Search

Psoriasis (PSO), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic urticaria (CU) are common manifestations of immunological skin and subcutaneous conditions and have been shown to have a substantial impact on the quality of life of patients. The cost of treating those conditions can also be high, as the use of biologic treatments has become more common for moderate to severe patients. In this review, we examine characteristics of economic evaluations and cost studies conducted for the three conditions.A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2016 to October 26, 2020 to identify economic evaluations where the cost of one or more drug treatment was evaluated and cost studies covering any intervention type. Each database was searched using keyword and MeSH terms related to treatment costs (e.g., health care cost, drug cost, etc.) and each condition (e.g., PSO, AD, eczema, CU, etc.).A total of 123 studies were reviewed, including 104 studies (85%) of PSO (including psoriasis, plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis vulgaris), 14 studies (11%) of AD, and 5 studies (4%) of CU. Seventy-two studies (59%) reviewed reported the inclusion of biologic treatments, 10 studies (8%) did not include biologic treatments, and 41 studies (33%) did not report whether or not a biologic treatment was included. While nearly all studies (98%) included direct costs, only 22 studies (18%) included indirect costs.Economic evaluations for AD and CU may be needed in order to better understand the value of new treatments. Moreover, a clearer delineation for biologic treatments and indirect costs (i.e., productivity losses and gains) may be required.

This is the English version of Japanese guidance for use of biologics for psoriasis (the 2022 version). As the first biologics for psoriasis in Japan, infliximab and adalimumab, anti-tumor necrosis factor-α antibodies, became available in the field of dermatology in 2010, followed by ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin (IL)-12/IL-23p40 antibody, which was launched in Japan in 2011. Moreover, after 2015, three IL-17 inhibitors, the IL-17A antibody preparations secukinumab and ixekizumab, and an anti-IL-17 receptor antibody preparation brodalumab were marketed. Furthermore, after 2018, the anti-IL23p19 antibody preparations guselkumab and risankizumab, the TNF inhibitor certolizumab pegol, the IL-23 inhibitor tildrakizumab, and the anti-IL-17A/F antibody bimekizumab were marketed. It is important for physicians to select appropriate biologic therapy for each psoriatic patient after due consideration of disease factors, treatment factors, and patient background factors, sharing such information with patients. The followings can be listed as points to be considered for the selection of biologics: drug effects (e.g., strength of effectiveness, time to onset of effectiveness, effectiveness against arthritis, primary failure, secondary failure), safety (e.g., infections, administration-related reactions, and relationships with other comorbidities), convenience for patients (e.g., hospital visit intervals, self-injection, maintenance therapy at clinics, feasibility of drug discontinuation/re-administration), and payment (medical costs) borne by patients. This guidance has been prepared with the aim of allowing dermatologists experienced in the treatment of psoriasis to use biologics appropriately according to the circumstances of individual patients after consideration of the above-mentioned factors.

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.

Introduction The combination of pembrolizumab and axitinib has recently been approved as a first-line treatment for previously untreated metastatic renal cell carcinoma. However, immune-related adverse events are not well known. Case presentation A 65-year-old male was diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma with metastases to the brain and lungs. The patient had a medical history of stasis dermatitis. During the combined treatment of pembrolizumab and axitinib, blisters appeared on the lower extremities. Skin biopsy revealed septal panniculitis, pustules, and perivascular lymphocytic and neutrophilic infiltration of the skin, and the patient was diagnosed with immune-related dermatitis. The dermatitis improved with oral prednisolone treatment. Conclusion A case of immune-related dermatitis during combinatorial treatment with pembrolizumab and axitinib for renal cell carcinoma has been reported. Preexisting stasis dermatitis may have affected the onset and deterioration of immune-related dermatitis.

