Optimizing adalimumab treatment in psoriasis with concomitant methotrexate (OPTIMAP): study protocol for a pragmatic, single-blinded, investigator-initiated randomized controlled trial

Quantifying the Effect of Methotrexate on Adalimumab Response in Psoriasis by Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling

Previously, we showed that the combination of methotrexate and adalimumab treatment leads to less antidrug antibody development. In this study, we quantify the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of adalimumab and evaluate the influence of methotrexate cotreatment. A population PK-PD model was developed using prospective data from 59 patients with psoriasis (baseline PASI = 12.6) receiving adalimumab over 49 weeks. Typical PK and PD parameters and their corresponding interpatient variability were estimated. We performed a covariate analysis to assess whether interpatient variability could be explained by addition of methotrexate and other covariates. In total, 330 PASIs, 252 adalimumab serum concentrations, and 247 antidrug antibody titers were available. Presence of antidrug antibodies (adalimumab group = 46.7%, adalimumab + methotrexate group = 38.7%; P = .031) was correlated with increased adalimumab apparent clearance (P < .001). In the PD model, the use of concomitant methotrexate was borderline to significantly correlated with a decreased half-maximal inhibitory concentration (adalimumab concentration for which clinical response score is reduced by half; P < .10). On the basis of our PK-PD model, concomitant use of methotrexate indirectly increases adalimumab concentration, partially through less antidrug antibodies formation, which may result in better efficacy.

Adalimumab combined with methotrexate versus adalimumab monotherapy in psoriasis: Three-year follow-up data of a single-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) are formed in patients treated with adalimumab (ADL). This might increase clearance of ADL, potentially causing a (secondary) non-response. Combination therapy of ADL and methotrexate (MTX) reduces ADA levels and has a clinical benefit in rheumatologic diseases. In psoriasis however, the long-term effectiveness and safety have not been studied.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the three-year follow-up data of ADL combined with MTX compared to ADL monotherapy in ADL-naive patients with moderate to severe plaque type psoriasis.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre RCT in the Netherlands and Belgium. Randomization was performed by a centralized online randomization service. Patients were seen every 12 weeks until week 145. Outcome assessors were blinded. We collected data on drug survival, effectiveness, safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of patients that started ADL combined with MTX compared to ADL monotherapy. We present descriptive analysis and patients were analysed according to the group initially randomized to. Patients becoming non-adherent to the biologic were excluded from analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included and 37 patients (ADL group n = 17, ADL + MTX group n = 20) continued in the follow-up study after 1 year. After 109 weeks and 145 weeks, there was a trend towards longer drug survival in the ADL + MTX group compared to the ADL group (week 109: 54.8% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.326, week 145: 51.6% vs. 41.4%; p = 0.464). At week 145, 7/13 patients were treated with MTX. In the ADL group, 4/12 patients that completed the study developed ADA, and 3/13 in the ADL + MTX group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this small study, there was no significant difference in ADL overall drug survival when it was initially combined with MTX, compared to ADL alone. Discontinuation due to adverse events was common in the combination group. To secure accessible healthcare, combination treatment of ADL and MTX can be considered in individual patients.

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.

Immunogenicity of biologic therapies in psoriasis: Myths, facts and a suggested approach

With biologic drugs dominating the therapeutic space for severe immune-mediated inflammatory disease, it is critical for clinicians to be familiar with the concept of drug immunogenicity, with the potential for our patients to develop antidrug antibodies (ADA) of clinical relevance. Whilst there are clear differences between different therapeutic biologics in terms of reported ADA rates, there is no accepted dermatology guideline or grouping of drugs by risk of clinically relevant ADA, nor a consensus on approach to ADA management. This is partly because making valid comparisons of immunogenicity across drugs is fundamentally flawed: the differing types of ADA assay, trial design and included patient population - as well as the molecular structure of the biologic molecules themselves - are all highly influential on reported ADA prevalence and impact on clinical response. Therefore, the first part of this article aims to give an overview of ADA that also clarifies common misconceptions on the subject, whilst the second part of this article outlines Phase III immunogenicity data on commonly used biologics for psoriasis, the most common dermatological indication. Based on this, and acknowledging current limitations in available evidence, we propose a working categorization of biologics together with a broad approach to management: Group 1 - biologics with higher risk of clinically relevant ADA; Group 2 - biologics with lower risk of clinically relevant ADA; and Group 3 - biologics with no established risk of clinically relevant ADA. However, these groupings represent a working concept only; more research is required, using comparable ADA assays and consistent reporting of related outcomes. Finally, there is an urgent need for better characterization of individuals at particular risk of developing ADA to inform future clinical decision-making.

