Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Br J Dermatol ; 189(3): 327-335, 2023 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37177895

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available regarding patient-centred dosing of dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate our patient-centred dupilumab dosing regimen in daily practice, to assess prognostic factors for successful tapering and to estimate medication-related cost savings. METHODS: This prospective multicentre study included adult patients with AD, participating in the BioDay registry, treated with dupilumab for ≥ 1.3 years. Interval prolongation was considered in the case of dupilumab standard dose for ≥ 1 year and persistent controlled AD [Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) ≤ 7; ≥ 6 months]. Primary endpoints were the mean EASI and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-pruritus after the start of tapering. Prognostic factors for successful tapering were analysed with logistic regression and a cost-savings analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 595 patients were included, of whom 401 patients [mean EASI 2.5 (SD 2.3); NRS-pruritus of 2.4 (SD 1.9) at the start of tapering] prolonged their dupilumab interval. In 83.3% of these patients tapering was successful; most patients used dupilumab every 3 or 4 weeks (Q3W/Q4W). A significant small increase was observed for EASI (highest mean 3.5) and NRS-pruritus (highest mean 3.2) (P < 0.001); however, scores remained low. Predicting successful tapering showed nonsignificant odds ratios for all incorporated variables. The estimated cost savings was €3 977 033.98 for 401 patients between January 2019 and June 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed successful tapering of dupilumab in 83.3% of patients with AD who attempted tapering, while maintaining controlled disease and with the majority using Q3W/Q4W. Interval prolongation can be beneficial both for the patient and from a socio-economic perspective.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Atopic , Adult , Humans , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Severity of Illness Index , Pruritus/drug therapy , Double-Blind Method
2.
Acta Derm Venereol ; 102: adv00820, 2022 Nov 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36420885

ABSTRACT

Clinical trials have shown that baricitinib, an oral selective Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, is effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. However, daily practice data are limited. Therefore, this multicentre prospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of 16-weeks' treatment with baricitinib in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in daily practice. A total of 51 patients from the BioDay registry treated with baricitinib were included and evaluated at baseline and after 4, 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Effectiveness was assessed using clinician- and patient-reported outcome measurements. Adverse events and laboratory assessments were evaluated at every visit. At week 16, the probability (95% confidence interval) of achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index ≤ 7 and numerical rating scale pruritus ≤ 4 was 29.4% (13.1-53.5) and 20.5% (8.8-40.9), respectively. No significant difference in effectiveness was found between dupilumab non-responders and responders. Twenty-two (43.2%) patients discontinued baricitinib treatment due to ineffectiveness, adverse events or both (31.4%, 9.8% and 2.0%, respectively). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (n = 6, 11.8%), urinary tract infection (n = 5, 9.8%) and herpes simplex infection (n = 4, 7.8%). In conclusion, baricitinib can be an effective treatment option for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, including patients with non-responsiveness on dupilumab. However, effectiveness of baricitinib is heterogeneous, which is reflected by the high discontinuation rate in this difficult-to-treat cohort.


Subject(s)
Azetidines , Dermatitis, Atopic , Janus Kinase Inhibitors , Adult , Humans , Dermatitis, Atopic/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Azetidines/adverse effects , Janus Kinase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Registries
3.
Expert Opin Biol Ther ; 19(5): 469-476, 2019 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30768375

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: For many years, oral immunosuppressive drugs such as cyclosporine A, azathioprine, mycophenolic acid, and methotrexate were the only treatment options, in addition to topical treatment, in patients with severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the IL-4 receptor alpha, is the first antibody-based treatment commercially available for the treatment of AD. In the near future, more antibody-based treatments and small molecules will become available in the treatment of severe AD. AREAS COVERED: This review gives an overview of current and future therapies for severe AD, outlines options to optimize treatment with oral immunosuppressive drugs and gives an insight into the future of personalized treatment in AD. EXPERT OPINION: Due to the heterogeneous character of AD, it is unlikely that all patients will respond equally to these newly tested drugs. We believe that biomarkers will lead to better identification of patients that will benefit from these highly specific, but expensive new treatments. In addition to a role for biomarkers in new treatments, the use of pharmacogenomic biomarkers can improve the efficacy of currently used oral immunosuppressive drugs in AD, which will still be needed for the treatment of moderate to severe AD in the coming years.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Precision Medicine , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Biomarkers/metabolism , Dermatitis, Atopic/pathology , Humans , Interleukin-4 Receptor alpha Subunit/immunology , Pharmacogenetics , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Severity of Illness Index
4.
Ther Adv Chronic Dis ; 9(9): 159-170, 2018 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30181845

