Abstract
Oral Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), a class of advanced targeted systemic therapy, have demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Like other small molecules, oral JAKi have the potential for off-target effects including laboratory-related adverse events (AEs). Product labels for oral JAKi recommend an initial laboratory assessment and follow-up 4–12 weeks later to monitor for potential changes, based on evidence from clinical trials across therapeutic indications for oral JAKi, which may not reflect a population of moderate-to-severe AD patients typically seen in routine clinical practice. To address this gap, a panel of eight dermatologists with clinical and research experience with oral JAKi for the management of AD conducted a targeted review of the literature focused on key laboratory-related AEs associated with oral JAKi in the moderate-to-severe AD population. Based on the synthesis of evidence and informed opinion, a set of best practice statements related to fundamental standards of care and consensus recommendations on laboratory monitoring were suggested, and level of agreement was ascertained using a Likert scale from 0 to 100. There was a high level of agreement on three of the four suggested recommendations related to assessment and monitoring of key laboratory parameters and to dose reduction or switching in response to laboratory changes; there was a lower level of agreement related to the frequency of ongoing laboratory monitoring. Appropriate patient selection and laboratory assessment is an important strategy to mitigate the potential risks associated with oral JAKi when treating AD.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Oral Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi) have emerged as an important addition to the management of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). |
Appropriate patient selection and laboratory assessment can mitigate the potential risks associated with oral JAKi treatment when treating patients with AD. |
Baseline assessment of laboratory parameters should be conducted prior to initiating oral JAKi treatment in patients with AD. |
Repeat laboratory parameters between 8 and 12 weeks will identify the majority of patients with AD who are susceptible to drug-related adverse events from oral JAKi treatment. |
Ongoing laboratory assessment is generally unnecessary in patients with AD treated with oral JAKi who do not exhibit clinically meaningful changes between 8 and 12 weeks. |
Introduction
Atopic dermatitis (AD), an inflammatory skin disease affecting a large proportion of children and a smaller proportion of adults, is a common reason for dermatology referral [1]. Since AD is often variable in intensity and usually of lower disease burden, emollients and topical therapies are the mainstay of treatment. Systemic therapies are arguably more likely to succeed in treating higher disease burden AD when success is measured by skin clearance, itch control, and quality of life (QoL) improvement [2, 3]. Biologics that are therapeutically beneficial have identified cytokines which play key roles in the immune-mediated inflammatory pathways underlying AD including interleukin (IL)-4, IL-13, and IL-31. Signaling of these cytokines is primarily mediated through the Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) signaling pathway [4,5,6], making JAK inhibition a rational therapeutic target for reducing inflammation in AD.
Janus kinases are ubiquitous cytoplasmic proteins comprised of four different receptor-associated tyrosine kinases: JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) [6]. JAK inhibitors (JAKi) are small molecules that block one or more JAK isoforms and prevent the transduction of signals from the cell surface to the nucleus where gene transcription is regulated [6]. Non-selective oral JAKi such as tofacitinib and ruxolitinib were first approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and myelodysplastic disorders, respectively [7]. More recently, JAKi have been studied in inflammatory skin diseases including AD. To date, three oral agents (the non-selective JAKi, baricitinib, and the selective JAK1 inhibitors, abrocitinib and upadacitinib) and two topical agents (the non-selective JAKi, ruxolitinib and delgocitinib) [8,9,10] have been approved by regulatory authorities for the treatment of AD (Table 1) [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]; several other JAKi are in various stages of development. JAKi have reported promising outcomes in numerous other inflammatory skin diseases [20], with expanded indications expected in the near future [12].
Like many small molecules, oral JAKi increase the risk of off-target effects including laboratory-related adverse events (AEs). As a class, they have been associated with signals for serious AEs, largely based on data from the first-generation, non-selective JAKi. Indeed, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [21], the European Medicines Agency (EMA) [22], and Health Canada [23] have mandated boxed warnings for the entire class of oral JAKi. Boxed warnings were recently updated based on findings from a surveillance study of oral tofacitinib versus tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in RA that showed an increased incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and malignancy, with a resultant increase in mortality [24]. This is in stark contrast to other real-world studies, which do not substantiate an increased risk of MACE in RA patients treated with oral JAKi [25, 26]. Moreover, patients with RA have different characteristics, risk profiles, and prior drug exposures relative to patients with AD, who tend to be younger with a lower prevalence of cardiometabolic comorbidities, such as hypertension and chronic kidney disease [27]. Reassuringly, systematic reviews on the safety of oral JAKi used in AD populations suggest low rates of these serious AEs overall [28, 29] and relative to traditional systemic therapies used in moderate-to-severe AD, such as methotrexate and cyclosporine [30].
There is currently limited published literature to help dermatologists navigate appropriate laboratory monitoring of AD patients treated with oral JAKi. Product labels incorporate conservative recommendations to inform clinical decision-making, including appropriate patient selection and subsequent monitoring (Table 2). However, the recommendations are agnostic to indication and are based on evidence from clinical trials in a broad range of patient populations including those with systemic inflammatory disorders unrelated to AD. To address this gap, this review summarizes the available evidence on the laboratory-related AEs associated with oral JAKi and offers a practical approach to monitoring in AD patients treated with these agents.
This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed in the study.
Methods
The lead authors (Mark G. Kirchhof, Vimal H. Prajapati, and Kim A. Papp) convened a panel of dermatologists with clinical and research experience with oral JAKi for the management of AD and agreed on key laboratory-related AEs to address based on an overview of the literature on oral JAKi used in the treatment of AD. Subsequently, they conducted a directed PubMed literature search for each identified AE with a focus on integrated safety analyses from the Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials for each oral JAKi. Evidence from real-world studies was excluded since it is derived from poorly defined populations thereby making it difficult to extract drug-associated events from population-associated events. The available evidence for safety of oral JAKi in AD was supplemented, where applicable, by evidence reported in other indications, recognizing that differences in risk rates may be attributable to differences in populations, underlying disease pathology, and concomitant medications as well as comorbidities.
The lead authors proposed practical suggestions on the approach to monitoring laboratory-related AEs based on a synthesis of the evidence, risk stratification, and informed opinion. Statements were categorized as those that are best practices that are fundamental to current standards of care and consensus recommendations that are based on expert opinion.
The following definitions and principles were used during the development of the statements:
-
Drug exposure (exposure) is the average serum level of a drug [31].
-
Adverse drug reactions (ADR) are exposure dependent with the likelihood of observing an abnormal drug-related AE increasing with an increase in exposure [32]. ADR are identified by observing dose-dependent event rates in a treated population that differ from the event rates seen in an untreated population. ADR include laboratory values that change as a result of treatment. In determining the importance of these changes, it is necessary to assess the potential for associated, consequential outcomes. Minimal changes relative to the range of normal are very unlikely to be of any consequence. Other parameters may be associated with future risk.
Following an approach similar to Papp et al. [33], all authors then independently voted on their level of agreement for each of the consensus recommendations (rated on a Likert scale from 0 to 100) with consensus expressed as the average level of support and a zone of confidence (i.e., lower and upper limit of agreement). The panel of authors agreed on a final set of best practice and consensus recommendations and finalized the content for the article through discussion and review.
Results
Overview of Laboratory-Related AEs and Safety Concerns Associated with Oral JAKi in Patients with AD
Integrated safety analyses for each oral JAKi approved in moderate-to-severe AD have been published and are described here in chronologic order from the date of their original publication [34,35,36]. Bieber et al. pooled baricitinib data from one Phase 2 study, five Phase 3 studies (BREEZE-AD1; BREEZE-AD2; BREEZE-AD4; BREEZE-AD5; BREEZE-AD7), and two long-term extension (LTE) studies (BREEZE-AD3; BREEZE-AD6) [37]. This integrated analysis was subsequently updated with an additional 105 patients and 2381 patient-years (PY) of follow-up; it thus offers the longest duration of follow-up (median 1.6 years, up to 3.9 years of continuous treatment) of the three oral JAKi approved in AD [34]. Simpson et al. pooled abrocitinib data from one Phase 2b study, four Phase 3 studies (MONO-1; MONO-2; COMPARE; REGIMEN), and one LTE study (EXTEND) of abrocitinib from the JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety (JADE) clinical trial program [35]. The maximum duration of drug exposure was 108 weeks, but only a minority of patients (6.9%) were exposed for 72 weeks or longer. Guttman-Yassky et al. pooled upadacitinib data from one Phase 2b study and three Phase 3 studies (MEASURE UP1; MEASURE UP2; AD Up) [36]. The mean duration of exposure was 405–415 days, with a maximum exposure of 818 days at the time of analysis. Unless otherwise noted, the incidence rates of laboratory-related AEs described below are derived from the integrated safety analyses.
A. Lipids
There is a consistent body of evidence from genetic, epidemiologic, and clinical studies implicating elevated levels of serum lipoproteins as a causal factor for the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and MACE [38]. The product labels for baricitinib, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib all include boxed warnings regarding a potentially increased risk of MACE [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. These warnings are based on data that showed an increased risk of MACE (defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], and nonfatal stroke) with oral tofacitinib compared with TNF inhibitors in patients with RA aged ≥ 50 years who had at least one cardiovascular risk factor [24].
