Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of fezakinumab (an IL-22 monoclonal antibody) in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis inadequately controlled by conventional treatments: A randomized, double-blind, phase 2a trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Interleukin 22 promotes epidermal hyperplasia and inhibits skin barrier function.

Objective

Evaluate interleukin 22 blockade in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD).

Methods

We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with intravenous fezakinumab monotherapy every 2 weeks for 10 weeks, with follow-up assessments until 20 weeks. The change in SCOring AD (SCORAD) score from baseline at 12 weeks served as the primary end point.

Results

At 12 weeks, the mean declines in SCORAD for the entire study population were 13.8 ± 2.7 in the fezakinumab arm and 8.0 ± 3.1 in the placebo arm (P = .134). In the severe AD patient subset (with a baseline SCORAD of ≥50), SCORAD decline was significantly stronger in the drug-treated patients than placebo-treated patients at 12 weeks (21.6 ± 3.8 vs 9.6 ± 4.2, P = .029) and 20 weeks (27.4 ± 3.9 vs 11.5 ± 5.1, P = .010). At 12 weeks, improvements in body surface area involvement in the entire population were significantly stronger in the drug-treated than placebo-treated patients (12.4% ± 2.4 vs 6.2% ± 2.7; P = .009), and in the severe AD subset, the decline in Investigator Global Assessment was significantly higher in the drug-treated than placebo-treated patients (0.7 ± 0.2 vs 0.3 ± 0.1; P = .034). All scores showed progressive improvements after last dosing (10 weeks) until end of study (20 weeks). Common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infections.

Limitations

The limited sample size and lack of assessment with Eczema Area and Severity Index and a pruritus numerical rating scale were limiting factors. Significance was primarily obtained in severe AD.

Conclusion

Fezakinumab was well-tolerated, with sustained clinical improvements after last drug dosing.

SUBMITTER: Guttman-Yassky E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8711034 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAtopic dermatitis (AD) is a heterogeneous disease, with involvement of the T-helper cell (Th) 2, Th22, and potentially Th17 pathways, supporting the use of interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-22 blockade in AD.MethodsThis phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT03706040) evaluated the efficacy and safety of risankizumab, an IL-23 inhibitor, in patients (≥ 12 years old) with moderate-to-severe AD, defined by an Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) ≥ 16, affected body surface area ≥ 10%, and a Validated Investigator Global Assessment for AD (vIGA-AD) score ≥ 3. Patients were randomized 2:2:1 to 16-week treatment with risankizumab 150 mg, risankizumab 300 mg, or placebo in period A; patients receiving placebo were re-randomized 1:1 to risankizumab 150 mg or 300 mg and patients receiving risankizumab continued on their randomized dose in 36-week period B. Study drug was administered at baseline and weeks 4, 16, 28, and 40. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 75% reduction from baseline in EASI (EASI 75) at week 16. Safety was analyzed in all randomized patients who received study medication.ResultsNeither the risankizumab 150 mg (n = 69) nor the 300 mg dose group (n = 69) demonstrated a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving EASI 75 at week 16 compared with the placebo group (n = 34; treatment difference [95% CI] 13.0% [-1.7 to 27.7%; P = 0.084] and 10.0% [-4.6 to 24.6%; P = 0.179], respectively). Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity; five patients receiving risankizumab reported serious adverse events, including two patients who reported cellulitis.ConclusionsRisankizumab was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified. The study's primary endpoint was not met, with no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving an EASI 75 response at week 16 with risankizumab 150 mg or 300 mg versus placebo.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03706040.

Project description:BackgroundNumerous therapies have recently emerged for treatment of patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), a common skin disease, and understanding their cost-effectiveness is of high importance for policy makers. This systematic literature review (SLR) aimed to provide an overview of full economic evaluations that assessed cost-effectiveness of emerging AD treatments.MethodsThe SLR was conducted in Medline, Embase, UK National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database and EconLit. Reports published by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health were manually searched. Economic evaluations published from 2017 to September 2022 that compared emerging AD treatments with any comparator were included. Quality assessment was conducted by using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list.ResultsA total of 1333 references were screened after removing duplicates. Among those references, 15 that conducted a total of 24 comparisons were included. Most studies were from the USA, UK or Canada. Seven different emerging treatments were compared, mostly with usual care. In 15 comparisons (63%), the emerging treatment was cost-effective, and 11 out of 14 dupilumab comparisons (79%) reported that dupilumab was cost-effective. Upadacitinib was the only emerging therapy that was never classified as cost-effective. On average, 13 out of 19 quality criteria (68%) per reference were rated as fulfilled while manuscripts and health technology reports received generally higher quality assessment scores than published abstracts.DiscussionThis study revealed some discrepancies in the cost-effectiveness of emerging therapies for AD. A variety of designs and guidelines made comparison difficult. Therefore, we recommend that future economic evaluations use more similar modelling approaches to improve comparability of results.OthersThe protocol was published in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022343993).