Efficacy and Safety of Certolizumab Pegol in Japanese Patients with Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis: 52-Week Results

Summary of certolizumab pegol in psoriasis including structural features, pharmacokinetics and treatment

Psoriasis pathogenesis involves TNF-α, IL-23 and IL17, against which biologics have been highly effective. Among the five TNF-α inhibitors available for psoriasis, namely infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and certolizumab pegol (CZP), CZP has a unique mechanism of action due to its structure. As CZP lacks the Fc region, it does not cross the placenta and can be safely used in pregnant women. Its PEGylated nature allows for longer distribution time in tissues, potentially leading to a longer-lasting effect compared with other TNF-α inhibitors. In clinical trials, the efficacy of CZP on psoriasis skin symptoms and joint symptoms was comparable to other TNF-α inhibitors, with no discernible differences in safety profiles.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Efficacy and Safety of Nail Psoriasis Targeted Therapies: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Nail changes are frequent clinical findings in patients with cutaneous psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, often causing significant impairments in quality of life. Numerous targeted therapies have been previously studied for treatment of nail psoriasis, however, newer agents have not been captured in prior systematic reviews. With over 25 new studies published since 2020, the landscape of nail psoriasis systemic treatments is rapidly evolving, warranting analysis of recently approved therapies.

METHODS

An updated systematic review of all PubMed and OVID database studies assessing efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for nail psoriasis was performed, with the goal of incorporating clinical data of recent trials and newer agents, namely brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies reporting at least one of the nail psoriasis clinical appearance outcomes (Nail Psoriasis Severity Index, modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index).

RESULTS

A total of 68 studies on 15 nail psoriasis targeted therapeutic agents were included. Biological agents and small molecule inhibitors included TNF-alpha inhibitors (adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab), IL-17 inhibitors (ixekizumab, brodalumab, secukinumab), IL-12/23 inhibitors (ustekinumab), IL-23 inhibitors (guselkumab, risankizumab, tildrakizumab), PDE-4 inhibitors (apremilast), and JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib). These agents all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in nail outcome scores, compared with placebo or with baseline values, at weeks 10-16 and weeks 20-26, with some studies assessing efficacy up to week 60. Safety data for these agents were acceptable and consistent with known safety profiles within these timepoints, with nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, injection site reactions, headache, and diarrhea being the most reported adverse events. Specifically, the newer agents, brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab, showed promising outcomes for treatment of nail psoriasis on the basis of current data.

CONCLUSION

Numerous targeted therapies have shown significant efficacy in improving nail findings in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Data from head-to-head trials have shown greater efficacy of ixekizumab over adalimumab and ustekinumab, as well as brodalumab over ustekinumab, while prior meta-analyses have demonstrated superiority of ixekizumab and tofacitinib to other included agents at various assessed timepoints. Further studies on the long-term efficacy and safety of these agents, as well as randomized controlled trials involving comparison with placebo arms, are needed to fully analyze differences in efficacy of newer agents compared with previously established therapies.

Nail Psoriasis: An Updated Review of Currently Available Systemic Treatments

Background

Nail psoriasis (NP) has a prevalence that ranges from 10 to 82% among patients with psoriasis (PsO) and is one of the most common difficult to treat site of psoriasis. We performed a thorough review of the literature, exploring evidence regarding all available NP systemic treatments, describing also in detail NP dedicated clinical trials.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase prior to February 2023 using a combination of the terms "nail" AND "psoriasis" AND "systemic therapy" AND/OR "systemic treatment". A total of 47 original studies and case reports were reviewed in this article.

Results

Systemic therapies should be considered when the disorder involves more than 3 nails, has extensive skin and joint involvement, and has a significant impact on QoL, due to their best long-term efficacy. In detail, conventional and biologic systemic drugs demonstrated efficacy in recent trials, including acitretin, methotrexate, cyclosporine, apremilast, adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, risankizumab and tildrakizumab.

Conclusion

Several therapies have demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of NP; however, the choice of treatment depends not only on the severity of the nail involvement, but also on whether PsA is present, the patient's comorbidities other than PsA, previous treatment history, and the patient's drug preferences.

