6%
and 12.2%
of subjects in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively, compared with 1.0% of subjects in the placebo group. The mean intensity scores were higher in the active treatment groups (0.89 and 0.81 in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively) compared with 0.13 in the placebo group.
The majority of cases of weeping/exudate, flaking/scaling, and scabbing/crusting were mild in intensity. Few subjects in any treatment group had a reaction considered to be severe.
A summary of subjects who had any post-baseline local skin reaction is presented in Table 94 below.
Table 94 Summary of Subjects Who Had Any Local Skin Reaction During the Study - Safety Population Number (%) of Subjects Imiquimod 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo Most Intense Reaction (post-Baseline) (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) 0=None 41 (21.7) 57 (31.7) 57 (58.2) 1=Mild 41 (21.7) 42 (23.3) 26 (26.5) 2=Moderate 74 (39.2) 48 (26.7) 13 (13.3) 3=Severe 33 (17.5) 33 (18.3) 2 (2.0) >0 (any reaction) 148 (78.3) 123 (68.3) 41 (41.8) Mean score (SD) 1.5 (1.0) 1.3 (1.1) 0.6 (0.8) SD = Standard deviation.
Note: For purposes of analysis, 'Erosion' is categorized as 2 = Moderate, and 'Ulceration is categorized as 3 = Severe.
Denominator for the most intense reaction is the number of subjects with at least 1 post-baseline assessment.
As noted for the individual LSRs, the percentage of subjects reporting an LSR
at each intensity category was higher in the active treatment group compared with placebo, and was somewhat higher with 3.75% imiquimod than with 2.5% imiquimod. Severe reactions were reported by 17.5% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group and 18.3% of subjects in the 2.5%
imiquimod group compared with 2.0% of subjects in the placebo group. The mean score for the most intense LSR reaction was slightly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group (1.5) than in the 2.5% imiquimod group (1.3).
The mean LSR sum score is shown by study week in Figure 24 Erythema was the major contributor to the LSR sum score in all treatment groups, as determined by visual inspection. In the imiquimod treatment groups, the mean LSR sum score peaked at Week 2, decreased slightly during the treatment period, and rapidly decreased when treatment was discontinued. Mean LSR scores in the placebo group were highest at Week 4 but were considerably lower than those seen with active treatment.
Rest Periods Summaries of the rest periods for the safety population are presented in Table 95 below.

Table 95 Summary of Rest Periods - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects requiring rest period, n/N (%)* 67 (32.7) 55 (27.4) 3 (2.9) P value vs Placebo <0.001 <0.001 NA
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.234 NA NA
No. of dosing days missed due to rest period"

Mean (SD) 10.3 (8.1) 9.3 (6.7) 6.7 (4.7) Median 7 7 5 P value vs Placebo 0.522 0.526 NA
P value vs 2.5% cream 0.714 NA NA
No. of dosing days prior to the beginning of the first rest period"

Mean (SD) 18.3 (11.5) 18.9 (13.7) 25.7 (4.0) Median 14 14 28 P value vs Placebo 0.151 0.192 NA
P value vs 2.5% cream 0.924 NA NA
No. = number; SD=standard deviation; NA=not applicable a P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site, taking 2 treatment groups at a time.
P values are from the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, taking 2 treatment groups at a time.
Significantly larger percentages of subjects in the active treatment groups compared with placebo took a rest period during the study (P <0.001). There was no significant difference between the active treatments in the percentage of subjects who took a rest period (32.7% and 27.4% in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment groups in the mean duration of rest periods or the mean number of dosing days prior to the rest periods.
Analysis of Adverse Events Application site reactions are commonly reported for topically applied products. An additional analysis of these events is presented below.
Application site reactions reported in this study are displayed in Table 96 below.

Table 96 Number (%) of Subjects with Treatment-Emergent Application Site Adverse Events - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any application site reaction, 35 (17.1) 33 (16.4) 3 ( 2.9) n (%) Number of application site reactions 59 54 4 Number (%) of subjects with any:
Related Application Site Reaction a, n (%) 33 (16.1) 32 (15.9) 3 ( 2.9) Serious Application Site Reaction, n (%) 0 0 0 Severe Application Site Reaction, n (%) 6 ( 2.9) 6 ( 3.0) 1 ( 1.0) Application Site Reaction Leading to Study 1 ( 0.5) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Discontinuation, n (%) General disorders and administration site 35 (17.1) 32 (15.9) 3 ( 2.9) conditions, n (%) Application site pain 17 ( 8.3) 8 ( 4.0) 0 Application site pruritus 8 ( 3.9) 14 ( 7.0) 1 ( 1.0) Application site irritation 12 ( 5.9) 8 ( 4.0) 1 ( 1.0) Application site rash 2 ( 1.0) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site ulcer 2 ( 1.0) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site bleeding 2 ( 1.0) 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 1.0) Application site vesicles 3 ( 1.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site reaction 1 ( 0.5) 2 ( 1.0) 0 Application site dermatitis 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site discharge 1 ( 0.5) 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site erythema 0 2 ( 1.0) 0 Application site dryness 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Application site erosion 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site hypersensitivity 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Application site oedema 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Application site paraesthesia 0 0 1 ( 1.0) Application site swelling 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Infections and infestations, n (%) 2 ( 1.0) 4 ( 2.0) 0 Application site infection 1 ( 0.5) 3 ( 1.5) 0 Application site cellulitis 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Application site pustules 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 a: Includes 'Probably related' and 'Related' adverse events.
Note: Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting 1 or more AEs that map to the MedDRA
system organ class. A subject may be counted once only in each row of the table.

The incidence of application site AEs and treatment-related application site AEs was similar in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod treatment study groups. Few subjects in any of the treatment groups reported severe application site events or application site events that led to study withdrawal. No serious application site reactions were reported in any study group.
Listing of Deaths, Other Serious Adverse Events and Other Significant Adverse Events Deaths There was one death in the study (a 28-year old White male randomized to the 3.75%
imiquimod group). The subject was undergoing treatment for EGW on the glans penis and penis shaft and in the inguinal area. At the time of the event (gunshot wound to the chest) the subject had applied an unknown number of packets of 3.75% imiquimod cream. The fatal gunshot wound to the chest occurred on Study Day 40. The subject was receiving paracetamol 650 mg po pm and topical Benzamycing 90 g qhs at the time he was hospitalized.
Other Serious Adverse Events Serious adverse events are presented in Table 97 below.

Table 97 Number (Y0) of Subjects with Serious Adverse Events - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5%
Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with any serious adverse event, n (%) 7(3.4) 2 (1.0) 1(1.0) Subjects with any treatment-emergent SAE, n (%) 6 (2.9) 2 (1.0) 1(1.0) Subjects with any treatment-related SAE, n (%) 0 0 Serious adverse events Malignant melanoma 2 ( 1.0) 0 0 Anxiety 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Suicidal ideation 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Chest pain 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Diverticulitis 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Gun shot wound 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Diabetes mellitus inadequate control 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Arthritis 0 0 1 ( 1.0) Dyspnoea 1 ( 0.5) 0 0 Ovarian cystectomy 0 1 ( 0.5) 0 Gall bladder disorder' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Pancreatic carcinoma' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Ovarian epithelial cancer' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Bile duct obstruction' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Abdominal pain' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Abdominal distension' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Pneumothoraxa 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Catheter related infection' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Obstruction gastric' 1 ( 0.5) NA NA
Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more adverse events that map to the MedDRA system organ class. A subject was counted only once in each row of the table.
a:
Subject 03/014 was diagnosed with cancer during screening. All events reported for this subject were classified as non treatment-emergent SAEs.
Few SAEs were reported during the study. The overall incidence of SAEs was higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod and placebo groups.
Treatment-emergent SAEs occurred in 6 subjects (2.9%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 2 subjects (1.0%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 1 subject (1.0%) in the placebo group. No trends were evident. No treatment-related SAEs were reported by subjects in any of the treatment groups.

Two SAEs (anxiety and suicidal ideation) were recorded as ongoing, 2 SAEs (diabetes and ovarian cystectomy) resolved with sequelae, and all other SAEs resolved without sequelae.
Other Significant Adverse Events Treatment-emergent AEs that led to discontinuation from the study are presented in Table 98.
Table 98 Number (%) of Subjects with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Leading to Study Discontinuation - Safety Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo (N=205) (N=201) (N=105) Subjects with an AE leading to study 3 (1.5) 5 (2.5) 0 discontinuation, n (%) Subjects with a treatment-related AE 1(0.5) 3 (1.5) 0 leading to study discontinuation, n (%) Adverse events leading to discontinuation, n (%) Application site pain 1(0.5) 2 (1.0) 0 Gunshot wound 1 (0.5) 0 0 Malignant melanoma right breast 1 (0.5) 0 0 Malignant melanoma right lower lateral 1 (0.5) 0 0 extremity Hypersensitivity Application site erythema 0 1 (0.5) 0 Application site irritation 0 1 (0.5) 0 Application site pruritus 0 1 (0.5) 0 Scrotal erythema 0 1 (0.5) 0 Scrotal ulcer 0 1 (0.5) 0 Lymph node pain 0 1 (0.5) 0 Pelvic pain 0 1(0.5) 0 Groin pain 0 1 (0.5) 0 Application site ulcer 0 1 (0.5) 0 Cellulitis 0 1 (0.5) 0 Application site infection 0 1 (0.5) 0 Suicidal ideation 0 1 (0.5) 0 Counts reflect numbers of subjects in each treatment group reporting one or more adverse events that map to the MedDRA system organ class. A subject was counted only once in each row of the table.
A treatment-emergent AE is an AE that began or worsened in severity after the first application of the study drug and no more than 30 days after the last application of the study drug.
Treatment-related includes Probably Related and Related.
The incidence of AEs that led to study discontinuation was low in all treatment groups.

