Dashboard

Disease indication

Systemic Sclerosis (Scleroderma)

The most lethal rheumatic disease, and the organ it is named after has no approved treatment at all. Several trials here did work — they worked on the lung, and were scored on the skin.

Therapeutic goal

Disease-modifying: Stop the progressive replacement of skin and organ tissue with collagen, judged on the modified Rodnan skin score — a trained examiner pinching skin at seventeen sites. No drug has ever been approved on it. The only intervention with a demonstrated survival benefit in this disease is not a drug at all.

Drugs approved for skin fibrosis
0

In four decades. The recent misses on a skin primary are tocilizumab (focuSSced, Phase 3), lenabasum (RESOLVE-1, Phase 3), riociguat (RISE-SSc, Phase 2b) and abatacept (ASSET, Phase 2). Two of those programmes nonetheless produced an approved drug, on a lung endpoint measured in the same trial.

high confidence
Direction of the placebo arm on skin
Improves

Skin thickening regresses without treatment in a substantial share of patients with early diffuse disease, and modern placebo arms improve accordingly. A trial must beat spontaneous recovery on a score whose measurement error is roughly the size of the effect it is powered to detect.

moderate confidence
Ten-year mortality, diffuse cutaneous disease
≈30–40%

The highest case-specific mortality of any rheumatic disease. Since renal crisis became treatable, lung fibrosis and pulmonary hypertension account for most of it — which is why the two organs with their own pages here are the two that decide survival.

moderate confidence
Interventions with a randomised survival benefit
1

Autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, in two randomised trials. It is a procedure rather than a licensable product, it carries treatment-related mortality of a few percent, and no regulator lists it as an approved therapy for this disease.

high confidence

One diagnosis, four therapeutic problems

Systemic sclerosis is four therapeutic problems that happen to occur in the same patient, and holding them side by side explains more about this disease than any single page can. Same autoimmunity, same fibroblasts, same person — and one manifestation was solved with a borrowed blood pressure pill, one has fourteen drugs it can borrow, one has two of its own, and one has nothing at all.

Skin and connective tissue

No approved therapy

Progressive thickening and tethering of the skin, and the feature the disease is named and classified by. Rarely the direct cause of death, and the best single predictor of who dies of everything else.

Drugs approved for it
None anywhere, in four decades of randomised trials
Endpoint, and its standing
mRSS — a clinician's fingers at 17 sites. Contested, and it improves without treatment
Share of scleroderma deaths
Not directly fatal, but extent and rate of skin change predict everything that is
Preclinical models
Dermal fibrosis models that resolve on their own, much as early skin disease often does

You are here

Lungs (interstitium)

Slowed, not stopped

Progressive interstitial fibrosis, present on imaging in most patients and clinically significant in roughly a third. The only manifestation to have produced a drug approval naming this disease.

Drugs approved for it
Two — nintedanib in 2019 and tocilizumab in 2021, both naming this disease
Endpoint, and its standing
FVC decline — a spirometer. Accepted, objective, and insensitive
Share of scleroderma deaths
Roughly a third — the leading single cause since the 1980s
Preclinical models
The same fibrosis models with the injection redirected into the airway, and the same false-positive record
Open this page

Pulmonary arteries

Borrowed, and less effective

Obliterative narrowing of the small pulmonary arteries, raising pressures until the right ventricle fails. Fourteen drugs are available to these patients and were licensed for a category rather than for them.

Drugs approved for it
Fourteen in the parent indication, none naming this disease, one dedicated trial ever run
Endpoint, and its standing
Time to clinical worsening — adjudicated events. Accepted, and the strongest endpoint on any of these pages
Share of scleroderma deaths
Roughly a quarter — second only to lung fibrosis
Preclinical models
Rodent pulmonary hypertension models, sharing nothing with the fibrosis ones but a single transgenic
Open this page

Kidneys (renal crisis)

Solved in 1979

Abrupt malignant hypertension with acute kidney failure, once the most feared complication of this disease and almost uniformly fatal within months. It is now largely survivable, and it was solved by accident.

Drugs approved for it
One class — ACE inhibitors, developed for hypertension and never licensed for this
Endpoint, and its standing
Survival and dialysis-free survival. Never tested against placebo, because by then nobody would randomise
Share of scleroderma deaths
Under 5% today, against roughly 40% before 1980
Preclinical models
None were used. The treatment arrived before the mechanism did, and the mechanism is still argued over

No page yet

These may be nearer to separate diseases than the shared name implies, and the autoantibody is the clearest evidence for that. Anti-topoisomerase I predicts lung fibrosis, anti-RNA polymerase III predicts renal crisis and rapid skin thickening, and anticentromere predicts pulmonary hypertension with limited skin involvement. The two manifestations that decide survival largely occur in different patients, and a trial enrolling on the diagnosis mixes them all.

