1
|
Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Guelimi R, Garcia-Doval I, Hua C, Hughes C, Naldi L, Kinberger M, Afach S, Le Cleach L. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023; 7:CD011535. [PMID: 37436070 PMCID: PMC10337265 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011535.pub6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/13/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilie Sbidian
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Clinical Investigation Centre, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Anna Chaimani
- Université de Paris, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), INSERM, F-75004, Paris, France
- Cochrane France, Paris, France
| | - Robin Guelimi
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Ignacio Garcia-Doval
- Department of Dermatology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo, Vigo, Spain
| | - Camille Hua
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Carolyn Hughes
- c/o Cochrane Skin Group, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Luigi Naldi
- Centro Studi GISED (Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in Dermatology) - FROM (Research Foundation of Ospedale Maggiore Bergamo), Padiglione Mazzoleni - Presidio Ospedaliero Matteo Rota, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Maria Kinberger
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Sivem Afach
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Laurence Le Cleach
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van Huizen AM, Sikkel R, Caron AGM, Menting SP, Spuls PI. Methotrexate Dosing Regimen for Plaque-type Psoriasis: An Update of a Systematic Review. J DERMATOL TREAT 2022; 33:3104-3118. [PMID: 36043844 DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2022.2117539] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
Background Methotrexate (MTX) is a systemic treatment for plaque-type psoriasis. At the time of approval, no dose-ranging studies were performed. Nowadays, a uniform dosing regimen is lacking. This might contribute to suboptimal treatment with the drug.Objective To summarize the literature involving the MTX dosing regimens in psoriasis patients.Methods In this SR, RCTs and documents with aggregated evidence (AgEv) on the MTX dosing regimen in psoriasis were summarized. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which oral, subcutaneous or intramuscular MTX was used in patients with psoriasis and AgEv, were included. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched up to June 20, 2022. This SR was registered in PROSPERO.Results Thirty-nine RCTs had a high risk of bias. Test dosages were given in only 3 RCTs. In the RCTs, MTX was usually prescribed in a start dose of 7.5 mg/week (n = 13). MTX was mostly given in a start dose of 15 mg/week, in the AgEv (n = 5). One guideline recommended a test dose, in other aggregated evidence a test dose was not mentioned or even discouraged.Conclusions There is a lack of high-quality evidence and available data for dosing MTX in psoriasis is heterogeneous.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Astrid M van Huizen
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Dermatology, Amsterdam Public Health, Infection and Immunity, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rosie Sikkel
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Dermatology, Amsterdam Public Health, Infection and Immunity, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk G M Caron
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Dermatology, Amsterdam Public Health, Infection and Immunity, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Stef P Menting
- OLVG hospital, Department of Dermatology, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Phyllis I Spuls
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Dermatology, Amsterdam Public Health, Infection and Immunity, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nguyen LTH. Signaling pathways and targets of natural products in psoriasis treatment. EXPLORATION OF MEDICINE 2022. [DOI: 10.37349/emed.2022.00098] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: Psoriasis is a common chronic inflammatory skin disorder, which has adverse effects on patients’ quality of life. Natural products exhibit significant therapeutic capacities with small side effects and might be preferable alternative treatments for patients with psoriasis. This study summarizes the signaling pathways with the potential targets of natural products and their efficacy for psoriasis treatment.
Methods: The literature for this article was acquired from PubMed and Web of Science, from January 2010 to December 2020. The keywords for searching included “psoriasis” and “natural product”, “herbal medicine”, “herbal therapy”, “medicinal plant”, “medicinal herb” or “pharmaceutical plant”.
Results: Herbal extracts, natural compounds, and herbal prescriptions could regulate the signaling pathways to alleviate psoriasis symptoms, such as T helper 17 (Th17) differentiation, Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT), nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), mitogen‑activated protein kinase (MAPK), phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), and other signaling pathways, which are involved in the inflammatory response and keratinocyte hyperproliferation. The anti-psoriatic effect of natural products in clinical trials was summarized.
Conclusions: Natural products exerted the anti-psoriatic effect by targeting multiple signaling pathways, providing evidence for the investigation of novel drugs. Further experimental research should be performed to screen and characterize the therapeutic targets of natural products for application in psoriasis treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ly Thi Huong Nguyen
- Department of Physiology, College of Korean Medicine, Dongguk University, Gyeongju 38066, Republic of Korea
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Oral Administration of East Asian Herbal Medicine for Inflammatory Skin Lesions in Plaque Psoriasis: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Exploration of Core Herbal Materials. Nutrients 2022; 14:nu14122434. [PMID: 35745164 PMCID: PMC9230602 DOI: 10.3390/nu14122434] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/15/2022] [Revised: 06/04/2022] [Accepted: 06/07/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Psoriasis is an inflammatory autoimmune skin disease with various clinical manifestations. The aim of this review was to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral administration of East Asian herbal medicine (EAHM) for inflammatory skin lesions in psoriasis and to explore core herbal materials for drug discovery. A comprehensive search was conducted in 10 electronic databases for randomized controlled trials from their inception until 29 July 2021. Statistical analysis was performed in R version 4.1.2 and R studio. When heterogeneity in studies was detected, the cause was identified through sensitivity analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup analysis. Methodological quality was independently assessed using the revised tool for risk of bias in randomized trials. A total of 56 trials with 4966 psoriasis patients met the selection criteria. Meta-analysis favored EAHM monotherapy on Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 70 (RR: 1.2845; 95% CI: 1.906 to 1.3858, p < 0.0001), PASI 60 (RR: 1.1923; 95% CI: 1.1134 to 1.2769, p < 0.0001), continuous PASI score (MD: −2.3386, 95% CI: −3.3068 to −1.3704, p < 0.0001), IL-17, IL-23, TNF-α, and Dermatology Life Quality Index. Patients treated with EAHM monotherapy had significantly reduced adverse events incidence rate. In addition, based on additional examination of the herb data included in this meta-analysis, 16 core materials were identified. They are utilized in close proximity to one another, and all have anti-inflammatory properties. The findings in this study support that oral EAHM monotherapy may be beneficial for inflammatory skin lesions in psoriasis. Meanwhile, the identified core materials are expected to be utilized as useful drug candidate hypotheses through follow-up studies on individual pharmacological activities and synergistic effects.
Collapse
|
5
|
Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Garcia-Doval I, Doney L, Dressler C, Hua C, Hughes C, Naldi L, Afach S, Le Cleach L. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 5:CD011535. [PMID: 35603936 PMCID: PMC9125768 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011535.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilie Sbidian
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Clinical Investigation Centre, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Anna Chaimani
- Université de Paris, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), INSERM, F-75004, Paris, France
- Cochrane France, Paris, France
| | - Ignacio Garcia-Doval
- Department of Dermatology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo, Vigo, Spain
| | - Liz Doney
- Cochrane Skin, Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Corinna Dressler
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Camille Hua
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Carolyn Hughes
- c/o Cochrane Skin Group, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Luigi Naldi
- Centro Studi GISED (Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in Dermatology) - FROM (Research Foundation of Ospedale Maggiore Bergamo), Padiglione Mazzoleni - Presidio Ospedaliero Matteo Rota, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Sivem Afach
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Laurence Le Cleach
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Garcia-Doval I, Doney L, Dressler C, Hua C, Hughes C, Naldi L, Afach S, Le Cleach L. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 4:CD011535. [PMID: 33871055 PMCID: PMC8408312 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011535.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilie Sbidian
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Clinical Investigation Centre, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Anna Chaimani
- Université de Paris, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS), INSERM, F-75004, Paris, France
- Cochrane France, Paris, France
| | - Ignacio Garcia-Doval
- Department of Dermatology, Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo, Vigo, Spain
| | - Liz Doney
- Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, Cochrane Skin Group, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Corinna Dressler
- Division of Evidence Based Medicine, Department of Dermatology, Venerology and Allergology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
| | - Camille Hua
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Carolyn Hughes
- c/o Cochrane Skin Group, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
| | - Luigi Naldi
- Centro Studi GISED (Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in Dermatology) - FROM (Research Foundation of Ospedale Maggiore Bergamo), Padiglione Mazzoleni - Presidio Ospedaliero Matteo Rota, Bergamo, Italy
| | - Sivem Afach
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Laurence Le Cleach
- Department of Dermatology, Hôpital Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
- Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Menter A, Gelfand JM, Connor C, Armstrong AW, Cordoro KM, Davis DMR, Elewski BE, Gordon KB, Gottlieb AB, Kaplan DH, Kavanaugh A, Kiselica M, Kivelevitch D, Korman NJ, Kroshinsky D, Lebwohl M, Leonardi CL, Lichten J, Lim HW, Mehta NN, Paller AS, Parra SL, Pathy AL, Prater EF, Rahimi RS, Rupani RN, Siegel M, Stoff B, Strober BE, Tapper EB, Wong EB, Wu JJ, Hariharan V, Elmets CA. Joint American Academy of Dermatology-National Psoriasis Foundation guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis with systemic nonbiologic therapies. J Am Acad Dermatol 2020; 82:1445-1486. [PMID: 32119894 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.02.044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 176] [Impact Index Per Article: 44.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Revised: 02/10/2020] [Accepted: 02/14/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disease involving multiple organ systems and affecting approximately 2% of the world's population. In this guideline, we focus the discussion on systemic, nonbiologic medications for the treatment of this disease. We provide detailed discussion of efficacy and safety for the most commonly used medications, including methotrexate, cyclosporine, and acitretin, and provide recommendations to assist prescribers in initiating and managing patients on these treatments. Additionally, we discuss newer therapies, including tofacitinib and apremilast, and briefly touch on a number of other medications, including fumaric acid esters (used outside the United States) and therapies that are no longer widely used for the treatment of psoriasis (ie, hydroxyurea, leflunomide, mycophenolate mofetil, thioguanine, and tacrolimus).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Joel M Gelfand
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | | | | | - Kelly M Cordoro
- Department of Dermatology, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Diego, California
| | | | | | | | - Alice B Gottlieb
- Department of Dermatology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Matthew Kiselica
- Patient Advocate, National Psoriasis Foundation, Portland, Oregon
| | | | - Neil J Korman
- University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio
| | | | - Mark Lebwohl
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | | | - Jason Lichten
- Patient Advocate, National Psoriasis Foundation, Portland, Oregon
| | - Henry W Lim
- Department of Dermatology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan
| | - Nehal N Mehta
- National Heart Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Amy S Paller
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
| | | | - Arun L Pathy
- Colorado Permanente Medical Group, Centennial, Colorado
| | | | | | - Reena N Rupani
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York
| | | | | | - Bruce E Strober
- Central Connecticut Dermatology, Cromwell, Connecticut; Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Elliot B Tapper
- Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Emily B Wong
- San Antonio Uniformed Services Health Education Consortium, Joint-Base San Antonio, Texas
| | - Jashin J Wu
- Dermatology Research and Education Foundation, Irvine, California
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Afach S, Doney L, Dressler C, Hua C, Mazaud C, Phan C, Hughes C, Riddle D, Naldi L, Garcia-Doval I, Le Cleach L. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 1:CD011535. [PMID: 31917873 PMCID: PMC6956468 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011535.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilie Sbidian
- Hôpital Henri Mondor, Department of Dermatology, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, France, 94000
- Hôpital Henri Mondor, Clinical Investigation Centre, Créteil, France, 94010
- Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Créteil, France
| | - Anna Chaimani
- Université de Paris, Research Center in Epidemiology and Statistics Sorbonne Paris Cité (CRESS-UMR1153), Inserm, Inra, F-75004, Paris, France
- Cochrane France, Paris, France
| | - Sivem Afach
- Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Epidemiology in dermatology and evaluation of therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Créteil, France
| | - Liz Doney
- Cochrane Skin Group, The University of Nottingham, Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, A103, King's Meadow Campus, Lenton Lane, Nottingham, UK, NG7 2NR
| | - Corinna Dressler
- Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Division of Evidence Based Medicine, Department of Dermatology, Venerology and Allergology, Charitéplatz 1, Berlin, Germany, 10117
| | - Camille Hua
- Hôpital Henri Mondor, Department of Dermatology, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, France, 94000
| | - Canelle Mazaud
- Hôpital Henri Mondor, Department of Dermatology, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, France, 94000
| | - Céline Phan
- Centre Hospitalier Victor Dupouy, Department of Dermatology, Argenteuil, France
| | - Carolyn Hughes
- The University of Nottingham, c/o Cochrane Skin Group, A103, King's Meadow Campus, Lenton Lane, Nottingham, UK, NG7 2NR
| | - Dru Riddle
- Texas Christian University (TCU), School of Nurse Anesthesia, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
| | - Luigi Naldi
- Padiglione Mazzoleni - Presidio Ospedaliero Matteo Rota, Centro Studi GISED (Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in Dermatology) - FROM (Research Foundation of Ospedale Maggiore Bergamo), Via Garibaldi 13/15, Bergamo, Italy, 24122
| | - Ignacio Garcia-Doval
- Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Vigo, Department of Dermatology, Meixoeiro sn, Vigo, Spain, 36214
| | - Laurence Le Cleach
- Hôpital Henri Mondor, Department of Dermatology, 51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, Créteil, France, 94000
- Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Epidemiology in Dermatology and Evaluation of Therapeutics (EpiDermE) - EA 7379, Créteil, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kogan N, Raimondo N, Gusis SE, Izcovich A, Abarca Duran JA, Barahona-Torres L, Blanco O, Quintana GB, Briones MC, Castro C, Castro Vargas EG, Criniti J, Diez de Medina JC, Franco M, Gómez M, Levrero VP, Martínez López JE, Valenzuela F. Latin American Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Systemic Treatment of Psoriasis SOLAPSO - Sociedad Latinoamericana de Psoriasis (Latin American Psoriasis Society). Int J Dermatol 2019; 58 Suppl 1:4-28. [PMID: 31282026 DOI: 10.1111/ijd.14471] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
This Clinical Practice Guideline on the systemic treatment of Psoriasis includes the recommendations elaborated by a panel of experts from the Latin American Psoriasis Society SOLAPSO, who assessed the quality of the available evidence using the GRADE system and the PICO process to guide the literature search. To answer each question, the experts discussed the results of randomized controlled trials, observational studies and metanalysis evaluating the interventions identified (non-biologics, biologics and phototherapy) in different populations of patients with moderate to severe plaque-psoriasis, which was summarized in Tables ad-hoc. The main end-points considered to assess efficacy were PASI 50, 75, 90 and 100, PGA 0-1 and significant improvement of health-related quality of life. Specific adverse events, either severe or leading to treatment interruption, were also evaluated. The 31 recommendations included in this CPG follow the structure proposed by GRADE: direction (for or against) and strength (strong or weak). The goal of this CPG is to improve the management of patients with psoriasis by recommending interventions of proved benefit and providing a reference standard for the treating physician. Adhering to the contents of this CPG does not guarantee therapeutic success. The final decision on the specific treatment is the responsibility of the physician based on the individual circumstances and considering the values, the preferences and the opinions of the patient or caregivers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nora Kogan
- Dermatology, Hospital Ramos Mejía, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | - Simon E Gusis
- Rheumatology, Hospital Ramos Mejía, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Ariel Izcovich
- Program on Evidence Based Medicine, Hospital Aleman, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Orestes Blanco
- Parasitology, Institute of Tropical Medicine Pedro Kouri, La Habana, Cuba
| | | | - María C Briones
- Centro Privado de Piel "Dr. Enrique Uraga", Guayaquil, Ecuador
| | - Carla Castro
- Pediatric Dermatology, Hospital Universitario Austral, Pilar, Argentina
| | | | - Juan Criniti
- Program on Evidence Based Medicine, Hospital Aleman, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | | | - Minerva Gómez
- Dermatology, University Hospital, Monterrey, Nueva León, Mexico
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Guo J, Liu J. Effect of white mange mixture in a murine model of psoriasis. Exp Ther Med 2019; 18:881-887. [PMID: 31384318 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2019.7641] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2018] [Accepted: 03/22/2019] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Psoriasis is an autoimmune disease with periods of remission or aggravation. Until now, no effective treatment has been developed. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the traditional Chinese medicine white mange mixture in a murine model of vaginal psoriasis. Female mice (n=70) were randomly divided into seven groups as follows: negative control group, positive control group, acitretin group, Xiaoying granule group, high-dose white mange mixture group, medium-dose white mange mixture group, and low-dose white mange mixture group. After vaginal psoriasis mouse model design, the inhibition of keratinocyte (KC) cell proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) was achieved by SP immunohistochemical method, spleen T lymphocyte apoptosis detection was assessed by using electron microscopy and granulocyte colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) levels were detected by ELISA method. According to our results, T lymphocyte nucleus appearance in the negative control group was normal whereas in all the doses of white mange mixture the nucleus significantly showed apoptotic trend. Compared with the negative control group, the amount of GM-CSF in the serum of the model was significantly increased (P<0.01) while administration of white mange mixture in different doses decreased the GM-CSF content significantly (P<0.01). White mange mixture can significantly inhibit vaginal psoriasis in a mouse model by decreasing the amount of epithelium KC cell PCNA and production of the inflammatory cytokines GM-CSF in serum.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiangtao Guo
- Pharmaceutical College, Guiyang University of Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou 550025, P.R. China
| | - Jie Liu
- Pharmaceutical College, Guiyang University of Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, Guizhou 550025, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Arnone M, Carvalho AVED, Takahashí MDF, Bernardo WM. Moderate to severe plaque psoriasis - treatment with drugs of the classic scheme. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2019; 65:530-534. [PMID: 31066805 DOI: 10.1590/1806-9282.65.4.530] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/01/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
The Guidelines Project, an initiative of the Brazilian Medical Association, aims to combine information from the medical field in order to standardize producers to assist the reasoning and decision-making of doctors. The information provided through this project must be assessed and criticized by the physician responsible for the conduct that will be adopted, depending on the conditions and the clinical status of each patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcelo Arnone
- Brazilian Society of Urology, Rua Real Grandeza, 108 sala 101 - Botafogo, Rio de Janeiro - RJ, Brasil
| | | | | | - Wanderley M Bernardo
- Brazilian Medical Association, Rua São Carlos do Pinhal, 324 - Bela Vista, São Paulo - SP, Brasil
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Geng W, Zhao J, Fu J, Zhang H, Qiao S. Efficacy of several biological therapies for treating moderate to severe psoriasis: A network meta-analysis. Exp Ther Med 2018; 16:5085-5095. [PMID: 30546410 PMCID: PMC6257037 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2018.6859] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2015] [Accepted: 12/19/2016] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
The aim of the present meta-analysis was to systematically assess the efficacy of the various treatments available for moderate to severe psoriasis. PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched to select relevant studies up to February 2015. Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as effect estimates. In addition, the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 50, PASI 75 and PASI 90 responses for the therapies were systematically assessed. A total of 33 randomized controlled trials were included in the present study. For the PASI 75 response rate, infliximab (5 mg) may be the most effective option for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis. Furthermore, the pooled results of the PASI 50 response rate demonstrated that infliximab (5 mg) and ustekinumab (90 mg) may be superior to other drugs for treating moderate to severe psoriasis. For the PASI 90 response rate, infliximab (5 mg), ustekinumab (90 mg) and briakinumab (weeks 0 and 4, 200 mg; week 8, 100 mg) exhibited improved results compared with other treatments. In conclusion, infliximab (5 mg) may be a superior option to treat moderate to severe psoriasis due to the relatively high PASI scores. However, despite the high PASI 90 responses, further studies are required to identify the efficacy of ustekinumab (90 mg) and briakinumab.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wenjun Geng
- Department of Dermatology, The Second Hospital of Liaocheng, Linqing, Shandong 252601, P.R. China
| | - Jianhua Zhao
- Department of Dermatology, The Second Hospital of Liaocheng, Linqing, Shandong 252601, P.R. China
| | - Jixing Fu
- Department of Dermatology, The Second Hospital of Liaocheng, Linqing, Shandong 252601, P.R. China
| | - Huamin Zhang
- Department of Dermatology, The Second Hospital of Liaocheng, Linqing, Shandong 252601, P.R. China
| | - Shaohua Qiao
- Department of Dermatology, The Second Hospital of Liaocheng, Linqing, Shandong 252601, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ornelas J, Routt E, Kallis P, Lev‐Tov H. Use of thehCONSORTcriteria as a reporting standard for herbal interventions for common dermatoses: a systematic review. Br J Dermatol 2018; 178:889-896. [DOI: 10.1111/bjd.16256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/09/2017] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- J. Ornelas
- University of California Davis Department of Dermatology Sacramento CA U.S.A
| | - E. Routt
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Department of Dermatology New York U.S.A
| | - P. Kallis
- University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery Miami FL U.S.A
| | - H. Lev‐Tov
- University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery Miami FL U.S.A
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Pongparit K, Chularojanamontri L, Limphoka P, Silpa-Archa N, Wongpraparat C. Effectiveness of and factors associated with clinical response to methotrexate under daily life conditions in Asian patients with psoriasis: A retrospective cohort study. J Dermatol 2018; 45:540-545. [PMID: 29512181 DOI: 10.1111/1346-8138.14270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2017] [Accepted: 01/29/2018] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
Given the relative scarcity of data concerning the efficacy of methotrexate under daily life conditions in psoriasis, this study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of methotrexate in Asian psoriatic patients and to identify factors associated with clinical response. This observational retrospective cohort study included adult psoriatic patients who had been treated with or were going to start methotrexate. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months were recorded. At 3 months, patients achieving 50% or more reduction from baseline PASI score were defined as responders. One hundred, 74 and 61 patients were followed for 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. Mean follow-up time was 15.3 ± 10.2 months. A reduction in PASI score of at least 75% was achieved in 26%, 32.5% and 45.2% at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively. At 12 and 24 months, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed 68.7% and 52.1% probability of drug survival, respectively. Male sex, body mass index (BMI) of less than 25 kg/m2 and absence of abdominal obesity were factors associated with response to treatment in univariate analysis. Male sex was the only significant factor in multivariate analysis. The effectiveness of methotrexate in clinical practise seemed to be lower than in clinical trials, but effectiveness increased with longer duration of treatment. Problems associated with methotrexate use in clinical practise may be due to medication adherence rather than lack of medication effectiveness. Female sex, abdominal obesity and BMI of 25 kg/m2 or more might decrease response to methotrexate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kamolwan Pongparit
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Leena Chularojanamontri
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Pichaya Limphoka
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Narumol Silpa-Archa
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Chanisada Wongpraparat
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sbidian E, Chaimani A, Garcia‐Doval I, Do G, Hua C, Mazaud C, Droitcourt C, Hughes C, Ingram JR, Naldi L, Chosidow O, Le Cleach L. Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 12:CD011535. [PMID: 29271481 PMCID: PMC6486272 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011535.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 101] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
