Comparison of effectiveness and safety of infliximab, etanercept, and adalimumab in psoriatic arthritis patients who experienced an inadequate response to previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs

Effectiveness and safety of biological and target synthetic drugs treatment for psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PA) is a chronic inflammatory systemic arthritis that can result in loss of functional capacity and joint deformation. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of biological and target synthetic drugs for treating PA.

METHODS

We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of Adalimumab, Etanercept, Infliximab, Golimumab, Secukinumab, Certolizumab Pegol and Tofacitinib in the main general databases and clinical trial registers databases. The primary outcomes were ACR 50, PsARC, and serious adverse events. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Network meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model and frequentist approach. The CINeMA software was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We included 33 RCTs (n = 11,034). The results from the network meta-analysis for the ACR 50 at 6-months follow-up showed that all drugs were superior to placebo, with Secukinumab (high certainty of evidence), Infliximab (very low certainty of evidence) and Adalimumab (high certainty of evidence) ranking the highest. Regarding the PsARC (at 6-months follow-up), all drugs, except for Golimumab (very low certainty of evidence), were superior to placebo, with Etanercept (low certainty of evidence), Infliximab (low certainty of evidence) and Certolizumab Pegol (low certainty of evidence) being the most effective drugs. There were no significant differences in the risk of serious adverse events between the drugs and placebo. Golimumab (very low certainty of evidence), Secukinumab (low certainty of evidence), and Adalimumab (very low certainty of evidence) ranked the highest for safety.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, based on the balance between efficacy and safety, Secukinumab and Adalimumab may be the preferred options among the evaluated drugs for treating patients with PsA. However, caution is necessary when interpreting the safety findings, as they are supported by evidence of low to very low certainty. Consequently, the balance between benefits and potential risks may change as new safety evaluation studies become available.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42022315577.

First-line biologic therapy with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors for psoriatic arthritis: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects multiple joints. It is associated with psoriasis and treated with synthetic and biologic drugs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients who received biologic therapy with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors in terms of effectiveness, safety, functionality, and quality of life.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A prospective observational study was performed at a single center in Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

METHODS

Patients with PsA who received their first TNF inhibitor treatment were followed up for 12 months. Disease activity was measured using the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI). Functionality was measured using the Health Questionnaire Assessment (HAQ), and quality of life was evaluated using the European Quality of Life Five Dimensions (EQ-5D). Multiple linear regression was used to identify predictors of the clinical response at 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients treated with adalimumab or etanercept were evaluated. Most of the clinical measures were significantly improved at 12 months. However, 31%-51% of the patients did not achieve good clinical control. No differences were observed between adalimumab and etanercept, except for poor functionality at 12 months among patients treated with etanercept. The main predictors of a worse clinical response were female sex, etanercept use, poor functionality, or lower quality of life at baseline. The main adverse reactions were alopecia, headache, injection site reaction, sinusitis, flu, dyslipidemia, and infections.

CONCLUSION

TNF inhibitor therapy was effective and safe. However, despite improvements in clinical measures, most patients did not achieve satisfactory control of the disease.

Use of FDA-Approved Medications: Biologics for Psoriatic Arthritis in Patients at an Urban Outpatient Rheumatology Clinic

Objective

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory arthritis associated with psoriasis that manifests as peripheral arthritis, dactylitis, enthesitis, and spondylitis. Biologics, particularly tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and some interleukin 17 (IL‐17) and interleukin 23 (IL‐23) inhibitors, are the only US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved treatments shown to limit joint damage in clinical trials for PsA. Conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs have also been adapted to PsA treatment. Current 2018 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines regard TNFis as first‐line therapy in treatment‐naïve patients. The aim of this project is to review the prescribing practices for patients with PsA at an urban rheumatology office, with a focus on biologic prescribing.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed to search for patients seen from June 1, 2017, to June 1, 2018, using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes for PsA. A log of prescribing practices listed the use of biologics versus oral small molecules (OSMs) (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, and apremilast) across different ages, sex, and disease severity.

Results

This study included a total of 97 patients (40 women and 57 men), and 66% were on biologics (60% of women and 70% of men). There was no sex bias in biologic prescribing (P = 0.59). Use of biologics was highest in the 38 to 57 years age group and lowest in the 78 to 97 years age group, although, statistically, there was no age bias in biologic prescribing (P = 0.22). Biologics provided superior disease control (84.37%) compared with nonbiologics (66.6%) (P = 0.0016). OSMs provided slightly better control (69.5%) over apremilast monotherapy (61.5%) (P = 0.016).