ABSTRACT

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is one of the most common chronic inflammatory skin diseases. The prevalence of AD is increasing and is currently estimated at 10-20% in adults worldwide. In the majority of patients, AD can be adequately controlled with topical treatment or ultraviolet light therapy, but there is a high unmet need for effective and safe therapeutics in patients with more severe or difficult to treat AD. During the past decade, new advances in the understanding of the underlying immune pathogenesis of AD have led to the development of new, more targeted therapies. Dupilumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the interleukin (IL)-4 receptor α, thereby blocking the IL-4 and IL-13 pathway, is one of the first biologics that has been developed for AD. Dupilumab has shown promising results in phase III trials and has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Commission for the treatment of moderate to severe AD. With the approval of dupilumab, we are entering a new era of biological therapeutics in AD management. The place of dupilumab should be established in the current treatment standards. Based on current treatment guidelines and experts' opinions in the management of AD, we have built a proposal for a treatment algorithm for systemic treatment of AD in European countries.

5.
J Dermatolog Treat ; 29(7): 682-687, 2018 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29526121

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Oral immunosuppressive drugs are commonly used in the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD). In patients with autoimmune- and rheumatic diseases, these drugs have been associated with lymphopenia. Lymphopenia is related to an increased risk of opportunistic infections. The incidence of lymphopenia in patients with AD treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs is yet unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the occurrence of recurrent lymphopenia in patients with AD treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs and to make recommendations for screening in daily practice. METHODS: Patients with recurrent lymphopenia (i.e. >5 times lymphocyte counts below 0.8 × 109/L) during treatment with oral immunosuppressive drugs were included from our immunosuppressive drugs database and further analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 360 AD patients, treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs, were screened. A recurrent lymphopenia during treatment was found in 11 patients. In 8/11 patients, recurrent lymphopenia was observed during concomitant treatment with prednisone. No serious infections were observed. CONCLUSION: Lymphopenia is occasionally seen in AD patients treat with oral immunosuppressive drugs. Concomitant treatment with prednisone seems to be a risk factor. We suggest to include monitoring of lymphocyte counts in the standard follow-up for all AD patients treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs.


Subject(s)
Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Lymphopenia/etiology , Administration, Oral , Adult , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/cytology , CD4-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/cytology , CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes/immunology , Dermatitis, Atopic/pathology , Female , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Leukocyte Count , Male , Middle Aged , Prednisone/adverse effects , Prednisone/therapeutic use , Recurrence , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
7.
Acta Derm Venereol ; 97(6): 724-730, 2017 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28218345

ABSTRACT

There is uncertainty about the risk of developing non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), including basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) treated with oral immunosuppressive drugs. A total of 557 patients with AD treated with these drugs in the University Medical Center Utrecht and Groningen, the Netherlands, were analysed. NMSC after oral immunosuppressive treatment was reported in 18 patients (3.2%). The standardized incidence ratio for developing SCC was 13.1 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) 6.5-19.7). Patients developing NMSC were older at the start of therapy (p<0.001) and data lock (p<0.001) compared with patients without NMSC. No significant differences were found in sex, cumulative days of oral immunosuppressive drugs and follow-up between these groups (p=0.42, p=0.88, and p=0.34, respectively). In interpreting these results it is important to include other factors, such as lack of association between treatment duration and tumour development and the long interval between treatment discontinuation and tumour development in some patients.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Basal Cell/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/epidemiology , Dermatitis, Atopic/drug therapy , Immunosuppressive Agents/administration & dosage , Skin Neoplasms/epidemiology , Academic Medical Centers , Administration, Oral , Adult , Aged , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/chemically induced , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/immunology , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/pathology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/chemically induced , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/immunology , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Dermatitis, Atopic/diagnosis , Dermatitis, Atopic/immunology , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Humans , Immunocompromised Host , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Skin Neoplasms/chemically induced , Skin Neoplasms/immunology , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...