Is ‘class effect’ relevant when assessing the benefit/risk profile of a biologic agent?

Psoriatic Arthritis: Development, Detection and Prevention: A Scoping Review

Psoriatic arthritis is a heterogenous chronic inflammatory disease that develops over time in some patients with psoriasis. The course of the disease is variable, with a broad clinical spectrum. The management of PsA has changed tremendously over the last decade, thanks to earlier diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach and progress in pharmacological therapies. Therefore, screening for risk factors and the early signs of arthritis is highly important and recommended. Currently, research is focused on finding soluble biomarkers and developing imaging techniques that can improve the prediction of psoriatic arthritis. Among imaging modalities, ultrasonography seems to be the most accurate in detecting subclinical inflammation. Early intervention is based on the assumption that it is possible to prevent or delay psoriatic arthritis if systemic treatment for psoriasis can be administered early enough. This review article provides an overview of the current perspectives and evidence regarding the diagnosis, management and prevention of psoriatic arthritis.

Adalimumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis in patients switching from other biologics

BACKGROUND

Ample evidence shows that switching from one biological agent to another may prove effective when response to the first one is inadequate. Nevertheless, there are little data so far showing the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with plaque psoriasis who previously received another biologic agent.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the 1-year effectiveness, safety and quality-of-life outcomes patients with psoriasis who had switched to adalimumab from other biologic therapies.

METHODS

Forty-two patients who participated in this Austrian multicenter study were treated with adalimumab over a 1-year period, after switching from efalizumab, infliximab or etanercept. Effectiveness was assessed using standardized tools for measurement of disease severity [Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI)] and quality of life [Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)]. The study endpoints were evaluated using the all-treated population.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of improvement at the end of the study was 74.3% for PASI, 81.6% for DLQI and 83.6% for NAPSI, demonstrating a considerable benefit of treatment with adalimumab. The safety profile observed was consistent with previous clinical trials for adalimumab, and no new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

Adalimumab therapy in patients with plaque psoriasis previously treated with other biologic agents demonstrates effectiveness, safety and improvement in quality of life.

Biosimilars in psoriasis: what can we expect?

Biosimilars are biotechnologically processed drugs whose amino acid sequence is identical to the original biopharmaceutical. They are of considerable clinical, economical, and health care interest. As patents for biologicals used to treat psoriasis expire, biosimilars will become more and more important within the field of dermatology. The patents for the two top-selling drugs (adalimumab and etanercept) will terminate in the next few years. Applications for biosimilars will presumably be submitted to the EMA and the FDA for all patent-free biologicals. Both regulatory bodies have issued guidelines on the assessment of bioequivalence, as well as the benefits and risks of biosimilars. While the preclinical requirements of the FDA and EMA are largely comparable, the formal requirements for clinical bioequivalence, including clinical efficacy and safety, differ markedly. Therefore, from a medical and health care perspective before biosimilars enter the market, specific evidence-based regulatory conditions need to be created and fulfilled. Only then biosimilars can be a less expensive option for a large number of patients, providing them with substances of the same value. Adequate, unequivocal proof of their bioequivalence, quality, and related patient safety should have priority over any ostensible economic benefits.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriatic patients previously treated with etanercept in a real-world setting

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge on the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients switching from etanercept is scarce, especially on the influence that causes of etanercept discontinuation may have on adalimumab response.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the response, adverse effects and factors that may influence the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients who failed on etanercept therapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Data from all moderate to severe plaque psoriasis patients who switched from etanercept to adalimumab were extracted from a registry of biological therapies of our department. Primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving PASI 50 at weeks 12, 24, and 52. Secondary endpoints were the percentages of patients achieving PASI 75 and PASI 90, patients who maintained PASI values <5 and <3, and the safety of adalimumab.

RESULTS

Of 35 patients who fulfilled the study criteria, 82.9% achieved PASI 50 at week 12, 74.3% at week 24, and 74.3% at week 52 on adalimumab treatment. Eleven of 16 primary and 11 of 17 secondary nonresponders to etanercept responded to adalimumab. There were no treatment discontinuations due to side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous etanercept failure seems not influence the success and safety of adalimumab treatment in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.