Switching to adalimumab for psoriasis patients with a suboptimal response to etanercept, methotrexate, or phototherapy: efficacy and safety results from an open-label study

Risks of Biologic Therapy and the Importance of Multidisciplinary Approach for an Accurate Management of Patients with Moderate-Severe Psoriasis and Concomitant Diseases

Simple Summary

Psoriasis is a chronic multisystem inflammatory disease associated with a wide range of comorbidities including cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, metabolic syndrome, anxiety, depression, chronic kidney disease, and malignancy. Currently available novel therapeutic options for moderate-severe psoriasis include tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors, inhibitors of the interleukin 17, and inhibitors of the interleukin 23. Apart from the concomitant diseases psoriasis patients may have, biologic therapy may cause significant complications requiring close collaboration between dermatologists and physicians of different specialties. Consequently, it was our main purpose to provide an overview of each class of biologic agents, as well as of the most frequent adverse events they may cause in psoriasis patients with concomitant diseases.

Abstract

Psoriasis is a chronic multisystem inflammatory disease associated with a plethora of comorbidities including metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, obesity, anxiety, depression, chronic kidney disease, and malignancy. Advancement in unveiling new key elements in the pathophysiology of psoriasis led to significant progress in the development of biologic agents which target different signaling pathways and cytokines involved in the inflammatory cascade responsible for the clinical manifestations found in psoriasis. Currently available novel therapeutic options for moderate-severe psoriasis include tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors, inhibitors of the interleukin 17, and inhibitors of the interleukin 23. Nevertheless, concerns have been raised with respect to the possible risks associated with the use of biologic therapy requiring close collaboration between dermatologists and physicians of different specialties. Our aim was to perform an in-depth literature review and discuss the potential risks associated with biologic therapy in patients with psoriasis and concurrent diseases with a focus on the influence of novel therapeutic agents on liver function in the context of hepatopathies, particularly viral hepatitis. A multidisciplinary teamwork and periodic evaluation of psoriasis patients under biologic therapy is highly encouraged to obtain an accurate management for each case.

Predictive factors of lack of response to adalimumab among bio-naive patients suffering from moderate-to severe psoriasis: analysis of a multicenter data collection in Italy

INTRODUCTION

Efficacy of anti-TNF-a agents seems inferior to IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Nevertheless, after biosimilars approval, anti TNF-a agents are recommended as first-line for psoriatic patients, for economic reasons.

METHODS

Predictive factors of response or non-response to adalimumab in bionaive patients who started adalimumab (originator or biosimilar) over 12 years in 9 dermatologic centers in Italy. Effectiveness was assessed with Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75 and PASI90) at weeks 12, 24 and 48. Multiple logistic regressions were used for variables predicting clinical response; Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression for drug survival.

RESULTS

The drug survival analysis showed reduced hazard ratio of overall discontinuation with male gender and scalp localization. In contrast, baseline PASI and genital psoriasis were significantly associated with increased risk of overall discontinuation. Predictive factors of non-response seemed elevated in patients with baseline PASI, older age groups, previously treated patients with phototherapy, females or patients with palmo-plantar while scalp psoriasis, previous cyclosporine and acitretin appeared as a positive predictive factor.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life analysis might be useful for clinicians in case of bio-naive patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and various comorbidities.

Real-life Efficacy and Safety of Biosimilar Adalimumab (ZRC-3197) in Patients with Plaque Psoriasis: A Tertiary Care Center Experience

Background

Adalimumab is proven to be safe and effective in treating plaque psoriasis. A biosimilar adalimumab (ZRC-3197; Exemptia™) - approved by Indian Regulators in 2014 - is a 'fingerprint match' of the reference adalimumab in terms of purity, potency, safety, and clinical efficacy. While reference adalimumab remains unavailable, this biosimilar adalimumab (bADA) serves as an accessible, cost-effective option for Indian patients. This is a first-hand, prospective, real-life data on the clinical use of bADA in Indian patients with plaque psoriasis.

Materials and Methods

Patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were prospectively treated with bADA therapy for 16 weeks-80 mg subcutaneously initially, followed by 40 mg every other week from week 1 in real-life setting. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) responses, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) outcomes, and Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) for psoriasis were analyzed. Safety and tolerability evaluations included reported adverse events.

Results

A total of 29 patients (15 males) with median age of 38 (25-56) years were included. After 16 weeks of bADA treatment, 93% patients achieved ≥75% reduction in their baseline PASI scores including PASI75, PASI90, and PASI100 responses in 24%, 14%, and 55% patients, respectively. About 52% patients had a DLQI score of 0/1 and 93% patients had a PGA score of 'clear or minimal' at 16 weeks. Treatment was well tolerated with no severe or serious adverse reactions requiring therapy discontinuation.

Conclusions

This report serves as a real-life evidence for the efficacy and tolerability of biosimilar adalimumab administered for 16 weeks in patients with plaque psoriasis.

Biologics switch in psoriasis

Aim: No guidelines exist for biologic switch in psoriasis after treatment failure. Although, switching between TNF-α antagonists has been reviewed, switching information about newer biologics is limited. Materials & methods: We did a thorough systematic review from 'PubMed' and 'Embase', which includes new biologics such as IL-12/IL-23 antagonists, IL-17A antagonists and IL-23 antagonists. Results & conclusion: New biologics such as IL-17 antagonist or IL-23 antagonist show greater responses in bio-experienced patients and could even be used for patients in whom previous treatments failed.

