Directrices españolas basadas en la evidencia para el tratamiento de la psoriasis moderada a grave con agentes biológicos

Recategorization of psoriasis severity: Delphi consensus from the International Psoriasis Council

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis severity categories have been important tools for clinicians to use in treatment decisions as well as to determine eligibility criteria for clinical studies. However, owing to the heterogeneity of severity classifications and their lack of consideration for the impact of psoriasis involvement of special areas or past treatment history, patients may be miscategorized, which can lead to undertreatment of psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a consensus statement on the classification of psoriasis severity.

METHODS

A modified Delphi approach was developed by the International Psoriasis Council to define psoriasis severity.

RESULTS

After completion of the exercise, 7 severity definitions were preferentially ranked. This most preferred statement rejects the mild, moderate, and severe categories in favor of a dichotomous definition: Psoriasis patients should be classified as either candidates for topical therapy or candidates for systemic therapy; the latter are patients who meet at least one of the following criteria: (1) body surface area >10%, (2) disease involving special areas, and (3) failure of topical therapy.

LIMITATIONS

This effort might have suffered from a lack of representation by all relevant stakeholders, including patients.

CONCLUSION

The consensus statement describes 2 categories of psoriasis severity, while accounting for special circumstances where patients may require systemic therapy.

Proposal of a new scoring formula for the Dermatology Life Quality Index in psoriasis

BACKGROUND

'Not relevant' responses (NRRs) on the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) may occur in up to 40% of patients with psoriasis. As these responses are scored as the item of the questionnaire having no impact on the patients' lives at all, it is more difficult for these patients to fulfil the DLQI > 10 criterion required by clinical guidelines to become candidates for systemic treatment including biologics.

OBJECTIVES

We propose a new scoring system for the DLQI that corrects for the bias in the NRR option and test its construct validity in a sample of patients with psoriasis.

METHODS

Data from 242 patients (104 of whom marked at least one NRR) from two earlier cross-sectional surveys were reanalysed. For each patient, the DLQI score was calculated in two ways: (i) according to the original scoring and (ii) by applying a new scoring formula (DLQI-R) that adjusts the total score for the number of NRRs. The construct validity of the DLQI-R was tested against the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and EQ-5D-3L.

RESULTS

The mean DLQI and DLQI-R scores were 9·99 ± 7·52 and 11·0 ± 8·02, respectively. The DLQI-R allowed eight more patients (3·3%) to achieve the 'PASI > 10 and DLQI > 10' threshold. The results were robust when limiting the maximum number of NRRs allowed to two or three. Compared with the DLQI, DLQI-R correlated slightly better with PASI (r_s = 0·59 vs. 0·57) and EQ-5D-3L index scores (r_s = -0·58 vs. -0·54).

CONCLUSIONS

The DLQI-R seems to be a valid scoring system for avoiding the bias in the NRR option and can help to improve patients' access to biologics.

Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics in Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis

Pharmacogenetics is the study of variations in DNA sequence related to drug response. Moreover, the evolution of biotechnology and the sequencing of human DNA have allowed the creation of pharmacogenomics, a branch of genetics that analyzes human genes, the RNAs and proteins encoded by them, and the inter-and intra-individual variations in expression and function in relation to drug response. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics are being used to search for biomarkers that can predict response to systemic treatments, including those for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease with an autoimmune contribution. Although its etiology remains unknown, genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors play a role in its development. Diverse systemic and biologic therapies are used to treat moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, these treatments are not curative, and patients exhibit a wide range of responses to them. Moderate-to-severe psoriasis is usually treated with systemic immunomodulators such as acitretin, ciclosporin, and methotrexate. Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) drugs (adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab) are the first-line treatment for patients resistant to conventional systemic therapies. Although these therapies are very efficient, around 30-50% of patients have inadequate response. Ustekinumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 and is used for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. New drugs (apremilast, brodalumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, and secukinumab) have recently been approved for psoriasis. However, response rates to systemic treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis range from 35 to 80%, so it is necessary to identify non-invasive biomarkers that could help predict treatment outcomes of these therapies and individualize care for patients with psoriasis. These biomarkers could improve patient quality of life and reduce health costs and potential side effects. Pharmacogenetic studies have identified potential biomarkers for response to biologic treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. These biomarkers need to be validated in clinical trials involving large cohorts of patients before they can be translated to the clinic. We review pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics studies for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Polymorphisms associated with etanercept response in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

AIM

Few studies have evaluated the influence of pharmacogenetics in psoriatic patients treated with etanercept.

MATERIALS & METHODS

We evaluated the association between 124 polymorphisms with the response to etanercept in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis at 3 months (n = 78) and 6 months of treatment (n = 68).

