Real-world effectiveness of abrocitinib treatment in patients with difficult-to-treat atopic dermatitis

Cost-effectiveness analysis of abrocitinib compared with standard of care in adult moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in Japan

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease with a significant clinical, economic, and human burden. The JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety (JADE) program's Phase 3 trials demonstrated that as a treatment for moderate-to-severe AD in adults with previous exposure to immunotherapy, abrocitinib showed superior efficacy and safety compared with standard of care (SoC), consisting of topical corticosteroids. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of abrocitinib with SoC versus SoC alone for this patient population in Japan from a societal perspective. A hybrid decision tree and Markov model were used to capture the initial treatment and long-term maintenance phases. Clinical inputs at 16 weeks were obtained through a Bayesian network meta-analysis of four pivotal trials from the JADE program. Clinical inputs at 52 weeks were derived from the JADE EXTEND trial. Response-specific utility inputs were obtained from published literature. Resource use, costs, and productivity inputs were gathered from Japanese claims analysis, literature, public documents, and expert opinion. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were discounted at 2.0% per year and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to validate the base case results and explore a payer perspective. Over a lifetime horizon and with the base-case societal perspective, abrocitinib produced a mean gain of 0.75 QALYs, incremental costs of JPY (¥) 2 270 386 (USD [$] 17 265.6), and a resulting ICER of ¥3 034 514 ($23 076.5) per QALY compared with SoC. From a payer perspective, the incremental costs increased to ¥4 476 777 ($34 044.4), with an ICER of ¥5 983 495 ($45 502.6) per QALY. The results were most sensitive to treatment-specific, response-based utility weights, drug costs, and productivity-related inputs. From a Japanese societal perspective, abrocitinib demonstrated superior QALYs and with a willingness-to-pay threshold of ¥5 000 000 ($38 023.4) per QALY, can be considered cost-effective compared with SoC as a treatment for moderate-to-severe AD in adult patients with previous immunosuppressant exposure.

Biologics Versus JAK Inhibitors. Part I: Cancer Risk. A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Biological drugs (BD) and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have revolutionized the treatment of diverse dermatoses. However, there are concerns regarding their safety, especially the risk of cancer and opportunistic infections. Here, we discuss the risk of cancer associated with the BD and JAKi used in dermatology.

METHODS

A narrative review was carried out. All relevant articles evaluating the risk of cancer associated with BD or JAKi and published between January 2010 and February 2024 were selected.

RESULTS

Multiple large studies have evaluated the association between BD, JAKi and cancer risk. However, there is a lack of prospective, comparative studies. Overall, patients undergoing BD and JAKi present a cutaneous cancer incidence similar to that in the general population. The drugs more strongly associated with non-skin cancer risk were anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNFs) agents and JAKi (especially tofacitinib and oral ruxolitinib). This risk appears to increase with age, the presence of other factors (such as chronic immunosuppression from previous drugs or other comorbidities), and specific diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and myelodysplastic syndrome. Conversely, BD such as interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors may even reduce the risk of some visceral and hematological malignancies. In patients with dermatological conditions such as psoriasis and atopic dermatitis, the risk of malignancies may be lower than in other subgroups, and probably comparable to the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of cancer in patients undergoing BD or JAKi is generally low. This incidence can be higher in elderly patients with RA or myelodysplastic syndrome, and in those undergoing prolonged therapy with tofacitinib or ruxolitinib (oral), or anti-TNF agents.

Abrocitinib-associated adverse events: a real-world pharmacovigilance study using the FAERS database

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease. Janus kinase (JAK) modulates cytokines involved in AD pathophysiology, and JAK inhibitors have emerged as effective pharmacotherapeutic remedies for AD. Abrocitinib, an oral selective inhibitor of JAK1, is indicated for the management of moderate-to-severe AD. The current study evaluated the adverse events (AEs) associated with abrocitinib in a real-world setting.

METHODS

To quantify the signals of abrocitinib-associated AEs, we used the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) for this pharmacovigilance study with two established pharmacovigilance methods.

RESULTS

A total of 1071 AEs of abrocitinib were investigated as the primary suspected from the FAERS to detect and characterize relevant safety signals. The analysis revealed 85 signals for abrocitinib. The most common AE for abrocitinib was drug ineffective. The signal strength of eczema herpeticum was 515.87 (277.80-957.98) and 510.59 (5148.65) and exhibited the highest strength for abrocitinib. Rare AEs such as aggravated condition, pruritus, and hypersensitivity were not listed on the label, and attention to these AEs is required.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of the AE signals may provide support for clinical monitoring and risk identification of abrocitinib.

Management of Patients Affected by Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis with JAK Inhibitors in Real-World Clinical Practice: An Italian Delphi Consensus

INTRODUCTION

Several systemic therapies have been approved for the treatment of severe AD. In particular, Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), including abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, recently received approval for the treatment of patients with severe AD after being evaluated in several clinical trials. However, a few concerns have been raised regarding their long-term safety and the management of these drugs in real-world clinical practice. In this article we described the results of a Delphi consensus aimed at describing the knowledge on JAKi and focusing, in particular, on providing clinical recommendations for dermatologists in daily practice regarding the use of these drugs.

METHODS

Twelve Italian dermatologists reviewed the most recent literature regarding the efficacy and safety profiles of JAKi and proposed 24 statements.