The number of subjects with any AE leading to study discontinuation was higher in the 2.5%
imiquimod group than in the 3.75% imiquimod group. No subjects in the placebo group discontinued the study because of AEs. Only 1 subject in the 3.75% imiquimod group and 3 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group reported treatment-related AEs that led to study discontinuation. Subject 06/021 (3.75% imiquimod) discontinued the study because of application site pain. In the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, Subject 04/022 discontinued the study because of application site pain, Subject 12/010 discontinued the study because of application site erythema, application site irritation, application site pain and application site pruritus, and Subject 18/016 discontinued the study because of scrotal erythema and scrotal ulcer in a non-treatment area, lymph node pain, pelvic pain, groin pain, and application site ulcer. All (except scrotal erythema and scrotal ulcer in a non-treatment area) were application site reactions. All of these AEs resolved without sequelae.
Analysis and Discussion of Serious Adverse Events, and Other Significant Adverse Events One death (3.75% imiquimod group) occurred among the subjects in this study.
The incidence of SAEs was low in this study. No SAE was considered related to study treatment.
Few subjects discontinued the study as a result of an AE. Treatment-related application site reactions accounted for less than half of the AEs leading to study withdrawal.
Only two SAEs (anxiety and suicidal ideation) were noted as ongoing and 2 SAEs (diabetes and ovarian cystectomy) resolved with sequelae.
Clinical Laboratory Evaluation For most of the hematological, chemistry, and urinalysis variables, the majority of the subjects were normal at Screening and at EOS. Occasional shifts from normal at Screening to above or below the limits of the normal range were observed; however, no dose-response relationship was evident.
For the clinical chemistry determinations, shifts from normal to high were most frequently recorded for ALT (15/155 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 11/146 in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, and 2/80 in the placebo group), AST (11/155 in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 4/144 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 3/79 in the placebo group), and glucose (8/156 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 10/146 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 4/79 in the placebo group).
Low cholesterol was noted in 6/156 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 8/146 in the 2.5%

imiquimod group, and 5/82 in the placebo group. High cholesterol was also noted in 9/156 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 6/146 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 6/82 in the placebo group.
Shifts from normal to low were most frequently recorded for cholesterol (9/156 in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 7/146 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 3/82 in the placebo group).
In the hematology analyses, shifts from normal to high were most frequently reported for neutrophils (5/155 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 7/147 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 6/80 in the placebo group). Shifts from normal to low were most frequently reported for WBCs (6/155 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 6/147 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 4/80 in the placebo group).
The most commonly-reported shift observed in the study was a shift from normal to high in urine protein (37/156 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 35/143 in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, and 17/79 in the placebo group). However, at screening, 24.4%, 20.3%, and 16.5% in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 2.5% imiquimod group, and placebo group, respectively, had high concentrations of urinary protein. Other findings from urinalysis included shifts from normal to high for leukocyte esterase (12/156 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 13/143 in the 2.5%
imiquimod group, and 2/79 in the placebo group) and blood in the urine (11/156 in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 6/143 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 2/79 in the placebo group).
Pregnancies and Outcome Five women became pregnant during the study, 2 in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 2 in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 1 in the placebo group. All of the pregnancies were discovered after the subject had taken her last dose of study medication. The exposure to study medication was 45 packets and unknown of 3.75% imiquimod cream, unknown and 24 packets of 2.5%
imiquimod cream, and 55 packets of placebo cream. The outcomes of the pregnancies are to be determined.
In addition, one subject in the 2.5% group reported that she was pregnant, just after a negative urine test result was reported at the Week 8 visit. The exposure to study medication was 55 packets.
Safety Conclusions = Mean exposure to study medication was approximately 44 packets, 45 packets, and 53 packets of study medication in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups respectively. Mean treatment duration was similar among the study groups and ranged from 50.0 days in the 3.75% imiquimod group to 54.7 days in the placebo group.
= Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 44.4%, 40.8%, and 32.4% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively. Most AEs were mild or moderate in intensity. Application site reactions were the most frequently reported AEs. Adverse events of the system organ classes "general disorders and administration site conditions" and "infections and infestations" were the most frequently reported. Incidences of these events were similar in the active treatment groups.
= The incidence of systemic symptoms (ie, flu-like symptoms, etc) previously noted with 5% imiquimod was low (<1%) in this study.
= Treatment-emergent SAEs were reported in 6 subjects in the 3.75%
imiquimod group, 2 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 1 subject in the placebo group.
None of the SAEs were considered treatment-related.
= Treatment-emergent AEs that led to study discontinuation were reported in 3 subjects, subjects, and no subjects in the in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively. Of those TEAEs leading to discontinuation, 4 subjects withdrew from the study for TEAEs considered treatment-related: 1 subject in the 3.75% imiquimod group and 3 subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group. All (except scrotal erythema and scrotal ulcer in a non-treatment area) were application site reactions.
= The incidence of TEAEs and severe AEs was higher in females than in males across all treatment groups, and the incidence of application site reactions was higher in females than in males in the active treatment groups.
= Adverse events leading to study discontinuation were rare in all treatment groups regardless of gender.
= Local skin reactions were reported in 78.3%, 68.3%, and 41.8% of subjects in the in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively. The incidence and severity of LSRs was higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. Erythema was the LSR reported with the greatest frequency and the greatest mean intensity in all treatment groups. Local skin reactions were coincident with the treatment period and rapidly decreased when treatment was concluded.
Severe intensity LSRs were similar in the active groups.
= Rest periods were taken by 67 subjects (32.7%), 55 subjects (27.4%), and 3 subjects (2.9%) in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively.
The frequency, duration, and number of dosing days prior to the rest period were similar in the active treatment group and lower in the placebo group.
= There was no evidence of clinically meaningful trends in vital sign measurements or clinical laboratory measurements. One subject in the placebo group reported laboratory AEs that were considered clinically significant, the AEs were considered not related to treatment.
DISCUSSION AND OVERALL CONCLUSIONS
Discussion In this double-blind, placebo controlled clinical study, 511 subjects with EGW
diagnosed by clinical examination were randomized to receive treatment with 3.75%
imiquimod cream, 2.5% imiquimod cream, or a matching placebo cream. During the evaluation period, subjects applied study medication once daily to the identified treatment area(s) for a maximum of 8 weeks. If the subject did not achieve complete wart clearance by the Week 8 visit (end of treatment [E0T1), the subject was monitored for an additional maximum 8 weeks of no treatment. Subjects determined to have achieved complete clearance of all warts at any time until Week 16 (end of study [E0S]) completed procedures for the end-of-study visit and were eligible to immediately enter the follow-up period for determination of wart recurrence. During the follow-up period, subjects were monitored every 4 weeks for up to 12 weeks or until the recurrence of warts. The 3.75% imiquimod cream and 2.5% imiquimod cream demonstrated efficacy and tolerability as compared with placebo for treatment of EGW.
Overall, 71.1% of subjects completed the evaluation period, and the discontinuation rates were similar in all treatment groups. Compliance with the daily treatment regimen ranged from 83.2% in the 3.75%
imiquimod group to 91.1% in the placebo group.
Imiquimod has been demonstrated to be a safe and effective treatment for EGW.
The dosing regimen for the currently approved product, 5% imiquimod cream, is 3 times per week for up to 16 weeks. Clinical experience has shown compliance with this regimen is challenging, as the treatment duration is long and the application schedule is non-intuitive. The current study was designed to evaluate imiquimod cream in lower concentrations to permit a more intuitive daily-dosing regimen and a shortened treatment regimen (up to 8 weeks) .
Efficacy Efficacy was demonstrated for the primary efficacy measure as well as for the secondary and tertiary efficacy measures for the 3.75% imiquimod cream and 2.5%
imiquimod cream.
Results for all efficacy measures for which statistical testing was performed were highly statistically significant in the both of the active treatment groups as compared with placebo in both the ITT and PP populations.
Measures of wart reduction showed pronounced treatment effects for the higher concentration product (complete clearance rates of 29.4%, 24.8% and 8.6%; >75%
clearance rates of 38.7%, 31.2%, and 10.5%; mean percent change in wart count of -40.9%, -37.7%, and -7.8%; and at least 50% reduction in wart count in 49.5%, 43.1%, and 20.0% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively, in the ITT
population).
It should be noted that the primary efficacy variable used in this study (complete clearance of all warts, both Baseline and newly emerged, in all assessed anatomic areas) was very conservative. Warts were counted in all assessed anatomic areas without distinction as to those warts identified at baseline or those newly identified. In this study, subjects applied study medication to individual warts in various anatomic areas identified at Baseline. Some subjects developed new warts during the study, and these new warts may have appeared in anatomic areas involved at Baseline as well as in newly involved anatomic areas. New warts were treated with study medication when they appeared, but received less than a full course of treatment, because treatment was not extended beyond 8 weeks from randomization/Day 1 visit.
Subjects who did not completely clear all warts by the Week 8/EOT visit were followed for a maximum 8 week no treatment period. As with evaluations during the daily treatment phase, subjects were evaluated for the presence of EGW in all anatomic areas, and no distinction was made between baseline and newly evident warts. As efficacy measures were based on complete clearance of all warts, not just warts presented at Baseline, development of new warts would potentially lower the complete and partial clearance rates.