Long-Term Safety of Adalimumab in 29,967 Adult Patients From Global Clinical Trials Across Multiple Indications: An Updated Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The safety profile of adalimumab was previously reported in 23,458 patients across multiple indications. Here we report the long-term safety of adalimumab in adults with plaque psoriasis (Ps), hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis, peripheral spondyloarthritis, Crohn's disease (CD), ulcerative colitis (UC), and non-infectious uveitis (UV).

METHODS

Safety data from 77 clinical trials were pooled. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) that occurred after the first study dose and within 70 days (5 half-lives) after the last study dose.

RESULTS

A total of 29,967 patients were included, representing 56,916 patient-years (PY) of exposure. The most frequently reported SAE of interest was infection (3.7/100 PY) with highest incidences in CD, RA, UV, and UC (3.5/100 PY-6.9/100 PY); serious infections in Ps (1.8/100 PY) and HS (2.8/100 PY) were lower. The observed number of deaths was below what would be expected in an age- and sex-adjusted population for most adalimumab-treated patients (including Ps). Lack of real-life data and limited long-term data (> 5 years) for most patients are limitations of this analysis.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile of adalimumab was consistent with previous findings and no new safety signals were observed.

Secukinumab for patients failing previous tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor therapy: results of a randomized open-label study (SIGNATURE)

BACKGROUND

Efficacy data on therapies for patients with psoriasis who have failed tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor therapy is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and tolerability of secukinumab, an interleukin (IL)-17A inhibitor, in patients with moderate/severe chronic plaque psoriasis with documented efficacy failure of TNF-α inhibitor therapy (SIGNATURE study).

METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, noncomparator study in 53 dermatology centres in the U.K. and Republic of Ireland. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive secukinumab 300 mg or 150 mg subcutaneously every week for 4 weeks, then 4-weekly thereafter. Patients were stratified by their prior efficacy failure with TNF-α inhibitors. Only patients who started and stayed on the same dose at each time point were included for efficacy assessments.

RESULTS

In total, 233 patients were analysed. The primary end point was met, with a statistically significant improvement in response rates [75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75)] from baseline to week 16 in both secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg dose groups [77 of 118 patients (65·3%) and 51 of 115 patients (44·3%), respectively; P < 0·0001]. After 72 weeks, in patients starting and remaining on 300 mg, 77% (54 of 70) achieved PASI 75. Improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index from baseline to week 16 occurred and were maintained up to 72 weeks. The safety profile was generally consistent with previous secukinumab studies, although a higher incidence of some adverse events (e.g. candida infections) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence of efficacy and safety of secukinumab for treatment of patients with psoriasis who failed prior TNF-α inhibitor therapy. This study represents a 'real-world' population, providing reassurance that secukinumab is a treatment option in this difficult-to-treat population. What's already known about this topic? Conventional systemic nonbiological and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor therapies for plaque psoriasis have not fully met patients' needs. There is a lack of data to support the treatment pathways for patients with psoriasis who have inadequate responses to TNF-α inhibitor therapy. Secukinumab, a recombinant high-affinity fully human monoclonal anti-human interleukin-17A antibody of the IgG1/κ-class, has shown excellent safety and efficacy in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. What does this study add? This is the first study evaluating treatment with biologics after prior efficacy failure of TNF-α inhibitor therapy as defined by the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria. Secukinumab is an effective treatment in this difficult-to-treat patient population. This study provides important practical information for clinicians managing psoriasis. Adverse events were consistent with the phase III programme for secukinumab, although some adverse events, e.g. candida, were increased.

Sustained long-term efficacy and safety of adalimumab in paediatric patients with severe chronic plaque psoriasis from a randomized, double-blind, phase III study

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (ADA) (Humira^® , AbbVie Inc., U.S.A.) is approved by the European Medicines Agency for children aged ≥ 4 years with severe plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of ADA in children with severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

Results are presented from the 52-week long-term extension (LTE) of the randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, phase III trial, in children with severe plaque psoriasis (results from prior periods have been published). Patients aged ≥ 4 and < 18 years were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to ADA 0·8 mg kg^-1 (40 mg maximum) or 0·4 mg kg^-1 (20 mg maximum) every other week or to methotrexate (MTX) 0·1-0·4 mg kg^-1 (25 mg maximum) weekly. The 16-week initial treatment (IT) period was followed by a 36-week withdrawal period and a 16-week retreatment period. Patients could enter the LTE at prespecified time points to receive ADA 0·8 mg kg^-1 (blinded or open label) or ADA 0·4 mg kg^-1 (blinded), or to remain off treatment. Efficacy is reported for patient groups according to doses received in the IT and LTE periods.

RESULTS

Of the 114 patients randomized in the IT period, 108 entered the LTE (n = 36 in each group); 93 received ADA 0·8 mg kg^-1 . Efficacy (≥ 75% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) was maintained or improved from entry to the end of the LTE: MTX(IT)/ADA 0·8(LTE) 31-86% of patients; ADA 0·4(IT)/0·4 or 0·8(LTE) 28-47%; ADA 0·8(IT)/0·8(LTE) 50-72%. No serious infections occurred in the LTE.

CONCLUSIONS

After 52 weeks of long-term ADA treatment in children aged 4-18 years with severe plaque psoriasis, disease severity was reduced and maintained or further improved, as demonstrated by efficacy outcomes. No new safety risks were identified. What's already known about this topic? The results from the first three periods of this phase III trial in children aged 4-18 years with severe plaque psoriasis suggest that adalimumab is a safe and efficacious treatment option in this population. What does this study add? This is the first study to evaluate long-term treatment of adalimumab in children with severe psoriasis, and the first to evaluate switching from methotrexate to adalimumab in this population.

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.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab after failure of other anti-TNFα agents for plaque-type psoriasis: clinician behavior in real life clinical practice

Introduction: During treatment with biologic agents for psoriasis (Pso) in a number of patients a failure may occur and discontinuation with transitioning to another drug or an optimization strategy, consisting in a dose-adjustment or a co-medication with a traditional systemic agent, represent two possible alternatives. Objective: The SAFARI study objective was a retrospective observation of adalimumab efficacy and safety profile after switching from other anti-TNFα agents related to clinician behavior after the failure of the first-line agent. Results: The retrospective multicenter observation demonstrated that after a first-line anti-TNFα failure adalimumab efficacy was consistent at week-12 and 24 with a further significant improvement at week-48 with a proportion of patients achieving PASI75/PASI90/PASI100 of 83.3, 71.6, and 56.9.%, respectively. Clinician strategies to extend drug-survival after first-line anti-TNFα failure, such as co-medication or dose-adjustment, were irrelevant to future drug effectiveness. Conclusions: Adalimumab profile was excellent in this 5-year retrospective observation, showing the clinical validity of interclass transitioning among anti-TNFα options.

Comprehensive long-term safety of adalimumab from 18 clinical trials in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab (Humira^® , AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, IL, U.S.A.) is a fully human monoclonal antibody specific for tumour necrosis factor-α that is approved to treat adults with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess long-term safety for patients with psoriasis receiving adalimumab in clinical studies.

METHODS

Adalimumab safety data from adults with psoriasis who received at least one adalimumab dose in 18 clinical trials were evaluated. Adalimumab was delivered subcutaneously in all treatment regimens. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were collected from the first dose to 70 days after the last dose or cut-off date (31 December 2015). AE incidence rates were expressed as events per 100 patient-years (E/100 PYs) of adalimumab exposure. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for malignancies and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Cumulative exposure was 5429·7 PYs in 3727 patients. Overall, there were 16 536 AEs (304·6 E/100 PYs). The most common AEs were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory infection and headache (23·7, 12·9 and 7·9 E/100 PYs, respectively). Incidence rates for serious infections, tuberculosis and opportunistic infections were 1·8, 0·3 and 0·02 E/100 PYs, respectively. Incidence of malignancy excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) was 0·8 E/100 PYs [SIR 0·86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·58-1·23]. Incidences of NMSC and melanoma were 0·6 and 0·2 E/100 PYs, respectively. The SIR was 1·55 (95% CI 1·10-2·13) for NMSC and 3·04 (95% CI 1·11-6·62) for melanoma. The SMR was 0·34 (95% CI 0·16-0·65).

CONCLUSIONS

AE rates remained stable in this analysis of patients with psoriasis receiving adalimumab; no new safety signals were identified compared with earlier analyses.

Secondary failure of TNF-α inhibitors in clinical practice

Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) is a leading inflammatory cytokine that plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. In case of a severe course of psoriasis and moderate-to-severe disease in which traditional systemic treatments are ineffective or contraindicated, TNF-α inhibitors (iTNF-α) are used. This class of drugs includes monoclonal antibodies and a fusion protein (etanercept) and can induce a humoral or cell-mediated immune response, leading to formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs). The immunogenicity may affect iTNF-α drug pharmacokinetics, which would lead to hampering the clinical response (secondary drug failure), so a need to increase the drug dose arises. Antibodies against monoclonal antibodies (adalimumab, infliximab) have been associated with diminished clinical response, while against etanercept are non-neutralizing and appear to have no significant effect on clinical response and treatment safety. Switching of biologic agents may be one strategy in ADA-associated secondary failure of iTNF-α. However researches are needed to identify risk factors for ADA development and investigate management strategies for optimized treatment response. The authors reviewed the literature on the effectiveness of iTNF-α and pointed out the prevention of secondary failure in clinical practice.

No need to change the drug class: ixekizumab- following secukinumab-therapy in psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Regarding treatment of psoriasis, dermatologists now use new, highly effective targeted therapies. Among such, biologic therapies have become a mainstay in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis; yet, a substantial proportion of patients show insufficient or no treatment response. Current literature has insufficient evidence for successful treatment when switching biologics after multiple failures, in particular when the biologics share a common mechanism of action.

