Patch Testing to Mentha piperita (Peppermint) Oil: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (2009-2020).

Background: Mentha piperita (MP; peppermint) oil has many commercial uses. Objective: To characterize the epidemiology of contact allergy to MP oil 2% petrolatum. Methods: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data (2009-2020). Results: Of 28,128 patients tested to MP, 161 (0.6%) had an allergic reaction. Most allergic patients were female (77.0%) and/or over 40 years of age (71.4%). The most common anatomical sites of dermatitis included face (31.7%; of these, one-third specified lips), hands (17.4%), and scattered/generalized (18.6%). Nearly one-third (30.4%) of reactions were strong (++)/extreme (+++), and 80.1% were considered currently relevant. Common sources included oral hygiene preparations, foods, and lip products. Co-reaction with at least 1 of the other 19 fragrance/plant-related screening test preparations occurred in 82.6% (133/161) of MP-allergic patients, most commonly Cananga odorata oil (42.9%), fragrance mix I (41.0%), hydroperoxides of linalool (35.7%), Compositae mix (35.4%), Jasminum officinale oil (31.9%), Myroxylon pereirae (31.7%), and propolis (28.1%). Co-reaction with at least 1 of the 3 most commonly used fragrance screening allergens (fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, and/or Myroxylon pereirae) was 59.6%. Conclusions: Twelve-year prevalence of MP allergy was 0.6%. Approximately 40% of cases would have been missed if only fragrance screening allergens were tested.

Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis Maintain Stable Response with No or Minimal Fluctuations with 1 Year of Lebrikizumab Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Lebrikizumab is a novel monoclonal antibody with established efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in multiple Phase 3 trials. One of the ultimate treatment goals for patients with moderate-to-severe AD is to achieve stable disease control without concern for planning future life events. METHODS: In ADvocate1 and ADvocate2, lebrikizumab-treated patients meeting the protocol-defined response criteria at Week 16 were re-randomized 2:2:1 to receive lebrikizumab every 2 weeks (Q2W), lebrikizumab every 4 weeks (Q4W), or placebo Q2W (lebrikizumab withdrawal) for 36 additional weeks. In this post hoc analysis, we evaluated the proportions of patients with no or minimal fluctuations of efficacy during the 36-week maintenance period and plotted individual patient trajectories. We defined no or minimal fluctuations as achieving and maintaining the defined endpoint (≥ 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI 75], ≥ 90% improvement in EASI, Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] ≥ 4-point improvement, or Pruritus NRS ≥ 3-point improvement) for ≥ 80% of the study visits. If patients used rescue medication, discontinued treatment, or transferred to the escape arm, data collected at or after the event were imputed as non-response. RESULTS: The proportions of lebrikizumab responders who maintained EASI 75 with no or minimal fluctuations were 70.8% (lebrikizumab Q2W), 71.2% (lebrikizumab Q4W), and 60.0% (lebrikizumab withdrawal). Of the patients with baseline Pruritus NRS ≥ 4 and who achieved ≥ 4-point improvement at Week 16, 66.1% (lebrikizumab Q2W), 62.7% (lebrikizumab Q4W), and 55.2% (lebrikizumab withdrawal) maintained ≥ 4-point Pruritus NRS improvement with no or minimal fluctuations. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who met the response criteria at Week 16 and continued treatment with lebrikizumab Q2W or Q4W demonstrated a stable response with no or minimal fluctuations of efficacy in measures of skin and itch up to Week 52. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04146363 (ADvocate1) and NCT04178967 (ADvocate2).

Atopic dermatitis, also known as atopic eczema (or just eczema), is a common skin disease that causes itchy, dry skin. Patients with eczema are often unsure of when disease flares will happen, even while receiving treatment. In two global studies, ADvocate1 and ADvocate2, lebrikizumab improved the signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe eczema after 16 weeks of treatment. Most of these patients also saw improvement up to 52 weeks. We wanted to know if patients continued to feel better between Week 16 and Week 52. Patients who responded to lebrikizumab after 16 weeks were given lebrikizumab every 2 weeks, lebrikizumab every 4 weeks, or placebo every 2 weeks. We tested how many patients experienced stable response to therapy, which we said was maintaining the same level of improvement on skin signs and itch symptoms for at least 80% of study visits from Week 16 to Week 52. In patients treated with lebrikizumab every 2 weeks or every 4 weeks, we saw that about seven of every ten patients maintained a stable response in skin improvement and about six of every ten patients maintained stable response in itch symptoms. In patients who stopped lebrikizumab therapy, six out of every ten patients maintained a stable skin improvement and more than five of every ten patients maintained a stable improvement in itch symptoms. In ADvocate1 and ADvocate2, most lebrikizumab-treated patients showed a stable response over time on skin and itch with dosing every 2 weeks or every 4 weeks.

Abrocitinib may improve itch and quality of life in patients with itch-dominant atopic dermatitis.

Background: Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) exhibit heterogeneous clinical phenotypes, reflecting different combinations of itch and lesional severity. AD with severe itch but clear-moderate lesions, also known as itch-dominant AD, is a common clinical phenotype. Objectives: To evaluate abrocitinib efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe AD who have itch-dominant AD. Methods: This post hoc analysis includes pooled data from clinical trials of patients with moderate-to-severe AD receiving abrocitinib (100 or 200 mg) as monotherapy (phase 2b; phase 3 JADE MONO-1 and JADE MONO-2) or in combination with topical therapy (phase 3 JADE COMPARE). Data from the ongoing long-term JADE EXTEND trial (data cutoff April 2020) were also evaluated. Itch-dominant AD was defined as baseline Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) score of 7-10 and Investigator's Global Assessment of 0-3 or Eczema Area and Severity Index of 0‒21. Assessments included a ≥4-point improvement in PP-NRS (PP-NRS4), PP-NRS score of 0 (no itch) or 1 (little itch) in patients with PP-NRS score ≥2 at baseline, ≥4-point improvement from baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM-4), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) of clear or almost clear, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score of 0 or 1 (no impact or little impact of AD on quality of life [QoL]). Results: In the pooled monotherapy trials, 37% of patients had itch-dominant AD at baseline. As early as Week 2, more patients with itch-dominant AD achieved PP-NRS4 with abrocitinib 100 mg (35%) and abrocitinib 200 mg (57%) versus placebo (7%); 6% and 22% versus 0%, respectively, achieved PP-NRS 0/1. More patients achieved a PtGA of clear/almost clear at Week 12 with abrocitinib 100 mg (28%) and abrocitinib 200 mg (45%) than placebo (9%). Additionally, abrocitinib led to clinically meaningful improvements in POEM and DLQI. Most patients with itch-dominant AD experienced itch improvement over time with abrocitinib monotherapy or with concomitant topical therapy; 86%-87% and 62%-67% of patients had no itch-moderate itch and clear-moderate lesions by weeks 24 and 48, respectively. Conclusions: Abrocitinib is highly efficacious in patients with itch-dominant AD, demonstrating rapid, deep, and sustained improvements in itch and clinically meaningful improvements in patients' QoL. Trial Registration Numbers: NCT02780167; NCT03349060; NCT03575871; NCT03720470; NCT03422822.

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).

Combining treat-to-target principles and shared decision-making: International expert consensus-based recommendations with a novel concept for minimal disease activity criteria in atopic dermatitis.

