Skip to main content
Erschienen in: American Journal of Clinical Dermatology 4/2021

Open Access 05.05.2021 | Original Research Article

Impact of Oral Abrocitinib Monotherapy on Patient-Reported Symptoms and Quality of Life in Adolescents and Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Pooled Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes

verfasst von: Jonathan I. Silverberg, Jacob P. Thyssen, Eric L. Simpson, Gil Yosipovitch, Sonja Ständer, Hernan Valdez, Ricardo Rojo, Pinaki Biswas, Daniela E. Myers, Claire Feeney, Marco DiBonaventura

Erschienen in: American Journal of Clinical Dermatology | Ausgabe 4/2021

Abstract

Background

Atopic dermatitis imparts a substantial patient burden, including itch, sleep disturbance, and decreased health-related quality of life.

Objective

This analysis evaluated changes in patient-reported outcomes of disease-specific signs/symptoms and health-related quality of life in adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis treated with once-daily oral abrocitinib 200-mg or 100-mg monotherapy.

Methods

Pooled data from one phase IIb (NCT02780167) and two phase III (NCT03349060, JADE MONO-1; NCT03575871, JADE MONO-2) monotherapy trials in adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome assessments included: global severity, itch, and multi-item measures that assess other signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis. Additional patient-reported outcome assessments measured depression, anxiety, fatigue, disease-specific and general health-related quality of life, and work and general productivity among employed patients.

Results

Overall, 942 patients were included in this analysis. Improvements were observed from the first post-baseline assessment to week 12 across all patient-reported outcomes, including Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) score of 0/1 (35.5%, 19.8%, and 5.9% for 200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo, respectively), ≥ 4-point improvement in Night Time Itch Scale (NTIS; 57.0%, 42.7%, and 12.7%), change from baseline in Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) score (− 11.4, − 8.2, and − 3.4), 1-point improvement in Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD; 75.2%, 65.1%, and 33.5%), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) anxiety (− 2.0, − 1.7, and − 1.0) and depression (− 1.7, − 1.3, and − 0.1).

Conclusions

Abrocitinib monotherapy improved disease-specific signs/symptoms and health-related quality of life across multiple domains as reported by adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis, complementing clinician-reported efficacy and safety outcomes.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT02780167 (registered 23 May, 2016), NCT03349060 (registered 21 November, 2017), NCT03575871 (registered 3 July, 2018).
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40257-021-00604-9.
A correction to this article is available online at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40257-021-00634-3.
Key Points
Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1 selective inhibitor, showed efficacy and a manageable safety profile for adult and adolescent patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in phase IIb and III trials; this analysis focuses on patient-report outcome assessments in phase IIb and phase III monotherapy trials.
The pooled analysis from three monotherapy studies (N = 942) showed that adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis treated with abrocitinib experienced clinically meaningful improvements in all patient-reported outcomes, especially itch, depression/anxiety, fatigue, and work productivity, which represent some of the most burdensome impacts of atopic dermatitis. Improvements in itch, sleep disturbance, skin pain, and health-related quality of life were evident as early as week 2 and sustained over a period of 12 weeks.
These results provide important information on the efficacy of abrocitinib from the patient perspective and complement clinician-reported efficacy and safety outcomes from previous phase IIb and III monotherapy trials.

1 Introduction

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, inflammatory skin condition with a high disease and comorbidity burden that affects up to 20% of children and 5–10% of adults worldwide [15]. Moderate-to-severe AD negatively affects patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL), impacting patients, their finances, families, and society in general [68]. Pruritus is the most common and bothersome symptom of AD [4, 9] and is associated with sleep disturbance [10], which additionally may lead to psychological comorbidities, including anxiety, depression, and fatigue [1116]. Atopic dermatitis is also associated with a higher work absentee rate, causing substantial direct and indirect costs [17].
Abrocitinib is an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) selective inhibitor under investigation for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD. By selectively inhibiting JAK1, abrocitinib modulates the signaling pathways of several key cytokines involved in the pathogenesis of AD and pruritus [18]. Monotherapy with once-daily oral abrocitinib showed significant efficacy in three phase II/III placebo-controlled trials in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD [1921]. A phase IIb trial in adults with moderate-to-severe AD showed that abrocitinib was safe and effective in reducing signs and symptoms of AD based on Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) response (clear [0] or almost clear [1] with ≥ 2-grade improvement) and change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) score from baseline [19]. In JADE MONO-1, significantly greater proportions of abrocitinib-treated (200 mg or 100 mg) patients than placebo-treated patients achieved IGA response (43.8% and 23.7% vs 7.9%; p < 0.0001 and p < 0.005, respectively) and/or ≥ 75% improvement in EASI (EASI-75) response (62.7% and 39.7% vs 11.8%; p < 0.0001 for both) [20]. Likewise, in JADE MONO-2, greater proportions of abrocitinib-treated (200 mg or 100 mg) than placebo-treated patients achieved IGA response (38.1%, 28.4% vs 9.1%; p < 0.001) and/or EASI-75 response (61.0%, 44.5% vs 10.4%; p < 0.0001) [21].
Although it is important to establish efficacy and safety for new treatments, clinician-reported outcome assessments do not capture the full extent of treatment benefits experienced by patients; therefore, it is important to report the clinically relevant and complementary data captured by patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments from clinical trials [22, 23]. Hence, to generate a comprehensive assessment of the effect of a treatment on AD, the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema and the More Than Skin Deep initiatives have recommended that clinical trials in AD include assessments of patient-reported symptoms, particularly Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) and Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (Pruritus-NRS)/Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS), and HRQoL, particularly the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), alongside clinician-evaluated endpoints and long-term disease control, as core outcome measures [24, 25]. Here, we present a pooled analysis from the placebo-controlled phase IIb and III studies of the effect of abrocitinib monotherapy on PRO measures in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe AD.

