Systemic Immunomodulatory Treatments for Atopic Dermatitis: Update of a Living Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Patients' preferences for systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis: safety and efficacy count the most

BACKGROUND

The advent of biologics and janus kinase inhibitors has revolutionized treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD).

OBJECTIVE

To investigate preferences of patients with AD for attributes of currently approved systemic treatments and assess influencing factors.

METHODS

An online discrete choice experiment was conducted in patients with AD throughout Germany to analyze preferences for outcome (probability of (almost) clear skin at week 16, probability of significant itch improvement, time to onset of itch relief and type of side effects) and process attributes (application method and frequency of laboratory tests).

RESULTS

Participants (n = 182, 75.3% female) considered side effects (Relative Importance Score (RIS): 31.2), (almost) clear skin (RIS: 24.2) and probability of itch improvement (RIS: 16.0) most important. Application method (RIS: 14.4), time to onset of itch relief (RIS: 7.4) and frequency of laboratory tests (RIS: 6.8) were less relevant. Preferences were significantly influenced by sex, age, psychiatric comorbidity, current therapy and health-related quality of life according to multivariate regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants attached great importance to safety and symptom control. However, preferences were also dependent on individual characteristics, underscoring the importance of personal counseling. Conjoined with medical considerations, patients' preferences have fundamental impact on shared decisions for treatment of AD.

Treatment of atopic dermatitis: Recently approved drugs and advanced clinical development programs

Atopic dermatitis (AD) represents the most common skin disease characterized by heterogeneous endophenotypes and a high disease burden. In Europe, six new systemic therapies for AD have been approved: the biologics dupilumab (anti-interleukin-4 receptor (IL-4R) α in 2017), tralokinumab (anti-IL-13 in 2021), lebrikizumab (anti-IL-13 in 2023), and the oral janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKi) targeting JAK1/2 (baricitinib in 2020 in the EU) or JAK1 (upadacitinib in 2021 and abrocitinib in 2022). Herein, we give an update on new approvals, long-term safety, and efficacy. Upadacitinib and abrocitinib have the highest short-term efficacy among the approved systemic therapies. In responders, dupilumab and tralokinumab catch up regarding long-term efficacy and incremental clinical benefit within continuous use. Recently, the European Medicines Agency has released recommendations for the use of JAKi in patients at risk (cardiovascular and thromboembolic diseases, malignancies, (former) smoking, and age ≥65 years). Furthermore, we give an overview on emerging therapies currently in Phase III trials. Among the topical therapies, tapinarof (aryl hydrocarbon receptor), ruxolitinib (JAK1/2i), delgocitinib (pan-JAKi), asivatrep (anti-transient receptor potential vanilloid), and phosphodiesterase-4-inhibitors (roflumilast, difamilast) are discussed. Among systemic therapies, current data on cord-blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells, CM310 (anti IL-4Rα), nemolizumab (anti-IL-31RA), anti-OX40/OX40L-antibodies, neurokinin-receptor-1-antagonists, and difelikefalin (κ-opioid-R) are reported.

A Multidisciplinary Approach Is Beneficial in Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a highly heterogeneous chronic inflammatory skin disorder that is frequently associated with a plethora of comorbidities. AD is, therefore, considered a systemic disease impacted by a considerable burden and leading to poor quality of life, especially in patients with moderate-to-severe disease. Since atopic and non-atopic comorbidities can further worsen the disease course, accurate establishment of the patient's individual intrinsic risk profile and needs is crucial and may help in guiding the selection of the best treatment option. Better quality of care for patients with AD can be delivered through a multidisciplinary team led by a dermatologist, for comprehensive patient management. The implementation of a multidisciplinary approach for AD could enhance the delivery of optimised and safe treatments, improve the standard of care and patient outcomes in the short and long term, and prevent or delay the lifelong impact of uncontrolled AD. Understanding the unmet needs, assessing correctly the patient risk profile and enhancing the shared patient-physician decision-making process can lead to disease control and quality-of-life improvement, especially in the context of the introduction of newer treatment for AD. This narrative review is a call for more data to establish standardised patient profiles and multidisciplinary strategies in AD management. In view on the fast-evolving treatments for AD, this review aims at highlighting the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to a comprehensive assessment and holistic care in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

Comparison of Old and New Systemic Treatments for Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Historically, systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) primarily consisted of immunosuppressive agents such as corticosteroids and Disease Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs (DMARDS), which provided symptomatic relief but often had long-term adverse effects. Newer treatments have shown significant efficacy with less side effects in clinical trials. This review discusses and compares conventional and newer systemic treatments for AD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer medications for AD including dupilumab, tralokinumab, lebrikizumab, and oral JAK inhibitors have been shown to be safe and efficacious. High dose cyclosporine and dupilumab were more effective than methotrexate and azathioprine in improving clinical signs of AD. High-dose upadacitinib was shown in another meta-analysis to be most effective in the measured outcomes but had the highest frequency of adverse events. Targeted biologic treatments are increasingly favored over traditional immunosuppressive treatments of AD. Treatment can be individualized based on potency, adverse side effects, mechanism of action, and administration preference. Ongoing research continues to expand treatment options for AD.

Effects of abrocitinib on pruritus and eczema symptoms and tolerance in patients with moderate‑to‑severe atopic dermatitis in randomized, double‑blind and placebo‑controlled trials: A systematic review and a meta‑analysis

Abrocitinib is a highly selective Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor that can block a multitude of inflammatory signaling pathways that underlie atopic dermatitis (AD). In addition, abrocitinib inhibits JAK1 signaling in sensory neurons to alleviate acute and chronic pruritus during AD. However, substantial variations in efficacy and safety risks remain due to variations in doses applied in clinical use. Therefore for the present study, differences in the efficacy and tolerability of 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib for treating pruritus and eczema symptoms in patients with moderate-to-severe AD were evaluated compared with placebo. Specifically, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of abrocitinib compared with placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD were searched on Pubmed, E.B. Stephens Company, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Medical network, Web of Science and related Clinical Trials Registry up to November 2023. In total, two researchers evaluated the quality of the included literature according to the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews. RevMan 5.3 software was used to conduct a meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety indicators in a cross-comparison of the effects exerted by placebo and 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib. A total of 1,825 patients with moderate-to-severe AD were included across five double-blind, placebo RCTs. Compared with the placebo group, during the double-blind trial period, significant improvements were observed in the investigator's global assessment score, response rate of eczema area and severity index (EASI)-50, EASI-75, EASI-90 and pruritus numerical rating scale (P-NRS) in the 100 and 200 mg abrocitinib groups (P<0.05). However, pairwise control analysis of the 100 and 200 mg group yielded significant differences (P<0.05) in all of the aforementioned therapeutic indicators except for the P-NRS score. In terms of safety, compared with the placebo group, there were significantly higher incidence of nausea, upper respiratory tract viral infection, infections and infestations in the 100 mg abrocitinib group (P<0.05). In addition, there were significantly higher incidence of nausea, gastrointestinal disorder, headache and dizziness in the 200 mg group (P<0.05). There were also significant differences in the incidence of nausea, gastrointestinal disorder and dizziness between the 100 and 200 mg groups (P<0.05). For patients with moderate-to-severe AD, oral administration of 100 or 200 mg abrocitinib once/day was concluded to ameliorate skin pruritus and eczema symptoms to varying degrees, with the efficacy significantly superior at the 200 mg dose. However, the risk of a number of adverse reactions, such as headache, dizziness, nausea and gastrointestinal dysfunction, is also significantly increased. Therefore, patients should be made aware of the risk of adverse drug effects prior to the administration of long-term high abrocitinib doses. Furthermore, large-scale, multi-center, rigorous clinical trials remain necessary to validate the findings from the present study.