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 conventional systemic agents (acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, methotrexate), small molecules (apremilast, tofacitinib, ponesimod), anti-TNF alpha (etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, certolizumab), anti-IL12/23 (ustekinumab), anti-IL17 (secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab), anti-IL23 (guselkumab, tildrakizumab), and other biologics (alefacept, itolizumab) for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases to December 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports. We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs. We searched the trial results databases of a number of pharmaceutical companies and handsearched the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic and biological 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. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Three 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 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI) 90) 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; we evaluated evidence as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. MAIN RESULTS We included 109 studies in our review (39,882 randomised participants, 68% men, all recruited from a hospital). The overall average age was 44 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo controlled (67%), 23% were head-to-head studies, and 10% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and placebo. We have assessed all treatments listed in the objectives (19 in total). In all, 86 trials were multicentric trials (two to 231 centres). All of the trials included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment at less than 24 weeks after randomisation); in fact, all trials included in the network meta-analysis were measured between 12 and 16 weeks after randomisation. We assessed the majority of studies (48/109) as being at high risk of bias; 38 were assessed as at an unclear risk, and 23, low risk.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.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. Small molecules were associated with a higher chance of reaching PASI 90 compared to conventional systemic agents.At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, all of the anti-IL17 agents and guselkumab (an anti-IL23 drug) were significantly more effective than the anti-TNF alpha agents infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept, but not certolizumab. Ustekinumab was superior to etanercept. No clear difference was shown between infliximab, adalimumab, and etanercept. Only one trial assessed the efficacy of infliximab in this network; thus, these results have to be interpreted with caution. Tofacitinib was significantly superior to methotrexate, and no clear difference was shown between any of the other small molecules versus conventional treatments.Network meta-analysis also showed that ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90: the most effective drug was ixekizumab (risk ratio (RR) 32.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23.61 to 44.60; Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 94.3; high-certainty evidence), followed by secukinumab (RR 26.55, 95% CI 20.32 to 34.69; SUCRA = 86.5; high-certainty evidence), brodalumab (RR 25.45, 95% CI 18.74 to 34.57; SUCRA = 84.3; moderate-certainty evidence), guselkumab (RR 21.03, 95% CI 14.56 to 30.38; SUCRA = 77; moderate-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 24.58, 95% CI 3.46 to 174.73; SUCRA = 75.7; moderate-certainty evidence), and ustekinumab (RR 19.91, 95% CI 15.11 to 26.23; SUCRA = 72.6; high-certainty evidence).We found no significant difference between all of the interventions and the placebo regarding the risk of serious adverse effects (SAEs): the relative ranking strongly suggested that methotrexate was associated with the best safety profile regarding all of the SAEs (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.99; SUCRA = 90.7; moderate-certainty evidence), followed by ciclosporin (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.10; SUCRA = 78.2; very low-certainty evidence), certolizumab (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.36; SUCRA = 70.9; moderate-certainty evidence), infliximab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.00; SUCRA = 64.4; very low-certainty evidence), alefacept (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.55; SUCRA = 62.6; low-certainty evidence), and fumaric acid esters (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.99; SUCRA = 57.7; very low-certainty evidence). Major adverse cardiac events, serious infections, or malignancies were reported in both the placebo and intervention groups. Nevertheless, the SAEs analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just over half of the treatment estimates in total, moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be considered with caution.Considering both efficacy (PASI 90 outcome) and acceptability (SAEs outcome), highly effective treatments also had more SAEs compared to the other treatments, and ustekinumab, infliximab, and certolizumab appeared to have the better trade-off between efficacy and acceptability.Regarding the 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 a third of the interventions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, certolizumab, and ustekinumab are the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate to severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. At class level, 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, too. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured between 12 to 16 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficiently relevant for a chronic disease. Moreover, low numbers of studies were found for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 44 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. Methotrexate appeared to have the best safety profile, but as the evidence was of very low to moderate quality, we cannot be sure of the ranking. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies as well.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 patients, 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ignacio Garcia‐Doval
- Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de VigoDepartment of DermatologyTorrecedeira 10, 2º AVigoSpain36202
| | - Giao Do
- Hôpital Henri MondorDepartment of Dermatology51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de TassignyCréteilFrance94000
| | - Camille Hua
- Hôpital Henri MondorDepartment of Dermatology51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de TassignyCréteilFrance94000
| | - Canelle Mazaud
- Hôpital Henri MondorDepartment of Dermatology51 Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de TassignyCréteilFrance94000
| | - Catherine Droitcourt
- Université de Rennes 1Department of Dermatology2 rue Henri le GuillouxRennesFrance35000
| | - Carolyn Hughes
- The University of Nottinghamc/o Cochrane Skin GroupA103, King's Meadow CampusLenton LaneNottinghamUKNG7 2NR
| | - John R Ingram
- Cardiff UniversityDepartment of Dermatology & Wound Healing, Cardiff Institute of Infection & Immunity3rd Floor Glamorgan HouseHeath ParkCardiffUKCF14 4XN
| | - Luigi Naldi
- Padiglione Mazzoleni ‐ Presidio Ospedaliero Matteo RotaCentro Studi GISED (Italian Group for Epidemiologic Research in Dermatology) ‐ FROM (Research Foundation of Ospedale Maggiore Bergamo)Via Garibaldi 13/15BergamoItaly24122
