Efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab in adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis inadequately controlled with or ineligible for ciclosporin A: a placebo-controlled, randomized phase IIIb clinical study (ADvantage)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Ciclosporin A (CsA) is approved for severe atopic dermatitis (AD), but its efficacy may not be optimal, and its toxicity limits longer-term use. The recently approved lebrikizumab has demonstrated robust efficacy and favourable safety in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lebrikizumab combined with topical corticosteroids (TCS) in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD who had a history of inadequate response to CsA or for whom CsA was not medically advisable. METHODS: This was a placebo-controlled, randomized phase IIIb clinical study (ADvantage; NCT05149313). Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive either lebrikizumab 250 mg plus TCS (with a loading dose of lebrikizumab 500 mg at baseline and week 2) or placebo plus TCS, delivered subcutaneously, every 2 weeks (Q2W), for the 16-week induction period. Following this, all patients received lebrikizumab 250 mg Q2W during a 36-week open-label maintenance period (with TCS use at investigator discretion). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved ≥ 75% improvement from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI 75) at week 16. RESULTS: In total, 331 patients were randomized, 220 to receive lebrikizumab plus TCS and 111 to receive placebo plus TCS. At week 16, a significantly higher proportion of the lebrikizumab group vs. the placebo group achieved EASI 75 (68.4% vs. 40.8%; P < 0.001). At week 16, a greater proportion of the treatment group achieved ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in EASI (EASI 90) (42.9% vs. 20.8%; P < 0.001), Investigator's Global Assessment of clear/almost clear skin (IGA 0/1) with ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline (42.0% vs. 24.5%; P < 0.01), and ≥ 4-point improvement in pruritus numeric rating scale (NRS) (49.9% vs. 29.7%; P < 0.05). At week 52, the proportion of patients treated with lebrikizumab with/without TCS who achieved EASI 75 and EASI 90 further increased to 88.9% and 71.7%, respectively; 64.4% achieved IGA 0/1 response and 71.3% achieved a ≥ 4-point improvement in pruritus NRS. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 62.3% in the lebrikizumab plus TCS group vs. 53.2% in the placebo plus TCS group at week 16, and 76.9% in the lebrikizumab group at week 52. Serious adverse events and TEAEs leading to discontinuation at week 16 were low and similar in lebrikizumab vs. placebo groups (1.4% vs. 0.9% and 0.5% vs. 0.9%, respectively), and remained low at week 52 (5.9% and 2.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Lebrikizumab 250 mg Q2W combined with TCS significantly improved signs and symptoms of AD at week 16 in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD and history of inadequate response to CsA or for whom CsA was not medically advisable, and those benefits were maintained and/or further improved by week 52. Safety was consistent with the known lebrikizumab safety profile.
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 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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) | 0,003 | 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 ».