Search

Background: Over the last decade, the treatment landscape for moderate–severe psoriasis has rapidly evolved. The Australasian College of Dermatologists sought to review and update previously published treatment goals for moderate–severe psoriasis. Methods: A modified Delphi approach was used. Comprehensive literature review and guideline evaluation resulted in the development of statements and other questions to establish current clinical practices. Two rounds of anonymous voting were undertaken, with a collaborative meeting held in between to discuss areas of discordance. Overall, consensus was defined as achievement of ≥75% agreement in the range 7–9 on a 9‐point scale (1 strongly disagree; 9 strongly agree). Results: Consensus was achieved on 26/29 statements in round 1 and a further 20 statements in round 2. There was strong agreement to expanding the classification/definition of psoriasis severity by including a choice of metrics, incorporating quality of life measures, and widening the scope of high‐impact sites. Consensus was also reached on revised treatment response criteria, which were then incorporated into a new treatment algorithm. There was discordance with the current requirement to undertake a trial with established systemic agents before accessing targeted therapy. Conclusion: The ability of new targeted treatment options to change the narrative in psoriasis patient care can only be properly realised if challenges to timely and equitable access are addressed. The proposed framework for the assessment, classification and management of moderate–severe psoriasis aligns with international recommendations. Its adoption into Australian clinical practice is hoped to improve treatment outcomes and patients' satisfaction with their care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/Background Targeting and binding OX40 ligand (OX40L) expressed on antigen-presenting cells may inhibit the persistent immune response that drives atopic dermatitis (AD) pathophysiology. Amlitelimab (SAR445229; KY1005) is a potential first-in-class, fully human, non-depleting anti-OX40L monoclonal antibody that blocks OX40L-OX40 interactions and has shown efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in a Phase 2a trial in adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Here, we present 24-week efficacy and safety results (Part 1) from an ongoing dose-ranging Phase 2b trial. The study remains blinded to individual patient data (Part 2 ongoing). Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of amlitelimab in adults with moderate-to-severe AD. Methods: STREAM-AD (NCT05131477) is a 52-week, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled Phase 2b monotherapy trial. This study is designed with 2 parts (double-blind throughout): a 24-week treatment period (Part 1, completed and presented here) and a 36-week maintenance/withdrawal period (Part 2, ongoing). Adults (18 to <75 years; n=390) with moderate-to-severe AD were randomised 1:1:1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous amlitelimab Q4W (250 mg with 500 mg loading dose [LD], n=77; 250 mg without LD, n=78; 125 mg without LD, n=77; or 62.5 mg without LD, n=79) or placebo Q4W (n=79). The primary endpoint was percentage change in Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI) from baseline at Week 16. Key secondary endpoints included percentage change in EASI at Week 24 and percentage of patients with at least 75% reduction from baseline in EASI (EASI-75), percentage of patients with Investigator Global Assessment response of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) and a reduction from baseline of ≥2 points (IGA 0/1), and proportion of patients with a weekly average reduction of Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (PP-NRS) ≥4 points from baseline. The primary efficacy analysis included all randomised patients who completed Week 24 or discontinued treatment or study prior to Week 24 visit (n=390), whereas the safety analysis included all treated patients (n=388). Results: Treatment with amlitelimab resulted in statistically significant improvements in percentage change in EASI from baseline to Week 16 compared to placebo for all four doses studied. The 250 mg with LD group had the numerically highest response versus placebo at Week 16, with a least-squares mean change from baseline of -32.1% (95% CI: -43.9, -20.3; P<0.0001); the remaining groups without LD had the following responses versus placebo: 250 mg, -27.3 (95% CI: -39.1, -15.6; P<0.0001); 125 mg, -22.2 (95% CI: -34.0, -10.4; P=0.0002); and 62.5 mg, -30.2 (95% CI: -41.9, -18.5; P<0.0001). There were also clinically meaningful improvements in all key secondary efficacy outcome measures, with all amlitelimab dose groups demonstrating nominally significant (P<0.05) efficacy versus placebo for EASI-75, IGA 0/1, and PP-NRS =4, except 250 mg (no LD) in IGA 0/1 at Week 16 (P=0.0562). Continued improvements were generally observed through Week 24 in primary and key secondary efficacy outcomes. Amlitelimab was well tolerated across all dose groups, with no safety concerns identified. Conclusions: In this dose-ranging Phase 2b trial of amlitelimab in adults with moderate-to-severe AD, amlitelimab demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy over 24 weeks with an acceptable safety profile across all four dose groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Amlitelimab is a fully-human, non-depleting, anti-OX40 ligand (OX40L) monoclonal antibody that binds to OX40L on antigen-presenting cells. Amlitelimab blocks the interaction of OX40L with OX40 on activated T-cells, inhibiting T-cell dependent inflammation without depleting T-cells. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of amlitelimab (Part 1), and explore the maintenance of clinical response over a 28-Week period (Part 2) in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. Methods STREAM-AD (NCT05131477), was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 2b trial, that included a 24-Week, double-blind, treatment period (Part 1), a 28-Week maintenance/withdrawal period (Part 2), and a 16-Week safety follow-up. In Part 1, adult participants were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to subcutaneous amlitelimab Q4W (250mg with 500mg loading dose [+ LD], n=77; 250mg, n=78; 125mg, n=77; 62.5mg, n=79) or placebo Q4W (n=79). In Part 2, Clinical responders (defined as those achieving EASI-75 and/or IGA 0/1 at Week-24) in Part 1, were rerandomized 3:1 to withdraw or continue pre-Week 24 Q4W dose (250mg + LD, n=34 [withdrawal]/n=13 [continuing]; 250mg, n=28/n=12; 125mg, n=33/n=12; 62.5mg, n=35/n=7; placebo responders continuing placebo, n=16), and were followed to Week-52 to evaluate maintenance of clinical response. Primary efficacy endpoint was percent change in EASI from baseline at Week-16. Key secondary endpoints were proportion of patients achieving IGA 0/1, EASI-75, PP-RNS≥4. The statistical analysis was performed using two methods: 1) imputing the endpoint as nonresponder after rescue medication use (NRI); and 2) including all measurements regardless of rescue use (treatment policy). Results Out of 390 participants enrolled in Part 1, 190 entered Part 2. In Part 1, all four doses of amlitelimab demonstrated statistically significant improvements in percent change in EASI from baseline to Week-16 vs placebo; the highest response was seen with 250mg + LD group. Clinically meaningful improvements in key secondary endpoints were observed at Week-16, with continued improvements through Week-24. In Part 2, maintenance of EASI-75 and/or IGA 0/1 response at Week-52 was observed in 59%, 63%, 55%, and 66% of clinical responders withdrawn from 250mg + LD, 250mg, 125mg, and 62.5mg, respectively (NRI). Using treatment policy, 77%, 82%, 67%, and 74% maintained response off-drug, respectively. Those continuing amlitelimab treatment had numerically higher maintenance response rates. AD-related biomarkers were reduced during Part 1 and remained decreased over Part 2. Amlitelimab was well tolerated across all dose groups, with no new safety concerns identified during the 52-Weeks. Conclusion Clinically meaningful efficacy with amlitelimab was demonstrated over 52-Weeks, with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical responses were maintained in most patients 28-Weeks after treatment discontinuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease affecting 2–7% of adults globally, with 30% experiencing moderate-to-severe disease. Although several treatments for moderate-to-severe AD are available, the efficacy of many treatments has not been compared in head-to-head trials. Objectives Using a network meta-analysis (NMA), we evaluated the relative efficacy between lebrikizumab, an emerging biologic, and approved targeted systemic treatments for AD. Methods Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials (systemic monotherapy-only) for moderate-to-severe AD in adults (≥18 years) and adolescents (≥12 years to ≤18 years) published before April 2023 were identified in a systematic literature review. Data were extracted for short-term (12–16 weeks) efficacy outcomes (Investigator's Global Assessment [IGA] 0/1 with ≥2-point improvement from baseline and the Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI]) and patient-reported outcomes (Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] with ≥4-point improvement from baseline). Bayesian NMAs were performed using random-effects models, with baseline-risk adjustment. Key estimates from the NMAs included pairwise differences between all treatments and absolute response rates for each treatment. Results Twenty-two clinical trials were included. For % achieving IGA 0/1, at 12–16 weeks, the estimated response rates (posterior median and 95% credible interval) for each of the treatments were: upadacitinib 30 mg 55.8% (43.7–64.2%), upadacitinib 15 mg 41.3% (30.1–50.0%), abrocitinib 200 mg 39.0% (29.8–47.8%), dupilumab 300 mg 31.8% (23.1–38.7%), lebrikizumab 250 mg 31.4% (24.1–39.2%), abrocitinib 100 mg 24.5% (17.5–32.0%), tralokinumab 300 mg 17.3% (12.8–22.2%), baricitinib 4 mg 16.7% (9.8–25.5%), baricitinib 2 mg 15.5% (9.6–22.0%), and placebo 