Open Access 02-05-2024 | Dupilumab | Correction
Correction to: Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab Treatment with Concomitant Topical Corticosteroids in Children Aged 6 Months to 5 Years with Severe Atopic Dermatitis
Published in: Advances in Therapy
Login to get accessExcerpt
Correction to: Adv Ther (2024) 41:1046–1061 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-023-02753-1-
Page 2: “Significant improvements with dupilumab were observed in all secondary endpoints, including a least squares mean 48.9% reduction in pruritus.”oChange “48.9%” to 44.9%
-
Page 5: “Between 30 June 2020 and 12 February 2021, 197 participants were screened and 162 were randomly assigned to treatment groups.”oChange “12 February” to 8 July
-
Table 1: “Height (cm), mean (SD)”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 63.”
-
Table 1: “BMI, mean (SD)”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 63.”
-
Table 1: “SCORAD, mean (SD; range)….76.7 (11.5; 50–99)”oChange “99” to “98”
-
Table 1: “CDLQI, mean (SD; range)*”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 32, dupilumab group n = 38.”
-
Table 1: “IDQOL, mean (SD; range)*”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 30, dupilumab group n = 25.”
-
Table 1: “Weekly average of daily skin pain NRS score, mean (SD; range)”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 62.”
-
Table 1: “Weekly average of daily patient’s sleep quality score, mean (SD; range)”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 62, dupilumab group n = 62.”
-
Table 1: “Weekly average of daily caregiver’s sleep quality score, mean (SD; range)”oAdd footnote “Placebo group n = 62, dupilumab group n = 62.”
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in EASI, LS mean (SE)…. − 39.2 (3.6)”oChange “- 39.2 (3.6)” to − 20.1 (3.84)
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in EASI, LS mean (SE)…. − 67.0 (3.5)”oChange “- 67.0 (3.5)” to − 63.5 (3.81)
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in EASI, LS mean (SE)…. − 27.8 (− 37.4, − 18.2)”oChange “− 27.8 (− 37.4, − 18.2)” to − 43.5 (− 53.66, − 33.32)
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in Worst Scratch/Itch NRS (score range 0–10), LS mean (SE)…. − 15.0 (4.8)”oChange “− 15.0 (4.8)” to − 4.7 (5.07)
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in Worst Scratch/Itch NRS (score range 0–10), LS mean (SE)…. − 48.9 (4.8)”oChange “− 48.9 (4.8)” to − 44.9 (4.99)
-
Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in Worst Scratch/Itch NRS (score range 0–10), LS mean (SE)…. − 33.9 (− 46.6, − 21.2)”oChange “− 33.9 (− 46.6, − 21.2)” to − 40.2 (− 53.41, − 27.00)
-
Table 2: “Change from baseline in percent BSA affected by AD, LS mean (SE)…. − 29.4 (3.0)”oChange “(3.0)” to 2.9
-
Table 2: “Change from baseline in patient’s sleep quality NRS* (0–10), LS mean (SE)….0.2 (0.3)”oChange “0.3” to 0.2
-
Table 2: “Change from baseline in CDLQI (0–30), LS mean (SE)”oAdd footnote: “Placebo group n = 32, dupilumab group n = 37.”
-
Table 2: “Change from baseline in IDQOL (0–30), LS mean (SE)”oAdd footnote: “Placebo group n = 30, dupilumab group n = 26.”
-
Table 2: “Change from baseline in IDQOL (0–30), LS mean (SE)…. − 8.5 (− 11.9, − 5.1)”oChange “− 11.9” to − 11.8
-
Page 10: “A greater reduction in serum CCL17 was seen as early as week 4 in the dupilumab group (− 80.4 median percent change from baseline) vs. placebo (− 26.04 median percent change from baseline) and was maintained through week 16 (− 87.26 dupilumab vs. − 52.03 placebo) (Fig. S5 in the supplementary material).”oChange “− 26.04” to − 26.0
-
Page 10: “A greater reduction in serum CCL17 was seen as early as week 4 in the dupilumab group (− 80.4 median percent change from baseline) vs. placebo (− 26.04 median percent change from baseline) and was maintained through week 16 (− 87.26 dupilumab vs. − 52.03 placebo) (Fig. S5 in the supplementary material).”oChange “− 87.26” to − 87.3
-
Page 10: “A greater reduction in serum CCL17 was seen as early as week 4 in the dupilumab group (− 80.4 median percent change from baseline) vs. placebo (− 26.04 median percent change from baseline) and was maintained through week 16 (− 87.26 dupilumab vs. − 52.03 placebo) (Fig. S5 in the supplementary material).”oChange “− 52.03” to − 52.0
-
Page 10: “By week 16, serum total IgE decreased from baseline in the dupilumab group (− 72.17 median percent change), while it increased in the placebo group (8.95 median percent change) (Fig. S5 in the supplementary material).”oChange “− 72.17” to − 72.2
-
Page 10: “By week 16, serum total IgE decreased from baseline in the dupilumab group (− 72.17 median percent change), while it increased in the placebo group (8.95 median percent change) (Fig. S5 in the supplementary material).”oChange “8.95” to 8.9
-
Page 10: “Despite a very high disease burden at baseline, 46% of dupilumab-treated patients achieved a 75% reduction in EASI by week 16 (compared with 6.5% in the placebo group), together with significant improvements in pruritus, skin pain and sleep loss.”oChange “6.5%” to 6.6%
-
Page 10–11: “In particular, dupilumab-treated patients achieved a LS mean 48.9% reduction in pruritus as assessed by Worst Scratch/Itch NRS compared with 15% in the placebo group.”oChange “48.9%” to 44.9%
-
Page 10–11: “In particular, dupilumab-treated patients achieved a LS mean 48.9% reduction in pruritus as assessed by Worst Scratch/Itch NRS compared with 15% in the placebo group.”oChange “15%” to 4.7%
-
Page 11: “Although only 14.9% of patients in the dupilumab group achieved IGA B 1 (clear or almost clear skin) by week 16, this proportion was still significantly higher than in the placebo group (1.6%).”oChange “14.9%” to 14.3%
-
Page 11, 13: “In addition, 42% of patients in the dupilumab group achieved IGA B 2, corresponding to mild disease, compared with 8.1% in the placebo group by week 16.”oChange “42%” to 42.9%
-
Page 11, 13: “In addition, 42% of patients in the dupilumab group achieved IGA B 2, corresponding to mild disease, compared with 8.1% in the placebo group by week 16.”oChange “8.1%” to 8.2%
-
Table 3: “Conjunctivitis (narrow)a…0.4 (6.4%)”oChange “6.4%” to 6.3%
-
Page 13: “Interestingly, the incidence of conjunctivitis with dupilumab in this age group (6.4%) was lower than that reported in older age groups (14% in adults [20], 9.8% in adolescents [21], and 6.7% in children aged 6–11 years [23] with in-label doses).”oChange “6.4%” to 6.3%