Tildrakizumab is a high‐affinity, humanized immunoglobulin G1κ, anti‐interleukin‐23p19 monoclonal antibody recently approved in Japan for treatment of plaque psoriasis. We report results from Japanese patients treated with tildrakizumab in the multinational, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled reSURFACE 1 study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01722331). Adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were randomized (2:2:1) to receive subcutaneous tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg or placebo every 12 weeks. Placebo recipients were rerandomized to tildrakizumab 100 or 200 mg at week 12. The global study coprimary endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving 75% improvement from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) response (0/1 with ≥2 grade reduction from baseline) at week 12. Analyses included 158 Japanese patients randomized to tildrakizumab 100 (n = 64) or 200 mg (n = 62) or placebo (n = 32). Japanese patients had higher mean baseline body surface area involvement and PASI versus all reSURFACE 1 patients. At week 12, significantly more Japanese patients receiving tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg versus placebo achieved PASI 75 (54.7% and 54.8% vs 6.3%, respectively, both nominal p 80% of patients achieving PASI 75 or PASI 90 at week 28 and continuing tildrakizumab treatment at the same dose maintained response at week 64. From baseline to week 28, absolute PASI decreased from >12 in all patients to ≤2 in >40% and ≤3 in >50% of patients receiving tildrakizumab. Tildrakizumab was generally well tolerated with an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo. Tildrakizumab treatment was associated with durable efficacy in Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis despite greater baseline disease severity versus the global reSURFACE 1 population.

The three part, double‐blind, randomized, controlled reSURFACE 1 trial and extension study (NCT01722331) evaluated efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Patients with ≥50% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50) following treatment with tildrakizumab 100 mg (TIL100) or 200 mg (TIL200) could enter the optional long‐term extension study and continue treatment at the same dose for an additional 192 weeks. This subgroup analysis assessed the long‐term efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab treatment for Japanese patients enrolled in reSURFACE 1 for up to 5 years of treatment. The primary efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients who maintained PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) clear or minimal with ≥2‐grade reduction from baseline (PGA 0/1) from base study week 64 to extension week 192. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients who maintained PASI 90/100 from base study week 64 to extension week 192. Adverse events (AEs) were monitored throughout the study and for up to 20 weeks after the last study visit. Of the 120 Japanese patients who entered the reSURFACE 1 extension study, 43 (79.6%) patients receiving tildrakizumab 100 mg and 58 (87.9%) patients receiving tildrakizumab 200 mg completed the extension study. Of all Japanese patients with PASI 75/90/100 and PGA 0/1 at week 64, 85%/88% receiving TIL100/TIL200 maintained PASI 75, 70%/96% maintained PASI 90, 63%/67% maintained PASI 100, and 68%/72% maintained PGA 0/1 at extension week 192. AEs led to discontinuation in 1.7 patients per 100 patient‐years (P100PY) receiving tildrakizumab 100 mg and 0.8 P100PY receiving tildrakizumab 200 mg. Incidences of severe infections, malignancies, confirmed major adverse cardiac events, and hypersensitivity reactions were low in both treatment groups. Through 5 years of treatment, tildrakizumab maintained efficacy and was well tolerated with low rates of AEs of special interest.

The safety and efficacy of omalizumab in chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) patients has been established, but real-world long-term data remain scarce, especially in Japan.52-week, open-label, single-arm, observational study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of first-time omalizumab in Japanese CSU patients responding inadequately to conventional therapies.Overall, 235 of 280 patients completed the study. Most patients were aged ≥ 18 and 65 years; adolescents (≥ 12 and ≤ 18 years) accounted for 9.6% of the total population. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) duration of CSU at baseline was 1.6 ± 3.1 years; 46.1% of patients had had CSU for6 months. At baseline, the mean ± SD of Urticaria Control Test (UCT) score, Weekly Urticaria Activity Score (UAS7), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) were 5.1 ± 3.2, 25.2 ± 11.9, and 8.4 ± 5.9, respectively. The mean ± SD duration of the observation period was 330.3 ± 86.2 days. Relapse was reported in 65 patients, 51, 9, and 5 of whom required retreatment with omalizumab 1, 2, and ≥ 3 times, respectively. The incidence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was reported in 11.8%, 1.4%, and 3.9% of patients, respectively. The most common AEs were urticaria (1.8%) and eczema (1.1%). No adolescents experienced ADRs. A cumulative of 92.8% of patients responded in the Physician's Global Impression of Change, with 81.3%, 75.0%, and 95.1% of patients achieving UCT ≥ 12, UAS7 ≤ 6, and DLQI ≤ 5 up to Week 52, respectively.This study supports the safety and effectiveness of omalizumab in CSU patients who responded inadequately to conventional therapies in real-world clinical practice in Japan.

