Comparison of Tightly Controlled Dose Reduction of Biologics With Usual Care for Patients With Psoriasis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Australian consensus: Treatment goals for moderate to severe psoriasis in the era of targeted therapies - Considerations for paediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Treatment goals have been established in Australia to facilitate the management of adults with moderate to severe psoriasis. The Australasian College of Dermatologists sought to determine if and how these adult treatment goals could be modified to accommodate the needs of paediatric and adolescent patients.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was used. Comprehensive literature review and guideline evaluation resulted in the development of statements and other questions to establish current clinical practices. Two rounds of anonymous voting were undertaken, with a collaborative meeting held in between to discuss areas of discordance. Overall, consensus was defined as achievement of ≥75% agreement in the range 7-9 on a 9-point scale (1 strongly disagree; 9 strongly agree).

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved on 23/29 statements in round 1 and 17/18 statements in round 2. There was a high level of concordance with treatment criteria in the adult setting. The limitations of applying assessment tools developed for use in adult patients to the paediatric setting were highlighted. Treatment targets in the paediatric setting should include objective metrics for disease severity and psychological impact on the patients and their family, and be based on validated, age-appropriate tools.

CONCLUSION

While the assessment, classification and management of moderate to severe psoriasis in paediatric patients aligns with metrics established for adults, it is vital that nuances in the transition from childhood to adolescence be taken into account. Future research should focus on psoriasis severity assessment scales specific to the paediatric setting.

Dose reduction of biologics in patients with plaque psoriasis: a review

Dose reduction (DR) of first-generation biologics for plaque psoriasis (TNF-alpha inhibitors (i) and interleukin (IL)-12/23i) has been described in a previous scoping review. The literature on the DR of the newest generation of biologics (IL-17/23i) was scarce. The current review provides a literature update on the previous scoping review on the DR of all biologics, including the newest generation, with a focus on the uptake and implementation of DR in practice. The current literature search on DR revealed 14 new articles in addition to those in the previous review. Four of the newly found articles tested DR strategies, mostly focusing on first-generation biologics; only guselkumab (IL-23i) was included in one study. The other 10 studies showed data on regaining response after failure of DR, safety, cost-effectiveness, and uptake and implementation, as well as information about IL-17/23i. The eligibility criteria to start DR included both absolute and relative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores (PASI ≤3/≤5/PASI 75-100) and/or Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) ≤3/≤5, or BSA ≤1/≤2, or Physician Global Assessment (PGA) ≤1/0-2 during a period ranging from 12 weeks to ≥1 year. Most studies used PASI ≤5 and/or DLQI ≤5 or PGA ≤1 for ≥6 months. DR strategies were mostly performed by stepwise interval prolongation in two steps (to 67% of the standard dose, followed by 50%). Some studies of IL-17/23i reduced the dose to ±25%. The tested DR strategies on stepwise or fixed DR on TNF-αi and IL-12/23i (three studies), as well as one "on-demand" dosing study on IL-23i guselkumab, were successful. In the case of relapse of DR on TNF-αi and IL-12/23i, clinical effectiveness was regained by retreatment with the standard dose. All studies showed substantial cost savings with the biologic DR of TNF-αi and IL-12/23i. The identified barriers against the implementation of DR were mainly a lack of guidelines and scientific evidence on effectiveness and safety, and a lack of time and (technical) support. The identified facilitators were mainly clear guidelines, feasible protocols, adequate education of patients and physicians, and cost reduction. In conclusion, DR seems promising, but a research gap still exists in randomized, prospective studies testing DR strategies, especially of IL-17/23i, hampering the completion of guidelines on DR. Taking into account the identified barriers and facilitators most likely results in a more successful implementation of biologic DR in practice.

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

Steps towards implementation of protocolized dose reduction of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab for psoriasis in daily practice

BACKGROUND

Dose reduction (DR) of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab has proven to be (cost-)effective in psoriasis patients with low disease activity. Further implementation is needed to establish application of DR for eligible patients.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the implementation of protocolized biologic DR in daily practice.