6.0% (4.3–7.3%). Similar trends were observed for the EASI and pruritus NRS responses at 12–16 weeks. Conclusions This 16-week NMA shows that lebrikizumab had a similar response rate to dupilumab, the most widely used targeted systemic therapy for AD, and may represent a valuable treatment option for moderate-to-severe AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common, chronic inflammatory disease requiring long-term, continuous therapy, yet in real life, patients may need to temporarily interrupt therapy. Objectives To indirectly compare long-term outcomes with lebrikizumab, tralokinumab, and dupilumab, we present an exploratory efficacy index, which accounts for on-drug and off-drug combined outcomes at Week 52. Methods The data set consisted of patients who, after 16 weeks, responded to treatment, defined as achieving either an IGA 0,1 or EASI 75 score, and who were randomized to receive maintenance dosages of lebrikizumab 250 mg Q4W (ADvocate1; ADvocate2), tralokinumab 300 mg Q2W (ECZTRA1; ECZTRA 2), and dupilumab 300 mg QW, Q2W (SOLO-CONTINUE) or were randomized to withdraw these treatments up to Week 52. The efficacy index is based on a weighted combination of response rates at Week 52, using non-responder imputation results, for IGA 0,1 or EASI 75, for patients who were either in the treatment continuation or the withdrawal arm. Here, we report the efficacy index, in which the weight places equal emphasis on continuing or stopping treatment, and we compare the efficacy index of tralokinumab and dupilumab with lebrikizumab. Results The efficacy index (95% CI) for lebrikizumab, tralokinumab, and dupilumab, respectively, was 53% (45%-61%), 45% (37%-53%), and 34% (28%-40%) with IGA 0,1; 63% (55%-71%), 42% (35%-49%), and 51% (45%-57%) with EASI 75. With IGA 0,1, lebrikizumab was statistically different from dupilumab; with EASI 75, lebrikizumab was statistically different from dupilumab and tralokinumab. Conclusions This novel efficacy index, which accounts for the importance of continuing or stopping therapy after Week 16, may be a useful tool to indirectly compare long-term treatment outcomes. Lebrikizumab's higher efficacy index may translate to improved long-term management of AD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Given the chronic nature of psoriasis and the loss of response that can be observed with therapies over time, it is important to understand the long-term efficacy of new treatments. Objectives To evaluate maintenance of Week 16 responses with bimekizumab (BKZ) treatment through Year 3, in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods Data were pooled from BKZ-treated patients in the 52-week (BE VIVID) and 56-week (BE READY and BE SURE) phase III studies, and their ongoing open-label extension (OLE), BE BRIGHT. Efficacy outcomes are reported through 3 years of BKZ treatment in patients with an efficacy response at Week 16. Missing data were imputed primarily using modified nonresponder imputation (mNRI), with nonresponder imputation and observed case data also reported. Results A total of 989 patients were randomized to BKZ at baseline in BE VIVID, BE READY and BE SURE. At Week 16, 693 patients achieved ≥ 90% reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90), 503 achieved 100% reduction from baseline in PASI (PASI 100), 694 achieved absolute PASI ≤ 2 and 597 achieved body surface area (BSA) ≤ 1%, and continued into the OLE. Of these, 93.0% maintained PASI 90, 80.8% maintained PASI 100, 94.0% maintained PASI ≤ 2 and 90.3% maintained BSA ≤ 1% responses through to 3 years of BKZ treatment (mNRI). Among Week 16 PASI 90 responders, 96.8% and 72.5% also achieved Investigator's Global Assessment 0/1 and PASI 100 at Week 16, respectively, and 92.2% and 73.4% achieved these responses at Year 3 (mNRI). Among Week 16 PASI 100 responders, 76.3% also achieved Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 at Week 16, and DLQI 0/1 response increased with continuous BKZ treatment to 89.0% at Year 3 (mNRI). Conclusions High levels of clinical response were maintained through to 3 years of BKZ treatment in the vast majority of Week 16 responders. Long-term treatment with BKZ was efficacious, with important benefits for health-related quality of life, in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A 70-year-old retired male plumber was admitted with reduced consciousness following a recent onset of confusion and headache. He developed encephalopathy, seizures and myoclonus. He died despite treatment 10 weeks later. This article reports the clinicopathological conference presented at the Edinburgh Clinical Neurology Course 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Deucravacitinib is an oral, selective tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor that demonstrated therapeutic benefit in a Phase 2 clinical trial of adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. This analysis was designed to evaluate the effect of deucravacitinib on additional clinical and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes and assess the relationship between these outcomes in adults with psoriasis. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of a 12-week Phase 2 trial was conducted for the three most efficacious dosage groups (3 mg twice daily, 6 mg twice daily, 12 mg once daily) and placebo. Investigator assessments for efficacy included Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), body surface area (BSA) involvement, and static Physician's Global Assessment; QoL was assessed using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Treatment responses and their associations were evaluated over time. Results: Deucravacitinib elicited improvement versus placebo as early as Week 4 for most efficacy measures (including changes in absolute PASI and BSA), with efficacy trends observed from Week 2 to Week 12. Improvements in QoL, assessed by achievement of a DLQI overall score of 0/1 (no effect at all on patient's life), followed a pattern similar to deucravacitinib-related clinical outcomes over 12 weeks. Overall, patients with greater improvements in psoriasis-related clinical signs and symptoms also reported greater improvement in QoL. However, complete skin clearance was not required for achieving DLQI 0/1. Conclusion: Deucravacitinib treatment produced early response and similar trends in improvements across multiple efficacy assessments and QoL in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Deucravacitinib has the potential to become a promising new oral therapy for this condition. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier; NCT02931838. Plain Language Summary: Psoriasis is a skin disease that affects up to 2% of the population. In psoriasis, red, scaly lesions develop on the skin driven by an aberrant immune response. Psoriasis impacts not only physical and mental health but also quality of life (QoL). Deucravacitinib is being investigated as a treatment for psoriasis. We performed a Phase 2 dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, 12-week study of deucravacitinib in adults with moderate to severe psoriasis. Patients in the USA, Australia, Canada, Germany, Japan, Latvia, Mexico, and Poland participated. The study showed that oral treatment with deucravacitinib was effective using a disease severity score (percentage of patients with ≥ 75% reduction from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score) at Week 12—placebo 7% and deucravacitinib 67%–75% for the three highest dosages—and was generally well tolerated. We further analyzed the association between efficacy and a QoL measure, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), in patients who received placebo or the most effective dosages of deucravacitinib (≥ 3 mg twice daily). Deucravacitinib was effective at the three dosage levels tested. Skin improvement occurred early during treatment and was mirrored by improvements in DLQI score during the 12 weeks of treatment. Although some patients did not have complete clearance of their psoriasis, a large percentage of those patients still achieved considerable improvement in QoL as measured by achieving a DLQI score of 0/1 (i.e., no effect at all on the patient's QoL). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Factors beyond the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) contribute to disease severity in psoriasis and potentially affect treatment responses. This subset analysis of data from two phase 3 clinical studies assessed baseline parameters in patients with different degrees of psoriasis severity in order to determine treatment responses to ixekizumab and safety outcomes. This study used integrated data from the UNCOVER-2 and -3 trials involving 2709 patients with chronic plaque psoriasis to assess the efficacy and safety of ixekizumab in three subgroups of patients, defined by PASI > 15 (group 1), PASI > 15 and history of ≥3 non-biologic systemic therapies (group 2), or PASI = 12-15 (group 3). In groups 1 and 2, additional baseline features were identified that could influence treatment responses, including age at disease onset, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and work productivity. Irrespective of subgroup, ixekizumab demonstrated high PASI responses at weeks 12 and 60, which were evident as early as week 2. Adverse events did not differ across subgroups. Our data support the efficacy, early onset of action, and maintained response of ixekizumab as observed in previous trials, and highlight the complexity of comprehensively defining disease severity in psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic hand/foot eczemas are common, but treatment is often challenging, with widespread dissatisfaction over current available options. Detailed history is important, particularly with regard to potential exposure to irritants and allergens. Patch testing should be regarded as a standard investigation. Individual treatment outcomes and targets, including systemic therapy, should be discussed early with patients, restoring function being the primary goal, with clearing the skin a secondary outcome. Each new treatment, where appropriate, should be considered additive or overlapping to any previous