Detecting T-cell receptor clonality in patients with severe atopic dermatitis refractory to dupilumab

BACKGROUND

Trials and real-life studies demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements of disease activity in the majority of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) treated with the anti-IL-4RA-antibody dupilumab. However, misdiagnosis or confounding skin diseases in particular cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) may lead to inadequate response.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical and pathological features of patients with AD who showed insufficient response to dupilumab.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 371 patients treated with dupilumab for severe AD. Insufficient response was defined as failure to achieve an improvement of the eczema area severity index (EASI) of at least 50% (EASI-50) at Week 16 and of 75% (EASI-75) at Week 52. Among 46 patients with insufficient response, 35 patients consented to a re-evaluation including a full physical exam, biopsies and laboratory assessments including immunohistochemistry and T-cell receptor gene rearrangement analysis to differentiate CTCL.

RESULTS

Of the 371 patients treated with dupilumab, 46 (12.3%) patients showed insufficient response to dupilumab. Of these, 35 underwent further evaluation, and 19 (54.2% of inadequate responders) were finally diagnosed with mycosis fungoides (MF). In these patients, transition to or addition of conventional MF treatment led to clinical improvements.

CONCLUSION

Insufficient response to dupilumab treatment may help uncover early MF on an existing AD background.

Interleukin antagonists for atopic dermatitis: a new era of therapy

INTRODUCTION

Over the last decade, increasing understanding of the immunopathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD) enabled the recognition of multiple therapeutic targets and subsequently the development of novel, highly effective systemic treatments, including interleukin (IL)-antagonists. To date, the IL-4Ra-inhibitor dupilumab, and the IL-13 inhibitor tralokinumab, have gained regulatory approval in Europe for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD, while more than 70 new therapeutics are currently in development.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we address the role of ILs in the pathogenesis of AD and provide an overview of the novel and investigational IL-antagonists, as regards their efficacy and safety on moderate-to-severe AD.

EXPERT OPINION

Current data have established IL-4 and IL-13 inhibitors as effective and safe for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD, as regards the rapid control of flares as well as the long-term remission of the disease. Data regarding the efficacy and safety of other IL-inhibitors, including those targeting IL-31, IL-22, IL-33, IL-36 and IL-18, are accumulating. There is still an unmet need for real-world-evidence studies and head-to-head studies for both currently available and future agents in AD treatment. Establishing predictive biomarkers of treatment response in a disorder of such considerable heterogenicity might help physicians pursue a patient-tailored therapeutic response.

Treatment of atopic dermatitis with upadacitinib: adcare single center experience

Introduction

The role of upadacitinib in the management of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis seems promising, but more data on its efficacy and safety are needed. This study endeavors to assess the practical impact and safety of upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, focusing on analyzing patient responses to the treatment.

Methods

In this study, adult patients diagnosed with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis received upadacitinib at daily doses of 15 mg or 30 mg, as prescribed by their attending physicians. The therapeutic efficacy of upadacitinib was meticulously assessed using established clinical metrics. Simultaneously, a comprehensive safety assessment was conducted through monthly monitoring, including the evaluation of potential effects of upadacitinib intake on hepatic function, lipid profile, and hematopoiesis using the pertinent laboratory tests.

Results

Sixteen participants were enrolled in the study. At 1month follow-up, there was a significant reduction in the mean Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score to 18.8 points, which further increased to 24 points at the 4-month mark. Additionally, 9 participants (56%) demonstrated an EASI-50 response after 1 month of treatment, with this response increasing to 9 participants (90%) after 4 months. Furthermore, enhanced therapeutic responses were observed at 4 months, with 6 patients (38%) achieving an EASI-75 response at 1month and 8 patients (80%) achieving this milestone at the 4-month follow-up. This study highlights the potential of upadacitinib as an effective treatment option for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. While it demonstrates improved symptom management, close monitoring for potential adverse events, particularly infections and the known risks of Janus kinase inhibitors, is essential. Further research is essential to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of upadacitinib.

Reappraising the Use of Systemic Immunomodulators for Psoriasis and Eczema in the Military

INTRODUCTION

Psoriasis and atopic dermatitis are chronic, immune-mediated skin disorders that are disqualifying for entrance into the military. Both conditions can cause difficulty wearing body armor and other protective equipment when poorly controlled, limiting a service member's ability to train and deploy worldwide. In addition, these conditions may be exacerbated by military service because of increased exposure to austere environments, extreme temperatures, stress, skin injury, bug bites, and vaccinations Service members have limited treatment options because of restrictions on systemic medications that can be used while deployed. Newer systemic medications-in particular, biologics and oral immunomodulators-have evolved to be both extremely effective and safe. We review more recent treatment options for psoriasis and atopic dermatitis in the context of DoD's regulations guiding entry and retention of personnel with psoriasis and eczema and make recommendations regarding updating DoD policy for systemic treatment options.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Ovid with the last search done in the fall of 2023 from all years to date. These articles were further screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. In total, 25 articles were included in this review. An Internet search was also performed on the DoD's regulations guiding entry and retention of personnel with psoriasis and eczema. In addition, we examined medical requirements for deployment to the U.S. Central Command and U.S. European Command.

RESULTS

Currently, U.S. Central Command and U.S. European Command do not allow the use of medications with special storage and handling requirements on deployments. Newer biologics are safe and efficacious but require refrigeration, although other immunomodulators like deucravacitinib and apremilast are oral pills and do not have cold-storage requirements. However, the use of biologics in austere environments may be feasible because of increased intervals between dosing and the ability to store refrigerated medical supplies in most deployed environments. For military service members with psoriasis, risankizumab and deucravacitinib are excellent options given their favorable safety and efficacy profiles. Of the biologics available for atopic dermatitis, dupilumab is the safest and effective systemic medication available. The Janus kinase inhibitors have also demonstrated excellent efficacy in treating atopic dermatitis, but more safety data are needed because of potential adverse events to include heart-related events, blood clots, and cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic treatments have evolved to become highly specific for both eczema and psoriasis. These newer biologics and immunomodulators may be compatible with use in the deployed setting, especially those that have long dosing intervals and proven efficacy and safety. Of the biologics, dupilumab and risankizumab offer the best efficacy, safety, and dosing intervals for atopic dermatitis and psoriasis, respectively. Deucravcitinib is a recently FDA-approved oral immunomodulator for psoriasis that has an excellent safety profile and efficacy. Allowing the use of these medications on deployments will enable more people with moderate to severe psoriasis and eczema to join and remain in the military while receiving effective treatment.

Distinct T cell signatures are associated with Staphylococcus aureus skin infection in pediatric atopic dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with a childhood prevalence of up to 25%. Microbial dysbiosis is characteristic of AD, with Staphylococcus aureus the most frequent pathogen associated with disease flares and increasingly implicated in disease pathogenesis. Therapeutics to mitigate the effects of S. aureus have had limited efficacy and S. aureus-associated temporal disease flares are synonymous with AD. An alternative approach is an anti-S. aureus vaccine, tailored to AD. Experimental vaccines have highlighted the importance of T cells in conferring protective anti-S. aureus responses; however, correlates of T cell immunity against S. aureus in AD have not been identified. We identify a systemic and cutaneous immunological signature associated with S. aureus skin infection (ADS.aureus) in a pediatric AD cohort, using a combined Bayesian multinomial analysis. ADS.aureus was most highly associated with elevated cutaneous chemokines IP10 and TARC, which preferentially direct Th1 and Th2 cells to skin. Systemic CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, except for Th2 cells, were suppressed in ADS.aureus, particularly circulating Th1, memory IL-10+ T cells, and skin-homing memory Th17 cells. Systemic γδ T cell expansion in ADS.aureus was also observed. This study suggests that augmentation of protective T cell subsets is a potential therapeutic strategy in the management of S. aureus in AD.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy at Week 32 of Tralokinumab and Dupilumab in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Tralokinumab and dupilumab are biological agents licensed for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in adult patients who are candidates for systemic treatment. However, no head-to-head studies of their efficacy have been conducted. This study indirectly compared the efficacy of tralokinumab and dupilumab, both in combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS), at week 32.

