A Review of Safety Outcomes from Clinical Trials of Baricitinib in Rheumatology, Dermatology and COVID-19.

Baricitinib is an oral, selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 that transiently and reversibly inhibits many proinflammatory cytokines. This mechanism is a key mediator in a number of chronic inflammatory diseases; accordingly, baricitinib has been studied and approved for the treatment of several rheumatological and dermatological disorders, as well as COVID-19. This narrative review summarises and discusses the safety profile of baricitinib across these diseases, with special focus on adverse events of special interest (AESI) for JAK inhibitors, using integrated safety data sets of clinical trial data, and puts findings into context with the underlying risk in the respective disease populations, using supporting literature. We show that rates of infection with baricitinib generally reflected the inherent risk of the disease populations being treated, with serious infections and herpes zoster being more frequent in rheumatic diseases than in dermatological disorders, and herpes simplex being reported particularly in atopic dermatitis. Similarly, rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), venous thromboembolism (VTE) and malignancies were generally within or below the ranges reported for the respective disease populations, thereby reflecting the underlying risk; these events were therefore more frequent in patients with rheumatic diseases than in those with dermatological disorders, the latter of whom generally had low absolute risk. AESI were usually more common in patients with risk factors specific for each event. When a population similar to that of ORAL Surveillance was considered, the incidence rate of MACE with baricitinib was numerically lower than that reported with tofacitinib and similar to that of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. No safety concerns were observed in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who received baricitinib for up to 14 days. Identifying the patterns and likelihoods of AEs that occur during treatment in large groups of patients with different diseases can help the physician and patient better contextualise the benefit-to-risk ratio for the individual patient.

The oral selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 baricitinib transiently and reversibly inhibits elements of the inflammatory pathway, which are key mechanisms for several chronic, inflammatory rheumatological and dermatological diseases but, as with all drugs, it can be associated with unwanted effects. This narrative review summarises adverse events of special interest (AESI) for baricitinib, considered as such either because of characteristics of patients with the disease being treated (rheumatological and dermatological disorders and COVID-19) or the mechanism of action of the drug. The risk of these events is considered in light of the inherent risk of each event in populations with the respective diseases. We show that serious infections and herpes zoster during baricitinib therapy were most common in patients with rheumatological disorders, and herpes simplex was reported particularly in patients with atopic dermatitis, likely because of disease-related risk factors. MACE, VTE and malignancies generally occurred in baricitinib-treated patients with a frequency within or below the ranges reported for the respective disease populations. Rates generally reflected the underlying risk of the disease populations, being higher in patients with rheumatological diseases than in those with dermatological disorders, and mostly occurring in patients with underlying risk factors for the AESI. No safety concerns were observed in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who received baricitinib for up to 14 days. Characterising patterns and likelihoods of unwanted events that occur during treatment in large groups of patients with different diseases can help put the actual risk to an individual patient into perspective.

Annular plaques mimicking Rowell's syndrome in the course of coronavirus disease 2019 mRNA vaccines: An overlooked phenomenon?

Effective vaccines for prevention of severe course and lethal outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 have been developed and approved in regulatory rolling and fast-track procedures; they are now widely distributed worldwide. Data about cutaneous side-effects of the new mRNA-type vaccines is scant, however. We herein report two similar cases of cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADR) mimicking Rowell's syndrome that occurred after the first dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively. Both patients achieved prompt clinical improvement with a short pulse of oral prednisolone and non-steroidal inflammatory drugs. We suspect this phenomenon to occur in a timeframe of 7-14 days after vaccination due to an interferon-γ-driven shift towards type I immunity in susceptible individuals. As rheumatic patients were excluded from phase III clinical trials and as most countries prioritized the elderly population to receive the vaccinations first, cutaneous ADR might become more frequent once the younger part of the population is vaccinated over the course of 2021. Atypical cutaneous ADR might be misinterpreted or overlooked by non-dermatologists. Further studies are required to determine the best suitable vaccine types for individual groups of patients.

Cutaneous Adverse Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines: Insights from an Immuno-Dermatological Perspective.

