Real-world clinical, psychosocial and economic burden of atopic dermatitis: Results from a multicountry study.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD), a relapsing, inflammatory skin disease, is associated with pruritus that can negatively affect patients' quality of life. Understanding the burden of AD is critical for informing and tailoring treatment and disease management to improve patient outcomes. This study characterized global treatment patterns and the clinical, psychosocial and economic burden of moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: MEASURE-AD was a cross-sectional 28-country study in patients with physician-confirmed moderate-to-severe AD who were either receiving or eligible for systemic therapy for AD. Patients ≥12 years were enrolled between December 2019 and December 2020 while attending routine office or clinic visit. Primary outcomes included Worst Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (WP-NRS; range: 0-10) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; range: 0-30) and Children's DLQI (CDLQI; range: 0-30). Secondary outcomes included physician- and patient-reported clinical, psychosocial and economic burden. RESULTS: Of the 1591 patients enrolled, 1558 (1434 adults and 124 adolescents) fulfilled all patient selection criteria and were included in this analysis. Almost all patients (98.4%) in the total population were using AD medications and more than half (56%) were receiving systemic medication (15% systemic monotherapy). The most used systemic therapies were dupilumab (56.3%), systemic glucocorticoids (18.1%) and methotrexate (16.2%). Mean WP-NRS was 5.3 in the total population, and most patients (≥55%) reported moderate-to-severe pruritus (WP-NRS ≥4). Mean DLQI was 10.8 and mean CDLQI was 9.6. Secondary endpoints demonstrated substantial clinical, psychosocial, and economic burden of disease. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients receiving systemic therapy had lower disease burden than those not taking systemic medications. CONCLUSIONS: While systemic therapy lowers overall disease burden, patients with moderate-to-severe AD continue to have substantial multidimensional disease burden and uncontrolled disease. Overall, there is a need for effective disease management, including effective treatments that improve patients' psychosocial outcomes and reduce the economic burden of AD.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure-response modelling to inform upadacitinib dose selection in adolescent and adult patients with atopic dermatitis.

AIMS: First, population pharmacokinetic analyses were used to characterize upadacitinib pharmacokinetics in adolescent and adult participants with atopic dermatitis (AD) and to identify patient covariates that may impact upadacitinib pharmacokinetics. Second, the exposure-response relationship for upadacitinib with efficacy and safety endpoints, and the effect of age and concomitant use of topical corticosteroids (TCS) on the exposure-response relationship and dose selection for patients with AD were evaluated. METHODS: A two-compartment model with combined first- and zero-order absorption adequately characterized the upadacitinib concentration-time profiles in 911 healthy volunteer adolescent and adult participants with AD who received upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg orally once daily (QD) as monotherapy or in combination with TCS for 16 weeks. Logistic regression models were developed to characterize the exposure-efficacy and safety relationships, and simulations were performed based on final exposure-response models to predict efficacy responses in participants with AD who received placebo or upadacitinib as monotherapy or in combination with TCS. RESULTS: Upadacitinib exposures were comparable between adolescents and adults. Mild or moderate renal impairment was predicted to increase the upadacitinib area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 h after dosing (AUC24 ) approximately 12% and 25%, respectively, compared to participants with normal renal function. Female participants were predicted to have 20% higher AUC24 compared to male participants. Participants with AD were predicted to have 18% higher AUC24 compared to healthy participants. Simulated clinical efficacy responses showed added clinical efficacy benefit for all endpoints evaluated (8-14%) with the upadacitinib 30 mg once-daily regimen compared to 15 mg once-daily in both age groups. In participants receiving upadacitinib in combination with TCS, significant exposure-dependent increases in upadacitinib efficacy endpoints were observed. No significant effects of age or weight were identified in any of the exposure-response models. CONCLUSION: The results of these analyses support the dose justification for upadacitinib in adult and adolescent patients with moderate to severe AD.

Efficacy and safety of switching from dupilumab to upadacitinib versus continuous upadacitinib in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from an open-label extension of the phase 3, randomized, controlled trial (Heads Up).

