This page shows what was measured, who it was measured in, and what that does not settle.
What Calcipotriol does in the body
Plaque psoriasis — the raised, red, scaly patches
Vitamin D is not really a vitamin — it is a hormone, and skin cells have a receptor for it sitting on their DNA. Calcipotriene is vitamin D redesigned so that it still fits that receptor but is destroyed within hours, so it acts on skin and does not raise the calcium in your blood the way real vitamin D would. When it binds, the receptor switches off the genes that keep the cell dividing and switches on the genes that make it mature and shed. The plaque thins. Separately and unexpectedly, the same receptor makes keratinocytes release an alarm signal that pulls immune cells in, which is why the drug ended up in a skin cancer trial.
What happened in people
Vitamin D analogues significantly better than placebo on the body, standardised mean difference -0.67 to -1.66 across 177 trials and 34,808 participants
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The recorded finding that sits closest to something a person would notice. Written into the record, not signed off, and it carries no population or interval.
The Cochrane conclusion that corticosteroids perform at least as well with fewer local adverse events has not been overturned
Where it acts
The epidermal keratinocyte nucleus, in the thickened plaque where cell division has run out of control
Kind of result
The kind of result is not recorded
Supervision
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
What the registries record it as
The substance registry classes this as chemical.
FDA substance registry · 143NQ3779B · read 2026-08-29
Where each sentence above came from
No recorded sentence describes the change this makes in a way that stands on its own. The page opens with what it is taken for instead, and the recorded explanation follows below.
Shown as the opening line on this page.
A limit recorded against this substance. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The four opening statements run to 151 words.
Words this page uses
Four words worth knowing first
Chosen from what this page shows, with each one explained before the word it depends on.
Comparator
A comparator is whatever the treatment was measured against.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like the other runner in a race.
Where that stops being true. A race has one winner. A study can show both arms improved.
What people get wrong. Results are read without asking what the other group got. Beating nothing is not beating a treatment.
The control condition against which the experimental intervention is assessed.
Randomisation
Randomisation means chance decides who gets which treatment.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a coin toss deciding the groups.
Where that stops being true. A coin toss is fair once. Fairness here comes from doing it for everyone.
What people get wrong. It is thought to make groups identical. It makes them similar on average, including on things nobody measured.
Allocation of participants to arms by a chance process, so that unmeasured factors are balanced in expectation.
Absolute difference
An absolute difference is how many more people in a hundred were affected.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like counting heads in two rooms of a hundred.
Where that stops being true. Heads are easy to count. Study results carry a margin of error too.
What people get wrong. It is confused with a percentage change, which can look far larger.
The arithmetic difference in event rates between arms.
Confidence interval
A confidence interval is the range the true answer is likely to sit in.
A picture of it, and where the picture fails
It is like a weather forecast giving a range rather than one number.
Where that stops being true. A forecast range covers tomorrow. This one covers what the study could resolve.
What people get wrong. The middle number is read as the answer. A range crossing zero means no change is still possible.
An interval estimate that would contain the true parameter in a stated proportion of repeated studies.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What happened in people
Each card is one study: the exact question it asked, who was in it, and whether it showed what it set out to show.
Global improvement in chronic plaque psoriasis against placebo and against other topical treatments
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Cochrane topical psoriasis review, vitamin D analogues against placebo (CD005028)
How many people
34808
Study design
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 177 randomised controlled trials
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Standardised mean difference against placebo on the body from -0.67 (95% CI -1.04 to -0.30) to -1.66 (95% CI -2.66 to -0.67), equivalent to 0.8 to 1.9 points on a six-point scale
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Only 25 of 177 trials assessed dermal atrophy, and reporting was too sparse to judge whether the assessment methods were adequate. The review states that the long-term safety comparison which motivates the whole drug class has not been made.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
Interval reported. 95% CI -1
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil actinic keratosis randomised trial registration record, 131 participants (NCT02019355) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Global improvement in scalp psoriasis, vitamin D against potent and very potent corticosteroids
✗ The study did not show it
Who was studied
Cochrane topical psoriasis review, vitamin D against corticosteroids on the scalp
How many people
34808
Study design
Pooled head-to-head comparison within the same systematic review
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
Vitamin D significantly less effective than both potent and very potent corticosteroids on the scalp, supported by indirect evidence from placebo-controlled trials
Repeated elsewhere
Replicated
What this does not prove. A study that did not show an effect does not show that no effect exists anywhere.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Potent corticosteroids also caused fewer local adverse events than vitamin D on both body and scalp, which reverses the usual assumption about which of the two is gentler.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil actinic keratosis randomised trial registration record, 131 participants (NCT02019355) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Percentage reduction in actinic keratosis count after a four-day course, against Vaseline plus 5-fluorouracil
✓ The study showed what it set out to show
Who was studied
Calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil actinic keratosis trial (NCT02019355)
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. Four days of treatment and a lesion-count endpoint. The cancer question was answered separately in a follow-up cohort of the same participants rather than in this trial.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
Interval reported. Not recorded in this summary
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil actinic keratosis randomised trial registration record, 131 participants (NCT02019355) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
Squamous cell and basal cell carcinoma incidence at 1, 2 and 3 years after treatment
Blinded prospective cohort study of participants from the randomised trial
Compared against
Not recorded for this study
Kind of result
A number that stands in for health
What was found
SCC on treated face and scalp within 3 years: 2 of 30 (7%) against 11 of 40 (28%), hazard ratio 0.215 (95% CI 0.048 to 0.972), P=0.032. Overall SCC-free survival over more than 1,500 days P=0.0765
Repeated elsewhere
Unreplicated
What this does not prove. Meeting one endpoint in one population does not carry to other goals or other people.
