O06 Association between novel systemic immunomodulatory medications and achievement of super response in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema: results from the UK–Irish Atopic Eczema Systemic Therapy Register (A-STAR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous post hoc analyses of randomized controlled trial data demonstrated that more patients with atopic eczema (AE) on Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors achieve ‘super response’ (defined as total or nearly total clearance of AE) compared with dupilumab. However, there is a lack of head-to-head comparisons between conventional and novel systemic medications in patients with AE achieving super response in a real-world setting. The aim of this analysis was to explore the association between systemic medications used in patients with AE and patients achieving super response in the UK–Irish Atopic Eczema Systemic Therapy Register (A-STAR). A-STAR is a multicentre prospective observational register in the UK and Ireland aimed at evaluating the real-world effectiveness and safety of systemic treatments in AE. Patients in A-STAR who initiated conventional systemics (oral or subcutaneous methotrexate or ciclosporin), dupilumab or a JAK1 inhibitor (abrocitinib or upadacitinib) were included in this analysis. The outcomes assessed were Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) and Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index or Dermatology Life Quality Index (C/DLQI). Patients were stratified by the medications prescribed at baseline. Super response was defined as achieving ≥ 90% improvement in EASI (EASI 90), PP-NRS of 0 or 1 (PP-NRS 0/1) and C/DLQI of 0 or 1 (C/DLQI 0/1) at any timepoint during the follow-up (censored at 500 days). Cox regression was used to assess the association between systemic medication exposure and time to achieve super response. Methotrexate was used as a reference medication. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Risk estimates were adjusted for baseline EASI, C/DLQI, PP-NRS, ethnicity, age, sex, education level, age of AE onset, number of prior systemic treatments, concomitant oral corticosteroids and Fitzpatrick skin type. In total 649 patients were included in the analysis. The medications used were methotrexate (n = 157), ciclosporin (n = 48), dupilumab (n = 299) and JAK1 inhibitors (n = 88). The patients’ mean age was 28.7 years (SD 15.6), the mean (SD) baseline EASI was 18.2 (12.3), mean (SD) baseline PP-NRS 6.5 (2.5) and mean (SD) baseline C/DLQI 14.4 (8.1). The results for the Cox regression are summarized in the Table. Using methotrexate as the reference, both dupilumab and JAK1 inhibitors were associated with significantly more patients achieving super response in crude and adjusted models. In conclusion, treatment with dupilumab and JAK1 inhibitors is associated with a higher proportion of patients with AE achieving super response, compared with methotrexate, despite these treatments being mainly used after failure of conventional systemic medication.TableAssociation between novel systemic immunomodulatory medications and achieving super response in patients with moderate-to-severe AE. Data are expressed as the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) CrudeAdjustedMethotrexate1 (reference)1 (reference)Ciclosporin2.25 (0.59–8.52)2.79 (0.56–13.9)Dupilumab2.20 (1.04–4.69)3.03 (1.23–7.46)JAK1 inhibitors2.75 (1.58–8.36)5.89 (2.09–16.6)
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".