Search

Background: Real‐world data on the effectiveness of upadacitinib on atopic dermatitis (AD), hand eczema (HE) and HE in the context of AD are limited. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib on AD and on HE in patients with AD. Methods: This prospective observational cohort study includes clinical outcomes: Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI), Photographic guide; and PROMs: average pruritus and pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score of the past week, Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Patient‐Oriented Eczema, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT), Patient Global Assessment of Disease (PGAD), Quality Of Life Hand Eczema Questionnaire (QOLHEQ) at baseline, Week 4, and Week 16 of upadacitinib‐treated patients. Adverse events were monitored during each visit. Results: Thirty‐eight patients were included, of which 32 patients had HE. At Week 16, EASI‐75 was achieved by 50.0%. Absolute cutoff score NRS‐pruritus ≤4 was reached by 62.5%, POEM ≤7 by 37.5%, DLQI ≤5 by 59.4%, ADCT <7 by 68.8%, and PGAD rating of at least 'good' by 53.1%. HECSI‐75 was achieved by 59.3% and (almost) clear on the Photographic guide by 74.1%. The minimally important change in QOLHEQ was achieved by 57.9%. Sub‐analysis in patients with concomitant irritant contact dermatitis showed no differences. Safety analysis showed no new findings compared to clinical trials. Conclusions: Upadacitinib can be an effective treatment for patients with AD and concomitant HE in daily practice. Future studies should focus on the effectiveness of upadacitinib on chronic HE, especially on the different etiological subtypes of HE, including HE in non‐atopic individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses two case studies including a 55-year-old male with complaints of periocular oedema, and a 27-year-old with pruritic hyperkeratosis, occasional vesicles of the hands, and fissures. Topics discussed include occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by ethylenediamine, hand eczema that was diagnosed as allergic contact dermatitis, and periocular airborne allergic contact dermatitis that is related to the direction of the wind.