2 Methods

2.1 Study Designs

All three studies included in this pooled analysis were similarly designed, international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials (Table 1 of the Electronic Supplementary Material [ESM]). The phase IIb study (NCT02780167) was conducted between April 2016 and April 2017 in Australia, Canada, Germany, Hungary, and the USA [19]. JADE MONO-1 (NCT03349060) was a phase III trial conducted between December 2017 and March 2019 in Australia, Canada, Europe, and the USA [20]. JADE MONO-2 (NCT03575871) was a phase III trial conducted between June 2018 and August 2019 in Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Japan, South Korea, and the USA [21].
All studies had similar eligibility criteria (described previously [1921]). Briefly, eligible patients were either 18–75 years of age (phase IIb) or ≥ 12 years of age (phase III) with moderate-to-severe AD (IGA ≥ 3, EASI [26] score ≥12 [phase IIb] or ≥ 16 [phase III], affected percentage of body surface area ≥ 10, PP-NRS [27] (used with permission of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sanofi) score ≥ 4 [PP-NRS4; phase III only], and inadequate response to treatment with topical corticosteroids or topical calcineurin inhibitors given for ≥ 4 weeks, a history of topical AD treatments considered medically inadvisable, or a history of systemic therapies for AD. Exclusion criteria were medical history of conditions associated with thrombocytopenia, coagulopathy, or platelet dysfunction; prior systemic JAK inhibitor use; systemic corticosteroid use within 4 weeks of study initiation; and treatment with dupilumab within 6 weeks of study initiation. The phase III studies also excluded patients with suicidal ideation associated with actual intent and method or plan in the past year (Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale [C-SSRS] [28] items 4 and 5), history of suicidal behaviors in the past 5 years (any CSSRS suicidal behavior item in the past 5 years), lifetime history of serious or recurrent suicidal behavior (Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised [29] total score ≥ 8), clinically significant depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-8 [30] total score ≥ 15), or any other major psychiatric disorder that might require exclusion in the opinion of the investigator. Use of topical medicated therapies for AD (topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, tars, antibiotic creams, topical antihistamines) and rescue medication (e.g., oral corticosteroids) was not permitted, but patients were allowed to use oral antihistamines and/or topical nonmedicated emollients during the studies.
In the phase IIb study, patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1:1 to receive once-daily oral abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, abrocitinib 30 mg, abrocitinib 10 mg, or matching placebo for 12 weeks. In the phase III studies, patients were randomly assigned 2:2:1 (stratified by baseline disease severity [IGA 3 or 4] and age group [12 to < 18 years or ≥ 18 years]) to receive once-daily oral abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, or matching placebo for 12 weeks. This analysis includes patients randomly assigned to receive abrocitinib 200 mg, abrocitinib 100 mg, or placebo.

2.2 Assessments

Patient-reported outcome assessments in all three studies included proportions of patients achieving a ≥ 4-point improvement in itch score (PP-NRS and Pruritus-NRS) [27, 31]. Other PRO assessments included in all studies were: Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) [32, 33] clear or almost clear with a ≥ 2-point improvement; Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis (PSAAD [33]) total score; change from baseline in POEM [3537] total score; distributions of patients across DLQI [38] and Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI [39]) band descriptors; and change from baseline in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) [40, 41] depression and/or anxiety subscale scores and, among patients with respective baseline subscale scores ≥ 8, proportions of patients achieving subscale scores < 8.
Several additional PRO endpoints were assessed in JADE MONO-1/MONO-2, including change from baseline in the Short Form-36 Health Survey, Version 2, Acute (SF-36v2) [42] mental and physical component summary scores and domain scores (for patients aged ≥ 18 years only), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L) [43] or EuroQol 5-Dimension Youth Scale (EQ-5D-Y) [44] index score, and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale (FACIT-F) [45] score or Pediatric FACIT-F (Peds-FACIT-F) [46] score as well as the proportion of patients achieving FACIT-F/Peds-FACIT-F < 30 at week 12 (among patients with FACIT-F/Peds-FACIT-F ≥ 30 at baseline).
JADE MONO-2 assessed two additional PRO endpoints: change from baseline in Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire–Atopic Dermatitis, Version 2.0 (WPAI-AD) [47] score (for patients aged ≥ 18 years only) and the proportion of patients and time to achieve a ≥ 4-point improvement in Night Time Itch Scale (NTIS) score for severity of worst itching due to AD during the previous night’s sleep. More detailed descriptions of each PRO assessment are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Summary of patient-reported outcomes evaluated in this analysis
Patient-reported outcomes
Descriptions
Assessments
PP-NRS [27]
Self-report of worst itch in the last 24 h
Scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse itch
Minimal clinically important difference is a ≥ 2–4 point change from baseline
Assessed during screening and daily on days 1–15 and on study visit days thereafter for phase III studies
Pruritus-NRS [31]
Self-report of itch in the last 24 hours
Scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse itch
Assessed daily on days 1–15 and on study visit days thereafter for the phase IIb study
PtGA [32, 33]
Scores range from 0 (clear) to 4 (severe), with higher scores indicating worse self-reported cutaneous disease
Assessed on study visit days
PSAAD [34]
Scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating worse daily symptoms of AD
Clinically important response defined as a ≥ 1-point improvement from baseline
Assessed on study visit days
POEM [3537]
Scores range from 0 to 28, with higher scores indicating higher severity of AD
Assessed on study visit days
DLQI [38]
Scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating worse QoL
For patients aged ≥ 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
CDLQI [39]
Scores range from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating worse QoL
For patients aged < 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
HADS [40, 41]
Scores range from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating increased anxiety or depression
Assessed on study visit days
SF-36v2 [42]
Assessed on study visit days
Norm-based scoring, with higher scores indicating higher impact on functional health and well-being
Assessed on study visit days
EQ-5D-5L [43]
Scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating increased problems
For patients aged ≥ 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
EQ-5D-Y [44]
Scores range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating increased problems
For patients aged < 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
FACIT-F [45]
Scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating less fatigue
For patients aged ≥ 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
Peds-FACIT-F [46]
Scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating less fatigue
For patients aged < 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
WPAI-AD [47]
Scores range from 0% to 100%, with higher scores indicating a greater percentage of work/activity time that was impaired
For patients aged ≥ 18 years
Assessed on study visit days
NTIS
Scores range from 0 (no itch/never or no itching) to 10 (worst itch imaginable/always or constant itching), with higher scores indicating worse itch
Assessed on days 1–15 and on study visit days thereafter
AD atopic dermatitis, CDLQI Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, DLQI Dermatology Life Quality Index, EQ-5D-5L EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level Scale, EQ-5D-Y EuroQol 5-Dimension Youth Scale, FACIT-F Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale, HADS Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, NTIS Night Time Itch Scale, Peds-FACIT-F Pediatric Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale, POEM Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, PP-NRS Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, Pruritus-NRS Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, PSAAD Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis, PtGA Patient Global Assessment, QoL quality of life, SF-36v2 Short Form-36 Health Survey, Version 2, Acute, WPAI-AD Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire–Atopic Dermatitis, Version 2.0

2.3 Statistical Analysis

Binary endpoints were analyzed using the Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test adjusted by randomization strata. Missing responses for patients who permanently discontinued the study were defined as non-responders at all subsequent visits. Continuous endpoints were analyzed based on the observed data using mixed-model repeated measures with fixed factors of treatment, week, treatment-by-week interaction, study, baseline disease severity, age category, and baseline value and unstructured covariance matrix or compound symmetry covariance matrix.

