Improvement of head and neck symptoms in patients with atopic dermatitis treated with baricitinib with in five Phase III clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In adults with atopic dermatitis (AD), head and/or neck involvement is frequent, bothersome, and impacts quality of life, however, long-term topical corticosteroids (TCS) are contraindicated for this difficult-to-treat region. Baricitinib, an oral, selective, reversible inhibitor of Janus kinase 1/2 has demonstrated efficacy in adult patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Objectives: For this post hoc analysis, data from five Phase III trials were used to investigate the efficacy of baricitinib in patients with head and neck involvement. Materials & Methods: Data were obtained from BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, -AD4, -AD5, and -AD7; Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies conducted in patients ≥18 years with moderate-to-severe AD. BREEZE-AD1, -AD2, and -AD5 evaluated baricitinib as monotherapy, and BREEZE-AD4 and -AD7 evaluated baricitinib in combination with TCS, topical calcineurin inhibitors, or topical PDE-4 inhibitors, where available. The proportion of patients with improvement of Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) total score from baseline of ≥50% (EASI50) and ≥75% (EASI75), as well as head/neck EASI50 and EASI75 and erythema head/neck EASI50 and EASI75 response rates were assessed up to Week 16. Results: Across the studies, 93-98% of patients had head/neck involvement at baseline (EASI head/neck score ≥1). Baricitinib was similarly effective based on EASI total score for the entire body in all studies. In the monotherapy studies, the proportion of patients achieving head/neck EASI50 and EASI75 scores was significantly higher for baricitinib 2-mg and 4-mg versus placebo at Weeks 1 and 16. Conclusion: Baricitinib 2-mg and 4-mg treatment showed rapid and substantial reduction in AD head and neck severity, including erythema.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".