Secukinumab is superior to fumaric acid esters in treating patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who are naive to systemic treatments: results from the randomized controlled PRIME trial

Guselkumab demonstrates long-term efficacy and maintenance of treatment response postwithdrawal in systemic treatment-naïve patients and nonresponders to fumaric acid esters: results from parts II and III of a randomized active-comparator-controlled phase IIIb trial (POLARIS)

BACKGROUND

The anti-interleukin-23 antibody guselkumab (GUS) demonstrated favourable week 24 efficacy and safety over fumaric acid esters (FAE) in systemic treatment-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (study part I).

OBJECTIVES

To compare, in study part II, the sustainability of treatment responses (weeks 24-32) in GUS- and FAE-treated patients and treatment responses (weeks 32-56) in patients treated with GUS and FAE and in FAE nonresponders switching to GUS; and, in part III, to investigate the maintenance of response through week 100 in patients withdrawn from GUS at week 56.

METHODS

At week 0, systemic treatment-naïve patients were randomized 1 : 1 to GUS or FAE as per label. At week 32, patients with a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 (≥ 75% improvement in PASI score) response (r) continued assigned treatment (GUSr-GUS; FAEr-FAE), whereas nonresponders (nr) received GUS (FAEnr-GUS; GUSnr-GUS). GUS-treated patients with a week 56 PASI 90 response (≥ 90% improvement in PASI score) were withdrawn (w) and followed until loss of response or week 100.

RESULTS

At week 32, 98% (n = 54/55) of GUS- and 41% (n = 14/34) of FAE-treated patients were PASI 75 responders. At week 56, 91%, 50% and 80% of GUSr-GUS, FAEr-FAE and FAEnr-GUS patients, respectively, achieved a PASI 90 response; 72%, 29% and 45%, respectively, achieved a Dermatology Life Quality Index score of 0/1. At week 100, 44 weeks postwithdrawal, 47% (n = 17/36) and 25% (n = 3/12) of GUS-GUSw and FAE-GUSw patients, respectively, maintained a PASI score ≤ 5. Overall, the adverse event and discontinuation rates were lower for GUS than FAE.

CONCLUSIONS

In these exploratory analyses, GUS, as a first-line systemic treatment or second-line systemic treatment in FAE nonresponders, was associated with long-term clinical efficacy up to week 100, including a withdrawal period.

Quality of reporting and concordance between sources of adverse events in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a cross-sectional study of RCTs from a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Incomplete reporting of safety outcomes in quality and availability of safety reporting in published articles of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were described in different medical areas. The number of RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis has increased considerably. Complete and precise reporting of safety is mandatory for the efficacy/harms balance evaluation. We aimed to assess the quality and availability of safety reporting in published RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis, as well as the concordance of data between published trials and ClinicalTrials.gov (CT).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We included all RCTs in adults initiated after September 2009, assessing systemic psoriasis treatments compared with placebo or with an active comparator. All trials were selected in duplicate by 2 independent authors from the latest search of the dedicated Cochrane review. We described quality of safety reporting for all published RCTs, using a modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms scale by using descriptive analysis, and a composite score of 3 key items of safety report. For each RCT, data on adverse events (AEs)/serious AEs (SAEs) were extracted from the publication and CT: total number of AEs/SAEs, patients with AEs/SAEs, SAEs by system organ class classification and deaths. These data were compared between sources for each RCT.

RESULTS

In total, 128 trials were included in the analysis of reporting quality, and 76 in the analysis of data concordance between sources. The median number of reported Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms items per article was 9 out of 18 (IQR 7-10), and mean number was 8.39 (SD = 3.02). Items in the methods section were the least frequently reported. The proportion of RCTs reporting the number of SAEs and death were significantly higher on CT than in the published article ((100% (76/76) vs 88.2%, McNemar test, P < .0016). At least 1 discrepancy between sources for SAE safety data was found in 30/76 (39.5%) RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Shortcomings and gaps in the quality of safety reporting in publications of RCTs of systemic psoriasis treatments have been identified. A lack of data in published articles and discrepancies between published articles and CT data complete this finding.

The Impact of Interleukin-17 Inhibitors on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Psoriasis or Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Naive to Biologic Agents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effects of IL-17 inhibitors on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in patients with either psoriasis (PsO) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). A systematic literature search in three databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for Randomized Controlled Trials) was conducted on December 7, 2022 for randomized controlled trials of patients with PsO/PsA treated with IL-17 inhibitors that reported confirmed MACEs. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and identified papers for full-text review. Exclusion criteria included trials that included the previous use of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effect method was utilized to calculate risk ratios and heterogeneity was measured by χ2 test and I2 statistics. Funnel plot analysis was undertaken to detect potential publication bias. Of the 919 references identified, nine RCT studies were included in the meta-analysis (n=2,096 patients). There was no statistically significant correlation between the use of IL-17 inhibitors and change in risk of MACEs (Risk Ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.15 to 2.14; p = 0.40). Subgroup analysis of secukinumab or ixekizumab also did not demonstrate these changes. Additionally, there was no detectable dose-dependent effect of IL-17 inhibitors. In conclusion, IL-17 inhibitor use is not correlated with a change in MACE risk in patients with PsO/PsA who previously did not receive biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.