OBJECTIVES

To compile a case series of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis who had primary or secondary loss of response to multiple previous systemic treatments. We specifically focused on patients recently treated with the anti-IL-17A antibody secukinumab, who further received the anti-IL-17A antibody ixekizumab as subsequent therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis. Inclusion criteria were patients with moderate to severe psoriasis vulgaris (as defined by European consensus and the German guidelines), who have previously been treated with systemic therapies including three or more biological therapies. All patients treated with anti-IL-17A antibody secukinumab experienced a primary and/or secondary treatment failure and subsequently received the anti-IL-17A antibody ixekizumab. The primary outcome was treatment response to ixekizumab using PASI score; the secondary outcome was incidence of adverse events.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were included. At week 6 of ixekizumab treatment, PASI 75 was achieved in 91.7%, PASI 90 in 66.7%, PASI 100 in 8.3% of patients. At week 12, PASI 75 was achieved in 100%, PASI 90 in 100%, PASI 100 in 58.3% of the cohort. Throughout the observation period, no severe adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ixekizumab proved to be an effective and safe therapeutic option for patients with prior systemic therapies, including biological treatments with the same mechanism of action. Thus, failure of secukinumab does not preclude future therapy success with a second IL-17A-directed therapy.

A Review of Switching Biologic Agents in the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated polygenic inherited skin disease. Many biologic agents have been approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The most commonly utilized biologics include TNF-α antagonists (etanercept, infliximab, and adalimumab), IL-12/23P40 antagonist (ustekinumab), IL-23P19 antagonist (guselkumab), IL-17A antagonist (secukinumab and ixekizumab), and IL-17RA antagonist (brodalumab). However, some patients may fail to respond well to their first biologic agent. Reasons for failure include primary failure (lack of initial efficacy), secondary failure (loss of efficacy over time) or the development of adverse effects. For patients desiring maximum skin clearance and better quality of life, switching to a second biologic agent might be a worthwhile option. This review discusses recent clinical studies on switching therapies in treating psoriasis, and found that switching biologic agents can significantly improve outcomes for patients. Some clinical guidelines are also discussed. This research provides some advice on establishing individualized treatment regimens based on clinical needs and pharmacologic characteristics.

Switching of biologics in psoriasis: Reasons and results

Efficacy and safety profiles of biologics have been established for moderate to severe psoriasis. However, inefficacy or adverse events sometimes require changing the treatment to other biologics. Here, we examine the effectiveness of this strategy. We retrospectively investigated cases requiring switching biologics. We enrolled 275 psoriatic patients treated with biologics between January 2010 and December 2014 in our hospital. Of these, 51 required a switch to another biologic. First-line therapies were infliximab (IFX, n = 26), adalimumab (ADA, n = 18) and ustekinumab (UST, n = 7), and second-line therapies were IFX (n = 5), ADA (n = 21) and UST (n = 25). Reasons for switching were inefficacy (n = 38), adverse events (n = 11) and others (n = 2). The details were primary failure (n = 15), secondary failure (n = 23) and infusion reactions (n = 8). In 49 patients who switched biologics due to inefficacy and adverse events, the mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score at week 16 was 4.3 for first-line therapies and 2.9 for second-line therapies (P < 0.05). Switching to a second biologic therapy to address the first's inefficacy or adverse events often results in significant improvement in moderate to severe psoriasis.

Effect of Adalimumab on Gene Expression Profiles of Psoriatic Skin and Blood

BACKGROUND

Adalimumab is an anti-TNF biologic drug that is efficacious in the treatment of psoriasis. However, the effect of adalimumab on genome-wide gene expression changes in skin and peripheral blood is not well characterized.<BR />

METHODS

Thirty adult subjects with &gt; 10% body surface area of chronic plaque psoriasis were recruited for the study. Lesional skin and peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples prior to and one month following treatment with adalimumab were collected. The skin samples were analyzed using genome-wide RNAseq, and the blood samples were analyzed using genome-wide Affymetrix microarrays. Data preprocessing and analysis were conducted using the EdgeR and Affy packages in R/Bioconductor.<BR />

RESULTS

In the skin, paired analysis before and after treatment revealed changes in pathways important to epidermal development and keratinocyte differentiation. Such important genes as keratin 6A and 6B, tubulin B6, desmocollin, and desmoglein 3 were among the top differentially expressed genes. In peripheral blood, pathways involved in hematopoetic cell lineage and immune response were found to be differentially expressed, including genes such as the Fc receptor-like A and 5, as well as immunoglobulin heavy chains. Using a principal components approach, we show that expression of genes in post-treatment skin more closely resembles that of healthy controls.<BR />

CONCLUSION

Treatment of psoriasis with adalimumab appears to be associated with modulation of keratinocyte and epidermal proliferation in the skin and with immunologic changes in the blood. We discuss the ramifications of these findings for the treatment for psoriasis.<BR /><BR /> <em>J Drugs Dermatol</em>. 2016;15(8):988-994.

Systematic review of efficacy of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in patients with psoriasis previously treated with a different anti-TNF agent

BACKGROUND

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists have improved outcomes for patients with psoriasis, but some patients are unresponsive to treatment (primary failure) or lose an initially effective response (secondary failure).

OBJECTIVE

We sought to systematically investigate the efficacy and safety of a second TNF antagonist after failure of a first TNF antagonist.

