Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2024 May 2;41(6):2536–2539. doi: 10.1007/s12325-024-02866-1

Correction to: Efficacy and Safety of Dupilumab Treatment with Concomitant Topical Corticosteroids in Children Aged 6 Months to 5 Years with Severe Atopic Dermatitis

Amy S Paller 1,2, Andreas Pinter 3, Lara Wine Lee 4, Roland Aschoff 5, Jacek Zdybski 6, Christina Schnopp 7, Amy Praestgaard 8, Ashish Bansal 9, Brad Shumel 9, Randy Prescilla 8, Mike Bastian 10,
PMCID: PMC11133072  PMID: 38698171

Correction to: Adv Ther (2024) 41:1046–1061 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.”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “12 February” to 8 July
  • Table 1: “Height (cm), mean (SD)”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 63.”
  • Table 1: “BMI, mean (SD)”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 63.”
  • Table 1: “SCORAD, mean (SD; range)….76.7 (11.5; 50–99)”
    • o
      Change “99” to “98”
  • Table 1: “CDLQI, mean (SD; range)*”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 32, dupilumab group n = 38.”
  • Table 1: “IDQOL, mean (SD; range)*”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 30, dupilumab group n = 25.”
  • Table 1: “Weekly average of daily skin pain NRS score, mean (SD; range)”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 61, dupilumab group n = 62.”
  • Table 1: “Weekly average of daily patient’s sleep quality score, mean (SD; range)”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 62, dupilumab group n = 62.”
  • Table 1: “Weekly average of daily caregiver’s sleep quality score, mean (SD; range)”
    • o
      Add footnote “Placebo group n = 62, dupilumab group n = 62.”
  • Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in EASI, LS mean (SE)…. − 39.2 (3.6)”
    • o
      Change “- 39.2 (3.6)” to − 20.1 (3.84)
  • Table 2: “Percent change from baseline in EASI, LS mean (SE)…. − 67.0 (3.5)”
    • o
      Change “- 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)”
    • o
      Change “− 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)”
    • o
      Change “− 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)”
    • o
      Change “− 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)”
    • o
      Change “− 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)”
    • o
      Change “(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)”
    • o
      Change “0.3” to 0.2
  • Table 2: “Change from baseline in CDLQI (0–30), LS mean (SE)”
    • o
      Add footnote: “Placebo group n = 32, dupilumab group n = 37.”
  • Table 2: “Change from baseline in IDQOL (0–30), LS mean (SE)”
    • o
      Add 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)”
    • o
      Change “− 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).”
    • o
      Change “− 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).”
    • o
      Change “− 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).”
    • o
      Change “− 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).”
    • o
      Change “− 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).”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “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%).”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “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.”
    • o
      Change “8.1%” to 8.2%
  • Table 3: “Conjunctivitis (narrow)a…0.4 (6.4%)”
    • o
      Change “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).”
    • o
      Change “6.4%” to 6.3%

Supplement

  • Please replace supplement that is currently published with the new supplementary materials attached and provided via email March 28th (file name: Paller et al. 2024 Severe Patients_Supplementary Material_corrected.pdf)

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials


Articles from Advances in Therapy are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES