Secukinumab administration by autoinjector maintains reduction of plaque psoriasis severity over 52 weeks: results of the randomized controlled JUNCTURE trial

Current Insights on Treatment Adherence in Prevalent Dermatological Conditions and Strategies To Optimize Adherence Rates

Adherence to prescribed medication regimens is crucial for treatment efficacy and patient safety, but it remains a challenge in the medical field, particularly in dermatology, where adherence to prescribed treatments is being intensively evaluated and improved. This narrative review provides a comprehensive overview of adherence behaviors in dermatological diseases, including fungal skin infections, psoriasis, acne, atopic dermatitis, and chronic urticaria, aiming to update scientific information on adherence patterns and management strategies in these highly prevalent conditions. Furthermore, the importance of a holistic approach that integrates patient-centered and physician-centered strategies to optimize treatment outcomes and enhance adherence in dermatological care is highlighted. The role of technological advancements in promoting adherence is also discussed, with an emphasis on the potential for digital solutions to facilitate medication management. Future perspectives underscore the need for targeted interventions to address the multifaceted barriers to adherence, including treatment complexity, healthcare accessibility, and patient-provider communication. By addressing these challenges, healthcare providers can enhance patient satisfaction, improve therapeutic outcomes, and mitigate the adverse consequences of non-adherence in dermatological practice.

Patient Experience with the SensoReady® Autoinjector Pen versus a Comparator Device: Results from a Canadian Patient Survey in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Crohn´s Disease

Purpose

Medication delivery device design impacts treatment satisfaction, adherence, and compliance in patients receiving biologics. This survey assessed autoinjector attributes that are important to patients, and assessed patient perceptions and preferences between an adalimumab biosimilar autoinjector (Hyrimoz® SensoReady® Pen [SDZ-ADL pen]) and the reference adalimumab autoinjector (Humira® Pen [ref-ADL pen]) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or Crohn's disease (CD) in Canada.

Patients and Methods

In this survey, adult patients were recruited for web-assisted telephone interviews. Patients had ≥ 3 months' experience with the ref-ADL pen and 1-12 months' experience with the SDZ-ADL pen.

Results

The survey included 120 patients with RA (n = 32) or CD (n = 88). Mean experience with the ref-ADL pen was 7 years for RA or 5 years for CD vs 9 months with the SDZ-ADL pen. The most important autoinjector attributes were the ability to use the pen independently and the ease and simplicity of self-injection. When comparing the two autoinjectors, patients significantly preferred the SDZ-ADL pen over the ref-ADL pen for nearly every attribute evaluated, with the greatest differences reported for visual and audible feedback mechanisms, ease of self-injection, and ability to use the device independently. Overall, 82% of patients preferred the SDZ-ADL pen over the ref-ADL pen, with buttonless activation and less injection pain being the main drivers for this preference.

Conclusion

Patients with RA or CD indicated a preference for the SDZ-ADL pen over the ref-ADL pen, independent of the duration of use of the pen. The preference for a biosimilar device within 1 year of switching provides reassurance of rapid patient acceptance of biosimilars and may simplify the switching process. These results confirm the importance of ensuring autoinjector design supports independent self-administration of medication and align with previous data showing high patient satisfaction with the SDZ-ADL pen.

Formation and clinical effects of anti-drug antibodies against biologics in psoriasis treatment: An analysis of current evidence

BACKGROUND

Formation of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs) against biologics is an important cause of psoriasis treatment failure.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize the characteristics of ADAs formation under different biological therapies and the influence of ADAs on the clinical effects and safety of biologics in patients with psoriasis.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception to August 2022. Studies on biologics that assessed ADA levels in patients with psoriasis were included. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) for case-control and cohort studies, and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for single-arm studies. We calculated the pooled incidence with a random-effects model using R software. Subgroup analyses revealed that differences in patient characteristics, disease conditions, study design, and immunoassays may influence ADA generation and detection.

RESULTS

The analysis included 86 studies, with a total population of 42,280 individuals. The pooled ADA rates were 0.49%, 2.20%, 2.38%, 4.08%, 7.38%, 7.94%, 14.29%, 21.93%, 29.70%, 31.76%, and 39.58% for secukinumab, etanercept, brodalumab, ustekinumab, tildrakizumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, infliximab, adalimumab, and bimekizumab, respectively. >70% (95% CI, 0.71-0.81) of ADAs against adalimumab were neutralizing antibodies, and over 70% of ADAs against secukinumab and brodalumab were transient. Concomitant methotrexate therapy with tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors decreased ADA levels. Lower infliximab doses and intermittent therapy with interleukin (IL)-23 p19 inhibitors increased ADA formation. Additionally, ADA formation under treatment using TNF-α inhibitors and IL-12/23 p40 inhibitors was associated with lower response rates or serum drug levels, but only high ADA titers reduced the clinical effects of IL-17 inhibitors. The occurrence of IL-23 p19 and TNF-α inhibitors has been linked to injection-site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the 11 biologics, secukinumab, etanercept, and brodalumab resulted in the lowest ADA formation rates. Immunogenicity contributes to lower biological efficacy and a higher likelihood of injection-site reactions. Low doses, intermittent treatment may increase ADA formation. An appropriate biologic should be selected based on the ADA formation rate and course of treatment.

Short-term risk and long-term incidence rate of infection and malignancy with IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors in adult patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The risk of infection and malignancy may be a concern for patients with psoriasis receiving interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors, particularly with long-term treatments. We aimed to estimate the short-term risks and long-term incidence rates of infection and malignancy with IL-17 or IL-23 antagonists in adult patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis through this comprehensive meta-analysis (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022363127). We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov until May 17, 2023 for randomized placebo-controlled trials and long-term (≥ 52 weeks) open-label extension studies. The estimates of short-term risk ratios (RRs) and long-term exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) were pooled using R software 4.1.1 and STATA 16.0. This review included 45 randomized placebo-controlled studies and 27 open-label extension studies. Short-term RRs of serious infection, overall infection and malignancy were 1.45 (95% confidence intervals, 95% CI: 0.81-2.59), 1.20 (95% CI: 1.06-1.35), 0.83 (95% CI: 0.41-1.71) with IL-17 inhibitors; and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.38-1.22), 1.13 (95% CI: 1.00-1.28), 0.87 (95% CI: 0.37-2.04) with IL-23 inhibitors. Increased short-term risks of nasopharyngitis and Candida infection with IL-17 inhibitors were found. Long-term EAIRs of serious infection, overall infection, nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), malignancies excluding NMSC, nasopharyngitis and upper respiratory tract infection were 1.11/100 patient-years (PYs), 57.78/100PYs, 0.47/100PYs, 0.24/100PYs, 15.07/100PYs, 8.52/100PYs, 3.41/100PYs with IL-17 inhibitors; and 1.09/100PYs, 48.50/100PYs, 0.40/100PYs, 0.43/100PYs, 10.75/100PYs, 5.84/100PYs with IL-23 inhibitors. Long-term EAIR of Candida infection was 3.41/100PYs with IL-17 inhibitors. No active or reactivated tuberculosis was ever reported in all the trials, and only a few cases of latent tuberculosis, hepatitis, and herpes zoster were reported during the long-term extension periods. No evidence of increased EAIRs of infection and malignancy with longer durations was found. Our study suggested that short-term risk and long-term incidence of infections and malignancies in psoriasis patients receiving IL-17 inhibitors and IL-23 inhibitors are generally low. However, close monitoring is required for nasopharyngitis and Candida infection with IL-17 inhibitors.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022363127.

