Search

Background Severe atopic dermatitis (AD) is often treated successfully with oral immunosuppressive drugs such as ciclosporin (CsA) or oral corticosteroids. However, some patients develop adverse effects or are unresponsive to these first-choice oral immunosuppressive drugs. Objectives To evaluate whether enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) is an effective treatment in patients with severe, recalcitrant AD. Methods Ten patients with severe, recalcitrant AD were treated with EC-MPS 720 mg twice daily for 6 months. All patients had to discontinue other oral immunosuppressive drugs due to adverse effects ( n = 8) or nonresponsiveness ( n = 2). Disease activity was monitored using the Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis (modified SCORAD) index and the Leicester Sign Score (LSS). Additionally, the level of serum thymus and activation-regulated cytokine (TARC) was measured. During treatment, safety laboratory examination was performed. Total serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) was followed during treatment. Use of topical corticosteroids was recorded before and during treatment. Results Compared with baseline, the mean scores for disease activity significantly decreased during treatment with EC-MPS [modified SCORAD ( P = 0·04), LSS severity ( P = 0·01), LSS extent ( P = 0·01)]. In addition, serum TARC levels and total serum IgE levels significantly decreased after treatment compared with before ( P = 0·03; P = 0·05). Disease activity decreased after approximately 2 months of treatment and stabilized during the 6-month treatment period. No differences in the amount of topical corticosteroids used in the 6 months prior to treatment compared with the 6-month treatment period were found ( P = 0·4). None of the patients discontinued use of EC-MPS and only mild adverse effects were seen. Conclusions In this study EC-MPS at a dose of 720 mg twice daily for 6 months has proven to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with severe, recalcitrant AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Limited data are available on the long-term effectiveness and safety of dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice., Objective: To evaluate clinical effectiveness and reasons for discontinuation of dupilumab treatment in children, adults, and older adults with AD with up to 5 years of treatment in daily practice., Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted using the BioDay registry (4 academic and 10 nonacademic hospitals in the Netherlands) to identify patients with AD of all ages who were treated with dupilumab between October 2017 and December 2022., Main Outcomes and Measures: Clinical effectiveness was evaluated by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), and numeric rating scale (NRS) for pruritus, stratified by children (<18 years), adults (18-64 years), and older adults (≥65 years). In addition, time to response, treatment responders, EASI subscores, second treatment episodes, and thymus- and activation-related chemokine and eosinophil levels were assessed. For patients who discontinued dupilumab, the reason for discontinuation was evaluated., Results: In total, 1286 patients with AD (median [IQR] age, 38 [26-54] years; 726 [56.6%] male) were treated with dupilumab, including 130 children, 1025 adults, and 131 older adults. The median (IQR) follow-up time was 87.5 (32.0-157.0) weeks. Most patients maintained controlled AD, with EASI of 7 or lower and NRS for pruritus of 4 or lower varying between 78.6% and 92.3% and 72.2% and 88.2% for up to 5 years of treatment, respectively, while up to 70.5% of all patients prolonged the dosing interval to mostly 300 mg every 3 or 4 weeks. Mean EASI and NRS for pruritus were 2.7 (95% CI, 1.2-4.2) and 3.5 (95% CI, 2.7-4.3), respectively, after 5 years of treatment. Statistically significant differences between age groups were found over time for EASI and IGA; however, differences were rather small (week 52: EASI, 0.3-1.6; IGA, 0.12-0.26). No statistically significant differences between age groups were found for NRS for pruritus. Median thymus- and activation-related chemokine levels considerably decreased from 1751 pg/mL (95% CI, 1614-1900 pg/mL) to 390 pg/mL (95% CI, 368-413 pg/mL) after 6 months of treatment and remained low. Median eosinophil levels temporarily increased up to week 16, with a subsequently statistically significant decrease over time. In total, 306 patients (23.8%) discontinued dupilumab after a median (IQR) of 54.0 (29.0-110.00) weeks, with adverse events among 98 patients (7.6%) and ineffectiveness among 85 patients (6.6%) as the most frequently reported reasons. Forty-one patients (3.2%) restarted dupilumab, and most of these patients recaptured response., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study with up to 5 years of follow-up, dupilumab maintained its clinical effectiveness, while two-thirds of patients tapered to a dosing interval of every 3 or 4 weeks. Treatment was discontinued in 23.8% of patients mainly due to adverse events and/or ineffectiveness.