As the first biologics for psoriasis in Japan, infliximab and adalimumab, anti-tumor necrosis factor-α antibodies, became available in the field of dermatology in 2010, followed by ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin (IL)-12/IL-23p40 antibody, which was launched in Japan in 2011. Since 2015, three IL-17 inhibitors of secukinumab and ixekizumab, anti-IL-17A antibodies, and brodalumab, an anti-IL-17 receptor antibody, and two anti-IL-23p19 antibodies of guselkumab and risankizumab, have also been launched. It is important for physicians to select appropriate biologic therapy for each psoriatic patient after due consideration of disease factors, treatment factors and patient background factors, sharing such information with patients. The following can be listed as points to be considered for the selection of biologics: drug effects (e.g. strength of effectiveness, time to onset of effectiveness, effectiveness against arthritis, primary failure, secondary failure), safety (e.g. infections, administration-related reactions and relationships with other comorbidities), convenience for patients (e.g. hospital visit intervals, self-injection, maintenance therapy at clinics, feasibility of drug discontinuation/re-administration) and payment (medical costs) borne by patients. This guidance has been prepared with the aim of allowing dermatologists experienced in the treatment of psoriasis to use biologics appropriately according to the circumstances of individual patients after consideration of the above-mentioned factors.

Previous studies demonstrated that delgocitinib ointment, a novel topical Janus kinase inhibitor, rapidly improved clinical signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis (AD) in Japanese adult patients. We sought to evaluate the long‐term safety and efficacy of delgocitinib 0.5% ointment in a 52‐week study (QBA4‐2). Japanese patients aged 16 years or older with AD received delgocitinib 0.5% ointment b.i.d. for up to 52 weeks. Topical corticosteroids for the treatment of worsening of AD could be used at the investigators’ discretion during the treatment period. Safety end‐points included the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). Pooled safety analyses included the data from the other long‐term study (QBA4‐1). Efficacy end‐points included the percentage change from baseline in the modified Eczema Area and Severity Index (mEASI). A total of 506 patients were included in the pooled safety population. Overall, AEs were reported in 69.0% of patients; most AEs were mild and unrelated to delgocitinib ointment. The most common AE was nasopharyngitis, followed by contact dermatitis, acne, and application site folliculitis. No skin atrophy or telangiectasia was found at the application sites of delgocitinib ointment. Application site irritation symptoms were infrequent (

The real‐world evidence on the profiles of patients suffering from atopic dermatitis (AD) in Japan is sparse. A retrospective claim database analysis was conducted to estimate the health‐care resource use (HCRU) and current AD treatment. Data from October 2013 to September 2016 were extracted from the JMDC (Tokyo, Japan) claims database. HCRU was assessed by a comparison of AD patients and matched non‐AD controls. A multivariate analysis was performed to estimate HCRU attributable to AD. AD patients (n = 39 893) have more claims of certain diagnoses such as rhinitis, viral and fungal infections, sleep disorders and conjunctivitis as well as higher HCRU (outpatient visits, prescriptions of AD‐related and non‐AD‐related medications, phototherapy, laboratory tests) than matched non‐AD controls (n = 39 893). Treatment pattern analysis included treatment‐naive patients (n = 8478) and previously treated AD patients (n = 30 109). Approximately 20% of previously treated patients were on the continuous systemic treatment during 18‐month follow up. Systemic corticosteroids were the most frequently used systemic treatments. Oral cyclosporin was less frequently used in both groups, but for the longest duration. Almost half of previously treated patients with oral cyclosporin continued treatment for more than 3 months. In conclusion, HCRU was higher in AD patients than non‐AD controls, indicating a high burden of the disease imposed on AD patients. Continuous administration of systemic treatment, such as oral cyclosporin, systemic corticosteroids and phototherapy, observed in AD patients sheds light on the difficulties of managing AD in Japanese clinical practise.

Risankizumab, a humanized immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody, selectively inhibits interleukin‐23, a key cytokine in the pathogenesis of psoriasis, by binding to its p19 subunit. In SustaIMM (ClinicalTrials.gov/{"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT03000075","term_id":"NCT03000075"}}NCT03000075), a phase 2/3, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled study, Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (n = 171) were stratified by bodyweight and concomitant psoriatic arthritis and randomized 2:2:1:1 to 75 mg risankizumab, 150 mg risankizumab, placebo with cross‐over to 75 mg risankizumab and placebo with cross‐over to 150 mg risankizumab. Dosing was at weeks 0, 4, 16, 28 and 40, with placebo cross‐over to risankizumab at week 16. The primary end‐point was 90% or more improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI‐90) at week 16 for risankizumab versus placebo. Missing data were imputed as non‐response. All primary and psoriasis‐related secondary end‐points were met for both risankizumab doses (P

