Search

There is a need for clear criteria to guide treatment decisions and disease management in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). The recently developed minimal disease activity (MDA) concept aims to optimize AD management through shared decision-making between patients and clinicians in a treat-to-target approach, and is based on consensus recommendations from 87 physicians and insights from 88 patients globally.This study aims to evaluate how achieving MDA affects outcomes in patients with AD. Observed-case data from three phase 3 clinical trials involving adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD were integrated and analysed (NCT03568318, NCT03569293 and NCT03607422). The MDA criteria were applied to clinician-reported measures [Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), SCORing of Atopic Dermatitis, validated Investigator Global Assessment, and body surface area] and patient-reported measures [Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS) Skin Pain score, Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS) Sleep disturbance score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Dermatology Life Quality Index]. Patients were stratified into three mutually exclusive groups by achievement of treatment targets per measurement at week 16: (i) achieving the optimal target (i.e. MDA) criteria [e.g. EASI improvement ≥90% (EASI 90); WP-NRS ≤1], (ii) achieving the moderate but not optimal target criteria [e.g. EASI improvement ≥75% and <90%; WP-NRS improvement (reduction) ≥4 and WP-NRS >1] and (iii) not achieving either target criteria. Among the stratified target groups (optimal, moderate and neither), patients' symptoms, quality of life, work productivity and treatment satisfaction were assessed based on achieving meaningful clinically important differences in ADerm-SS 7-item total symptom score (ADerm-SS TSS-7; improvement ≥28), ADerm-IS Daily Activities score (improvement ≥14), ADerm-IS Emotional State score (improvement ≥11), percentage-point improvement in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Overall Work Productivity score and proportion reporting Patient Global Impressions of Treatment of 'Extremely/Very Satisfied'. Stratified target groups were compared with a chi-squared or t -test for categorical or continuous variables, respectively, based on observed data. This analysis included 2392 patients. Patients in the optimal target (MDA) group based on EASI (EASI 90) vs. those in the moderate or neither target group had a higher proportion reporting meaningful improvements in ADerm-SS TSS-7 (optimal = 82.6% vs. moderate = 56.8% or neither = 27.4%; P < 0.001 for both comparisons), ADerm-IS Daily Activities (87.2% vs. 66.2% or 39.9%; both P < 0.001) and ADerm-IS Emotional State (86.1% vs. 67.1% or 36.8%; both P < 0.001); a greater percentage-point improvement in WPAI Overall Work Productivity (36.8% vs. 29.2% or 16.6%; both P < 0.01); and a higher proportion reporting being very/extremely satisfied with treatment (73.5% vs. 54.0% or 23.5%; both P < 0.001). Patients in the optimal target (MDA) group based on itch (WP-NRS ≤1) vs. those in the moderate or neither target group had a higher proportion reporting meaningful improvements in ADerm-SS TSS-7 (94.3% vs. 79.7% or 19.1%; both P < 0.001), ADerm-IS Daily Activities (97.3% vs. 84.7% or 33.6%; both P < 0.001) and ADerm-IS Emotional State (94.5% vs. 84.5% or 31.7%; both P < 0.001); a greater percentage-point improvement in WPAI Overall Work Productivity [39.7% vs. 35.2% (not significant) or 14.6% (P < 0.001)]; and a higher proportion reporting being very/extremely satisfied with treatment (79.7% vs. 60.5% or 26.8%; both P < 0.001). Trends were similar in other clinician- and patient-reported measures, with patients who achieved MDA generally reporting better outcomes. Achieving MDA from both a clinician and patient perspective was generally associated with greater improvements in AD symptoms, daily activities, emotional state, work productivity and higher satisfaction. These results demonstrate the value of achieving MDA and support implementing MDA in clinical practice to help improve the current standard of AD care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Network meta-analysis (NMA) provides useful information for medical decision makers via comprehensive indirect comparisons across therapies. As the targeted systemic therapy options for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) continue to grow, it is critical to update NMAs as well. Objectives: To assess the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies with concomitant topical corticosteroids (TCS) in moderate-to-severe AD by including the latest Phase 3 combination therapy