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

Nemolizumab with concomitant topical therapy in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (ARCADIA 1 and ARCADIA 2): results from two replicate, double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Nemolizumab, an interleukin (IL)-31 receptor subunit α antagonist, inhibits the IL-31 pathway of itch and skin inflammation in atopic dermatitis. Two international phase 3 studies were done to assess the efficacy and safety of nemolizumab in atopic dermatitis. In this Article we report results for the 16-week initial treatment period of both trials. METHODS: ARCADIA 1 and ARCADIA 2 were identical 48-week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials in adult and adolescent participants (aged ≥12 years) with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, associated pruritus, and inadequate response to topical steroids. Participants were enrolled from 281 clinics, hospitals, and academic centres in 22 countries across both trials, and were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive nemolizumab 30 mg subcutaneously (baseline loading dose 60 mg) or matching placebo once every 4 weeks with background topical corticosteroids (TCS) with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI; ie, TCS-TCI background treatment). Randomisation was done via interactive response technology and stratified by baseline disease and pruritus severity. Study staff and participants were masked throughout the study, with outcome assessors masked until database lock. Coprimary endpoints at week 16 post-baseline were Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) success (score of 0 [clear skin] or 1 [almost clear skin] with a ≥2-point improvement from baseline) and at least 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index score from baseline (EASI-75 response). Outcome rates were compared between groups with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test adjusting for randomisation strata. The key secondary endpoints were the proportion of participants with Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) score improvement of at least 4 points at weeks 1, 2, 4, and 16; PP-NRS score below 2 at weeks 4 and 16; Sleep Disturbance Numerical Rating Scale score improvement of at least 4 points at week 16; EASI-75 response plus PP-NRS score improvement of at least 4 points at week 16; and IGA success plus PP-NRS score improvement of at least 4 points at week 16. Efficacy analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis; safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of nemolizumab or placebo. Both studies are completed (ClinicalTrials.gov: ARCADIA 1, NCT03985943 and ARCADIA 2, NCT03989349). FINDINGS: Between Aug 9, 2019, and Nov 2, 2022, 1728 participants were enrolled across both trials: 1142 were allocated to nemolizumab plus TCS-TCI (620 in ARCADIA 1 and 522 in ARCADIA 2) and 586 to placebo plus TCS-TCI (321 in ARCADIA 1 and 265 in ARCADIA 2). ARCADIA 1 included 500 (53%) male participants and 441 (47%) female participants, and ARCADIA 2 included 381 (48%) male participants and 406 (52%) female participants. Mean age ranged from 33·3 (SD 15·6) years to 35·2 (17·0) years across the treatment groups. Both trials met the coprimary endpoints; at week 16, a greater proportion of participants receiving nemolizumab plus TCS-TCI versus placebo plus TCS-TCI had IGA success (ARCADIA 1: 221 [36%] of 620 vs 79 [25%] of 321, adjusted percentage difference 11·5% [97·5% CI 4·7-18·3], p=0·0003; ARCADIA 2: 197 [38%] of 522 vs 69 [26%] of 265, adjusted difference 12·2% [4·6-19·8], p=0·0006) and an EASI-75 response (ARCADIA 1: 270 [44%] vs 93 [29%], adjusted difference 14·9% [7·8-22·0], p<0·0001; ARCADIA 2: 220 [42%] vs 80 [30%], adjusted difference 12·5% [4·6-20·3], p=0·0006). Significant benefits were observed with nemolizumab for all key secondary endpoints including improvement in itch, as early as week 1, and sleep improvement by week 16. The safety profile was similar between nemolizumab plus TCS-TCI and placebo plus TCS-TCI. In the safety sets, 306 (50%) of 616 participants (ARCADIA 1) and 215 (41%) of 519 participants (ARCADIA 2) who received nemolizumab plus TCS-TCI had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (serious treatment-emergent adverse events in six [1%] and 13 [3%], respectively); and 146 (45%) of 321 (ARCADIA 1) and 117 (44%) of 263 (ARCADIA 2) who received placebo plus TCS-TCI had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (serious treatment-emergent adverse events in four [1%] and three [1%], respectively). Ten serious treatment-emergent adverse events possibly related to nemolizumab were reported in five (1%) participants in ARCADIA 2. No deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Nemolizumab plus TCS-TCI was efficacious and showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in inflammation and itch in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Nemolizumab might offer a valuable extension of current therapies if approved. FUNDING: Galderma.

Cendakimab in Patients With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Cendakimab selectively targets interleukin (IL)-13, a type 2 cytokine implicated in atopic dermatitis (AD) pathogenesis, by inhibiting binding to its receptors (IL13R-α1 and IL13R-α2). Proof-of-concept work in AD supports using cendakimab for type 2 inflammatory diseases. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cendakimab compared with placebo in patients with moderate to severe AD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, dose-ranging clinical trial was conducted from May 2021 to November 2022. Adult patients with moderate to severe AD and inadequate response to topical medications were enrolled at 69 sites in 5 countries (US [n = 26], Japan [n = 17], Canada [n = 9], Poland [n = 9], and Czech Republic [n = 8]). Data were analyzed between April 25, 2023, and October 16, 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive subcutaneous cendakimab, 360 mg, every 2 weeks; 720 mg, every 2 weeks; 720 mg, once weekly; or placebo. Main Outcome and Measure: Mean percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index scores from baseline to week 16. Hierarchical testing with multiplicity adjustment was performed for 720 mg, once weekly vs placebo, then 720 mg, every 2 weeks vs placebo, and then 360 mg, every 2 weeks vs placebo. Results: Overall, 221 patients were randomized, and 220 received study drug (95 women [43%]; mean [SD] age, 37.7 [13.9] years; 720 mg, once weekly [54 (24%)]; 720 mg, every 2 weeks [55 (25%)]; 360 mg, every 2 weeks [55 (25%)]; placebo [56 (26%)]). The primary efficacy end point was met for cendakimab, 720 mg, once weekly vs placebo (-84.4 vs -62.7; P = .003) but missed statistical significance for 720 mg, every 2 weeks (-76.0 vs -62.7; P = .06). The treatment effect for 360 mg, every 2 weeks (-16.3; nominal P = .03 vs placebo) was comparable with 720 mg, once weekly (-21.8); however, significance was not claimed because the hierarchical testing sequence was interrupted. Of patients with treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation, 4 (7.4%) received 720 mg, once weekly; 2 (3.6%) 720 mg, every 2 weeks; 1 (1.8%) 360 mg, every 2 weeks; and 2 (3.6%) placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this randomized clinical trial indicated that cendakimab was effective, generally safe, and well-tolerated in patients with moderate to severe AD. The primary end point was met with a significant reduction in Eczema Area and Severity Index scores with 720 mg, once weekly at week 16. Cendakimab demonstrated progressive AD improvement at all doses during 16 weeks of treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04800315.

