560 KPL-716, anti-Oncostatin M receptor beta antibody, reduced pruritus in atopic dermatitis

A systematic review of interleukin-31 inhibitors in the treatment of prurigo nodularis

BACKGROUND

Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a neuroimmunological skin disease. Severe itching is the most challenging symptom which affects patients' quality of life. T helper 2-derived cytokines, such as interleukin-31 and oncostatin M (OSM), play a crucial role in PN pathogenesis. Nemolizumab and vixarelimab are two biologics acting as IL-31 inhibitors. Vixarelimab also suppresses the OSM activity. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy and safety of nemolizumab and vixarelimab in PN management.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed/Medline, Ovid Embase, and Web of Science up to September 17th, 2023. Clinical trials and cohort studies published in English were included.

RESULTS

Among a total of 96 relevant records, five were included. The results of four studies with 452 patients using nemolizumab showed that a significantly higher percentage of patients treated with nemolizumab demonstrated a reduction in peak pruritus numerical rating scale (PP-NRS) and investigator's global assessment along with improved sleep disturbance (SD) and quality of life than the placebo group. Moreover, one study administered vixarelimab to 49 PN patients, and their finding illustrated a higher rate of subjects who received vixarelimab experienced ≥ 4-point diminution in worst itch NRS, visual analog scale, healing of representative lesions, and SD quality compared to the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

IL-31 inhibitors suggest distinct advantages in improving pruritus, sleep quality, and overall quality of life in subjects with moderate-to-severe PN. Further clinical studies are recommended to compare the effectiveness of these biologics to other therapeutic choices.

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.

Type 2 chronic inflammatory diseases: targets, therapies and unmet needs

Over the past two decades, significant progress in understanding of the pathogenesis of type 2 chronic inflammatory diseases has enabled the identification of compounds for more than 20 novel targets, which are approved or at various stages of development, finally facilitating a more targeted approach for the treatment of these disorders. Most of these newly identified pathogenic drivers of type 2 inflammation and their corresponding treatments are related to mast cells, eosinophils, T cells, B cells, epithelial cells and sensory nerves. Epithelial barrier defects and dysbiotic microbiomes represent exciting future drug targets for chronic type 2 inflammatory conditions. Here, we review common targets, current treatments and emerging therapies for the treatment of five major type 2 chronic inflammatory diseases - atopic dermatitis, chronic prurigo, chronic urticaria, asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps - with a high need for targeted therapies. Unmet needs and future directions in the field are discussed.

Novel Therapeutic Targets for the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that significantly impacts quality of life. The pathogenesis of AD is a complex combination of skin barrier dysfunction, type II immune response, and pruritus. Progress in the understanding of the immunological mechanisms of AD has led to the recognition of multiple novel therapeutic targets. For systemic therapy, new biologic agents that target IL-13, IL-22, IL-33, the IL-23/IL-17 axis, and OX40-OX40L are being developed. Binding of type II cytokines to their receptors activates Janus kinase (JAK) and its downstream signal, namely signal transduction and activator of transcription (STAT). JAK inhibitors block the activation of the JAK-STAT pathway, thereby blocking the signaling pathways mediated by type II cytokines. In addition to oral JAK inhibitors, histamine H4 receptor antagonists are under investigation as small-molecule compounds. For topical therapy, JAK inhibitors, aryl hydrocarbon receptor modulators, and phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors are being approved. Microbiome modulation is also being examined for the treatment of AD. This review outlines current and future directions for novel therapies of AD that are currently being investigated in clinical trials, focusing on their mechanisms of action and efficacy. This supports the accumulation of data on advanced treatments for AD in the new era of precision medicine.

Efficacy and safety of vixarelimab, a human monoclonal oncostatin M receptor β antibody, in moderate-to-severe prurigo nodularis: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a study

BACKGROUND

Prurigo nodularis is a chronic skin disease characterised by intensely pruritic, hyperkeratotic nodules. Vixarelimab, a human monoclonal antibody, binds to the beta subunit of the oncostatin M receptor, inhibiting signalling of both interleukin 31 and oncostatin M, two cytokine pathways that contribute to pruritus and nodule formation in prurigo nodularis.

