The efficacy and safety of etanercept when used with as-needed adjunctive topical therapy in a randomised, double-blind study in subjects with moderate-to-severe psoriasis (the PRISTINE trial)

Quality of reporting and concordance between sources of adverse events in the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a cross-sectional study of RCTs from a Cochrane systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Incomplete reporting of safety outcomes in quality and availability of safety reporting in published articles of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were described in different medical areas. The number of RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis has increased considerably. Complete and precise reporting of safety is mandatory for the efficacy/harms balance evaluation. We aimed to assess the quality and availability of safety reporting in published RCTs assessing systemic treatments for psoriasis, as well as the concordance of data between published trials and ClinicalTrials.gov (CT).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We included all RCTs in adults initiated after September 2009, assessing systemic psoriasis treatments compared with placebo or with an active comparator. All trials were selected in duplicate by 2 independent authors from the latest search of the dedicated Cochrane review. We described quality of safety reporting for all published RCTs, using a modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms scale by using descriptive analysis, and a composite score of 3 key items of safety report. For each RCT, data on adverse events (AEs)/serious AEs (SAEs) were extracted from the publication and CT: total number of AEs/SAEs, patients with AEs/SAEs, SAEs by system organ class classification and deaths. These data were compared between sources for each RCT.

RESULTS

In total, 128 trials were included in the analysis of reporting quality, and 76 in the analysis of data concordance between sources. The median number of reported Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials harms items per article was 9 out of 18 (IQR 7-10), and mean number was 8.39 (SD = 3.02). Items in the methods section were the least frequently reported. The proportion of RCTs reporting the number of SAEs and death were significantly higher on CT than in the published article ((100% (76/76) vs 88.2%, McNemar test, P < .0016). At least 1 discrepancy between sources for SAE safety data was found in 30/76 (39.5%) RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Shortcomings and gaps in the quality of safety reporting in publications of RCTs of systemic psoriasis treatments have been identified. A lack of data in published articles and discrepancies between published articles and CT data complete this finding.

Etanercept in Axial Spondyloarthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, and Plaque Psoriasis: Real-World Outcome Data from German Non-interventional Study ADEQUATE

INTRODUCTION

For chronic diseases such as axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and plaque psoriasis (PsO), treatment goals include remission or at least low disease activity (LDA) by 12 weeks. Improvements in symptoms such as pain and fatigue should also be treatment goals.

METHODS

ADEQUATE was a German, prospective, non-interventional study to evaluate the proportion of patients with rheumatoid arthritis, PsA, axSpA, or PsO who, in routine clinical practice, benefit from the continuation of treatment with etanercept (ETN) beyond 12 weeks, even when their treatment goals have not yet been reached. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and changes in concomitant glucocorticoid use were also recorded. This article focuses on results for patients with axSpA and PsA; data for patients with PsO are described briefly.

RESULTS

In total, 305, 254, and 70 patients with axSpA, PsA, and PsO, respectively, were included. Rates of remission at week 12 and week 24, respectively, were 19% and 18% for axSpA, 38% and 51% for PsA, and 7% and 19% for PsO. Rates of LDA at week 12 and week 24, respectively, were 39% and 45% for axSpA, 50% and 60% for PsA, and 34% and 51% for PsO. Extending treatment up to 52 weeks was associated with stable rates of or further increases in remission and LDA rates. Improvements in pain, fatigue, and depression (axSpA, PsA, and PsO) and reductions in concomitant glucocorticoid use (axSpA and PsA) were observed. No new safety signals were detected.

CONCLUSION

These findings confirm the effectiveness and safety of ETN in routine clinical practice for several indications and highlight potential benefits of continuing ETN treatment in patients who have not reached their treatment goals after 12 weeks. Additional benefits included improvements in PROs and reduction of concomitant glucocorticoids.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02486302.

A systematic review investigating at what proportion clinical images are shared in prospective randomized controlled trials involving patients with psoriasis and biological agents

For many patients including those with psoriasis, scientific manuscripts comprising clinical outcomes including psoriasis area severity index (PASI) and/or physician global assessment (PGA) may be difficult to understand. However, most patients can relate to images at baseline and follow-up, particularly for dermatological diseases. This study aimed to assess the proportion of shared clinical images in psoriasis trials. A systematic review adhering to the PRISMA guidelines was performed. The review was limited to randomized controlled trials, and among these, only investigations involving biological agents for treatment of psoriasis were included. The Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for eligible studies published from inception to October 26, 2021. In total, 152 studies were included. When combining these, 62,871 patients were randomized. Overall, 203 images were shared depicting 60 patients in the manuscripts yielding an overall sharing rate of 0.1%. Patient images are seldom incorporated in clinical trial manuscripts which impairs interpretation for patients. Inclusion of image material would strengthen the patients' perspective and understanding on what treatment effects that can be expected. As such, this systematic review should be an invitation to the pharmaceutical industry, other sponsors, and editorial offices to improve easy transfer of information to patients using image data.

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.

