MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406295765 · doi:10.25251/skin.9.supp.517

Lebrikizumab vs Other Systemic Monotherapies for Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Network Meta-analysis of Short-term Efficacy

2025· article· en· W4406295765 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Thomas Bieber, Amy S. Paller, Masahiro Kamata, L. Puig, Marni Wiseman, Khaled Ezzedine, Peter Foley, M. Dossenbach, Bülent Akmaz, Marta Casillas, Andrei Karlsson, Raj Chovatiya

Bibliographic record

VenueSKIN The Journal of Cutaneous Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersAstraZenecaBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyArgenxBiogenAmgen
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineTerm (time)Meta-analysisDermatologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Treatment options for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) after inadequate response to topical therapy include biologics and Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to evaluate the short-term efficacy of lebrikizumab relative to other monotherapies approved for moderate-to-severe AD in adults and adolescents (≥12 years). Methods: Data were included from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled monotherapy trials of lebrikizumab 250 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W), dupilumab 300 mg Q2W, tralokinumab 300 mg Q2W, abrocitinib 100 or 200 mg daily, baricitinib 2 or 4 mg daily, and upadacitinib 15 or 30 mg daily. Efficacy outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement, Investigator Global Assessment of 0 or 1 (IGA 0/1), and ≥4-point improvement in pruritus/itch numeric rating scale (NRS) score at 12 weeks (abrocitinib) or 16 weeks (other treatments). A Bayesian NMA was used to estimate number needed to treat (NNT), odds ratios (ORs), probabilities, and 95% credible intervals (CrI). Results: Twenty-two monotherapy studies involving 8531 patients were identified. For itch improvement, lebrikizumab had lower NNT values (2.90, 95% CrI: 2.26–3.80) than baricitinib 2 mg (11.12, 6.11–29.30) or 4 mg (8.10, 4.42–19.64) and tralokinumab (7.03, 4.81–11.17). Lebrikizumab had comparable NNT values for itch relative to abrocitinib 100 mg (3.50, 2.67–4.91) or 200 mg (2.31, 1.90–2.93), upadacitinib 15 mg (2.57, 2.09–3.29) or 30 mg (2.02, 1.74–2.46), and dupilumab (3.47, 2.78–4.58). NNT values for IGA 0,1 and EASI response were similar, except that upadacitinib 30 mg QD had lower NNT values than biologics at week 16. In pairwise comparisons, lebrikizumab was statistically superior to baricitinib and tralokinumab and comparable to abrocitinib, dupilumab, and upadacitinib 15 mg across all outcomes. Lebrikizumab had statistically inferior outcomes to upadacitinib 30 mg at week 16. Conclusion: Lebrikizumab has comparable or better short-term efficacy relative to other biologics and JAK inhibitors, except for upadacitinib 30 mg. Lebrikizumab may be a highly promising first-line biologic for moderate-to-severe AD, offering patients meaningful symptom relief.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.044
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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