BACKGROUND: The phase III reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 (NCT01722331/NCT01729754) trials of the anti-interleukin-23p19 monoclonal antibody tildrakizumab (TIL) for psoriasis treatment are complete. OBJECTIVES: We present 5-year pooled data from reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2. METHODS: reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 were double-blind, randomized, controlled studies with optional long-term extensions. Adults with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis were randomized 2 : 2 : 1 to TIL 100 mg (TIL 100) or 200 mg (TIL 200) or placebo at weeks 0 and 4, and every 12 weeks thereafter [reSURFACE 2 included an etanercept (ETN) arm]. Efficacy outcomes included proportions of patients achieving absolute and relative improvement from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score through week 244 in TIL responders (≥ 75% improvement from baseline PASI; PASI 75 response) continuously receiving the same dose and ETN partial responders and nonresponders (PASI < 75 response) switched to TIL 200 at week 28. Safety was assessed from adverse events (AEs) in all patients as treated. RESULTS: Efficacy analyses included 329 and 227 week 28 responders to TIL 100 and TIL 200, respectively, and 121 ETN partial responders/nonresponders switched to TIL 200 at week 28. Of TIL 100 or TIL 200 responders and ETN partial responders/nonresponders entering the extensions, 235/302, 176/213 and 85/107, respectively, were evaluated at week 244, and 88·7%, 92·5% and 81·3%, respectively, achieved PASI 75 response. Exposure-adjusted rates of serious AEs were 6·3 and 6·0 patients with events per 100 patient-years of TIL 100 and TIL 200, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: TIL treatment provided sustained disease control over 5 years in week 28 TIL responders and ETN partial responders/nonresponders, with a reassuring safety profile.

Altres ajuts: Eli Lilly and Company. Introduction: Burdensome symptoms of atopic dermatitis include itch and sleep disturbance. This post hoc analysis reports the effect of baricitinib on itch and sleep disturbance during the first week of treatment in 3 phase 3 studies. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1:1:1 to once-daily placebo or baricitinib 1 mg, 2 mg, or 4 mg in the BREEZE-AD1 and -AD2 studies and 1:1:1 to once-daily placebo or baricitinib 2 mg or 4 mg in the BREEZE-AD7 study. Topical corticosteroids were only allowed in BREEZE-AD7. Patients completed the itch numerical rating scale and atopic dermatitis sleep scale (ADSS) items 1-3 using an electronic daily diary. Data were analyzed by study as least squares mean percent change from baseline in daily scores for the randomized patients. Mixed model repeated measures analysis was used to analyze change from baseline values. Results: A total of 624, 615, and 329 patients were randomized in BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, and -AD7, respectively. Itch severity significantly improved with baricitinib 2 mg and 4 mg versus placebo starting at day 2 (1 day after first dose) in BREEZE-AD1 and -AD7 and at day 1 in BREEZE-AD2. Patients' ability to fall asleep (ADSS item 1) significantly improved with baricitinib 2 mg and 4 mg versus placebo starting at day 2 in all three studies. There were significant improvements in patients waking due to itch (ADSS item 2) with baricitinib 4 mg versus placebo starting at day 2 in all three studies. Patients' ability to return to sleep after being woken by itch (ADSS item 3) was significantly improved with baricitinib 4 mg versus placebo starting at day 2 in BREEZE-AD1 and -AD2 and at day 4 in BREEZE-AD7. Conclusion: Rapid onset of action, typically 1 day after taking the first dose of baricitinib, was observed consistently for the burdensome symptoms of itch and sleep disturbance. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: BREEZE-AD1, NCT03334396; BREEZE-AD2, NCT03334422; BREEZE-AD7, NCT03733301.

BACKGROUND Delgocitinib 0.5% ointment, a topical Janus kinase inhibitor, has been approved in Japan for adult patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of delgocitinib ointment in pediatric patients with AD. METHODS Part 1 of this study was a 4-week double-blind period in which Japanese patients aged 2 through 15 years were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to delgocitinib 0.25% ointment or vehicle ointment. Part 2 was a 52-week extension period. Eligible patients entered part 2 to receive 0.25% or 0.5% delgocitinib ointment. RESULTS At the initiation of the study, approximately half of the patients had moderate AD. At the end of treatment in part 1, the least-squares mean percent change from baseline in modified Eczema Area and Severity Index score, the primary efficacy endpoint, was significantly greater for delgocitinib ointment than for vehicle (-39.3% vs +10.9%, P