Comparison of the relative efficacy of different biologics in different body areas in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis receiving biologics and tofacitinib in phase 3 randomized controlled trials: a 15-year single-center experience

BACKGROUND

: The treatment of psoriasis has been revolutionized after the advent of biologics. However, focal resistant plaques are still common which may impose a significant impact on quality-of-life.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

: We compared the relative efficacy of different biologics and tofacitinib in different body areas in Asian patients with psoriasis. We retrospectively included the clinical data of 177 patients (228 treatment courses) with moderate-to-severe psoriasis in 10 biologic or tofacitinib trials conducted between 2004 and 2019. Pooled data was analyzed at week 12-16 and week 44-52 respectively for total and four regional PASI 75, 90, and 100 responses.

RESULTS

: The result showed that secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab and risankizumab had more favorable efficacy, followed by adalimumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib, while etanercept showed the least efficacy. The regional PASI response peaked early in the head area with subsequent decline while the lower extremities improved slowly. At week 52, the head-and-neck and lower extremities were less likely to achieve PASI responses compared to the trunk and upper extremities.

CONCLUSIONS

: The treatment responses of different body regions of biologics and tofacitinib were in line with the overall response. However, the head region responds fast but total clearance at 52 weeks was similarly lower as the leg region. More subjects and prospective studies may be required to compare the efficacy of different biologics in different body regions.

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.

Biosimilar versus originator etanercept: a real-life clinical study

BACKGROUND

Over the last few years, novel therapeutic approaches based on the use of monoclonal antibodies against cytokines, or their cognate receptors, involved in psoriasis progression have shown remarkable results, being capable to reduce disease progression and increase patient's quality of life. Among these is etanercept (Enbrel®, Pfizer, Sandwich, UK) and its biosimilar compound SB4 (Benepali®, Samsung Bioepis, Delft, The Netherlands), both approved for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis. Aim of the present study was to evaluate in a less controlled environment, such as real-life, the actual bioequivalence between the etanercept (ETN) and the SB4 in term of safety, efficacy and patient's quality of life.

METHODS

For this purpose, we analyzed a case study consisting of 65 patients affected by plaque psoriasis, with or without psoriatic arthritis at our dermatological outpatient center of Sant'Andrea Hospital in Rome, all of them under treatment with either ETN or the biosimilar SB4 drug for at least 3 months. The indicators used to evaluate the effectiveness of the therapies were the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for itch, the VAS for pain, and the Dermatology Life Quality Index.

RESULTS

The results showed no significant differences among the two drugs in all the analyzed parameters confirming the equivalence between the ETN and its biosimilar SB4.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we can confirm the overlapping clinical efficacy between ETN and its biosimilar SB4 drug and that even in an uncontrolled environment such as real-life, the biosimilar drugs are an excellent opportunity to reduce health costs allowing to expand the audience of patients who can benefit from these innovative treatments.

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.

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.

Remission Duration and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis Treated by Biologics or Tofacitinib in Controlled Clinical Trials: A 15-Year Single-Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

Relapse is common after treatment discontinuation for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. The objective of this study was to understand the remission duration and long-term outcomes in psoriasis patients after biologic withdrawal.

METHODS

We retrospectively included the follow-up data of 184 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis after the end of 11 biologic or tofacitinib trials conducted between 2004 and 2016.

RESULTS

Among the 232 treatment courses, 95 achieved (psoriasis area and severity index) PASI 75 at the end of the studies. At 6 months after treatment discontinuation, the systemic treatment-free rates of our patients who entered the PRESTA, PRISTINE, PEARL, ERASURE, CLEAR, the global tofacitinib study, and the IXORA-P study were 66.7%, 66.7%, 75.0%, 16.7%, 22.2%, 33.3%, and 29.2%, respectively. Pooled data showed a serious adverse event incidence rate of 1.5/100 person-years. The proportions of systemic treatment-free episodes were 16.8%, 7.4%, 4.3%, 3.2%, and 3.2% at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively. Biologics were reinitiated in 41.9%, 66.7%, 77.1%, 83.5%, and 86.1% at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively. Multivariate generalized estimating equation (GEE) regression analysis demonstrated that predictors for a longer relapse-free duration were baseline PASI, PASI improvement, biologic naivety, and early biologic intervention. Patients who received early biologic intervention, who achieved PASI 90, and who were biologic naive showed significantly higher relapse-free rate by Kaplan-Meier analysis with log rank test.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic treatment was required in 86.1% of patients within 12 months after biologic withdrawal and biologics were reinitiated in 77.1% of patients after 3 years. However, early biologic administration within 2 years after diagnosis demonstrated a lower risk of relapse in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

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.