BACKGROUND: Characterization of upadacitinib use and switching from dupilumab to upadacitinib among patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of continuous upadacitinib 30 mg and switching to upadacitinib after 24 weeks of dupilumab. METHODS: Adults who completed the phase 3b clinical trial of oral upadacitinib 30 mg vs injectable dupilumab 300 mg (Heads Up) and entered a 52-week open-label extension (OLE) (NCT04195698) were included. All patients received 30-mg upadacitinib during the open-label period. We report results of a prespecified interim OLE 16-week analysis. RESULTS: Patients (n = 239) continuing upadacitinib maintained high levels of skin and itch response. Patients (n = 245) switching from dupilumab experienced additional incremental improvements in clinical responses within 4 weeks of starting upadacitinib. Most patients who did not achieve adequate clinical responses with dupilumab did so with upadacitinib. The safety profile of upadacitinib up to 40 weeks (week 16 of OLE) was consistent with previous phase 3 AD studies, with no new safety risks observed. LIMITATIONS: Open-label study design. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical responses are maintained with continuous upadacitinib through 40 weeks and patients regardless of prior dupilumab response experienced improved outcomes when switched to upadacitinib. No new safety risks were observed.

Upadacitinib treatment withdrawal and retreatment in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from a phase 2b, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritic eczematous lesions. The effect of treatment withdrawal after response to upadacitinib oral treatment is not fully characterized. OBJECTIVES: Assess the effect of upadacitinib withdrawal on skin clearance and itch improvement in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD and evaluate the kinetics of recovery on rescue treatment. METHODS: Data from a phase 2b randomized, placebo-controlled trial (NCT02925117) of upadacitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe AD were analysed. Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive upadacitinib 7.5 mg, 15 mg, 30 mg or placebo, and then at Week 16, patients were re-randomized 1:1 to receive the same dose of upadacitinib (upadacitinib 30 mg for patients initialized to placebo) or placebo. From Week 20, those who experienced loss of response defined as Eczema Area and Severity Index <50% improvement from baseline (EASI 50) received rescue treatment with upadacitinib 30 mg. RESULTS: Patients who withdrew from upadacitinib experienced a rapid loss of skin clearance response, while those who switched from placebo to upadacitinib gained response. Loss of skin clearance response occurred within 4 weeks and worsening of itch occurred within 5 days. In patients who originally received placebo or a lower dose of upadacitinib leading to a loss of EASI response, rescue treatment with upadacitinib 30 mg resulted in rapid recovery or improvement of both skin and itch responses; most patients who were re-randomized to placebo achieved EASI 75 and IGA 0/1 by 8 weeks of rescue treatment. No new safety risks were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous treatment with upadacitinib is suggested to maintain skin clearance and antipruritic effects.

Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in combination with topical corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD Up): results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic therapies are typically combined with topical corticosteroids for the management of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Upadacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with greater inhibitory potency for JAK1 than JAK2, JAK3, or tyrosine kinase 2 that is being tested for atopic dermatitis. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib plus topical corticosteroids compared with placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (AD Up) adults (aged 18-75 years) and adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with chronic atopic dermatitis that was moderate to severe (≥10% of body surface area affected, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] score of ≥16, validated Investigator's Global Assessment for atopic dermatitis [vIGA-AD] score of ≥3, and weekly average Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score of ≥4 at baseline) were enrolled at 171 clinical centres across 22 countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Europe, the Middle East, North America, and Oceania. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo once daily, all in combination with topical corticosteroids for 16 weeks. Randomisation was done using an interactive response technology system, stratified by baseline disease severity, geographical region, and age. Study investigators, study site personnel, and patients were masked to study treatment. The coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had achieved at least a 75% reduction in EASI score from baseline (EASI-75) and the proportion of patients who had achieved a vIGA-AD response (defined as a vIGA-AD score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with ≥2 grades of improvement from baseline) at week 16. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03568318, and is active, but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 9, 2018, and Dec 20, 2019, 901 patients were randomly assigned to receive upadacitinib 15 mg plus topical corticosteroids (n=300), upadacitinib 30 mg plus topical corticosteroids (n=297), or placebo plus topical corticosteroids (n=304). At week 16, the proportion of patients who had achieved EASI-75 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg plus topical corticosteroid group (194 [65%] of 300 patients) and the upadacitinib 30 mg plus topical corticosteroids group (229 [77%] of 297 patients) than the placebo group (80 [26%] of 304 patients; adjusted difference in EASI-75 response rate vs placebo, 38·1% [95% CI 30·8-45·4] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 50·6% [43·8-57·4] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group; p<0·0001 for both doses). The proportion of patients who had achieved a vIGA-AD response at week 16 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg plus topical corticosteroid group (119 [40%] patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg plus topical corticosteroid group (174 [59%] patients) than the placebo group (33 [11%] patients; adjusted difference in vIGA-AD response vs placebo, 28·5% [22·1-34·9] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 47·6% [41·1-54·0] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group; p<0·0001 for both doses). During the double-blind period, upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg were well tolerated in combination with topical corticosteroids. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (≥5% in any treatment group) were acne, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, oral herpes, elevation of blood creatine phosphokinase levels, headache, and atopic dermatitis. The incidence of acne was higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg (30 [10%] of 300 patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg (41 [14%] of 297 patients) groups than the placebo group (six [2%] of 304 patients). The incidence of adverse events leading to discontinuation of study drug (four [1%] patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg plus topical corticosteroids group, four [1%] patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg plus topical corticosteroids group, and seven [2%] patients in the placebo plus topical corticosteroids group) and serious adverse events (seven [2%] patients, four [1%] patients, and nine [3%] patients) were similar among treatment groups. No deaths were reported in any treatment group. INTERPRETATION: Upadacitinib plus topical corticosteroids was well tolerated and superior to placebo plus topical corticosteroids. Upadacitinib as combination therapy had a positive benefit-risk profile in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Once-daily upadacitinib versus placebo in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2): results from two replicate double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Upadacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor with greater inhibitory potency for JAK1 than JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib compared with placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 were replicate multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials; Measure Up 1 was done at 151 clinical centres in 24 countries across Europe, North and South America, Oceania, and the Asia-Pacific region; and Measure Up 2 was done at 154 clinical centres in 23 countries across Europe, North America, Oceania, and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and adults (aged 18-75 years) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (≥10% of body surface area affected by atopic dermatitis, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] score of ≥16, validated Investigator's Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis [vIGA-AD] score of ≥3, and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score of ≥4). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) using an interactive response technology system to receive upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo once daily for 16 weeks, stratified by baseline disease severity, geographical region, and age. Coprimary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had achieved at least a 75% improvement in EASI score from baseline (EASI-75) and the proportion of patients who had achieved a vIGA-AD response (defined as a vIGA-AD score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] with ≥2 grades of reduction from baseline) at week 16. Efficacy was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03569293 (Measure Up 1) and NCT03607422 (Measure Up 2), and are both active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Aug 13, 2018, and Dec 23, 2019, 847 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=281), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=285), or placebo (n=281) in the Measure Up 1 study. Between July 27, 2018, and Jan 17, 2020, 836 patients were randomly assigned to upadacitinib 15 mg (n=276), upadacitinib 30 mg (n=282), or placebo (n=278) in the Measure Up 2 study. At week 16, the coprimary endpoints were met in both studies (all p<0·0001). The proportion of patients who had achieved EASI-75 at week 16 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg (196 [70%] of 281 patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg (227 [80%] of 285 patients) groups than the placebo group (46 [16%] of 281 patients) in Measure Up 1 (adjusted difference in EASI-75 response rate vs placebo, 53·3% [95% CI 46·4-60·2] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 63·4% [57·1-69·8] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group) and Measure Up 2 (166 [60%] of 276 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 206 [73%] of 282 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 37 [13%] of 278 patients in the placebo group; adjusted difference in EASI-75 response rate vs placebo, 46·9% [39·9-53·9] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 59·6% [53·1-66·2] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group). The proportion of patients who achieved a vIGA-AD response at week 16 was significantly higher in the upadacitinib 15 mg (135 [48%] patients) and upadacitinib 30 mg (177 [62%] patients) groups than the placebo group (24 [8%] patients) in Measure Up 1 (adjusted difference in vIGA-AD response rate vs placebo, 39·8% [33·2-46·4] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 53·6% [47·2-60·0] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group) and Measure Up 2 (107 [39%] patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group and 147 [52%] patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group vs 13 [5%] patients in the placebo group; adjusted difference in vIGA-AD response rate vs placebo, 34·0% [27·8-40·2] for the upadacitinib 15 mg group; 47·4% [41·0-53·7] for the upadacitinib 30 mg group). Both upadacitinib doses were well tolerated. The incidence of serious adverse events and adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation were similar among groups. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were acne (19 [7%] of 281 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group, 49 [17%] of 285 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group, and six [2%] of 281 patients in the placebo group in Measure Up 1; 35 [13%] of 276 patients in the upadacitinib 15 mg group, 41 [15%] of 282 patients in the upadacitinib 30 mg group, and six [2%] of 278 patients in the placebo group in Measure Up 2), upper respiratory tract infection (25 [9%] patients, 38 [13%] patients, and 20 [7%] patients; 19 [7%] patients, 17 [16%] patients, and 12 [4%] patients), nasopharyngitis (22 [8%] patients, 33 [12%] patients, and 16 [6%] patients; 16 [6%] patients, 18 [6%] patients, and 13 [5%] patients), headache (14 [5%] patients, 19 [7%] patients, and 12 [4%] patients; 18 [7%] patients, 20 [7%] patients, and 11 [4%] patients), elevation in creatine phosphokinase levels (16 [6%] patients, 16 [6%] patients, and seven [3%] patients; nine [3%] patients, 12 [4%] patients, and five [2%] patients), and atopic dermatitis (nine [3%] patients, four [1%] patients, and 26 [9%] patients; eight [3%] patients, four [1%] patients, and 26 [9%] patients). INTERPRETATION: Monotherapy with upadacitinib might be an effective treatment option and had a positive benefit-risk profile in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Characterization of acne associated with upadacitinib treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A post hoc integrated analysis of 3 phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Acne is the most frequent adverse event associated with upadacitinib treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the adverse event of acne associated with upadacitinib. METHODS: This was a post hoc integrated analysis of 3 phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of upadacitinib, alone (NCT03569293 and NCT03607422) or in combination with topical corticosteroids (NCT03568318). Data included were from the 16-week placebo-controlled period. RESULTS: Over 16 weeks, 84 of 857 (9.8%), 131 of 864 (15.2%), and 19 of 862 (2.2%) patients randomized to receive upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, and placebo, respectively, experienced acne. All cases of acne, except 1, were mild/moderate in severity; 2 patients discontinued treatment due to moderate acne. Acne occurred at higher rates among younger, female, and non-White patients. Acne required no intervention in 40.5% and 46.6% of patients receiving upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg, respectively; most remaining cases were managed with topical antibiotics, benzoyl peroxide, and/or retinoids. Acne also had no impact on patient-reported outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was relatively short in duration and had a small patient population. CONCLUSIONS: Acne associated with upadacitinib for atopic dermatitis treatment is usually mild/moderate in severity and managed with topical therapies or no intervention.

