MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404455182 · doi:10.25251/skin.8.supp.450

Real-World Effectiveness of Upadacitinib in Moderate‑to‑Severe Atopic Dermatitis (AD): Results From Longitudinal Analyses of the CorEvitas AD Registry

2024· article· en· W4404455182 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Melinda Gooderham, Christopher G. Bunick, Brian Calimlim, Ayman Grada, Yolanda Muñoz Maldonado, Alvin Li, Nicole Fergestrom, Eric L. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueSKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsProbity Medical ResearchQueen's University
FundersLEO PharmaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbJanssen PharmaceuticalsGenentechChugai PharmaceuticalAmgen
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineLongitudinal dataDermatologyData miningComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Clinical trials demonstrated that upadacitinib is efficacious in treating atopic dermatitis (AD). Its real-world effectiveness is less understood. In this study, we investigated the longitudinal real-world outcomes of upadacitinib-treated adults in the CorEvitas AD Registry. Methods: The CorEvitas AD Registry is a prospective, non-interventional registry of adults diagnosed with AD in the United States and Canada. We evaluated participants enrolled through April 30, 2024 with data available prior to upadacitinib exposure (baseline) and at the six-month follow-up visit, and were receiving upadacitinib at the follow-up visit. Outcomes evaluated include the achievement of: Validated Investigators Global Assessment Scale for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-ADTM) of “clear” or “almost clear” among participants rated “mild” or worse at baseline (vIGA-AD 0/1); Eczema Area and Severity Index improvement of ≥75%/≥90%/100% from baseline (EASI 75/90/100); Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (PP-NRS) improvement ≥4 among participants with a score ≥4 at baseline (∆PP-NRS≥4); PP-NRS score of 0 or 1 among participants with a score >1 at baseline (PP-NRS 0/1); Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score improvement ≥4 among participants with a score ≥4 at baseline (∆DLQI≥4); and DLQI score of 0 or 1 among participants with a score >1 at baseline (DLQI 0/1). Simultaneous achievement of both EASI 90 & PP-NRS 0/1 was also assessed. Data were analyzed as observed with no imputation. Safety events were not assessed in this analysis. Results: The longitudinal analysis included 192 participants (mean age 46.2 years; 57.8% female; 69.8% White; 43.8% prior exposure to dupilumab or tralokinumab; 64.4% receiving 15 mg dose at follow-up visit; mean upadacitinib treatment duration of 6.0 months). More than half achieved clear/almost clear skin (66.1% vIGA-AD 0/1), EASI 75 (69.3%), and EASI 90 (59.2%); 45.3% achieved complete skin clearance (EASI 100). More than 40% reported little-to-no itch (44.4% PP-NRS 0/1) and no impact of AD on quality of life (43.3% DLQI 0/1), and more than half reported meaningful improvements in itch (58.6% ∆PP-NRS≥4) and quality of life (76.0% ∆DLQI≥4). Simultaneous attainment of both EASI 90 & PP-NRS 0/1 was achieved in 46.6% of participants at 6 months. Conclusions: In the real-world setting, the majority of adults treated and remained on upadacitinib achieved clinically meaningful outcomes in skin lesions, itch, and quality of life, with many achieving complete skin clearance, little-to-no itch, and experiencing no impact of AD on their quality of life. These findings underscore upadacitinib's potential to offer multidimensional relief to patients with AD in everyday clinical practice.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSKIN The Journal of Cutaneous MedicineSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207