Publicação
Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Dupilumab, Tralokinumab, and Upadacitinib in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis
| Resumo: | Introduction: Evaluating the real-world effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of targeted biologic and non-biologic therapies in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated in routine clinical practice remains crucial. In this international, multicenter, retrospective, comparative study we aimed to evaluate the 52-week effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib in patients with AD aged ≥ 12 years. Methods: Effectiveness was assessed at weeks 16, 24, and 52 using Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and itch Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores. Safety was measured via adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 1286 treatment courses were included: 62.5% received dupilumab, 24.3% received upadacitinib, and 13.1% received tralokinumab. Upadacitinib demonstrated higher effectiveness than dupilumab and tralokinumab across all time points and most evaluated outcomes both on the overall population and the biologic-/JAKi-naïve population, including stringent treatment targets such as EASI 90 response and combined EASI 90 + itch NRS 0/1 response. While upadacitinib demonstrated superior effectiveness, it was associated with a higher incidence of AEs, both leading to and not leading to treatment discontinuation, including thromboembolic events, lipid abnormalities, and hematologic abnormalities. In contrast, conjunctivitis was the most frequently observed AE among patients receiving biologics. Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive real-world comparison of dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib in AD, highlighting upadacitinib’s superior effectiveness in achieving stringent treatment targets, both in the short and long term, but also a higher incidence of AEs. However, the considerable heterogeneity of the study population, an inherent limitation of real-world studies, must be acknowledged when interpreting these findings. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Torres, Tiago |
| Outros Autores: | Yeung, Jensen; Prajapati, Vimal H.; Ribero, Simone; Balato, Anna; Marzano, Angelo Valerio; Cruz, Maria João; Paiva Lopes, Maria João; Paiva-Lopes, Maria; Lazaridou, Elizabeth; Carrascosa, Jose Manuel; Alvarenga, José Miguel; Farinha, Pedro; Farinha, Pedro; Duarte, Bruno; Munera-Campos, Monica; Sood, Siddhartha; Rankin, Brian D.; Ortoncelli, Michela; Caccavale, Stefano; Ferrucci, Silvia Mariel; Pires Rosa, Gilberto; Daponte, Athina Ioanna; Silvi, Gianmarco; Peris, Ketty; Gori, Niccolò; Prignano, Francesca; Kolios, Antonio; Herranz, Pedro; Gregoriou, Stamatios; Rompoti, Natalia; Gkalpakiotis, Spyridon; Chiricozzi, Andrea |
| Assunto: | Atopic dermatitis Dupilumab Effectiveness Safety Tralokinumab Upadacitinib Dermatology |
| Ano: | 2025 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | artigo |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade Nova de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório Institucional da UNL |
| Resumo: | Introduction: Evaluating the real-world effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of targeted biologic and non-biologic therapies in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated in routine clinical practice remains crucial. In this international, multicenter, retrospective, comparative study we aimed to evaluate the 52-week effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib in patients with AD aged ≥ 12 years. Methods: Effectiveness was assessed at weeks 16, 24, and 52 using Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) and itch Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores. Safety was measured via adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 1286 treatment courses were included: 62.5% received dupilumab, 24.3% received upadacitinib, and 13.1% received tralokinumab. Upadacitinib demonstrated higher effectiveness than dupilumab and tralokinumab across all time points and most evaluated outcomes both on the overall population and the biologic-/JAKi-naïve population, including stringent treatment targets such as EASI 90 response and combined EASI 90 + itch NRS 0/1 response. While upadacitinib demonstrated superior effectiveness, it was associated with a higher incidence of AEs, both leading to and not leading to treatment discontinuation, including thromboembolic events, lipid abnormalities, and hematologic abnormalities. In contrast, conjunctivitis was the most frequently observed AE among patients receiving biologics. Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive real-world comparison of dupilumab, tralokinumab, and upadacitinib in AD, highlighting upadacitinib’s superior effectiveness in achieving stringent treatment targets, both in the short and long term, but also a higher incidence of AEs. However, the considerable heterogeneity of the study population, an inherent limitation of real-world studies, must be acknowledged when interpreting these findings. |
|---|