Efficacy of Immunobiologic and Small Molecule Inhibitor Drugs for Psoriasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Aminooxy acetic acid suppresses Th17-mediated psoriasis-like skin inflammation by inhibiting serine metabolism

Background: Psoriasis is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by an external red rash that is caused by abnormal proliferation and differentiation of keratinocytes and immune T cells. This study aimed to elucidate the role of aminooxy acetic acid (AOA) in alleviating psoriasis from the perspective of immunology and metabolomics. Therefore, contributing to the development of new drugs as candidates for psoriasis treatment. Methods: To investigate the symptom-alleviating effects and the related mechanisms of AOA on the treatment of psoriasis, we used a 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-induced psoriasis-like skin mouse model and interleukin (IL)-17-stimulated human keratinocytes. Results: The results showed that AOA ameliorated psoriasis-related symptoms and decreased inflammation-associated antimicrobial peptides and T-helper 17 (Th17)-associated cytokines in a mouse model of psoriasis. Furthermore, AOA inhibited the activation of mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) by suppressing serine metabolism-related genes. Importantly, mTOR inhibition ameliorated psoriatic disease by affecting the differentiation of various T cells and normalizing the Th17/regulatory T (Treg) cell balance. In addition, IL-17-stimulated human keratinocytes showed the same results as in the in vivo experiments. Conclusion: Taken together, these results suggest that targeting the serine metabolism pathway in the treatment of psoriasis is a novel strategy, and that AOA could be utilized as a novel biologic to treat psoriasis.

Identification immune response genes in psoriasis after treatment with secukinumab

BACKGROUND

Secukinumab is a fully human IgG1κ MoAb that selectively binds to IL-17A with high affinity, and it has been proven effective for the treatment of psoriasis. However, the immune response pathways and mechanisms during the treatment are still masked. Therefore, the current study was designed to investigate the potential immune response genes via bioinformatics approaches.

METHODS

Gene expression data of severe plaque-type psoriasis was retrieved from the GEO database. Quantification of immune infiltration by ssGSEA and identification of differentially infiltrated immune cells were conducted to validate the treatment effect of secukinumab. After data processing, differentially expressed genes were identified between the treatment and untreated group. TC-seq was employed to analyze the trend of gene expression and clustering analysis. IL-17 therapeutic immune response genes were selected by taking the intersection of the genes inside the key cluster set and the MAD3-PSO geneset. Based on these therapeutic response genes, protein-protein interaction networks were built for key hub gene selection. These hub genes would work as potential immune response genes, and be validated via an external dataset.

RESULTS

Enrichment scores calculated by ssGSEA illustrated that the immune infiltration level of T cells had a strong difference before and after medication, which validated the treatment effect of Secukinumab. 1525 genes that have significantly different expression patterns before and after treatment were extracted for further analysis, and the enrichment result shows that these genes have the function related to epidermal development, differentiation, and keratinocytes differentiation. After overlapping candidate genes with MAD3-PSO gene set, 695 genes were defined as anti-IL7A treatment immune response genes, which were mainly enriched in receptor signaling and IL-17 signaling pathways. Hub gene were pinpointed from the PPI network constructed by anti-IL7A treatment immune response genes, their expression pattern fits TC-seq gene expression pattern.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed the potential anti-IL7A treatment immune response genes, and the central hub genes, which may act critical roles in Secukinumab, induced immune response. This would open up a novel and effective avenue for the treatment of psoriasis.

Value drivers of development stage biopharma companies

OBJECTIVE

Scholars previously estimated research and development (R&D) costs of the internal drug development process. However, little is known about the costs and value arising from externally acquired therapeutics. This study identifies and estimates the magnitude of factors associated with Biopharma acquisition value.

METHODS

SDC Thomson Reuter and S&P Capital IQ were screened for majority acquisitions of US and EU Biopharma companies developing new molecular entities for prescription use (SIC code: 2834) from 2005 to 2020. Financial acquisition data were complemented with variables characterizing the target's product portfolio extracted from clinicaltrials.gov, Drugs@FDA database, US SEC filings, and transaction announcements. A multivariate regression assesses the association of firm value with extracted variables.

RESULTS

311 acquisitions of companies developing prescription drugs were identified over the study period. Acquirers paid 37% (p < 0.05) more for companies with biologics and gene therapeutics than small-molecule lead drugs. Multi-indication products were acquired for a 12% premium per additional indication (p < 0.01). No significant valuation difference between companies developing orphan and non-orphan designated lead products was observed (18%, p = 0.223). Acquisition value positively correlated with the total number of further products, headquarter location in the US, underlying market conditions, and acquirer market capitalization (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Internal and external drug development consumes many financial and human resources, yet it is important for entrepreneurs, regulators, and payers to understand their precise magnitude and value drivers. This information permits the design of targeted pricing and industrial policies that incentivize the development of novel drugs in areas with high unmet needs.