Therapeutic management with biological anti-TNF-α agent in severe psoriasis associated with chronic hepatitis B: A case report

Systemic therapy in patients with concurrent psoriasis and chronic hepatitis B is a challenging task for both dermatologists and gastroenterologists since there is a high risk for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and hepatic toxicity under biological therapy. The therapeutic management of a patient with psoriasis and infection with the HBV is a challenge as the classical systemic treatment (methotrexate, acitretin, cyclosporine) shows a high risk of immunosuppression and/or hepatic toxicity and the biological therapy is endangered by the possibility of HBV reactivation. We present the case of a patient with moderate-severe psoriasis and chronic hepatitis B for whom we assessed the risk-benefit relation and considered useful to initiate the anti-TNF therapy concomitantly with the antiviral therapy with entecavir. The therapeutic algorithm included initiation of anti-TNF therapy with etanercept 2×50 mg/week combined with entecavir, an antiviral treatment administered continuously since the diagnosis of the HBV hepatitis, with hepatic function and viral load monitoring. After 3 months of therapy with etanercept the patient was given a dose of etanercept of 50 mg/week combined with entecavir 0.5 mg/day which he continued until week 36 when psoriatic lesions had cleared (PASI=0.6; DLQI=0). No adverse effects were registered and there was no evidence of HBV viral replication or changes in viral markers. We wish to emphasize that the use of etanercept in a patient with psoriasis and hepatitis B is a successful therapeutic alternative which may be safely used concomitantly with entecavir, with regular monitoring of viral load and hepatic function tests.

Joint AAD-NPF guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with biologics

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the US population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care, providing recommendations based on the available evidence. The treatment of psoriasis with biologic agents will be reviewed, emphasizing treatment recommendations and the role of the dermatologist in monitoring and educating patients regarding benefits as well as associated risks.

Guselkumab for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis During Induction Phase: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background:

Guselkumab is an interleukin-23 inhibitor indicated for treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Objective:

The objective was to determine the relative efficacy and safety of guselkumab compared to other biologics.

Methods:

A systematic review was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted using meta-regression analyses that adjusted for cross-trial differences and risk differences. The primary outcome was Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response. Other efficacy and safety outcomes were considered. Several meta-regressions were performed to account for variations in patient and study characteristics: baseline risk adjustment (ie, control group response), prior biologic use, duration of psoriasis, weight, age, race, and baseline PASI/dermatology life quality index scores. The best-fitting model using predefined criteria was selected.

Results:

Forty-five RCTs were identified. Patient and study characteristics differed between RCTs as reflected in variations in control group response. Both the baseline risk-adjusted NMA and the risk-difference NMA fit the data best and suggested guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses. Pairwise comparisons from the baseline risk-adjusted PASI 90 NMA suggested guselkumab has comparable efficacy with ixekizumab (relative risk [RR]: 0.999, 95% credible intervals [CrIs]: 0.89-1.13) and brodalumab (RR: 1.04, 95% CrIs: 0.91-1.17) and superior efficacy versus all other treatments in the network (RR range, 1.20 to 43.22). Guselkumab was superior or comparable to other therapies for other efficacy outcomes and had a more favorable safety profile than most.

Conclusions:

Guselkumab has one of the highest PASI 90 responses among psoriasis treatments; similar findings were observed for other efficacy outcomes. Guselkumab has a favorable benefit–risk balance compared to moderate-to-severe psoriasis therapies.

Importance of assessing and adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity in network meta-analysis: a case study of psoriasis

Aim: The importance of adjusting for cross-study heterogeneity when conducting network meta-analyses (NMAs) was demonstrated using a case study of biologic therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods: Bayesian NMAs were conducted for Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90 response. Several covariates were considered to account for cross-trial differences: baseline risk (i.e., placebo response), prior biologic use, body weight, psoriasis duration, age, race and baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score. Model fit was evaluated. Results: The baseline risk-adjusted NMA, which adjusts for multiple observed and unobserved effect modifiers, was associated with the best model fit. Lack of adjustment for cross-trial differences led to different clinical interpretations of findings. Conclusion: Failure to adjust for cross-trial differences in NMA can have important implications for clinical interpretations when studying the comparative efficacy of healthcare interventions.

The Physician Global Assessment and Body Surface Area composite tool is a simple alternative to the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index for assessment of psoriasis: post hoc analysis from PRISTINE and PRESTA

Background

The product of Physician Global Assessment and Body Surface Area (PGA × BSA) is a new outcome measure for psoriasis severity and response to therapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate PGA × BSA as an alternative to Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) for psoriasis assessments.

Methods

The relationship between PASI and PGA × BSA was assessed in a post hoc analysis of pooled data from the PRISTINE (NCT00663052) and PRESTA (NCT00245960) trials in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who received etanercept 50 mg/week. Data were analyzed using Spearman and intra-class correlation coefficients, effect sizes, scatterplots, Bland–Altman plots, and Kappa statistics.

Results

Spearman correlations at baseline, week 12, and week 24 were strong for PGA × BSA versus PASI (r=0.78, 0.87, and 0.90, respectively; all P<0.0001) as were intra-class correlations (0.76 [95% confidence interval 0.73–0.80], 0.80 [0.76–0.83], and 0.85 [0.82–0.87], respectively). The effect size was −1.53 for PASI and −0.94 for PGA × BSA (baseline to week 24). Scatterplots and Bland–Altman plots detected a trend across the range of measurement. Kappa statistics (at 12 and 24 weeks) between PASI50/75/90 and 50/75/90% improvement in PGA × BSA showed good agreement (0.58–0.69 at week 12 and 0.63–0.67, respectively; all P<0.0001). At baseline, the Spearman correlation coefficients were 0.96, 0.51, 0.19, and 0.17 for PGA × BSA versus BSA, PGA, Patient Global Assessment, and Dermatology Life Quality Index, respectively (all P<0.001).

