Importance of concomitant topical therapy in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis treated with cyclosporine

A systematic review investigating the proportion of clinical images shared in prospective randomized controlled trials involving patients with atopic dermatitis and systemic pharmacotherapy

For individuals with atopic dermatitis (AD), interpreting scientific papers that present clinical outcomes including the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and Investigators Global Assessment may be difficult. When compared to tabulated data and graphs, images from before and after treatment are often far more meaningful to these patients that ultimately will be candidates for the treatment. This systematic review focused on determining the frequency of clinical image sharing in AD research.

Conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, the review concentrated on randomized controlled trials that investigated predefined and available systemic treatments for AD. The search was performed in the MEDLINE database for studies published from the inception until 21 December 2023.

The review included 60 studies, encompassing 17,799 randomized patients. Across these studies, 16 images representing 6 patients were shared in the manuscripts, leading to a sharing rate of 0.3‰.

The almost missing inclusion of patient images in clinical trial publications hinders patient understanding. Adding images to scientific manuscripts could significantly improve patients' comprehension of potential treatment outcomes. This review highlights the need for authors, the pharmaceutical industry, study sponsors, and publishers to enhance and promote patient information through increased use of visual data.

English Version of Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis 2021

This is the English version of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Atopic Dermatitis 2021. Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a disease characterized by relapsing eczema with pruritus as a primary lesion. In Japan, from the perspective of evidence-based medicine, the current strategies for the treatment of AD consist of three primary measures: (i) use of topical corticosteroids, tacrolimus ointment, and delgocitinib ointment as the main treatment of the inflammation; (ii) topical application of emollients to treat the cutaneous barrier dysfunction; and (iii) avoidance of apparent exacerbating factors, psychological counseling, and advice about daily life. In the present revised guidelines, descriptions of three new drugs, namely, dupilumab, delgocitinib, and baricitinib, have been added. The guidelines present recommendations to review clinical research articles, evaluate the balance between the advantages and disadvantages of medical activities, and optimize medical activity-related patient outcomes with respect to several important points requiring decision-making in clinical practice.

Update on the Pathogenesis and Therapy of Atopic Dermatitis

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory skin disorder characterized by recurrent eczematous lesions and intense itch. Although it most often starts in infancy and affects children, it is also highly prevalent in adults. In this article, the main aspects of AD have been updated, with a focus on the pathogenetic and therapeutic aspects. The pathogenesis of AD is complex, and it is evident that a strong genetic predisposition, epidermal dysfunction, skin microbiome abnormalities, immune dysregulation, and the neuroimmune system are critical in AD development. Mutations in the genes associated with disrupted epidermal barrier, exaggerated pathological inflammation and inadequate antimicrobial peptides can promote enhanced Th2 inflammation and mediate pruritus. Current understanding of etiology highlights gut microbial diversity, NK cell deficiency, and different immunological phenotype with age and race. For topical anti-inflammatory treatment for mild-to-severe AD, phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors (PDE-4), JAK inhibitors, and microbiome transplantation with Roseomonas mucosa provided more management selections. The treatment of moderate-to-severe AD has been limited to merely symptomatic and relatively nonspecific immunosuppressive approaches. In-depth understanding of the pathogenesis of AD has led to the development of innovative and targeted therapies, such as biologic agents targeting interleukin (IL)-4, IL-13 and JAK/STAT inhibitors. Other potential therapeutic agents for AD include agents targeting the T helper (Th) 22 and Th17/IL23 pathway. Antipruritic therapy and complementary probiotics therapy have also been reviewed.

Systemic treatments in the management of atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As an evidence resource for the currently planned European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) clinical practice guideline "systemic treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD)," we critically appraised evidence on systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD.

METHODS

We systematically identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the safety and efficacy of systemic treatments for AD up to February 2020. Primary efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, AD symptoms and health-related quality of life. Primary safety outcomes included cumulative incidence rates for (serious) adverse events. Trial quality was assessed applying the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Meta-analyses were conducted where appropriate.

RESULTS

50 RCTs totalling 6681 patients were included. Trial evidence was identified for apremilast, azathioprine (AZA), baricitinib, ciclosporin A (CSA), corticosteroids, dupilumab, interferon-gamma, intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG), mepolizumab, methotrexate (MTX), omalizumab, upadacitinib and ustekinumab. Meta-analyses were indicated for the efficacy of baricitinib [EASI75 RD 0.16, 95% CI (0.10;0.23)] and dupilumab [EASI75, RD 0.37, 95% CI (0.32;0.42)] indicating short-term (ie 16-week treatment) superiority over placebo. Furthermore, efficacy analyses of AZA and CSA indicated short-term superiority over placebo; however, nonvalidated scores were used and can therefore not be compared to EASI.

CONCLUSION

The most robust, replicated high-quality trial evidence is present for the efficacy and safety of dupilumab for up to 1 year in adults. Robust trial evidence was further revealed for AZA, baricitinib and CSA. Methodological restrictions led to limited evidence-based conclusions for all other systemic treatments. Head-to-head trials with novel systemic treatments are required to clarify the future role of conventional therapies.

Dupilumab shows slow, steady effectiveness for intractable prurigo in patients with atopic dermatitis

Prurigo lesions in atopic dermatitis are intractable. This single-center, retrospective study examined dupilumab's clinical effects on intractable prurigo. Twenty adult atopic dermatitis patients (12 with prurigo, eight without) were administrated dupilumab. Its effects on itching and disease severity were examined with Numerical Rating Scale-Itch (NRS-I), Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores; body surface areas (BSA); and thymus- and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC), total immunoglobulin (Ig)E, and eosinophil levels. NRS-I scores, EASI scores, TARC levels, and total IgE levels before dupilumab treatment were not statistically different between the prurigo and non-prurigo groups. With dupilumab treatment, NRS-I scores, EASI scores, IGA scores, BSA, TARC levels, and total IgE levels were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups at 1-2 months and onward, but skin symptom improvement in the prurigo group was slower than in the non-prurigo group, as evidenced by significantly higher EASI scores, BSA, and TARC levels at several time points during the 12 months of dupilumab treatment. Prurigo patients were slower in EASI-50 achievement and significantly lower in EASI-90 achievement at 12 months than non-prurigo patients. Adherence to dupilumab was not different, but total equivalent amounts of concomitant therapeutic agents (corticosteroids and tacrolimus) used during dupilumab treatment were significantly higher in the prurigo group (median, 56.2 g/week) than in the non-prurigo group (median, 33.7 g/week). There were 2.2 adverse events per patient on average; ocular complaints were most frequent. Dupilumab was effective in treating intractable prurigo, but despite significantly greater concomitant therapeutic agent use, skin symptom improvement was slower in prurigo patients than in non-prurigo patients.