A.1 In the pooled safety analyses of AD clinical trials, the incidence rates of MACE were 0.1–0.2 per 100 PY for baricitinib [34], 0.2 per 100 PY for abrocitinib [35], and ≤ 0.1 per 100 PY for upadacitinib [36]. In the baricitinib studies, patients who experienced MACE had at least one cardiovascular risk factor, except for one patient who had a hemorrhagic stroke as a result of a cerebral aneurysm that was not considered related to the study drug [39]. There were no associations between changes in lipid levels and MACE or other cardiovascular events reported with any of the three oral JAKi in clinical populations of AD patients [35,36,37].
A.2 In the pooled analyses of safety data from AD clinical trials for baricitinib, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib, dose-dependent increases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) were observed, without any notable changes in the LDL-C/HDL-C ratio [34,35,36].
A.3 The increases in LDL-C and HDL-C generally occurred early and remained elevated during long-term treatment; however, most patients had lipid levels below threshold values for dyslipidemia (3.5 mmol/L and 1.5 mmol/L, respectively) at baseline and most categorical increases remained below these levels [35, 37].
A.4 Elevations in triglycerides were reported only for baricitinib. In the placebo-controlled period (to Week 16), the incidence rates (IR) for triglycerides ≥ 5.6 mmol/l were similar between baricitinib treatment arms and placebo (0.6–0.8%) and they remained similar across both baricitinib groups during the extended follow-up (1.1–1.2%) [37].
A.5 The long-term clinical risk associated with elevated LDL-C, total cholesterol (TC)/HDL-C ratio, and non-HDL-C (which includes LDL-C, very LDL-C, and intermediate-density lipoprotein) is MACE [40, 41]. Evidence suggests that age-adjusted risk of MACE increases linearly with every 1 mmol/l increase in these values in both men and women, with the strongest associations for TC/HDL-C and non-HDL-C [42, 43].
Oral JAKi have been observed to increase some lipid parameters in RA patients, without any notable associations between lipid changes and MACE [44, 45]; this is not surprising since lipids must generally be elevated for decades before the risk of MACE increases appreciably [43]. In the AD clinical trials of oral JAKi, dose-dependent increases in both LDL-C and HDL-C were observed and relatively stable, but levels remained below threshold levels for dyslipidemia treatment [34,35,36]. Similar to RA clinical trials, there was no association between lipid elevations and MACE.
B. Hematologic
JAK inhibition has been associated with hematologic abnormalities including anemia, lymphopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia.
B.1 Platelet counts increased with baricitinib by Week 4 and remained elevated throughout treatment; however, there were no AEs related to increased platelets [34, 37]. Changes in hemoglobin, lymphocyte, and neutrophil counts were uncommon and mild or moderate in severity. No patients discontinued treatment with baricitinib due to changes in hematologic laboratory test results [37].
B.2 A dose-dependent decrease in median platelet count was observed by Week 4 after abrocitinib initiation and then subsequently increased and plateaued by Week 12, and levels remained below baseline values thereafter [35]. Only two patients (0.1%) receiving abrocitinib met discontinuation criteria for thrombocytopenia, both in the 200 mg group, and neither had a bleeding-related event. Abrocitinib was not associated with any significant changes in hemoglobin, lymphocyte, or neutrophil counts [35]. Four patients in the abrocitinib 200 mg group discontinued treatment due to lymphopenia; these events occurred in older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) with three of four events occurring during the first 4 weeks of treatment [35].
B.3 Upadacitinib was associated with dose-dependent increases in rates of anemia, neutropenia, and lymphopenia [36]. Grade 3 events were reported for anemia (≤ 0.3%), neutropenia (≤ 1.5%), and lymphopenia (≤ 1.0%), while Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in two patients (0.2%) in the 30 mg group. Most neutropenia events occurred during the first 16 weeks of upadacitinib exposure, whereas mean lymphocyte levels initially increased before returning to baseline with continued treatment. Few patients discontinued treatment because of cytopenias [36].
The available data suggest that hematologic changes observed with baricitinib, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib in patients with AD were generally mild and/or not clinically meaningful and not associated with cellular dysfunction that would potentially increase the risk of infections. Most hematologic changes occurred early after treatment initiation, generally resolved over time, infrequently led to treatment discontinuation, and were not associated with AEs including infections [35,36,37].
C. Hepatobiliary
C.1 In pooled analyses of safety data from AD clinical trials, no or very few clinically meaningful changes in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels were observed with baricitinib [34, 37]. Overall, treatment with baricitinib was associated with a small dose-dependent increase in ALT levels, but rates were similar to placebo [34, 37]; most cases of elevated transaminases were transient and asymptomatic, with no relation to liver injury [37].
C.2 While there were no clinically meaningful changes in ALT over time with abrocitinib and no associations between changes in liver enzyme levels and hepatic-related AEs, there was a low incidence of ALT > 3 times the upper limit of normal in all study arms (0.5% for each of abrocitinib 100 mg and 200 mg relative to 1.5% for placebo) [35, 46].