METHODS

An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using individual patient data (IPD) from the ECZTRA 3 tralokinumab trial and aggregate data from the LIBERTY AD CHRONOS dupilumab trial. IPD were selected by applying inclusion criteria from LIBERTY AD CHRONOS and weighting to match summary baseline characteristics-age, sex, race, body mass index, disease duration, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and SCORing Atopic Dermatitis index-of patients treated with dupilumab. Week 32 outcomes of interest were 50%, 75% or 90% improvements in EASI (EASI-50, EASI-75 and EASI-90), IGA scores of 0 or 1 (IGA 0/1), ≥ 4-point improvement in worst daily pruritus numerical rating scale (NRS) score, and mean improvements in DLQI and the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM).

RESULTS

After matching, tralokinumab and dupilumab, both in combination with TCS, showed similar efficacy across clinical response endpoints at week 32 (IGA 0/1, tralokinumab 49.9% vs dupilumab 39.3%; EASI-50, 78.9% vs 77.5%; EASI-75, 71.5% vs 71.9%; EASI-90, 53.3% vs 56.2%). The mean change from baseline in DLQI was statistically significantly larger in the matched tralokinumab plus TCS population than in the dupilumab plus TCS arm (- 12.1 vs - 10.4, p = 0.005). Changes in POEM and worst daily pruritus NRS were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this analysis demonstrate that, in combination with TCS, tralokinumab and dupilumab have similar efficacy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD at 32 weeks of therapy.

Management of Patients Affected by Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis with JAK Inhibitors in Real-World Clinical Practice: An Italian Delphi Consensus

INTRODUCTION

Several systemic therapies have been approved for the treatment of severe AD. In particular, Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), including abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, recently received approval for the treatment of patients with severe AD after being evaluated in several clinical trials. However, a few concerns have been raised regarding their long-term safety and the management of these drugs in real-world clinical practice. In this article we described the results of a Delphi consensus aimed at describing the knowledge on JAKi and focusing, in particular, on providing clinical recommendations for dermatologists in daily practice regarding the use of these drugs.

METHODS

Twelve Italian dermatologists reviewed the most recent literature regarding the efficacy and safety profiles of JAKi and proposed 24 statements.

RESULTS

Agreement was reached for statements focusing on three main topics: (1) place in therapy of JAKi in patients with moderate-to-severe AD; (2) effectiveness and safety of JAK inhibitors in different phenotypes; (3) different approaches to the management of patients treated with JAKi in clinical practice. The panel proposed several recommendations regarding all the statements.

CONCLUSION

Given the wide use of JAKi in clinical practice, it is crucial to establish a specific follow-up for each patient's phenotype in order to achieve the best possible clinical outcome and minimize potential adverse events.

Targeted therapy for immune mediated skin diseases. What should a dermatologist know?

BACKGROUND

Molecularly targeted therapies, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis), have emerged as essential tools in the treatment of dermatological diseases. These therapies modulate the immune system through specific signaling pathways, providing effective alternatives to traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents. This review aims to provide an updated summary of targeted immune therapies for inflammatory skin diseases, considering their pathophysiology, efficacy, dosage, and safety profiles.

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed over the past 10 years, focusing on randomized clinical trials, case reports, and case series related to targeted immune therapies in dermatology. Eligibility criteria were applied, and data were extracted from each study, including citation data, study design, and results.

RESULTS

We identified 1360 non-duplicate articles with the initial search strategy. Title and abstract review excluded 1150, while a full-text review excluded an additional 50 articles. The review included 143 studies published between 2012 and 2022, highlighting 39 drugs currently under investigation or in use for managing inflammatory skin diseases.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The heterogeneity of summarized information limits this review. Some recommendations originated from data from clinical trials, while others relied on retrospective analyses and small case series. Recommendations will likely be updated as new results emerge.

CONCLUSION

Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment of chronic skin diseases, offering new options for patients unresponsive to standard treatments. Paradoxical reactions are rarely observed. Further studies are needed to fully understand the mechanisms and nature of these therapies. Overall, targeted immune therapies in dermatology represent a promising development, significantly improving the quality of life for patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Computational and in vitro analyses on synergistic effects of paclitaxel and thymoquinone in suppressing invasive breast cancer cells

BACKGROUND

In the present experiment, we evaluated the impact of thymoquinone (TQ) and paclitaxel (PTX) treatment on MDA-MB-231 cell line growth inhibition via controlling apoptosis/autophagy.

MATERIALS AND RESULTS

MDA-MB-231cells were exposed to PTX (0, 25, 50, 75, and 100 nM), TQ (0, 25, 50, 75, and 100 µM), and combinations for 48 h. After the MTT assessment, dose-response curves and IC50 values were calculated, and the combination synergism was evaluated using the Compusyn software. Following the treatment with PTX, TQ, and combinations at IC50 doses, the expression of apoptosis and autophagy genes was assessed in cells. The GraphPad Prism program was used to analyze the data, and Tukey's test at p < 0.05 was then run. PTX, TQ, and their combinations inhibited MDA-MB-231cell proliferation and viability dose-dependently. TQ reduced the effective concentration (IC50) of PTX in co-treatment groups. PTX and TQ showed antagonistic effects when cell proliferation declined above 70%. Antagonistic effects shifted into additive and synergistic effects upon increasing PTX concentration, indicated by diminished cell proliferation below 70%. PTX-TQ co-treatment significantly enhanced P53 and BAX expression while reducing Bcl-2 expression. Also, their combination increased Beclin-1, ATG-5, and ATG-7 expression in treated cells.

CONCLUSION

Effective concentrations of TQ and PTX had synergic effects and inhibited breast cancer cells via prompting apoptosis and autophagy in vitro.

Targeted Systemic Therapies for Adults with Atopic Dermatitis: Selecting from Biologics and JAK Inhibitors

Therapeutic options for people with moderate or severe atopic dermatitis refractory to topical therapy have rapidly expanded in recent years. These new targeted immunomodulatory agents-biologics and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors-have each demonstrated high levels of efficacy and acceptable safety in mostly placebo-controlled clinical trials for atopic dermatitis, but there is no universally applicable algorithm to help choose between them for a given patient. Hence, patients and physicians should utilize shared decision making, discussing efficacy, safety, mode of delivery, monitoring, costs, speed of onset, and other factors to reach individualized treatment decisions. In this review, we try to aid shared decision making by summarizing the efficacy, safety, and monitoring of biologics and oral JAK inhibitors for adults with atopic dermatitis. Network meta-analyses suggest that higher doses of abrocitinib and upadacitinib are more effective than biologics. They also show that, among biologics, dupilumab is likely more effective than tralokinumab and lebrikizumab. Biologics are generally considered safer than JAK inhibitors, although concerns about JAK inhibitors are mainly extrapolated from older generation JAK inhibitors used in higher-risk populations. We also outline evidence and considerations for choosing and using systemic immunomodulatory treatments for special populations including pregnant individuals, those with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B and C, end stage kidney disease, and older adults.