Risankizumab selectively inhibits interleukin 23, a cytokine that contributes to psoriatic inflammation.To evaluate the efficacy and safety of risankizumab vs placebo and continuous treatment vs withdrawal in adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.Multinational, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from March 6, 2016, to July 26, 2018. A total of 507 eligible patients had stable moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis for 6 months or longer, body surface area involvement greater than or equal to 10%, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) greater than or equal to 12, and a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score greater than or equal to 3. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted.Patients were randomized (4:1, interactive response technology) to risankizumab, 150 mg, subcutaneously, or placebo at weeks 0 and 4 (part A1). All patients received risankizumab at week 16. At week 28, patients randomized to risankizumab who achieved an sPGA score of 0/1 were rerandomized 1:2 to risankizumab or placebo every 12 weeks (part B).Co-primary end points for the part A1 phase included proportions of patients achieving greater than or equal to 90% improvement in PASI (PASI 90) and sPGA score of 0/1 at week 16. The PASI measures severity of erythema, infiltration, and desquamation weighted by area of skin involvement over the head, trunk, upper extremities, and lower extremities; scores range from 0 (no disease) to 72 (maximal disease activity). The sPGA assesses average thickness, erythema, and scaling of all psoriatic lesions; scores range from 0 (clear) to 4 (severe), with 0/1 indicating clear or almost clear. Primary and secondary end points in part B included proportion of rerandomized patients achieving an sPGA score of 0/1 at week 52 (primary) and week 104 (secondary).Of 563 patients screened, 507 were randomized to risankizumab (n = 407) or placebo (n = 100). Most patients were men (356 [70.2%]); median age was 51 years (interquartile range, 38-60 years). At week 16, 298 patients (73.2%) in the treatment group vs 2 patients (2.0%) receiving placebo achieved a PASI 90 response, and 340 patients (83.5%) receiving risankizumab vs 7 patients (7.0%) receiving placebo achieved sPGA 0/1 scores (placebo-adjusted differences: PASI 90: 70.8%; 95% CI, 65.7%-76.0%; sPGA 0/1: 76.5%; 95% CI, 70.4%-82.5%; P .001 for both). At week 28, 336 responders were rerandomized to risankizumab (n = 111) or treatment withdrawal (n = 225). At week 52, the sPGA 0/1 score was achieved by 97 patients (87.4%) receiving risankizumab vs 138 patients (61.3%) receiving placebo. At week 104, the sPGA 0/1 score was achieved by 90 patients (81.1%) receiving risankizumab vs 16 patients (7.1%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted differences: week 52: 25.9%; 95% CI, 17.3%-34.6%; week 104: 73.9%; 95% CI, 66.0%-81.9%; P .001 for both). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between risankizumab (186 [45.7%]) and placebo (49 [49.0%]) in part A1 and remained stable over time.Risankizumab showed superior efficacy compared with placebo through 16 weeks and treatment withdrawal through 2 years. Risankizumab was well tolerated, with no unexpected safety findings during the 2-year trial.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02672852.

Background: Many patients with chronic spontaneous/idiopathic urticaria (CSU/CIU) do not respond adequately to treatment with non-sedating H1 antihistamines (H1AH). There are limited studies on use of omalizumab as add-on therapy for treatment of CSU in an Asian population. Objective: The POLARIS study (NCT02329223), representing the first randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase III trial of omalizumab for CSU in an Eastern Asian population, evaluated efficacy and safety of omalizumab as add-on therapy for treatment of CSU. Methods: This 26-week multicenter (41 Japanese/Korean sites) study enrolled patients (12-75 years) who were symptomatic despite H1AH treatment. Eligible participants (N = 218) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive three subcutaneous injections of omalizumab 300 mg, 150 mg, or placebo every 4 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of follow-up. Primary outcome was change from baseline to Week 12 (Wk12) in weekly itch severity score (ISS7). Safety was assessed through the summary of adverse events (AEs). Results: Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally well balanced across treatment groups. At Wk12, statistically significant decreases from baseline were observed in ISS7 with omalizumab vs placebo (mean changes -10.22, -8.80, and -6.51 for omalizumab 300 mg, 150 mg and placebo; p < 0.001 and p = 0.006 vs placebo, respectively). Overall AE incidence was similar across treatment groups (54.8%, 57.7%, and 55.4% in omalizumab 300 mg, 150 mg, and placebo groups, respectively); nasopharyngitis was the most frequently reported AE in all treatment arms. Conclusion: The POLARIS study demonstrates that omalizumab is an efficacious and well-tolerated add-on therapy in Japanese and Korean H1AH-refractory patients with CSU.