data for abrocitinib, lebrikizumab, and dupilumab in the NMA presented in Thyssen et al, 2021. Methods: Data from the Phase 3 combination therapy trial for lebrikizumab in moderate-to-severe AD (ADhere [NCT04250337]) as well as an additional abrocitinib-dupilumab head-to-head Phase 3 trial (JADE DARE [NCT04345367]) were included in the analyses along with other eligible trials for abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib identified through a systematic literature review in Thyssen et al., 2021. Outcomes included ≥90% and ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 90, EASI 75) from baseline, ≥4-point improvement in Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥4), and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) with a ≥2-point reduction from baseline (IGA 0/1), at the week 16 timepoint of each study. Bayesian NMA was performed with fixed and random effects models, with and without baseline risk-adjustment; fit statistics were assessed. Inconsistency was assessed via unrelated mean relative effects models. Odds ratio (OR), number needed to treat (NNT), placebo-unadjusted absolute response rate (ARR), and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA) scores were estimated. Statistical significance was assessed by OR 95% credible intervals excluding 1. Results: The updated NMA analyzed 8 unique placebo-controlled trials and 1 active-controlled trial involving 4391 patients in 23 arms across 6 targeted therapies. Fit statistics supported fixed effects models across outcomes. All therapies were statistically more efficacious than placebo across all outcomes except baricitinib 2 mg for EASI-90. For EASI-90, upadacitinib 30 mg had the most favorable response estimates (ARR=63.2%, OR=11.3, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=98.3%), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=55.8%, OR=8.3, NNT=2.4, SUCRA=90.0%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=44.8%, OR=5.3, NNT=3.2, SUCRA=68.3%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=44.0%, OR=5.2, NNT=3.3, SUCRA=65.8%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=42.9%, OR=4.9, NNT=3.4, SUCRA=64.3%), and the newly added lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR=28.9%, OR=2.7, NNT=6.6, SUCRA=39.9%). The rank order for EASI-75 was similar (upadacitinib 30 mg [ARR=78.3%, OR=9.5, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=98.5%], abrocitinib 200 mg [ARR=73.0%, OR=7.1, NNT=2.3, SUCRA=89.1%], upadacitinib 15 mg [ARR=66.1%, OR=5.1, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=71.0%], dupilumab 300 mg [ARR=65.3%, OR=5.0, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=69.2%], abrocitinib 100 mg [ARR=60.3%, OR=4.0, NNT=3.2, SUCRA=54.0%], and lebrikizumab 250 mg [ARR=54.5%, OR=3.1, NNT=3.8, SUCRA=41.2%]). For ΔNRS ≥4, upadacitinib 30 mg had the most favorable response (ARR=68.9%, OR=10.0, NNT=2.1, SUCRA=99.9%), followed by upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=56.6%, OR=5.9, NNT=2.7, SUCRA=84.0%), abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=51.6%, OR=4.8, NNT=3.1, SUCRA=75.6%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=49.3%, OR=4.4, NNT=3.3, SUCRA=67.0%), baricitinib 4 mg (ARR=44.4%, OR=3.6, NNT=4.0, SUCRA=57.7%), and abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=35.9%, OR=2.5, NNT=5.9, SUCRA=36.1%); lebrikizumab 250 mg ranked eighth (ARR=33.4%, OR=2.3, NNT=7.0, SUCRA=31.3%). For IGA 0/1, upadacitinib 30 mg (ARR=66.5%, OR=11.7, NNT=2.0, SUCRA=99.6%) had the most favorable estimates, followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR=53.5%, OR=6.8, NNT=2.6, SUCRA=86.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR=48.0%, OR=5.4, NNT=3.0, SUCRA=76.2%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR=42.1%, OR=4.3, NNT=3.7, SUCRA=64.7%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR=39.1%, OR=3.8, NNT=4.1, SUCRA=56.1%), and baricitinib 4 mg (ARR=30.6%, OR=2.6, NNT=6.4, SUCRA=39.9%); lebrikizumab 250 mg ranked seventh (ARR=29.2%, OR=2.4, NNT=7.0, SUCRA=35.8%). Baricitinib 2 mg and tralokinumab 300 mg were generally ranked lower across outcomes. Conclusions: Among targeted therapies for moderate-to-severe AD used with concomitant TCS for 16 weeks, upadacitinib 30 mg remained the most efficacious therapy in this NMA, generally followed by abrocitinib 200 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg or dupilumab 300 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, and baricitinib 4 mg or lebrikizumab 250 mg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory disease characterized by typical clinical signs (erythema, edema/papulation, oozing/crusting, excoriation, lichenification and dryness) and prominent itch that can markedly impact a patient's sleep and quality of life (QoL). Upadacitinib is a selective oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with greater inhibitory potency for JAK1 vs. JAK2, JAK3 and tyrosine kinase 2. The SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) measure is a validated assessment tool that evaluates the extent of disease based on the area of the body affected, intensity of clinical signs of AD, and itch and sleeplessness due to AD. In this integrated post hoc analysis of the Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 studies, we compared the effects of upadacitinib (15 and 30 mg) vs. placebo on the intensity of the individual signs assessed by the SCORAD at Week 2 and Week 16. Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 are replicate phase 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies comparing the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib 15 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg to placebo in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Patients were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg or placebo orally once daily. All patients received additive-free, bland emollient twice daily for at least 7 days before baseline and during the study until week 16. The current study assessed the intensity of the six clinical signs assessed by the SCORAD (erythema, edema/papulation, oozing/crusting, excoriation, lichenification and dryness with a 4-level rating scale of none, mild, moderate and severe). The proportions of patients achieving resolution (i.e. an intensity rating of 'none') of each clinical sign at Week 2 and Week 16 were evaluated among patients with mild, moderate or severe intensity at baseline. Resolution rates were compared using the Mantel–Haenszel test. Missing data were handled using nonresponder imputation. A total of 1679 participants (placebo, 558; upadacitinib 15 mg, 557; upadacitinib 30 mg, 564) were included in the analysis of integrated data from the Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 studies. Differences in the proportion of patients achieving resolution for both upadacitinib doses (15 mg/30 mg) vs. placebo were observed at Week 2 (P < 0.0001) for erythema (3.1%/6.0% vs. 0.0%), edema/papulation (13.1%/16.6% vs. 1.3%), oozing/crusting (49.8%/59.1% vs. 15.6%), excoriation (26.9%/34.6% vs. 3.1%), lichenification (9.6%/13.5% vs. 1.4%) and dryness (8.6%/11.9% vs. 1.8%). Resolution rates were also higher with upadacitinib (15 mg/30 mg) vs. placebo at Week 16 (P < 0.0001) for erythema (22.2%/29.7% vs. 2.2%), edema/papulation (33.6%/42.8% vs. 4.9%), oozing/crusting (62.1%/72.0% vs. 20.5%), excoriation (43.3%/54.6% vs. 8.5%), lichenification (30.8%/40.7% vs. 5.2%) and dryness (28.7%/35.9% vs. 4.4%). Greater proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib 15 mg or upadacitinib 30 mg achieved resolution of erythema, edema/papulation, oozing/crusting, excoriation, lichenification or dryness compared with placebo at Week 2 and Week 16. Complete resolution of these clinical signs of AD may correspond to reductions in disease burden that translate to improved QoL. Consideration of the clinical signs of AD as assessed by the SCORAD may help inform physicians as they tailor their treatment choices specifically to the unique skin manifestations of each individual patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory disease characterized by sensitive and dry skin, eczematous lesions and intense pruritus. Patients with moderate-to-severe AD often require systemic treatments if their symptoms are insufficiently controlled with topical treatments or phototherapy. While numerous systemic therapies are currently available for moderate-to-severe AD, more data evaluating patient satisfaction with various characteristics of these treatments are needed to help guide physicians and their patients with joint treatment decision-making. This study aims to investigate patient satisfaction with AD treatments according to the degree and speed of itch improvement and the degree of skin clearance. A cross-sectional, web-based survey was used to evaluate patient preferences for characteristics associated with systemic AD therapies. Respondents were required to have a physician-confirmed diagnosis of AD (currently moderate or severe), to be aged ≥18 years, to be a US resident, and to read and understand English. Assessments included worst itch experienced in the past 24 h (using a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 defined as no itch and 10 defined as the worst imaginable itch), time to noticeable itch reduction following initiation of their current treatment (1–6 days, 7–13 days or ≥14 days) and the amount of body surface area still affected