MED3000 FAQs

MED3000 is now the codename for a formulation of DermaSys^® developed specifically for the treatment of ED. MED3000 is a unique formulation of DermaSys^® using volatile solvent components tailored for the treatment of ED.

MED3000 is a topical gel applied directly to the head (glans) of the penis for the treatment of ED.

MED3000 works through an evaporative and unique mode of action.  MED3000’s combination of volatile solvent components creates an evaporative and novel action that stimulates nerve sensors in the highly innervated glans penis rapidly, leading to smooth muscle relaxation, tumescence and erection.

Futura now plans to pursue the medical device regulatory pathway for MED3000. Futura has commenced formal proceedings for MED3000 as a clinically proven treatment for ED to be approved as a medical device for the treatment of ED. Futura is expecting to submit the dossier to EU regulators by the end of July 2020 with the U.S. FDA providing optimism for submission for a medical De Novo device approval filing by end of Q3 2020.

Futura will submit its technical file for review by an EU Notified Body (Notified Bodies are the regulatory authorities that oversees the approval of medical devices within the EU for all EU countries including the UK), including the full clinical study report for FM57 and the Company’s Quality Management System.

A medical device is described within the EU as a product which does not achieve its principal intended action on the human body by pharmacological, immunological or metabolic means.  The regulatory pathway for a medical device is expected to be faster. An EU Notified Body has confirmed that MED3000 is a medical device and the US FDA has confirmed that the classification for the filing of MED3000 is a De Novo medical device.

These regulatory positions are the consensus from a number of regulatory experts consulted by Futura, nevertheless the Company is meeting with respective regulators ahead of regulatory filings.

Unfortunately, under the current regulations, Futura Medical are not able to provide samples.

MED3000 discussions are progressing well with regulators with an EU filing expected by the end of July 2020 and with positive dialogue with the US FDA providing optimism for a submission for a medical de novo device approval filing by the end of Q3 2020.

The recruitment for the European Phase 3 study (FM57) is now closed.

MED3000 achieved all co-primary clinical endpoints against baseline (before treatment). We are now pursuing regulatory filings as a medical device in the EU and US.

The DermaSys^® control (now known as MED3000) showed very high levels of efficacy in mild, moderate and severe ED. The vast majority of subjects experienced a meaningful clinical improvement in their ED; up to 83%. This left limited ability to show additional improvement for MED2005.

All four formulations tested; the Dermasys control (now known as MED3000) and the 3 formulations containing the active ingredient in the Dermasys base, showed very high levels of efficacy in mild, moderate and severe ED when compared to the pre-treatment (baseline) level of ED. However, because the vast majority of subjects experienced a meaningful clinical improvement, up to 83%, with the  Dermasys control. This left limited ability to show additional improvement for MED2005.

An ED-specific DermaSys^® formulation (now known as MED3000) was used as a control arm (placebo) following regulatory requirements, including the FDA in the US. The documented code requirement here is that the placebo must be as identical as possible to the test product. With respect to physical characteristics, placebos must have identical smell, colour, physical sensation on the skin to enable studies to be authentically blinded, disabling the patient from determining which is the drug and which is the placebo. The FDA acknowledge that not all placebos are inactive and to meet their requirements it was agreed in consultation with them that only the Dermasys base would be appropriate.

The Phase 2 study did show a placebo effect which was expected as the massaging of gel into the glans penis will cause some sexual stimulation. However, the effect was much lower than experienced in the phase 3 study. We believe the greater effectiveness in the Phase 3 study is a result of two main factors.

1. The study had far greater scale than the Phase 2 study. The study ran for 12 weeks versus 4 weeks where we noticed improvement in efficacy between 4 and 12 weeks. Also 61 sites were used versus 4 sites in the phase 2 study which would reduce the impact of natural variability occurring between test sites. Moreover, 3792 versus 984 intercourse attempts were made which is a much larger and more reliable sample size to study the effect.
2. We learnt from the Phase 2 study that enhancements to the subject recruitment process and pre-screening were required and therefore much greater emphasis on this was placed in the Phase 3 study with very strict compliance to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. We also placed greater emphasis on patient training and therefore compliance to the treatment regimen.

Therefore, we have concluded that in moving from a small Phase 2 study to a large Phase 3 study that the placebo effect was far greater than first indicated and presents an exciting opportunity in its own right without the inclusion of a drug substance.