Biologics in psoriasis: Indian experience

An Open-Label, Randomized, Prospective, Comparative, Three-Arm Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of Apremilast with Three Different Titration Methods in Patients with Chronic Plaque Psoriasis in India

Purpose

To minimize adverse effects (AEs), apremilast is recommended to titrate at the initiation of therapy. But still, many patients experience AEs, resulting in discontinuation of therapy. As a result, many dermatologists have adapted to further titrate apremilast in different ways. The present study was planned to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of apremilast in different dose titration methods as initiation therapy in the treatment of plaque psoriasis.

Patients and Methods

In this open-label, randomized, prospective, comparative, three-arm, single center study, 128 plaque psoriasis patients were included. Patients were randomized into three groups. Group I received standard titration for the first 6 days; Group II received all tablets in a starter pack as once a day (OD) total for 13 days; and Group III received two starter packs as 8 tablets each of apremilast 10 mg and 20 mg as OD and 10 tablets of 30 mg as OD, in total for 26 days. All groups received apremilast 30 mg as twice a day after initial titration. The total duration of apremilast therapy in all groups was 16 weeks.

Results

In safety assessment, AEs were reported in 50%, 41.3% and 25% in Groups I, II and III, respectively (p <0.05) with nausea being the most common AE. In Group I, 10.53% of patients discontinued apremilast whereas 6.52% and 2.27% discontinued in Groups II and III respectively. Maximum number of AEs were seen in Group I in first week only (74.19%) compared with other groups. At week 16, on the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI 75 was achieved in 31.43%, 42.4% and 33.3% of patients in Groups I, II and III, respectively with no statistical difference between any groups.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that slower titration is a useful strategy for minimizing AEs while at the same time maintaining effectiveness of apremilast.

The Use of Apremilast in Psoriasis: An Indian Perspective on Real-World Scenarios

Apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, is approved for use in the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Although its efficacy and safety have been well established in clinical studies, in real-world settings, different practice scenarios have been reported. This review paper serves to evaluate clinical real-world scenarios and aspects of treatment for which the information in the literature was considered to be lacking or controversial. Following a literature review, a panel of five dermatologists with expertise in psoriasis considered five scenarios; namely, the positioning of apremilast in psoriasis, its use in difficult-to-treat areas, special conditions and populations, safety, dose titration and dose in maintenance therapy. These were then assessed with psoriasis experts in India using a web-based questionnaire. A total of 28 questions were discussed regarding these scenarios. According to the responses, apremilast is effective in stable mild to moderate psoriasis as monotherapy and in severe psoriasis in combination. Also, a positive response was received with regard to its effectiveness in difficult locations such as the scalp, palms and soles. To reduce adverse effects, prolonged titration therapy over 4 weeks is required and lower doses can be prescribed to maintain remission. Apremilast therapy should be continued for a minimum of 8 weeks once initiated to achieve the desired results, and the total duration of therapy should be about 24 weeks for better efficacy. It is also effective in many other cases, such as obese patients, patients with hepatitis B or C and HIV, or patients on polypharmacy. It was also reported that apremilast requires less prescreening and monitoring than other conventional and biologic systemic therapies. Overall, apremilast is an attractive option for the individualized treatment of psoriasis owing to its favorable safety profile, its ease of oral administration without the need for screening or ongoing laboratory monitoring, and its positive impact on symptoms and lesions in difficult-to-treat areas.