Efficacy and Predictors of Low-Dose Abrocitinib in Chinese Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Background: Real-world data on abrocitinib 100 mg for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in Asians remain limited. This study evaluates effectiveness, regional responses, safety, and predictors of low-dose abrocitinib in Chinese adults. Methods: A single-center prospective study (n = 40) in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis received abrocitinib 100 mg once daily. Assessments occurred at baseline, Weeks 2, 4, 12, and 24. Primary endpoints: Week 12 Eczema Area and Severity Index 75% improvement (EASI-75) and safety. Secondary: region-specific Eczema Area and Severity Index improvement, patient-reported outcomes, and predictive factor analysis. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors of response; multivariable analyses were exploratory due to limited sample size. Results: At Week 12, 60.0% achieved EASI-75, 42.5% EASI-90, and 42.5% Investigator Global Assessment response. Significant improvements occurred in EASI (−90.8%), pruritus, and quality-of-life. By Week 24 (subgroup), EASI-75 and EASI-90 rates rose to 90.9% and 68.2%, respectively. Regional EASI reduction exceeded 90% in head/neck, trunk, and upper limbs. Baseline immunoglobulin E (IgE) ≥100 IU/mL predicted a lower Week 2 response (OR = 0.20; P = 0.030), while age ≥45 years showed a non-significant trend toward better Week 4 response. Safety analysis included all 40 patients through Week 12 and 22 patients through Week 24, with 13 treatment-emergent adverse events reported, predominantly mild to moderate respiratory and gastrointestinal events. No major adverse cardiovascular events were observed during follow-up. Conclusion: Low-dose abrocitinib 100 mg once daily is effective and well tolerated, providing rapid and regionally consistent disease control in Chinese adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Baseline IgE may predict early response, supporting personalized management. These findings support low-dose abrocitinib as a viable therapy and highlight its potential role in personalized atopic dermatitis management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".