Conclusion

PGA × BSA has advantages over PASI for measuring moderate-to-severe psoriasis; it is intuitive, sensitive, and easy to use.

Prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational and clinical studies

BACKGROUND

Wide-ranging prevalence estimates of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in patients with psoriasis have been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prevalence and incidence of PsA in patients with psoriasis.

METHODS

Two authors independently searched 3 databases for studies reporting on the prevalence or incidence of PsA in patients with psoriasis. A proportion meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled proportion estimates of PsA in patients with psoriasis.

RESULTS

A total of 266 studies examining 976,408 patients with psoriasis were included. Overall, the pooled proportion (95% confidence interval [CI]) of PsA among patients with psoriasis was 19.7% (95% CI, 18.5%-20.9%). In children and adolescents (<18 years of age), the pooled prevalence was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.1%-4.9%). The PsA prevalence was 22.7% (95% CI, 20.6%-25.0%) in European patients with psoriasis, 21.5% (95% CI, 15.4%-28.2%) in South American patients with psoriasis, 19.5% (95% CI, 17.1%-22.1%) in North American patients with psoriasis, 15.5% (95% CI, 0.009%-51.5%) in African patients with psoriasis, and 14.0% (95% CI, 95% CI, 11.7%-16.3%) in Asian patients with psoriasis. The prevalence of PsA was 23.8% (95% CI, 20.1%-27.6%) in studies in which the Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis were applied. The incidence of PsA among patients with psoriasis ranged from 0.27 to 2.7 per 100 person-years.

LIMITATIONS

Between-study heterogeneity may have affected the estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that 1 in 4 patients with psoriasis have PsA. With the growing recognition of the Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis, more homogenous and comparable prevalence estimates are expected to be reported.

The comparative efficacy of brodalumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relative efficacy of brodalumab compared with approved biologic therapies and apremilast for moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane for randomized controlled trials reporting induction phase responses. The primary analysis examined the proportion of patients achieving Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 50, 75, 90, or 100 responses using a random-effects Bayesian multinomial likelihood model with probit link, with and without adjustment for variation in study-level placebo responses.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies were included. Based on PASI 100 response, the most efficacious therapies were brodalumab 210 mg every two weeks (Q2W) and ixekizumab. Brodalumab 210 mg Q2W was significantly more efficacious than adalimumab, apremilast, brodalumab 140 mg Q2W, etanercept, infliximab, secukinumab, and ustekinumab. Results were consistent for PASI 50, 75, and 90 outcomes and all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings are consistent with pivotal trials which indicate that high levels of complete clearance can be achieved with brodalumab. Based on existing evidence, induction-phase efficacy of brodalumab is similar to ixekizumab and superior to other approved therapies, including anti-TNFs, apremilast, secukinumab, and ustekinumab.

Safety and efficacy of etanercept monotherapy for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: A prospective 12-week follow-up study

Etanercept has been shown to be effective for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Since most clinical trials examined etanercept in combination with other drugs, the efficacy and safety of etanercept monotherapy for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis have not been well established. This prospective study enrolled 61 Chinese patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis to explore the efficacy and safety of etanercept monotherapy. These patients were treated with etanercept at a subcutaneous dose of 25 mg, twice a week, for 12 weeks. All the 61 patients completed the treatment and showed significant improvement in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) scores. At 4, 8, and 12 weeks after treatment, the response rates (PASI75) were 0%, 21.31%, and 40.98%, respectively. It was concluded that etanercept monotherapy is efficacious and safe for patients with moderate- to-severe plaque psoriasis.

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.

Redefining the therapeutic objective in psoriatic patients candidates for biological therapy

The advances in psoriasis management currently allow achieving a good control of the disease. In particular, with the latest developed molecules, available evidence suggests that it is possible to pose an ambitious therapeutic goal, such as a Dermatology Life Quality Index 0/1, a Physician Global Assessment 0/1, or a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90/100 response. However, patients often fail to achieve the complete clearance of their cutaneous lesions or the improvement of disease factors that impair their quality of life. To optimize the treatment of psoriasis, it is not enough to define precisely the therapeutic objective, but also to adapt the therapeutic strategy to make the necessary modifications in case of not achieving it at the time point (at the end of the induction phase, or every 3-6 months) to be agreed with the patient (the so-called treat-to-target approach). In the present report, based on the Delphi methodology, 11 dermatologists from the Spanish Psoriasis Group addressed key issues that could be involved in the achievement and maintenance of the therapeutic goals of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. The document provides 27 consensus statements intended to support clinical decision-making by healthcare professionals for patients who might be candidates to receive biologic therapy.