Risk of candidiasis associated with interleukin-17 inhibitors: Implications and management

The application of interleukin-17 (IL-17) inhibitors, including secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab, and bimekizumab, are associated with elevated risk of candidiasis. These medications interfere with the IL-17 pathway, which is essential for maintaining mucosal barriers and coordinating the immune response against Candida species. The observational data and clinical trials demonstrate the increased incidence of candidiasis in individuals treated with IL-17 inhibitors. Brodalumab and bimekizumab pose a greater risk than secukinumab in eliciting candidiasis, whereas the data regarding ixekizumab are equivocal. Higher doses and prolonged treatment duration of IL-17 inhibitors increase the risk of candidiasis by compromising the immune response against Candida species. Prior to prescribing IL-17 inhibitors, healthcare professionals should comprehensively evaluate patients' medical histories and assess their risk factors. Patients should be educated on the signs and symptoms of candidiasis to facilitate early detection and intervention. Future research should focus on identifying the risk factors associated with candidiasis in patients receiving IL-17 inhibitors. Prospective studies and long-term surveillance are required to explore the impact of specific inhibitors on the incidence and severity of candidiasis and to evaluate the effectiveness of combination therapies, such as concurrent use of IL-17 inhibitors and prophylactic antifungal agents.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) results confirmed by head-to-head trials: a case study in psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head comparisons through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide high-quality evidence to inform healthcare decisions. In their absence, indirect comparisons are often performed; however, evidence is limited on how valid matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC)-based comparative efficacy estimates are vs. RCT-based estimates.

OBJECTIVES

Compare MAIC and RCT results of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab to provide insight into validity of results generated using MAIC methods.

METHODS

Previously reported results from MAICs of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab were compared with results from ECLIPSE and IXORA-R RCTs based on risk differences between Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response rates.

RESULTS

Risk difference (95% confidence interval) in PASI 90 response rates at week 48 for guselkumab vs. secukinumab was 14.4% (9.4%; 19.4%) in ECLIPSE and 9.4% (4.7%; 14.0%) in the MAIC. The risk difference at week 24 for guselkumab vs. ixekizumab was 0.0% (-5.4%; 5.4%) in IXORA-R and 0.7% (-5.1%; 6.4%) in the MAIC.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparative efficacy results were consistent between MAICs and RCTs of guselkumab vs. secukinumab and ixekizumab. This analysis demonstrates that MAIC methods can provide valid relative treatment effect estimates when direct comparisons are lacking, particularly when trials with similar designs and patient populations inform the analysis.

Gradually increasing the dosing interval of Secukinumab for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: A single-center, uncontrolled, prospective study in 36 weeks

Secukinumab is a recombinant, fully human monoclonal anti-IL-17A antibody approved to treat moderate-to-severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Its effectiveness and safety have been confirmed, but a gradual increase in the secukinumab dosing interval has not been investigated. To assess the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of gradually increasing the secukinumab dosing interval; the interval duration was determined by changes in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores. Patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis received secukinumab 300 mg subcutaneously at baseline and weeks 0, 1, 2, and 3. At week 4, the improvement from baseline PASI guided the next injection time until week 36. In total, 83 patients were recruited. PASI 75 was achieved by 80%, 96%, and 95% of patients at weeks 4, 12, and 36, respectively. PASI 90 was achieved by 54%, 95%, and 84% of patients at weeks 4, 12, and 36, respectively. PASI 100 was achieved by 28%, 89%, and 68% of patients at weeks 4, 12, and 36, respectively. The average PASI score (1.05 ± 1.83) was significantly lower at week 36 than at baseline. Most patients reached PASI 75 at week 36 in our modified study. This study may provide information for future biotherapies.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Understanding efficacy-safety balance of biologics in moderate-to-severe pediatric psoriasis

Background

Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease affecting both adults and children. To better understand the efficacy-safety profile of biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, this study aimed to analyze efficacy and safety data of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in pediatric psoriasis and to compare efficacy outcomes in children with those in adults.

Methods

RCTs investigating biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis were identified in a systematic literature review. PASI75/90 treatment responses at weeks 11/12 were analyzed comparing biologics with control arms. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were analyzed at the end of each study. Efficacy data from RCTs in adults with psoriasis were selected for the same biologics. Risk ratios (RR) of selected RCTs were pooled together in a statistical random effects model using the inverse variance method.

Results

For children, there were 1 etanercept, 2 secukinumab, 1 ixekizumab and 1 ustekinumab placebo-controlled RCTs and 1 adalimumab RCT using methotrexate as reference arm at weeks 11/12. For adults, out of 263 RCTs, 7 adalimumab and 15 etanercept (TNF inhibitors) and 4 ixekizumab and 12 ustekinumab (IL-17 and IL-12/23 inhibitors) RCTs reported PASI75/90 efficacy responses at weeks 11/12. Regarding efficacy, all biologics showed improved PASI responses over control arms. RRs ranges were 2.02-7.45 in PASI75 and 4.10-14.50 in PASI90. The highest PASI75 responses were seen for ustekinumab 0.375 mg/kg (RR = 7.25, 95% CI 2.83-18.58) and ustekinumab 0.75 mg/kg (RR = 7.45, 95% CI 2.91-19.06) in the CADMUS study. The highest PASI90 response was seen for ixekizumab (RR = 14.50, 95% CI 4.82-43.58) in the IXORA-PEDS study. SAE incidences in pediatric and adult arms with biologics were 0 to 3% except for a pediatric arm with adalimumab 0.40 mg/kg (8%). For adults, pooled RR also showed improved PASI responses over placebo for all biologics, with highest PASI75 response observed for ixekizumab (pooled RR = 16.18, 95% CI 11.83-22.14).

