Non-biologic systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis: Current state of the art and future directions

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.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Abrocitinib Compared with Other Systemic Treatments for Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Spain

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease characterized by itchy, painful, and dry skin. Despite the great number of available therapies, economic evaluations are still needed to provide evidence on their cost efficiency. This research aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor abrocitinib (200 mg) compared with dupilumab (300 mg), tralokinumab (300 mg), baricitinib (2 and 4 mg), and upadacitinib (15 and 30 mg) for the treatment of patients with severe AD from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective.

METHODS

A hybrid model consisting of a decision tree linked to a Markov model was developed to estimate costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total years in response and incremental cost-per-QALY gained (willingness-to-pay [WTP] threshold: €25,000/QALY). Adults with severe AD entered the decision tree and response (75% reduction in baseline Eczema Area and Severity Index score, EASI-75) was considered at 16 and 52 weeks. After this time, patients entered the Markov model (remainder of the 10-year time horizon), which consisted of three health states: maintenance with active therapy, subsequent treatment, or death. All costs were presented in 2022 euros (€). Additionally, cost per number-needed-to-treat (NNT) was calculated for abrocitinib and dupilumab based on a head-to-head post-hoc analysis.

RESULTS

Abrocitinib 200 mg was dominant (i.e., lower incremental costs and higher incremental benefit) compared with all studied alternatives (dupilumab 300 mg, tralokinumab 300 mg, baricitinib 2 and 4 mg, upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg) with a QALYs gain of 0.49, 0.60, 0.64, 0.43, 0.45, and 0.08, respectively, and per-person costs savings of €22,097, €24,140, €14,825, €7,116, €12,805, and €45,189, respectively. Considering the WTP threshold, abrocitinib was dominant or cost effective compared with all alternatives for most simulations. Additionally, abrocitinib was dominant compared with all alternatives when evaluating the cost effectiveness over a 5-year time horizon. NNT showed that abrocitinib was dominant versus dupilumab.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study show that abrocitinib is a cost-effective therapy compared with other JAK inhibitors and biological therapies from the Spanish NHS perspective.