Subgroup analyses were performed for the primary efficacy variable. In general, the complete clearance rates increased in a dose-dependent manner regardless of subgroup. The most striking subgroup effect was observed in the analysis by gender; the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males in all treatment groups. The higher absolute clearance rates in females than in males have been seen previously with 5% imiquimod cream as well as with other topical treatments and may be due in part to the distribution of warts on females (eg, less keratinized skin).
In addition to gender subgroup, the complete clearance rates tended to be higher in subjects with <7 warts at Baseline, in subjects with a Baseline wart area <70 mm2, in subjects who took a rest period, in subjects with no previous imiquimod treatment, in subjects whose EGW was first diagnosed within 1 year, and in subjects with baseline warts in the anatomic areas with less keratinized skin such as the (perianal area, the perineal area, on the glans penis, or on the vulva). Of note, baseline demographics for the population as a whole suggest that EGWs in this study cohort were of relatively longstanding duration (mean/median years since diagnosis of 5.4/2.2 years).
Safely Daily application of 3.75% or 2.5% imiquimod cream was generally well tolerated in this study. Few subjects discontinued the study due to adverse events. Very few serious adverse events were reported, and none were considered treatment related. The proportion of subjects with treatment-related AEs was higher in the active treatment groups (19.5%
and 18.4% in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod, respectively) than with placebo (2.9%), but there was no difference in the incidence rates between imiquimod groups. Most AEs were mild or moderate in intensity, and resolved without sequelae.
The majority of AEs considered treatment-related occurred in the system organ class "General Disorders and Administrative Site Conditions", and are not unanticipated with imiquimod. For the most part, these represented various application site reaction symptoms such as pain, irritation, and pruritus. The proportion of subjects with any application site reaction was similar in the active treatment groups.
Anticipated reactions in the application area were also captured separately as local skin reactions (LSRs). The frequency and intensity of LSRs were higher in the active treatments compared with placebo. Erythema was the LSR reported with the greatest frequency and the greatest mean intensity in all treatment groups. Severe intensity LSRs were similar between the active groups. Local skin reactions were coincident with the treatment period and rapidly decreased when treatment was concluded.
There was no evidence of clinically meaningful trends in vital sign measurements or clinical laboratory measurements.
Conclusion The 3.75% and 2.5% cream formulations of imiquimod demonstrated substantial efficacy for the treatment of EGW. All efficacy measures for which statistical testing was performed were significantly superior in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod treatment groups compared with placebo in both the ITT and PP populations. The difference between 3.75%
imiquimod and 2.5% imiquimod did not reach statistical significance at any time during the study. Treatment with either imiquimod formulation resulted in greater increases in local skin reactions compared with the placebo cream: erythema was the LSR reported with the greatest frequency and the greatest mean intensity in all treatment groups. For both active creams, the number and severity of local skin reactions decreased rapidly after the completion of treatment.
The most frequently reported adverse events were application site reactions observed in the active treatment groups;
however, few subjects discontinued the study as a result of adverse events, indicating that these events were manageable and generally well tolerated.

Study Number: GW01-0801 Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of 2.5%
imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream to placebo cream, applied once daily for up to 8 weeks, in the treatment of external genital warts (EGW). The secondary objective of this study is to provide information on recurrence of EGW.
Methodology: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study that compared the efficacy and safety of 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream with that of placebo in the treatment of EGW. Subjects determined to be eligible during the screening period were stratified by gender and randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to 2.5%
imiquimod cream, 3.75% imiquimod cream, or placebo cream. Subjects were scheduled for 1 prestudy screening visit, and then were scheduled for visits every 2 weeks for up to 16 weeks during the evaluation period, depending upon clearance of all baseline and new warts. During the evaluation period, subjects applied investigative cream to the identified treatment area for a maximum of 8 weeks.
If the subject did not achieve complete wart clearance by the Week 8 visit (end of treatment, EOT), the subject was monitored for an additional maximum of 8 weeks. Subjects determined to have achieved clearance of all warts at any time until Week 16 completed procedures for the end -of -study (EOS) visit and were eligible to immediately enter the follow-up period for determination of recurrence. During the follow-up period, subjects were monitored every 4 weeks for up to 12 weeks or until the recurrence of warts.
Clinical evaluations included counting of warts and assessment of local skin reactions (LSRs), and recording of adverse events (AEs) and concomitant medications. At selected centers, photography was performed at designated visits. Laboratory tests were also performed prior to treatment and at the EOS visit to assess safety.
Number of Subjects (total and for each treatment):

It was planned to enroll approximately 450 subjects in a 2:2:1 ratio. Actual enrollment was 470 subjects, and the ITT population and safety population comprised 470 subjects (195 imiquimod 3.75%, 178 imiquimod 2.5%, and 97 placebo). The per protocol (PP) population comprised 347 subjects (137 imiquimod 3.75%, 134 imiquimod 2.5%, and 76 placebo).
Inclusion criteria:
Subjects could participate in the study if they met the following inclusion criteria:
1. Were willing and able to give informed consent -- for subjects under 18, the parent/legal guardian was required to give written informed consent and the subject was required to provide written assent in accordance with local regulations;
2. Were at least 12 years of age at the time of initial screening;
3. Were willing and able to participate in the study as outpatients, making frequent visits to the study center during the treatment and follow-up periods, and to comply with all study requirements;
4. Had a diagnosis of external genital / perianal warts with at least 2 warts and no more than 30 warts located in one or more of the following anatomic locations:
= In both sexes: inguinal, perineal, and perianal areas;
= In men: over the glans penis, penis shaft, scrotum, and foreskin;
= In women: on the vulva;
5. Had total wart areas of at least 10 mm2;
6. Were judged to be in good health based upon the results of a medical history, physical examination, and safety laboratory profile;
7. If female and of childbearing potential, had a negative serum pregnancy test at Screening and a negative urine pregnancy test prior to randomization and were willing to use effective contraception; and 8. If male or a male partner of a female subject, were willing to use condoms for sexual activities during the study.

Exclusion criteria:
Subjects were excluded from the study if they met any of the following criteria:
1. Had received any topical and/or destructive treatments for external genital warts within 4 weeks (within 12 months for imiquimod and within 12 weeks for sinecatechins) prior to enrollment (ie, the randomization visit);
2. Had received any of the following treatments within the indicated time intervals prior to enrollment:
Medication/Treatment Washout Interval Any marketed or investigational HPV vaccines 12 months Imiquimod 12 months Sinecatechins (Veregen ) 12 weeks Interferon/ Interferon inducer 4 weeks Cytotoxic drugs 4 weeks Immunomodulators or immunosuppressive therapies 4 weeks Oral antiviral drugs (with the exception of oral 4 weeks acyclovir and acyclovir related drugs for suppressive or acute therapy herpes; or oseltamivir for prophylaxis or acute therapy of influenza) Topical antiviral drugs (including topical acyclovir and 4 weeks acyclovir related drugs) in the wart areas Podophyllotoxin / Podofilox in the wart areas 4 weeks Oral and parenteral corticosteroids (inhaled/intranasal 4 weeks steroids are permitted) Any topical prescription therapy for any conditions in 4 weeks the wart areas Dermatologic/cosmetic procedures or surgeries in the 4 weeks wart areas 3. Had any evidence (physical or laboratory) of clinically significant or unstable disease and/or any condition that might have interfered with the response to the study treatment or altered the natural history of EGW;
4. Were currently participating in another clinical study or had completed another clinical study with an investigational drug or device within the past 4 weeks;

5. Had known or active chemical dependency or alcoholism as assessed by the investigator;
6. Had known allergies to study drug or any excipient in the study cream;
7. Were currently immunosuppressed or had a history of immunosuppression;
8. Had a planned surgery that would cause an interruption of study treatment;
9. Had sexual partners currently in treatment with an approved or investigational treatment for EGW;
10. Had any current or recurrent malignancies in the genital or treatment area;
11. Had any untreated or unstable genital infections (other than genital warts);
12. Had any of the following conditions:
= known human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection;
= current or past history of high risk HPV infection (eg, HPV 16, 18, etc);
= an outbreak of herpes genitalis in the wart areas within 4 weeks prior to enrollment;
= internal (rectal, urethral, vaginal/cervical) warts that required or were undergoing treatment;
= a dermatological disease (eg, psoriasis) or skin condition in the wart areas which may have caused difficulty with examination;
13. If female, had clinically significant abnormalities on pelvic examination or had laboratory test results showing high-grade pathology (eg, high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, moderate or severe dysplasia, squamous cell carcinoma);
14. If female, were nursing or pregnant or planned to become pregnant during the study.

