Combination systemic therapies in psoriatic arthritis

Monotherapy or combination therapy in PsA: current aspects

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disease with heterogeneity regarding its clinical features, mainly affecting the skin and the musculoskeletal system; additionally, extra-musculoskeletal manifestations and comorbidities are common, adding complexity to its treatment. In the last decades, a plethora of therapeutic options have been available, including conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs), and many recommendations have been published regarding the proper use of them in patients with PsA. In rheumatoid arthritis, the combination of conventional with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs is a common and recommended practice, whereas in PsA there is scarce data about the benefit of this combination. This review summarizes all the available data from randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and registries about the value of this therapeutic strategy.

Comparison of Etanercept Monotherapy and Combination Therapy with Methotrexate in Psoriatic Arthritis: Results from 2 Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical/functional outcomes associated with etanercept (ETN) monotherapy versus combination therapy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Data from patients with PsA who received ETN alone (n = 322) or combined with methotrexate (MTX; n = 152) for 24 weeks in 2 placebo-controlled clinical trials were summarized across studies.

RESULTS

Similar proportions of patients in the monotherapy and combination therapy groups achieved the PsA Response Criteria (80% and 83%) and the American College of Rheumatology improvements of 20% (ACR20; both 70%); numerically higher proportions receiving monotherapy achieved ACR50 (55% vs 48%) and ACR70 (35% vs 27%). Little between-group difference was observed in the 28-joint Disease Activity Score with C-reactive protein, the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, and the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index improvement.

CONCLUSION

ETN with and without MTX provided similar benefits in active PsA.

Psoriatic arthritis for the dermatologist

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, progressive, inflammatory spondyloarthropathy that affects approximately one-third of patients with all types of psoriasis. Dermatologists are in a unique position to recognize early symptoms of PsA, initiate appropriate therapy, and prevent development of further disability. The course of PsA can be modulated by immunosuppressive therapy; patients with moderate-to-severe disease require aggressive management with medications proven to halt disease progression. It is essential for the dermatologist to understand the safety, tolerability, efficacy, cost, and potential to halt disease progression with available medications for this relatively common and potentially disabling disease.

Use of biologic agents in combination with other therapies for the treatment of psoriasis

Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder, which is associated with a significant negative impact on a patient’s quality of life. Traditional therapies for psoriasis are often not able to meet desired treatment goals, and high-dose and/or long-term use is associated with toxicities that can result in end-organ damage. An improved understanding of the involvement of cytokines in the etiology of psoriasis has led to the development of biologic agents targeting tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and interleukins (ILs)-12/23. While biologic agents have improved treatment outcomes, they are not effective in all individuals with psoriasis. The combination of biologic agents with traditional therapies may provide improved therapeutic options for patients who inadequately respond to a single drug or when efficacy may be increased with supplementation of another treatment. In addition, combination therapy may reduce safety concerns and cumulative toxicity, as lower doses of individual agents may be efficacious when used together. This article reviews the current evidence available on the efficacy and safety of combining biologic agents with systemic therapies (methotrexate, cyclosporine, or retinoids) or with phototherapy, and the combination of biologic agents themselves. Guidance is provided to help physicians identify situations and the characteristics of patients who would benefit from combination therapy with a biologic agent. Finally, the potential clinical impact of biologic therapies in development (e.g., those targeting IL-17A, IL-17RA, or IL-23 alone) is analyzed.

Drug Therapies for Peripheral Joint Disease in Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Review

In 2009, GRAPPA published their first evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Since then, new information has been published and drugs developed. We summarize evidence for the efficacy of available treatments for peripheral joint involvement in PsA. We performed a systematic review of current literature on the efficacy of different therapies, management, and therapeutic strategies for peripheral arthritis involvement in PsA, in order to provide information for the development of the new GRAPPA treatment recommendations.

Long term efficacy and safety of etanercept in the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated inflammatory disease affecting both the skin and joints. Approximately 20% of patients suffer a moderate to severe form of skin disease and up to 30% have joint involvement. Standard therapies for psoriasis include topical medications, phototherapy, and both oral systemic and biological therapies whereas therapies for psoriatic arthritis include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs followed by disease modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors and interleukin-12/23p40 inhibitors. Treatment of both diseases is typically driven by disease severity. In the past decade, major advances in the understanding of the immunopathogenesis of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis have led to the development of numerous biological therapies, which have revolutionized the treatment for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Anti-TNF-α agents are currently considered as first line biological therapies for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Currently approved anti-TNF-α agents include etanercept, adalimumab, and infliximab for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis as well as golimumab and certolizumab for psoriatic arthritis. In this article, we aim to evaluate the long term safety and efficacy of etanercept in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.