A systematic review investigating at what proportion clinical images are shared in prospective randomized controlled trials involving patients with psoriasis and biological agents

For many patients including those with psoriasis, scientific manuscripts comprising clinical outcomes including psoriasis area severity index (PASI) and/or physician global assessment (PGA) may be difficult to understand. However, most patients can relate to images at baseline and follow-up, particularly for dermatological diseases. This study aimed to assess the proportion of shared clinical images in psoriasis trials. A systematic review adhering to the PRISMA guidelines was performed. The review was limited to randomized controlled trials, and among these, only investigations involving biological agents for treatment of psoriasis were included. The Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for eligible studies published from inception to October 26, 2021. In total, 152 studies were included. When combining these, 62,871 patients were randomized. Overall, 203 images were shared depicting 60 patients in the manuscripts yielding an overall sharing rate of 0.1%. Patient images are seldom incorporated in clinical trial manuscripts which impairs interpretation for patients. Inclusion of image material would strengthen the patients' perspective and understanding on what treatment effects that can be expected. As such, this systematic review should be an invitation to the pharmaceutical industry, other sponsors, and editorial offices to improve easy transfer of information to patients using image data.

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.

Adverse events associated with anti-IL-17 agents for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic scoping review

Background

Anti-interleukin (IL)-17 biological agents (BAs) have significant efficacy in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis; however, adverse events (AEs) are common, and their safety has not been systematically evaluated.

Objectives

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the number and corresponding rates of AEs caused by anti-IL-17 BAs in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis to improve clinical decision-making regarding their use.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were independently searched by three authors for articles on the treatment of psoriasis with anti-IL-17 BAs that were published before March 1, 2022, and included at least one AE. Dichotomous variables and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were analyzed using R software (version 4.1.3) and the Meta and Metafor software packages. Funnel plots and meta-regression were used to test for the risk of bias, I² was used to assess the magnitude of heterogeneity, and subgroup analysis was used to reduce heterogeneity.

Results

A total of 57 studies involving 28,424 patients with psoriasis treated with anti-IL-17 BAs were included in the meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis showed that anti-IL-17A (73.48%) and anti-IL-17A/F (73.12%) BAs were more likely to cause AEs than anti-IL-17R BAs (65.66%). The incidence of AEs was as high as 72.70% with treatment durations longer than one year, and long-term use of medication had the potential to lead to mental disorders. Infection (33.16%), nasopharyngitis (13.74%), and injection site reactions (8.28%) were the most common AEs. Anti-IL-17 BAs were most likely to cause type α (33.52%) AEs. Type δ AEs (1.01%) were rarely observed.

Conclusions

Anti-IL-17 BAs used for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis caused a series of AEs, but the symptoms were generally mild.

Response to fumaric acid esters for plaque type psoriasis in real-world practice is largely independent of patient characteristics at baseline - a multivariable regression analysis from the German psoriasis registry PsoBest

OBJECTIVES

Fumaric acid esters (FAEs) are a well-established treatment option for long-term therapy of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. This study examines effectiveness of FAEs for the treatment of plaque psoriasis in real-world practice at 12 months and if patient characteristics affect the odds of clinical response.

METHODS

A descriptive, multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted in a cohort drawn from the German registry PsoBest. Baseline patient characteristics were assessed as potential treatment effect modifiers.

RESULTS

444 patients (mean age 47.0 years, 39.0% female) were eligible for response analysis using nonresponder imputation at month 12. Of these, 39.6% achieved clinical response, i.e., Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≤3 or skin clearance. In logistic regression analysis (R² = 0.114), only baseline PASI was a significant factor: patients with PASI <10 had a 4 times higher odds (p ≤ 0.001, OR 4.088), patients with PASI of 10-20 a twofold higher odds of response (p ≤ 0.044, OR 1.961) compared to those with PASI >20. Neither sex, age, body weight, disease duration, comorbidity nor pre-treatment had an impact on the odds of response (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

FAEs showed a favorable response at 12 months, largely independent of patient characteristics.

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.

Long-Term Treatment with Dimethyl Fumarate for Plaque Psoriasis in Routine Practice: Good Overall Effectiveness and Positive Effect on Impactful Areas

Introduction

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) is an oral compound to treat plaque psoriasis. Data on the treatment of patients with psoriasis affecting impactful areas are scarce. In this interim analysis of the prospective, noninterventional SKILL study, we summarized results of DMF treatment regarding effectiveness (overall and in impactful areas) and safety.

Methods

Data from 676 patients suffering from moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were analyzed after 52 weeks of DMF treatment. Of these, 257 had data available after 52 weeks. The considered impactful areas were nails, palms, soles, and scalp. Data analysis included observed cases (OC) and last observation carried forward (LOCF).