The limits of this study, and where it came from
Main limit. The significant result is confined to one anatomical site and one time horizon in 70 people. Basal cell carcinoma did not differ, and two authors hold a filed patent on the combination.
How far it carries. This study is recorded from the curated record, not from the registry match.
Form and route. Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
Interval reported. 95% CI 0
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim.
Calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil actinic keratosis randomised trial registration record, 131 participants (NCT02019355) · a recorded source, not a stored snapshot
What we know
RNAWiki holds 4 written-up human studies for this substance, each with the question it asked.
How we know it
Each card names the study, the number of people and what the study set out to measure.
What this does not prove
These summaries were written by a person and have not been signed off as reviewed claims.
Why it matters
A study that failed is as informative as one that worked, and both are here.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim exists, so no exact population, effect size or interval is published yet.
What it changes in the body◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
The path through the body
From what a person takes to what changes. A solid line is a step measured in people. A dashed line is a step nobody has measured that way.
Start
Calcipotriol
What a person takes: Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate.
The measurement behind this step
Applied to plaques. The molecule is degraded by acid and by light, so the vehicle is formulated on the alkaline side and packaged accordingly, and it is chemically incompatible with acidic co-applied products such as salicylic acid. The foam vehicle carries the paediatric indication from age 4. Rapid metabolism after absorption is what confines the effect to skin.
Getting in
Vitamin D, redesigned to self-destruct
The molecule is real vitamin D hormone with its tail rebuilt so the body breaks it down within hours. That is what lets it work on skin without raising blood calcium the way vitamin D would.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Calcipotriol is calcitriol with a 22,23-double bond and a terminal cyclopropyl ring on the side chain. Receptor affinity is comparable to calcitriol; systemic half-life is not. The molecule is rapidly metabolised to a 24-oxo and then a 24-hydroxy derivative with far lower activity, which is the entire safety design.
Inside a skin cell the drug binds a receptor that is parked on specific stretches of the genome, waiting for a signal.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
The vitamin D receptor heterodimerises with retinoid X receptor and binds vitamin D response elements. Ligand binding exchanges corepressors for coactivators, the same architecture the retinoid receptors use — which is why a retinoid and a vitamin D analogue can be described in almost identical terms and still do different things.
The genes that keep psoriatic skin cells dividing get switched off, and the genes that make a cell mature and shed get switched on. The plaque thins.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
VDR activation induces cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors and drives transcription of involucrin, transglutaminase 1 and other terminal differentiation markers, reversing the hyperproliferation and parakeratosis that define the plaque. It also suppresses T-cell derived IL-2 and interferon-gamma, so the effect is not purely on the keratinocyte.
Unexpectedly, the same switch makes skin cells release a cytokine that summons immune cells. In psoriasis that is a side note. On sun-damaged skin it turned out to be the main event.
──Measured in people. Written by a person from the study named beside the step. Not signed off as a reviewed claim.
The measurement behind this step
VDR activation induces thymic stromal lymphopoietin in keratinocytes. In genetically engineered mice calcipotriol suppressed skin carcinogenesis in a TSLP-dependent manner, and in human skin the calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil combination induced TSLP, HLA class II and NKG2D ligand expression with a CD4+ T cell infiltrate peaking at days 10 to 11.