METHODS

A pilot implementation study was performed in 3 hospitals during 6 months. By combining education and protocol development, involved healthcare providers (HCPs) were directed toward the adoption of protocolized DR. DR of adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab was achieved by stepwise injection interval prolongation. Implementation outcomes (fidelity, feasibility) were assessed. Factors for optimizing implementation were explored in interviews with HCPs. Uptake was measured in patients by chart review.

RESULTS

The implementation strategy was executed as planned. Implementation fidelity was less than 100% as not all provided tools were used across study sites. HCPs indicated the feasibility of implementing protocolized DR, although time investment was needed. Identified additional factors for successful implementation included support for patients, uptake of DR into guidelines, and supportive electronic health record systems. During the 6 months intervention period, 52 patients were eligible for DR of whom 26 (50%) started DR. The proposed DR protocol was followed in 22/26 patients (85%) on DR.

CONCLUSION

Additional staff for support, extra time during consultations, education on DR for HCPs and patients, and effective tools such as a feasible protocol can lead to more patients on biologic DR.

A systematic review investigating at what proportion clinical images are shared in prospective randomized controlled trials involving patients with psoriasis and biological agents

For many patients including those with psoriasis, scientific manuscripts comprising clinical outcomes including psoriasis area severity index (PASI) and/or physician global assessment (PGA) may be difficult to understand. However, most patients can relate to images at baseline and follow-up, particularly for dermatological diseases. This study aimed to assess the proportion of shared clinical images in psoriasis trials. A systematic review adhering to the PRISMA guidelines was performed. The review was limited to randomized controlled trials, and among these, only investigations involving biological agents for treatment of psoriasis were included. The Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for eligible studies published from inception to October 26, 2021. In total, 152 studies were included. When combining these, 62,871 patients were randomized. Overall, 203 images were shared depicting 60 patients in the manuscripts yielding an overall sharing rate of 0.1%. Patient images are seldom incorporated in clinical trial manuscripts which impairs interpretation for patients. Inclusion of image material would strengthen the patients' perspective and understanding on what treatment effects that can be expected. As such, this systematic review should be an invitation to the pharmaceutical industry, other sponsors, and editorial offices to improve easy transfer of information to patients using image data.

Real-World Implementation and Outcomes of Adalimumab Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Psoriasis: A National Specialized Center Experience

Serum adalimumab concentration is a biomarker of treatment response but therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is yet to be implemented in routine psoriasis care. We incorporated adalimumab TDM in a national specialized psoriasis service and evaluated it using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) implementation science framework. We undertook pre-implementation planning (validating local assays) and implementation interventions targeted to patients (pragmatic sampling at routine reviews), clinicians (introduction of a TDM protocol), and healthcare systems (adalimumab TDM as a key performance indicator). Over 5 months, 170 of 229 (74%) individuals treated with adalimumab received TDM. Clinical improvement after TDM-guided dose escalation occurred in 13 of 15 (87%) nonresponders with serum drug concentrations <8.3 μg/ml (median PASI reduction of 3.2 [interquartile range = 2.2-8.2] after 23.4 weeks) and in all nonresponders who had TDM-guided switch in biologic due to supratherapeutic drug concentrations (>8.3 μg/ml; n = 2) or positive antidrug antibody (n = 2) (PASI reduction of 7.8 [interquartile range = 7.5-12.9] after 20.0 weeks). Proactive TDM led to dose reduction in five individuals with clear skin and subtherapeutic or supratherapeutic drug concentrations; four (80%) sustained clear skin after 50 weeks (range = 42-52). Adalimumab TDM based on pragmatic serum sampling is clinically viable and may lead to patient benefit. Context-specific implementation interventions and systematic implementation assessment may bridge the biomarker research-to-practice gap.