C.3 Dose-dependent elevations in ALT and AST were observed with upadacitinib [36]. Most of these AEs were transient and mild or moderate in severity; Grade 2 events (defined as ≥ 3 times the upper limit of normal) were uncommon overall (≤ 1.4% for increased ALT and ≤ 1.2% for increased AST vs. 1.1% and 0.9%, respectively, for placebo) [19]. No hepatic abnormalities were considered serious and treatment discontinuations due to these events were rare (≤ 0.4 per 100 PY).
Although the clinical risk associated with elevated liver enzymes is hepatic injury, there was no association observed between changes in liver enzyme tests and hepatic-related AEs in the AD clinical trials for baricitinib, abrocitinib, or upadacitinib [34,35,36,37].
D. Creatine Phosphokinase
D.1 JAK inhibition has been associated with increases in creatine phosphokinase (CPK) levels [47]. A preclinical study suggests that this effect may be related to reversal of inflammation-associated inhibition of myoblast differentiation [48], but other studies suggest that CPK is inversely associated with systemic inflammatory markers in the general population [49]. The relationship between CPK and inflammation, and its clinical implications, has yet to be confirmed.
In the integrated safety analyses from AD clinical trials for baricitinib, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib, increased CPK was the most common laboratory-related AE and occurred in a dose-dependent manner with each agent [34,35,36].
D.2 Most cases of increases in CPK levels occurred early during treatment and were transient, asymptomatic, and nonserious and infrequently led to treatment discontinuation.
There were no rhabdomyolysis events reported with baricitinib [34] or abrocitinib [35]. One rhabdomyolysis event was reported with upadacitinib in a 23-year-old male patient; the event resolved after intravenous hydration, and the investigators considered there to be a reasonable possibility that it was etiologically related to upadacitinib [36]. Other than this single case, there was no apparent clinical consequence of elevations in CPK levels.
An Approach to Monitoring and Management of Oral JAKi-Associated Laboratory AEs and Other Safety Concerns in Patients with AD
Based on the above synthesis of the evidence and informed opinion of the authors, six best practice statements related to fundamental standards of care were proposed (Table 3). Four additional consensus recommendations were proposed and level of agreement was ascertained (Table 4). Overall, there was a high level of agreement (i.e., ≥ 90) for three of four proposed recommendations for laboratory monitoring of AD patients receiving oral JAKi in the clinical setting.
Discussion
There is an accumulating body of evidence supporting the safety of oral JAKi in the treatment of AD [29, 34,35,36, 39]. Nonetheless, the respective product labels of the three currently approved oral JAKi for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD recommend laboratory assessments prior to initiating treatment and after 4–12 weeks of treatment initiation and then according to routine patient management thereafter [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19]. These recommendations are based on evidence from clinical trials across all indications for oral JAKi, and they may not be representative of the moderate-to-severe AD patients routinely seen in clinical practice. Therefore, a practical set of suggestions on the approach to monitoring laboratory-related AEs was proposed based on a thorough review of the available evidence from clinical trials including their long-term extensions, risk stratification, and informed opinion. Six best practice statements related to standards of care were suggested, and four additional recommendations were voted on by a panel of dermatologists with clinical and research expertise with oral JAKi for treating AD to ascertain the level of support for each of these recommendations.
The statement with the lowest level of agreement and the widest spread was related to ongoing laboratory monitoring (median level of agreement, 80 [range 59–100]). This could reflect individual dermatologists’ level of comfort with monitoring and managing laboratory-related AEs and the evolving evidence base on the long-term safety of oral JAKi in AD. To date, the longest published follow-up of AD patients treated with an oral JAKi was reported by Bieber et al. (2023) [34]. In their integrated safety analysis of eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the median duration of treatment with abrocitinib was 1.6 years with some patients having over 3.5 years of continuous exposure. Changes in laboratory parameters, including LDL-C, HDL-C, platelets, lymphocytes, neutrophils, and ALT, generally occurred during the first 4 to 8 weeks of treatment and then stabilized thereafter out to 120 weeks. Although these observations are derived from mean changes in the study population and not individual-level data, it is reassuring that there were no changes of clinical relevance over > 2 years of continuous treatment. The probability of a causal association between an oral JAKi and a de novo laboratory-related AE after 12 or more months of treatment is extremely small; however, dermatologists should use their clinical judgement in the context of an individual patient as well as regional standards of practice to guide their decisions related to ongoing laboratory monitoring.