(1) Background: Numerous vaccines are under preclinical and clinical development for prevention of severe course and lethal outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In light of high efficacy rates and satisfactory safety profiles, some agents have already reached approval and are now distributed worldwide, with varying availability. Real-world data on cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) remain limited. (2) Methods: We performed a literature research concerning cutaneous ADRs to different COVID-19 vaccines, and incorporated our own experiences. (3) Results: Injection site reactions are the most frequent side effects arising from all vaccine types. Moreover, delayed cutaneous ADRs may occur after several days, either as a primary manifestation or as a flare of a pre-existing inflammatory dermatosis. Cutaneous ADRs may be divided according to their cytokine profile, based on the preponderance of specific T-cell subsets (i.e., Th1, Th2, Th17/22, Tregs). Specific cutaneous ADRs mimic immunogenic reactions to the natural infection with SARS-CoV-2, which is associated with an abundance of type I interferons. (4) Conclusions: Further studies are required in order to determine the best suitable vaccine type for individual groups of patients, including patients suffering from chronic inflammatory dermatoses.

Upadacitinib plus topical corticosteroids in atopic dermatitis: Week 52 AD Up study results.

BACKGROUND: Primary (week 16) results from the ongoing phase 3, double-blind AD Up study (NCT03568318) demonstrate a positive benefit-risk profile for upadacitinib + topical corticosteroid (TCS) in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of upadacitinib + TCS through 52 weeks. METHODS: Patients aged 12 to 75 years with chronic moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (≥10% of body surface area affected, Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] ≥16, Validated Investigator's Global Assessment for atopic dermatitis [vIGA-AD] ≥3, and Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [WP-NRS] score ≥4) were randomized 1:1:1 to once-daily upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS, upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS, or placebo (PBO) + TCS (rerandomized at week 16 to upadacitinib + TCS). Safety and efficacy, including proportion of patients experiencing ≥75% improvement in EASI (EASI-75), vIGA-AD of clear/almost clear with improvement ≥2 grades (vIGA-AD 0/1), and WP-NRS improvement ≥4, were assessed through week 52. Missing data were primarily handled by nonresponse imputation incorporating multiple imputation for missing values due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESULTS: Of 901 patients, 300 were randomized to upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS, 297 to upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS, and 304 to PBO + TCS. For all end points, efficacy for upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS and upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS at week 16 was maintained through week 52. At week 52, the proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib 15 mg + TCS and upadacitinib 30 mg + TCS who experienced EASI-75 were 50.8% and 69.0%, respectively; 33.5% and 45.2%, respectively, experienced vIGA-AD 0/1; and 45.3% and 57.5%, respectively, experienced WP-NRS improvement ≥4. Upadacitinib + TCS was well tolerated through 52 weeks; no new important safety risks beyond the current label were observed. No deaths were reported; major adverse cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolic events were infrequent (≤0.2/100 patient-years). CONCLUSIONS: Results through 52 weeks demonstrate long-term maintenance of efficacy and a favorable safety profile of upadacitinib + TCS in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

Efficacy and Safety of Baricitinib Combined With Topical Corticosteroids for Treatment of Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor, effectively reduced disease severity in moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in 2 phase 3 monotherapy studies. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of 4 mg and 2 mg of baricitinib in combination with background topical corticosteroid (TCS) therapy in adults with moderate to severe AD who previously had an inadequate response to TCS therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 randomized clinical trial, BREEZE-AD7 (Study of Baricitinib [LY3009104] in Combination With Topical Corticosteroids in Adults With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis) was conducted from November 16, 2018, to August 22, 2019, at 68 centers across 10 countries in Asia, Australia, Europe, and South America. Patients 18 years or older with moderate to severe AD and an inadequate response to TCSs were included. After completing the study, patients were followed up for up to 4 weeks or enrolled in a long-term extension study. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 2 mg of baricitinib once daily (n = 109), 4 mg of baricitinib once daily (n = 111), or placebo (n = 109) for 16 weeks. The use of low-to-moderate potency TCSs was allowed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a validated Investigator Global Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (vIGA-AD) score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear), with a 2-point or greater improvement from baseline at week 16. Results: Among 329 patients (mean [SD] age, 33.8 [12.4] years; 216 [66%] male), at week 16, a vIGA-AD score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) was achieved by 34 patients (31%) receiving 4 mg of baricitinib and 26 (24%) receiving 2 mg of baricitinib compared with 16 (15%) receiving placebo (odds ratio vs placebo, 2.8 [95% CI, 1.4-5.6]; P = .004 for the 4-mg group; 1.9 [95% CI, 0.9-3.9]; P = .08 for the 2-mg group). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 64 of 111 patients (58%) in the 4-mg group, 61 of 109 patients (56%) in the 2-mg group, and 41 of 108 patients (38%) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 patients (4%) in the 4-mg group, 2 (2%) in the 2-mg group, and 4 (4%) in the placebo group. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, and folliculitis. Conclusions and Relevance: A dose of 4 mg of baricitinib in combination with background TCS therapy significantly improved the signs and symptoms of moderate to severe AD, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies of baricitinib in AD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03733301.