RESULTS

Agreement was reached for statements focusing on three main topics: (1) place in therapy of JAKi in patients with moderate-to-severe AD; (2) effectiveness and safety of JAK inhibitors in different phenotypes; (3) different approaches to the management of patients treated with JAKi in clinical practice. The panel proposed several recommendations regarding all the statements.

CONCLUSION

Given the wide use of JAKi in clinical practice, it is crucial to establish a specific follow-up for each patient's phenotype in order to achieve the best possible clinical outcome and minimize potential adverse events.

Practical Use of Upadacitinib in Patients with Severe Atopic Dermatitis in a Real-World Setting: A Systematic Review

Upadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of severe atopic dermatitis (AD). This systematic review aims to summarize the most recent data in terms of effectiveness and safety of upadacitinib in the treatment of severe AD in a real-world setting. The review included a comprehensive search of databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar and Web of Science, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search initially identified 242 studies. Of these, 214 were excluded after reviewing their titles and abstracts. We then conducted a full-text review of 25 studies, of which 17 met our inclusion criteria and were therefore included in our systematic review. The analysis of real-world studies showed high effectiveness of upadacitinib, in terms of both clinical signs and subjective symptoms, in different patient populations, including those resistant to other treatments. No new significant safety concerns have emerged as compared to randomized clinical trials.

Janus kinase inhibitors in atopic dermatitis: an umbrella review of meta-analyses

Background

Clinicians and healthcare policymakers have been drenched with a deluge of overlapping meta-analyses (MAs), and the necessity for comprehensive and clearly defined evidence of Janus kinase inhibitors (JKIs) in atopic dermatitis (AD) is urgent.

Methods

Six databases were searched for MAs published until October 2023. Qualitative description of MAs was mainly used, and Investigator's Global Assessment response (IGA response), the 75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (the EASI75), peak pruritus Numerical rating score (PP-NRS), and adverse effects were cited to describe the efficacy and safety of JKIs. The methodological quality of the included MAs was assessed by A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews II (AMSTAR II), and the quality of evidence was evaluated by the grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE).

Results

Sixteen MAs were pooled in this review, of which five studies appraised JKIs, five appraised systemic JKIs, five papers assessed abrocitinib only, and one assessed baricitinib. Two studies were of "high" methodological quality and 14 MAs were of "moderate" quality. Eleven MAs integrated the results of JKIs and reported that JKIs provide faster onset of IGA response (RR=2.83, 95% CI [2.25, 3.56], high-quality evidence). Similarly, 10 MAs showed that JAK inhibitors were more effective in improving the EASI75 (RR=2.84, 95% CI [2.2, 3.67], high-quality evidence). Results from 12 MAs showed JKIs were active in reducing the PP-NRS (SMD=-0.49, 95% CI [-0.67, -0.32]). All MAs affirmed JKIs added no adverse effects leading to discontinuation and serious adverse events (P<0.05). However, 200mg of abrocitinib had a higher risk of acne (RR=4.34, 95% CI [1.61, 11.71), herpes zoster (RR=1.64, 95% CI [0.42, 6.39]), headache (RR=1.76, 95% CI [1.03, 3]), and nausea (RR=7.81, 95% CI [3.84, 15.87]). Upadacitinib was known to increase acne (RR=6.23, 95% CI [4.08, 9.49]), nasopharyngitis (RR=1.36, 95% CI [1.03, 1.8]) and blood creatine phosphokinase (blood CPK) (RR=2.41, 95% CI [1.47, 3.95]). Baricitinib at 2mg was associated with increased blood CPK (RR=2.25, 95% CI [1.1, 2.97]).

Conclusion

Compared to placebo or dupilumab, the administration of JKIs can ameliorate IGA response more effectively, improve the EASI75, and relieve pruritus without severe adverse effect, while accompanied by more acne, nasopharyngitis, headache, and digestive disturbances. The curative effect of 200 mg of abrocitinib is significant and more caution should be given in patients with gastrointestinal dysfunction, herpes zoster, and those who are acne-prone. Baricitinib and upadacitinib should be avoided in populations at high risk for cardiovascular events.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=369369, PROSPERO (CRD42022369369).

Real-world Experience of Abrocitinib Treatment in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis and Hand Eczema: Up to 28-week Results from the BioDay Registry

Limited daily practice data on the effect of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis are available. The aim of this multicentre prospective study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of abrocitinib in patients with atopic dermatitis treated in daily practice. In a subgroup, the effectiveness of abrocitinib on hand eczema was evaluated. A total of 103 patients from the BioDay registry were included in the study: week 4 (n = 95), week 16 (n = 61) and week 28 (n = 39). At week 28, the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-50/75/90 was achieved by 81.8%, 57.6%, and 18.2%, respectively, and the weekly average pruritus numerical rating scale ≤ 4 by 62.9%. The effectiveness of abrocitinib was not significantly different between dupilumab non-responders and dupilumab-naïve patients/responders, and between upadacitinib non-responders and upadacitinib-naïve patients/responders. Mean ± standard deviation Hand Eczema Severity Index decreased from 27.4 ± 27.7 at baseline to 7.7 ± 12.1 at week 28 (n = 31). Thirty-two patients (31.1%) discontinued treatment due to ineffectiveness (n = 17), adverse events (n = 9) or both (n = 3). The most frequently reported adverse event was nausea (n = 28). In conclusion, abrocitinib is an effective treatment for atopic dermatitis and can be effective for patients with previous inadequate response to dupilumab or upadacitinib. Furthermore, hand eczema can improve in patients treated with abrocitinib for atopic dermatitis.