ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2026
Real-World Treatment Patterns in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis Initiating Ruxolitinib Cream: A 12-Month Follow-Up Analysis of a US Payer Claims Database.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 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.
- Real-World Effect of Ruxolitinib Cream: Decreased Use of Additional Topical Therapies and Limited Escalation to Systemic Treatments.Advances in therapy · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study describes a cohort of US commercially insured and Medicare Advantage patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) using ruxolitinib cream therapy and characterizes their treatment patterns before ruxolitinib cream initiation and during a 12-month follow-up. Patients and Methods: This retrospective, observational cohort study analyzed longitudinal administrative claims and social drivers of health data for patients diagnosed with AD and treated with ruxolitinib cream. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and healthcare resource utilization were described for the 6 months before and 12 months after ruxolitinib cream initiation. Results: The overall population (N=556) had a mean (SD) age of 40.3 (17.3) years and was 60.8% female, with 71.9% of patients being in the upper 2 socioeconomic status index score quartiles. Baseline predominant treatment patterns (overall cohort) included no treatment (26.6%), topical corticosteroids (53.4%), biologics (22.5%), systemic corticosteroids (20.9%), topical calcineurin inhibitors (14.9%), and topical phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitors (6.7%). Post-index treatment patterns showed a decreasing trend in corticosteroid use, with topical corticosteroid use dropping from 31.3% in months 1-6 to 26.6% in months 7-12, and systemic corticosteroid use stabilizing after an initial decrease (16.0% to 16.6%). However, the mean cumulative prednisone-equivalent dose among patients using systemic corticosteroids decreased overall by 28.9%, from 402.1 mg at baseline to 362.3 mg during months 1-6 and to 285.7 mg during months 7-12 of follow-up. Among the biologic-naïve cohort (n=431), 90.0% remained biologic-free during follow-up, and among the biologic-experienced cohort (n=125), 14.4% discontinued biologics during follow-up. The percentage of patients with healthcare encounters for AD decreased from 85.3% at baseline to 70.0% during follow-up. Conclusion: The reduced use of other AD treatments, including corticosteroids, and the high proportion of patients remaining biologic-free during the 12-month follow-up support the durability of the effectiveness of ruxolitinib as a therapeutic option for adults and adolescents with AD.
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.