Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39476813›Full record

Trial reportDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Efficacy and Safety of Upadacitinib versus Dupilumab Treatment for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Four Body Regions: Analysis from the Heads Up Study.

Jacob P Thyssen, David Rosmarin, Antonio Costanzo, Richard Warren, Chia-Yu Chu, Raj Chovatiya, Barry Ladizinski, Xiaofei Hu, Yingyi Liu, Brian Calimlim and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Abrocitinib for Head and Neck Dermatitis: Case Series and Literature Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Jacob P ThyssenDepartment of Dermatology, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
David RosmarinDepartment of Dermatology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Antonio CostanzoDermatology Unit, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy.
Richard WarrenThe Dermatology Centre, Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Chia-Yu ChuDepartment of Dermatology, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan.
Raj ChovatiyaDepartment of Dermatology, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Barry LadizinskiAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Xiaofei HuAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Yingyi LiuAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Brian CalimlimAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Chudi NduakaAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Namita VignaAbbVie, Inc, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
April ArmstrongDivision of Dermatology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUpadacitinib has demonstrated high and rapid rates of efficacy in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) as assessed by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). This post hoc analysis assessed the EASI response in four anatomical regions for patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab over 24 weeks.

methodsData from patients randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 30 mg extended-release tablet orally once daily or dupilumab 300 mg by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks after a loading dose of 600 mg in the Heads Up study were analyzed for achievement of ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction of EASI in four body regions: (1) head and neck, (2) trunk (including genitals), (3) upper limbs, and (4) lower limbs (including buttocks) at each study visit through week 24. Patient response data from the Head and Neck Patient Global Impression of Severity (HN-PGIS) were also analyzed at each study visit for comparison of upadacitinib to dupilumab.

resultsGreater proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib versus dupilumab achieved skin clearance rates of ≥75% (EASI 75) at week 1 and higher clearance rates of ≥90% (EASI 90) or 100% (EASI 100) by week 4 or earlier in all four body regions. This difference was maintained at each visit through week 24 for both EASI 90 and EASI 100. Patient responses on the HN-PGIS indicated that a greater proportion of patients (nominal p value <0.05) treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab reported that AD symptoms in the head and neck region were absent or minimal as early as week 1.

conclusionCompared to dupilumab, upadacitinib treatment provided higher rates of rapid, sustained efficacy for the head and neck, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD as measured by the EASI and supported by patient responses.

introductionUpadacitinib has demonstrated high and rapid rates of efficacy in adolescent and adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) as assessed by the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). This post hoc analysis assessed the EASI response in four anatomical regions for patients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab over 24 weeks.

methodsData from patients randomized 1:1 to receive upadacitinib 30 mg extended-release tablet orally once daily or dupilumab 300 mg by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks after a loading dose of 600 mg in the Heads Up study were analyzed for achievement of ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% reduction of EASI in four body regions: (1) head and neck, (2) trunk (including genitals), (3) upper limbs, and (4) lower limbs (including buttocks) at each study visit through week 24. Patient response data from the Head and Neck Patient Global Impression of Severity (HN-PGIS) were also analyzed at each study visit for comparison of upadacitinib to dupilumab.

resultsGreater proportions of patients treated with upadacitinib versus dupilumab achieved skin clearance rates of ≥75% (EASI 75) at week 1 and higher clearance rates of ≥90% (EASI 90) or 100% (EASI 100) by week 4 or earlier in all four body regions. This difference was maintained at each visit through week 24 for both EASI 90 and EASI 100. Patient responses on the HN-PGIS indicated that a greater proportion of patients (nominal p value <0.05) treated with upadacitinib compared to dupilumab reported that AD symptoms in the head and neck region were absent or minimal as early as week 1.

conclusionCompared to dupilumab, upadacitinib treatment provided higher rates of rapid, sustained efficacy for the head and neck, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD as measured by the EASI and supported by patient responses.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedDermatitis, AtopicDermatologic AgentsHeterocyclic Compounds, 3-RingAdolescentAdultFemaleHeadHumansMaleMiddle AgedSeverity of Illness IndexTorsoTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedDermatologic AgentsdupilumabHeterocyclic Compounds, 3-RingupadacitinibAtopic dermatitisBody regionDupilumabEASIEczemaUpadacitinib

Identifiers

PMID39476813
PMCPMC11793090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.