METHODS

Published primary studies evaluating the efficacy of switching TNF antagonists after failure were systematically extracted.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. Although response rates to a second TNF antagonist were lower than for a first, a substantial proportion of patients in every study achieved treatment success. Week-24 response rates for a second antagonist were 30% to 74% for a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score and 20% to 70% for achieving a Physician Global Assessment score of 0/1; mean improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index ranged from -3.5 to -13. In general, patients who experienced secondary failure achieved better responses than patients with primary failure. Adverse event incidences ranged from 20% to 71%, without unexpected adverse events; 0% to 11% of patients experienced serious adverse events.

LIMITATIONS

There was no common definition of treatment failure across these studies of varied design.

CONCLUSIONS

Some patients benefit from switching to a second TNF antagonist after failure of a first TNF antagonist, with improved quality of life.

Key design considerations on comparative clinical efficacy studies for biosimilars: adalimumab as an example

The global development of a biosimilar product is a methodologically complex affair, lined with potential design pitfalls and operational missteps to be avoided. Without careful attention to experimental design and meticulous execution, a development programme may fail to demonstrate equivalence, as would be anticipated for a biosimilar product, and not receive regulatory approval based on current guidance. In order to demonstrate similarity of a biosimilar product versus the originator (ie, the branded product), based on regulatory guidance, a stepwise approach is usually taken, starting with a comprehensive structural and functional characterisation of the new biological moiety. Given the sequential nature of the review process, the extent and nature of the non-clinical in vivo studies and the clinical studies to be performed depend on the level of evidence obtained in these previous step(s). A clinical efficacy trial is often required to further demonstrate biosimilarity of the two products (biosimilar vs branded) in terms of comparative safety and effectiveness. Owing to the focus on demonstrating biosimilarity and not safety and efficacy de novo, designing an adequate phase III (potentially pivotal) clinical efficacy study of a biosimilar may present some unique challenges. Using adalimumab as an example, we highlight design elements that may deserve special attention.

Adalimumab Efficacy in Patients with Psoriasis Who Received or Did Not Respond to Prior Systemic Therapy: A Pooled Post Hoc Analysis of Results from Three Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Introduction

There are limited data from randomized controlled clinical trials on the outcomes of biologics after discontinuation of a different systemic therapy. To determine the efficacy of adalimumab in patients who previously received systemic therapy (including failed therapy), we performed a pooled post hoc analysis of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response data from three double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Methods

Patients from the M02-528, REVEAL, and CHAMPION studies who were previously exposed to systemic treatment were categorized based on their response. The efficacy of adalimumab compared with placebo was analyzed at the end of the double-blind treatment period for the overall pooled intent-to-treat population (N = 1469) and subgroups that received (n = 780) or did not respond to (n = 229) previous systemic pretreatments.

Results

Rates for an improvement of ≥75 % from baseline in the PASI score (PASI75 response) were significantly greater (p < 0.001) at week 16 in patients treated with adalimumab compared with patients who received placebo in the overall (72.1 vs. 8.0 %, respectively), previously treated (72.7 vs. 8.5 %), and previously failed treatment (70.4 vs. 8.1 %) groups. PASI75 response rates were similar in the overall group and in patients who did not respond to methotrexate, cyclosporine, or psoralen plus ultraviolet A therapy. Improvements of ≥90 or ≥100 % from baseline PASI score were also higher with adalimumab vs. placebo in previously treated patients. Adverse events were similar among subgroups.

Conclusions

Adalimumab was efficacious for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis regardless of prior exposure to systemic therapies or failure of those prior therapies.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers

NCT00645814, NCT00237887, NCT00235820.

Recommendations for managing a suboptimal response to biologics for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A Belgian perspective

Over the past decade, biologics have become the gold standard in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis for patients who have failed or who have contraindications to traditional systemic treatments. However, although practical recommendations on how to treat a suboptimal response to biologics exist in other chronic inflammatory diseases, they are only just beginning to emerge for psoriasis. This article aims to formulate recommendations in the case of a suboptimal response of psoriasis to biologics in the Belgian setting. A Belgian taskforce of psoriasis experts was convened to review the results of a literature search and formulate recommendations based on the available evidence and provide expert opinion to address gaps in the evidence. The taskforce has proposed a treatment algorithm for patients with a primary non-response or a secondary loss of response to help address an unmet need. Expert recommendations have been developed to address treatment strategies in case of a primary or secondary suboptimal response to biologics in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in Belgium.

An evolution in switching therapy for psoriasis patients who fail to meet treatment goals

Switching psoriasis treatment is a common, accepted practice that is used to improve disease management and improve patient outcomes (e.g., when patients are experiencing suboptimal efficacy and/or tolerability with a given therapy). Historically, switching treatment was often performed to limit patients’ cumulative exposure to conventional systemic agents (e.g., methotrexate, cyclosporine) with the goal of reducing end‐organ toxicity. However, the practice of switching treatments has evolved in recent years with the availability of highly effective and tolerable biologic agents. In current practice, near‐complete skin clearance with minimal side effects should be a realistic treatment goal for most patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis, and consideration for switching therapies has shifted to become more focused on achieving maximum possible skin clearance, enhanced quality of life, and improved patient satisfaction. This review provides a discussion of recent guidance on switching psoriasis therapies, including initial considerations for when switching therapy may be advisable and challenges associated with switching therapy, along with an overview of published clinical studies evaluating outcomes associated with switching therapy. The goal of this review is to empower dermatologists to optimally manage their patients’ psoriasis by providing the tools needed to develop rational strategies for switching treatments based on the pharmacologic characteristics of available treatments and each patient's clinical needs and treatment preferences.

Adalimumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis in patients switching from other biologics

BACKGROUND

Ample evidence shows that switching from one biological agent to another may prove effective when response to the first one is inadequate. Nevertheless, there are little data so far showing the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with plaque psoriasis who previously received another biologic agent.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the 1-year effectiveness, safety and quality-of-life outcomes patients with psoriasis who had switched to adalimumab from other biologic therapies.

METHODS

Forty-two patients who participated in this Austrian multicenter study were treated with adalimumab over a 1-year period, after switching from efalizumab, infliximab or etanercept. Effectiveness was assessed using standardized tools for measurement of disease severity [Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI)] and quality of life [Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)]. The study endpoints were evaluated using the all-treated population.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of improvement at the end of the study was 74.3% for PASI, 81.6% for DLQI and 83.6% for NAPSI, demonstrating a considerable benefit of treatment with adalimumab. The safety profile observed was consistent with previous clinical trials for adalimumab, and no new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab therapy in patients with plaque psoriasis previously treated with other biologic agents demonstrates effectiveness, safety and improvement in quality of life.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriatic patients previously treated with etanercept in a real-world setting

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge on the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients switching from etanercept is scarce, especially on the influence that causes of etanercept discontinuation may have on adalimumab response.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the response, adverse effects and factors that may influence the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients who failed on etanercept therapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Data from all moderate to severe plaque psoriasis patients who switched from etanercept to adalimumab were extracted from a registry of biological therapies of our department. Primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving PASI 50 at weeks 12, 24, and 52. Secondary endpoints were the percentages of patients achieving PASI 75 and PASI 90, patients who maintained PASI values <5 and <3, and the safety of adalimumab.

RESULTS

Of 35 patients who fulfilled the study criteria, 82.9% achieved PASI 50 at week 12, 74.3% at week 24, and 74.3% at week 52 on adalimumab treatment. Eleven of 16 primary and 11 of 17 secondary nonresponders to etanercept responded to adalimumab. There were no treatment discontinuations due to side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous etanercept failure seems not influence the success and safety of adalimumab treatment in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

Treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with biologics: analysis of the additional cost of temporary dose escalation vs switch to another biologic after failure of maintenance therapy

INTRODUCTION

In the event of failure of maintenance therapy with biologic agents for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, the possible approaches are to switch to another agent or escalate the dose (generally by increased dosing frequency). Knowledge of the economic impact of the 2 alternatives would be extremely useful for therapeutic decision making.

OBJECTIVE

The present analysis aimed to determine the moment in which the annualized additional cost of escalation exceeds a specified cost overrun.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on the purchase cost (average wholesale price) of approved biologics for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis, the number of weeks of escalation of the initial biologic until the annualized cost of dose escalation ran €1000 over the cost of switching to another biologic was calculated for a typical patient weighing 80 kg.

RESULTS

According to this model, switching to another biologic is always cost effective, with adalimumab followed by ustekinumab the best choices in this respect. Ustekinumab allows for a longer trial escalation period (2 to 4 injections) before the cost overrun threshold is reached, whereas the threshold is reached in a single infusion if a patient is on infliximab.

CONCLUSION

The study does not take into account the differential efficacy of the various biologic therapies as rescue treatment for failure of maintenance therapy given the lack of scientific evidence. The results nevertheless show substantial differences in the period during which treatment can be intensified before reaching the preset cost overrun.

Efficacy of switching between tumor necrosis factor-alfa inhibitors in psoriasis: results from the Italian Psocare registry

BACKGROUND

Some studies have shown that switching patients from one tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alfa inhibitor to another may be beneficial when they have an inadequate response or an adverse event.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the variables predicting the efficacy of the second TNF-alfa inhibitor in patients discontinuing the first TNF-alfa inhibitor.

METHODS

Data from all 5423 consecutive patients starting TNF-alfa inhibitor therapy for psoriasis between September 2005 and September 2010 who were included in the Italian Psocare registry were analyzed.

RESULTS

In 105 patients who switched to a second TNF-alfa inhibitor who had complete follow-up data, 75% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index score (PASI 75) was reached by 29% after 16 weeks and by 45.6% after 24 weeks. Patients who switched because of secondary loss of efficacy (loss of initial PASI 75 response) or adverse events/intolerance were more likely to reach PASI 75 than those who switched as a result of primary inefficacy (PASI 75 never achieved) (hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.3-5.5 vs hazard ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.0-3.9 and 1, respectively).

LIMITATIONS

There was a small number of patients with complete follow-up data.

CONCLUSION

PASI 75 response in patients who switched from one anti-TNF-alfa agent to another was significantly reduced in patients who showed primary inefficacy of the first anti-TNF-alfa.

