Dataset Information

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Long-Term Efficacy Maintenance and Adverse Event Rates of Lebrikizumab versus Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Lebrikizumab and dupilumab are monoclonal antibodies approved for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Both have demonstrated efficacy and safety over the 16-week SOLOs and ADvocate trials. However, AD is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory disease, and the long-term maintenance of efficacy is critical for achieving disease control from the perspective of patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies. This study aims to compare the long-term efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) and dupilumab every week or every 2 weeks (QW/Q2W) among adult patients who have achieved treatment efficacy following the induction period of 16 weeks.

Methods

Lebrikizumab's efficacy was assessed using individual patient data (IPD) from the ADvocate 1 and 2 monotherapy trials. Dupilumab's efficacy was evaluated using aggregate data from the adult-exclusive SOLO-CONTINUE trial. Due to the absence of a common comparator trial arm, we employed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC), a robust methodology widely accepted by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. This re-weights ADvocate IPD to align with SOLO-CONTINUE's prognostic factors and effect modifiers. We compared lebrikizumab's adjusted outcomes with dupilumab outcomes at week 52, focusing on 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index from baseline (EASI-75), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0 or 1, and overall adverse event (AE) rates. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test various combinations of matching variables.

Results

Adults on lebrikizumab Q4W were more likely to maintain IGA 0/1 through the 36-week maintenance period (weeks 16-52) compared with those on dupilumab QW/Q2W [risk ratio (RR) 1.334; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.74; p = 0.035]. Both treatments demonstrated comparable efficacy in terms of EASI-75 maintenance (RR 0.937; 95% CI 0.78-1.13; p = 0.490) and similar AE rates (RR 1.052; 95% CI 0.90-1.23; p = 0.526). Sensitivity analyses substantiated these findings.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that lebrikizumab Q4W may provide equal or superior long-term maintenance of efficacy measured with EASI-75 and IGA 0/1 compared with dupilumab QW/Q2W, with the advantage of requiring less frequent doses.

SUBMITTER: Rand K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10828239 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Long-Term Efficacy Maintenance and Adverse Event Rates of Lebrikizumab versus Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

Rand Kim K Ramos-Goñi Juan Manuel JM Akmaz Bülent B Solé-Feu Laia L Armario-Hita José-Carlos JC

Dermatology and therapy 20231028 1

<h4>Introduction</h4>Lebrikizumab and dupilumab are monoclonal antibodies approved for treating moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Both have demonstrated efficacy and safety over the 16-week SOLOs and ADvocate trials. However, AD is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory disease, and the long-term maintenance of efficacy is critical for achieving disease control from the perspective of patients, physicians, and regulatory agencies. This study aims to compare the long-term efficacy and safe ...[more]

PMID: 37897645

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCrisaborole topical ointment, 2%, is a nonsteroidal, topical anti-inflammatory phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) inhibitor that is approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis (AD). The objective of the current analysis was to compare the efficacy of crisaborole 2% relative to pimecrolimus 1%, tacrolimus 0.03% and tacrolimus 0.1% in patients aged ≥ 2 years with mild-to-moderate AD by comparing improvement in Investigator's Static Global Assessment scores ( (ISGA scores of 0/1 indicating "clear or almost clear"). ISGA was selected as the primary efficacy outcome given the US Food and Drug Administration's recommendations on the use of ISGA for assessment of global severity in AD and to align with efficacy measurements in the crisaborole registration trials. Safety endpoints could not be analyzed due to differences in outcome definitions across studies.MethodsEfficacy of crisaborole was evaluated using individual patient data (IPD) from two pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and efficacy of comparators was evaluated using published RCTs included in a previous network meta-analysis. Vehicle controls were not comparable due to differences in ingredients and population imbalance and, therefore, an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was used, which reweighted IPD for crisaborole to estimate absolute response in comparator populations.ResultsThe odds of achieving an improvement in ISGA score was higher with crisaborole 2% versus pimecrolimus 1% (odds ratio [OR] 2.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-2.85; effective sample size = 627, reduced from 1021; p value < 0.001) and for crisaborole 2% versus tacrolimus 0.03% (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.09-2.05; effective sample size = 311, reduced from 1021; p = 0.012).ConclusionThe unanchored MAIC suggests that the odds of achieving an improvement in ISGA score is greater with crisaborole 2% than with pimecrolimus 1% or tacrolimus 0.03% in patients aged ≥ 2 years with mild-to-moderate AD. These results are consistent with findings from the previously published network meta-analysis, which used a different methodology for performing indirect treatment comparisons.