Oral JAKi are small molecules, and, as such, they are associated with a potential for drug-drug interactions. As a part of appropriate patient selection and good clinical practice, dermatologists should consider the concomitant medications an individual patient is taking when prescribing an oral JAKi. The three available oral JAKis for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD differ in their drug metabolism and thus potential for cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated drug interactions (Table 1) [13, 14, 17]; dermatologists should therefore consult the respective product labels for each agent and concomitant medications when prescribing. Notably, multiple CYP enzymes are involved in the metabolism of abrocitinib; its dose should be reduced by half in patients concomitantly receiving strong inhibitors of CYP2C19 (e.g., fluconazole; fluvoxamine; fluoxetine) or moderate inhibitors of CYP2C9 (e.g., amiodarone; fluconazole), and it should be avoided in patients who are taking strong inducers of CYP enzymes (e.g., rifampin) [14]. In contrast, baricitinib and upadacitinib are minimally metabolized by CYP34A (10% and 34%, respectively) [11, 17]. Beyond drug interactions, there is also the theoretical potential for additive adverse effects on laboratory parameters. Therefore, prescribers should consult the respective product labels of concomitantly prescribed medications and consider their propensity for causing abnormalities in hematologic parameters, lipid profile, as well as liver enzyme and CPK levels when co-prescribing oral JAKi.
To our knowledge, this is the first set of practical consensus recommendations on the laboratory monitoring of patients receiving oral JAKi for the treatment of moderate-to-severe AD. Strengths include the practical and non-prescriptive nature of the recommendations that are informed by the available evidence from RCTs, physiologic plausibility, and risk stratification and informed opinion of a panel of dermatologists with clinical and research expertise in the use of oral JAKi in patients with AD. Unlike formal guidelines [50], our approach allows for flexibility such that final decisions are made between the clinician and patient. Our approach has limitations including the inclusion of clinical trial data only, which captures a limited duration of treatment, and the inability to account for individual clinical situations and the exclusion of real-world evidence, which also plays a role in informing clinical management decisions.
Conclusions
Oral JAKi have emerged as an important addition to the management of moderate-to-severe AD. As with any medication, appropriate patient selection and laboratory assessment is an important strategy to mitigate the potential risks associated with oral JAKi when treating AD. This set of practical recommendations offers an approach to laboratory monitoring in AD patients receiving oral JAKi based on a synthesis of the available evidence, risk stratification, and informed opinion. As oral JAKi are integrated into the clinical management of moderate-to-severe AD, expanding experience and comfort in monitoring and managing laboratory-related AEs will increase.
Data Availability
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
References
Peck GM, Roberson FA, Feldman SR. Why do patients in the United States seek care from dermatologists? Dermatol Ther. 2022;12(4):1065–72.
Simpson EL, Bruin-Weller M, Flohr C, et al. When does atopic dermatitis warrant systemic therapy? Recommendations from an expert panel of the International Eczema Council. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77(4):623–33.
Megna M, Napolitano M, Patruno C, et al. Systemic treatment of adult atopic dermatitis: a review. Dermatol Ther. 2016;7(1):1–23.
Hunt AE, Williams LM, Lali FV, Foxwell BMJ. IL-4 regulation of p38 MAPK signalling is dependent on cell type. Cytokine. 2002;18(6):295–303.
Lee PJ, Zhang X, Shan P, et al. ERK1/2 mitogen-activated protein kinase selectively mediates IL-13–induced lung inflammation and remodeling in vivo. J Clin Invest. 2006;116(1):163–73.
O’Shea JJ, Kontzias A, Yamaoka K, Tanaka Y, Laurence A. Janus kinase inhibitors in autoimmune diseases. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(suppl 2):ii111–5.
Banerjee S, Biehl A, Gadina M, Hasni S, Schwartz DM. JAK–STAT signaling as a target for inflammatory and autoimmune diseases: current and future prospects. Drugs. 2017;77(5):521–46.
OPZELURA (ruxolitinib cream) prescribing information. [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Jul 12]. https://www.opzelura.com/prescribing-information.pdf.
OPZELURA (ruxolitinib cream). Summary of Product Characteristics. [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Jul 12]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/opzelura-epar-product-information_en.pdf.
Japan Tobacco. Listing on the Japanese National Health Insurance Drug Price List and Launch of CORECTIM(R) Ointment 0.25% in Japan [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 Jul 12]. https://www.torii.co.jp/en/release/2021/20210526_E1.pdf.
Lilly USA. OLUMIANT (baricitinib) prescribing information [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://pi.lilly.com/us/olumiant-uspi.pdf.
Eli Lilly. OLUMIANT (baricitinib) summary of product characteristics [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Nov 6]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/olumiant-epar-product-information_en.pdf.
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. OLUMIANT (baricitinib) product monograph [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://pdf.hres.ca/dpd_pm/00066474.PDF.
Pfizer Inc. CIBINQO (abrocitinib) prescribing information. [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?format=PDF&id=16652.
Pfizer Europe. CIBINQO (abrocitinib) summary of product characteristics [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/cibinqo-epar-product-information_en.pdf.
