Etanercept biosimilar (recombinant human tumor necrosis factor-α receptor II: IgG Fc fusion protein) and methotrexate combination therapy in Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

ITPRIPL1 binds CD3ε to impede T cell activation and enable tumor immune evasion

Cancer immunotherapy has transformed treatment possibilities, but its effectiveness differs significantly among patients, indicating the presence of alternative pathways for immune evasion. Here, we show that ITPRIPL1 functions as an inhibitory ligand of CD3ε, and its expression inhibits T cells in the tumor microenvironment. The binding of ITPRIPL1 extracellular domain to CD3ε on T cells significantly decreased calcium influx and ZAP70 phosphorylation, impeding initial T cell activation. Treatment with a neutralizing antibody against ITPRIPL1 restrained tumor growth and promoted T cell infiltration in mouse models across various solid tumor types. The antibody targeting canine ITPRIPL1 exhibited notable therapeutic efficacy against naturally occurring tumors in pet clinics. These findings highlight the role of ITPRIPL1 (or CD3L1, CD3ε ligand 1) in impeding T cell activation during the critical "signal one" phase. This discovery positions ITPRIPL1 as a promising therapeutic target against multiple tumor types.

Safety of biologic therapy in combination with methotrexate in moderate to severe psoriasis: a cohort study from the BIOBADADERM registry

BACKGROUND

Safety is an important consideration in decisions on treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and the study of drug safety is the main purpose of the BIOBADADERM registry. The combination of a biologic agent and a conventional systemic drug [generally methotrexate (MTX)] is a common treatment in clinical practice. However, there is a paucity of evidence from real-world practice on the safety of such combination regimens in the treatment of psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to ascertain whether the use of regimens combining biologic drugs with MTX in the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis increases the risk of adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs (SAEs). We compared monotherapy using tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors with the use of the same drugs in combination with MTX.

METHODS

Using data from the BIOBADADERM registry, we compared biologic monotherapies with therapies that were combined with MTX. We estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) using a random effects Poisson regression with 95% confidence intervals for all AEs, SAEs, infections and serious infections and other AEs by system organ class.

RESULTS

We analysed data from 2829 patients and 5441 treatment cycles, a total of 12 853 patient-years. The combination of a biologic with MTX was not associated with statistically significant increases in overall risk of AEs or SAEs in any treatment group. No increase in the total number of infections or serious infections in patients receiving combined therapy was observed for any group. However, treatment with a TNF inhibitor combined with MTX was associated with an increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal AEs (aIRR 2.50, 95% CI 1.57-3.98; P < 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of AEs and SAEs was not significantly increased in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis receiving different classes of biologic drugs combined with MTX compared with those on biologic monotherapy.

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.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Real-World Experience of Methotrexate in the Treatment of Skin Diseases: an Italian Delphi Consensus

BACKGROUND

After decades of use, methotrexate displays an established safety and efficacy profile in both in-hospital and outpatient settings. Despite its widespread use, there is surprisingly little clinical evidence to guide daily practice with methotrexate in dermatology.

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for clinicians in daily practice for areas in which there is limited guidance.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus exercise on 23 statements was carried out on the use of methotrexate in dermatological routine settings.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on statements that cover six main areas: (1) pre-screening exams and monitoring of therapy; (2) dosing and administration in patients naïve to methotrexate; (3) optimal strategy for patients in remission; (4) use of folic acid; (5) safety; and (6) predictors of toxicity and efficacy. Specific recommendations are provided for all 23 statements.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to optimize methotrexate efficacy, it is essential to optimize treatment using appropriate dosages, carrying out a rapid drug-based step-up on a treat-to-target strategy and preferably using the subcutaneous formulation. To manage safety aspects appropriately, it is essential to evaluate patients' risk factors and carry out proper monitoring during the course of treatment.

Drug Survival Outcomes Associated with the Real-World Use of Ixekizumab, Secukinumab, Guselkumab, and Adalimumab for the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis in China: A 52-Week Single-Center Retrospective Study

Background

Data pertaining to biologic agents used for treating psoriasis in real-world settings are lacking at present. To compare drug survival at 52 weeks for a range of biologics used to treat psoriasis under real-world conditions.

Methods

This was a retrospective, single-center, observational study of a cohort of patients diagnosed with plaque psoriasis treated using ixekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, or adalimumab between January 2020 and December 2021. Baseline demographic characteristics, duration of psoriasis, and prior biological treatments for all patients were recorded. Drug survival rates were analyzed in different patient groups using Kaplan-Meier curves and Log rank tests.

Results

In total, this study included 386 plaque psoriasis patients, of whom 70, 175, 36, and 105 were, respectively, treated using ixekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and adalimumab. Over a 52-week period, the overall cumulative drug survival rates for ixekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and adalimumab were 67.1%, 63.0%, 72.2%, and 37.1%, respectively. Lack of efficacy was the primary cause of discontinuation for these biologic therapies, followed by economic burden and adverse event incidence.