Project description:IntroductionA systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the short-term efficacy of lebrikizumab to other biologic and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor monotherapies approved for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults and adolescents.MethodsThe NMA included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled monotherapy phase 2 and 3 trials of biologics (lebrikizumab 250 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], dupilumab 300 mg Q2W, and tralokinumab 300 mg Q2W) and JAK inhibitors (abrocitinib 100/200 mg daily, baricitinib 2/4 mg daily, and upadacitinib 15/30 mg daily) at approved doses. Efficacy outcomes included the proportions of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement, an Investigator Global Assessment of 0 or 1 (IGA 0/1), and a ≥ 4-point improvement in pruritus/itch numeric rating scale score at 12 weeks (abrocitinib) or 16 weeks (other treatments). Itch was also assessed at week 4. A Bayesian NMA employing baseline risk-adjusted random effects models was used to estimate treatment differences.ResultsTwenty-two monotherapy studies involving 8531 patients were included in the NMA. By week 12/16, lebrikizumab had superior odds of achieving IGA 0/1 and itch improvement compared to baricitinib and tralokinumab; similar odds to dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib 15 mg; and inferior odds to upadacitinib 30 mg. Additionally, lebrikizumab had a higher probability of improving EASI than baricitinib 2 mg; similar probability to baricitinib 4 mg, tralokinumab, dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib 15 mg; and lower probability than upadacitinib 30 mg daily. At week 4, lebrikizumab had superior odds of improving itch compared to tralokinumab; similar odds to baricitinib, dupilumab, and abrocitinib 100 mg; and inferior odds to abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib.ConclusionAmong biologics, lebrikizumab was comparable to dupilumab and superior to tralokinumab in improving response rates at week 16. Upadacitinib 30 mg was the only JAK inhibitor with superior response rates compared to lebrikizumab.

Project description:IntroductionEfficacy of upadacitinib has been assessed in trials including Measure Up 1 (NCT03569293), Measure Up 2 (NCT03607422), and Heads Up (NCT03738397). Measure Up 1 and 2 assessed efficacy of upadacitinib 30 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg against placebo, while Heads Up assessed efficacy of upadacitinib 30 mg in a head-to-head trial against dupilumab 300 mg. A head-to-head trial of upadacitinib 15 mg against dupilumab 300 mg has not been conducted. Network meta-analysis has shown that upadacitinib 30 mg and upadacitinib 15 mg are among the most efficacious targeted systemic therapies, but prior indirect comparisons have not evaluated more stringent outcomes.MethodsA population-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted using post hoc individual patient data from Measure Up 1 and 2 and Heads Up to estimate how upadacitinib 15 mg would have performed if included in Heads Up by adjusting for patient-level covariates. Absolute response rates at weeks 4, 16, and 24 were estimated for the following outcomes: no/minimal itch [Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS) score of 0/1], Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score of ≤ 3 (EASI ≤ 3), 100% improvement in EASI (EASI 100), both ≥ 90% improvement in EASI (EASI 90) and WP-NRS 0/1, both EASI ≤ 3 and WP-NRS 0/1, and both EASI 100 and WP-NRS 0/1. The analysis was conducted on adult patients, aligned with the intention-to treat population for the clinical trials, and used non-responder imputation.ResultsAcross all outcomes assessed, the estimated absolute response rates were greatest for upadacitinib 30 mg, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg and then dupilumab. This pattern was observed at week 4, week 16, and week 24.ConclusionsFor adults with moderate-to-severe AD, upadacitinib 30 mg appears to be the most efficacious treatment in attaining more stringent and composite outcomes across multiple timepoints, followed by upadacitinib 15 mg and then dupilumab 300 mg.

Dataset Information

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Long-Term Efficacy Maintenance and Adverse Event Rates of Lebrikizumab versus Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Long-Term Efficacy Maintenance and Adverse Event Rates of Lebrikizumab versus Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets