ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2025
Long-Term Real-World Effectiveness of Dupilumab vs. Upadacitinib in Early Treatment Responders with Atopic Dermatitis: Results from Central European Health Fund Registry.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Response Trajectories with Dupilumab or Upadacitinib in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Multicentre Real-World Study: IL-AD (Italian Landscape Atopic Dermatitis).Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Lebrikizumab in Adults and Adolescents with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A 52-Week Retrospective Italian Study Focusing on Head and Neck Involvement.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of dupilumab following discontinuation of JAK inhibitors in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a single-center retrospective study.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While clinical trials have shown the efficacy of using dupilumab and upadacitinib to treat atopic dermatitis (AD), long-term real-world data remain limited. This retrospective cohort study, utilizing data from the Polish National Health Fund Registry, evaluates the long-term effectiveness of dupilumab versus upadacitinib in early treatment responders, focusing on sustained efficacy outcomes and high levels of skin clearance. Data from the Polish National Health Fund Registry were analyzed for 435 patients; 220 were treated with dupilumab and 215 were treated with upadacitinib, each receiving treatment for at least 40 weeks. Upadacitinib had a faster onset of action, leading to significantly higher rates of complete skin clearance compared to dupilumab at weeks 16 and 28 (EASI100 at week 16: 19.5% vs. 7.3%,
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.