Two Phase 3 Trials of Lebrikizumab for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Lebrikizumab, a high-affinity IgG4 monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-13, prevents the formation of the interleukin-4Rα-interleukin-13Rα1 heterodimer receptor signaling complex. METHODS: We conducted two identically designed, 52-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials; both trials included a 16-week induction period and a 36-week maintenance period. Eligible patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (adults [≥18 years of age] and adolescents [12 to <18 years of age, weighing ≥40 kg]) were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either lebrikizumab at a dose of 250 mg (loading dose of 500 mg at baseline and week 2) or placebo, administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks. Outcomes for the induction period were assessed up to 16 weeks and are included in this report. The primary outcome was an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (indicating clear or almost clear skin; range, 0 to 4 [severe disease]) with a reduction (indicating improvement) of at least 2 points from baseline at week 16. Secondary outcomes included a 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index score (EASI-75 response) and assessments of itch and of itch interference with sleep. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: In trial 1, the primary outcome was met in 43.1% of 283 patients in the lebrikizumab group and in 12.7% of 141 patients in the placebo group (P<0.001); an EASI-75 response occurred in 58.8% and 16.2%, respectively (P<0.001). In trial 2, the primary outcome was met in 33.2% of 281 patients in the lebrikizumab group and in 10.8% of 146 patients in the placebo group (P<0.001); an EASI-75 response occurred in 52.1% and 18.1%, respectively (P<0.001). Measures of itch and itch interference with sleep indicated improvement with lebrikizumab therapy. The incidence of conjunctivitis was higher among patients who received lebrikizumab than among those who received placebo. Most adverse events during the induction period were mild or moderate in severity and did not lead to trial discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: In the induction period of two phase 3 trials, 16 weeks of treatment with lebrikizumab was effective in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. (Funded by Dermira; ADvocate1 and ADvocate2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT04146363 and NCT04178967, respectively.).

Efficacy and safety of rademikibart (CBP-201), a next-generation mAb targeting IL-4Rα, in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: A phase 2 randomized trial (CBP-201-WW001).

BACKGROUND: Rademikibart (CBP-201) is a next-generation IL-4 receptor alpha-targeting antibody. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate rademikibart in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. METHODS: A total of 226 patients were randomized, double-blind, to subcutaneous rademikibart (300 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], 150 mg Q2W, 300 mg every 4 weeks [Q4W]; plus 600-mg loading dose) or placebo. Randomization began in July 2020. The trial was completed in October 2021. RESULTS: The WW001 phase 2 trial achieved its primary end point: significant percent reduction from baseline in least-squares mean Eczema Area Severity Index (EASI) to week 16 with rademikibart 300 mg Q2W (-63.0%; P = .0007), 150 mg Q2W (-57.6%; P = .0067), 300 mg Q4W (-63.5%; P = .0004) versus placebo (-39.7%). EASI scores decreased significantly with 300 mg Q2W and Q4W at the earliest assessment (week 2), with no evidence of plateauing by week 16. Significant improvements were also observed in secondary end points, including pruritus. Across the primary and secondary end points, efficacy tended to be comparable with 300 mg Q2W and Q4W dosing. Rademikibart and placebo had similar, low incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) (48% vs 54%), serious TEAEs (1.8% vs 3.6%), TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation (1.2% vs 1.8%), conjunctivitis of unspecified cause (2.9% vs 0%), herpes (0.6% vs 1.8%), and injection-site reactions (1.8% vs 1.8%). Although no discontinuations were attributed to coronavirus disease 2019, pandemic-related restrictions likely had an impact on trial conduct. CONCLUSIONS: Rademikibart was efficacious and well tolerated at Q2W and Q4W intervals. Q4W dosing is a more convenient frequency than approved for current therapies.