Results

All effectiveness parameters improved after 52 weeks. The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score was reduced by 79.5% (OC) and 65.7% (LOCF). Compared with baseline, improvements were shown for 70.2% of the patients in their nail psoriasis [nail-Physician Global Assessment (PGA)] and for 57.3% in palmoplantar disease (palmoplantar-PGA). The proportion of patients with scalp-PGA 0/1 (clear/almost clear) increased significantly to 79.8% (OC) and 69.3% (LOCF, both p < 0.001) (versus 37.5% and 36.6% at baseline, respectively). Significant reduction of pruritus (p < 0.001) was also observed. No unexpected adverse drug reactions were observed.

Conclusion

Long-term treatment with DMF in routine practice showed good overall effectiveness and safety, and a positive effect on plaque-psoriasis-affected impactful areas.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00714-0.

The Societal Economic Impact of Secukinumab in First-Line Treatment of Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis in Germany: An Open-Cohort Simulation

OBJECTIVES

Moderate to severe plaque psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease. In Germany, guidelines recommend fumaric acid esters (FAEs) as first-line systemic treatment. Despite treatment with FAEs, disease burden remains high in Germany. Secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated greater efficacy and safety than FAEs in the PRIME trial. The aim of the current study, hence, is to quantify the potential societal economic impact of secukinumab in systemic treatment-naïve patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in Germany.

METHODS

We employed a semi-Markov model to capture health gains at an individual level and a dynamic population model to extrapolate the findings in the population of interest. We quantified the health outcomes in two scenarios: (i) patients receiving secukinumab and (ii) patients receiving FAEs. Using estimates on change in work productivity and societal economic parameters, we translated the health outcomes into paid and unpaid economic gains. We used gross value added (GVA) to value these gains and calculated the macroeconomic indirect and induced value-chain effects.

RESULTS

Our calculations show that patients treated with secukinumab spend on average 94% of their time in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≥ 75 state compared with 80% for patients in the FAEs scenario. When assuming that FAEs are the sole comparator to secukinumab, this difference could lead to 4.3 million active hours gained until 2030. These gained hours translate to a total societal economic impact of €308 million till 2030 for the whole patient population in GVA terms.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that using secukinumab instead of FAEs in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis could lead to substantial macroeconomic GVA gains.

Practical update of the Recommendations Published by the Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (GPS) on the Treatment of Psoriasis with Biologic Therapy. Part 1. Concepts and General Management of Psoriasis with Biologic Therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A new, updated AEDV Psoriasis Group consensus document on the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis was needed owing to the approval, in recent years, of a large number of new drugs and changes in the treatment paradigm.

METHODOLOGY

The consensus document was developed using the nominal group technique and a scoping review. First, a designated coordinator selected a group of Psoriasis Group members for the panel. The coordinator defined the objectives and key points for the document and, with the help of a documentalist, conducted a scoping review of articles in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2021. The review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical trials not included in those studies and high-quality real-world studies. National and international clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents on the management of moderate to severe psoriasis were also reviewed. Based on these reviews, the coordinator drew up a set of proposed recommendations, which were then discussed and modified in a nominal group meeting. After several review processes, including external review by other GPs members, the final document was drafted.

RESULTS

The present guidelines include general principles for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and also define treatment goals and criteria for the indication of biologic therapy and the selection of initial and subsequent therapies. Practical issues, such as treatment failure and maintenance of response, are also addressed.

Common Fundamentals of Psoriasis and Depression

Psoriasis is an inflammatory, immune-mediated disease that is frequently associated with psychological comorbidities such as depression. The stigma patients feel because of the appearance of their skin may contribute to the high psycho-social burden of psoriasis. However, there is emerging evidence that overlapping biological mechanisms are, to a substantial degree, responsible for the close interaction between psoriasis and depression. Increased proinflammatory mediators, such as C-reactive protein or interleukin-6, are present in both psoriasis and depression, indicating that inflammation may represent a pathophysiological link between the diseases. Anti-inflammatory biologic therapies treat the clinical manifestations of psoriasis, but might also play a significant role in reducing associated depressive symptoms in patients with psoriasis. Comparison between single studies focusing on the change in depressive symptoms in psoriasis is limited by inconsistency in the depression screening tools applied.

Direct comparison of risankizumab and fumaric acid esters in systemic therapy-naïve patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Fumaric acid esters (FAEs; Fumaderm^®) are the most frequently prescribed first‐line systemic treatment for moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in Germany. Risankizumab (Skyrizi^®) is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin 23.

Objectives

To compare risankizumab treatment to FAEs in patients with psoriasis.

Methods

This phase III randomized, active‐controlled, open‐label study with blinded assessment of efficacy was conducted in Germany. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg (weeks 0, 4 and 16) or oral FAEs at increasing doses from 30 mg daily (week 0) up to 720 mg daily (weeks 8–24). Enrolled patients were adults naïve to and candidates for systemic therapy, with chronic moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis. Phototherapy was not allowed within 14 days before or during the study.

