Nocebo effects in systemic therapies for adult plaque psoriasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The nocebo effect is defined as adverse outcomes secondary to negative patient expectations rather than the pharmacologic activity of an intervention. Nocebo effects can reduce treatment adherence and/or persistence. Therefore, nocebo effects in psoriasis need to be defined.

Methods

A Cochrane systematic review was updated with a search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials for phase II - IV RCTs comparing systemic therapy versus placebo for patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Estimates were pooled using a random effects model, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. The primary outcome was the pooled proportion of any adverse event (AE) and corresponding risk difference (RD) in patients randomized to placebo versus systemic therapy.

Results

A total of 103 unique trials were identified enrolling 43,189 patients. The overall pooled AE rate in patients randomized to systemic therapy was 57.1% [95% CI: 54.7-59.5%] compared to 49.8% [95% CI: 47.1-52.4%] for placebo [RD 6.7% (95% CI: 4.6-8.9%), p < 0.00001, I2 = 75%]. Both biologic and non-biologic systemic therapy groups had a higher proportion of infectious AEs compared to placebo. No statistically significant RD in serious AEs or AEs leading to discontinuation was identified between systemic therapy and placebo groups.

Discussion

Half of patients exposed to inert placebo in clinical trials of systemic psoriasis therapies experienced AEs, which may be explained by nocebo effects. These findings have important implications when counseling patients and designing future studies.

International eDelphi Study to Reach Consensus on the Methotrexate Dosing Regimen in Patients With Psoriasis

Importance

A clear dosing regimen for methotrexate in psoriasis is lacking, and this might lead to a suboptimal treatment. Because methotrexate is affordable and globally available, a uniform dosing regimen could potentially optimize the treatment of patients with psoriasis worldwide.

Objective

To reach international consensus among psoriasis experts on a uniform dosing regimen for treatment with methotrexate in adult and pediatric patients with psoriasis and identify potential future research topics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Between September 2020 and March 2021, a survey study with a modified eDelphi procedure that was developed and distributed by the Amsterdam University Medical Center and completed by 180 participants worldwide (55 [30.6%] resided in non-Western countries) was conducted in 3 rounds. The proposals on which no consensus was reached were discussed in a conference meeting (June 2021). Participants voted on 21 proposals with a 9-point scale (1-3 disagree, 4-6 neither agree nor disagree, 7-9 agree) and were recruited through the Skin Inflammation and Psoriasis International Network and European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology in June 2020. Apart from being a dermatologist/dermatology resident, there were no specific criteria for participation in the survey. The participants worked mainly at a university hospital (97 [53.9%]) and were experienced in treating patients with psoriasis with methotrexate (163 [91.6%] had more than 10 years of experience).

Main Outcomes and Measures

In a survey with eDelphi procedure, we tried to reach consensus on 21 proposals. Consensus was defined as less than 15% voting disagree (1-3). For the consensus meeting, consensus was defined as less than 30% voting disagree.

Results

Of 251 participants, 180 (71.7%) completed all 3 survey rounds, and 58 participants (23.1%) joined the conference meeting. Consensus was achieved on 11 proposals in round 1, 3 proposals in round 2, and 2 proposals in round 3. In the consensus meeting, consensus was achieved on 4 proposals. More research is needed, especially for the proposals on folic acid and the dosing of methotrexate for treating subpopulations such as children and vulnerable patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this eDelphi consensus study, consensus was reached on 20 of 21 proposals involving methotrexate dosing in patients with psoriasis. This consensus may potentially be used to harmonize the treatment with methotrexate in patients with psoriasis.

Effect of Costimulatory Blockade With Abatacept After Ustekinumab Withdrawal in Patients With Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis: The PAUSE Randomized Clinical Trial

Question

Does blockade of CD28/B7 costimulatory signaling with abatacept suppress the psoriasis molecular signature and prevent psoriasis relapse after ustekinumab withdrawal?

Findings

In this parallel-design, double-blind randomized clinical trial of 91 adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, costimulatory blockade with abatacept did not prevent psoriasis relapse and did not maintain suppression of the pathogenic psoriasis molecular signature following ustekinumab withdrawal.

