ArticleActa dermato-venereologica2025
Efficacy and Safety of Abrocitinib in an Elderly Chinese Population with Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Non-randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a paucity of data regarding the use of Janus kinase inhibitors in elderly patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis necessitating systemic therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of abrocitinib compared with dupilumab in atopic dermatitis patients aged 60 years or older. A single-centre, non-randomized controlled trial (ChiCTR2300077724) was conducted from December 2022 to March 2024, in which 58 patients were assigned to receive either abrocitinib (100 mg daily) or dupilumab (600 mg loading dose followed by 300 mg every 2 weeks). The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 4-point reduction in the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) at Week 2 and the proportion achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI)-75 at Week 12; EASI-90 response at Week 24 was a key secondary endpoint. Results showed that a higher proportion of patients receiving abrocitinib achieved a PP-NRS4 response at Week 2 (52% vs 26%; p = 0.046). At Week 12, EASI-75 response rates were similar between the 2 groups (45% for abrocitinib vs 44% for dupilumab; p = 0.95). By Week 24, the EASI-90 response rate was 52% in the abrocitinib group compared with 41% in the dupilumab group (p = 0.4). Adverse events in the abrocitinib group included colon tumour (3%), nausea (6%), folliculitis (6%), and headache (16%), while the dupilumab group reported T-cell prolymphocytic leukaemia (3%) and conjunctivitis (7%). In conclusion, abrocitinib provided more rapid relief from pruritus and demonstrated superior long-term efficacy compared with dupilumab in the elderly population.
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.