Results

Key efficacy endpoints were met at week 24 for risankizumab (n = 60) vs. FAEs (n = 60) (P < 0·001): achievement of a ≥ 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI; primary endpoint 83·3% vs. 10·0%), ≥ 100% improvement in PASI (50·0% vs. 5·0%), ≥ 75% improvement in PASI (98·3% vs. 33·3%), ≥ 50% improvement in PASI (100% vs. 53·3%) and a Static Physician’s Global Assessment of clear/almost clear (93·3% vs. 38·3%). The rates of gastrointestinal disorders, flushing, lymphopenia and headache were higher in the FAE group. One patient receiving risankizumab reported a serious infection (influenza, which required hospitalization). There were no malignancies, tuberculosis or opportunistic infections in either treatment arm.

Conclusions

Risankizumab was found to be superior to FAEs, providing earlier and greater improvement in psoriasis outcomes that persisted with continued treatment, and more favourable safety results, which is consistent with the known safety profile. No new safety signals for risankizumab or FAEs were observed.

What is already known about this topic?

Risankizumab (Skyrizi^®) is approved as treatment for patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy.

Risankizumab is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin 23.

Fumaric acid esters (FAEs) are the most frequently prescribed first‐line systemic treatment for moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in Germany.

What does this study add?

In patients with psoriasis who were naïve to systemic treatment, risankizumab treatment was superior to FAEs, providing earlier and greater improvement in psoriasis outcomes that persisted to week 24.

Risankizumab showed more favourable safety results than FAEs and no new safety signals.

The results support risankizumab treatment for patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who are naïve to systemic treatment.

Linked Comment: P. Fleming. Br J Dermatol 2022; 186:4–5.

Plain language summary available online

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.

Association of Secukinumab Treatment With Tuberculosis Reactivation in Patients With Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis, or Ankylosing Spondylitis

Question

What is the association of secukinumab with active tuberculosis (TB) development, TB reactivation, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) activation?

Findings

In this pooled cohort study of 12 319 patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis, spontaneous reporting of new LTBI while undergoing secukinumab treatment was rare. No active cases of TB or LTBI reactivation were reported.

Meaning

The findings of this study provide a broader understanding of the safety of secukinumab and appear to support its long-term use in chronic systemic inflammatory conditions.

Importance

Approximately one-quarter of the global population have latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), and tuberculosis (TB) is accountable for more than 1.5 million deaths annually. Methotrexate, cyclosporine, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may be associated with increased risk of TB and LTBI reactivation, although data are limited on the risks of TB with use of newer biologics.

Objective

To assess the association of secukinumab with reporting of active TB development, TB reactivation, and LTBI activation as an adverse event (AE) in patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pooled cohort study pooled data from 28 clinical trials of secukinumab used in psoriasis (17 phase 3 or 3b and 2 phase 4 trials), psoriatic arthritis (5 phase 3 trials), and ankylosing spondylitis (4 phase 3 trials). A search of the Novartis Secukinumab Compound Pool Database was conducted for the 28 trials. All trial participants who had received at least 1 approved subcutaneous dose of secukinumab (150 mg or 300 mg) were included. Before randomization in these trials, patients underwent screening for TB. Patients with active TB were excluded, and patients with LTBI were treated according to local guidelines. Data were analyzed from the start of treatment in the individual studies through December 25, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reporting of active TB or LTBI as an AE over a 5-year period using exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIR; incidence rates per 100 patient-years).

Results

A total of 12 319 patients were included, of whom 8819 patients had psoriasis (71.6%; 5930 men [67.2%]; mean [SD] age, of 44.9 [13.5] years), 2523 had psoriatic arthritis (20.5%; 1323 women [52.4%]; mean [SD] age, 48.8 [12.1] years), and 977 had ankylosing spondylitis (7.3%; 658 men [67.3%]; mean [SD] age, 42.3 [11.9] years). In the total population, 684 patients (5.6%) had tested positive for LTBI at screening. Over 5 years, LTBI as an AE during secukinumab treatment was reported in 13 patients (0.1% of 12 319). Of these 13 patients, 6 had a prior positive LTBI test result, and 7 were newly diagnosed as having LTBI. Four of the 7 patients had psoriasis (EAIR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.07), 1 had psoriatic arthritis (EAIR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.11), and 2 had ankylosing spondylitis (EAIR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.28). No cases of active TB were reported.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that LTBI reported as an AE after secukinumab treatment was uncommon and appeared to support the use of secukinumab in chronic systemic inflammatory conditions.

PASI 100 response rates in moderate to severe psoriasis: a systematic literature review and analysis of clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Response to treatments in psoriasis can be assessed using the PASI response 50, 75, 90 or 100. Achieving a PASI 100 response would mean a complete resolution of the patient's basal lesions. Therefore, PASI 100 score has been increasingly used in the context of research, but its role in daily practice is currently controversial.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To analyze PASI 100 response rates to pharmacological treatments; (2) To examine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommendations/comments on PASI 100.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR). Selection criteria concerned patients with psoriasis, reporting PASI 100.

