Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Upadacitinib, an oral selective-JAK1 inhibitor, has been used in clinical trials to treat atopic dermatitis (AD).

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in moderate-to-severe AD.

Material and methods

We searched clinical trials from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and Web of Science. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of upadacitinib treatment on patients with moderate-to-severe AD were included. A meta-analysis was performed using the fixed- or random-effects models to calculate pooled standard mean differences or relative risks (SMD or RR, respectively).

Results

Compared with the placebo group, our meta-analysis revealed that upadacitinib was related to a significant decrease in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) scores, and pruritus numeric rating scale (NRS) scores. A higher response rate in Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) and EASI-75 were also detected in the upadacitinib group. Although patients treated with upadacitinib experienced a higher incidence of adverse events (AEs), these AEs were mild and tolerated. As for serious adverse events (SAEs), there was no difference between the placebo group and the upadacitinib group.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrated that upadacitinib is a safe and effective treatment for moderate-to-severe AD. Further long-term trials are required for confirmation.

SUBMITTER: Huang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10809830 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Huang Yuanjie Y Cai Limin L Wu Xuerui X Chen Chen C

Postepy dermatologii i alergologii 20231201 6

<h4>Introduction</h4>Upadacitinib, an oral selective-JAK1 inhibitor, has been used in clinical trials to treat atopic dermatitis (AD).<h4>Aim</h4>To evaluate the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in moderate-to-severe AD.<h4>Material and methods</h4>We searched clinical trials from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases, and Web of Science. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of upadacitinib treatment on patients with moderate-to-severe AD were included. A meta-analysis was performed u ...[more]

PMID: 38282878

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo assess the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD).MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Clinical Trials Website, and Cochrane Library databases, spanning from their inception until February 18, 2024. The review incorporated all randomized controlled trials examining upadacitinib's efficacy in managing moderate to severe AD among adolescent patients. The methodological quality of the selected studies underwent thorough assessment utilizing the Cochrane systematic review methodology. Statistical analyses of the outcome measures were executed employing the Review Manager 5.3 software.ResultsThe meta-analysis encompassed 4 studies in total. Compared to placebo, upadacitinib at doses of both 15 and 30 mg was associated with a significant enhancement in the eczema area and severity index-75% ([odds ratio, OR = 11.06, 95% confidence interval, CI (6.78-18.04), P < .00001]; [OR = 21.73, 95% CI (12.73-37.11), P < .00001]), a reduction in the numerical rating scale of ≥4 ([OR = 6.16, 95% CI (3.56-10.64), P < .00001]; [OR = 10.58, 95% CI (6.12-18.29), P < .00001]), and improvement in the investigator's global assessment to 0/1 ([OR = 8.85, 95% CI (4.86-16.10), P < .00001]; [OR = 21.43, 95% CI (11.64-39.46), P < .00001]). Regarding safety, upadacitinib at both 15 and 30 mg doses was linked to a statistically significant rise in the overall incidence of adverse events when juxtaposed with placebo ([OR = 1.57, 95% CI (1.01-2.44), P = .04]; [OR = 2.21, 95% CI (1.44-3.41), P = .0003]). Nevertheless, no statistically significant disparity was discovered in the occurrence of serious adverse events between upadacitinib and placebo ([OR = 1.02, 95% CI (0.27-3.84), P = .98]; [OR = 0.42, 95% CI (0.09-1.93), P = .26]).ConclusionThe findings from this meta-analysis indicate that upadacitinib demonstrates substantial effectiveness and tolerability in treating moderate to severe AD in adolescents. Moreover, upadacitinib provides a rapid reduction in pruritus and markedly ameliorates symptoms and signs, with the 30 mg dosage showing a more pronounced therapeutic effect relative to the 15 mg dosage.