Background: Long-term daily practice data on patient-reported benefits of dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) remains limited., Objective: To evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the safety of dupilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe AD over a follow-up period of up to 5 years., Methods: Data were extracted from the prospective, multicenter BioDay registry (October 2017-2022) of patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with dupilumab in daily practice., Results: In total 1223 patients, 1108 adults and 115 pediatric patients were included. After ≥1 year of treatment, mean Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Numeric rating scale (NRS)-pruritus ranged between 7.8 and 8.7, 3.5 and 4.2, and 2.9 and 3.1 in adults, respectively, whilst these patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) ranged between 8.9 and 10.9, 4.4 and 6.4, and 3.0 and 3.7 in pediatric patients, respectively. At follow-up, overall work impairment decreased from 40.1% to 16.3% to 13.3% in adults. Furthermore, class I obesity and itch-dominant patients generally had less favorable treatment response. Of all patients, 66.8% reported ≥1 adverse event, with conjunctivitis being the most common (33.7%)., Limitations: The overall percentage of missing values for selected PROMs was 26% in adults and 46% in pediatric patients., Conclusion: In addition to favorable safety, dupilumab has demonstrated sustained effectiveness across various PROMs, underscoring the treatment benefits from patients' perspectives., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest C.M. Boesjes is a speaker for AbbVie and Eli Lilly. L.S. Spekhorst is a speaker for AbbVie. I.M. Haeck is a consultant, advisory board member, and/or speaker for Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, LEO Pharma, AbbVie, Janssen, and Eli Lilly. L.F. van der Gang is a speaker for AbbVie. L.P. van der Rijst is a speaker for AbbVie. R.A. Tupker is an advisory board member of Leo Pharma, Eli Lilly, and Novartis. K.Politiek was an advisory board member and/or speaker for AbbVie, LEO Pharma, Novartis, and Sanofi. W. Touwslager is an advisor, consultant, and speaker for Sanofi, Leo Pharma, AbbVie, and Novartis. WA Christoffers is an advisory board member of Leo Pharma. M. de Graaf is a consultant, advisory board member, and/or speaker for AbbVie, Almiral, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi. M.S. de Bruin-Weller is a consultant, advisory board member, and/or speaker for AbbVie, Almirall, Aslan, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi. M.L.A. Schuttelaar is an advisor, consultant, speaker, and/or investigator for AbbVie, Pfizer, LEO Pharma, Regeneron, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, and Galderma. She has received grants from Regeneron, Sanofi, Novartis, and Pfizer., (Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Limited daily practice data on the effect of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis are available. The aim of this multicentre prospective study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis treated in daily practice. In a subgroup, the effectiveness of abrocitinib on hand eczema was evaluated. A total of 103 patients from the BioDay registry were included in the study: week 4 (n = 95), week 16 (n = 61) and week 28 (n = 39). At week 28, the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-50/75/90 was achieved by 81.8%, 57.6%, and 18.2%, respectively, and the weekly average pruritus numerical rating scale ≤ 4 by 62.9%. The effectiveness of abrocitinib was not significantly different between dupilumab non-responders and dupilumab-naïve patients/responders, and between upadacitinib non-responders and upadacitinib-naïve patients/responders. Mean ± standard deviation Hand Eczema Severity Index decreased from 27.4 ± 27.7 at baseline to 7.7 ± 12.1 at week 28 (n = 31). Thirty-two patients (31.1%) discontinued treatment due to ineffectiveness (n = 17), adverse events (n = 9) or both (n = 3). The most frequently reported adverse event was nausea (n = 28). In conclusion, abrocitinib is an effective treatment for atopic dermatitis and can be effective for patients with previous inadequate response to dupilumab or upadacitinib. Furthermore, hand eczema can improve in patients treated with abrocitinib for atopic dermatitis.