Conclusion

Both adults and children with psoriasis show superior efficacy with biologics compared to control arms after 3 months of treatment with SAE incidences in the low percentages. Additional longer-term clinical studies are warranted to fully understand the overall efficacy-safety profile of biologics in children with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Anti-drug antibodies of IL-17 inhibitors for psoriasis: a systematic review

Biologics may elicit the production of anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), the clinical significance of which is not fully understood. ADA development in psoriasis patients on IL-17 inhibitors was evaluated by incidence, impact on efficacy, and relationship with adverse events. We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases, identifying 456 references. 17 studies met inclusion criteria. ADA incidence was: 0% to 5.5% (secukinumab), 11% to 19.4% (ixekizumab), 0% to 3.3% (brodalumab), and 19% to 39% (bimekizumab). Neutralizing antibody incidence was: 0% to 1.5% (secukinumab), 0% to 3.5% (ixekizumab), and 0% (brodalumab). ADA presence alone with secukinumab, ixekizumab, and bimekizumab did not impact drug efficacy. Brodalumab was the only one of the IL-17 inhibitors, which showed a reduction in efficacy in ADA + patients. In one analysis, high ADA titers to ixekizumab were associated with diminished treatment response. ADAs to secukinumab and bimekizumab were not associated with adverse events. There were limited data on ADAs and safety with ixekizumab or brodalumab. Overall, when monitoring patients on secukinumab, ADAs, titers, and the presence of neutralizing antibodies were not prognostic of outcomes. However, monitoring for ADAs with brodalumab and measuring titers with ixekizumab may be of value clinically.

Review and Practical Guidance on Managing Fungal Infections in Patients With Psoriasis Receiving Anti-IL-17 Therapies

The IL-17 signalling pathway is a major target in treatment of plaque psoriasis. IL-17 signalling contributes to chronic inflammation and epidermal hyperplasia seen in psoriatic lesions. Blocking the IL-17 signalling cascade is an effective method in treating this disease. However, IL-17 also plays a role in the immunological protection against fungal infections and therefore, patients on IL-17 biologics experience an increased rate of fungal infections, specifically Candida albicans. It is prudent that patients and physicians are aware of this risk and understand how to recognize and manage Candida infections. In this review, we examine the Candida infection rates associated with IL-17 biologics, both in clinical trials and real-world practice. We discuss common presentations associated with various types of candidiasis and propose a recommended management approach to treating these infections.

RV, Shreya S, Suzsmi L. S. Secukinumab: A Silver Lining in Dermatology

Secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, is a biological agent that targets interleukin-17A. Secukinumab is used in the management of the common dermatological entity - plaque-type psoriasis and its various types, namely psoriatic arthritis, hypertrophic palmoplantar psoriasis and generalized pustular psoriasis. Other less common indications of this popular interleukin -17A inhibitor, secukinumab include ankylosing spondylitis, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, Familial Mediterranean fever, and tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS). This review article was written by referring to various review articles, original articles, and some books related to highly regarded databases, such as the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. The keywords explored during review of literature consisted of combinations of the following words: human monoclonal antibody, IL-17A, and biologicals. The authors with this in-depth review hope to explore the working of this versatile biological, Secukinumab, especially as a silver lining in dermatology.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Practical update of the Recommendations Published by the Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (GPS) on the Treatment of Psoriasis with Biologic Therapy. Part 1. Concepts and General Management of Psoriasis with Biologic Therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A new, updated AEDV Psoriasis Group consensus document on the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis was needed owing to the approval, in recent years, of a large number of new drugs and changes in the treatment paradigm.

METHODOLOGY

The consensus document was developed using the nominal group technique and a scoping review. First, a designated coordinator selected a group of Psoriasis Group members for the panel. The coordinator defined the objectives and key points for the document and, with the help of a documentalist, conducted a scoping review of articles in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2021. The review included systematic reviews and meta-analyses as well as clinical trials not included in those studies and high-quality real-world studies. National and international clinical practice guidelines and consensus documents on the management of moderate to severe psoriasis were also reviewed. Based on these reviews, the coordinator drew up a set of proposed recommendations, which were then discussed and modified in a nominal group meeting. After several review processes, including external review by other GPs members, the final document was drafted.

RESULTS

The present guidelines include general principles for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and also define treatment goals and criteria for the indication of biologic therapy and the selection of initial and subsequent therapies. Practical issues, such as treatment failure and maintenance of response, are also addressed.

Cumulative Clinical Benefits of Biologics in the Treatment of Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis over 1 Year: a Network Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Both early clinical improvement and long-term maintenance of clinical efficacy of treatments matter to patients with psoriasis. We compared cumulative clinical benefits of treatment with biologics over 1 year based on the area under the curve (AUC) for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 100 and PASI 90 responses in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

Published phase 3 randomized, placebo- or active-controlled clinical trial data for biologics approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis were obtained from a systematic literature review up to 30 September 2020. Eighteen clinical trials that included data from baseline to 48 or 52 weeks where AUC could be calculated were included. Data were compared using a fixed-effect model with a separate random-effect baseline model to account for effects of the placebo arm. Cumulative clinical benefit was estimated using the AUC for PASI 100 and PASI 90 responses (complete and almost-complete skin clearance, respectively). Normalized AUC was compared using Bayesian NMA. Cumulative days of response were calculated using normalized AUC and study duration.

Results

Interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors demonstrated greater cumulative clinical benefits for both PASI 100 and PASI 90 versus IL-12/23 and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. Over 52 weeks, cumulative days with PASI 100 were greatest with ixekizumab [158.7 (95% credible interval, 147.4, 170.0) days] followed by risankizumab [154.0 (144.9, 163.4) days]; PASI 90 days were greatest with risankizumab [249.3 (239.5, 259.2) days] followed by ixekizumab [238.8 (227.1, 250.8) days]. Both ixekizumab and risankizumab showed greater cumulative days with PASI 100 or PASI 90 responses versus secukinumab [117.9 (110.7, 125.2) and 215.5 (208.2, 223.1) days, respectively] and greater cumulative days with PASI 100 versus guselkumab [130.7 (120.5, 140.9) days].

Conclusion

For complete and almost-complete skin clearance, ixekizumab and risankizumab provided the greatest cumulative clinical benefits over 1 year.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00690-5.

Effectiveness and Safety of Secukinumab for Psoriasis in a Real-World Clinical Setting in the Asia-Pacific and Middle East Regions: Results from the REALIA Study

INTRODUCTION

Secukinumab has demonstrated sustained long-term efficacy with a favourable safety profile in various manifestations of psoriatic disease. We investigated effectiveness and safety of secukinumab, other biologics and conventional systemic therapies in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis in a real-world setting.