Capturing patient-reported sleep disturbance in atopic dermatitis clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Patient-focused approaches to capturing day-to-day variability in sleep disturbance are needed to properly evaluate the sleep benefits of new treatments. Such approaches rely on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures validated in the target patient population. METHODS: Using atopic dermatitis (AD) as an example of a disease in which sleep is commonly disturbed, we developed a strategy for measuring sleep disturbance in AD trials. In developing this strategy, we conducted a targeted literature review and held concept elicitation interviews with adolescents and adults with AD. We subsequently identified potentially suitable PRO measures and cognitively debriefed them. Finally, we evaluated their psychometric properties using data from phase 2b (NCT03100344) and phase 3 (NCT03985943 and NCT03989349) clinical trials. RESULTS: The literature review confirmed that sleep disturbance is a key impact of AD but failed to identify validated PRO measures for assessing fluctuations in sleep disturbance. Subsequent concept elicitation interviews confirmed the multidimensional nature of sleep disturbance in AD and supported use of a single-item measure to assess overall sleep disturbance severity, complemented by a diary to capture individual components of sleep disturbance. The single-item sleep disturbance numerical rating scale (SD NRS) and multi-item Subject Sleep Diary (SSD)-an AD-adapted version of the Consensus Sleep Diary-were identified as potentially suitable PRO measures. Cognitive debriefing of the SD NRS and SSD demonstrated their content validity and their understandability to patients. Psychometric analyses based on AD trial data showed that the SD NRS is a well-defined, reliable, and fit-for-purpose measure of sleep disturbance in adults with AD. Furthermore, the SD NRS correlated with many SSD sleep parameters, suggesting that most concepts from the SSD can be covered using the SD NRS. CONCLUSIONS: Using these findings, we developed an approach for measuring sleep disturbance in AD trials. Subject to further research, the same approach could also be applied to future trials of other skin diseases where itch causes sleep disturbance.

Efficacy of Upadacitinib and Dupilumab on Achieving Stringent and Composite Skin and Itch Outcomes: an Indirect Comparison of Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Efficacy of upadacitinib has been assessed in trials including Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293), Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422), and Heads Up (NCT03738397). Measure Up 1 and 2 assessed efficacy of upadacitinib 30 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg against placebo, while Heads Up assessed efficacy of upadacitinib 30 mg in a head-to-head trial against dupilumab 300 mg. A head-to-head trial of upadacitinib 15 mg against dupilumab 300 mg has not been conducted. Network meta-analysis has shown that upadacitinib 30 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg are among the most efficacious targeted systemic therapies, but prior indirect comparisons have not evaluated more stringent outcomes. METHODS: A population-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using post hoc individual patient data from Measure Up 1 and 2 and Heads Up to estimate how upadacitinib 15 mg would have performed if included in Heads Up by adjusting for patient-level covariates. Absolute response rates at weeks 4, 16, and 24 were estimated for the following outcomes: no/minimal itch [Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS) score of 0/1], Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of ≤ 3 (EASI ≤ 3), 100% improvement in EASI (EASI 100), both ≥ 90% improvement in EASI (EASI 90) and WP-NRS 0/1, both EASI ≤ 3 and WP-NRS 0/1, and both EASI 100 and WP-NRS 0/1. The analysis was conducted on adult patients, aligned with the intention-to treat population for the clinical trials, and used non-responder imputation. RESULTS: Across all outcomes assessed, the estimated absolute response rates were greatest for upadacitinib 30 mg, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg and then dupilumab. This pattern was observed at week 4, week 16, and week 24. CONCLUSIONS: For adults with moderate-to-severe AD, upadacitinib 30 mg appears to be the most efficacious treatment in attaining more stringent and composite outcomes across multiple timepoints, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg and then dupilumab 300 mg.

Patient-reported burden in adults with atopic dermatitis: an international qualitative study.

The objective was to study a large, international, ethnically diverse population of patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) to support the creation of patient-centric recommendations for AD management. Qualitative data were generated from 45-min, 1:1 telephone interviews conducted across 15 countries in each patient's native language. Interviews explored the impact of AD on patients' lives, patients' most important symptoms, treatment expectations, and treatment decision-making. Participants were also questioned on their current knowledge of AD scoring systems and what was most important to include in these tools. In total, 88 adult patients (≥ 18 years old) receiving treatment for AD were recruited through a market research database, clinician referrals, and local advertising. All patients were screened to ensure a balanced and diverse sample in terms of age, gender, educational level, employment status, geographic location, and AD severity. Patients involved in market research or activities supporting advocacy groups within the previous 6 months or affiliated with or employed by pharmaceutical companies were excluded. AD had a substantial impact on patients' lives. Itch, skin redness, and dry/flaky skin were the most frequently reported symptoms, with > 75% of patients experiencing these symptoms every 1-3 days. Mental health issues were common and resulted in the greatest negative impact on patients' daily lives. Patients perceived clinicians to underestimate the burden of their AD. Patients had little awareness of AD scoring systems and indicated a preference for these to be more clearly incorporated in clinical practice. For an ideal scoring system, patients favored using a combination of patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes to reflect disease burden and ensure consistency across all settings. This global study generated diverse patient perspectives on the disease burden of AD, their expectations of treatment, and their views on AD scoring methods. These data provide evidence to support the development of patient-centric recommendations for AD management.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis in Construction Workers: A Retrospective Analysis of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group Data, 2001-2020.