Efficacy and safety of Ruxolitinib, Crisaborole, and Tapinarof for mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: a Bayesian network analysis of RCTs

Given the lack of head-to-head studies of novel non-steroidal molecule topical therapies in mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD), network meta-analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data for clinical decision-making. In this NMA, we performed a literature search until 01 March 2023 for eligible studies written in English using databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Only double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with topical Ruxolitinib, Crisaborole, or Tapinarof versus vehicle for patients with mild-to-moderate AD were included. Baseline and follow-up data were extracted. Efficacy was evaluated using Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) achieving "clear" or "almost clear," with 2 points or more improvement from baseline at the end of treatment, referred to as "IGA success." For binary outcomes, we analyzed in random-effects Bayesian NMA consistency models to compare the efficacy of these 3 topical therapies by odds ratio (OR) with 95% credibility interval (CrI). Overall, 10 phase 2 or phase 3 RCTs were identified, which included 4010 patients with mild to moderate AD. Compared with the topical vehicle control, all these 3 treatments had higher response rate of "IGA success" at the end of trial (Ruxolitinib 1.5% b.i.d: OR, 11.94; 95%CrI, 6.28-23.15; Crisaborole 2% b.i.d: OR, 2.08; 95%CrI, 1.46-3.52; Tapinarof 1% b.i.d: OR, 2.64; 95%CrI, 0.75-9.70). Notably, Ruxolitinib 1.5% b.i.d. had the highest probability of achieving "IGA success" in ranking analysis (Rank 1, SUCRA = 0.75) and lower risk of AE (Rank 8, SUCRA = 0.22). Besides, there was no difference in treatment-related adverse events between 3 therapies. Heterogeneity was not significant across studies.

Nonsteroidal Approaches for Atopic Dermatitis: A Clinical Update

Topical corticosteroids (TCSs) are the most widely used treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD), but they can have adverse effects such as skin atrophy, telangiectasias, and hypopigmentation, especially with prolonged use of higher potency steroids. Many patients also have a fear of using TCSs, known as "corticophobia." With the development of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors, a nonsteroidal approach to the treatment of AD may be possible and may be preferred by certain patients. Given what is known about these nonsteroidal therapies, we propose a structured treatment ladder and action plan that can guide clinicians and patients on the use of these therapies for the treatment of AD. The ladder divides nonsteroidal medication classes into treatments for exacerbation versus maintenance therapies in an escalating order of increasing potential for adverse effects, both real and perceived. This treatment algorithm proposal paves the way for a potential nonsteroidal approach to managing AD.

S3 guideline Atopic dermatitis: Part 2 - Systemic treatment

The present S3 guideline was created based on the European English-language S3 guideline, with special consideration given to the medical conditions in the German-speaking region, and with additions from the previous German-language version, in accordance with the criteria of the AWMF. This second part of the guideline addresses the systemic therapy of atopic dermatitis (AD). It covers topics such as the indication for systemic therapy in children, adolescents, and adult patients with AD. Furthermore, it addresses all medications approved for AD, such as the biologics dupilumab and tralokinumab, the Janus kinase inhibitors abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, as well as conventional immunosuppressive therapies with systemic glucocorticosteroids and ciclosporin. Additionally, it discusses systemic off-label therapies. The first part of the guideline, published separately, includes the definition and diagnostic aspects of AD, describes topical therapy, non-drug therapy approaches, and addresses aspects related to special patient groups.

S3-Leitlinie Atopische Dermatitis: Teil 2 - Systemische Therapie: S3 guideline Atopic dermatitis: Part 2 - Systemic treatment

Die vorliegende S3‐Leitlinie wurde auf der Basis der europäischen englischsprachigen S3‐Leitlinie unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der medizinischen Gegebenheiten im deutschsprachigen Raum und mit Ergänzungen der deutschsprachigen Vorgängerversion, entsprechend den Kriterien der AWMF, erstellt. Dieser zweite Teil der Leitlinie behandelt die systemische Therapie der atopischen Dermatitis (AD). Eingegangen wird unter anderem auf die Indikationsstellung für eine Systemtherapie bei Kindern, Jugendlichen und erwachsenen Patienten mit AD. Darüber hinaus werden alle für die AD zugelassenen Medikamente wie die Biologika Dupilumab und Tralokinumab, die Januskinase‐Inhibitoren Abrocitinib, Baricitinib und Upadacitinib sowie die konventionellen immunsuppressiven Therapien mit systemischen Glukokortikosteroiden und Ciclosporin adressiert. Systemische Off‐Label‐Therapien werden ebenfalls behandelt. Der separat publizierte erste Teil der Leitlinie umfasst die Definition und diagnostischen Aspekte der AD, beschreibt die topische Therapie sowie nichtmedikamentöse Therapieverfahren und geht auf Aspekte bei besonderen Patientengruppen ein.

Safety of Upadacitinib in Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: Systematic Literature Review of Indirect and Direct Treatment Comparisons of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), non-radiographic axial spondylarthritis (nr-axSpA), atopic dermatitis (AD), ulcerative colitis (UC), and Crohn's disease (CD) pose a substantial burden on patients and their quality of life. Upadacitinib is an orally administered, selective, and reversible Janus kinase inhibitor indicated for seven conditions, but data on its safety versus other active treatments are limited. A systematic literature review of indirect and direct treatment comparisons of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to assess the safety profile of upadacitinib.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for indirect and direct treatment comparisons of RCTs that (1) included licensed upadacitinib dosages; (2) studied any of the seven conditions; (3) reported any adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), AEs leading to discontinuation, major adverse cardiovascular event, venous thromboembolism, malignancies, infections or serious infections, and death; and (4) were published between January 2018 and August 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies were eligible for inclusion. SAEs, AEs leading to discontinuation, and any AEs were commonly studied. RA was the most studied condition, followed by AD and UC. Most studies (16/25, 64%) reported no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes between upadacitinib and other active treatments (e.g., tumor necrosis factor blockers, interleukin receptor antagonists, integrin receptor antagonists, T cell co-stimulation modulator), or placebo (placebo ± methotrexate or topical corticosteroids). Other studies (9/25, 36%) reported mixed results of no statistically significant difference and either statistically higher (8/25, 32%) or lower rates (1/25, 4%) on upadacitinib.

CONCLUSION

Most studies suggested that upadacitinib has no statistically significant difference in the studied safety outcomes compared to active treatments or placebo in patients with RA, PsA, AS, AD, UC, and CD. A few studies reported higher rates, but findings were inconsistent with limited interpretation.

Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis in adults with phototherapy and systemic therapies

BACKGROUND

For people with atopic dermatitis (AD) refractory to topical therapies, treatment with phototherapy and systemic therapies can be considered. Multiple biologic therapies and Janus kinase (JAK)inhibitors have been approved since 2014 to treat AD. These guidelines update the 2014 recommendations for management of AD with phototherapy and systemic therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD in adults.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a systematic review and applied the GRADE approach for assessing the certainty of evidence and formulating and grading recommendations.

RESULTS

The workgroup developed 11 recommendations on the management of AD in adults with phototherapy and systemic agents, including biologics, oral JAK inhibitors, and other immunomodulatory medications.

LIMITATIONS

Most randomized controlled trials of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD are of short duration with subsequent extension studies, limiting comparative long-term efficacy and safety conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

We make strong recommendations for the use of dupilumab, tralokinumab, abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib. We make conditional recommendations in favor of using phototherapy, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate, and against the use of systemic corticosteroids.

Comparing binary efficacy outcomes for systemic immunomodulatory treatments for atopic dermatitis in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) are evaluated primarily in placebo-controlled trials with binary efficacy outcomes. In a living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA), we previously analysed continuous efficacy measures.

OBJECTIVES

To compare binary efficacy outcomes of systemic treatments for AD.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information (LILACS) database, Global Resource for Eczema Trials (GREAT) database and trial registries up to 1 March 2023. We included randomized trials examining ≥ 8 weeks of treatment with systemic immunomodulatory medications for moderate-to-severe AD. We screened titles, abstracts and full texts and abstracted data independently, in duplicate. Outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving at least 50%, 75% and 90% improvements in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 50, EASI 75 and EASI 90, respectively) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) success. We performed random-effects Bayesian NMAs to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) between each intervention for each outcome.

