Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

Effectiveness and safety of dupilumab in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and associated comorbidities: a multicentric prospective study in real life

BACKGROUND

Biologics are currently one of the main treatment options for a number of diseases. The IgG4 monoclonal antibody dupilumab targets the Interleukin-4 receptor alpha chain, thus preventing the biological effects of the cytokines IL-4 and IL-13, that are essential for the Th2 response. Several controlled trials showed that dupilumab is effective and safe in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), severe asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), thus resulting in approval by regulatory agencies. Aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dupilumab in adult patients with CRSwNP stratified by common overlapping comorbid conditions.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, observational, prospective study enrolling adult patients with severe CRSwNP who had started dupilumab treatment in the context of standard care from January 2021 to October 2021. Data were collected from twentynine Italian secondary care centers for allergy and clinical immunology, all of which were part of the Italian Society of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC). A number of efficacy parameters were used. Patient data were compared using the Wilcoxon test for paired data. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS version 20 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

In total, 82 patients with nasal polyposis were identified. A significant improvement was detected for all the applied efficacy parameters, i.e. 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and bilateral endoscopic nasal polyp score (NPS) scores for CRSwNP, Rhinitis Control Scoring System (RCSS) and Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) scores for allergic perennial rhinitis, Forced Expiratory Volume in the 1st second (FEV1) and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) scores for asthma, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores for AD. A non-significant improvement was also obtained in the Urticaria Activity Score over 7 days (UAS7) for chronic spontaneous urticaria. Treatment with dupilumab was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that dupilumab treatment in patients suffering from CRSwNP and associated comorbidities may be suitable. Such outcome, although confirmation by trials is warranted, suggests the possibility to treat different disorders with a single therapy, with favorable effects especially under the cost-effectiveness aspect.

Indirect Treatment Comparison of Baricitinib versus Dupilumab in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis

INTRODUCTION

Indirect treatment comparison was used to compare approved doses of baricitinib and dupilumab for treating adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) who are candidates for systemic therapy.

METHODS

Baricitinib and dupilumab were compared (Bucher method) at weeks 4 and 16. Performance in combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS) was analyzed in patients with inadequate response or inadvisable to topical therapies (population A) and cyclosporine (population B). Population A was additionally examined as monotherapy.

RESULTS

For the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) 75, baricitinib and dupilumab were similar. A ≥ 4-point improvement in itch numerical rating scale (NRS) was significantly more likely with baricitinib 4 mg than dupilumab in population A as monotherapy (RR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.22, 5.61, p = 0.013) and in TCS combination at week 4. These differences were not significant by week 16. For the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), baricitinib 4 mg and dupilumab were similar on mean difference in change from baseline (MDcfb), though some differences were seen between baricitinib 2 mg and dupilumab at week 16 for the population A monotherapy (MDcfb = 2.05, 95% CI 0.53, 3.56, p = 0.016) and TCS combination therapy (MDcfb = 2.48, 95% CI 0.46, 4.50, p = 0.016) groups, and in population B (MDcfb = 3.38 95% CI 1.18, 5.58, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Baricitinib potentially offers more rapid improvement in itch while providing similar efficacy on EASI75 and DLQI outcomes compared with dupilumab.

Controversies in Allergy: The Potential Role of Biologics as First-Line Therapy in Eosinophilic Disorders

With advances in understanding the role of eosinophils in disease pathogenesis, particularly in the airways, gastrointestinal tract, and skin, targeting eosinophils or the cytokines that lead to their production, activation, and survival has become an increasingly pursued therapeutic approach. Newly developed biologic agents target eosinophils directly, other cells interacting with or activating eosinophils, or cytokines in the type 2 inflammatory pathway with specific antibodies. Current treatment paradigms reserve therapy with biologics for patients refractory to or intolerant of corticosteroids or immunosuppressants. Given accumulating data for safety and efficacy of these biologics, however, there is the question of whether targeted treatments should be used earlier in the treatment algorithm. In this article, we discuss the pros and cons of using biologics as first-line therapy for eosinophilic diseases of the airways, gastrointestinal tract, and skin. We highlight emerging biologic agents and future directions for research, as well as a rationale for the early use of some biologics to prevent tissue damage, disease progression, and organ dysfunction in selected conditions.

Comparative Efficacy of Targeted Systemic Therapies for Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis without Topical Corticosteroids: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has not been systematically assessed using recent phase 3 data. This network meta-analysis assesses the comparative efficacy of targeted systemic therapies without the addition of topical corticosteroids (TCS) and/or topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) in adults with moderate to severe AD.

METHODS

The systematic literature review searched through 17 May 2021 for phase 3/4 trials with upadacitinib, interleukin-4 (IL-4), interleukin-13 (IL-13), or JAK inhibitors compared with placebo or active intervention for adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD with inadequate response to TCS/TCI or for whom TCS/TCI was medically inadvisable, without restrictions on year or region. Researchers assessed data using PRISMA guidelines. The proportion of patients achieving trial co-primary endpoints [Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear) and reduction of ≥ 2 points from baseline; proportion of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement ≥ 75% from baseline (EASI-75)]; EASI improvement ≥ 90% from baseline (EASI-90); and ≥ 4-point improvement on Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale from baseline (ΔNRS ≥ 4) were evaluated using Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of 3415 initially identified records, network meta-analysis (NMA) ultimately included 6 records representing 9 unique studies. Two upadacitinib trials were also included. Eleven clinical trials including 6254 patients were analyzed. Upadacitinib 30 mg daily was the most efficacious therapy across all endpoints at the primary endpoint (week 12 or 16) and at earlier timepoints, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg daily and abrocitinib 200 mg daily.

DISCUSSION

Many factors need to be considered for treatment selection for AD. These findings can help healthcare providers when personalizing a patient's treatment.

CONCLUSION

Upadacitinib 30 mg daily, upadacitinib 15 mg daily, and abrocitinib 200 mg daily may be the most efficacious targeted systemic therapies over 12-16 weeks of therapy in AD.

The suitability of treating atopic dermatitis with Janus kinase inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with significant morbidity and reduced quality of life, especially in patients with moderate-severe AD. Recently, topical and oral Janus kinase (JAK)-inhibitors were investigated as potential treatments for mild-moderate and moderate-severe AD. However, rare serious adverse-events observed with JAK-inhibitor therapy in AD, rheumatoid arthritis, and other immune-mediated disorders warrant careful consideration.

AREAS COVERED

This review examines the efficacy and safety of topical and oral JAK-inhibitors for treatments in AD, and reviews potential treatment applications in patients with moderate-severe AD.

EXPERT OPINION

JAK-inhibitors have rapid-onset and robust and durable efficacy, which give them considerable versatility for treating the gamut of AD patients. While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has only approved upadacitinib and abrocitinib to treat moderate-severe AD refractory to treatment with other systemic medications including biologics, or when use of those therapies is not recommended, oral JAK-inhibitors have the potential to be used both as first-line or second-line systemic therapies in moderate-severe AD. However, oral JAK-inhibitors can lead to laboratory anomalies and rare serious adverse events. All of these important characteristics should be addressed in shared-decision making conversations, patient counseling, choosing appropriate therapies for patients, and monitoring patients in clinical practice.

Tralokinumab in Atopic Dermatitis: A Profile of Its Use

Tralokinumab (tralokinumab-ldrm) [Adbry^™ (USA); Adtralza^® (EU)], a human IgG4 monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to interleukin (IL)-13, is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment option for adult patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis who are candidates for systemic therapy. In pivotal phase III trials, subcutaneous tralokinumab improved the clinical signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis as well as quality of life (QOL). In ECZTRA 1 and 2, tralokinumab monotherapy was superior to placebo in the first 16 weeks of treatment, with improvements in pruritus and sleep scores seen as early as week 1. Many patients who met the criteria for clinical response at week 16 maintained this response at week 52. Tralokinumab was also more effective than placebo when used in combination with 'as needed' topical corticosteroids (TCS) in ECZTRA 3 and 7; most tralokinumab recipients used no or very little amounts of TCS. In an open-label extension trial, tralokinumab provided consistent symptom control over the longer term (up to 2 years). The majority of adverse events with tralokinumab, including injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis, were of mild to moderate severity. The tolerability profile of tralokinumab longer term was consistent with that in the phase III trials.

Portuguese recommendations for the treatment of atopic dermatitis with biologic therapy and JAK inhibitors in adult patients

Atopic dermatitis is a highly prevalent chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease with a significant burden on patients, families and healthcare systems. This article presents recommendations developed by the Atopic Dermatitis Group of the Portuguese Society of Dermatology and Venereology addressing several clinical questions that arise in the management and care of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with biologic agents and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors based on the available evidence. The recommendations were generated after a thorough evaluation of existing guidelines on the treatment of atopic dermatitis, publications concerning new biologics and JAK inhibitors not yet incorporated into existing guidelines, and expert-based recommendations. It also includes considerations on atopic dermatitis severity, indications for initiating biologic agents and JAK inhibitors, parameters to be considered in the treatment choice, in particular treatment goals, and recommendations for the use, screening and monitoring of these therapies.

Flare management in atopic dermatitis: from definition to treatment

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a skin immune-mediated inflammatory disease with a chronic-recurrent course. Acute exacerbations or flares are an integral part of the AD course and are generally defined as disease worsening, requiring escalation/intensification of treatment. Management of flares is crucial since their prevention is a key aim of long-term disease control. Nevertheless, difficulties related to this aspect are several, starting from the definition of flare itself, which is not always satisfactory or unambiguous, and needs clarification. Indeed, this hurdle may reduce clarity on treatment choice and generate difficulties when comparing data between studies. Deepening our knowledge on flares could be highly relevant to both clinicians and patients to provide adequate control of the disease through patient education and appropriate treatment. This review aims to summarize current knowledge on the management of AD flares from definition to treatment, highlighting aspects that are still unclear, and identifying any necessary unmet needs to better manage AD.

A Literature Review of Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with pruritus, characterized by recurrent eczema with exacerbations and remissions. AD impairs patients’ QOL and places a heavy burden on patients. Recently, dupilumab, an anti–IL-4Rα antibody, was approved for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe AD who are refractory to topical agents and/or conventional systemic therapy. Clinical trials of dupilumab for AD demonstrated high efficacy and tolerable safety profiles. Furthermore, real-world evidence of dupilumab for AD is accumulating. Most of these data show favorable effectiveness and safety profile; however, they also clarified issues, including conjunctivitis and facial redness. There are still a certain number of patients with significant failure. In this article, we review real-world evidence of dupilumab for AD, identify concerns specific to dupilumab, and discuss unmet needs and issues to be addressed in the future.