ArticleDermatology and therapy2025
Rapid Itch Improvement and Skin Clearance with Upadacitinib Versus Placebo (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2) and Versus Dupilumab (Heads Up): Results from Three Phase 3 Clinical Trials in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
A Phase 3 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study to Evaluate Upadacitinib in Adolescent and Adult Subjects With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis
A Phase 3 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study to Evaluate Upadacitinib in Adolescent and Adult Subjects With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis
A Phase 3b Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Active Controlled Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Upadacitinib to Dupilumab in Adult Subjects With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Successful treatment of Grover's disease with upadacitinib: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
- Real-World Use of Upadacitinib for Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis in Saudi Arabia: A Single-Centre Retrospective Descriptive Analysis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Targeting Intracellular Pathways in Atopic Dermatitis with Small Molecule Therapeutics.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Review
- Successful Treatment of Refractory Pruritus in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis with Upadacitinib: A Case Report.Case reports in gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAchievement of stringent outcomes (e.g., ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI 90] or minimal-to-no itch on the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [WP-NRS 0/1]) is associated with a substantial improvement in quality of life among patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). Using stringent outcomes, we evaluated the efficacy of upadacitinib vs placebo and vs dupilumab on rapid itch improvement and skin clearance in patients with moderate-to-severe AD in three phase 3 clinical trials.
methodsPatients received orally administered upadacitinib 15 mg (UPA15), 30 mg (UPA30), or placebo once daily for 16 weeks in Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2 and orally administered UPA30 once daily or subcutaneously administered 300 mg dupilumab every 2 weeks (after a 600 mg loading dose) for 24 weeks in Heads Up. Key outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving WP-NRS 0/1, WP-NRS 0, EASI 90, and EASI 100, as well as the proportion of patients achieving composite outcomes (EASI 90 and WP-NRS 0/1; EASI 100 and WP-NRS 0). Patients assessed WP-NRS daily for the first 16 weeks and at scheduled visits thereafter, and investigators assessed EASI at scheduled visits.
resultsA greater proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib vs placebo and vs dupilumab achieved WP-NRS 0/1 at week 16 (nominal p < 0.001 vs placebo) and week 24 (nominal p < 0.001 vs dupilumab), with differences as early as the day after treatment initiation (day 2; nominal p < 0.05 vs placebo and vs dupilumab), as well as WP-NRS 0 at week 16 (nominal p < 0.001 vs placebo) and week 24 (nominal p < 0.001 vs dupilumab), with differences as early as day 8 (nominal p < 0.01 vs placebo; nominal p < 0.001 vs dupilumab). A greater proportion of patients receiving upadacitinib vs placebo and vs dupilumab achieved EASI 90 at week 16 (p < 0.001 vs dupilumab), with differences as early as week 1 (nominal p < 0.01 vs placebo; nominal p < 0.05 vs dupilumab), as well as EASI 100 at week 16 (p < 0.001 vs placebo) and week 24 (nominal p < 0.001 vs dupilumab), with differences as early as week 4 (nominal p < 0.001 vs placebo and vs dupilumab). A greater proportion of patients also achieved EASI 90 and WP-NRS 0/1 by week 2 (UPA15: 2.7%, UPA30: 6.7% vs placebo: 0%, nominal p < 0.001; UPA30: 7.1% vs dupilumab: 1.2%, nominal p < 0.001) and EASI 100 and WP-NRS 0 by week 4 (UPA15: 1.6%, UPA30: 3.9% vs placebo: 0.2%, nominal p ≤ 0.01; UPA30: 4.7% vs dupilumab: 0.6%, nominal p < 0.01) through all evaluated time points.
conclusionsPatients with moderate-to-severe AD treated with upadacitinib rapidly achieved stringent itch improvement and skin clearance targets compared with those receiving placebo or dupilumab, with responses sustained through weeks 16 (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2) and 24 (Heads Up). CLINICAL
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03569293 (Measure Up 1), NCT03607422 (Measure Up 2), and NCT03738397 (Heads Up).
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.