RESULTS

The results of the multivariate analysis showed an association between polymorphisms rs13437088 (HLA-B/MICA), rs96844 (MAP3K1), rs2431697 (PTTG1), rs9304742 (ZNF816A) and the response to etanercept at 3 months. Besides polymorphisms rs928655 (GBP6) and rs2546890 (IL12B) were associated to response at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Nevertheless, these biomarkers should be validated in large-scale studies before its implementation in clinical practice.

The efficacy and safety of apremilast, etanercept and placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: 52-week results from a phase IIIb, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (LIBERATE)

Background

Apremilast, an oral, small‐molecule phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Objective

Evaluate efficacy and safety of apremilast vs. placebo in biologic‐naive patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis and safety of switching from etanercept to apremilast in a phase IIIb, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study (NCT01690299).

Methods

Two hundred and fifty patients were randomized to placebo (n = 84), apremilast 30 mg BID (n = 83) or etanercept 50 mg QW (n = 83) through Week 16; thereafter, all patients continued or switched to apremilast through Week 104. The primary efficacy endpoint was achievement of PASI‐75 at Week 16 with apremilast vs. placebo. Secondary endpoints included achievement of PASI‐75 at Week 16 with etanercept vs. placebo and improvements in other clinical endpoints vs. placebo at Week 16. Outcomes were assessed through Week 52. This study was not designed for apremilast vs. etanercept comparisons.

Results

At Week 16, PASI‐75 achievement was greater with apremilast (39.8%) vs. placebo (11.9%; P < 0.0001); 48.2% of patients achieved PASI‐75 with etanercept (P < 0.0001 vs. placebo). PASI‐75 response was maintained in 47.3% (apremilast/apremilast), 49.4% (etanercept/apremilast) and 47.9% (placebo/apremilast) of patients at Week 52. Most common adverse events (≥5%) with apremilast, including nausea, diarrhoea, upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, tension headache and headache, were mild or moderate in severity; diarrhoea and nausea generally resolved in the first month. No new safety or tolerability issues were observed through Week 52 with apremilast.

Conclusion

Apremilast demonstrated significant efficacy vs. placebo at Week 16 in biologic‐naive patients with psoriasis, which was sustained over 52 weeks, and demonstrated safety consistent with the known safety profile of apremilast. Switching from etanercept to apremilast did not result in any new or clinically significant safety findings, and efficacy was maintained with apremilast through Week 52.

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent disease with a major impact on quality of life; therefore, appropriate patient management is mandatory. Given that many issues in psoriasis are controversial and not clearly defined by evidence-based medicine, management of psoriasis is very variable. Expert consensus can generate practical guidelines for optimization of patient care. Much has changed since 2009, when the Consensus Document on the Evaluation and Treatment of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis was published by the Spanish Psoriasis Group (GEP) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV). The objective of the present consensus document is to provide the dermatologist with updated recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. All active members of the GEP of the AEDV were invited to participate in the survey. The final group comprised 46 members from various areas of Spain and with substantial experience in managing psoriasis. A 3-round Delphi process was used to reach consensus. Consistent agreement and consistent disagreement (consensus) required the achievement of at least two of the following three criteria: Criterion 1, which was based on the position occupied by the mean on a scale of 1-9 and an SD <2; Criterion 2, which was based on the median and interquartile range (IQR) on a scale of 1-9; Criterion 3, which considered the percentage of the voting experts on a scale of 1-9. The items studied were definition of severity, therapeutic objectives, indications for systemic treatment and biologic therapy, induction and maintenance periods, therapeutic failure, loss of response, relapse and rebound, continuous and intermittent therapy, screening of patients before treatment, adherence to therapy, follow-up of treatment outcome, combination of drugs, transitioning and associated comorbidities. Consistent agreement or disagreement (consensus) was achieved for 198 items (agreement, 3 criteria 146 items, 2 criteria 43 items; disagreement, 3 criteria 9 items, 2 criteria 0 items) based on the criteria described above. Completion of the Delphi consensus process enabled a broad and experienced group of Spanish psoriasis experts to provide useful and practical guidelines for the management and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, particularly in areas where evidence is lacking.

