Search

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the most common inflammatory skin condition and affects people of all ages. New therapies, including the monoclonal antibody therapy dupilumab, offer excellent efficacy. However, in clinical trials, and emphasized in real-world observations, an unexpected increased frequency of ocular adverse effects has become apparent. The effectiveness of dupilumab and the unpredictability of ocular adverse effects mean that clinicians need guidance on counselling patients prior to treatment and on managing them if adverse effects arise. The British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) and Royal College of Ophthalmologists collaborated on this consensus guidance on managing dupilumab-related ocular surface disorders (DROSD). A multidisciplinary group was formed of adult and paediatric dermatologists and ophthalmologists with expertise in DROSD, patient representatives and the BAD Clinical Standards Unit. A literature search was conducted and the results reviewed. All recommendations were reviewed, discussed and voted on. The recommendations pertain to dermatology and ophthalmology management, and apply to people of all ages, unless otherwise stated. Importantly, initiation of dupilumab for AD should not be delayed for most eye disorders except acute new problems (e.g. infections) or potentially severe conditions (e.g. a history of corneal transplant; ophthalmology advice should be sought first). There is insufficient evidence to recommend lubricant drops prophylactically. Dermatologists should assess eye complaints to diagnose DROSD; a severity grading system is provided. DROSD management differs slightly in those aged < 7 years, as ocular complications may affect neuro-ocular development. Therefore, irrespectively of DROSD severity, this population should be referred for ophthalmology advice. In those aged ≥ 7 years, dermatologists should feel confident to trial treatment and reserve ophthalmology advice for severe or nonresponding cases. Discussion about dupilumab withdrawal should be prompted by a significant impact on quality of life, threat to sight, or other complications. Although dupilumab is a highly effective agent for treating AD, the risk of ocular adverse effects should not inhibit clinicians or patients from using it, but clinicians should be aware of them. If a patient develops DROSD, there are clear pathways to assess severity and offer initial management. Where this is ineffective, dermatologists should assess the urgency and seek advice from or initiate referral to ophthalmology. While the evidence reviewed for these guidelines reflects the extensive literature on dupilumab, we believe our advice has relevance for ocular surface disorders in patients with AD treated with tralokinumab and lebrikizumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current treat‐to‐target recommendations for atopic dermatitis (AD) may not include high enough treatment targets and do not fully consider patient needs. Objective: To develop recommendations for optimized AD management, including disease severity assessments, treatment goals and targets, and guidance for treatment escalation/modification. Methods: An international group of expert dermatologists drafted a series of recommendations for AD management using insights from a global patient study and 87 expert dermatologists from 44 countries. Experts voted on recommendations using a modified eDelphi voting process. Results: The Aiming High in Eczema/Atopic Dermatitis (AHEAD) recommendations establish a novel approach to AD management, incorporating shared decision‐making and a concept for minimal disease activity (MDA). Consensus (≥70% agreement) was reached for all recommendations in 1 round of voting; strong consensus (≥90% agreement) was reached for 30/34 recommendations. In the AHEAD approach, patients select their most troublesome AD feature(s); the clinician chooses a corresponding patient‐reported severity measure and objective severity measure. Treatment targets are chosen from a list of 'moderate' and 'optimal' targets, with achievement of 'optimal' targets defined as MDA. Conclusions: Patient and expert insights led to the development of AHEAD recommendations, which establish a novel approach to AD management. Patients were not involved in the eDelphi voting process used to generate consensus on each recommendation. However, patient perspectives were captured in a global, qualitative patient research study that was considered by the experts in their initial drafting of the recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the use of dupilumab in the treatment of chronic actinic dermatitis (CAD), a rare skin condition characterized by photosensitivity. The study found that while dupilumab was effective in improving dermatitis symptoms in patients with CAD and concomitant atopic dermatitis (AD), it was less effective in improving photosensitivity. The study suggests that further research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of dupilumab in CAD. [Extracted from the article]