Conclusion

There is no age or sex bias in prescribing practices for PsA. In accordance with the ACR, patients with controlled symptoms on OSMs are being appropriately maintained. Although apremilast is allocated as an add‐on therapy, 13.4% of patients were on apremilast monotherapy. This quality improvement project reveals that in most instances, biologics are being appropriately initiated as the primary mode of therapy for patients with PsA at our outpatient practice; however, treatment modifications can be made regarding patients who are managed with apremilast alone.

A criterion-based approach to systematic and transparent comparative effectiveness: a case study in psoriatic arthritis

Aim: Indirect treatment comparisons are used when no direct comparison is available. Comparison networks should satisfy the transitivity assumption, that is, equal likelihood of treatment assignment for a given patient based on comparability of studies. Materials & methods: Seven criteria were evaluated across 18 randomized controlled trials in psoriatic arthritis: inclusion/exclusion criteria, clinical trial design and follow-up, patient-level baseline characteristics, disease severity, prior therapies, concomitant and extended-trial treatment and placebo response differences. Results: Across studies, placebo was a common comparator, and key efficacy end points were reported. Collectively, several potential sources of insufficient transitivity were identified, most often related to trial design and population differences. Conclusion: Potential challenges in satisfying transitivity occur frequently and should be evaluated thoroughly.

Latin American Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Systemic Treatment of Psoriasis SOLAPSO - Sociedad Latinoamericana de Psoriasis (Latin American Psoriasis Society)

This Clinical Practice Guideline on the systemic treatment of Psoriasis includes the recommendations elaborated by a panel of experts from the Latin American Psoriasis Society SOLAPSO, who assessed the quality of the available evidence using the GRADE system and the PICO process to guide the literature search. To answer each question, the experts discussed the results of randomized controlled trials, observational studies and metanalysis evaluating the interventions identified (non-biologics, biologics and phototherapy) in different populations of patients with moderate to severe plaque-psoriasis, which was summarized in Tables ad-hoc. The main end-points considered to assess efficacy were PASI 50, 75, 90 and 100, PGA 0-1 and significant improvement of health-related quality of life. Specific adverse events, either severe or leading to treatment interruption, were also evaluated. The 31 recommendations included in this CPG follow the structure proposed by GRADE: direction (for or against) and strength (strong or weak). The goal of this CPG is to improve the management of patients with psoriasis by recommending interventions of proved benefit and providing a reference standard for the treating physician. Adhering to the contents of this CPG does not guarantee therapeutic success. The final decision on the specific treatment is the responsibility of the physician based on the individual circumstances and considering the values, the preferences and the opinions of the patient or caregivers.

Comparative effectiveness of secukinumab and etanercept in biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis assessed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison

OBJECTIVE

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) can be used to assess the comparative effectiveness of two treatments indirectly using data from randomized placebo-controlled trials. This MAIC assessed the comparative effectiveness of secukinumab (an anti-interleukin-17A) and etanercept (a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor) in a target population of biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Individual patient data pooled from FUTURE 2 (NCT01752634), FUTURE 3 (NCT01989468), and FUTURE 5 (NCT02404350) (secukinumab: 150 mg, n=458 and 300 mg, n=461) were matched to data from the population in the NCT00317499 trial (etanercept 25 mg, n=101) using MAIC methodology, by adjusting for clinical and demographic baseline characteristics. Recalculated outcomes from FUTURE 2, 3, and 5 (150 mg, effective sample size (ESS) post-matching=104; 300 mg, ESS=75; and placebo, ESS=159) were compared with the NCT00317499 trial. Pairwise comparisons using odds ratios (ORs) were performed for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20, 50, and 70 response criteria at week 12 (placebo-adjusted) and week 24 (non-placebo-adjusted).

RESULTS

At week 12, there were no significant differences in ACR responses between secukinumab and etanercept. There was no significant difference between secukinumab 150 mg and etanercept at week 24 with respect to ACR 20 and 50 response rates; however, ACR 70 response rates were higher for secukinumab 150 mg (OR (95% confidence interval (CI)): 4.48 (2.01-9.99), p<0.001). ACR 20, 50, and 70 response rates were higher with secukinumab 300 mg than with etanercept at this time point (OR (95% CI): ACR 20, 3.28 (1.69-6.38), p<0.001; ACR 50, 1.90 (1.04-3.50), p=0.038; and ACR 70, 3.56 (1.51-8.40), p=0.004).