RESULTS

Overall, 65 studies were included. Patients on methotrexate achieved at 16 weeks a PASI 100 of 7.3%. For TNF inhibitors rates were: 3.7-11.1% at 12 weeks, 13.7-20% at 16 weeks, 10.7-24% at 24 weeks and 21.8-34.8% at 1 year. IL-17 inhibitors achieved 23.3-44% at 12 weeks, 44.3-57.2% at 16 weeks, 39.7-67.5% at 24 weeks and 41.4-67.5% at 1 year. And the reported by IL-12/23 inhibitors were 12%/23.8% at 12 weeks, 32.7%/50% at 16 weeks, 44% at 24 weeks and 41.8%/56.3% at 1 year. PASI 100 response is scarcely commented in the CPGs.

CONCLUSIONS

PASI 100 response rate is an endpoint fundamentally restricted to research.

Systematic literature review of non-topical treatments for early, untreated (systemic therapy naïve) psoriatic disease: a GRAPPA initiative

Background

Psoriatic disease (PsD) is a complex systemic disorder with cutaneous and musculoskeletal manifestations. Current evidence on pharmacological interventions, effective across the spectrum of clinical manifestations of early, systemic treatment-naïve PsD, is limited. This review aims to appraise such evidence.

Methods

This systematic review examined seven patient-intervention-comparator-outcome research questions to address the efficacy of the interventions on the following: across the spectrum of clinical manifestations PsD activity; peripheral arthritis; dactylitis; spondylitis; enthesitis; skin; and nails. Early PsD was defined as a disease duration of ≤2 years, except for studies investigating outcomes restricted to the skin. Eligible references were clinical trials or well-designed prospective studies/series reporting on adult humans, untreated, with cutaneous and/or musculoskeletal features of PsD.

Results

Nine references (out of 160 319, publication range 1946-2019) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. No study adopted comprehensive (that is, simultaneous assessment of different PsD manifestations) composite indices as primary outcome measures. Individual studies reported that apremilast and biologics successfully improved outcomes (disease activity index for PsA, minimal disease activity, PsA DAS, psoriasis area and severity index, PsA response criteria) when efficacy analyses were restricted to single manifestations of untreated PsD. Only qualitative synthesis of evidence was possible, owing to the following factors: data heterogeneity (disease classification criteria, outcome measures); unavailable data subsets (focused on early, untreated PsD) at the single study level; and insufficient data on the exposure of participants to previous treatment.

Conclusion

Effective interventions, albeit limited in scope, were found for early, treatment-naïve PsD. No study provided evidence about the management of co-occurring cutaneous and musculoskeletal manifestations in early, treatment-naïve PsD. This review highlights an unmet need in research on early PsD.

A phase 4, randomized, head-to-head trial comparing the efficacy of subcutaneous injections of brodalumab to oral administrations of fumaric acid esters in adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (CHANGE)

BACKGROUND

Brodalumab is a fully human monoclonal immunoglobulin IgG2 antibody that binds to the human IL-17 receptor subunit A and by that inhibits the biologic action of IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-17C and IL-17E. Therapy with fumaric acid esters (FAE) is a well established and widely used first-line systemic treatment for subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare brodalumab to FAE in terms of clinical efficacy, patient-reported outcomes and safety in subjects with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who were naïve to systemic treatment.

METHODS

Eligible subjects were randomized 1 : 1 to 210 mg brodalumab injections or oral FAE according to product label in this 24-week, open-label, assessor-blinded, multi-centre, head-to-head phase 4 trial. The primary endpoints were having PASI75 and having sPGA score of 0 or 1 (sPGA 0/1). Subjects with missing values for the primary endpoints were considered non-responders.

RESULTS

A total of 210 subjects were randomized. 91/105 subjects completed brodalumab treatment and 58/105 subjects completed FAE treatment. At Week 24, significantly more subjects in the brodalumab group compared to the FAE group had PASI75 (81.0% vs. 38.1%, P < 0.001) and sPGA 0/1 (64.8% vs. 20.0%, P < 0.001). In the brodalumab group, the median time to both PASI75 and to PASI90 was significantly shorter than in the FAE group (4.1 weeks vs. 16.4 weeks, and 7.4 weeks vs. 24.4 weeks, respectively, P < 0.0001 for both). The rate of adverse events was lower in subjects treated with brodalumab compared to subjects treated with FAE (616.4 vs. 1195.8 events per 100 exposure years). No new safety signals were detected for brodalumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Brodalumab was associated with rapid and significant improvements in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, with a superior efficacy profile to what was observed with FAE in systemic-naïve subjects over 24 weeks.

The effects of selected biologics and a small molecule on Health-Related Quality of Life in adult plaque psoriasis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is commonly used to assess the quality of life of patients with skin diseases. Clinical trials confirm the positive effect of the use of biologics and new molecules on the quality of life of patients with plaque psoriasis.

