Efficacy and Safety of Lebrikizumab in Combination With Topical Corticosteroids in Adolescents and Adults With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Lebrikizumab (LEB), a high-affinity monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin (IL)-13, demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) during 16 weeks of monotherapy in a phase 2b trial, and two 52-week phase 3 trials. Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of LEB combined with low- to mid-potency topical corticosteroids (TCS) in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ADhere trial was a 16-week randomized, double-blinded, placebo (PBO)-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 clinical trial conducted from February 3, 2020, to September 16, 2021. The study was conducted at 54 outpatient sites across Germany, Poland, Canada, and the US and included adolescent (aged ≥12 to <18 years weighing ≥40 kg) and adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD. The treatment allocation ratio was 2:1 (LEB:PBO). Interventions: Overall, 211 patients were randomized to subcutaneous LEB (loading dose of 500 mg at baseline and week 2, followed by 250 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W] thereafter) or PBO Q2W in combination with TCS for 16 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: Efficacy analyses at week 16 included proportions of patients achieving Investigator's Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 (IGA [0,1]) with 2 or more points improvement from baseline, and 75% improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75). Key secondary end points included evaluation of itch, itch interference on sleep, and quality of life. Safety assessments included monitoring adverse events (AEs). Results: The mean (SD) age of patients was 37.2 (19.3) years, 103 (48.8%) patients were women, 31 (14.7%) patients were Asian, and 28 (13.3%) patients were Black/African American. At week 16, IGA (0,1) was achieved by 145 (41.2%) patients in the LEB+TCS group vs 66 (22.1%) receiving PBO+TCS (P = .01); corresponding proportions of patients achieving EASI-75 were 69.5% vs 42.2% (P < .001). The LEB+TCS group showed statistically significant improvements in all key secondary end points. Most treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were nonserious, mild or moderate in severity, and did not lead to study discontinuation. The TEAEs frequently reported in the LEB+TCS group included conjunctivitis (7 [4.8%]), headache (7 [4.8%]), hypertension (4 [2.8%]), injection site reactions (4 [2.8%]), and herpes infection (5 [3.4%]) vs 1.5% or less patient-reported frequencies in the PBO+TCS group. Similar frequencies of patient-reported serious AEs following LEB+TCS (n = 2, 1.4%) and PBO+TCS (n = 1, 1.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized phase 3 clinical trial, LEB+TCS was associated with improved outcomes in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD compared with TCS alone, and safety was consistent with previously reported AD trials. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04250337.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».