Upadacitinib in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: 16-week results from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritic skin lesions. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of multiple doses of the selective Janus kinase 1 inhibitor upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: In the 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging portion of this 88-week trial in 8 countries (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02925117; ongoing, not recruiting), adults with moderate to severe disease and inadequate control by topical treatment were randomized 1:1:1:1, using an interactive response system and stratified geographically, to once-daily upadacitinib oral monotherapy 7.5, 15, or 30 mg or placebo. The primary end point was percentage improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline at week 16. Efficacy was analyzed by intention-to-treat in all randomized patients. Safety was analyzed in all randomized patients who received study medication, based on actual treatment. RESULTS: Patients (N = 167) enrolled from November 21, 2016, to April 20, 2017. All were randomized and analyzed for efficacy (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 41); 166 were analyzed for safety (each upadacitinib group, n = 42; placebo, n = 40). The mean (SE) primary efficacy end point was 39% (6.2%), 62% (6.1%), and 74% (6.1%) for the upadacitinib 7.5-, 15-, and 30-mg groups, respectively, versus 23% (6.4%) for placebo (P = .03, <.001, and <.001). Serious adverse events occurred in 4.8% (2 of 42), 2.4% (1 of 42), and 0% (0 of 42) of upadacitinib groups (vs 2.5% [1 of 40] for placebo). CONCLUSIONS: A dose-response relationship was observed for upadacitinib efficacy; the 30-mg once-daily dose showed the greatest clinical benefit. Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed.

The Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD): The development and reliability testing of a novel clinical outcome measurement instrument for the severity of atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: An Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) is recommended by health agencies for drug registration in atopic dermatitis (AD). Current IGA scales lack standardization. OBJECTIVES: To develop an IGA scale, training module, and clinical certification examination for use in AD trials; establish content validity; and assess reliability. METHODS: Expert dermatologists participated in the development of the validated IGA for AD (vIGA-ADTM). Reliability (interrater and intrarater) was assessed by 2 web-based surveys. Clinical certification for investigators consisted of a training module and examination. RESULTS: Expert consensus was achieved around a 5-point IGA scale including morphologic descriptions, and content validity was established. Survey 1 showed strong interrater reliability (Kendall's coefficient of concordance W [Kendall's W], 0.809; intraclass correlation [ICC], 0.817) and excellent agreement (weighted kappa, 0.857). Survey 2, completed 5 months after training of dermatologists, showed improvements in scale reliability (Kendall's W, 0.819; ICC, 0.852; weighted kappa, 0.889). In this study, 627 investigators completed vIGA-AD training and certification. LIMITATIONS: Ratings were assessed on photographs. CONCLUSION: A validated IGA scale and training module were developed with the intent of harmonizing assessment of disease severity in AD trials. Strong reliability and excellent agreement between assessments were observed.

