Improvement Across Dimensions of Disease with Lebrikizumab Use in Atopic Dermatitis: Two Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Monotherapy Trials (ADvocate1 and ADvocate2).

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis is a complex, chronic, inflammatory skin disease that requires long-term control of symptoms like itch and sleep loss and improvement in quality of life, in addition to reduction of clinical signs. Lebrikizumab is a selective interleukin-13 inhibitor approved in the European Union, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, Canada, and Japan for treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults and adolescents. Here, we assess the magnitude of changes across signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis with lebrikizumab monotherapy over the 16-week induction period in two phase 3 studies, ADvocate1 and ADvocate2. METHODS: Eligible adults (aged ≥ 18 years) and adolescents (aged 12 to < 18 years and weighing ≥ 40 kg) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were randomized to receive either 250 mg of lebrikizumab or placebo subcutaneously every two weeks. Least squares mean percentage change from baseline through week 16 was compared between lebrikizumab and placebo using mixed model repeated measure analysis for the following endpoints: Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Sleep-Loss Scale, Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). RESULTS: In both trials, significant (P < 0.05) improvements were observed for lebrikizumab treatment compared with placebo at each 2-week timepoint for EASI, Pruritus NRS, Sleep-Loss Scale, and POEM, and at each 4-week timepoint for DLQI, through week 16. Statistically significant (P < 0.001) improvements were observed at 16 weeks for lebrikizumab treatment versus placebo in ADvocate1/ADvocate2 for EASI (71.9%/75.0% vs. 35.6%/43.3%), Pruritus NRS (53.3%/46.3% vs. 21.4%/18.0%), Sleep-Loss Scale (57.7%/55.6% vs. 23.9%/25.5%), POEM (54.4%/45.8% vs. 18.8%/16.9%), and DLQI (64.2%/60.5% vs. 28.5%/32.2%). Patient photos show improvements in skin appearance when disease measures improve. CONCLUSIONS: Lebrikizumab monotherapy resulted in significant and fast improvements in multiple dimensions of disease (clinical signs, symptoms, and quality of life) over 16 weeks in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT04146363; NCT04178967.

Complementary and Alternative Therapies for Psoriasis.

Despite recent advancements in psoriasis treatment, challenges in management persist. Recently, there has been a rising interest amongst patients in complementary and alternative medicines (CAM), driven by the desire for more natural, holistic approaches and dissatisfaction with conventional treatments. Up to 41% of patients with psoriasis reported using alternative therapies and 39.5% use complementary therapies (Murphy EC, Nussbaum D, Prussick R, Friedman AJ (2019) Use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients with psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol 81:280-283). Despite their rapidly growing prevalence, literature on CAM therapies for psoriasis is lacking, making their recommendation difficult. Since the last systematic review on this topic published in 2018, evidence for new alternative therapies has emerged, promoting a further investigation of their efficacy (Gamret AC, Price A, Fertig RM, Lev-Tov H, Nichols AJ (2018) Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies for Psoriasis: A Systematic Review. JAMA Dermatol 154:1330-1337). This systematic review aims to compile recent literature on the most studied alternative therapies for psoriasis and further discuss their effectiveness in order to counsel clinicians in guiding patients on the use of these non-standard approaches. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCT) on complementary and alternative therapies in psoriasis from March 2018 through April 2024, resulting in 12 studies being included in this review. The preliminary results for many treatments such as curcumin, dietary modification and additions, indigo naturalis, meditation, acupuncture, and balneotherapy showed positive clinical effects. However, additional well-designed randomized trials are needed to confirm the potential beneficial effects and to establish safety of use.

Lebrikizumab Improves Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease for which signs and symptoms have a negative impact on a patient's quality of life (QoL) and mental health. Here, we assess the impact of lebrikizumab on QoL and mental health after 16 weeks of treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: Data were analyzed over 16 weeks from two separate phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, monotherapy trials (ADvocate1 and ADvocate2). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the following measures: Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), EQ-5D-5L visual analogue scale (VAS), EQ-5D-5L index scores (UK and US), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anxiety, and PROMIS Depression. RESULTS: Treatment with lebrikizumab 250 mg every 2 weeks in two studies led to statistically significant improvements (based on nominal p values) versus placebo in DLQI since week 4 (the first timepoint assessed) for the following measures: change from baseline in DLQI total score (ADvocate1 - 7.8 vs - 2.8; ADvocate2 - 7.3 vs - 3.9), proportion of patients with DLQI ≥ 4-point improvement (ADvocate1 69.5% vs 36.2%; ADvocate2 60.5% vs 42.6%), DLQI total score ≤ 5 (ADvocate1 36.7% vs 8.8%; ADvocate2 29.6% vs 10.8%), and DLQI (0, 1) (ADvocate1 12.3% vs 1.7%; ADvocate2 9.2% vs 1.7%). Improvements in DLQI measures, EQ-5D-5L index scores (UK and US), and EQ-5D-5L VAS were sustained through week 16. Additionally, lebrikizumab improved PROMIS Anxiety and PROMIS Depression scores, and improvements were higher in patients with at least a mild score (≥ 55) versus placebo for PROMIS Anxiety (ADvocate1 - 7.43 vs - 1.51; ADvocate2 - 4.95 vs - 0.82) and PROMIS Depression (ADvocate1 - 7.42 vs - 2.46; ADvocate2 - 4.28 vs - 2.00). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with monotherapy 250 mg lebrikizumab for 16 weeks provided clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes related to QoL and mental health for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Lebrikizumab-treated patients reported improvements in DLQI as early as week 4, the first measure since baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Registration NCT04146363 (ADvocate1) and NCT04178967 (ADvocate2).

