Association between serum interleukin-17A and clinical response to tofacitinib and etanercept in moderate to severe psoriasis

Serum concentrations of 25-OH vitamin D and the pro-inflammatory interleukins IL-17, IL-23, and IL-18 in patients with plaque psoriasis

AIMS

The present study aimed to assess vitamin D status and serum concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-17, Il-23, and IL-18 in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis and their association with various demographic and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

The study was conducted during the autumn/winter period on 48 patients with chronic plaque psoriasis and 48 controls. Total serum 25(OH)D level was determined with Roche Elecsys® 2010 Vitamin D total assay. Commercial ELISA kits were used for quantifying the serum levels of IL-17A, IL-18, and IL-23.

RESULTS

Serum 25(OH)D had a median value of 16.95 ng/mL (IQR 10.8-23.50) for patients with psoriasis and 18.80 ng/mL (IQR 15.45-25.85) for the control group (P=0.09). A moderate negative correlation was found between PASI score and 25(OH)D levels (rs=-0.34; P=0.02). The serum levels of IL-17 (P=0.001), IL-23 (P=0.01) and IL-18 (P=0.02) were significantly higher in the patient group compared to controls. IL-17 concentrations were higher in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis compared to patients with mild psoriasis (P=0.003). No significant correlations were detected between the serum concentrations of 25(ОH)D and IL-17, IL-23, and IL-18.

CONCLUSION

It was confirmed that IL-17 serum level is associated with psoriasis severity. Measurement of 25(OH)D serum concentration can be useful in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis with or without comorbidities. A direct association between 25(OH)D serum concentration and the serum concentrations of IL-17, IL-23, or IL-18 was not identified in this study.

Early disease intervention with guselkumab in psoriasis leads to a higher rate of stable complete skin clearance ('clinical super response'): Week 28 results from the ongoing phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, GUIDE study

BACKGROUND

Guselkumab is an interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in patients with psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the impact of early disease intervention on clinical responses following 28 weeks of guselkumab treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Correlate clinical response and disease duration data with serum biomarker data.

METHODS

GUIDE is a phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study of adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. In study part 1, patients with a short disease duration (SDD [≤2 years]) or a long disease duration (LDD [>2 years]) received guselkumab 100 mg at Week (W) 0, 4, 12, and 20. Those achieving complete skin clearance at W20 and W28 were defined as a super responder (SRe). A multivariable logistic regression analysed the association between baseline factors and the likelihood of becoming an SRe. The relationship between clinical response, disease duration and serum biomarker data was assessed at W0 and 4.

RESULTS

In total, 880 patients were enrolled (SDD/LDD = 40.6%/59.4% of patients). More SDD than LDD patients achieved absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) = 0 at W28 (51.8% vs. 39.4%) and were SRes (43.7% vs. 28.1% [overall 34.4%]). SDD patients also achieved PASI = 0 quicker than LDD patients (median 141 vs. 200 days). Disease duration and prior biologic use had the greatest impact on becoming an SRe, with no strong association among these independent variables. At baseline, there were no significant differences in the serum biomarker levels of IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-22 and β-defensin 2 between SDD and LDD patients, or between SRe and non-SRe patients. Guselkumab rapidly decreased these markers of systemic inflammation across all patient groups analysed at W4. Guselkumab was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Guselkumab efficacy was consistent across subpopulations, on the skin and systemically. The proportion of SRes was higher in SDD than LDD patients, indicating early treatment intervention may improve clinical outcomes.

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.

Utility of in silico prediction of target suppression for antibodies against soluble targets: static versus dynamic models

PURPOSE

Antibodies that bind soluble targets such as cytokines belong to an important class of immunotherapies. Target levels can significantly accumulate after antibody administration due to formation of antibody-target complex, accompanied with suppression in free target which is often difficult to measure. Being a surrogate for pharmacodynamic activity, free target suppression is often predicted using in silico tools. The objective of this work is to illustrate the utility of modelling and to compare static versus dynamic models in the prediction of free target suppression.

METHODS

Using binding principles, we have derived a static equation to predict free target suppression at steady state (FTSS). This equation operates with five input parameters and accounts for target accumulation over time. Its predictivity was compared to a dynamic model and to other existing metrics in literature via simulations and assumptions were illustrated.

RESULTS

We demonstrated the utility of in silico tools in prediction of free target suppression using static and dynamic models and clarified the assumptions in key input parameters and their limitations. Predicted values using the FTSS equation correlate very well with those from the dynamic model at level > 20% target suppression, relevant for antagonistic antibodies.

CONCLUSION

In silico tools are needed to predict target suppression by antibody drugs. Static or dynamic models can be used dependant on the scope, available data and undertaken assumptions. These tools can be used to guide discovery and development of antibodies and has the potential to reduce clinical failure.

Dysbiosis in imiquimod-induced psoriasis alters gut immunity and exacerbates colitis development

Psoriasis has long been associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, a causal link is yet to be established. Here, we demonstrate that imiquimod-induced psoriasis (IMQ-pso) in mice disrupts gut homeostasis, characterized by increased proportions of colonic CX₃CR₁^hi macrophages, altered cytokine production, and bacterial dysbiosis. Gut microbiota from these mice produce higher levels of succinate, which induce de novo proliferation of CX₃CR₁^hi macrophages ex vivo, while disrupted gut homeostasis primes IMQ-pso mice for more severe colitis with dextran sulfate sodium (DSS) challenge. These results demonstrate that changes in the gut environment in psoriasis lead to greater susceptibility to IBD in mice, suggesting a two-hit requirement, that is, psoriasis-induced altered gut homeostasis and a secondary environmental challenge. This may explain the increased prevalence of IBD in patients with psoriasis.

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.

Molecular Pathogenesis of Psoriasis and Biomarkers Reflecting Disease Activity

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease induced by multifactorial causes and is characterized by bothersome, scaly reddish plaques, especially on frequently chafed body parts, such as extensor sites of the extremities. The latest advances in molecular-targeted therapies using biologics or small-molecule inhibitors help to sufficiently treat even the most severe psoriatic symptoms and the extra cutaneous comorbidities of psoriatic arthritis. The excellent clinical effects of these therapies provide a deeper understanding of the impaired quality of life caused by this disease and the detailed molecular mechanism in which the interleukin (IL)-23/IL-17 axis plays an essential role. To establish standardized therapeutic strategies, biomarkers that define deep remission are indispensable. Several molecules, such as cytokines, chemokines, antimicrobial peptides, and proteinase inhibitors, have been recognized as potent biomarker candidates. In particular, blood protein markers that are repeatedly measurable can be extremely useful in daily clinical practice. Herein, we summarize the molecular mechanism of psoriasis, and we describe the functions and induction mechanisms of these biomarker candidates.

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.

Interleukin-17A Is Produced by CD4+ but Not CD8+ T Cells in Synovial Fluid Following T Cell Receptor Activation and Regulates Different Inflammatory Mediators Compared to Tumor Necrosis Factor in a Model of Psoriatic Arthritis Synovitis

OBJECTIVE

Interleukin-17A (IL-17A) and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) contribute to the pathogenesis of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). However, their functional relationship in PsA synovitis has not been fully elucidated. Additionally, although CD8+ T cells in PsA have been recognized via flow cytometry as a source of IL-17A production, it is not clear whether CD8+ T cells secrete IL-17A under more physiologically relevant conditions in the context from PsA synovitis. This study was undertaken to clarify the roles of IL-17A and TNF in the synovial fluid (SF) from patients with PsA and investigate the impact of CD8+ T cells on IL-17A production.

METHODS

IL-17A+ T cells were identified by flow cytometry in SF samples from 20 patients with active PsA, blood samples from 22 treatment-naive patients with PsA, and blood samples from 22 healthy donors. IL-17A+ T cells were sorted from 12 PsA SF samples and stimulated using anti-CD3/anti-CD28 or phorbol myristate acetate (PMA) and ionomycin ex vivo, alone (n = 3) or together with autologous monocytes (n = 3) or PsA fibroblast-like synoviocytes (FLS) (n = 5-6). To evaluate the differential allogeneic effects of neutralizing IL-17A and TNF, SF CD4+ T cells and PsA FLS cocultures were also used (n = 5-6).

