Dermatitis, Atopic
Conditions
Keywords
Eczema
Brief summary
The main objective of the trial is to demonstrate the efficacy of dupilumab administered concomitantly with topical corticosteroids (TCS) in participants ≥6 years to \<12 years of age with severe atopic dermatitis (AD). The secondary objective is to assess the safety of dupilumab administered concomitantly with TCS in patients ≥6 years to \<12 years of age with severe AD.
Interventions
DRUGDupilumab
Pharmaceutical form: Solution for injection in pre-filled syringe; Route of administration: Subcutaneous (SC)
DRUGMatching Placebo
Pharmaceutical form: Solution for injection; Route of administration: Subcutaneous (SC)
OTHERBackground Treatment: Topical Corticosteroids
All participants are required to initiate treatment with a medium potency TCS using a standardized regimen. It is recommended that participants use triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% cream, fluocinolone acetonide 0.025% cream, or clobetasone butyrate 0.05%.
OTHERBackground Treatment: Moisturizers
All participants should apply moisturizers throughout the study. All types of moisturizers are permitted, but participants may not initiate treatment with prescription moisturizers. Participants may continue using stable doses of such moisturizers if initiated before the screening visit.
Sponsors
Sanofi
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
6 Years to 11 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
Key Inclusion Criteria: 1. Diagnosis of AD according to the American Academy of Dermatology consensus criteria (Eichenfield 2003) at screening visit 2. Chronic AD diagnosed at least 1 year prior to the screening visit 3. IGA = 4 at screening and baseline visits 4. EASI ≥21 at the screening and baseline visits 5. BSA ≥15% at screening and baseline visits 6. Documented recent history (within 6 months before the baseline visit) of inadequate response to topical AD medication(s) 7. At least 11 (of a total of 14) applications of a stable dose of topical emollient (moisturizer) twice daily during the 7 consecutive days immediately before the baseline visit Key
Exclusion criteria
1. Participation in a prior dupilumab clinical study 2. Treatment with a systemic investigational drug before the baseline visit 3. Treatment with a topical investigational drug within 2 weeks prior to the baseline visit 4. Treatment with crisabarole within 2 weeks prior to the baseline visit 5. History of important side effects of medium potency topical corticosteroids (e.g, intolerance to treatment, hypersensitivity reactions, significant skin atrophy, systemic effects), as assessed by the investigator or patient's treating physician 6. Treatment with a topical calcineurin inhibitor (TCI) within 2 weeks prior to the baseline visit 7. Having used any of the following treatments within 4 weeks before the baseline visit, or any condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, is likely to require such treatment(s) during the first 4 weeks of study treatment: 1. Immunosuppressive/immunomodulating drugs (e.g, systemic corticosteroids, cyclosporine, mycophenolate-mofetil, interferon gamma, Janus kinase inhibitors, azathioprine, methotrexate, etc.) 2. Phototherapy for AD 8. Treatment with biologics, as follows: 1. Any cell-depleting agents including but not limited to rituximab: within 6 months before the baseline visit, or until lymphocyte and CD 19+ lymphocyte count returns to normal, whichever is longer 2. Other biologics: within 5 half-lives (if known) or 16 weeks before the baseline visit, whichever is longer 9. Treatment with a live (attenuated) vaccine within 4 weeks before the baseline visit 10. Body weight \<15 kg at baseline Note: Other Inclusion/
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 at Week 16 | Week 16 | The IGA was an assessment instrument used in clinical studies to rate the severity of AD globally, based on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear) to 4 (severe). The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at Week 16 were considered as a non-responder. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | The EASI assesses severity and extent of AD. Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥3 Points at Week 16 | Week 16 | The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint. |
| Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥4 Points at Week 16 | Week 16 | The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint. |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 50 (EASI-50) (≥ 50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | Week 16 | The EASI assessed severity and extent of AD. Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. |
| Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 90 (EASI - 90) (≥ 90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | Week 16 | The EASI assessed the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD). Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. |
| Time to Achieve ≥ 4 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 16 | The worst itch scale: simple assessment tool that participants used to report intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) where 0 (no itching) and 10 (worst itching) possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, & follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as worse of scores for 2 questions. FAS was used. Time to event is calculated in weeks as (date of first event - date of first dose)/7. The event of NRS reduction ≥ 4 was based on observed data without setting data to be non-responder after rescue treatment use. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint & NA represents Not computable as only 12.3% of participants achieved NRS reduction during 16-week treatment period & hence median time to achieve ≥ 4-point reduction of NRS for placebo +TCS treated participants could not be reported. |