Plaques flatten, and steroids do it at least as well
On the body the drug clearly beats a placebo. Against a steroid it is a draw on the body, a loss on the scalp, and it stings more in both places.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Vitamin D analogues on the body: standardised mean difference against placebo -0.67 to -1.66. Potent corticosteroids -0.89 (95% CI -1.06 to -0.72) and very potent -1.56 (95% CI -1.87 to -1.26). On the scalp, vitamin D was significantly less effective than both, and less well tolerated locally than potent corticosteroids on both sites.
Psoriasis is treated for decades and these trials ran for weeks. The reason to pick this drug over a steroid is what happens to skin over years, and only twenty-five of a hundred and seventy-seven trials even looked.
╌╌Described, with no measurement named. No measurement is named for this step, so it is drawn as an unconfirmed link.
The measurement behind this step
Only 25 of 177 trials assessed clinical cutaneous dermal atrophy; few cases were found and reporting was insufficient to judge whether the assessment methods could have detected it. The review states that clinical measurements of dermal atrophy are insensitive and detect only the most severe cases.
No suggested links are held for this record, so nothing is hidden from this path.
What we know
The record describes 6 steps from taking it to an effect in a person.
How we know it
Each step names the study behind it in the technical detail beside it.
What this does not prove
A change inside the body is a reason to look. It is not a result in a person.
Why it matters
A reader can see exactly where the chain stops being measured in people.
What we still do not know
No reviewed claim binds any of these steps to a named population.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Were people like you studied?
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it, and where the result stops carrying.
Who was studied
People similar to this profile were included.
Adults and children from age 4 with plaque psoriasis, usually now in a fixed combination with a corticosteroid rather than alone.
Who is missing from the studies
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What the label states about particular groups
On pediatric, the label states: “The safety and effectiveness of SORILUX Foam in pediatric patients less than 4 years of age have not been established.”
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-30
On older people, the label states: “Clinical trials of SORILUX Foam did not include sufficient numbers of subjects aged 65 years and over to determine whether they respond differently from younger subjects.”
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-30
On people who are pregnant, the label states: “Risk Summary Although there are no available data on the drug- associated risk of major birth defects, miscarriage or adverse maternal or fetal outcomes in pregnant women exposed to SORILUX Foam, systemic exposure to calcipotriene is likely to be low [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.2 , 12.3) ] .”
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-30
On people who are breastfeeding, the label states: “Risk Summary There are no data on the presence of topically administered calcipotriene in human or animal milk, the effects on the breastfed infant, or the effects on milk production.”
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-30
Where the result stopped carrying
Lost significantly to both potent and very potent corticosteroids on scalp psoriasis
Caused more burning and irritation than the steroids it was meant to replace
Was designed to avoid affecting blood calcium and still carries hypercalcaemia and hypercalciuria in its Warnings and Precautions
Overall squamous cell carcinoma-free survival across the whole follow-up period did not reach significance (P=0.0765), and basal cell carcinoma did not move at all
This is a scope explorer, not a diagnosis engine.
It shows who was studied so you can see whether people similar to you were included.
RNAWiki cannot tell whether a study fits you. It can show who was in it.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Why it might seem to do nothing
A real effect and a noticed effect are different things. These are the recorded reasons the two come apart.
It was studied in different people
The people in the studies were not much like the reader.
On this record: Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
The evidence may simply be wrong
Small early studies often do not hold up.
On this record: RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Other reasons RNAWiki checked and found nothing for (11)
It was studied for a different goal
The studies measured something else entirely. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
A different form was studied
The studied form is not the form on the shelf. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
There was nothing to correct
Where a level is already normal, topping it up may change nothing. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else had to happen too
In the studies it was paired with training, a diet or another treatment. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The change is too small to feel
A real change can still sit below what a person notices. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Day-to-day swing hides it
Sleep, food, stress and time of day move most numbers more than this would. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Not enough time yet
The studies ran longer than the person has waited. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
It was not taken as studied
Missed days change the result, and studies count them. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
Something else changed at the same time
Two changes at once cannot be told apart afterwards. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
The product may not be what it says
Contents of a sold product are not always what the label states. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
No recorded reason
RNAWiki has nothing stored that would explain it. Nothing in this record points to this reason.
None of these is a reason to take more. Taking more is not a step this page ever suggests.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What taking it involves
The recorded facts about getting hold of it and using it. Nothing here is a suggestion about what you should do.
How it is supplied
Prescription only
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Read from the recorded approval status.
No source is stored against this line.
Form and route
Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form and route recorded on this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
Who oversees it
Professional supervision is normally required. A regulator classifies this substance in a way that restricts how it is supplied.
❝ Quoted from a source
Where this came from
Copied from a source RNAWiki stored, with the source named.
