507 - Dupilumab demonstrates greater improvement in disease activity than standard-of-care H1-antihistamines in CSU

Lisa A Beck,Thomas B Casale,Eric Mortensen,Elizabeth Laws,Ryan B Thomas,Chien-Chia Chuang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljad498.015
IF: 11.113
2024-02-01
British Journal of Dermatology
Abstract:Abstract IntroductionChronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by wheals and/or angioedema recurring for >6 weeks. Cumulative distribution function (CDF) curves compare cumulative probabilities of response between treatments across responder definition spectrums. Methods LIBERTY-CSU CUPID Study A (NCT04180488) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of dupilumab treatment for 24 weeks in patients with CSU remaining symptomatic despite standard-of-care (SOC) H1-antihistamines. Patients were randomized to receive add-on dupilumab (dupilumab/SOC) or placebo (placebo/SOC) subcutaneously every 2 weeks. CDF curves were plotted for the distribution of possible within-patient response for Urticaria Activity Score over 7 days (UAS7), Itch Severity Score over 7 days (ISS7), and Hives Severity Score over 7 days (HSS7) for dupilumab/SOC and placebo/SOC arms. Results In CDF analysis at Week 24, more patients experienced UAS7, ISS7, and HSS7 improvements with dupilumab/SOC than placebo/SOC; 74.2% vs 50.0% of patients (dupilumab/SOC vs placebo/SOC) achieved ≥11-point reductions (minimal important difference [MID] threshold) in UAS7. Similarly, 78.8% vs 51.7% of patients (dupilumab/SOC vs placebo/SOC) reached ≥5-point reductions (MID threshold) in ISS7 and HSS7. The responder proportion was ≥20% greater for dupilumab/SOC vs placebo/SOC for response thresholds of 9.5- to 22-point reductions for UAS7, 4.5- to 11-point reductions for ISS7, and 5- to 11-point reductions for HSS7. Conclusion Irrespective of within-patient responder thresholds, greater proportions of patients experienced improvement in UAS7, ISS7, and HSS7 with dupilumab/SOC vs placebo/SOC at Week 24. Overall safety was consistent with the known dupilumab safety profile.
dermatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?