A consensus report on appropriate treatment optimization and transitioning in the management of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

There is limited information on systemic and biological treatment optimization and transitioning in routine clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical guidance on treatment optimization and transitioning for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

Dermatologists from 33 countries contributed to the Transitioning Therapies programme. Fourteen questions were identified. Answers were drafted based on systematic literature reviews (7/14 questions) and expert opinion (7/14 questions). Using a modified Delphi procedure, dermatologists from 30 countries voted on their level of agreement with each draft answer (scale: 1-9, strong disagreement to strong agreement). Consensus was defined as ≥75% of participants scoring within the 7-9 range.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved on the answers to all questions. Recommendations for the use of cyclosporine and methotrexate were agreed. Transitioning from a conventional systemic therapy to a biological agent may be done directly or with an overlap (if transitioning is required because of lack of efficacy) or potentially with a treatment-free interval (if transitioning is required for safety reasons). Combination therapy may be beneficial. Continuous therapy for patients on biologicals is strongly recommended. However, during successful maintenance with biological monotherapy, a dosage reduction may be considered to limit drug exposure, although this may carry the risk of decreased efficacy. Switching biologicals for reasons of efficacy should be done without a washout period, but switching for reasons of safety may require a treatment-free interval.

CONCLUSION

This consensus provides practical guidance on treatment optimization and transitioning for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, based on literature reviews and the expert opinion of dermatologists from across the globe.

Sequential use of biologics in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

A number of biologic agents, including the tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists etanercept, adalimumab and infliximab, and the interleukin (IL)-12/IL-23 antagonist ustekinumab, are available for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in the U.K. Currently, the selection of the first biologic, and the choice of sequential biologics in the event of efficacy/tolerability concerns, is made using a limited evidence base. The efficacy of biologics, the potential mechanisms of primary and secondary failure and the evidence for sequencing therapy among TNF antagonists and between TNF antagonists and IL-12/IL-23 blockade are reviewed. As psoriasis biologics registers begin to produce long-term safety and efficacy data, therapy decisions in plaque psoriasis may become more objective, and it may be possible to individualize treatment based on clinical or pharmacogenetic information.

Effects of the tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist adalimumab on arterial inflammation assessed by positron emission tomography in patients with psoriasis: results of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with increased risks of myocardial infarction and stroke. Systemic treatments for moderate to severe psoriasis can reduce skin and joint inflammation; however, their effects on vascular inflammation are unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This randomized, controlled trial included 30 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and a history, or multiple risk factors, of coronary atherosclerosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive either adalimumab subcutaneously for 4 months or to control nonsystemic treatment (topical therapies or phototherapy). Vascular inflammation was measured in the carotid artery and ascending aorta at baseline and week 15, by (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake on positron emission tomography. The change in target:

BACKGROUND

=0.004) but not for the control group (-0.10 [95% CI, -0.32 to 0.12]; P=0.35). The difference between study arms for this primary end point did not reach statistical significance (-0.13 [95% CI, -0.01 to 0.14]; P=0.32). The change in target:

BACKGROUND

=0.021) and in carotid arteries (-0.32±0.15, P=0.037) when analyzed separately (secondary end points). Changes in other positron emission tomography indices also improved significantly with adalimumab compared with controls in the ascending aorta and carotids. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein decreased by 51% at week 16 with adalimumab compared with 5% in controls (P=0·002).

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not meet its primary end point because the change in target:background ratio in patients randomized to adalimumab was not different from controls. Although adalimumab may reduce vascular inflammation in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, this effect is not large enough to be demonstrated in a study with a small sample size.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00940862.

Sleep quality and other patient-reported outcomes improve after patients with psoriasis with suboptimal response to other systemic therapies are switched to adalimumab: results from PROGRESS, an open-label Phase IIIB trial

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is associated with poor health-related quality of life, including sleep impairment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent of sleep impairment, the effect of adalimumab on sleep and other patient-reported outcomes, and correlations between changes in these outcomes and sleep quality in patients with psoriasis.

METHODS

Patients in the 16-week, open-label, Phase IIIb PROGRESS trial had chronic plaque psoriasis and suboptimal response to prior therapy (etanercept, methotrexate or narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy). Adalimumab was self-injected subcutaneously (80 mg at week 0, then 40 mg every other week from week 1). The focus for this analysis was the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. Other patient-reported outcomes included the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Physician's Global Assessment, a visual analogue scale for psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis (PsA) pain, and the Work Productivity and Activity Index Questionnaire-Specific Health Problems.

RESULTS

Patients with psoriasis had impaired sleep at baseline. The degree of sleep impairment was significantly associated with the extent of work productivity for all sleep measures and, for some sleep measures, was associated with DLQI impairment, clinical severity measured by PASI, the presence of PsA, and depression. Adalimumab treatment significantly improved sleep quality by 15% from baseline, as well as DLQI score, pain and work productivity. The improvement in sleep was partially explained (R(2 ) = 0·16, P < 0·001) by improvements in the objectively measured psoriasis signs in PASI.

CONCLUSIONS

Adalimumab treatment improved sleep outcomes and other patient-reported outcomes including health-related quality of life, work productivity, daily activity and disease-related pain.

The efficacy and safety of infliximab in patients with plaque psoriasis who had an inadequate response to etanercept: results of a prospective, multicenter, open-label study

BACKGROUND

In patients with psoriasis and inadequate response (IR) to tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist treatment, the incremental benefit of switching to another tumor necrosis factor-α antagonist is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the clinical response to an etanercept-to-infliximab switch in patients with psoriasis and IR to etanercept.