Successful tapering of dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis with low disease activity: a large pragmatic daily practice study from the BioDay registry

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available regarding patient-centred dosing of dupilumab for atopic dermatitis (AD) in daily practice.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate our patient-centred dupilumab dosing regimen in daily practice, to assess prognostic factors for successful tapering and to estimate medication-related cost savings.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre study included adult patients with AD, participating in the BioDay registry, treated with dupilumab for ≥ 1.3 years. Interval prolongation was considered in the case of dupilumab standard dose for ≥ 1 year and persistent controlled AD [Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) ≤ 7; ≥ 6 months]. Primary endpoints were the mean EASI and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-pruritus after the start of tapering. Prognostic factors for successful tapering were analysed with logistic regression and a cost-savings analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 595 patients were included, of whom 401 patients [mean EASI 2.5 (SD 2.3); NRS-pruritus of 2.4 (SD 1.9) at the start of tapering] prolonged their dupilumab interval. In 83.3% of these patients tapering was successful; most patients used dupilumab every 3 or 4 weeks (Q3W/Q4W). A significant small increase was observed for EASI (highest mean 3.5) and NRS-pruritus (highest mean 3.2) (P < 0.001); however, scores remained low. Predicting successful tapering showed nonsignificant odds ratios for all incorporated variables. The estimated cost savings was €3 977 033.98 for 401 patients between January 2019 and June 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed successful tapering of dupilumab in 83.3% of patients with AD who attempted tapering, while maintaining controlled disease and with the majority using Q3W/Q4W. Interval prolongation can be beneficial both for the patient and from a socio-economic perspective.

Patients' perspectives towards biologic dose reduction in psoriasis: a qualitative study

Dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis could contribute to more efficient use of these expensive medicines. Evidence on opinions of patients with psoriasis regarding dose reduction is sparse. The objective of this study was therefore to explore patients' perspectives towards dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis. A qualitative study was conducted, comprising semi-structured interviews with 15 patients with psoriasis with different characteristics and treatment experiences. Interviews were analyzed by inductive thematic analysis. Perceived benefits of biologic dose reduction according to patients were minimizing medication use, lowering risks of adverse effects and lowering societal healthcare costs. Patients reported to have experienced a large impact of their psoriasis, and expressed concerns about loss of disease control due to dose reduction. Fast access to flare treatment and adequate monitoring of disease activity were among reported preconditions. According to patients, they should have confidence in dose reduction effects and should be willing to change their effective treatment. Moreover, addressing information needs and involvement in decision-making were deemed important among patients. In conclusion, addressing patients' concerns, fulfilling information needs, providing the possibility of resuming standard dose, and involving patients in decision-making are important according to patients with psoriasis when considering biologic dose reduction.

Incidence of Anti-Drug Antibodies to Monoclonal Antibodies in Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Antidrug antibodies (ADAs) may worsen the efficacy and safety of biologics. However, little is known about the incidence of ADAs associated with the 6 biologics approved for the treatment of asthma in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the incidence of ADAs and their impact on reported clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, open-label extension studies, and nonrandomized studies of biologics in patients with asthma indexed in PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL between January 1, 2000, and July 9, 2022, were carried out. The primary outcomes were treatment-emergent ADAs (incidence) and ADA prevalence.

RESULTS

A total of 46 studies met the eligibility criteria. ADA incidence over follow-up was 2.91% (95% CI, 1.60-4.55) and was highest in the benralizumab studies (8.35%), with a risk ratio of 4.9 (2.69-8.92) when compared with placebo, and lowest in the omalizumab studies (0.00%). Incidence was 7.61% in the dupilumab studies, 4.39% in reslizumab, 3.63% in mepolizumab, and 1.12% in the tezepelumab studies. Incidence of neutralizing antibodies was 0.00% to 10.74% and was highest for benralizumab (7.12%). Incidence of neutralizing antibodies was higher in the benralizumab every 8 weeks (8.17%) versus every 4 weeks arms (5.81%). Results were consistent in subgroup analyses by study type and length of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 2.9% of individuals in the included studies developed ADAs over study follow-up period. The incidence was highest in the benralizumab group and lowest in the omalizumab group. The subcutaneous route and longer dosing intervals were associated with higher ADA development.