RESULTS

Eighty-three trials with 22 122 participants were included in the systematic review. In analyses limited to trials of 8-16 weeks' duration with predominantly adult populations, abrocitinib 200 mg daily (OR 1.5, 95% CrI 1.1-2.2) and upadacitinib 15 mg daily (OR 1.7, 95% CrI 0.9-3.3) and 30 mg daily (OR 2.5, 95% CrI 1.3-5.0) were associated with higher odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Abrocitinib 100 mg daily (OR 0.7, 95% CrI 0.5-1.0), baricitinib 2 mg daily (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.5) and 4 mg daily (OR 0.5, 95% CrI 0.3-0.7), and tralokinumab (OR 0.4, 95% CrI 0.3-0.6) were associated with lower odds of achieving EASI 50 vs. dupilumab. Results were similar for EASI 75, EASI 90 and IGA success.

CONCLUSIONS

Supporting results for continuous outcome measures, upadacitinib 30 mg daily and abrocitinib 200 mg daily are the most efficacious with regard to binary efficacy endpoints up to 16 weeks in adults with moderate-to-severe AD, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg daily, dupilumab and abrocitinib 100 mg daily. Dupilumab and both doses of upadacitinib and abrocitinib are more efficacious than baricitinib 4 and 2 mg daily and tralokinumab.

Vaccinations in Selected Immune-Related Diseases Treated with Biological Drugs and JAK Inhibitors-Literature Review and Statement of Experts from Polish Dermatological Society

The growing use of biological drugs in immune-mediated chronic diseases has undoubtedly revolutionized their treatment. Yet, the topic of vaccinations in this group of patients still raises many concerns and implies many therapeutic problems that require discussion and standardization of management. The aim of this literature review is to present current knowledge regarding safety and efficacy of vaccinations in dermatological and rheumatological patients treated with biological drugs and JAK inhibitors. Additionally, this article provides recommendation from experts of the Polish Dermatological Society about proper use of vaccinations during therapy with biologics. Generally, all live attenuated vaccines are contraindicated during immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory therapy. If there is need, they should be administered long enough prior to the therapy or after cessation. Yet, inactivated vaccines mostly can be safely used, but the problem in this case is the effectiveness of the vaccination. Most studies report that the immune response in patients on biologics after administration of different inactivated vaccines is similar to or even better than in the control group. Thus, the importance of vaccination among patients on biologics must be emphasized to reduce omissions and the fear of possible side effects or insufficient post-vaccination response.

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Long-Term Efficacy Maintenance and Adverse Event Rates of Lebrikizumab versus Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Lebrikizumab and dupilumab are monoclonal antibodies approved for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Both have demonstrated efficacy and safety over the 16-week SOLOs and ADvocate trials. However, AD is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory disease, and the long-term maintenance of efficacy is critical for achieving disease control from the perspective of patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies. This study aims to compare the long-term efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) and dupilumab every week or every 2 weeks (QW/Q2W) among adult patients who have achieved treatment efficacy following the induction period of 16 weeks.

METHODS

Lebrikizumab's efficacy was assessed using individual patient data (IPD) from the ADvocate 1 and 2 monotherapy trials. Dupilumab's efficacy was evaluated using aggregate data from the adult-exclusive SOLO-CONTINUE trial. Due to the absence of a common comparator trial arm, we employed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), a robust methodology widely accepted by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. This re-weights ADvocate IPD to align with SOLO-CONTINUE's prognostic factors and effect modifiers. We compared lebrikizumab's adjusted outcomes with dupilumab outcomes at week 52, focusing on 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline (EASI-75), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, and overall adverse event (AE) rates. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test various combinations of matching variables.

RESULTS

Adults on lebrikizumab Q4W were more likely to maintain IGA 0/1 through the 36-week maintenance period (weeks 16-52) compared with those on dupilumab QW/Q2W [risk ratio (RR) 1.334; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.74; p = 0.035]. Both treatments demonstrated comparable efficacy in terms of EASI-75 maintenance (RR 0.937; 95% CI 0.78-1.13; p = 0.490) and similar AE rates (RR 1.052; 95% CI 0.90-1.23; p = 0.526). Sensitivity analyses substantiated these findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that lebrikizumab Q4W may provide equal or superior long-term maintenance of efficacy measured with EASI-75 and IGA 0/1 compared with dupilumab QW/Q2W, with the advantage of requiring less frequent doses.

Costo per NNT di upadacitinib nel trattamento dei pazienti con dermatite atopica da moderata a severa in Italia

Background:

Targeted systemic therapies, including abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab and upadacitinib, are new treatments for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD). We evaluated the efficacy and the costs of these targeted systemic therapies in the treatment of adult patients with moderate to severe AD.

Methods:

The clinical efficacy was assessed considering the results of a previous network meta-analysis (NMA). The analysis involved five therapies approved in Italy for the treatment of moderate to severe AD: abrocitinib (ABR), baricitinib (BAR), dupilumab (DUP), tralokinumab (TRA) and upadacitinib (UPA). According to the NMA, the cost of the treatment was based on the number of administrations dispensed at 16 weeks and the clinical efficacy was measured by the number needed to treat (NNT) compared to placebo using the improvement ≥ 75% (EASI-75) or ≥ 90 (EASI-90) from baseline of the eczema area and severity index (EASI). Only the ex-factory price of the targeted systemic therapies was considered. The cost per NNT was adopted as a cost-effectiveness indicator.

Results:

At 16 weeks, the cost per NNT based on EASI-75 was lower for UPA 15 mg (€ 6,384.00) compared to BAR 4 mg (€ 11,619.73) and 2 mg (€ 14,524.66), ABR 100 mg (€ 16,265.22), DUP 300 mg (€ 16,115.04) and TRA 300 mg (€ 31,710.24). UPA 15 (€ 8,512.00) also showed the lower cost per NNT based on EASI-90 at 16 weeks compared to BAR 4 mg (€ 14,788.75) and 2 mg (€ 20,862.70), ABR 100 mg (€ 25,922.69), DUP 300 mg (€ 25,992.00) and TRA 300 mg (€ 41,067.36).

Conclusions:

The findings show that upadacitinib is the most cost-effective option (cost per NNT) for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis.

Skin infections during dupilumab monotherapy in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis - a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Atopic dermatitis (AD) increases the risk of bacterial and viral cutaneous infections. This study assesses the risk of skin infections related to dupilumab monotherapy in moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library. For gray literature, Google Scholar was searched. A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for overall skin infections, eczema herpeticum, nonherpetic skin infections and subgroup meta-analysis based on overall herpetic infection type was performed.

RESULTS

We observed a statistically significant (p < 0.005) lower incidence rate in the dupilumab group compared to placebo for overall skin infections (Risk Ratio [RR] = 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.47, 0.75], P < 0.0001) and nonherpetic skin infections (RR = 0.42, 95% CI: [0.27, 0.66], P = 0.0001). For herpetic infections in 2b phase studies a meta-analysis demonstrated significantly higher events in dupilumab group compared to placebo (RR = 3.38, 95% CI: [1.98, 5.76], P < 0.00001, test for subgroup differences: P = 0.02, I2 = 65.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In moderate-to-severe AD, dupilumab in monotherapy may be an effective and safe therapeutic approach, not associated with an increased risk of overall skin infections and nonherpetic skin infections. Due to the lack of statistical significance in heterogeneity associated with potential confounders in some cases, results should be interpreted cautiously.

REGISTRATION

The meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO, ID: CRD42023441346.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna).

RESULTS

The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Health technology management: the experience of a managed access approach to the reimbursement of dupilumab in Ireland

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab was the first biological medicine to receive marketing authorisation, in Ireland, for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). In 2019, Ireland's National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics recommended that dupilumab not be reimbursed at the submitted price; it was not cost effective. Following confidential price negotiations, the Health Service Executive (HSE) reimbursed dupilumab subject to a HSE-Managed Access Protocol (MAP). Patients with refractory, moderate-to-severe AD were deemed eligible to receive treatment under the MAP; the cohort for which dupilumab is expected to be most effective and most cost effective (versus standard of care). Approval, for treatment, is granted on an individual patient basis by the HSE-Medicines Management Programme.

