MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196688555 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2021.682547

Systematic Review on the Efficacy and Safety of Oral Janus Kinase Inhibitors for the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis

2021· review· en· W3196688555 on OpenAlexafffund
Michelle Le, Melissa Berman-Rosa, Feras M. Ghazawi, Marc Bourcier, Loretta Fiorillo, Melinda Gooderham, Lyn Guenther, Sameh Hanna, Hwanhee Hong, Ian Landells, Perla Lansang, Danielle Marcoux, Marni Wiseman, Jensen Yeung, Charles Lynde, Ivan V. Litvinov

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandProbity Medical ResearchUniversity of OttawaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéPfizer Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineAtopic dermatitisJanus kinase inhibitorSafety profileDermatologyJanus kinaseAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Atopic dermatitis is a chronic, relapsing and remitting disease that can be difficult to treat despite a recently approved biologic therapy targeting IL-4/IL-13 receptor. Oral janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) represent a novel therapeutic class of targeted therapy to treat moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Objective: To review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic characteristics of oral JAKi in the treatment of AD. Methods: A PRISMA systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE (Ovid), and PubMed databases for studies assessing the efficacy, safety, and/or pharmacokinetic properties of oral forms of JAKi in the treatment of AD in pediatric or adult populations from inception to June 2021. Results: 496 papers were reviewed. Of 28 articles that underwent full text screening, 11 met our inclusion criteria for final qualitative review. Four studies examined abrocitinib; three studies examined baricitinib; three examined upadacitinib and one examined gusacitinib (ASN002). Significant clinical efficacy and a reassuring safety profile was reported for all JAKi agents reviewed. Rapid symptom control was reported for abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib. Limitations: Given the relatively limited evidence for each JAKi and the differences in patient eligibility criteria between studies, the data was not deemed suitable for a meta-analysis at this time. Conclusion: Given their ability to achieve rapid symptom control with a reassuring safety profile, we recommend considering the use of JAKi as a reliable systemic treatment option for adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD, who are unresponsive to topical or skin directed treatments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207