ArticleDermatology and therapy2026
EP262, an MRGPRX2 Antagonist for the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis: Results From the Phase 2 Randomized EASE Study.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06144424 (Phase 2a, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacodynamics of EP262 in Subjects With Atopic Dermatitis), which is not on this 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.
Phase 2a, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacodynamics of EP262 in Subjects With Atopic Dermatitis (EASE)
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMas-related G protein-coupled receptor X2 (MRGPRX2) levels are elevated in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). EP262, a small-molecule MRGPRX2 receptor antagonist, significantly diminished AD development in humanized mouse models of AD. In the EASE study, the safety, tolerability, and pharmacodynamics of EP262 were compared with placebo in patients with AD.
methodsPatients aged 18-80 years with AD, 3%-20% affected body surface area, and validated Investigator's Global Assessment for AD (vIGA-AD) score ≥ 3 were randomized 2:1 to receive 150 mg EP262 or placebo once daily for 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. The secondary endpoint was change from baseline to Week 6 in gene expression signature and skin histology. Exploratory efficacy endpoints included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), vIGA-AD, and Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS).
resultsOf 32 randomized patients (median [range] age, 41.0 [18-70] years), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 19.0% of patients who received EP262 and 63.6% who received placebo, with none considered treatment-related. No grade ≥ 3 or serious TEAEs were observed, and no TEAEs led to dose interruptions or treatment discontinuations. No genes were differentially expressed between baseline lesional or nonlesional samples and Week 6 lesional samples. Differences in epidermal thickness were not meaningful between groups following treatment. No improvement was observed at Week 6 between EP262 and placebo in EASI (mean percentage change from baseline, - 14.9% vs - 40.7%), vIGA-AD (patients scoring 0/1 with ≥ 2-point improvement from baseline, 21.1% vs 27.3%), or PP-NRS scores (mean percentage change from baseline, - 26.7% vs - 25.1%).
conclusionsEP262 was well tolerated in patients with AD. No meaningful differences were observed in gene expression, skin thickness, or efficacy measures in patients who received EP262 versus placebo.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT06144424 (registered on November 16, 2023).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42629547What 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.