Oral tofacitinib efficacy, safety and tolerability in Japanese patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study

Oroxylin A attenuates psoriasiform skin inflammation by direct targeting p62 (sequestosome 1) via suppressing M1 macrophage polarization

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Psoriasis results from the interplay of innate and adaptive immunity in the skin. Oroxylin A (OA) has shown anti-inflammatory effects in various disorders. This study explores oroxylin A potential in treating psoriasis, particularly its impact on type I macrophage (Mφ1) polarization.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Oroxylin A-mediated therapeutic effects were evaluated using imiquimod-induced or IL-23-injected psoriatic mice models, followed by proteomics assays to predict potential signalling and targeting proteins. Immunofluorescence and immunoblot assays verified that oroxylin A suppresses NF-kB signalling in M1 macrophages. Co-immunoprecipitation and microscale thermophoresis (MST) assays further demonstrated that p62 (sequestosome 1) is the target protein for oroxylin A in macrophages. Oroxylin A-p62-mediated suppression of psoriasis was validated in an imiquimod-induced p62 conditional knockout (cKO) mice model.

KEY RESULTS

Oroxylin A demonstrated therapeutic efficacy in murine models induced by imiquimod or IL-23 by attenuating cutaneous inflammation and mitigating Mφ1 polarization via NF-κB signalling. Proteomics analysis suggested SQSTM1/p62 as a key target, confirmed to interact directly with oroxylin A. Oroxylin A disrupted the p62-PKCζ interaction by binding to PB1 domain of p62. Its anti-inflammatory effects were significantly reduced in macrophages from p62 cKO mice compared to the wild-type (WT) mice in psoriasis model, supporting oroxylin A role in suppressing Mφ1 polarization through its interaction with p62.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings demonstrated oroxylin A suppressed psoriasiform skin inflammation in mouse models by blocking the PKCζ-p62 interaction, subsequently inhibiting the activation of NF-κB p65 phosphorylation in macrophages.

Inhibition of the JAK-STAT Pathway in the Treatment of Psoriasis: A Review of the Literature

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent dermatological disease associated with an increased systemic inflammatory response. In addition, joint involvement is also present in around 20% of patients. Therefore, treatment modalities used in this condition should be simultaneously effective at improving skin manifestations, reducing inflammation, and addressing psoriatic arthritis when present. Twenty years ago, the introduction of biologic treatments for psoriasis was a turning point in the management of this condition, offering an effective and reasonably safe option for patients whose disease could not be adequately controlled with conventional therapies. At the moment, Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis) are a new class of promising molecules in the management of psoriasis. They are orally administered and can show benefits in patients who failed biologic therapy. We conducted a scoping review in order to identify randomized-controlled trials that investigated different JAKis in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, with an emphasis on molecules that have been approved by the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration. The added value of this study is that it collected information about JAKis approved for two different indications, plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, in order to provide an integrated understanding of the range of effects that JAKis have on the whole spectrum of psoriasis manifestations.

Multicenter evaluation of tofacitinib retention and safety in rheumatoid arthritis - why cardiovascular risk factors do not equate to overt risk

Introduction

This multicenter, real-world, retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib (TOFA) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Material and methods

Two hundred nine patients with active RA treated with TOFA, unresponsive to at least 2 conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs, were recruited. Clinical characteristics were extracted from an electronic registry and supplemented with manual chart review and data linkage with ambulatory care. Drug retention and reasons for discontinuation were evaluated.

Results

Median (interquartile range) follow-up in the whole sample was 16.9 (5.93-31.7) months. Mean (standard deviation) age was 51.44 (±11.84) years, with female predominance (n = 168, 80.4%). Only 30 patients (14.4%) had no pre-existing traditional cardiovascular (CV) risk factor at TOFA initiation. Tofacitinib retention rates were high, with median survival estimated at 89.3% at 6 months, 82.4% at 12 months, and 60.4% at 24 months. Ineffectiveness was the primary cause of discontinuation (n = 50). The rate of adverse events (AEs) was relatively low, with lipid abnormalities, blood count alterations, and infectious events among the most common. No major adverse CV event was reported. The incidence rate of AEs necessitating treatment switch was 60.34 (95% CI: 37-92) per 1,000 person-years of follow-up. Presence of multiple (> 3) CV risk factors was associated with lower odds of TOFA retention and treatment effectiveness.

Conclusions

Tofacitinib demonstrated high retention rates and a favorable safety profile in RA patients, including those with traditional CV risk factors. Tofacitinib may be a valuable treatment option for RA patients when combined with individualized CV risk management. Further studies are warranted to explore the long-term effects of TOFA and its CV impact in larger populations.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Therapeutic consequences in patients with both inflammatory rheumatic diseases and multiple sclerosis

Dealing with patients with both multiple sclerosis (MS) and inflammatory rheumatic disorders (IRDs) is not uncommon for a rheumatologist, as there is a statistical association between SpA and MS. As several CNS demyelinating events have been reported in patients treated with TNF inhibitor (TNFi), the pre-existing demyelinating disease was considered a contraindication for TNFi. However, this contraindication is mainly based on a randomized controlled trial in MS and not on large epidemiological studies. According to the last epidemiological studies, TNFi might not be an inducer of MS. Moreover, there are no clear recommendations on the use of the other DMARDs in patients suffering from an IRD and MS. In this review, we summarize the link between MS and IRDs and the impact of DMARDs on MS, especially TNFi. We also look at the impact of disease-modifying drugs for adults with MS and IRDs.

Conventional, biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and Janus kinase inhibitors and varicella zoster virus

INTRODUCTION

The advent of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), and more recently of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi), has had a major impact on the herpes zoster (HZ) reactivation, which represents an important clinical challenge in the treatment of inflammatory arthritis (IA) in patients with a complete pharmacological control of peripheral inflammation.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we provide an overview on the effects of conventional DMARDs/ bDMARDs and JAKi on HZ reactivation. Furthermore, we underline the controversial findings and the potential management strategies. We searched PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library for papers published between 1995 and February 2017.