A multicenter, randomized, open-label pilot trial assessing the efficacy and safety of etanercept 50 mg twice weekly followed by etanercept 25 mg twice weekly, the combination of etanercept 25 mg twice weekly and acitretin, and acitretin alone in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis

Background

Etanercept, a soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor, and acitretin have been shown to be effective in treating psoriasis. Acitretin is widely used in Korea. However, the combination of etanercept plus acitretin has not been evaluated among Korean patients with psoriasis. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with etanercept and acitretin in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

Methods

Sixty patients with psoriasis were randomized to receive etanercept 50 mg twice weekly (BIW) for 12 weeks followed by etanercept 25 mg BIW for 12 weeks (ETN-ETN); etanercept 25 mg BIW plus acitretin 10 mg twice daily (BID) for 24 weeks (ETN-ACT); or acitretin 10 mg BID for 24 weeks (ACT). The primary efficacy measurement was the proportion of patients achieving 75 % improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 24. Secondary end points included 50 % improvement in PASI (PASI 50) at week 24 and clear/almost-clear by Physician Global Assessment (PGA) at each visit through week 24.

Results

The proportions of patients achieving PASI 75, PASI 50, and PGA clear/almost-clear at week 24 in the ETN-ETN (52.4, 71.4, and 52.4 %, respectively) and ETN-ACT groups (57.9, 84.2, and 52.6 %, respectively) were higher than in the ACT group (22.2, 44.4, and 16.7 %, respectively). The incidence of adverse events was similar across all arms. This was an open-label study with a small number of patients.

Conclusion

In Korean patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, etanercept alone or in combination with acitretin was more effective than acitretin. All treatments were well tolerated throughout the study.

Trial registration

This study was registered on July 7, 2009 at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00936065.

Brodalumab -an IL-17RA monoclonal antibody for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis

INTRODUCTION

IL-17 is a growing target for autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. Brodalumab is a fully human anti-IL-17RA monoclonal antibody that has been investigated in a range of disease including psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease and asthma.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to summarize up-to-date pharmacological properties of brodalumab and the clinical efficacy and safety data presented in clinical trials. The focus of this review will be on psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis although we will briefly touch on the other indications in which the drug has been studied as we feel it adds to our understanding of the IL-17 pathway and highlights areas where research is still needed.

EXPERT OPINION

Brodalumab has shown good efficacy in psoriasis in small but extended studies with a moderate effect on psoriatic arthritis. Brodalumab studies are clearly negative in rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease. The data are equivocal in asthma; however, further studies in this disease are justifiable. The safety profile of this drug thus far is not worrisome although longer studies in more patients are needed.

Predictors of Topical Use in Psoriasis Patients in the REFINE Study

BACKGROUND

The factors influencing the use of topical agents in combination with biologic therapies for the treatment of plaque psoriasis (PsO) are not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

To examine potential predictors of topical use in patients with moderate to severe plaque PsO receiving etanercept (ETN).

METHODS

Post hoc descriptive analyses and a multinomial regression of the REFINE study data were used to examine associations between topical agent potency and covariates, including Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score, study site, and province.

RESULTS

Not achieving PASI 90 at week 12 predicted topical use, with a lower PASI 90 rate in patients who used high-potency topical agents post randomization (P = .003). Additionally, statistically significant differences were found in patterns of topical use among Canadian provinces (P = .007), with the use of high-potency topical agents being greater in Ontario and Quebec than the rest of Canada.

CONCLUSION

This analysis revealed that region and PASI 90 status at week 12 predict topical use.

Statistical reporting in randomized controlled trials from the dermatology literature: a review of 44 dermatology journals

BACKGROUND

The validity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is determined by several statistical factors.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the level of recent statistical reporting in RCTs from the dermatology literature.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE for all RCTs published between 1 May 2013 and 1 May 2014 in 44 dermatology journals.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ten articles were screened, of which 181 RCTs from 27 journals were reviewed. Primary study outcomes were met in 122 (67.4%) studies. Sample size calculations and beta values were reported in 52 (28.7%) and 48 (26.5%) studies, respectively, and nonsignificant findings were supported in only 31 (17.1%). Alpha values were reported in 131 (72.4%) of studies with 45 (24.9%) having two-sided P-values, although adjustment for multiple statistical tests was performed in only 16 (9.9% of studies with ≥ two statistical tests performed). Sample size calculations were performed based on a single outcome in 44 (86.3%) and multiple outcomes in six (11.8%) studies. However, among studies that were powered for a single primary outcome, 20 (45.5%) made conclusions based on multiple primary outcomes. Twenty-one (41.2%) studies relied on secondary/unspecified outcomes. There were no differences for primary outcome being met (Chi-square, P = 0.29), sample size calculations (P ≥ 0.55), beta values (P = 0.89), alpha values (P = 0.65), correction for multiple statistical testing (P = 0.59), two-sided alpha (P = 0.64), support of nonsignificant findings (Fisher's exact, P = 0.23) based on the journal's impact factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Levels of statistical reporting are low in RCTs from the dermatology literature. Future work is needed to improve these levels of reporting.

Efficacy and cost of etanercept in long-term psoriasis: Rational use in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

The advent of the biological therapies has led health expenditure in dermatology units. This study aims to evaluate, in our regular clinical practice, the patterns of use of etanercept and its influence on efficacy and safety outcomes, as well as the real costs associated with continuous and intermittent treatment regimens.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective, non-interventionist, and multicenter study to analyze the experience of the treatment with etanercept in the management of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, given according to the daily clinical practice of the Dermatology Departments of the Complejo Hospitalario de Jaén and the Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío (Seville).

