ReviewDermatology and therapy2025
Lebrikizumab vs Other Systemic Monotherapies for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Network Meta-analysis of Efficacy.
Review in Dermatology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world Effectiveness and Safety of Lebrikizumab in Atopic Dermatitis: A TREATgermany Analysis.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2026Article
- A Durability Index for Atopic Dermatitis: Indirect Comparison of Lebrikizumab, Dupilumab, and Tralokinumab in Maintaining Efficacy Under Variable Treatment Adherence.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Review
- Efficacy of Lebrikizumab on Pruritus: A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2026Review
- Short-Term Efficacy of Lebrikizumab Versus Dupilumab in Combination with Topical Corticosteroids in Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Short-Term Cost per Responder of Lebrikizumab versus Tralokinumab for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Saudi Arabia: A Model-Based Payer Analysis.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Article
- Effectiveness, Safety, and Health-Related Quality of Life in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis Treated with Lebrikizumab: A 16-Week Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Article
- Budget Impact Analysis of Lebrikizumab for Treating Severe Atopic Dermatitis.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Dupilumab versus Lebrikizumab Demonstrates Greater Likelihood of Achieving and Maintaining Improvements in Efficacy Outcomes Using a Placebo-Adjusted Indirect Treatment Comparison.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs) and Proteins: The Biologic Drugs Approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2024.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Tralokinumab and Dupilumab in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted to compare the short-term efficacy of lebrikizumab to other biologic and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor monotherapies approved for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis in adults and adolescents.
methodsThe NMA included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled monotherapy phase 2 and 3 trials of biologics (lebrikizumab 250 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], dupilumab 300 mg Q2W, and tralokinumab 300 mg Q2W) and JAK inhibitors (abrocitinib 100/200 mg daily, baricitinib 2/4 mg daily, and upadacitinib 15/30 mg daily) at approved doses. Efficacy outcomes included the proportions of patients achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) improvement, an Investigator Global Assessment of 0 or 1 (IGA 0/1), and a ≥ 4-point improvement in pruritus/itch numeric rating scale score at 12 weeks (abrocitinib) or 16 weeks (other treatments). Itch was also assessed at week 4. A Bayesian NMA employing baseline risk-adjusted random effects models was used to estimate treatment differences.
resultsTwenty-two monotherapy studies involving 8531 patients were included in the NMA. By week 12/16, lebrikizumab had superior odds of achieving IGA 0/1 and itch improvement compared to baricitinib and tralokinumab; similar odds to dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib 15 mg; and inferior odds to upadacitinib 30 mg. Additionally, lebrikizumab had a higher probability of improving EASI than baricitinib 2 mg; similar probability to baricitinib 4 mg, tralokinumab, dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib 15 mg; and lower probability than upadacitinib 30 mg daily. At week 4, lebrikizumab had superior odds of improving itch compared to tralokinumab; similar odds to baricitinib, dupilumab, and abrocitinib 100 mg; and inferior odds to abrocitinib 200 mg and upadacitinib.
conclusionAmong biologics, lebrikizumab was comparable to dupilumab and superior to tralokinumab in improving response rates at week 16. Upadacitinib 30 mg was the only JAK inhibitor with superior response rates compared to lebrikizumab.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.