Suppression classes recorded: S3.
No source is stored against this line.
What is in the pack
Applied to plaques.
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
Recorded notes on how this is sold. The rest of the recorded wording: The molecule is degraded by acid and by light, so the vehicle is formulated on the alkaline side and packaged accordingly, and it is chemically incompatible with acidic co-applied products such as salicylic acid. The foam vehicle carries the paediatric indication from age 4. Rapid metabolism after absorption is what confines the effect to skin.
No source is stored against this line.
Where it is registered
Regulatory records are listed in the technical disclosure at the foot of this page.
# Counted from records
Where this came from
A count of rows RNAWiki holds. It describes our records, not your body.
Register entries are stored per jurisdiction and shown with their dates.
No source is stored against this line.
Why people stop
Not recorded.
∅ Nothing recorded
Where this came from
RNAWiki holds nothing here and says so rather than guessing.
No record of why people stopped taking it is stored for this substance.
No source is stored against this line.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What can go wrong
Sorted by where each line came from. A regulator's label and a report somebody sent in are not the same kind of fact.
·Worth asking a clinician aboutWritten into the record from the studies named on this page
Local burning and irritation are the commonest effects and are significantly more frequent than with potent topical corticosteroids. Hypercalcaemia and hypercalciuria have been observed and the label directs discontinuation until calcium metabolism normalises. The fixed combination with betamethasone adds the corticosteroid warnings: reversible HPA-axis suppression with potential glucocorticosteroid insufficiency, and increased risk of cataract and glaucoma. The pooled review found no significant difference between topical agents in systemic adverse effects.
Nobody counted how many people took this and were fine, so this cannot be turned into a rate.
Over a long time. No completed tested study window is recorded, so long-term effects are not established by the registry record.
Groups the studies covered thinly. Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded for this substance. Pregnancy, breastfeeding, children, older adults, and people with liver or kidney conditions are commonly excluded from trials; nothing here says whether they were.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Does the exact form matter?
Evidence belongs to the exact thing that was tested. A different salt, a different mixture or a different preparation is a different question.
The form that was studied
Topical ointment, cream, foam and scalp solution; also a fixed combination ointment and suspension with betamethasone dipropionate
✎ Source-linked record
Where this came from
A person wrote this into the record with the study named beside it. No reviewer has signed it off.
The form used in the studies cited on this page.
No source is stored against this line.
What is sold
A recorded note compares this form with the others that are sold. It is kept below, word for word.
§ A fixed RNAWiki sentence
Where this came from
Wording RNAWiki always uses, not a finding about this substance.
The recorded note, unchanged: The molecule is degraded by acid and by light, so the vehicle is formulated on the alkaline side and packaged accordingly, and it is chemically incompatible with acidic co-applied products such as salicylic acid. The foam vehicle carries the paediatric indication from age 4. Rapid metabolism after absorption is what confines the effect to skin.
No source is stored against this line.
What is recorded as being sold
37 products list this as an active ingredient in the United States drug directory. 26 of them contain it and nothing else.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72162-1428 · read 2026-08-29
They are sold as aerosol, foam, cream, ointment, powder, solution and suspension, taken topical.
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72162-1428 · read 2026-08-29
The regulator's established pharmacologic class for it is vitamin d analog [epc] and vitamin d [cs].
FDA National Drug Code directory · 72162-1428 · read 2026-08-29
22 published labels name it as an active ingredient. 11 of them describe this substance alone, which is where its own label text on this page comes from.
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-29
Those labels are classed as human prescription drug.
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-29
3 marketed supplement labels list this ingredient, classed as other combinations.
Those labels carry all other, nutrient and structure/function claims. A claim of that kind is written by the manufacturer and is not assessed by any regulator, so its presence says nothing about whether it is true.
SORILUX is topical at 3 DOSAGE FORMS AND STRENGTHS 0.005%, white foam., recorded as fda label in effect 2024-05-09 in the United States.
US prescribing information · 51f208d0-7b3f-44cc-8bed-92fa3d2e7bbe · read 2026-08-30
Recorded price in US: 1.04028–2.25733 USD per one gram, across 10 priced products whose strengths and pack forms differ, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Recorded price in US: 2.69894 USD per one millilitre, for the one priced product, as of 2026-08-26, paid by retail pharmacies buying the product, as surveyed by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. It is not a list price, an insurance price, or what anyone pays at a counter..
Recorded source · 2026-08-26 · read 2026-08-28
Evidence carries across two names for one substance. It does not carry across a salt, a mirror form or a mixture.
