TY - JOUR
T1 - Dupilumab Versus Cyclosporine for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Adults
T2 - Indirect Comparison Using the Eczema Area and Severity Index
AU - Ariëns, Lieneke F M
AU - Gadkari, Abhijit
AU - van Os-Medendorp, Harmieke
AU - Ayyagari, Rajeev
AU - Terasawa, Emi
AU - Kuznik, Andreas
AU - Chen, Zhen
AU - Bégo-Le Bagousse, Gaëlle
AU - Lu, Yufang
AU - Rizova, Elena
AU - Graham, Neil M H
AU - Pirozzi, Gianluca
AU - De Bruin-Weller, Marjolein
AU - Eckert, Laurent
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Acta Dermato-Venereologica.
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Dupilumab is approved for uncontrolled moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD); cyclosporine is approved for severe AD for ≤ 1 year. The efficacy/effectiveness of these treat-ments was compared indirectly. Regression models used pooled patient-level data to estimate response (Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) EASI-50/EASI-75 at weeks 12-16 and 24-30) to dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (CHRONOS [NCT02260986]) or cyclosporine (University Medical Center). Models were adjusted for sex, baseline EASI, and thymus and activation-regulated chemokine level. A total of 106 patients received dupilumab (+ topical cortico-steroids; + TCS), and 57 received cyclosporine (+ TCS). Among University Medical Center patients, estimated EASI-50 responders were, dupilumab vs. cyclosporine, 91% vs. 77% (p = 0.038; weeks 12-16), and 96% vs. 67% (p < 0.0001; weeks 24-30); EASI-75 responders were 78% vs. 56% (p = 0.016; weeks 12-16) and 80% vs. 47% (p <0.001; weeks 24-30). Among CHRONOS patients, estimated EASI-50 responders were 90% vs. 74% (p <0.038; weeks 12-16) and 92% vs. 53% (p < 0.0001; weeks 24-30); EASI-75 responders were 75% vs. 52% (p = 0.016; weeks 12-16) and 74% vs. 40% (p <0.001; weeks 24-30), respectively. These results suggest a higher relative efficacy of dupilumab vs. cyclosporine.
AB - Dupilumab is approved for uncontrolled moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD); cyclosporine is approved for severe AD for ≤ 1 year. The efficacy/effectiveness of these treat-ments was compared indirectly. Regression models used pooled patient-level data to estimate response (Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) EASI-50/EASI-75 at weeks 12-16 and 24-30) to dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (CHRONOS [NCT02260986]) or cyclosporine (University Medical Center). Models were adjusted for sex, baseline EASI, and thymus and activation-regulated chemokine level. A total of 106 patients received dupilumab (+ topical cortico-steroids; + TCS), and 57 received cyclosporine (+ TCS). Among University Medical Center patients, estimated EASI-50 responders were, dupilumab vs. cyclosporine, 91% vs. 77% (p = 0.038; weeks 12-16), and 96% vs. 67% (p < 0.0001; weeks 24-30); EASI-75 responders were 78% vs. 56% (p = 0.016; weeks 12-16) and 80% vs. 47% (p <0.001; weeks 24-30). Among CHRONOS patients, estimated EASI-50 responders were 90% vs. 74% (p <0.038; weeks 12-16) and 92% vs. 53% (p < 0.0001; weeks 24-30); EASI-75 responders were 75% vs. 52% (p = 0.016; weeks 12-16) and 74% vs. 40% (p <0.001; weeks 24-30), respectively. These results suggest a higher relative efficacy of dupilumab vs. cyclosporine.
KW - Adult
KW - Atopic dermatitis
KW - Cyclosporine
KW - Dupilumab
KW - Eczema
KW - Eczema Area and Severity Index
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85071709203
U2 - 10.2340/00015555-3219
DO - 10.2340/00015555-3219
M3 - Article
C2 - 31099402
SN - 0001-5555
VL - 99
SP - 851
EP - 857
JO - Acta Dermato-Venereologica
JF - Acta Dermato-Venereologica
IS - 10
ER -