Background: Construction workers (CWs) are at risk for occupational contact dermatitis (CD) owing to workplace exposures. Objective: Determine the prevalence of occupational allergic CD and characterize common occupational allergens in CWs referred for patch testing in the United States and Canada. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from 2001 to 2020. Results: Of 47,843 patch-tested patients, 681 (1.4%) were CWs. Compared with non-CWs, CWs were more likely to be male (91.0% vs 30.9%) have occupational skin disease (36.9% vs 11.4%) and have hand involvement (37.2% vs 22.5%) (all P < 0.0001). Of 681 CWs, 60.1% (411) had clinically relevant positive patch test reactions, and nearly 1/3 of CWs (128) had occupationally relevant reactions. Most common occupationally relevant allergens were potassium dichromate 0.25% pet. (30.5%, 39/128), bisphenol A epoxy resin 1% pet. (28.1%, 36/128), carba mix 3% pet. (14.8%, 19/128), cobalt (ii) chloride hexahydrate 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128), and thiuram mix 1% pet. (14.1%, 18/128). Top sources of occupationally relevant allergens were cement/concrete/mortar (20.4%, 46/225), gloves (15.1%, 34/225), and coatings (paint/lacquer/shellac/varnish/stains) (9.8%, 22/225). Conclusions: Occupational CD in North American CWs is common. In this group, frequently identified etiological sources of occupational allergic CD included metals, epoxy resin, and rubber.

Integrated Safety Update of Abrocitinib in 3802 Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Data from More than 5200 Patient-Years with Up to 4 Years of Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1-selective inhibitor, is efficacious in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with a manageable long-term safety profile. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to provide updated integrated long-term safety results for abrocitinib from available data accrued up to a maximum of almost 4 years in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis from the JADE clinical development program. METHODS: Analysis included 3802 patients (exposure: 5213.9 patient-years) from the phase II monotherapy study (NCT02780167) and the phase III studies JADE MONO-1 (NCT03349060), JADE MONO-2 (NCT03575871), JADE TEEN (NCT03796676), JADE COMPARE (NCT03720470), JADE DARE (NCT04345367; 200 mg only), JADE REGIMEN (NCT03627767), and JADE EXTEND (NCT03422822; data cutoff 25 September, 2021). Data from patients receiving one or more doses of abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg were pooled in a consistent-dose cohort (patients were allocated to receive the same abrocitinib dose throughout exposure in the qualifying parent study and/or long-term study) or a variable-dose cohort (patients received open-label abrocitinib 200 mg; responders were randomized to abrocitinib 200 mg, 100 mg, or placebo, and could then receive abrocitinib 200 mg plus topical corticosteroids as rescue therapy). Incidence rates of adverse events of special interest were assessed. Cox regression analysis of risk factors for herpes zoster and serious infections was performed. RESULTS: Overall, this safety analysis of long-term data up to a maximum of ~ 4 years of abrocitinib exposure does not indicate any changes from the previously reported risk profile. The most frequent serious infections (per Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred term) with consistent-dose abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg were herpes zoster (0.5% and 0.2%), pneumonia (0.2% with either dose), and herpes simplex (0.1% with either dose). Risk factors for herpes zoster were a history of herpes zoster, abrocitinib 200-mg dose, age ≥ 65 years, absolute lymphocyte count < 1 × 103/mm3 before the event, and residing in Asia. For serious infections, > 100 kg body weight was a risk factor. Incidence rate/100 patient-years (95% confidence interval) with the consistent abrocitinib 200-mg and 100-mg dose combined was higher in older (aged ≥ 65 years) patients versus younger (aged 18 to < 65 years) patients for serious adverse events (17.6 [11.7‒25.4] vs 6.7 [5.8‒7.8]), malignancy excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (2.4 [0.6‒6.0] vs 0.1 [0.0‒0.4]), non-melanoma skin cancer (2.4 [0.6‒6.1] vs 0.2 [0.1‒0.4]), lymphopenia (3.5 [1.3‒7.6] vs 0.1 [0.0‒0.3]), and venous thromboembolism (1.7 [0.4‒5.1] vs 0.1 [0.0‒0.3]). Incident rate/100 patient-years (95% confidence interval) of non-melanoma skin cancer with the consistent abrocitinib 200-mg and 100-mg dose combined was higher in current/former smokers (0.9 [0.4‒1.6]) vs never-smokers (0.0 [0.0‒0.1]). CONCLUSIONS: This safety update showed a consistent profile for abrocitinib with no new safety signals and continues to support that abrocitinib has a manageable long-term safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Risk of specific adverse events was higher in certain patient populations, especially those aged ≥ 65 years. [Video abstract available.] CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02780167; study start date: April, 2016; primary completion date: March, 2017; study completion date: April, 2017. NCT03349060; study start date: 7 December, 2017; study completion date: 26 March, 2019. NCT03575871; study start date: 29 June, 2018; study completion date: 13 August, 2019. NCT03720470; study start date: 29 October, 2018; primary completion date: 27 December, 2019; study completion date: 6 March, 2020. NCT03796676; study start date: 18 February, 2019; study completion date: 8 April, 2020. NCT03627767; study start date: 11 June, 2018; primary completion date: 2 September, 2020; study completion date: 7 October, 2020. NCT04345367; study start date: 11 June, 2020; primary completion date: 16 December, 2020; study completion date: 13 July, 2021. NCT03422822; study start date: 8 March, 2018; study completion date: ongoing (estimated completion date: 31 January, 2026).