3 Results

3.1 Demographics and Baseline Disease Characteristics

Overall, 942 patients were included in this pooled analysis. Baseline disease characteristics were similar across treatment groups and across three included studies (Table 2 and Supplementary Table 2 of the ESM). The total population reported moderate-to-severe signs and symptoms of AD per mean POEM total score (Table 3). Furthermore, 62.7% of patients had moderate AD and 37.3% had severe AD per IGA; this distribution was 43.7% and 48.7%, respectively, per PtGA (Table 3). Finally, the patients reported considerable symptoms of anxiety or depression per HADS subscores and a very large effect of AD on their quality of life (QoL) based on mean DLQI and CDLQI total scores (Table 3).
Table 2
Baseline demographic characteristics
 
Placebo
Abrocitinib
Total
100 mg
200 mg
Pooled monotherapy (phase IIb/III)
N = 216
N = 369
N = 363
N = 942
Age, mean (SD), years
35.0 (15.0)
35.9 (15.8)
34.1 (16.4)
35.0 (15.9)
Age group, n (%)
    
 12–17 years
25 (11.9)
51 (13.8)
48 (13.2)
124 (13.2)
 18–64 years
178 (84.8)
297 (80.5)
289 (79.6)
764 (81.1)
 ≥ 65 years
7 (3.3)
21 (5.7)
26 (7.2)
54 (5.7)
Male sex, n (%)
117 (55.7)
215 (58.3)
197 (54.3)
529 (56.2)
Race, n (%)
    
 White
141 (67.1)
253 (68.6)
231 (63.6)
625 (66.3)
 Asian
39 (18.6)
80 (21.7)
85 (23.4)
204 (21.7)
 Black or African American
22 (10.5)
31 (8.4)
30 (8.3)
83 (8.8)
 Multiracial
2 (1.0)
2 (0.5)
8 (2.2)
12 (1.3)
 Other
3 (1.4)
2 (0.5)
5 (1.4)
10 (1.1)
 Not reported
3 (1.4)
1 (0.3)
4 (1.1)
8 (0.8)
Ethnicity, n (%)
    
 Not Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
196 (93.3)
352 (95.4)
349 (96.1)
897 (95.2)
 Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
11 (5.2)
14 (3.8)
12 (3.3)
37 (3.9)
 Not reported
3 (1.4)
3 (0.8)
2 (0.6)
8 (0.8)
SD standard deviation
Table 3
Baseline disease characteristics
 
Placebo
Abrocitinib
Total
100 mg
200 mg
Pooled monotherapy (phase IIb/III)
N = 216
N = 369
N = 363
N = 942
Disease duration, median (range), years
20.8 (1.1–67.1)
21.2 (1.0–68.6)
18.9 (1.0–68.8)
20.2 (1.0–68.8)
IGA, n (%)
    
 Moderate (3)
132 (62.9)
228 (61.8)
231 (63.6)
591 (62.7)
 Severe (4)
78 (37.1)
141 (38.2)
132 (36.4)
351 (37.3)
EASI score, mean (SD)
27.6 (11.8)
29.4 (12.4)
29.0 (13.4)
28.8 (12.7)
%BSA, mean (SD)
45.8 (22.1)
48.6 (22.5)
47.2 (23.6)
47.4 (22.8)
Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS score, mean (SD)
n = 207
7.0 (1.9)
n = 368
7.1 (1.9)
n = 362
7.0 (1.9)
n = 937
7.0 (1.9)
POEM total score, mean (SD)
n = 209
19.9 (5.8)
n = 362
20.2 (6.2)
n = 359
19.8 (5.8)
n = 930
20.0 (5.9)
PtGA, n (%)
n = 209
n = 362
n = 359
n = 930
 Clear
0
1 (0.3)
0
1 (0.1)
 Almost clear
5 (2.4)
3 (0.8)
2 (0.6)
10 (1.1)
 Mild
8 (3.8)
23 (6.2)
21 (5.8)
52 (5.5)
 Moderate
101 (48.1)
142 (38.5)
169 (46.6)
412 (43.7)
 Severe
95 (45.2)
196 (53.1)
168 (46.3)
459 (48.7)
PSAAD total score, mean (SD)
n = 171
5.3 (2.0)
n = 314
5.3 (2.2)
n = 317
5.3 (2.1)
n = 802
5.3 (2.1)
HADS score, mean (SD)
n = 208
n = 362
n = 358
n = 928
 Depression subscale
4.5 (3.6)
4.3 (4.0)
4.2 (3.8)
4.3 (3.8)
 Anxiety subscale
6.6 (4.0)
6.0 (4.3)
5.8 (4.0)
6.1 (4.1)
DLQI total score,a mean (SD)
n = 184
14.3 (7.2)
n = 315
15.1 (7.1)
n = 311
14.4 (6.6)
n = 810
14.6 (6.9)
CDLQI total score,b mean (SD)
n = 24
12.5 (6.3)
n = 48
12.4 (6.4)
n = 47
13.1 (5.5)
n = 119
12.7 (6.0)
Pooled monotherapy (phase III)
n = 155
n = 314
n = 309
n = 778
FACIT-F score,a mean (SD)
37.9 (10.2)
37.4 (11.8)
38.3 (10.6)
37.9 (11.0)
Peds-FACIT-F score,b mean (SD)
35.8 (7.8)
36.2 (9.0)
37.1 (7.7)
36.5 (8.2)
EQ-5D-5L index score,a mean (SD)
0.78 (0.15)
0.79 (0.15)
0.80 (0.14)
0.79 (0.15)
EQ-5D-Y index score,b mean (SD)
0.63 (0.39)
0.66 (0.36)
0.65 (0.32)
0.65 (0.35)
SF-36v2 score,a mean (SD)
    
Mental component summary
48.6 (9.2)
48.3 (10.8)
47.9 (10.7)
48.2 (10.4)
Physical component summary
46.0 (8.1)
45.2 (9.0)
46.0 (8.0)
45.7 (8.4)
JADE MONO-2 study
    
 WPAI-AD,a mean (SD)
    
  Percentage work time missedc
n = 42
4.2 (10.3)
n = 93
4.6 (16.0)
n = 79
5 (19.5)
n = 214
4.7 (16.4)
  Percentage impairment while workingc
n = 42
35.2 (24.3)
n = 92
35.4 (26.3)
n = 76
36.4 (26.3)
n = 210
35.8 (25.8)
  Percentage overall work impairmentc
n = 42
37.3 (25.8)
n = 92
36.4 (27.4)
n = 76
36.9 (26.6)
n = 210
36.8 (26.7)
  Percentage activity impairment
n = 70
41.9 (27.2)
n = 139
41.0 (27.5)
n = 138
43.0 (25.6)
n = 347
42.0 (26.7)
 NTIS score, mean (SD)
n = 78
6.2 (2.1)
n = 158
6.8 (2.0)
n = 155
6.8 (1.9)
n = 391
6.7 (2.0)
AD atopic dermatitis, %BSA percentage of body surface area, CDLQI Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index, DLQI Dermatology Life Quality Index, EASI Eczema Area and Severity Index, EQ-5D-5L EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level Scale, EQ-5D-Y EuroQol 5-Dimension Youth Scale, HADS Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, IGA Investigator’s Global Assessment, OTC over-the-counter, POEM Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, Pruritus-NRS, Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, PP-NRS Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, PSAAD Pruritus and Symptoms Assessment for Atopic Dermatitis, PtGA Patient Global Assessment, SD standard deviation, WPAI-AD Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire–Atopic Dermatitis, Version 2.0
aFor patients aged ≥ 18 years
bFor patients aged < 18 years
cOnly patients who were employed completed work-related items