EXPERT OPINION

The overall data showed a slightly higher risk of HZ in patients treated with bDMARDs, and more pronounced for those treated with JAKi. As management strategies, we suggest an effective vaccination campaign and a focus on early diagnosis.

Recent advance in management of herpes simplex in Japan

Herpes simplex, a common infection caused by the herpes simplex virus (HSV), is transmitted through contact of the skin/mucous membrane and establishes latency in the sensory ganglia for the rest of the life of the host. HSV occasionally reactivates and forms blisters around the lips or genitalia in some patients. Repeated overt symptoms, and, much more frequent, subclinical reactivation in the mucosa, make the host retain anti-HSV immunity continuously, resulting in maintaining steadily elevated antibody titer at any point after infection. Clinical symptoms differ in primary infection and recurrence. Primary infections sometimes manifest as severe symptoms such as fever and lymphadenopathy in addition to blisters/erosions of the skin, gingiva, lips, and oral mucosa, while recurrent herpes is generally mild. Diagnosing typical herpes simplex is not difficult, but when the course and manifestations are typical, definitive tests to identify HSV infection are limited since serology is not useful except with primary infection. For treatment, safe and effective oral antiviral drugs are available. Patient-initiated therapy is a new method of administration labeled in Japan. Amenamevir, an inhibitor of viral helicase primase, is available in Japan and labeled in addition to herpes zoster. These new diagnostic and therapeutic tools should be used for better management of herpes simplex.

Comparison of the relative efficacy of different biologics in different body areas in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis receiving biologics and tofacitinib in phase 3 randomized controlled trials: a 15-year single-center experience

BACKGROUND

: The treatment of psoriasis has been revolutionized after the advent of biologics. However, focal resistant plaques are still common which may impose a significant impact on quality-of-life.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

: We compared the relative efficacy of different biologics and tofacitinib in different body areas in Asian patients with psoriasis. We retrospectively included the clinical data of 177 patients (228 treatment courses) with moderate-to-severe psoriasis in 10 biologic or tofacitinib trials conducted between 2004 and 2019. Pooled data was analyzed at week 12-16 and week 44-52 respectively for total and four regional PASI 75, 90, and 100 responses.

RESULTS

: The result showed that secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab and risankizumab had more favorable efficacy, followed by adalimumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib, while etanercept showed the least efficacy. The regional PASI response peaked early in the head area with subsequent decline while the lower extremities improved slowly. At week 52, the head-and-neck and lower extremities were less likely to achieve PASI responses compared to the trunk and upper extremities.

CONCLUSIONS

: The treatment responses of different body regions of biologics and tofacitinib were in line with the overall response. However, the head region responds fast but total clearance at 52 weeks was similarly lower as the leg region. More subjects and prospective studies may be required to compare the efficacy of different biologics in different body regions.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Tofacitinib combined with leflunomide for treatment of psoriatic arthritis with IgA nephropathy: a case report with literature review

Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease that is associated with increased risk of several diseases, such as psoriatic arthritis (PsA), inflammatory bowel disease, and cardiovascular diseases. About 20 to 30% patients with psoriasis subsequently develop PsA. IgA nephropathy is the most common primary glomerular disease world-wide. Psoriasis and IgA nephropathy appear to be associated, but the mechanism underlying this connection is unclear. Tofacitinib and leflunomide are common treatments for psoriatic arthritis. We administered tofacitinib combined with leflunomide to a 38-year-old female patient who presented with PsA and IgA nephropathy. After treatment, she experienced significant reductions in the psoriatic lesions, pain in the right knee joint, and proteinuria. Administration of tofacitinib combined with leflunomide for treatment of a patient who had PsA complicated with IgA nephropathy led to significant resolution of the symptoms of both conditions. These results suggest similarities in the pathogenesis of PsA and IgA nephropathy and a possible new treatment for IgA nephropathy.

Recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology for the management of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic systemic inflammatory disease that affects the skin, musculoskeletal structures and other organs and systems compromising functionality, quality of life and reducing the life expectancy of patients. It is a complex disease that requires specialist and timely care and management. The alternatives for treating the manifestations of psoriatic arthritis have increased and the effect of the different agents on specific manifestations has been clarified in recent studies. Therefore, we should incorporate the available evidence to build a strategy for the treatment of these patients. The Mexican College of Rheumatology selected a committee to evaluate these different alternatives and make recommendations.

METHODS

The study group included 16 rheumatologists and 3 certified dermatologists, selected from different health institutions and regions of the country. An executive committee was formed to coordinate the meetings and a committee of experts selected the literature search criteria, prepared the research questions, rated the quality of the evidence, and produced the recommendations in the different disease domains based on the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

24 updated recommendations were generated for the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis. The recommendations establish the role of the drugs currently available in our country. The importance of adequate disease control is emphasized, individualizing the level of involvement of each patient in each of the six domains potentially affected by the disease. In addition, the sequence in the choice of treatments available for each domain is established, based on their efficacy, safety profile and accessibility.

CONCLUSIONS

With this consensus document, it will be possible to improve the care of patients with psoriatic arthritis. The recommendations were generated based on the best available information and in consideration of the Mexican health system.

Unconventional treatment options in psoriasis: A review

Psoriasis is a common skin disease that affects 1-3% of the general population. The treatment depends on body surface area involved, quality of life impairment and associated comorbidities. The treatment options include topical therapy, phototherapy, conventional systemic therapy (methotrexate, cyclosporine and acitretin), biologics and oral small molecules (apremilast and tofacitinib). Despite the availability of newer therapies such as biologics and oral small molecules, many a time, there is a paucity of treatment options due to the chronic nature of the disease, end-organ toxicity of the conventional drugs or high cost of newer drugs. In these scenarios, unconventional treatment options may be utilized as stand-alone or adjuvant therapy. In this review, we have discussed these uncommonly used treatment options in the management of psoriasis.