Abrocitinib is an approved treatment for people with moderate or severe atopic dermatitis, also known as AD or atopic eczema. Abrocitinib is a tablet that is taken by mouth once a day. This safety analysis looked at the side effects of treatment in a large group of adults and adolescents with moderate or severe AD who took abrocitinib up to a maximum of almost 4 years. This analysis also looked at which people were more likely to have certain side effects after taking abrocitinib. The results from this analysis were similar to those of previous safety analyses with abrocitinib, with no new side effects. Infections such as shingles, pneumonia, or herpes simplex can occur during treatment with abrocitinib. Shingles was more likely to occur in people who previously had shingles before taking abrocitinib, or who took the higher dose of abrocitinib (200 mg), or were 65 years of age or older, or had certain blood test results, or lived in Asia. People who are 65 years of age or older and took abrocitinib were more likely to develop some types of cancer, have certain abnormal blood test results, or develop blood clots in the veins than people with AD who were younger and took abrocitinib. Current or former smokers with AD who took abrocitinib were more likely to develop skin cancer (but not melanoma) than people with AD who took abrocitinib but have never smoked. This analysis further shows that abrocitinib had manageable safety in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Video abstract: Integrated safety update of abrocitinib in 3802 patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: data from more than 5200 patient-years with up to 4 years of exposure (MP4 63720 KB).

Predicting Abrocitinib Efficacy at Week 12 Based on Clinical Response at Week 4: A Post Hoc Analysis of Four Randomized Studies in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

INTRODUCTION: Early prediction of abrocitinib efficacy in atopic dermatitis (AD) could help identify candidates for an early dose increase. A predictive model determined week 12 efficacy based on week 4 responses in patients receiving abrocitinib 100 mg/day and assessed the effect of an abrocitinib dose increase on platelet counts. METHODS: Analysis included the phase 3 trials JADE MONO-1 (NCT03349060), MONO-2 (NCT03575871), COMPARE (NCT03720470), and TEEN (NCT03796676). For platelet counts and simulations, a phase 2 psoriasis trial (NCT02201524) and phase 2b (NCT02780167) and phase 3 (MONO-1, MONO-2, and REGIMEN (NCT03627767)) abrocitinib trials were pooled. A training-and-validation framework assessed potential predictors of response at week 4: score and score change from baseline in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS), and percentage change from baseline in EASI. The dependent variables at week 12 were ≥ 75% improvement in EASI (EASI-75) and IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline. The probability of each variable to predict week 12 EASI-75 and IGA responses was calculated. RESULTS: In the training cohort (n = 453), 72% of the ≥ 50% improvement in EASI (EASI-50) at week 4 responders and 16% of the nonresponders with abrocitinib 100 mg achieved EASI-75 at week 12; 48% and 6% of the week 4 EASI-50 responders and nonresponders, respectively, achieved week 12 IGA response. Similar results occurred with week 4 IGA = 2, ≥ 4-point improvement from baseline in PP-NRS, or EASI = 8 responders/nonresponders. Platelet counts after an abrocitinib dose increase from 100 to 200 mg were similar to those seen with continuous dosing with abrocitinib 100 mg or 200 mg. CONCLUSION: Achieving week 4 clinical responses with abrocitinib 100 mg may be useful in predicting week 12 responses. Week 4 nonresponders may benefit from a dose increase to abrocitinib 200 mg, and those that receive this dose increase are likely to achieve treatment success at week 12, with no significant impact on platelet count recovery. Video abstract available for this article. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03349060, NCT03575871, NCT03720470, NCT03796676, NCT02201524, NCT02780167 and NCT03627767.