Valuation and Returns of Drug Development Companies: Lessons for Bioentrepreneurs and Investors

Objectives

This study evaluates the association of Biopharma company valuation with the lead drug’s development stage, orphan status, number of indications, and disease area. We also estimated annual returns Bioentrepreneurs and investors can expect from founding and investing in drug development ventures.

Methods

SDC Thomson Reuter and S&P Capital IQ were screened for majority acquisitions of US and EU Biopharma companies developing new molecular entities for prescription use (SIC code: 2834). Acquisition data were complemented with drug characteristics extracted from clinicaltrials.gov, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and deal announcements. Thereafter, company valuations were combined with previously published clinical development periods alongside orphan-, indication-, and disease-specific success rates to estimate annual returns for investments in drug developing companies.

Results

Based on a sample of 311 Biopharma acquisitions from 2005 to 2020, companies developing orphan, multi-indication, and oncology drugs were valued significantly higher than their peers during later development stages (p < 0.05). We also estimated significantly higher returns for shareholders of companies with orphan relative to non-orphan-designated lead drugs from Phase 1 to FDA approval (46% vs. 12%, p < 0.001). Drugs developed across multiple indications also provided higher returns than single-indication agents from Pre-Clinic to FDA approval (21% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Returns for oncology drugs exceeded other disease areas (26% vs. 8%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Clinical and economic conditions surrounding orphan-designated drugs translate to a favorable financial risk-return profile for Bioentrepreneurs and investors. Bioentrepreneurs must be aware of the upside real option value their multi-indication drug could offer when negotiating acquisition or licensing agreements.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43441-021-00364-y.

Costo per responder di risankizumab e secukinumab nel trattamento della psoriasi a placche da moderata a grave in Italia

Purpose:

The objective of this analysis was to compare the cost per responder between risankizumab and secukinumab among patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Italy.

Methods:

The clinical efficacy was assessed based on IMMerge study of published efficacy data as measured by Psoriasis Area and Severity Index response (PASI 90 and PASI 100) for risankizumab and secukinumab. The treatment cost was based on the number of administrations dispensed in the first (induction plus maintenance period) and the second (maintenance period only) year of treatment and the ex-factory price of each treatment. The cost per responder was adopted as a cost-effectiveness indicator.

Results:

Independently of the PASI response (PASI 90 and PASI 100) used and the year of treatment considered, the cost per responder was consistently lower for risankizumab compared to secukinumab in all clinical measures. For example, considering the first-year costs and PASI 100, the cost per responder for risankizumab was € 24,506.83 compared to € 38,000.00 for secukinumab. The differences in the cost per responder between risankizumab and secukinumab increased when higher PASI response levels were considered.

Conclusion:

This economic evaluation suggested that the cost per responder is consistently lower for risankizumab compared to secukinumab from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

A Survey of Community Dermatologists Reveals the Unnecessary Impact of Trial-and-Error Behavior on the Psoriasis Biologic Treatment Paradigm

Introduction

In the USA, psoriasis affects approximately 3% of the population and costs more than $110 billion annually. The development of targeted biologics has revolutionized psoriasis management, but at an increasing cost. According to Joint AAD/NPF guidelines, an important need exists to identify biomarkers that can predict the appropriate biologic agent for patients.

Methods

A survey of community dermatologists was developed to address (1) significant factors influencing biologic therapy utilization in psoriasis; (2) the clinical utility of a test stratifying biologic response.

Results

Respondents confirmed that trial and error leads to frequent biologic switching. The survey indicated that 82% of dermatologists switch 10–30% of their patients in the first year and 98% switch intra-class for at least 50% of non-responding patients. The trial and error is due, in part, to formularies influencing the physician 77% of the time, with only 14% reporting that their first choice and the formulary alignment is greater than 75%. Compounding trial and error, 93% of the physicians report that they wait at least 12 weeks before determining non-response, in alignment with AAD/NPF guidelines. The lack of precision medicine and this trial-and-error approach result in unnecessary wasted spending and suboptimal patient outcomes. After being given an overview of Mind.Px, a dermal biomarker patch used to predict therapeutic response to a biologic class, survey participants expressed that:

93% would utilize Mind.Px results to determine first-line therapy even if this differed from initial clinical choice

100% would utilize Mind.Px if part of the prior authorization process

98% say Mind.Px would improve patient outcomes

81% reported Mind.Px would help with prior authorization process

Conclusions

Surveyed dermatologists believe a test that predicts psoriasis treatment response to a class of biologic drugs would lessen trial and error, provide a tool for physicians to make more informed decisions about drug selection, improve patient outcomes, and significantly reduce wasted spending.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-021-00573-1.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab vs. secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (IMMerge): results from a phase III, randomized, open-label, efficacy-assessor-blinded clinical trial

Background

Patients with plaque psoriasis treated with biologic therapies need more efficacious, safe and convenient treatments to improve quality of life. Risankizumab and secukinumab inhibit interleukin‐23 and interleukin‐17A, respectively, and are effective in adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis but have different dosing regimens.

