Comparative safety of oral Janus kinase inhibitors and dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Systemic Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) and dupilumab both have emerged as promising therapeutics for atopic dermatitis (AD). While dupilumab has a favorable safety profile, use of oral JAKi has been established in other diseases that carry potential comorbid susceptibilities that influence safety. OBJECTIVE: To provide real-world evidence of the safety of oral JAKi in AD patients. METHODS: The study used observational data from TriNetX (Cambridge, Massachusetts). Patients with AD treated with either oral JAKi (upadacitinib, abrocitinib, and baricitinib) or dupilumab were enrolled. The two treatment groups were propensity-score matched 1:1 based on demographics, comorbidities, and prior medications. Safety outcomes within two years after the initiation of medications were measured by hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 14,716 patients were included, with 942 patients treated with oral JAKi and 13,774 with dupilumab. The two treatment groups included 938 patients after matching. Treatment with oral JAKi was not associated with increased risks of mortality, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, renal events, or serious gastrointestinal events. However, patients receiving oral JAKi showed significantly higher risks of skin and subcutaneous tissue infection, herpes infection, acne, cytopenia, and hyperlipidemia, whereas the risk of ophthalmic complications was higher in those receiving dupilumab. CONCLUSION: This study found that oral JAKi did not exhibit concerning safety issues in treating patients with AD but increased the risk of infections and laboratory abnormalities. Long-term follow-up data are required to validate these findings.

Real-world data show sustained therapeutic effects of dupilumab in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) over 3 years.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) is a prevalent chronic inflammatory condition affecting the nose and paranasal sinuses, posing a significant socio-economic impact with substantial challenges in management. Biologics targeting type 2 inflammation such as dupilumab, have emerged as promising options. This study addresses a critical knowledge gap by comprehensively evaluating the 3-year impact of sustained dupilumab therapy in CRSwNP. METHODS: A multicentric, retrospective collection of real-world data from five tertiary referral centers in Germany was conducted, enrolling 150 adult patients. The study investigated patient-reported outcomes, disease-specific indices and clinical measures, focusing on therapeutic response persistence, adverse events, and factors influencing treatment continuity. RESULTS: Results indicate significant improvements in clinical parameters from baseline (n = 150) with sustained effectiveness after 36 months (n = 138) as indicated in mean score ± standard deviation. Dupilumab treatment significantly improved overall disease-related impairment (VAS score: 7.5 ± 2.5 to 1.6 ± 1.3) and rhinosinusitis symptoms (SNOT-22: 59.4 ± 19.4 to 18.0 ± 15.0). Nasal Polyp Scores (NPS) decreased (5.3 ± 1.8 to 0.7 ± 1.1), and olfactory function improved (3.2 ± 2.5 to 8.4 ± 2.8), with three out of four patients achieving normosmia or hyposmia after 36 months. An "Excellent" treatment response according to EUFOREA23 criteria was observed in 76.5% of patients after 36 months. Sixteen patients discontinued Dupilumab, 12 permanently. Adverse events totaled 69 in 48 patients, commonly self-limiting. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the enduring effectiveness and lack of habituation to dupilumab after a sustained therapy of 3 years, providing valuable insights into its long-term therapeutic implications for CRSwNP patients.

Rate of dupilumab use and symptom severity of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis after Draf 3 frontal sinusotomy.

BACKGROUND: The indications for endoscopic modified Lothrop procedure (Draf 3) in patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis (CRSwNP) remain unclear. This study evaluates the effectiveness of Draf 3 for refractory CRSwNP focusing on improvements in disease severity and need for subsequent dupilumab rescue therapy. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients with CRSwNP undergoing Draf 3 surgery at a tertiary center between 2012 and 2022. Clinicodemographic variables were compared across those who did versus did not require rescue with postoperative dupilumab. Time to postoperative dupilumab rescue was analyzed and longitudinal disease-specific outcomes were measured using the sinonasal outcomes test (SNOT-22). RESULTS: Within 87 patients with CRSwNP, 24.1% had aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease (AERD). Significant improvement in SNOT-22 score was found in CRSwNP with AERD (p < 0.001) and without AERD (p = 0.01) up to 24 months postoperative. 14.9% eventually required rescue with a dupilumab. More specifically, of 21 patients with AERD, 24.1% eventually required rescue with dupilumab. Dupilumab rescue was associated with a greater number of prior sinus surgeries (p = 0.02), prior aspirin desensitization (p = 0.02), and worse preoperative Lund-MacKay scores (p < 0.001). No association between biologic rescue and frontal recess antero-posterior diameter was found (p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Draf 3 surgery in CRSwNP was associated with significant improvement in SNOT-22 score at 24 months. Furthermore, only 14.9% of patients required dupilumab rescue. Patients with AERD were more likely to require rescue with dupilumab even though 75.1% avoided treatment with the biologic over the study period.

More Time Spent with Clear Skin and No Itch with Upadacitinib versus Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD), with its hallmark symptoms of pruritus and skin lesions, often impairs patients' quality of life. We assessed time spent with clear/almost clear skin and no/minimal itch during upadacitinib treatment versus placebo or dupilumab among patients with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: This analysis consisted of a post hoc analysis of Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293), Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422), and Heads Up (NCT03738397). Measure Up 1 and 2 were replicate, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies with patients randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily oral upadacitinib 15 mg, upadacitinib 30 mg, or placebo for 16 weeks. Heads Up was a head-to-head, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3b study with patients randomized (1:1) to upadacitinib 30 mg or subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg for 24 weeks. Skin clearance was assessed with the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) at baseline, weeks 1, 2, and 4, and every 4 weeks thereafter. Itch was assessed using the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS) daily over 16 weeks and every 2 weeks thereafter to week 24 in Heads Up. RESULTS: This analysis included 1683 patients in Measure Up 1 and 2 and 673 patients in Heads Up. Through 16 weeks in Measure Up 1 and 2, patients receiving upadacitinib spent 9.8-13.4 times as many days with an EASI 90 response and 7.0-10.3 times as many days with a WP-NRS 0/1 response versus placebo. In Heads Up, patients receiving upadacitinib spent 2.0 and 1.7 times as many days through 16 and 24 weeks, respectively, with an EASI 90 response versus dupilumab. Through 16 and 24 weeks, patients receiving upadacitinib spent 3.0 and 2.6 times as many days, respectively, with a WP-NRS 0/1 response versus dupilumab. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with moderate-to-severe AD spent more time with clear/almost clear skin and no/minimal itch with upadacitinib versus placebo or dupilumab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293), Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422), Heads Up (NCT03738397).

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies in allergy: Targeting IgE, cytokine, and alarmin pathways.

The etiology of allergy is closely linked to type 2 inflammatory responses ultimately leading to the production of allergen-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE), a key driver of many allergic conditions. At a high level, initial allergen exposure disrupts epithelial integrity, triggering local inflammation via alarmins including IL-25, IL-33, and TSLP, which activate type 2 innate lymphoid cells as well as other immune cells to secrete type 2 cytokines IL-4, IL-5 and IL-13, promoting Th2 cell development and eosinophil recruitment. Th2 cell dependent B cell activation promotes the production of allergen-specific IgE, which stably binds to basophils and mast cells. Rapid degranulation of these cells upon allergen re-exposure leads to allergic symptoms. Recent advances in our understanding of the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying allergic pathophysiology have significantly shaped the development of therapeutic intervention strategies. In this review, we highlight key therapeutic targets within the allergic cascade with a particular focus on past, current and future treatment approaches using monoclonal antibodies. Specific targeting of alarmins, type 2 cytokines and IgE has shown varying degrees of clinical benefit in different allergic indications including asthma, chronic spontaneous urticaria, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, food allergies and eosinophilic esophagitis. While multiple therapeutic antibodies have been approved for clinical use, scientists are still working on ways to improve on current treatment approaches. Here, we provide context to understand therapeutic targeting strategies and their limitations, discussing both knowledge gaps and promising future directions to enhancing clinical efficacy in allergic disease management.