Bayesian network meta-analysis of head-to-head trials for complete resolution of nail psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Almost 50% of patients with skin psoriasis have concomitant nail involvement. The comparative effectiveness of the available biologics for nail psoriasis (NP) is still an area of contention because of limited data on nails.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of biologics in achieving complete resolution of NP.

METHODS

We identified studies in PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus. The eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trial (RCTs) or cohort studies for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis with at least two arms of active comparator of biologic reporting at least one efficacy outcome of interest: that is the Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI), the modified NAPSI or the Physician's Global Assessment of Fingernail Psoriasis with a score of 0.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies comprising seven treatments met the inclusion criteria, and were included in the NMA. The NMA showed the odds of complete NP resolution were superior with ixekizumab [risk ratio (RR) 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-3.10] compared with the treatment of reference (adalimumab). Brodalumab (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.14-7.40), guselkumab (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40-1.80), infliximab (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.19-4.60) and ustekinumab (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.08-1.60) demonstrated worse therapeutic effect compared with adalimumab. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, ixekizumab 80 mg every 4 weeks had the highest probability of being the best treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The interleukin-17A inhibitor ixekizumab has the highest rate of complete nail clearance and it can be considered the best-ranked therapy from the present evidence. This study is relevant to daily practice as it facilitates the decision when choosing between the wide variety of available biologics in patients for whom clearance of nail symptoms is the first concern.

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.

English version of Japanese guidance for use of biologics for psoriasis (the 2022 version)

This is the English version of Japanese guidance for use of biologics for psoriasis (the 2022 version). As the first biologics for psoriasis in Japan, infliximab and adalimumab, anti-tumor necrosis factor-α antibodies, became available in the field of dermatology in 2010, followed by ustekinumab, an anti-interleukin (IL)-12/IL-23p40 antibody, which was launched in Japan in 2011. Moreover, after 2015, three IL-17 inhibitors, the IL-17A antibody preparations secukinumab and ixekizumab, and an anti-IL-17 receptor antibody preparation brodalumab were marketed. Furthermore, after 2018, the anti-IL23p19 antibody preparations guselkumab and risankizumab, the TNF inhibitor certolizumab pegol, the IL-23 inhibitor tildrakizumab, and the anti-IL-17A/F antibody bimekizumab were marketed. It is important for physicians to select appropriate biologic therapy for each psoriatic patient after due consideration of disease factors, treatment factors, and patient background factors, sharing such information with patients. The followings can be listed as points to be considered for the selection of biologics: drug effects (e.g., strength of effectiveness, time to onset of effectiveness, effectiveness against arthritis, primary failure, secondary failure), safety (e.g., infections, administration-related reactions, and relationships with other comorbidities), convenience for patients (e.g., hospital visit intervals, self-injection, maintenance therapy at clinics, feasibility of drug discontinuation/re-administration), and payment (medical costs) borne by patients. This guidance has been prepared with the aim of allowing dermatologists experienced in the treatment of psoriasis to use biologics appropriately according to the circumstances of individual patients after consideration of the above-mentioned factors.

Bimekizumab Efficacy and Safety in Japanese Patients with Plaque Psoriasis in BE VIVID: A Phase 3, Ustekinumab and Placebo-Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

Bimekizumab treatment resulted in improved clinical outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in BE VIVID, a 52-week, phase 3, randomized, ustekinumab and placebo-controlled study. We present data from the BE VIVID Japan patient subpopulation.

METHODS

Globally, patients were randomized to receive bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), ustekinumab (45/90 mg weight-based at baseline and week 4, then every 12 weeks), or placebo (Q4W through week 16, then bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W). Efficacy endpoints included week 16 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1, and other outcomes [PASI 100, PASI 75, IGA 0, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, absolute PASI, scalp IGA, Psoriasis Symptoms and Impacts Measure (P-SIM) responses]. Safety analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

There were 108 Japanese randomized patients (bimekizumab: 62; ustekinumab: 29; placebo: 17). At week 16, bimekizumab-treated patients had a higher clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo (PASI 90: 85.5% versus 51.7% and 5.9%; IGA 0/1: 82.3% versus 48.3% and 0.0%). Over 52 weeks, improved clinical response was maintained with bimekizumab, including patients switching from placebo at week 16. Overall, the safety profile in Japanese patients was consistent with that observed in the global population.

CONCLUSION

Bimekizumab resulted in improved clinical response versus ustekinumab and placebo, and was well-tolerated in Japanese patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03370133.

