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.

Topical Treatments in Atopic Dermatitis: An Expansive Review

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common inflammatory skin condition found worldwide. It impacts patient quality of life (QoL) and is thought to arise as an inflammatory response to epidermal barrier dysfunction and hypersensitivity. AD can lead to large out-of-pocket costs and increased healthcare expenses over a lifetime. An analysis of all randomized control trials conducted since 1990 on topical therapies for AD were reviewed, including 207 trials in the final analysis. It was found that an average of 226 patients were enrolled over 2.43 arms. Common topical treatments included corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, JAK inhibitors, and phosphodiesterase inhibitors. The most utilized tools to identify treatment efficacy were the EASI, IGA, SCORAD, and PGA. There was a paucity of data on trials that evaluated efficacy, QoL, and cost of treatment simultaneously. This review highlights the need for comprehensive trials that evaluate multiple aspects of treatment, including financial cost and QoL impact, to ensure each patient has the best treatment modality for the management of their AD.

Topical treatments for atopic dermatitis (eczema): Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common skin condition with multiple topical treatment options, but uncertain comparative effects.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of AD prescription topical treatments.

METHODS

For the 2023 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters AD guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, ICTRP, and GREAT databases to September 5, 2022, for randomized trials addressing AD topical treatments. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects network meta-analyses addressed AD severity, itch, sleep, AD-related quality of life, flares, and harms. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. We classified topical corticosteroids (TCS) using 7 groups-group 1 being most potent. This review is registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/q5m6s).

RESULTS

The 219 included trials (43,123 patients) evaluated 68 interventions. With high-certainty evidence, pimecrolimus improved 6 of 7 outcomes-among the best for 2; high-dose tacrolimus (0.1%) improved 5-among the best for 2; low-dose tacrolimus (0.03%) improved 5-among the best for 1. With moderate- to high-certainty evidence, group 5 TCS improved 6-among the best for 3; group 4 TCS and delgocitinib improved 4-among the best for 2; ruxolitinib improved 4-among the best for 1; group 1 TCS improved 3-among the best for 2. These interventions did not increase harm. Crisaborole and difamilast were intermediately effective, but with uncertain harm. Topical antibiotics alone or in combination may be among the least effective. To maintain AD control, group 5 TCS were among the most effective, followed by tacrolimus and pimecrolimus.

CONCLUSIONS

For individuals with AD, pimecrolimus, tacrolimus, and moderate-potency TCS are among the most effective in improving and maintaining multiple AD outcomes. Topical antibiotics may be among the least effective.

Evidence Review of Topical Calcineurin Inhibitors for the Treatment of Adult Atopic Dermatitis

Topical calcineurin inhibitors (TCIs) were approved in the early 2000s for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), and despite the recent introduction of newer topical and systemic therapies for AD, TCIs such as tacrolimus ointment (0.03% and 0.1%) and pimecrolimus cream (1%), remain recommended treatment options in contemporary management guidelines. The goal of this article is to review the evidence supporting the approved indications for TCIs in adults with AD, including short-term treatment of active disease and as intermittent or maintenance treatment for the prevention of flares. Other evidence reviewed in this article includes the treatment of specific body areas (such as the face and eyelids), combination or sequential use of TCIs with topical corticosteroids, and the comparative efficacy of the 2 commercially available TCIs. This review of the evidence confirms that TCIs remain an effective treatment option for the management of adult AD.

Treatment for moderate to severe atopic dermatitis in alpine and moderate maritime climates differentially affects helper T cells and memory B cells in children

BACKGROUND

Treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) is focused on topical anti-inflammatory therapy, epidermal barrier repair and trigger avoidance. Multidisciplinary treatment in both moderate maritime and alpine climates can successfully reduce disease activity in children with AD. However, it remains unclear whether abnormalities in B cell and T cell memory normalize and whether this differs between treatment strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether successful treatment in maritime and alpine climates normalizes B- and T lymphocytes in children with moderate to severe AD.

