ArticleDermatology and therapy2026
Tralokinumab Versus Dupilumab for the Treatment of Atopic Dermatitis with Moderate-to-Severe Hand Involvement: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison.
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 2 registered trials, which are 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.
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel- Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab in Adult and Adolescent Patients With Moderate-to-Severe Atopic Hand and Foot Dermatitis
A Phase 3b, Interventional, Adaptive, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Tralokinumab 300 mg Every Second Week Monotherapy Compared With Placebo in Subjects With Moderate-to-severe Atopic Hand Eczema Who Are Candidates for Systemic Therapy
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBoth tralokinumab and dupilumab have shown efficacy in atopic dermatitis (AD) with moderate-to-severe hand involvement in double-blind phase 3 trials. As there are no head-to-head studies of tralokinumab and dupilumab, an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was conducted.
methodsIn the ADHAND trial, adults with AD with moderate-to-severe hand involvement were randomised to tralokinumab 300 mg or placebo every 2 weeks for 16 weeks. In the LIBERTY-AD-HAFT trial, adults and adolescents (≥ 12 years) with moderate-to-severe AD with hand and/or foot involvement were randomised to dupilumab 300 mg or placebo every 2 weeks for 16 weeks. An anchored MAIC was conducted using individual patient data from ADHAND weighted to match aggregate data for age, sex, race, and baseline Hand Eczema Severity Index (HECSI) score from LIBERTY-AD-HAFT, with placebo as the common anchor. Endpoints compared at week 16 were proportions of patients with Investigator's Global Assessment scores of 0/1, HECSI-75 and HECSI-90, and percent reductions in HECSI and the Routine Activity Impairment domain of the Work Productivity and Activity Index. Reductions in itch and pain and proportions of patients with ≥ 4-point itch improvement were also compared.
resultsLIBERTY-AD-HAFT included 133 patients (dupilumab, n = 67, placebo, n = 66) while ADHAND included 235 patients (tralokinumab, n = 156; placebo, n = 79). The effective sample size after matching was 99 (tralokinumab, n = 76, placebo, n = 23). Anchor-adjusted relative treatment differences significantly favoured tralokinumab compared with dupilumab for the proportions of patients achieving HECSI-90 (17.5% [95% CI 0.8, 34.2]; p = 0.040) and decrease in percent routine activity impairment (16.0% [95% CI 4.8, 27.1]; p = 0.005). Relative differences for other endpoints favoured tralokinumab over dupilumab but were not significantly different between treatments.
conclusionIn this anchored MAIC, tralokinumab was associated with a higher placebo-adjusted response than dupilumab, with a higher proportion achieving HECSI-90, and a significantly greater improvement in ability to perform regular daily activities versus dupilumab. Other endpoints were numerically in favour of tralokinumab. Graphical abstract and video abstract available for this article. CLINICAL
trial registrationNCT05958407, NCT04417894. Video Abstract (MP4 112997 KB).
Indexed as
Identifiers
42825999What 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.