Biologic tapering for patients with psoriasis with low disease activity: data from the French PsoBioTeq Registry

Dose tapering strategies with biologics in psoriasis may lower the treatment burden over time, while enabling high therapeutic response maintenance in patients benefiting from them. Our results should contribute to developing clinical guidelines to fill the current gap in knowledge on this promising therapeutic approach

National consensus on biologic dose reduction in psoriasis: a modified eDelphi procedure

BACKGROUND

Dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis is applied in daily practice, although guidelines are lacking. Striving for clear criteria is important, as it leads to a consistent application of dose reduction.

OBJECTIVE

To achieve consensus on criteria for biologic dose reduction in psoriasis patients with stable and low disease activity.

METHODS

An online Delphi procedure (eDelphi) was conducted. Dutch dermatologists were invited to participate in a maximum of 3 voting rounds. Proposed statements were selected based on literature review and included criteria for the application of dose reduction and dosing schedules. Biologic dose reduction was defined as 'application of injection interval prolongation'. Proposed statements were rated using a 9-point Likert scale; consensus was reached when ≥70% of all voters rated 'agree' (7-9) and <15% rated 'disagree' (1-3).

RESULTS

A total of 27 dermatologists participated and reached a consensus on 15 recommendations over 2 voting rounds. Agreed statements included criteria for dose reduction eligibility, criteria for dose reduction (dis)continuation, and dosing schedules for adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab. Based on the eDelphi outcomes, an algorithm fit for implementation in current practice was developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations of this national consensus process can guide clinicians, and consequently their patients, toward consistent application of biologic dose reduction.

Early intervention in psoriasis: Where do we go from here?

Patients with psoriasis often have comorbidities and are at increased risk of developing several complications compared with the general population. Knowledge on the role of immune mediators and systemic inflammation in psoriasis has led to the hypothesis that early intervention with systemic therapy has the potential to modify the course of the disease and reduce the risk of long-term adverse outcomes. In this article, we address some potential issues that need to be considered before early intervention can be implemented routinely. The first is determining what constitutes "early" intervention for psoriasis. A second point is whether the intervention should be considered for patients with early disease or for selected subsets based on risk stratification. A third important consideration is defining success for early intervention. Finally, adoption of early and effective intervention should be based on high-level evidence. Ideally, randomized trials would be the best strategy to compare early vs. late systemic treatment in patients with psoriasis, probably using the frequency of long-term outcomes as primary endpoint, with cutaneous and pharmacoeconomic outcomes assessed secondarily.

Patient-centered dupilumab dosing regimen leads to successful dose reduction in persistently controlled atopic dermatitis

BACKGROUND

At present, no real-world studies are available on different dupilumab dosing regimens in controlled atopic dermatitis (AD). The aim of this study was to clinically evaluate a patient-centered dupilumab dosing regimen in patients with controlled AD and to relate this to serum drug levels and serum biomarkers.

METHODS

Ninety adult AD patients from the prospective BioDay registry were included based on their dupilumab administration interval according to a predefined patient-centered dosing regimen. Group A (n = 30) did not fulfill the criteria for interval prolongation and continued using the standard dupilumab dosage (300 mg/2 weeks), group B (n = 30) prolonged dupilumab interval with 50% (300 mg/4 weeks), and group C (n = 30) prolonged dupilumab interval with 66%-75% (300 mg/6-8 weeks). AD severity score, patient-reported outcomes, serum dupilumab levels, and serum biomarkers were analyzed over time.

