Fumaric acid esters for severe psoriasis: the Leicestershire experience

Use of fumaric acid derivatives in Italian reference centers for psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Several therapies are available for psoriasis, including in some countries oral fumaric acid derivatives (FADs). Even if FADs are not available in the Italian market, they can be prescribed and reimbursed by the National Health Service, on request from the treating physician, when considered as a valuable option in selected patient.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the PsoReal registry data, restricted to adult psoriatic patients enrolled between 2009 and 2017. Demographic and clinical data were collected together with information on systemic therapies prescribed for psoriasis, drug shifts and adverse effects. We focused our analysis on FADs compared with other systemic drugs.

RESULTS

From the registry data, a total of 17,064 patients were extracted, and 11,592 patients (67.9%), fulfilled inclusion criteria. The majority of them had chronic plaque psoriasis, the mean disease duration was 17.1±12.6 years, and the mean PASI was 17.8±10.9, with 51.5% presenting a moderate Ps (PASI between 10 and 20). A total of 36 patients (0.3%) were treated by FADs. The average treatment duration of conventional (9.0±10.0 months) and biological agents (13.7±11.6 months) was lower compared to the duration of FADs (28.1±20.1, P value<0.001). FADs were used at an average dosage of 361.0±146.3 mg/day and FADs treated patients displayed an overall lower healthcare cost compared with other drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study confirms previous European data about efficacy and safety of FADs and suggests a decrease of healthcare costs for FADs treated patients as compared to other treatments.

Fumaric acid esters for psoriasis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic skin disease associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Effective and safe long term treatment options are required to manage the illness successfully. A number of systemic agents are available, however, each of them has potentially significant side effects. Fumaric acid esters (FAE) are used first line in Germany for the management of moderate to severe psoriasis, however, their use in Ireland is on an unlicensed basis (Clinical and Experimental Dermatology 37:786-801, 2012).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this literature review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FAEs in the management of moderate to severe psoriasis in adult patients. The reviewer intends to systematically review all available literature on the efficacy and/or safety of fumaric acid esters in the management of moderate to severe psoriasis in adult patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by one reviewer. The PubMed, TRIP, Embase, and Cochrane Collaboration databases were systematically interrogated to include randomised controlled trials, cohort studies and case studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of FAEs in the management of moderate to severe psoriasis in adult patients. Inclusion criteria were studies which included adults over 18 years of age, with a diagnosis of moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis, who were treated with FAEs and no other systemic anti-psoriatic agents concurrently. Exclusion criteria were studies involving children, mild psoriasis, studies which did not include patients with chronic plaque psoriasis, the use of FAE for the management of illnesses other than psoriasis, and patients treated with more than one systemic anti-psoriatic agent concurrently.

RESULTS

In total 19 articles were selected for review including 2 randomised placebo controlled trials, 1 non-randomised comparative study, 7 retrospective cohort studies, 2 prospective cohort studies and 7 case studies. The findings suggest that FAEs are a safe and effective treatment option for the management of moderate to severe psoriasis in adult patients. Gastrointestinal side effects may occur on treatment initiation and may be minimised by slow dose titration. Lymphocytopenia and eosinophilia are common, however, they are rarely of significance and there is no high level of evidence available to suggest a resultant increased risk of infection or malignancy. Rarely alterations of renal and hepatic function may occur, however, these are largely reversible on treatment withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the use of FAE in the management of moderate to severe psoriasis is a promising treatment option, especially for those patients intolerant of, or unresponsive to other agents. If blood parameters are closely monitored during treatment as per the European Medicine Agencies guidelines (European Medicines Agency, 'Updated recommendations to minimise the risk of the rare brain infection PML with Tecfidera', http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Press_release/2015/10/WC500196017.pdf , 2015) they may be safely used in practice. The licensing of FAEs in Ireland for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis would be desirable, increasing available treatment options.

