ReviewClinical drug investigation2026
Clinical Trial Comparison of Dupilumab and Nemolizumab for Prurigo Nodularis FDA-Approved Biologic Therapy Selection in Prurigo Nodularis.
Review in Clinical drug investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Immunopathogenesis of itch: an integrative framework for chronic pruritus.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a chronic, pruritic skin disorder characterized by significant morbidity and historically limited treatment options. The recent approval of biologic therapies has rapidly changed the treatment landscape, with dupilumab and nemolizumab now Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved for PN. This article provides a clinically relevant overview of completed randomized trials, highlighting differences in efficacy, timing of response, and symptom targets. Data were extracted from six compound randomized clinical trials (two dupilumab trials and four nemolizumab trials) identified on ClinicalTrials.gov through January 2025. Across phase 3 studies, dupilumab demonstrated sustained reductions in itch severity and lesional disease, with approximately 58-60% of patients achieving a ≥ 4-point improvement in Worst Itch Numeric Rating Scale (WI-NRS) scores and 45-48% achieving Investigator Global Assessment for Prurigo Nodularis-Stage (IGA PN-S) success by week 24. Nemolizumab showed a more rapid onset of antipruritic effect, with 41-56% of patients achieving a ≥ 4-point improvement in Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (PP-NRS) scores as early as week 4, along with clinically meaningful improvements in sleep disturbance by week 16. Both therapies demonstrated manageable safety profiles, with predominantly mild to moderate adverse events and low rates of serious adverse events, although nemolizumab was associated with higher overall rates of mild to moderate adverse events. These findings suggest that dupilumab may offer greater lesional clearance at later time points, whereas nemolizumab may provide faster itch relief and less sleep disturbance. These findings support a phenotype-guided approach to biologic selection while highlighting the need for further comparative studies.
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.