Assessment of algorithms for identifying patients with triple-class refractory multiple myeloma using real-world data.

Objective: Patients with triple-class refractory (TCR) multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and poor prognoses. This high unmet need has prompted the development of new therapies allowing for improved outcomes for these patients. Recently, new targeted therapies for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MM have been approved based on single-arm clinical trial results. Real-world (RW) data enable a better understanding of the effectiveness of new therapies in clinical practice and provide external controls for single-arm studies. However, using RW data to identify patients with TCR MM is challenging and subject to limitations. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study of an analysis of the COTA electronic health record (EHR) database, we used four algorithms to define refractory status and created four groups of patients with TCR MM initiating post-TCR therapy. Each algorithm relied on slightly different criteria to identify TCR patients, but all were based on the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG)-derived and/or healthcare provider (HCP)-reported progressions within the database. Results: A total of 3815 patients with newly diagnosed MM met the eligibility criteria for this study. The choice of the algorithm did not impact the characteristics of identified patients with TCR MM (Algorithm 1 [n = 404], Algorithm 2 [n = 123], Algorithm 3 [n = 404], and Algorithm 4 [n = 375]), including their demographic and disease characteristics, MM treatment history, or treatment patterns received after becoming TCR. However, identifying TCR MM using a combination of IMWG-derived and HCP-reported progressions allowed up to a 70% increase in the size of the identified group of patients compared with using only IMWG-derived progressions. Conclusion: In RW settings, progressions from both IMWG-derived data and physician reports may be used to identify patients with TCR MM.

Elranatamab efficacy in MagnetisMM-3 compared with real-world control arms in triple-class refractory multiple myeloma.

Elranatamab efficacy in the single-arm, registrational MagnetisMM-3 trial (NCT04649359) was compared with that of physician's choice of treatment (PCT) for triple-class refractory multiple myeloma. MagnestisMM-3 eligibility criteria were applied to two USA-based oncology electronic health record databases, COTA and Flatiron Health (FH), to identify cohorts for this study (NCT05932290). Applied statistical techniques accounted for cohort imbalances. MagnetisMM-3 (BCMA-naive; n = 123) outcomes were compared with those from COTA (n = 239) and FH (n = 152). Elranatamab was associated with a significantly higher objective response rate (risk ratios, 1.88-2.25), significantly longer progression-free survival (hazard ratios [HRs], 0.37-0.57), and, across most analyses, significantly longer overall survival (HRs, 0.46-0.66) versus PCT. BCMA-naive patients who were treated with elranatamab exhibited significantly better outcomes than patients treated in real-world clinical practice.

Elranatamab is a new medicine for the treatment of people with multiple myeloma. In the ongoing clinical trial MagnetisMM-3, most people had fewer myeloma cells when treated with elranatamab. However, MagnetisMM-3 only looks at the effects of elranatamab without comparing it to other myeloma treatments. Therefore, a new study was designed to compare the effectiveness of elranatamab in the MagnetisMM-3 study with other treatments used in real-world clinical practice (not in a clinical trial). Data from people in MagnetisMM-3 was compared with data from two US databases (COTA and Flatiron Health) containing health records of patients treated for multiple myeloma in real-life clinical practice. The same criteria used to select patients for the MagnetisMM-3 trial (123 people) were used to identify people with similar characteristics in COTA (239 people) and Flatiron Health (152 people). More people treated with elranatamab had fewer myeloma cells in their bodies after treatment than people who received their doctor's choice of treatment in clinical practice. In fact, six out of ten people treated with elranatamab had fewer myeloma cells versus about three in ten people from each real-world database. People treated with elranatamab versus physician's choice of treatment lived longer without their disease getting worse and lived longer overall. In conclusion, this study found that more people treated with elranatamab responded to treatment and lived longer than similar people from the COTA and Flatiron Health databases who were given treatments available in a real-world clinical setting.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05932290 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Impact of elranatamab on quality of life: Patient-reported outcomes from MagnetisMM-3.

