Cargando…

Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis

Given the lack of head‐to‐head studies of systemic therapies in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD), network meta‐analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data to inform clinical decision‐making. In this NMA, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 24 O...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Silverberg, J.I., Thyssen, J.P., Fahrbach, K., Mickle, K., Cappelleri, J.C., Romero, W., Cameron, M.C., Myers, D.E., Clibborn, C., DiBonaventura, M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8453983/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33991374
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.17351
_version_ 1784570395810070528
author Silverberg, J.I.
Thyssen, J.P.
Fahrbach, K.
Mickle, K.
Cappelleri, J.C.
Romero, W.
Cameron, M.C.
Myers, D.E.
Clibborn, C.
DiBonaventura, M.
author_facet Silverberg, J.I.
Thyssen, J.P.
Fahrbach, K.
Mickle, K.
Cappelleri, J.C.
Romero, W.
Cameron, M.C.
Myers, D.E.
Clibborn, C.
DiBonaventura, M.
author_sort Silverberg, J.I.
collection PubMed
description Given the lack of head‐to‐head studies of systemic therapies in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD), network meta‐analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data to inform clinical decision‐making. In this NMA, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 24 October 2019 were identified by a systematic literature review. Short‐term (12–16 weeks) efficacy (Investigator’s Global Assessment [IGA] and Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] responses), patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and safety data from each trial were abstracted and analysed separately for monotherapy and combination therapy (systemic plus topical anti‐inflammatory therapy). RCTs were analysed in fixed‐effects and random‐effects Bayesian NMA models. Overall, 19 phase 2 and phase 3 RCTs of abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, tralokinumab and upadacitinib were included. In monotherapy RCTs, upadacitinib 30 mg once daily (QD) had the numerically highest efficacy (83.6% achieved ≥50% improvement in EASI [EASI‐50 response]), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg QD (74.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg QD (70.5%), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (63.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (56.7%). Similar trends in EASI‐75 and EASI‐90 response were observed. In combination therapy RCTs, abrocitinib 200 mg QD had the highest EASI‐50 (86.6%), followed by dupilumab 300 mg Q2W (82.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (79.7%). Similar findings were observed for IGA response and PROs. In monotherapy and combination therapy RCTs, the probability of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was higher among all active treatments than with placebo (except for dupilumab 300 mg Q2W [odds ratio (OR), 0.96; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.45–2.18] and abrocitinib 100 mg QD [OR, 0.95; 95% CrI, 0.35–2.66] in combination therapy RCTs), although active treatments did not significantly differ from one another. Abrocitinib, dupilumab and upadacitinib were consistently the most effective systemic therapies in adult and adolescent patients with AD, with no significant TEAE differences in short‐term RCTs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8453983
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84539832021-09-27 Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis Silverberg, J.I. Thyssen, J.P. Fahrbach, K. Mickle, K. Cappelleri, J.C. Romero, W. Cameron, M.C. Myers, D.E. Clibborn, C. DiBonaventura, M. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Review Articles Given the lack of head‐to‐head studies of systemic therapies in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis (AD), network meta‐analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data to inform clinical decision‐making. In this NMA, eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before 24 October 2019 were identified by a systematic literature review. Short‐term (12–16 weeks) efficacy (Investigator’s Global Assessment [IGA] and Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] responses), patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) and safety data from each trial were abstracted and analysed separately for monotherapy and combination therapy (systemic plus topical anti‐inflammatory therapy). RCTs were analysed in fixed‐effects and random‐effects Bayesian NMA models. Overall, 19 phase 2 and phase 3 RCTs of abrocitinib, baricitinib, dupilumab, lebrikizumab, nemolizumab, tralokinumab and upadacitinib were included. In monotherapy RCTs, upadacitinib 30 mg once daily (QD) had the numerically highest efficacy (83.6% achieved ≥50% improvement in EASI [EASI‐50 response]), followed by abrocitinib 200 mg QD (74.6%), upadacitinib 15 mg QD (70.5%), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (63.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (56.7%). Similar trends in EASI‐75 and EASI‐90 response were observed. In combination therapy RCTs, abrocitinib 200 mg QD had the highest EASI‐50 (86.6%), followed by dupilumab 300 mg Q2W (82.4%) and abrocitinib 100 mg QD (79.7%). Similar findings were observed for IGA response and PROs. In monotherapy and combination therapy RCTs, the probability of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was higher among all active treatments than with placebo (except for dupilumab 300 mg Q2W [odds ratio (OR), 0.96; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.45–2.18] and abrocitinib 100 mg QD [OR, 0.95; 95% CrI, 0.35–2.66] in combination therapy RCTs), although active treatments did not significantly differ from one another. Abrocitinib, dupilumab and upadacitinib were consistently the most effective systemic therapies in adult and adolescent patients with AD, with no significant TEAE differences in short‐term RCTs. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-06-12 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8453983/ /pubmed/33991374 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.17351 Text en © 2021 Pfizer Inc. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Silverberg, J.I.
Thyssen, J.P.
Fahrbach, K.
Mickle, K.
Cappelleri, J.C.
Romero, W.
Cameron, M.C.
Myers, D.E.
Clibborn, C.
DiBonaventura, M.
Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title_full Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title_short Comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
title_sort comparative efficacy and safety of systemic therapies used in moderate‐to‐severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic literature review and network meta‐analysis
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8453983/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33991374
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.17351
work_keys_str_mv AT silverbergji comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT thyssenjp comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT fahrbachk comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT micklek comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT cappellerijc comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT romerow comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT cameronmc comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT myersde comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT clibbornc comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT dibonaventuram comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsystemictherapiesusedinmoderatetosevereatopicdermatitisasystematicliteraturereviewandnetworkmetaanalysis