CONCLUSION

In this MAIC, secukinumab was associated with higher ACR 20 and 50 (secukinumab 300 mg) and 70 (secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg) response rates at week 24 than etanercept in biologic-naïve patients with active PsA, whereas no significant difference was observed in the short-term at week 12.

Radiologic parameters of ankylosing spondylitis patients treated with anti-TNF-α versus nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and sulfasalazine

PURPOSE

Limited data are available on the relationship between treatment agents and sagittal balance in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). We investigated radiological features related to treatment agents and compared sagittal balance between patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (anti-TNF-α) and those treated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and sulfasalazine (SSZ).

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 133 consecutive AS patients. Patients were eligible for the trial if they were under medical treatment with the same treatment agents for at least 1 year. All patients were treated initially with NSAIDs and SSZ. Sixty-nine patients achieved an excellent pain control outcome with these agents (group A). Sixty-four patients who reported of intractable low back pain were switched to anti-TNF-α treatment (group B). Twelve radiographic parameters were measured. Clinical outcome was assessed with the Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP). All parameters were measured at enrolment, upon changing treatment agents, and every 6 months during follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean ESR, CRP, BASDAI, and thoracic kyphosis at baseline were significantly higher in group B. After treatment, group B had significantly higher lumbar lordosis (LL) and significantly better clinical outcomes. Correlation analysis revealed significant relationships between radiologic parameters and BASDAI. On multiple regression analysis, LL was a significant predictor of BASDAI.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a clear association between treatment agents and radiologic parameters in AS. Anti-TNF-α treatment improved LL with improvement in clinical outcomes. Lumbar lordosis was a significant predictor of clinical outcome in AS patients treated with anti-TNF-α. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Certolizumab pegol and secukinumab for treating active psoriatic arthritis following inadequate response to disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Several biologic therapies are approved by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who have had an inadequate response to two or more synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). NICE does not specifically recommend switching from one biologic to another, and only ustekinumab (UST; STELARA^®, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Horsham, PA, USA) is recommended after anti-tumour necrosis factor failure. Secukinumab (SEC; COSENTYX^®, Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland) and certolizumab pegol (CZP; CIMZIA^®, UCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium) have not previously been appraised by NICE.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CZP and SEC for treating active PsA in adults in whom DMARDs have been inadequately effective.

DESIGN

Systematic review and economic model.

DATA SOURCES

Fourteen databases (including MEDLINE and EMBASE) were searched for relevant studies from inception to April 2016 for CZP and SEC studies; update searches were run to identify new comparator studies.

REVIEW METHODS

Clinical effectiveness data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were synthesised using Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) methods to investigate the relative efficacy of SEC and CZP compared with comparator therapies. A de novo model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of SEC and CZP compared with the other relevant comparators. The model was specified for three subpopulations, in accordance with the NICE scope (patients who have taken one prior DMARD, patients who have taken two or more prior DMARDs and biologic-experienced patients). The models were further classified according to the level of concomitant psoriasis.

RESULTS

Nineteen eligible RCTs were included in the systematic review of short-term efficacy. Most studies were well conducted and were rated as being at low risk of bias. Trials of SEC and CZP demonstrated clinically important efficacy in all key clinical outcomes. At 3 months, patients taking 150 mg of SEC [relative risk (RR) 6.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.55 to 15.43] or CZP (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.94 to 5.56) were more likely to be responders than patients taking placebo. The NMA results for the biologic-naive subpopulations indicated that the effectiveness of SEC and CZP relative to other biologics and each other was uncertain. Limited data were available for the biologic-experienced subpopulation. Longer-term evidence suggested that these newer biologics reduced disease progression, with the benefits being similar to those seen for older biologics. The de novo model generated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for three subpopulations and three psoriasis subgroups. In subpopulation 1 (biologic-naive patients who had taken one prior DMARD), CZP was the optimal treatment in the moderate-severe psoriasis subgroup and 150 mg of SEC was optimal in the subgroups of patients with mild-moderate psoriasis or no concomitant psoriasis. In subpopulation 2 (biologic-naive patients who had taken two or more prior DMARDs), etanercept (ETN; ENBREL^®, Pfizer Inc., New York City, NY, USA) is likely to be the optimal treatment in all subgroups. The ICERs for SEC and CZP versus best supportive care are in the region of £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In subpopulation 3 (biologic-experienced patients or patients in whom biologics are contraindicated), UST is likely to be the optimal treatment (ICERs are in the region of £21,000-27,000 per QALY). The optimal treatment in subpopulation 2 was sensitive to the choice of evidence synthesis model. In subpopulations 2 and 3, results were sensitive to the algorithm for Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index costs. The optimal treatment is not sensitive to the use of biosimilar prices for ETN and infliximab (REMICADE^®, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Kenilworth, NJ, USA).