The physical and emotional burden of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has been strongly correlated with declining health-related quality of life (QOL) in the patients it affects. This analysis evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-naive (n = 123) and -exposed (n = 64) patients with RRMM enrolled in the MagnetisMM-3 study (NCT04649359) and treated with the humanized, bispecific BCMA-CD3 antibody elranatamab. Patients received two step-up doses of elranatamab (12 mg on day 1, 32 mg on day 4) before starting the full dose of 76 mg on day 8 (each cycle = 28 days). Global health status, functioning and symptom data were collected electronically using validated and myeloma-specific questionnaires. Improvements in PROs occurred early, with marked reductions in pain and disease symptoms and notable improvements in patients' outlook for their future health. Additionally, 40.2% of BCMA-naive and 52.6% of BCMA-exposed patients perceived their disease as 'a little better' or 'much better' by Cycle 1, Day 15. The results from this analysis demonstrated that elranatamab maintained or improved symptomology and general health status, regardless of prior BCMA-directed therapy. Thus, in addition to its clinical benefits, elranatamab therapy may sustain or improve QOL in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM.

Interpreting the Relationship Among Itch, Sleep, and Work Productivity in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of JADE MONO-2.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily Janus kinase 1-selective inhibitor, improved itch severity, sleep, and work productivity versus placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate relationships among itch, sleep, and work productivity in the phase III JADE MONO-2 clinical trial. METHODS: A repeated-measures longitudinal model was used to examine relationships between itch (using the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [PP-NRS] or Nighttime Itch Scale [NTIS]) and sleep disturbance/loss (using the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure sleep item and SCORing AD Sleep Loss Visual Analog Scale) and, separately, between itch and work productivity (using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Atopic Dermatitis Version 2.0 questionnaire). Mediation modelling was used to investigate the effect of treatment (abrocitinib vs placebo) on work impairment via improvements in itch and sleep. RESULTS: The relationships between itch/sleep and itch/work productivity were approximately linear. PP-NRS scores of 0, 4-6, and 10 were associated with 0 days, 3-4 days, and 7 days per week of disturbed sleep, respectively. PP-NRS or NTIS scores of 0-1, 4-5, and 10 were associated with 0-10%, 20-30%, and >50% overall work impairment, respectively. Seventy-five percent of the effect of abrocitinib on reducing work impairment was indirectly mediated by improvement in itch, followed by sleep. CONCLUSION: These results quantitatively demonstrate that reducing itch severity is associated with improvements in sleep and work productivity. Empirical evidence for the mechanism of action of abrocitinib showed that itch severity is improved, which reduces sleep loss/sleep disruption and, in turn, improves work productivity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03575871.

Atopic dermatitis (AD), also called atopic eczema, is a common skin disease that is associated with itch and reduced quality of life. Abrocitinib, a recently approved medicine for AD, was shown in clinical trials to improve itch, which is considered the most bothersome symptom to people with AD. Abrocitinib also improved sleep outcomes and work productivity in people with moderate or severe AD. It is unknown if improvement in itch can lead to improvement in sleep and work productivity. We analyzed data from the JADE MONO-2 study, which included 391 people who received treatment with abrocitinib or placebo for 12 weeks. We used mathematical modelling to study relationships between itch and sleep or work productivity. We also wanted to study if the improvements in itch and sleep with abrocitinib treatment had an impact on work productivity. We found that a relationship existed between itch, sleep disturbance, and work impairment; as itch improved, so too did sleep disturbance and work impairment. When people were treated with abrocitinib, they experienced relief from itch, which improved sleep, which in turn reduced work productivity loss. Larger and longer studies are needed to confirm these results. This analysis further informs the expectations of patients with moderate or severe AD as it relates to progression of symptom relief after treatment with abrocitinib.

Abrocitinib efficacy and safety in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from phase 3 studies, including the long-term extension JADE EXTEND study.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib improved signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) at 12 or 16 weeks in phase 3 studies with a manageable safety profile. Further understanding of the abrocitinib long-term efficacy and safety profile is important for its appropriate use in treating chronic AD. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the abrocitinib efficacy up to 48 weeks and long-term safety in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: JADE EXTEND (NCT03422822) is an ongoing, phase 3, long-term extension study that enrolled patients from previous abrocitinib AD trials. This analysis focusses on patients from the phase 3 JADE MONO-1 (NCT03349060), JADE MONO-2 (NCT03575871) and JADE COMPARE (NCT03720470) studies who completed the full treatment period of placebo or abrocitinib (200 mg or 100 mg once daily) and subsequently entered JADE EXTEND. Efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving skin clearance (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] 0/1 [clear/almost clear]; ≥75% improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI-75]) and itch response (Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [PP-NRS] severity ≥4-point improvement). Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Data cut-off: April 22, 2020. RESULTS: As of the data cut-off, ~70% and ~45% of patients received abrocitinib for ≥36 and ≥48 weeks, respectively. Nasopharyngitis, atopic dermatitis, nausea and upper respiratory tract infections were the most frequent TEAEs. Serious TEAEs occurred in 7% and 5% and TEAEs leading to study discontinuation occurred in 9% and 7% of patients receiving abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg, respectively. Week 48 efficacy responses with abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg were as follows: IGA 0/1 52% and 39%; EASI-75 82% and 67%, and PP-NRS severity ≥4-point improvement 68% and 51%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate-to-severe AD, long-term abrocitinib treatment resulted in clinically meaningful skin and pruritus improvement. The long-term safety profile was manageable and consistent with previous reports.

