Search

A. Sahuquillo-Torralba, Dr. P. Coto-Segura, Dr. O. Baniandrés, Dr. R. Feltes, and Dr. M. Alsina contributed to data collection, discussed the results, and commented on the manuscript. Dr. S. Armesto, Dr. E. Herrera-Acosta, Dr. D. Vidal, Dr. E. Vilarrasa, Dr. R. Rivera, Dr. P. de la Cueva, Dr. I. Belinchón, Dr. G. Carretero, Dr. L. Rodríguez, Dr. [Extracted from the article]

Topical therapies have been available for the treatment of psoriasis for several decades. Despite this and the availability of several types of topicals, with varying potency, and numerous vehicles of administration, the majority of clinical data and guidance is on short-term use in the management of psoriasis. The aim of this manuscript is to review the unmet needs that exist in the long-term management of psoriasis and provide the dermatology community with an understanding that a treatment regimen with topical therapies could be the best treatment option at least for some phases of this chronic relapsing disease. We present a 'call to action' on the need for clinical alignment on terminology in the field and recommend the term 'long-term management' be adopted as the most appropriate in the context of this manuscript. This expert opinion report provides a detailed review of the limited evidence available regarding long-term use of topical therapies for the management of psoriasis, alongside our key considerations and recommendations to assist dermatologists with the implementation of topicals as part of long-term management strategies. Long-term management should be considered mandatory to ensure patients receive appropriate proactive treatment which may help optimize adherence and long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data on the effectiveness and safety of a drug in real‐world clinical practice complement the evidence from clinical trials, which are carried out in a different setting. Little has been published on the effectiveness and safety of guselkumab in the treatment of psoriasis in clinical practice. The ojective of this study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of guselkumab at 24 weeks in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in routine clinical practice. A retrospective, multicentre study of adult patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis treated with guselkumab for at least 24 weeks was carried out in Spain. We studied 343 patients, 249 of whom were followed for 24 weeks. By week 24, the mean (SD) psoriasis area severity index (PASI) had decreased from 11.1 (7.3) to 1.7 (2.8) (−9.3; [−10.2;‐8.4]), 85.9% of the patients had achieved PASI score of 4 or less and 77.9% a PASI score of 2 or less. In terms of relative PASI response, 59.4% of the patients achieved a PASI‐90 response and 49.0% a PASI‐100 response. On multivariate analysis, two factors reduced the probability of a PASI of 2 or less at 24 weeks: a BMI ≥30 (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22–0.88) and a greater previous exposure to biologic therapy (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, [0.56–0.84]). Adverse events were rare (9.9%) and led to withdrawal from treatment in only nine patients (2.6%) by the end of the follow‐up period. The results of this study confirm the high efficacy and safety of guselkumab indicated by the clinical trial data. In clinical practice, the absolute PASI score appears to be a better marker of response to treatment than the relative value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is limited and conflicting evidence over the real-world drug survival of secukinumab (SEC) in patients with psoriasis, especially in the long term. Our objective was to analyze the short- and long-term survival of SEC (S-SEC) and its predictive factors for the treatment of psoriasis. Methods: Patients clinically diagnosed with plaque psoriasis and under treatment with secukinumab (n = 384) in a daily practice setting were analyzed in a retrospective, multicenter study performed in a nationwide cohort and followed up for a period of 2 years. Kaplan–Meier curve was plotted to analyze drug survival time, and log-rank test was performed to compare several groups. Factors related to speed of treatment discontinuation were studied with a Cox regression model. Results: The overall cumulative secukinumab drug survival rates observed at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months were 97.1%, 89.0%, 81.1%, and 74.3%, respectively. Obesity [hazard ratio (HR), 1.809, CI 95% 1.114–2.962; p = 0.004] and previous experience with biological therapies, particularly those who had been treated with ≥ 2 biologicals with different mechanisms of action (HR 3.476, CI 95% 1.875–6.444; p = 0.017) were associated with an early discontinuation, whereas psoriatic arthritis was associated with delayed discontinuation, (HR 0.493, CI 95% 0.265–0.917; p = 0.025). Conclusions: In our study, we found that cumulative secukinumab drug survival for psoriasis patients for the period 6–18 months was in the range of real-world evidence studies. Additionally, we observed a relatively high long-term survival rate at 24 months (74.3%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To analyze the performance of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) screening tools, examine their implementation in daily practice, and reach a consensus about the best screening tool for implementation in daily practice in different medical settings. Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR), structured telephone interviews to hospitals, and a multidisciplinary nominal group meeting were all conducted. The SLR employed sensitive search strategies using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2020. Two reviewers independently selected articles that reported data on PsA screening tools and that included sufficient data to at least calculate the sensitivity and specificity of those tools (e.g., questionnaires, algorithms, specific questions, and biomarkers). The hospital interviews collected data regarding the process of suspected PsA diagnosis and referral to rheumatology, the implementation of PsA screening tools, and barriers and facilitators to implementation of those tools. In the nominal group meeting, a multidisciplinary team of experts discussed all these data and subsequently recommended a screening tool for implementation. Results: The SLR included 41 moderate-quality studies that analyzed 14 PsA screening tools, most of which were questionnaire-based tools. All of these studies reported a moderate-good performance but presented different characteristics regarding the time to completion or the number and type of items or questions. The implementation of screening tools was low (30.5%). The experts ultimately recommended regular use of a PsA screening tool, preferably the PURE-4 questionnaire. Conclusions: The implementation of PsA screening tools like the PURE-4 questionnaire in daily practice likely improves the prognosis of PsA patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

1) Analizar la implementación de los modelos de atención multidisciplinar en pacientes con artritis psoriásica (APs), y 2) definir estándares de calidad de mínimos y de excelencia. Se envió una encuesta a profesionales que ya realizan atención multidisciplinar o están en vías preguntando por: 1) tipo de modelo de abordaje multidisciplinar, y 2) grado, prioridad y facilidad de la implementación de los estándares de calidad de estructura, proceso y resultado. En 6 reuniones regionales se presentaron y discutieron los resultados de la encuesta, tanto a nivel nacional como regional, y se definió la prioridad definitiva de los estándares de calidad. En una reunión de grupo nominal, 11 expertos (reumatólogos y dermatólogos) analizaron los resultados de la encuesta y las reuniones regionales. Con ello definieron qué estándares de calidad son actualmente de mínimos y cuáles de excelencia. Los modelos de atención multidisciplinar conjunto y paralelo son los más implementados, y los de los estándares de calidad es muy variable: en los de estructura varía del 22 al 74%, en los de proceso del 17 al 54% y en los de resultado del 2 al 28%. De los 25 estándares de calidad originales, 9 se consideran solo de mínimos, 4 de excelencia y 12 tienen definidos unos criterios para ser de mínimos y otros para la excelencia. La definición de estándares de calidad de mínimos y de excelencia ayudará en la consecución del objetivo de la atención multidisciplinar para pacientes con APs, que es la mejor asistencia sanitaria posible. 1) To analyze the implementation of multidisciplinary care models in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients, 2) To define minimum and excellent standards of care. A survey was sent to clinicians who already performed multidisciplinary care or were in the process of undertaking it, asking: 1) Type of multidisciplinary care model implemented; 2) Degree, priority and feasibility of the implementation of quality standards in the structure, process and result for care. In 6 regional meetings the results of the survey were presented and discussed, and the ultimate priority of quality standards for care was defined. At a nominal meeting group, 11 experts (rheumatologists and dermatologists) analyzed the results of the survey and the regional meetings. With this information, they defined which standards of care are currently considered as minimum and which are excellent. The simultaneous and parallel models of multidisciplinary care are those most widely implemented, but the implementation of quality standards is highly variable. In terms of structure it ranges from 22% to 74%, in those related to process from 17% to 54% and in the results from 2% to 28%. Of the 25 original quality standards for care, 9 were considered only minimum, 4 were excellent and 12 defined criteria for minimum level and others for excellence. The definition of minimum and excellent quality standards for care will help achieve the goal of multidisciplinary care for patients with PAs, which is the best healthcare possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Reumatología Clínica is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)