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Farahnik B, Sharma D, Alban J, Sivamani R. Oral (Systemic) Botanical Agents for the Treatment of Psoriasis: A Review. J Altern Complement Med 2017; 23:418-425. [PMID: 28157393 DOI: 10.1089/acm.2016.0324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Patients with psoriasis often use botanical therapies as part of their treatment. It is important for clinicians to be aware of the current evidence regarding these agents as they treat patients. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE database for randomized clinical trials assessing the use of botanical therapeutics for psoriasis. The search included the following keywords: "psoriasis" and "plant" or "herbal" or "botanical." Citations within articles were also reviewed to identify relevant sources. The results were then further refined by route of administration, and the oral (systemic) botanical agents are reviewed herein. RESULTS A total of 12 controlled and uncontrolled clinical trials addressing the use of oral, systemic botanical agents for psoriasis were assessed in this review. While overall evidence is limited in quantity and quality, HESA-A, curcumin, neem extract, and, to a lesser degree, Traditional Chinese Medicine seem to be the most efficacious agents. CONCLUSION The literature addresses a large amount of studies in regards to botanicals for the treatment of psoriasis. While most agents appear to be safe, further research is necessary for evidence-based recommendation of oral botanical agents to psoriasis patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Benjamin Farahnik
- 1 Department of Dermatology, University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine , Burlington, VT
| | - Divya Sharma
- 2 Department of Medicine, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University and Rhode Island Hospital , Providence, RI
| | - Joseph Alban
- 3 Alban Acupuncture and Herbs , New York, NY.,4 Dermveda, Inc. , Sacramento, CA
| | - Raja Sivamani
- 5 Department of Dermatology, University of California-Davis , Sacramento, CA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Ali F, Cueva A, Vyas J, Atwan A, Salek M, Finlay A, Piguet V. A systematic review of the use of quality-of-life instruments in randomized controlled trials for psoriasis. Br J Dermatol 2016; 176:577-593. [DOI: 10.1111/bjd.14788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/23/2016] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- F.M. Ali
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
| | - A.C. Cueva
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
- Centro de la Piel; Quito Ecuador
| | - J. Vyas
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
| | - A.A. Atwan
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
| | - M.S. Salek
- School of Life and Medical Sciences; University of Hertfordshire; Hatfield U.K
- Institute for Medicines Development; Cardiff U.K
| | - A.Y. Finlay
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
| | - V. Piguet
- Department of Dermatology and Academic Wound Healing; Division of Infection and Immunity; School of Medicine; Cardiff University; 3rd Floor Glamorgan House, Heath Park Cardiff CF14 4XN U.K
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Parker S, Zhang CS, Yu JJ, Lu C, Zhang AL, Xue CC. Oral Chinese herbal medicine versus placebo for psoriasis vulgaris: A systematic review. J DERMATOL TREAT 2016; 28:21-31. [PMID: 27366921 DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2016.1178377] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder and the efficacy and safety of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) treatments is unclear. This review evaluates oral CHM for psoriasis vulgaris clinical trial evidence. DESIGN The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, CBM, CNKI, CQVIP and Wanfang databases were searched from inception to June 2015. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of oral CHM compared to placebo data were included and analysed using Review Manager 5.2. RESULTS Seven studies were included, no study utilised identical CHM intervention. Four studies data were subgrouped (decoction or capsule/pill) and pooled in meta-analysis to evaluate treatment effective rate for PASI60 or above (RR: 2.74 [0.92, 8.21] I2 = 65%). Another five studies were subgrouped and evaluated for PASI score change, (MD -7.00 [-10.74, -3.27] I2 = 98%). Only one study presented Dermatology Life Quality Index data, which favoured CHM (MD: -4.08 [-7.56, -0.60]). Two studies presented data on psoriasis-related inflammatory cell-signalling protein tumour necrosis factor-a (TNF-a) (MD: -4.92 [-5.31, -4.53]). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION While CHMs appear to be safe and may have benefit for psoriasis, variation between CHM interventions, outcome measures and the quality of included studies limit the conclusions of this review. Further rigorous RCTs utilising reliable, validated symptom and QoL outcome measures are recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shefton Parker
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Claire Shuiqing Zhang
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Jason Jingjie Yu
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia.,b Guangdong Provincial Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences and Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine , Guangzhou , China
| | - Chuanjian Lu
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia.,b Guangdong Provincial Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences and Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine , Guangzhou , China.,c Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Clinical Research on Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome , Guangzhou , China
| | - Anthony Lin Zhang
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia
| | - Charlie C Xue
- a School of Health and Biomedical Sciences , China-Australia International Research Centre for Chinese Medicine, RMIT University , Melbourne , Australia.,b Guangdong Provincial Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences and Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine , Guangzhou , China
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
West J, Ogston S, Foerster J. Safety and Efficacy of Methotrexate in Psoriasis: A Meta-Analysis of Published Trials. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0153740. [PMID: 27168193 PMCID: PMC4864230 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2015] [Accepted: 04/04/2016] [Indexed: 01/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Methotrexate (MTX) has been used to treat psoriasis for over half a century. Even so, clinical data characterising its efficacy and safety are sparse. Objective In order to enhance the available evidence, we conducted two meta-analyses, one for efficacy and one for safety outcomes, respectively, according to PRISMA checklist. (Data sources, study criteria, and study synthesis methods are detailed in Methods). Results In terms of efficacy, only eleven studies met criteria for study design and passed a Cochrane risk of bias analysis. Based on this limited dataset, 45.2% [95% confidence interval 34.1–60.0] of patients achieve PASI75 at primary endpoint (12 or 16 weeks, respectively, n = 705 patients across all studies), compared to a calculated PASI75 of 4.4 [3.5–5.6] for placebo, yielding a relative risk of 10.2 [95% C.I. 7.1–14.7]. For safety outcomes, we extended the meta-analysis to include studies employing the same dose range of MTX for other chronic inflammatory conditions, e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, in order not to maximise capture of relevant safety data. Based on 2763 patient safety years, adverse events (AEs) were found treatment limiting in 6.9 ± 1.4% (mean ± s.e.) of patients treated for six months, with an adverse effect profile largely in line with that encountered in clinical practice. Finally, in order to facilitate prospective clinical audit and to help generate long-term treatment outcomes under real world conditions, we also developed an easy to use documentation form to be completed by patients without requirement for additional staff time. Limitations Meta-analyses for efficacy and safety, respectively, employed non-identical selection criteria. Conclusions These meta-analyses summarise currently available evidence on MTX in psoriasis and should be of use to gauge whether local results broadly fall within outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan West
- University of Dundee, College of Medicine, Dentistry, and Nursing, Dundee, Scotland
| | - Simon Ogston
- University of Dundee, College of Medicine, Dentistry, and Nursing, Dundee, Scotland
| | - John Foerster
- University of Dundee, College of Medicine, Dentistry, and Nursing, Dundee, Scotland
- Department of Dermatology and Photobiology, NHS Tayside, Dundee, Scotland
- * E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Bae SH, Yun SJ, Lee JB, Kim SJ, Won YH, Lee SC. Algorithm to select optimal systemic anti-psoriatic drugs in relation with patients' Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score for plaque psoriasis. J Dermatol 2015; 43:643-9. [DOI: 10.1111/1346-8138.13195] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2015] [Accepted: 09/25/2015] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Soo Hyeon Bae
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| | - Sook Jung Yun
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| | - Jee-Bum Lee
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| | - Seong-Jin Kim
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| | - Young Ho Won
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| | - Seung-Chul Lee
- Department of Dermatology; Chonnam National University Medical School; Gwangju Korea
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
|
22
|
Zhou D, Chen W, Li X, Deng B, Xu W, Qu J, Zhang G, Zhang C, Sun L, Jiang C, Xu J, Li P, Chen J, Duan Y, Yang Z, Bai Y, Liu W, Qu X, Wang P, Liu J. Evidence-based practice guideline of Chinese herbal medicine for psoriasis vulgaris (Bai Bi). Eur J Integr Med 2014. [DOI: 10.1016/j.eujim.2014.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
23
|
Schmitt J, Rosumeck S, Thomaschewski G, Sporbeck B, Haufe E, Nast A. Efficacy and safety of systemic treatments for moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis: meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. Br J Dermatol 2014; 170:274-303. [DOI: 10.1111/bjd.12663] [Citation(s) in RCA: 126] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/01/2013] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- J. Schmitt
- Centre for Evidence‐Based Healthcare University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 D‐01307 Dresden Germany
- Department of Occupational and Social Medicine Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 D‐01307 Dresden Germany
| | - S. Rosumeck
- Division of Evidence Based Medicine (dEBM) Department of Dermatology Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin Charitéplatz 1 10117 Berlin Germany
| | - G. Thomaschewski
- Centre for Evidence‐Based Healthcare University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 D‐01307 Dresden Germany
| | - B. Sporbeck
- Division of Evidence Based Medicine (dEBM) Department of Dermatology Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin Charitéplatz 1 10117 Berlin Germany
| | - E. Haufe
- Centre for Evidence‐Based Healthcare University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 D‐01307 Dresden Germany
- Department of Occupational and Social Medicine Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus Technische Universität Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 D‐01307 Dresden Germany
| | - A. Nast
- Division of Evidence Based Medicine (dEBM) Department of Dermatology Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin Charitéplatz 1 10117 Berlin Germany
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Dogra S, Mahajan R. Systemic methotrexate therapy for psoriasis: past, present and future. Clin Exp Dermatol 2013; 38:573-88. [DOI: 10.1111/ced.12062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/14/2012] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- S. Dogra
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology; Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research; Chandigarh; India
| | - R. Mahajan
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology; Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research; Chandigarh; India
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Bhuchar S, Katta R, Wolf J. Complementary and alternative medicine in dermatology: an overview of selected modalities for the practicing dermatologist. Am J Clin Dermatol 2012; 13:311-7. [PMID: 22668453 DOI: 10.2165/11597560-000000000-00000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
According to survey data, 35-69% of patients with skin disease have used complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in their lifetime. A literature search on this subject reveals a number of studies on the efficacy of CAM treatment for dermatologic conditions, as well as a number of articles showing the growing prevalence of CAM use amongst patients suffering from these conditions. Given the consensus amongst these articles that dermatologists require increased education on CAM, this paper presents an overview of some of the most widely used systems of alternative medicine to serve as a tool for practicing dermatologists. Specifically, the history and theory behind psychocutaneous therapies, traditional Chinese medicine (including acupuncture), homeopathy, and Ayurvedic medicine will be described, along with current evidence for their efficacy and reports of their adverse effects. The authors conclude that more evidence and better studies are needed for each of the major CAM modalities before they may be considered as independent therapeutic options. Moreover, given the shortage of evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of CAM, dermatologists should obtain a thorough history of CAM use from their patients. In general, ingestible substances including most homeopathic, Ayurvedic, and traditional Chinese medicine herbal formulations that are not US FDA regulated should be viewed with caution as they may cause severe adverse effects such as arsenicosis and hepatotoxicity. On the other hand, less invasive techniques such as acupuncture and psychocutaneous therapies may be more acceptable given their low-risk profile. Ultimately, until the availability of more sound data, these treatments should primarily be used in combination with conventional treatment and rarely independently.