Clinical trials showed that upadacitinib, a selective Janus kinase-1 inhibitor, is effective for treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. However, daily practice studies are limited. This multicentre prospective study evaluated the effectiveness of 16 weeks of upadacitinib treatment for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adult patients, including those with previous inadequate response to dupilumab and/or baricitinib, in daily practice. A total of 47 patients from the Dutch BioDay registry treated with upadacitinib were included. Patients were evaluated at baseline, and after 4, 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Effectiveness was assessed by clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements. Safety was assessed by adverse events and laboratory assessments. Overall, the probabilities (95% confidence intervals) of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7 and Numerical Rating Scale - pruritus ≤ 4 were 73.0% (53.7-86.3) and 69.4% (48.7-84.4), respectively. The effectiveness of upadacitinib was comparable in patients with inadequate response to dupilumab and/or baricitinib and in patients who were naïve for these treatments or who had stopped such treatments due to adverse events. Fourteen (29.8%) patients discontinued upadacitinib due to ineffectiveness, adverse events or both (8.5%, 14.9% and 6.4%, respectively). Most frequently reported adverse events were acneiform eruptions (n = 10, 21.3%), herpes simplex (n = 6, 12.8%), nausea and airway infections (both n = 4, 8.5%). In conclusion, upadacitinib is an effective treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, including those with previous inadequate response to dupilumab and/or baricitinib treatment.

Clinical trials have shown that baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, is effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. However, daily practice data are limited. Therefore, this multicentre prospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 16-weeks' treatment with baricitinib in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in daily practice. A total of 51 patients from the BioDay registry treated with baricitinib were included and evaluated at baseline and after 4, 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Effectiveness was assessed using clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements. Adverse events and laboratory assessments were evaluated at every visit. At week 16, the probability (95% confidence interval) of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7 and numerical rating scale pruritus ≤ 4 was 29.4% (13.1-53.5) and 20.5% (8.8-40.9), respectively. No significant difference in effectiveness was found between dupilumab non-responders and responders. Twenty-two (43.2%) patients discontinued baricitinib treatment due to ineffectiveness, adverse events or both (31.4%, 9.8% and 2.0%, respectively). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (n = 6, 11.8%), urinary tract infection (n = 5, 9.8%) and herpes simplex infection (n = 4, 7.8%). In conclusion, baricitinib can be an effective treatment option for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, including patients with non-responsiveness on dupilumab. However, effectiveness of baricitinib is heterogeneous, which is reflected by the high discontinuation rate in this difficult-to-treat cohort.

Importance: Long-term data on dupilumab drug survival in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) are scarce. Furthermore, little is known about the factors associated with drug survival of dupilumab in AD., Objective: To describe the drug survival of dupilumab in patients with AD and to identify associated predictors., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was based on data from the multicenter prospective daily practice BioDay registry, in which 4 university and 10 nonuniversity hospitals in the Netherlands participated. Analysis included patients (age ≥18 years) participating in the BioDay registry with a follow-up of at least 4 weeks. The first patient treated with dupilumab was recorded in the BioDay registry in October 2017; data lock took place in December 2020, and data analysis was performed from October 2017 to December 2020., Main Outcomes and Measures: Drug survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and associated characteristics by using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis., Results: A total of 715 adult patients with AD (mean [SD] age, 41.8 [16.0] years; 418 [58.5%] were male) were included with a 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year overall dupilumab drug survival of 90.3%, 85.9%, and 78.6%, respectively. Characteristics associated with shorter drug survival owing to ineffectiveness were the use of immunosuppressant drugs at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.64; 95% CI, 1.10-6.37) and being a nonresponder at 4 weeks (HR, 8.68; 95% CI, 2.97-25.35). Characteristics associated with shorter drug survival owing to adverse effects were the use of immunosuppressant drugs at baseline (HR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.32-5.48), age 65 years or older (HR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.10-7.87), and Investigator Global Assessment score of very severe AD (HR, 3.51; 95% CI, 1.20-10.28)., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study demonstrated a good overall 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year dupilumab drug survival. Patients using immunosuppressive therapy at baseline and those with an absence of treatment effect at week 4 tended to discontinue treatment owing to ineffectiveness more frequently. Using immunosuppressant drugs at baseline, older age, and Investigator Global Assessment score of very severe AD were characteristics associated with an increased risk for discontinuation owing to adverse effects. These data provide more insight and new perspectives regarding dupilumab treatment in AD and can contribute to the optimization of patient outcomes.

