MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401435959 · doi:10.1093/bjd/ljae266.067

693 - Efficacy and safety of orismilast, a potent PDE4B/D inhibitor, in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a phase 2b randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (ADESOS)

2024· article· en· W4401435959 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Lawrence F. Eichenfield, Andrew Blauvelt, Alan D. Irvine, Richard G. Langley, Emma Guttman, Richard B. Warren, Lars E. French, Claus Bang Pedersen, Anna Carlsson, Morten Lind Jensen, Morten Otto Alexander Sommer, Kim Kjøller, Eric L. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Dermatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboAtopic dermatitisInternal medicineTolerabilityApremilastPopulationClinical endpointPsoriasisRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyClinical trialAdverse effectImmunologyDiseasePsoriatic arthritisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction/Background Orismilast is a potent selective phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4)-B and -D inhibitor, showing significant efficacy in a Phase 2b psoriasis study.1,2 PDE4-B and PDE4-D isoforms are over-expressed in the skin of patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), compared to healthy individuals.3 Enhanced PDE4 activity has also been observed in peripheral blood leukocytes in AD. Orismilast inhibits PDE4-B/D isoforms up to 39 times more potently than apremilast,1 leading to potent suppression of Th1, Th17, and Th2 effector cytokines.1 Objectives To evaluate efficacy and safety of orismilast versus placebo in adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Methods ADESOS is a 16-week, phase 2b, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose-finding study assessing efficacy and safety of orismilast in adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to orismilast 20, 30, 40 mg, or placebo, twice daily. Randomized and dosed patients were included in the Intent-to-Treat Population. Missing data were handled using Multiple Imputation (MI) for the analysis of primary and secondary efficacy endpoints. Results Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were generally balanced across groups for the 233 dosed patients. Significantly more patients achieved IGA0/1 responses at Week 16 in orismilast 20 (n=58), 30 (n=61), and 40 mg (n=59) groups, compared to placebo (n=55) (26.3%, 24.3%, 30.9%, and 9.5%, respectively; all p-values <0.05). All active arms demonstrated a significant ≥4-point reduction in itch NRS at Week 2, compared to placebo (p <0.05). Similarly, Patient Global Impression of Change of “much or very much improved” was significant in active arms compared to placebo at Week 16. Mean percentage changes in EASI at Week 16 were -55.1%, - 52.2%, -61.4%, and -50.4%, in orismilast 20, 30, 40 mg and placebo groups, respectively (p>0,05). Mean EASI at baseline was 23, the least severe reported in Phase 2b/3 studies in moderate-to-severe AD.4 In a subgroup analysis of patients with baseline EASI >21 separation from placebo was increased in the 20 and 40 mg arms, as patients on placebo achieving EASI75 and EASI90 were reduced by 50% and 67%, for the severe population versus the full population. At Week 16, percentages of patients experiencing any Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) were orismilast 20 mg, 76%; 30 mg, 79%; 40 mg, 86%; and placebo, 64%. Infection rates were numerically lower in the orismilast groups compared to placebo groups. The most common TEAEs were diarrhea, nausea, and headache, mainly seen within the first month, mostly mild in severity, with few leading to treatment discontinuation. Conclusion Orismilast demonstrated early itch reduction NRS≥4 and statistically significant efficacy versus placebo at Week 16 as measured by IGA0/1. The study was impacted by a high EASI placebo rate; however, in severe patients, the 20 and 40 mg doses separated from placebo for EASI75 and EASI90 measurements, consistent with the overall findings as measured by IGA 0/1, patient-reported efficacy, and objective biomarkers. No new safety signals were identified, and the profile was aligned with the well-established experience from the PDE4 inhibitor class. The most frequent TEAEs were gastrointestinal-related and headache. These data confirm the clinical relevance of high potency PDE4B/D selective inhibition with orismilast, potentially offering a convenient, novel, oral therapy for the treatment of AD and other inflammatory diseases.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of DermatologySame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207