All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a healthcare professional.

  TRANSLATE

The Lupus Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the Lupus Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Lupus Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

The Lupus Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Autolus, Biogen and Biogen MA, Inc. and UCB. Funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.

Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients

Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.

Find out more

Daxdilimab in moderate-to-severe DLE: Phase II trial results

By Amy Hopkins

Share:

Oct 23, 2026

Learning objective: After reading this article, learners will be able to cite a new clinical development in cutaneous lupus erythematosus.


Results from a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase II trial (NCT05591222) evaluating daxdilimab in patients with moderate-to-severe discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) were presented by Victoria P. Werth at the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Congress 2026, September 30 – October 3, 2026, Vienna, AT. Patients were randomized to receive low-dose daxdilimab (n = 24), high-dose daxdilimab (n = 23), or placebo (n = 25). The primary endpoint was Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus (CLE) Area and Severity Index-Activity (CLASI-A) at Week 24.

Key data: At Week 24, the primary endpoint was met, with both low- and high-dose daxdilimab demonstrating significant reductions in CLASI-A scores vs placebo, with least squares mean difference in change from baseline of –6.0 (90% confidence interval [CI], –8.7 to –3.2; p = 0.0005) and –5.7 (90% CI, –8.5 to –2.9; p = 0.0012), respectively; differences were significant from Week 4 in the low-dose group and from Week 8 in the high-dose group. A greater proportion of patients receiving low- and high-dose daxdilimab attained Cutaneous Lupus Activity Investigator’s Global Assessment (CLA-IGA) scores of 0/1 (both p < 0.05), ≥70% reduction from baseline in CLASI (CLASI70; both p < 0.05), and CLASI-A scores of 0–3 (both p < 0.05) at Week 24. Rates of adverse events (AEs) were similar between patients receiving low-dose daxdilimab, high-dose daxdilimab, and placebo (58.3%, 56.5%, and 60.0%, respectively). The most frequently reported treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) in the overall daxdilimab population were headache (10.6%), cough (6.4%), diarrhea (6.4%), and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI; 6.4%).

Key results: In this phase II trial, daxdilimab demonstrated significant improvements in disease activity vs placebo, regardless of dose level, with a well-tolerated safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe DLE, supporting further investigation in this patient population.

References

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:

The content was clear and easy to understand

The content addressed the learning objectives

The content was relevant to my practice

I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content

This content is accurate as of the date of publication and is not updated retrospectively. Please refer to the latest available evidence, guidelines, and relevant regulatory information when making clinical decisions.

Your opinion matters

In which area of SLE management would additional medical education be most valuable to support your clinical practice?