CONCLUSIONS

SEC and CZP may be an effective use of NHS resources, depending on the subpopulation and subgroup of psoriasis severity. There are a number of limitations to this assessment, driven mainly by data availability.

FUTURE WORK

Trials are needed to inform effectiveness of biologics in biologic-experienced populations.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016033357.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

What does evidence-based medicine tell us about treatments for different subtypes of psoriatic arthritis? A systematic literature review on randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

PsA is a heterogeneous disease with various subtypes of joint manifestations, which can affect the homogeneity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The aim of this systematic literature review was to evaluate the inclusion criteria, demographics and outcomes of RCTs to see whether the whole spectrum of PsA was represented.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were screened for RCTs on the efficacy of any treatment for PsA up to 4 October 2016 to investigate the inclusion criteria, demographics, outcomes and efficacy.

RESULTS

Two thousand and sixty-eight abstracts were identified at screening; 76 articles and 52 conference proceedings were included in the final analysis. The main inclusion criteria always included the number of active joints and never axial symptoms, enthesitis nor dactylitis. Only 10 studies provided information about subtypes, of which symmetrical polyarthritis was the main subtype. Mean (s.d.) tender and swollen joints were between 7.8 and 35.8 (1.8-22.1) and between 5.2 and 25.2 (1.5-16.2), respectively. All studies had responses in joint counts as their primary outcome. Responses in enthesitis and dactylitis were usually secondary or tertiary outcomes. Response in BASDAI was among the outcomes in four studies. The comparison of efficacy in polyarticular vs oligoarticular disease was given in three studies, whereas no information was available for DIP joint disease or arthritis mutilans.

CONCLUSION

There is evidence in the literature to guide clinicians on how to treat PsA patients with polyarticular disease, but there is a gap in knowledge about the other subtypes.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The study protocol is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42017053907).

A Case of Recalcitrant Psoriatic Arthritis to TNF Inhibitors Improved After Administration of Secukinumab, an IL-17A Inhibitor

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a unique inflammatory arthritis due to the fact that patients have to deal not only with pain but also with their skin appearance, which may have a detrimental effect on their everyday lives and psychology. Treating a patient with PsA, improving both the musculoskeletal and skin symptoms is a challenge for the clinical rheumatologist. In this case, we present a patient of recalcitrant PsA to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) who had an exceptional improvement after administration of the interleukin-17A inhibitor (IL-17Ai) secukinumab.

Small molecule therapy for managing moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis

INTRODUCTION

The majority of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients experience a good clinical response to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and biologic therapies (bDMARDs). However, treatment failure with these drugs can represent a relevant clinical problem. Moreover, in daily clinical practice, the appropriate identification of patients eligible for these agents can be conditioned by numerous aspects, mainly represented by comorbidities, such as history of malignancies, chronic and recurrent infectious diseases. Areas covered: We searched in the PUBMED database and review published data on the efficacy and safety profile of the small molecules, inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 4, apremilast, and of JAK/STAT pathways, tofacitinib, in PsA. Moreover, we report data on the other JAK inhibitor, baricitinib, and the A(3) adenosine receptors agonist, CF101, emerging by studies conducted in psoriasis patients. Expert opinion: In Psoriatic Arthritis, apremilast appears promising for PsA and recent studies have shown a good efficacy and an acceptable safety profile. Data on tofacitinib in PsA are limited. Studies on the small molecules, baricitinib and CF101 are still incomplete and limited to trials conducted in Rheumatoid Arthritis and in psoriasis. Further studies on small molecules and on their underlining mechanisms are advocated in PsA.

Biologics that inhibit the Th17 pathway and related cytokines to treat inflammatory disorders

INTRODUCTION

Advances in the understanding of TNF-α and IL-17 synergistic functions have recently led to the concept that patients who do not respond or who respond inadequately to TNF-α inhibitors may have IL-17-driven diseases, opening up the way for a new class of therapeutic development: Th17-inhibitors. Areas covered: In this review, the authors discuss the central role that the IL-23/Th17 axis plays in the pathogenesis of several inflammatory diseases, such as psoriasis, highlighting its position as a relevant therapeutic target. In particular, the authors start by giving a brief historical excursus on biologic agent development up until the success of TNF-α inhibitors, and continue with an overview of IL12/23 pathway inhibition. Next, they describe Th17 cell biology, focusing on the role of IL-17 in host defense and in human immune-inflammatory diseases, discussing the use and side effects of IL-17 inhibitors. Expert opinion: The IL-23/Th17 signaling pathway plays a central role in the pathogenesis of several inflammatory diseases, such as psoriasis. Recent data has demonstrated that biologics neutralizing IL-17 (ixekizumab, secukinumab) or its receptor (brodalumab) are highly effective with a positive safety profile in treating moderate to severe psoriasis, offering new treatment possibilities, especially for patients who do not respond adequately to anti-TNF-α therapies.

Review of the treatment of psoriatic arthritis with biological agents: choice of drug for initial therapy and switch therapy for non-responders

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous chronic inflammatory disease with a broad clinical spectrum and variable course. It can involve musculoskeletal structures as well as skin, nails, eyes, and gut. The management of PsA has changed tremendously in the last decade, thanks to an earlier diagnosis, an advancement in pharmacological therapies, and a wider application of a multidisciplinary approach. The commercialization of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, and infliximab) as well as interleukin (IL)-12/23 (ustekinumab) and IL-17 (secukinumab) inhibitors is representative of a revolution in the treatment of PsA. No evidence-based strategies are currently available for guiding the rheumatologist to prescribe biological drugs. Several international and national recommendation sets are currently available with the aim to help rheumatologists in everyday clinical practice management of PsA patients treated with biological therapy. Since no specific biological agent has been demonstrated to be more effective than others, the drug choice should be made according to the available safety data, the presence of extra-articular manifestations, the patient’s preferences (e.g., administration route), and the drug price. However, future studies directly comparing different biological drugs and assessing the efficacy of treatment strategies specific for PsA are urgently needed.

Efficacy of the combined therapy with etanercept and methotrexat at the female patient with generalized pustular psoriasis and arthritis psoriasis after the therapeutic failure of two the TNF-α receptor inhibitors. Case study

The article presents the clinical observation effectiveness of TNF-a inhibitor etanercept in patients with generalized pustular psoriasis and PsA, resistant to treatment by other drugs of this class. It presents the current recommendations for the management of patients with pustular psoriasis.

Beyond TNF Inhibitors: New Pathways and Emerging Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by psoriasis, synovitis, enthesitis, spondylitis and association with other extra-articular manifestations. Chronic inflammation of involved tissues possibly leads to structural damage and to a reduction in function and quality of life. The treatment of PsA dramatically changed with the introduction of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α drugs, which have been shown to reduce the symptoms and signs of the disease, and slow radiographic progression. However, some patients do not respond to anti-TNFα or have a loss of response. Recently, the discovery of new pathogenic mechanisms have made possible the development of new drugs that target pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as interleukin (IL)-12, IL-23 and IL-17, or interfere with cellular pathways involved in skin, joint and entheseal inflammation. New molecules, namely ustekinumab, secukinumab, and apremilast have shown efficacy and safety over the various components of the disease in randomized clinical trials. These drugs have been recently approved for the treatment of PsA and included in new treatment recommendations. Other molecules are currently being tested in phase III clinical trials and are potential new treatment options for PsA. The aim of this review is to update the new pathways involved in the development of the disease and the emerging treatments for PsA beyond TNFα inhibition.

A Review of Psoriasis, Therapies, and Suicide

Many chronic medical disorders are associated with psychiatric morbidity. Yet the psychological burden of these disorders often goes unnoticed. In dermatology, psoriasis has a higher association with psychiatric illness, including depression and suicide risk, compared with many other conditions. Studies suggest that effective treatment of psoriasis results in the improvement of psychiatric morbidity, particularly depression and anxiety. New biologic treatments for psoriasis may offer help beyond clearing of the skin in these patients and may lead to a reduction of psychiatric morbidity. Although concerns have been raised regarding the potential link between interleukin-17R blockade in the treatment of psoriasis and suicide, current literature provides no evidence to support this association.