Objectives

To compare directly the efficacy and safety of risankizumab vs. secukinumab over 52 weeks.

Methods

IMMerge was an international, phase III, multicentre, open‐label, efficacy–assessor‐blinded, active‐comparator study, in which adult patients with chronic, moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio to treatment with risankizumab 150 mg or secukinumab 300 mg. Primary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90) at week 16 (noninferiority comparison with margin of 12%) and week 52 (superiority comparison).

Results

In total 327 patients from nine countries were treated with risankizumab (n = 164) or secukinumab (n = 163). Risankizumab was noninferior to secukinumab in the proportion of patients achieving PASI 90 at week 16 [73·8% vs. 65·6%; difference of 8·2%, 96·25% confidence interval (CI)−2·2 to 18·6; within the 12% noninferiority margin] and superior to secukinumab at week 52 (86·6% vs. 57·1%; difference of 29·8%, 95% CI 20·8–38·8; P < 0·001), thus meeting both primary endpoints. All secondary endpoints (PASI 100, static Physician's Global Assessment 0 or 1, and PASI 75) at week 52 demonstrated superiority for risankizumab vs. secukinumab (P < 0·001). No new safety concerns were identified.

Conclusions

At week 52, risankizumab demonstrated superior efficacy and similar safety with less frequent dosing compared with secukinumab.

What is already known about this topic?

The need remains for treatments with sustained efficacy and a more convenient dosing schedule in moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Risankizumab and secukinumab are indicated for the treatment of adults with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis and target interleukin‐23 and interleukin‐17, respectively.

To date, risankizumab and secukinumab have not been directly compared.

What does this study add?

IMMerge directly compared the safety and efficacy of risankizumab and secukinumab in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis using ≥ 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at weeks 16 (noninferiority) and 52 (superiority) as primary endpoints.

In terms of efficacy risankizumab was noninferior to secukinumab at week 16 and superior to secukinumab at week 52 of treatment based on primary endpoint analyses. The two medications had a similar safety profile.

Linked Comment:Schmitt-Egenolf. Br J Dermatol 2021; 184: 3–4.

Plain language summary available online

The Efficacy and Evidence-Based Use of Biologics in Children and Adolescents: Using Monoclonal Antibodies and Fusion Proteins as Treatments

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) and fusion proteins (FP) are increasingly being used in children and adolescents. In this review, we analyze the evidence for their safety and efficacy in the treatment of the most common chronic inflammatory diseases.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, AWMF.org, and other databases for high-quality trials (i.e., randomized controlled trials with clinical primary endpoints) and guidelines published at any time up to 10 December 2018 that dealt with mAb and FP that are approved for pediatric use. The search term was "monoclonal anti- body/fusion protein [e. g. adalimumab] AND children."

RESULTS

The 620 hits included 25 high-quality trials (20 of them manufacturer- sponsored) on 9 mAb/FP (omalizumab, adalimumab, etanercept, ustekinumab, infliximab, golimumab, anakinra, canakinumab, tocilizumab, and abatacept), as well as 6 guidelines (3 each of levels S3 and S2k) on the treatment of bronchial asthma, psoriasis, juvenile idopathic arthritis, and chronic inflammatory bowel diseases. For none of these conditions are mAb and FP the drugs of first choice. Adverse drug effects are rare but sometimes severe (infection, immune dysregulation, tumors).

CONCLUSION

The retrieved trials have deficiencies that make it difficult to reliably evaluate the efficacy, safety, and utility of mAb/FP for children and adolescents with chronic inflammatory diseases. mAb/FP nonetheless represent a treatment option to be considered in case conventional immune-modulating drugs are ineffective. Researcher-initiated, high-quality trials and manufacturer-independent, systematic long-term evaluations of adverse effects (e.g., tumors) are sorely needed.

