Efficacy and Risk Stratification of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, 3 oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors-abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib-were approved in many regions around the world for the treatment of moderate-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). These JAK inhibitors generally have rapid onset of action and short half-life. Higher doses of abrocitinib and upadactinib even demonstrated superior efficacy to dupilumab. However, JAK inhibitors can be associated with rare serious and potentially life-threatening adverse events. Heterogeneity in study designs and lack of head-to-head studies make safety comparison between JAK inhibitors difficult. Dose reduction and patient selection are the most important considerations for risk mitigation. This narrative review examines the efficacy data for abrocitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib from large phase III double-blinded randomized controlled trials in AD and discusses risk stratification for oral JAK inhibitors in AD patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".