Itch: Pathogenesis and treatment

Itch pathogenesis is broadly characterized into histaminergic and nonhistaminergic pathways and transmitted via 2 main receptor families: G protein-coupled receptors and transient receptor potential channels. In the skin, itch is primarily transmitted by unmyelinated type C and thinly myelinated type Aδ nerve fibers. Crosstalk between the immune and neural systems modulates itch transmission at the skin, spinal cord, and brain. Among the many known pruritogens, Th2 cytokines, such as interleukin-4, interleukin-13, interleukin-31, and thymic stromal lymphopoietin, are particularly important mediators that signal through shared Janus kinase pathways, representing novel targets for novel itch therapeutics. Emerging evidence has also revealed that the opioidergic system is a potent modulator of itch transmission, with increased μ-opioid activity and decreased κ-opioid activity contributing to itch pathogenesis. Optimal management of itch requires that treatment approaches be tailored to specific etiologic itch subtypes. When the etiology is unknown and patients are given a diagnosis of chronic pruritus of unknown origin, treatment should be guided by the presence of Th2 polarization, often reflected by increased blood eosinophils. In the second article of this 2-part series, we outline our current understanding of itch pathogenesis and discuss available and emerging treatments for itch.

JAK inhibitors and psoriatic arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the therapeutic armamentarium for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) has considerably expanded over the last thirty years, additional drugs are needed to improve care of this disease. JAK inhibitors (JAKinhibs) are small molecules able to interfere with the JAK/STAT pathway, involved in the pathogenesis of PsA. Tofacitinib and Upadacitinib were recently approved for the treatment of PsA. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of JAKinhibs for the treatment of PsA.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify RCTs by electronic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE database until April 2021. RCTs were considered eligible if included only patients with PsA treated with JAKinhibs. The pooled efficacy and safety outcomes were calculated by meta-analysis and expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Five RCTs for a total of 3293 PsA patients treated with different JAKinhibs or placebo were included (2 phase III studies on Tofacitinib, 1 phase II study on Filgotinib and 2 phase III studies on Upadacitinib). All the studies were judged at low risk of bias according to Cochrane criteria. JAKinhibs showed a significantly higher ACR20 response rate compared to placebo (OR 3.78, 95% CI 2.72-5.24, I^2 = 57%, random effect model).and were associated with a non-statistically significant higher risk of serious adverse events (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.14-2.82, I^2 = 46%, random effect model).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review that performed a comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of JAKinhibs for PsA in RCTs. Our analysis suggests a statistically significant benefit of JAKinhibs that appear to be effective and safe over placebo for the treatment of PsA.

Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Dermatology: Part 2: Applications in Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Other Dermatoses

Dermatologists' interest in the Janus-associated kinase (JAK)/signal transducers and activators of transcription (STAT) pathway has been growing as evidence builds to support its key role in the pathogenesis of inflammatory skin diseases. Because certain proinflammatory cytokines use the JAK/STAT pathway for signal transduction, it has become a promising therapeutic target in diseases where selective modulation of the immune system can be useful. We aim to review current knowledge of the JAK/STAT signaling pathway and its role in immune-mediated skin diseases. In the second part of the review we cover the efficacy and safety of oral and topical JAK inhibitors in the treatment of psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, and other skin diseases.

Recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology for the management of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis is a chronic systemic inflammatory disease that affects the skin, musculoskeletal structures and other organs and systems compromising functionality, quality of life and reducing the life expectancy of patients. It is a complex disease that requires specialist and timely care and management. The alternatives for treating the manifestations of psoriatic arthritis have increased and the effect of the different agents on specific manifestations has been clarified in recent studies. Therefore, we should incorporate the available evidence to build a strategy for the treatment of these patients. The Mexican College of Rheumatology selected a committee to evaluate these different alternatives and make recommendations.

METHODS

The study group included 16 rheumatologists and 3 certified dermatologists, selected from different health institutions and regions of the country. An executive committee was formed to coordinate the meetings and a committee of experts selected the literature search criteria, prepared the research questions, rated the quality of the evidence, and produced the recommendations in the different disease domains based on the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

24 updated recommendations were generated for the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis. The recommendations establish the role of the drugs currently available in our country. The importance of adequate disease control is emphasized, individualizing the level of involvement of each patient in each of the six domains potentially affected by the disease. In addition, the sequence in the choice of treatments available for each domain is established, based on their efficacy, safety profile and accessibility.

CONCLUSIONS

With this consensus document, it will be possible to improve the care of patients with psoriatic arthritis. The recommendations were generated based on the best available information and in consideration of the Mexican health system.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Effect of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs on major cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were developed to treat joint inflammation. There is growing evidence that anti-inflammatory drugs prevent major cardiovascular events (MACE). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine whether DMARDs reduce the risk of MACE. A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effect of DMARDs on cardiovascular events. The primary outcome was MACE defined as the first occurrence of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke or cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction or stroke alone and all-cause mortality. Safety was assessed by fatal or life threatening infection. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models and reported as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Study quality and publication bias were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias and funnel plots. Twelve RCTs involving 18,056 participants testing three different DMARDs subclasses (Tumor Necrosis Factor inhibitors—4 trials; Janus Kinase inhibitors—5 trials; Interleukin inhibitors—3 trials) were included. Meta-analysis suggested that none of the DMARD subclasses had any effect on MACE, MI alone, stroke alone, risk of fatal or life threatening infection or death. Risk of bias was high, low and unclear in five, six and one studies respectively. Funnel plots suggested a low possibility of publication bias. This meta-analysis suggests that DMARDs do not affect the incidence of MACE. More trials are needed for firm conclusions.