Comparing how well abrocitinib and dupilumab treat atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms: a plain language summary.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Atopic dermatitis (AD, also called atopic eczema) is a skin disease that that can affect a person for a long time and causes red or flaky skin that can be itchy and uncomfortable. Healthcare providers can prescribe medicated creams and ointments to reduce the visible signs and symptoms of AD, but these treatments are not always enough to keep it under control. A new medicine called abrocitinib is taken every day as a tablet. Abrocitinib works by slowing a part of the body's defense mechanism, called immune response, that is not functioning properly in AD. The clinical study described in this plain language summary, called JADE DARE, investigated how well and how safely 26 weeks of treatment with abrocitinib worked in adults with AD compared to an injected medicine, called dupilumab, that is also approved for AD. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: The study showed that abrocitinib was more effective than dupilumab in providing itch relief after 2 weeks. In addition, people who were taking abrocitinib for 4 and 16 weeks experienced greater improvement in the visible skin signs of AD than people who were taking dupilumab. The number of people who had health complaints while taking abrocitinib was similar to the number of people who had health complaints while taking dupilumab. Most of these complaints were minor. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Abrocitinib was more effective than dupilumab in quickly improving the signs and symptoms of moderate or severe AD in people who did not show improvement with prescribed medications like creams or ointments. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04345367 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Efficacy and Safety of Abrocitinib in Patients with Severe and/or Difficult-to-Treat Atopic Dermatitis: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Randomized Phase 3 JADE COMPARE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Traditional systemic immunosuppressants and advanced therapies improve signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). However, data are limited in severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. In the phase 3 JADE COMPARE trial of patients with moderate-to-severe AD receiving background topical therapy, once-daily abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg showed significantly greater reductions in the symptoms of AD than placebo and significantly greater improvement in itch response (with abrocitinib 200 mg) than dupilumab at week 2. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib and dupilumab in a subset of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD in a post hoc analysis of the JADE COMPARE trial. METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe AD received once-daily oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg, dupilumab 300 mg subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks, or placebo with concomitant medicated topical therapy. Severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD subgroups were classified by baseline characteristics [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 4, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) > 21, failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids), percentage of body surface area (%BSA) > 50, upper quartiles of EASI (EASI > 38) and %BSA (%BSA > 65), and combined subgroup of IGA 4, EASI > 21, and %BSA > 50, and failure or intolerance to prior systemic agents (excluding patients who took only corticosteroids)]. Assessments included IGA score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and a ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline, ≥ 75% and ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in EASI (EASI-75 and EASI-90), ≥ 4-point improvement from baseline in Peak Pruritus-Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4), time to PP-NRS4, least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in 14-day PP-NRS (days 2-15), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) up to week 16. RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving IGA 0/1, EASI-75, and EASI-90 responses was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.05) across all subgroups with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. Across most subgroups, PP-NRS4 response was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.01); the time to achieve this response was shorter with abrocitinib 200 mg (range 4.5-6.0 days) than abrocitinib 100 mg (range 5.0-17.0 days), dupilumab (range 8.0-11.0 days), and placebo (range 3.0-11.5 days). LSM change from baseline in POEM and DLQI was significantly greater with abrocitinib 200 mg than placebo (nominal p < 0.001) across all subgroups. Clinically meaningful differences were observed between abrocitinib and dupilumab for most evaluated endpoints across several subgroups, including in patients who failed or were intolerant to prior systemic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Abrocitinib provided rapid and substantially greater improvements in skin clearance and quality of life compared with placebo and dupilumab in subgroups of patients with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. These findings support the use of abrocitinib for severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03720470.