AIMS

Applications for approval of treatment with dupilumab were analysed to determine the percentage of patients deemed eligible. Key characteristics of this population were investigated.

METHODS

Data from individual patient applications were analysed. Key characteristics of the approved population were investigated using IBM SPSS Statistics® version 27. Data were derived from the HSE-Primary Care Reimbursement Service pharmacy claims database. The number of patients who received dupilumab over the study period was determined.

RESULTS

In total, 96% of submitted applications were deemed eligible. Of these, 65% were male and 87% were adults. In the main, the approved patient population had severe refractory AD; the mean Eczema Area Severity Index score was 28.72.

CONCLUSION

The majority of applications submitted were approved. This work highlights how a MAP can facilitate access to treatment in patients who are deemed eligible whilst containing overall expenditure.

Effectiveness of switching from baricitinib 4 mg to upadacitinib 30 mg in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a real-world clinical practice in Japan

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic eczematous disease with severe pruritus. Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, upadacitinib, baricitinib, and abrocitinib, are systemic treatments for AD. The outcomes of switching from one JAK inhibitor to another have not been examined.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the outcomes of switching from baricitinib 4 mg to upadacitinib 30 mg in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

Twenty patients treated with baricitinib 4 mg, showing insufficient response or adverse events, were switched to treatment with upadacitinib 30 mg. We evaluated total eczema area and severity index (EASI), EASI at head and neck, trunk, upper, or lower limbs, EASI of erythema, edema/papulation, excoriation, or lichenification, and peak pruritus numerical-rating scale (PP-NRS) at baseline (start of baricitinib), weeks 0 (time of switching), and 4 and 12 after switching.

RESULTS

Total EASI, EASI at each anatomical site, EASI of each clinical sign, and PP-NRS were markedly reduced at weeks 4 or 12 compared to week 0. Achievement rates of more than 75% or 90% reduction of EASI from baseline significantly improved after switching.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from baricitinib 4 mg to upadacitinib 30 mg effectively improved rash and pruritus.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) implementation roadmap

BACKGROUND

Core outcome sets (COS) are consensus-driven sets of minimum outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials. COS aim to reduce heterogeneity in outcome measurement and reporting, and selective outcome reporting. Implementing COS into clinical trials is challenging. Guidance to improve COS uptake in dermatology is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a structured practical guide to COS implementation.

METHODS

Members of the Harmonising Outcome Measurement for Eczema (HOME) executive committee developed an expert opinion-based roadmap founded on a combination of a review of the COS implementation literature, the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative resources, input from HOME members and experience in COS development and clinical trials.

RESULTS

The data review and input from HOME members was synthesized into themes, which guided roadmap development: (a) barriers and facilitators to COS uptake based on stakeholder awareness/engagement and COS features; and (b) key implementation science principles (assessment-driven, data-centred, priority-based and context-sensitive). The HOME implementation roadmap follows three stages. Firstly, the COS uptake scope and goals need to be defined. Secondly, during COS development, preparation for future implementation is supported by establishing the COS as a credible evidence-informed consensus by applying robust COS development methodology, engaging multiple stakeholders, fostering sustained and global engagement, emphasizing COS ease of use and universal applicability, and providing recommendations on COS use. Thirdly, incorporating completed COS into primary (trials) and secondary (reviews) research is an iterative process starting with mapping COS uptake and stakeholders' attitudes, followed by designing and carrying out targeted implementation projects. Main themes for implementation projects identified at HOME are stakeholder awareness/engagement; universal applicability for different populations; and improving ease-of-use by reducing administrative and study burden. Formal implementation frameworks can be used to identify implementation barriers/facilitators and to design implementation strategies. The effect of these strategies on uptake should be evaluated and implementation plans adjusted accordingly.

CONCLUSIONS

COS can improve the quality and applicability of research and, so, clinical practice but can only succeed if used and reported consistently. The HOME implementation roadmap is an extension of the original HOME roadmap for COS development and provides a pragmatic framework to develop COS implementation strategies.

Assessment of Efficacy and Safety Outcomes Beyond Week 16 in Clinical Trials of Systemic Agents Used for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Combination with Topical Corticosteroids

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory disease requiring efficacious and safe long-term therapy. Several new systemic treatments have recently been approved for use in patients with moderate to severe AD. However, head-to-head comparisons have not been conducted for all the currently available treatments for AD. Multiple network meta-analyses have compared efficacy of these different therapies during the initial 16-week treatment period, but not beyond week 16. Therefore, understanding the differences in key trial design and statistical methods is essential for evaluating long-term efficacy, making cross-trial comparisons, and informing treatment decisions. This focused narrative review provides an overview of data and trial methodology to guide clinicians in evaluating longer-term efficacy and safety of currently approved systemic treatments for patients with AD. We discuss important elements of longer-term trial designs and statistical analysis strategies that should be considered based on our experience as clinical trialists. In addition, a summary of key efficacy results of published, longer-term, phase III clinical trials of US Food and Drug Administration-approved, novel systemic treatments (i.e., dupilumab, tralokinumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib) is provided, including the design and data handling methods used. Long-term safety considerations and differences in the time-effect and safety profiles of various medications are also noted to help inform clinical decisions for individual patients. Overall, the findings of these trials support efficacy in long-term treatment with novel systemic agents for patients with AD.

Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Individualized Homeopathic Medicines in Atopic Dermatitis in Adults: A Replication Trial with 6 Months' Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic relapsing and remitting inflammatory skin disease that can have a significant impact on quality of life. During the last four decades, a rising trend in AD has been observed in India. Homeopathic medicines are claimed to be beneficial in AD; however, convincing research evidence has been lacking. We compared the efficacy of individualized homeopathic medicines (IHMs) against placebos in the treatment of AD.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 6 months' duration (n = 60), adult patients were randomized to receive either IHMs (n = 30) or identical-looking placebos (n = 30). All participants received concomitant conventional care, which included the application of olive oil and maintaining local hygiene. The primary outcome measure was disease severity using the Patient-Oriented Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (PO-SCORAD) scale; secondary outcomes were the Atopic Dermatitis Burden Scale for Adults (ADBSA) and Dermatological Life Quality Index (DLQI) - all were measured at baseline and every month, up to 6 months. Group differences were calculated on the intention-to-treat sample.

RESULTS

After 6 months of intervention, inter-group differences became statistically significant on PO-SCORAD, the primary outcome (-18.1; 95% confidence interval, -24.0 to -12.2), favoring IHMs against placebos (F 1, 52 = 14.735; p <0.001; two-way repeated measures analysis of variance). Inter-group differences for the secondary outcomes favored homeopathy, but were overall statistically non-significant (ADBSA: F 1, 52 = 0.019; p = 0.891; DLQI: F 1, 52 = 0.692; p = 0.409).

CONCLUSION

IHMs performed significantly better than placebos in reducing the severity of AD in adults, though the medicines had no overall significant impact on AD burden or DLQI.

Consensus on the therapeutic management of atopic dermatitis ‒ Brazilian Society of Dermatology: an update on phototherapy and systemic therapy using e-Delphi technique

This publication is an update of the "Consensus on the therapeutic management of atopic dermatitis - Brazilian Society of Dermatology" published in 2019, considering the novel, targeted-oriented systemic therapies for atopic dermatitis. The initial recommendations of the current consensus for systemic treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis were based on a recent review of scientific published data and a consensus was reached after voting. The Brazilian Society of Dermatology invited 31 experts from all regions of Brazil and 2 international experts on atopic dermatitis who fully contributed to the process. The methods included an e-Delphi study to avoid bias, a literature search and a final consensus meeting. The authors added novel approved drugs in Brazil and the indication for phototherapy and systemic therapy for AD. The therapeutical response to systemic treatment is hereby reported in a suitable form for clinical practice and is also part of this updated manuscript.