therapy. Management extends beyond mere pharmacological or physical treatment, and requires an encompassing approach including removal or avoidance of causative factors, behavioural changes and social support. To date, there is little evidence to guide sequences or combinations of therapies. Moderately symptomatic patients (e.g. DLQI ≥ 10) should be started on a potent/super‐potent topical corticosteroid applied once or twice per day for 4 weeks, with tapering to twice weekly application. If response is inadequate, consider phototherapy, and then a 12‐week trial of a retinoid (alitretinoin or acitretin). Second line systemic treatments include methotrexate, ciclosporin and azathioprine. For patients presenting with severe symptomatic disease (DLQI ≥ 15), consider predniso(lo)ne 0.5–1.0 mg/kg/day (or ciclosporin 3 – 5 mg/kg/day) for 4–6 weeks with tapering, and then treating as for moderate disease as above. In non‐responders, botulinum toxin and/or iontophoresis, if associated with hyperhidrosis, may sometimes help. Some patients only respond to long‐term systemic corticosteroids. The data on sequencing of newer agents, such as dupilumab or JAK inhibitors, are immature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guselkumab effectively treats moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Objectives: Results of continuous guselkumab treatment through 4 years from VOYAGE 2 are presented. Methods: At baseline, 992 patients were randomized to receive guselkumab 100 mg every 8 weeks, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg every 2 weeks. Placebo-treated patients crossed over to guselkumab at week 16. Weeks 28–76 incorporated randomized withdrawal, and all patients received open-label guselkumab through to week 204. Efficacy was analyzed using pre-specified treatment failure rules (patients were considered nonresponders after discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, worsening of psoriasis, or use of a prohibited treatment). There was no missing data imputation after treatment failure rules. Safety was analyzed through 4 years. Results: The proportions of guselkumab-treated patients who achieved and maintained designated clinical responses at weeks 100 and 204, respectively, were as follows: at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index from baseline (PASI 75): 94.1% and 92.3%; PASI 90: 79.1% and 79.7%; PASI 100: 48.4% and 51.0%; Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) score of 0/1: 83.1% and 81.9%; IGA score of 0: 52.7% and 52.7%; Dermatology Life Quality Index score of 0/1: 70.2% and 69.1%; Psoriasis Symptoms and Signs Diary (PSSD) symptom score of 0: 35.7% and 39.7%; PSSD sign score of 0: 22.0% and 27.2%; ≥ 5% improvement in Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical component score: 48.8% and 45.0%; ≥ 5% improvement in SF-36 mental component score: 45.1% and 43.2%; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS)-anxiety score ≥ 8: 22.9% and 21.7%; and HADS-depression score ≥ 8: 16.6% and 21.0%. Similar findings were reported for the adalimumab → guselkumab group. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: High efficacy levels were maintained from week 100 through to week 204 with continuous guselkumab treatment, across multiple endpoints, in VOYAGE 2. Guselkumab was well tolerated. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02207244. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biological disease‐modifying agents have increasingly become available for the effective treatment of both cutaneous and non‐cutaneous inflammatory conditions. We report a case of a woman treated successfully for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis with the IL‐17 inhibitor secukinumab whilst simultaneously being treated for severe asthma and nasal polyps, initially with the IL‐5 inhibitor benralizumab, followed by dupilumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the IL‐4 receptor alpha subunit which blocks signalling from both IL‐4 and IL‐13. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unhealthy weight gain and diabetes are global challenges that threaten not only the well-beings of hundreds of millions of persons but also the global economy. The authors in this article describe two overlapping stories, one is about a 150-year-old diet, known as the Banting Diet, which is similar to the Atkins or Keto Diet, and the other is about a provider-patient relationship story that helped the patient make lifestyle modifications that were effective in significant weight loss, improved quality of life, and reduced need for exogenous insulin for Type 2 diabetes. Both of the stories are from England but might be useful worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) may be markedly impaired in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.Objectives: Our objectives were to compare improvements in Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Psoriasis Symptoms and Signs Diary (PSSD) scores between patients receiving guselkumab compared with placebo or adalimumab and to correlate these improvements with skin