Systemic immunobiological, immunosuppressant, and oncologic agents for the treatment of dermatologic diseases during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic emergency: A quick review for a quick consultation

The precision medicine era has helped to better manage patients with immunological and oncological diseases, improving the quality of life of this class of patients. Regarding the management of these patients and positivity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), currently, limited data are available and information is evolving. In this quick review, we have analyzed the mechanisms of action and related infective risk of drugs used for the treatment of immune‐mediated and oncologic skin conditions during the daily clinical practice. In general, immunosuppressant and antineoplastic agents for dermatologic treatments do not require suspension and do not require special measures, if not those commonly observed. In the case of a coronavirus disease (COVID‐19) patient with complications (such as pneumonia, respiratory failure), treatment suspension should always be considered after taking into account the general condition of the patient, the risk‐benefit ratio, and the pathophysiology of COVID‐19 infection. The COVID‐19 emergency pandemic does not imply undertreatment of existing skin conditions, which together with the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection may jeopardize the patient's life.

Small-molecule-based immunotherapy for immunologically mediated skin conditions

A better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of cutaneous immune disorders, together with advances in pharmaceutical drug development, led to the introduction of small-molecule inhibitors in the therapeutic management of a large spectrum of skin immune conditions. Small molecules are agents with a low molecular weight that are capable of affecting proinflammatory pathways through modulation of intracellular targets. These agents promise to improve the therapeutic management of many skin immune disorders due to their easy administration, high bioavailability and favorable safety profile. Here, we review the major small-molecule inhibitors targeting receptor-associated kinases, second messengers and transcription factors in development for the treatment of cutaneous immune conditions.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab and other commonly used treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab with other commonly used biologics and apremilast as the first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a US health plan's perspective.

METHODS

A 10-year cost-effectiveness model was developed to compare the incremental cost per extra month with a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 response. Patients were assumed to receive one of the treatments evaluated as their first-line treatment at the outset of the analysis. Nonresponders (PASI <75) discontinued their current treatment; 25% went on to receive a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies, while 75% received a second-line therapy before receiving a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies. Direct medical costs were calculated based on drug acquisition, administration, and monitoring costs.

RESULTS

The incremental cost per extra month a patient had a PASI 75 response was lowest for brodalumab ($3,685), infliximab ($4,102), apremilast ($4,770), and tildrakizumab ($5,150), followed by risankizumab ($5,319), secukinumab ($5,675), guselkumab ($5,784), ixekizumab ($5,900), adalimumab ($5,943), ustekinumab ($6,131), etanercept ($6,618), and certolizumab pegol ($13,476).

CONCLUSION

Tildrakizumab was among the most cost-effective first-line treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and was more cost-effective than risankizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, and certolizumab pegol.

Treatment of psoriasis: janus kinases inhibitors and biologics for the interleukin-23/Th17 axis

With the discovery of the IL-23 / Th17 axis, the treatment of psoriasis has entered a new era. The aim of this study was to explore the progress of biologics and janus kinases (JAK) inhibitors targeting IL-23/Th17 axis in the treatment of psoriasis. review of English-language article was performed. Search terms included IL-17, IL-23, biologics, monoclonal antibodies, neutralizing antibodies, JAK, inhibitors, Psoriasis Area Severity Index and psoriasis. Data were selected from two phase 2 clinical trials; and nine phase 3 randomized, double-blind clinical trials; and other clinical trials. This review analyzes skin lesion clearance and major adverse reactions of 9 mAbs including mirikizumab and bimekizumab. At the same time, the research progress and prospects of three non-IgG small molecule biologics are analyzed too. This paper also compares the efficacy and limitations of biologics targeting the IL-23/Th17 axis with non-biologics acting on the JAK-signal transducer and activator of transcription pathway. The IL-17A/F inhibitors and non-IgG small molecule biologics that are being studied will bring a revolutionary development to the treatment of psoriasis. Topical application of JAK inhibitors can not only achieve the purpose of treating psoriasis, but also reduce the amounts of systemic medication, and reduces side effects. Each drug has its own indication, and the effect of the drug can be better achieved by selecting the indication for the drug.

Remission of autoimmune diabetes by anti-TCR combination therapies with anti-IL-17A or/and anti-IL-6 in the IDDM rat model of type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The cytokine IL-17 is a key player in autoimmune processes, while the cytokine IL-6 is responsible for the chronification of inflammation. However, their roles in type 1 diabetes development are still unknown.

METHODS

Therefore, therapies for 5 days with anti-IL-17A or anti-IL-6 in combination with a T cell-specific antibody, anti-TCR, or in a triple combination were initiated immediately after disease manifestation to reverse the diabetic metabolic state in the LEW.1AR1-iddm (IDDM) rat, a model of human type 1 diabetes.

RESULTS

Monotherapies with anti-IL-6 or anti-IL-17 showed no sustained anti-diabetic effects. Only the combination therapy of anti-TCR with anti-IL-6 or anti-IL-17 at starting blood glucose concentrations up to 12 mmol/l restored normoglycaemia. The triple antibody combination therapy was effective even up to very high initial blood glucose concentrations (17 mmol/l). The β cell mass was raised to values of around 6 mg corresponding to those of normoglycaemic controls. In parallel, the apoptosis rate of β cells was reduced and the proliferation rate increased as well as the islet immune cell infiltrate was strongly reduced in double and abolished in triple combination therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

The anti-TCR combination therapy with anti-IL-17 preferentially raised the β cell mass as a result of β cell proliferation while anti-IL-6 strongly reduced β cell apoptosis and the islet immune cell infiltrate with a modest increase of the β cell mass only. The triple combination therapy achieved both goals in a complimentary anti-autoimmune and anti-inflammatory action resulting in sustained normoglycaemia with normalized serum C-peptide concentrations.

Ixekizumab—An Effective and Safe Treatment for Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis in Patients Previously Treated With Other IL-17 Inhibitors: Results From IXORA-P

Background:

The impact of treatment with interleukin 17 (IL-17) inhibitors on the efficacy of subsequent IL-17 inhibitor therapy is unknown.

Objective:

To evaluate the impact of previous treatment with IL-17 inhibitors on the 52-week efficacy of ixekizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Methods:

In a phase 3, randomized, double-blinded trial (IXORA-P; NCT02513550), patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were randomized (2:1:1) to ixekizumab 80 mg every 2 weeks (IXE Q2W, n = 611), every 4 weeks (IXE Q4W, n = 310), or IXE Q4W/IXE Q2W dose adjustment (per predefined criteria; n = 306). Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75%, 90%, and 100% response rates (PASI 75, PASI 90, and PASI 100) were assessed.

Results:

Overall, 288 (23.5%) of 1227 patients were IL-17 inhibitor experienced (brodalumab, 22.6%; secukinumab, 1.1%). The PASI 75, 90, and 100 at week 52 were similar between IL-17 inhibitor-naive and IL-17 inhibitor-experienced patients. The PASI 75 at week 52 for IL-17 inhibitor-naive and -experienced patients was 85% and 89% (IXE Q2W), 79% and 81% (IXE Q4W), and 83% and 85% (IXE Q4W/IXE Q2W), respectively. The PASI 90 at week 52 for IL-17 inhibitor-naive and -experienced patients was 79% and 82% (IXE Q2W), 65% and 67% (IXE Q4W), and 73% and 75% (IXE Q4W/IXE Q2W), respectively. The PASI 100 at week 52 for IL-17 inhibitor-naive and -experienced patients was 60% and 59% (IXE Q2W), 44% and 42% (IXE Q4W), and 49% and 52% (IXE Q4W/IXE Q2W), respectively. Safety findings were generally similar between IL-17 inhibitor-naive and -experienced patients.

Conclusion:

Ixekizumab was demonstrated to be an effective and safe therapeutic option for patients previously treated with other IL-17 inhibitors.

Joint AAD-NPF guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with biologics

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the US population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care, providing recommendations based on the available evidence. The treatment of psoriasis with biologic agents will be reviewed, emphasizing treatment recommendations and the role of the dermatologist in monitoring and educating patients regarding benefits as well as associated risks.

Treating to Target(s) With Interleukin-17 Inhibitors

Background:

The treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has become established in several medical specialties as a key guidance to optimal therapeutic decision making. T2T may be effective in the assessment of the biologic class of agents called interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, which are emerging as a safe and effective treatment option for autoimmune inflammatory conditions such as plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

Objective:

The objective of this article is to use a T2T approach for the evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of IL-17 inhibitors in the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

Methods:

Following a comprehensive literature search, a full-day meeting was convened to discuss and identify the T2T targets for psoriasis, PsA, and AS. Clinical trial evidence was presented for the approved IL-17 inhibitors—secukinumab, ixekizumab, and brodalumab—to assess whether these data meet T2T safety and efficacy targets.

Results:

All 3 approved agents were significantly superior to placebo and active controls in the achievement of T2T targets for psoriasis. Secukinumab and ixekizumab were likewise associated with significantly better outcomes than controls in the PsA targets, and secukinumab resulted in significant AS target improvements vs placebo. The IL-17 inhibitors were also associated with low rates of serious adverse events and exacerbations of common comorbid conditions.

Conclusion:

Phase III trial results support the T2T benefit and safety of IL-17 inhibitors according to their specific indications for the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

Tetrandrine inhibits the proliferation and cytokine production induced by IL-22 in HaCaT cells

Objective

To investigate the effect of tetrandrine (Tet) on HaCaT cell proliferation and cytokine expression induced by interleukin (IL)-22, and to investigate the underlying mechanism.