3.2 Symptoms of AD

Mean (standard deviation [SD]) Pruritus-NRS (phase IIb)/PP-NRS scores (phase III; 200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 7.0 (1.9), 7.1 (1.9), and 7.0 (1.9) at baseline and 2.9 (2.6), 3.9 (2.7), 5.4 (2.6) at week 12, respectively. Pooled proportions of patients achieving a ≥ 4-point improvement in itch severity based on Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS score were greater starting at the first post-baseline assessment (week 2) for abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg compared with placebo. At week 2, 44.2% (200 mg), 24.9% (100 mg), and 5.8% (placebo) of patients achieved a ≥ 4-point improvement (i.e., response criteria in phase III studies). Proportions achieving a ≥ 4-point improvement in Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS at weeks 4, 8, and 12 were, respectively, 57.5%, 59.2%, and 57.3% for 200 mg, 35.7%, 39.7%, and 42.9% for 100 mg, and 12.3%, 14.3%, and 16.5% for placebo. Similarly, a significant proportion of patients achieved an itch-free or virtually itch-free status (i.e., PP-NRS 0/1) at week 12 with abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg (36.6% and 23.4%, respectively) compared with placebo (5.3%). The median (95% confidence interval [CI]) time to achieve a ≥4-point improvement in Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS was significantly shorter for abrocitinib 200 mg (15 days [1329]) and abrocitinib 100 mg (57 days [30–64]) vs placebo (112 days [92–not estimable]).
Mean (SD) NTIS scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 6.8 (1.9), 6.8 (2.0), and 6.2 (2.1) at baseline and 2.2 (2.3), 3.2 (2.8), and 4.8 (3.0) at week 12, respectively. A higher proportion of patients receiving abrocitinib (100 or 200 mg) experienced a ≥ 4-point improvement in the severity of night-time itch (Fig. 1a). The differences in the proportion of patients who achieved NTIS response at week 12 vs placebo for abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg were 44.6% (95% CI 33.0–56.1; p < 0.0001) and 29.8% (95% CI 18.3–41.4; p < 0.0001), respectively. The median (95% CI) time to achieve a ≥ 4-point improvement in the NTIS score was significantly shorter for abrocitinib 200 mg (29 days [1433]) and abrocitinib 100 mg (57 days [30–81]) vs placebo (116 days [89–116]; p < 0.0001 for both). Mean (SD) PSAAD scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 5.3 (2.1), 5.3 (2.2), and 5.3 (2.0) at baseline and 2.0 (2.1), 2.8 (2.1), and 4.3 (2.4) at week 12, respectively. Overall, > 50% of patients treated with abrocitinib reported experiencing a clinically important response in pruritus and symptoms as measured by PSAAD (≥ 1-point improvement) starting at week 2 and continuing through week 12; the proportions of responders were greater for both doses of abrocitinib than placebo at all time points (Fig. 1b). As measured with PtGA, the proportions of patients with moderate AD (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 46.6%, 38.5%, and 48.1% at baseline and 22.7%, 32.8%, and 31.6% at week 12, respectively. The proportions of patients with severe AD (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 46.3%, 53.1%, and 45.2% at baseline and 7.1%, 12.4%, and 23.9% at week 12, respectively. In the overall monotherapy pool, both doses of abrocitinib improved overall disease severity as rated by patients (PtGA) starting at the first post-baseline assessment (week 2) and continuing through the end of treatment (Fig. 1c). Mean (SD) POEM scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 19.8 (5.8), 20.2 (6.2), and 19.9 (5.8) at baseline and 8.9 (7.5), 12.0 (7.8), and 16.4 (7.1) at week 12, respectively. Compared with placebo-treated patients, abrocitinib-treated patients reported marked reductions in the frequency of symptoms via POEM throughout the study (Fig. 1d).

3.3 Depression, Anxiety, and Fatigue

Mean HADS depression subscale scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 4.2 (3.8), 4.3 (4.0), and 4.5 (3.6) at baseline and 2.4 (3.0), 2.7 (3.2), and 4.0 (3.9) at week 12, respectively. Mean HADS anxiety subscale scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 5.8 (4.0), 6.0 (4.3), and 6.6 (4.0) at baseline and 3.8 (3.7), 4.1 (3.7), and 4.9 (4.0) at week 12, respectively.
Decreases from baseline in HADS depression and anxiety subscale scores were greater for abrocitinib-treated patients at all time points (Fig. 2). Among adults with baseline HADS depression score ≥ 8, 32 of 53 patients (60.4%), 28 of 60 patients (46.7%), and 9 of 33 patients (27.3%) in the 200-mg, 100-mg, and placebo groups, respectively, achieved HADS depression scores < 8 at week 12. Among adults with baseline HADS anxiety scores ≥ 8, 53 of 98 patients (54.1%), 48 of 100 patients (48.0%), and 17 of 67 patients (25.4%) in the 200-mg, 100-mg, and placebo groups, respectively, achieved HADS anxiety score < 8 at week 12.
Mean FACIT-F scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 38.3 (10.6), 37.4 (11.8), and 37.9 (10.2) at baseline and 41.9 (8.9), 40.6 (10.4), and 37.4 (12.1) at week 12, respectively. For adult patients, the least-squares mean change (95% CI) from baseline to week 12 in FACIT-F scores was 3.9 (2.9–4.9) in the abrocitinib 200-mg group and 2.9 (1.9–3.9) in the abrocitinib 100-mg group compared with 0.6 (–2.2 to 0.9) in the placebo group. In adolescent patients, mean Peds-FACIT-F scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 37.1 (7.7), 36.2 (9.0), and 35.8 (7.8) at baseline and 39.8 (6.4), 37.9 (9.0), and 37.7 (7.9) at week 12. Least-squares mean change (95% CI) from baseline to week 12 in Peds-FACIT-F was 3.0 (1.3–4.7) in the abrocitinib 200-mg group and 1.4 (– 0.3 to 3.1) in the abrocitinib 100-mg group vs 1.5 (– 1.1 to 4.0) in the placebo group. Among patients with FACIT-F/Peds-FACIT-F ≥ 30 at baseline (i.e., severe fatigue; n = 224 for abrocitinib 200 mg, n = 209 for abrocitinib 100 mg, n = 93 for placebo), 10 (4.5%), 14 (6.7%), and 13 (14.0%), respectively, achieved FACIT-F/Peds-FACIT-F < 30 at week 12.