RESULTS

Disease severity scores did not significantly change over time during the tapering period in any of the groups. In groups B and C, the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)-pruritus temporarily significantly increased after interval prolongation but remained low (median NRS-pruritus≤4). Median dupilumab levels remained stable in group A (standard dosage), but significantly decreased in groups B and C (24.1 mg/L (IQR = 17.1-45.6); 12.5 mg/L (IQR = 1.7-22.3)) compared with the levels during the standard dosage (88.2 mg/L [IQR = 67.1-123.0, p < .001]). Disease severity biomarker levels (CCL17/CCL18) remained low in all study groups during the whole observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that dose reduction was successful in a subgroup of patients with controlled AD by using a patient-centered dosing regimen. These patients showed stable low disease activity and low severity biomarkers over time.

Long-Term Dose Optimization of Adalimumab via Dose Spacing in Patients with Psoriasis

Dose spacing (DS) can be useful for optimizing treatment with biologics in psoriasis patients. However, interval prolongation might increase the production of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) and, therefore, reduce the drug’s effectiveness. The long-term effects of DS with adalimumab in psoriatic patients have not been reported. The goal of our study was to evaluate the long-term follow-up of psoriatic patients after adalimumab DS regarding the clinical course and determination of circulating adalimumab, TNFα levels, and anti-adalimumab antibodies. We retrospectively included seven patients treated with adalimumab for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and benefiting from DS from 2010 to 2021. The dose interval of adalimumab was extended to three weeks for all patients and then to four weeks for three of the seven patients. Adalimumab trough levels, TNFα levels, and ADA against adalimumab were measured. For six of the seven patients, absolute PASI values remained below 3 throughout the follow-up period (median = 8.0 years; range: 1.7−11.5) after DS. All the patients were satisfied with the effectiveness of their treatment regime. Within the follow-up period, an average of 63 doses of adalimumab per patient were spared. The median adalimumab trough levels were 4.7 µg/mL (range: 1.9−12.5). TNFα levels remained under 10 pg/mL (undetectable) in all except one patient. ADA against adalimumab remained negative (<10 µg/mL) during the follow-up in all patients. Our data indicate that therapeutic drug monitoring, including the measurement of trough concentrations and ADA, together with the clinical response and patient’s preference, can be helpful for clinical decision making and treatment optimization in psoriasis.

Treat-to-target dose reduction and withdrawal strategy of TNF inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVES

Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are effective in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), but are associated with a small (0.6%) increase in serious infection risk, patient burden due to need for self-injection and high costs. Treat-to-target (T2T) tapering might ameliorate these drawbacks, but high-quality evidence on T2T tapering strategies is lacking in PsA and axSpA.

METHODS

We performed a pragmatic open-label, monocentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority (NI) trial on T2T tapering of TNFi. Patients with PsA and axSpA using a TNFi with ≥6 months stable low disease activity (LDA) were included. Patients were randomised 2:1 to disease activity-guided T2T with or without tapering until withdrawal and followed-up to 12 months. Primary endpoint was the difference in proportion of patients having LDA at 12 months between groups, compared with a prespecified NI margin of 20%, estimated using a Bayesian prior.

RESULTS

122 patients (64 PsA and 58 axSpA) were randomised to a T2T strategy with (N=81) or without tapering (N=41). The proportion of patients in LDA at 12 months was 69% for the tapering and 73% for the no-tapering group: adjusted difference 5% (Bayesian 95% credible interval: -10% to 19%) which confirms NI considering the NI margin of 20%. The mean percentage of daily defined dose was 53% for the tapering and 91% for the no-tapering group at month 12.

CONCLUSIONS

A T2T TNFi strategy with tapering attempt is non-inferior to a T2T strategy without tapering with regard to the proportion of patients still in LDA at 12 months, and results in a substantial reduction of TNFi use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL 6771.