METHODS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2a trial was done at both private and academic dermatology outpatient research clinics across the United States and Canada (n = 40). Patient eligibility criteria included age 18-75 years, physician-documented diagnosis of prurigo nodularis minimum 6 months duration of prurigo nodularis, presence of at least 10 pruritic nodules approximately 0.5-2 cm in size on at least two different anatomical locations (excluding face and scalp) and involving the extremities, and presence of normal-appearing skin between nodules; atopic dermatitis as a comorbidity was exclusionary. Patients were required to have moderate-to-severe pruritus, defined as Worst Itch-Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) score ≥7 at screening and LS-mean weekly WI-NRS score ≥5 for each of the 2 consecutive weeks immediately before randomisation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly subcutaneous vixarelimab 360 mg (720 mg loading dose) or placebo using stratification factors (sex and presence of atopy) and block size 4 through the IWRS system. Stratification by atopy status was based on the reported high prevalence of atopy in this population and the potential impact of atopy in the immunopathologic process in prurigo nodularis. Patients, investigators, study sponsor, and site staff were masked to study treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was least squares (LS)-mean percent change from baseline (PCFB) at Week 8 in weekly average Worst Itch-Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) score. The primary efficacy endpoint was analysed with ANCOVA including treatment as fixed effect, with baseline WI-NRS, and randomisation stratification factor as covariates. All randomised patients who had at least 1 dose of study drug or placebo were included in the Safety Analysis Set. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03816891.

FINDINGS

Of 50 patients randomised between March 11, 2019 and January 31, 2020, 23 vixarelimab recipients and 26 placebo recipients comprised the modified intent-to-treat analysis population (baseline LS-mean [SD] WI-NRS score, 8.3 [1.05]). Outcomes at Week 8 for vixarelimab versus placebo included LS-mean PCFB in WI-NRS score, -50.6% versus -29.4% (LS-mean difference [95% CI], -21.2% [-40.82, -1.60]; p = 0.03); ≥4-point reduction in WI-NRS score, 52.2% (12/23) versus 30.8% (8/26) (p = 0.11); PN-IGA score of 0 or 1, 30.4% (7/23) versus 7.7% (2/26) (p = 0.03); LS-mean PCFB in pruritus VAS score, -54.4% versus -32.6% (p = 0.03); and LS-mean PCFB sleep loss reduction (improvement), -56.3% versus -30.0% (p = 0.02). No deaths, serious TEAEs, or TEAEs leading to dose interruption were reported. The percentage of vixarelimab recipients reporting any TEAE was 91.3% (21/23) versus 76.9% (20/26) of placebo recipients; drug-related TEAEs generally were similar between the two groups (vixarelimab, 43.5% [10/23]; placebo, 38.5% [10/26]).

INTERPRETATION

Vixarelimab demonstrated rapid reduction of pruritus and achievement of clear/almost clear skin in one-third of the patients by Week 8. Relief of itch and clearing of skin nodules represent two important potential therapeutic advances in the management of patients suffering from the debilitating disease Prurigo Nodularis.

FUNDING

Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.

The evolving landscape of biologic therapies for atopic dermatitis: Present and future perspective

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common, chronic inflammatory skin diseases with a significant physical, emotional and socioeconomic burden. In recent years the understanding of AD pathogenesis has expanded from the Th2-centred perspective, with the recognition of the involvement of other immune axes. In different AD endotypes, influenced by environment, genetics and race, transcriptomic profiles have identified differing contributions of multiple immune axes such as, Th17, Th22 and Th1. The enriched pathogenic model of AD has catalysed the development of numerous biologic therapies targeting a range of key molecules implicated in disease progression. Currently, dupilumab and tralokinumab, which both target the Th2 pathway, are the only approved biologic therapies for AD in the United States and Europe. New biologic therapies in development, however, target different Th2-pathway molecules along with cytokines in other immune axes, including Th17 and Th22, offering promise for varied treatments for this heterogeneous disease. As the biologic pipeline advances, the integration into clinical practice and approval of these experimental biologics may provide more effective, tailored therapeutic solutions and illuminate on the pathologic processes of AD across a broader, more diverse patient population.

Existing and Investigational Medications for Refractory Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: Safety, Adverse Effects, and Monitoring

Treatment of chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is responsive to H1 antihistamines administered up to four times the recommended US Food and Drug Administration dose in approximately 50% of patients. However, when patients do not respond to these first-line agents, evidence-based guidelines using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology have provided direction for second- and third-line treatments that can effectively treat patients with CSU. Some patients remain refractory to these advanced treatments; therefore, alternative treatments with a lower certainty of evidence may be necessary. Regardless of the therapies used to treat CSU patients, it is essential for clinicians to be knowledgeable about the mechanism of action, efficacy, and safety and monitoring recommendations of the treatments prescribed. This review provides a comprehensive review of the adverse effects and monitoring recommendations for agents in use for CSU treatment as well as those currently undergoing investigation for CSU treatment.

In vitro models for investigating itch

Itch (pruritus) is a sensation that drives a desire to scratch, a behavior observed in many animals. Although generally short-lasting and not causing harm, there are several pathological conditions where chronic itch is a hallmark symptom and in which prolonged scratching can induce damage. Finding medications to counteract the sensation of chronic itch has proven difficult due to the molecular complexity that involves a multitude of triggers, receptors and signaling pathways between skin, immune and nerve cells. While much has been learned about pruritus from in vivo animal models, they have limitations that corroborate the necessity for a transition to more human disease-like models. Also, reducing animal use should be encouraged in research. However, conducting human in vivo experiments can also be ethically challenging. Thus, there is a clear need for surrogate models to be used in pre-clinical investigation of the mechanisms of itch. Most in vitro models used for itch research focus on the use of known pruritogens. For this, sensory neurons and different types of skin and/or immune cells are stimulated in 2D or 3D co-culture, and factors such as neurotransmitter or cytokine release can be measured. There are however limitations of such simplistic in vitro models. For example, not all naturally occurring cell types are present and there is also no connection to the itch-sensing organ, the central nervous system (CNS). Nevertheless, in vitro models offer a chance to investigate otherwise inaccessible specific cell–cell interactions and molecular pathways. In recent years, stem cell-based approaches and human primary cells have emerged as viable alternatives to standard cell lines or animal tissue. As in vitro models have increased in their complexity, further opportunities for more elaborated means of investigating itch have been developed. In this review, we introduce the latest concepts of itch and discuss the advantages and limitations of current in vitro models, which provide valuable contributions to pruritus research and might help to meet the unmet clinical need for more refined anti-pruritic substances.

Prurigo Nodularis Is Characterized by Systemic and Cutaneous T Helper 22 Immune Polarization

Prurigo nodularis (PN) is an understudied, chronic inflammatory skin disease that disproportionately affects African Americans and presents with intensely pruritic nodules of unknown etiology. To better characterize the immune dysregulation in PN, PBMCs and skin biopsies were obtained from patients with PN and healthy subjects (majority African American) matched by age, race, and sex. Flow cytometric analysis of functional T-cell response comparing patients with PN with healthy subjects identified increased γδT cells (CD3+CD4-CD8-γδTCR+) and Vδ2+ γδT enrichment. Activated T cells demonstrated uniquely increased IL-22 cytokine expression in patients with PN compared with healthy controls. CD4+ and CD8+ T cells were identified as the source of increased circulating IL-22. Consistent with these findings, RNA sequencing of lesional PN skin compared with nonlesional PN skin and biopsy site‒matched control skin demonstrated robust upregulation of T helper (Th) 22‒related genes and signaling networks implicated in impaired epidermal differentiation. Th22‒related cytokine upregulation remained significant, with stratifications by race and biopsy site. Importantly, the expression of the IL-22 receptors IL22RA1 and IL22RA2 was significantly elevated in lesional PN skin. These results indicate that both systemic and cutaneous immune responses in patients with PN are skewed toward a Th22/IL-22 profile. PN may benefit from immunomodulatory therapies directed at Th22‒mediated inflammation.

Atopic dermatitis: an expanding therapeutic pipeline for a complex disease

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease with a complex pathophysiology that underlies a wide spectrum of clinical phenotypes. AD remains challenging to treat owing to the limited response to available therapies. However, recent advances in understanding of disease mechanisms have led to the discovery of novel potential therapeutic targets and drug candidates. In addition to regulatory approval for the IL-4Ra inhibitor dupilumab, the anti-IL-13 inhibitor tralokinumab and the JAK1/2 inhibitor baricitinib in Europe, there are now more than 70 new compounds in development. This Review assesses the various strategies and novel agents currently being investigated for AD and highlights the potential for a precision medicine approach to enable prevention and more effective long-term control of this complex disease.

Recent advances in understanding of the complex phenotype and mechanisms underlying atopic dermatitis (AD) have revealed multiple new potential targets for pharmacological intervention. Here, Bieber reviews therapeutic strategies and assesses the expanding pipeline for the therapy of AD, highlighting the potential for a precision medicine approach to the management of this complex disorder.

Emerging Therapeutic Options for Chronic Pruritus

Chronic pruritus, defined as an unpleasant sensation resulting in a need to scratch that lasts more than 6 weeks, is a prevalent and bothersome symptom associated with both cutaneous and systemic conditions. Due to complex pathogenesis and profuse contributing factors, chronic pruritus therapy remains challenging. Regardless of the well-established antipruritic properties of classic pharmacotherapy (topical therapy, phototherapy and systemic therapy), these methods often provide insufficient relief for affected individuals. Owing to the growing interest in the field of pruritic research, further experimental and clinical data have emerged, continuously supporting the possibility of instigating novel therapeutic measures. This review covers the most relevant current modalities remaining under investigation that possess promising perspectives of approval in the near future, especially opioidergic drugs (mu-opioid antagonists and kappa-opioid agonists), neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, biologic drugs, Janus kinase inhibitors, ileal bile acid transporter inhibitors, aryl hydrocarbon receptor agonists and histamine H₄ receptor antagonists.