Methods

The half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) and antiproliferation effects of Tet on IL-22-treated HaCaT cells were analysed by MTT assay. Signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) expression was measured by reverse transcription plus real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and by Western blot. Phosphorylated (p)-STAT3 levels were also measured by Western blot. Cytokine production by HaCaT cells was analysed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) following administration of IL-22 and/or Tet.

Results

Tet displayed a dose-dependent inhibitory effect on HaCaT cell proliferation and reduced the phosphorylation level of STAT3 induced by IL-22, without affecting STAT3 mRNA and protein levels. Furthermore, co-incubation with Tet significantly down-regulated HaCaT cell production of tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-20 and chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 20 (CCL20) induced by IL-22.

Conclusions

Tet inhibits proliferation and cytokine production in HaCaT cells, and the process may involve the inhibition of STAT3 phosphorylation.

Biologics and Small Molecule Agents in Allergic and Immunologic Skin Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Biologics and small molecules are key therapeutic options in the treatment of chronic immunologic and allergic skin conditions. By directly targeting innate and inflammatory responses within the skin, including pro-inflammatory cytokines and cellular signaling pathways, these new agents have the potential to counteract the inflammatory cascade responsible for various conditions, including psoriasis and atopic dermatitis. Over the past decade, groundbreaking research identifying key cytokines and receptors involved in the pathogenesis of these diseases has allowed for the development of highly efficacious biologics and small molecules that are associated with unprecedented rates of skin clearance and favorable adverse event profiles.

RECENT FINDINGS

This narrative review evaluates new and upcoming biologic and small molecule agents for the treatment of two allergic/immunologic skin diseases-atopic dermatitis and psoriasis. Numerous small molecules and biologics targeting TNF-α, IL-12/23, IL-17 and IL-17R, and IL-23 are commercially available for the treatment of psoriasis, and newer agents are in various stages of development. Currently, dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that blocks IL-4R∝, is the only approved biologic for atopic dermatitis. Antibodies targeting IL-13 and IL-31 and small molecules that inhibit Janus kinase and pruritus-mediating receptors are currently being studied in clinical trials. Further investigations into the pathophysiology of atopic dermatitis will likely yield additional therapeutic options in the future. This article reviews recent literature on small molecules and biologics for the treatment of atopic dermatitis and psoriasis.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2): results from two double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled and ustekinumab-controlled phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

Risankizumab is a humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin-23, inhibiting this key cytokine and its role in psoriatic inflammation. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of risankizumab compared with placebo or ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2 were replicate phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active comparator-controlled trials done at 139 sites in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, and the USA. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. In each study, patients were stratified by weight and previous exposure to tumour necrosis factor inhibitor and randomly assigned (3:1:1) by use of interactive response technology to receive 150 mg risankizumab, 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (weight-based per label), or placebo. Following the 16-week double-blind treatment period (part A), patients initially assigned to placebo switched to 150 mg risankizumab at week 16; other patients continued their originally randomised treatment (part B, double-blind, weeks 16-52). Study drug was administered subcutaneously at weeks 0 and 4 during part A and at weeks 16, 28, and 40 during part B. Co-primary endpoints were proportions of patients achieving a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 90) and a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score of 0 or 1 at week 16 (non-responder imputation). All efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02684370 (UltIMMa-1) and NCT02684357 (UltIMMa-2), and have been completed.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 24, 2016, and Aug 31, 2016, 506 patients in UltIMMa-1 were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg risankizumab (n=304), 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (n=100), or placebo (n=102). Between March 1, 2016, and Aug 30, 2016, 491 patients in UltIMMa-2 were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg risankizumab (n=294), 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (n=99), or placebo (n=98). Co-primary endpoints were met for both studies. At week 16 of UltIMMa-1, PASI 90 was achieved by 229 (75·3%) patients receiving risankizumab versus five (4·9%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 70·3% [95% CI 64·0-76·7]) and 42 (42·0%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 33·5% [22·7-44·3]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). At week 16 of UltIMMa-2, PASI 90 was achieved by 220 (74·8%) patients receiving risankizumab versus two (2·0%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 72·5% [95% CI 66·8-78·2]) and 47 (47·5%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 27·6% [16·7-38·5]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). In UltIMMa-1, sPGA 0 or 1 at week 16 was achieved by 267 (87·8%) patients receiving risankizumab versus eight (7·8%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 79·9% [95% CI 73·5-86·3]) and 63 (63·0%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 25·1% [15·2-35·0]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). In UltIMMa-2, 246 (83·7%) patients receiving risankizumab versus five (5·1%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 78·5% [95% CI 72·4-84·5]) and 61 (61·6%) receiving ustekinumab achieved sPGA 0 or 1 at week 16 (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 22·3% [12·0-32·5]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). The frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events in UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2 was similar across risankizumab (part A: 151 [49·7%] of 304 and 134 [45·6%] of 294; part B: 182 [61·3%] of 297 and 162 [55·7%] of 291), placebo (part A: 52 [51·0%] of 102 and 45 [45·9%] of 98), ustekinumab (part A: 50 [50·0%] of 100 and 53 [53·5%] of 99; part B: 66 [66·7%] of 99 and 70 [74·5%] of 94), and placebo to risankizumab (part B: 65 [67·0%] of 97 and 61 [64·9%] of 94) treatment groups throughout the study duration.