Achieving Hidradenitis Suppurativa Response Score is Associated with Significant Improvement in Clinical and Patient-reported Outcomes: Post Hoc Analysis of Pooled Data From PIONEER I and II.

Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), is a validated tool that has been used to assess the efficacy of adalimumab among patients with hidradenitis suppurativa. We evaluated the clinical meaning of HiSCR by relating it to patient-reported outcomes to give further context to its achievement in a post hoc analysis of integrated data from two phase 3 clinical trials (PIONEER I and II). Pooling placebo and active treatment arms, 39% of patients (245/629) achieved HiSCR at week 12. Irrespective of treatment, significantly (p <0.05) more HiSCR responders than non-responders experienced clinically meaningful improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index (60.5% vs 30.4%), Pain Numeric Rating Scale (46.9% vs 19.9%), hidradenitis suppurativa quality of life (49.4% vs 26.9%), work-related performance (52.6% vs 37.7%), and non-work-related performance (59.5% vs 33.3%). Clinically meaningful outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa are more likely to be attained in patients achieving HiSCR level improvement.

Utility of immunoglobulin isotypes against LID-1 and NDO-LID for, particularly IgG1, confirming the diagnosis of multibacillary leprosy.

BACKGROUND Leprosy remains a health problem in many countries, with difficulties in diagnosis resulting in delayed treatment and more severe disabilities. Antibodies against several Mycobacterium leprae antigens have, however, shown value as diagnostic and/or prognostic markers. OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to evaluate serum immunoglobulin (Ig) IgM and IgG subclass reactivity against three M. leprae specific antigens: NDO-HSA, a conjugate formed by natural octyl disaccharide bound to human serum albumin; LID-1, the fusion protein product of the ml0405 and ml2331 genes; and NDO-LID, a combination of LID-1 and NDO. METHODS Sera from healthy controls, paucibacillary (PB) and multibacillary (MB) leprosy patients, and their respective household contacts, were evaluated for the presence of antigen-specific IgM, IgG, and IgG subclass antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The sensitivity and specificity of each ELISA were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. FINDINGS Our data confirm that serum IgM antibodies against NDO-HSA and IgG antibodies against LID-1, as well as IgG/M antibodies against NDO-LID, are markedly increased in MB patients. For the first time, our data reveal a selective increase in IgG1 and IgG3 antibodies against LID-1 and NDO-LID in MB patients, demonstrating that these antibody isotypes are suitable for differentiation between MB and PB patients. ROC curve analysis indicates an improved capacity for diagnosing MB leprosy patients using the detection of IgG antibodies, particularly the IgG1 isotype, specific to LID-1 and NDO-LID over the performance levels attained with NDO-HSA. CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that serological tests based on the detection of antigen-specific IgG1 antibodies are a useful tool to differentiate MB from PB patients, and indicate the enhanced performance of the LID-1 and NDO-LID antigens in the serodiagnosis of leprosy.

Systematic review of efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in patients with psoriasis previously treated with a different anti-TNF agent.

BACKGROUND: Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists have improved outcomes for patients with psoriasis, but some patients are unresponsive to treatment (primary failure) or lose an initially effective response (secondary failure). OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically investigate the efficacy and safety of a second TNF antagonist after failure of a first TNF antagonist. METHODS: Published primary studies evaluating the efficacy of switching TNF antagonists after failure were systematically extracted. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included. Although response rates to a second TNF antagonist were lower than for a first, a substantial proportion of patients in every study achieved treatment success. Week-24 response rates for a second antagonist were 30% to 74% for a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score and 20% to 70% for achieving a Physician Global Assessment score of 0/1; mean improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index ranged from -3.5 to -13. In general, patients who experienced secondary failure achieved better responses than patients with primary failure. Adverse event incidences ranged from 20% to 71%, without unexpected adverse events; 0% to 11% of patients experienced serious adverse events. LIMITATIONS: There was no common definition of treatment failure across these studies of varied design. CONCLUSIONS: Some patients benefit from switching to a second TNF antagonist after failure of a first TNF antagonist, with improved quality of life.