MAIN OBJECTIVES

Investigation of the effect of infliximab, adalimumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and tofacitinib on Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) measured by the DLQI in adult plaque psoriatic patients with respect to the patients' race, type of used agent/placebo, agent's dosage and treatment duration as well as the DLQI score prior to and after commencement of treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematic literature searching for referential papers written in English using four databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov as well as and manual searching (Google) Cochran's (Q) and I2 tests were used for evaluation of heterogeneity or the degree of variation in the true effect size estimates between the analysed studies. The standardized mean difference (the SMD; Hedge's g score) was applied to measure the differences between the two means (i.e. two groups: treated vs non-treated or treated vs placebo). The data coding and Hedge's g values were calculated according to the guidance of MetaXL software version 5.3.

MAIN RESULTS

43 studies, in total 25,898 individuals, were evaluated by the DLQI and weighted mean scores were derived for the analysis. The mean DLQI scores ranged from 6.83 to 17.8 with the overall DLQI score of 12.12 (95%CI: 11.24 to 13.06). A random-effects model demonstrated significant considerable heterogeneity of the study results (I2 = 98%; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Infliximab, adalimumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and tofacitinib in adult plaque psoriatic patients improved HRQOL measured by the DLQI. The patients with lower quality of life before treatment obtained better results.

A review of secukinumab in psoriasis treatment

Psoriasis is a systemic immunologic disorder associated with decreased quality of life and numerous co-morbidities, including psoriatic arthritis and cardiovascular disease. Secukinumab, a fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody, selectively binds IL-17A and is approved by the US FDA and European Medicines Agency for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. This review examines the efficacy and safety of secukinumab for the treatment of psoriasis using the literature retrieved from the PubMed database. In clinical trials, treatment with secukinumab led to rapid and sustained improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores, with PASI 90 response rates up to 68.5% at 5 years. Long-term clinical trial and real-world data have established secukinumab as a safe and effective treatment for psoriasis.

Infectious Complications of Biological and Small Molecule Targeted Immunomodulatory Therapies

The past 2 decades have seen a revolution in our approach to therapeutic immunosuppression. We have moved from relying on broadly active traditional medications, such as prednisolone or methotrexate, toward more specific agents that often target a single receptor, cytokine, or cell type, using monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins, or targeted small molecules. This change has transformed the treatment of many conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, cancers, asthma, and inflammatory bowel disease, but along with the benefits have come risks. Contrary to the hope that these more specific agents would have minimal and predictable infectious sequelae, infectious complications have emerged as a major stumbling block for many of these agents. Furthermore, the growing number and complexity of available biologic agents makes it difficult for clinicians to maintain current knowledge, and most review articles focus on a particular target disease or class of agent. In this article, we review the current state of knowledge about infectious complications of biologic and small molecule immunomodulatory agents, aiming to create a single resource relevant to a broad range of clinicians and researchers. For each of 19 classes of agent, we discuss the mechanism of action, the risk and types of infectious complications, and recommendations for prevention of infection.

Risk for development of inflammatory bowel disease under inhibition of interleukin 17: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) during treatment with interleukin (IL)-17 antagonists have been reported from trials in psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. The aim of this study was to assess the overall risk for development of IBD due to IL-17 inhibition.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted 2010–2018 of treatment with IL-17 antagonists in patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and rheumatoid arthritis. We compared risk of IBD development in anti-IL-17 treated patients compared to placebo treatments. We also computed incident rates of IBD overall. A ‘worst case scenario’ defining subjects ambiguous for prevalent versus incident cases for the latter was also applied.

Results

Sixty-six studies of 14,390 patients exposed to induction and 19,380 patients exposed to induction and/or maintenance treatment were included. During induction, 11 incident cases of IBD were reported, whereas 33 cases were diagnosed during the entire treatment period. There was no difference in the pooled risk of new-onset IBD during induction studies for both the best-case [risk difference (RD) 0.0001 (95% CI: -0.0011, 0.0013)] and worst-case scenario [RD 0.0008 (95% CI: -0.0005, 0.0022)]. The risk of IBD was not different from placebo when including data from maintenance and long-term extension studies [RD 0.0007 (95% CI: -0.0023, 0.0036) and RD 0.0022 (95% CI: -0.0010, 0.0055), respectively].

Conclusions

The risk for development of IBD in patients treated with IL-17 antagonists is not elevated. Prospective surveillance of patients treated with IL-17 antagonists with symptom and biomarker assessments is warranted to assess for onset of IBD in these patients.

A safety evaluation of dimethyl fumarate in moderate-to-severe psoriasis

Introduction: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disorder affecting skin, nails and joints. Systemic therapy of psoriasis is based upon several drugs which include fumaric acid esters (FAEs), initially introduced in 1959. Since 2017, one of the key substances among FAE spectrum (dimethyl fumarate; DMF) was registered by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis vulgaris.Areas covered: This article covers the basic concepts underlying usefulness of DMF in psoriasis and extensively reviews the studies, which included its use in monotherapy of this dermatosis, with a particular emphasis on safety aspects and adverse events (AEs).Expert opinion: DMF monotherapy is a valuable systemic modality in the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis as proved by a recent phase III study. AEs associated with DMF therapy are frequent, usually of mild severity, with a dose-independent manner. Occasionally they are burdensome and require drug discontinuation. The most common AEs comprise gastrointestinal symptoms, flushing and white blood cell count abnormalities. The latter require strict monitoring to prevent serious complications. Acknowledging the possibility of AEs, the use of DMF in moderate-to-severe psoriasis is encouraged while the need of further studies still remains.

