Absolute Eczema Area and Severity Index Responses with Lebrikizumab in Patients with Moderate-to-severe Atopic Dermatitis: A Secondary Analysis of Two Phase 3 Trials
- Journal
- Acta Dermato-Venereologica (Q1)
- Published
- 21 May 2026
- Study design
- Randomized controlled trial
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1b)
- Authors
- Diamant Thaçi, Luis Puig, Sei-Ichiro Motegi, Kim Papp, Linda Stein Gold, Leon Kircik, et al.
- PMID
- 42163822
- DOI
- 10.2340/actadv.v106.adv-2025-0160
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Dermatology (top studies of the week, 25 October 2026): Post‑hoc absolute EASI response analysis of lebrikizumab trials
Abstract
The ADvocate trials (NCT04146363, NCT04178967) investigated adults/adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) receiving lebrikizumab (LEB) monotherapy, using percent improvement in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI). In clinical trials, percent EASI improvement is used to compare study arms and measure treatment effect size/impact. In clinical practice, however, absolute EASI scores are used (especially in Europe), as they measure an individual's disease state regardless of baseline severity. This post-hoc analysis assessed absolute EASI response - EASI≤7, ≤5, ≤3, and ≤1 - from the ADvocate trials to understand LEB efficacy in adults/adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. Week-16 data from patients receiving LEB 250 mg Q2W (n=564) were compared with placebo (n=287). Across baseline moderate/severe/very severe EASI and baseline Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 3/4, significantly higher percentages of patients receiving LEB than those receiving placebo achieved each absolute EASI response. Week--16 LEB EASI 75 responders (n=284) and per-protocol LEB non-responders (n=215) were assessed through week 52. Absolute EASI scores were generally low and stable among responders and reduced among non-responders. Overall, LEB was associated with high rates of durable absolute EASI response, even in cases of high baseline severity or suboptimal week-16 outcomes. Results reflect clinically meaningful improvements that could help guide clinical practice.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.