Abrocitinib versus Placebo or Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The oral Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor abrocitinib, which reduces interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, is being investigated for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Data from trials comparing JAK1 inhibitors with monoclonal antibodies, such as dupilumab, that block interleukin-4 receptors are limited. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with atopic dermatitis that was unresponsive to topical agents or that warranted systemic therapy (in a 2:2:2:1 ratio) to receive 200 mg or 100 mg of abrocitinib orally once daily, 300 mg of dupilumab subcutaneously every other week (after a loading dose of 600 mg), or placebo; all the patients received topical therapy. The primary end points were an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response (defined as a score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] on the IGA [scores range from 0 to 4], with an improvement of ≥2 points from baseline) and an Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) response (defined as ≥75% improvement from baseline in the score on the EASI [scores range from 0 to 72]) at week 12. The key secondary end points were itch response (defined as an improvement of ≥4 points in the score on the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [scores range from 0 to 10]) at week 2 and IGA and EASI-75 responses at week 16. RESULTS: A total of 838 patients underwent randomization; 226 patients were assigned to the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 238 to the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 243 to the dupilumab group, and 131 to the placebo group. An IGA response at week 12 was observed in 48.4% of patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 36.6% in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 36.5% in the dupilumab group, and 14.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo); an EASI-75 response at week 12 was observed in 70.3%, 58.7%, 58.1%, and 27.1%, respectively (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo). The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. Nausea occurred in 11.1% of the patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group and 4.2% of those in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, and acne occurred in 6.6% and 2.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, abrocitinib at a dose of either 200 mg or 100 mg once daily resulted in significantly greater reductions in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis than placebo at weeks 12 and 16. The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. (Funded by Pfizer; JADE COMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03720470.).

Phosphorylated p38 MAP kinase expression by leucocytes is increased in allergic humans and associated with IgE responses.

Mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPK) activate cascades that regulate cell proliferation, differentiation and death. Phosphorylated (phos-)p38 MAPK is a cell-signalling pathway associated with Th2 cytokine responses, which is required for immunoglobulin (Ig)E production. It is unknown whether MAPK are associated with IgE production. We examine the evidence linking p38 MAPK to inflammatory responses. Phos-p38, extracellular signal-related kinase (ERK) and c-JUN-n terminal (JNK) MAPK expression by blood leucocyte subsets and levels of serum Igs were measured in blood from adults with asthma and/or rhinoconjunctivitis (N = 28) and non-asthma (N = 10) (flow cytometry, microfluorenzymeimmunoassay). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from allergic subjects were cultured for 10 days ± anti-CD40/recombinant IL-4 ± inhibitor of phos-P38. Culture supernatants were assayed for IgE (ELISA). Phos-p38 MAPK expression by all leucocyte subsets of allergic subjects was associated with serum IgE levels (p ≤ 0.01), after adjusting for cell counts, age, sex, race and smoking status (p ≤ 0.04). Leucocyte expression of phos-ERK and JNK did not correlate with IgE (p = 0.09-0.99). Instead, phos-ERK expression was associated with serum IgG. When PBMC from atopic subjects were cultured for 10 days with anti-CD40/rhIL-4, IgE levels were 26.2 ± 18 ng/mL. Inclusion of SB202190 (5-20 µg/mL), a specific inhibitor of phos-p38 MAPK, in culture suppressed IgE production in dose-dependent manner, with peak suppression obtained with SB202190 at 20 µg/mL (82.1% ± 11.8) (p = 0.0001), with virtually no cytotoxicity (<5%). Different MAPK pathways may be associated with IgE (p38) and IgG (ERK) responses. Phos-p38 MAPK can be a potential anti-allergy drug target.

Navigating the atopic dermatitis toolbox: Challenging scenarios and shared decision-making.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory disease with a complex pathogenesis and heterogeneous clinical presentation. Recently, multiple advanced therapies were approved for the treatment of moderate-severe AD, including the biologics dupilumab, tralokinumab, and lebrikizumab and oral Janus kinase inhibitors abrocitinib, upadacitinib, and baricitinib. These treatments have different efficacy, safety, and tolerability profiles and monitoring requirements. The availability of multiple recently approved therapies poses a clinical challenge for health care providers and patients on how to select the best treatment for patients. This article aims to highlight clinical considerations and patient perspectives to guide shared decision-making for biologic and oral systemic therapy, particularly Janus kinase inhibitors, in AD. Important aspects to consider include treatment goals, medical history, symptom severity, physician assessments, safety profile of drugs, and the risk predispositions in patients.

Abrocitinib efficacy and safety in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis by race, ethnicity, and Fitzpatrick skin type.

BACKGROUND: Response to abrocitinib treatment for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has not been evaluated across racial and ethnic subpopulations. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib on the basis of patient race, ethnicity, and Fitzpatrick skin type (FST). METHODS: Data were pooled post hoc from patients treated with abrocitinib 200 mg, 100 mg, or placebo in 3 monotherapy trials (NCT02780167, NCT03349060, and NCT03575871). Race and ethnicity were self-reported; FST was determined by study investigators. Evaluations through Week 12 include the following: (1) Investigator's Global Assessment of clear or almost-clear skin; (2) greater than or equal to 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index or SCORing AD; (3) a greater-than-or-equal-to 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score; (4) least squares mean changes in Dermatology Life Quality Index and Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure scores; and (5) treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: The sample comprised 628 White, 204 Asian, and 83 Black patients; 37 were Hispanic or Latino; 624 had FST I to III and 320 had FST IV to VI. Treatment with either abrocitinib dose was associated with greater proportions of patients achieving Investigator's Global Assessment of clear or almost-clear skin, ≥ 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index, ≥ 75% improvement in SCORing AD, and a ≥ 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, or greater score changes from baseline in Dermatology Life Quality Index and Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure vs placebo regardless of race, ethnicity, or FST. Dose-response was most prominent in White patients. In Black patients, the effects of the 2 doses were similar. Treatment-emergent adverse events were more common in White and Black than in Asian patients. CONCLUSION: Abrocitinib was more efficacious than placebo across the racial and ethnic groups and ranges of phototypes analyzed. Studies with increased representation of populations of color are warranted to elucidate potential variations in response across diverse populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02780167 (phase 2b), NCT03349060 (phase 3 MONO-1), and NCT03575871 (phase 3 MONO-2).

Atopic dermatitis (eczema) guidelines: 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters GRADE- and Institute of Medicine-based recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Guidance addressing atopic dermatitis (AD) management, last issued in 2012 by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task Force, requires updating as a result of new treatments and improved guideline and evidence synthesis methodology. OBJECTIVE: To produce evidence-based guidelines that support patients, clinicians, and other decision-makers in the optimal treatment of AD. METHODS: A multidisciplinary guideline panel consisting of patients and caregivers, AD experts (dermatology and allergy/immunology), primary care practitioners (family medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine), and allied health professionals (psychology, pharmacy, nursing) convened, prioritized equity, diversity, and inclusiveness, and implemented management strategies to minimize influence of conflicts of interest. The Evidence in Allergy Group supported guideline development by performing systematic evidence reviews, facilitating guideline processes, and holding focus groups with patient and family partners. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. Evidence-to-decision frameworks, subjected to public comment, translated evidence to recommendations using trustworthy guideline principles. RESULTS: The panel agreed on 25 recommendations to gain and maintain control of AD for patients with mild, moderate, and severe AD. The eAppendix provides practical information and implementation considerations in 1-2 page patient-friendly handouts. CONCLUSION: These evidence-based recommendations address optimal use of (1) topical treatments (barrier moisturization devices, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, PDE4 inhibitors [crisaborole], topical JAK inhibitors, occlusive [wet wrap] therapy, adjunctive antimicrobials, application frequency, maintenance therapy), (2) dilute bleach baths, (3) dietary avoidance/elimination, (4) allergen immunotherapy, and (5) systemic treatments (biologics/monoclonal antibodies, small molecule immunosuppressants [cyclosporine, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolate, JAK inhibitors], and systemic corticosteroids) and UV phototherapy (light therapy).