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic skin condition for which a range of systemic treatments have recently been approved. A treat-to-target strategy has been developed previously alongside an algorithm to guide the management of patients with atopic dermatitis. Here, we review the strategy and algorithm in the context of the evolving therapeutic landscape, and identify areas for further refinement and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Itch is the most burdensome symptom of atopic dermatitis (AD) that severely affects sleep and overall and quality of life.1,2 Rapid control of itch could be instrumental in minimizing disease symptoms and the associated burden for patients.3,4 Nemolizumab, an interleukin-31 (IL-31) alpha antagonist, inhibits the IL-31 pathway of itch and inflammation in AD.5 Objectives To evaluate speed of onset of itch relief and sleep improvements with nemolizumab in moderate-to-severe AD. Methods ARCADIA-1 and ARCADIA-2 were two identical, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled studies. Patients (≥12 years) with moderate-to-severe AD and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids (TCS) were randomized (2:1) to receive nemolizumab 30mg every 4 weeks (60mg baseline loading dose) or matching placebo, both with background TCS of low/medium potency with/without topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI). Results Significant improvements in itch (least squares [LS] mean±standard error [SE] change from baseline [CFB] in Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale [PP-NRS]) were noted in nemolizumab-treated vs placebo-treated patients by Day 1 in ARCADIA-1 (-0.9±0.08 vs -0.4±0.10) and ARCADIA-2 (-1.1±0.09 vs -0.4±0.12), reaching -2.4±0.08 vs -1.2±0.11 and -2.3 ±0.09 vs -0.9±0.12 respectively at Day 14 (p <0.001 for all). Significantly greater proportions of nemolizumab-treated vs placebo-treated patients achieved ≥4-point improvement in PP-NRS by Day 2 in ARCADIA-1 (9.4% vs 3.4%, p<0.01) and Day 1 in ARCADIA-2 (8.2% vs 1.9%, p<0.001) and through Day 14 (ARCADIA-1: 22.7% vs 10.6%, p<0.0001; ARCADIA-2: 23.4% vs 6.8%, p <0.0001). Conclusions Treatment with nemolizumab plus TCS/TCI resulted in rapid, statistically and clinically significant improvements in itch in moderate-to-severe AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction It is unknown whether baseline demographics and disease characteristics have an influence on efficacy and safety of nemolizumab in adults with moderate-to-severe prurigo nodularis (PN). Objectives To report safety and efficacy of nemolizumab in the phase 3 studies (OLYMPIA-1 [NCT04501666]1 and OLYMPIA-2 [NCT04501679]2) for different subgroups. Materials & Methods Data were pooled from the pivotal studies in which adults with moderate-to-severe PN were randomized (2:1) to receive nemolizumab (initial 60mg subcutaneous dose, followed by 30mg/60mg [depending on a baseline weight: <90kg/≥90kg] every 4 weeks) or matching placebo. Results Comparisons in all subgroups (age, sex, race, weight, disease severity, atopy, prior treatment) identified efficacy of nemolizumab versus placebo consistent with the overall intention-to-treat population. At Week (W) 16, a ≥4-point improvement in weekly average Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale of nemolizumab vs. placebo was found in 18- to 65-year-old/>65-year-old: 58.6%/54.0% vs 20.0%/14.3%; males/females: 54.7%/59.2% vs 21.1%/17.1%; White/Black/Asian/Other race: 60.3%/56.5%/36.4%/40.0% vs 20.8%/11.8%/12.5%/0%, <90kg/≥90kg baseline weight: 55.6%/60.8% vs 17.9%/20.8%, baseline Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] score of 3 [moderate]/4 [severe]: 54.9%/60.8% vs 23.6%/11.7%, with/without history of atopy: 53.8%/59.0% vs 20.3%/17.9% and with/without prior systemic treatment for PN: 57.9%/56.8% vs 14.4%/22.7%. An IGA success (score of 0/1 [clear/almost clear skin] with ≥2-point reduction from baseline) was found in 18- to 65-year-old/>65-year-old: 34.8%/24.0% vs 11.0%/2.4%; males/females: 28.0%/34.5% vs 10.5%/8.1%; White/Black/Asian/Other race: 32.2%/26.1%/33.3%/30.0% vs 8.1%/11.8%/18.8%/0%, <90kg/≥90kg baseline weight: 34.3%/27.2% vs 9.0%/9.4%, baseline IGA score of 3 [moderate]/4 [severe]: 34.0%/29.1% vs 12.7%/3.9%, with/without history of atopy: 29.9%/32.8% vs 4.7%/11.4% and with/without prior systemic treatment for PN: 37.2%/26.8% vs 8.9%/9.3%. Similar results were noted for sleep disturbance. No major difference was reported in the safety profile of nemolizumab between the subgroups. Conclusion Safety and efficacy of nemolizumab monotherapy in itch, skin lesions and sleep disturbance were consistent between the subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Nemolizumab demonstrated clinically and statistically significant improvements in itch, sleep disturbance, and skin lesions in adults with moderate-to-severe prurigo nodularis (PN) in two phase 3 pivotal studies (OLYMPIA 1 [NCT04501666]1 and OLYMPIA 2 [NCT04501679]2). Objectives To report pooled efficacy and safety from two phase 3 studies of nemolizumab in the treatment of PN. Materials & Methods A pooled analysis of two phase 3 pivotal studies in adults with moderate-to-severe PN, randomized (2:1) to receive either nemolizumab (initial 60 mg subcutaneous dose followed by 30 mg or 60 mg [depending on a baseline weight below or ≥90 kg, respectively]) or matching placebo every 4 weeks (Q4W). Results Nemolizumab significantly improved all pre-specified efficacy endpoints vs placebo. At Week 16, a ≥4-point improvement from baseline in weekly average Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) was achieved in 57.4% of nemolizumab- vs 18.7% placebo-treated patients (P <0.0001), an Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0/1 [clear/almost clear skin] with ≥2-point reduction from baseline was achieved in 31.9% of nemolizumab- vs 9.1% of placebo-treated patients (P <0.0001) at Week 16, itch-free/nearly itch-free state (defined as PP-NRS<2) was achieved in 34.6% of nemolizumab- vs 5.9% of placebo-treated patients (P <0.0001) and a ≥4-point improvement from baseline in weekly average Sleep Disturbance NRS was achieved in 50.9% of nemolizumab- vs 16.0% of placebo-treated patients (P <0.0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 66.5% of patients (nemolizumab) and 59.1% (placebo). Of these patients, the majority in each treatment group experienced that were considered mild or moderate in severity. Conclusion Nemolizumab monotherapy administered Q4W was well-tolerated and led to rapid and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in itch intensity and sleep disturbance along with improvement in skin lesions. Pooled results were consistent with those observed in individual pivotal phase 3 studies.2,3 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]