Test product, dose and mode of administration:
The test products were 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream. The reference therapy was placebo cream. Subjects applied the study drug in a thin layer once daily to each wart identified at Baseline and any new wart that appeared during the treatment period.
A maximum of 1 packet (250 mg) of study drug was applied for a given dose (250 mg of 3.75% cream is equivalent to 9.375 mg imiquimod, and 250 mg of 2.5% cream is equivalent to 6.25 mg imiquimod). Study drug was applied prior to normal sleeping hours and removed approximately 8 hours later with mild soap and water. Subjects were to continue to apply study cream to all identified wart/wart areas until all warts were cleared.
The investigational products, 2.5% imiquimod cream and 3.75% imiquimod cream, contained imiquimod, isostearic acid, benzyl alcohol, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, polysorbate 60, sorbitan monostearate, white petrolatum, glycerin, methyl paraben, propyl paraben, purified water, and xanthan gum. The placebo cream contained the same ingredients as the active formulations with the exception of imiquimod.
Subjects meeting all inclusion and no exclusion criteria were randomly assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to 1 of the 3 treatment groups (2.5% imiquimod cream: 3.7% imiquimod cream: or placebo cream).
Each dose of study drug was to be applied by the subject at approximately the same time of day. To reduce the risk of study drug removal from daily hygienic or physical activities, study drug was to be applied just prior to the subject's normal sleeping hours.
Subjects were to wash the treatment area with mild soap and water before applying the study medication, allow the area to dry thoroughly, and then apply the study medication once daily. Subjects were to apply a thin layer of study cream to each wart identified at Baseline and any new wart that appeared during the treatment period. Only up to one packet of study cream was to be applied per application.
The subjects were encouraged to leave study cream on for approximately 8 hours, preferably during normal sleeping hours, and were not to wash the treatment area, swim, shower or bathe, or have sexual contacts while the study medication was on the skin.
Subjects could wash the study cream off with soap and water any time after approximately 8 hours of application. Subjects were to continue applying the study cream for a maximum of 8 weeks or until the investigator determined that they had achieved complete clearance of all (baseline and new) warts. Subjects were not to make up any missed doses.
Rest periods, or temporary interruptions of dosing due to intolerable local skin reactions, were allowed during the study if the investigator or subject (or legal parent or guardian) decided that study drug application should be interrupted. Subjects who were placed on a rest period were to be seen by the investigator prior to resuming treatment with study drug in order to assess if the recovery of the treatment site was sufficient. Doses missed due to a rest period were not counted as missed doses in the assessment of subject compliance with the treatment regimen. The study visit schedule and procedures were not to be altered due to missed doses or rest periods. If a subject experienced a strong local reaction in one treatment area but not in other treated areas, the subject could temporarily stop applying study cream in that affected area while continuing study treatment in the other areas.
During treatment period, any new warts appearing in any of the protocol-defined anatomic locations were treated with the study cream. Neither the warts present at Baseline nor new warts were allowed to be treated during the no-treatment period (ie, from the Week 8/EOT visit to the Week 16 visit).
Criteria for evaluation:
Primary Efficacy Variables:
The primary efficacy variable was subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts (baseline and new) in all anatomic areas at Week 16 (End of Study, EOS), as determined by the investigator.
Secondary and Tertiary Efficacy Variables Secondary efficacy variables were the following:
= Subject status with respect to partial clearance of baseline warts, defined as at least 75%
reduction in the number of baseline warts at EOS/Week 16.
= Percent change from Baseline to EOS in total number of warts.

= Subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts at EOS, remaining cleared in all anatomic areas, as determined by the investigator, through the end of the follow-up for recurrence period, and = Time from Baseline to complete clearance of all warts, as determined by the investigator.
Tertiary efficacy variables were the following:
= Subject status with respect to complete clearance of all warts (baseline and new) in all anatomic areas at EOT/Week 8, = Subject status with respect to at least 50% reduction in the number of baseline warts at EOS/Week 16.
Statistical Methods For Efficacy Analyses Efficacy analyses were conducted on the ITT population and on the PP
population. For the primary efficacy variable, imputations were made for missing data points using last observation carried forward (LOCF, primary analysis), taking all missed observations as failure (sensitivity analysis), and using observed cases (supportive analysis). For the ITT population, subjects who had no post-baseline data were included in the analysis carrying forward the baseline data. The PP population analysis used observed cases except for complete clearance and recurrence.
Analysis of the Primary Efficacy Variable The primary efficacy endpoint, complete clearance rate at the EOS, was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying by gender and site.
All pairwise comparisons of active treatment versus placebo were made using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. If either test was significant at a 0.025 level of significance, then that test was considered significant. Otherwise, if both tests were significant at 0.05, then both tests were considered significant. The 3.75% and 2.5% treatment groups were compared to each other at the 0.05 level of significance if at least one of these treatment groups was found to be different than the placebo using the Hochberg's test.
In the primary analysis of complete clearance rate, the Breslow-Day statistic was tested at the 10% level for heterogeneity of the odds ratios across analysis sites. A
finding of statistical significance in this test was followed by exploratory analyses to characterize the source of the heterogeneity.

Analysis of Secondary Efficacy Variables The secondary efficacy variable partial clearance rate was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying by gender and site. The percent change from baseline to EOS in wart count was analyzed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for baseline wart count, gender, and analysis site. The proportion of subjects who were clear prior to or at EOS and remained clear at the end of the follow-up for recurrence period was summarized by frequency count and 95% confidence interval. The time to complete clearance was analyzed using the log rank test in the context of a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.
For analysis of secondary efficacy variables, only the LOCF method was used for the ITT
population, and observed cases for the PP population. All data from interim visits were analyzed using visit windows.
The secondary efficacy variables were to be compared pairwise using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
= If at least one of the active arms was found to be superior to placebo in the primary efficacy variable of complete clearance according to Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure, the secondary efficacy variable of partial (>75%) clearance was compared between each of the active arms and placebo.
= If the secondary efficacy variable of partial (>75%) clearance was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of percent change from Baseline to EOS in wart count was tested.
= If the secondary efficacy variable of percent change from Baseline to EOS
in wart count was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of complete clearance at EOS and remained clear at the end of follow-up for recurrence period was tested.
= If the secondary efficacy variable of complete clearance at EOS and remained clear at the end of follow-up for recurrence period was found to be superior to placebo in either of the active treatment groups, then the secondary efficacy variable of time from Baseline to complete clearance was tested.
The percent change from Baseline in EGW count at each post-baseline visit was summarized by mean, standard deviation, median, and range by treatment group.
The recurrence rate of warts was summarized by treatment group and study visit using visit windows.

Analysis of Tertiary Efficacy Variables The tertiary efficacy endpoints, complete clearance rate at EOT and subject status with respect to at least a 50% reduction in baseline wart count, were analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) statistics, stratifying on gender and site.
Visit Windows For the analysis of wart counts, the data were summarized by analysis visits.
Analysis visits were assigned according to the actual study day of the evaluation as illustrated in Table 98below.
Table 98 Visit Windows Evaluation Period Target Analysis Visit Study Day Day Range Baseline 1 Study Day 5_ 1 Week 2 15 1 < Study Day 22 Week 4 29 22 < Study Day 36 Week 6 43 36 < Study Day 50 Week 8 57 50 < Study Day 64 End of Treatment (EOT) Study Day 64 Week 10 71 64 < Study Day < 78 Week 12 85 78 < Study Day < 92 Week 14 99 92 < Study Day 5_ 106 Week 16 113 106 < Study Day < 127 End of Study (EOS) Study Day < 127 Follow-up Period Target Analysis Visit Study Day Day Range Post EOS
Follow-up Week 4 29 1 < Study Day 43 Follow-up Week 8 57 43 < Study Day 71 Follow-up Week 12 85 71 < Study Day 99 All visits (scheduled or unscheduled) were mapped to an analysis visit. If more than 1 evaluation was assigned to an analysis visit, the evaluation with the lowest wart count within the window was used for analysis. Study day was calculated as the date of evaluation minus the date of randomization plus one except for the follow up visits. For the follow up visits, study day was calculated as the date of evaluation minus the date of End of Study (EOS) visit plus one.
Safety Analyses All safety variables were analyzed using the safety population. Safety variables included the following:
= Local skin reactions.
= Rest periods during the treatment period:
o The number and percentage by treatment group of subjects who required a rest period (1 or more).
o The number of dosing days missed due to rest periods.
o The number of dosing days prior to the beginning of the first rest period.
= Adverse events.
= Clinical laboratory test results.
Adverse Events Adverse events were coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA, version 11.0) terminology. A treatment-emergent AE was defined as an AE that began or worsened in severity after Day 1 and no more than 30 days after the last application of study drug. If an AE had a completely missing start date, it was considered a "treatment emergent" event, unless the stop date was prior to the date of randomization.
Treatment-emergent AEs and all AEs were summarized for each treatment group by the overall incidence of at least one event, incidence by system organ class, and incidence by system organ class and preferred term. Each subject contributed only once to each of the rates, regardless of the number of occurrences (events) the subject experienced.
Treatment-emergent AEs were summarized by severity (mild, moderate, or severe) and by relationship to study product (related, not related). Events were considered not related to study product if the relationship was "not related" or "probably not related."
Similarly, related events were those that were "probably related" or "related." An AE was assumed to be related to study drug if the relationship to study drug was unknown. For AEs that occurred more than once, the AE that was most related to study drug in that period was used in the summary of AEs by relationship to study drug categories. Similarly, the AE with the maximum intensity in that period was used in the summary of AEs by severity. If severity was missing or unknown, it was assumed to be severe.
The incidence of AEs was summarized for subgroup analysis by gender, by age subgroup, and by number of anatomic locations (ie, one location versus multiple).
Serious AEs (SAEs) and AEs that led to discontinuation from the study were listed by subject.
Local Skin Reactions The LSR intensities were summarized by frequency counts and mean score by treatment group and study visit for each LSR type. The LSRs were graded as follows:
= Erythema (0=None, 1=Faint to mild redness, 2¨Moderate redness, 3=Intense redness), = Edema (0=None, 1=Mild visible or barely palpable swelling/ induration, 2=Easily palpable swelling/indurationõ 3=Gross swelling/induration), = Weeping/Exudate (0¨None, 1=Minimal exudate, 2=Moderate exudate, 3=Heavy exudate), = Flaking/Scaling/Dryness (0=None, 1=Mild dryness/flaking, 2¨Moderate dryness/flaking, 3=Severe dryness/flaking), = Scabbing/Crusting (0=None, 1=Crusting, 2=Serous scab, 3=Eschar), = Erosion/Ulceration (0=None, 2=Erosion, 3=Ulceration).
Erosion/ulceration intensity was originally collected as 0 = None, 1 =
Erosion, and 2 ¨
Ulceration. For consistency in the analysis of LSR intensities and sum score, these were recoded as 0 = None, 2 = Erosion, and 3 = Ulceration.
The most intense reaction (post-baseline) and incidence of any reaction (post-baseline) for each LSR type were also presented by frequency distribution and mean score by treatment group.
Data were analyzed using windows.
The LSR sum score (addition of 6 scores) was computed and summarized by treatment group at each study visit.