RESULTS

83.3% (n = 45) of the 54 patients included in our study received the continuous regimen of Etanercept, whereas 16.7% (n = 9) were given the intermittent regimen. 94.4% (n = 51) of the patients studied began the Etanercept treatment at a dose of 50 mg/week. The mean patient/year cost of the study population is €11 298.80 (95%CI €10 551.40-€12 046.20). Breaking down the first and the second year of treatment by regimen, in the continuous regimen the mean cost would be €12 294.15 and €12 327.05 in the first and the second year, respectively, and €10 302.07 and €4986.51 in the intermittent regimen.

DISCUSSION

Etanercept is a biologic that had demonstrated its versatility over the years and permits the individualization of treatment in our patients, thus having a direct impact on drug-related costs. This is well demonstrated in our series, where 94.4% of our patients begin with the dose of 50 mg/d. Our study yields relatively higher figures in patients on continuous therapy, with 77.1% of them maintaining PASI75 at week 24.

CONCLUSIONS

We present our experience in regular clinical practice with etanercept, showing it to be an effective, safe, and versatile drug that permits patient-tailored treatment, delivering a frankly satisfactory control of our psoriasis patients.

Etanercept: a review of its use in autoimmune inflammatory diseases

With its approval more than 15 years ago, subcutaneous etanercept (Enbrel(®)) was the first biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) and the first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor to be approved for use in rheumatic diseases. Etanercept remains an important cost-effective treatment option in adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis or plaque psoriasis, and in paediatric patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis or plaque psoriasis. In all of these populations, etanercept (with or without methotrexate) effectively reduced signs and symptoms, disease activity and disability, and improved health-related quality of life, with these benefits sustained during long-term treatment. The safety profile of etanercept during short- and long-term treatment was consistent with the approved product labelling, with adverse events being of a predictable and manageable nature. The introduction of etanercept and other bDMARDs as therapeutic options for patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases and spondyloarthropathies revolutionized disease management and these agents continue to have a central role in treatment strategies. This article reviews the extensive clinical experience with etanercept in these patient populations.

Effect of etanercept therapy on psoriasis symptoms in patients from Latin America, Central Europe, and Asia: a subset analysis of the PRISTINE trial

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis prevalence and characteristics in Asia, Central Europe, and Latin America have not been thoroughly investigated and there are no large trials for biologic treatments for patients from these regions. The goal of this analysis was to report clinical response to anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha treatment in these patients.

METHODS

Patients from Argentina, Czech Republic, Hungary, Mexico, Taiwan, and Thailand (N=171) were included in this subset analysis of the PRISTINE trial. Patients with stable moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were blinded and randomized to receive etanercept 50 mg once weekly (QW) or biweekly (BIW) for 12 weeks, followed by 12 weeks of open-label QW treatment with etanercept 50 mg through week 24 (QW/QW vs. BIW/QW). Concomitant methotrexate (≤20 mg/week) and mild topical corticosteroids or other agents were permitted at the physician's discretion, in accordance with therapeutic practice.

RESULTS

As early as week 8, 26.7 % in the etanercept QW group and 44.0 % in the BIW group achieved Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75. At weeks 12 and 24, respectively, PASI 75 increased to 39.5 % and 62.8 % in the QW/QW group and 66.7 % and 83.3 % in the BIW/QW group. PASI 75 was significantly different between treatment groups from week 8 through the end of study (p<0.05). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the proportions achieving PASI 75 in QW/QW and BIW/QW groups, respectively, was 27.4 % and 45.8 % through week 8; 41.9 % and 68.7 % through week 12; and 72.5 % and 95.2 % through week 24.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with etanercept 50 mg provided rapid relief of psoriasis symptoms in patients from Asia, Central Europe, and Latin America. A more rapid response was observed in patients who received BIW treatment for the first 12 weeks which was sustained after reducing to QW dosing for the subsequent 12 weeks. Response rates were similar to those observed in the overall PRISTINE population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00663052 .

Expert recommendations on treating psoriasis in special circumstances

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

A great amount of information on systemic and biologic therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis is now available. However, applying the evidence in numerous clinical scenarios has engendered debate; under these circumstances, the consensus of experts is useful.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A scientific committee systematically reviewed the literature relevant to 5 clinical scenarios. An online Delphi survey of dermatologists with experience treating moderate to severe psoriasis was then carried out in order to shed light on questions that remained unresolved by the available evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-three dermatologists responded to the survey and consensus was reached on 37 (56%) of the 66 statements proposed. These results led to consensus on various clinical situations even though firm evidence was lacking. Thus, intermittent therapeutic regimens and strategies for reducing the intensity of treatment are considered appropriate for optimizing biologic treatment and reducing costs. The measurement of drug and antidrug antibody levels should be included routinely when following patients on biologics to treat psoriasis. Concomitant psoriatic arthritis or a history of cardiovascular conditions will influence the choice of biologic; in these situations, an agent with anti-tumor necrosis factor properties will be preferred. Tailored management is important when the patient is pregnant or intends to conceive; drug half-life and disease severity are important factors to take into consideration in these scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of systematic review of the literature and structured discussion of expert opinion facilitates decision-making in specific clinical scenarios.

Pruritus and quality of life in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: post hoc explorative analysis from the PRISTINE study

BACKGROUND

Pruritus is a clinically important symptom of psoriasis that has a major impact on quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine pruritus and QoL in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis treated with etanercept (ETN) in the PRISTINE clinical trial.

METHODS

Patients were randomized (1 : 1, double-blind) to ETN 50 mg QW or 50 mg BIW for 12 weeks, followed by 50 mg QW for 12 weeks. Pruritus was reported as 0 (no itching) to 5 (severe itching). Associations were examined between pruritus and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Screening (HADS), Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue), Euro-Qol 5D (EQ-5D) and Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Sleep Index II.

RESULTS

At baseline, patients (n = 270) had a mean pruritus level of 3.6. Itching (level ≥1) was reported by 96% of patients, 62% of whom had severe itching (level ≥4) and 26% had the highest level of itching. DLQI, HADS-Anxiety, HADS-Depression, FACIT-Fatigue, EQ-5D visual analog scale, and MOS Sleep Index II were significantly associated with itch. At week 12, mean pruritus improvement in the ETN BIW/QW group was greater than in the QW/QW group (2.4 vs. 1.6, P < 0.001), but not at week 24 (2.2 vs. 2.0, P = 0.180). Patients with the most severe itching at baseline (score of 5) had a mean score of 1.7 at week 24. Overall, patients with clinically meaningful pruritus improvement at week 24 reported greater improvement in QoL measures than other patients.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis in this study (96%) reported pruritus. Pruritus improved significantly with ETN therapy and was strongly associated with improvements in QoL. These data support the clinical relevance of pruritus as an important symptom of patients with moderate/severe psoriasis.

Biologic therapy with or without topical treatment in psoriasis: what does the current evidence say?

Biologic therapy represents a relatively new class of drugs which have revolutionized the treatment of psoriasis and are used with increasing frequency in order to control this chronic, systemic inflammatory disease. However, it is unclear what role there is for combination therapy of biologics with traditional topical agents. The purpose of this article is to assess the literature on the role of topical agents as adjuvants to biological treatments in the treatment of psoriasis and identify areas for further research. A MEDLINE search was performed in order to identify English-language publications from 1996 to 2014 examining combination biologic therapy with topical medications in the treatment of psoriasis. Data from these clinical studies are summarized and the outcomes are discussed. In general, the addition of adjuvant topical therapy to systemic biologic therapy allowed for a reduction in dosage and side effects of both agents, maintenance of initial response to biologics, treatment of recalcitrant lesions in partial responders, and potential acceleration of response to biologic therapies. The current data, though limited, suggest that using topical therapies as adjunct treatment to biologics is a well tolerated and effective means of controlling psoriasis and improving quality of life for patients. However, the treating physician should remain attentive to signs of adverse events and seek opportunities to reduce the dose or treatment frequency during chronic use.

Saudi practical guidelines on biologic treatment of psoriasis

The current treatment of psoriasis patients with biologic agents in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is mainly based on clinical experience. Although there are published international guidelines for treatment with biologics, such as the European S3 guidelines (a joint project of the European Dermatology Forum, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, and the International Psoriasis Council), many nations have found it beneficial to develop country-based guidelines that incorporate specific regional aspects of therapy (legal and practical). With the expanded role of biologic agents in the treatment of psoriasis in Saudi Arabia, a need for local Saudi guidelines has become evident. Here we present a practical approach to the evidence-based clinical administration of biologics for professionals who treat patients with psoriasis.

A Randomized, blinded assessor study to Evaluate the efFIcacy and safety of etanercept 50 mg once weekly plus as Needed topical agent vs. Etanercept 50 mg twice weekly in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (REFINE)

BACKGROUND

Topical corticosteroids are used with systemic therapies for treatment of plaque psoriasis, but data from randomized clinical trials to document efficacy of combination therapy are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate efficacy and safety of adding topical corticosteroid therapy from the time that etanercept dosage is reduced from initial label dose [50 mg twice weekly (BIW)] to maintenance dose [50 mg once weekly (QW)].

METHODS

In this phase 3b, multicentre, randomized, open-label study, patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis received etanercept 50 mg BIW for 12 weeks, and then were randomized to etanercept 50 mg BIW or 50 mg QW plus topical agent as needed to achieve static physician global assessment (sPGA) status of clear for 12 weeks. Endpoints included percentage change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score from week 12 to week 24 (primary endpoint); proportion of patients achieving 50% improvement in (PASI 50), PASI 75 and PASI 90; patients achieving sPGA of clear/almost clear; and change in affected body surface area (BSA).

