High grade follicular lymphoma in a patient receiving adalimumab and methotrexate for pityriasis rubra pilaris

Systemic therapies of pityriasis rubra pilaris: a systematic review

Pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) is a rare papulosquamous disorder. Treatment is challenging; the armamentarium consists of topical corticosteroids, phototherapy, classic systemic treatments such as retinoids or immunosuppressive drugs, and most recently biologicals. However, the relative effectiveness of therapies is unclear. Our objective was to review the published literature on systemic treatment of PRP. A systematic review was conducted on PubMed and the Cochrane Library up to 5 September 2017. Studies evaluating any systemic treatments of PRP (except for historical treatments) were included. Overall, 182 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria, and reported on 475 patients and 652 courses of treatment. 42.0 % (225/514) of all patients treated with retinoids achieved an excellent response (isotretinoin: 61.1 % [102/167], etretinate: 47 % [54/115], and acitretin: 24.7 % [43/174]) compared to an excellent response rate of 33.1 % (53/160) with methotrexate. Therapy with biologicals was successful in 51.0 % of patients (71/133) (ustekinumab: 62.5 % [10/16], infliximab: 57.1 % [28/49], etanercept: 53.3 % [16/30], and adalimumab: 46.4 % [13/28]). This review balances effectiveness, side effects, experience, and drug costs in order to suggest a treatment regimen starting with isotretinoin as first-line, methotrexate as second-line and biologicals as third-line treatment for this difficult-to-treat dermatosis.

Biologics for pityriasis rubra pilaris treatment: A review of the literature

Pityriasis rubra pilaris (PRP) is a rare inflammatory papulosquamous skin disease that is often refractory to conventional therapies. The off-label use of biologics, such as anti-tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin (IL) 12/IL-23, and anti-IL-17 agents, has been proven successful in the past 2 decades for PRP treatment. Our aim was to analyse the literature for the use of biologics in PRP treatment. We conducted a review by performing PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov searches. Sixty-eight articles met our selection criteria and are herein discussed. Out of 86 PRP patients, the vast majority were treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor, anti-IL-12/IL-23, or anti-IL-17 biologics, either alone or in combination therapy. A marked-to-complete response was observed in 50%-78%, a partial response in 11%-25%, and no or poor response in 11%-25%. This review has several limitations, including small sample sizes and the lack of shared study design criteria. In some instances, PRP might have resolved spontaneously. Further, the presence of concomitant therapy or the lack of detailed data on previous treatments, makes it difficult to strictly define a therapeutic role per se of specific biologics in PRP. This review shows that biologics may be regarded as a tool for PRP treatment alone or in combination therapy although clinical trials are needed to better assess their efficacy and safety.