Tailored treatment options for patients with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis: review of established and new biologic and small molecule therapies

The diverse clinical picture of PsA suggests the need to identify suitable therapies to address the different combinations of clinical manifestations. This review aimed to classify the available biologic agents and new small molecule inhibitors (licensed and nonlicensed) based on their proven efficacy in treating different clinical manifestations associated with psoriasis and PsA. This review presents the level of evidence of efficacy of different biologic treatments and small molecule inhibitors for certain clinical features of treatment of PsA and psoriasis, which was graded in categories I–IV. The literature searches were performed on the following classes of biologic agents and small molecules: TNF inhibitors (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab), anti-IL12/IL23 (ustekinumab), anti-IL17 (secukinumab, brodalumab, ixekizumab), anti-IL6 (tocilizumab), T cell modulators (alefacept, efalizumab, abatacept, itolizumab), B cell depletion therapy (rituximab), phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor (apremilast) and Janus kinase inhibitor (tofacitinib). A comprehensive table including 17 different biologic agents and small molecule inhibitors previously tested in psoriasis and PsA was generated, including the level of evidence of their efficacy for each of the clinical features included in our review (axial and peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and nail and skin disease). We also proposed a limited set of recommendations for a sequential biologic treatment algorithm for patients with PsA who failed the first anti-TNF therapy, based on the available literature data. There is good evidence that many of the biologic treatments initially tested in psoriasis are also effective in PsA. Further research into both prognostic biomarkers and patient stratification is required to allow clinicians the possibility to make better use of the various biologic treatment options available. This review showed that there are many potentially new treatments that are not included in the current guidelines that can be used for selected categories of patients based on their disease phenotype, clinician experience and access to new biologic therapies.

Progress in understanding and utilizing TNF-α inhibition for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis

The improved recognition of pathogenetic molecular mechanisms has led to the use of drugs targeting cytokines in different inflammatory arthropathies as well psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In particular, the progress in knowledge on tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α in the pathogenesis of PsA has changed the therapeutic approach by use of direct and receptor cytokine antagonists. Currently, infliximab (IFX), adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and certolizumab pegol represent the five anti-TNF-α available for the treatment of PsA. This review describes evidence on treatment aimed at neutralizing TNF-α in PsA patients, from the first study in 2000 until today, mainly derived from randomized clinical trials. In comparison with traditional therapies, anti-TNF-α agents have shown to have more efficacy both in treating clinical aspects, including enthesitis, dactylitis, joint pain and swelling, axial involvement, nail and skin lesions, and in reducing radiographic progression. Moreover, anti-TNF-α agents have been demonstrated to be reasonably safe in PsA, as confirmed by data derived by different registries.

Pharmacological treatment of spondyloarthritis: exploring the effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biological therapies

Spondyloarthritis represents a heterogeneous group of articular inflammatory diseases that share common genetic, clinical and radiological features. The therapy target of spondyloarthritis relies mainly in improving patients' quality of life, controlling articular inflammation, preventing the structural joints damage and preserving the functional abilities, autonomy and social participation of patients. Among these, traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs have been demonstrated to be effective in the management of peripheral arthritis; moreover, in the last decade, biological therapies have improved the approach to spondyloarthritis. In patients with axial spondyloarthritis, tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors are currently the only effective therapy in patients for whom conventional therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs has failed. The aim of this review is to summarize the current experience and evidence about the pharmacological approach in spondyloarthritis patients.

Indirect comparisons of the efficacy of biological agents in patients with psoriatic arthritis with an inadequate response to traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs or to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While the efficacy of biologic agents for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has been well demonstrated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the data on their relative efficacy is limited. This meta-analysis is aimed at assessing the comparative efficacy of these agents in patients who had persistently active disease despite traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), or who could not tolerate NSAIDs/DMARDs.

METHODS

RCTs examining the efficacy of biologic agents in patients with PsA who experienced inadequate response or intolerance of traditional DMARDs or NSAIDs were identified. If more than one RCT were available for a given biologic agent, the pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of attaining a 20% improvement according to American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR20) response across trials were calculated. The pooled risk ratios for each biologic agent were then compared using the indirect comparison technique.