RESULTS

Mean difference [95% confidence interval (CI)] between etanercept arm (n = 140) and etanercept plus topical arm (n = 142) in change in PASI score from week 12 to week 24 was 16.2% (-3.5%, 35.8%). PASI response rates were similar between groups. Percentage (95% CI) of patients achieving sPGA status of clear/almost clear was 40.6% (32.5%, 48.6%) and 45.8% (37.6%, 54.0%) at week 12 for patients in etanercept and etanercept plus topical arms, respectively, and 53.5% (45.3%, 61.7%) and 45.4% (37.2%, 53.6%) at week 24. Difference (95% CI) between groups in change in affected BSA from week 12 to week 24 was 4.9% (-23.4%, 33.2%).

CONCLUSION

Patients who received etanercept 50 mg QW at week 12 plus as-needed topical therapy and those who stayed on etanercept 50 mg BIW maintained clinical response through week 24 with no notable differences in PASI responses.

Eliciting preferences to inform patient-centred policies: the case of psoriasis

OBJECTIVE

To assess patient preferences for psoriasis treatment features and to investigate the heterogeneity of preferences among patients with different socio-demographic and disease-related characteristics.

METHODOLOGY

A discrete choice experiment was conducted on adult patients with moderate to severe plaque-type psoriasis during a routine visit to their physician at 15 centres in Italy. We investigated the preferences of patients with respect to five treatment attributes: (1) mode and frequency of administration; (2) time to improvement; (3) time free of symptoms; (4) unintended life expectancy reduction resulting from treatment; and (5) monthly treatment cost. The heterogeneity of preferences was investigated in a mixed logit model with normally distributed random coefficients.

RESULTS

Overall, patients preferred the subcutaneous or intravenous route of administration (versus oral administration) and treatments that took less time to show improvement, ensured a longer time free of symptoms, involved a lesser reduction in life expectancy and had lower costs. There was significant preference heterogeneity for all attributes. The cost attribute was found to be significantly more important to females and to older patients (above 60 years of age). Older patients placed significantly greater emphasis on reduced life expectancy, whereas the time free of symptoms was significantly less important to them than to patients under 60 years of age. Patients with higher scores on the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) placed higher value on the time free of symptoms than those with lower DLQI scores. For the overall sample, the marginal willingness to pay (WTP) for a month's reduction in the time to improvement was <euro>32.4, whereas the WTP for one additional month without symptoms was significantly higher (<euro>68.2).

CONCLUSION

Patient-centred policies should consider the heterogeneity of patients' expectations to identify individualized treatments that would aid in optimizing patient satisfaction and wellbeing, as well as overall treatment effectiveness.

Cardiometabolic biomarkers in chronic plaque psoriasis before and after etanercept treatment

OBJECTIVE

To assess cardiometabolic biomarkers in patients with psoriasis before and after etanercept treatment.

METHODS

Patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis were randomized to etanercept 50 mg once or twice weekly, double-blinded. Cardiometabolic biomarkers were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment (n = 273).

RESULTS

At baseline, 42% of patients had metabolic syndrome. Etanercept was not associated with any clinically relevant adverse effects on cardiometabolic biomarkers. In the once-weekly subgroup, significant mean percentage changes from baseline (p < 0.05) were observed for the quantitative insulin-sensitivity check index (QUICKI; -2.2%), apolipoprotein (Apo) A1 (3.2%), Apo B:Apo A1 ratio (-3.5%), leptin (8.6%) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) (-65.5%); and in the twice-weekly subgroup for plasma insulin (15.9%), QUICKI (-2.7%), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; 2.9%), apolipoprotein (Apo) A1 (2.8%), Apo B:Apo A1 (-4.6%) and hsCRP (-74.4%).

CONCLUSION

Metabolic syndrome was common in these patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Etanercept treatment may provide some potentially favorable modulation of insulin sensitivity, HDL-C, Apo A1 and Apo B:Apo A1 ratio.

From the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation: The risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals with psoriasis and the potential impact of current therapies

BACKGROUND

Many studies have identified cardiovascular risk factors in patients with psoriasis. Some psoriasis therapies may increase cardiovascular disease (CVD) and others may decrease CVD.

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the literature to define the impact of common psoriasis therapies on cardiovascular measures and outcomes.

RESULTS

Phototherapy has no major cardiovascular impact and may reduce levels of proinflammatory cytokines. Acitretin increases serum lipids and triglycerides, but has not been shown to increase cardiovascular risk. Cyclosporine A increases blood pressure, serum triglycerides, and total cholesterol. Methotrexate is associated with a decreased risk of CVD morbidity and mortality. Among the biologics, data for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors suggest an overall reduction in cardiovascular events. Most data on short-term ustekinumab use suggest no effect on major adverse cardiovascular events, however some authorities remain concerned. Nevertheless, ustekinumab use over a 4-year period shows a decrease in major adverse cardiovascular events when compared both with the general US population and with psoriatics in Great Britain.

LIMITATIONS

Most studies lack the power and randomization of large clinical trials and long-term follow-up periods. In addition, the increased risk of CVD associated with psoriasis itself is a confounding factor.

CONCLUSION

Some therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis, including methotrexate and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, may reduce cardiovascular events in psoriatic patients. Ustekinumab appears to be neutral but there may be a long-term benefit. Appropriate patient counseling and selection and clinical follow-up are necessary to maximize safety with these agents. Further long-term study is necessary to quantify the benefits and risks associated with biologic therapies.