Oral fumaric acid esters for psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that can markedly reduce life quality. Several systemic therapies exist for moderate to severe psoriasis, including oral fumaric acid esters (FAE). These contain dimethyl fumarate (DMF), the main active ingredient, and monoethyl fumarate. FAE are licensed for psoriasis in Germany but used off-licence in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of oral fumaric acid esters for psoriasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 7 May 2015: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in the Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2015), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), and LILACS (from 1982). We searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. We handsearched six conference proceedings that were not already included in the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FAE, including DMF monotherapy, in individuals of any age and sex with a clinical diagnosis of psoriasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Primary outcomes were improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score and the proportion of participants discontinuing treatment due to adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 6 studies (2 full reports, 2 abstracts, 1 brief communication, and 1 letter), with a total of 544 participants. Risk of bias was unclear in several studies because of insufficient reporting. Five studies compared FAE with placebo, and one study compared FAE with methotrexate. All studies reported data at 12 to 16 weeks, and we identified no longer-term studies. When FAE were compared with placebo, we could not perform meta-analysis for the primary outcome of PASI score because the three studies that assessed this outcome reported the data differently, although all studies reported a significant reduction in PASI scores with FAE. Only 1 small study designed for psoriatic arthritis reported on the other primary outcome of participants discontinuing treatment due to adverse effects (2 of 13 participants on FAE compared with none of the 14 participants on placebo; risk ratio (RR) 5.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 102.1; 27 participants; very low-quality evidence). However, these findings are uncertain due to indirectness and a very wide confidence interval. Two studies, containing 247 participants and both only reported as abstracts, allowed meta-analysis for PASI 50, which showed superiority of FAE over placebo (RR 4.55, 95% CI 2.80 to 7.40; low-quality evidence), with a combined PASI 50 of 64% in those given FAE compared with a PASI 50 of 14% for those on placebo, representing a number needed to treat to benefit of 2. The same studies reported more participants achieving PASI 75 with FAE, but we did not pool the data because of significant heterogeneity; none of the studies measured PASI 90. One study reported significant improvement in participants' quality of life (QoL) with FAE, measured with Skindex-29. However, we could not compute the mean difference because of insufficient reporting in the abstract. More participants experienced adverse effects, mainly gastrointestinal disturbance and flushing, on FAE (RR 4.72, 95% CI 2.45 to 9.08; 1 study, 99 participants; moderate-quality evidence), affecting 76% of participants given FAE and 16% of the placebo group (representing a number needed to treat to harm of 2). The other studies reported similar findings or did not report adverse effects fully.One study of 54 participants compared methotrexate (MTX) with FAE. PASI score at follow-up showed superiority of MTX (mean Difference (MD) 3.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 6.92; 51 participants; very low-quality evidence), but the difference was not significant after adjustment for baseline disease severity. The difference between groups for the proportion of participants who discontinued treatment due to adverse effects was uncertain because of imprecision (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.53; 1 study, 51 participants; very low-quality evidence). Overall, the number of participants experiencing common nuisance adverse effects was not significantly different between the 2 groups, with 89% of the FAE group affected compared with 100% of the MTX group (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.03; 54 participants; very low-quality evidence). Flushing was more frequent in those on FAE, with 13 out of 27 participants affected compared with 2 out of 27 given MTX. There was no significant difference in the number of participants who attained PASI 50, 75, and 90 in the 2 groups (very low-quality evidence) whereas this study did not measure the effect of treatments on QoL. The included studies reported no serious adverse effects of FAE and were too small and of limited duration to provide evidence about rare or delayed effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that FAE are superior to placebo and possibly similar in efficacy to MTX for psoriasis; however, the evidence provided in this review was limited, and it must be noted that four out of six included studies were abstracts or brief reports, restricting study reporting. FAE are associated with nuisance adverse effects, including flushing and gastrointestinal disturbance, but short-term studies reported no serious adverse effects.

Fumaric acid esters in the management of psoriasis

Fumaric acid esters (FAE) are small molecules with immunomodulating, anti-inflammatory, and anti-oxidative effects. FAE were introduced as a systemic psoriasis treatment in 1959 and empirically developed further between 1970 and 1990 in Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. The development of FAE as psoriasis treatment did not follow the traditional drug development phases. Nonetheless, in 1994 FAE were approved in Germany for the treatment of severe plaque psoriasis. FAE are currently one of the most commonly used treatments in Germany, and FAE are increasingly being used as an unlicensed treatment in several other European countries. To date, six randomized controlled trials and 29 observational studies have evaluated FAE in a combined total of 3,439 patients. The efficacy and safety profile of FAE is favorable. About 50%–70% of patients achieve at least 75% improvement in psoriasis severity after 16 weeks of treatment. Common adverse events of FAE include gastrointestinal complaints and flushing symptoms, which lead to treatment discontinuation in up to 40% of patients. Lymphocytopenia, eosinophilia, and proteinuria are commonly observed during FAE treatment, but rarely require treatment discontinuation. The long-term safety profile of continuous FAE treatment is favorable without an increased risk for infections, malignancies, or other serious adverse events. There are no known drug-interactions for FAE. The 2009 European evidence-based S3-guidelines on psoriasis treatment recommend FAE and suggest it as a first-line systemic treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. This review is aimed to give an overview of FAE treatment in the management of psoriasis.

Treatment of severe, recalcitrant, chronic plaque psoriasis with fumaric acid esters: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Fumaric acid esters (FAE) are used in Germany as a first-line systemic treatment for chronic plaque psoriasis, with proven efficacy and low toxicity. Their use in the U.K. is variable, and they remain unlicensed. Consequently, efficacy and safety data from U.K. patients is limited and their place in the psoriasis treatment armamentarium is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of FAE in a prospective cohort of U.K. patients with severe, treatment-recalcitrant, chronic plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

A single-centre, open, nonrandomized, prospective study was performed in a regional referral centre for patients with severe psoriasis. Outcomes were measured by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), blood investigations and adverse events monitoring.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were recruited. Fifty-nine per cent were taking a concomitant oral antipsoriatic agent; 20% achieved a PASI-50, 8% a PASI-75 and 4% a PASI-90 on intention-to-treat analysis at 3 months with an overall, statistically significant, reduction in PASI from 13.9 + or - 9.0 to 11.3 + or - 9.2 (P < 0.0001). At 3 months, lymphopenia was seen in 33% of the cohort with significantly lower counts in patients responsive to FAE (P = 0.008). In addition, by 3 months, 36% of concomitant antipsoriatic medication had been stopped and 25% of doses had been reduced without loss of disease control. Side-effects (most commonly diarrhoea, abdominal pain and flushing) were reported by 74% of patients resulting in cessation of FAE in 36%.

CONCLUSIONS

FAE is a useful alternative treatment option in patients with severe, treatment-resistant, chronic plaque psoriasis and can allow dose reduction, and subsequent cessation, of other, potentially more toxic agents.