Efficacy of Dupilumab in Atopic Dermatitis: The Patient’s Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD), a predominantly type 2 inflammatory skin disease, affects approximately 2-5% of adults, with a high burden of disease. In moderate-to-severe AD, lesions can be extensive and pruritus intense with patients experiencing skin pain, sleep and mental health disturbances, and diminished quality of life (QoL). METHODS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dupilumab for the treatment of AD from the patients' perspective using patient-reported outcome data from four clinical trials (CHRONOS, SOLO 1&2, and CAFÉ) in patients (N = 1553) receiving either the approved 300 mg q2w dupilumab with/without topical corticosteroids (TCS) dose or control (placebo or placebo + TCS). Patient Global Assessment of Disease Status (PGADS) was used to measure patients' well-being and Patient Global Assessment of Treatment Effect (PGATE) was used to measure treatment efficacy. Patients were asked "Considering all the ways in which your eczema affects you, indicate how well you are doing" to assess their perception of well-being and "How would you rate the way your eczema responded to the study medication?" to assess their perception of treatment effect. Possible responses for both metrics included poor, fair, good, very good, and excellent. RESULTS: In all four studies, a significantly higher proportion of dupilumab-treated patients reported "Good"/"Very Good"/"Excellent" disease status from week 2 through study end versus control (CHRONOS, 52 weeks: 69.8% vs. 25.1%; SOLO 1&2, 16 weeks: 59.5% vs. 24.6%; CAFÉ, 16 weeks: 84.1% vs. 45.4%; all P < 0.0001), and significantly more dupilumab-treated patients reported "Good"/"Very Good"/"Excellent" treatment efficacy versus control (CHRONOS: 72.6% vs. 24.8%; SOLO 1&2: 65.0% vs. 21.1%; CAFÉ, 16 weeks: 85.0% vs. 36.1%; all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Adult patients with AD perceived that dupilumab with/without concomitant TCS was highly efficacious and improved overall disease status and well-being as early as week 2 and throughout treatment periods up to 1 year. Video Abstract (MP4 90521 kb).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".