What it would be like to take◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What you could measure
This one is decided with a clinician, so this section holds questions to ask rather than a plan to run.
Self-experiment planning is not offered for a prescription or clinician-supervised medicine. The questions below are for a clinician or pharmacist.
Questions worth asking
Which of the trials of Calcipotriol studied people like me?
What was measured, and for how long?
Was the result a laboratory value or a health outcome?
What would we watch for, and when would we stop?
Tracking can show whether something changed for you. It cannot show what caused it.
RNAWiki records evidence. It does not say whether this substance is right for you.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Claims that go past the evidence
Things said about this substance that sound reasonable, and the exact step that is missing between the evidence and the claim.
✗Goes past the evidence
That a vitamin D analogue spares skin from atrophy over years of psoriasis treatment — the rationale for the class, unmeasured in 152 of 177 trials
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the non-steroid option is the gentler one, when the pooled data show the opposite on local tolerability
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That calcipotriene prevents skin cancer, when the significant result is a single-site three-year subgroup of 70 people
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
✗Goes past the evidence
That the actinic keratosis result transfers to psoriasis or the psoriasis result to skin cancer — they are different endpoints in different diseases
Why it sounds right. It follows from something real on this page: a body step, an animal result or a related finding.
The missing step. Nobody measured this in people for this use, or the study that did measure it did not show it.
What would change this
A study in people, for this exact use, measuring this exact thing, that a reviewer signs off.
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
What nobody knows yet
Open questions, each with why it is open and what would close it.
Missing populations
Which groups were under-represented in the studies has not been recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing long-term data
No completed tested study window is recorded.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
No reviewed conclusion
RNAWiki has not yet published a reviewed conclusion for this use.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Missing interaction studies
No interaction was found in the registers checked. Not finding one is not the same as showing there is none.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Formulation uncertainty
Several salts, forms or products of Calcipotriol are recorded. Results from one form may not transfer to another.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
Mechanism not reviewed
No reviewed mechanism story exists for this substance.
Why it matters. Recorded by the evidence model as a gap on this record.
What would answer it
A study that measures it, and a reviewer to sign it off.
Last checked 2026-09-04. Searched: The sources listed in the receipts at the foot of this page.
What happened in people◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
Check any of this yourself
Every line above traced back to the study it came from. This is the technical layer, and the vocabulary changes here.
Every line above can be traced to the study named beside it. Follow the link and read it.
Better than placebo on the body, across 177 trials and 34,808 participants
In plain words
The Cochrane review of topical psoriasis treatments is one of the largest in dermatology. Vitamin D analogues beat placebo on the body, by roughly one point on a six-point improvement scale.
What was measured
Standardised mean difference in global improvement against placebo, pooled across randomised trials
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The 2013 Cochrane review included 177 randomised controlled trials with 34,808 participants, including 26 trials of scalp psoriasis. Most vitamin D analogues used on the body were significantly more effective than placebo, with standardised mean differences ranging from -0.67 (95% CI -1.04 to -0.30) for twice-daily becocalcidiol to -1.66 (95% CI -2.66 to -0.67) for once-daily paricalcitol — on a six-point global improvement scale, 0.8 and 1.9 points respectively. Vitamin D generally performed better than coal tar; findings against dithranol were mixed. No comparison of topical agents found a significant difference in systemic adverse effects.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
On the scalp it lost to steroids, and it irritated more everywhere
In plain words
Applied to the scalp, the vitamin D analogue was significantly worse than both potent and very potent steroid preparations. And on both body and scalp it caused more burning and irritation than the steroids did.
What was measured
Head-to-head effectiveness and local adverse event rates against potent and very potent corticosteroids
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
The Cochrane review states that when applied to psoriasis of the scalp, vitamin D was significantly less effective than both potent corticosteroids and very potent corticosteroids, and that indirect evidence from placebo-controlled trials supported the finding. Head-to-head comparisons on the body had mixed findings. For both body and scalp, potent corticosteroids were less likely than vitamin D to cause local adverse events such as burning or irritation. The authors’ overall conclusion is that corticosteroids perform at least as well as vitamin D analogues and are associated with a lower incidence of local adverse events.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The reason to avoid steroids has never been properly measured
In plain words
People use a vitamin D analogue instead of a steroid to protect the skin from thinning over years. Of 177 trials, twenty-five looked for skin thinning at all, found almost none, and did not report enough detail to know whether they would have detected it.
What was measured
That using a vitamin D analogue instead of a corticosteroid protects skin from atrophy over years of treatment — the rationale for the entire drug class, and unmeasured in 152 of the 177 trials that could have measured it
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
The review records that only 25 trials assessed clinical cutaneous dermal atrophy, few cases were detected, and trials reported insufficient information to determine whether the assessment methods were robust. It adds that clinical measurements of dermal atrophy are insensitive and detect only the most severe cases. The authors conclude that for people receiving long-term corticosteroid treatment there remains a lack of evidence about the risk of skin dermal atrophy, and that further research is required to inform long-term maintenance treatment. Psoriasis is treated for decades and the trials are measured in weeks; the comparison that would justify the whole steroid-sparing strategy has not been run at the necessary duration on either side.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The combination beats either component, and is gentler than calcipotriene alone
In plain words
Putting the vitamin D analogue and a steroid in one product worked better than either separately, on the body and on the scalp. It also stung less than the vitamin D on its own.
What was measured
Effectiveness and local tolerability of the fixed combination against each component alone
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
For both body and scalp psoriasis, combined treatment with vitamin D and corticosteroid performed significantly better than vitamin D alone or corticosteroid alone. Combined treatment on either site was tolerated as well as potent corticosteroids and significantly better than vitamin D alone. The combination product’s own label reports the most common adverse reactions at 1% or more as pruritus and scaly rash, from a safety database of 2,448 subjects with plaque psoriasis, of whom 1,992 were exposed for 4 weeks and 289 for 8 weeks.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Four days of it cleared 87.8% of precancerous lesions, in a different disease
In plain words
A trial gave people four days of calcipotriene mixed with a chemotherapy cream, on sun-damaged faces and scalps, and counted precancerous spots. Almost nine in ten disappeared, against about one in four with the chemotherapy cream alone.
What was measured
Percentage reduction in actinic keratosis count after a four-day course, against 5-fluorouracil with an inert vehicle
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
A randomised double-blind trial in 131 participants compared 0.005% calcipotriol ointment plus 5% 5-fluorouracil cream against Vaseline plus 5-fluorouracil, self-applied to the whole of qualified anatomical sites — face, scalp and upper extremities — twice daily for four consecutive days. Mean reduction in actinic keratosis count was 87.8% against 26.3% (P<0.0001). The combination induced thymic stromal lymphopoietin, HLA class II and NKG2D ligand expression in lesional keratinocytes with a marked CD4+ T cell infiltrate peaking at days 10 to 11, without pain, crusting or ulceration. The mechanism was worked out first in genetically engineered mice, where calcipotriol suppressed skin carcinogenesis in a TSLP-dependent manner. Registered as NCT02019355 and investigator-initiated.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
The cancer-prevention follow-up is real, small, and narrower than it sounds
In plain words
Following those same patients for three years, fewer of the calcipotriene group developed squamous cell carcinoma on the treated face and scalp — two of thirty against eleven of forty. Across the whole body and the whole follow-up period, the difference did not reach significance.
What was measured
That calcipotriene prevents skin cancer — the significant result is a 3-year, single-site, 70-person subgroup; the whole-follow-up comparison did not reach significance and basal cell carcinoma did not move at all
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
See the technical detail.
From the source
A blinded prospective cohort study of the trial participants assessed squamous cell and basal cell carcinoma at 1, 2 and 3 years. Significantly fewer participants developed SCC on the treated face and scalp within 3 years: 2 of 30 (7%) against 11 of 40 (28%), hazard ratio 0.215 (95% CI 0.048 to 0.972), P=0.032. Over the full follow-up of more than 1,500 days the proportion remaining SCC-free favoured the treated group but did not reach significance (P=0.0765). There was no difference in basal cell carcinoma. Epidermal tissue-resident memory T cells persisted in treated face and scalp skin (P=0.0028). Two of the authors are co-inventors on a filed patent for the use of calcipotriol plus 5-fluorouracil for precancerous skin lesions, which the paper discloses.
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
It was engineered not to raise blood calcium, and sometimes does anyway
In plain words
The entire point of redesigning vitamin D was to keep the skin effect and lose the effect on blood calcium. The label still records that raised blood and urine calcium have been seen, and instructs stopping treatment when they are.
What was measured
Regulatory label warning — hypercalcaemia and hypercalciuria observed in use, with directed discontinuation
Effect estimate
No reviewed effect estimate exists for this record.
Limits
This entry records a failure.
From the source
The calcipotriene and betamethasone dipropionate ointment label lists hypercalcaemia and hypercalciuria in Warnings and Precautions, directing that treatment be discontinued until parameters of calcium metabolism normalise. The same label carries the corticosteroid class warnings for the combination product: reversible hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression with potential glucocorticosteroid insufficiency during and after withdrawal, with risk raised by high potency, large surface area, occlusion, prolonged use, altered skin barrier, liver failure and paediatric use, plus increased risk of cataract and glaucoma. The Cochrane review separately found no comparison of topical agents showing a significant difference in systemic adverse effects, so the label warning and the pooled trial data are describing different resolutions of the same question.
Source
Calcipotriene and betamethasone dipropionate ointment United States prescribing information, section 5 Warnings and Precautions (ANDA 200174, openFDA label endpoint)
Role in the trial
Not matched to a registered study
Identity check
no open identity hold
Audit mark
caution
Review state
Written into the record, not signed off as a reviewed claim
Where else this substance is registered
FDA substance identifier (UNII)
143NQ3779B
RxNorm concept
1020035
Checks this page had to pass
✓ Passed
Identity resolved
no open identity hold
✓ Passed
No unresolved merge across substance families
no quarantine open
✓ Passed
Every public sentence names a source
The opening statement carries the origin: Written into the record, not signed off.
✗ Not passed
Trial roles classified for highlighted evidence
No registered study is classified as testing this substance.
✓ Passed
No internal keys in reader text
enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
✓ Passed
Safety mode resolved
Suppression classes recorded: S3.
✓ Passed
Canonical metadata present
slug and display name present
What is missing or unclear◇Read from sources, not yet reviewed
How this medicine reached us
Kept near the foot of the page. A historical event moves up only when it changes something about this substance today.
What the approval register records
22 approved applications cover products containing this substance. The earliest was NDA020273, approved 19931229 to LEO PHARMA AS.
This order is fixed in code and does not count clicks or time on the page.
What is not here
7 questions this page could not answer
These sections were prepared and left out because there was nothing to put in them. They are listed rather than hidden, so the gaps in this record are visible.
What was measured, goal by goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
How close this is to real life — found nothing in the sources checked.
Felt, measured, or meaningful — found nothing in the sources checked.
How long anything takes — found nothing in the sources checked.
What it may clash with — found nothing in the sources checked.
Other ways to the same goal — found nothing in the sources checked.
What changed on this page — found nothing in the sources checked.
The record as stored
The full record, for auditing
Everything above is built from what is below. This layer keeps the technical vocabulary, record identifiers and every stored row, so a reader who wants to check the page can.
The older medicine-wide conclusion held in this record
Written for a clinical reader, and about the medicine as a whole rather than about one indication, population and set of trials. RNAWiki does not treat it as a programme conclusion and no reviewer has signed it off in that form. It is here word for word because it is what the record holds.
A vitamin D analogue that binds the vitamin D receptor in keratinocytes and forces them to stop dividing and differentiate — significantly better than placebo on the body across a 177-trial, 34,808-participant Cochrane review, significantly worse than potent corticosteroids on the scalp and more irritating than they are everywhere, and, in an unrelated four-day use, the agent that cut three-year squamous cell carcinoma on treated faces from 28% to 7%.
Recorded evidence blocks (8)
Q2
On the Calcipotriol label: indicated for what?
"Calcipotriene foam is indicated for the topical treatment of plaque psoriasis of the scalp and body in adults and pediatric patients 4 years of age and older. Calcipotriene foam, is a vitamin D analog indicated for the topical treatment of plaque psoriasis of the scalp and body in adults and pediatric patients 4 years…": indications and usage on Calcipotriol's label. DailyMed label · 26756ac7-a80c-49db-97bb-351f76ad8a71 · 2024-05-09
Q3
94 registered trials of Calcipotriol — at which phases?
Registered studies posting no result
63 of 94
94 registered studies of Calcipotriol: 28 phase2, 27 phase1, 17 phase4, 12 phase3, 8 na, 5 early phase1, 5 na or unstated. CLINICALTRIALS_SNAPSHOT · 2026-09-01
70 with a PubMed record
Show the evidence
phase2
28
phase1
27
phase4
17
phase3
12
na
8
early phase1
5
9 more recorded rows
na or unstated
5
completed
73
unknown
6
terminated
4
not yet recruiting
3
recruiting
3
active not recruiting
2
withdrawn
2
enrolling by invitation
1
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q4
5 of Calcipotriol's trials stopped: accrual/recruitment, other?
"Withdrawal of marketing autorization of efalizumab by the EMEA."; 5 of 94 registered studies
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00608777
terminated; "Withdrawal of marketing autorization of efalizumab by the EMEA."
NCT02411643
terminated; "Accrual incomplete/Investigator left institution"
NCT02680717
withdrawn; "Unable to obtain IRB approval at all sites"
NCT03996252
terminated; "The study team was not able to start the study and they never completed the IRB submission, so the study was terminated."