Rest Periods A rest period was a temporary interruption of dosing due to intolerable LSRs or other AEs. Doses missed due to a subject's noncompliance with the treatment regimen were not considered a rest period. The start of a rest period was the first date on which the study medication was not applied for the reason of "rest period" on CRF page 20. The end of the rest period was the first date of application following the start of the rest period. The number and percentage of subjects who required a rest period (1 or more) were analyzed by treatment group using CMH statistics. The number of dosing days missed due to rest periods and the number of dosing days prior to the beginning of the first rest period were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test.
In this analysis, only subjects who experienced a rest period were included.
Disposition of subjects The disposition of subjects for the evaluation period is shown in Table 99 below:

Table 99 Subject Disposition - Evaluation Period (ITT Population) lmiquimod Cream Total Subjects, n (%) 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall Randomized 195 178 97 470 Completed evaluation perioda 136 (69.7) 121 (68.0) 66 (68.0) 323 (68.7) Not Cleared 82 (42.1) 87 (48.9) 56 (57.7) 225 (47.9) Cleared, Ended Study 4(2.1) 3 (1.7) 4(4.1) 11(2.3) Cleared, Entered Follow-up 50 (25.6) 31 (17.4) 6(6.2) 87 (18.5) Discontinued evaluation period 59 (30.3) 57 (32.0) 31 (32.0) 147 (31.3) Reasons for discontinuation during evaluation period, n (%) Safety reasons (AEs) 3(1.5) 2(1.1) 1(1.0) 6(1.3) Investigator's request 1 (0.5) 0 0 1 (0.2) Subject's request (not AE) 10(5.1) 8(4.5) 7(7.2) 25(5.3) Lack of efficacy 0 1(0.6) 0 1(0.2) Noncompliance 1(0.5) 4(2.2) 0 5 (1.1) Use of concomitant therapy 0 0 0 0 Lost to follow-up 39 (20.0) 37 (20.8) 19 (19.6) 95 (20.2) Other (not AE) 5(2.6) 5(2.8) 4(4.1) 14(3.0) AE = adverse event.
a Based on investigator assessment (CRF page 31), includes subjects who (1) cleared prior to or at EOS/Week 16, (2) not cleared at Week 16.
Of the 794 subjects who were screened, 470 (59.2%) were randomized and 324 (40.8%) were screen failures. The most frequent reason for screen failure (170 subjects [52.5%} out of 324 screen failures) was that subjects did not have a clinical diagnosis of EGW with at least 2 warts and no more than 30 warts in one or more of the protocol-specified anatomic locations.
One hundred ninety five (195) subjects were randomized into the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 178 subjects were randomized into the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 97 subjects were randomized into the placebo group. Overall, 68.7% of subjects completed the study, and in the individual treatment groups, 69.7%, 68.0%, and 68.0% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively, completed the study. Lost to follow-up was the most common reason for discontinuation from the evaluation period, and accounted for withdrawal of approximately 20% of subjects in each treatment group. Among the treatment groups, there was no appreciable difference in the percentages of subjects who were lost to follow-up or the times at which they became lost to follow-up. A sizeable number of subjects discontinued early, ie, had no post-Baseline visit: 15 of 59 (25.4%) in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 16 of 57 (28.1%) in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 5 of 31(16.1%) in the placebo group.

Follow-up for Recurrence Period Subject disposition for the follow-up period is shown in Table 100 below:
Table 100 Subject Disposition ¨ Follow-up Period (ITT Population) Imiquimod Cream Total Subjects, n (%) 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall Entered follow-up period 50(100) 31(100) 6(100) 87 (100) Completed study, no recurrence 41 (82.0) 20 (64.5) 6 (100) 67 (77.0) Subjects with EGW recurrence 7 (14.0) 7 (22.6) 0 14 (16.1) Discontinued follow-up perioda 2 (4.0) 4 (12.9) 0 6 (6.9) Reasons for discontinuation during follow-up, n (%) Subject's request (not AE) 0 1(3.2) 0 1(1.1) Lost to follow-up 2 (4.0) 3 (9.7) 0 5 (5.7) Other (not AE) 0 0 0 0 AE = adverse event.
a Excludes subjects discontinued due to recurrence of external genital warts.
Overall, 87 subjects entered the follow-up for recurrence period; 50 from the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 31 from the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 6 from the placebo group. Only 6 subjects (2 and 4 in the 3.75% and 2.5% imiquimod groups, respectively) discontinued the follow-up for evaluation period. Of these, 5 subjects were lost to follow-up and 1 subject was discontinued at his request.
EFFICACY EVALUATION
Datasets Analyzed The number of subjects in each analysis population is presented in Table 101 below.

Table 101 Number (%) of Subjects in Analysis Populations Imiquimod Cream Populations 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall ITT population 195 178 97 470 PP population 137 134 76 347 Safety population 195 178 97 470 Follow-up for Recurrence population 50 31 6 87 A total of 470 subjects were included in the ITT and safety populations. Of these, 347 subjects were included in the PP population. A total of 87 subjects elected to enter the follow-up period and comprised the follow-up for recurrence population.
Demographic and Other Baseline Characteristics Prestudy/Baseline Demographics Demographic and baseline characteristics for the ITT population are shown in Table 102 below.
Table 102 Demographic Summary by Treatment Group - ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=195) (N=178) (N=97) (N=470) Age in years Mean (SD) 32.5(11.6) 32.7(11.3) 30.5(10.6) 32.2(11.3) Median 29.0 30.0 27.0 29.0 Minimum, Maximum 18.0, 81.0 17.0, 78.0 18.0, 75.0 17.0, 81.0 Sex, n (%) Male 95 (48.7) 83 (46.6) 47 (48.5) 225 (47.9) Female 100 (51.3) 95 (53.4) 50 (51.5) 245 (52.1) Race, n (%) White 147 (75.4) 122 (68.5) 66 (68.0) 335 (71.3) Black/African American 41 (21.0) 47 (26.4) 28 (28.9) 116 (24.7) Other 7(3.6) 9(5.1) 3 (3.1) 19(4.0) Ethnicity, n (%) Hispanic 31 (15.9) 25 (14.0) 11 (11.3) 67 (14.3) Non-Hispanic 164 (84.1) 153 (86.0) 86 (88.7) 403 (85.7) SD = standard deviation.