Atopic dermatitis (AD), also known as atopic eczema, is a skin disease that causes itchy and red skin patches. People can be diagnosed with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD if their signs and symptoms of AD are extremely severe and their AD cannot be adequately treated by common medicines. Abrocitinib is a treatment that has been shown in clinical trials to improve the symptoms of AD. We analyzed data from the JADE COMPARE study, which included 837 people who were treated with abrocitinib, dupilumab (another treatment for AD), or placebo. Many of these people had severe symptoms when they entered the study. Some had AD signs and symptoms that did not improve after they took common medicines for AD. We studied how well abrocitinib worked in these people with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD. We found that these people achieved clear skin and itch relief at week 16 after treatment with abrocitinib 200 mg compared with placebo (no drug control). Additionally, they achieved significant relief from itch faster with abrocitinib 200 mg compared with abrocitinib 100 mg, dupilumab, or placebo. People reported less severe AD and better quality of life after treatment with abrocitinib compared with placebo. Together, the findings of our study provide important evidence for healthcare providers as they determine a treatment plan for people with severe and/or difficult-to-treat AD.

Comparing g-computation, propensity score-based weighting, and targeted maximum likelihood estimation for analyzing externally controlled trials with both measured and unmeasured confounders: a simulation study.

OBJECTIVES: To have confidence in one's interpretation of treatment effects assessed by comparing trial results to external controls, minimizing bias is a critical step. We sought to investigate different methods for causal inference in simulated data sets with measured and unmeasured confounders. METHODS: The simulated data included three types of outcomes (continuous, binary, and time-to-event), treatment assignment, two measured baseline confounders, and one unmeasured confounding factor. Three scenarios were set to create different intensities of confounding effect (e.g., small and blocked confounding paths, medium and blocked confounding paths, and one large unblocked confounding path for scenario 1 to 3, respectively) caused by the unmeasured confounder. The methods of g-computation (GC), inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), overlap weighting (OW), standardized mortality/morbidity ratio (SMR), and targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE) were used to estimate average treatment effects and reduce potential biases. RESULTS: The results with the greatest extent of biases were from the raw model that ignored all the potential confounders. In scenario 2, the unmeasured factor indirectly influenced the treatment assignment through a measured controlling factor and led to medium confounding. The methods of GC, IPTW, OW, SMR, and TMLE removed most of bias observed in average treatment effects for all three types of outcomes from the raw model. Similar results were found in scenario 1, but the results tended to be biased in scenario 3. GC had the best performance followed by OW. CONCLUSIONS: The aforesaid methods can be used for causal inference in externally controlled studies when there is no large, unblockable confounding path for an unmeasured confounder. GC and OW are the preferable approaches.

Improvements in Disease Activity Partially Mediate the Effect of Tofacitinib Treatment on Generic and Disease-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Data from the OCTAVE Program.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) often report impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Tofacitinib is an oral small molecule Janus kinase inhibitor for the treatment of UC. In addition to previous demonstrations of improved clinical measures (e.g., Mayo score), tofacitinib has been shown to improve HRQoL in patients with UC. This analysis explored the interrelationships among tofacitinib treatment, HRQoL, and disease activity (measured using Mayo subscores) using mediation modeling. METHODS: Data were collected from two 8-week induction studies (OCTAVE Induction 1 and 2) in patients with moderate to severe UC treated with tofacitinib or placebo. Two mediation models were specified. First, Mayo subscores were mediators between the binary treatment variable (tofacitinib vs. placebo) and the eight Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) domain scores as outcomes. Second, the four Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire (IBDQ) domain scores served as outcomes. Both models used data collected at week 8. RESULTS: Overall, 1,073 and 1,079 patients were included in the SF-36- and IBDQ-based models, respectively. For all SF-36 domains, improvements in Mayo subscores were estimated to explain 65.6% (bodily pain) to 92.9% (mental health) of the total treatment effect on SF-36 domain scores (all p < 0.05). For all IBDQ domains, improvements in Mayo subscores explained 71.6% (systemic symptoms) to 84.7% (emotional function) of the total treatment effect (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Mayo scores and Mayo subscores are significant but incomplete contributors to tofacitinib's effect on HRQoL in patients with moderate to severe UC. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT01465763; NCT01458951.

