Safety profile and tolerability of topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors for the treatment of atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluating Efficacy and Safety of Crisaborole in Managing Childhood Mild to Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aims/Background Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disorder globally. Crisaborole, a nonsteroidal topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor (PDE4i), has been utilized in treating AD. Crisaborole regulates the production of inflammatory cytokines, which are usually overactive among AD patients. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in treating AD in patients aged ≤18 years. Methods A literature search was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria involved primary studies evaluating the effect of crisaborole in treating dermatitis, articles exploring the use of crisaborole in AD patients below 18 years (>two years), and articles published in English between 2000 and 2022. However, the studies evaluating AD in adult patients, those reporting treatments other than crisaborole, those published before 2000, and articles written in languages other than English were excluded from this analysis. Furthermore, secondary data sources such as case reports, newspaper articles, magazines, and other systematic reviews and meta-analyses were excluded. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4. The risk of bias in the manuscripts was assessed using the Cochrane tool. The I-square test statistic was used to determine heterogeneity, and Egger's test was used to evaluate publication bias. Results Ten studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies exhibited a low risk of bias with no publication bias. Meta-analysis indicated a significant difference in the number of patients attaining Investigator Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success at day 29, with significantly higher patients in the crisaborole group than in the vehicle group (odds ratio (OR) 1.56, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.96; I2 = 77%; p = 0.0001). Similarly, pruritus improvement was significant between the two cohorts at day 29, indicating significantly higher heterogeneity (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.63; I2 = 91%; p = 0.02). Furthermore, the safety profiling of the treatments was insignificant, demonstrating no statistical difference in the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between the two groups with high heterogeneity (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.98; I2 = 99%; p = 0.35). Conclusion Crisaborole demonstrates substantial efficacy in treating mild to moderate AD compared to vehicle therapies, as it reduces the signs and symptoms of the disease. Furthermore, crisaborole is well tolerated and has an acceptable safety profile in treating mild to moderate AD patients.

Nonsteroidal Approaches for Atopic Dermatitis®: A Clinical Update

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

The role of aryl hydrocarbon receptor agonists in the treatment of vitiligo

Vitiligo is a chronic autoimmune disorder characterized by progressive skin depigmentation. Vitiligo significantly impacts patients' quality of life, contributing to psychological and social burdens. Despite readily available therapeutic options, many cases remain refractory to treatment, highlighting the critical need for safer and more effective therapies. Currently, ruxolitinib is the only FDA-approved medication for vitiligo; however, it carries a black box warning for serious adverse effects, including infections, malignancy, and major cardiovascular events, limiting its use. Recent studies have identified the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) as a promising therapeutic target, suggesting that AhR agonists could address the multifaceted pathogenesis of vitiligo. Adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search to analyze the role of AhR agonists in the treatment of vitiligo on PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, and Web of Science databases on April 15, 2024. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising two clinical trials, two case reports, and nine basic science studies. Our search revealed that culturing AhR agonists with melanocytes upregulates melanin-synthesizing enzymes, reduces reactive oxygen species, and modulates pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-17A and IL-22. Tapinarof, a topical AhR agonist used commonly for the treatment of psoriasis, demonstrated clinical efficacy in repigmentation with a favorable safety profile compared to long-term steroid use. Although limited by the number of clinical studies, this review underscores the potential of using AhR agonists, such as tapinarof, as a transformative approach to vitiligo management. Future clinical trials are necessary to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes of AhR agonists.

Topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema: network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema (atopic dermatitis) is the most burdensome skin condition worldwide and cannot currently be prevented or cured. Topical anti-inflammatory treatments are used to control eczema symptoms, but there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and safety of different topical anti-inflammatory treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare and rank the efficacy and safety of topical anti-inflammatory treatments for people with eczema using a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and trial registries on 29 June 2023, and checked the reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included within-participant or between-participant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people of any age with eczema of any severity, but excluded trials in clinically infected eczema, seborrhoeic eczema, contact eczema, or hand eczema. We included topical anti-inflammatory treatments used for at least one week, compared with another anti-inflammatory treatment, no treatment, or vehicle/placebo. Vehicle is a 'carrier system' for an active pharmaceutical substance, which may also be used on its own as an emollient for dry skin. We excluded trials of topical antibiotics used alone, complementary therapies, emollients used alone, phototherapy, wet wraps, and systemic treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were patient-reported eczema symptoms, clinician-reported eczema signs and investigator global assessment. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, long-term control of eczema, withdrawal from treatment/study, and local adverse effects (application-site reactions, pigmentation changes and skin thinning/atrophy were identified as important concerns through patient and public involvement). We used CINeMA to quantify our confidence in the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 291 studies involving 45,846 participants with the full spectrum of eczema severity, mainly conducted in high-income countries in secondary care settings. Most studies included adults, with only 31 studies limited to children aged < 12 years. Studies usually included male and female participants, multiple ethnic groups but predominantly white populations. Most studies were industry-funded (68%) or did not report their funding sources/details. Treatment duration and trial participation were a median of 21 and 28 days (ranging from 7 days to 5 years), respectively. Interventions used were topical corticosteroids (TCS) (172), topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCI) (134), phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors (55), janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors (30), aryl hydrocarbon receptor activators (10), or other topical agents (21). Comparators included vehicle (170) or other anti-inflammatory treatments. The risk of bias was high in 242 of the 272 (89.0%) trials contributing to data analyses, most commonly due to concerns about selective reporting. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was only possible for short-term outcomes. Patient-reported symptoms NMA of 40 trials (6482 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a binary outcome ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 6.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 32.98), potent TCS (OR 5.99, 95% CI 2.83 to 12.69), and ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 5.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 25.25) as the most effective, all with low confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, and crisaborole 2% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and was more effective than mild TCI and PDE-4 inhibitors. NMA of 29 trials (3839 participants) reporting patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome ranked very potent TCS (SMD -1.99, 95% CI -3.25 to -0.73; low confidence) and tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -1.57, 95% CI -2.42 to -0.72; moderate confidence) the highest. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial of 60 participants at high risk of bias. Roflumilast 0.15%, delgocitinib 0.25% or 0.5%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and mild/moderate TCS was less effective than mild TCI. A further 50 trials (9636 participants) reported patient-reported symptoms as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Clinician-reported signs NMA of 32 trials (4121 participants) reported clinician signs as a binary outcome and ranked potent TCS (OR 8.15, 95% CI 4.99, 13.57), tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 8.06, 95% CI 3.30, 19.67), ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 7.72, 95% CI 4.92, 12.10), and delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 7.61, 95% CI 3.72, 15.58) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, roflumilast 0.15%, crisaborole 2%, and tapinarof 1% were the least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS more effective than potent TCI, mild TCI, JAK inhibitors, PDE-4 inhibitors; and mild TCS and PDE-4 inhibitors had similar effectiveness. NMA of 49 trials (5261 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome and ranked tacrolimus 0.03% (SMD -2.69, 95% CI -3.36, -2.02) and very potent TCS (SMD -1.87, 95% CI -2.69, -1.05) as most effective, both with moderate confidence; roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and tapinarof 1% were ranked as least effective. Direct information for tacrolimus 0.03% was based on one trial in 60 participants with a high risk of bias. For some sensitivity analyses, potent TCS, tacrolimus 0.1%, ruxolitinib 1.5%, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% became some of the most effective treatments. Class-level analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors, and moderate/mild TCS was more effective than mild TCI. A further 100 trials (22,814 participants) reported clinician signs as a continuous outcome but could not be included in NMA. Investigator Global Assessment NMA of 140 trials (23,383 participants) reported IGA as a binary outcome and ranked ruxolitinib 1.5% (OR 9.34, 95% CI 4.8, 18.18), delgocitinib 0.5% (OR 10.08, 95% CI 2.65, 38.37), delgocitinib 0.25% (OR 6.87, 95% CI 1.79, 26.33), very potent TCS (OR 8.34, 95% CI 4.73, 14.67), potent TCS (OR 5.00, 95% CI 3.80, 6.58), and tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.59, 7.13) as most effective, all with moderate confidence. Mild TCS, crisaborole 2%, pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 0.3% and 1%, and tacrolimus 0.03% were the least effective. In a sensitivity analysis of low risk of bias information (12 trials, 1639 participants), potent TCS, delgocitinib 0.5% and delgocitinib 0.25% were most effective, and pimecrolimus 1%, roflumilast 0.15%, difamilast 1% and difamilast 0.3% least effective. Class-level sensitivity analysis found potent/very potent TCS had similar effectiveness to potent TCI and JAK inhibitors and were more effective than PDE-4 inhibitors; mild/moderate TCS were less effective than potent TCI and had similar effectiveness to mild TCI. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 12 months showed a possible increase in effectiveness for pimecrolimus 1% versus vehicle (4 trials, 2218 participants) in a pairwise meta-analysis, and greater treatment success with mild/moderate TCS than pimecrolimus 1% (based on 1 trial of 2045 participants). Local adverse effects NMA of 83 trials (18,992 participants, 2424 events) reporting application-site reactions ranked tacrolimus 0.1% (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.53, 3.17; moderate confidence), crisaborole 2% (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.18, 3.81; high confidence), tacrolimus 0.03% (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.10, 2.09; low confidence), and pimecrolimus 1% (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.01, 2.04; low confidence) as most likely to cause site reactions. Very potent, potent, moderate, and mild TCS were least likely to cause site reactions. NMA of eight trials (1786 participants, 3 events) reporting pigmentation changes found no evidence for increased pigmentation changes with TCS and crisaborole 2%, with low confidence for mild, moderate or potent TCS and moderate confidence for crisaborole 2%. NMA of 25 trials (3691 participants, 36 events) reporting skin thinning found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term (median 3 weeks, range 1-16 weeks) use of mild TCS (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.12, 4.31), moderate TCS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.16, 5.33), potent TCS (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.21, 4.43) or very potent TCS (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.31, 2.49), all with low confidence. Longer-term outcomes over 6 to 60 months showed increased skin thinning with mild to potent TCS versus TCI (3 trials, 4069 participants, 6 events with TCS).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Potent TCS, JAK inhibitors and tacrolimus 0.1% were consistently ranked as amongst the most effective topical anti-inflammatory treatments for eczema and PDE-4 inhibitors as amongst the least effective. Mild TCS and tapinarof 1% were ranked amongst the least effective treatments in three of five efficacy networks. TCI and crisaborole 2% were ranked most likely to cause local application-site reactions and TCS least likely. We found no evidence for increased skin thinning with short-term TCS but an increase with longer-term TCS.