Systemic treatments for eczema: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Eczema is a common and chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin disorder. It seriously impacts quality of life and economic outcomes, especially for those with moderate to severe eczema. Various treatments allow sustained control of the disease; however, their relative benefit remains unclear due to the limited number of trials directly comparing treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different types of systemic immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe eczema using NMA and to generate rankings of available systemic immunosuppressive treatments for eczema according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to August 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic immunosuppressive agents for moderate to severe atopic eczema when compared against placebo or any other eligible eczema treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We synthesised data using pair-wise analysis and NMA to compare treatments and rank them according to their effectiveness. Effectiveness was assessed primarily by determining the proportion of participants who achieved at least 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75) and improvement in the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM). Safety was evaluated primarily by considering the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) and infection. We deemed short-term follow-up as ≤ 16 weeks and long-term follow-up as > 16 weeks. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for these primary outcomes using six domains of CiNEMA grading.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 74 studies, with 8177 randomised participants. Approximately 55% of participants were male, with average age of 32 years (range 2 to 84 years), although age and gender were unreported for 419 and 902 participants, respectively. Most of the included trials were placebo controlled (65%), 34% were head-to-head studies (15% assessed the effects of different doses of the same drug), and 1% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. All trials included participants with moderate to severe eczema, but 62% of studies did not separate data by severity; 38% of studies assessed only severe eczema. The total duration of included trials ranged from 2 weeks to 60 months, whereas treatment duration varied from a single dose (CIM331, KPL-716) to 60 months (methotrexate (MTX)). Seventy studies were available for quantitative synthesis; this review assessed 29 immunosuppressive agents from three classes of interventions. These included (1) conventional treatments, with ciclosporin assessed most commonly; (2) small molecule treatments, including phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors; and (3) biological treatments, including anti-CD31 receptors, anti-interleukin (IL)-22, anti-IL-31, anti-IL-13, anti-IL-12/23p40, anti-OX40, anti-TSLP, anti-CRTH2, and anti-immunoglobulin E (IgE) monoclonal antibodies, but most commonly dupilumab. Most trials (73) assessed outcomes at a short-term duration ranging from 2 to 16 weeks, whereas 33 trials assessed long-term outcomes, with duration ranging from 5 to 60 months. All participants were from a hospital setting. Fifty-two studies declared a source of funding, and of these, pharmaceutical companies funded 88%. We rated 37 studies as high risk; 21, unclear risk, and 16, low risk of bias, with studies most commonly at high risk of attrition bias. Network meta-analysis suggests that dupilumab ranks first for effectiveness when compared with other biological treatments. Dupilumab is more effective than placebo in achieving EASI75 (risk ratio (RR) 3.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.51 to 3.69) and improvement in POEM score (mean difference 7.30, 95% CI 6.61 to 8.00) at short-term follow-up (high-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence means we are uncertain of the effects of dupilumab when compared with placebo, in terms of the proportion of participants who achieve EASI75 (RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.87 to 3.60) at longer-term follow-up. Low-certainty evidence indicates that tralokinumab may be more effective than placebo in achieving short-term EASI75 (RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.34), but there was no evidence for tralokinumab to allow us to assess short-term follow-up of POEM or long-term follow-up of EASI75. We are uncertain of the effect of ustekinumab compared with placebo in achieving EASI75 (long-term follow-up: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.45; short-term follow-up: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.97; both very low certainty). We found no evidence on ustekinumab for the POEM outcome. We are uncertain whether other immunosuppressive agents that targeted our key outcomes influence the achievement of short-term EASI75 compared with placebo due to low- or very low-certainty evidence. Dupilumab and ustekinumab were the only immunosuppressive agents evaluated for longer-term EASI75. Dupilumab was the only agent evaluated for improvement in POEM during short-term follow-up. Low- to moderate-certainty evidence indicates a lower proportion of participants with SAEs after treatment with QAW039 and dupilumab compared to placebo during short-term follow-up, but low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in SAEs during short-term follow-up of other immunosuppressive agents compared to placebo. Evidence for effects of immunosuppressive agents on risk of any infection during short-term follow-up and SAEs during long-term follow-up compared with placebo was of low or very low certainty but did not indicate a difference. We did not identify differences in other adverse events (AEs), but dupilumab is associated with specific AEs, including eye inflammation and eosinophilia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that dupilumab is the most effective biological treatment for eczema. Compared to placebo, dupilumab reduces eczema signs and symptoms in the short term for people with moderate to severe atopic eczema. Short-term safety outcomes from clinical trials did not reveal new safety concerns with dupilumab. Overall, evidence for the efficacy of most other immunosuppressive treatments for moderate to severe atopic eczema is of low or very low certainty. Given the lack of data comparing conventional with newer biological treatments for the primary outcomes, there remains high uncertainty for ranking the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments such as ciclosporin and biological treatments such as dupilumab. Most studies were placebo-controlled and assessed only short-term efficacy of immunosuppressive agents. Further adequately powered head-to-head RCTs should evaluate comparative long-term efficacy and safety of available treatments for moderate to severe eczema.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of atopic dermatitis 2018

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a disease characterized by relapsing eczema with pruritus as a primary lesion. The current strategies to treat AD in Japan from the perspective of evidence-based medicine consist of three primary measures: (i) the use of topical corticosteroids and tacrolimus ointment as the main treatment for the inflammation; (ii) topical application of emollients to treat the cutaneous barrier dysfunction; and (iii) avoidance of apparent exacerbating factors, psychological counseling and advice about daily life. The guidelines present recommendations to review clinical research articles, evaluate the balance between the advantages and disadvantages of medical activities, and optimize medical activity-related patient outcomes with respect to several important points requiring decision-making in clinical practice.