by AD (≤2%, 3–10% or >10%; patient-assessed). Patient satisfaction with itch improvement, speed of itch improvement and skin clearance with their current treatment was also assessed and classified into three categories: satisfied, dissatisfied or neither. P values were determined by Chi-square tests (or Fisher's exact test where appropriate). Of the 213 individuals recruited by physicians to participate in the survey, 200 respondents fulfilled the eligibility criteria, consented to participate and completed surveys. A total of 186 respondents indicated that they were currently receiving treatment for their AD; treatments included over-the-counter creams, ointments or medicines (26.9%, n = 50), prescription creams (72.0%, n = 134), oral corticosteroids (16.7%, n = 31) or dupilumab (11.3%, n = 21). Treatment satisfaction differed based on the patient's itch level within the past 24 h (P < 0.001): 85.2% (n = 23) of the 27 patients reporting the lowest levels of itch (0–1) indicated they were satisfied with their current treatment, whereas only 7.1% (n = 1) of the 14 patients reporting the worst levels of itch (8–10) were satisfied with their current treatment. Among the 73 respondents who experienced the fastest itch reduction (within 1–6 days), 65.8% (n = 48) were satisfied with their treatment. For the 36 respondents experiencing itch reduction ≥14 days post treatment, 13.9% (n = 5) were satisfied with their treatment (P < 0.001). Of the 75 respondents with the highest degree of skin clearance (≤2% of body surface area still affected), 65.3% (n = 49) were satisfied with their treatment. Among the 21 respondents with the lowest degree of skin clearance (>10% of body surface area still affected), 14.3% (n = 3) were satisfied with their treatment (P < 0.001). Safety was not evaluated, which may limit the findings in this analysis. In patients with moderate-to-severe AD, the majority of respondents experiencing the lowest levels of itch, the fastest onset of itch improvement and the highest degree of skin clearance also reported satisfaction with their current treatment. These findings underscore the stringent thresholds for both the degree and speed of symptom improvement required to achieve patient satisfaction. This highlights patients' desire for treatments offering both rapid and extensive itch reduction and skin clearance and may help broaden physicians' understanding of patient preferences and inform treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is characterized by intense itch and symptoms that adversely impact quality of life (QoL). Upadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase-1 inhibitor approved for moderate-to-severe AD. We assessed the effect of once daily oral upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg), with or without concurrent topical corticosteroid treatment, on patient-reported outcomes for adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis during the double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trials, Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293), Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422) and AD Up (NCT03568318). Assessments included itch (Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale), skin pain and symptom severity (AD Symptom Scale), symptom frequency (Patient Oriented Eczema Measure) and sleep, daily activities and emotional state (AD Impact Scale). Post hoc analysis of 2240 adults and 344 adolescents randomized patients was performed. By Week 2, more patients receiving upadacitinib achieved a clinically relevant response in itch, skin pain, symptom severity, symptom frequency, sleep, daily activities and emotional state vs. placebo across studies among adults (upadacitinib 15 mg: 30.8–87.3%; upadacitinib 30 mg: 38.0–89.9%; placebo: 2.1–43.1%; nominal P < 0.001 for all comparisons) and adolescents (upadacitinib 15 mg: 19.4–82.9%; upadacitinib 30 mg: 35.3–97.6%; placebo: 0–41.0%; nominal P < 0.05 for 37/42 comparisons). These trends continued through week 16 where response rates for all outcomes improved with upadacitinib vs. placebo in adults (upadacitinib 15 mg: 42.9–80.4%; upadacitinib 30 mg: 60.9–84.6%; placebo: 10.1–38.1%; nominal P < 0.001 for all comparisons) and adolescents (upadacitinib 15 mg: 33.3–78.0%; upadacitinib 30 mg: 50.0–85.7%; placebo: 2.8–43.6%; nominal P < 0.05 for 41/42 comparisons). These findings highlight the rapid, sustained efficacy of once daily oral upadacitinib in improving symptom burden and QoL in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The landscape of targeted systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) continues to expand. With limited head-to-head randomized controlled trials conducted in AD, a network