Herpesvirus Infections Potentiated by Biologics

Herpesviruses such as herpes simplex virus (HSV) type 1 and 2, varicella-zoster virus (VZV), and cytomegalovirus (CMV) maintain lifelong latency in the host after primary infection and can reactivate periodically either as asymptomatic viral shedding or as clinical disease. Immunosuppression, including biologic therapy, may increase frequency and severity of herpesvirus reactivation and infection. Licensed biologics are reviewed regarding their risks of potentiating HSV, VZV, and CMV reactivation and infection. Approaches to prophylaxis against HSV, VZV, and CMV infection or reactivation are discussed.

Efficacy of Systemic Treatments of Nail Psoriasis: A Systemic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance: Nail involvement is a common condition in patients with psoriasis. The treatment of nail psoriasis is considered challenging and is often left untreated by physicians. Objective: To assess the efficacy of current systemic treatments on nail psoriasis. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant articles from inception to September 1, 2020. Included articles were restricted to English language and human studies. Study Selection: This was a systematic literature review with meta-analysis. Thirty-five random control trials that evaluated systemic therapies for nail psoriasis were selected in the systemic review. Among them, we retained 14 trials for meta-analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. All steps were performed by two independent investigators, and any disagreements were resolved by a third investigator. Meta-analysis of aggregated study data was conducted to assess therapeutic efficacy. The use of random-effects model was based on high heterogeneity as a variable endpoint in different studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: Therapeutic effects on nail psoriasis were expressed in terms of effect sizes with 95% CIs. Results: We included 35 random control trials (RCTs) in this systemic review. At baseline, a high prevalence (62.1%) of nail psoriasis was confirmed. The meta-analysis included 14 trials highlighting that biologic and small-molecule therapies were effective in treating nail psoriasis with variable effect size magnitudes [-0.89 (-1.10, -0.68), I ² = 84%]. In particular, tofacitinib and ixekizumab showed the most significant scale of effect size magnitudes in treating nail psoriasis (-1.08 points and -0.93 points, respectively). We also found that a higher dose of tofacitinib and ixekizumab had similar effectiveness, and anti-IL-17 agents seem to be superior in effectiveness compared to anti-TNF-α therapies in the treatment of nail psoriasis. However, these results must be displayed carefully as variable endpoints in different studies. Conclusions and Relevance: This study provides a comprehensive overview of systemic treatments for nail psoriasis. For patients with psoriatic nail damage who are candidates of systemic therapies, the priority should be given to administering biologic and small-molecule therapies, especially anti-IL-17 drugs.

Efficacy of Tofacitinib in the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Therapeutic approaches for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) include non-pharmacologic therapies, symptomatic treatments, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin inhibitors, cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 immunoglobulin, and Janus kinase inhibitors. This systematic review aimed to provide complete and up-to-date information on efficacy of tofacitinib in the treatment of PsA, giving special attention to non-skin manifestations (peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis, and dactylitis).

METHODS

A search of studies published between January 2016 and June 2020 was carried out on PubMed and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

The number of studies with tofacitinib in PsA is limited and most of them are post hoc analyses from OPAL Broaden and OPAL Beyond. Tofacitinib has been demonstrated to be efficacious for the treatment of all disease manifestations in PsA. Superior effectivity to placebo is achieved at the earliest time point evaluated, and maintained over time. Patients who switch from placebo to tofacitinib show the same improvements; however, the time to initial response is faster in patients who firstly receive tofacitinib, compared with those switching subsequently. Additional data suggest that tofacitinib may be also effective for the treatment of the axial domain.

CONCLUSIONS

Tofacitinib has been demonstrated to be efficacious for the treatment of peripheral and axial involvement, enthesitis, and dactylitis manifestation in PsA. Further prospective and long-term studies are required to corroborate and complete the present results. Similarly, real-world evidence is also necessary to complement the information obtained in clinical trials, and thereby to have a better overview of real efficacy and safety of the drug.

Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Dermatology: Part 2: Applications in Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Other Dermatoses

Dermatologists' interest in the Janus-associated kinase (JAK)/signal transducers and activators of transcription (STAT) pathway has been growing as evidence builds to support its key role in the pathogenesis of inflammatory skin diseases. Because certain proinflammatory cytokines use the JAK/STAT pathway for signal transduction, it has become a promising therapeutic target in diseases where selective modulation of the immune system can be useful. We aim to review current knowledge of the JAK/STAT signaling pathway and its role in immune-mediated skin diseases. In the second part of the review we cover the efficacy and safety of oral and topical JAK inhibitors in the treatment of psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, and other skin diseases.

[Herpes zoster and subunit vaccine]

Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) causes varicella (chickenpox) as primary infection, and latently infects neuronal cells in the dorsal root ganglia (DRG). Reactivation of VZV from DRG results in herpes zoster, often decades later. VZV is the only airborne human herpesvirus and the only herpesvirus whose symptoms (both varicella and herpes zoster) can be prevented by vaccination. Herpes zoster is significantly more common in patients with bone marrow transplants, hematological malignancies, oral Jak inhibitors, SLE, and the elderly. The brand new subunit vaccine, ShingrixⓇ, for preventing herpes zoster is a mixture of adjuvant and recombinant VZV glycoprotein gE, which is highly effective in preventing zoster even in elderly people. In this review, the author discuss the onset mechanism of zoster from the clinical findings and summarize the result of clinical trials of the subunit vaccine.

Treatment of Juvenile Spondyloarthritis: Where We Stand

Juvenile spondyloarthritis is a subset of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with onset in late childhood and adolescence and a strong association with human leukocyte antigen (HLA) B-27 positivity and familial aggregation that has the potential for axial involvement, potentially leading to ankylosing spondylitis. Current therapy for severe disease relies heavily on tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). Treatment paradigms in children largely consist of extrapolation from studies on adults with spondyloarthritis. Additional therapies studied in adults include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), blockade of the interleukin-17 (IL-17) and IL-23 axes, blockade of T-cell stimulation, phosphodiesterase (PDE)-4 inhibition, and Janus-activated kinase (JAK) pathway alteration. IL-17 blockade and IL-23 blockade are guideline approved after TNFi failure (and even as an alternative to TNFi) in adults, depending on concomitant inflammatory bowel and skin disease, with JAK and PDE-4 inhibition options following biologic failure. Neither pediatric nor adult guidelines address IL-6 blockade, T-cell co-stimulation blockade, or combination biologic therapy.

