特应性皮炎停药后全身治疗的疗效调查第一部分:生物制剂。

Q2 Medicine
Naiem T Issa, Rama Abdin, Kabir Al-Tariq, Dana Jaalouk, Michael Kaiser, James Del Rosso, Shawn Kwatra
{"title":"特应性皮炎停药后全身治疗的疗效调查第一部分:生物制剂。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

目的:作者试图回顾已发表的关于生物制剂单药治疗特应性皮炎(AD)停药后疗效的文献。方法:对PubMed/MEDLINE进行全面检索,检查AD临床试验中受试者接受生物制剂治疗的药物停药情况。如果仅涉及AD患者的试验报告在退出生物治疗后湿疹面积和严重程度指数(EASI)-75和研究者总体评估(IGA)得分为0或1,则纳入试验。涉及多药方案的临床试验,包括研究联合局部治疗的临床试验,被排除在我们的分析之外。结果:5个临床试验项目符合我们的纳入标准,每个项目研究一种不同的生物制剂:dupilumab、tralokinumab、lebrikizumab、amlitelimab和rocatinlimab。局限性:本综述的局限性包括少数符合纳入标准的试验,研究设计的变化阻碍了直接比较,以及缺乏长期随访数据。结论:不同试验的适应度标准、治疗持续时间和停药期的可变性是评估生物制剂治疗AD的主要挑战,使它们在缺乏正面研究的情况下持续反应的比较复杂化。这种异质性,再加上疾病持续时间和试验入组前的全身性药物使用等因素,阻碍了对AD发病机制关键途径的识别,也阻碍了更好地理解和表征该疾病的努力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Investigating Efficacy of Atopic Dermatitis Systemic Therapeutics After Discontinuation Part I: Biologics.

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
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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