Early Itch Response with Abrocitinib Is Associated with Later Efficacy Outcomes in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Subgroup Analysis of the Randomized Phase III JADE COMPARE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor, provided significant itch relief by week 2 in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in the phase III JADE COMPARE trial. OBJECTIVES: This post-hoc analysis of JADE COMPARE aimed to further characterize itch response and determined whether early itch relief could predict subsequent improvements in AD severity. METHODS: JADE COMPARE was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial. Adult patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with moderate-to-severe AD were randomly assigned to receive oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg every other week (after a 600-mg loading dose), or placebo, plus medicated topical therapy for 16 weeks. Assessments were ≥ 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) from days 2 to 15, Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) scores at week 12. Association between week 2 PP-NRS4 and efficacy at week 12 was evaluated by chi-squared tests. The predictive value of early response for later efficacy was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: As early as day 4 after treatment, a significantly greater proportion of patients achieved PP-NRS4 response with abrocitinib 200 mg (18.6%) versus dupilumab (5.6%; p < 0.001) and placebo (6.0%; p < 0.003). A similar trend was observed with abrocitinib at the 100-mg dose, with significantly greater PP-NRS4 response rates versus placebo as early as day 9. With both doses of abrocitinib, week 12 IGA 0/1, EASI-75, EASI-90, and DLQI 0/1 response rates were greater in week 2 PP-NRS4 responders than nonresponders; no differences were observed between week 2 PP-NRS4 responders and nonresponders in the dupilumab and placebo groups. Early improvement in PP-NRS at week 2 was associated with skin clearance at week 12 in abrocitinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Abrocitinib resulted in rapid relief from itch in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, with significant improvement in itch as early as day 4 after treatment with abrocitinib 200 mg compared with dupilumab and placebo. Abrocitinib-induced itch relief by week 2 was associated with subsequent improvements at week 12. [Video abstract available.] TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03720470. Early itch response with abrocitinib is associated with later efficacy outcomes in patients withmoderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: subgroup analysis of the randomized phase III JADE COMPARE trial (MP4 335,375kb).

Atopic dermatitis (AD), also called atopic eczema, is a skin disease that affects people throughout their lives. About 10% of adults worldwide have AD. Itch is the most bothersome symptom reported by people with AD and scratching this itch can damage the skin, resulting in painful sores. It is unknown if relief from itch can influence other symptoms of AD. We analyzed data from the JADE COMPARE study, which included 837 people who received treatment with abrocitinib, dupilumab or placebo. We studied how fast itch relief occurred after people received these treatments. We also wanted to study if rapid itch relief was associated with improvement in other signs of AD later on with continued treatment. We found that as early as 4 days after treatment, abrocitinib 200 mg provided significant relief from itch compared with dupilumab or placebo. People who had rapid itch relief within 2 weeks of treatment with abrocitinib were more likely to have clear or almost clear skin and improved quality of life after 12 weeks of continued treatment with abrocitinib. Rapid itch relief did not appear to increase the likelihood of clear skin at week 12 in people who received dupilumab. Larger studies are needed to confirm this result. This study provides important evidence for physicians as they analyze itch relief and determine treatment options for people with AD.

Magnitude and Time Course of Response to Abrocitinib for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Emerging treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) may provide greater and faster improvement in AD signs and symptoms than current therapies. OBJECTIVE: To examine JADE COMPARE (NCT03720470) data using stringent efficacy end points. METHODS: Adults with moderate-to-severe AD were randomly assigned 2:2:2:1 to receive oral abrocitinib 200 or 100 mg once daily, subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (600-mg loading dose), or placebo, with medicated topical therapy for 16 weeks. Stringent response thresholds were applied for Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Investigator's Global Assessment, Dermatology Life Quality Index, Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, and Night Time Itch Scale severity. RESULTS: At week 16, 48.9%, 38.0%, and 38.8% of the abrocitinib 200-mg, 100-mg, and dupilumab groups, respectively, achieved greater than or equal to 90% improvement from baseline in EASI versus 11.3% placebo; 14.9%, 12.6%, and 6.5% achieved Investigator's Global Assessment 0 (clear) versus 4.8% placebo; 29.7%, 21.6%, and 24.0% achieved Dermatology Life Quality Index 0/1 (no/minimal impact on quality of life) versus 10.6% placebo; and 57.1%, 44.5%, and 46.1% achieved Night Time Itch Scale severity 0/1 (no/minimal night-time itch) versus 31.9% placebo. Kaplan-Meier median time to greater than or equal to 90% improvement from baseline in EASI was 59, 113, and 114 days in the abrocitinib 200-mg, 100-mg, and dupilumab groups, respectively, and was not evaluable for placebo; median time to Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale 0/1 (no/very minimal itch) was 86 and 116 days for abrocitinib 200-mg and dupilumab groups, respectively, and was not evaluable for abrocitinib 100-mg and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: A greater proportion of patients treated with abrocitinib than placebo had almost complete control of AD signs and symptoms.

