Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy of Delgocitinib Cream and Dupilumab in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Atopic Hand Eczema
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was performed comparing the efficacy of delgocitinib and dupilumab in patients with atopic hand eczema (AHE), one aetiological subtype of chronic hand eczema (CHE). METHODS: DELTA 1/2 were phase 3 trials in which adults with moderate to severe CHE received delgocitinib cream 20 mg/g or cream vehicle twice daily for 16 weeks. LIBERTY-AD-HAFT was a phase 3 trial in which patients with moderate to severe AD with hand or foot involvement received subcutaneous dupilumab or placebo every 2 weeks for 16 weeks. An anchored MAIC was conducted using individual patient data (IPD) from DELTA 1/2 and aggregate published data from LIBERTY-AD-HAFT, with vehicle and placebo as the common anchor. IPD from patients with AHE as the primary subtype in DELTA 1/2 were weighted to match age, race, sex and baseline Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI) score in LIBERTY-AD-HAFT. RESULTS: LIBERTY-AD-HAFT included 133 patients (dupilumab, n = 67, placebo, n = 66) while DELTA 1/2 included 345 patients with AHE; the effective sample size after weighted matching was 201 (delgocitinib, n = 128, cream vehicle, n = 73). Anchor-adjusted odds ratios comparing delgocitinib versus dupilumab at week 16 were 1.1 (95% CI: 0.3, 3.4; p = 0.890) for Investigator's Global Assessment for Chronic Hand Eczema / Hand and Foot Investigator's Global Assessment score 0/1, 1.2 (95% CI: 0.4, 3.2; p = 0.773) for HECSI 75 and 1.3 (95% CI: 0.4, 4.9; p = 0.661) for HECSI 90 while response difference for HECSI percent improvement was 11.7% (95% CI: -9.2%, 32.7%; p = 0.273). CONCLUSIONS: Topical delgocitinib and dupilumab in patients with AHE had comparable efficacy, with all results being numerically in favour of delgocitinib, although not statistically significant. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04871711, NCT04872101, NCT04417894.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".