Evaluating Efficacy and Safety of Crisaborole in Managing Childhood Mild to Moderate Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Aims/Background Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic inflammatory skin disorder globally. Crisaborole, a nonsteroidal topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor (PDE4i), has been utilized in treating AD. Crisaborole regulates the production of inflammatory cytokines, which are usually overactive among AD patients. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of crisaborole in treating AD in patients aged ≤18 years. Methods A literature search was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria involved primary studies evaluating the effect of crisaborole in treating dermatitis, articles exploring the use of crisaborole in AD patients below 18 years (>two years), and articles published in English between 2000 and 2022. However, the studies evaluating AD in adult patients, those reporting treatments other than crisaborole, those published before 2000, and articles written in languages other than English were excluded from this analysis. Furthermore, secondary data sources such as case reports, newspaper articles, magazines, and other systematic reviews and meta-analyses were excluded. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4. The risk of bias in the manuscripts was assessed using the Cochrane tool. The I-square test statistic was used to determine heterogeneity, and Egger's test was used to evaluate publication bias. Results Ten studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies exhibited a low risk of bias with no publication bias. Meta-analysis indicated a significant difference in the number of patients attaining Investigator Static Global Assessment (ISGA) success at day 29, with significantly higher patients in the crisaborole group than in the vehicle group (odds ratio (OR) 1.56, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.96; I² = 77%; p = 0.0001). Similarly, pruritus improvement was significant between the two cohorts at day 29, indicating significantly higher heterogeneity (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.63; I² = 91%; p = 0.02). Furthermore, the safety profiling of the treatments was insignificant, demonstrating no statistical difference in the treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) between the two groups with high heterogeneity (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.98; I² = 99%; p = 0.35). Conclusion Crisaborole demonstrates substantial efficacy in treating mild to moderate AD compared to vehicle therapies, as it reduces the signs and symptoms of the disease. Furthermore, crisaborole is well tolerated and has an acceptable safety profile in treating mild to moderate AD patients.