Demographic characteristics were similar among the 3 treatment groups.
Slightly more than half of the subjects were female. Overall, 71.3% of subjects were White, and more than 84% of subjects in every treatment group were non-Hispanic. The mean age ranged from 30.5 years in the placebo group to 32.7 years in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group.
Medical History The most frequently-reported concomitant medical conditions were hypertension/high blood pressure (42 subjects), seasonal allergies (27 subjects), and depression (21 subjects).
External Genital Warts Treatment History Previous EGW treatment was reported by 49.7%, 42.7%, and 33.0% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively. Cryotherapy was the most frequently reported treatment, and had been performed in 28.2% of the subjects in the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 18.5% of subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 13.4% of subjects in the placebo group. Other treatments included acetic acid (in a total of 42 subjects), imiquimod (in 33 subjects), podophyllotoxin (in 23 subjects), laser therapy (in 22 subjects), "other" treatments (in 20 subjects), surgical excision (in 12 subjects), podophyllin (in 9 subjects), and electrodessication (in 3 subjects).
Prior and Concomitant Medications Sixteen subjects (8.2%) in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 12 subjects (6.7%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 4 subjects (4.1%) in the placebo group were taking prior medications, ie, medications that were discontinued prior to the date of randomization. The most common prior medications were antibacterials for systemic use in 3.6% of the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 3.9% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 2.1% of the placebo group.
Ninety-two subjects (47.2%) in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 94 subjects (52.8%) in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 45 subjects (46.4%) in the placebo received one or more concomitant medications during the study. The following classes of concomitant medications were received by more than 10% of the subjects in one or more treatment groups:
= Analgesics, received by 18.5% of the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group, 13.5% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 20.6% of the placebo group;

= Anti-inflammatory and anti- rheumatic products, received by 10.3% of the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 13.5% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 12.4% of the placebo group;
= Sex hormones and modulators of the genital system, by 7.7% of the 3.75%
imiquimod treatment group, 10.1% of the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group, and 9.3% of the placebo group.
Baseline Number of External Genital Warts A summary of the external genital wart counts at Baseline and other baseline data relevant to subjects' EGW are presented in Table 103 below Table 103 Baseline External Genital Warts Data by Treatment Group - ITT
Population lmiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=195) (N=178) (N=97) (N=470) Total wart area (mm2) Mean (SD) 150.9 (458.7) 160.2 (334.8) 140.7 (248.6) 152.3 (377.0) Median 52 68 73 61 Minimum, Maximum 10, 5579 10, 3212 6, 1969 6,5579 Total wart count Mean (SD) 8.6 ( 6.4) 9.2 ( 6.7) 11.6 ( 8.8) 9.4 (7.1) Median 7 7 8 7 Minimum, Maximum 2, 30 2, 30 2, 30 2, 30 Years Since Diagnosis Mean 4.2 4.8 3.6 4.3 Standard Deviation 6.6 7.8 6.1 7.0 Median 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.4 Minimum, Maximum 0.0, 33.3 0.0, 53.7 0.0, 33.7 0.0, 53.7 Continued Anatomic location, Males a, n 95 83 47 225 Inguinal 29 (30.5) 20 (24.1) 13 (27.7) 62 (27.6) Perineal 7 (7.4) 6 (7.2) 4 (8.5) 17 (7.6) Perianal 6(6.3) 8(9.6) 2(4.3) 16(7.1) Glans penis 9 (9.5) 6 (7.2) 5 (10.6) 20 (8.9) Penis shaft 77 (81.1) 71 (85.5) 42 (89.4) 190 (84.4) Scrotum 27 (28.4) 29 (34.9) 8 (17.0) 64 (28.4) Foreskin 3 (3.2) 4 (4.8) 1(2.1) 8 (3.6) Anatomic location, Females b, n 100 95 50 245 Table 103 Baseline External Genital Warts Data by Treatment Group - ITT
Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo Overall (N=195) (N=178) (N=97) (N=470) Inguinal 17 (17.0) 11 (11.6) 6(12.0) 34 (13.9) Perineal 48 (48.0) 43 (45.3) 22 (44.0) 113 (46.1) Perianal 44 (44.0) 52 (54.7) 22 (44.0) 118 (48.2) Vulva 59 (59.0) 60 (63.2) 32 (64.0) 151 (61.6) Number of treatment anatomic areas, n (%)-- Males' Total Males 95 (100) 83 (100) 47 (100) 225 (100) 1 47 (49.5) 38 (45.8) 25 (53.2) 110 (48.9) 2 34 (35.8) 31 (37.3) 16 (34.0) 81 (36.0) 3 13 (13.7) 12 (14.5) 6(12.8) 31 (13.8) 4 1(1.1) 2(2.4) 0 3(1.3) Number of treatment anatomic areas, n (%) --Females b Total Females 100 (100) 95 (100) 50 (100) 245 (100) 1 49 (49.0) 40 (42.1) 26 (52.0) 115 (46.9) 2 36 (36.0) 40 (42.1) 17 (34.0) 93 (38.0) 3 13 (13.0) 14 (14.7) 6 (12.0) 33 (13.5) 4 2(2.0) 1(1.1) 1(2.0) 4(1.6) SD = standard deviation.
a: Denominator based on the number of males in treatment group b: Denominator based on the number of females in treatment group.
The mean total wart area was 152.3 mm2 overall, and ranged from 140.7 mm2 in the placebo group to 160.2 mm2 in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group. The mean total wart count was 9.4 warts overall, and ranged from 8.6 warts in the 3.75% imiquimod treatment group to 11.6 warts in the placebo group. In males, the most commonly affected anatomic areas were the penis shaft (84.4%), the scrotum (28.4%), and the inguinal area (27.6%). In females, the most commonly affected anatomic areas were the vulva (61.6%), the perianal area (48.2%), and the perineal area (46.1%). The anatomic distribution of warts was fairly consistent across the treatment groups. More than 50% of subjects in both gender subgroups had two or more anatomic locations affected with warts at Baseline.
Measurements of Treatment Compliance Treatment compliance data was collected and analyzed. Compliance was based on the number of applications received (where a rest period day was counted as an application) divided by the number of intended applications, or by the number of packets used (where a rest period day was counted as a packet used) divided by the number of packets intended to be used per the protocol-defined treatment regimen, whichever was greater. Noncompliance with the treatment regimen was defined as compliance less than 75% or greater than 125%.
The overall mean treatment compliance was 84.3% in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 84.7%
in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 86.8% in the placebo group. Of the 123 subjects excluded from the PP population in this study, 122 exclusions were the result of noncompliance with the treatment regimen, including many subjects who were lost to follow-up.
Compliance rates were slightly higher in subjects who cleared their EGW during the study (90.9%, 88.5%, and 87.2% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively) compared with subjects who did not clear (81.5%, 83.8%, and 86.8% in the 3.75% imiquimod, 2.5% imiquimod, and placebo groups, respectively).
Efficacy Results Complete Clearance of All Warts COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF STUDY
The primary efficacy variable in this study was the proportion of subjects with complete clearance of all warts (those present at Baseline and new warts) at EOS (ie, 8 weeks after EOT).
The primary analysis was performed on the ITT population with imputation (LOCF) for missing data points. The results of the analyses on the ITT population, overall and by gender, are shown in Table 104 below. Results are presented graphically for the ITT population in Figure 25.

Table 104 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at the Week 16 /End of Study (EOS) Visit Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) niNa (%) 53/195 (27.2) 34/178 (19.1) 10/97 (10.3) 95% Cl 21.1, 34.0 13.6, 25.7 5.1, 18.1 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.065 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.061 Males niNa (%) 19/95 (20.0) 11/83 (13.3) 2/47 (4.3) 95% confidence interval 12.5, 29.5 6.8, 22.5 0.5, 14.5 P value vs Placebo 0.015** 0.110 P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.236 , --Females n INa (%) 34/100 (34.0) 23/95 (24.2) 8/50 (16.0) 95% confidence interval 24.8, 44.2 16.0, 34.1 7.2, 29.1 P value vs Placebo 0.017** 0.255 P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.147 LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a:
n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals are calculated using exact binomial statistics.
Breslow-Day P values for ITT Population (LOCF), males, are 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.357, 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.245, and 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream = 0.708.
Breslow-Day P values for ITT Population (LOCF), females, are 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.358, 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream vs Placebo = 0.310, and 3.75% Imiquimod Cream vs 2.5%
Imiquimod Cream = 0.178.
In the ITT population, the rate of complete clearance of EGW at EOS was significantly higher (P<0.001) in the 3.75% imiquimod group (27.2%) compared with placebo (10.3%); the difference in rate of complete clearance between the 2.5% imiquimod group (19.1%) and the placebo group (10.3%) did not attain statistical significance (P=0.065). The 3.75% imiquimod group had a higher rate of complete clearance than the 2.5% imiquimod group, but the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant (P =
0.061).
Results were similar in the by-gender analyses. Complete clearance rates at EOS were statistically significantly higher with 3.75% imiquimod than with placebo in both genders. There was no significant difference in complete clearance rates at EOS between 2.5%
imiquimod and placebo in either gender. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.

Rates of complete clearance at EOS in the ITT population are illustrated in Figure 25.
The primary efficacy variable was analyzed for the PP population, overall and by gender, using observed cases (OC). Results for the PP population are shown in Table 105 below.
Table 105 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at the Week 16 /End of Study (EOS) Visit - PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC), at EOS

n/N a (%) 46/137 (33.6) 32/134 (23.9) 9/76 (11.8) 95% Cl 25.7, 42.1 16.9, 32.0 5.6, 21.3 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.044** --P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.060 -- --Males niNa (%) 17/69 (24.6) 10/63 (15.9) 2/34 (5.9) 95% confidence interval 15.1, 36.5 7.9, 27.3 0.7, 19.7 P value vs Placebo 0.023** 0.161 --P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.286 -- --Females n/Na (%) 29/68 (42.6) 22/71 (31.0) 7/42 (16.7) 95% confidence interval 30.7, 55.2 20.5, 43.1 7.0, 31.4 P value vs Placebo 0.005** 0.140 --P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.121 -- --95% Cl = 95% confidence interval, OC=observed cases.
a: n/N-number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
Complete clearance was carried forward once achieved.
In the PP population, the complete clearance rates at EOS were higher than those in the ITT population for all treatment groups: 33.6% in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 23.9% in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 11.8% in the placebo group. The larger responses in the active treatment groups were statistically significant compared with placebo (P<0.001 for 3.75%
imiquimod vs placebo; P=0.044 for 2.5% imiquimod vs placebo). As was the case in the ITT
population, the complete clearance rate was larger in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group, but the difference between the 2 active treatment groups was not statistically significant.