METHODS

REALIA was a non-interventional, multicentre, prospective, parallel group study. Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years old with chronic plaque psoriasis commencing a new treatment with a biologic agent or conventional systemic therapies.

RESULTS

At baseline, 541 patients were divided into three cohorts based on treatment initiated: conventional systemics (173), secukinumab (184) and other biologics (184). A significantly higher proportion of patients achieved almost clear to clear skin based on physician's judgement in secukinumab versus conventional systemics at month 3 (64.7% versus 22.8%, P < 0.001) and month 6 (61.8% versus 20.8%, P < 0.001). At month 12, clear to almost clear skin was achieved by 52.1% of the patients in secukinumab versus 35.8% in conventional systemics (P = 0.066). The proportion of patients achieving Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 90 on conventional systemics, secukinumab and other biologics was 18.8%, 59.7% and 40.0% at month 3 and 35.3%, 60.8% and 50.0% at month 12, respectively. Secukinumab patients showed significantly higher change in PASI total score from baseline versus conventional systemics at month 3 {least squares [LS] mean [standard error (SE)]: -14.49 [0.648] versus -8.48 [1.149], P < 0.001} and numerically higher [LS mean (SE): -13.60 (0.475) versus -10.84 (1.733), P = 0.122] at month 12. The proportion of patients with Dermatology Life Quality Index 0/1 score on conventional systemics, secukinumab and other biologics was 22.6%, 65.0% and 41.6% at month 3 and 32.0%, 63.5% and 41.3% at month 12, respectively. Safety profile was comparable across cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Secukinumab is effective and well tolerated in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis in a real-world setting in an Asia-Pacific and Middle East population, and these results are in agreement with clinical outcomes of secukinumab reported in randomised clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

170803-001645.

Comparison of Efficacy of Anti-interleukin-17 in the Treatment of Psoriasis Between Caucasians and Asians: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Interleukin-17 (IL-17) monoclonal antibody drugs have been increasingly significant in the treatment of psoriasis, but it is not clear whether the efficacy is equivalent across ethnicities.

Objective

To explore the differences of short-term efficacy of IL-17 inhibitors between Caucasians and Asians.

Methods

The pooled log risk ratio (logRR) between the groups was estimated. The meta-regression analysis on the logRR was performed, with the proportion of Caucasian patients as the covariate. The subgroup analysis was performed by specific IL-17 inhibitors.

Results

Of the 1,569 potentially relevant studies, sixteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. For the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 (PASI 75) response at week 12, the pooled logRR of the Asian group and the Caucasian group was 2.81 (95% CI: 2.27–3.35, p < 0.001) and 2.93 (95% CI: 2.71–3.16, p < 0.001), respectively, indicating no significant difference of efficacy between Asians and Caucasians. The meta-regression analysis did not show an association of the proportion of Caucasians with the effect size (β = 0.3203, p = 0.334). In the subgroup analysis, the comparison results of secukinumab were consistent with the main analysis.

Limitations

Only the short-term efficacy was explored. The data from Asian countries were limited.

Conclusions

The short-term efficacy of IL-17 inhibitors in the treatment of psoriasis has no significant difference between Caucasians and Asians.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42020201994, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Secukinumab demonstrates efficacy, safety and tolerability upon administration by 2 mL autoinjector in adult patients with plaque psoriasis: 52-week results from MATURE, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Convenient administration is an important factor for treatment adherence in patients with psoriasis. MATURE study reports the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of secukinumab 300 mg 2 mL autoinjector (AI) from MATURE trial (NCT03589885). Eligible patients were randomized to secukinumab 300 mg 2 mL AI or 2x 1 mL pre-filled syringe (PFS) or placebo. The co-primary endpoints were Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 response rates at Week 12 versus placebo. Other endpoints included PASI90/100 response, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1, pharmacokinetics, 2 mL AI usability rated using Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ), and safety. The study met both co-primary and secondary endpoints (p < 0.0001). Secukinumab 300 mg 2 mL AI and 2x 1 mL PFS treatments led to superior PASI75/90/100 (2 mL AI: 95.1%/75.6%/43.9%; 2x 1 mL PFS: 83.2%/62.6%/37.5% and placebo: 10%/5.0%/0.0%, respectively), IGA, and DLQI 0/1 responses compared with placebo, and efficacy was sustained through 52 weeks. SIAQ results showed high usability of self-injection with 2 mL AI device. No new safety signals were observed. Study design may bias the interpretation of safety profile after Week 12, due to different exposure of secukinumab versus placebo. Secukinumab 300 mg administered with the 2 mL AI demonstrated superior efficacy over placebo, good tolerability and convenient administration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Efficacy, safety, usability, and acceptability of risankizumab 150 mg formulation administered by prefilled syringe or by an autoinjector for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Risankizumab is approved for treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Availability of a patient-controlled single self-injection of risankizumab may improve adherence and long-term management of psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate efficacy, safety, and usability of a new risankizumab 150 mg/mL formulation administered as a single subcutaneous injection via prefilled syringe (PFS) or autoinjector (AI).

METHODS

Efficacy, safety, usability, and acceptability of risankizumab 150 mg/mL PFS or AI were investigated in adults with moderate to severe psoriasis in two phase 3 studies. Study 1 was a multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study that investigated 150 mg/mL risankizumab PFS; study 2 was a multicenter, single-arm, open-label study that investigated 150 mg/mL risankizumab AI.

RESULTS

At week 16, risankizumab 150 mg/mL demonstrated efficacy vs. placebo (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index ≥90% improvement (PASI 90), 62.9% vs. 3.8%; static Physician Global Assessment (sPGA) 0/1, 78.1% vs. 9.6%; both p< .001) in study 1; in study 2, PASI 90 and sPGA 0/1 were 66.7%, and 81.5%, respectively. All patients successfully self-administered study treatments via PFS or AI. Acceptability of self-injection was high in both studies. Efficacy and safety of risankizumab 150 mg/mL were comparable with results from previous risankizumab phase 3 studies using the 90 mg/mL formulation.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy, safety, and usability of 150 mg/mL risankizumab delivered as a single PFS or AI injection support use of this new formulation in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