Dupilumab reduces inflammatory biomarkers in pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) often have elevated type 2 inflammatory serum biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: To report changes in thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC)/CC chemokine ligand 17 (CCL17), total immunoglobulin E (IgE), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and eosinophils in pediatric patients treated with dupilumab or placebo. METHODS: Biomarker data were analyzed from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies of patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Patients aged 6 months-5 years were randomized to weight-dependent dupilumab 200/300mg every 4 weeks (q4w) or placebo; aged 6-11 years to dupilumab 100/200mg every 2 weeks (q2w), dupilumab 300mg q4w, or placebo; aged 12-17 years to dupilumab 200/300mg q2w, dupilumab 300mg q4w, or placebo. The youngest two groups also applied topical corticosteroids. Median percent changes from baseline to week 16 reported using last observation carried forward method, censoring after rescue treatment. RESULTS: Pediatric patients who received dupilumab vs placebo achieved significantly greater median percent reductions at week 16 in: TARC/CCL17 (-83.3% to -72.4% vs -14.9% to -1.8%), total IgE (-71.2% to -58.4% vs -21.0% to +28.1%), and LDH (-26.2% to -9.8% vs -1.5% to +1.5%). All comparisons were significantly different (P < .0001) between each dupilumab dosing group and respective placebo groups. In contrast, absolute changes in eosinophils were small in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment for pediatric patients with moderate-to-severe AD significantly reduced levels of TARC/CCL17, total IgE, and LDH to levels comparable to those of healthy controls, reflecting a reduction in systemic type 2 and general inflammation.

Type 2 asthma paediatric patients eligible for dupilumab: An Italian biomarker-based analysis.

Background: Type 2 inflammation is the principal determinant of asthma in children, and it leads to the downstream activation of eosinophils (EOS), the production of immunoglobulin-E (IgE), and increased levels of fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO). Dupilumab received the approval for the treatment of uncontrolled severe Type 2 asthma in children. Objective: The aim of this analysis was to calculate the Type 2 severe asthma paediatric population who would be eligible for treatment with dupilumab in Italy and characterize them by expected biomarker status. Methods: The calculation of the dupilumab-eligible population employed a two-phase approach: 1) estimating the total number of children aged 6-11 years with uncontrolled severe asthma; and 2) stratifying the severe uncontrolled asthma population, based on appropriate biomarker levels, thus identifying patients eligible for treatment with dupilumab. The VOYAGE study provided the data for this analysis. Results: The two-phase approach utilizing VOYAGE data revealed that the average number of paediatric patients with uncontrolled severe asthma was N = 1007. Stratification of these patients, as per VOYAGE data, indicated that the majority (N = 740; 73.5%) would have ≥2 elevated biomarkers, and over one-third patients (N = 434, 43.1%) would exhibit simultaneously elevated levels of EOS, FeNO and IgE. Of the paediatric patients, N = 864 were identified as eligible to dupilumab treatment, constituting 85.8% of the target population. Notably, nearly half eligible patients (N = 454) displayed elevated levels of both EOS and FeNO biomarkers, while the substantial majority (81.1%) exhibited at least an increase of EOS levels (N = 817). Patients with increased FeNO levels without a concurrent increase in EOS were less frequent (N = 47; 5.4% of the eligible population). Conclusion: The simultaneous testing of multiple biomarkers during baseline patient assessment and disease follow-up is highly recommended. Utilizing cost-effective tests, physicians can estimate the prevalence of severe Type 2 asthma, categorize patients into distinct phenotypes (eosinophilic, allergic, or mixed), and consequently identify and prescribe the most suitable therapeutic interventions. This approach also facilitates the ongoing evaluation and adjustment of the treatment strategies based on individual patient responses.

Real-life management of atopic dermatitis patients with an inadequate response to on-label use of dupilumab.

In patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) showing an inadequate response to dupilumab 300mg/2weeks, few real-life studies reported the response to alternative regimen maintaining dupilumab. To assess and analyze the response to an increased dose of dupilumab or its combination with cyclosporin A (CsA), methotrexate (MTX), or itraconazole (ITRA), all adult AD patients from 7 French University Hospitals were retrospectively included if they achieved an inadequate response to dupilumab 300mg/2weeks and were subsequently treated with an increased dose of dupilumab (300mg every 7 or 10 days), or a combination of dupilumab 300mg/2weeks with CsA, MTX or ITRA. The response after 3 months, along with epidemiological, clinical, and therapeutic baseline characteristics, were collected. Overall, 68.75% of the 48 included patients achieved an improved response, including 45.8% of complete response (CR). No strategy proved significantly better. Patients showing an initial no response never achieved a further CR versus 52.4% of patients with an initial partial response (p = 0.025). Digestive intolerance and tachycardia led to MTX and ITRA discontinuation in 3 patients. Increasing the dose of dupilumab or combining it with CsA, MTX, or ITRA could be alternative and safe options, to be evaluated in further medico-economic studies.

Comparative Effectiveness of Dupilumab and Omalizumab on Asthma Exacerbations and Systemic Corticosteroid Prescriptions: Real-World US ADVANTAGE Study.

BACKGROUND: In the US, dupilumab is approved for moderate-to-severe eosinophilic or oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, while omalizumab is approved for managing moderate-to-severe allergic asthma uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids. However, limited comparative effectiveness data exist for these biologics due to differing patient characteristics and treatment histories. OBJECTIVE: This analysis assessed the real-world effectiveness of dupilumab and omalizumab for asthma among patients in the US. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, TriNetX Dataworks electronic medical record data were used to identify asthma patients (age: ≥12 years) who initiated (index) dupilumab or omalizumab between November 2018 and September 2020, and who had at least 12 months of pre- and post-index clinical information. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied to balance potential confounding in treatment groups. Asthma exacerbation rates and systemic corticosteroid (SCS) prescriptions were compared using a doubly robust negative binomial regression model, adjusting for baseline exacerbation/SCS rates and patient characteristics with ≥10% standardized differences after IPTW. RESULTS: Overall, 2,138 patients in dupilumab and 1,313 in omalizumab treatment groups met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. After weighting, the majority of baseline characteristics were balanced (standard difference <10%) between the two groups. Dupilumab was associated with a 44% lower asthma exacerbation rate (p<0.0001) than omalizumab. Additionally, dupilumab treatment significantly (p<0.05) reduced SCS prescriptions by 28% during the follow-up period compared to omalizumab treatment. CONCLUSION: The US ADVANTAGE real-world study demonstrated a significant reduction in severe asthma exacerbations and SCS prescriptions for patients prescribed dupilumab compared to those prescribed omalizumab during 12 months of follow-up.

Efficacy of different biologics for treating chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a debate around the use of biological agents in the treatment of chronic sinusitis with nasal polyps. Therefore, this study's purpose was to assess the effectiveness of various biologics in the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. METHODS: A systematic and manual search was conducted for all relevant studies from inception to December 20, 2023. Two independent authors carried out the search, screening, assessment, and data extraction. Network meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 14 software. RESULTS: Our analysis includes a comprehensive set of 19 studies. These studies compared the efficacy of four distinct biologic treatments. The results of reticulated Meta-analysis showed that Dupilumab (MD = - 1.85, 95% CI: - 2.47, - 1.24), Omalizumab (MD = - 1.30, 95% CI: - 1.90, - 0.70), Benralizumab (MD = - 0.84, 95% CI: - 1.66, - 0.03) and Mepolizumab (MD = - 1.48, 95% CI: - 2.22, - 0.74) were superior to placebo from the nasal polyp score(NPS), Dupilumab (MD = - 12.56, 95% CI: - 22.49,- 2.63) was superior to placebo from the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22(SNOT-22)score, and Dupilumab (MD = - 0.84, 95% CI: - 1.08, - 0.59) and Omalizumab (RR = - 0.51, 95% CI: - 0.83, - 0.19) were superior to placebo from the nasal congestion severity(NCS). In terms of cumulative sorting under the surface of the curve (SUCRA) values, Dupilumab was the best performer in the NPS (0.92), SNOT-22 score (0.70), and NCS (0.93); Four different biologics outperformed placebo in the NPS, SNOT-22 score, and NCS. CONCLUSION: In patients with CRSwNP, based on the efficacy (NPS, (SNOT-22) score, NCS) and, dupilumab is the most efficacious for CRSwNP.

Use of dupilumab for recalcitrant bullous pemphigoid: A case report.

Bullous pemphigoid is an autoimmune blistering disease affecting the dermo-epidermal junction, most commonly seen in older patients. First-line treatment includes systemic, topical corticosteroids and/or steroid-sparing immunosuppressants. Treatment with these medications may be limited by their safety profile. Dupilumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 cytokines currently indicated for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, severe asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis, and moderate-to-severe prurigo nodularis. We report a case of a patient with recalcitrant bullous pemphigoid effectively treated with dupilumab.