There are limited data on the safety and efficacy of switching to secukinumab from cyclosporine A (CyA) in patients with psoriasis. The purpose of the present study was to assess the efficacy and safety of secukinumab for 16 weeks after direct switching from CyA in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis. In this multicenter, open‐label, phase IV study, 34 patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis and inadequate response to CyA received secukinumab 300 mg s.c. at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 8 and 12. The primary end‐point was ≥75% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 75) at week 16. The efficacy of secukinumab treatment was evaluated up to week 16, and adverse events (AE) were monitored during the study. The primary end‐point of the PASI 75 response at week 16 was achieved by 82.4% (n = 28) of patients receiving secukinumab. Early improvements were observed with secukinumab, with PASI 50 response of 41.2% at week 2 and PASI 75 response of 44.1% at week 4. AE were observed in 70.6% (n = 24) of patients, and there were no serious AE or deaths reported in the entire study period. Secukinumab showed a favorable safety profile consistent with previous data with no new or unexpected safety signals. The results of the present study show that secukinumab is effective in patients with psoriasis enabling a smooth and safe direct switch from CyA to biological therapy.

A placebo‐controlled, randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group, comparative, multicenter study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of benzoyl peroxide (BPO) gel, administrated once daily for 12 weeks to Japanese patients with acne vulgaris. Efficacy was evaluated by counting all inflammatory and non‐inflammatory lesions. Safety was evaluated based on adverse events, local skin tolerability scores and laboratory test values. All 609 subjects were randomly assigned to receive the study products (2.5% and 5% BPO and placebo), and 607 subjects were included in the full analysis set, 544 in the per protocol set and 609 in the safety analyses. The median rates of reduction from baseline to the last evaluation of the inflammatory lesion counts, the primary end‐point, in the 2.5% and 5% BPO groups were 72.7% and 75.0%, respectively, and were significantly higher than that in the placebo group (41.7%). No deaths or other serious adverse events were observed. The incidences of adverse events in the 2.5% and 5% BPO groups were 56.4% and 58.8%, respectively; a higher incidence than in the placebo group, but there was no obvious difference between the 2.5% and 5% BPO groups. All adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. Most adverse events did not lead to study product discontinuation. The results suggested that both 2.5% and 5% BPO are useful for the treatment of acne vulgaris.

Summary Background Dupilumab, a human monoclonal antibody, blocks the shared receptor unit for interleukin‐4 and interleukin‐13. International phase II and III studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in adults with moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD), but the effects of dupilumab in Japanese patients have not been reported. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in Japanese patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD. Methods We analysed the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in the Japanese cohorts of a 16‐week, phase IIb dose‐finding trial (AD‐1021; NCT01859988); a 16‐week, phase III, placebo‐controlled monotherapy trial (LIBERTY AD SOLO 1; NCT02277743) and a 52‐week, phase III, placebo‐controlled study of dupilumab with topical corticosteroids (LIBERTY AD CHRONOS; NCT02260986). Results Twenty‐seven, 106 and 117 Japanese patients were enrolled in AD‐1021, SOLO 1 and CHRONOS, respectively. Baseline disease severity was numerically higher in the Japanese cohort than in the overall study population. Generally, dupilumab significantly improved signs and symptoms of AD, including pruritus and patient quality of life, compared with placebo in the Japanese cohort, consistent with the overall study population. The combined safety profile of dupilumab in the Japanese cohort was similar to that in the total study populations; dupilumab was associated with an increased incidence of injection‐site reactions and conjunctivitis compared with placebo. Dupilumab was associated with rapid reduction in thymus and activation‐regulated chemokine and gradual IgE reductions. Conclusions Dupilumab alone or with topical corticosteroids improved signs and symptoms of AD, had an acceptable safety profile, and suppressed biomarkers of type 2 inflammation compared with placebo in Japanese adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD. What's already known about this topic? Differences in atopic dermatitis (AD) pathology have been reported between Asian and Western populations, in which distinct helper T‐cell activation profiles have been observed.International clinical studies in adults with moderate‐to‐severe AD have evaluated the efficacy and safety of dupilumab, which blocks interleukin‐4 and interleukin‐13, key molecules in type 2 inflammation.The effects of dupilumab in Japanese patients specifically have not yet been reported. What does this study add? Dupilumab alone or with topical corticosteroids improved signs and symptoms of AD and had an acceptable safety profile compared with placebo in Japanese patients with moderate‐to‐severe AD.The effects were comparable with those observed in the overall study population.Reported immunological differences in AD pathology in Asian patients may be secondary to type 2 immune activation., Plain language summary available online Respond to this article