What a trial has to prove

The whole page in one table. The skin endpoint is a clinician's fingers, it improves without treatment, and nothing has ever been approved on it. The lung endpoint measured in the same trials is a spirometer, and two drugs have.

Endpoints used in Systemic Sclerosis (Scleroderma) trials for the Disease-modifying goal, how each is measured, how long it takes to read, and whether it is accepted as evidence for the claim. Select one for detail.
EndpointTypeRead atStanding
Modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS)Clinician-rated12 monthsContested
ACR CRISS composite indexComposite12 monthsExploratory
Forced vital capacity (FVC) declinePerformance52 weeksAccepted
Scleroderma HAQ (HAQ-DI with visual analogue scales)Self-reported12 monthsContested
Event-free survivalComposite2–5 yearsAccepted
Accepted
Regulators accept this as evidence for the claim.
Surrogate
A stand-in for clinical benefit, accepted or under negotiation for accelerated approval — the benefit itself must still be confirmed.
Contested
Used in trials, but not accepted as establishing the claim on its own.
Exploratory
Informative for development — target engagement, enrichment — but never the basis of an approval.
None accepted
No endpoint has ever been accepted as establishing this claim in this disease.

Preclinical model validity

This disease is three processes at once — vasculopathy, autoimmunity and fibrosis — and no model has all three. Each isolates one leg, a candidate is selected on the leg it targets, and it then meets patients who have all of them. That is a different failure from the one on the Parkinson's page: not a wrong model, a partial one.

Validity of Systemic Sclerosis (Scleroderma) preclinical models across face, construct, and predictive validity. Predictive validity is shown for the Halt or reverse fibrosis goal.
ModelFaceDoes it look like the disease?ConstructDoes it arise the same way?PredictiveHalt or reverse fibrosis
ValidityNoneLowModerateHighNo evidencenever tested — not a low score

Translation ledger

Read the outcome column against the endpoint column rather than on its own. Two of these programmes produced an approved drug. Neither was approved on the endpoint it was designed around.

Interventions that showed benefit in a Systemic Sclerosis (Scleroderma) preclinical model, and what happened when they reached the clinic.
InterventionRested onPrimary endpointReachedOutcome
Lenabasum
Corbus Pharmaceuticals · Selective cannabinoid receptor type 2 agonist, intended to resolve inflammation without immunosuppression
Bleomycin skinPatient fibroblasts
ACR CRISS composite index at 52 weeks
Phase 3
RESOLVE-1 · 2021
Failed
Tocilizumab
Roche / Genentech · Monoclonal antibody blocking the interleukin-6 receptor
Bleomycin skinPatient fibroblasts
Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score at 48 weeks
Approved (for the lung manifestation)
focuSSced · 2020
Missed primary
Abatacept
Bristol Myers Squibb / academic · CTLA4-Ig fusion protein blocking the co-stimulatory signal T cells need to be activated
sclGVHDBleomycin skin
Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score at 12 months
Phase 2
ASSET · 2020
Missed primary
Nintedanib
Boehringer Ingelheim · Intracellular inhibition of multiple tyrosine kinases, including PDGF, FGF and VEGF receptors
Bleomycin skinFra-2
Annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity, in millilitres per year, over 52 weeks
Approved (for the lung manifestation)
SENSCIS · 2019
Approved
Riociguat
Bayer · Soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator, raising cyclic GMP independently of nitric oxide
Bleomycin skinFra-2
Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score at 52 weeks
Phase 2b
RISE-SSc · 2019
Missed primary
Autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation
Academic consortia (EBMT/EULAR; NIAID) · Ablation of the autoreactive immune repertoire, followed by reconstitution from the patient's own stem cells
sclGVHD
Event-free survival: time to death or irreversible major organ failure
Phase 3 (randomised, two trials)
ASTIS; SCOT · 2018
Benefit, no approval
Mycophenolate mofetil
Academic (NHLBI) · Inhibition of inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase, selectively suppressing lymphocyte proliferation
sclGVHD
Course of percent-predicted forced vital capacity over 24 months
Phase 3
Scleroderma Lung Study II · 2016
Benefit, no approval
Imatinib
Novartis / investigator-initiated · Tyrosine kinase inhibitor blocking PDGF receptor and c-Abl, two nodes downstream of TGF-β
Bleomycin skinTsk-1Patient fibroblasts
Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score at 6 to 12 months
Phase 2
Multiple small randomised and open-label studies · 2011
Failed
Oral cyclophosphamide
Academic (NHLBI) · Alkylating agent producing broad, non-selective immunosuppression
sclGVHDBleomycin skin
Percent-predicted forced vital capacity at 12 months
Phase 3
Scleroderma Lung Study I · 2006
Benefit, no approval
Endpoint · Clinician-rated

Modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS)

How thick and tethered the skin feels to a trained examiner, summed across seventeen body sites

ContestedRead at 12 months
Scale
Ordinal, 0–3 at each of 17 sites, summed to a total of 0–51. Higher is worse. Analysed as a continuous change from baseline, despite being a sum of four-point judgements.
How it is administered
A trained examiner pinches and rolls the patient's skin between finger and thumb at seventeen defined sites and grades each one by feel: 0 normal, 1 mild thickening, 2 moderate thickening, 3 severe thickening with the skin unable to be pinched into a fold. No device is involved at any point.
What it contains
  • Fingers, hands and forearms, scored bilaterally
  • Upper arms, scored bilaterally
  • Face, anterior chest and abdomen, scored once each
  • Thighs, lower legs and feet, scored bilaterally
How a score is produced
The seventeen site scores are added to a single total, and change from baseline is compared between arms. There is no adjustment for examiner, and no calibration standard exists against which a given examiner's sense of moderate thickening can be checked.
What counts as success
A fall of 3 to 5 points is conventionally called clinically meaningful. Published inter-observer variability sits in a similar range, so the noise on a single reading is roughly the size of the effect a trial is powered to detect — the reason trials mandate the same examiner throughout, and the reason a negative result here is genuinely hard to interpret.
Why it matters here

The endpoint the disease is named around, and no drug has ever been approved on it. Two problems compound: examiner-dependent measurement, and a placebo arm that improves because early diffuse skin disease often regresses on its own.

Clements et al., J Rheumatol 1995; Khanna et al., J Scleroderma Relat Disord 2017 (mRSS reliability and responsiveness)high confidence

What the clinic costs

Among the most expensive per success on this site, for an unusual reason. The trials are not large by the standards of common disease. What makes them expensive is that almost none of them work, and the endpoint is a substantial part of why.

A full year on the skin score, twice. Modest enrolment by the standards of common disease and expensive anyway, because the endpoint cannot be read faster and a single trial will not carry a claim on a measure this contested.

3.8×
the exposure
2.4×
the cost

718 patient-years against 189 for a symptomatic programme. Cost grows more slowly than exposure because the fixed enrolment cost of each participant — screening, baseline imaging — is paid once however long they are then followed. The goal, not the molecule, still sets the budget.

Citedenrolment, duration and study counts, from named trials.Assumptionthe two cost parameters below.Computedeverything else.

Clinical programme by phase: enrolment, duration, exposure in patient-years, and modelled cost.
PhaseDesignN × studiesDurationPatient-yearsModelled cost
Phase 1
SAD / MAD, healthy volunteers
Reads: Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics
Antifibrotics and immunomodulators both carry tolerability questions that shape later dosing, so first-in-human work is not abbreviated.
Conventional first-in-human designmoderate confidence
50
9 mo
38
$1.4M–$2.2M
Phase 2
Dose-ranging on the skin score, with lung function as a key secondary
Reads: Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score at 12 months
A full year even at Phase 2, because the score moves slowly and a shorter read cannot separate treatment from the spontaneous improvement seen in early diffuse disease. Sized after ASSET and faSScinate.
Khanna et al., Arthritis Rheumatol 2020 (ASSET); Khanna et al., Lancet 2016 (faSScinate)high confidence
120
1 yr
120
$3.8M–$6.4M
Phase 3
Two pivotals, 48 to 52 weeks, placebo-controlled on background therapy
Reads: Change from baseline in modified Rodnan skin score, or the CRISS composite, at 48 to 52 weeks
Sized between focuSSced and RESOLVE-1. Two pivotals is the honest assumption for an endpoint on which no drug has ever been approved: the first sponsor to succeed on the skin score should expect to be asked to do it again.
Khanna et al., Lancet Respir Med 2020 (focuSSced); Spiera et al., Arthritis Rheumatol 2023 (RESOLVE-1)moderate confidence
280 × 2
1 yr
560
$18M–$30M
Total2.8 yr of clinical development, treating phases as sequential718$23M–$38M
AssumptionThe two cost parameters
Fixed, per participant
$12,000–$18,000
Running, per year on study
$20,000–$35,000

Model assumptions, not citations — the only free parameters here. The fixed component covers screening, baseline imaging and randomisation, incurred once per participant; the running component covers visits, monitoring and site fees for each year on study. Splitting them matters: a single rate per patient-year would price short symptomatic trials far below what pivotal trials actually cost.