Project description:ImportanceAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, recurrent, inflammatory skin disease with an unmet need for treatments that provide rapid and high levels of skin clearance and itch improvement.ObjectiveTo assess the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib vs dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe AD.Design, setting, and participantsHeads Up was a 24-week, head-to-head, phase 3b, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy, active-controlled clinical trial comparing the safety and efficacy of upadacitinib with dupilumab among 692 adults with moderate-to-severe AD who were candidates for systemic therapy. The study was conducted from February 21, 2019, to December 9, 2020, at 129 centers located in 22 countries across Europe, North and South America, Oceania, and the Asia-Pacific region. Efficacy analyses were conducted in the intent-to-treat population.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1 and treated with oral upadacitinib, 30 mg once daily, or subcutaneous dupilumab, 300 mg every other week.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was achievement of 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI75) at week 16. Secondary end points were percentage change from baseline in the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (weekly average), proportion of patients achieving EASI100 and EASI90 at week 16, percentage change from baseline in Worst Pruritus NRS at week 4, proportion of patients achieving EASI75 at week 2, percentage change from baseline in Worst Pruritus NRS (weekly average) at week 1, and Worst Pruritus NRS (weekly average) improvement of 4 points or more at week 16. End points at week 24 included EASI75, EASI90, EASI100, and improvement of 4 points or more in Worst Pruritus NRS from baseline (weekly average). Safety was assessed as treatment-emergent adverse events in all patients receiving 1 or more dose of either drug.ResultsOf 924 patients screened, 348 (183 men [52.6%]; mean [SD] age, 36.6 [14.6] years) were randomized to receive upadacitinib and 344 were randomized to receive dupilumab (194 men [56.4%]; mean [SD] age, 36.9 [14.1] years); demographic and disease characteristics were balanced among treatment groups. At week 16, 247 patients receiving upadacitinib (71.0%) and 210 patients receiving dupilumab (61.1%) achieved EASI75 (P = .006). All ranked secondary end points also demonstrated the superiority of upadacitinib vs dupilumab, including improvement in Worst Pruritus NRS as early as week 1 (mean [SE], 31.4% [1.7%] vs 8.8% [1.8%]; P < .001), achievement of EASI75 as early as week 2 (152 [43.7%] vs 60 [17.4%]; P < .001), and achievement of EASI100 at week 16 (97 [27.9%] vs 26 [7.6%]; P < .001). Rates of serious infection, eczema herpeticum, herpes zoster, and laboratory-related adverse events were higher for patients who received upadacitinib, whereas rates of conjunctivitis and injection-site reactions were higher for patients who received dupilumab.Conclusions and relevanceDuring 16 weeks of treatment, upadacitinib demonstrated superior efficacy vs dupilumab in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, with no new safety signals.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03738397.

Project description:IntroductionUpadacitinib has demonstrated high and rapid rates of efficacy in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) as assessed by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). This post hoc analysis assessed the EASI response in four anatomical regions for patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab over 24 weeks.MethodsData from patients randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 30 mg extended-release tablet orally once daily or dupilumab 300 mg by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks after a loading dose of 600 mg in the Heads Up study were analyzed for achievement of ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction of EASI in four body regions: (1) head and neck, (2) trunk (including genitals), (3) upper limbs, and (4) lower limbs (including buttocks) at each study visit through week 24. Patient response data from the Head and Neck Patient Global Impression of Severity (HN-PGIS) were also analyzed at each study visit for comparison of upadacitinib to dupilumab.ResultsGreater proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib versus dupilumab achieved skin clearance rates of ≥75% (EASI 75) at week 1 and higher clearance rates of ≥90% (EASI 90) or 100% (EASI 100) by week 4 or earlier in all four body regions. This difference was maintained at each visit through week 24 for both EASI 90 and EASI 100. Patient responses on the HN-PGIS indicated that a greater proportion of patients (nominal p value <0.05) treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab reported that AD symptoms in the head and neck region were absent or minimal as early as week 1.ConclusionCompared to dupilumab, upadacitinib treatment provided higher rates of rapid, sustained efficacy for the head and neck, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD as measured by the EASI and supported by patient responses.IntroductionUpadacitinib has demonstrated high and rapid rates of efficacy in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) as assessed by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). This post hoc analysis assessed the EASI response in four anatomical regions for patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab over 24 weeks.MethodsData from patients randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 30 mg extended-release tablet orally once daily or dupilumab 300 mg by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks after a loading dose of 600 mg in the Heads Up study were analyzed for achievement of ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction of EASI in four body regions: (1) head and neck, (2) trunk (including genitals), (3) upper limbs, and (4) lower limbs (including buttocks) at each study visit through week 24. Patient response data from the Head and Neck Patient Global Impression of Severity (HN-PGIS) were also analyzed at each study visit for comparison of upadacitinib to dupilumab.ResultsGreater proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib versus dupilumab achieved skin clearance rates of ≥75% (EASI 75) at week 1 and higher clearance rates of ≥90% (EASI 90) or 100% (EASI 100) by week 4 or earlier in all four body regions. This difference was maintained at each visit through week 24 for both EASI 90 and EASI 100. Patient responses on the HN-PGIS indicated that a greater proportion of patients (nominal p value <0.05) treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab reported that AD symptoms in the head and neck region were absent or minimal as early as week 1.ConclusionCompared to dupilumab, upadacitinib treatment provided higher rates of rapid, sustained efficacy for the head and neck, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD as measured by the EASI and supported by patient responses.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction

Aim

Material and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets