ArticleDermatology and therapy2026
Clinical Trial Eligibility in Atopic Dermatitis: Data from a Large Real-World International Cohort.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Special Populations in Pivotal Clinical Trials: Eligibility and Supporting Evidence for Exclusion in EMA-Authorised Medicines.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Upadacitinib Versus Abrocitinib in Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) in atopic dermatitis (AD) often exclude older adults and patients with comorbidities, limiting the generalizability of trial findings to real-world populations. Despite the growing use of biologics and Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) in clinical practice, the extent to which real-world patients meet RCT eligibility criteria and their associated safety outcomes remains unclear.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of a large, multicenter international cohort of adolescents and adults with AD treated with biologics (dupilumab, tralokinumab) or systemic JAKis (abrocitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib) between October 2017 and March 2023 across 16 dermatology centers. Eligibility was defined according to commonly applied RCT criteria. Patients meeting ≥ 1 exclusion criterion were classified as ineligible. Demographic, clinical, and safety outcomes were analyzed.
resultsAmong 2154 patients, 514 (23.9%) were ineligible. The most frequent reasons were Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) < 16 (67.9%), age ≥ 75 years (21.8%), and cardiovascular disease (13.0%). Ineligibility patterns differed across treatments: patients receiving JAKis were most often ineligible because of EASI < 16 (92.8%), whereas ineligibility among biologic users more commonly reflected also age or cardiovascular comorbidity. Ineligible patients were older, had more non-atopic comorbidities, and had lower measured baseline disease activity. Safety profiles were generally favorable. Among biologic-treated patients, adverse event rates were similar between eligible and ineligible groups. In the JAKi cohort, overall adverse events were more frequent in ineligible patients (52.9% vs. 42.6%; p = 0.051), with acneiform eruption and lipid abnormalities emerging as the most distinct differences. No unexpected safety signals were identified in either treatment group.
conclusionNearly one-quarter of real-world patients with AD would not have met eligibility criteria for pivotal RCTs, yet both biologics and JAK inhibitors demonstrated acceptable safety profiles in these populations. While adverse events were more frequent among ineligible patients receiving JAKis, findings require further investigation to determine their clinical relevance, particularly regarding long-term cardiovascular outcomes.
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.