Experimental and Investigational Pharmacotherapy for Psoriatic Arthritis: Drugs of the Future

In recent years, different studies have shown in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), the pathogenetic role of multiple cytokines other than tumor necrosis factor-α, such as interleukin-17 (IL-17), and IL-23 and dysfunction of Janus kinase (JAK)-signal family pathway. These molecules also represent the target of recently developed biologic (bDMARDs) and targeted synthetic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (tsDMARDs) currently investigated in several Phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This review examines the therapeutic efficacy and safety of most recent developed IL-17, IL-23 and JAK inhibitors and highlights how these new PsA therapies are going to revolutionize the management of PsA in the next few years. Ongoing RCTs of these molecules in PsA are also described. Available literature on new anti-IL-17 and anti-IL-23 agents and JAK inhibitors demonstrates the potential role of these molecules as effective therapeutic strategies across multiple PsA clinical domains, along with an acceptable tolerability and safety profile, thus expanding the treatment options available for PsA patients. Of note, other molecules are under investigation, and among those, potential therapeutic strategies seem to be represented by single antibodies blocking simultaneously two cytokines, the agents inhibiting mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), receptor retinoic acid receptor-related orphan receptor gamma (RORγt), A3 adenosine receptor (A3 AR), and K⁺ channel voltage channel inhibitors. Remarkable progress has been made in PsA pharmacotherapy, and novel bDMARDs targeting IL17A and tsDMARDs (JAK-inhibitors) represent promising therapies. More clinical trials are needed to better characterize the efficacy and safety profile of these therapeutic agents in PsA treatment.

Performance of Janus kinase inhibitors in psoriatic arthritis with axial involvement in indirect comparison with ankylosing spondylitis: a retrospective analysis from pooled data

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

As the well-acknowledged autoimmune disease, Janus kinase (JAK) is thought to play important roles in the progression of tissue injury in spondyloarthropathy. From a current perspective, JAK inhibitors could be applied to both psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Nonetheless, it is reasonable to doubt whether PsA and AS differentially respond to JAK inhibitors.

METHODS

Different databases were searched for full-text publication based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. For data-pooling, a fixed-effect model was applied if heterogeneity was not detected. All results of the analysis were illustrated as forest plots. Publication bias was assessed using Begg's adjusted rank correlation test. The standard mean difference (SMD) was calculated in continuous variables. The pooled odds ratio was calculated in categorical variables.

RESULTS

Nine clinical studies were finally included with a 3-month follow-up. The efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors were comprehensively investigated. JAK inhibitors were proved to be effectively improving disease condition within 3 months (12 weeks) in both PsA and AS. Besides, psoriasis-related dermal lesions could also be improved by JAK inhibitors. Dose-dependent effects suggested that higher dose tofacitinib could bring not only a higher level of treatment response but also more safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

JAK inhibitors were proved to be effective in improving arthritis symptoms and enhancing the quality of life in both PsA and AS patients. Compared with AS, JAK inhibitors seemed to perform better in PsA treatment. However, the frequency of adverse events PsA and AS in comparison with the placebo group showed no difference. Higher dose of tofacitinib could attain better treatment response without increasing adverse events in short-term follow-up.

KEY POINTS

• JAK inhibitors were proved to be effective in improving arthritis symptoms and enhancing the quality of life in both PsA and AS patients. • Compared with AS, JAK inhibitors seemed to perform better in PsA treatment. • The frequency of adverse events PsA and AS in comparison with the placebo group showed no difference. • Higher dose of tofacitinib could attain better treatment response without increasing adverse events in short-term follow-up.

Safety of Janus Kinase Inhibitors in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Diseases or Other Immune-mediated Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Inhibitors of Janus kinases (JAKs) are being developed for treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases and other immune-mediated diseases. Tofacitinib is effective in treatment of ulcerative colitis, but there are safety concerns. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the safety profile of tofacitinib, upadacitinib, filgotinib, and baricitinib in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel diseases, psoriasis, or ankylosing spondylitis.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1990, through July 1, 2019. We performed a manual review of conference databases from 2012 through 2018. The primary outcome was incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs. We also estimated incidence rates of serious infections, herpes zoster infection, non-melanoma skin cancer, other malignancies, major cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, and mortality. We performed a meta-analysis, which included controlled studies, to assess the relative risk of these events.

RESULTS

We identified 973 studies; of these, 82 were included in the final analysis, comprising 66,159 patients with immune-mediated diseases who were exposed to a JAK inhibitor. Two-thirds of the included studies were randomized controlled trials. The incidence rate of AEs was 42.65 per 100 person-years and of serious AEs was 9.88 per 100 person-years. Incidence rates of serious infections, herpes zoster infection, malignancy, and major cardiovascular events were 2.81 per 100 person-years, 2.67 per 100 person-years, 0.89 per 100 person-years, and 0.48 per 100 person-years, respectively. Mortality was not increased in patients treated with JAK inhibitors compared with patients given placebo or active comparator (relative risk 0.72; 95% confidence interval 0.40-1.28). The meta-analysis showed a significant increase in risk of herpes zoster infection among patients who received JAK inhibitors (relative risk 1.57; 95% confidence interval 1.04-2.37).

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found an increased risk of herpes zoster infection among patients with immune-mediated diseases treated with JAK inhibitors. All other AEs were not increased among patients treated with JAK inhibitors.

TYK2/JAK1 Inhibitor PF-06700841 in Patients with Plaque Psoriasis: Phase IIa, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

TRIAL DESIGN

We report results from a phase IIa study of efficacy and safety of PF-06700841, an oral TYK2/Jak1 inhibitor, in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (NCT02969018).