METHODS

The study was performed in the context of a trial (DAVOS trial, registered at Current Controlled Trials ISCRTN88136485) in which eighty-eight children with moderate to severe AD were randomized to 6 weeks of treatment in moderate maritime climate (outpatient setting) or in the alpine climate (inpatient setting). Before and directly after treatment, disease activity was determined with SA-EASI and serum TARC, and T cell and B cell subsets were quantified in blood.

RESULTS

Both treatment protocols achieved a significant decrease in disease activity, which was accompanied by a reduction in circulating memory Treg, transitional B cell and plasmablast numbers. Alpine climate treatment had a significantly greater effect on disease activity and was accompanied by a reduction in blood eosinophils and increases in memory B cells, CD8+ TemRO, CD4+ Tcm and CCR7+ Th2 subsets.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Clinically successful treatment of AD induces changes in blood B- and T cell subsets reflecting reduced chronic inflammation. In addition, multidisciplinary inpatient treatment in the alpine climate specifically affects memory B cells, CD8+ T cells and Th2 cells. These cell types could represent good markers for treatment efficacy.

PRINCIPLES THERAPY OF ATOPIC DERMATITIS IN CHILDHOOD IN THE ASPECT OF MODERN CONCEPTS OF THE PATHOGENESIS OF THE DISEASE

The article contains data on the key links in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis in children. The authors of the article have covered modern approaches to topical therapy of atopic dermatitis in children. Modern algorithms of proactive therapy and control over the course of the disease are presented.

A programme of research to set priorities and reduce uncertainties for the prevention and treatment of skin disease

Background

Skin diseases are very common and can have a large impact on the quality of life of patients and caregivers. This programme addressed four diseases: (1) eczema, (2) vitiligo, (3) squamous cell skin cancer (SCC) and (4) pyoderma gangrenosum (PG).

Objective

To set priorities and reduce uncertainties for the treatment and prevention of skin disease in our four chosen diseases.

Design

Mixed methods including eight systematic reviews, three prioritisation exercises, two pilot randomised controlled trials (RCTs), three feasibility studies, two core outcome initiatives, four funding proposals for national RCTs and one completed national RCT.

Setting

Secondary care, primary care and the general population.

Participants

Patients (and their caregivers) with eczema, vitiligo, SCC and PG, plus health-care professionals with an interest in skin disease.

Interventions

Our three intervention studies included (1) barrier enhancement using emollients from birth to prevent eczema (pilot RCT); (2) handheld narrowband ultraviolet light B therapy for treating vitiligo (pilot RCT); and (3) oral ciclosporin (Neoral®, Novartis Pharmaceuticals) compared with oral prednisolone for managing PG (pragmatic national RCT).

Results

Systematic reviews included two overarching systematic reviews of RCTs of treatments for eczema and vitiligo, an umbrella review of systematic reviews of interventions for the prevention of eczema, two reviews of treatments for SCC (one included RCTs and the second included observational studies), and three reviews of outcome measures and outcome reporting. Three prioritisation partnership exercises identified 26 priority areas for future research in eczema, vitiligo and SCC. Two international consensus initiatives identified four core domains for future eczema trials and seven core domains for vitiligo trials. Two pilot RCTs and three feasibility studies critically informed development of four trial proposals for external funding, three of which are now funded and one is pending consideration by funders. Our pragmatic RCT tested the two commonly used systemic treatments for PG (prednisolone vs. ciclosporin) and found no difference in their clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. Both drugs showed limited benefit. Only half of the participants’ ulcers had healed by 6 months. For those with healed ulcers, recurrence was common (30%). Different side effect profiles were noted for each drug, which can inform clinical decisions on an individual patient basis. Three researchers were trained to PhD level and a dermatology patient panel was established to ensure patient involvement in all aspects of the programme.