Pfizer Canada. CIBINQO (abrocitinib) product monograph [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://www.pfizer.ca/files/CIBINQO_PM_EN.pdf.
AbbVie Inc. RINVOQ (upadacitinib) prescribing information. [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://www.rxabbvie.com/pdf/rinvoq_pi.pdf.
AbbVie GmBH. RINVOQ (upadacitinib) summary of product characteristics [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/rinvoq-epar-product-information_en.pdf.
AbbVie Corporation. RINVOQ (upadacitinib) product monograph [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 6]. https://pdf.hres.ca/dpd_pm/00068075.PDF.
Shalabi MMK, Garcia B, Coleman K, Siller A, Miller AC, Tyring SK. Janus kinase and tyrosine kinase inhibitors in dermatology: a review of their utilization, safety profile and future applications. Skin Ther Lett. 2022;27(1):4–9.
Kragstrup TW, Glintborg B, Svensson AL, et al. Waiting for JAK inhibitor safety data. RMD Open. 2022;8(1): e002236.
EMA. European Medicines Agency. 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 22]. EMA confirms measures to minimise risk of serious side effects with Janus kinase inhibitors for chronic inflammatory disorders. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/ema-confirms-measures-minimise-risk-serious-side-effects-janus-kinase-inhibitors-chronic.
Government of Canada. Janus Kinase Inhibitors and the Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, Thrombosis (Including Fatal Events) and Malignancy—Recalls, advisories and safety alerts—Canada.ca [Internet]. Government of Canada, Health Canada, Marketed health products; 2022 [cited 2023 Jan 29]. https://recalls-rappels.canada.ca/en/alert-recall/janus-kinase-inhibitors-and-risk-major-adverse-cardiovascular-events-thrombosis.
Ytterberg SR, Bhatt DL, Mikuls TR, et al. Cardiovascular and cancer risk with tofacitinib in rheumatoid arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(4):316–26.
Hoisnard L, Vegas LP, Dray-Spira R, Weill A, Zureik M, Sbidian E. Risk of major adverse cardiovascular and venous thromboembolism events in patients with rheumatoid arthritis exposed to JAK inhibitors versus adalimumab: a nationwide cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2023;82(2):182–8.
Khosrow-Khavar F, Kim SC, Lee H, Lee SB, Desai RJ. Tofacitinib and risk of cardiovascular outcomes: results from the Safety of TofAcitinib in Routine care patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis (STAR-RA) study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2022;81(6):798–804.
Montez-Rath ME, Lubwama R, Kapphahn K, et al. Characterizing real world safety profile of oral Janus kinase inhibitors among adult atopic dermatitis patients: evidence transporting from the rheumatoid arthritis population. Curr Med Res Opin. 2022;38(8):1431–7.
Wood H, Chandler A, Nezamololama N, Papp K, Gooderham MJ. Safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in the short-term treatment of atopic dermatitis. Int J Dermatol. 2022;61(6):746–54.
Le M, Berman-Rosa M, Ghazawi FM, et al. Systematic review on the efficacy and safety of oral janus kinase inhibitors for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021;8: 682547.
Daniele S, Bunick C. JAK inhibitor safety compared to traditional systemic immunosuppressive therapies. J Drugs Dermatol. 2022;21(12):1298–303.
Brunton L, Chabner BA, Knollman B. Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 12th Edition.pdf [Internet]. [cited 2023 May 9]. https://www.docdroid.net/JDeELxO/goodman-gilmans-the-pharmacological-basis-of-therapeutics-12th-edition-pdf.
Coleman JJ, Pontefract SK. Adverse drug reactions. Clin Med. 2016;16(5):481–5.
Papp KA, Beecker J, Cooper C, et al. Use of systemic therapies for treatment of psoriasis in people living with controlled HIV: inference-based guidance from a multidisciplinary expert panel. Dermatol Ther. 2022;12(5):1073–89.
Bieber T, Katoh N, Simpson EL, et al. Safety of baricitinib for the treatment of atopic dermatitis over a median of 1.6 years and up to 3.9 years of treatment: an updated integrated analysis of eight clinical trials. J Dermatol Treat. 2023;34(1):2161812.
Simpson EL, Silverberg JI, Nosbaum A, et al. Integrated safety analysis of abrocitinib for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis from the phase II and phase III clinical trial program. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021;22(5):693–707.
Guttman-Yassky E, Thyssen JP, Silverberg JI, et al. Safety of upadacitinib in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: an integrated analysis of phase 3 studies. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2023;151(1):172–81.
Bieber T, Thyssen JP, Reich K, et al. Pooled safety analysis of baricitinib in adult patients with atopic dermatitis from 8 randomized clinical trials. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;35(2):476–85.