RESULTS

A total of 12 RCTs were identified and included in the data analyses. We found that patients who received older TNF inhibitors (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, and golimumab) had a statistically significantly higher chance of achieving ACR20 response compared with apremilast, ustekinumab, and certolizumab. The likelihood of achieving ACR20 response among secukinumab users (at the dose of 150 mg and 300 mg weekly) was also higher compared with apremilast, ustekinumab, and certolizumab, though the relative risk did not always reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that patients with PsA who experience inadequate response or intolerance of traditional DMARDs or NSAIDs have a higher probability of achieving the ACR20 response with older TNF inhibitors and secukinumab.

Making the next steps in psoriatic arthritis management: current status and future directions

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory condition with articular and extra-articular manifestations: peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis, dactylitis, and skin and nail disease. It is associated with cardiovascular comorbidities. It is now recognized as a new entity, different from rheumatoid arthritis and other spondyloarthritis in terms of clinical manifestations, pathogenesis, and response to therapies. Anti-tumor necrosis factors (anti-TNFs) have demonstrated clinical efficacies exceeding that of conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The current treatment paradigms recommend early diagnosis and treatment, and a strategic and target orientated approach, aiming at a low disease activity status. New understanding in the immunopathogenesis of PsA has led to new treatment targets. This review addresses the evidence of current treatment for each of the domains as an aid to the clinician managing these patients in the clinic. Some new therapeutic targets are presented. We highlight the importance of development and validation in outcome measures, including that of composite scores that capture various disease domains that will facilitate future clinical trials to inform the best treatment.

Psoriatic arthritis: latest treatments and their place in therapy

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogeneous chronic inflammatory disease that may affect peripheral and axial joints, entheses, skin and nails, and other organs. Treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, steroid and disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs had been the backbone of traditional management of PsA for many years. However, improvement in our understanding of immunopathogenesis of PsA has led to new immunomodulatory therapies. Introduction of novel agents has raised the bar for treatment and helped drive research into additional therapeutic options.

Diagnosing and treating psoriatic arthritis: an update

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory arthritis of uncertain pathogenesis, affecting approximately one in four patients with psoriasis. Onset of psoriasis typically precedes the development of PsA. Therefore, the dermatologist is ideally positioned to recognize the early signs and symptoms of PsA for diagnosis and subsequent treatment. The role of the dermatologist in early diagnosis and treatment is essential for preventing pain and functional disabilities, as well as the joint deterioration that accompanies progressive forms of PsA. Diagnosis of PsA is a key aspect of the clinical decision process for the dermatologist, as psoriasis plus PsA requires a different therapeutic approach from that required for psoriasis alone. Furthermore, PsA is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular comorbidities that present significant health concerns. In this review, the pathogenesis and comorbidities of PsA are discussed. In addition, screening and imaging tools that aid in the diagnosis of PsA, as well as tools used for efficacy assessment, are reviewed. Available therapies are presented, with a focus on targeted biologics and emerging treatments.

Management of arthropathy in inflammatory bowel diseases

The most common extra-intestinal manifestation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is articular involvement, with a prevalence ranging between 17% and 39%. It is frequently characterized by an involvement of the axial joints but may also be associated with peripheral arthritis. The target of therapy in the management of arthritis associated with IBD is to reduce the inflammation and prevent any disability and/or deformity. This requires active cooperation between gastroenterologist and rheumatologist. The treatment of axial involvement has focused on the combination of exercise with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Immunomodulators have been efficacious in patients with peripheral arthritis and other extra-intestinal manifestations, but they are not effective for the treatment of axial symptoms of spondylitis. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) α inhibitors have been proven to be highly effective in the treatment of IBD patients which are steroid-dependent or refractory to conventional therapy and in patients with associated articular manifestations. The treatment of peripheral involvement and/or enthesitis and/or dactylitis is based on local steroid injections, while sulfasalazine and/or low doses of systemic steroids may be useful in case of inadequate response to intra-articular steroids. Sulfasalazine induces only a little improvement in peripheral arthritis. Immunomodulators such as methotrexate, azathioprine, cyclosporine and leflunomide show their efficacy in some patients with peripheral arthritis and other extra-intestinal components. TNF-α inhibitors should be considered the first-line therapeutic approach when moderate-to-severe luminal Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis is associated with polyarthritis. The aim of this review is to provide a fair summary of current treatment options for the arthritis associated with IBD.

A multicentre randomized trial of the treatment of patients with pemphigus vulgaris with infliximab and prednisone compared with prednisone alone

BACKGROUND

Pemphigus vulgaris (PV) is a blistering disease and tumour necrosis factor-α has a role in its pathogenesis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety of infliximab (IFX) with prednisone compared with prednisone alone in the treatment of PV. In addition, treatment response was assessed and mechanistic studies were performed.