Adalimumab Treatment in Women With Moderate-to-Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa from the Placebo-Controlled Portion of a Phase 2, Randomized, Double-Blind Study.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis Suppurativa (HS), also known as acne inversa, is a painful, chronic, debilitating, inflammatory skin disease and has shown response to anti-TNF-α therapy. Efficacy and safety of the anti-TNF-α agent, adalimumab, was assessed in a post hoc analysis of women from the first 16 weeks of a phase 2 study of men and women with HS. METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe HS in at least 2 body areas, unresponsive or intolerant to oral antibiotics for treatment of their HS, and with no previous anti-TNF-a or systemic non-biologic treatment, were randomized 1:1:1 to 40 mg adalimumab-weekly or every-other-week, or placebo. Efficacy was analyzed post hoc for women from the intent-to-treat population (ITT Population). Efficacy was analyzed for the primary endpoint Hidradenitis Suppurativa Physicians Global Response Clinical Response (HS-PGA Clinical Response), Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR, defined as a ≥50% reduction in total abscess and inflammatory nodule count with no increase in abscess count and no increase in draining fistula count relative to baseline), and a pain endpoint, represented by 30% reduction measured by visual analog scale (VAS30). RESULTS: At week 16, a higher percentage of women randomized to adalimumab-weekly vs. every-other-week or placebo achieved treatment response measured by HS-PGA (19.4% vs. 7.9% or 5.6%; P>.05), by HiSCR (51.6% vs. 24.2% or 27.6%; P>.05), and achieved VAS30 (50.0% vs. 34.3%; P>.05 or 21.2% P<.05; significant for adalimumab-weekly vs. placebo). Four women had serious adverse events (anemia, benign neoplasm, pneumonia, and suicide attempt). There were no fatalities. Women had a similarly acceptable safety profile as the overall study population. CONCLUSION: In this subpopulation of women with moderate-to-severe HS, a greater proportion achieved reduction in HS severity and pain with adalimumab 40 mg weekly dosing compared with every-other-week or placebo. No new safety signals were identified.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(10):1192-1196.

Reduction in pain scores and improvement in depressive symptoms in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa treated with adalimumab in a phase 2, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, recurrent, inflammatory skin disease with frequent comorbidities of painand depression. Adalimumab treatment for 16 weeks improved HS lesions significantly versus placebo (NCT00918255). OBJECTIVE: The relationship between pain and depressive symptoms and the effects of adalimumab on each was examined in this post hoc analysis. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe HS (N=154) were randomized 1:1:1 to adalimumab 40 mg weekly (ew), adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow), or placebo. Skin pain was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 mm). Depressive symptoms were assessed using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9; score ≥10 indicative of depression). RESULTS: At baseline, overall mean±SD pain VAS was 54.3±26.5 mm and 41.8% of patients had PHQ-9 scores ≥10. At baseline, VAS pain scores (mean±SD) were significantly higher (P<0.001) for patients with PHQ-9 scores ≥10 (63.9±23.3) versus <10 (47.4±26.7). At Week 16, clinically relevant pain reduction was observed for ew-treated patients with baseline PHQ-9 score ≥10 (ew, 45.8%; eow, 29.4%; placebo, 23.8%) and <10 (ew, 50.0%; eow, 37.9%; placebo, 29.6%), but did not reach statistical significance. In patients with high baseline pain (≥median VAS score), adalimumab ew significantly decreased depressivesymptoms versus placebo (PHQ-9 scores, -34.03% vs +2.26%; P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate to severe HS had a high degree of pain and depressive symptoms at baseline. Adalimumabtherapy was associated with decreased pain and depressive symptoms compared to baseline.

Antigen-specific assessment of the immunological status of various groups in a leprosy endemic region.