Ference BA, Ginsberg HN, Graham I, et al. Low-density lipoproteins cause atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. 1. Evidence from genetic, epidemiologic, and clinical studies. A consensus statement from the European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(32):2459–72.
King B, Maari C, Lain E, et al. Extended safety analysis of baricitinib 2 mg in adult patients with atopic dermatitis: an integrated analysis from eight randomized clinical trials. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2021;22(3):395–405.
Brunner FJ, Waldeyer C, Ojeda F, et al. Application of non-HDL cholesterol for population-based cardiovascular risk stratification: results from the Multinational Cardiovascular Risk Consortium. Lancet. 2019;394(10215):2173–83.
Allan GM, Lindblad AJ, Hudson B, et al. Simplified lipid guidelines: prevention and management of cardiovascular disease in primary care. Can Fam Physician. 2015;61(10):857–67.
Prospective Studies Collaboration, Lewington S, Whitlock G, et al. Blood cholesterol and vascular mortality by age, sex, and blood pressure: a meta-analysis of individual data from 61 prospective studies with 55,000 vascular deaths. Lancet. 2007;370(9602):1829–39.
Domanski MJ, Tian X, Wu CO, et al. Time course of LDL cholesterol exposure and cardiovascular disease event risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76(13):1507–16.
Choy EHS, Miceli-Richard C, González-Gay MA, et al. The effect of JAK1/JAK2 inhibition in rheumatoid arthritis: efficacy and safety of baricitinib. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2019;37(4):694–704.
Taylor PC, Kremer JM, Emery P, et al. Lipid profile and effect of statin treatment in pooled phase II and phase III baricitinib studies. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(7):988–95.
European Medicines Agency. Assessment report: Cibinqo [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 May 25]. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/cibinqo-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf.
Fleischmann R. Recent issues in JAK inhibitor safety: perspective for the clinician. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2022;18(3):295–307.
Queeney K, Housley W, Sokolov J, Long A. Fri0131 Elucidating the mechanism underlying creatine phosphokinase upregulation with upadacitinib. Ann Rheum Dis. 2019;78(Suppl 2):734–5.
Bekkelund SI, Johnsen SH. Creatine kinase is associated with reduced inflammation in a general population: the Tromsø study. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(5): e0198133.
Woolf SH, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ. 1999;318(7182):527–30.
Simpson EL, Lacour JP, Spelman L, et al. Baricitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids: results from two randomized monotherapy phase III trials. Br J Dermatol. 2020;183(2):242–55.
Reich K, Kabashima K, Peris K, et al. Efficacy and safety of baricitinib combined with topical corticosteroids for treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(12):1333–43.
Bieber T, Reich K, Paul C, et al. Efficacy and safety of baricitinib in combination with topical corticosteroids in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with inadequate response, intolerance or contraindication to ciclosporin: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III clinical trial (BREEZE-AD4). Br J Dermatol. 2022;187(3):338–52.
Simpson EL, Sinclair R, Forman S, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (JADE MONO-1): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10246):255–66.
Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Thyssen JP, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(8):863–73.
Eichenfield LF, Flohr C, Sidbury R, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in combination with topical therapy in adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: the JADE TEEN randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(10):1165–73.
Bieber T, Simpson EL, Silverberg JI, et al. Abrocitinib versus placebo or dupilumab for atopic dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(12):1101–12.
Reich K, Thyssen JP, Blauvelt A, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib versus dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2022;400(10348):273–82.
Blauvelt A, Silverberg JI, Lynde CW, et al. Abrocitinib induction, randomized withdrawal, and retreatment in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: results from the JAK1 Atopic Dermatitis Efficacy and Safety (JADE) REGIMEN phase 3 trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86(1):104–12.
Reich K, Silverberg JI, Papp KA, et al. Abrocitinib efficacy and safety in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: results from phase 3 studies, including the long-term extension JADE EXTEND study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37(10):2056–66.
Guttman-Yassky E, Teixeira HD, Simpson EL, et al. Once-daily upadacitinib versus placebo in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (Measure Up 1 and Measure Up 2): results from two replicate double-blind, randomised controlled phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2021;397(10290):2151–68.
Reich K, Teixeira HD, de Bruin-Weller M, et al. Safety and efficacy of upadacitinib in combination with topical corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD Up): results from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2021;397(10290):2169–81.
Blauvelt A, Teixeira HD, Simpson EL, et al. Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib vs dupilumab in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(9):1047–55.
Simpson EL, Papp KA, Blauvelt A, et al. Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. JAMA Dermatol. 2022;158(4):404–13.
Medical Writing Assistance
Christina Clark, MSc at CC Medical Writing Inc. (Mansonville, QC) provided professional medical writing services in the form of editorial and administrative support for this manuscript, funded by unrestricted grants provided by AbbVie and Pfizer to the Dermatology Association of Ontario.
