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

Sequencing of Targeted Therapy in Psoriasis: Does it Matter?

With the continued development of biologics for the treatment of psoriasis, some patients have achieved optimal control, but a recommended biologic sequence if a biologic fails to initially improve the skin, termed primary nonresponse, or loses efficacy after initial improvement, termed secondary nonresponse, is still lacking. Primary and secondary nonresponse can occur with any class of biologics, and the type of nonresponse can drive the choice of whether to switch within a biologic class or to a different biologic class. The choice of biologic can also be challenging when managing psoriasis and concomitant psoriatic arthritis, as treatment differs on the basis of the severity of both diseases and further classification of axial and peripheral joint involvement. When choosing a biologic, each patient's comorbidities and preferences are also taken into account to provide the optimal therapy. With this lack of an established biologic sequence after biologic failure, the objective of our review is to define a therapy sequence for the tumor necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin-17 (IL-17), and interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitor classes in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Our proposed biologic sequence was derived through an analysis of the efficacy of each biologic class, primary and secondary nonresponse rates from clinical trials, and clinical experience with expert opinion.

A systematic review of 454 randomized controlled trials using the Dermatology Life Quality Index: experience in 69 diseases and 43 countries

BACKGROUND

Over 29 years of clinical application, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) has remained the most used patient-reported outcome (PRO) in dermatology due to its robustness, simplicity and ease of use.

OBJECTIVES

To generate further evidence of the DLQI's utility in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and to cover all diseases and interventions.

METHODS

The methodology followed PRISMA guidelines and included seven bibliographical databases, searching articles published from 1 January 1994 until 16 November 2021. Articles were reviewed independently by two assessors, and an adjudicator resolved any opinion differences.

RESULTS

Of 3220 screened publications, 454 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion, describing research on 198 190 patients, were analysed. DLQI scores were primary endpoints in 24 (5.3%) of studies. Most studies were of psoriasis (54.1%), although 69 different diseases were studied. Most study drugs were systemic (85.1%), with biologics comprising 55.9% of all pharmacological interventions. Topical treatments comprised 17.0% of total pharmacological interventions. Nonpharmacological interventions, mainly laser therapy and ultraviolet radiation treatment, comprised 12.2% of the total number of interventions. The majority of studies (63.7%) were multicentric, with trials conducted in at least 42 different countries; 40.2% were conducted in multiple countries. The minimal clinically importance difference (MCID) was reported in the analysis of 15.0% of studies, but only 1.3% considered full score meaning banding of the DLQI. Forty-seven (10.4%) of the studies investigated statistical correlation of the DLQI with clinical severity assessment or other PRO/quality of life tools; and 61-86% of studies had within-group scores differences greater than the MCID in 'active treatment arms'. The Jadad risk-of-bias scale showed that bias was generally low, as 91.8% of the studies had Jadad scores of ≥ 3; only 0.4% of studies showed a high risk of bias from randomization. Thirteen per cent had a high risk of bias from blinding and 10.1% had a high risk of bias from unknown outcomes of all participants in the studies. In 18.5% of the studies the authors declared that they followed an intention-to-treat protocol; imputation for missing DLQI data was used in 34.4% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides a wealth of evidence of the use of the DLQI in clinical trials to inform researchers' and -clinicians' decisions for its further use. Recommendations are also made for improving the reporting of data from future RCTs using the DLQI.

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.

Why targeted therapeutics have provided benefit in psoriasis: looking at IL-17 biology

INTRODUCTION

Psoriasis is an inflammatory, chronic and immune-mediated disease that can affect the skin and joints. Pro-inflammatory cytokines have a dominant role in the pathogenesis of this heterogeneous disease in which the IL-23/IL-17 axis plays a crucial role. The IL-17 family is involved in numerous processes such as immune defense, intestinal disorders and diseases of the central nervous system. In psoriasis, in particular, many cytokines belonging to the IL-17 family are involved in the inflammatory cascade underlying the disease.

AREAS COVERED

The knowledge of the mechanisms and pathways behind psoriasis is crucial for the development of new target therapies. We focused on IL-17 biology in order to understand why biological drugs against this cytokine are an effective treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis. Clinical trials results of ixekizumab, brodalumab, secukinumab and bimekizumab have been presented.

EXPERT OPINION

Il-17 inhibitors are a very fast and effective treatment against psoriasis; however, fungal infections can occur during their use, due to IL-17 biological functions. Therefore, it should be mandatory to choose the right patients to treat with these monoclonal antibodies in order to have a tailored target therapy for each patient.

Biologics for psoriasis patients under 18 years of age: Real-world evidence from the Chinese psoriasis real world evidence research group

Background

Treatment for pediatric psoriasis is challenging because of the lack of real-world evidence, especially for biological therapies.

Objectives

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of biologics in children with psoriasis based on real-world evidence.

Methods

Pediatric psoriasis patients aged <18 years who were treated with biologics in our hospital (2020–2022) were prospectively analyzed. Patients treated with adalimumab, secukinumab, or ixekizumab were followed up for at least 16 weeks, and 22 of 38 patients completed the 52-week observation period. Dermatologist raters were blinded to ensure the reliability of the PASI, BSA, and PGA score assessments. PASI 75 or PGA 0/1 at week 12 represented an efficient indicator.

Results

Thirty-eight patients (20 males and 18 females; median age, 12.6 ± 4.1 years) were enrolled, and none were lost to follow-up. All participants were diagnosed with psoriasis, including plaque psoriasis (n = 36), nail psoriasis (n = 1), and pustular psoriasis (n = 1). Within 12 weeks, all patients achieved scores above PASI 75 and PGA 0/1. The average time to reach PASI 75 was 4.3 ± 2.0, 3.2 ± 1.8, and 2.4 ± 0.4 weeks in patients using adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab, respectively, and, 27.2% (3/11), 86.4% (19/22), and 75.0% (3/4) of these patients achieved PASI 100 at week 12, respectively. Moreover, 18 of 20 patients with plaque psoriasis maintained ≥PASI 75 after 52 weeks. The most commonly reported adverse effect was upper respiratory tract infection, and no severe adverse effects were reported.

Conclusions

Our real-world data demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of adalimumab, secukinumab, and ixekizumab in children with psoriasis.

Evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and side effects of secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis: real-world data from a retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Clinical studies have demonstrated that IL-17A inhibition with secukinumab is effective for clearing the skin of patients with psoriasis and has a favorable safety profile.

OBJECTIVE

The authors aim to determine whether secukinumab is effective and safe for the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic psoriasis based on clinical experience with this drug.

METHOD

The authors conducted a multicenter retrospective study in nine referral centers and included patients with psoriasis who had received secukinumab between March 2018 to November 2020. Data on demographic characteristics, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores, and previous treatments were collected from medical records. Patients were evaluated at 12, 24, and 52 weeks with respect to response to treatment and side effects.

RESULTS

In total, 229 patients were recruited for the study. A PASI score improvement of ≥90 points over the baseline was achieved by 79%, 69.8%, and 49.3% of patients at weeks 12, 24, and 52, respectively. The most common adverse events wereCandida infections and fatigue. In total, 74 (32%) patients discontinued treatment by week 52, including due to adverse events, or secondary ineffectiveness.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that secukinumab therapy is reasonably effective in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Comorbidities and time length of the disease can affect the response to treatment. The rates of adverse events were high in this patient population.

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.

Enhanced NF-κB signaling in type-2 dendritic cells at baseline predicts non-response to adalimumab in psoriasis

Biologic therapies have transformed the management of psoriasis, but clinical outcome is variable leaving an unmet clinical need for predictive biomarkers of response. Here we perform in-depth immunomonitoring of blood immune cells of 67 patients with psoriasis, before and during therapy with the anti-TNF drug adalimumab, to identify immune mediators of clinical response and evaluate their predictive value. Enhanced NF-κBp65 phosphorylation, induced by TNF and LPS in type-2 dendritic cells (DC) before therapy, significantly correlates with lack of clinical response after 12 weeks of treatment. The heightened NF-κB activation is linked to increased DC maturation in vitro and frequency of IL-17⁺ T cells in the blood of non-responders before therapy. Moreover, lesional skin of non-responders contains higher numbers of dermal DC expressing the maturation marker CD83 and producing IL-23, and increased numbers of IL-17⁺ T cells. Finally, we identify and clinically validate LPS-induced NF-κBp65 phosphorylation before therapy as a predictive biomarker of non-response to adalimumab, with 100% sensitivity and 90.1% specificity in an independent cohort. Our study uncovers important molecular and cellular mediators underpinning adalimumab mechanisms of action in psoriasis and we propose a blood biomarker for predicting clinical outcome.

Gastroenterological safety of IL-17 inhibitors: a systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

Interleukin 17 is a proinflammatory cytokine considered to play a significant role in the immunopathogenesis of many chronic immune-mediated disorders. Interleukin 17 inhibitors provide an excellent treatment option for patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis. However, Interleukin 17 inhibitors have been suspected of worsening or triggering new-onset inflammatory bowel disease.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was conducted until March 2021 to investigate reporting prevalence, and characteristics of all gastroenterological adverse events in patients treated with Interleukin 17 inhibitors. One hundred and six clinical randomized trials were included, involving 40,053 patients. Inflammatory bowel disease cases were reported in 0.4% of patients exposed to Interleukin 17 inhibitors. The most frequent other gastrointestinal adverse events were diarrhea (2.5%), nausea or vomiting (0.7%), and gastroenteritis (0.2%). Sixty-one uncontrolled or retrospective studies were included, involving 16,791 patients. Sixty (0.36%) inflammatory bowel disease cases were reported, 0.6% of patients reported other gastrointestinal adverse events.