IL-17A in Psoriasis and Beyond: Cardiovascular and Metabolic Implications

Interleukin 17A (IL-17A) is one of the currently known six members of the IL-17 cytokine family and is implicated in immune responses to infectious pathogens and in the pathogenesis of inflammatory autoimmune diseases like psoriasis. Psoriatic skin is characterized by high expression of IL-17A and IL-17F, which act on immune and non-immune cell types and strongly contribute to tissue inflammation. In psoriatic lesions, IL-17A, IL-17E, and IL-17F are involved in neutrophil accumulation, followed by the formation of epidermal micro abscesses. IL-17A together with other Th17 cytokines also upregulates the production of several chemokines that are implicated in psoriasis pathogenesis. IL17A-targeting antibodies show an impressive clinical efficacy in patients with psoriasis. Studies have reported an improvement of at least 75% as measured by the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) in >80% of patients treated with anti-IL-17A therapy. Psoriasis skin manifestations, cardiovascular as well as metabolic disease in psoriasis appear to share pathogenic mechanisms evolving around IL-17A and its proinflammatory role. Thus, anti-IL-17A therapy not only improves skin manifestations of psoriasis, but also cardiovascular inflammation as well as metabolic factors and different domains of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) including peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and axial involvement. This review summarizes the biological role of IL-17A, before reviewing currently available data on its role in the physiology and pathophysiology of the skin, as well as the cardiovascular and the metabolic system. In conclusion, clinical recommendations for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis based on the current available data are given.

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.

A 24-week multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study comparing the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab vs. fumaric acid esters and methotrexate in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis naive to systemic treatment

Background

Interleukin‐17 antagonists have received a first‐line label for moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis.

Objectives

We conducted the first head‐to‐head trial between the two most commonly used first‐line therapies in Germany, fumaric acid esters (FAEs) and methotrexate, and the interleukin‐17A antagonist, ixekizumab.

Methods

Systemic‐naive patients were randomized in this parallel‐group, active‐comparator, open‐label, rater‐blinded trial (each group n = 54). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at 24 weeks. Key secondary outcomes included 24‐week PASI 90 and 100, static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score of 0 or 1, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score of 0 or 1. Safety events at week 24 were analysed using Fisher's exact test. Missing data were imputed using nonresponder imputation. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02634801) and EudraCT (2015‐002649‐69).

Results

At week 24, more ixekizumab‐treated patients achieved PASI 75 [91% vs. 22% FAEs (P < 0·001) and 70% methotrexate (P = 0·014)], PASI 90 [80% vs. 9% FAEs (P < 0·001) and 39% methotrexate (P < 0·001)] and PASI 100 [41% vs. 4% FAEs (P < 0·001) and 13% methotrexate (P = 0·0041)], as well as sPGA (0,1) and DLQI (0,1).

Conclusions

Ixekizumab was superior in inducing PASI 75/90/100, sPGA (0,1) and DLQI (0,1) responses at week 24 compared with methotrexate and FAEs. Safety profiles for all treatments were consistent with prior studies.

What's already known about this topic?

Fumaric acid esters (FAEs) and methotrexate are two frequently used conventional systemic therapies for chronic plaque psoriasis.

A recent meta‐analysis of methotrexate showed a ≥ 75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) rate of 45·2% from primary end points at either 12 or 16 weeks.

Until recently, FAEs were licensed for psoriasis only in Germany, but were used in many other European countries as off‐label treatment of psoriasis. In 2017, the European Medicines Agency approved dimethyl fumarate, presumed to be the main active ingredient of FAEs, for the treatment of adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

What does this study add?

This study is the first randomized, head‐to‐head trial comparing a biologic treatment with these therapies in a systemic‐treatment‐naive patient population.

This study shows the low tolerability of FAEs leading to a significant discontinuation rate, the better tolerability and moderate efficacy of methotrexate, and the good tolerability, fast onset of action and high efficacy of ixekizumab in an unbiased comparison.

Our findings reinforce the favourable risk–benefit profile of ixekizumab shown previously and provide further evidence of its efficacy at 24 weeks.

