Kelsey B Nusbaum1, Sarah Fleischer2, Alan B Fleischer3. 1. University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 2. Department of Mathematics, Eberly College of Arts and Sciences, Morgantown, WV, USA. 3. Department of Dermatology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As new targeted therapies continue to emerge for atopic dermatitis (AD), comparisons between agents are necessary to inform clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVES: Assess the efficacy of biologics and oral small molecules on the clinical signs, symptoms, and quality of life in AD. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified phase II and III randomized clinical trials of biologics and oral small molecules in AD. Clinical benefit was assessed for three outcome measures: Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) by performing a meta-analysis using the inverse variance heterogeneity model ((IVhet)). RESULTS: The highest achievement of 75% reduction in EASI was seen with the higher dose of upadacitinib (30 mg) followed by abrocitinib and lebrikizumab, which outperformed dupilumab. Similarly, the highest proportion achieving at least a 4-point reduction of PP-NRS was seen with lebrikizumab followed by upadacitinib and abrocitinib which had greater reduction of itch than dupilumab. Abrocitinib had the greatest improvement in DLQI. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib, abrocitinib, and lebrikizumab had greater improvement of clinical signs, symptoms, and quality of life in AD compared to dupilumab and other targeted therapies.
BACKGROUND: As new targeted therapies continue to emerge for atopic dermatitis (AD), comparisons between agents are necessary to inform clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVES: Assess the efficacy of biologics and oral small molecules on the clinical signs, symptoms, and quality of life in AD. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified phase II and III randomized clinical trials of biologics and oral small molecules in AD. Clinical benefit was assessed for three outcome measures: Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) by performing a meta-analysis using the inverse variance heterogeneity model ((IVhet)). RESULTS: The highest achievement of 75% reduction in EASI was seen with the higher dose of upadacitinib (30 mg) followed by abrocitinib and lebrikizumab, which outperformed dupilumab. Similarly, the highest proportion achieving at least a 4-point reduction of PP-NRS was seen with lebrikizumab followed by upadacitinib and abrocitinib which had greater reduction of itch than dupilumab. Abrocitinib had the greatest improvement in DLQI. CONCLUSIONS: Upadacitinib, abrocitinib, and lebrikizumab had greater improvement of clinical signs, symptoms, and quality of life in AD compared to dupilumab and other targeted therapies.