Previous studies showed the potential effectiveness of delgocitinib ointment, a novel topical Janus kinase inhibitor, in atopic dermatitis (AD).This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of delgocitinib 0.5% ointment.In part 1, a 4-week double-blind period, Japanese patients aged 16 years or older with moderate or severe AD were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to delgocitinib 0.5% ointment or vehicle ointment. Eligible patients entered part 2, a 24-week extension period, to receive delgocitinib 0.5% ointment.At the end of treatment in part 1, the least-squares mean percent changes from baseline in the modified Eczema Area and Severity Index score, the primary efficacy endpoint, were significantly greater in the delgocitinib group than in the vehicle group (-44.3% vs 1.7%, P .001). The improvement in modified Eczema Area and Severity Index score was maintained in part 2. Most adverse events were mild and unrelated to delgocitinib across the study periods.Only Japanese patients were included. The vehicle-controlled period lasted only 4 weeks. In part 2, topical corticosteroids were allowed for the treatment of worsening of AD.Delgocitinib ointment was effective and well tolerated in Japanese adult patients with moderate to severe AD for up to 28 weeks.

Topical delgocitinib (JTE-052), a novel Janus kinase inhibitor, had been shown to be clinically effective in adults with atopic dermatitis (AD). However, the efficacy of topical delgocitinib in pediatric patients with AD remained unclear.We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of delgocitinib ointment in pediatric patients with AD.In this phase 2 clinical study (JapicCTI-173553) Japanese patients aged 2 through 15 years with AD were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 0.25% or 0.5% delgocitinib ointment or vehicle ointment twice daily for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage change from baseline in the modified Eczema Area and Severity Index score at the end of treatment (EOT).At EOT, modified Eczema Area and Severity Index scores in both delgocitinib groups were significantly reduced compared with that in the vehicle group. The least-squares mean percentage change from baseline was -54.2% in the 0.25% group and -61.8% in the 0.5% group versus -4.8% in the vehicle group (P .001 for both comparisons). Similarly, all other efficacy parameters, including Investigator's Global Assessment and pruritus scores, in both delgocitinib groups were significantly improved compared with those in the vehicle group at EOT. Adverse events in both delgocitinib groups were mild in severity, and no serious adverse events were reported.Delgocitinib ointment improved clinical signs and symptoms in pediatric patients with AD and was well tolerated. These study results indicate that delgocitinib ointment can be a promising therapeutic option for pediatric patients with AD.

not available.

BACKGROUND Inhibiting interleukin (IL)-23 in patients with psoriasis has demonstrated high levels of skin clearance. OBJECTIVES To investigate, in a phase II (AMAF; NCT02899988), multicentre, double-blind trial, the efficacy and safety of three doses of mirikizumab (LY3074828), a p19-directed IL-23 antibody, vs. placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS Adult patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 to receive placebo (n = 52), mirikizumab 30 mg (n = 51), mirikizumab 100 mg (n = 51) or mirikizumab 300 mg (n = 51) subcutaneously at weeks 0 and 8. The primary objective was to evaluate the superiority of mirikizumab over placebo in achieving a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90) response at week 16. Comparisons were done using logistic regression analysis with treatment, geographical region and previous biological therapy in the model. Missing data were imputed as nonresponses. RESULTS Ninety-seven per cent of patients completed the first 16 weeks of the study. The primary end point was met for all mirikizumab dose groups vs. placebo, with PASI 90 response rates at week 16 of 0%, 29% (P = 0·009), 59% (P < 0·001) and 67% (P < 0·001) for patients receiving placebo, and mirikizumab 30 mg, 100 mg and 300 mg, respectively. There were two (1%) serious adverse events in mirikizumab-treated patients vs. one (2%) in a placebo-group patient. CONCLUSIONS At week 16, 67% of patients treated with mirikizumab 300 mg at 8-week intervals achieved PASI 90. The percentage of patients reporting at least one treatment-emergent adverse event was similar among patients treated with placebo or mirikizumab.