CLINICAL TRIALS

NCT03875482 and NCT0387508.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this living systematic review we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to September 2020: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase. We searched two trials registers to the same date. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for further references to eligible RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse events). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons, according to CINeMA, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer on treatment hierarchy: 0% (treatment is the worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (treatment is the best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 158 studies (18 new studies for the update) in our review (57,831 randomised participants, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (58%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 20 treatments. In all, 133 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (53/158) as being at high risk of bias; 25 were at an unclear risk, and 80 at low risk. Most studies (123/158) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report their source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in reaching PASI 90. At class level, in reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the non-biological systemic agents. At drug level, infliximab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, brodalumab, risankizumab and guselkumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab, and etanercept. Ustekinumab and adalimumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than etanercept; ustekinumab was more effective than certolizumab, and the clinical effectiveness of ustekinumab and adalimumab was similar. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and three non-biological drugs: fumaric acid esters (FAEs), ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar, except for ixekizumab which had a better chance of reaching PASI 90 compared with secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab. The clinical effectiveness of these seven drugs was: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 50.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.96 to 120.67, SUCRA = 93.6; high-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 32.48, 95% CI 27.13 to 38.87; SUCRA = 90.5; high-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.76, 95% CI 23.96 to 34.54; SUCRA = 84.6; high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86; SUCRA = 81.4; high-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 25.79, 95% CI 21.61 to 30.78; SUCRA = 76.2; high-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.52, 95% CI 21.25 to 30.64; SUCRA = 75; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 23.55, 95% CI 19.48 to 28.48; SUCRA = 68.4; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as mirikizumab, tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to moderate certainty for all the comparisons. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab and brodalumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the evidence for all the interventions was of low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials directly comparing active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between non-biological systemic agents and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Autoinjector device for rapid administration of drugs and antidotes in emergency situations and in mass casualty management

There are several situations such as medical emergencies and incidents involving mass casualties where drugs and antidotes have to be administered immediately along with other first aid at the site of the event. Self-administration by the affected person or by a companion is required as a life-saving measure. Autoinjector devices (AIDs) are useful for the rapid administration of drugs and antidotes and they can also be used by those who have not been medically trained. This makes them very convenient for emergency and mass casualty management. An AID has a drug cartridge with an embedded needle for subcutaneous or intramuscular injection, which is usually painless. The drugs are delivered slowly by the AID across a large area in the muscle, which increases the absorption and the drug effects are equal to that of intravenous administration. A variety of AIDs are available, such as atropine and pralidoxime for nerve agent poisoning, epinephrine for anaphylactic shock and allergy, diazepam for seizures, sumatriptan for migraine, amikacin for antibacterial treatment, buprenorphine for pain relief and monoclonal antibodies for a variety of diseases. This review describes the published peer-reviewed literature identified by online searches of journal databases.

PASI 100 response rates in moderate to severe psoriasis: a systematic literature review and analysis of clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Response to treatments in psoriasis can be assessed using the PASI response 50, 75, 90 or 100. Achieving a PASI 100 response would mean a complete resolution of the patient's basal lesions. Therefore, PASI 100 score has been increasingly used in the context of research, but its role in daily practice is currently controversial.

OBJECTIVE

(1) To analyze PASI 100 response rates to pharmacological treatments; (2) To examine clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) recommendations/comments on PASI 100.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review (SLR). Selection criteria concerned patients with psoriasis, reporting PASI 100.

RESULTS

Overall, 65 studies were included. Patients on methotrexate achieved at 16 weeks a PASI 100 of 7.3%. For TNF inhibitors rates were: 3.7-11.1% at 12 weeks, 13.7-20% at 16 weeks, 10.7-24% at 24 weeks and 21.8-34.8% at 1 year. IL-17 inhibitors achieved 23.3-44% at 12 weeks, 44.3-57.2% at 16 weeks, 39.7-67.5% at 24 weeks and 41.4-67.5% at 1 year. And the reported by IL-12/23 inhibitors were 12%/23.8% at 12 weeks, 32.7%/50% at 16 weeks, 44% at 24 weeks and 41.8%/56.3% at 1 year. PASI 100 response is scarcely commented in the CPGs.

CONCLUSIONS

PASI 100 response rate is an endpoint fundamentally restricted to research.

Joint Statement (DZK, DGRh, DDG) on the Tuberculosis Risk with Treatment Using Novel Non-TNF-Alpha Biologicals

BACKGROUND

 While the risk of tuberculosis (TB) reactivation is adequately documented in relation to TNF-alpha inhibitors (TNFi), the question of what the tuberculosis risk is for newer, non-TNF biologics (non-TNFi) has not been thoroughly addressed.

METHODS

 We conducted a systematic review of randomized phase 2 and phase 3 studies, and long-term extensions of same, published through March 2019. Of interest was information pertaining to screening and treating of latent tuberculosis (LTBI) in association with the use of 12 particular non-TNFi. Only rituximab was excluded. We searched MEDLINE and the ClinicalTrial.gov database for any and all candidate studies meeting these criteria.

RESULTS

 677 citations were retrieved; 127 studies comprising a total of 34,293 patients who received non-TNFi were eligible for evaluation. Only 80 out of the 127 studies, or 63 %, captured active TB (or at least opportunistic diseases) as potential outcomes and 25 TB cases were reported. More than two thirds of publications (86/127, 68 %) mentioned LTBI screening prior to inclusion of study participants in the respective trial, whereas in only 4 studies LTBI screening was explicitly considered redundant. In 21 studies, patients with LTBI were generally excluded from the trials and in 42 out of the 127 trials, or 33 %, latently infected patients were reported to receive preventive therapy (PT) at least 3 weeks prior to non-TNFi treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

 The lack of information in many non-TNFi studies on the number of patients with LTBI who were either excluded prior to participating or had been offered PT hampers assessment of the actual TB risk when applying the novel biologics. Therefore, in case of insufficient information about drugs or drug classes, the existing recommendations of the German Central Committee against Tuberculosis should be applied in the same way as is done prior to administering TNFi. Well designed, long-term "real world" register studies on TB progression risk in relation to individual substances for IGRA-positive cases without prior or concomitant PT may help to reduce selection bias and to achieve valid conclusions in the future.

Efficacy and safety of risankizumab vs. secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (IMMerge): results from a phase III, randomized, open-label, efficacy-assessor-blinded clinical trial

Background

Patients with plaque psoriasis treated with biologic therapies need more efficacious, safe and convenient treatments to improve quality of life. Risankizumab and secukinumab inhibit interleukin‐23 and interleukin‐17A, respectively, and are effective in adult patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis but have different dosing regimens.

Objectives

To compare directly the efficacy and safety of risankizumab vs. secukinumab over 52 weeks.

Methods

IMMerge was an international, phase III, multicentre, open‐label, efficacy–assessor‐blinded, active‐comparator study, in which adult patients with chronic, moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio to treatment with risankizumab 150 mg or secukinumab 300 mg. Primary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of patients achieving ≥ 90% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90) at week 16 (noninferiority comparison with margin of 12%) and week 52 (superiority comparison).