Conclusion

These results suggest that guselkumab exhibited superior drug survival, drug survival outcomes for ixekizumab and secukinumab were comparable, and significantly better than those of adalimumab in China. Preventing a loss of drug efficacy represents a primary approach to improving biologic drug survival in psoriasis patients.

Comparative Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Immunogenicity Study of the Prefilled Syringe and Lyophilized Formulation of a Recombinant Human Tumor Necrosis Factor-α Receptor II:lgG Fc Fusion Protein in Healthy Chinese Male Subjects

This study aimed to compare the pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity of the prefilled syringe (PFS) with lyophilized (LYO) recombinant human tumor necrosis factor-α receptor II:lgG Fc fusion protein (rhTNFR:Fc) in healthy Chinese male subjects. A single-center, randomized, open-label, 2-period, crossover study was performed in healthy Chinese male subjects. Subjects were randomly assigned into 2 sequences and received a subcutaneous injection of 25 mg rhTNFR:Fc PFS or rhTNFR:Fc LYO (Anbainuo), with a 35-day washout between the 2 periods. Blood samples were collected at specified time intervals, and then serum concentrations of rhTNFR:Fc were analyzed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The maximum serum concentration, area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, and AUC from time 0 to infinity were all calculated and evaluated. Meanwhile, safety and immunogenicity were also assessed. A total of 82 subjects completed the study, and six subjects withdrew for various reasons. The 90%CIs for geometric mean ratios of maximum serum concentration, AUC from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, and AUC from time 0 to infinity were all within the equivalence range of 80% to 125%. Safety was comparable between the 2 formulations with low immunogenicity. rhTNFR:Fc PFS exhibited similar pharmacokinetic and safety profiles of rhTNFR:Fc LYO (Anbainuo) in healthy Chinese male subjects.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Impairment of μ-calpain activation by rhTNFR:Fc reduces severe burn-induced membrane disruption in the heart

Stress cardiomyopathy is a major clinical complication after severe burn. Multiple upstream initiators have been identified; however, the downstream targets are not fully understood. This study assessed the role of the plasma membrane in this process and its relationship with the protease μ-calpain and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α). Here, third-degree burn injury of approximately 40% of the total body surface area was established in rats. Plasma levels of LDH and cTnI and cardiac cell apoptosis increased at 0.5 h post burn, reached a peak at 6 h, and gradually declined at 24 h. This effect correlated well with not only the disruption of cytoskeletal proteins, including dystrophin and ankyrin-B, but also with the activation of μ-calpain, as indicated by the cleaved fragments of α-spectrin and membrane recruitment of the catalytic subunit CAPN1. More importantly, these alterations were diminished by blocking calpain activity with MDL28170. Burn injury markedly increased the cellular uptake of Evans blue, indicating membrane integrity disruption, and this effect was also reversed by MDL28170. Compared with those in the control group, cardiac cells in the burn plasma-treated group were more prone to damage, as indicated by a marked decrease in cell viability and increases in LDH release and apoptosis. Of note, these alterations were mitigated by CAPN1 siRNA. Moreover, after neutralizing TNF-α with rhTNFR:Fc, calpain activity was blocked, and heart function was improved. In conclusion, we identified μ-calpain as a trigger for severe burn-induced membrane disruption in the heart and provided evidence for the application of rhTNFR:Fc to inhibit calpain for cardioprotection.

Efficacy and safety of etanercept biosimilar rhTNFR-Fc in Chinese patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: An open-label multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND

Etanercept biosimilar recombinant human TNF-α receptor II: IgG Fc fusion protein (rhTNFR-Fc) has showed its efficacy and safety in Chinese patients with rheumatoid arthritis. However, data on rhTNFR-Fc's application in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is limited.

METHODS

A prospective, observational, multicenter study was performed at 6 institutes in China from July 2020 to December 2021. In a 24-week follow-up, patients with JIA including polyarticular JIA and enthesitis related arthritis received rhTNFR-Fc plus methotrexate (MTX) treatment. The primary outcome parameters were improvements of cJADAS-10 (clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score), and the secondary outcome parameter was an inactive disease.

RESULTS

60 patients completed at least 12-week follow-up, and 57 completed 24-week follow-up. They had high C reactive protein values (11.6 mg/L) and cJADAS-10 (14.6) at baseline. Thirteen patients had morning stiffness. 33 patients showed synovial thickening, and 34 showed bone marrow edemas on MRI. Ultrasonography demonstrated significant joint effusions in 43 patients. The cJADAS-10 sharply decreased from 14.66 at the baseline to 2.4 at 24 weeks of rhTNFR-Fc therapy, respectively (P < 0.01). About half of patients achieved inactive disease at 24 weeks of therapy. Compared with the baseline, the number of patients with morning stiffness, joint effusions, bone marrow edema and synovial thickening on MRI significantly decreased at 24 weeks. Adverse events were consistent with known side effects of biologic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study indicated that the combination of rhTNFR-Fc and MTX significantly improve symptoms and disease activity of children with JIA. This study suggests etanercept biosimilar rhTNFR-Fc as an effective and safe therapy for children with JIA.