Results were similar in the by-gender analyses. Complete clearance rates at EOS were statistically significantly higher with 3.75% imiquimod than with placebo in both genders. There was no significant difference in complete clearance rates at EOS between 2.5%
imiquimod and placebo in either gender. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
Rates of complete clearance at EOS in the PP population are illustrated in Figure 26.
COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF TREATMENT
A summary of the complete clearance at EOT for the ITT population, overall and by gender, is provided in Table 106.

Table 106 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at End of Treatment - ITT Population (LOCF) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) niNa (%) 43/195 (22.1) 20/178 (11.2) 5/97 (5.2) 95% CI 16.4, 28.5 7.0, 16.8 1.7, 11.6 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.090 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.004**
Males rilNa (v.) 14/95 (14.7) 6/83 (7.2) 1/47 (2.1) 95% CI 8.3, 23.5 2.7, 15.1 0.1, 11.3 P value vs placebo 0.027 0.227 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.123 Females n/Na (%) 29/100 (29.0) 14/95 (14.7) 4/50 (8.0) 95% Cl 20.4, 38.9 8.3, 23.5 2.2, 19.2 P value vs placebo 0.003** 0.215 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.017**
LOCF = last observation carried forward, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using liochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
At Week 8/EOT, 22.1% of subjects in the 3.75% imiquimod group, 11.2% of subjects in the 2.5% imiquimod group, and 5.2% of subjects in the placebo group had attained complete clearance. The overall complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo (P<0.001) and compared with 2.5%
imiquimod (P=0.004). The difference between 2.5% imiquimod and placebo was not statistically significant.
The complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo and compared with 2.5% imiquimod only in the female subgroup.
The difference between 2.5% imiquimod and placebo was not statistically significant in either gender subgroup. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
A summary of the complete clearance at EOT for the PP population, overall and by gender, is provided in Table 107.

Table 107 Proportion of Subjects with Complete Clearance of Warts at End of Treatment -PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC) at EOT
niNa (%) 36/137 (26.3) 19/134 (14.2) 4/76 (5.3) 95% CI 19.1, 34.5 8.8, 21.3 1.5, 12.9 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.038**
P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.015**
Males IN (%) 12/69 (17.4) 6/63 (9.5) 1/34 (2.9) 95% CI 9.3, 28.4 3.6, 19.6 0.1, 15.3 P value vs placebo 0.069 0.267 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.290 Females niNa (%) 24/68(35.3) 13/71 (18.3) 3/42(7.1) 95% CI 24.1, 47.8 10.1, 29.3 1.5, 19.5 P value vs placebo <0.001** 0.079 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod cream 0.025**
95% CI = 95% confidence interval, OC=observed cases.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of treatment divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
Complete clearance was carried forward once achieved.
In the PP population, the EOT complete clearance rate was significantly higher in both active treatment groups compared with placebo (P<0.001 for 3.75% imiquimod vs placebo; and P=0.038 for 2.5% imiquimod vs placebo). The complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly greater with 3.75% imiquimod than with 2.5% imiquimod (P=0.015).
In the female subgroup, the complete clearance rate at EOT was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo and compared with 2.5% imiquimod.
In the male subgroup, there was no significant difference between any of the treatment groups. In all treatment groups, the complete clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
COMPLETE CLEARANCE RATES BY VISIT WEEK
A by-visit summary of complete clearance rates in the ITT population during the evaluation period is shown graphically in Figure 27.

As shown in Figure 27, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 2; this includes the Week 8/end of treatment assessment and the Week 16/end of study assessment. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 2.5% imiquimod group compared with placebo at Weeks 6, 10, 12, and 14. The clearance rate was higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group and the difference was statistically significant at Week 8 (end of treatment), and at Weeks 10, 12, and 14.
In female subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 2, and was significantly higher compared with 2.5% imiquimod at Weeks 4, 6, 8, 12, and 14. In male subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo at Weeks 10, 12, 14, and 16. There was no statistically significant difference in complete clearance rate between 2.5% imiquimod and placebo in either gender.
A by-visit summary of complete clearance rates in the PP population during the evaluation period is shown in Figure 28.
Results in the PP population were similar to those in the ITT population. The complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod and 2.5%
imiquimod groups compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 2. The clearance rate was higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group than in the 2.5% imiquimod group and the difference was statistically significant at Weeks 8, 12, and 14.
In female subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75%
imiquimod group compared with placebo at all assessment time points after Week 2, and was significantly higher compared with 2.5% imiquimod at Weeks 8 and 12. In male subjects, the complete clearance rate was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo at Weeks 10, 12, 14, and 16. The only significant difference in complete clearance rate between 2.5% imiquimod and placebo occurred in females at Week 10.
Partial Clearance Rates PARTIAL (>75%) CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF STUDY
The proportion of subjects, overall and by gender, who had a partial clearance (>75%
reduction from Baseline in wart count) during the study is summarized in Table 108 and Figure 29 for the ITT population. Partial clearance was defined as at least a 75%
reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline.
Table 108 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (>75%) Clearance at End of Study ¨ ITT Population Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo ITT Population (LOCF) at EOS
n/Na (%) 74/195 (37.9) 48/178 (27.0) 13/97 (13.4) 95% Cl 31.1, 45.2 20.6, 34.1 7.3, 21.8 P value vs Placebo <0.001** 0.010**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.023**
Males nnsia (%) 29/95 (30.5) 15/83 (18.1) 3/47 (6.4) 95% Cl 21.5,40.8 10.5,28.0 1.3, 17.5 P value vs Placebo 0.001** 0.060 P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.067 Females niNa (%) 45/100 (45.0) 33/95 (34.7) 10/50 (20.0) 95% Cl 35.0, 55.3 25.3, 45.2 10.0, 33.7 P value vs Placebo 0.002** 0.071 P value vs 2.5% imiquimod Cream 0.150 95% Cl = 95% confidence interval.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defined as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with **
are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure.
Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial distribution.
In the ITT population, the difference in the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant. The partial (>75%) clearance rate in the 3.75% imiquimod group was significantly higher than that in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group.
In the by-gender analyses, the >75% clearance rate at EOS was significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo for both males and females. There was no significant difference between 2.5% imiquimod and placebo, or between the 3.75% and 2.5%

imiquimod groups. In all treatment groups, the >75% clearance rates were consistently higher in females than in males.
A summary of the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS for the PP population, overall and by gender, is presented in Table 109. The >75% clearance rates at EOS are presented graphically in Figure 30.
Table 109 Proportion of Subjects with Partial (>75%) Clearance at End of Study - PP Population (Observed Cases) Imiquimod Cream 3.75% 2.5% Placebo PP Population (OC), at EOS
niNa (%) 64/137 (46.7) 46/134 (34.3) 10/76 (13.2) 95% CI 38.1, 55.4 26.3, 43.0 6.5, 22.9 P value vs Placebo <0.001** <0.001**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.048**
Males niNa 27/69 (39.1) 14/63 (22.2) 2/34 (5.9) 95% CI 27.6, 51.6 12.7, 34.5 0.7, 19.7 P value vs Placebo <0.001** 0.041**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.090 Females n/Na (%) 37/68 (54.4) 32/71 (45.1) 8/42 (19.0) 95% CI 41.9, 66.5 33.2, 57.3 8.6, 34.1 P value vs Placebo <0.001** 0.009**
P value vs 2.5% Imiquimod Cream 0.257 95% Cl = 95% confidence interval, OC = observed cases.
a: n/N=number of subjects with complete clearance at end of study divided by the number of subjects analyzed.
Partial clearance was defmed as at least a 75% reduction in the number of warts in the treatment area compared with Baseline. P values are from Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, stratified by gender and analysis site (overall population) or stratified by analysis site (gender subgroups), taking 2 treatment groups at a time. The P values marked with ** are statistically significant using Hochberg's modified Bonferroni procedure. Confidence intervals were calculated using the exact binomial statistics.
In the PP population, the partial (>75%) clearance rate at EOS was higher in the active treatment groups than in the placebo group. The difference between each of the imiquimod treatment groups and placebo was statistically significant (P<0.001). The partial (>75%) clearance rate in the 3.75% imiquimod group was significantly higher (P=0 .0 48) than that in the 2.5% imiquimod treatment group. The partial (>75%) clearance rates were statistically significantly higher in the 3.75% imiquimod group compared with placebo at all analysis time points after Week 0.
As in the overall PP population, the >75% clearance rate was significantly higher with 3.75% imiquimod and with 2.5% imiquimod versus placebo in either gender. There was no statistically significant difference between the active treatment groups in either gender.
PARTIAL (>75%) CLEARANCE RATES AT END OF TREATMENT
The proportion of subjects who had a 75% or greater reduction from Baseline in wart count at EOT is shown in Table 110.

