Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Oclacitinib versus ciclosporin for treating dog skin allergy itching
By Little, Peter R et al.·Published in Veterinary dermatology·2015·Veterinary Medicine Research and Development, Australia·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: A blinded, randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of oclacitinib and ciclosporin for the control of atopic dermatitis in client-owned dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of 226 dogs with atopic dermatitis (a common skin allergy) were treated with either oclacitinib or ciclosporin to see which worked better. Owners reported that dogs on oclacitinib had a significant reduction in itching within just a few days, while those on ciclosporin saw improvements more slowly. By the end of the study, both treatments were effective, but oclacitinib had fewer side effects, especially stomach issues. Overall, oclacitinib was found to be a quicker and safer option for managing this condition in dogs.
People also search for: dog itching treatment · oclacitinib for dogs · ciclosporin side effects in dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ciclosporin is approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) in dogs and has been shown to be safe and effective. Placebo-controlled studies suggest that oclacitinib is a safe and effective alternative therapy. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oclacitinib, in comparison to ciclosporin, for the control of AD in a blinded, randomized clinical trial, incorporating a noninferiority test at day 28. ANIMALS: A total of 226 client-owned dogs with a history of AD from eight sites were enrolled. METHODS: Enrolled animals were randomized to receive oral oclacitinib (0.4-0.6 mg/kg twice daily for 14 days, then once daily) or oral ciclosporin (3.2-6.6 mg/kg once daily) for 12 weeks. Owners assessed pruritus using an enhanced visual analog scale (VAS), and veterinarians assessed dermatitis using the Canine Atopic Dermatitis Extent and Severity Index (CADESI)-02. RESULTS: On days 1, 2, 7, 14, 28, 56 and 84, the percentage reduction from baseline for owner-assessed pruritus changed from 25.6 to 61.0% in the oclacitinib group compared with 6.5 to 61.5% in the ciclosporin group; differences were significant at all time points up to day 28. On day 56, ciclosporin-treated dogs showed a similar decrease in pruritus to oclacitinib-treated dogs. On day 14, the percentage reduction from baseline CADESI-02 was significantly greater in the oclacitinib group (58.7%) than in the ciclosporin group (43.0%). Three times as many adverse events attributed to gastrointestinal signs were reported in the ciclosporin group compared with the oclacitinib group. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: In this study of treatment for canine AD, oclacitinib had a faster onset of action and a lower frequency of gastrointestinal side effects compared with ciclosporin.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25496303/