NCT05416320
withdrawn; "The IRB was closed without enrolling any participants"
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q5
Human studies of Calcipotriol used Dovonex Cream (50 mcg/g 0.005%) — over how long?
studies of Calcipotriol used the recorded amount. ClinicalTrials.gov · 2026-09-01
12 recorded entries; human; also "Dovonex Cream (50 mcg/g 0.005%)", "Ointment A: LEO 29102 2.5 mg/g plus calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment", "Ointment C: Calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment"
Show the evidence
human
NCT00705900
Dovonex Cream (50 mcg/g 0.005%)
NCT01466478
Ointment A: LEO 29102 2.5 mg/g plus calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment
NCT01466478
Ointment C: Calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment
NCT01466478
Ointment D: LEO 29102 2.5 mg/g plus calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment
NCT01466478
Ointment G: LEO 29102 2.5 mg/g plus calcipotriol 50 µg/g ointment
NCT01536938
calcipotriol 50 mcg/g and betamethasone 0.5 mg/g (as dipropionate)
6 more recorded rows
humanNCT01745133
Sorilux foam 0.005% foam
humanNCT02019355
Calcipotriol 0.005% ointment
humanNCT02432027
calcipotriol 50mcg/g
humanNCT03069144
Calcipotriol 0.005%
humanNCT03996252
Calcipotriene 0.005% Foam
humanNCT04221906
Daivonex cream (calcipotriol 0.005%)
recorded 2026-09-01 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q6
Which 44 trials of Calcipotriol posted no result?
Posted no result
44 of 44 completed trials
Registrations
NCT00216892, NCT00358384, NCT00437255, NCT00705900, NCT00796211 and NCT00625326, and 38 more
Completion dates
oldest 2005-12; newest 2023-11-13
Show the evidence
Trial
NCT00216892
2005-12
NCT00358384
2006-02-24
NCT00437255
2007-06
NCT00705900
2008-11
NCT00796211
2009-01
NCT00625326
2009-06
14 further recorded trials
NCT01052467
2010-05
NCT01297166
2011-04
NCT01229098
2011-10
NCT01466478
2011-12
NCT01320774
2012-01
NCT03069144
2012-05-28
NCT01646567
2012-11
NCT01763424
2012-12
NCT01837576
2013-06
NCT05488990
2013-06-17
NCT01743118
2013-07
NCT01946386
2013-10
NCT02004574
2014-06
NCT02019355
2015-03
Q7
At the median, Calcipotriol's trials enrolled 35.5 people — anything larger?
Median enrolment
35.5
Largest enrolment
1245
Registered trials counted
94
Q8
What do 2535 spontaneous reports say about Calcipotriol — and not say?
These are reports people sent to a regulator. They do not show the medicine caused the reaction. Nobody counted how many people took the medicine and reported nothing. The same event can be reported more than once, and many reports are incomplete. News coverage, lawsuits and new warnings change how often people report. A count is not a rate and not a risk.
Calcipotriol appears in spontaneous reports to regulators. Across the 10 most-reported reaction terms, 2535 reaction mentions were counted: fatigue 328; pain 289; pneumonia 275; dyspnoea 269. FAERS via Open Targets · CHEMBL1200666 · 2026-06-24
Show the evidence
fatigue
328
pain
289
pneumonia
275
dyspnoea
269
pain in extremity
250
gastrooesophageal reflux disease
245
4 more recorded rows
asthma
234
vomiting
230
hypersensitivity
210
cough
205
recorded 2026-06-24 · last checked 2026-09-04
Q9
Which 10 reactions does Calcipotriol's label not list?
ChEMBL 37 — CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported · ChEMBL ATC CC BY-SA · ClinicalTrials.gov — US Government work · Open Targets 26.06 — CC0 · mixed register set; per-register licences in docs/specs/corpus-20k-sources.md · openFDA / DailyMed — US Government work
✗ required summary fields resolved: 4 required field(s) not terminal: Why people use it, Best-supported result, Biggest unanswered question, Human evidence
✓ public claims reviewed: 0 reviewed claim(s); drafts are never rendered
✓ source coverage passed: 6 source rows
✓ no critical contamination: no quarantine open
✓ canonical metadata passed: slug and display name present
✓ no raw internal fields: enforced by the copy-contract test over the rendered page
This is a record of evidence. It is not medical advice, and it does not say this substance suits you. Nothing here says any substance on RNAWiki is appropriate for a child.