| Time to Achieve ≥ 3 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 16 | The worst itch scale: a simple assessment tool that participants used to report intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) where 0 (no itching) & 10 (worst itching) possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, & follow-up period). Daily worst itch score was calculated as worse of scores for 2 questions. FAS was used. Time to event is calculated in weeks as (date of first event - date of first dose)/7. The event of NRS reduction ≥ 3 was based on observed data without setting data to be non-responder after rescue treatment use. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint & NA represents Not computable as only 21.1% of participants achieved NRS reduction during 16-week treatment period & hence median time to achieve ≥ 3-point reduction of NRS for placebo +TCS treated participants could not be reported. |
| Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body using the rule of nines (the possible highest score for each region is: head and neck \[9%\], anterior trunk \[18%\], back \[18%\], upper limbs \[18%\], lower limbs \[36%\], and genitals \[1%\]) and were reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined. The proportion assigned to different body regions were different in younger children as compared to older children (head and neck area is assigned a higher proportion in younger children as compared to older children). The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | SCORAD was used to assess the extent and severity of AD. Extent and severity of eczema as well as subjective symptoms (insomnia, etc) were assessed and scored. SCORAD total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease). The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index -75 (EASI-75) (≥ 75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | Week 16 | The EASI assesses severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD). Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. |
| Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | POEM was a 7-item, validated questionnaire used to assess disease symptoms in children and adults. The format was a response to 7 items (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding, and weeping) based on frequency of these disease symptoms during the past week (ie, 0 = no days, 1 = 1 to 2 days, 2 = 3 to 4 days, 3 = 5 to 6 days, and 4 = all days) with a scoring system of 0 to 28; the total score reflected the disease-related morbidity. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). A high score is indicative of a poor quality of life. |
| Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Change From Baseline in Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1) , Week 16 | DFI was a 10-item questionnaire with items inquiring about housework, food preparation, sleep, family leisure activity, shopping, expenditure, tiredness, emotional distress, relationships and the impact of helping with treatment on the primary caregiver's life. The DFI questions were scored on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 3, so that the total DFI score ranges from 0 to 30. Timeframe of reference was the past week. A higher DFI score indicated greater impairment in family Quality of life (QOL) as affected by atopic dermatitis. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Anxiety Short Form Scale Total Score at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | PROMIS Anxiety instrument measures self-reported fear (fearfulness, panic), anxious misery (worry, dread), hyperarousal (tension, nervousness, restlessness), & somatic symptoms related to arousal (racing heart, dizziness). Each question has 5 response options ranging in value from 1-5 (1=Never, 2=Almost never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Almost Always). Total raw score calculated using sum of response values: for 8-item form, lowest possible is 8 & highest possible is 40; For 6-item form: lowest possible is 6; highest possible is 30. Higher score indicates greater severity of symptoms. |
| Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Depressive Symptoms Short Form Scale Score at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | PROMIS Depression instrument assesses self-reported negative mood (sadness/guilt), views of self (self-criticism/worthlessness) & social cognition (loneliness/interpersonal alienation), & decreased positive affect & engagement (loss of interest/meaning/purpose). Each question has 5 response options with values from 1-5 (1=Never, 2=Almost never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Almost Always). Total raw score is the sum of response values. For 8-item form, lowest possible is 8, highest is 40; for 6-item form, lowest possible is 6, highest is 30. Higher score indicates greater severity of symptoms. |
| Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Through Week 16 | Baseline through Week 16 | Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as adverse events (AEs) that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study. A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-subjects hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Percentage of participants having at least one skin infection TEAE (Excluding Herpetic Infections) through Week 16 were reported. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1) through Week 16 | Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as adverse events (AEs) that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study. A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-participants hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). |
| Proportion of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Medication-free Days From Baseline to Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | Proportion of TCS medication-free days is calculated as the number of days that a participant used neither TCS/TCI nor system rescue therapy divided by the study days of each period. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint. |
| Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) in Grams for Low or Medium Potency TCS From Baseline to Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | Mean weekly dose of TCS in grams for low or medium potency TCS from baseline to Week 16 were reported. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint. |
| Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 16 | Baseline (Day 1), Week 16 | CDLQI was a validated 10 question tool to measure the impact of skin disease on the quality of life (QOL) in children by assessing how much the skin problem has affected the participant over the past week. Nine questions were scored as follows: Very much = 3, Quite a lot = 2, Only a little = 1, Not at all or unanswered = 0. Question 7 has an added possible response, which was scored as 3. CDLQI equals the sum of the score of each question (maximum = 30, minimum = 0). Higher the score, the greater the impact on QOL. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Data presented reflects the mean & standard deviation of the CDLQI total scores. |
Countries
Canada, Czechia, Germany, Poland, United Kingdom, United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
A total of 474 participants were screened for study eligibility at multiple sites in the United States and Europe. Screen failure was mostly due to inclusion/exclusion criteria not met and other reasons. The majority of participants (221/367) were enrolled at study sites in the United States.
Pre-assignment details
A total of 474 participants were screened. 367 participants randomized in 1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 3 treatment groups. 5 randomized participants were not treated (2 in placebo + TCS group & 3 in combined dupilumab + TCS group). Participants randomized to receive Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS, Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS or matching placebo.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS Participants received matching placebo every 2 weeks (Q2W) or every 4 weeks (Q4W) during the 16-week double-blind treatment phase. Matching placebo was administered concomitantly with topical corticosteroids (TCS), including doubling the amount of placebo on Day 1 to match the loading dose. | 123 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS Participants received subcutaneous injections of 600 milligrams (mg) loading dose on Day 1, then 300 mg of Dupilumab every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4 to Week 12. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) were administered concomitantly during the 16-week double-blind treatment phase. | 122 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS Participants received subcutaneous injections of 100 milligrams (mg) or 200 mg of Dupilumab every 2 weeks (Q2W). For 100 mg Q2W treatment group, participants received a 200 mg loading dose on Day 1, then 100 mg Q2W from Week 2 to Week 14. For 200 mg Q2W treatment group, participants received a 400 mg loading dose on Day 1, then 200 mg Q2W from Week 2 to Week 14. Topical corticosteroids (TCS) were administered concomitantly in all groups during the 16-week double-blind treatment phase. | 122 |
| Total | 367 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 | FG002 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Ongoing | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Other | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Physician Decision | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Transition to another study at week 16 | 80 | 86 | 78 |
| Overall Study | Transition to OLE during follow-up | 37 | 33 | 39 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 5 | 1 | 2 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Placebo + TCS | Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 8.3 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.76 | 8.5 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.74 | 8.5 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.68 | 8.5 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.72 |
| Body Surface Area (BSA) of Atopic Dermatitis | 60.2 Percentage of BSA STANDARD_DEVIATION 21.46 | 54.8 Percentage of BSA STANDARD_DEVIATION 21.58 | 57.8 Percentage of BSA STANDARD_DEVIATION 20.04 | 57.6 Percentage of BSA STANDARD_DEVIATION 21.1 |
| Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) Total Score | 14.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.41 | 16.2 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.85 | 14.5 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.78 | 15.1 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.38 |
| Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) | 15.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.54 | 16.9 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 8.65 | 14.9 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.05 | 15.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.81 |
| Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score | 39.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.01 | 37.4 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.45 | 37.3 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.86 | 37.9 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.79 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 13 Participants | 16 Participants | 16 Participants | 45 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 110 Participants | 106 Participants | 106 Participants | 322 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) Score | 4.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0 | 4.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.09 | 4.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0 | 4.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.05 |
| Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) | 20.7 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.48 | 21.3 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.51 | 20.5 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.5 | 20.9 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.49 |
| Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Anxiety Scale | 57.3 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.62 | 59.8 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.66 | 58.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.32 | 58.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.25 |
| Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Depression Scale | 55.0 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.05 | 58.1 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.77 | 56.3 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.22 | 56.4 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.06 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 13 Participants | 5 Participants | 10 Participants | 28 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 23 Participants | 19 Participants | 20 Participants | 62 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 10 Participants | 9 Participants | 4 Participants | 23 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 77 Participants | 89 Participants | 88 Participants | 254 Participants |
| SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) Score | 72.9 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.01 | 75.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.71 | 72.3 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.83 | 73.6 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.59 |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 62 Participants | 65 Participants | 57 Participants | 184 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 61 Participants | 57 Participants | 65 Participants | 183 Participants |
| Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score | 7.7 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.54 | 7.8 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.58 | 7.8 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.52 | 7.8 Score on a Scale STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.54 |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk | EG002 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 120 | 0 / 120 | 0 / 122 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 57 / 120 | 47 / 120 | 50 / 122 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 2 / 120 | 3 / 120 | 0 / 122 |
Outcome results
Primary
Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 at Week 16
The IGA was an assessment instrument used in clinical studies to rate the severity of AD globally, based on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (clear) to 4 (severe). The full analysis set (FAS) included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at Week 16 were considered as a non-responder.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 at Week 16 | 11.4 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 at Week 16 | 32.8 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0 or 1 at Week 16 | 29.5 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: =0.000495% CI: [8.28, 27.97]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [11.36, 31.45]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 16
CDLQI was a validated 10 question tool to measure the impact of skin disease on the quality of life (QOL) in children by assessing how much the skin problem has affected the participant over the past week. Nine questions were scored as follows: Very much = 3, Quite a lot = 2, Only a little = 1, Not at all or unanswered = 0. Question 7 has an added possible response, which was scored as 3. CDLQI equals the sum of the score of each question (maximum = 30, minimum = 0). Higher the score, the greater the impact on QOL. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Data presented reflects the mean & standard deviation of the CDLQI total scores.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 16 | -6.4 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.51 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 16 | -10.6 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.47 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) at Week 16 | -10.7 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.46 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-5.62, -2.99]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-5.57, -2.89]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) at Week 16
DFI was a 10-item questionnaire with items inquiring about housework, food preparation, sleep, family leisure activity, shopping, expenditure, tiredness, emotional distress, relationships and the impact of helping with treatment on the primary caregiver's life. The DFI questions were scored on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 3, so that the total DFI score ranges from 0 to 30. Timeframe of reference was the past week. A higher DFI score indicated greater impairment in family Quality of life (QOL) as affected by atopic dermatitis. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) , Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) at Week 16 | -6.77 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.497 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) at Week 16 | -10.75 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.476 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Dermatitis Family Index (DFI) at Week 16 | -10.89 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.469 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-5.434, -2.796]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-5.298, -2.657]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16
POEM was a 7-item, validated questionnaire used to assess disease symptoms in children and adults. The format was a response to 7 items (dryness, itching, flaking, cracking, sleep loss, bleeding, and weeping) based on frequency of these disease symptoms during the past week (ie, 0 = no days, 1 = 1 to 2 days, 2 = 3 to 4 days, 3 = 5 to 6 days, and 4 = all days) with a scoring system of 0 to 28; the total score reflected the disease-related morbidity. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). A high score is indicative of a poor quality of life.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16 | -5.3 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.69 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16 | -13.6 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.65 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) at Week 16 | -13.4 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.65 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-9.96, -6.31]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-10.13, -6.43]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Anxiety Short Form Scale Total Score at Week 16
PROMIS Anxiety instrument measures self-reported fear (fearfulness, panic), anxious misery (worry, dread), hyperarousal (tension, nervousness, restlessness), & somatic symptoms related to arousal (racing heart, dizziness). Each question has 5 response options ranging in value from 1-5 (1=Never, 2=Almost never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Almost Always). Total raw score calculated using sum of response values: for 8-item form, lowest possible is 8 & highest possible is 40; For 6-item form: lowest possible is 6; highest possible is 30. Higher score indicates greater severity of symptoms.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