Upadacitinib effectiveness in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A real-life multicentre and retrospective study

This was an observational and retrospective multicentre study conducted on adolescents and adults diagnosed with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) and treated with upadacitinib. Disease severity was measured by Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), validated investigator global assessment for AD and pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline and Weeks 4, 16, 24 and 52 (when available). Twenty-one patients were included. All patients had previously received topical and systemic corticosteroids. Rapid response to upadacitinib was observed: Mean (SD) EASI score was 19.8 (6.5) at baseline, and 3.1 (4.2), 0.9 (1.4), 0.6 (0.6) and 0.6 (0.6) at the Weeks 4, 16, 24 and 52, respectively. Itch was controlled at Week 4 in all patients (mean [SD] NRS score 7.6 [1.9] baseline, 1.5 [1.3] W4). Severe infections or major adverse cardiovascular events were not reported. We highlight effectiveness and rapid response of upadacitinib in achieving itch control even in long-standing recalcitrant cases.

Long-Term Safety Profile and Off-Label Use of JAK Inhibitors in Dermatological Disorders

JAK inhibitors target specific inflammatory cytokines involved in various inflammatory diseases. Four molecules have been approved for dermatological use: upadacitinib, baricitinib, abrocitinib and topical ruxolitinib. Off-label prescriptions for other dermatological conditions have been reported. We conducted a narrative review of the literature to assess the long-term safety profile of currently approved JAK inhibitors in dermatology, and their off-label use in skin disorders. We performed literature searches with PubMed and Google Scholar from January 2000 to January 2023, using the keywords "Janus kinase inhibitors", "JAK inhibitors","off-label", "dermatology", "safety", "adverse events", "ruxolitinib", "upadacitinib","abrocitinib" and "baricitinib". Our search yielded a total of 37 dermatological disorders with studies supporting the use of these JAK inhibitors. Preliminary studies indicate that JAK inhibitors generally have a favorable safety profile and can be considered as an option in many dermatological disorders.

Long-Term Safety Profile and Off-Label Use of JAK Inhibitors in Dermatological Disorders

JAK inhibitors target specific inflammatory cytokines involved in various inflammatory diseases. Four molecules have been approved for dermatological use: upadacitinib, baricitinib, abrocitinib and topical ruxolitinib. Off-label prescriptions for other dermatological conditions have been reported. We conducted a narrative review of the literature to assess the long-term safety profile of currently approved JAK inhibitors in dermatology, and their off-label use in skin disorders. We performed literature searches with Pubmed and Google Scholar from January 2000 to January 2023, using the keywords "Janus kinase inhibitors", "JAK inhibitors", "off-label", "dermatology", "safety", "adverse events", "ruxolitinib", "upadacitinib", "abrocitinib" and "baricitinib". Our search yielded a total of 37 dermatological disorders with studies supporting the use of these JAK inhibitors. Preliminary studies indicate that JAK inhibitors generally have a favorable safety profile and can be considered as an option in many dermatological disorders.

Comparative Efficacy of Targeted Systemic Therapies for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis without Topical Corticosteroids: An Updated Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The treatment landscape for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) continues to expand. This network meta-analysis (NMA) updates a previously conducted NMA to include data from the most recent phase 3 trials to assess the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies without the addition of topical corticosteroids (TCS) and/or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) in adults with moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

Data from recent phase 3 monotherapy trials of lebrikizumab, ADvocate1 (NCT04146363) and ADvocate2 (NCT04178967), were included in the analyses, along with other eligible phase 3/4 randomized placebo-controlled trials for abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib identified through a systemic literature review in Silverberg et al. (Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 12(5):1181-1196, 2022). The proportion of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement ≥ 90% from baseline (EASI-90), EASI improvement ≥ 75% from baseline (EASI-75), ≥ 4-point improvement on Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥ 4), and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) and reduction of ≥ 2 points from baseline (IGA 0/1) were evaluated using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The updated NMA analyzed 13 unique placebo-controlled trials involving 7105 patients in 32 arms across 6 targeted therapies. Upadacitinib 30 mg was the most efficacious therapy across all endpoints at the primary timepoint (week 12 or 16) and at earlier timepoints, generally followed by abrocitinib 200 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, dupilumab 300 mg, and lebrikizumab 250 mg or abrocitinib 100 mg. Baricitinib 2 mg and tralokinumab were generally ranked lower across outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Many factors need to be considered for treatment selection for AD, especially as new treatments continue to emerge. After incorporating recent placebo-controlled phase 3 data of lebrikizumab, upadacitinib 30 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, and abrocitinib 200 mg remain the most efficacious targeted systemic therapies over 12-16 weeks of therapy in AD. These updated findings can help healthcare providers when creating a patient's personalized treatment plan.

Reporting of Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) core outcome set instruments in randomized clinical trials for systemic treatments in atopic dermatitis

The HOME initiative has successfully completed a core outcome set for atopic dermatitis (AD) trials, and most trials now include the core set instruments. However, to enable evidence synthesis of all relevant trials, reporting must also be standardized. In this study, we evaluated the reporting of the core outcome set instruments in AD systemic treatment trials included in a living systematic review and network meta-analysis. We found that although the core instruments were measured in most trials, they were often not reported sufficiently to enable inclusion in network meta-analysis.

Development of SkinTracker, an integrated dermatology mobile app and web portal enabling remote clinical research studies

Introduction

In-person dermatology clinical research studies often face recruitment and participation challenges due to travel-, time-, and cost-associated barriers. Studies incorporating virtual/asynchronous formats can potentially enhance research subject participation and satisfaction, but few mobile health tools are available to enable remote study conduct. We developed SkinTracker, a patient-facing mobile app and researcher-facing web platform, that enables longitudinal collection of skin photos, patient reported outcomes, and biometric health and environmental data.

Methods

Eight design thinking sessions including dermatologists, clinical research staff, software engineers, and graphic designers were held to create the components of SkinTracker. Following iterative prototyping, SkinTracker was piloted across six adult and four pediatric subjects with atopic dermatitis (AD) of varying severity levels to test and provide feedback on SkinTracker for six months.

Results

The SkinTracker app enables collection of informed consent for study participation, baseline medical history, standardized skin photographs, patient-reported outcomes (e.g., Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)), medication use, adverse events, voice diary to document qualitative experiences, chat function for communication with research team, environmental and biometric data such as exercise and sleep metrics through integration with an Apple Watch. The researcher web portal allows for management and visualization of subject enrollment, skin photographs for examination and severity scoring, survey completion, and other patient modules. The pilot study requested that subjects complete surveys and photographs on a weekly to monthly basis via the SkinTracker app. Afterwards, participants rated their experience in a 7-item user experience survey covering app function, design, and desire for participation in future studies using SkinTracker. Almost all subjects agreed or strongly agreed that SkinTracker enabled more convenient participation in skin research studies compared to an in-person format.

Discussion

To our knowledge, SkinTracker is one of the first integrated app- and web-based platforms allowing collection and management of data commonly obtained in clinical research studies. SkinTracker enables detailed, frequent capture of data that may better reflect the fluctuating course of conditions such as AD, and can be modularly customized for different skin conditions to improve dermatologic research participation and patient access.

A concept for integrated care pathways for atopic dermatitis-A GA2 LEN ADCARE initiative

INTRODUCTION

The integrated care pathways for atopic dermatitis (AD-ICPs) aim to bridge the gap between existing AD treatment evidence-based guidelines and expert opinion based on daily practice by offering a structured multidisciplinary plan for patient management of AD. ICPs have the potential to enhance guideline recommendations by combining interventions and aspects from different guidelines, integrating quality assurance, and describing co-ordination of care. Most importantly, patients can enter the ICPs at any level depending on AD severity, resources available in their country, and economic factors such as differences in insurance reimbursement systems.

METHODS

The GA2 LEN ADCARE network and partners as well as all stakeholders, abbreviated as the AD-ICPs working group, were involved in the discussion and preparation of the AD ICPs during a series of subgroup workshops and meetings in years 2020 and 2021, after which the document was circulated within all GAL2 EN ADCARE centres.