Therapeutic strategies in psoriasis patients with psoriatic arthritis: focus on new agents

Psoriatic arthritis affects approximately 6-42 % of patients with psoriasis. It is useful for physicians or dermatologists managing psoriasis patients to be aware of how to concurrently manage the joint manifestations, as it is preferable and convenient to use a single agent in such patients. However, only certain therapies are effective for both. Systemic agents, which can be used for both skin and joint manifestations, include methotrexate and ciclosporin. For the group of biologic agents, the tumor necrosis factor inhibitors such as adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab and certolizumab are effective. Ustekinumab is a more recently developed agent belonging to the group of anti-IL-12p40 antibodies and has been shown to be efficacious. Newer drugs in the treatment armamentarium that have shown efficacy for both psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis consist of the anti-IL-17 agent, secukinumab, and a phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, apremilast. The other anti-IL-17 agents, ixekizumab and brodalumab, as well as the oral Jak inhibitor, tofacitinib, have very limited but promising data. This review paper provides a good overview of the agents that can be used for the concurrent management of skin and joint psoriasis.

Safety and tolerability of tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors in psoriasis: a narrative review

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors are an alternative to oral systemic therapies for psoriasis. Data regarding the safety of TNF-α inhibitors from randomized clinical trials may not fully reflect the effects on the clinic patient population receiving the therapy, but other sources of information are available. We performed a literature review to assess the safety and tolerability of the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis with TNF-α inhibitors. A literature search was conducted using PubMed for articles dating from January 2000 to October 2013. Randomized controlled, cohort, open-label, and observational studies were included, as well as case reports and letters to the editor. Articles found on PubMed describing the safety of anti-TNF-α therapy in psoriasis patients were included, while studies highlighting interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 inhibitors were excluded, as were non-English articles. In total, 58 articles were included in the review. TNF-α inhibitors exhibit both efficacy and tolerability in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Adverse effects associated with these medications are not common and can be minimized with routine clinical monitoring and patient education. While the risk of severe adverse events is low, the lack of very large, long-term, randomized safety trials limits the ability to fully define the safety of these agents. TNF-α inhibitors have a good efficacy/safety ratio for use in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Serious adverse effects are not common, and common injection-site reactions are usually manageable. The benefits of TNF-α inhibitors outweigh the risks for moderate-to-severe psoriasis; however, there are potential adverse effects and the patient populations at highest risk include the elderly and those with a history of malignancy.

Cyclosporine regimens in plaque psoriasis: an overview with special emphasis on dose, duration, and old and new treatment approaches

Cyclosporine A (CsA) is one of the most effective systemic drugs available for the treatment of psoriasis, as evidenced by the results of several randomized studies and by a prolonged experience in dermatological setting. In clinical practice, CsA is usually used for the induction of psoriasis remission at a daily dose included in the range of 2.5–5 mg/kg and with intermittent short-term regimens, lasting on average 3–6 months. The magnitude and rapidity of response are dose dependent, as well as the risk of development of adverse events. Therefore, the dose should be tailored to patient's needs and general characteristics and adjusted during the treatment course according to both the efficacy and tolerability. Some studies support the feasibility of pulse administration of CsA for a few days per week for both the induction and the maintenance of response in psoriasis patients. This paper will review the data on CsA regimens for plaque-type psoriasis and will focus the attention on dose, treatment duration, novel schedules, and role in combination therapies, including the association with biologicals.

Effective and sustainable biologic treatment of psoriasis: what can we learn from new clinical data?