De-escalation of Anti-tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha Agents and Reduction in Adverse Effects: A Systematic Review

Background: The long-term use of anti-TNF-α agents can lead to adverse effects, such as infections and immune-mediated cutaneous reactions. Whether de-escalation by dose reduction or interval lengthening reduces these adverse effects is uncertain. This systematic review aims to compare the incidence of infections and skin manifestations after anti-TNF-α dose de-escalation with standard dosing. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to 14 January 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing anti-TNF-α de-escalation strategies with standard dosing among patients with inflammatory conditions, that report on infections, skin manifestations, or both, were included. The risk of bias was assessed with the revised Cochrane risk-of bias tool (RCTs) or the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (non-RCTs). Results: Fourteen RCTs and six observational studies (or 2706 patients) were included. Eight RCTs had low risk of bias or some concerns. Four non-RCTs were of good methodological quality. The studies described patients with axial spondyloarthritis (8 studies, 780 patients), rheumatoid arthritis (7 studies, 1458 patients), psoriasis (3 studies, 332 patients), or inflammatory bowel disease (2 studies, 136 patients). De-escalation strategies included interval lengthening (12 studies, 1317 patients), dose reduction (6 studies, 1130 patients), or both (2 studies, 259 patients). Overall, the occurrence of infections and skin manifestations did not differ between standard treatment and de-escalation. The disappearance of infections or skin manifestations after de-escalation was only reported in two studies. The majority of studies focused on etanercept and adalimumab. Heterogeneity in reporting of infections and skin manifestations precluded meta-analysis. Conclusion: We found that anti-TNF-α de-escalation does not reduce infections or skin reactions. A de-escalation strategy should not be recommended for the sole purpose of reducing drug-related adverse effects. The meticulous documentation of adverse effects is recommended to further address this question. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021252977.

Serum drug levels and anti-drug antibodies in the context of dose tapering by interval prolongation of adalimumab, etanercept and ustekinumab in psoriasis patients: results of the CONDOR trial

BACKGROUND

Biologics for psoriasis are registered in standard dosages. In patients with low disease activity, reduction of the dose by interval prolongation can prevent overtreatment, and lower risks and costs. However, fear for increased anti-drug antibody (ADA) formation due to interval prolongation of biologics is an important barrier.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the course of serum drug concentrations, ADA levels, and predictors for successful dose reduction of adalimumab, ustekinumab, and etanercept for psoriasis.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to dose reduction (DR) or usual care (UC) and followed for one year. The course and extent of detectable ADA levels were expressed as proportions/relative risks for DR vs. UC. Association of baseline characteristics with successful tapering was investigated with log-binomial regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 118 patients were included. In adalimumab-treated patients, no significant difference in the proportion of patients with relevant ADA levels in DR vs. UC was seen. For ustekinumab, relevant ADA development was absent in both groups. Baseline trough levels were not predictive for successful DR.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunogenicity may not increase by interval prolongation in psoriasis patients with low disease activity. This pilot provides important and reassuring insight into the pharmacological changes after dose tapering of adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab.

Dose reduction of the new generation biologics (IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors) in psoriasis: study protocol for an international, pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study-the BeNeBio study

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease for which biologics are effective treatments. Dose reduction (DR) of the first generation biologics seems a promising way for more efficient use of expensive biologics. A substantial part of patients on tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alfa inhibitors and ustekinumab could successfully lower their dose, after following a tightly controlled DR strategy. The objective of this study is to assess whether controlled DR of interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors in psoriasis patients with low disease activity is non-inferior (NI) to usual care (UC).

METHODS

This is an international, prospective, multicenter, pragmatic, randomized, non-inferiority trial. A total of 244 patients with stable low disease activity (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≤ 5) for at least 6 months and using secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, risankizumab, or tildrakizumab in the standard dose, together with stable low disease activity, defined as a PASI ≤ 5 and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) ≤ 5 at the moment of inclusion, will be randomized 2:1 to DR or UC. In the DR group, dosing intervals will be prolonged stepwise to achieve 66% and 50% of the original dose. Disease activity is monitored every 3 months by PASI and DLQI. In case of disease flare (i.e., PASI and/or DLQI increase), treatment is adjusted to the previous effective dose. The primary outcome is the incidence proportion of persistent flares (PASI > 5 for ≥ 3 months), which will be compared between arms. Secondary outcomes include proportion of patients with successful DR, (course of) PASI and DLQI, serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life, costs, and pharmacokinetic profile. Outcomes of DR will be compared to UC.