Population: The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Anxiety Short Form Scale Total Score at Week 16 | -10.17 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.912 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Anxiety Short Form Scale Total Score at Week 16 | -13.19 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.861 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Anxiety Short Form Scale Total Score at Week 16 | -13.54 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.86 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: =0.006195% CI: [-5.779, -0.962]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: =0.013395% CI: [-5.414, -0.629]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Depressive Symptoms Short Form Scale Score at Week 16
PROMIS Depression instrument assesses self-reported negative mood (sadness/guilt), views of self (self-criticism/worthlessness) & social cognition (loneliness/interpersonal alienation), & decreased positive affect & engagement (loss of interest/meaning/purpose). Each question has 5 response options with values from 1-5 (1=Never, 2=Almost never, 3=Sometimes, 4=Often, 5=Almost Always). Total raw score is the sum of response values. For 8-item form, lowest possible is 8, highest is 40; for 6-item form, lowest possible is 6, highest is 30. Higher score indicates greater severity of symptoms.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
Population: The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Depressive Symptoms Short Form Scale Score at Week 16 | -7.42 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.848 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Depressive Symptoms Short Form Scale Score at Week 16 | -12.84 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.793 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Information Systems (PROMIS) Pediatric Depressive Symptoms Short Form Scale Score at Week 16 | -11.92 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.79 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-6.734, -2.272]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-7.641, -3.207]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16
BSA affected by AD was assessed for each section of the body using the rule of nines (the possible highest score for each region is: head and neck \[9%\], anterior trunk \[18%\], back \[18%\], upper limbs \[18%\], lower limbs \[36%\], and genitals \[1%\]) and were reported as a percentage of all major body sections combined. The proportion assigned to different body regions were different in younger children as compared to older children (head and neck area is assigned a higher proportion in younger children as compared to older children). The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16 | -21.65 Percentage of BSA | Standard Error 1.721 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16 | -40.53 Percentage of BSA | Standard Error 1.648 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Percent Body Surface Area (BSA) Affected by Atopic Dermatitis (AD) at Week 16 | -39.37 Percentage of BSA | Standard Error 1.629 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-22.272, -13.161]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-23.479, -14.289]ANCOVA
Secondary
Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16
The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -2.05 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.215 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -4.22 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.207 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -4.45 Score on a Scale | Standard Error 0.206 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-2.984, -1.831]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-2.754, -1.599]ANCOVA
Secondary
Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) in Grams for Low or Medium Potency TCS From Baseline to Week 16
Mean weekly dose of TCS in grams for low or medium potency TCS from baseline to Week 16 were reported. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) in Grams for Low or Medium Potency TCS From Baseline to Week 16 | 20.1 Grams | Standard Error 1.37 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) in Grams for Low or Medium Potency TCS From Baseline to Week 16 | 15.0 Grams | Standard Error 1.36 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Mean Weekly Dose of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) in Grams for Low or Medium Potency TCS From Baseline to Week 16 | 14.4 Grams | Standard Error 1.38 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 levelp-value: =0.00395% CI: [-9.49, -1.96]ANOVA
p-value: =0.008295% CI: [-8.8, -1.31]ANOVA
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 50 (EASI-50) (≥ 50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI assessed severity and extent of AD. Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 50 (EASI-50) (≥ 50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 43.1 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 50 (EASI-50) (≥ 50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 91.0 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 50 (EASI-50) (≥ 50% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 82.8 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [28.68, 50.72]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [37.77, 58.01]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 90 (EASI - 90) (≥ 90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI assessed the severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD). Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 90 (EASI - 90) (≥ 90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 7.3 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 90 (EASI - 90) (≥ 90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 41.8 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Achieving Eczema Area and Severity Index - 90 (EASI - 90) (≥ 90% Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 30.3 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [13.65, 32.38]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [24.6, 44.37]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Week 16