RESULTS

Flow cytometry analyses of SF samples from patients with PsA showed IL-17A positivity for CD4+ and CD8+ T cells (IL-17A, median 0.71% [interquartile range 0.35-1.50%] in CD4+ cells; median 0.44% [interquartile range 0.17-1.86%] in CD8+ T cells). However, only CD4+ T cells secreted IL-17A after anti-CD3/anti-CD28 activation, when cultured alone and in cocultures with PsA monocytes or PsA FLS (each P < 0.05). Remarkably, CD8+ T cells only secreted IL-17A after 4- or 72-hour stimulation with PMA/ionomycin. Anti-IL-17A and anti-TNF treatments both inhibited PsA synovitis ex vivo. Neutralizing IL-17A strongly inhibited IL-6 (P < 0.05) and IL-1β (P < 0.01), while anti-TNF treatment was more potent in reducing matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP-3) (P < 0.05) and MMP-13.

CONCLUSION

CD8+ T cells, in contrast to CD4+ T cells, in SF specimens obtained from PsA patients did not secrete IL-17A following T cell receptor activation. Overlapping, but distinct, effects at the level of inflammatory cytokines and MMPs were found after neutralizing IL-17A or TNF ex vivo in a human model of PsA synovitis.

The role of interleukin-17 in asthma: a protective response?

While there now exist effective treatments for type 2 high, eosinophilic asthma, there are no specific therapies for 40–50% of people with asthma with other phenotypes, which result from poorly understood underlying pathological mechanisms. One such pathology is neutrophilic inflammation, which has been associated with interleukin (IL)-17 family cytokines. Human genetic studies identified IL-17 polymorphisms associated with asthma; in murine models of allergic airways disease, IL-17A contributes to airway hyperresponsiveness, and in humans, elevated airway IL-17A levels are repeatedly observed in severe asthma. However, the directionality of this association is unknown, and the assumption that IL-17 cytokines drive disease pathology remains speculative. Here, we explore the evidence underlying the relationship between IL-17 and asthma, we review lessons learned from investigating IL-17 in other inflammatory diseases, and discuss the possibility that IL-17 may even be protective in asthma rather than pathogenic. We also critically examine the newly proposed paradigm of a reciprocal relationship between type 2 and type 17 airways inflammation. In summary, we suggest an association between IL-17 and asthma, but research is needed examining the diverse functions of these cytokines, their longitudinal stability, their response to clinical interventions, and for mechanistic studies determining whether they are protective or pathogenic.

IL-17 cytokines have been implicated in neutrophilic asthma by genetic, murine and human data. Here, previous studies are critiqued and the assumption their dominant role is pathogenic rather than protective of airway epithelial barrier integrity is challenged.http://bit.ly/3axB4Zs

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.

IL-1β, IL-17A and combined phototherapy predicts higher while previous systemic biologic treatment predicts lower treatment response to etanercept in psoriasis patients

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to explore the correlation of circulating inflammatory cytokines' levels with treatment response to etanercept (ETN) treatment in psoriasis patients.

METHODS

97 moderate-to-severe plaque-psoriasis patients were continuously recruited in this prospective cohort study, and all patients received ETN treatment. Serum samples were collected before and at 6 months (M6) after treatment, and nine inflammatory cytokines expressions were detected by enzyme-linked immuno sorbent assay. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score was evaluated at baseline (M0), 1 month (M1), 3 months (M3) and M6 after treatment, and the corresponding PASI 75/90 responses' rates were calculated.

RESULTS

Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-12, IL-17A, IL-22, IL-23, and IL-32 levels were reduced, while IL-10 level was elevated at M6 after ETN treatment compared to baseline. PASI 75/90 responses' rates to ETN were 69.1 and 38.1% at M6, respectively. IL-1β and IL-17A levels were elevated in PASI 75-response patients compared to PASI 75 non-response patients, while IL-17A level was also increased in PASI 90-response patients compared to PASI 90 non-response patients. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that IL-1β, IL-17A and combined phototherapy during study predicted higher, while previous systemic biologic treatment predicted lower PASI 75 response to ETN independently. In addition, IL-17A independently predicted higher PASI 90 response to ETN as well.

CONCLUSIONS

IL-1β, IL-17A, and combined phototherapy predicts higher while previous systemic biologic treatment predicts lower treatment response to ETN independently in psoriasis patients.