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.18905 available online

Assessing the relative efficacy of interleukin-17 and interleukin-23 targeted treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of PASI response

INTRODUCTION

New generation biologics, including interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors, have delivered higher rates of skin clearance than older treatments in head-to-head studies. However, studies comparing these new biologics directly to one another are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the short-term efficacy of available (or imminently available) biologic and non-biologic systemic therapies for treating patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating biologic treatments, apremilast and dimethyl fumarate. MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched from the 1st January 2000 to 22nd November 2018. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a random-effects multinomial likelihood model with probit link and meta-regression to adjust for cross-trial variation in placebo responses compared the efficacy of interventions at inducing different levels of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response during the induction period. A range of sensitivity analyses was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven trials (34,816 patients) were included in the NMA. The base-case analysis showed that all active treatments were superior to placebo. IL-17 inhibitors, guselkumab and risankizumab were found to be more efficacious than tildrakizumab, ustekinumab, all TNF inhibitors and non-biologic systemic treatments at inducing all levels of PASI response. In addition, brodalumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab were significantly more efficacious than secukinumab; no significant difference was found in the comparison with guselkumab. The greatest benefit of brodalumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, and risankizumab was seen for PASI 90 and PASI 100 response. Results were consistent across all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In the NMA brodalumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab and guselkumab showed the highest levels of short-term efficacy. There were differences in efficacy between treatments within the same class. Longer-term analyses are needed to understand differences between these drugs beyond induction in what is a life-long condition.

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

Long-term real-life safety profile and effectiveness of fumaric acid esters in psoriasis patients: a single-centre, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Fumaric acid esters (FAEs) are an established systemic treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, the long-term clinical safety and effectiveness of continuous FAE monotherapy and combination therapy have not been established.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the long-term safety and effectiveness of FAEs as monotherapy and in combination with phototherapy or methotrexate in patients with psoriasis treated at a single centre in Germany.

METHODS

This monocentric, retrospective observational study, with a follow-up period of up to 32.5 years, included 859 patients: 626 received FAE monotherapy, 123 received FAEs with concomitant phototherapy and 110 received FAEs with methotrexate.

RESULTS

Approximately half of patients (49.0%) reported adverse events (566 total events), most of which involved the gastrointestinal tract. Serious adverse events were reported in 2.3% of patients, but none were deemed to have a causal relationship with any of the treatment regimens. Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation were observed in 12.9% of patients. A median duration of 1 year was observed in all three treatment subcohorts (P = 0.70) from initiation of FAE treatment to a 50% response rate, where response was defined as achieving a cumulative static Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) score of 'light' and at least a 2-point reduction in baseline PGA. A 50% response rate for the cumulative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 was achieved in the FAE monotherapy subcohort after a median of 3 years of treatment, in the FAEs + phototherapy subcohort after 6.7 years and in the FAEs + methotrexate subcohort after 8.1 years (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

According to our data, FAEs as monotherapy or in combination with phototherapy or methotrexate are safe and beneficial for long-term clinical use. However, multicentre, randomized controlled trials are required to establish the clinical value of monotherapy versus combination therapy and the optimal treatment duration.

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) vs. monoethyl fumarate (MEF) salts for the treatment of plaque psoriasis: a review of clinical data

Fumarates (fumaric acid esters, FAEs) are orally administered systemic agents used for the treatment of psoriasis and multiple sclerosis. In 1994, a proprietary combination of FAEs was licensed for psoriasis by the German Drug Administration for use within Germany. Since then, fumarates have been established as one of the most commonly used treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis in Germany and other countries. The licensed FAE formulation contains dimethyl fumarate (DMF), as well as calcium, zinc, and magnesium salts of monoethyl fumarate (MEF). While the clinical efficacy of this FAE mixture is well established, the combination of esters on which it is based, and its dosing regimen, was determined empirically. Since the mid-1990s, the modes of action and contribution of the different FAEs to their overall therapeutic effect in psoriasis, as well as their adverse event profile, have been investigated in more detail. In this article, the available clinical data for DMF are reviewed and compared with data for the other FAEs. The current evidence substantiates that DMF is the main active compound, via its metabolic transformation to monomethyl fumarate (MMF). A recent phase III randomized and placebo-controlled trial including more than 700 patients demonstrated therapeutic equivalence when comparing the licensed FAE combination with DMF alone, in terms of psoriasis clearance according to the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Physician's Global Assessment (PGA). Thus, DMF as monotherapy for the treatment of psoriasis is as efficacious as in combination with MEF, making the addition of such fumarate derivatives unnecessary.

Secukinumab: a review of the anti-IL-17A biologic for the treatment of psoriasis

Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease associated with numerous comorbidities and a profound impact on patients' quality of life. While its complex immune pathogenesis is still not fully delineated, current evidence supports a fundamental role of the T-helper-17 (TH-17) pathway and its related interleukin-17 (IL-17) cytokine. Thus, new antipsoriatic therapies have been developed to block this key cytokine and its downstream effects. Secukinumab is a fully humanized, monoclonal anti-IL-17A antibody, and the first in its class to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. It has also been approved for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Its clinical efficacy in plaque psoriasis has been well demonstrated in numerous phase II and III clinical trials. In addition, it has shown superiority in clinical trials to current biologic agents including etanercept and ustekinumab, with a safe adverse event profile. In correlation with excellent skin improvements, secukinumab is also associated with significant improvements in health-related quality of life measures. Thus, secukinumab offers the potential for equal, or improved, therapeutic effects compared with other biologics, and is a valuable addition to our current antipsoriatic armamentarium.