Psoriasiform Eruption and Worsening of Pustulosis Palmoplantaris After Treatment with Two Anti-TNF-α Inhibitors, Followed by Successful Treatment with Ustekinumab

A Systematic Review Characterizing Psoriatic Arthritis Onset and Exacerbation in Patients Receiving Biologic Therapy

Background

While biologic therapies revolutionized treatment of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), some adverse effects have been noted. This includes the development and exacerbation of PsA in patients on biologic agents, however the outcomes were not extensively explored.

Objective

To perform a systematic review to characterize the outcomes of PsA onset or exacerbation secondary to biologic use.

Methods

MEDLINE and EMBASE search conducted on March 23, 2021 resulted in 18 studies comprised of 64 patients.

Results

Of the 64 patients, 57 (89.1%) experienced new-onset PsA and 7 (10.9%) experienced exacerbation of preexisting PsA following exposure to a biologic; most commonly a TNF-α inhibitor (42.2%, n = 27/64) and IL-12/23 inhibitors (39.1%, n = 25/64). The mean durations of biologic use before PsA onset and exacerbation were 14.8 months and 5.2 months, respectively. Twenty-four patients (44.4%) subsequently switched to an alternate biologic without further reports of PsA-related adverse events. All 64 patients reported a specific treatment for PsA; most commonly discontinuation of the associated biologic agent (32.8%, n = 21/64). Complete resolution of PsA was reported in 35.9% (n = 23/64) of cases, of which 91.3% (n = 21/23) resulted after discontinuation of biologic.

Conclusion

Although we characterized outcomes of PsA induction and exacerbation secondary to biologic use, large-scale studies are required.

Switching biologics in psoriasis - practical guidance and evidence to support

INTRODUCTION

Advances of biologic agents have changed the treatment paradigm of psoriasis to higher efficacy and better quality of life. However, the demand for biologic switch is increasing due to patient's greater expectation and decreasing efficacy in long-term use. Also, biologic-induced adverse effects necessitate the switching of biologics.

AREAS COVERED

This review article was divided into two parts. The first part focused on the biologic switch due to lack of efficacy. The second part provided switching suggestions related to adverse effects.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Biologic switch in psoriasis was mainly due to lack of efficacy, and the subsequent biologic agent was usually given at the next scheduled time point without washout period. In pivotal randomized controlled trials, patients with poor response to TNF-alpha inhibitors and ustekinumab achieved better efficacy after switching to IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors. In addition, real-world data showed that intra-class switch could still achieve a 50%-80% of PASI 75 response in individuals with anti-IL-17 failure histories. As for the biologic switch due to adverse effects, washout period was recommended and transition to a biologic agent with different modes of action was preferred, especially class-specific adverse events.

TNF Inhibitor-Induced Psoriasis: Proposed Algorithm for Treatment and Management

Tumor necrosis factor a (TNF-α)-targeted therapies have expanded the therapeutic options for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriasis, and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and have significantly improved patients' quality of life. Paradoxically, anti-TNF-α agents may induce psoriatic eruptions or worsen preexisting psoriatic skin disease. Currently, there is no standard approach for the management of TNF inhibitor-induced psoriasis. Here, we conduct a literature review on TNF inhibitor-induced psoriasis and introduce a novel treatment algorithm for maintaining otherwise effective anti-TNF therapy versus switching to a different class as appropriate in the management of patients with IBD, RA, psoriasis, or PsA.

Paradoxical Reactions to Biologic Therapy in Psoriasis: A Review of the Literature

Biologic drugs, which are molecules designed to act on specific immune system targets, have been shown to be very effective in treating various dermatological, rheumatological, and systemic diseases. As a group, they have an acceptable safety profile, but their use has been associated with the onset of both systemic and organ-specific inflammatory conditions. True paradoxical reactions are immune-mediated disorders that would usually respond to the biologic agent that causes them. There is still debate about whether certain other adverse reactions can be said to be paradoxical. The hypotheses proposed to explain the pathogenesis of such reactions include an imbalance in cytokine production, with an overproduction of IFN-α and altered lymphocyte recruitment and migration (mediated in part by CXCR3), and the production of autoantibodies. Some biologic therapies favor granulomatous reactions. While most of the paradoxical reactions reported have been associated with the use of TNF-α inhibitors, cases associated with more recently introduced biologic therapies -such as ustekinumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab- are increasingly common. The study of paradoxical adverse events not only favors better management of these reactions in patients receiving biologic therapy, but also improves our knowledge of the pathogenesis of chronic inflammatory diseases and helps to identify potential therapeutic targets.