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that is being investigated for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Japanese patients aged 20 years or more with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis were double‐blindly randomized 1:1 to tofacitinib 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. for 16 weeks, open‐label 10 mg b.i.d. for 4 weeks, then variable 5 or 10 mg b.i.d. to Week 52. Primary end‐points at Week 16 were the proportion of patients achieving at least a 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75) and Physician's Global Assessment of “clear” or “almost clear” (PGA response) for psoriasis, and 20% or more improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) for patients with psoriatic arthritis. Safety was assessed throughout. Eighty‐seven patients met eligibility criteria for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (5 mg b.i.d., n = 43; 10 mg b.i.d., n = 44), 12 met eligibility criteria for psoriatic arthritis (5 mg b.i.d., n = 4; 10 mg b.i.d., n = 8) including five who met both criteria (10 mg b.i.d.). At Week 16, 62.8% and 72.7% of patients achieved PASI75 with tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg b.i.d., respectively; 67.4% and 68.2% achieved PGA responses; all patients with psoriatic arthritis achieved ACR20. Responses were maintained through Week 52. Adverse events occurred in 83% of patients through Week 52, including four (4.3%) serious adverse events and three (3.2%) serious infections (all herpes zoster). No malignancies, cardiovascular events or deaths occurred. Tofacitinib (both doses) demonstrated efficacy in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis through 52 weeks; safety findings were generally consistent with prior studies.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of secukinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, compared to other clinically used biologics (adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab) in Japan for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis from the healthcare system (total costs) and patient co-payment (using different frequencies of drug purchase) perspectives. Methods: A decision-tree (first year)/Markov model (subsequent years), with an annual cycle, was developed. The model adopted a 5-year time horizon. Efficacy inputs were obtained from a mixed-treatment comparison analysis, and other model inputs were collected from published literature and local Japanese sources. Model outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per QALY gained. The annual discounting rate of 2% was applied to both costs and outcomes. Results: Results for the healthcare system perspective showed that secukinumab had the highest number of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (4.07) vs other biologics, dominated ustekinumab and infliximab, and the ICER of secukinumab compared to adalimumab was ¥8,418,222/QALY gained. In the patient co-payment perspective with the monthly purchase of drugs, ustekinumab had the lowest co-payment cost, followed by infliximab, adalimumab, and secukinumab. In the patient co-payment perspective with a once every 3 months purchase of secukinumab and adalimumab, the co-payment costs of secukinumab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab became comparable, and infliximab had the highest co-payment cost. Limitations: Only short-term efficacy data was modeled, as there was a lack of data on long-term outcomes. Treatment sequencing was restricted to first-line biologic treatment. Drop-out rates for comparators were assumed to be equivalent to secukinumab in the absence of available data. Conclusions: Secukinumab is a cost-efficient treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis, providing greater health outcomes to patients at lower total costs compared to infliximab and ustekinumab, as well as comparable patient co-payment relative to other biologic treatments.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of secukinumab, a fully human anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, compared to other clinically used biologics (adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab) in Japan for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis from the healthcare system (total costs) and patient co-payment (using different frequencies of drug purchase) perspectives. Methods: A decision-tree (first year)/Markov model (subsequent years), with an annual cycle, was developed. The model adopted a 5-year time horizon. Efficacy inputs were obtained from a mixed-treatment comparison analysis and other model inputs were collected from published literature and local Japanese sources. Model outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per QALY gained. The annual discounting rate of 2% was applied to both costs and outcomes. Results: Results for the healthcare system perspective showed that secukinumab had the highest number of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (4.07) versus other biologics, dominated ustekinumab and infliximab, and the ICER of secukinumab compared to adalimumab was ¥8,418,222/QALY gained. In the patient co-payment perspective with the monthly purchase of drugs, ustekinumab had the lowest co-payment cost, followed by infliximab, adalimumab, and secukinumab. In the patient co-payment perspective with once every three months purchase of secukinumab and adalimumab, the co-payment costs of secukinumab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab became comparable, and infliximab had highest co-payment cost. Limitations: Only short-term efficacy data was modeled, as there was a lack of data on long-term outcomes. Treatment sequencing was restricted to first-line biologic treatment. Drop-out rates for comparators were assumed to be equivalent to secukinumab in the absence of available data. Conclusions: Secukinumab is a cost-efficient treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis, providing greater health outcomes to patients at lower total costs compared to infliximab and ustekinumab, as well as comparable patient co-payment relative to other biologic treatments.