New and emerging biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: mechanistic rationales and recent clinical data for IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors

The development of effective and well-tolerated biologic therapies has advanced the management of psoriasis by enabling clinicians to treat underlying disease mechanisms. Biologics approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis include three tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors and an interleukin-12/interleukin-23 inhibitor. The establishment of the immunological basis of psoriasis has led to the development of biologic agents targeting specific downstream mediators in the psoriatic cascade. These drugs inhibit cytokines and cytokine signaling/transcription mediators like interleukin-17, which plays an important role in immunopathogenesis. Several interleukin-17 inhibitors are undergoing phase 3 clinical studies. In addition, biologics that selectively inhibit interleukin-23 have been assessed in phase 2 studies. This review describes how the dissection of pathways in the immunopathogenesis of psoriasis has led to the development of therapeutic agents and highlights the latest clinical efficacy, safety and tolerability data on new and emerging biologic therapies that selectively target interleukin-17 or interleukin-23.

Prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis taking biologic therapies in a dermatologic private practice in Miami, Florida

BACKGROUND

The reactivation of a latent tuberculosis infection is one of the possible major events that may occur during biologic therapies for inflammatory chronic diseases such as psoriasis. Although its main screening test is regularly used in clinical practice, there are few studies about the prevalence of this silent mycobacterial infection and the rate of positive convertors during treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis receiving biologic therapy by using tuberculin skin test as a screening method and to evaluate the rate of conversion of tuberculin skin test (TST) during the treatment with biologics.

METHODS

A total of 445 patients were included in our retrospective study, conducted from January 2006 to September 2012. Tuberculin skin test was performed in all patients prior to treatment and once a year during the follow-up. PPD was considered positive with an induration above 5 mm, following the recommendations of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ America Thoracic Society. Data analysis was obtained with SPSS 20.0.

RESULTS

The prevalence of LTBI in our population before initiating the treatment was 4.5% by using TST screening method. During the treatment, 10 cases that were initially TST-negative became positive. Only one of the patients developed active tuberculosis infection. The other 9 TST-positive patients were detected during the regular annual screening, and no symptoms or findings on chest x-ray were seen. All the patients were treated with isoniazid (INH) for nine months, and biologic therapy was restarted after one month of treatment with INH without development of overt TB infection in any of them during the follow-up period of the study. The mean time to becoming TST positive from start date was 26.7 months (range from 8 months to 5 years). As the PPD was done annually, it is unknown exactly when the patients became TST positive. Prior to initiating treatment, 20 patients were found to be TST positive. All patients had clear chest x-rays and were treated with nine months of INH prior to initiating biologic therapy at least month later.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a screening tool for LTBI is mandatory in patients taking biologic therapies to avoid severe infectious complications. Periodic follow-up is also crucial as positive results may be seen after prolonged use of these agents.

Estimation of the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in Spain: The Latent study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy for moderate to severe psoriasis can increase the risk of active tuberculosis in patients who have latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). The main objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of LTBI in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis being treated in dermatology clinics in Spain.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Non-interventional, cross-sectional, national epidemiological study conducted in Spain in 2011-2012. Patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were included if they had undergone at least one tuberculin skin test (TST) and/or been evaluated with an interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) based on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (QuantiFERON(®) TB Gold In-Tube) in the 2 years preceding the study.

RESULTS

Data for 440 patients were valid for analysis. In total, 97.7% of the patients had undergone a TST, with a positive result in 23%. Of the 238 patients in whom the initial result was negative, 5% converted to positive on re-testing for a booster effect. IGRA results were available for 16.8%, 20.5% of them positive. Two of the patients with positive IGRA results had a negative TST. The prevalence of LTBI in the whole sample was 26.6%. The degree of concordance between the TST and the IGRA was moderate (κ=0.516; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of LTBI in this study was similar to previous estimates for Spain.

Treatment sequencing after failure of the first biologic in cost-effectiveness models of psoriasis: a systematic review of published models and clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the treatment sequencing assumptions after failure on a first-line biologic in cost-effectiveness models of treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, and to compare them with the most recent treatment guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit and the Cochrane Library databases used free text and Medical Subject Headings terms including psoriasis, biologic therapies indicated for psoriasis, and all types of economic evaluations. Two researchers performed 2-level abstract screening for articles meeting pre-specified inclusion criteria. Assumptions about treatment pathways after first-line biologic failure in the cost-effectiveness models were analysed. A second systematic search was performed for psoriasis clinical practice guidelines. Sequence assumptions were compared with treatment guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Of 25 cost-effectiveness modelling studies identified, ten estimated the incremental cost per responder; time horizons varied (12 weeks-18 months) and treatment sequencing was not considered. In 15 studies where treatment sequencing was considered, with time horizons up to 10 years, five studies included only a switch to nonsystemic therapy or best supportive care after first-line biologic failure. Another five of the 15 treatment-pathway studies were available only as abstracts with no details of the sequence assumptions. In five of the 15 studies, first-line biologic failure was followed by second-line biologic monotherapy, one of the recommendations in current treatment guidelines. In only one of these five studies was the efficacy of the second-line biologic adjusted downwards, compared with first-line treatment. Only one of these studies considered dose titration with a first-line biologic and none combination therapy (biologic plus methotrexate or phototherapy) after first-line biologic failure, as recommended in some treatment guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Cost-effectiveness models of first-line biologics for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis either do not include subsequent treatment regimens or include only some of the regimens recommended in current treatment guidelines. Results may be sensitive to assumptions about treatment sequencing and the choice and efficacy of subsequent treatment regimens.

