Search

This is the English version of the Japanese guidance for biologics in treating atopic dermatitis (AD). The signaling pathway mediated by interleukin (IL)‐4 and IL‐13 contributes to type 2 inflammatory responses and plays an important role in the pathogenesis of AD. IL‐31 is a cytokine mainly produced by activated T cells and is known to be involved in the pruritus of AD. Biologics for AD have been approved, including dupilumab, an anti‐IL‐4 receptor α antibody that was approved for expanded use in AD in 2018. In 2022, nemolizumab, an anti‐IL‐31 receptor α antibody, was approved for pruritus of AD, and tralokinumab, an anti‐IL‐13 antibody, was approved for AD. Physicians who intend to use these drugs should sufficiently understand and comply with the contents of the guidelines prepared by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare to promote the optimal use of the drugs. In treatment with biologics, it is important to consider disease factors (activity and severity), treatment factors (dosage and administration as well as the efficacy and safety), and patients' background characteristics (age and comorbidities) and share this information with patients when choosing treatment options. This guidance was developed for board‐certified dermatologists who specialize in treating AD, and for promoting the proper use of biologics, taking into account the variety of factors in individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody inhibiting interleukin (IL) 4 and IL‐13, is approved for the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in children aged ≥6 years, adolescents, and adults. Both clinical trials and real‐life data demonstrate its efficacy and safety. However, some cutaneous adverse events (cAEs) have been observed during real‐world experiences. The authors' aim was to analyze the spectrum of cAEs in patients receiving dupilumab for the treatment of AD in a real‐world setting. A retrospective review of electronic medical records was conducted for 916 patients (475 males and 541 females; mean age, 50.23 ± 19.66 years [range, 18–91 years]) who had received dupilumab for a minimum of 1 month for the treatment of AD from December 2018 to November 2022 at the Department of Dermatology of University Federico II of Naples (Italy). The mean duration of dupilumab treatment was 27.31 ± 21.26 months. A total of 148 of 916 (16.15%) (90 males; mean age, 50.91 ± 15.34 years) patients reported other cAEs apart of AD flare; namely, facial redness (82 of 916; 8.95%), psoriasis (39 of 916; 4.25%), alopecia areata (11 of 916; 1.2%), skin peeling (11 of 916; 1.2%), parapsoriasis (three of 916; 0.32%), and vitiligo (two of 916; 0.21%). Thirty‐one of 916 (3.38%) patients discontinued dupilumab because of cAEs (18 of 916; 1.96%) for facial redness, 10 of 916 (1.09%) for psoriasis, and three of 916 (0.32%) for parapsoriasis. In our population, most of the cAEs were mild and did not require discontinuation of dupilumab. These findings would enable dermatologists understand the cutaneous side effects of dupilumab better, resulting in improved treatment plan decisions in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the English version of guidance for the use of oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Several cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)‐4, IL‐13, IL‐22, IL‐31, thymic stromal lymphopoietin, and interferon‐γ, are involved in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis. As oral JAK inhibitors hinder the JAK‐signal transducers and activators of transcription signal transduction routes involved in the signal transduction of these cytokines, they may be effective for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. In Japan, as oral JAK inhibitors for atopic dermatitis, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, baricitinib, expanded its authorized indications for atopic dermatitis in 2020. Consequentially, a JAK1 inhibitor, upadacitinib, also expanded its indications to atopic dermatitis in 2021, followed by new approval of another JAK1 inhibitor, abrocitinib, for the use under the Japanese health insurance system. Physicians who intend to use them should sufficiently understand and comply with contents of guidelines prepared by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare to promote optimal use of these drugs. In the treatment with oral JAK inhibitors, it is important to sufficiently consider disease factors, treatment factors and patient backgrounds, and share them with patients to choose treatment options. Points to be considered for drug selection include the efficacy and safety of drugs, age of patients, and dosage and administration of the drug. This guidance was developed for board certified dermatologists, who are specialized in the treatment of atopic dermatitis, and for promoting proper use of oral JAK inhibitors, taking into account a variety of factors in individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the English version of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis 2021. Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a disease characterized by relapsing eczema with pruritus as a primary lesion. In Japan, from the perspective of evidence‐based medicine, the current strategies for the treatment of AD consist of three primary measures: (i) use of topical corticosteroids, tacrolimus ointment, and delgocitinib ointment as the main treatment of the inflammation; (ii) topical application of emollients to treat the cutaneous barrier dysfunction; and (iii) avoidance of apparent exacerbating factors, psychological counseling, and advice about daily life. In the present revised guidelines, descriptions of three new drugs, namely, dupilumab, delgocitinib, and baricitinib, have been added. The guidelines present recommendations to review clinical research articles, evaluate the balance between the advantages and disadvantages of medical activities, and optimize medical activity‐related patient outcomes with respect to several important points requiring decision‐making in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Topical Janus kinase (JAK) and phosphodiesterase‐4 (PDE4) inhibitors are novel treatment approaches for atopic dermatitis (AD). This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of JAK and PDE4 inhibitors for AD treatment. The databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched until June 2021 for eligible studies of AD patients treated with topical JAK and PDE4 inhibitors. Baseline and follow‐up data were extracted. Efficacy of JAK inhibitors 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 response"). A Bayesian multiple treatment network meta‐analysis with fixed effects was performed. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% credibility interval (CrI) were used for comparing the efficacy of JAK and PDE4 inhibitors with placebo for AD. A total of 10 randomized controlled trials of topical JAK and PDE4 inhibitors with 4689 patients were included for analysis. A total of three topical JAK inhibitors and two topical PDE4 inhibitors were included. Compared with placebo, all JAK and PDE4 inhibitors had higher IGA response at 4 weeks of treatment. Notably, with similar safety profile, tofacitinib 2% b.i.d., ruxolitinib 1.5% b.i.d., and delgocitinib 3% b.i.d. showed favorable IGA response compared with topical tacrolimus and corticosteroids. Ranking analysis suggested that among all included JAK and PDE4 inhibitors, tofacitinib 2% b.i.d. had the highest probability of achieving IGA response (SUCRA = 0.880). Besides, JAK and PDE4 inhibitors showed non‐inferior safety profile with placebo. This study confirmed that topical JAK and PDE4 inhibitors had promising treatment efficacy and safety for AD patients. Tofacitinib 2% b.i.d., ruxolitinib 1.5% b.i.d. and delgocitinib 3% b.i.d. showed superior efficacy over other JAK and PDE4 inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors are emerging treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD). Due to this novel role as a therapeutic option for patients with AD, we aimed to review current evidence on the pathophysiology and the safety and adverse effects (AEs) of oral JAK inhibitors for the treatment of AD utilizing the key terms atopic dermatitis, JAK inhibitors, and adverse effect or event. Our study indicated that oral JAK inhibitors have a moderate safety profile for use in AD in several reviews and phase II or III clinical trials. Headaches, nausea, and nasopharyngitis are the most commonly reported systemic AEs. Furthermore, acne, herpes simplex, herpes zoster, and eczema herpeticum are the most commonly recorded dermatological AEs. Current evidence indicates JAK inhibitors may also have less association with some of the serious AEs, although there is potential for increased risk of asthma, acute pancreatitis, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. Whereas data remain limited for the long‐term safety of JAK inhibitor use in patients with AD, many ongoing clinical trials have promising preliminary results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common inflammatory skin disease affecting people of all age groups worldwide. To our knowledge, there are currently no studies estimating the effectiveness of tacrolimus ointment and dupilumab as a combination therapy for AD. Thus, here we describe the effectiveness and safety of tacrolimus ointment in combination with dupilumab for facial rashes in patients with AD. Overall, we included 109 patients who newly received dupilumab from April 2018 to July 2020 in the Dermatology Department of Hyogo College of Medicine Hospital. Of them, 60 patients were treated with tacrolimus ointment. Specifically, of the 60 patients, 40 were treated with dupilumab in combination with tacrolimus ointment and topical steroids, whereas the remaining 20 were prescribed tacrolimus ointment alone and were further analyzed. The analysis showed that the combination does not cause serious side‐effects at high frequency. The patients showed rapid improvement of facial dermatitis