A Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of Monotherapy and Combination Therapy With Biologic for Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis

Targeted therapy for immune mediated skin diseases. What should a dermatologist know?

BACKGROUND

Molecularly targeted therapies, such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and Janus Kinase inhibitors (JAKis), have emerged as essential tools in the treatment of dermatological diseases. These therapies modulate the immune system through specific signaling pathways, providing effective alternatives to traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents. This review aims to provide an updated summary of targeted immune therapies for inflammatory skin diseases, considering their pathophysiology, efficacy, dosage, and safety profiles.

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search was conducted on PubMed over the past 10 years, focusing on randomized clinical trials, case reports, and case series related to targeted immune therapies in dermatology. Eligibility criteria were applied, and data were extracted from each study, including citation data, study design, and results.

RESULTS

We identified 1360 non-duplicate articles with the initial search strategy. Title and abstract review excluded 1150, while a full-text review excluded an additional 50 articles. The review included 143 studies published between 2012 and 2022, highlighting 39 drugs currently under investigation or in use for managing inflammatory skin diseases.

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The heterogeneity of summarized information limits this review. Some recommendations originated from data from clinical trials, while others relied on retrospective analyses and small case series. Recommendations will likely be updated as new results emerge.

CONCLUSION

Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment of chronic skin diseases, offering new options for patients unresponsive to standard treatments. Paradoxical reactions are rarely observed. Further studies are needed to fully understand the mechanisms and nature of these therapies. Overall, targeted immune therapies in dermatology represent a promising development, significantly improving the quality of life for patients with chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Paradoxical and bimodal immune-mediated dermatological side effects of TNF-α inhibitors: A comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Due to the increasing prevalence of immune-mediated diseases such as psoriasis, lichen planus, rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, dermatologists have turned to new biologic drugs known as DMARDs (disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs) in recent years.

AREAS COVERED

In this study, we evaluate the immune-mediated dermatological side effects of DMARDS by reviewing and analyzing previous peer-reviewed research on the effects of TNF-α inhibitors in the treatment of skin diseases, as well as adverse effects of these drugs and some of the main causes of these effects.

EXPERT OPINION

DMARDs are very effective in improving control of the above diseases. TNF-α inhibitors are an important group of DMARDs that are widely used. The paradoxical adverse events (PAEs) associated with the use of TNF-α inhibitors are divided into three categories: true paradoxical, borderline paradoxical, and non-paradoxical. True PAEs include conditions for which TNF-α inhibitors are approved for treatment. Borderline PAEs are considered to occur with this class of drugs for which there is no definite approval but for which there is sufficient evidence. Although these events are rare, early recognition of the accused drug and appropriate decision-making may prevent progression of complications and irreversible side effects.

Biologic TNF-α Inhibitors for Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, and TEN-SJS Overlap: A Study-Level and Patient-Level Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are severe cutaneous adverse reactions with high morbidity and mortality and not clearly established treatment protocol. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of three biologic TNF-α inhibitors (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab) in the treatment of SJS, SJS-TEN overlap, and TEN.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for original studies containing human participants diagnosed with SJS/TEN and treated with biologic TNF-α inhibitors. Individual patient data were collected and summarized to provide a comprehensive overview on therapeutic efficacy of different biologic TNF-α inhibitors for SJS, SJS-TEN overlap, and TEN, respectively. Meta-analyses on aggregated study data were conducted using random-effects model.

RESULTS

Overall, 55 studies with 125 sets of individual patient data were included. Infliximab was used to treat 3 patients with SJS-TEN overlap and 28 patients with TEN, and the actual mortality rate was 33.3% and 17%, respectively. Etanercept was administered to 17 patients with SJS, 9 patients with SJS-TEN overlap, and 64 patients with TEN, and mortality rate was reported to be 0%, 0%, and 12.5%, respectively. For participants with TEN, no significant difference was found in time of reepithelialization, hospitalization time, and mortality rate comparing etanercept with infliximab. More sequelae were reported in patients receiving infliximab than in patients treated with etanercept (39.3% versus 6.4%). Adalimumab was administered to four patients with TEN, and mortality rate was 25%. Meta-analyses on aggregated study data revealed significantly shortened hospitalization time in etanercept compared with non-etanercept groups [weighted mean differences (WMD) -5.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.65 to -1.96]. Etanercept was associated with a survival benefit for patients when compared with non-etanercept treatment, however, the analysis was not statistically significant (odds ratio 0.55; 95% CI 0.23-1.33).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the current findings, etanercept is currently the most promising biologic therapy for SJS/TEN. Further evaluation in prospective studies is required to confirm its efficacy and safety.

A Review of the Systemic Treatment of Stevens–Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis

Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are uncommon but life-threatening diseases mostly caused by drugs. Although various systemic immunomodulating agents have been used, their therapeutic efficacy has been inconsistent. This study aimed to provide an evidence-based review of systemic immunomodulating treatments for SJS/TEN. We reviewed 13 systematic review and meta-analysis articles published in the last 10 years. The use of systemic corticosteroids and IVIg is still controversial. An increasing number of studies have suggested the effectiveness of cyclosporine and biologic anti-TNF-α in recent years. There were also some promising results of combination treatments. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are required to provide more definitive evidence of the effectiveness of these treatments. The pathogenesis of SJS/TEN has been elucidated in recent years and advances in the understanding of SJS/TEN may inspire the discovery of potential therapeutic targets.

Inhibition of tumor necrosis factor improves conventional steroid therapy for Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in a cohort of patients

BACKGROUND

Systemic steroid therapies for Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS)/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) have been challenged because of their limited benefits. Whether additional tumor necrosis factor (TNF) α inhibition provides an optimized approach remains unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of TNF-α inhibition combined with a steroid to treat SJS/TEN and to identify potential biomarkers.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with SJS/TEN were recruited and divided into 2 groups: 10 patients received methylprednisolone and 15 patients received etanercept plus methylprednisolone. Serum levels of granzyme B, perforin, interferon-γ, interleukin (IL) 6, IL-15, IL-18, macrophage inflammatory protein 1α, macrophage inflammatory protein 1β, and TNF-α were measured by multiplex cytokine analysis kits during the acute and resolution phases.

RESULTS

Compared with the steroid monotherapy, the combination therapy significantly shortened the course of the initial steroid treatment and the duration of the acute stage, hospitalization stay, and skin re-epithelialization. Although both therapies significantly reduced IL-15 levels; the combination therapy also decreased IL-6 and IL-18 levels. While the level of IL-15 was positively correlated with skin re-epithelialization time in both groups, the level of IL-6 served as an additional marker for the course of the disease in the combination therapy group.

LIMITATIONS

The cohort size is relatively small.

CONCLUSION

Additional TNF-α inhibition to steroid treatment appeared to improve outcomes for SJS/TEN.