44
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    1
    shares
      Are you tired of sifting through news that doesn't interest you?
      Personalize your Karger newsletter today and get only the news that matters to you!

      Sign up

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Efficacy and Safety of Multiple Dupilumab Dose Regimens in Patients with Moderate-To-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Dupilumab ameliorates the signs and symptoms of atopic dermatitis (AD) and improves the patient’s quality of life. Multiple-dose regimens of dupilumab have been applied by clinicians, but the efficacy of some regimens remains unclear. Objectives: The aim of the study was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of multiple dupilumab dose regimens in patients with moderate-to-severe AD in terms of comprehensive outcomes. Methods: We searched electronic databases and subjected the selected studies to risk-of-bias assessment and network meta-analysis (NMA). Efficacy and safety outcomes were compared using a random-effects NMA to estimate pooled relative risk ratio (RR) of direct and indirect comparisons among multiple dupilumab dose regimens. The Eczema Area Severity Index, Investigator’s Global Assessment, and pruritus numerical rating scale were analyzed to assess the efficacy, while adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events to represent the safety. Results: Eight randomized controlled trials involving 3,679 patients were identified. Most patients received therapy for 16 weeks. Multiple dupilumab dose regimens, including 300 mg weekly (QW), 300 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W), 200 mg Q2W, 300 mg monthly (QM), 300 mg every 2 months (Q2M), and 100 mg QM were analyzed. All regimens, except 100 mg QM, had significantly better efficacy than placebo. 300 mg QW and 300 mg Q2W appeared to have similar efficacy. Notably, both 300 mg QW and 300 mg Q2W had no significantly better efficacy than 300 mg QM. As for 300 mg Q2M, significantly reduced efficacy was noted in only one efficacy outcome when compared to 300 mg QW and 300 mg Q2W. In terms of safety outcomes, AEs occurring with any of the regimens were comparable with the placebo. No significant inconsistency was noted within the network in all efficacy outcomes. Conclusions: Our NMA indicated that the administration of the following dupilumab regimens was effective for patients with moderate-to-severe AD: 300 mg QW, 300 mg Q2W, 200 mg Q2W, 300 mg QM, and 300 mg Q2M. Our data can improve the understanding of the relative efficacy and safety of multiple dupilumab dose regimens, which will help in shared decision-making between clinicians and patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.

              The PRISMA statement is a reporting guideline designed to improve the completeness of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors have used this guideline worldwide to prepare their reviews for publication. In the past, these reports typically compared 2 treatment alternatives. With the evolution of systematic reviews that compare multiple treatments, some of them only indirectly, authors face novel challenges for conducting and reporting their reviews. This extension of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) statement was developed specifically to improve the reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses. A group of experts participated in a systematic review, Delphi survey, and face-to-face discussion and consensus meeting to establish new checklist items for this extension statement. Current PRISMA items were also clarified. A modified, 32-item PRISMA extension checklist was developed to address what the group considered to be immediately relevant to the reporting of network meta-analyses. This document presents the extension and provides examples of good reporting, as well as elaborations regarding the rationale for new checklist items and the modification of previously existing items from the PRISMA statement. It also highlights educational information related to key considerations in the practice of network meta-analysis. The target audience includes authors and readers of network meta-analyses, as well as journal editors and peer reviewers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                DRM
                Dermatology
                10.1159/issn.1018-8665
                Dermatology
                S. Karger AG
                1018-8665
                1421-9832
                2022
                November 2022
                13 June 2022
                : 238
                : 6
                : 1060-1072
                Affiliations
                [_a] aDepartment of Medical Education, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                [_b] bDepartment of Dermatology, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                [_c] cSchool of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                [_d] dCenter for Evidence-Based Health Care, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                [_e] eDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Shuang Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                [_f] fDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
                Author notes
                *Hung-Chou Chen, 10462@s.tmu.edu.tw
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6710-4435
                Article
                524608 Dermatology 2022;238:1060–1072
                10.1159/000524608
                35696987
                efa555f7-cd6a-4f99-9c31-74271d105ec5
                © 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

                History
                : 28 November 2021
                : 10 April 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 6, Tables: 4, Pages: 13
                Funding
                There are no funding sources to declare.
                Categories
                Atopic Dermatitis – Research Article

                Oncology & Radiotherapy,Pathology,Surgery,Dermatology,Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine
                Atopic dermatitis,Dose,Dupilumab,Efficacy

                Comments

                Comment on this article