Efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a systematic review

Evelien Roekevisch, Phyllis Ira Spuls, Denise Kuester, Jacqueline Limpens, Jochen Schmitt

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

261 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) require systemic immunomodulating treatment to achieve adequate disease control. We sought to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe AD. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (until June 2012). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating systemic immunomodulating treatments for moderate-to-severe AD were included. Selection, data extraction, quality assessment, and generation of treatment recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were performed independently by 2 reviewers. Efficacy outcomes were clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life, and the course of AD. Safety data were compared by calculating the weekly incidence rates (as percentages) for adverse events. Thirty-four RCTs with 12 different systemic treatments and totaling 1653 patients were included. Fourteen trials consistently indicate that cyclosporin A efficaciously improves clinical signs of AD. Cyclosporin A is recommended as first-line treatment for short-term use. A second-line treatment option is azathioprine, but efficacy is lower, and evidence is weaker. Methotrexate can be considered a third-line treatment option. Recommendations are impossible for mycophenolate, montelukast, intravenous immunoglobulins, and systemic glucocorticosteroids because of limited evidence. A meta-analysis was not performed because of a lack of standardization in outcome measures. Although 12 different interventions for moderate-to-severe AD have been studied in 34 RCTs, strong recommendations are only possible for the short-term use of cyclosporin A. Methodological limitations in the majority of trials prevent evidence-based conclusions. Large head-to-head trials evaluating long-term treatments are required
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)429-438
JournalJournal of allergy and clinical immunology
Volume133
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Cite this