Evidence Hub

Reduced atopic march risk in pediatric atopic dermatitis patients prescribed dupilumab versus conventional immunomodulatory therapy: A population-based cohort study

Teng-Li Lin, Yi-Hsuan Fan, Kuo-Sheng Fan, Chao-Kuei Juan, Yi-Ju Chen, Chun-Ying Wu

Journal of American Academy of Dermatology, 2024

2,192 participants · 38 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Dupilumab effectively treats atopic dermatitis (AD); however, its role in halting the atopic march remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate dupilumab's effect on atopic march in pediatric AD patients versus conventional immunomodulators.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized data from the TriNetX US Collaborative Network (2011-2024). Pediatric AD patients (≤18 years) were categorized into DUPI-cohort (newly prescribed dupilumab) or CONV-cohort (prescribed conventional immunomodulators without dupilumab). After 1:1 propensity-score matching, we analyzed atopic march progression, defined by the incident asthma or allergic rhinitis (AR). Cumulative incidence was plotted using Kaplan-Meier, with risk assessment via Cox regression.

RESULTS

The study included 2192 patients in each cohort. The 3-year cumulative incidence of atopic march progression was lower in the DUPI-cohort than the CONV-cohort (20.09% vs 27.22%; P < .001). The DUPI-cohort demonstrated significant risk reduction in atopic march progression (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.83), individual asthma (HR 0.60, 0.45-0.81), and individual AR (HR 0.69, 0.54-0.88). Younger patients on dupilumab exhibited a greater risk reduction for atopic march progression and individual asthma, contrasting with the opposite age-related pattern for individual AR.

LIMITATIONS

Observational study.

CONCLUSION

Among pediatric AD patients, dupilumab was associated with reduced risk of atopic march progression…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,192 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free