Calibration: priced this way a single pivotal trial in this programme comes to $3.6M–$5.8M, against published pivotal trial costs of $1233M (median $19M) across all indications. A rare disease with trials in the low hundreds, so a single pivotal here lands below the published all-indication interquartile range. The unusual feature is duration: the skin endpoint needs a full year regardless of trial size, because the score moves slowly and noisily, so this programme costs more than its enrolment alone would suggest. Moore et al., JAMA Internal Medicine 2018.

ComputedRisk-adjusted cost
$578M$956M

Programme cost divided by a 4% likelihood of approval from Phase 1 in skin fibrosis in systemic sclerosis — what one success costs once the failures are paid for. BIO / Informa / QLS, Clinical Development Success Rates — autoimmune disease sits near the all-indication average, and fibrosis sits far below it.

Read this one carefully: The lowest rate on this site, and the one resting on the plainest arithmetic: four decades of randomised trials against skin fibrosis and no approvals at all. Read it as a statement about the endpoint rather than about the biology. Two of the programmes counted as failures here produced approved drugs — on a lung endpoint measured in the same trial — so the 4% describes the odds of winning the argument a skin trial is set up to have, not the odds that a compound does something.

low confidence
For scale — industry-wide, per approved drug
$985M
Median R&D cost per approval
Wouters et al., JAMA 2020 (capitalised; estimates range $314M–$2.8B)
$2.6B
Capitalised cost per approval
DiMasi et al., J Health Econ 2016

These are portfolio figures spanning all of R&D and already carry the cost of failure, so they are not comparable with the per-programme clinical costs above — they are the order of magnitude those costs roll up into.

What is changing

Three shifts, and two of them are about who is enrolled and what is measured rather than about new mechanisms.

Rebuilding the endpoint, and finding that is not enough

The composite index was designed to fix the skin score by borrowing strength from lung function, patient report and physician judgement. It then failed as the primary endpoint of a Phase 3 trial, because its components drift in the same favourable direction in untreated patients — the composite inherited the problem instead of averaging it away. The current direction is different in kind: skin biopsy transcriptomic scores and high-frequency ultrasound aim to replace a human judgement with an instrument reading, on the argument that what is wrong with the skin score is not its weighting but that it is measured by hand.

Khanna et al., Arthritis Rheumatol 2016 (CRISS); Spiera et al., Arthritis Rheumatol 2023 (RESOLVE-1)

The autoantibody may be the real disease boundary

Three antibodies carve this population into groups with different natural histories: anti-topoisomerase I predicts lung fibrosis, anti-RNA polymerase III predicts rapid skin thickening and renal crisis, and anticentromere predicts pulmonary hypertension with limited skin disease. A trial enrolling diffuse cutaneous disease mixes them, and a pre-specified analysis in one Phase 2 found the response confined to a single skin gene-expression subset. Enriching by serotype or expression subset is the obvious response and remains largely undone, because the disease is rare enough that any enrichment criterion makes an already difficult trial harder to fill.

Steen, Semin Arthritis Rheum 2005 (autoantibody-defined subsets); Khanna et al., Arthritis Rheumatol 2020 (ASSET subset analysis)

CD19 CAR-T, and the first regressions anyone has reported

Small uncontrolled case series of CD19-directed CAR-T cell therapy in severe autoimmune disease, systemic sclerosis included, report skin score falls and organ improvement that outstrip anything in the randomised record, with autoantibodies disappearing and B cells returning naive. The numbers are single-digit, there is no control arm, and follow-up is short — this is the weakest evidence on the page and the most interesting. It also carries an implicit claim worth stating: if depleting B cells this deeply reverses established fibrosis, the fibroblast is not as autonomous as the culture data suggest.

Müller et al., NEJM 2024 (CD19 CAR-T in autoimmune disease); early single-centre case series

Educational. Validity ratings are a coded reading of the published literature, not a consensus standard. This page covers skin fibrosis and the disease as a whole; the lung and pulmonary-vascular manifestations are treated separately. Much of what patients actually receive is used off-label on observational evidence, and those entries are flagged accordingly. Not medical, regulatory, or investment advice.