Suppr超能文献

生物制剂治疗特应性皮炎有效吗?系统评价和荟萃分析。

Are Biologics Efficacious in Atopic Dermatitis? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Dermatology, Beilinson Hospital, Rabin Medical Center, 4941492, Petah Tikva, Israel.

Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, 6997801, Tel Aviv, Israel.

出版信息

Am J Clin Dermatol. 2018 Apr;19(2):145-165. doi: 10.1007/s40257-017-0324-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Current systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD) offer limited efficacy and are often restricted by safety concerns. Biologics may address the unmet need for improved AD therapeutics.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biologic agents in AD.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating AD patients treated with biologics was performed. The primary outcome was the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-75 response, while secondary outcomes were SCOring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD)-75, EASI-50, SCORAD-50, Investigator Global Assessment 0/1 responses, change in responses from baseline, and adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 observational studies evaluating nine biologics. High-quality evidence was available for dupilumab, nemolizumab and ustekinumab. Pooling five studies, at weeks 12-16 dupilumab 300 mg every week to every 2 weeks achieved EASI-75 responses of 55%, superior to placebo [relative risk (RR) 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-3.6]. Nemolizumab had similar EASI-75 responses as placebo, but significantly improved pruritus. In online reports, lebrikizumab demonstrated superior EASI-50 responses versus placebo (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.04-1.7), while tralokinumab had superior SCORAD-50 responses versus placebo, with borderline significance (RR 1.7, 95% CI 0.97-3.1). In two RCTs each, omalizumab and ustekinumab were comparable with placebo, while antithymic stromal lymphopoietin receptor, infliximab, and rituximab lacked adequate evidence of efficacy. All medications had a comparable safety profile to placebo.

LIMITATIONS

Lack of RCTs and the use of variable outcome measures limited conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Dupilumab is currently the only biologic with robust evidence of efficacy in AD. Nemolizumab, lebrikizumab, and tralokinumab show promise but further data are needed. Longer follow-up and larger studies will establish their safety profile.

摘要

背景

目前用于特应性皮炎(AD)的全身性治疗方法疗效有限,且常受到安全性问题的限制。生物制剂可能满足改善 AD 治疗方法的未满足需求。

目的

本研究旨在评估生物制剂在 AD 中的疗效和安全性。

方法

对评估生物制剂治疗 AD 患者的研究进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。主要结局是湿疹面积和严重程度指数(EASI)-75 缓解,次要结局是 SCORing Atopic Dermatitis(SCORAD)-75、EASI-50、SCORAD-50、研究者整体评估 0/1 缓解、从基线变化的反应以及不良反应。

结果

我们纳入了 13 项随机对照试验(RCT)和 10 项观察性研究,评估了 9 种生物制剂。高质量证据可用于评估度普利尤单抗、nemolizumab 和 ustekinumab。汇总 5 项研究,在第 12-16 周时,度普利尤单抗每周 300mg 或每 2 周 300mg 治疗可达到 55%的 EASI-75 缓解率,优于安慰剂[相对风险(RR)3.3,95%置信区间(CI)2.9-3.6]。Nemolizumab 的 EASI-75 缓解率与安慰剂相似,但显著改善了瘙痒。在在线报告中,lebrikizumab 与安慰剂相比,EASI-50 缓解率更高(RR 1.3,95%CI 1.04-1.7),而 tralokinumab 与安慰剂相比,SCORAD-50 缓解率更高,具有边缘显著性(RR 1.7,95%CI 0.97-3.1)。在每项各有 2 项 RCT 中,omalizumab 和 ustekinumab 与安慰剂相当,而抗胸腺基质淋巴细胞生成素受体、英夫利昔单抗和利妥昔单抗缺乏足够的疗效证据。所有药物的安全性与安慰剂相当。

局限性

缺乏 RCT 和使用可变的结局测量限制了结论。

结论

度普利尤单抗是目前唯一具有强有力的 AD 疗效证据的生物制剂。Nemolizumab、lebrikizumab 和 tralokinumab 有一定前景,但需要更多的数据。更长时间的随访和更大规模的研究将确定其安全性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验