along with systemic dermatitis, and the rate of improvement of head/neck Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score significantly correlated with the rate of improvement of overall EASI score. In addition, there was no complication of herpes simplex observed in these 20 patients. Thus, tacrolimus ointment combined with dupilumab is an effective and safe treatment option for facial AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The goal of a treatment regimen for atopic dermatitis is to reach and maintain a state where the patient exhibits mild symptoms or an absence of symptoms, and the patient should not experience disturbance during daily activities. The basis of a treatment regimen for atopic dermatitis is topical therapy, and currently there exist topical corticosteroids, tacrolimus and delgocitinib. Using these, proactive therapy is performed as maintenance therapy after remission induction therapy. However, in cases of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis, topical drugs alone cannot induce remission and systemic therapies such as cyclosporin, ultraviolet therapy, and dupilumab should be used in combination. In particular, dupilumab has many advantages such as high efficacy, relatively few adverse reactions, and ease of use in elderly patients with severe atopic dermatitis. In this review, we present a treatment algorithm for atopic dermatitis that emphasizes the importance of maintaining remission after induction of remission, and summarizes the characteristics of current medication therapy for atopic dermatitis in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dupilumab shows high efficacy and tolerable safety for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). However, the extent of its effectiveness varies in individual patients. To date, practical predictors of later effectiveness of dupilumab in AD patients have not been reported. To explore practical predictors of later effectiveness of dupilumab in AD, we retrospectively investigated the correlation of baseline demographics and baseline laboratory results with the percentage reduction in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after initiating dupilumab. Furthermore, multiple regression analyses were conducted. Data were collected from patients' charts. Data on 54 Japanese adult patients (43 men and 11 women) with moderate to severe AD were analyzed. Baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level was negatively correlated with the percentage reduction in EASI score at 3, 6 and 12 months after initiating dupilumab but not at 1 month. Multiple regression analyses also revealed that effectiveness of dupilumab at 3 and 6 months was associated with lower baseline serum LDH level. AD patients with allergic diseases tended to have lower percentage reduction in EASI at 1 month, but had higher percentage reduction in EASI in the long term than patients without allergic diseases. In conclusion, higher baseline serum LDH level was associated with poor effectiveness of dupilumab in the long term in patients with AD. Furthermore, it tended to take a longer time for AD patients with allergic diseases to respond to dupilumab, and these patients responded better to dupilumab in the long term than patients without allergic diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Systemic treatment options for chronic hand eczema are limited. Dupilumab is used in atopic dermatitis (AD) but is not licensed for (isolated) hand eczema. In this observational prospective study we aimed to determine the response of hand eczema to dupilumab in patients with AD. Adult patients with hand eczema and AD received dupilumab s.c. at a 600 mg loading dose, followed by 300 mg every 2 weeks. Primary outcome was a minimum improvement of 75% on the Hand Eczema Severity Index after 16 weeks (HECSI‐75). Secondary outcomes were severity, measured using the Photographic guide; quality of life improvement as patient‐reported outcome, measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI); and AD severity, measured using the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). Forty‐seven patients were included (32 males; mean age, 45 years). HECSI‐75 was achieved by 28 (60%). Mean HECSI score reduction was 49.2 points (range, 0–164; 95% within‐subject confidence interval, 46.4–52.0), which was already significantly decreased after 4 weeks (P < 0.001). DLQI score mean improvement was 8.8 points (standard deviation [SD], 6.0) or 70.0% decrease (SD, 26.4) (P < 0.001). Eighteen patients (38%) were classified as responders on the Photographic guide. There was no difference in response between chronic fissured and recurrent vesicular clinical subtypes. Similar percentages of patients achieving EASI‐75 and HECSI‐75 were seen after 16 weeks. In conclusion, this study shows a favorable response of hand eczema to dupilumab in patients with AD. This raises the question whether a response will also be seen in isolated hand eczema. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]