meta-analysis (NMA) helps inform treatment decisions by providing indirect comparisons across therapies. This study aims to update an NMA presented in Silverberg et al. (2022), assessing the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic treatments without concomitant topical corticosteroids in moderate-to-severe AD by including the latest Phase 3 monotherapy data for lebrikizumab. Data from the two most recently published Phase 3 monotherapy trials for lebrikizumab in moderate-to-severe AD [ADvocate1 (NCT04146363); ADvocate2 (NCT04178967)] were included in the analyses along with other eligible Phase 3 or 4 randomized placebo-controlled trials for abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab and upadacitinib identified through a systemic literature review in Silverberg et al. (2022). Prespecified efficacy outcomes included ≥90% and ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 90, EASI 75) from baseline, ≥4-point improvement in Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥4) and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) with a ≥2-point reduction from baseline (IGA 0/1), at the primary endpoint timepoint for each study (Week 12 for abrocitinib, Week 16 for all other therapies). Bayesian NMA was performed with fixed-effect, random-effect and baseline risk-adjusted models; fit statistics and diagnostics were assessed. The odds ratio (OR), number needed to treat (NNT), placebo-unadjusted absolute response rate (ARR) and Surface Under the Cumulative RAnking curve (SUCRA) scores were estimated. Statistical significance was assessed by OR 95% credible intervals excluding 1. The updated NMA analysed 13 unique placebo-controlled trials involving 7105 patients in 32 arms across six targeted therapies. Fit statistics and diagnostics supported fixed-effect models for all outcomes analysed. All targeted therapies had significantly greater response rates compared with placebo across all outcomes. For EASI 90, upadacitinib 30 mg had the most favorable response estimates (ARR = 58.3%, OR = 23.1, NNT = 1.9, SUCRA = 98.5%), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR = 45.2%, OR = 13.5, NNT = 2.5, SUCRA = 84.3%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR = 43.7%, OR = 12.8, NNT = 2.6, SUCRA = 82.0%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR = 27.3%, OR = 6.2, NNT = 4.7, SUCRA = 52.8%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR = 26.8%, OR = 6.0, NNT = 4.8, SUCRA = 48.4%), baricitinib 4 mg (ARR = 25.0%, OR = 5.5, NNT = 5.2, SUCRA = 45.5%) and lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR = 23.6%, OR = 5.1, NNT = 5.6, SUCRA = 40.0%). A similar rank order was observed for EASI 75 [upadacitinib 30 mg (ARR = 72.3%, OR = 19.1, NNT = 1.7, SUCRA = 98.5%), abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR = 64.6%, OR = 13.3, NNT = 1.9, SUCRA = 87.3%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR = 59.8%, OR = 10.9, NNT = 2.1, SUCRA = 80.2%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR = 45.3%, OR = 6.0, NNT = 3.0, SUCRA = 55.4%), abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR = 44.9%, OR = 5.9, NNT = 3.1, SUCRA = 53.5%) and lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR = 44.7%, OR = 5.9, NNT = 3.1, SUCRA = 53.9%)]. For ΔNRS ≥4, upadacitinib 30 mg also had the most favorable response (ARR = 56.1%, OR = 12.9, NNT = 2.1, SUCRA = 99.0%), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR = 45.4%, OR = 8.3, NNT = 2.8, SUCRA = 83.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR = 42.9%, OR = 7.6, NNT = 3.0, SUCRA = 79.2%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR = 33.9%, OR = 5.2, NNT = 4.0, SUCRA = 54.2%), lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR = 33.9%, OR = 5.1, NNT = 4.1, SUCRA = 54.1%) and abrocitinib 100 mg (ARR = 31.5%, OR = 4.6, NNT = 4.5, SUCRA = 46.1%). For IGA 0/1, upadacitinib 30 mg (ARR = 61.8%, OR = 19.4, NNT = 1.9, SUCRA = 99.9%) and upadacitinib 15 mg (ARR = 48.1%, OR = 11.1, NNT = 2.5, SUCRA = 86.9%) had the most favorable estimates, followed by abrocitinib 200 mg (ARR = 39.3%, OR = 7.7, NNT = 3.2, SUCRA = 75.5%), dupilumab 300 mg (ARR = 32.4%, OR = 5.7, NNT = 4.1, SUCRA = 62.1%) and lebrikizumab 250 mg (ARR = 28.0%, OR = 4.7, NNT = 5.0, SUCRA = 49.1%). Baricitinib 2 mg and tralokinumab 300 mg were generally ranked lower across outcomes. Among targeted treatments for moderate-to-severe AD used without concomitant topical corticosteroids for 12–16 weeks, upadacitinib 30 mg remains the most efficacious therapy in this NMA, generally followed by abrocitinib 200 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, dupilumab 300 mg and lebrikizumab 250 mg or abrocitinib 100 mg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]