Safety and efficacy of eblasakimab, an interleukin 13 receptor α1 monoclonal antibody, in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A phase 1b, multiple-ascending dose study.

BACKGROUND: Eblasakimab, an interleukin (IL)-13 receptor α1 antagonist, blocks IL-4 and IL-13 signaling through the type 2 receptor. OBJECTIVE: The safety and efficacy of eblasakimab was evaluated in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: In this phase 1b randomized, double-blinded study, 52 patients with moderate-to-severe AD received weekly subcutaneous injections of eblasakimab 200, 400, or 600 mg, or placebo for 8 weeks. Primary outcome was the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events. Secondary outcomes included percentage change in the Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline; Eczema Area and Severity Index improvement of at least 50%, 75%, or 90% from baseline; and percentage change in the peak-pruritus numeric rating scale score from baseline. RESULTS: Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 47% placebo and 71% eblasakimab patients; most were considered mild or moderate and did not lead to study discontinuation. At week 8 eblasakimab 600 mg showed statistically significant improvement in mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index versus placebo (-65% vs -27%, P = .014). Other key secondary physician- and patient-reported end points were met. LIMITATIONS: Longer studies are required to confirm eblasakimab safety and efficacy in AD patients. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe AD with eblasakimab was well-tolerated and associated with significant clinical improvements versus placebo.

Efficacy and safety of crisaborole ointment, 2%, in participants aged ≥45 years with stasis dermatitis: Results from a fully decentralized, randomized, proof-of-concept phase 2a study.

BACKGROUND: Crisaborole ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in stasis dermatitis (SD). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, decentralized phase 2a study (NCT04091087), 65 participants aged ≥45 years with SD without active ulceration received crisaborole or vehicle (1:1) twice-daily for 6 weeks. The primary end point was percentage change from baseline in total sign score at week 6 based on in-person assessment. RESULTS: Crisaborole-treated participants had significantly reduced total sign score from baseline versus vehicle based on in-person (nondermatologist) assessment (-32.4% vs -18.1%, P = .0299) and central reader (dermatologists) assessment of photographs (-52.5% vs -10.3%, P = .0004). Efficacy according to success and improvement per Investigator's Global Assessment score and lesional percentage body surface area reached statistical significance based on central reader but not in-person assessments. Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders were common all-causality treatment-emergent adverse events with crisaborole. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and short treatment duration were key limitations. In-person assessment was not conducted by dermatologists. CONCLUSION: Crisaborole improved signs and symptoms of SD and was well tolerated. Central reader assessment represents a promising approach for siteless clinical research.

More than just methylisothiazolinone: Retrospective analysis of patients with isothiazolinone allergy in North America, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Isothiazolinones are a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to isothiazolinones from 2017-2020 and characterize isothiazolinone-allergic (Is+) patients compared with isothiazolinone nonallergic (Is-) patients. METHODS: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 9028 patients patch tested to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) 0.02% aqueous, MI 0.2% aqueous, benzisothiazolinone (BIT) 0.1% petrolatum, and/or octylisothiazolinone (OIT) 0.025% petrolatum. Prevalence, reaction strength, concurrent reactions, clinical relevance, and source of allergens were tabulated. RESULTS: In total, 21.9% (1976/9028) of patients had a positive reaction to 1 or more isothiazolinones. Positivity to MI was 14.4% (1296/9012), MCI/MI was 10.0% (903/9017), BIT was 8.6% (777/9018), and OIT was 05% (49/9028). Compared with Is-, Is+ patients were more likely to have occupational skin disease (16.5% vs 10.3%, P <.001), primary hand dermatitis (30.2% vs 19.7%, P <.001), and be >40 years (73.1% vs 61.9%, P <.001). Positive patch test reactions to >1 isothiazolinone occurred in 44.1% (871/1976) of Is+ patients. Testing solely to MCI/MI would miss 47.3% (611/1292) of MI and 60.1% (466/776) of BIT allergic reactions. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective cross-sectional study design and lack of follow-up data. CONCLUSION: Sensitization to isothiazolinones is high and concurrent sensitization to multiple isothiazolinone allergens is common.

Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis in adults with phototherapy and systemic therapies.

BACKGROUND: For people with atopic dermatitis (AD) refractory to topical therapies, treatment with phototherapy and systemic therapies can be considered. Multiple biologic therapies and Janus kinase (JAK)inhibitors have been approved since 2014 to treat AD. These guidelines update the 2014 recommendations for management of AD with phototherapy and systemic therapies. OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD in adults. METHODS: A multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a systematic review and applied the GRADE approach for assessing the certainty of evidence and formulating and grading recommendations. RESULTS: The workgroup developed 11 recommendations on the management of AD in adults with phototherapy and systemic agents, including biologics, oral JAK inhibitors, and other immunomodulatory medications. LIMITATIONS: Most randomized controlled trials of phototherapy and systemic therapies for AD are of short duration with subsequent extension studies, limiting comparative long-term efficacy and safety conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: We make strong recommendations for the use of dupilumab, tralokinumab, abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib. We make conditional recommendations in favor of using phototherapy, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate, and against the use of systemic corticosteroids.

Executive summary: Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis in adults with phototherapy and systemic therapies.

BACKGROUND: The summarized guidelines update the 2014 recommendations for the management of AD with phototherapy and systemic therapies. METHODS: A multidisciplinary workgroup conducted a systematic review and applied the GRADE approach for assessing the certainty of the evidence and formulating and grading recommendations. RESULTS: The workgroup developed 11 recommendations on the management of AD in adults with phototherapy and systemic therapies, including biologics, oral Janus Kinase inhibitors, and other immunomodulatory medications. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supported strong recommendations for the use of dupilumab, tralokinumab, abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib and conditional recommendations in favor of using phototherapy, azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate, and against the use of systemic corticosteroids.

Tapinarof cream 1% once daily: Significant efficacy in the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in adults and children down to 2 years of age in the pivotal phase 3 ADORING trials.

BACKGROUND: Tapinarof cream 1% once daily (QD), a topical aryl hydrocarbon receptor agonist, downregulates pro-inflammatory Th2 cytokines, upregulates skin-barrier components, and reduces oxidative stress. OBJECTIVE: To assess tapinarof efficacy and safety in adults and children down to 2 years of age with atopic dermatitis (AD). METHODS: Eight hundred and thirteen patients were randomized to tapinarof or vehicle QD in two 8-week phase 3 trials. RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint, Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis score of 0 or 1 and ≥2-grade improvement from baseline at Week 8, was met with statistical significance in both trials: 45.4% versus 13.9% and 46.4% versus 18.0% (tapinarof vs vehicle; both P < .0001). Significantly superior Eczema Area and Severity Index 75 (EASI75) responses were also observed with tapinarof versus vehicle at Week 8: 55.8% versus 22.9% and 59.1% versus 21.2% (both P < .0001). Rapid improvements in patient-reported pruritus were also significant with tapinarof versus vehicle. Common adverse events (≥5%) of folliculitis, headache, and nasopharyngitis were mostly mild or moderate, with lower discontinuations due to adverse events in the tapinarof groups than with vehicle. LIMITATIONS: Long-term efficacy was not assessed. CONCLUSION: Tapinarof demonstrated highly significant efficacy and favorable safety and tolerability in a diverse population of patients with AD down to 2 years of age.