3.4 QoL and Productivity Impact

Mean EQ-5D-5L index scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 0.80 (0.14), 0.79 (0.15), and 0.78 (0.15) at baseline and 0.9 (0.1), 0.9 (0.1), and 0.8 (0.2) at week 12, respectively. For adult patients, both abrocitinib doses improved EQ-5D-5L index scores compared with placebo (Fig. 3a). Mean EQ-5D-Y index scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 0.65 (0.32), 0.66 (0.36), and 0.63 (0.39) at baseline and 0.9 (0.2), 0.8 (0.3), and 0.8 (0.3) at week 12, respectively. For adolescents, abrocitinib 200 mg improved EQ-5D-Y index scores compared with placebo (Fig. 3b).
Mean SF-36v2 mental component summary scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 47.9 (10.7), 48.3 (10.8), and 48.6 (9.2) at baseline and 51.5 (9.4), 50.3 (10.3), and 48.8 (9.7) at week 12, respectively. Mean SF-36v2 physical component summary scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 46.0 (8.0), 45.2 (9.0), and 46.0 (8.1) at baseline and 51.0 (7.5), 49.6 (7.6), and 46.8 (8.4) at week 12, respectively. Improvements from baseline to week 12 in SF-36v2 mental and physical component summary scores as well as all eight domain scores were greater for abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg than for placebo (Fig. 3c). Mean DLQI total scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 14.4 (6.6), 15.1 (7.1), and 14.3 (7.2) at baseline and 4.9 (5.6), 6.9 (6.2), and 10.3 (7.9) at week 12, respectively. By week 12, abrocitinib-treated patients reported a greater shift in DLQI/CDLQI band descriptors toward no or a small impact on disease-specific QoL than placebo-treated patients (Fig. 4). Adult patients treated with abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg experienced improvement in all individual items of DLQI (effect on symptom severity, embarrassment or self-consciousness, daily activities, clothing, social/leisure activities, performance of sports, prevention of work/study, impairment of work/study, personal relationships, sex life, and burden of treatment) compared with patients treated with placebo from weeks 2 to 12 (Fig. 1 of the ESM). In adolescent patients, mean CDLQI total scores (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 13.1 (5.5), 12.4 (6.4), and 12.5 (6.3) at baseline and 4.3 (3.8), 6.4 (5.2), and 9.6 (5.2) at week 12, respectively. Adolescent patients treated with abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg experienced improvement in the individual items on CDLQI that address effects on symptom severity, embarrassment or self-consciousness, sleep, and burden of treatment compared with patients treated with placebo from weeks 2 to 12 (Fig. 2 of the ESM). Mean percentages of activity impairment measured by WPAI-AD (200 mg, 100 mg, and placebo) were 43.0 (25.6), 41.0 (27.5), and 41.9 (27.2) at baseline and 20.5 (25.3), 22.7 (25.2), and 38.0 (28.6) at week 12, respectively. Employed abrocitinib-treated patients reported greater reductions from baseline to week 12 in the percentage of impairment while working and the percentage of overall work impairment compared with placebo-treated patients (Table 4). Likewise, abrocitinib-treated patients reported greater reductions in activity impairment from baseline to week 12 than placebo-treated patients (Table 4).
Table 4
Change from baseline in WPAI-AD scores at week 12
LSM change (95% CI)
Placebo (N = 210)
Abrocitinib
100 mg (N = 369)
200 mg (N = 363)
Percentage work time misseda
n = 42
− 1.7 (− 7.0 to 3.5)
n = 93
– 0.1 (− 3.3 to 3.0)
n = 79
− 2.7 (− 6.2 to 0.8)
Percentage impairment while workinga
n = 42
− 4.7 (− 12.4 to 2.9)
n = 92
− 18.5 (−23.2 to − 13.9)*
n = 76
− 22.7 (−27.8 to − 17.5)**
Percentage overall work impairmenta
n = 42
− 5.0 (− 12.8 to 2.8)
n = 92
−‍18.7 (−23.4 to − 14.0)*
n = 76
− 22.9 (−28.2 to − 17.6)**
Percentage activity impairment
n = 70
− 3.3 (− 9.8 to 3.3)
n = 139
− 19.4 (− 23.5 to − 15.2)**
n = 138
− 21.5 (− 25.6 to − 17.4)***
WPAI-AD included in JADE MONO-2 only
CI confidence interval, LSM least-squares mean, WPAI-AD Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire–Atopic Dermatitis, Version 2.0, *p < 0.05; **p < 0.001; ***p < 0.0001 vs placebo
aOnly patients who were employed completed work-related items

4 Discussion

This pooled analysis from three placebo-controlled studies showed that adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD treated once daily with oral abrocitinib 200 mg or 100 mg monotherapy experienced clinically meaningful improvements in all domains of patient-reported disease-specific symptoms and HRQoL that were observed starting at the first post-baseline assessment (week 2) and sustained over a period of 12 weeks. These improvements were observed across a global measure (PtGA), single-symptom measures (Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS, NTIS), and multi-item measures that included assessments of sleep disturbance, itch, skin pain, erythema, and other skin signs of AD (POEM, PSAAD). These improvements are supported by reduced depression, anxiety, and fatigue (HADS, FACIT-F, Peds-FACIT-F) as well as improved disease-specific (DLQI, CDLQI) and general HRQoL (EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-Y, SF-36v2) and improved work and general productivity among employed patients (WPAI-AD). The data generally show that abrocitinib treatment resulted in dose-dependent improvements, showing that a higher dose of abrocitinib is associated with greater improvements in PROs and HRQoL assessments, and greater proportions of patients benefit from the treatment in these outcomes. These results are consistent with previously reported trends in clinical efficacy outcomes in the individual studies included in this analysis and a pooled analysis of abrocitinib monotherapy studies focusing on itch relief [1921, 48]. Finally, the changes from baseline reported in this study (POEM, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-36v2) were above meaningful changes previously reported in the literature [42, 49, 50].
Starting at the first post-baseline assessment (week 2) and increasing to week 12, substantially greater proportions of patients treated with abrocitinib reported clear or almost clear skin via PtGA compared with placebo. Although the baseline disease severity in the total population differed by clinician (IGA) and patient (PtGA) assessment, the trend in improvement in disease severity was consistent with both assessments by week 12. Likewise, substantially greater proportions of abrocitinib-treated patients than placebo-treated patients reported “no impact” on QoL (DLQI/CDLQI band descriptors) at weeks 4 and 12, suggesting both abrocitinib doses improved disease-specific QoL compared with placebo. These improvements in having little-to-no disease activity and impact are especially notable given the severity of disease and impairment observed at baseline in this population.
A recent systematic review and network meta-analysis (which included only the phase IIb study data for abrocitinib) found that improvements in Pruritus-NRS/PP-NRS, POEM, and DLQI scores for abrocitinib 200 mg were comparable to those observed for dupilumab [51]. The majority of improvement in itch with abrocitinib (proportion of patients achieving PP-NRS4 and PP-NRS score changes from baseline) was observed within the first 2 weeks of treatment [48]. In the context of other systemic treatments with more gradual improvements in itch (i.e., the majority of itch relief with dupilumab is observed over the first 4 weeks of treatment [52]), the short time to maximal itch relief with abrocitinib treatment is particularly beneficial to patients, especially during acute flares. The more rapid onset of itch relief with abrocitinib vs dupilumab has also been confirmed in JADE COMPARE, which compared short-term efficacy and safety data between abrocitinib and dupilumab treatments in patients with moderate-to-severe AD [53]. Other JAK inhibitors, such as baricitinib, have also shown a rapid and sustained itch relief [54]; however, because different itch metrics were used, comparing abrocitinib to baricitinib in the onset of itch relief is challenging. Immediate and sustained relief from itch has been identified as the most relevant benefit expected from new treatments based on a survey of individuals with eczema [25]. This rapid onset of itch relief is also reflected in early separation of abrocitinib from placebo in other measures of AD symptoms, psychological burden, and QoL.
As with any post hoc analysis, the strength of these results may be limited. It is possible that improvements in itch could have led to improvements in sleep, hence decreasing fatigue and increasing productivity. Future studies will need to address the interdependency of itch and sleep improvement with QoL outcomes. The PRO instruments were administered at specific time points, influencing the time to detection of an improvement. In addition, differences in PRO instruments across studies resulted in smaller data sets for some of the endpoints. The exclusion of patients with suicidal ideation/behaviors or other psychiatric disorders from the phase III studies may limit the generalizability of these results to patients with depressive symptoms, which affect up to 20% of patients with AD (compared with ~15% of patients without AD) [55]. Last, these studies were relatively short (12 weeks); the long-term efficacy and safety of abrocitinib are being assessed in ongoing trials.