Conclusions

Findings from this programme of work have already informed clinical guidelines and patient information resources. Feasibility studies have ensured that large national pragmatic trials will now be conducted on important areas of treatment uncertainty that address the needs of patients and the NHS. There is scope for considerable improvement in terms of trial design, conduct and reporting for RCTs of skin disease, which can be improved through wider collaboration, registration of trial protocols and complete reporting and international consensus over core outcome sets. Three national trials have now been funded as a result of this work. Two international initiatives to establish how best to measure the core outcome domains for eczema and vitiligo are ongoing.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials Barrier Enhancement for Eczema Prevention (BEEP) (ISRCTN84854178 and NCT01142999), Study of Treatments fOr Pyoderma GAngrenosum Patients (STOP GAP) (ISRCTN35898459) and Hand Held NB-UVB for Early or Focal Vitiligo at Home (HI-Light Pilot Trial) (NCT01478945).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 4, No. 18. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Scoping systematic review of treatments for eczema

Background

Eczema is a very common chronic inflammatory skin condition.

Objectives

To update the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) systematic review of treatments for atopic eczema, published in 2000, and to inform health-care professionals, commissioners and patients about key treatment developments and research gaps.

Data sources

Electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched from the end of 2000 to 31 August 2013. Retrieved articles were used to identify further randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Review methods

Studies were filtered according to inclusion criteria and agreed by consensus in cases of uncertainty. Abstracts were excluded and non-English-language papers were screened by international colleagues and data were extracted. Only RCTs of treatments for eczema were included, as other forms of evidence are associated with higher risks of bias. Inclusion criteria for studies included availability of data relevant to the therapeutic management of eczema; mention of randomisation; comparison of two or more treatments; and prospective data collection. Participants of all ages were included. Eczema diagnosis was determined by a clinician or according to published diagnostic criteria. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. We used a standardised approach to summarising the data and the assessment of risk of bias and we made a clear distinction between what the studies found and our own interpretation of study findings.

Results

Of 7198 references screened, 287 new trials were identified spanning 92 treatments. Trial reporting was generally poor (randomisation method: 2% high, 36% low, 62% unclear risk of bias; allocation concealment: 3% high, 15% low, 82% unclear risk of bias; blinding of the intervention: 15% high, 28% low, 57% unclear risk of bias). Only 22 (8%) trials were considered to be at low risk of bias for all three criteria. There was reasonable evidence of benefit for the topical medications tacrolimus, pimecrolimus and various corticosteroids (with tacrolimus superior to pimecrolimus and corticosteroids) for both treatment and flare prevention; oral ciclosporin; oral azathioprine; narrow band ultraviolet B (UVB) light; Atopiclair™ and education. There was reasonable evidence to suggest no clinically useful benefit for twice-daily compared with once-daily topical corticosteroids; corticosteroids containing antibiotics for non-infected eczema; probiotics; evening primrose and borage oil; ion-exchange water softeners; protease inhibitor SRD441 (Serentis Ltd); furfuryl palmitate in emollient; cipamfylline cream; andMycobacterium vaccaevaccine. Additional research evidence is needed for emollients, bath additives, antibacterials, specialist clothing and complementary and alternative therapies. There was no RCT evidence for topical corticosteroid dilution, impregnated bandages, soap avoidance, bathing frequency or allergy testing.

Limitations

The large scope of the review coupled with the heterogeneity of outcomes precluded formal meta-analyses. Our conclusions are still limited by a profusion of small, poorly reported studies.

Conclusions

Although the evidence base of RCTs has increased considerably since the last NIHR HTA systematic review, the field is still severely hampered by poor design and reporting problems including failure to register trials and declare primary outcomes, small sample size, short follow-up duration and poor reporting of risk of bias. Key areas for further research identified by the review include the optimum use of emollients, bathing frequency, wash products, allergy testing and antiseptic treatments. Perhaps the greatest benefit identified is the use of twice weekly anti-inflammatory treatment to maintain disease remission. More studies need to be conducted in a primary care setting where most people with eczema are seen in the UK. Future studies need to use the same core set of outcomes that capture patient symptoms, clinical signs, quality of life and the chronic nature of the disease.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Efficacy and safety of dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis inadequately controlled by topical treatments: a randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND

Data from early-stage studies suggested that interleukin (IL)-4 and IL-13 are requisite drivers of atopic dermatitis, evidenced by marked improvement after treatment with dupilumab, a fully-human monoclonal antibody that blocks both pathways. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of several dose regimens of dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis inadequately controlled by topical treatments.