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as adverse events (AEs) that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study. A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-participants hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) through Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Week 16 | 1.6 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Week 16 | 1.6 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Serious Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) Through Week 16 | 0 Percentage of Participants |
Secondary
Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Through Week 16
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as adverse events (AEs) that developed or worsened or became serious during on-treatment period (time from the first dose of study drug up to the end of study. A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-subjects hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. Any TEAE included participants with both serious and non-serious AEs. Percentage of participants having at least one skin infection TEAE (Excluding Herpetic Infections) through Week 16 were reported. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline through Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Through Week 16 | 13.0 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Through Week 16 | 5.7 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants Having at Least One Skin Infection Treatment Emergent Adverse Event (TEAE) (Excluding Herpetic Infections) Through Week 16 | 8.2 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: =0.22295% CI: [-12.49, 2.87]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: =0.050895% CI: [-14.51, -0.03]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index -75 (EASI-75) (≥ 75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16
The EASI assesses severity and extent of atopic dermatitis (AD). Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index -75 (EASI-75) (≥ 75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 26.8 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index -75 (EASI-75) (≥ 75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 69.7 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Eczema Area and Severity Index -75 (EASI-75) (≥ 75 Percent (%) Improvement From Baseline) at Week 16 | 67.2 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [28.95, 51.82]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [31.54, 54.15]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥3 Points at Week 16
The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥3 Points at Week 16 | 21.1 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥3 Points at Week 16 | 60.3 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥3 Points at Week 16 | 67.5 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [35.3, 57.42]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [27.88, 50.51]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥4 Points at Week 16
The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Values after first rescue treatment used were set to missing. Participants with missing score at week 16 were considered as a non-responder. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint.
Time frame: Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥4 Points at Week 16 | 12.3 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥4 Points at Week 16 | 50.8 Percentage of Participants |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percentage of Participants With Improvement (Reduction From Baseline) of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score ≥4 Points at Week 16 | 58.3 Percentage of Participants |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [35.47, 56.61]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [27.86, 49.21]Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel
Secondary
Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16
The EASI assesses severity and extent of AD. Scores range from 0-72. Four AD disease characteristics (erythema, thickness, scratching, and lichenification) were assessed for severity on a scale of 0 (absent) through 3 (severe). Area of involvement assessed as a percentage by body area of head, trunk, upper limbs, and lower limbs, and converted to a score of 0 to 6. FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16 | -48.6 Percent change | Standard Error 2.46 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16 | -82.1 Percent change | Standard Error 2.37 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) Score at Week 16 | -78.4 Percent change | Standard Error 2.35 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-36.33, -23.24]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-40.06, -26.82]ANCOVA
Secondary
Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16
SCORAD was used to assess the extent and severity of AD. Extent and severity of eczema as well as subjective symptoms (insomnia, etc) were assessed and scored. SCORAD total score ranges from 0 (absent disease) to 103 (severe disease). The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16 | -29.8 Percent change | Standard Error 2.26 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16 | -62.4 Percent change | Standard Error 2.13 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) at Week 16 | -60.2 Percent change | Standard Error 2.11 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-36.3, -24.48]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-38.57, -26.59]ANCOVA
Secondary
Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16
The worst itch scale was a simple assessment tool that participants used to report the intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) in which 0 indicated no itching while 10 indicated worst itching possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, and follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as the worse of the scores for the 2 questions. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized).