5 Conclusions

The results of these analyses suggest that abrocitinib is effective for adult and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD [19, 21]. These results of PRO assessments provide important information on the efficacy of abrocitinib from the patient perspective and complement clinician-reported efficacy and safety outcomes.

Acknowledgements

This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Editorial/medical writing support under the guidance of the authors was provided by Alison Comer, PhD, Juan Sanchez-Cortes, PhD, and Jennifer C. Jaworski, MS, at ApotheCom, San Francisco, CA, USA, and was sponsored by Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA, in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines (Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:461–4).

Declarations

Funding

This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc.

Conflict of Interest

Jonathan I. Silverberg has served as an investigator for Celgene, Eli Lilly, F. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Menlo Therapeutics, Realm Therapeutics, Regeneron, and Sanofi; as a consultant for Pfizer Inc., AbbVie, Anacor, AnaptysBio, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Dermira, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Glenmark, Incyte, Kiniksa, LEO Pharma, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Realm Therapeutics, Regeneron, and Sanofi; and as a speaker for Regeneron and Sanofi. Jacob P. Thyssen is an advisor/investigator or speaker for Pfizer, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, LEO Pharma, Regeneron, and Sanofi-Genzyme. Eric L. Simpson is a consultant for Pfizer, AbbVie, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GlaxoSmithKline, Menlo Therapeutics, LEO Pharma, and Regeneron and a principal investigator for AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Regeneron, Tioga Pharmaceuticals, and Vanda Pharmaceuticals. Gil Yosipovitch has been a consultant and advisor for Bellus, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Galderma, LEO Pharma, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Sanofi-Regeneron, and Trevi Therapeutics, and a principal investigator for Pfizer, Galderma, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, LEO Pharma, Sanofi-Regeneron, Novartis, and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries. Sonja Ständer is a consultant and/member of advisory boards for Pfizer Inc., Almirall, Bayer, Beiersdorf, Bellus Health, Bionorica, Cara Therapeutics, Celgene, Clexio, DS Biopharma, Galderma, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Nuformix, Perrigo, Sanofi, Sienna Biopharmaceutical, Trevi Therapeutics, and Vifor Pharma; has received research grants from the German Research Foundation (DFG), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), Almirall, Beiersdorf, Galderma, LEO Pharma, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Sanofi, and Trevi Therapeutics; and has been an investigator for Dermasence, Galderma, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Menlo Therapeutics, Novartis, Sanofi, Trevi Therapeutics, and Vanda Pharmaceuticals. Hernan Valdez, Ricardo Rojo, Pinaki Biswas, Daniela E. Myers, Claire Feeney, and Marco DiBonaventura are employees and shareholders of Pfizer Inc.

Ethics Approval

The institutional review board at each study site approved the study protocol and written informed consent was provided by parents/legal guardians. The study was conducted in accordance with the protocol, local legal and regulatory requirements, and the general principles set forth in the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, International Conference on Harmonisation Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, and the Declaration of Helsinki.
Written informed consent was provided by the participants of all studies.

Availability of Data and Material

Upon request, and subject to certain criteria, conditions, and exceptions (see https://​www.​pfizer.​com/​science/​clinical-trials/​trial-data-and-results for more information), Pfizer will provide access to individual de-identified participant data from Pfizer-sponsored global interventional clinical studies conducted for medicines, vaccines, and medical devices (1) for indications that have been approved in the USA and/or the European Union or (2) in programs that have been terminated (i.e., development for all indications has been discontinued). Pfizer will also consider requests for the protocol, data dictionary, and statistical analysis plan. Data may be requested from Pfizer trials 24 months after study completion. The de-identified participant data will be made available to researchers whose proposals meet the research criteria and other conditions, and for which an exception does not apply, via a secure portal. To gain access, data requestors must enter into a data access agreement with Pfizer.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed to the design of the study; participated in the acquisition, analysis, and/or interpretation of data; reviewed and critically revised the report for important intellectual content; and gave final approval of the version that was submitted.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by-nc/​4.​0/​.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

e.Med Dermatologie

Kombi-Abonnement

Mit e.Med Dermatologie erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen des Fachgebietes Dermatologie, den Premium-Inhalten der dermatologischen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten dermatologischen Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.