Real-World Effectiveness of Newly Initiated Systemic Therapy for Atopic Dermatitis in the United States: A Claims Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with significant quality-of-life and economic burdens. Real-world evidence is needed to identify optimal treatment pathways for AD. Here we evaluate real-world effectiveness of systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe AD in the USA. METHODS: Data (September 2016 to December 2019) were from the IQVIA Health Plan Claims data set (IQVIA, Danbury, CT) from patients aged 12 years or older with AD (ICD-9/10-CM, 691.8/L20.x) initiating a systemic immunosuppressive (SIS) agent (methotrexate, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or azathioprine) or dupilumab and continuously enrolled for at least 6 months before and after the index date. Indicators of non-response (i.e., adding on/switching systemic therapy, AD-related inpatient/emergency room visits, or incident staphylococcal/streptococcal skin infection) and predictors of non-response were evaluated. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier rates and times were obtained; Cox regression models were used. RESULTS: In 3249 patients, 45.4% exhibited at least one indicator of non-response, with median time to non-response being longer for dupilumab than for any SIS therapy (27.0 vs 4.0-7.7 months, respectively). Key non-response predictors were age, geographic region, and baseline number of annual AD-related medical visits. CONCLUSION: Non-response was common in patients with AD who required systemic treatment, and non-response indicators occurred significantly more frequently with SIS treatment than with dupilumab treatment.

Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Phase 3 trials have assessed efficacy of abrocitinib versus placebo in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, a common immunoinflammatory skin disease. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, parallel-treatment, phase 3 trial enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who requir=ed systemic therapy or had inadequate response to topical medications. Participants were enrolled from 151 sites, located in Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the USA. These participants were then randomly assigned (1:1) with block randomisation to receive oral abrocitinib (200 mg per day) or subcutaneous dupilumab (300 mg every 2 weeks) for 26 weeks. Participants were required to apply topical corticosteroids (medium or low potency), topical calcineurin inhibitors, or a topical phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor to active lesion areas. Primary endpoints were response based on achieving a 4 point or higher improvement in Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS4) at week 2 and a 90% or better improvement in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-90) at week 4. Family-wise type 1 error was controlled via a sequential multiple-testing procedure (two sided, α=0·05). Randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention were included in the efficacy and safety analysis sets. This trial was completed on July 13, 2021 (NCT04345367). FINDINGS: Between June 11, 2020, and Dec 16, 2020, 940 patients were screened and 727 were enrolled (362 in the abrocitinib group and 365 in the dupilumab group). Compared with dupilumab, a larger proportion of patients treated with abrocitinib reached the primary outcomes, PP-NRS4 at week 2 (172 [48%] of 357, 95% CI 43·0-53·4 vs 93 [26%] of 364, 21·1-30·0; difference 22·6%, 15·8-29·5; p<0·0001), and EASI-90 at week 4 (101 [29%] of 354, 23·8-33·2 vs 53 [15%] of 364, 10·9-18·2; difference 14·1%, 8·2-20·0; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 268 (74%) of 362 patients treated with abrocitinib and by 239 (65%) of 365 patients treated with dupilumab. Two non-treatment-related deaths occurred in the abrocitinib group. INTERPRETATION: Abrocitinib 200 mg per day was more efficacious than dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis on background topical therapy in inducing early reductions of itch and atopic dermatitis disease signs. Both treatments were well tolerated over 26 weeks. FUNDING: Pfizer.