METHODS

Patients were randomized to PF-06700841 30 mg once daily (QD), 60 mg QD, or placebo (4-week induction), followed by 10 mg QD, 30 mg QD, 100 mg once weekly, or placebo (8-week maintenance). The primary endpoint was week 12 change from baseline in PASI score. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving 75% and 90% reduction from baseline PASI at week 12.

RESULTS

In total, 212 patients in 35 sites were treated; mean (SD) baseline PASI score was 20.8 (7.68). Decreases in PASI at week 12 were statistically significant compared with placebo in five treatment groups. The greatest change from baseline (least squares mean change -17.3 [95% confidence interval, -20.0 to -14.6]) was observed in the 30-mg QD continuous treatment group. Overall, 136 patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events, including six serious adverse events in five patients and 13 discontinuations in treatment groups because of adverse events. No herpes zoster cases or major adverse cardiac events including thromboembolic events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

PF-06700841 was generally effective and well tolerated in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Targeted synthetic pharmacotherapy for psoriatic arthritis: state of the art

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, different studies regarding psoriatic arthritis (PsA) have shown the pathogenetic role of dysfunction of signaling pathways involving the phosphodiesterase-4 enzyme and transcription factors or enzymes belonging to the kinase (JAK)-signal family pathway. These also represent the target of several drugs known as targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (tsDMARDs).

AREAS COVERED

The authors performed a systematic literature search using the PubMed database, as well as through retrieving data from randomized controlled trials, their post-hoc analysis, and pooled data analysis on the efficacy and safety profile of the PDE4 inhibitor (PDE4i), apremilast, and the inhibitors of JAK (JAKis), tofacitinib, filgotinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib, in PsA.

EXPERT OPINION

In PsA, the PDE4i, apremilast, and the JAKi, tofacitinib, are effective across multiple clinical domains and have an acceptable tolerability profile, thus expanding the treatment options available for PsA patients. Apremilast and tofacitinib show several advantages mainly represented by their oral administration, a fast onset of action, and a short half-life. Data on tsDMARDs in PsA are still limited, and randomized trials and real-life studies are advocated.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. This is the baseline update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017, in preparation for this Cochrane Review becoming a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our research using the following databases to January 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings. We also searched five trials registers and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports (until June 2019). We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse effects (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse effects). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes, according to GRADE, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 140 studies (31 new studies for the update) in our review (51,749 randomised participants, 68% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (59%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 19 treatments. In all, 117 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (57/140) as being at high risk of bias; 42 were at an unclear risk, and 41 at low risk. Most studies (107/140) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report the source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90. At class level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents. At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, infliximab, all of the anti-IL17 drugs (ixekizumab, secukinumab, bimekizumab and brodalumab) and the anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab, but not tildrakizumab) were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and 3 anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept. Adalimumab and ustekinumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than certolizumab and etanercept. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and between two conventional drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness for these seven drugs was similar: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 29.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.94 to 43.70, Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 88.5; moderate-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.12, 95% CI 23.17 to 34.12, SUCRA = 88.3, moderate-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 27.67, 95% CI 22.86 to 33.49, SUCRA = 87.5, high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86, SUCRA = 83.5, low-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.84, 95% CI 20.90 to 31.95; SUCRA = 81; moderate-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 23.97, 95% CI 20.03 to 28.70, SUCRA = 75.4; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 21.96, 95% CI 18.17 to 26.53, SUCRA = 68.7; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just under half of the treatment estimates in total, and moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were very similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab were the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence (low-certainty evidence for bimekizumab). This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. Indeed, we found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, but the evidence for all the interventions was of very low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials comparing directly active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between conventional systemic and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Effect of tofacitinib on cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

We aimed to systematically assess a possible association of tofacitinib therapy with cardiovascular events (CVEs) and all-cause mortality.

Methods

Systematic searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were conducted from inception through March 2019. Randomized controlled trials in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) reporting safety data were included. Included studies compared tofacitinib with placebo or 5 mg tofacitinib with 10 mg tofacitinib. The primary and secondary outcome measures were all CVEs [major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs)/venous thromboembolism events (VTEs)] and all-cause mortality.

Results

29 studies randomizing 13,611 patients were included. Compared with placebo, there was no significant increased risk of all CVEs (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.49-2.34), MACEs (OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42-5.59), or all-cause mortality (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.26-4.95), but a decreased rate of VTEs (OR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00-0.21) in patients with IMIDs initiating tofacitinib. Meanwhile, paired comparison showed 10 mg tofacitinib twice daily was associated with a significantly lower incidence of all CVEs (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.96), MACEs (OR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.22-1.05), or all-cause mortality (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.19-1.17), but a trend toward an increase in VTEs risk (OR = 1.47, 95% CI 0.25-8.50), compared with the 5 mg regimen.

Conclusion

Compared with placebo, there was no augmented risk of CVEs and all-cause mortality in patients with IMIDs following tofacitinib treatment in a short-term perspective, whereas 10 mg twice daily tofacitinib appeared to be associated with reduction in cardiovascular and all-cause mortality risks, except VTEs, relative to the 5 mg twice daily dose. Long-term studies and postmarketing risk monitoring are increasingly needed to develop a better understanding.

Tofacitinib in Pediatric Psoriasis: An Open-Label Trial to Study Its Safety and Efficacy in Children

Introduction: Psoriasis is a chronic, multifactorial, inflammatory disorder, with an estimated prevalence of 0.71% in children. The commonly used therapeutic agents target the underlying inflammation. Tofacitinib has demonstrated efficacy in adult psoriasis. Aim: To study the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of tofacitinib in pediatric patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis. Methods: The study included children aged between 8 and 17 years, with moderate to severe psoriasis, given tofacitinib 5 mg orally twice daily for at least 36 weeks. The clinical response was estimated using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score, Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA), and the Children’s Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI). The incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) were meticulously recorded in each case. Results: A total of 47 patients, with a median age of 12.3 years, completed the study. At week 12, 55.32% achieved PASI 75, and 70.21% at week 36. PGA of clear or almost clear responses at week 12 were 59.57 and 65.96%, ­respectfully, at week 36. Relatively few and mostly minor ­adverse effects were noted. No severe AEs were reported. ­Conclusion: The treatment with tofacitinib was safe and well tolerated, and led to significant improvement of their disease and quality of life as reflected in CDLQI scores. However, the results need to be validated in larger multicenter trials.