Anhänge

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Hanifin JM. Adult eczema prevalence and associations with asthma and other health and demographic factors: a US population-based study. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;132(5):1132–8.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Hanifin JM. Adult eczema prevalence and associations with asthma and other health and demographic factors: a US population-based study. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;132(5):1132–8.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Williams H, Robertson C, Stewart A, et al. Worldwide variations in the prevalence of symptoms of atopic eczema in the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1999;103(1 Pt 1):125–38.PubMedCrossRef Williams H, Robertson C, Stewart A, et al. Worldwide variations in the prevalence of symptoms of atopic eczema in the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1999;103(1 Pt 1):125–38.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Chiesa Fuxench ZC, Block JK, Boguniewicz M, et al. Atopic dermatitis in America study: a cross-sectional study examining the prevalence and disease burden of atopic dermatitis in the US adult population. J Invest Dermatol. 2019;139(3):583–90.PubMedCrossRef Chiesa Fuxench ZC, Block JK, Boguniewicz M, et al. Atopic dermatitis in America study: a cross-sectional study examining the prevalence and disease burden of atopic dermatitis in the US adult population. J Invest Dermatol. 2019;139(3):583–90.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Gelfand JM, Margolis DJ, et al. Patient burden and quality of life in atopic dermatitis in US adults: a population-based cross-sectional study. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(3):340–7.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Gelfand JM, Margolis DJ, et al. Patient burden and quality of life in atopic dermatitis in US adults: a population-based cross-sectional study. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(3):340–7.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Thyssen JP, Andersen Y, Halling AS, et al. Strengths and limitations of the United Kingdom Working Party criteria for atopic dermatitis in adults. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(8):1764–72.PubMedCrossRef Thyssen JP, Andersen Y, Halling AS, et al. Strengths and limitations of the United Kingdom Working Party criteria for atopic dermatitis in adults. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(8):1764–72.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Drucker AM, Wang AR, Li WQ, et al. The burden of atopic dermatitis: summary of a report for the National Eczema Association. J Invest Dermatol. 2017;137(1):26–30.PubMedCrossRef Drucker AM, Wang AR, Li WQ, et al. The burden of atopic dermatitis: summary of a report for the National Eczema Association. J Invest Dermatol. 2017;137(1):26–30.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI. Public health burden and epidemiology of atopic dermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2017;35(3):283–9.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI. Public health burden and epidemiology of atopic dermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2017;35(3):283–9.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Gelfand JM, Margolis DJ, et al. Health utility scores of atopic dermatitis in US adults. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019;7(4):1246-52.e1.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Gelfand JM, Margolis DJ, et al. Health utility scores of atopic dermatitis in US adults. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2019;7(4):1246-52.e1.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Augustin M, Langenbruch A, Blome C, et al. Characterizing treatment-related patient needs in atopic eczema: insights for personalized goal orientation. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(1):142–52.PubMedCrossRef Augustin M, Langenbruch A, Blome C, et al. Characterizing treatment-related patient needs in atopic eczema: insights for personalized goal orientation. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(1):142–52.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Bender BG, Leung SB, Leung DY. Actigraphy assessment of sleep disturbance in patients with atopic dermatitis: an objective life quality measure. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003;111(3):598–602.PubMedCrossRef Bender BG, Leung SB, Leung DY. Actigraphy assessment of sleep disturbance in patients with atopic dermatitis: an objective life quality measure. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003;111(3):598–602.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Chrostowska-Plak D, Reich A, Szepietowski JC. Relationship between itch and psychological status of patients with atopic dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013;27(2):e239–42.PubMedCrossRef Chrostowska-Plak D, Reich A, Szepietowski JC. Relationship between itch and psychological status of patients with atopic dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013;27(2):e239–42.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Yaghmaie P, Koudelka CW, Simpson EL. Mental health comorbidity in patients with atopic dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;131(2):428–33.PubMedCrossRef Yaghmaie P, Koudelka CW, Simpson EL. Mental health comorbidity in patients with atopic dermatitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;131(2):428–33.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Yu SH, Silverberg JI. Association between atopic dermatitis and depression in US adults. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(12):3183–6.PubMedCrossRef Yu SH, Silverberg JI. Association between atopic dermatitis and depression in US adults. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(12):3183–6.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Garg NK, Paller AS, et al. Sleep disturbances in adults with eczema are associated with impaired overall health: a US population-based study. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(1):56–66.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Garg NK, Paller AS, et al. Sleep disturbances in adults with eczema are associated with impaired overall health: a US population-based study. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135(1):56–66.PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Ronnstad ATM, Halling-Overgaard AS, Hamann CR, et al. Association of atopic dermatitis with depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79(3):448-56.e30.PubMedCrossRef Ronnstad ATM, Halling-Overgaard AS, Hamann CR, et al. Association of atopic dermatitis with depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2018;79(3):448-56.e30.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Eckert L, Gupta S, Amand C, et al. Impact of atopic dermatitis on health-related quality of life and productivity in adults in the United States: an analysis using the National Health and Wellness Survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77(2):274-9.e3.PubMedCrossRef Eckert L, Gupta S, Amand C, et al. Impact of atopic dermatitis on health-related quality of life and productivity in adults in the United States: an analysis using the National Health and Wellness Survey. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77(2):274-9.e3.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Babon JJ, Lucet IS, Murphy JM, et al. The molecular regulation of Janus kinase (JAK) activation. Biochem J. 2014;462(1):1–13.PubMedCrossRef Babon JJ, Lucet IS, Murphy JM, et al. The molecular regulation of Janus kinase (JAK) activation. Biochem J. 2014;462(1):1–13.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Gooderham MJ, Forman SB, Bissonnette R, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor abrocitinib for patients with atopic dermatitis: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(12):1371–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Gooderham MJ, Forman SB, Bissonnette R, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor abrocitinib for patients with atopic dermatitis: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(12):1371–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Simpson EL, Sinclair R, Forman S, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (JADE MONO-1): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10246):255–66.PubMedCrossRef Simpson EL, Sinclair R, Forman S, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (JADE MONO-1): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10246):255–66.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Thyssen JP, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(8):1–11.PubMedCentralCrossRef Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Thyssen JP, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(8):1–11.PubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Copley-Merriman C, Zelt S, Clark M, et al. Impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in dermatology drug development. Patient. 2017;10(2):203–13.PubMedCrossRef Copley-Merriman C, Zelt S, Clark M, et al. Impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in dermatology drug development. Patient. 2017;10(2):203–13.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. 2009. https://www.fda.gov/media/77832/download. Accessed 16 Dec 2020. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. 2009. https://​www.​fda.​gov/​media/​77832/​download. Accessed 16 Dec 2020.
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Chalmers JR, Schmitt J, Apfelbacher C, et al. Report from the third international consensus meeting to harmonise core outcome measures for atopic eczema/dermatitis clinical trials (HOME). Br J Dermatol. 2014;171(6):1318–25.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Chalmers JR, Schmitt J, Apfelbacher C, et al. Report from the third international consensus meeting to harmonise core outcome measures for atopic eczema/dermatitis clinical trials (HOME). Br J Dermatol. 2014;171(6):1318–25.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al. The Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. EASI Evaluator Group. Exp Dermatol. 2001;10(1):11–8.PubMedCrossRef Hanifin JM, Thurston M, Omoto M, et al. The Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis. EASI Evaluator Group. Exp Dermatol. 2001;10(1):11–8.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Yosipovitch G, Reaney M, Mastey V, et al. Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale: psychometric validation and responder definition for assessing itch in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol. 2019;181(4):761–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Yosipovitch G, Reaney M, Mastey V, et al. Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale: psychometric validation and responder definition for assessing itch in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis. Br J Dermatol. 2019;181(4):761–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Posner K, Oquendo MA, Gould M, et al. Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA): classification of suicidal events in the FDA’s pediatric suicidal risk analysis of antidepressants. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(7):1035–43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Posner K, Oquendo MA, Gould M, et al. Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA): classification of suicidal events in the FDA’s pediatric suicidal risk analysis of antidepressants. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(7):1035–43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Osman A, Bagge CL, Gutierrez PM, et al. The Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R): validation with clinical and nonclinical samples. Assessment. 2001;8(4):443–54.CrossRefPubMed Osman A, Bagge CL, Gutierrez PM, et al. The Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R): validation with clinical and nonclinical samples. Assessment. 