Abrocitinib monotherapy in Investigator's Global Assessment nonresponders: improvement in signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis and quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Abrocitinib, a once-daily, oral Janus kinase 1 selective inhibitor, was shown to be an effective treatment for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in phase 2 b/3 monotherapy trials. METHODS: These analyses included data for Investigator's Global Assessment responder (clear [0] or almost clear [1] with ≥2-grade improvement) and nonresponder patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who received abrocitinib (200 mg or 100 mg) or placebo in three abrocitinib monotherapy trials (phase 2 b, NCT02780167; two phase 3, NCT03349060/JADE MONO-1 and NCT03575871/JADE MONO-2). Outcomes measuring skin clearance, itch, and quality of life were evaluated. RESULTS: Both nonresponders (n = 548) and responders (n = 260) treated with abrocitinib had rapid and clinically meaningful improvement in skin clearance, itch, and quality of life compared with placebo. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis treated with abrocitinib who did not achieve an Investigator's Global Assessment 0/1 response at week 12 still experienced rapid, clinically meaningful improvements across several other validated measures of efficacy and quality of life. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02780167, NCT03349060, NCT03575871.

Predictors of nonresponse to dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis: A machine learning analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) have a suboptimal response to systemic therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed predictors of nonresponse to dupilumab in patients with AD. METHODS: Data (April 2017 through June 2019) for patients aged 12 years and above with AD (International Classification of Diseases-9/10-Clinical Modification: 691.8/L20.x) who initiated dupilumab on or after April 1, 2017 (index date) were collected from an electronic health record and insurance claims database. Nonresponse indicators (dupilumab discontinuation, addition of another systemic therapy or phototherapy, addition of a high-potency topical corticosteroid, AD-related hospital visit, AD-related emergency department visit, incident skin infection) were predicted from available demographic and clinical variables using machine learning. RESULTS: Among 419 patients (mean age: 45 years), 145 (35%) experienced at least 1 indicator of nonresponse in the 6-month postindex period. In patients with at least 1 indicator, the most common was dupilumab discontinuation (47% [68/145]). Of note, this analysis could not capture nonmedical reasons for dupilumab discontinuation (eg, cost, access). The most common predictors of nonresponse were a claim for ibuprofen (in 69% of patients with a nonresponse indicator) and a Quan-Charlson Comorbidity Index value of 3 to 4 (59%). CONCLUSION: Systemic dupilumab therapy for AD can be associated with a relatively high prevalence of nonresponse indicators. Factors associated with these indicators-that is, predictors of nonresponse-may be used to optimize disease management.

Abrocitinib induction, randomized withdrawal, and retreatment in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: Results from the JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety (JADE) REGIMEN phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The heterogeneous course of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis necessitates treatment flexibility. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the maintenance of abrocitinib-induced response with continuous abrocitinib treatment, dose reduction or withdrawal, and response to treatment reintroduction following flare (JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety [JADE] REGIMEN: National Clinical Trial 03627767). METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis responding to open-label abrocitinib 200 mg monotherapy for 12 weeks were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to blinded abrocitinib (200 or 100 mg) or placebo for 40 weeks. Patients experiencing flare received rescue treatment (abrocitinib 200 mg plus topical therapy). RESULTS: Of 1233 patients, 798 responders to induction (64.7%) were randomly assigned. The flare probability during maintenance was 18.9%, 42.6%, and 80.9% with abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, and placebo, respectively. Among patients with flare in the abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, and placebo groups, 36.6%, 58.8%, and 81.6% regained investigator global assessment 0/1 response, respectively, and 55.0%, 74.5%, and 91.8% regained eczema area and severity index response, respectively, with rescue treatment. During maintenance, 63.2% and 54.0% of patients receiving abrocitinib 200 and 100 mg, respectively, experienced adverse events. LIMITATIONS: The definition of protocol-defined flare was not established, limiting the generalizability of findings. CONCLUSION: Induction treatment with abrocitinib was effective; most responders continuing abrocitinib did not flare. Rescue treatment with abrocitinib plus topical therapy effectively recaptured response.

Patient and caregiver preferences on treatment attributes for atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The expanding number of potential treatment options for atopic dermatitis (AD) highlights the need to better understand the treatment preferences of individuals with AD. OBJECTIVE: This study identified attributes that most greatly influenced treatment preferences of adults/adolescents/caregivers of children with mild/moderate/severe AD. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years), adolescents (12-17 years), and caregivers of children (2-11 years) with mild, moderate, or severe AD in the United States (US) and United Kingdom (UK) participated in semistructured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to identify and generate themes across the interview results describing the treatment attributes of greatest importance to participants. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 35 adults, 35 caregivers, and 33 adolescent participants across both countries (n = 103; US = 51; UK = 52) and all severity groups (mild = 43; moderate = 47; severe = 13). The most important treatment attributes included efficacy (96.1%; speed and duration of symptom relief), mode of administration (66.0%; route of administration, frequency, and convenience), and side effects (55.3%, short-term, long-term, and general). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy, mode of administration, and side effects were the most important attributes that influenced AD treatment preferences for patients and caregivers across different countries, ages, and disease severity. These results may assist patients/caregivers/clinicians in shared decision-making discussions to improve treatment adherence and outcomes.