clearance.Methods: Pooled phase III VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2 data were evaluated through week 24. At baseline, patients were randomized to guselkumab 100 mg, placebo, or adalimumab 40 mg. At week 16, patients receiving placebo switched to guselkumab. Assessment measures included DLQI percent change from baseline, DLQI 0/1, DLQI minimal clinically important difference (MCID), individual domain scores, PSSD symptoms and signs score = 0, DLQI association with PSSD, Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA), and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI).Results: Significantly greater improvements from baseline DLQI were observed with guselkumab versus placebo (weeks 8 and 16) and versus adalimumab (week 24; p < 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving DLQI 0/1 ("no impact") at week 24 was higher with guselkumab than with adalimumab (58.9 vs. 40.2%; p < 0.001), and more patients attained a ≥ 4-point reduction in DLQI (MCID) at this timepoint (p < 0.001). Changes in individual DLQI domains were significantly greater for patients receiving guselkumab than for those receiving adalimumab, and among patients with individual baseline domain scores = 3 or 6 (severest impact), more guselkumab recipients than those receiving adalimumab achieved a score = 0 across all domains at week 24. DLQI 0/1 scores were associated with a PSSD symptom or sign score = 0 (no impact) and greater improvement of PASI and IGA (week 24).Conclusions: Pooled VOYAGE 1/VOYAGE 2 data demonstrated that guselkumab was superior to adalimumab in improving HRQoL, which was associated with greater skin clearance.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02207231 and NCT02207244. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the research investigating goals for the treatment for the skin disorder psoriasis. It states that in addition to psoriasis area severity index (PASI) assessment, a quality of life assessment was relevant in distinguishing psoriasis severity and treatment outcome. It mentions that the identification of treatment goals will lead clinicians in treatment decision-making, improve the availability and proper use of therapies and increase patient satisfaction with their care.

Background: Risankizumab is a humanised IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin-23, inhibiting this key cytokine and its role in psoriatic inflammation. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of risankizumab compared with placebo or ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis.Methods: UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2 were replicate phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active comparator-controlled trials done at 139 sites in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Spain, and the USA. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. In each study, patients were stratified by weight and previous exposure to tumour necrosis factor inhibitor and randomly assigned (3:1:1) by use of interactive response technology to receive 150 mg risankizumab, 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (weight-based per label), or placebo. Following the 16-week double-blind treatment period (part A), patients initially assigned to placebo switched to 150 mg risankizumab at week 16; other patients continued their originally randomised treatment (part B, double-blind, weeks 16-52). Study drug was administered subcutaneously at weeks 0 and 4 during part A and at weeks 16, 28, and 40 during part B. Co-primary endpoints were proportions of patients achieving a 90% improvement in the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 90) and a static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) score of 0 or 1 at week 16 (non-responder imputation). All efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02684370 (UltIMMa-1) and NCT02684357 (UltIMMa-2), and have been completed.Findings: Between Feb 24, 2016, and Aug 31, 2016, 506 patients in UltIMMa-1 were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg risankizumab (n=304), 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (n=100), or placebo (n=102). Between March 1, 2016, and Aug 30, 2016, 491 patients in UltIMMa-2 were randomly assigned to receive 150 mg risankizumab (n=294), 45 mg or 90 mg ustekinumab (n=99), or placebo (n=98). Co-primary endpoints were met for both studies. At week 16 of UltIMMa-1, PASI 90 was achieved by 229 (75·3%) patients receiving risankizumab versus five (4·9%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 70·3% [95% CI 64·0-76·7]) and 42 (42·0%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 33·5% [22·7-44·3]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). At week 16 of UltIMMa-2, PASI 90 was achieved by 220 (74·8%) patients receiving risankizumab versus two (2·0%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 72·5% [95% CI 66·8-78·2]) and 47 (47·5%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 27·6% [16·7-38·5]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). In UltIMMa-1, sPGA 0 or 1 at week 16 was achieved