Treatment of psoriasis: focus on clinic-based management with infliximab

Psoriasis is a disabling chronic inflammatory condition of the skin and joints that typically requires long-term treatment. Recommended treatments for psoriasis include a wide range of topical and systemic options, from topical agents and targeted phototherapy for mild psoriasis to traditional systemic agents such as methotrexate, cyclosporine and acitretin for more serious disease. The introduction of targeted biological agents such as T-cell-modulating agents, tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antagonists and interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 inhibitors has provided new choices for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis that may offer better long-term efficacy and tolerability than traditional approaches. Most biological agents are administered by subcutaneous injection. Infliximab, a TNFα antagonist, is the only biological agent approved for psoriasis that is administered by intravenous infusion, in the setting of hospital-based or specialized infusion center-based clinics. Infliximab allows weight-based dosing and may offer more rapid disease control than other biological agents, with significant improvements seen as early as 1 week after treatment initiation. This article gives an overview of psoriasis management, focusing on clinic-based infusion therapy with infliximab.

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Etanercept and Adalimumab for Plaque Psoriasis not Associated with Arthritis

Introduction

Pharmacoeconomic studies examining the cost-effectiveness of biological agents to treat moderate-to-severe psoriasis in real-life clinical practice are scarce. The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency, in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness, of etanercept and adalimumab in a real clinical setting.

Methods

Direct and indirect costs were assessed from a Spanish societal perspective in a historical hospital cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis attending a tertiary referral hospital over a 1-year period. The data examined included drug-related variables, use of health-care resources, transportation and work productivity losses. Effectiveness was measured as the proportion of patients achieving a reduction of at least 75% with respect to the baseline value for the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 75) during the first 52 weeks of treatment.

Results

No statistically significant differences in effectiveness between etanercept (n = 135) and adalimumab (n = 48) were found (PASI 75 80% vs. 85.7%; RR = 1.07 [0.90, 1.27]; RRA = 5.7 [−8.9, 20.2]; p = 0.943). There were no significant differences in total cost per patient with etanercept as compared to adalimumab (14,843.73 ± 6,178.98 € vs. 15,405.91 ± 9,106.50 €; p = 0.768).

Conclusion

Under conditions of daily clinical practice in our hospital, total health-care costs associated with the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis with etanercept appear to be equivalent to those with adalimumab in the first year of treatment.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13555-013-0030-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Expert report on psoriasis: Spanish dermatologists' opinions on the use of biologic agents to manage moderate to severe psoriasis in adults

BACKGROUND

Although national guidelines on biologic agents for treating moderate to severe psoriasis in adults have been published in several countries, increased knowledge on the practical aspects of their implementation is required.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to survey Spanish dermatologists to determine their expert opinions on practical aspects of psoriasis treatment with biologics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was sent to 309 dermatologists who belong to the Spanish Psoriasis Group and/or the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV). The questionnaire was designed specifically for the study and included items on various aspects of the treatment of psoriasis in clinical practice. Six coordinators in different geographic areas worked together to write the final expert report.

RESULTS

The response rate was 97% (300 returned questionnaires). The biologics preferred, or considered to be the best option (median score 4 out of 4 points) by respondents, were infliximab for its short-term efficacy (74% of the respondents) and rapid onset of action (78%); ustekinumab for convenience of administration (73%); and etanercept because of its suitability for cyclic treatment (71%), safety in long-term use (72%), and the possibility of temporary interruption of treatment under certain circumstances (76%). Etanercept was assigned the highest evaluations for safety and expected survival time (scored 5 on each item by 49% and 33% of the respondents, respectively). Thirty percent of the respondents considered that clinical guidelines contain important information for therapeutic management of psoriasis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a unique perspective on the opinions of a large sample of dermatologists as regards current treatment of psoriasis with biologics in Spain.

[Analysis of the cost effectiveness of home-based phototherapy with narrow-band UV-B radiation compared with biological drugs for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis]

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is associated with high treatment costs due to the increasing use of biologic drugs. Phototherapy has been demonstrated to be safe and cost effective for the treatment of psoriasis, although it is limited by the requirement for patients to visit a hospital various times a week.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficiency of home-based phototherapy with narrow-band UV-B radiation compared with biologic drugs for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis under normal practice conditions in our setting.

