Therapeutic outcomes across Janus kinase inhibitors in prurigo nodularis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a debilitating skin condition. When inadequate disease control is achieved or other systemic therapies are contraindicated, Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) may be considered, although real-world evidence remains limited. OBJECTIVES: To investigate clinical findings and treatment outcomes among patients diagnosed with PN and treated with JAKis in a real-world setting. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study across 23 Italian tertiary referral hospitals. Patients with PN were eligible if aged ≥ 18 years and had received a JAKi with a minimum follow-up of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was defined as the proportion of patients achieving a reduction of ≥ 4 points from baseline in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale score. Key secondary outcomes included the rates of patients reaching a significant reduction in Investigator Global Assessment of Prurigo Nodularis Stage (IGA PN-S) and Investigator Global Assessment of Prurigo Nodularis Activity (IGA PN-A) scores. RESULTS: Of the total, 71 patients met the inclusion criteria. At week 16, the proportion of patients achieving the primary outcome was 94% for upadacitinib [n = 52/55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 87-100%], 83% for abrocitinib (n = 10/12; 95% CI 52-98%) and 100% for baricitinib (n = 4/4; 95% CI 40-100%), with results sustained at week 24. An IGA PN-A score of 0/1 was achieved in 90% of patients treated with upadacitinib and abrocitinib and in 50% of those on baricitinib by week 24. Improvements were observed across all other secondary outcomes assessed, with no safety concerns reported. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that JAKis can achieve clinically meaningful outcomes in PN irrespective of atopic background, supporting their use across diverse patient profiles. Further research is warranted to validate these observations and explore their long-term effects.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".