DISCUSSION

With this study, we aim to assess whether DR of IL-17 and IL-23 inhibiting biologics can be achieved for psoriasis patients with low disease activity, without losing disease control. Reducing the dose may lead to more efficient use of biologics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04340076 . Registered on April 9 2020.

Attitudes and behaviour regarding dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis: a survey among dermatologists worldwide

Dose reduction (DR) of biologics, where possible, seems promising for more efficient use of expensive biologics. For implementation of DR strategies, it is essential to get insight in factors that influence implementation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the attitudes and behaviour regarding dose reduction of biologic therapies for psoriasis among psoriasis expert dermatologists worldwide. A 27-question e-survey was sent through the International Psoriasis Council (IPC) to its 114 dermatologist councilors worldwide. The survey assessed demographics, general and DR prescription behaviour, and motivations for and barriers against application of DR. Of 57 respondents, 53 respondents who prescribed biologics were included for analysis. Thirty-seven (69.8%) applied DR (i.e., ‘DR dermatologists’), and 16 (30.2%) did not (i.e., ‘Non-DR dermatologists’). DR strategies varied among respondents. Regarding criteria for starting DR, differences were reported in required treatment duration, and interpretation and duration of stable low disease activity. In addition, the prolongation of intervals between injections varied between respondents. For most ‘DR dermatologists’ (n = 32/37, 86.5%), cost savings were one of the main reasons to apply DR. Fifteen out of 16 ‘Non-DR dermatologists’ (94%) did not apply DR due to lack of scientific evidence. In conclusion, DR of biologics for psoriasis is part of clinical practice in psoriasis experts globally. Barriers for applying DR included lack of evidence or guidelines, and uncertainty on DR effects and risks. Although growing evidence shows DR feasibility, future studies are needed to accumulate and broaden evidence, along with development of (inter)national guidelines on DR strategies.

Adverse Events Associated With Anti-IL-23 Agents: Clinical Evidence and Possible Mechanisms

Background

Anti-interleukin (IL)-23 agents are widely used for autoimmune disease treatment; however, the safety and risks of specific symptoms have not been systematically assessed.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to summarize the characteristics and mechanisms of occurrence of five immunological and non-immunological adverse events caused by different anti-IL-23 agents.

Methods

The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched for eligible randomized clinical trials published from inception through May 1, 2020. Randomized clinical trials that reported at least one type of adverse event after treatment were included, regardless of sex, age, ethnicity, and diagnosis. Two investigators independently screened and extracted the characteristics of the studies, participants, drugs, and adverse event types. The Cochrane Handbook was used to assess the methodological quality of the included randomized clinical trials. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. Meta-regression was applied to determine the sources of heterogeneity, and subgroup analysis was used to identify the factors contributing to adverse events.

Results

Forty-eight studies were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 25,624 patients treated with anti-IL-23 agents. Serious immunological or non-immunological adverse events were rare. Anti-IL-12/23-p40 agents appeared to cause adverse events more easily than anti-IL-23-p19 agents. The incidence of cancer did not appear to be related to anti-IL-23 agent treatment, and long-term medication could lead to mental diseases. The prevention of complications should be carefully monitored when administered for over approximately 40 weeks to avoid further adverse reactions, and the incidence of infection was the highest among general immunological adverse events.

Conclusions

The application of anti-IL-23 agents induced a series of immunological and non-immunological adverse events, but these agents tend to be well-tolerated with good safety profiles.