METHODS

In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older who had an Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of 12 or higher at screening (≥16 at baseline) and inadequate response to topical treatments from 91 study centres, including hospitals, clinics, and academic institutions, in Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Poland, and the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1), stratified by severity (moderate or severe, as assessed by Investigator's Global Assessment) and region (Japan vs rest of world) to receive subcutaneous dupilumab: 300 mg once a week, 300 mg every 2 weeks, 200 mg every 2 weeks, 300 mg every 4 weeks, 100 mg every 4 weeks, or placebo once a week for 16 weeks. We used a central randomisation scheme, provided by an interactive voice response system. Drug kits were coded, providing masking to treatment assignment, and allocation was concealed. Patients on treatment every 2 weeks and every 4 weeks received volume-matched placebo every week when dupilumab was not given to ensure double blinding. The primary outcome was efficacy of dupilumab dose regimens based on EASI score least-squares mean percentage change (SE) from baseline to week 16. Analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received one or more doses of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01859988.

FINDINGS

Between May 15, 2013, and Jan 27, 2014, 452 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 380 patients were randomly assigned. 379 patients received one or more doses of study drug (300 mg once a week [n=63], 300 mg every 2 weeks [n=64], 200 mg every 2 weeks [n=61], 300 mg every 4 weeks [n=65], 100 mg every 4 weeks [n=65]; placebo [n=61]). EASI score improvements favoured all dupilumab regimens versus placebo (p<0·0001): 300 mg once a week (-74% [SE 5·16]), 300 mg every 2 weeks (-68% [5·12]), 200 mg every 2 weeks (-65% [5·19]), 300 mg every 4 weeks (-64% [4·94]), 100 mg every 4 weeks (-45% [4·99]); placebo (-18% [5·20]). 258 (81%) of 318 patients given dupilumab and 49 (80%) of 61 patients given placebo reported treatment-emergent adverse events; nasopharyngitis was the most frequent (28% and 26%, respectively).

INTERPRETATION

Dupilumab improved clinical responses in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in a dose-dependent manner, without significant safety concerns. Our findings show that IL-4 and IL-13 are key drivers of atopic dermatitis.

FUNDING

Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.

Thymus and activation-regulated chemokine as a clinical biomarker in atopic dermatitis

Thymus and activation-regulated chemokine (TARC/CCL17) is a member of the T-helper 2 chemokine family. In Japan, serum TARC level has been commercially measured since 2008. After years of experience, we realized that TARC is an extremely useful clinical biomarker for atopic dermatitis (AD) treatment. Usually, physicians conduct a visual examination to determine whether their treatment has been successful; however, the visual examination results may not always be accurate; in such cases, serum TARC levels should be measured to eliminate any ambiguity regarding the treatment outcome. When the waning and waxing of eczema and fluctuations in the serum TARC levels were considered, we frequently found that AD does not follow a natural course but follows non-regulated inflammatory floating caused by insufficient intermittent topical treatment. Serum TARC is a promising biomarker for remission and can be used for accurately monitoring proactive treatment for long-term control. Abnormally high serum TARC levels indicate accelerated pathogenesis of cutaneous inflammation. Rapid normalization and maintaining normal serum TARC levels using appropriate topical treatment is a reasonable strategy for alleviating inflammation without upregulating cytokine expression. Observing serum TARC levels during early intervention for severe infantile AD is worthwhile to determine initial disease activity and evaluate treatment efficacy. Appropriate control of severe early-onset infantile AD is important for improving prognosis of eczema and for preventing food allergies. Additionally, this biomarker is useful for improving patient adherence. Dermatologists will be able to make great progress in treating AD by adopting biomarkers such as TARC for accurately assessing non-visible subclinical disorders.