Improving systemic therapy selection for inflammatory skin diseases: A clinical need survey.

Background: Empirical decisions to select therapies for psoriasis (PSO) and atopic dermatitis (AD) can lead to delays in disease control and increased health care costs. However, routine molecular testing for AD and PSO are lacking. Objective: To examine (1) how clinicians choose systemic therapies for patients with PSO and AD without molecular testing and (2) to determine how often the current approach leads to patients switching medications. Methods: A 20-question survey designed to assess clinician strategies for systemic treatment of AD and PSO was made available to attendees of a national dermatology conference in 2022. Results: Clinicians participating in the survey (265/414, 64% response rate) ranked "reported efficacy" as the most important factor governing treatment choice (P < .001). However, 62% (165/265) of clinicians estimated that 2 or more systemic medications were typically required to achieve efficacy. Over 90% (239/265) of respondents would or would likely find a molecular test to guide therapeutic selection useful. Limitations: To facilitate ease of recall, questions focused on systemic therapies as a whole and not individual therapies. Conclusion: Clinicians want a molecular test to help determine the most efficacious drug for individual patients.

Topical steroids or emollients: does order matter?

Topical corticosteroids, topical steroid-sparing agents, and emollients are all used to treat atopic dermatitis. However, there are no formal guidelines dictating the order and timing in which these topical modalities should be applied. Additionally, the order of application may change drug absorption, efficacy, and distribution. This is especially important for patients with atopic dermatitis. These patients have a dysfunctional skin barrier, which can lead to greater systemic absorption of drugs. Moreover, children already have an increased rate of systemic absorption due to a higher ratio of body surface area to body weight. Thus, the order of application of topical regimens is of the utmost importance in pediatric dermatology. This manuscript presents an updated review of the literature with a focus on guiding clinicians toward the best practices from the available resources.

Nonsteroidal Approaches for Atopic Dermatitis: A Clinical Update.

Topical corticosteroids (TCSs) are the most widely used treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD), but they can have adverse effects such as skin atrophy, telangiectasias, and hypopigmentation, especially with prolonged use of higher potency steroids. Many patients also have a fear of using TCSs, known as "corticophobia." With the development of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors, a nonsteroidal approach to the treatment of AD may be possible and may be preferred by certain patients. Given what is known about these nonsteroidal therapies, we propose a structured treatment ladder and action plan that can guide clinicians and patients on the use of these therapies for the treatment of AD. The ladder divides nonsteroidal medication classes into treatments for exacerbation versus maintenance therapies in an escalating order of increasing potential for adverse effects, both real and perceived. This treatment algorithm proposal paves the way for a potential nonsteroidal approach to managing AD.

Is Food-Triggered Atopic Dermatitis a Form of Systemic Contact Dermatitis?

Food allergy in atopic dermatitis is mediated by complex immune interactions between genetics, diet, environment, and the microbiome. When contact between inflamed skin and food antigens occurs, contact hypersensitivity can develop. Consequently, systemic contact dermatitis (SCD) can occur after ingestion of allergenic foods or food additives in the setting of a Th2 response with CLA-positive T cells, triggering dermatitis where skin resident memory lymphocytes reside. This phenomenon explains food-triggered dermatitis. Atopy patch tests (APTs) detect sensitization to food proteins responsible for SCD, which in turn can be confirmed by oral food challenge with delayed interpretation. We summarize the literature on using APTs to identify foods for oral challenge with dermatitis as an outcome. In dermatitis patients at risk for Th2 skewing based on a history of childhood-onset flexural dermatitis, shared decision-making should include a discussion of identifying and avoiding food and food additive triggers, as well as identifying and avoiding all contact allergens, prior to initiation of systemic therapy for dermatitis.

Atopic Dermatitis: Beyond the Skin and Into the Gut.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic and recurring inflammatory skin disorder characterized by an intensely pruritic, eczematous dermatitis. The etiology of AD is thought to involve a combination of environmental, genetic, and immunologic factors. Emerging research has investigated factors that may impact individual risk for developing AD, disease severity, and treatment response. One component is the gut microbiome, which is considered to play an essential role in maintaining the homeostasis of several organ systems. The gut microbiome has been described as a major regulator of the "gut-skin axis," yet some studies have yielded conflicting evidence regarding the strength of the association of gut microbiota dysbiosis with AD. This review discusses recent insights into the role of the gut microbiome in AD pathogenesis and its interplay among other complex systems that govern the current assessments of and treatments for AD.

Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s). RESULTS: The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an inflammatory skin condition with multiple systemic treatments and uncertainty regarding their comparative impact on AD outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD systemic treatments. METHODS: For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and GREAT databases from inception to November 29, 2022, for randomized trials addressing systemic treatments and phototherapy for AD. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/e5sna). RESULTS: The 149 included trials (28,686 patients with moderate-to-severe AD) evaluated 75 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, high-dose upadacitinib was among the most effective for 5 of 6 patient-important outcomes; high-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib were among the most effective for 2 outcomes. These Janus kinase inhibitors were among the most harmful in increasing adverse events. With high-certainty evidence, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab were of intermediate effectiveness and among the safest, modestly increasing conjunctivitis. Low-dose baricitinib was among the least effective. Efficacy and safety of azathioprine, oral corticosteroids, cyclosporine, methotrexate, mycophenolate, phototherapy, and many novel agents are less certain. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals with moderate-to-severe AD, high-certainty evidence demonstrates that high-dose upadacitinib is among the most effective in addressing multiple patient-important outcomes, but also is among the most harmful. High-dose abrocitinib and low-dose upadacitinib are effective, but also among the most harmful. Dupilumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab are of intermediate effectiveness and have favorable safety.

Efficacy and safety of topically applied therapeutic ammonia oxidising bacteria in adults with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis and moderate-to-severe pruritus: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase 2b trial.

Background: Topical anti-inflammatory therapy is a cornerstone of treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD). However, many unmet needs remain with existing therapies. B244 is a live topical biotherapeutic being tested for the reduction of pruritus and improvement of eczema signs in patients with AD. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of B244, compared to vehicle, for patients with mild-to-moderate AD and moderate-to-severe pruritus. Methods: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 2b trial, adults aged 18-65 years with mild-to-moderate AD and moderate-to-severe pruritus were enrolled across 56 sites in the USA. Patients were randomised 1:1:1 into a low-dose (optical density at 600 nm [OD] 5.0), high-dose (OD 20.0), or vehicle group for the 4-week treatment period and a 4 week follow-up period. Patients were instructed to apply the topical spray twice daily throughout the treatment period. Randomisation was centrally based (random alternating blocks of 6 and 3) and stratified by site. All participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were blinded to the treatment group assignments. The primary endpoint was the mean change in pruritus as measured by the Worst Itch Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) at 4 weeks. Safety was tracked throughout the study. Primary efficacy analyses included the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, encompassing those who received at least one dose of study drug and attended at least one post-baseline visit. The safety population included all participants who received at least one does of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04490109. Findings: Between June 4, 2020 and October 22, 2021, 547 eligible patients were enrolled. All study endpoints were meaningfully improved with B244 compared to vehicle. The WI-NRS score was reduced by 34% (-2.8 B244 vs -2.1 placebo, p = 0.014 and p = 0.015 for OD 20.0 and OD 5.0), from a baseline score of >8. B244 was well tolerated with no serious adverse events (SAEs); treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and treatment related TEAEs were low in incidence, mild in severity, and transient. 33 (18%) of 180 patients given B244 OD 5.0, 29 (16%) of 180 patients given B244 OD 20.0, and 17 (9%) of 186 patients given placebo reported treatment-emergent adverse events; headache was the most frequent (3%, 2%, and 1%, respectively). Interpretation: B244 was well tolerated and demonstrated improved efficacy compared to vehicle in all primary, secondary, and exploratory endpoints and should be further developed as a novel, natural, fast-acting topical spray treatment option for AD and associated pruritus. Funding: AOBiome Therapeutics.

Values and Preferences of Patients and Caregivers Regarding Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis (Eczema): A Systematic Review.

Importance: Patient values and preferences can inform atopic dermatitis (AD) care. Systematic summaries of evidence addressing patient values and preferences have not previously been available. Objective: To inform American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI)/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI) Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guideline development, patient and caregiver values and preferences in the management of AD were systematically synthesized. Evidence Review: Paired reviewers independently screened MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from inception until March 20, 2022, for studies of patients with AD or their caregivers, eliciting values and preferences about treatment, rated risk of bias, and extracted data. Thematic and inductive content analysis to qualitatively synthesize the findings was used. Patients, caregivers, and clinical experts provided triangulation. The GRADE-CERQual (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) informed rating of the quality of evidence. Findings: A total of 7780 studies were identified, of which 62 proved eligible (n = 19 442; median age across studies [range], 15 years [3-44]; 59% female participants). High certainty evidence showed that patients and caregivers preferred to start with nonmedical treatments and to step up therapy with increasing AD severity. Moderate certainty evidence showed that adverse effects from treatment were a substantial concern. Low certainty evidence showed that patients and caregivers preferred odorless treatments that are not visible and have a minimal effect on daily life. Patients valued treatments capable of relieving itching and burning skin and preferred to apply topical corticosteroids sparingly. Patients valued a strong patient-clinician relationship. Some studies presented varied perspectives and 18 were at high risk for industry sponsorship bias. Conclusions and Relevance: In the first systematic review to address patient values and preferences in management of AD to our knowledge, 6 key themes that may inform optimal clinical care, practice guidelines, and future research have been identified.