METHODS

Adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and IR to etanercept (≥ 4 months) were eligible for this open-label study (called PSUNRISE). Patients had a Physician Global Assessment (PGA) score of at least 2 (mild) on a 5-point scale with etanercept, with or without concomitant oral systemic methotrexate or cyclosporine at baseline and during the study. Patients received intravenous infusions of infliximab 5 mg/kg at weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, and 22. PGA was used to evaluate efficacy at week 10 (primary end point) and week 26 (durability). Safety was evaluated through the end of the study.

RESULTS

Of 215 patients, only 10 received concomitant immunomodulators. At week 10, 65.4% of patients (138 of 211; 95% confidence interval 58.6%-71.8%) achieved a PGA score of clear (0) or minimal (1) (primary end point). This response was durable through week 26, at which time 61.3% (122 of 199; 95% confidence interval 54.2%-68.1%) achieved a PGA score of clear (0) or minimal (1). There were no unexpected side effects or safety concerns.

LIMITATIONS

This was an open-label, 26-week study; an incremental change of 1 PGA point, even mild to minimal, was considered clinically significant, as most psoriasis practitioners seek to achieve minimal psoriasis or clear skin.

CONCLUSION

After switching to infliximab, a substantial proportion of patients with psoriasis and IR to etanercept experienced rapid and durable improvement.

The long-term safety of adalimumab treatment in moderate to severe psoriasis: a comprehensive analysis of all adalimumab exposure in all clinical trials

BACKGROUND

A favorable benefit-risk profile has been established for adalimumab, with up to 5 years of treatment in 13 clinical trials in patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this analysis was to assess the long-term safety of all adalimumab exposure in all psoriasis clinical trials.

METHODS

A total of six sets of data were analyzed as follows: (i) all cumulative safety data from all exposure for all adalimumab-treated patients in the 13 clinical trials in moderate to severe psoriasis (All Adalimumab Treatment Population) through April 2007, November 2008, and November 2009, respectively; (ii) longitudinal data for 1403 patients treated with adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow) dosing (Every Other Week Population) through June 2007 and April 2010; and (iii) data from placebo-controlled periods of clinical trials. Adverse events that occurred up to 70 days after the final dose of adalimumab were analyzed.

RESULTS

During placebo-controlled periods, a total of 572 patients had 173.0 patient-years (PYs) of exposure to placebo and 1188 patients had 370.5 PYs of exposure to adalimumab. Adverse event incidence rates, expressed as events per 100 PYs (events/100 PYs), for placebo- and adalimumab-treated patients for serious adverse events were 7.52 and 8.64, and for serious infectious adverse events were 2.89 and 2.43, respectively. In the 2007, 2008, and 2009 All Adalimumab Treatment Population there were, respectively, 1819 patients (2424.7 PYs), 2197 patients (4351.9 PYs), and 3010 patients (4844.7 PYs), with serious adverse event incidence rates of 6.51, 7.22, and 8.36 events/100 PYs, and serious infectious adverse event rates of 1.32, 1.38, and 1.65 events/100 PYs. In the 2007 and 2010 Every Other Week Population (n = 1403), there were 1883.5 and 2854.1 total PYs of exposure, respectively, with serious adverse event incidence rates of 6.32 and 6.87 events/100 PYs, and serious infectious adverse event rates of 1.33 and 1.37 events/100 PYs, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple lines of evidence from a total of six sets of safety data, with treatment for up to 5 years, including results from all adalimumab-treated patients, and a subset of patients treated with 40 mg eow dosing, did not show evidence of cumulative toxicity, and showed adverse event rates that were generally stable or decreased with increased mean per-patient exposure.

Etanercept-induced cutaneous and pulmonary sarcoid-like granulomas resolving with adalimumab

A 59-year-old female with rheumatoid arthritis on etanercept therapy presented with a 7-cm-large subcutaneous forearm mass. Multiple smaller nodules subsequently developed on the upper and lower extremities. Except for a new cough, the patient was systemically well. Biopsy of the mass showed sarcoidal type granulomatous inflammation with nodular aggregations of non-necrotizing epithelioid histiocytes in the subcutis. A chest computed tomography (CT) scan showed mediastinal adenopathy consistent with pulmonary sarcoidosis. Etanercept was discontinued, and the patient was started on adalimumab for rheumatoid arthritis control. The cutaneous nodules fully resolved in 6 months with no additional treatment. A 4-month follow-up CT scan showed significant regression of mediastinal adenopathy. The patient has since been maintained on adalimumab therapy for 2 years with no recurrence of sarcoid-like manifestations. Biologic response modifiers targeting tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) are effective treatments of chronic inflammatory conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis. TNFα represents a major cytokine in granuloma formation, and TNFα inhibitors are sometimes efficacious in the treatment of sarcoidosis. Paradoxically, there is a small volume of literature implicating TNFα inhibitors in the development of sarcoid-like disease. We present this case to promote the recognition of TNFα inhibitor-induced sarcoidosis and to illustrate the wide clinicopathologic differential of sarcoidal type granulomas.