by 267 (87·8%) patients receiving risankizumab versus eight (7·8%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 79·9% [95% CI 73·5-86·3]) and 63 (63·0%) receiving ustekinumab (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 25·1% [15·2-35·0]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). In UltIMMa-2, 246 (83·7%) patients receiving risankizumab versus five (5·1%) receiving placebo (placebo-adjusted difference 78·5% [95% CI 72·4-84·5]) and 61 (61·6%) receiving ustekinumab achieved sPGA 0 or 1 at week 16 (ustekinumab-adjusted difference 22·3% [12·0-32·5]; p<0·0001 vs placebo and ustekinumab). The frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events in UltIMMa-1 and UltIMMa-2 was similar across risankizumab (part A: 151 [49·7%] of 304 and 134 [45·6%] of 294; part B: 182 [61·3%] of 297 and 162 [55·7%] of 291), placebo (part A: 52 [51·0%] of 102 and 45 [45·9%] of 98), ustekinumab (part A: 50 [50·0%] of 100 and 53 [53·5%] of 99; part B: 66 [66·7%] of 99 and 70 [74·5%] of 94), and placebo to risankizumab (part B: 65 [67·0%] of 97 and 61 [64·9%] of 94) treatment groups throughout the study duration.Interpretation: Risankizumab showed superior efficacy to both placebo and ustekinumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Treatment-emergent adverse event profiles were similar across treatment groups and there were no unexpected safety findings.Funding: AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dupilumab (an anti-interleukin-4-receptor-α monoclonal antibody) blocks signalling of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13, type 2/Th2 cytokines implicated in numerous allergic diseases ranging from asthma to atopic dermatitis. Previous 16-week monotherapy studies showed that dupilumab substantially improved signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis with acceptable safety, validating the crucial role of interleukin 4 and interleukin 13 in atopic dermatitis pathogenesis. We aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of dupilumab with medium-potency topical corticosteroids versus placebo with topical corticosteroids in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis.Methods: In this 1-year, randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study (LIBERTY AD CHRONOS), adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis and inadequate response to topical corticosteroids were enrolled at 161 hospitals, clinics, and academic institutions in 14 countries in Europe, Asia-Pacific, and North America. Patients were randomly assigned (3:1:3) to subcutaneous dupilumab 300 mg once weekly (qw), dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks (q2w), or placebo via a central interactive voice/web response system, stratified by severity and global region. All three groups were given concomitant topical corticosteroids with or without topical calcineurin inhibitors where inadvisable for topical corticosteroids. Topical corticosteroids could be tapered, stopped, or restarted on the basis of disease activity. Coprimary endpoints were patients (%) achieving Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) 0/1 and 2-point or higher improvement from baseline, and Eczema Area and Severity Index 75% improvement from baseline (EASI-75) at week 16. Week 16 efficacy and week 52 safety analyses included all randomised patients; week 52 efficacy included patients who completed treatment by US regulatory submission cutoff. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02260986.Findings: Between Oct 3, 2014, and July 31, 2015, 740 patients were enrolled: 319 were randomly assigned to dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 106 to dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids, and 315 to placebo plus topical corticosteroids. 623 (270, 89, and 264, respectively) were evaluable for week 52 efficacy. At week 16, more patients who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids achieved the coprimary endpoints of IGA 0/1 (39% [125 patients] who received dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids qw and 39% [41 patients] who received dupilumab q2w plus topical corticosteroids vs 12% [39 patients] who received placebo plus topical corticosteroids; p<0·0001) and EASI-75 (64% [204] and 69% [73] vs 23% [73]; p<0·0001). Week 52 results were similar. Adverse events were reported in 261 (83%) patients who received dupilumab qw plus topical corticosteroids, 97 (88%) patients who received dupilumab q2w, and 266 (84%) patients who received placebo, and serious adverse events in nine (3%), four (4%), and 16 (5%) patients, respectively. No significant dupilumab-induced laboratory abnormalities were noted. Injection-site reactions and conjunctivitis were more common in patients treated with dupilumab plus topical corticosteroids-treated patients than in patients treated with placebo plus topical corticosteroids.Interpretation: Dupilumab added to standard topical corticosteroid treatment for 1 year improved atopic dermatitis signs and symptoms, with acceptable safety.Funding: Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]