2001;8(4):443–54.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, et al. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2009;114(1–3):163–73.PubMedCrossRef Kroenke K, Strine TW, Spitzer RL, et al. The PHQ-8 as a measure of current depression in the general population. J Affect Disord. 2009;114(1–3):163–73.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Phan NQ, Blome C, Fritz F, et al. Assessment of pruritus intensity: prosepctive study on validty and reliability of the visual analogue scale, numerical rating scale and verbal rating scale in 471 patients with chronic pruritus. Acta Derm Venereol. 2021;92(5):502–7.CrossRef Phan NQ, Blome C, Fritz F, et al. Assessment of pruritus intensity: prosepctive study on validty and reliability of the visual analogue scale, numerical rating scale and verbal rating scale in 471 patients with chronic pruritus. Acta Derm Venereol. 2021;92(5):502–7.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Chiesa Fuxench ZC, Gelfand JM, et al. Content and construct validity, predictors, and distribution of self-reported atopic dermatitis severity in US adults. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(6):729-34.e4.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Chiesa Fuxench ZC, Gelfand JM, et al. Content and construct validity, predictors, and distribution of self-reported atopic dermatitis severity in US adults. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(6):729-34.e4.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Vakharia PP, Chopra R, Sacotte R, et al. Validation of patient-reported global severity of atopic dermatitis in adults. Allergy. 2018;73(2):451–8.PubMedCrossRef Vakharia PP, Chopra R, Sacotte R, et al. Validation of patient-reported global severity of atopic dermatitis in adults. Allergy. 2018;73(2):451–8.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Lebwohl MG, Simpson EL, Bushmakin AG, et al. Validation of the pruritus and symptoms assessment for atopic dermatitis in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis [ISAD abstract P071]. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179:e44. Lebwohl MG, Simpson EL, Bushmakin AG, et al. Validation of the pruritus and symptoms assessment for atopic dermatitis in adults with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis [ISAD abstract P071]. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179:e44.
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Charman CR, Venn AJ, Williams HC. The patient-oriented eczema measure: development and initial validation of a new tool for measuring atopic eczema severity from the patients’ perspective. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(12):1513–9.PubMedCrossRef Charman CR, Venn AJ, Williams HC. The patient-oriented eczema measure: development and initial validation of a new tool for measuring atopic eczema severity from the patients’ perspective. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(12):1513–9.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Ersser SJ, Cowdell F, Latter S, et al. Psychological and educational interventions for atopic eczema in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 2014(1):CD004054. Ersser SJ, Cowdell F, Latter S, et al. Psychological and educational interventions for atopic eczema in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 2014(1):CD004054.
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Schmitt J, Langan S, Williams HC. What are the best outcome measurements for atopic eczema? A systematic review. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;120(6):1389–98.PubMedCrossRef Schmitt J, Langan S, Williams HC. What are the best outcome measurements for atopic eczema? A systematic review. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2007;120(6):1389–98.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Finlay AY, Khan GK. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI): a simple practical measure for routine clinical use. Clin Exp Dermatol. 1994;19(3):210–6.PubMedCrossRef Finlay AY, Khan GK. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI): a simple practical measure for routine clinical use. Clin Exp Dermatol. 1994;19(3):210–6.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Lewis-Jones MS, Finlay AY. The Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI): initial validation and practical use. Br J Dermatol. 1995;132(6):942–9.PubMedCrossRef Lewis-Jones MS, Finlay AY. The Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI): initial validation and practical use. Br J Dermatol. 1995;132(6):942–9.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361–70.PubMedCrossRef Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361–70.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat White D, Leach C, Sims R, et al. Validation of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for use with adolescents. Br J Psychiatry. 1999;175:452–4.PubMedCrossRef White D, Leach C, Sims R, et al. Validation of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale for use with adolescents. Br J Psychiatry. 1999;175:452–4.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Ware JE. User’s manual for the SF-36v2 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2008. Ware JE. User’s manual for the SF-36v2 health survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2008.
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Ravens-Sieberer U, Wille N, Badia X, et al. Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y: results from a multinational study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(6):887–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Ravens-Sieberer U, Wille N, Badia X, et al. Feasibility, reliability, and validity of the EQ-5D-Y: results from a multinational study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(6):887–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Cella D, Lai JS, Chang CH, et al. Fatigue in cancer patients compared with fatigue in the general United States population. Cancer. 2002;94(2):528–38.PubMedCrossRef Cella D, Lai JS, Chang CH, et al. Fatigue in cancer patients compared with fatigue in the general United States population. Cancer. 2002;94(2):528–38.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Lai JS, Cella D, Kupst MJ, et al. Measuring fatigue for children with cancer: development and validation of the pediatric Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (pedsFACIT-F). J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2007;29(7):471–9.PubMedCrossRef Lai JS, Cella D, Kupst MJ, et al. Measuring fatigue for children with cancer: development and validation of the pediatric Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (pedsFACIT-F). J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2007;29(7):471–9.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993;4(5):353–65.PubMedCrossRef Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993;4(5):353–65.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim BS, Silverberg JI, Ständer S, et al. Rapid improvement of itch associated with atopic dermatitis with abrocitinib is partially independent of overall disease improvement: results from pooled phase 2b and 3 monotherapy studies. Dermatitis. 2021 (In press). Kim BS, Silverberg JI, Ständer S, et al. Rapid improvement of itch associated with atopic dermatitis with abrocitinib is partially independent of overall disease improvement: results from pooled phase 2b and 3 monotherapy studies. Dermatitis. 2021 (In press).
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Luo N, Johnson J, Coons SJ. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med Care. 2010;48(4):365–71.PubMedCrossRef Luo N, Johnson J, Coons SJ. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Med Care. 2010;48(4):365–71.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Schram ME, Spuls PI, Leeflang MM, et al. EASI, (objective) SCORAD and POEM for atopic eczema: responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference. Allergy. 2012;67(1):99–106.PubMedCrossRef Schram ME, Spuls PI, Leeflang MM, et al. EASI, (objective) SCORAD and POEM for atopic eczema: responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference. Allergy. 2012;67(1):99–106.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Zurück zum Zitat Drucker AM, Ellis AG, Bohdanowicz M, et al. Systemic immunomodulatory treatments for patients with atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(6):659–67.PubMedCrossRef Drucker AM, Ellis AG, Bohdanowicz M, et al. Systemic immunomodulatory treatments for patients with atopic dermatitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(6):659–67.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Zurück zum Zitat Silverberg JI, Yosipovitch G, Simpson EL, et al. Dupilumab treatment results in early and sustained improvements in itch in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: analysis of the randomized phase 3 studies SOLO 1 & SOLO 2, AD ADOL, and CHRONOS. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(6):1328–36.PubMedCrossRef Silverberg JI, Yosipovitch G, Simpson EL, et al. Dupilumab treatment results in early and sustained improvements in itch in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: analysis of the randomized phase 3 studies SOLO 1 & SOLO 2, AD ADOL, and CHRONOS. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(6):1328–36.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Bieber T, Simpson EL, Silverberg JL, et al. Abrocitinib versus placebo and dupilumab for atopic dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(12):1101-1112.PubMedCrossRef Bieber T, Simpson EL, Silverberg JL, et al. Abrocitinib versus placebo and dupilumab for atopic dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(12):1101-1112.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Zurück zum Zitat Reich K, DeLozier AM, Nunes FP, et al. Baricitinib improves symptoms in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids: patient-reported outcomes from two randomized monotherapy phase III trials. J Dermatolog Treat. 2020;1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2020.1839008 Reich K, DeLozier AM, Nunes FP, et al. Baricitinib improves symptoms in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids: patient-reported outcomes from two randomized monotherapy phase III trials. J Dermatolog Treat. 2020;1–10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09546634.​2020.​1839008
55.
Zurück zum Zitat Patel KR, Immaneni S, Singam V, et al. Association between atopic dermatitis, depression, and suicidal ideation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80(2):402–10.PubMedCrossRef Patel KR, Immaneni S, Singam V, et al. Association between atopic dermatitis, depression, and suicidal ideation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019;80(2):402–10.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Impact of Oral Abrocitinib Monotherapy on Patient-Reported Symptoms and Quality of Life in Adolescents and Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Pooled Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes
verfasst von
Jonathan I. Silverberg
Jacob P. Thyssen
Eric L. Simpson
Gil Yosipovitch
Sonja Ständer
Hernan Valdez
Ricardo Rojo
Pinaki Biswas
Daniela E. Myers
Claire Feeney
Marco DiBonaventura
Publikationsdatum
05.05.2021
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
American Journal of Clinical Dermatology / Ausgabe 4/2021
Print ISSN: 1175-0561
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-1888
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40257-021-00604-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2021

American Journal of Clinical Dermatology 4/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Dermatologie

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Dermatologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.