INTERPRETATION

Risankizumab showed superior efficacy to both placebo and ustekinumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Treatment-emergent adverse event profiles were similar across treatment groups and there were no unexpected safety findings.

FUNDING

AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim.

Effect of Prior Biologic Use on Cost-Effectiveness of Brodalumab vs. Ustekinumab for Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis in the United States

Introduction

Clinical trials have shown brodalumab to have better efficacy than ustekinumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. An estimation of the cost-effectiveness of brodalumab vs. ustekinumab is warranted and may be useful for treatment decision-making processes, especially in the context of the cost considerations of the current US healthcare system. Therefore, we compared the cost-effectiveness of brodalumab with ustekinumab for treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in biologic-naïve and biologic-experienced patients in the USA.

Methods

An Excel-based economic model was developed to estimate and compare total annual costs to health plans associated with treatment with brodalumab vs. ustekinumab per achievement of Psorasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75, 90, and 100 for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Results

For treatment with brodalumab vs. ustekinumab, total annual treatment costs per PASI 75, 90, and 100 were $31,106, $57,776, and $163,069, respectively, lower for a patient naïve to prior biologic treatment; they were $40,535, $65,472, and $223,610, respectively, lower for a patient experienced with prior biologic treatment. In an additional analysis among patients with and without prior biologic failure, they were $52,822, $93,309, and $365,606, respectively, lower for a patient with failure and they were $31,660, $57,128, and $164,996, respectively, lower for a patient without failure.

Conclusion

Compared to ustekinumab, treatment with brodalumab was associated with better cost-effectiveness ratios for biologic-naïve and experienced-patients and also patients with and without prior biologic treatment failure. The greater cost-effectiveness of brodalumab was most prominent for biologic-experienced and prior biologic treatment failure patients.

Funding

Ortho Dermatologics.

Phosphorylation of intracellular signalling molecules in peripheral blood cells from patients with psoriasis on originator or biosimilar infliximab

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis vulgaris is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease characterized by a dysregulated immune response and it is associated with substantial systemic comorbidities. Biological drugs such as tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors can ameliorate the disease but are expensive. Biosimilar drugs have the same amino-acid sequence as the originator, but differences in manufacturing can affect biological activity, efficacy and tolerability.

OBJECTIVES

To explore potential differences in intracellular phosphorylation of signalling molecules in peripheral blood cells from patients with psoriasis treated with the TNF-α inhibitor infliximab compared with healthy controls, and to investigate if the phosphorylation pattern was influenced by switching from the originator infliximab to the biosimilar CT-P13.

METHODS

By flow cytometry, we measured phosphorylation of nuclear factor kappa B, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2, p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase and signal transducer and activator of transcription 3, before and after TNF-α stimulation in monocytes and T, B, natural killer and CD3⁺  CD56⁺ cells from 25 patients with psoriasis treated with infliximab and 19 healthy controls.

RESULTS

At inclusion, phosphorylation levels of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were increased in patients with psoriasis compared with healthy controls, even though clinical remission had already been achieved. Phosphorylation levels declined in patients on both originator infliximab and biosimilar during continued treatment. No significant differences were detected between the two medications after 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with psoriasis on infliximab have higher activation levels of PBMCs than do healthy controls, possibly reflecting systemic inflammation. Switching from the originator infliximab to biosimilar CT-P13 did not affect phosphorylation levels or clinical parameters, suggesting that CT-P13 is a noninferior treatment alternative to the originator infliximab.

The budget impact of brodalumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis on US commercial health plans

INTRODUCTION

Brodalumab is a new biologic approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2017 for the treatment of moderate-severe psoriasis. This study evaluated the impact of the introduction of brodalumab on the pharmacy budget on US commercial health plans.

METHODS

An Excel-based health economic decision analytic model with a US health plan perspective was developed. The model incorporated published moderate-to-severe psoriasis prevalence data; market shares of common biologic drugs, including adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, and etanercept, used for the treatment of moderate-severe psoriasis; 2017-year Wholesale Acquisition Costs for the biologic drugs; drug dispensing fee; patient co-pay; and drug contracting discount. Total annual health plan costs for the biologic drugs were estimated. Scenarios with different proportions of patients treated with brodalumab were compared to a control scenario when no brodalumab was used.