METHODS

Subjects with PV who had ongoing disease activity while being maintained on prednisone were randomized to receive either IFX or placebo in addition to prednisone. Response status and immunoglobulin (Ig) G anti-desmoglein (Dsg)1 and Dsg3 antibodies were assessed at 18 and 26 weeks.

RESULTS

Ten subjects were randomized to each group. There were no safety signals during the course of the study. At week 18, one subject in each group had responded. At week 26, three IFX-treated subjects vs. none in the placebo group had responded (P = 0·21). At weeks 18 and 26, the median IgG anti-Dsg1 and anti-Dsg3 levels were lower in the IFX-treated patients [IgG anti-Dsg-1 (week 18, P = 0·035; week 26, P = 0·022); IgG anti-Dsg3 (week 18, P = 0·035; week, 26 P = 0·05)].

CONCLUSIONS

This study is limited by the relatively small sample size. There was no significant difference between study arms in the proportion of subjects with treatment-related adverse events > grade 3. IFX therapy was not shown to be effective for the treatment of patients with PV in this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, although IFX treatment may be associated with a decrease in anti-Dsg1 and Dsg3 antibodies.

Biological therapies for spondyloarthritis

Biological therapies and new imaging techniques have changed the therapeutic and diagnostic approach to spondyloarthritis. In patients with axial spondyloarthritis, tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) inhibitor treatment is currently the only effective therapy in patients for whom conventional therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has failed. TNFα inhibitor treatment is more effective in preventing articular damage in peripheral joints than in axial ones. It is important to treat patients at an early stage of disease to reduce disease progression; moreover it is necessary to identify causes of therapy inefficacy in preventing joint damage in the axial subset.

The use of TNF-α blockers in psoriatic arthritis patients with latent tuberculosis infection

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an inflammatory arthropathy associated with skin and/or nail psoriasis. TNF-α is an essential cytokine for the host defense, and its depletion by treatment may facilitate the risk of infections or their reactivation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TNF-α blockers in patients with PsA and concomitant latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) comparing their outcome with non-infected PsA patients. This is a retrospective study in 321 patients with PsA, attending the Psoriatic Arthritis Clinic at the University Federico II of Naples, who had an inadequate response to DMARDs and started therapy with TNF-α blockers. We identified 40 patients with LTBI, who were included in this study along with 40 not infected PsA patients as control group. At baseline (T0) and every 3 months for 2 years (T2), data concerning PsA activity were registered. All patients underwent chest X-ray every 6 months (or 12 if appropriate). In each group, 22 patients were on etanercept therapy, 14 on adalimumab, and 4 on infliximab. Anti-TNF-α therapy was effective in both group of patients, and no statistically significant differences were found in the analysis of the study variables between the two groups from T0 to T2. No serious adverse events occurred in both groups, and no patient was withdrawn from therapy. Our experience suggests that anti-TNF-α treatment is effective and safe in PsA patients with concomitant LTBI. Therefore, neither LTBI nor chemoprophylaxis seems to influence the course of anti-TNF-α therapy.

Clinical and Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Echography Outcomes in Psoriatic Arthritis Patients after One Year of Continuous Therapy with Anti-TNF Drugs

Background. We wanted to verify retrospectively the proportion of patients with psoriatic arthritis who were in remission after 1 year of continuous therapy with either etanercept or adalimumab. Remission was defined as the absence of both clinical and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings suggestive of joint inflammation. Patients and Methods. The data of twenty-five patients with psoriatic arthritis were available for the clinical and CEUS evaluations before and after 1 year of continuous therapy with etanercept or adalimumab. The count of swollen (ACR66), tender (ACR68), and active inflamed joints (AJC) was used to measure the severity of joint involvement. PASI was used to score the severity of psoriasis. HAQ, DLQI, VAS pain, and VAS itching were administered to each patient before starting therapy and every 3 months, up to 1 year. Results. Eight (32%) out of twenty-five patients were in remission after 1 year of therapy with etanercept or adalimumab. A significant reduction of all clinical variables analysed was seen during the course of therapy. Conclusion. Although a significant proportion of patients achieved remission of arthritis after 1 year of effective anti-TNF therapy, the majority of them continued to have either clinical or CEUS findings suggestive of persistence of joint inflammation.