Meaning

In this study, abatacept did not prevent psoriasis relapse, which may rely on alternative, compensatory mechanisms of residual T-cell activation in skin.

Importance

Psoriasis relapse may involve compensatory T-cell activation pathways in the presence of CD28-CD80/CD86 blockade with abatacept.

Objective

To determine whether costimulatory signaling blockade with abatacept prevents psoriasis relapse after ustekinumab withdrawal.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Psoriasis Treatment with Abatacept and Ustekinumab: a Study of Efficacy (PAUSE), a parallel-design, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial, was conducted at 10 sites in the US and Canada. Participant enrollment opened on March 19, 2014, and concluded on April 11, 2016. Participants were adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and received ustekinumab in a lead-in phase. Those who responded to ustekinumab at week 12 were randomized 1:1 to either the continued with ustekinumab group (ustekinumab group) or the switched to abatacept group (abatacept group). Treatment was discontinued at week 39, and participants were followed up for psoriasis relapse until week 88. Statistical analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and safety samples from May 3, 2018, to July 6, 2021.

Interventions

Participants received subcutaneous ustekinumab at weeks 0 and 4 (45 mg per dose for those ≤100 kg; 90 mg per dose for those >100 kg). Participants randomized to the abatacept group at week 12 received subcutaneous abatacept, 125 mg weekly, from weeks 12 to 39 and ustekinumab placebo at weeks 16 and 28. Participants randomized to the ustekinumab group received ustekinumab at weeks 16 and 28 and abatacept placebo weekly from weeks 12 to 39.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the proportion of participants with psoriasis relapse (loss of ≥50% of the initial Psoriasis Area and Severity Index improvement) between weeks 12 and 88. Secondary end points included time to psoriasis relapse, proportion of participants with psoriasis relapse between weeks 12 and 40, and adverse events. The psoriasis transcriptome and serum cytokines were evaluated.

Results

A total of 108 participants (mean [SD] age, 46.1 [12.1] years; 73 [67.6%] men) were treated with open-label ustekinumab; 91 were randomized to blinded treatment. Similar proportions of participants in the abatacept group and the ustekinumab group relapsed between weeks 12 and 88 (41 of 45 [91.1%] vs 40 of 46 [87.0%]; P = .41). Median time to relapse from the last dose of ustekinumab was similar between groups as well: 36 weeks (95% CI, 36-48 weeks) in the abatacept group vs 32 weeks (95% CI, 28-40 weeks) in the ustekinumab group. Similar numbers and rates of adverse events occurred. Abatacept did not maintain suppression of the pathogenic IL-23-mediated psoriasis molecular signature in lesions after ustekinumab withdrawal, and serum IL-19 levels increased.

Conclusions and Relevance

This parallel-design, double-blind randomized clinical trial found that abatacept did not prevent psoriasis relapse that occurred after ustekinumab withdrawal because it did not completely block the pathogenic psoriasis molecular pathways that led to relapse.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01999868

Ustekinumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in paediatric patients (≥ 6 to < 12 years of age): efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetic and biomarker results from the open-label CADMUS Jr study

BACKGROUND

Limited options are available for treatment of paediatric psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ustekinumab in paediatric patients with psoriasis (≥ 6 to < 12 years of age).

METHODS

CADMUS Jr, a phase III, open-label, single-arm, multicentre study, evaluated ustekinumab in paediatric patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Patients received weight-based dosing of ustekinumab (< 60 kg: 0·75 mg kg^-1 ; ≥ 60 to ≤ 100 kg: 45 mg; > 100 kg: 90 mg) administered by subcutaneous injection at weeks 0 and 4, then every 12 weeks through week 40. Study endpoints (all at week 12) included the proportions of patients achieving a Physician's Global Assessment score of cleared/minimal (PGA 0/1) and ≥ 75%/90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75/90), and change in Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI). Serum ustekinumab concentrations, antidrug antibodies and cytokine levels were measured through week 52. Safety was evaluated through week 56.

