Investigating Efficacy of Atopic Dermatitis Systemic Therapeutics After Discontinuation Part I: Biologics.

Q2 Medicine
Naiem T Issa, Rama Abdin, Kabir Al-Tariq, Dana Jaalouk, Michael Kaiser, James Del Rosso, Shawn Kwatra
{"title":"Investigating Efficacy of Atopic Dermatitis Systemic Therapeutics After Discontinuation Part I: Biologics.","authors":"Naiem T Issa, Rama Abdin, Kabir Al-Tariq, Dana Jaalouk, Michael Kaiser, James Del Rosso, Shawn Kwatra","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The authors sought to review published literature on the efficacy of biologics as monotherapy for atopic dermatitis (AD) following discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted examining drug withdrawal in AD clinical trials where participants were treated with biologics. Trials were included if they exclusively involved participants with AD that reported the maintenance or achievement of Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-75 and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores of 0 or 1 after withdrawal of biologic therapy. Clinical trials involving multidrug regimens, including those investigating concomitant topical therapeutics, were excluded from our analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five clinical trial programs met our inclusion criteria, each investigating a different biologic: dupilumab, tralokinumab, lebrikizumab, amlitelimab, and rocatinlimab.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Limitations to this review include a small number of trials that met the inclusion criteria, variations in study design that hinder direct comparisons, and the absence of long-term follow up data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The variability in eligibility criteria, treatment durations, and withdrawal periods across trials presents a major challenge in assessing biologics for AD, complicating the comparison of their sustained responses in the absence of head-to-head studies. This heterogeneity, combined with factors such as disease duration and prior use of systemic medications before trial enrollment, hampers the identification of key pathways in AD pathogenesis and impedes efforts to better understand and characterize the disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":53616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","volume":"18 2","pages":"33-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The authors sought to review published literature on the efficacy of biologics as monotherapy for atopic dermatitis (AD) following discontinuation.

Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted examining drug withdrawal in AD clinical trials where participants were treated with biologics. Trials were included if they exclusively involved participants with AD that reported the maintenance or achievement of Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-75 and Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores of 0 or 1 after withdrawal of biologic therapy. Clinical trials involving multidrug regimens, including those investigating concomitant topical therapeutics, were excluded from our analysis.

Results: Five clinical trial programs met our inclusion criteria, each investigating a different biologic: dupilumab, tralokinumab, lebrikizumab, amlitelimab, and rocatinlimab.

Limitations: Limitations to this review include a small number of trials that met the inclusion criteria, variations in study design that hinder direct comparisons, and the absence of long-term follow up data.

Conclusion: The variability in eligibility criteria, treatment durations, and withdrawal periods across trials presents a major challenge in assessing biologics for AD, complicating the comparison of their sustained responses in the absence of head-to-head studies. This heterogeneity, combined with factors such as disease duration and prior use of systemic medications before trial enrollment, hampers the identification of key pathways in AD pathogenesis and impedes efforts to better understand and characterize the disease.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信