Off-label studies on tofacitinib in dermatology: a review

PURPOSE

Tofacitinib citrate is an oral Janus kinase 1/3 inhibitor approved for rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, and active psoriatic arthritis. Tofacitinib is being increasingly used off-label for dermatological conditions, with varying efficacy across recent studies. A review of these studies will be a helpful resource for dermatologists considering the use of tofacitinib for conditions refractory to first-line therapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were all searched for articles and trials mentioning the term 'tofacitinib', then manually reviewed to identify published data on off-label uses of tofacitinib. The article was structured according to the quality of the evidence available.

RESULTS

Tofacitinib appears to show strong efficacy for numerous dermatologic conditions. Randomized controlled trial data is available for atopic dermatitis, alopecia areata, and plaque psoriasis. Case report and case series data is available for numerous other dermatologic conditions.

CONCLUSION

While tofacitinib has a wide array of immunoregulatory properties, making it a possible candidate for treating many dermatologic conditions refractory to other treatments, further testing is needed to better characterize its efficacy and utility moving forward, as well as its safety and adverse effect profile.

Tofacitinib in the management of active psoriatic arthritis: patient selection and perspectives

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). It provides an alternative option for patients who have had an inadequate response and tolerance to other disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). It has demonstrated comparable efficacy to biologics, is effective in the management of treatment resistant disease, and is reported to improve enthesitis, dactylitis, and radiographic progression. Tofacitinib is also associated with an increased risk of serious infections, malignancy, and laboratory abnormalities. There is currently a large armamentarium of therapies for psoriatic arthritis, and choosing among treatments can be challenging. Due to this wide selection, a thorough assessment of psoriatic disease phenotype, patient preference, disease presentation, and comorbidities is critical. This review addresses key considerations in patient selection for the treatment of PsA with tofacitinib.

Tyrosine Kinases in Autoimmune and Inflammatory Skin Diseases

Tyrosine kinases relay signals from diverse leukocyte antigen receptors, innate immune receptors, and cytokine receptors, and therefore mediate the recruitment and activation of various leukocyte populations. Non-receptor tyrosine kinases of the Jak, Src, Syk, and Btk families play major roles in various immune-mediated disorders, and small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors are emerging novel therapeutics in a number of those diseases. Autoimmune and inflammatory skin diseases represent a broad spectrum of immune-mediated diseases. Genetic and pharmacological studies in humans and mice support the role of tyrosine kinases in several inflammatory skin diseases. Atopic dermatitis and psoriasis are characterized by an inflammatory microenvironment which activates cytokine receptors coupled to the Jak-Stat signaling pathway. Jak kinases are also implicated in alopecia areata and vitiligo, skin disorders mediated by cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Genetic studies indicate a critical role for Src-family kinases and Syk in animal models of autoantibody-mediated blistering skin diseases. Here, we review the various tyrosine kinase signaling pathways and their role in various autoimmune and inflammatory skin diseases. Special emphasis will be placed on identification of potential therapeutic targets, as well as on ongoing preclinical and clinical studies for the treatment of inflammatory skin diseases by small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Tofacitinib for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are inflammatory immune-mediated conditions which can cause considerable disability and reduced quality of life. Management can be complex as clinical heterogeneity may lead to different treatment pathways. Tofacitinib is a novel, oral Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitor with proven efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis. Areas covered: This review analyzes recent studies of tofacitinib in psoriatic disease treatment. The relevant literature was identified using clinicaltrials.gov, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Tofacitinib efficacy was demonstrated in PsA by the OPAL Broaden and OPAL Beyond phase-III studies, and received FDA and EMA approval. Tofacitinib was superior to placebo for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in the OPT Pivotal 1 and 2, OPT Retreatment studies, but FDA approval was declined for this indication based on issues of clinical efficacy and long-term safety. Expert commentary: Tofacitinib is an important oral drug for the treatment of PsA. However, the long-term safety data require further evaluation. Tofacitinib and other JAK inhibitors show potential to broaden the treatment options in PsA and other inflammatory conditions.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib and Apremilast in Patients with Active Psoriatic Arthritis: A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Tofacitinib and apremilast have shown considerable efficacy in placebo-controlled trials of active psoriatic arthritis, but the relative efficacy and safety remain unclear because of a lack of head-to-head comparisons.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the relative efficacy and safety of tofacitinib and apremilast at different doses in patients with active psoriatic arthritis.

METHOD

We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine evidence from randomized controlled trials for examination of the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib 10 mg, tofacitinib 5 mg, apremilast 30 mg, and apremilast 20 mg in psoriatic arthritis.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials including 3086 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were ten pairwise comparisons including six direct comparisons of five interventions. All the interventions achieved a significant American College of Rheumatology 20 response compared with placebo. Tofacitinib 10 mg and apremilast 30 mg were among the most effective treatments for active psoriatic arthritis, followed by tofacitinib 5 mg, and apremilast 20 mg. The ranking probability based on the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) indicated that tofacitinib 10 mg had the highest probability of being the best treatment in terms of the American College of Rheumatology 20 response rate (SUCRA = 0.785). This was followed by apremilast 30 mg (SUCRA = 0.670), tofacitinib 5 mg (SUCRA = 0.596), apremilast 20 mg (SUCRA = 0.448), and placebo (SUCRA = 0.001). We observed no significant differences in the incidence of serious adverse events after treatment with tofacitinib 10 mg, apremilast 30 mg, tofacitinib 5 mg, apremilast 20 mg, or placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with active psoriatic arthritis, tofacitinib 10 mg and apremilast 30 mg were the most efficacious interventions and were not associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events.