The introduction of the biologic agents, adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab and ustekinumab, has provided more options for the short- and long-term treatment of patients with psoriasis. Physicians are now able to achieve and maintain effective disease control in more patients using biologic therapies. Newly published clinical data support the introduction of novel optimization strategies to further improve outcomes in patients with psoriasis. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials have provided data on the efficacy of conventional therapies, including systemic agents, and biologics at specific time points. Switching from methotrexate to a tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonist after 16 weeks can improve response rates, as demonstrated in a study of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, while the benefit of long-term methotrexate use remains unclear. In a separate study, psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) ≥ 75 response rates were maintained over time (>3 years for adalimumab), suggesting that long-term biologic therapy is an effective and sustainable treatment option for psoriasis. For each individual patient, the benefit of a particular treatment needs to be balanced with the risks. The lack of head-to-head trials of antipsoriatic therapies, particularly biologic therapies, does not help with making individualized treatment decisions. However, a benefit-risk assessment of TNF-α antagonists calculated from an integrated analysis of published literature in moderate-to-severe psoriasis can be used to aid clinical practice. The number needed to treat, number needed to harm and number of patient years of observation to detect an adverse event have been determined for adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab. The benefit-risk profiles generated demonstrated that, during the initial year of treatment, likelihood of success with TNF-α antagonists was several orders of magnitude greater than the likelihood of serious toxicity.

Hepatic steatosis and disease activity in subjects with psoriatic arthritis receiving tumor necrosis factor-α blockers

OBJECTIVE

Little is known about tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) blockers, disease activity, and liver steatosis (hepatic steatosis; HS) in subjects with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We prospectively evaluated changes in HS during treatment with TNF-α blockers.

METHODS

In 48 patients with PsA who had evidence of HS before the beginning of TNF-α blocker treatment, an ultrasound followup examination was performed after a 12-month treatment period with TNF-α blockers. All subjects were stratified according to minimal disease activity (MDA) or not (n-MDA), during treatment with TNF-α blockers. Changes in grade of HS were evaluated in parallel in 42 controls with HS and without PsA.

RESULTS

At baseline, no significant difference in HS score was found between PsA subjects and controls (HS scores 1.46 ± 0.65 vs 1.62 ± 0.66, respectively; p = 0.249). At 12-month followup, a worsening HS score was found in 20 (41.7%) patients with PsA and in 6 (14.3%) controls (p = 0.005). Overall, the grade of HS worsening was higher in patients with PsA (0.37 ± 0.70) than in controls (0.09 ± 0.43; p = 0.028). A significantly lower prevalence of worsening HS was found among patients with PsA with MDA, compared with n-MDA subjects (16.7% vs 66.7%, respectively; p = 0.001). Laboratory measures of liver function behaved similarly. The risk of worsening HS in patients with PsA who had MDA was similar to that in controls (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.34-4.33, p = 0.77), and higher in patients who did not have MDA (HR 4.46, 95% CI 1.73-11.47, p = 0.001, regression analysis).

CONCLUSION

Compared with patients with MDA, those with active disease after 12-month treatment with TNF-α blockers exhibited significantly higher incidence of worsening liver steatosis.

Adalimumab or Cyclosporine as Monotherapy and in Combination in Severe Psoriatic Arthritis: Results from a Prospective 12-month Nonrandomized Unblinded Clinical Trial

Objective.

To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab or cyclosporine (CYC) as monotherapy or combination therapy for patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA), despite methotrexate (MTX) therapy.

Methods.

A prospective 12-month, nonrandomized, unblinded clinical trial of 57, 58, and 55 patients who received CYC (2.5–3.75 mg/kg/day), adalimumab (40 mg every other week), or combination, respectively. Lowering of concomitant nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) and corticosteroids and reductions of adalimumab and/or CYC doses in responding patients were not restricted.

Results.

Mean numbers of tender/swollen joints at baseline were 9.7/6.7 in CYC-treated, 13.0/7.8 in adalimumab-treated, and 14.5/9.4 in combination-treated patients, indicating lesser disease severity of patients assigned to the first group. The Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria at 12 months were met by 65% of CYC-treated (p = 0.0003 in favor of combination treatment), 85% of adalimumab-treated (p = 0.15 vs combination treatment), and 95% of combination-treated patients, while the American College of Rheumatology-50 response rates were 36%, 69%, and 87%, respectively (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.03 in favor of combination treatment). A significantly greater mean improvement in Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index was achieved by combination treatment (−1.11) vs CYC (−0.41) or adalimumab alone (−0.85). Combination therapy significantly improved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index-50 response rates beyond adalimumab, but not beyond the effect of CYC monotherapy. Doses of NSAID and corticosteroids were reduced in combination-treated patients; CYC doses and frequency of adalimumab injections were also reduced in 51% and 10% of them, respectively. No new safety signals were observed.

Conclusion.

The combination of adalimumab and CYC is safe and seemed to produce major improvement in both clinical and serological variables in patients with severely active PsA and inadequate response to MTX.