Novel systemic therapies in atopic dermatitis: what do we need to fulfil the promise of a treatment revolution?

Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) who do not adequately respond to topical therapy and phototherapy often need systemic immunomodulatory treatment to control their symptoms. Conventional systemic agents, such as ciclosporin, azathioprine, and methotrexate, have been used for decades, but there are concerns about their safety profile. There are now many novel systemic agents emerging through clinical trials, which may have great potential in the treatment of AD. Despite this, there are very few data comparing the performance of these drugs against each other. The purpose of this article is to review the current systemic therapies in AD and present an indirect comparison of systemic AD treatments using effectiveness and safety data from published randomised controlled trials, highlighting important remaining gaps in knowledge. Although the latest developments in systemic AD treatments are exciting and dearly needed, further work is required before the promise of a therapeutic revolution becomes reality.

Long-term management of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with dupilumab and concomitant topical corticosteroids (LIBERTY AD CHRONOS): a 1-year, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab (an anti-interleukin-4-receptor-α monoclonal antibody) blocks signalling of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13, type 2/Th2 cytokines implicated in numerous allergic diseases ranging from asthma to atopic dermatitis. Previous 16-week monotherapy studies showed that dupilumab substantially improved signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with acceptable safety, validating the crucial role of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13 in atopic dermatitis pathogenesis. We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of dupilumab with medium-potency topical corticosteroids versus placebo with topical corticosteroids in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

METHODS

In this 1-year, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (LIBERTY AD CHRONOS), adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids were enrolled at 161 hospitals, clinics, and academic institutions in 14 countries in Europe, Asia-Pacific, and North America. Patients were randomly assigned (3:1:3) to subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg once weekly (qw), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), or placebo via a central interactive voice/web response system, stratified by severity and global region. All three groups were given concomitant topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors where inadvisable for topical corticosteroids. Topical corticosteroids could be tapered, stopped, or restarted on the basis of disease activity. Coprimary endpoints were patients (%) achieving Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 and 2-point or higher improvement from baseline, and Eczema Area and Severity Index 75% improvement from baseline (EASI-75) at week 16. Week 16 efficacy and week 52 safety analyses included all randomised patients; week 52 efficacy included patients who completed treatment by US regulatory submission cutoff. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02260986.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 3, 2014, and July 31, 2015, 740 patients were enrolled: 319 were randomly assigned to dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 106 to dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids, and 315 to placebo plus topical corticosteroids. 623 (270, 89, and 264, respectively) were evaluable for week 52 efficacy. At week 16, more patients who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids achieved the coprimary endpoints of IGA 0/1 (39% [125 patients] who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids qw and 39% [41 patients] who received dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids vs 12% [39 patients] who received placebo plus topical corticosteroids; p<0·0001) and EASI-75 (64% [204] and 69% [73] vs 23% [73]; p<0·0001). Week 52 results were similar. Adverse events were reported in 261 (83%) patients who received dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 97 (88%) patients who received dupilumab q2w, and 266 (84%) patients who received placebo, and serious adverse events in nine (3%), four (4%), and 16 (5%) patients, respectively. No significant dupilumab-induced laboratory abnormalities were noted. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common in patients treated with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids-treated patients than in patients treated with placebo plus topical corticosteroids.

INTERPRETATION

Dupilumab added to standard topical corticosteroid treatment for 1 year improved atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms, with acceptable safety.

FUNDING

Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Systemic Treatment of Adult Atopic Dermatitis: A Review

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease that predominantly affects children. However, it can persist in adulthood and/or start at older ages. Due to its chronic nature and frequently occurring relapses, AD has a substantial effect on patients' quality of life, often requiring long-term systemic treatment, especially in adult patients, who are more frequently refractory to adequate topical treatment with mid- to high-potent corticosteroids and/or calcineurin inhibitors. Therefore, treatment with systemic therapies is often needed to take control of the disease, prevent exacerbations and improve quality of life. However, data regarding systemic treatment effectiveness and long-term safety in adult patients with AD are insufficient. Indeed, standardized international guidelines are lacking, and the treatment approach widely differs among diverse countries. This review focuses on the use of systemic treatments in adult AD patients analyzing published literature.