EXPERT OPINION

Interleukin 17 inhibitors are safe and effective in the treatment of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. Low incidence rate of developing new-onset inflammatory bowel disease or exacerbating preexisting inflammatory bowel disease with anti-IL-17 agents has been reported. Clinicians should be aware of the possibility of these concerns when considering this therapy.

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.

New generation biologics for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. State of the art and considerations about the risk of infection

Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated disease characterized by inflammation of skin (psoriasis) or joints (psoriatic arthritis) or both, resulting from a dysregulation in particular of the T helper (Th)17 functions. There is no available cure for psoriasis, and a life-long treatment is needed to control signs and symptoms. Research interest is high around the newest biological drugs approved for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, and especially drugs blocking the IL-23/IL-17 axis. Our aim is to review the new biological drugs for the treatment of psoriasis and their adverse effects, focusing on the risk of infections.

Switching biologics in psoriasis - practical guidance and evidence to support

INTRODUCTION

Advances of biologic agents have changed the treatment paradigm of psoriasis to higher efficacy and better quality of life. However, the demand for biologic switch is increasing due to patient's greater expectation and decreasing efficacy in long-term use. Also, biologic-induced adverse effects necessitate the switching of biologics.

AREAS COVERED

This review article was divided into two parts. The first part focused on the biologic switch due to lack of efficacy. The second part provided switching suggestions related to adverse effects.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Biologic switch in psoriasis was mainly due to lack of efficacy, and the subsequent biologic agent was usually given at the next scheduled time point without washout period. In pivotal randomized controlled trials, patients with poor response to TNF-alpha inhibitors and ustekinumab achieved better efficacy after switching to IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors. In addition, real-world data showed that intra-class switch could still achieve a 50%-80% of PASI 75 response in individuals with anti-IL-17 failure histories. As for the biologic switch due to adverse effects, washout period was recommended and transition to a biologic agent with different modes of action was preferred, especially class-specific adverse events.

Ixekizumab for the treatment of psoriasis: up-to-date

Introduction: Ixekizumab (an IL-17A antagonist) is a biologic therapeutic licensed for use in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. IL-17 antagonists (also including Secukinumab and Brodalumab) represent a new generation of biologic therapy with rapid and high response rates, quickly becoming a crucial part of the psoriasis treatment armamentarium.Areas covered: In this review, we describe how IL-17A antagonists disrupt inflammatory cascades in psoriasis and summarize results from clinical trials examining the safety and efficacy of ixekizumab against placebo and comparators.Expert opinion: Ixekizumab induces a 75% reduction in psoriasis area severity index (PASI 75) in 89% of patients after 12 weeks and after 1 year, PASI 75 is maintained in 80% of patients. Ixekizumab is superior to both etanercept and ustekinumab, however, further comparator trials are needed to determine superiority between newer agents. Network meta-analysis suggests that ixekizumab is one of the most rapid and efficacious agents for treating psoriasis, but ideally more long-term real-world data are needed to determine the persistence of response. Candida may be commonly encountered during treatment and IL-17 agents should be avoided in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Overall, ixekizumab represents an efficacious and well-studied therapeutic that can offer biologic-naïve and bio-failure patients durable disease control.

Interleukin-17A and Keratinocytes in Psoriasis

The excellent clinical efficacy of anti-interleukin 17A (IL-17A) biologics on psoriasis indicates a crucial pathogenic role of IL-17A in this autoinflammatory skin disease. IL-17A accelerates the proliferation of epidermal keratinocytes. Keratinocytes produce a myriad of antimicrobial peptides and chemokines, such as CXCL1, CXCL2, CXCL8, and CCL20. Antimicrobial peptides enhance skin inflammation. IL-17A is capable of upregulating the production of these chemokines and antimicrobial peptides in keratinocytes. CXCL1, CXCL2, and CXCL8 recruit neutrophils and CCL20 chemoattracts IL-17A-producing CCR6⁺ immune cells, which further contributes to forming an IL-17A-rich milieu. This feed-forward pathogenic process results in characteristic histopathological features, such as epidermal hyperproliferation, intraepidermal neutrophilic microabscess, and dermal CCR6⁺ cell infiltration. In this review, we focus on IL-17A and keratinocyte interaction regarding psoriasis pathogenesis.