Advancing Treatment in Atopic Dermatitis: A Comprehensive Review of Clinical Efficacy, Safety, and Comparative Insights Into Corticosteroids, Calcineurin Inhibitors, and Phosphodiesterase-4 Inhibitors as Topical Therapies

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a pervasive and multifaceted dermatological disorder causing daily distress to afflicted individuals worldwide. This comprehensive review synthesizes the historical and contemporary advancements in therapeutic strategies, offering a critical analysis of their efficacy, safety profiles, and adaptability. The enduring role of topical corticosteroids in managing AD is examined, acknowledging their potent anti-inflammatory properties alongside their potential adverse side effects, particularly in extended usage. The article explores the utilization of topical calcineurin inhibitors like tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, highlighting their novel anti-inflammatory pathways while also scrutinizing concerns over potential malignancies that relegate them to second-line therapy. The present investigation features the emergence of crisaborole, a phosphodiesterase four inhibitor. Its innovative mode of action, benign safety profile, and applicability to mild and moderate AD are thoroughly evaluated. The review also includes challenges, particularly cost considerations, which constrain accessibility and necessitate nuanced implementation in therapeutic regimens. This study underscores the need for persistent investigation, teamwork, and innovations in managing AD. In this regard, AD requires a united approach between clinicians, researchers, affected individuals, and policymakers to refine patient-focused treatment and develop precise, economical strategies to address this chronic and frequently life-altering health condition.

A Comprehensive Review of Phototherapy in Atopic Dermatitis: Mechanisms, Modalities, and Clinical Efficacy

This literature review explores atopic dermatitis and its management, with a focus on phototherapy as a treatment modality. The primary objectives are to elucidate the pathophysiological mechanisms, clinical manifestations, diagnostic criteria, and epidemiology of atopic dermatitis. Additionally, it seeks to explain phototherapy mechanisms, different modalities, and other therapeutic approaches. In this review, we comprehensively examine atopic dermatitis by synthesizing findings from diverse sources over the past 20 years. We investigate the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnostic criteria, and role of phototherapy in treatment. We conduct thematic analysis, compare phototherapy modalities, consider contextual factors, and integrate patient perspectives while upholding ethical considerations. Limitations include potential publication bias, language barriers, temporal constraints, subjectivity, and limited generalizability. Atopic dermatitis has a complex pathogenesis and can be managed with diverse modalities. Phototherapy emerges as an effective and safe treatment, particularly when other therapies prove ineffective.

