Search

Summary: Tildrakizumab is a fairly new type of medicine called a biologic, used for the treatment of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis. The drug prevents the action of a specific molecule in the body involved in inflammation, known as cytokine interleukin (IL)‐23p19. Previous studies have shown it to be superior to a placebo (an inactive substance, like a "sugar pill") and to an older biologic drug, the TNF inhibitor etanercept. However, trials rarely reflect real‐world experience, where patients may switch from one drug to another, change drug dosage or interrupt treatment, e.g. because of an infection. The authors, based in U.S.A., Canada and Germany, reviewed results from two studies, one comparing two different doses of tildrakizumab (100mg or 200mg per day) with placebo, and the other comparing it with etanercept, including a total of 1862 adults with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis. Treatments were re‐randomised during the course of the study. They found that the response to tildrakizumab was sustained (meaning it kept working), without the secondary failure (decreasing responsiveness to a drug after an initial satisfactory response) seen in some patients on etanercept, and the drug regained effective control of the psoriasis after treatment was interrupted. Overall the drug was well tolerated, meaning that side effects were minimal. This is a summary of the study: Efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab for plaque psoriasis with continuous dosing, treatment interruption, dose adjustments and switching from etanercept: results from phase III studies Linked Article: Kimball et al. Br J Dermatol 2020; 182:1359–1368 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: ABP 501 was an adalimumab (ADA) biosimilar approved for treating immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) including rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). In this retrospective study, we aimed to examine the treatment patterns of ABP 501 among patients with these IMIDs using German and French pharmacy claims databases. Methods: Patients with RA, PsA, or AS who initiated ABP 501 between October 2018 and March 2020 and were observed continuously for ≥ 365 days both before and after ABP 501 initiation were included. Descriptive analyses of persistence and switch after ABP 501 discontinuation were conducted and reported for each disease cohort by prior use of ADA products (patients naïve to ADA or patients experienced with ADA). Results: Median (95% confidence interval) persistence on ABP 501 was 9.4 (8.6–10.3), 10.2 (9.0–11.7), and 12.1 (11.0–13.1) months in German patients, and 11.7 (9.9–13.3), 7.1 (5.8–8.4), and 10.8 (9.6–11.9) months in French patients for RA, PsA, and AS, respectively. For patients who switched from ABP 501 to another targeted therapy during the first 12 months of follow-up, switching patterns varied between patients naïve to ADA and patients experienced with ADA in both Germany and France, with patients naïve to ADA switching most frequently to other targeted therapies including non-ADA tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi), non-TNFi biologic, or Janus Kinase inhibitor (JAKi) and patients experienced with ADA switching most frequently back to ADA reference product (RP). Conclusions: Across three rheumatologic diseases, about half of patients persisted on ABP 501 at the end of 12 months after treatment initiation in both Germany and France. Patients experienced with ADA were more likely to switch back to ADA RP, regardless of indication and country, suggesting a possible nocebo effect. Future studies are warranted to understand reasons of discontinuation and switching. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For the treatment of moderate to severe atopic dermatitis (AD), two groups of modern systemic therapies with a total of five drugs are currently approved in Germany: biologics (dupilumab, tralokinumab) and "small molecules" (abrocitinib, baricitinib, upadacitinib). The growing armamentarium of therapy options, especially with more than one drug per substance group, makes it challenging for practitioners to select the appropriate treatment for the individual patient. In this review article, the preconditions and requirements of each drug group as well as the corresponding substances are presented comparatively. On the one hand, direct therapeutic effects on the severity of the disease are considered and, on the other hand, the spectrum of potential adverse drug reactions are discussed. In particular, short- and long-term effects, the safety profile and the patient's concomitant diseases represent key factors for shared decision-making with regard to select the optimum personalized therapy option., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is the leading cause of skin-related disease burden worldwide, affecting a large percentage of the population. Bibliometrics is the statistical analysis of academic literature in a certain field. Objectives: We aimed to perform the latest bibliometric analysis of atopic dermatitis literature. Methods: We searched the Web of Science database on 29th Nov 2021. We used the keywords "atopic dermatitis," "atopic eczema," and "eczema" for our search. All items published between 2001 and 2021 were included. The top 100 most cited articles were identified and analyzed. Results: Our study provided a detailed bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most cited articles on atopic dermatitis. These articles were published between 2002 and 2019 and were from 15 different countries, mostly in the USA and Germany. Most articles have focused on the pathogenesis and treatment of AD. The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology made the greatest contribution to the top 100 list, with 28 articles. The most cited article originated from Lancet. The highest number of citations was seen in 2006, with 9220 citations, while the highest number of publications was seen in 2006 with 12 publications. Conclusions: Our study aims to provide physicians and researchers with a historical perspective for the scientific progress of atopic dermatitis, and help clinicians effectively obtain useful articles that have a significant impact on the field of atopic dermatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biologic psoriasis treatments are differentiated by efficacy, side effects, and other attributes. Determine attributes of biologic psoriasis treatments that drive patients' treatment choices. Respondents (USA: n = 300; Germany: n = 300) with moderate-to-severe psoriasis completed a discrete-choice–experiment survey, choosing between hypothetical treatments characterized by attributes with varying levels: chance of clear skin after 1 year, number of first-year treatments, first-year risks of mild-to-moderate injection site reaction (ISR) and serious infection, and years of proven efficacy/safety. U.S. respondents most valued clear skin (conditional relative importance, 1.88; p <.05). While other attributes were of generally equivalent importance, ISR risk outweighed serious-infection risk (1.06 vs. 0.70; p <.05). German respondents placed greatest importance on ISR risk (1.61; p <.05) and clear skin (1.49; p <.05). Respondents evaluated hypothetical treatments and were recruited from web panels. Clear skin and ISR risk are stronger drivers of treatment choice than injection frequency and infection risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fully human monoclonal antibody guselkumab is an effective treatment option for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. The objective of this study was to examine the cost per responder of guselkumab compared with other targeted therapies for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in Germany. A one-year cost per responder model was developed based on efficacy and safety data from a published network meta-analysis. Drug, treatment administration, resource use, and adverse event costs were included in the analysis. The primary analysis assessed the cost per Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 responder at week 16. Additional analyses were conducted at year 1. In the year 1 analyses, treatment response was assessed at the end of the induction period (week 16) to determine which patients continued onto maintenance therapy (responders) and which patients moved onto a subsequent adalimumab or secukinumab therapy (non-responders). At week 16, the cost per PASI 90 responder was lower for guselkumab than all comparators except adalimumab and brodalumab. Similarly, in the year 1 analyses, guselkumab had a lower cost per PASI 90 responder than all comparators except brodalumab. Guselkumab is a cost-effective therapy option in Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease characterised by pruritic skin lesions that impair quality of life (QOL). Long-Term Documentation of the Utilization of Apremilast in Patients with Plaque Psoriasis under Routine Conditions (LAPIS-PSO; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02626793) was a 52-week, prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study conducted in real-world dermatology clinical settings in Germany. We evaluated physician- and patient-reported outcomes for QOL, effectiveness and tolerability in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis vulgaris in LAPIS-PSO. Methods: The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score ≤ 5 or ≥ 5-point improvement from baseline in DLQI score at visit 2 (~ 4 months after baseline). Secondary endpoints included assessments of symptoms and disease severity. Tolerability was evaluated based on adverse events (AEs). A pre-defined subgroup analysis based on baseline Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) score (2 or 3 versus 4) was performed. Data were examined descriptively through visit 5 (~ 13 months) using the last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) approach and data as observed. Results: In total, 257 patients were included for efficacy assessment. On LOCF analysis, most patients achieved the primary endpoint at visit 2 (66.5%); DLQI response was maintained at visit 5 (72.4%). Earlier treatment response was observed in patients with a PGA score of 2 or 3 versus 4 (visit 1 PASI ≤ 3: 20.5% versus 10.8%). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of apremilast. Conclusions: In routine clinical care in Germany, patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis benefited from apremilast treatment up to ~ 13 months, consistent with findings from clinical trials, with a good safety profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background: Fumaric acid esters (FAEs; Fumaderm®) are the most frequently prescribed first‐line systemic treatment for moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in Germany. Risankizumab (Skyrizi®) is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin 23. Objectives: To compare risankizumab treatment to FAEs in patients with psoriasis. Methods: This phase III randomized, active‐controlled, open‐label study with blinded assessment of efficacy was conducted in Germany. Patients were randomized (1 : 1) to subcutaneous risankizumab 150 mg (weeks 0, 4 and 16) or oral FAEs at increasing doses from 30 mg daily (week 0) up to 720 mg daily (weeks 8–24). Enrolled patients were adults naïve to and candidates for systemic therapy, with chronic moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis. Phototherapy was not allowed within 14 days before or during the study. Results: Key efficacy endpoints were met at week 24 for risankizumab (n = 60) vs. FAEs (n = 60) (P < 0·001): achievement of a ≥ 90% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI; primary endpoint 83·3% vs. 10·0%), ≥ 100% improvement in PASI (50·0% vs. 5·0%), ≥ 75% improvement in PASI (98·3% vs. 33·3%), ≥ 50% improvement in PASI (100% vs. 53·3%) and a Static Physician's Global Assessment of clear/almost clear (93·3% vs. 38·3%). The rates of gastrointestinal disorders, flushing, lymphopenia and headache were higher in the FAE group. One patient receiving risankizumab reported a serious infection (influenza, which required hospitalization). There were no malignancies, tuberculosis or opportunistic infections in either treatment arm. Conclusions: Risankizumab was found to be superior to FAEs, providing earlier and greater improvement in psoriasis outcomes that persisted with continued treatment, and more favourable safety results, which is consistent with the known safety profile. No new safety signals for risankizumab or FAEs were observed. What is already known about this topic? Risankizumab (Skyrizi®) is approved as treatment for patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy.Risankizumab is a humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to the p19 subunit of interleukin 23.Fumaric acid esters (FAEs) are the most frequently prescribed first‐line systemic treatment for moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in Germany. What does this study add? In patients with psoriasis who were naïve to systemic treatment, risankizumab treatment was superior to FAEs, providing earlier and greater improvement in psoriasis outcomes that persisted to week 24.Risankizumab showed more favourable safety results than FAEs and no new safety signals.The results support risankizumab treatment for patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who are naïve to systemic treatment. Linked Comment: P. Fleming. Br J Dermatol 2022; 186:4–5. Plain language summary available online [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In a phase 3 clinical study, patients from Germany with moderate to severe psoriasis who were naïve to systemic treatment and received risankizumab had greater and more rapid disease improvements compared with those who received fumaric acid esters (FAEs). Objective: To evaluate patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) in patients treated with risankizumab compared with FAEs. Methods: Adult patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either risankizumab 150 mg subcutaneous injections at weeks 0, 4 and 16 or FAEs (Fumaderm®) provided according to the prescribing label. PRO secondary endpoints assessed were Psoriasis Symptom Scale (PSS), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), 36‐Item Short Form Health Survey, version 2 (SF‐36v2), Patient Benefit Index (PBI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) and European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ‐5D‐5L). PROs were assessed at weeks 0, 16 and 24. Results: Sixty patients each were randomized to receive risankizumab or FAEs. A significant PSS improvement was observed with risankizumab vs. FAEs at weeks 16 and 24 for total and psoriasis‐associated redness, itching and burning scores (P < 0.001). DLQI scores were significantly lower (reflecting better health‐related quality of life) with risankizumab vs. FAEs, with least squares (LS) mean differences of −7.4 and −7.6 at weeks 16 and 24, respectively (both P < 0.001). Patients randomized to risankizumab also had larger improvements in SF‐36 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores, HADS anxiety and depression scores, PtGA, and EQ‐5D‐5L index and visual analogue scale scores (all P ≤ 0.002) at weeks 16 and 24 compared with FAEs. PBI was significantly higher, indicating greater benefit, with risankizumab vs. FAEs, with an LS mean difference of 1.1 and 1.3 at weeks 16 and 24, respectively (both P < 0.001). Conclusions: Risankizumab provides significant benefits over FAEs in improving PROs across several dimensions in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]