Claims (70)

1. Use of a topical composition comprising imiquimod in an amount of about 3.75% by weight, together with a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle therefor, for the treatment of an area afflicted with external genital or perianal warts, the use comprising application of the composition to the area once a day for up to eight weeks.

2. Use of imiquimod to manufacture a topical composition comprising imiquimod in an amount of about 3.75% by weight, together with a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle therefor, for the treatment of an area afflicted with external genital or perianal warts, the composition being formulated for administration of imiquimod by application of the composition to a treatment area once a day for up to eight weeks.

3. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-2, wherein the composition is formulated for application of a daily amount of up to 9.4 mg imiquimod.

4. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-2, wherein the pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle comprises a fatty acid.

5. The use defined in Claim 4, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of from about 3 percent to about 45 percent by weight of the topical composition.

6. The use defined in Claim 4, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of from about 5 percent to about 25 percent by weight of the topical composition.

7. The use defined in Claim 4, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of about 20 percent by weight of the topical composition

8. The use defined in any one of Claims 4-7, wherein the fatty acid is selected from the group consisting of isostearic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, unrefined oleic acid, refined oleic acid and any combination thereof.

9. The use defined in any one of Claims 4-7, wherein the fatty acid is isostearic acid.

10. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-9, wherein the topical formulation is in the form of a cream.

11. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-10, wherein the topical composition further comprises at least one of an emollient, an emulsifier, a thickener, a preservative, a solubilizing agent, a humectant, a skin penetration enhancer and any combination thereof.

12. The use defined in Claim 11, wherein the emollient is selected from the group comprising cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetearyl alcohol, petrolatum, light mineral oil, acetylated lanolin and any combination thereof.

13. The use defined in Claim 11, wherein the emollient is a combination of consisting of cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol and petrolatum.

14. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-13, wherein the emollient is present in an amount of about 5 percent to about 30 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

15. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-13, wherein the emollient is present in an amount of about 5 percent to about 10 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

16. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-15, wherein the emulsifier is selected from the group consisting of polysorbate 60, sorbitan monostearate, polyglyceryl-4 oleate, polyoxyethylene(4)lauryl ether and any combination thereof.

17. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-15, wherein the emulsifier is a combination of polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate

18. The use defined in any one of Claims 16-17, wherein the emulsifier is present in an amount in the range of from about 2 percent to about 14 percent by weight of the topical composition.

19. The use defined in any one of Claims 16-17, wherein the emulsifier is present in an amount in the range of from about 2 percent to about 6 percent by weight of the topical composition.

20. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-17, wherein the thickener is selected from the group comprising xanthum gum, guar gum, Veegum gum .TM.K, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetearyl alcohol and any combination thereof.

21. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-17, wherein the thickener is xanthum gum.

22. The use defined in any one of Claims 20-21, wherein the thickener is present in an amount of from about 3 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

23. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-22, where the preservative is selected from the group comprising methylparaben, propylparaben, benzyl alcohol and any combination thereof.

24. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-22, where the preservative is present as a combination of methylparaben, propylparaben and benzyl alcohol.

25. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-24, wherein the solubilizing agent is selected from the group comprising benzyl alcohol, lactic acid, acetic acid, stearic acid, salicylic acid, glycolic acid, hydrochloric acid and any combination thereof.

26. The use defined in Claim 25, where the additional solubilizing agent is present in an amount in the range of from about 1 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

27. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-26, wherein the humectant is glycerin.

28. The use defined in any one of Claims 11-27, wherein the skin penetration enhancer is butyl stearate.

29. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-28, wherein the pharmaceutically acceptable carrier comprises water.

30. The use defined in Claim 29, wherein water is present in an amount in the range of from about 45 to about 85 percent by weight based on the weight of the topical composition.

31. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-2, wherein the topical composition is in the form of a cream and comprises:

32. The use defined in any one of Claims 1-31, wherein the treatment is of an area afflicted with external genital warts.

33. Use of a topical composition comprising imiquimod in an amount of about 2.5% by weight, together with a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle therefor, for the treatment of an area afflicted with external genital or perianal warts, the use comprising application of the composition to the area once a day for up to eight weeks.

34. Use of imiquimod to manufacture a topical composition comprising imiquimod in an amount of about 2.5% by weight, together with a pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle therefor, for the treatment of an area afflicted with external genital or perianal warts, the composition being formulated for administration of imiquimod by application of the composition to a treatment area once a day for up to eight weeks.

35. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-34, wherein the composition is formulated for application of a daily amount of up to 6.25 mg imiquimod.

36. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-34, wherein the pharmaceutically acceptable vehicle comprises a fatty acid.

37. The use defined in Claim 36, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of from about 3 percent to about 45 percent by weight of the topical composition.

38. The use defined in Claim 36, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of from about 5 percent to about 25 percent by weight of the topical composition.

39. The use defined in Claim 36, wherein the fatty acid is present in an amount of about 20 percent by weight of the topical composition

40. The use defined in any one of Claims 36-39, wherein the fatty acid is selected from the group consisting of isostearic acid, palmitic acid, stearic acid, linoleic acid, unrefined oleic acid, refined oleic acid and any combination thereof.

41. The use defined in any one of Claims 36-39, wherein the fatty acid is isostearic acid.

42. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-41, wherein the topical formulation is in the form of a cream.

43. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-42, wherein the topical composition further comprises at least one of an emollient, an emulsifier, a thickener, a preservative, a solubilizing agent, a humectant, a skin penetration enhancer and any combination thereof.

44. The use defined in Claim 43, wherein the emollient is selected from the group comprising cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetearyl alcohol, petrolatum, light mineral oil, acetylated lanolin and any combination thereof.

45. The use defined in Claim 43, wherein the emollient is a combination of consisting of cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol and petrolatum.

46. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-45, wherein the emollient is present in an amount of about 5 percent to about 30 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

47. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-45, wherein the emollient is present in an amount of about 5 percent to about 10 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

48. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-47, wherein the emulsifier is selected from the group consisting of polysorbate 60, sorbitan monostearate, polyglyceryl-4 oleate, polyoxyethylene(4)lauryl ether and any combination thereof

49. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-47, wherein the emulsifier is a combination of polysorbate 60 and sorbitan monostearate

50. The use defined in any one of Claims 48-49, wherein the emulsifier is present in an amount in the range of from about 2 percent to about 14 percent by weight of the topical composition.

51. The use defined in any one of Claims 48-49, wherein the emulsifier is present in an amount in the range of from about 2 percent to about 6 percent by weight of the topical composition.

52. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-49, wherein the thickener is selected from the group comprising xanthum gum, guar gum, Veegum gum .TM. K, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, cetearyl alcohol and any combination thereof.

53. The use defined in any one of Claims 43-49, wherein the thickener is xanthum gum.

54. The use defined in any one of Claims 52-53, wherein the thickener is present in an amount of from about 3 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

55. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-54, where the preservative is selected from the group comprising methylparaben, propylparaben, benzyl alcohol and any combination thereof.

56. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-55, where the preservative is present as a combination of methylparaben, propylparaben and benzyl alcohol.

57. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-56, wherein the solubilizing agent is selected from the group comprising benzyl alcohol, lactic acid, acetic acid, stearic acid, salicylic acid, glycolic acid, hydrochloric acid and any combination thereof.

58. The use defined in Claim 57, where the additional solubilizing agent is present in an amount in the range of from about 1 percent to about 12 percent by weight based on the total weight of the topical composition.

59. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-58, wherein the humectant is glycerin.

60. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-59, wherein the skin penetration enhancer is butyl stearate.

61. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-60, wherein the pharmaceutically acceptable carrier comprises water.

62. The use defined in Claim 61, wherein water is present in an amount in the range of from about 45 to about 85 percent by weight based on the weight of the topical composition.

63. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-34, wherein the topical composition is in the form of a cream and comprises:

64. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-63, wherein the treatment is of an area afflicted with external genital warts.

60. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-59, wherein the skin penetration enhancer is butyl stearate.
61. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-60, wherein the pharmaceutically acceptable carrier comprises water.
62. The use defined in Claim 61, wherein water is present in an amount in the range of from about 45 to about 85 percent by weight based on the weight of the topical composition.
63. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-34, wherein the topical composition is in the form of a cream and comprises:
64. The use defined in any one of Claims 33-63, wherein the treatment is of an area afflicted with external genital warts.

65. The use defined in any one of claims 1-3, wherein the composition is formulated for application of a weekly amount of up to 65.6 mg imiquimod.

66. The use defined in any one of claims 1-4, wherein the composition is formulated for application of an eight week amount of up to 525 mg imquimod.

67. The use defined in any one of claims 1-5, wherein the composition is formulated for application of up to 250 mg of the composition to the area each day.

68. The use defined in any one of claims 33-35, wherein the composition is formulated for application of a weekly amount of up to 43.75 mg imiquimod.

69. The use defined in any one of claims 33-36, wherein the composition is formulated for application of an eight week amount of up to 350 mg imquimod.

70. The use defined in any one of claims 33-37, wherein the composition is formulated for application of up to 250 mg of the composition to the area each day.