Cargando…
Short-term efficacy and safety of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors for patients with atopic dermatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: In recent years, biologics targeting key cytokines and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety outcomes for atopic dermatitis (AD) therapy. To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of AD therapy involving biologics, JAK inhibitors, and their co...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10685203/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38034798 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22014 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: In recent years, biologics targeting key cytokines and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety outcomes for atopic dermatitis (AD) therapy. To evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of AD therapy involving biologics, JAK inhibitors, and their combination with topical corticosteroids (TCS) for patients with AD, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis. Using eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of 12 or 16 weeks of treatment with systemic medications and 4 weeks of topical treatment for AD. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to October 25, 2023. English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of 12 or 16 weeks of treatment with systemic medications and 4 weeks of topical treatment for AD were included. Titles, abstracts, and articles were screened in duplicate. Of 7261 citations, 37 studies were included. The data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4 and the outcomes were measured by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), the pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), as well as instances of adverse events (AE), and serious AE (SAE), which were presented as risk ratio (RR) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI). The efficacy of the biological therapies was analyzed with the percentage of patients who have achieved EASI 75, EASI 90, IGA 0/1 and pruritus NRS4, while the safety of treatments was evaluated in terms of the number of patients who had ≥1 AE and who had at least one SAE. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies with 43 cohorts that examined 9 medications and placebo and involved 18172 participants were included. Compared with the placebo, all biologics and JAK inhibitors were associated with a higher response rate in efficacy outcomes, while systematic administration was presented by dupilumab 200 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks with superior improvement in EASI 90 (RR 9.50, 95 % CI 2.31–39.03) and IGA0/1 (RR 17.00, 95 % CI 2.33–123.78), upadacitinib 30 mg once daily in EASI 75 (RR 5.14, 95 % CI 4.20–6.31) and Pruritus NRS4 (RR 5.73, 95 % CI 4.44–7.39), and external use was presented by ruxolitinib 1.5 % twice daily orally in EASI 75 (RR 4.14, 95 % CI 3.06–5.61) and Pruritus NRS4 (RR 4.08, 95 % CI 2.86–5.81), and most of doses led to a better safety profile. Most doses of baricitinib, dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib in combination with TCS demonstrated good efficacy as compared with the control groups (placebo + TCS). However, patients receiving baricitinib at a dosage of 2 mg daily (RR 1.23, 95 % CI 1.02–1.49) and 4 mg daily (RR 1.39, 95 % CI 1.22–1.58) in combination with TCS, exhibited a higher incidence of one or more SAE as compared with those taking placebo + TCS. CONCLUSION: Our research has revealed that ruxolitinib and dupilumab are effective and safe treatments for mild to moderate AD and moderate to severe AD, respectively. Additionally, the combination of dupilumab and TCS demonstrates greater efficacy and safety compared to baricitinib, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib with TCS as a background treatment for moderate to severe AD. We suggest that the use of topical JAK inhibitors could be a potential alternative to TCS when used in combination with systemic medications, as a novel approach to treat AD. Insufficient different data sources caused by partial interventions were only mentioned in a few articles and low event rates in safety analyses may lead to the results being biased. Further studies directly comparing existing and novel treatments are needed and will be included in forthcoming updates of this review. Our findings could form a useful foundation for developing a new generation of treatment guidelines for AD. |
---|