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

Baseline Body Surface Area and Itch Severity Define Response to Baricitinib in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis at Week 16

INTRODUCTION

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease characterized by heterogeneous clinical phenotypes and high symptom burden, especially through itch. Baricitinib (BARI), an oral Janus Kinase 1/2 inhibitor, is approved in Europe, Japan, and other countries, for treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe AD who are candidates for systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis of a Phase 3 topical corticosteroid (TCS) combination therapy trial (BREEZE-AD7) aims to characterize patients who might benefit most from BARI.

METHOD

Classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was used to identify baseline predictors for patients treated with BARI 4-mg, who achieved ≥ 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75), or EASI75 or Itch Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) ≥ 4-point improvement at week 16 (responders), versus non-responders. Subgroup efficacy analyses were performed based on identified predictor variables, combined with Itch NRS < 7/ ≥ 7. Missing data were imputed as non-responder.

RESULTS

Baseline body surface area (BSA) was identified by CART as strongest variable predicting response to BARI at week 16, with a cut-off around 40% (BSA ≤ 40%). When combining BSA with itch severity, highest response rates were achieved by BARI patients with BSA ≤ 40%/Itch NRS ≥ 7 at baseline. In this subgroup, 69% and 58% of patients treated with BARI 4-mg achieved EASI75 and Itch NRS ≥ 4-point response at week 16, respectively. While these response rates were 65% and 50% for BARI 4-mg patients with baseline BSA ≤ 40%/Itch NRS < 7, they were 33% and 11% in BSA > 40%/Itch NRS < 7, and 32% and 49% in BSA > 40%/Itch NRS ≥ 7 subgroups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Using a machine learning approach, patients with moderate-to-severe AD and a BSA affecting 10-40% and Itch NRS ≥ 7 were characterized as likely to benefit most from BARI 4-mg TCS combination therapy. This was confirmed by subgroup analyses, which showed that these patients are most likely to show favorable response rates in improving AD signs and symptoms, specifically itch, after 16 weeks of treatment.

Comparison of Efficacy of Baricitinib and Dupilumab in the Treatment of Chinese Moderate-To-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) patients with insufficient response or intolerance to topical medication remains clinical challenges, and there is a paucity of head-to-head trials comparing the efficacy of novel biological agents such as JAK inhibitor and antibody.

METHODS

To compare the efficacy of selective JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor baricitinib and interleukin-4 monoclonal antibody dupilumab in the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe AD, a retrospective cohort study method was adopted. Clinical data from June 2020 to April 2022 were systematically reviewed. Eligible patients who received baricitinib or dupilumab were screened according to the following inclusion criteria: (1) age ≥ 18 years; (2) moderate-to-severe AD: baseline investigator global assessment (IGA) score ≥ 3, baseline eczema area and severity index (EASI) score ≥ 16; (3) poor response or intolerance to at least one topical drug in the past 6 months; (4) no topical glucocorticoids were used in the past 2 weeks and no systematic treatment was given in the past 4 weeks. Patients of the baricitinib group were treated with oral baricitinib in doses of 2 mg per day for 16 weeks, and patients of the dupilumab group were treated with standardized use of dupilumab for 16 weeks, with the initial 600 mg subcutaneous injection and the following 300 mg subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks. The clinical efficacy score indexes including the IGA score, EASI score, and Itch Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score. These scores at 0, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks after the start of treatment were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 54/45 patients treated with baricitinib/dupilumab were included. There was no significant difference in the decrease of all scores between the two groups at the 4th week (p > 0.05). There was no difference in the EASI score and Itch NRS score (p > 0.05), but the IGA score of the baricitinib group was lower at the 16th week (Z = 4.284, p < 0.001). Within the first 4 weeks, the Itch NRS score of the baricitinib group decreased rapidly, but with the prolongation of treatment time, there was no significant difference between the two groups at the 16th week (Z = 1.721, p = 0.085).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of baricitinib at a dose of 2 mg daily was similar to dupilumab, and the improvement in pruritus was significantly faster in the early stage of treatment (the first 4 weeks) than that of dupilumab.

An indirect comparison of 144-week efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dolutegravir plus lamivudine and second-generation integrase inhibitor-based, 3-drug, single-tablet regimens in therapy-naive people with HIV-1

BACKGROUND

The long-term efficacy and safety of the 2-drug regimen dolutegravir (DTG) + lamivudine (3TC) and 3-drug single-tablet regimens recommended for antiretroviral therapy (ART)-naive people with HIV-1 (PWH) have yet to be compared directly in clinical trials. This indirect treatment comparison (ITC) was conducted to compare the durability of efficacy and long-term safety of DTG + 3TC vs second-generation, integrase strand transfer inhibitor (INSTI)-based, 3-drug, single-tablet regimens bictegravir/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide (BIC/FTC/TAF) and DTG/abacavir/3TC (DTG/ABC/3TC) at Week 144 after treatment initiation.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified 4 trials evaluating the treatment regimens of interest in ART-naive PWH (GEMINI-1, GEMINI-2, GS-US-380-1489, and GS-US-380-1490). Safety, efficacy, and tolerability results were compared using fixed-effects Bucher ITC methodology to calculate relative outcomes.

RESULTS

Rates of virologic suppression (HIV-1 RNA < 50 copies/mL, US Food and Drug Administration Snapshot analysis) and virologic failure (HIV-1 RNA ≥ 50 copies/mL) as well as mean change in CD4 + cell count were similar with DTG + 3TC, BIC/FTC/TAF, and DTG/ABC/3TC at Week 144. Serious adverse events occurred less frequently with DTG + 3TC compared with both BIC/FTC/TAF (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI 0.29-0.87; P = 0.014) and DTG/ABC/3TC (OR, 0.38; 95% CI 0.19-0.75; P = 0.006). Discontinuations and overall adverse events were similar across all 3 regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the 2-drug regimen DTG + 3TC offers comparable and durable efficacy with fewer serious adverse events vs BIC/FTC/TAF and DTG/ABC/3TC through 144 weeks of treatment in ART-naive PWH. These long-term comparative data support the therapeutic value of DTG + 3TC for PWH.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of baricitinib versus dupilumab for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: an Italian healthcare system perspective

AIMS

To assess, within the Italian healthcare system, the cost-effectiveness of baricitinib versus dupilumab, both in combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS), in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) who are eligible for but have failed, have contraindications to, or cannot tolerate ciclosporin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the perspective of the Italian healthcare payer, direct medical costs associated with each intervention were estimated over a lifetime horizon. A Markov cohort model utilized the proportions of patients with ≥75% improvement Eczema Area and Severity Index obtained from clinical trials. Health outcomes were evaluated in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to assess the cost effectiveness of baricitinib against a willingness-to-pay threshold of €35,000 per QALY gained.

RESULTS

In the base case, with secondary censoring applied, patients treated with dupilumab or baricitinib, in combination with TCS, accumulated total costs of €135,780 or €129,586, and total QALYs of 18.172 or 18.133, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of dupilumab versus baricitinib was estimated at €160,905/QALY.

LIMITATIONS

Core assumptions were needed to extrapolate available short-term clinical trial data to lifelong data, adding uncertainty. Benefits of baricitinib seen in clinical trials and not assessed in dupilumab clinical trials were not included. Discontinuation rates for each treatment were derived from different sources potentially introducing bias. Results may not be generalizable to other populations.

CONCLUSIONS

This cost-effectiveness analysis shows that, from the Italian healthcare payer perspective, in the treatment of patients with moderate to severe AD who have experienced failure on, are intolerant to, or have contraindication to ciclosporin, dupilumab cannot be considered cost-effective when compared with baricitinib. Given its oral administration, favorable risk/benefit profile and lower acquisition cost compared with dupilumab, baricitinib may offer a valuable, cost-effective treatment option-after failure on conventional systemic agents-for patients with moderate to severe AD in Italy.

Daily Practice Experience of Baricitinib Treatment for Patients with Difficult-to-Treat Atopic Dermatitis: Results from the BioDay Registry

Clinical trials have shown that baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, is effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. However, daily practice data are limited. Therefore, this multicentre prospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 16-weeks' treatment with baricitinib in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in daily practice. A total of 51 patients from the BioDay registry treated with baricitinib were included and evaluated at baseline and after 4, 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Effectiveness was assessed using clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements. Adverse events and laboratory assessments were evaluated at every visit. At week 16, the probability (95% confidence interval) of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7 and numerical rating scale pruritus ≤ 4 was 29.4% (13.1-53.5) and 20.5% (8.8-40.9), respectively. No significant difference in effectiveness was found between dupilumab non-responders and responders. Twenty-two (43.2%) patients discontinued baricitinib treatment due to ineffectiveness, adverse events or both (31.4%, 9.8% and 2.0%, respectively). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (n = 6, 11.8%), urinary tract infection (n = 5, 9.8%) and herpes simplex infection (n = 4, 7.8%). In conclusion, baricitinib can be an effective treatment option for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, including patients with non-responsiveness on dupilumab. However, effectiveness of baricitinib is heterogeneous, which is reflected by the high discontinuation rate in this difficult-to-treat cohort.

Baricitinib: A Review in Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis

Baricitinib (Olumiant^®) is an oral small molecule inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2, which have been implicated in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD). In phase III studies in adults with moderate to severe AD who were inadequately controlled with topical corticosteroids (TCS) or systemic treatments (e.g. ciclosporin), or for whom these therapies were not advisable, baricitinib, alone or in combination with TCS, achieved significant and/or clinically relevant improvements in multiple measures of disease severity, pruritus, skin pain, sleep disturbance and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) over 16 weeks. Benefit onset was rapid, with efficacy generally sustained over the longer term (treatment duration ≤ 68 weeks). In this patient population, the safety profile of baricitinib was consistent with that established in the moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) population. Although further longer-term data would be beneficial, current evidence indicates that baricitinib, alone or in combination with TCS, provides an oral alternative to subcutaneous biologics for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in adults who are candidates for systemic therapy.