RESULTS

In a hypothetical commercial health plan covering two million members, 7,038 moderate-to-severe psoriasis patients were estimated to be eligible for treatment with brodalumab. Prior to brodalumab approval, the proportions of patients treated by other biologics were estimated at 50.8% for adalimumab, 13.5% for ustekinumab, 14.1% for secukinumab, 4.4% for ixekizumab, and 17.2% for etanercept. With a 20% drug price discount applied to all biologics, the annual health plan costs for brodalumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, and etanercept were estimated at $37,224, $49,166, $55,084, $56,061, $64,396, and $57,170, respectively. When no brodalumab is used, the total annual pharmacy budget for the biologics used among these patients was estimated at $414,362,647. Among scenarios where the proportions of brodalumab usage were 3%, 8%, 16%, and 30%, the total annual pharmacy cost was estimated to be reduced by $3,698,129, $9,861,677, $19,723,355, and $36,981,290, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Based on the economic model, brodalumab has the potential to substantially reduce pharmacy expenditures for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in the US.

Targeting IL-17 in psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic and progressive inflammatory arthritis intimately associated with psoriasis, and can be an impairing disease that leads to reduced quality of life and significant morbidity. Treatment often requires TNF antagonists, yet many patients with PsA are not responsive to the standard anti-TNF therapies. The interleukin-17 (IL-17)/IL-17 receptor (IL-17R) family has recently been implicated in the pathogenesis of PsA and psoriasis. Much enthusiasm has been generated for the development of biologics that target the IL-17 signaling pathway directly or indirectly, many of which have produced striking results in the setting of psoriasis and PsA. Herein, we review the role of IL-17 and the IL-17 receptor (IL-17R) in the pathogenesis of PsA, as well as the clinical evidence for IL-17 and IL-17R targeted therapeutics.

The content validity of the PSS in patients with plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the content validity of the Psoriasis Symptom Scale (PSS), with a specific focus on understanding of the content of the PRO measure by conducting one-on-one interviews with patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. This was a cross-sectional, qualitative study conducted with 20 patients with plaque psoriasis who participated in in-person, one-on-one interviews. Participants were asked to describe their psoriasis symptoms, completed the PSS, and were cognitively debriefed on its content. Interviews were conducted in two separate rounds. Following Round 1, the study data were examined to determine if modifications to the PSS were required. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected for sample descriptive purposes.

RESULTS

The 20 study participants had a mean age of 50.2 ± 12.0 years (range: 25.0-73.0), and 55% were female. Thirty-five percent of the sample reported their psoriasis severity as moderate or severe. The average time since diagnosis of plaque psoriasis was almost 18 years, ranging from less than one to over 38 years. The most frequently reported symptoms and signs during the concept elicitation portion of the interviews included redness (N = 20, 100%), itching (n = 20, 100%), pain (n = 15, 75%), burning (n = 13, 65%), and flaking (n = 11, 55%). Overall, participants provided positive feedback on the PSS and felt that it was comprehensive and relevant to their experience with psoriasis. The item meaning and response options were well-understood for the majority of the items. Findings indicate that for the patient-reported symptom of redness, which is also a sign that can be reported by clinicians, redness or the perception of redness is most accurately captured by patient report. Study results did not support modifications to the instrument and no changes to the PSS were recommended.

CONCLUSION

The evidence gained in this study provided support for the content validity of the PSS for use as clinical trial endpoint among patients with plaque psoriasis. This study found that the symptoms included in the PSS are important to and well-understood by patients with plaque psoriasis. The PSS is appropriate for inclusion in future studies designed to measure the effect of treatment on psoriasis-related symptoms.

Ixekizumab: A Review in Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis

Ixekizumab (Taltz^®) is a subcutaneously administered, humanized anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy (USA and EU) or phototherapy (USA). In the phase 3 UNCOVER trials in this patient population, ixekizumab was superior to placebo or etanercept in terms of the proportion of patients achieving a ≥75% reduction from baseline in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index and in those achieving a static Physician Global Assessment score of 0 or 1, after 12 weeks of induction treatment. Clinical responses to ixekizumab were seen as early as week 1. Patients receiving ixekizumab also reported improvements in health-related quality of life, itching, and work productivity. Clinical responses to ixekizumab were sustained during additional 48 weeks of maintenance treatment. Ixekizumab was generally well tolerated and exhibited low immunogenicity in the UNCOVER trials during up to 60 weeks of therapy. Currently available data indicate that ixekizumab is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment option for patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. It has the potential advantage of one maintenance dose for every 4 weeks.