Dose Tapering of Biologics in Patients with Psoriasis: A Scoping Review

Introduction

Biologics serve as a cornerstone in psoriasis treatment, with low disease activity or sometimes even clinical remission as a realistic treatment outcome. So far, it is unclear whether biologics should be tapered when this target is achieved. Dose tapering could offer potential benefits by decreasing side effects, the burden of repetitive injections and costs of biological therapy. However, clinical guidelines on dose tapering of biologicals in psoriasis patients are lacking. This scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the current literature on dose tapering and offer guidance for clinicians in daily clinical practice.

Methods

Dose tapering is defined as the administration of a lower dose per administration, or the prolongation of the regular dose interval, after initial treatment according to the standard dosing. Four electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were systematically searched for literature on tapering of biologics in adult patients with psoriasis from 1 January 2000.

Results

We included 19 original articles on biologic tapering in psoriasis patients: four randomized controlled trials and 15 observational studies. Tapering eligibility criteria, tapering strategies, tapering outcomes, and recapture of response after relapse were assessed. Furthermore, the available evidence on possible predictors for successful tapering, and the effect of tapering on safety, quality of life and costs is summarized. The definition of low disease activity as a measure for tapering eligibility varied widely. Beside tapering criteria, tapering strategies were also heterogeneous. Of note, quality-of-life measurements were barely integrated in the evaluation of tapering outcomes. Literature on regaining response after relapse due to tapering was limited, but restored remission has been described. The included studies did not proclaim a significant effect of tapering on the occurrence of (severe) adverse events. Even though cost savings have been reported, no proper cost-effectiveness analysis has been conducted yet.

Conclusion

Biologic tapering seems to be effective and safe in psoriasis patients with stable low disease activity or clinical remission. Available data on biologic dose tapering in patients with psoriasis are promising, but more research is warranted to fill the current gaps in knowledge.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40265-020-01448-z.

Biologics are effective in treating psoriasis amongst other diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn’s disease. However, biologics are costly, and can cause side effects, such as an increased risk of infection. In patients with rheumatoid arthritis, it is not uncommon to lower the dose of these biologics (also called “dose tapering”), once stable low disease activity, or even remission, is reached. However, in psoriasis patients, dose tapering of biologics is not common practice. In this “scoping review,” we provide an overview of the available literature on dose tapering of biologics in adult patients with plaque psoriasis in order to address the current gaps in literature. We found 19 studies that addressed dose tapering. These studies used different criteria to determine which patients were eligible for tapering, which led to various interpretations of tapering success. This made it difficult for us to draw general conclusions on which tapering criteria and strategies should be further investigated. Dose tapering seems to be effective and safe in patients with a stable low disease activity, although more (high-quality) research is needed. Future studies should focus on generating more data on long-term safety, finding predictors for successful tapering, calculating the cost-effectiveness of dose tapering, and evaluating dose tapering in the newest generation of biologics.

Two-year follow-up of a dose reduction strategy trial of biologics adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab in psoriasis patients in daily practice

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Tightly-controlled dose reduction was possible during 1 year in psoriasis patients on adalimumab, etanercept or ustekinumab with low disease activity (CONDOR trial). Extended observation is needed to ensure long-term effectiveness and safety of the strategy. With prolonged follow-up, we investigated the clinical effects and safety of the strategy, the proportion of patients with successful dose reduction, and assessed if patients with a disease flare regained remission.

METHODS

Two-year follow up of a subgroup of patients previously included in a randomized pragmatic study comparing usual care (UC) with stepwise dose reduction (DR). Effectiveness (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), adverse events, proportion of patients with successful DR and proportion of persistent disease flares were analyzed.

RESULTS

DR leads temporarily to a slightly increased PASI groupwise, but on the long-term patients regained low PASI. DLQI scores remained stable during follow-up. No serious adverse events due to DR were reported. Forty-one percent of patients remained on a low dose up to 2 years. The number of persistent flares was low in DR and UC.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed dose reduction strategy is effective for a significant part of patients and remains safe up to 2 years of follow-up.