Biologic Treatment Algorithms for Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis with Comorbid Conditions and Special Populations: A Review

The emergence of data from clinical trials of biologics, the approval of new biologics, and our improved understanding of psoriasis pathogenesis have increased the therapeutic possibilities for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Biologics currently approved for the treatment of psoriasis include tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, ustekinumab (an IL-12/23 inhibitor), and IL-23 inhibitors. Data from clinical trials and studies of the safety and efficacy of biologics provide essential information for the personalization of patient care. We discuss the benefits and disadvantages of biologics as a first-line treatment choice, update treatment recommendations according to current evidence, and propose psoriasis treatment algorithms. Our discussion includes the following comorbid conditions: psoriatic arthritis, multiple sclerosis, congestive heart failure, inflammatory bowel disease, hepatitis B, nonmelanoma skin cancer, lymphoma, and latent tuberculosis. We make evidence-based treatment recommendations for special populations, including pediatric patients, patients with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), and pregnant and breastfeeding patients with psoriasis. Ultimately, individualized recommendations that consider patient preferences, disease severity, comorbid conditions, and additional risk factors should be offered to patients and updated as new trial data emerges.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Are biologics combined with methotrexate better than biologics monotherapy in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

To investigate if the combination of biologics with methotrexate (MTX) would have better performance than biological monotherapy in clinical efficiency and safety for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA)， a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) searched from the Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and Embase was conducted. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) responses (including PASI 50, 75, and 90), and proportion of patients with Physician's Global Assessment Scale (sPGA) scored 0 or 1, were used for psoriasis assessment. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70 responder indices were used to assess the efficiency for treating PsA. The incidences of adverse events and antidrug antibodies' development were also recorded. A total of 15 studies with 4221 patients were included in this study. Three of the 15 RCTs were categorized as low risk of bias, nine studies as unclear, and three as high. Significant greater improvement in the combination group than monotherapy group for psoriasis was observed at week 12, week 24, and week 48, with no increased risk of severe adverse events and drug withdrawals due to adverse events. There was no significant difference in the comparison of clinical efficiency for the treatment of PsA at week 24. In conclusion, biologics plus MTX made better performance on improving the clinical efficiency for the treatment of psoriasis when compared with biologic monotherapy, without a difference in tolerability. However, this combination cannot improve the clinical efficiency of PsA treatment and more studies are warranted to elucidate relevant problems.

Long-term safety of combination treatment with methotrexate and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists versus TNF-α antagonists alone in psoriatic patients

Methotrexate, a folic acid analog, is the conventional systemic anti-psoriatic agent most commonly chosen for combination with biologics in the treatment of psoriasis. Real-world long-term safety data of this combination versus biologic treatment alone in dermatological practice are sparse. Here, we present results of a comparative retrospective study of laboratory dynamics and adverse events in psoriatic patients receiving a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonist (adalimumab or etanercept) with and without concomitant methotrexate (176 treatment courses, mean duration of 629 days). Co-treatment with methotrexate significantly (P < 0.05) correlated with a decrease of leukocyte, neutrophil and erythrocyte counts and an increase of glutamate pyruvate transaminase (GPT) (Pearson correlation, n > 148). The relative risk for a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade 1-2 laboratory adverse event was significantly elevated to 1.11 for anemia and 1.16 for a GPT increase if the patients received concomitant methotrexate at the time the laboratory test was performed. Combination treatment was given for equal or more than 30% of the time (MTX_≥30% ) during 12% of the treatment courses. During these treatment courses, dynamics of leukocyte (-8.1%), neutrophil (-8.1%), erythrocyte (-3.2%) counts and GPT (+16.9%) from baseline to average under treatment were significantly more pronounced. CTCAE grade 3-4 laboratory adverse events occurred in 9.5% and 5.2% of treatment courses with and without MTX_≥30% , respectively (p = 0.70), and affected transaminases in 90% of the cases. Methotrexate was discontinued due to CTCAE grade 3-4 laboratory adverse events in 4.25% of the treatment courses with MTX of 30% or more. Elevated baseline γ-glutamyl transferase levels significantly predicted the occurrence of CTCAE grade 3-4 laboratory adverse events and should trigger investigations for pre-existing liver disease or alcohol abuse. In conclusion, our comparative data supplement previous short-term studies and support a tolerable long-term safety profile of the combination treatment. However, given the additional toxicities and low evidence for benefits, alternative options such as biologic monotherapy or switching to a different biologic should be considered in a dermatological setting.