Abrocitinib is an approved treatment for people with moderate or severe atopic dermatitis. Abrocitinib tablets are available in two doses (100 and 200 mg) and are taken by mouth once daily. Some people with atopic dermatitis who are taking abrocitinib 100 mg may need to increase the dose to 200 mg to get adequate symptom relief. We studied whether people with atopic dermatitis who did or did not experience clear skin or itch relief after taking abrocitinib 100 mg for 4 weeks are likely or not likely to experience relief after 12 weeks of treatment. We also defined the level of response after 4 weeks of treatment that best differentiates people who did or did not experience symptom relief, and we identified who might benefit from increasing the abrocitinib dose from 100 to 200 mg. We found that people with atopic dermatitis who had symptom relief after 4 weeks of abrocitinib 100 mg treatment were much more likely to have greater relief after 12 weeks, and people who did not achieve symptom relief after 4 weeks may benefit from a dose increase at week 4. Some people who receive abrocitinib 200 mg may have a temporary decrease in the number of certain blood cells called platelets at week 4, but platelets return to near-normal levels by week 12. This analysis showed that increasing the abrocitinib dose from 100 to 200 mg at week 4 did not seem to affect the platelet numbers after week 4. Video abstract (MP4 174529 KB).

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.

Efficacy, Safety, and Long-Term Disease Control of Ruxolitinib Cream Among Adolescents with Atopic Dermatitis: Pooled Results from Two Randomized Phase 3 Studies.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD), a highly pruritic, inflammatory skin disease, affects approximately 7% of adolescents globally. A topical formulation of ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor, demonstrated safety and efficacy among adolescents/adults in two phase 3 studies (TRuE-AD1/TRuE-AD2). OBJECTIVE: To describe safety and efficacy of 1.5% ruxolitinib cream versus vehicle and long-term disease control of ruxolitinib cream among adolescents aged 12-17 years from pooled phase 3 study data. METHODS: Patients [≥ 12 years old with AD for ≥ 2 years, Investigator's Global Assessment score (IGA) 2/3, and 3-20% affected body surface area (BSA) at baseline] were randomized 2:2:1 to ruxolitinib cream (0.75%/1.5%) or vehicle for 8 weeks of continuous use followed by a long-term safety (LTS) period up to 52 weeks with as-needed use. Patients originally applying vehicle were rerandomized 1:1 to 0.75%/1.5% ruxolitinib cream. Efficacy measures at week 8 included IGA treatment success (IGA-TS; i.e., score of 0/1 with ≥ 2 grade improvement from baseline), ≥ 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75), and ≥ 4-point improvement in itch numerical rating scale (NRS4). Measures of disease control during the LTS period included IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and percentage affected BSA. Safety was assessed throughout the study. RESULTS: Of 1249 randomized patients, 245 (19.6%) were aged 12-17 years. Of these, 45 patients were randomized to vehicle and 92 patients to 1.5% ruxolitinib cream. A total of 104/137 (75.9%) patients continued on 1.5% ruxolitinib cream in the LTS period [82/92 (89.1%) continued on 1.5% ruxolitinib cream; 22/45 (48.9%) patients on vehicle were reassigned to 1.5% ruxolitinib cream], and 83/104 (79.8%) of these patients completed the LTS period. At week 8, substantially more patients who applied 1.5% ruxolitinib cream versus vehicle achieved IGA-TS (50.6% versus 14.0%), EASI-75 (60.9% versus 34.9%), and NRS4 (52.1% versus 17.4%; P = 0.009). The mean (SD) reduction in itch NRS scores was significantly greater in patients applying 1.5% ruxolitinib cream versus vehicle from day 2 [- 0.9 (1.9) versus -0.2 (1.4); P = 0.03]. During the LTS period, mean (SD) trough steady-state ruxolitinib plasma concentrations at weeks 12/52 were 27.2 (55.7)/15.5 (31.5) nM. The percentage of patients achieving IGA score of 0 or 1 was sustained or further increased with 1.5% ruxolitinib cream; mean affected BSA was generally low (< 3%; i.e., mild disease). Through 52 weeks, application site reactions occurred in 1.8% of adolescent patients applying 1.5% ruxolitinib cream at any time; no patients had serious adverse events. There were no serious infections, malignancies, major adverse cardiovascular events, or thromboembolic events. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful anti-inflammatory and antipruritic effects were demonstrated with 1.5% ruxolitinib cream in the subset of adolescent patients with AD, comparable with those observed in the overall study population; long-term, as-needed use maintained disease control and was well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT03745638 (registered 19 November 2018) and NCT03745651 (registered 19 November 2018).