Use of biologicals in allergic and type-2 inflammatory diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic: Position paper of Ärzteverband Deutscher Allergologen (AeDA)A, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Klinische Immunologie (DGAKI)B, Gesellschaft für Pädiatrische Allergologie und Umweltmedizin (GPA)C, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (ÖGAI)D, Luxemburgische Gesellschaft für Allergologie und Immunologie (LGAI)E, Österreichische Gesellschaft für Pneumologie (ÖGP)F in co-operation with the German, Austrian, and Swiss ARIA groupsG, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases has faced major challenges. Recommendations for "social distancing" and the fear of patients becoming infected during a visit to a medical facility have led to a drastic decrease in personal doctor-patient contacts. This affects both acute care and treatment of the chronically ill. The immune response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is so far only insufficiently understood and could be altered in a favorable or unfavorable way by therapy with monoclonal antibodies. There is currently no evidence for an increased risk of a severe COVID-19 course in allergic patients. Many patients are under ongoing therapy with biologicals that inhibit type 2 immune responses via various mechanisms. There is uncertainty about possible immunological interactions and potential risks of these biologicals in the case of an infection with SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed, Livivo, and the internet to cover the past 10 years (May 2010 - April 2020). Additionally, the current German-language publications were analyzed. Based on these data, the present position paper provides recommendations for the biological treatment of patients with allergic and atopy-associated diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In order to maintain in-office consultation services, a safe treatment environment must be created that is adapted to the pandemic situation. To date, there is a lack of reliable study data on the care for patients with complex respiratory, atopic, and allergic diseases in times of an imminent infection risk from SARS-CoV-2. Type-2-dominant immune reactions, as they are frequently seen in allergic patients, could influence various phases of COVID-19, e.g., by slowing down the immune reactions. Theoretically, this could have an unfavorable effect in the early phase of a SARS-Cov-2 infection, but also a positive effect during a cytokine storm in the later phase of severe courses. However, since there is currently no evidence for this, all data from patients treated with a biological directed against type 2 immune reactions who develop COVID-19 should be collected in registries, and their disease courses documented in order to be able to provide experience-based instructions in the future. CONCLUSION: The use of biologicals for the treatment of bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, and spontaneous urticaria should be continued as usual in patients without suspected infection or proven SARS-CoV-2 infection. If available, it is recommended to prefer a formulation for self-application and to offer telemedical monitoring. Treatment should aim at the best possible control of difficult-to-control allergic and atopic diseases using adequate rescue and add-on therapy and should avoid the need for systemic glucocorticosteroids. If SARS-CoV-2 infection is proven or reasonably suspected, the therapy should be determined by weighing the benefits and risks individually for the patient in question, and the patient should be involved in the decision-making. It should be kept in mind that the potential effects of biologicals on the immune response in COVID-19 are currently not known. Telemedical offers are particularly desirable for the acute consultation needs of suitable patients.

Allergen immunotherapy in the current COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper of AeDA, ARIA, EAACI, DGAKI and GPA: Position paper of the German ARIA GroupA in cooperation with the Austrian ARIA GroupB, the Swiss ARIA GroupC, German Society for Applied Allergology (AEDA)D, German Society for Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI)E, Society for Pediatric Allergology (GPA)F in cooperation with AG Clinical Immunology, Allergology and Environmental Medicine of the DGHNO-KHCG and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)H.

No abstract available.