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -25.9 Percent change | Standard Error 2.9 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -54.6 Percent change | Standard Error 2.89 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Percent Change From Baseline in Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score at Week 16 | -57.0 Percent change | Standard Error 2.77 |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-38.76, -23.26]ANCOVA
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [-36.47, -20.82]ANCOVA
Secondary
Proportion of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Medication-free Days From Baseline to Week 16
Proportion of TCS medication-free days is calculated as the number of days that a participant used neither TCS/TCI nor system rescue therapy divided by the study days of each period. The FAS included all randomized participants. Efficacy analyses were based on the treatment allocated at randomization (as randomized). Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1), Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Proportion of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Medication-free Days From Baseline to Week 16 | 0.11 Proportion of Days | Standard Deviation 0.185 |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Proportion of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Medication-free Days From Baseline to Week 16 | 0.20 Proportion of Days | Standard Deviation 0.23 |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Proportion of Topical Corticosteroid (TCS) Medication-free Days From Baseline to Week 16 | 0.19 Proportion of Days | Standard Deviation 0.207 |
Secondary
Time to Achieve ≥ 3 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period
The worst itch scale: a simple assessment tool that participants used to report intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) where 0 (no itching) & 10 (worst itching) possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, & follow-up period). Daily worst itch score was calculated as worse of scores for 2 questions. FAS was used. Time to event is calculated in weeks as (date of first event - date of first dose)/7. The event of NRS reduction ≥ 3 was based on observed data without setting data to be non-responder after rescue treatment use. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint & NA represents Not computable as only 21.1% of participants achieved NRS reduction during 16-week treatment period & hence median time to achieve ≥ 3-point reduction of NRS for placebo +TCS treated participants could not be reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 3 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | NA Weeks |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 3 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | 6.0 Weeks |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 3 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | 5.0 Weeks |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.631, 3.182]Cox model
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.481, 2.908]Cox model
Secondary
Time to Achieve ≥ 4 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period
The worst itch scale: simple assessment tool that participants used to report intensity of their pruritus (itch). This was an 11-point scale (0 to 10) where 0 (no itching) and 10 (worst itching) possible. Participants were asked to answer 2 questions daily throughout the entire study (screening period, treatment period, & follow-up period). The daily worst itch score was calculated as worse of scores for 2 questions. FAS was used. Time to event is calculated in weeks as (date of first event - date of first dose)/7. The event of NRS reduction ≥ 4 was based on observed data without setting data to be non-responder after rescue treatment use. Here Number of participants analyzed = number of participants who were evaluated for this specific endpoint & NA represents Not computable as only 12.3% of participants achieved NRS reduction during 16-week treatment period & hence median time to achieve ≥ 4-point reduction of NRS for placebo +TCS treated participants could not be reported.
Time frame: Baseline (Day 1) up to Week 16
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEDIAN) |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 4 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | NA Weeks |
| Dupilumab 300 mg Q4W + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 4 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | 10.0 Weeks |
| Dupilumab 100 mg or 200 mg Q2W + TCS | Time to Achieve ≥ 4 Point Reduction of Weekly Average of Daily Worst Itch Score From Baseline During the 16-week Treatment Period | 10.0 Weeks |
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.097, 4.624]Cox model
Comparison: A 2-sided hierarchical testing procedure was used for the primary and secondary endpoints in a pre-specified order. Testing was then performed sequentially in the order the endpoints are reported. The hierarchical testing sequence continued only when the previous endpoint was statistically significant at 0.05 level.p-value: <0.000195% CI: [1.957, 4.36]Cox model