RESULTS

In total, 44 patients (median age 9·5 years) received at least one dose of ustekinumab. Three patients discontinued the study agent through week 40. At week 12, 77% of patients achieved PGA 0/1, 84% achieved PASI 75 and 64% achieved PASI 90 response. The mean change in CDLQI was -6·3. Trough serum ustekinumab concentrations reached steady state at weeks 28-52. The incidence of antidrug antibodies was 10% (n = 4). Mean serum concentrations of interleukin-17A/F and interleukin-22 were significantly reduced at weeks 12 and 52. Overall, 34 patients (77%) had at least one adverse event and three (7%) had a serious adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Ustekinumab effectively treated moderate-to-severe psoriasis in paediatric patients, and no new safety concerns were identified. What is already known about this topic? Ustekinumab is approved for use in adolescents (≥ 12 to < 18 years of age) and adults (≥ 18 years) with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. What does this study add? Ustekinumab effectively treats moderate-to-severe psoriasis in paediatric patients (≥ 6 to < 12 years of age), with no new safety concerns. Linked Comment: Reich. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:606-607.

Exploring the relationship between generalised anxiety/depression scales and asthma-specific quality of life/control questionnaires in a specialist asthma clinic

INTRODUCTION

Psychological issues are common in patients with chronic disabling diseases such as asthma. National guidance recommends that specialist asthma clinic attendees should complete questionnaires screening for psychological comorbidities. However, completing these in addition to asthma specific questionnaires can be burdensome. In order to investigate whether anxiety and depression questionnaires can be used in a targeted manner, this study investigates the correlation between the respective scores. We hypothesize that there is correlation between asthma-specific and anxiety/depression questionnaire scores.

METHODS

Three-hundred individuals with poorly controlled asthma attending a specialist clinic were asked to complete Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (mini-AQLQ), Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaires (PHQ-9). A Pearson correlation coefficient was generated and area under ROC and confusion matrices were used to assess correlation.

RESULTS

49% and 47% of patients completing the GAD-7 or PHQ-9 questionnaires, respectively had scores above the screening level for co-morbid anxiety and depression. Additional questionnaires were often incomplete (GAD-7 = 150 and PHQ-9 = 140). GAD-7 and PHQ-9 correlated with ACQ and mini-AQLQ (all p = <0.001, r values 0.53-0.65). Asthma-specific questionnaire scores were predictive of GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores (AUCs of 0.78 to 0.84). 75% of patients with a mini-AQLQ score of <3 met the threshold GAD-7 and PHQ-9 score of 10.

CONCLUSIONS

ACQ and mini-AQLQ correlate with GAD-7 and PHQ-9 amongst specialist asthma clinic attendees. A mini-AQLQ >3 suggests patients are unlikely to have anxiety or depression. These findings could be used to identify patients requiring formal screening for psychological co-morbidity.

Apremilast for the treatment of moderate-to-severe palmoplantar psoriasis: results from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study

BACKGROUND

Palmoplantar psoriasis is a variant of psoriasis vulgaris which can severely impair quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study were to assess the efficacy and impact on quality of life and work productivity of apremilast for the treatment of moderate-to-severe palmoplantar psoriasis.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients with moderate-to-severe palmoplantar psoriasis were randomized to either apremilast 30 mg bid or placebo for 16 weeks. At Week 16, all patients received apremilast 30 mg bid until Week 32. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a Palmoplantar Psoriasis Physician Global Assessment (PPPGA) of 0/1 at Week 16.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who achieved a PPPGA of 0/1 at Week 16 between patients randomized to apremilast (14%) and placebo (4%; P = 0.1595). After 32 weeks of treatment with apremilast, 24% of patients achieved a PPGA of 0/1. In addition, apremilast was superior to placebo in achieving Palmoplantar Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PPPASI) 75 (apremilast: 22%; placebo: 8%; P = 0.0499), in improving PPPASI (apremilast: -7.4 ± 7.1; placebo: -3.6 ± 5.9; P = 0.0167), Dermatology Life Quality Index score (apremilast: -4.3 ± 5.1; placebo: -0.8 ± 4.5; P = 0.0004) and in reducing activity impairment (apremilast: -11.0 ± 22.3; placebo: 2.5 ± 25.5; P = 0.0063).

CONCLUSION

Despite the absence of a significant difference between apremilast and placebo in proportion of patients achieving a PPPGA of 0/1, the presence of significant differences observed for several secondary endpoints suggests that apremilast may have a role in the treatment of moderate-to-severe palmoplantar psoriasis.