Lack of association of atopic dermatitis severity and morphology with asthma onset and control.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is one of the most well-recognized comorbidities of atopic dermatitis (AD). However, the relationship of AD severity and morphology with asthma characteristics in adults is not well defined. OBJECTIVES: To understand associations of AD severity and morphology with comorbid asthma age-of-onset and control in adults with AD. METHODS: A cross-sectional, dermatology practice-based study was performed in adults (≥ 18 years) with AD and history of asthma (N = 252). Self-administered electronic questionnaires were completed by patients, including demographics, patient-reported outcomes measures of AD severity, history of asthma, age-of-onset, and Asthma Control Test (ACT). Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine relationships between AD severity and morphology with asthma age-of-onset and control. RESULTS: The mean ± standard deviation ACT score was 21.7 ± 4.3 (range 5-25), with 55 (21.8%) having ACT scores ≤ 19 indicating poorly controlled asthma. AD severity and morphology were not associated with adult-onset asthma or poor asthma control. CONCLUSIONS: AD severity and morphology were not consistently associated with comorbid asthma age-of-onset or control in adults with AD.

Upadacitinib Rapidly Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes in Atopic Dermatitis: 16-Week Results from Phase 3 Clinical Trials (Measure Up 1 and 2).

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is characterized by intense itch and other symptoms that negatively impact quality of life (QoL). This study evaluates the effect of upadacitinib (an oral selective Janus kinase inhibitor) monotherapy on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD over 16 weeks. METHODS: This integrated analysis of the double-blind, placebo-controlled periods of phase 3 monotherapy clinical trials Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293) and Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422) assessed itch (Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [WP-NRS] and SCORing Atopic Dermatitis [SCORAD]), skin pain and symptom severity (AD Symptom Scale), symptom frequency (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure), sleep (AD Impact Scale [ADerm-IS] and SCORAD), daily activities and emotional state (ADerm-IS), QoL (Dermatology Life Quality Index [DLQI] and Children's DLQI), mental health (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), and patient impressions (Patient Global Impression of Severity, Patient Global Impression of Change, and Patient Global Impression of Treatment). RESULTS: Data from 1683 patients (upadacitinib 15 mg, n = 557; upadacitinib 30 mg, n = 567; placebo, n = 559) were analyzed. A greater proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib versus placebo experienced improvements in itch (≥ 4-point improvement on WP-NRS) by week 1 (upadacitinib 15 mg, 11.2%; upadacitinib 30 mg, 17.7%; placebo, 0.5%; P < 0.001), with response rates sustained through week 16 (upadacitinib 15 mg, 47.1%; upadacitinib 30 mg, 59.8%; placebo, 10.4%; P < 0.001). Improvements were similar for PROs assessing skin pain/symptoms, sleep, daily activities, QoL, emotional state, mental health, and patient impressions of disease severity and treatment. Responses generally improved rapidly (within 1-2 weeks), increased through weeks 4-6, and were maintained through week 16. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily oral upadacitinib monotherapy improved response rates across PROs compared with placebo. Upadacitinib therapy resulted in rapid, sustained improvements in PROs measuring symptom burden and QoL in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT03569293 and NCT03607422.

Atopic dermatitis, or eczema, is characterized by itchy, dry, inflamed skin. These symptoms often make it difficult for patients to get adequate sleep. Patients with atopic dermatitis may also experience anxiety, depression, reduced self-confidence, social isolation, disruption to daily activities like school and work, and decreased quality of life. Many atopic dermatitis symptoms, including itch and psychological impact, are difficult for doctors to assess. Thus, it is important to consider patients' descriptions of their symptoms and quality of life, particularly when assessing treatment benefit. Upadacitinib is an orally administered drug approved to treat moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. We investigated how upadacitinib (15 mg or 30 mg) given once daily to adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in the Measure Up 1 and 2 clinical trials impacts their symptoms and quality of life over a 16-week period. We compared changes in patient-reported itch, pain, sleep, daily activities, emotional state, mental health, and overall quality of life among patients in the clinical trials who received upadacitinib with those in the same studies who received a dummy (placebo) treatment. Upadacitinib improved patient-reported symptoms and quality of life early in the clinical trials, often within the first 1­2 weeks. The extent of the improvements increased through weeks 4­6 of treatment and lasted through week 16. Patients who received upadacitinib reported greater improvements in symptoms and quality of life than did patients who received placebo. Upadacitinib treatment resulted in rapid and lasting improvements in the well-being of patients with atopic dermatitis.