Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40176741›Full record

ArticleJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2025

Infection risk in atopic dermatitis patients treated with biologics and JAK inhibitors: BioDay results.

Lian F van der Gang, Keneshka Atash, Nicolaas P A Zuithoff, Inge Haeck, Celeste M Boesjes, Octavian I Bacoş-Cosma, Laura Loman, Marijke Kamsteeg, Simone Stadhouders-Keet, Albert J Oosting and 13 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Large-scale meta-analysis of infection risk with JAK-STAT inhibitors in 29,000 patients.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Dupilumab for the treatment of eczema molluscatum: A pediatric case report and systematic literature review.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dupilumab versus tralokinumab in atopic dermatitis: A propensity score adjusted comparison from BioDay.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  10. Addressing potential bias when assessing safety of biologics and JAK inhibitors in atopic dermatitis.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  11. Dermatologic Toxicities Induced by JAK Inhibitors.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Safety of upadacitinib in atopic dermatitis in randomized clinical trials across 6 years.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  14. Janus kinase inhibitors enhance the efficacy of dupilumab in refractory atopic dermatitis.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Reassuring evidence on infection risk with dupilumab in atopic dermatitis: Lessons from real-world evidence.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Article
  19. Infection risk in atopic dermatitis patients treated with biologics and JAK inhibitors: BioDay results.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

Lian F van der GangNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7981-7771
Keneshka AtashNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Nicolaas P A ZuithoffJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inge HaeckNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Celeste M BoesjesNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3371-6414
Octavian I Bacoş-CosmaDepartment of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Laura LomanDepartment of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2731-9284
Marijke KamsteegDepartment of Dermatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Simone Stadhouders-KeetDepartment of Dermatology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands.
Albert J OostingDepartment of Dermatology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands.
Anneke M T van Lynden-van NesDepartment of Dermatology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Klaziena PolitiekDepartment of Dermatology, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Antoni GostynksiDepartment of Dermatology, University Medical Center Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1091-2914
Lisette Berntsen-ZandbergenDepartment of Dermatology, Haga Hospital, Den Haag, The Netherlands.
Wianda A ChristoffersDepartment of Dermatology, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Annebeth FlintermanDepartment of Dermatology, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Wouter R H TouwslagerDepartment of Dermatology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Berit VelstraDepartment of Dermatology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands.
Shiarra M StewartDepartment of Dermatology, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, The Netherlands.
Francine C van ErpDepartment of Dermatology, TerGooi Medical Center, Hilversum, The Netherlands.
Marlies de GraafNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marie-Louise A SchuttelaarDepartment of Dermatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marjolein S de Bruin-WellerNational Expertise Center for Atopic Dermatitis, Department of Dermatology and Allergology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLimited data exist on the comparative risk of infections during biologic and Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi) treatment for atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice.

objectivesTo assess the differential infection risk of biologic and JAKi treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe AD in a real-world setting.

methodsThis prospective, multicentre study evaluated treatment-emergent infections in patients (age ≥ 12 years) using biologics or JAKi from the BioDay registry from October 2017 to July 2024. Crude incidence rates were calculated per 100 patient-years (PY) per treatment. Cox regression for recurrent events, adjusted for potential confounders, was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for the rate of infections, with subgroup and sensitivity analyses in bio-/JAKi-naïve patients.

resultsIn total 1793 patients were included (4044.1 PY; 1886 biologic treatment episodes (TEs); 480 JAKi), with 794 infections. JAKi showed higher infection rates (58.4-65.5/100 PY) compared to biologics (13.6-22.0), especially for herpes infections (n = 195, 24.6%; JAKi 13.6-19.8 vs. biologicals 3.0-3.6). Cox regression indicated increased rates with JAKi (abrocitinib HR 4.1, 95% CI: 3.1-5.5; baricitinib HR 4.2, 95% CI: 2.9-6.2; upadacitinib HR 4.0, 95% CI: 3.2-5.0; all p < 0.0001) and a slight increase with tralokinumab (HR 1.4, 95% CI: 1.0-2.0, p = 0.039) compared to dupilumab. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these results, except for tralokinumab. Rates of severe infections were higher with JAKi compared to dupilumab, although absolute numbers were low and associations were not consistently significant. History of infection, predominantly viral or fungal skin infections (HR 1.9, 95% CI: 1.4-2.6, p < 0.0001; 2.4, 1.3-4.4, p = 0.003, resp.), was identified as an independent factor associated with infection.

conclusionsThis cohort study demonstrated an increased risk of infection during JAKi treatment compared to dupilumab for moderate-to-severe AD. These findings enhance understanding of the differential infection risk with targeted therapies in AD, aiding tailored treatment choices that consider patient-specific risks such as prior skin infections.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsDermatitis, AtopicInfectionsJanus Kinase InhibitorsAdolescentAdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedChildFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRegistriesYoung AdultAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedBiological ProductsJanus Kinase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID40176741
PMCPMC12645187

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.