530 - Treatment efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who switched from dupilumab to abrocitinib in JADE EXTEND, a phase 3 long-term extension study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1–selective inhibitor, and dupilumab, an anti–interleukin 4 receptor α monoclonal antibody, have been approved for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). The efficacy of abrocitinib and dupilumab as monotherapy or in combination with medicated topical therapy has been demonstrated in multiple phase 3 clinical trials. As is the case with many therapies, some patients with AD may need to discontinue treatment with dupilumab (due to inadequate efficacy, intolerable side-effects, patient choice, or other reasons) and switch to other systemic therapies. Objective To evaluate the long-term treatment response in patients with moderate-to-severe AD who switched from dupilumab to abrocitinib, as it is valuable information for prescribers and patients to consider when making treatment decisions. Methods The phase 3 JADE COMPARE trial (NCT03720470) evaluated the efficacy of abrocitinib (100 mg or 200 mg once daily) and dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks) versus placebo in combination with topical medicated therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe AD through week 16. After a wash-out period, dupilumab-treated patients from JADE COMPARE who enrolled in the ongoing long-term extension trial JADE EXTEND (NCT03422822; clinical data cutoff: Sept 25, 2021) were randomised to receive double-blinded treatment with abrocitinib 100 mg or 200 mg. This post hoc analysis evaluated the response to dupilumab through week 16 in JADE COMPARE and thereafter in JADE EXTEND following a switch to abrocitinib through week 104 of total treatment duration/week 84 of abrocitinib treatment. Assessments included Investigator’s Global Assessment score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) with a ≥2-point improvement from baseline (IGA 0/1), ≥75% or ≥90% improvement from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-75 or EASI-90), ≥4-point improvement from baseline in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score (PP-NRS4; PP-NRS used with permission from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Sanofi), and a PP-NRS score of 0 or 1 (PP-NRS 0/1). JADE EXTEND data are presented as observed; patients with missing data at a visit were excluded. Analyses included both dupilumab responders and non-responders. Results Overall, 242 patients were treated with dupilumab in JADE COMPARE (mean age: 37 years; IGA score 4: 33%). Of those, 203 enrolled in JADE EXTEND and received abrocitinib 200 mg (n=73) or abrocitinib 100 mg (n=130). After 16 weeks of treatment with dupilumab in JADE COMPARE, the proportion of responders was 39% for IGA 0/1, 66% for EASI-75, 39% for EASI-90, 57% for PP-NRS4, and 24% for PP-NRS 0/1. As early as 2 weeks after switching to abrocitinib (200 mg/100 mg) in JADE EXTEND, the proportion of responders was observed to increase in a dose-dependent manner, respectively, for IGA 0/1 (61%; 51%), EASI-75 (90%; 85%), EASI-90 (60%; 54%), PP-NRS4 (81%; 72%), and PP-NRS 0/1 (47%; 37%). Long-term efficacy was observed out to week 84 (Figure). Conclusions In patients with moderate-to-severe AD who received prior treatment with dupilumab, switching to abrocitinib resulted in dose-dependent increases in the proportion of responders as early as week 2 after treatment with abrocitinib. This efficacy continued to be observed long-term through week 84 of abrocitinib treatment.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».