Systemic treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common and chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin disorder. It seriously impacts quality of life and economic outcomes, especially for those with moderate to severe eczema. Various treatments allow sustained control of the disease; however, their relative benefit remains unclear due to the limited number of trials directly comparing treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different types of systemic immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe eczema using NMA and to generate rankings of available systemic immunosuppressive treatments for eczema according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to August 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic immunosuppressive agents for moderate to severe atopic eczema when compared against placebo or any other eligible eczema treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We synthesised data using pair-wise analysis and NMA to compare treatments and rank them according to their effectiveness. Effectiveness was assessed primarily by determining the proportion of participants who achieved at least 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75) and improvement in the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). Safety was evaluated primarily by considering the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) and infection. We deemed short-term follow-up as ≤ 16 weeks and long-term follow-up as > 16 weeks. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for these primary outcomes using six domains of CiNEMA grading.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 74 studies, with 8177 randomised participants. Approximately 55% of participants were male, with average age of 32 years (range 2 to 84 years), although age and gender were unreported for 419 and 902 participants, respectively. Most of the included trials were placebo controlled (65%), 34% were head-to-head studies (15% assessed the effects of different doses of the same drug), and 1% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. All trials included participants with moderate to severe eczema, but 62% of studies did not separate data by severity; 38% of studies assessed only severe eczema. The total duration of included trials ranged from 2 weeks to 60 months, whereas treatment duration varied from a single dose (CIM331, KPL-716) to 60 months (methotrexate (MTX)). Seventy studies were available for quantitative synthesis; this review assessed 29 immunosuppressive agents from three classes of interventions. These included (1) conventional treatments, with ciclosporin assessed most commonly; (2) small molecule treatments, including phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors; and (3) biological treatments, including anti-CD31 receptors, anti-interleukin (IL)-22, anti-IL-31, anti-IL-13, anti-IL-12/23p40, anti-OX40, anti-TSLP, anti-CRTH2, and anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibodies, but most commonly dupilumab. Most trials (73) assessed outcomes at a short-term duration ranging from 2 to 16 weeks, whereas 33 trials assessed long-term outcomes, with duration ranging from 5 to 60 months. All participants were from a hospital setting. Fifty-two studies declared a source of funding, and of these, pharmaceutical companies funded 88%. We rated 37 studies as high risk; 21, unclear risk, and 16, low risk of bias, with studies most commonly at high risk of attrition bias. Network meta-analysis suggests that dupilumab ranks first for effectiveness when compared with other biological treatments. Dupilumab is more effective than placebo in achieving EASI75 (risk ratio (RR) 3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.51 to 3.69) and improvement in POEM score (mean difference 7.30, 95% CI 6.61 to 8.00) at short-term follow-up (high-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain of the effects of dupilumab when compared with placebo, in terms of the proportion of participants who achieve EASI75 (RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.60) at longer-term follow-up. Low-certainty evidence indicates that tralokinumab may be more effective than placebo in achieving short-term EASI75 (RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.34), but there was no evidence for tralokinumab to allow us to assess short-term follow-up of POEM or long-term follow-up of EASI75. We are uncertain of the effect of ustekinumab compared with placebo in achieving EASI75 (long-term follow-up: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.45; short-term follow-up: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.97; both very low certainty). We found no evidence on ustekinumab for the POEM outcome. We are uncertain whether other immunosuppressive agents that targeted our key outcomes influence the achievement of short-term EASI75 compared with placebo due to low- or very low-certainty evidence. Dupilumab and ustekinumab were the only immunosuppressive agents evaluated for longer-term EASI75. Dupilumab was the only agent evaluated for improvement in POEM during short-term follow-up. Low- to moderate-certainty evidence indicates a lower proportion of participants with SAEs after treatment with QAW039 and dupilumab compared to placebo during short-term follow-up, but low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in SAEs during short-term follow-up of other immunosuppressive agents compared to placebo. Evidence for effects of immunosuppressive agents on risk of any infection during short-term follow-up and SAEs during long-term follow-up compared with placebo was of low or very low certainty but did not indicate a difference. We did not identify differences in other adverse events (AEs), but dupilumab is associated with specific AEs, including eye inflammation and eosinophilia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that dupilumab is the most effective biological treatment for eczema. Compared to placebo, dupilumab reduces eczema signs and symptoms in the short term for people with moderate to severe atopic eczema. Short-term safety outcomes from clinical trials did not reveal new safety concerns with dupilumab. Overall, evidence for the efficacy of most other immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe atopic eczema is of low or very low certainty. Given the lack of data comparing conventional with newer biological treatments for the primary outcomes, there remains high uncertainty for ranking the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments such as ciclosporin and biological treatments such as dupilumab. Most studies were placebo-controlled and assessed only short-term efficacy of immunosuppressive agents. Further adequately powered head-to-head RCTs should evaluate comparative long-term efficacy and safety of available treatments for moderate to severe eczema.