Results

In total 327 patients from nine countries were treated with risankizumab (n = 164) or secukinumab (n = 163). Risankizumab was noninferior to secukinumab in the proportion of patients achieving PASI 90 at week 16 [73·8% vs. 65·6%; difference of 8·2%, 96·25% confidence interval (CI)−2·2 to 18·6; within the 12% noninferiority margin] and superior to secukinumab at week 52 (86·6% vs. 57·1%; difference of 29·8%, 95% CI 20·8–38·8; P < 0·001), thus meeting both primary endpoints. All secondary endpoints (PASI 100, static Physician's Global Assessment 0 or 1, and PASI 75) at week 52 demonstrated superiority for risankizumab vs. secukinumab (P < 0·001). No new safety concerns were identified.

Conclusions

At week 52, risankizumab demonstrated superior efficacy and similar safety with less frequent dosing compared with secukinumab.

What is already known about this topic?

The need remains for treatments with sustained efficacy and a more convenient dosing schedule in moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis.

Risankizumab and secukinumab are indicated for the treatment of adults with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis and target interleukin‐23 and interleukin‐17, respectively.

To date, risankizumab and secukinumab have not been directly compared.

What does this study add?

IMMerge directly compared the safety and efficacy of risankizumab and secukinumab in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis using ≥ 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at weeks 16 (noninferiority) and 52 (superiority) as primary endpoints.

In terms of efficacy risankizumab was noninferior to secukinumab at week 16 and superior to secukinumab at week 52 of treatment based on primary endpoint analyses. The two medications had a similar safety profile.

Linked Comment:Schmitt-Egenolf. Br J Dermatol 2021; 184: 3–4.

Plain language summary available online

Secukinumab Use in Patients with Moderate to Severe Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis and Ankylosing Spondylitis in Real-World Setting in Europe: Baseline Data from SERENA Study

INTRODUCTION

Secukinumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that directly inhibits interleukin-17A, has demonstrated robust efficacy in the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis (PsO), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS), with a rapid onset of action, sustained long-term clinical responses and a consistently favourable safety profile across phase 3 trials. Here, we report the clinical data at enrolment from SERENA, designed to investigate the real-world use of secukinumab across all three indications.

METHODS

SERENA is an ongoing, longitudinal, observational study conducted at 438 sites across Europe in patients with moderate to severe plaque PsO, active PsA or active AS. Patients should have received at least 16 weeks of secukinumab treatment before enrolment in the study.

RESULTS

Overall 2800 patients were included in the safety set; patients with PsA (N = 541) were older than patients with PsO (N = 1799) and patients with AS (N = 460); patients with PsO had a higher mean body weight than patients with PsA and patients with AS; and patients with PsO and patients with AS were predominantly male. Time since diagnosis was longer in patients with PsO compared with patients with PsA and patients with AS, and about 40% of patients were either current or former smokers. The proportion of obese patients (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) was similar across indications. Patients were treated with secukinumab for a mean duration of 1 year prior to enrolment (range 0.89-1.04). The percentages of patients with prior biologics exposure were 31.5% PsO, 59.7% PsA and 55% AS. The percentages of patients prescribed secukinumab monotherapy were 75% (n = 1349) in PsO, 48.2% (n = 261) in PsA and 48.9% (n = 225) in AS groups.

CONCLUSION

Baseline demographics of the study population are consistent with existing literature. This large observational study across all secukinumab indications will provide valuable information on the long-term effectiveness and safety of secukinumab in the real-world setting.

Classification and mitigation of negative injection experiences with biologic medications

Injection site reactions with biologic medications are encountered with variable frequency. Although there is no clear definition, they commonly manifest with pain and irritation at the injection site. Previously proposed reaction classification systems may be impractical or insufficient, and more intuitive nomenclature may benefit clinical dermatologists and patients. Negative injection experiences (NIE) are common reasons for biologic medication nonadherence. Here we provide clinical classifications and recommendations for mitigating these reactions. We categorized NIEs into the following: (a) physical, due to the needle and injection process, (b) irritant, related to properties of the injected solution, and (c) allergic, both immediate and delayed.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis. This is the baseline update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017, in preparation for this Cochrane Review becoming a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our research using the following databases to January 2019: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and the conference proceedings of a number of dermatology meetings. We also searched five trials registers and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) reports (until June 2019). We checked the reference lists of included and excluded studies for further references to relevant RCTs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults (over 18 years of age) with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis whose skin had been clinically diagnosed with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, in comparison to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes of this review were: the proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 at induction phase (from 8 to 24 weeks after the randomisation), and the proportion of participants with serious adverse effects (SAEs) at induction phase. We did not evaluate differences in specific adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Several groups of two review authors independently undertook study selection, data extraction, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and analyses. We synthesised the data using pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the treatments of interest and rank them according to their effectiveness (as measured by the PASI 90 score) and acceptability (the inverse of serious adverse effects). We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence from the NMA for the two primary outcomes, according to GRADE, as either very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 140 studies (31 new studies for the update) in our review (51,749 randomised participants, 68% men, mainly recruited from hospitals). The overall average age was 45 years; the overall mean PASI score at baseline was 20 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most of these studies were placebo-controlled (59%), 30% were head-to-head studies, and 11% were multi-armed studies with both an active comparator and a placebo. We have assessed a total of 19 treatments. In all, 117 trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). All but two of the outcomes included in this review were limited to the induction phase (assessment from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation). We assessed many studies (57/140) as being at high risk of bias; 42 were at an unclear risk, and 41 at low risk. Most studies (107/140) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 22 studies did not report the source of funding. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all of the interventions (conventional systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) were significantly more effective than placebo in terms of reaching PASI 90. At class level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, the biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha were significantly more effective than the small molecules and the conventional systemic agents. At drug level, in terms of reaching PASI 90, infliximab, all of the anti-IL17 drugs (ixekizumab, secukinumab, bimekizumab and brodalumab) and the anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab, but not tildrakizumab) were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and 3 anti-TNF alpha agents: adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept. Adalimumab and ustekinumab were significantly more effective in reaching PASI 90 than certolizumab and etanercept. There was no significant difference between tofacitinib or apremilast and between two conventional drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. Network meta-analysis also showed that infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab outperformed other drugs when compared to placebo in reaching PASI 90. The clinical effectiveness for these seven drugs was similar: infliximab (versus placebo): risk ratio (RR) 29.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 19.94 to 43.70, Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) = 88.5; moderate-certainty evidence; ixekizumab (versus placebo): RR 28.12, 95% CI 23.17 to 34.12, SUCRA = 88.3, moderate-certainty evidence; risankizumab (versus placebo): RR 27.67, 95% CI 22.86 to 33.49, SUCRA = 87.5, high-certainty evidence; bimekizumab (versus placebo): RR 58.64, 95% CI 3.72 to 923.86, SUCRA = 83.5, low-certainty evidence; guselkumab (versus placebo): RR 25.84, 95% CI 20.90 to 31.95; SUCRA = 81; moderate-certainty evidence; secukinumab (versus placebo): RR 23.97, 95% CI 20.03 to 28.70, SUCRA = 75.4; high-certainty evidence; and brodalumab (versus placebo): RR 21.96, 95% CI 18.17 to 26.53, SUCRA = 68.7; moderate-certainty evidence. Conservative interpretation is warranted for the results for bimekizumab (as well as tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, acitretin, ciclosporin, fumaric acid esters, and methotrexate), as these drugs, in the NMA, have been evaluated in few trials. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low to very low certainty for just under half of the treatment estimates in total, and moderate for the others. Thus, the results have to be viewed with caution and we cannot be sure of the ranking. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1) the results were very similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, secukinumab and brodalumab were the best choices for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of moderate- to high-certainty evidence (low-certainty evidence for bimekizumab). This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes were measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation) and is not sufficient for evaluation of longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean age of 45 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. Another major concern is that short-term trials provide scanty and sometimes poorly-reported safety data and thus do not provide useful evidence to create a reliable risk profile of treatments. Indeed, we found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, but the evidence for all the interventions was of very low to moderate quality. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will also be necessary to evaluate non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports released from regulatory agencies. In terms of future research, randomised trials comparing directly active agents are necessary once high-quality evidence of benefit against placebo is established, including head-to-head trials amongst and between conventional systemic and small molecules, and between biological agents (anti-IL17 versus anti-IL23, anti-IL23 versus anti-IL12/23, anti-TNF alpha versus anti-IL12/23). Future trials should also undertake systematic subgroup analyses (e.g. assessing biological-naïve participants, baseline psoriasis severity, presence of psoriatic arthritis, etc.). Finally, outcome measure harmonisation is needed in psoriasis trials, and researchers should look at the medium- and long-term benefit and safety of the interventions and the comparative safety of different agents. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Treating to Target(s) With Interleukin-17 Inhibitors

