4.6 Article

Baricitinib in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: A phase 2 parallel, double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled multiple-dose study

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2018.01.018

关键词

atopic dermatitis; baricitinib; EASI; JAK-STAT signaling; phase 2; pruritus; SCORAD; topical corticosteroids

资金

  1. Eli Lilly and Company

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The efficacy and safety of baricitinib were evaluated in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Methods: In this phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 124 patients with moderate-to-severe AD applied topical corticosteroids (TCSs) for 4 weeks before randomization to once-daily placebo, 2 mg of baricitinib, or 4 mg of baricitinib for 16 weeks. Use of TCSs was permitted during the study. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving at least a 50% reduction in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI-50) compared with placebo. Results: Significantly more patients who received baricitinib, 4 mg, achieved EASI-50 than did patients receiving placebo (61% vs 37% [P = .027]) at 16 weeks. The difference between the proportion of patients receiving baricitinib, 2 or 4 mg, who achieved EASI-50 and the proportion of patients receiving placebo and achieving EASI-50 was significant as early as week 4. Baricitinib also improved pruritus and sleep loss. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 24 of the patients receiving placebo (49%), 17 of those receiving 2 mg of baricitinib (46%), and 27 of those receiving 4 mg of baricitinib (71%). Limitations: A TCS standardization period before randomization reduced disease severity, limiting the ability to compare results with those of baricitinib monotherapy. Longer studies are required to confirm baricitinib's efficacy and safety in patients with AD. Conclusions: Baricitinib used with TCSs reduced inflammation and pruritus in patients with moderate-to-severe AD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据