Clinical improvement in psoriasis with specific targeting of interleukin-23

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder that affects approximately 2-3% of the population worldwide and has severe effects on patients' physical and psychological well-being. The discovery that psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease has led to more targeted, effective therapies; recent advances have focused on the interleukin (IL)-12/23p40 subunit shared by IL-12 and IL-23. Evidence suggests that specific inhibition of IL-23 would result in improvement in psoriasis. Here we evaluate tildrakizumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the IL-23p19 subunit, in a three-part, randomized, placebo-controlled, sequential, rising multiple-dose phase I study in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis to provide clinical proof that specific targeting of IL-23p19 results in symptomatic improvement of disease severity in human subjects. A 75% reduction in the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) score (PASI75) was achieved by all subjects in parts 1 and 3 (pooled) in the 3 and 10 mg kg(-1) groups by day 196. In part 2, 10 out of 15 subjects in the 3 mg kg(-1) group and 13 out of 14 subjects in the 10 mg kg(-1) group achieved a PASI75 by day 112. Tildrakizumab demonstrated important clinical improvement in moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients as demonstrated by improvements in PASI scores and histological samples.

Infliximab induces downregulation of the IL-12/IL-23 axis in 6-sulfo-LacNac (slan)+ dendritic cells and macrophages

BACKGROUND

The spectrum of TNF-α-producing cells in patients with psoriasis, as well as their fate during treatment with TNF-α antagonists, is not clearly defined.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to analyze the effects of anti-TNF-α treatment on TNF-α(+) cells in the skin and blood of patients with psoriasis.

METHODS

Lesional psoriatic skin was analyzed by means of immunohistologic staining and quantitative RT-PCR, and peripheral blood cells were phenotypically characterized by means of multicolor immunofluorescence labeling.

RESULTS

By using a tyramide-based signal amplification system, TNF-α was detected in dermal CD45(+)HLA-DR(+) leukocytes consisting of CD11c(+) dendritic cells and CD163(+) macrophages. In peripheral blood we observed an increase in the TNF-α-producing myeloid subsets of CD14(-) 6-sulfo-LacNac(+) dendritic cells and CD14(+)CD16(+) "intermediate" monocytes compared with healthy control subjects. Strikingly, we did not find detectable levels of TNF-α in other cells, including keratinocytes or T cells, making these cell types unlikely targets of TNF-α blockers. Up to 48 hours after the intravenous administration of the TNF-α antagonist infliximab, we encountered no overt changes in numbers of TNF-α(+) cells or signs of apoptosis in lesional psoriatic skin. Yet we observed a rapid decrease in IL-12p40, IL-1β, CCL20, and IL12RB1 mRNA levels. Consistently, TNF-α blockade during in vitro stimulation of 6-sulfo-LacNac DCs resulted in decreased production of IL-12 and IL-23 but not IL-6. In a mixed leukocyte reaction infliximab led to significantly decreased proliferation rates of T cells independent of the Fc antibody fragment.

CONCLUSION

The decrease in tissue inflammation during anti-TNF-α therapy is not due to immediate killing of TNF-α-producing cells but rather results from a rapid downregulation of the pathogenic IL-12/IL-23-driven immune response.

Prospective registration and outcome-reporting bias in randomized controlled trials of eczema treatments: a systematic review

We assessed completeness of trial registration and the extent of outcome-reporting bias in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eczema (atopic dermatitis) treatments by surveying all relevant RCTs published from January 2007 to July 2011 located in a database called the Global Resource of Eczema Trials (GREAT). The GREAT database is compiled by searching six bibliographic databases, including EMBASE and MEDLINE. Out of 109 identified RCTs, only 37 (34%) had been registered on an approved trial register. Only 18 out of 109 trials (17%) had been registered "properly" in terms of submitting the registration before the trial end date and nominating a primary outcome. The proportion of "any registered" and "properly registered" RCTs increased from 19% and 10% in 2007 to 57% and 36% in 2011, respectively. Assessment of selective outcome-reporting bias was difficult even among the properly registered trials owing to unclear primary outcome description especially with regard to timing. Only 5 out of the 109 trials (5%) provided enough information for us to be confident that the outcomes reported in the published trial were consistent with the original registration. Adequate trial registration and description of primary outcomes for eczema RCTs is currently poor.