Background:

The treat-to-target (T2T) strategy has become established in several medical specialties as a key guidance to optimal therapeutic decision making. T2T may be effective in the assessment of the biologic class of agents called interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, which are emerging as a safe and effective treatment option for autoimmune inflammatory conditions such as plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS).

Objective:

The objective of this article is to use a T2T approach for the evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of IL-17 inhibitors in the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

Methods:

Following a comprehensive literature search, a full-day meeting was convened to discuss and identify the T2T targets for psoriasis, PsA, and AS. Clinical trial evidence was presented for the approved IL-17 inhibitors—secukinumab, ixekizumab, and brodalumab—to assess whether these data meet T2T safety and efficacy targets.

Results:

All 3 approved agents were significantly superior to placebo and active controls in the achievement of T2T targets for psoriasis. Secukinumab and ixekizumab were likewise associated with significantly better outcomes than controls in the PsA targets, and secukinumab resulted in significant AS target improvements vs placebo. The IL-17 inhibitors were also associated with low rates of serious adverse events and exacerbations of common comorbid conditions.

Conclusion:

Phase III trial results support the T2T benefit and safety of IL-17 inhibitors according to their specific indications for the management of patients with plaque psoriasis, PsA, and AS.

Adverse drug events observed with 150 mg versus 300 mg secukinumab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Secukinumab has been approved for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. However, safety measures concerning drug administration is vital during treatment. Understanding the right way to administer drugs is important to reduce any serious adverse drug event. In this analysis we aimed to systematically show the risk of adverse drug events which were observed with 150 mg versus (vs) 300 mg secukinumab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

The major online databases: Cochrane Central, MEDLINE, www.ClinicalTrials.com and EMBASE were searched for relevant publications based on the comparison of secukinumab 150 mg vs 300 mg for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Adverse drug events were considered as the clinical endpoints. Statistical analysis was carried out by the RevMan 5.3 software. Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated to represent the data following statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Seven studies with a total number of 2361 participants were included. Results of this analysis showed that the risk of any adverse event (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.96-1.05; P = .94), the risk of serious adverse events (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.75-1.43; P = .82) and the risk of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.61-1.57; P = .92) were not significantly different between 150 mg vs 300 mg secukinumab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. When the detailed adverse drug events were studied, the risks of infection or infestation (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.98-1.25; P = .09), naso-pharyngitis (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.90-1.23; P = .55), headache (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.68-1.25; P = .60), diarrhea (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.75-1.73; P = .55), pruritus (RR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.56-1.22; P = .33), arthralgia (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.67-1.38; P = .83), upper respiratory tract infection (RR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.70-1.36; P = .89), hypertension (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.83-1.81; P = .31), nausea (RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 0.63-3.04; P = .42), and cough (RR: 1.46, 95% CI: 0.67-3.19; P = .34) were still not significantly different between these 2 dosage regimens.

CONCLUSION

Secukinumab 150 mg and 300 mg were both equally tolerable and might safely be used for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. No significant adverse drug events were observed with any of the dosage.

Long-term efficacy of novel therapies in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of PASI response

Background

Patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis require long‐term treatment, yet few trials compare outcomes beyond a short‐term induction period. Quantitative comparisons of long‐term outcomes in patients with psoriasis are limited. To our knowledge, no network meta‐analysis (NMA) of such data has been performed.

Objective

To compare novel systemic therapies, both biologic and non‐biologic, approved for moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis by conducting a systematic review (SR) and NMA of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) outcomes measured at or around 1 year.

Methods

An SR was conducted to identify studies reporting PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 responses. Feasibility of an NMA on maintenance phase endpoints was assessed and sources of heterogeneity considered. Data appropriate for analysis were modelled using a Bayesian multinomial likelihood model with probit link. Wherever possible, data corresponding to an intention‐to‐treat approach with non‐responder imputation were used.

Results

Twenty‐four studies reporting outcomes at 40–64 weeks were identified, but heterogeneity in study design allowed synthesis of only 17. Four 52‐week randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprised the primary analysis, which found brodalumab was significantly more efficacious than secukinumab, ustekinumab and etanercept. Secukinumab was also more efficacious than ustekinumab and both outperformed etanercept. In a secondary analysis, evidence from 13 additional studies and 4 further therapies (adalimumab, apremilast, infliximab and ixekizumab) was included by comparing long‐term outcomes from active interventions to placebo outcomes extrapolated from induction. Results were consistent with the primary analysis: brodalumab was most effective, followed by ixekizumab and secukinumab, then ustekinumab, infliximab and adalimumab. Etanercept and apremilast had the lowest expected long‐term efficacy. Results were similar when studies with low prior exposure to biological therapies were excluded.