Comparing abrocitinib and dupilumab in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a plain language summary.

Atopic dermatitis (AD, also called atopic eczema) is a long-term skin disease that causes intensely itchy, red skin. Healthcare providers can prescribe medicated creams and ointments to reduce the signs and symptoms of AD. However, these treatments are not always enough to provide relief. A new medicine called abrocitinib, which is taken every day as a tablet, reduces part of the body's immune response that happens in AD. The clinical study described in this plain language summary, called JADE COMPARE, investigated how well and how safely 16 weeks of treatment with abrocitinib worked in adults with AD compared to placebo ('dummy treatment') and a medicine that is already approved for AD, called dupilumab. The study showed that abrocitinib was better than placebo in improving the signs and symptoms of AD after 16 weeks. In addition, patients who were taking abrocitinib 200 mg for 2 weeks experienced greater relief from itch than patients who were taking abrocitinib 100 mg, placebo, or dupilumab. More people who took abrocitinib 200 mg reported side effects than those taking abrocitinib 100 mg, placebo, or dupilumab, but most of these side effects were mild or moderate. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT number: NCT03720470.

Retrospective Database Analysis: Dose Escalation and Adherence in Patients Initiating Biologics for Ulcerative Colitis.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies are often used in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who are nonresponsive to conventional treatments. However, nonresponse or loss of response to biologics often occurs, leading to dose escalation, combination therapy, and/or treatment switching. We investigated real-world treatment patterns of biologic therapies among patients with UC in the USA. METHODS: This study analyzed data from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases (medical/pharmacy claims for >250 million patients in the USA) to identify patients with UC initiating a biologic therapy (adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, or vedolizumab) with 12 months of follow-up post-initiation. Key measures were patient baseline characteristics, dose escalation (average maintenance dose >20% higher than label), adherence (proportion of days covered), and ulcerative colitis-related healthcare costs in the 12 months following biologic therapy initiation. RESULTS: Of 2,331 patients included in the study (adalimumab [N = 1,291], infliximab [N = 810], golimumab [N = 127], and vedolizumab [N = 103]), 28.1% used concomitant immunosuppressant therapy within 12 months post-initiation. Overall, 23.6% (adalimumab), 34.8% (infliximab), 9.9% (golimumab), and 39.2% (vedolizumab) of patients dose escalated within 12 months. Patients who dose escalated incurred USD 20,106 higher total UC-related healthcare costs over 12 months than those who did not. Adherence (covariate-adjusted proportion of days covered) ranged from 0.63 to 0.73, and 39.3% of patients discontinued within 12 months (median treatment duration = 112 days). CONCLUSION: Dose escalation was common, and incurred higher costs, in patients with UC initiating biologic therapies. Suboptimal adherence and/or discontinuation within 12 months of initiation occurred frequently, highlighting the challenges in managing these patients.

Symptom burden of patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease associated with intense and persistent pruritus. OBJECTIVES: To examine associations between AD symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults (aged ≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe AD. MATERIALS & METHODS: Patient chart and survey data from physicians within Europe were derived from the Adelphi AD Disease Specific Programme (Q3 2019-Q2 2020). HRQoL measures included Euro-Qol 5-dimension, 3-level, questionnaire; Dermatology Life Quality Index; and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Atopic Dermatitis questionnaire. Data were evaluated using descriptive statistics and generalized linear models. RESULTS: Of 631 patients, 90.1%, 49.3%, 18.5% and 17.7% reported pruritus, sleep disruption, anxiety and depression, respectively. Adjusted analyses indicated an increased frequency of symptoms associated with worse HRQoL and greater work/activity impairments, particularly for patients with pruritus and sleep disruption. CONCLUSION: Reductions in symptom frequency may have important implications for improving the overall health of patients with moderate-to-severe AD.