METHODS

A retrospective cost-effectiveness study was undertaken in 12 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. Half of the patients were treated with biologic drugs (2 with etanercept, 2 with adalimumab, and 2 with infliximab) and the other half with home-based phototherapy using a Waldmann UV100L-TL01 lamp. Clinical effectiveness was determined on the basis of achieving a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) within 16 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Treatment was considered to be effective in 5 out of 6 patients (83%) treated with biologics and 4 out of 6 patients (66%) treated with home-based phototherapy. The direct costs required to achieve PASI 75 were 8256€ per patient for biologics and 903€ per patient for home-based phototherapy. The costs associated with effective treatment using biologic drugs in a single patient would provide effective home-based phototherapy for 9.1 patients.

LIMITATIONS

The study included a limited number of patients analyzed over a short time period (16 weeks) and the comparison group included multiple treatments with different predicted responses.

CONCLUSIONS

Although biologic drugs exhibited greater efficacy, home-based phototherapy was more efficient for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis. Home-based phototherapy represents a cost-effective treatment option for patients with psoriasis and may be appropriate for use in the Spanish health care system.

CCL4L polymorphisms and CCL4/CCL4L serum levels are associated with psoriasis severity

Psoriasis is a common inflammatory skin disease with key immunological and genetic components. Recruitment of leukocytes into the skin is a central step in its pathogenesis, mediated by cytokines. Among the cytokines expressed in psoriatic lesions, C-C chemokine ligand 4 (CCL4) and C-C chemokine ligand 4-like (CCL4L) chemokines appear to be pivotal elements for the skin recruitment of proinflammatory cells. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationship between CCL4L polymorphisms (including single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and copy number variation (CNV)) and the course and prognosis of psoriasis. We analyzed the CNV and the rs4796195 SNP in 211 psoriatic patients and 234 controls; sera from both populations were also quantified for CCL4/CCL4L protein. Our results showed that a high CNV (≥3 copies) is associated with psoriasis severity, whereas moderate disease correlated with a lower CNV (≤2 copies); specifically, the CCL4L1 allele frequency is higher in severe psoriasis, whereas CCL4L2 is more frequent in patients with a milder disease. In addition, we found a positive correlation between the CNV and sera protein levels. Our results suggest that CCL4L genotyping could not only allow a better understanding of the psoriatic pathogenesis but could also be used as a prognostic tool, even helping to modulate the efficacy of treatments.

[Clinical characteristics and disease course in patients treated with efalizumab following suspension of marketing authorization by the European medicines agency: a multicenter observational study]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The withdrawal of marketing authorization for efalizumab by the European Medicines Agency in February, 2009 provided a unique opportunity to assess the course of disease in patients who were not subject to the selection criteria and biases that were common in the pivotal trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate the course of psoriasis following forced suspension of efalizumab in a group of patients treated in normal clinical practice. As secondary objectives, we sought to assess the relationships between clinical characteristics, treatment response, and disease course during efalizumab treatment and 12 and 24 weeks after suspension.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Information on the epidemiological profile and disease course during treatment and following suspension of the drug was collected from a group of patients treated with efalizumab. Statistical analyses were performed to identify predictive factors.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-seven patients from 12 Spanish hospitals were included in the study. During treatment, 4% of patients were diagnosed with generalized inflammatory flares. Most patients could be classified as having a good (55%) or moderate (18%) response to treatment. Rebound following withdrawal of efalizumab was observed in 30% of patients. The likelihood of rebound was independent of clinical characteristics, treatment response, or therapeutic approach used by the dermatologist following suspension.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high frequency of rebound following suspension of efalizumab, exceeding the rate reported in pivotal trials. This is particularly noteworthy given the large proportion of patients with a good response to treatment and therefore believed to have a better prognosis. Other significant findings were the higher frequency of positive treatment response than observed in previous studies (possibly influenced by the mean treatment duration) and the high frequency of generalized inflammatory flares.

Evaluation of and perspectives on guidelines: what is important?

Tan et al. critically appraised the quality of eight guidelines for the treatment of psoriasis published by five working groups between 2006 and 2009, using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument. Four groups used the standards established by the AGREE instrument. All guidelines received high scores for "scope and purpose" and "clarity and presentation," but each of the guidelines was found to have important shortcomings in at least one item, including "stakeholder involvement," "development rigor," "applicability," and "editorial independence." The investigators conclude that, despite the use of predefined standards in their development, important deficiencies exist in the most recent clinical treatment guidelines for psoriasis.