Conclusion

Results suggest that brodalumab is associated with a higher likelihood of sustained PASI response, including complete clearance, at week 52 than comparators. Further long‐term active‐comparator RCT data are required to better assess relative efficacy across therapies.

Secukinumab in the treatment of psoriasis: patient selection and perspectives

Secukinumab is a human monoclonal antibody targeting IL-17A that has been approved for three indications: moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and ankylosing spondylitis. In Phase III clinical trials for each of these three indications, secukinumab has proven to be both highly efficacious and well-tolerated. However, several biologic medications are currently approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, and many demonstrate excellent efficacy and safety. Due to this wide selection, it is often unclear how to choose biologics for specific patients. Important considerations in biologic selection include clinical efficacy, safety, cost, convenience, onset of action, and management of comorbid disease. This article aims to outline the key considerations in patient selection for the treatment of plaque psoriasis with secukinumab.

Targeting the IL-23/IL-17 Pathway in Psoriasis: the Search for the Good, the Bad and the Ugly

New promising treatments have been developed for psoriasis that target different parts of the interleukin (IL)-23/IL-17 pathway. This approach is believed to be more disease specific, and sparing the T helper 1 pathway might prevent serious long-term adverse events. Moreover, superior Psoriasis Area and Severity Index improvements are observed, which has redefined treatment goals in psoriasis. The new molecules can be divided into different categories, according to the target: blocking agents can target the upstream cytokine IL-23 or the downstream IL-17. In the latter, a variety of targets exist, such as the ligands IL-17A and IL-17F, or a combination thereof, or a subunit of the receptor, IL-17RA. Each target seems to have its own set of advantages and pitfalls, which will impact the treatment decision in clinical practice. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on the different inhibitors of the IL-23/IL-17 pathway. Furthermore, we briefly discuss the role of IL-17 in other diseases and comorbidities. Finally, we discuss how comprehensive knowledge is needed for the prescribing physician in order to make the most appropriate therapeutic choice for each individual patient.

Efficacy and safety of secukinumab administration by autoinjector in patients with psoriatic arthritis: results from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial (FUTURE 3)

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to assess 52-week efficacy and safety of secukinumab self-administration by autoinjector in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the FUTURE 3 study ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01989468).

METHODS

Patients (≥ 18 years of age; N = 414) with active PsA were randomized 1:1:1 to subcutaneous (s.c.) secukinumab 300 mg, 150 mg, or placebo at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4, and every 4 weeks thereafter. Per clinical response, placebo-treated patients were re-randomized to s.c. secukinumab 300 or 150 mg at week 16 (nonresponders) or week 24 (responders) and stratified at randomization by prior anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy (anti-TNF-naïve, 68.1%; intolerant/inadequate response (anti-TNF-IR), 31.9%). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving at least 20% improvement in American College of Rheumatology response criteria (ACR20) at week 24. Autoinjector usability was evaluated by Self-Injection Assessment Questionnaire (SIAQ).

RESULTS

Overall, 92.1% (300 mg), 91.3% (150 mg), and 93.4% (placebo) of patients completed 24 weeks, and 84.9% (300 mg) and 79.7% (150 mg) completed 52 weeks. In the overall population (combined anti-TNF-naïve and anti-TNF-IR), ACR20 response rate at week 24 was significantly higher in secukinumab groups (300 mg, 48.2% (p < 0.0001); 150 mg, 42% (p < 0.0001); placebo, 16.1%) and was sustained through 52 weeks. SIAQ results showed that more than 93% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied with autoinjector usage. Secukinumab was well tolerated with no new or unexpected safety signals reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Secukinumab provided sustained improvements in signs and symptoms in active PsA patients through 52 weeks. High acceptability of autoinjector was observed. The safety profile was consistent with that reported previously.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01989468 . Registered 21 November 2013. EudraCT 2013-004002-25 . Registered 17 December 2013.

Quantitative evaluation to efficacy and safety of therapies for psoriasis: A network meta-analysis

Therapies treating psoriasis can be categorized into five classes according to their mechanism: anti-metabolites (AM), anti-interleukin-12/23 agents (anti-IL12/23), anti-interleukin-17 agents (anti-IL17), anti-T-cell agent (ANT), and anti-tumor necrosis factor-α agent (anti-TNF-α). This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to give a quantitative and systemic evaluation of safety and efficacy for the five kinds of therapies mentioned above. Odds ratios and mean differences were calculated to evaluate binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. Forest plots were conducted to show the performance of pair-wise comparison of above therapies in each outcome, and surface under the cumulative ranking curves was given to evaluate the relative ranking of above therapies in each outcome. Node splitting was conducted to evaluate the consistency between direct and indirect evidence. Direct comparisons from 65 studies (32,352 patients) were included in this NMA. Our results showed an excellent efficacy of anti-IL12/23 and anti-IL17. However, these two therapies and anti-TNF-α were revealed to have a high possibility to cause adverse effects (AEs) such as infections. Additionally, node splitting showed that no inconsistency appeared between the direct and indirect comparisons. Anti-IL12/23 was the most recommended therapy according to this NMA. Anti-IL17 had similar efficacy to anti-IL12/23 but should be applied with caution since it has poor performance in safety outcomes.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease for which some people have a genetic predisposition. The condition manifests in inflammatory effects on either the skin or joints, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have compared the efficacy of the different systemic treatments in psoriasis against placebo. However, the relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head to head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of 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.

Secukinumab: a review of the anti-IL-17A biologic for the treatment of psoriasis

Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease associated with numerous comorbidities and a profound impact on patients' quality of life. While its complex immune pathogenesis is still not fully delineated, current evidence supports a fundamental role of the T-helper-17 (TH-17) pathway and its related interleukin-17 (IL-17) cytokine. Thus, new antipsoriatic therapies have been developed to block this key cytokine and its downstream effects. Secukinumab is a fully humanized, monoclonal anti-IL-17A antibody, and the first in its class to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. It has also been approved for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. Its clinical efficacy in plaque psoriasis has been well demonstrated in numerous phase II and III clinical trials. In addition, it has shown superiority in clinical trials to current biologic agents including etanercept and ustekinumab, with a safe adverse event profile. In correlation with excellent skin improvements, secukinumab is also associated with significant improvements in health-related quality of life measures. Thus, secukinumab offers the potential for equal, or improved, therapeutic effects compared with other biologics, and is a valuable addition to our current antipsoriatic armamentarium.