Efficacy and safety of tofacitinib for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor that targets JAK1 and JAK3, and thus regulates immune response. Therefore, tofacitinib is used to treat immune-mediated inflammatory diseases such as chronic plaque psoriasis. The objective of this study was to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in treating chronic plaque psoriasis.

Objective

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis.

Methods

Databases including PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials about the efficacy and safety of tofacitinib in treating chronic plaque psoriasis from inception to August 2017 (PROSPERO Code No: CRD42017076587).

Results

Six articles (seven randomized controlled trial studies) involving 3743 patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that for efficacy, tofacitinib (5 mg or 10 mg) compared with placebo can significantly improve the Physician’s Global Assessment response, PASI75, and PASI90 after treatment. For safety, the incidence of adverse reactions was statistically significantly higher for tofacitinib compared with placebo.

Conclusion

Treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis with tofacitinib is effective, but there may be more adverse reactions.

Time until onset of action when treating psoriatic arthritis: meta-analysis and novel approach of generating confidence intervals

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is associated with progressive joint destruction and reduced quality of life. The time until a drug treatment starts to show an effect (TOA) is important for preventing joint destruction. The objective was to assess the time until onset of action of drugs when treating PsA. A systematic review of PsA drug trials was performed. Outcomes were: time until 25% of patients (TOA) reached (1) ≥ 20%, (2) ≥ 50% improvement in modified American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR), (3) ≥ 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI75). 95% confidence intervals were calculated extracting data from graphs using a novel method. Meta-analysis was conducted. Two head-to-head trials show no difference between ixekizumab and adalimumab or adalimumab and tofacitinib for TOA-ACR outcomes. For PASI75, ixekizumab had a faster onset than adalimumab. Infliximab plus MTX was faster than MTX alone. Pooled results from 32 study arms for TOA-ACR20 (week [95% CI]) are: < 2 weeks: infliximab (1.18 [0.72-1.65]), ixekizumab (1.04 [0.80-1.28]), tofacitinib (10 mg 1.56 [1.14-1.98]); ≤ 4 weeks: adalimumab (1.95 [1.35-2.55]), secukinumab (75 mg 1.89 [0.16-3.62], 150 mg 2.13 [1.34-2.91], 300 mg 2.26 [1.75-2.76]), tofacitinib (5 mg 2.20 [1.41-2.99]); 4 + weeks: apremilast, ustekinumab. For TOA-ACR50, all pooled point estimates are > 4 weeks. For TOA-PASI75, the range is between 2.24 [1.65-2.84] for ixekizumab and 6.03 [3.76-8.29] for adalimumab. Indirect, mixed comparison suggest a faster onset of infliximab, ixekizumab and tofacitinib compared to apremilast, methotrexate and ustekinumab for ACR20, not ACR50. For PASI75, ixekizumab is faster than adalimumab.

Benefit-risk profile of tofacitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis: pooled analysis across six clinical trials

Background

Although existing psoriasis treatments are effective and well tolerated in many patients, there is still a need for new effective targeted treatment options. Tofacitinib is an oral Janus kinase inhibitor that has been investigated in patients with moderate‐to‐severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

Objectives

To consider the benefits and risks of tofacitinib in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Methods

Data were pooled from one phase II, four phase III and one long‐term extension study comprising 5204 patient‐years of tofacitinib treatment. Efficacy end points included patients achieving Physician's Global Assessments of ‘clear’ or ‘almost clear’, ≥ 75% and ≥ 90% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (coprimary end points) and improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index score, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression score and Itch Severity Item score, at weeks 16 and 52. Safety data were summarized for 3 years of tofacitinib exposure.

Results

Tofacitinib 5 and 10 mg twice daily (BID) showed superiority over placebo for all efficacy end points at week 16, with response maintained for 52 weeks of continued treatment. Tofacitinib improved patients’ quality of life and was well tolerated. Rates of safety events of interest (except herpes zoster) were similar to those in the published literature and healthcare databases for other systemic psoriasis therapies. Tofacitinib 10 mg BID demonstrated greater efficacy than 5 mg BID.

Conclusions

Tofacitinib has a benefit–risk profile in moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis consistent with that of other systemic treatments.

What's already known about this topic?

Psoriasis is a chronic, systemic inflammatory disease, which has a significant impact on patients’ health‐related quality of life.

Although several existing psoriasis treatments are efficacious and well tolerated in many patients, some patients require treatment switching, and a proportion of patients remain untreated or undertreated.

Potential challenges to the use of existing therapies include safety issues and limited efficacy in some patients with conventional oral psoriasis treatments, inconvenience of topical treatments and the requirement for parenteral administration of biologics.

What does this study add?

Consistent efficacy and a safety profile consistent with that seen in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ulcerative colitis were demonstrated for oral tofacitinib in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Tofacitinib has a benefit–risk profile in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis that is consistent with that of other systemic psoriasis treatments.

Linked Comment: Fleming. Br J Dermatol 2019; 180:13–14.

Plain language summary available online

Respond to this article

Differential efficacy of biologic treatments targeting the TNF-α/IL-23/IL-17 axis in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis

Psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis cause significant physical and psychological burdens for afflicted individuals. An accelerated TNF-α/IL-23/IL-17 axis is their major pathomechanism; therefore, anti-TNF-α/IL-23/IL-17 biologics are very effective for the treatment of skin and joint lesions in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Given that the IL-17 signature is more upregulated in the skin than in synovium in psoriatic arthritis, anti-IL-23/IL-17 agents seem to be superior to anti-TNF-α remedies in the treatment of skin lesions. In this review, we focus on the differential efficacy of anti-TNF-α/IL-23/IL-17 biologics in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.