BACKGROUND: Serological tests can be important tools to assist in the diagnosis of leprosy and can contribute to an earlier diagnosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibody responses against phenolic glycolipid-1 (PGL-1), natural disaccharide linked to human serum albumin via an octyl (NDO-HSA), Leprosy IDRI Diagnostic-1 (LID-1) and natural disaccharide octyl--Leprosy IDRI Diagnostic-1 (NDO-LID) in leprosy patients, household contacts of patients and the general population. METHODS: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays were used to analyze the antigen-specific antibody responses of 94 leprosy cases, 104 household contacts of cases and 2.494 individuals from the general population. RESULTS: A positive correlation was observed for the antibody responses to all antigens studied. A higher proportion of seropositivity for all antigens, along with stronger magnitude of response, was observed in multibacillary (MB) leprosy patients and household contacts of MB leprosy patients compared with the levels observed in paucibacillary (PB) leprosy patients and household contacts of PB leprosy patients. A substantial and significant positive correlation was found between seropositivity and the bacterial index for the leprosy patients. Anti-PGL-1 tests were more frequently positive than anti-NDO-HSA tests among patients with all clinical forms of leprosy and among the group of household contacts. The LID-1 and NDO-LID antigens showed a greater capacity to identify household contacts and individuals from the general population infected with M. leprae. CONCLUSIONS: Tests that measure the antibody responses against LID-1, NDO-LID, NDO-HSA and PGL-1 were effective tools for the detection of patients with MB leprosy. Our data indicate that the anti-LID-1 and anti-NDO-LID responses were more effective than an anti-NDO-HSA response for the identification of individuals with subclinical infection.

Five-year analysis from the ESPRIT 10-year postmarketing surveillance registry of adalimumab treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: ESPRIT is an ongoing, 10-year, observational registry, evaluating long-term safety and effectiveness of adalimumab treatment in routine clinical practice for patients with moderate to severe, chronic plaque psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: Initial 5-year results are reported. METHODS: Two populations were analyzed: the "all-treated" population received 1 or more adalimumab doses in registry, continuing adalimumab treatment from a current prescription or previous study participation, and included the "new-prescription" population initiating adalimumab 4 weeks or earlier preregistry entry. RESULTS: Data were collected from September 26, 2008, through November 30, 2013, for all-treated (n = 6059), which included new-prescription (n = 2580, 42.6%); median registry exposure was 765 and 677 days, respectively. In all-treated, rate (events per 100 patient-years of total adalimumab exposure [E/100PY]) of serious treatment-emergent adverse events (inside or outside of the registry) was 4.3 E/100PY, serious infection 1.0 E/100PY, malignancies 0.9 E/100PY (nonmelanoma skin cancers 0.6 E/100PY; melanomas <0.1 E/100PY). Standardized mortality ratio was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.19-0.44). Physician Global Assessment clear or minimal (effectiveness parameter) was achieved by 57.0% at 12 months and 64.7% at 60 months of treatment. LIMITATIONS: Observational data are subject to outcome-reporting bias. CONCLUSION: No new safety signals were observed with adalimumab treatment during this initial 5-year registry review. Observed number of deaths was below expected. As-observed effectiveness remained stable through 60 months.

Analysis of body regions and components of PASI scores during adalimumab or methotrexate treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: The PASI score, the most common outcome measure in clinical trials of psoriasis treatment, is a non-linear scale that does not allow reliable assessment of subtle variations of its components (erythema, induration, and desquamation). OBJECTIVE: Highlight treatment response patterns potentially hidden by PASI score's compounded weighted-average calculation. METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis enrolled in the phase-3, 16-week, randomized CHAMPION study, and received adalimumab, methotrexate, or placebo. PASI scores were assessed post hoc for improvement, by body region and component. RESULTS: At Week 16, a significantly greater percentage of adalimumab-treated patients vs methotrexate- and placebo-treated patients, achieved PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 response in each body region and component. 55.7% of adalimumab-treated patients reached PASI 100 response in the head and neck region vs 16.7% overall. Two key components of PASI, induration and desquamation, were affected by treatment more than erythema, the third component. Adalimumab was particularly effective in complete resolution of induration (44.9% of patients) vs methotrexate (10.9%). For all PASI body regions and components, mean percent improvement in score at Weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 was significantly greater (P<0.05) for adalimumab treatment vs methotrexate or placebo. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab therapy resulted in complete resolution of individual body regions in at least 30.6% up to 55.7% of patients in CHAMPION. This was more than twice that of methotrexate and placebo. PASI improvement by body region is a novel and an important patient-relevant outcome worthy of reporting in future studies.

Aggregate Response Benefit in Skin Clearance and Itch Reduction With Upadacitinib or Dupilumab in Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis®.