Funding
Unrestricted grants were provided by AbbVie and Pfizer to the Dermatology Association of Ontario. These grants were pooled and used to pay for medical writing assistance and for the journal’s rapid service fee. Funders did not influence the content of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Mark G. Kirchhof, Vimal H. Prajapati and Kim A. Papp contributed to the article conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Mark G. Kirchhof, Vimal H. Prajapati and Kim A. Papp. The manuscript was initially drafted by Mark G. Kirchhof, Vimal H. Prajapati and Kim A. Papp and multiple rounds of content review and revisions were undertaken with all authors (Mark G. Kirchhof, Vimal H. Prajapati, Melinda Gooderham, Chih-ho Hong, Charles W. Lynde, Catherine Maari, Irina Turchin, and Kim A. Papp) before article finalization. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors disclose the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Mark G. Kirchhof has been an advisor, consultant and/or speaker for: AbbVie, Arcutis, Bausch Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, Recordati, Sun Pharma, Therakos, and UCB. Vimal H. Prajapati has been an advisor, consultant, and/or speaker for: AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, Apogee Therapeutics, Aralez, Arcutis, Aspen, Bausch Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Canadian Psoriasis Network, Celgene, Cipher, Eczema Society of Canada, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Homeocan, Janssen, LEO Pharma, L’Oréal, Medexus, Novartis, Organon, Pediapharm, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, Sun Pharma, Tribute, and UCB; investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, AnaptysBio, Arcutis, Arena, Asana, Bausch Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Concert, Dermavant, Dermira, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Nimbus Lakshmi, Novartis, Pfizer, RAPT Therapeutics, Regeneron, Reistone, Sanofi Genzyme, Takeda, and UCB; and received grants from: AbbVie, Bausch Health, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, and Sanofi Genzyme. Melinda Gooderham has been a speaker, investigator, consultant or advisory board member for: AbbVie, Acelyrin, Amgen, Akros, AnaptysBio, Apogee, Arcutis, Aristea, Aslan, Bausch Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Coherus, Dermira, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Incyte, InMagene, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, LEO Pharma, Medimmune, Merck, Moonlake, Nimbus, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Reistone, Sanofi Genzyme, Sun Pharmaceuticals, Takeda, Tarsus, UCB, Union and Ventyx. Chih-ho Hong has been an investigator and/or consultant and/or speaker for: AbbVie, Amgen, Arcutis, Bausch Health, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bristol Meyers Squibb, Celgene, Cutanea, Dermira, Dermavant, DS Biopharma, Eli Lilly, Galderma, GSK, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Medimmune, Merck, Mirimar, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Genzyme, Roche, and UCB. Charles W. Lynde has been a speaker, consultant, or principal investigator for: AbbVie, Acelyrin, Akros, Altius, Amgen, Aralez, Arcutis, Avillion, Bausch Health, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, Cipher, Concert, Dermavant, Devonian, Eli Lilly, Evelo, Fresnius Kabi, Galderma, GSK, InCyte, Innovaderm, Intega Skin, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, La Roche Posay, LEO Pharma, L’Oreal, Medexus, MedX, Merck, MoonLake, Novartis, P&G, Pediapharm, Pfizer, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Sandoz, Sentrex, Sun Pharma, TEVA, Tribute, UCB, Valeant, Viatris, and Volo Health. Catherine Maari has been an advisor, an investigator, a consultant and/or speaker for: AbbVie, Apogee, Arcutis, Bausch Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Nimbus, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi Genzyme, Sun Pharma, Tarsus, Ventyx and UCB. Irina Turchin has been a speaker, consultant, or principal investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, Arcutis, Bausch Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Incyte, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Mallinckrodt, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, and UCB. Kim A. Papp has been a speaker, investigator, consultant, advisory board member, and/or scientific officer for: AbbVie, Acelyrin, Akros, Amgen, Anacor, Aralez Pharmaceuticals, Arcutis, Avillion, Bausch Health/Valeant, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Can-Fite Biopharma, Celgene, Celltrion, Coherus, CorEvitas, Dermavant, Dermira, Dice Pharmaceuticals, Dow Pharma, Eli Lilly, Evelo, Forbion, Galderma, Gilead, GSK, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, LEO Pharma, Meiji Seika Pharma, Merck (MSD), Mitsubishi Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Reistone, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis/Genzyme, Sandoz, Sun Pharma, Takeda, UCB, vTv Therapeutics, and Xencor.
Ethical Approval
This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kirchhof, M.G., Prajapati, V.H., Gooderham, M. et al. Practical Recommendations on Laboratory Monitoring in Patients with Atopic Dermatitis on Oral JAK Inhibitors. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 14, 2653–2668 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-024-01243-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13555-024-01243-8