Dupilumab versus tralokinumab in atopic dermatitis: A propensity score adjusted comparison from BioDay

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab and tralokinumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) target the type 2 axis through different mechanisms of action, which may lead to variation in effectiveness and safety. Head-to-head trials, however, are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of dupilumab and tralokinumab in AD. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled biologic-/Janus kinase inhibitor-naïve AD patients (≥12 years) from the BioDay registry who initiated dupilumab or tralokinumab between November 2021 and September 2024. Visits were scheduled at baseline, 4 weeks and every 3 months up to 52 weeks. Effectiveness outcomes included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), weekly mean pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), treat-to-target thresholds (EASI ≤ 7; NRS-pruritus ≤ 4, with patients discontinuing treatment considered non-responders) and drug survival. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed at each visit. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance treatment groups. RESULTS: In total, 750 patients were included (643 dupilumab; 107 tralokinumab). After IPTW, baseline characteristics were well balanced. During follow-up, dupilumab patients had lower EASI scores than tralokinumab patients, although differences were not consistently statistically significant (p = 0.10). NRS-pruritus scores were significantly lower with dupilumab at all visits (p < 0.0001), mean differences did not exceed the 2-point clinical relevance threshold. The probability of achieving EASI ≤ 7 and NRS-pruritus ≤ 4 was higher with dupilumab (both p < 0.0001), with risk differences of 34.7% and 40.2% at 52 weeks, respectively. After 52 weeks, dupilumab drug survival was 92.6% vs. 70.6% for tralokinumab. Ocular surface disease incidence was similar (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.6, p = 0.94) between treatments, leading to discontinuation of dupilumab in n = 23 (3.4/100 PY) and tralokinumab in n = 5 (5.4/100 PY). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world comparison, dupilumab provided superior effectiveness compared with tralokinumab. In responders continuing treatment, EASI and NRS-pruritus differences were small. More substantial differences were observed when treatment targets EASI ≤ 7 and NRS-pruritus ≤ 4, and discontinuation rates were taken into account.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Published
2026-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.70442
Primary Topic
Dermatology and Skin Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dupilumab versus tralokinumab in atopic dermatitis: A propensity score adjusted comparison from BioDay

Simone Stadhouders‐Keet, I Haeck, Klaziena Politiek, Francine C. van Erp et al.
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Dermatology and Skin Diseases
article

Dupilumab versus tralokinumab in atopic dermatitis: A propensity score adjusted comparison from BioDay

Simone Stadhouders‐Keet, I Haeck, Klaziena Politiek, Francine C. van Erp, Veroniek E. M. Harbers, Anneke M.T. van Lynden-van Nes, Wouter R. H. Touwslager, Lian F. van der Gang, Marlies de Graaf, Annebeth Flinterman, Nicolaas P. A. Zuithoff, Berit Velstra, Antoni Gostyński, Albert J. Oosting, Anne-Moon van Tuyll van Serooskerken, S. Stewart, Marie L. A. Schuttelaar, Hoo‐Yin Lam, Marjolein S. de Bruin‐Weller
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab and tralokinumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) target the type 2 axis through different mechanisms of action, which may lead to variation in effectiveness and safety. Head-to-head trials, however, are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of dupilumab and tralokinumab in AD. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled biologic-/Janus kinase inhibitor-naïve AD patients (≥12 years) from the BioDay registry who initiated dupilumab or tralokinumab between November 2021 and September 2024. Visits were scheduled at baseline, 4 weeks and every 3 months up to 52 weeks. Effectiveness outcomes included Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), weekly mean pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), treat-to-target thresholds (EASI ≤ 7; NRS-pruritus ≤ 4, with patients discontinuing treatment considered non-responders) and drug survival. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed at each visit. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance treatment groups. RESULTS: In total, 750 patients were included (643 dupilumab; 107 tralokinumab). After IPTW, baseline characteristics were well balanced. During follow-up, dupilumab patients had lower EASI scores than tralokinumab patients, although differences were not consistently statistically significant (p = 0.10). NRS-pruritus scores were significantly lower with dupilumab at all visits (p < 0.0001), mean differences did not exceed the 2-point clinical relevance threshold. The probability of achieving EASI ≤ 7 and NRS-pruritus ≤ 4 was higher with dupilumab (both p < 0.0001), with risk differences of 34.7% and 40.2% at 52 weeks, respectively. After 52 weeks, dupilumab drug survival was 92.6% vs. 70.6% for tralokinumab. Ocular surface disease incidence was similar (HR 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.6, p = 0.94) between treatments, leading to discontinuation of dupilumab in n = 23 (3.4/100 PY) and tralokinumab in n = 5 (5.4/100 PY). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world comparison, dupilumab provided superior effectiveness compared with tralokinumab. In responders continuing treatment, EASI and NRS-pruritus differences were small. More substantial differences were observed when treatment targets EASI ≤ 7 and NRS-pruritus ≤ 4, and discontinuation rates were taken into account.

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
University Medical Center Groningen (NL), Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL), Catharina Ziekenhuis (NL), Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden (NL), Radboud University Medical Center (NL), University Medical Center Utrecht (NL), Maastricht University (NL), Reinier de Graaf Hospital (NL), Spaarne Ziekenhuis (NL), St. Antonius Ziekenhuis (NL), Diakonessenhuis hospital (NL), IJsselland Ziekenhuis (NL), Haga Hospital (NL), Juliana Kinderziekenhuis (NL), Isala (NL), Tergooi (NL), Meander Medisch Centrum (NL), Maastro Clinic (NL), Spaarne Gasthuis (NL)
LEO Pharma
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Dermatology and Skin Diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.