RESULTS

The AD-ICPs outline the diagnostic procedures, possible co-morbidities, different available treatment options including differential approaches for the pediatric population, and the role of the pharmacists and other stakeholders, as well as remaining unmet needs in the management of AD.

CONCLUSION

The AD-ICPs provide a multidisciplinary plan for improved diagnosis, treatment, and patient feedback in AD management, as well as addressing critical unmet needs, including improved access to care, training specialists, implementation of educational programs, assessment on the impact of climate change, and fostering a personalised treatment approach. By focusing on these key areas, the initiative aims to pave the way for a brighter future in the management of AD.

Association of risk of incident acne and treatment with systemic Janus kinase inhibitors in atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic efficacy of systemic Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) is well established. However, the associated risk of incident acne, which is a prevalent adverse event in AD patients treated with systemic JAK inhibitors, has yet to be systematically analyzed.

METHODOLOGY

To evaluate the risk of incident acne in AD patients treated with systemic JAK inhibitors, an extensive database search (clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed) was performed to identify publications eligible for inclusion from January 2020 to October 2022. Five randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of abrocitinib, four RCTs of upadacitinib, and one RCT of baricitinib, encompassing a total of 7901 participants, were included in the analysis. The risk difference for incident acne between systemic JAK inhibitors and controls was assessed using Review Manager, version 5.3, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis elucidated a significant difference in the risk of incident acne between AD participants receiving 200 mg abrocitinib (Mantel-Haenszel risk difference, 3.69; 95% CI 1.60-8.48; P < 0.01), 15 mg upadacitinib (Mantel-Haenszel risk difference, 4.61; 95% CI 2.79-7.62; P < 0.00001), and 30 mg upadacitinib (Mantel-Haenszel risk difference, 6.82; 95% CI 4.59-10.13; P < 0.00001) compared with controls receiving placebo or dupilumab. In contrast, no significant difference was found in the risk of incident acne between participants receiving 100 mg abrocitinib, 2 mg baricitinib, and 4 mg baricitinib, as compared with controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, there is an increased risk of acne related to systemic JAK inhibitors, particularly with abrocitinib and upadacitinib. For patients predisposed to acne, the balance between the benefits of symptomatic relief from AD and the potential risk of acne may need to be carefully considered. This study contributes to a nuanced understanding of the risk profile of systemic JAK inhibitors and has the potential to guide personalized treatment decisions for AD patients.

Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Atopic Dermatitis: New Perspectives

The JAK/STAT (Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription) pathway is an essential final step in the signaling process of most interleukins with a critical role in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis. By achieving broad, intermittent inhibition of the activity of multiple cytokines, JAK inhibitors help modulate T helper 2 cell-mediated inflammation, epidermal barrier dysfunction, and itch signaling. This comprehensive blockade, however, can result in a wider range of adverse effects. We review a number of JAK inhibitors that have been recently approved for use in atopic dermatitis, such as baricitinib, upadacitinib, and abrocitinib, as well as others that are currently in the pipeline or under development, such as gusacitinib, delgocitinib, ruxolitinib, brepocitinib, tofacitinib, and cerdulatinib. The use of JAK inhibitors to block the signaling of numerous cytokines with a critical role in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis has revolutionized the treatment of this pathogenically complex, phenotypically heterogeneous skin disease.

[Translated article] Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Atopic Dermatitis: New Perspectives

The JAK/STAT (Janus kinase/signal transducer and activator of transcription) pathway is an essential final step in the signaling process of most interleukins with a critical role in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis. By achieving broad, intermittent inhibition of the activity of multiple cytokines, JAK inhibitors help to modulate T helper 2 cell-mediated inflammation, epidermal barrier dysfunction, and itch signaling. This comprehensive blockade, however, can result in a wider range of adverse effects. We review a number of JAK inhibitors that have been recently approved for use in atopic dermatitis, such as baricitinib, upadacitinib, and abrocitinib, as well as others that are currently in the pipeline or under development, such as gusacitinib, delgocitinib, ruxolitinib, brepocitinib, tofacitinib, and cerdulatinib. The use of JAK inhibitors to block the signaling of numerous cytokines with a critical role in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis has revolutionized the treatment of this pathogenically complex, phenotypically heterogeneous skin disease.

Optimal Use of Jak Inhibitors and Biologics for Atopic Dermatitis on the Basis of the Current Evidence

Recently, Jak inhibitors such as baricitinib, upadacitinib, and abrocitinib were approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) in addition to biologics, including dupilumab, tralokinumab, and nemolizumab. The increase in treatment options can be a benefit to patients with AD. Meanwhile, it could make it difficult for physicians to choose the best treatment among those treatment options. Biologics and Jak inhibitors differ in efficacy, safety, route of administration, and whether or not there is a concern about immunogenicity in addition to the evidence on comorbidities. Among the three Jak inhibitors, the degree of inhibition of signal transducer and activator of transcription differs in each Jak inhibitor. Therefore, the efficacy and safety profiles of the three Jak inhibitors are different. Physicians who treat patients with AD with Jak inhibitors and biologics need to understand the current evidence and choose the best treatment for individual patients. In this review, we discuss how integrating knowledge of the mechanisms of action of Jak inhibitors and biologics, the potential significant adverse events of these drugs, and the age and comorbidities of the patient can help achieve optimal clinical benefit for patients with moderate-to-severe AD refractory to topical agents.

Real-Life Effectiveness and Tolerance of Upadacitinib for Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Adolescents and Adults

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in atopic dermatitis have been defined in clinical trials, but long-term real-life experience, essential for clinical decision-making, is still limited. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and tolerance of upadacitinib in a real-life cohort of adults and adolescents with severe atopic dermatitis in whom previous systemic therapies largely failed.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study collecting data from adults and adolescents treated with upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg per day between July 2021 to August 2022. The outcomes for effectiveness were evaluated by the percentage of patients who achieved a validated Investigator's Global Assessment for atopic dermatitis (vIGA-AD) of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and/or an improvement of at least 75% on the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 75) at the end of the follow-up. All treatment-emergent adverse events were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients were included (22 adults and 7 adolescents), with a median follow-up of 54.4 weeks. At the end of the follow-up, 23 patients (79.3%) reached a vIGA-AD of 0/1, and 24 patients (82.7%) achieved EASI 75. Among patients treated with upadacitinib after initial failure of first- and/or second-line treatment with biologics or baricitinib, 5/7 patients (71.4%) reached a vIGA-AD score of 0/1. Disease control was slightly better in adults than in adolescents (81.8% vs 71.4% reached the efficacy endpoint, respectively). Response rate in patients with upadacitinib 15 mg seemed better than in clinical trials or network meta-analysis. Safety data were reassuring; lipid changes were the most frequent adverse event.

CONCLUSION

This real-life study confirms the effectiveness of upadacitinib, particularly for the treatment of atopic dermatitis recalcitrant to conventional systemic agents, biologics or baricitinib. Induced lipid changes require close follow-up.

Biologic Versus Small Molecule Therapy for Treating Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Clinical Considerations

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval of dupilumab for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis shifted the paradigm from use of broad, systemic immunosuppressants to a safer, targeted treatment and led to the emergence of newer interleukin (IL)-4/IL-13 directed biologics and small molecule therapies, namely Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (JAKi). Tralokinumab and emerging (not yet approved) lebrikizumab, which both target IL-13, are alternative biologics to dupilumab. The emerging anti-IL-31 receptor nemolizumab is likely to be used second-line to other biologics, primarily for pruritus. Three JAKi are currently in use for treating atopic dermatitis, 2 of which, abrocitinib and upadacitinib, are U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved. This review provides an in-depth, practical discussion on use of these biologics and JAKi that are approved or have completed phase 3 clinical trials in pediatric patients and adults, comparing the groups of medications based on available efficacy and safety data.