Dupilumab treatment improves signs, symptoms, quality of life, and work productivity in patients with atopic hand and foot dermatitis: Results from a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite high disease burden, systemic treatment options for patients with atopic hand and/or foot dermatitis (H/F AD) are limited. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate efficacy and safety of dupilumab in H/F AD using specific instruments for assessing disease severity on hands and feet. METHODS: In this multicenter phase 3 trial, adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe H/F AD were randomized to dupilumab monotherapy (regimen approved for generalized AD), or matched placebo. The primary endpoint was proportion of patients achieving Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 at week 16. Secondary prespecified endpoints assessed the severity and extent of signs, symptom intensity (itch, pain), quality of life, and sleep. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients (adults = 106, adolescents = 27) were randomized to dupilumab (n = 67) or placebo (n = 66). At week 16, significantly more patients receiving dupilumab (n = 27) than placebo (n = 11) achieved Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0 or 1 (40.3% vs 16.7%; P = .003). All other prespecified endpoints were met. Safety was consistent with the known AD dupilumab profile. LIMITATIONS: Short-term, 16-week treatment period. CONCLUSION: Dupilumab monotherapy resulted in significant improvements across different domains of H/F AD with acceptable safety, supporting dupilumab as a systemic treatment approach for this often difficult to treat condition.

Abrocitinib Provides Rapid and Sustained Improvement in Skin Pain and Is Associated with Improved Quality of Life Outcomes in Adult and Adolescent Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Skin pain in atopic dermatitis (AD) increases with disease severity and is associated with substantial quality of life (QoL) burden. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate abrocitinib efficacy on skin pain and QoL in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: This post hoc analysis included data with abrocitinib administered as monotherapy (pooled phase 2b [NCT02780167] and phase 3 JADE MONO-1 [NCT03349060] and JADE MONO-2 [NCT03575871]) or in combination with topical therapy (phase 3 JADE COMPARE [NCT03720470] and JADE TEEN [NCT03796676]). Patients received oral, once-daily abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, or placebo for 12 or 16 weeks (JADE COMPARE). Skin pain was rated using the Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD) skin pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) item ("How painful was your skin over the past 24 h?") on a scale from 0 (not painful) to 10 (extremely painful). Itch (Peak Pruritus NRS) and QoL (Dermatology Life Quality Index or Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index) were assessed. Least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline was analyzed using mixed-effects repeated measures modeling. RESULTS: A total of 1,822 patients (monotherapy pool, n = 942; JADE COMPARE, n = 595; and JADE TEEN, n = 285) were analyzed. LSM change from baseline in PSAAD skin pain score was significantly greater with abrocitinib versus placebo from week 2 through week 12 or 16 across all 3 study populations and occurred in a dose-dependent manner. A greater proportion of patients achieved a ≥4-point improvement from baseline in PSAAD skin pain score with abrocitinib (200 mg and 100 mg) versus placebo in the monotherapy pool (56% and 38% vs. 12%; week 12), JADE COMPARE (72% and 52% vs. 26%; week 16), and JADE TEEN (51% and 60% vs. 31%; week 12). Additionally, a greater proportion of patients achieved a stringent threshold of skin pain improvement (PSAAD skin pain score <2) with abrocitinib versus placebo. Adults and adolescents who achieved a ≥4-point improvement in skin pain reported greater QoL improvement than those who did not achieve a ≥4-point improvement. A positive correlation (≥0.3) was observed between skin pain and QoL and separately between skin pain and itch across the 3 study populations. CONCLUSION: Abrocitinib as monotherapy or in combination with topical therapy improved skin pain and was associated with improved QoL in both adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD across all evaluated studies.

Targeted Combined Endpoint Improvement in Patient and Disease Domains in Atopic Dermatitis: A Treat-to-Target Analysis of Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis Treated with Upadacitinib.

A treat-to-target approach was recently developed to guide systemic treatment for adults with atopic dermatitis (AD). Recommendations outlined criteria for a 3-month initial acceptable treatment target and a 6-month optimal target, evaluated using global assessment of patient-reported disease severity, as well as Eczema Area and Severity Index, itch assessed on an 11-point numerical rating scale, Dermatology Life Quality Index, or Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure. Achievement of these targets with once-daily upadacitinib (15 mg and 30 mg) monotherapy was evaluated using integrated adult data from the Measure Up 1 and 2 phase 3 studies. Among the 852 patients treated with upadacitinib 15 mg or 30 mg, the 3-month initial acceptable target was achieved by >80%, >78%, and ≥87% of patients, and the 6-month optimal target was achieved by ≥53%, >61%, and >73% of patients at weeks 2, 16, and 52, respectively. Achievement of all 6 individual criteria for each of the target goals also increased over time. These findings suggest that upadacitinib 15 mg and 30 mg may help improve standards of care in patients with moderate-to-severe AD by achieving 6-month target goals at 16 weeks and as early as 2 weeks for most patients.