Efficacy and Safety of Certolizumab Pegol in Japanese Patients with Generalized Pustular Psoriasis and Erythrodermic Psoriasis: 52-Week Results

Introduction

We report an exploratory analysis of the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol (CZP) in Japanese patients with generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) and erythrodermic psoriasis (EP) (NCT03051217).

Methods

Patients ≥ 20 years with GPP or EP were randomized 1:1 to open-label CZP 400 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) or 200 mg Q2W (400 mg weeks 0/2/4) for 16 weeks; patients who achieved “much improved” or “very much improved” on the Global Improvement Score (GIS; for GPP) or a PASI 50 response (≥ 50% reduction from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; for EP) continued to week 52. Efficacy outcomes assessed included Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI 0/1), and Itch Numeric Rating Scale (INRS 0). GIS and Japanese Dermatological Association (JDA) severity index were assessed in patients with GPP, and PASI and Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) in patients with EP. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated through weeks 0–52.

Results

Of 22 patients randomized, 19 completed week 52. At week 16, all reported outcomes improved with both CZP doses and were generally maintained through week 52. At week 52, 6/7 GPP and 12/12 EP patients achieved CGI-I response (“improved” or “remission”). Also, 4/7 GPP and 7/12 EP patients achieved DLQI 0/1; 2/7 GPP and 2/12 EP patients achieved INRS 0. Meanwhile, 6/7 patients with GPP achieved GIS response, and JDA severity index was reduced from baseline. We found that 9/12 and 5/12 patients with EP achieved PASI 90 and PGA 0/1, respectively. Overall, three serious TEAEs were reported in three CZP 400 mg Q2W-treated patients.

Conclusion

CZP treatment over 16 weeks improved the signs and symptoms of GPP and EP, and improvements were maintained through week 52. No new safety signals were identified.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03051217.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00741-x.

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.

Certolizumab Pegol in Japanese Patients with Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis: Effect of Demographics and Baseline Disease Characteristics on Efficacy

Introduction

We present certolizumab pegol (CZP) efficacy data across patient demographic and baseline disease characteristic subgroups from a phase 2/3 trial investigating CZP treatment in Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (PSO; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03051217).

Methods

Patients were randomised 1:2:2 to placebo once every 2 weeks (Q2W), CZP 400 mg Q2W and CZP 200 mg Q2W (400 mg weeks 0, 2 and 4) for 16 weeks. Patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50) score at week 16 continued therapy to week 52. PASI 75/90 (75% and 90% reduction, respectively) and Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1 responder rates at weeks 16 and 52 were reported for patient demographic and baseline disease characteristic subgroups, including body mass index (BMI), PASI, disease duration and prior biologic use. Non-responder imputation was used.

Results

Of the randomised patients, 2/26 patients in the placebo group, 47/53 patients in the CZP 400 mg Q2W group and and 39/48 patients in the CZP 200 mg Q2W group completed week 52. In the subgroups evaluated, week 16 efficacy was generally maintained through week 52. At week 52, PASI 75 was achieved by 84.2, 85.7 and 80.0% of patients receiving CZP 400 mg Q2W in the low (15.0–23.7 kg/m²)/intermediate (> 23.7–27.4 kg/m²)/high (> 27.4–47.0 kg/m²) BMI subgroups, respectively, and by 77.8, 70.6 and 69.2%, respectively of patients treated with CZP 200 mg Q2W. PASI 75 at week 52 was achieved by 92.9, 75.0 and 84.2% of patients receiving CZP 400 mg Q2W in the low (12.0–18.0)/intermediate (> 18.0–27.0)/high (> 27.0–67.2) baseline PASI subgroups, respectively, and by 85.0, 58.3 and 68.8% of patients receiving CZP 200 mg Q2W, respectively. Similar responses were observed across other subgroups evaluated for both CZP doses in PASI 75/90 and PGA 0/1.

Conclusion

Clinically meaningful improvements in signs and symptoms of PSO were maintained through week 52 for CZP dosed at 400 mg Q2W or 200 mg Q2W, across patient subgroups. In general, a numerically greater response was observed for patients receiving CZP 400 mg Q2W versus those receiving CZP 200 mg Q2W across patient subgroups.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03051217.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-021-00645-2.