Background: In patients with moderate-to-severe atopic Dermatitis® (AD), greater skin clearance and itch reduction are associated with more pronounced improvements in quality of life (QoL). Objective: To characterize the aggregate response benefit with upadacitinib versus dupilumab or placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Methods: Degree of skin clearance and itch response in 3 phase 3 studies (Heads Up [NCT03738397] and Measure Up 1/2 [integrated; NCT03569293/NCT03607422]) were assessed by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), respectively, using mutually exclusive categories. The aggregate response benefit with upadacitinib over dupilumab or placebo was determined by summing incremental differences for each EASI or WP-NRS category across the full distribution of patient responses. Results: Comparisons across EASI improvement threshold distributions, EASI severity levels, and WP-NRS categories demonstrated an aggregate response benefit favoring upadacitinib over dupilumab as early as week 4 and continuing at weeks 16 and 24. Similar trends were observed for upadacitinib 15 and 30 mg versus placebo. Conclusions: The aggregate response benefit in skin clearance and itch reduction favored upadacitinib 30 mg over dupilumab and upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg over placebo. These benefits may translate to overall greater improvements in patient QoL.

Rapid and sustained improvements in itch and quality of life with upadacitinib plus topical corticosteroids in adults and adolescents with atopic dermatitis: 52-week outcomes from the phase 3 AD Up study.

Purpose: Atopic dermatitis (AD) adversely impacts quality of life (QoL). We evaluated the effect of upadacitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase inhibitor approved for moderate-to-severe AD, plus topical corticosteroids (+TCS) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) over 52 weeks.Materials and methods: In the phase 3 AD Up study (NCT03568318), adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily upadacitinib 15 mg, 30 mg, or placebo + TCS. Itch, skin pain/symptoms, sleep, QoL, daily activities, emotional state, mental health, and patient impressions of disease severity/improvement/treatment satisfaction were assessed.Results: This analysis included 901 patients. Within 1-2 weeks, PRO improvements were greater with both upadacitinib doses than with placebo (p <.05). Improvements increased through weeks 4-8; rates were generally maintained through week 52. At week 52, the proportion of patients with clinically meaningful improvements in itch (Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale improvement ≥4), skin pain (AD Symptom Scale Skin Pain improvement ≥4), sleep (AD Impact Scale [ADerm-IS] Sleep improvement ≥12), daily activities (ADerm-IS Daily Activities improvement ≥14), and emotional state (ADerm-IS Emotional State improvement ≥11) ranged from 62.1%-77.7% with upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS and 71.3%-83.6% with upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS.Conclusions: Upadacitinib + TCS results in rapid, sustained improvements in burdensome AD symptoms and QoL.

Comparative Study of a Novel Lateral Flow Rapid Test with Conventional Serological Test Systems for the Diagnosis of Canine Leishmaniosis in Croatia and Brazil.

Control of canine infections with Leishmania infantum (L. infantum), a major zoonotic disease in Brazil and southern Europe, is becoming increasingly important due to its close proximity to humans, the increasing import of dogs from endemic regions and the impact of climate change on vector spreading. Simple, rapid and reliable diagnostic tests are therefore needed to detect infected dogs. Here, we re-evaluated different serological methods for the diagnosis of canine leishmaniosis (CanL) in Croatia and Brazil. The diagnostic performance of the indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) and the VetLine® Leishmania ELISA (GSD Frankfurt, Germany) was compared with three rKLi8.3-based diagnostic test systems, the rKLi8.3 ELISA (GSD Frankfurt, Germany), the INgezim® Leishma CROM (GSD Madrid, Spain) lateral flow test (LFT) and the VetBlot®Leishmania LineBlot (GSD Frankfurt, Germany). CanL symptomatic dogs were efficiently diagnosed by all tests, except the VetLine® Leishmania ELISA, which is based on whole Leishmania antigens. The advantage of rKLi8.3 was also observed in oligo- and asymptomatic dogs from Brazil and Croatia, although with reduced diagnostic efficiency compared to symptomatic dogs. Similar to IFAT and rKLi8.3 ELISA, the LFT did not cross-react with other common canine pathogens; it showed very high specificity for healthy dogs from endemic regions in both countries and did not react with healthy, vaccinated dogs in Brazil. In conclusion, serodiagnostic tests based on the rKLi8.3 antigens are superior to whole parasite antigens, and the LFT has the advantage of providing a laboratory-independent, rapid and specific diagnosis of CanL.