Assessing the relative efficacy of interleukin-17 and interleukin-23 targeted treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of PASI response

INTRODUCTION

New generation biologics, including interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors, have delivered higher rates of skin clearance than older treatments in head-to-head studies. However, studies comparing these new biologics directly to one another are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the short-term efficacy of available (or imminently available) biologic and non-biologic systemic therapies for treating patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomised controlled trials evaluating biologic treatments, apremilast and dimethyl fumarate. MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched from the 1st January 2000 to 22nd November 2018. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) using a random-effects multinomial likelihood model with probit link and meta-regression to adjust for cross-trial variation in placebo responses compared the efficacy of interventions at inducing different levels of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response during the induction period. A range of sensitivity analyses was undertaken.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven trials (34,816 patients) were included in the NMA. The base-case analysis showed that all active treatments were superior to placebo. IL-17 inhibitors, guselkumab and risankizumab were found to be more efficacious than tildrakizumab, ustekinumab, all TNF inhibitors and non-biologic systemic treatments at inducing all levels of PASI response. In addition, brodalumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab were significantly more efficacious than secukinumab; no significant difference was found in the comparison with guselkumab. The greatest benefit of brodalumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, and risankizumab was seen for PASI 90 and PASI 100 response. Results were consistent across all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

In the NMA brodalumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab and guselkumab showed the highest levels of short-term efficacy. There were differences in efficacy between treatments within the same class. Longer-term analyses are needed to understand differences between these drugs beyond induction in what is a life-long condition.

Investigation of the Mechanism of Therapeutic Protein-Drug Interaction Between Methotrexate and Golimumab, an Anti-TNFα Monoclonal Antibody

A prominent example of human therapeutic protein-drug interaction (TP-DI) is between methotrexate (MTX) and anti-TNFα mAbs. One plausible mechanism for this TP-DI is through the pharmacodynamic effect of MTX on immunogenicity. However, there is no definitive evidence to substantiate this mechanism, and other competing hypotheses, such as MTX suppressing FcγRI expression thereby affecting mAb PK, have also been proposed. In order to understand this mechanism, a cynomolgus monkey study was conducted using golimumab as a model compound. Golimumab elicited high incidences of immunogenicity in healthy cynomolgus monkeys. Concomitant dosing of MTX delayed the onset and reduced the magnitude of anti-drug antibody (ADA) formation. The impact of MTX on golimumab PK correlated with the ADA status. Prior to ADA formation, MTX has no discernable effect on golimumab PK. Additionally, no alteration in FcγRI expression was observed following MTX treatment. The impact of MTX on golimumab immunogenicity and PK has been observed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis. In a representative phase 3 study of golimumab in patients with PsA, patients not receiving concomitant MTX was reported to have ~ 30% lower steady-state trough golimumab levels compared to those who received MTX. However, further analysis showed that PsA patients who were negative for ADA in both treatment groups had comparable trough levels of golimumab. Taken together, our results suggest that the mechanism of TP-DI between MTX and golimumab can mostly be attributed to the pharmacodynamic effect of MTX, i.e., the lowering of immunogenicity and immunogenicity-mediated clearance of mAbs.

Functional diversity of macrophages in vascular biology and disease

Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial chronic inflammatory disease and is largely responsible for cardiovascular disease, the most common cause of global mortality. The hallmark of atherogenesis is immune activation following lipid accumulation in the arterial wall. In particular, macrophages play a non-redundant role in both the progression and regression of inflammation in the atherosclerotic lesion. Macrophages are remarkably heterogeneous phagocytes that perform versatile functions in health and disease. Their functional diversity in vascular biology is only partially mapped. Targeting macrophages is often highlighted as a therapeutic approach for cancer, metabolic and inflammatory diseases. Future strategies for therapeutic intervention in atherosclerosis may benefit from attempts to reduce local proliferation of pro-inflammatory macrophage subsets or enhance resolution of inflammation. Thus, characterisation of macrophage subsets during atherosclerosis would empower clinical interventions. Therefore, it would be of fundamental importance to understand how pathological factors modulate macrophage activity in order to exploit their use in the treatment of atherosclerosis and other diseases.