The immunological and structural epidermal barrier dysfunction and skin microbiome in atopic dermatitis-an update

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic and relapsing inflammatory skin disease with various clinical presentations and combinations of symptoms. The pathophysiology of AD is complex and multifactorial. There are several factors involved in the etiopathogenesis of AD including structural and immunological epidermal barrier defect, imbalance of the skin microbiome, genetic background and environmental factors. Alterations in structural proteins, lipids, proteases, and their inhibitors, lead to the impairment of the stratum corneum which is associated with the increased skin penetration and transepidermal water loss. The elevated serum immunoglobulin E levels and blood eosinophilia have been shown in the majority of AD patients. Type 2 T-helper cell immune pathway with increased expression of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-13, has an important role in the etiopathogenesis of AD. Both T cells and keratinocytes contribute to epidermal barrier impairment in AD via a dynamic interaction of cytokines and chemokines. The skin microbiome is another factor of relevance in the etiopathogenesis of AD. It has been shown that during AD flares, Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) colonization increased, while Staphylococcus epidermidis (S. epidermidis) decreased. On the contrary, S. epidermidis and species of Streptococcus, Corynebacterium and Propionibacterium increased during the remision phases. However, it is not clear whether skin dysbiosis is one of the symptoms or one of the causes of AD. There are several therapeutic options, targeting these pathways which play a critical role in the etiopathogenesis of AD. Although topical steroids are the mainstay of the treatment of AD, new biological therapies including IL-4, IL-13, and IL-31 inhibitors, as well as Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), increasingly gain more importance with new advances in the therapy of AD. In this review, we summarize the role of immunological and structural epidermal barrier dysfunction, immune abnormalities, impairment of lipids, filaggrin mutation and skin microbiome in the etiopathogenesis of AD, as well as the therapeutic options for AD and their effects on these abnormalities in AD skin.

Phosphodiesterase inhibitors in psychiatric disorders

RATIONALE

Challenges in drug development for psychiatric disorders have left much room for the introduction of novel treatments with better therapeutic efficacies and indices. As a result, intense research has focused on identifying new targets for developing such pharmacotherapies. One of these targets may be the phosphodiesterase (PDE) class of enzymes, which play important roles in intracellular signaling. Due to their critical roles in cellular pathways, these enzymes affect diverse neurobiological functions from learning and memory formation to neuroinflammation.

OBJECTIVES

In this paper, we reviewed studies on the use of PDE inhibitors (PDEIs) in preclinical models and clinical trials of psychiatric disorders including depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), bipolar disorder (BP), sexual dysfunction, and feeding disorders.

RESULTS

PDEIs are able to improve symptoms of psychiatric disorders in preclinical models through activating the cAMP-PKA-CREB and cGMP-PKG pathways, attenuating neuroinflammation and oxidative stress, and stimulating neural plasticity. The most promising therapeutic candidates to emerge from these preclinical studies are PDE2 and PDE4 inhibitors for depression and anxiety and PDE1 and PDE10 inhibitors for schizophrenia. Furthermore, PDE3 and 4 inhibitors have shown promising results in clinical trials in patients with depression and schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger and better designed clinical studies of PDEIs in schizophrenia, depression, and anxiety are warranted to facilitate their translation into the clinic. Regarding the other conditions discussed in this review (most notably PTSD and BP), better characterization of the effects of PDEIs in preclinical models is required before clinical studies.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of ruxolitinib cream in children and adolescents with atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Therapies for children with atopic dermatitis (AD) have safety and tolerability concerns that may limit long-term use. Ruxolitinib cream, a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, is effective and well tolerated in adolescents and adults with AD.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the safety and tolerability of ruxolitinib cream in pediatric patients. Pharmacokinetics and efficacy were also evaluated in this phase 1 study (NCT03257644).

METHODS

Patients aged 2 to 17 years with AD (affected body surface area 8%-20%; Investigator's Global Assessment score ≥2) were enrolled stepwise in 6 age-descending, strength-increasing cohorts to apply 0.5%, 0.75%, or 1.5% ruxolitinib cream twice daily for 28 days. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy were analyzed at baseline, week 2 (day 10), and week 4 (day 29).

RESULTS

Among 71 patients, 44 (62.0%) had a baseline Investigator's Global Assessment score of 3; median (range) body surface area affected at baseline was 12.2% (1.7%-20.4%). Ruxolitinib cream was well tolerated, with 4 patients (5.6%) experiencing treatment-related adverse events (all grades 1/2). No clinically meaningful changes in mean chemistry or hematology values were observed, and no consistent pattern of change in bone biomarkers was detected. Mean plasma ruxolitinib levels within each cohort (range, 23.1-97.9 nM) were well below the half-maximal inhibitory concentration for thrombopoietin phosphorylation of STAT3 (281 nM). All cohorts experienced improvements in exploratory efficacy end points.

CONCLUSION

Ruxolitinib cream was well tolerated in pediatric patients with AD, with no effect on blood counts or bone biomarkers. Mean plasma concentration was low. Efficacy was consistent with data from previous studies in adolescents and adults.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03257644.