MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Upadacitinib in Adolescents With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis

2024· article· en· W4403681187 on OpenAlexaff
Amy S. Paller, Pedro Mendes‐Bastos, Elaine C. Siegfried, Lawrence F. Eichenfield, Weily Soong, Vimal H. Prajapati, Peter Lio, Eric L. Simpson, Eliza M. Raymundo, Smitha Suravaram, Xiaofei Hu, Yang Yang, Xiaohong Huang, Brian Calimlim, Andrew M. Platt, John Su, Min Zheng, Kiwako Yamamoto‐Hanada, Henrique D. Teixeira, Alan D. Irvine

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Dermatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchSKiN HealthUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtopic dermatitisEczema Area and Severity IndexPlaceboAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialSeverity of illnessInternal medicineClinical trialPhysical therapyDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up studies demonstrated the efficacy and adverse events of upadacitinib through 52 weeks in adults and adolescents with atopic dermatitis (AD); however, longer-term outcomes (longer than 1 year) in adolescents have not previously been available. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of upadacitinib in adolescent patients with moderate to severe AD through 76 weeks. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up trials are ongoing double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trials including adolescents (aged 12 to 17 years) with moderate to severe AD. Data were collected from August 2018 to April 2022, and data were analyzed from June 2022 to September 2023. Interventions: Adolescents were randomized 1:1:1 to receive once-daily oral upadacitinib, 15 mg; upadacitinib, 30 mg; or placebo, either alone (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 trials) or with topical corticosteroids (AD Up). At week 16, placebo-treated patients were rerandomized to receive upadacitinib, 15 mg, or upadacitinib, 30 mg, daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary end points assessing efficacy included achievement of 75% reduction or more in the Eczema Area and Severity Index Score (EASI-75) from baseline, Validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD) score of clear (0) or almost clear (1) with 2 grades or more of improvement, and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS) improvement of 4 points or greater through week 76 for participants with a WP-NRS score of 4 points or higher at baseline. Results: From all studies, 542 adolescents were included; of these, 284 (52.4%) were female. At week 76, among patients in the Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up trials, EASI-75 was achieved by 89.1%, 84.4%, and 87.8% of adolescents taking upadacitinib, 15 mg, respectively, and by 96.1%, 93.6%, and 82.7% of adolescents taking upadacitinib, 30 mg, indicating maintenance or improvement of EASI-75 across 76 weeks with upadacitinib. Efficacy measured by achievement of vIGA-AD score of 0 or 1 and WP-NRS improvement of 4 points or more from baseline was similarly maintained or improved through week 76 for adolescents taking upadacitinib, 15 mg or 30 mg. Long-term outcomes in Measure Up 1, Measure Up 2, and AD Up participants were consistent with the known adverse event profile of upadacitinib (herpetic infection: 4.0, 1.9, and 1.1 events per 100 patient-years, respectively; creatine kinase elevation: 11.6, 11.0, and 7.1 events per 100 patient-years); no new signals were observed with either dose. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study assessing 3 randomized clinical trials, long-term treatment of adolescents with moderate to severe AD with upadacitinib demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile, with sustained efficacy responses through 76 weeks. Trial Registrations: Measure Up 1 trial: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03569293; Measure Up 2 trial: NCT03607422; AD Up trial: NCT03568318.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA DermatologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207