Collapse
|
26
|
Placebo response in relation to clinical trial design: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for determining biologic efficacy in psoriasis treatment. Arch Dermatol Res 2012; 304:707-17. [DOI: 10.1007/s00403-012-1266-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2012] [Revised: 07/11/2012] [Accepted: 07/16/2012] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
27
|
May BH, Zhang AL, Zhou W, Lu CJ, Deng S, Xue CCL. Oral herbal medicines for psoriasis: a review of clinical studies. Chin J Integr Med 2012; 18:172-8. [PMID: 22466940 DOI: 10.1007/s11655-012-1008-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2011] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Various forms of complementary and alternative medicine are used in psoriasis. Among these, herbal medicines are frequently used as systemic and/or topical interventions either as a replacement for or in conjunction with conventional methods. The benefit of such use is unclear. This review is to provide an up-to-date review and discussion of the clinical evidence for the main kinds of herbal therapies for psoriasis. Searches of the biomedical databases PubMed (including MEDLINE), EMBASE and CINAHL were conducted in December 2011 which identified 32 clinical studies, all published in English. Twenty of these primarily tested topical herbal medicines and were thus excluded. The 12 studies that evaluated systemic use of herbal medicines were included in the review. Four were case series studies and the other 8 were controlled trials. In terms of interventions, 4 studies tested the systemic use of plant oils combined with marine oils and 8 studies tested multi-ingredient herbal formulations. The clinical evidence for plant and animal derived fatty acids is inconclusive and any benefit appears to be small. For the multi-herb formulations, benefits of oral herbal medicines were shown in several studies, however, a number of these studies are not controlled trials, a diversity of interventions are tested and there are methodological issues in the controlled studies. In conclusion, there is promising evidence in a number of the studies of multi-herb formulations. However, well-designed, adequately powered studies with proper control interventions are needed to further determine the benefits of these formulations. In addition, syndrome differentiation should be incorporated into trial design to ensure effective translation of findings from these studies into Chinese medicine clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brian H May
- Traditional & Complementary Medicine Research Program, Health Innovations Research Institute, WHO Collaborating Centre for Traditional Medicine, School of Health Sciences, RMIT University, Bundoora, VIC 3083, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Lucka TC, Pathirana D, Sammain A, Bachmann F, Rosumeck S, Erdmann R, Schmitt J, Orawa H, Rzany B, Nast A. Efficacy of systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term treatment. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2012; 26:1331-44. [PMID: 22404617 DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2012.04492.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 54] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the chronicity of psoriasis, most systematic reviews focus on short-term treatment. METHODS The systematic search strategy and results from the German Psoriasis Guidelines were adapted. To update the data a literature search in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library was conducted. The proportion of participants achieving ≥75% decrease in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) as well as Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) reduction at different time points were assessed. Trials were summarized with respect to time periods and study designs. Suitable trials were included in a meta-analysis. Particular attention was paid to statistical approaches of handling dropouts. RESULTS A total of 33 articles including 27 trials totaling 6575 patients with active treatment were included in the systematic review. Seven randomized controlled trials were eligible for the meta-analysis. Over a 24 week treatment period infliximab [risk difference (RD) 78%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 72-83%] and ustekinumab 90 mg every 12 weeks (RD 77%, 95% CI 71-83%) were the most efficacious treatments. Adalimumab (RD: 60%, 95% CI 45-74%) showed results within the range of different etanercept dosages (etanercept 50 mg once weekly: RD 62%, 95% CI, 52-72%), (etanercept 25 mg twice weekly: RD 45%, 95% CI 34-56%), (etanercept 50 mg twice weekly: RD 56%, 95% CI 49-62%) and (etanercept 50 mg twice weekly until week 12, then 25 mg twice weekly: RD 50%, 95% CI 42-57%). After 24 weeks a decrease in efficacy for inflximab, adalimumab and etanercept was observed. CONCLUSIONS More sufficient data is required to draw reliable conclusions in extended long-term treatment and head-to-head comparisons are necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T C Lucka
- Division of Evidence Based Medicine, and Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|