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.

Treat-to-target in dermatology: A scoping review and International Eczema Council survey on the approach in atopic dermatitis.

Treat-to-target (T2T) is a pragmatic therapeutic strategy being gradually introduced into dermatology after adoption in several other clinical areas. Atopic dermatitis (AD), one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases, may also benefit from this structured and practical therapeutic approach. We aimed to evaluate existing data regarding the T2T approach in dermatology, with a specific focus on AD, as well as the views of International Eczema Council (IEC) members on the potential application of a T2T approach to AD management. To do so, we systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications on the T2T approach for any skin disease in the PubMed and Scopus databases up to February 2022 and conducted a survey among IEC members regarding various components to potentially include in a T2T approach in AD. We identified 21 relevant T2T-related reports in dermatology, of which 14 were related to psoriasis, five to AD, one for juvenile dermatomyositis and one for urticaria. In the IEC member survey, respondents proposed treatable traits (with itch, disease severity and sleep problems getting the highest scores), relevant comorbidities (with asthma being selected most commonly, followed by anxiety and depression in adults), recommended specialists that should define the approach in AD (dermatologists, allergists and primary care physicians were most commonly selected in adults), and applicable assessment tools (both physician- and patient-reported), in both adult and paediatric patients, for potential future utilization of the T2T approach in AD. In conclusion, while the T2T approach may become a useful tool to simplify therapeutic goals and AD management, its foundation in AD is only starting to build. A multidisciplinary approach, including a wide range of stakeholders, including patients, is needed to further define the essential components needed to utilize T2T in AD.

Targeting the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor to Address the Challenges of Atopic Dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic relapsing–remitting disease with a multifactorial etiology involving epidermal barrier and immunologic dysfunction. Topical therapies form the mainstay of AD treatment, but options are limited by adverse effects and restrictions on application site, duration, and extent of use. Tapinarof (VTAMA; Dermavant Sciences, Inc.) is a first-in-class, non-steroidal, topical aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) agonist approved for the treatment of plaque psoriasis. AhR is a ligand-dependent transcription factor with wide-ranging roles, including regulation of homeostasis and immune response in skin cells. AhR expression and signaling are altered in many inflammatory skin diseases, and clinical trials with tapinarof have validated AhR as a therapeutic target capable of delivering significant efficacy. Tapinarof cream 1% once daily demonstrated efficacy versus vehicle in adults and adolescents with AD and is being investigated in the ADORING trials for the treatment of AD in adults and children down to 2 years of age. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(2):23-28.  doi:10.36849/JDD.8026.

Comorbidities of atopic dermatitis-what does the evidence say?

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common disease that is associated with atopic and nonatopic comorbidities. There has been a growing interest in this area of AD, because presence or risk of comorbidities can in many ways impact the management of patients with AD. Thus, some treatments for AD may improve its comorbidities as well, whereas others may increase their risk. In this review article, we discuss various comorbidities of AD mostly on the basis of the results of recent multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses to update readers about this rapidly developing area of dermatology. We emphasize the important information provided by studies presenting both relative risk and absolute risk, and show that AD is associated with, among others, atopic comorbidities such as asthma, rhinitis, and food allergy, nonatopic comorbidities such as ocular, psychiatric, infectious, endocrine, autoimmune, and cardiovascular diseases, and certain cancers. Clinicians need to be aware of these and be cognizant about positive and negative effects of existing and new treatments for AD.