This study identified risk factors for the development of dupilumab-associated ocular surface disease in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a large prospective daily practice cohort. Data from the Dutch BioDay Registry were used to assess the risk of developing dupilumab-associated ocular surface disease, by performing univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. A total of 469 patients were included, of which 152/469 (32.4%) developed dupilumab-associated ocular surface disease. Multivariate analysis showed a statistically significant association of the development of dupilumab-associated ocular surface disease with a history of any eye disease (history of self-reported episodic acute allergic conjunctivitis excluded) combined with the use of ophthalmic medication at the start of dupilumab (odds ratio 5.16, 95% confidence interval 2.30-11.56, p < 0.001). In conclusion, a history of any eye disease (history of self-reported episodic acute allergic conjunctivitis excluded) combined with the use of ophthalmic medication at baseline was associated with the development of dupilumab-associated ocular surface disease in patients with atopic dermatitis.

Dupilumab treatment improves signs, symptoms, and quality of life in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. This study evaluated the impact of dupilumab treatment on absenteeism, presenteeism, and related costs in a large multi-centre cohort of adult patients with difficult-to-treat atopic dermatitis in daily practice. Patients treated with dupilumab participating in the Dutch BioDay Registry reporting employment were included. Absenteeism, presenteeism, and related costs at baseline and during follow-up were calculated using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. A total of 218 adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were included. Total work impairment reduced significantly from baseline (35.5%) to week 52 (11.5%), p < 0.001. Median weekly productivity losses reduced significantly from baseline (€379.8 (140.7-780.8)) to week 52 (€0.0 (0.0-211.0), p < 0.001). In this study, dupilumab treatment demonstrated a significant improvement in work productivity and reduction in associated costs in a large cohort of patients with difficult-to-treat atopic dermatitis in daily practice.

Background: Real-life data on long-term effectiveness and safety of dupilumab in atopic dermatitis patients are limited., Objective: To study 52-week effectiveness and safety of dupilumab in a prospective multicenter cohort of adult patients with treatment-refractory atopic dermatitis., Methods: Patients treated with dupilumab and participating in the Dutch BioDay registry were included. Clinical effectiveness and safety were evaluated., Results: Two hundred ten atopic dermatitis patients were included. Mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index score after 16 weeks was -70.0% (standard deviation 33.2%) and further decreased to -76.6% (standard deviation 30.6%) by week 52. A greater than or equal to 75% improvement in the score was achieved by 59.9% of individuals by week 16 and by 70.3% by week 52. The most reported adverse effect was conjunctivitis (34%). Limited patients (17; 8.1%) discontinued dupilumab treatment., Limitations: Because of the lack of a control group and observational design, factors of bias may have been induced., Conclusion: Treatment with dupilumab resulted in a rapid improvement in clinical outcome measures, and effectiveness further improved during the 52-week follow-up period., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In a recent investigation of bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, we found that one third of the patients had a low BMD, predominately males. This could be due to the use of topical corticosteroids or due to chronic inflammation. However, neither could be held responsible for the above finding. Low BMD at baseline does not seem to progress quickly, as assessed in a 2-year follow-up study. Treatment of low BMD is questionable as the effect of vitamin D and/or calcium supplementation on low BMD is controversial. We recommend performing long-term follow-up studies to assess the course of BMD over time from onset of AD., (Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel.)