Search

OBJECTIVE: To analyze degree of implementation of recommendations on the management of psoriasis during preconception, pregnancy, postpartum, breastfeeding, and perinatal care published by the Psoriasis Working Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV). METHODS: We designed a structured online survey consisting of closed questions. A link was emailed to all the members of the Psoriasis Working Group to collect their anonymous responses. We also collected sociodemographic, professional, and practice-related data related to the goals of the study and then compiled descriptive statistics to analyze the survey findings. RESULTS: We received 53 responses for analysis. Overall, 96% of respondents were familiar with the recommendations, but very few of them worked in multidisciplinary maternity care units or had access to specific protocols on the management of psoriasis before, during, and after pregnancy in their departments. Seventy percent of dermatologists regularly ask their patients about pregnancy plans, but only 46% ask both men and women. Women also receive more preconception advice than men (54% vs. 19%). Significant variations were observed in the type of advice given. Ninety percent of the dermatologists interrupt topical treatments during pregnancy, and nearly all suspend conventional systemic drugs with the exception of cyclosporin A. Most biologics are also being discontinued in the third trimester, with the exception of certolizumab pegol. Almost all the respondents indicated that they use topical treatments, phototherapy, and certolizumab pegol in breastfeeding mothers. The main barriers to implementing the working group's recommendations are a lack of time, a lack of support, and a lack of robust data. CONCLUSIONS: Although the AEDV psoriasis working group's recommendations are widely known, areas for improvement remain.

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.

Childhood-onset psoriasis generally follows an indolent course but patients with moderate or severe disease may require systemic treatment. The aim of this study was to determine the relative proportion of children and young people aged up to 21 years with moderate to severe psoriasis in the BIOBADADERM registry and to analyze the characteristics of these patients, treatments used, and adverse events. Of the 3946 patients in the registry, 24 were aged 21 years or younger. The mean age of this group when they started treatment upon registration on Biobadaderm was 16.1 years and the mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index was 9.4. In 67% the first treatment recorded was with a conventional systemic drug. Treatment was discontinued in 14 patients (58%) due to adverse events or a loss or lack of effectiveness. In conclusion, the BIOBADADERM registry shows that young people account for a small proportion of psoriasis patients receiving systemic treatment, and they are more likely to be treated using conventional systemic drugs. (C) 2021 AEDV. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U.

To analyze knowledge, perceptions, attitude, barriers and facilitators of biosimilars uptake across physicians managing immune diseases and hospital pharmacists.

The purpose of this study is to propose a ranking system for the severity of psoriasis. The consensus method of selecting the indices to include and the classification of real patient profiles by an expert panel to create a gold standard of severity were used. The performance of potential cut-offs was evaluated to create a ranking algorithm. The combined use of PASI, BSA, and sPGA may allow the classification of the severity of psoriatic patients. The final algorithm identifies severe patients in a single step (2 out 3 are met: PASI = 11 or BSA = 10 or sPGA = 3), while two steps are required for mild ((2 out 3 are met: PASI = 3 or BSA = 5 or sPGA = 2) and DLQI < 5) and moderate forms (the patient does not meet 2 out 3 (PASI = 11 or BSA = 10 or sPGA = 3) but has a DLQI = 5. A ranking algorithm is presented, consisting of different measures of disease which classifies psoriatic patients into three categories: mild, moderate, and severe.

INTRODUCTION: The diagnosis and management of atopic dermatitis (AD) is extensively addressed in detailed clinical guidelines. However, the high heterogeneity regarding presentation and progression and the increasingly broad therapeutic landscape suggest a complex real-world scenario, leading to multiple trajectories of AD patients. METHODS: Using a Delphi methodology for assessing the degree of consensus, we explored the views of a panel of dermatologists regarding the patients' trajectory through the diagnosis (block 1), treatment (block 2), and long-term management (block 3) of AD. Based on a systematic search of the literature, a scientific committee prepared a questionnaire of relevant items that were rated on a 10-point scale (from "totally agree" to "totally disagree") by a panel of dermatologists attending patients with AD in the hospital setting. Consensus was established based on predefined rules. RESULTS: The final questionnaire included 58 items and was answered by 17 dermatologists. Overall, consensus was reached on 22 items (37.9%), each of which was a consensus for agreement. The consensus rates in blocks 1, 2, and 3 were 22.7%, 19.0%, and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed a remarkable lack of consensus on various aspects of the routine diagnosis and treatment of AD. These findings suggest the presence of unmet needs or limited implementation of guidelines for the management of AD and encourage further research to explore the causes of this low consensus on the management of AD in the real-world setting.

Background As treatment interruptions occur during psoriasis management in clinical practice, it is important to know the duration of clinical response after treatment withdrawal. Objectives To report time to and predictors of relapse in patients who were tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg responders (>= 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI 75) at week 28 re-randomized to placebo from reSURFACE 1 trial. Methods Post hoc analysis of adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a 64-week phase 3 trial. Relapse was primarily defined as loss of PASI 75 response. Both relapses defined as loss of PASI 90 and loss of absolute PASI < 2 response were included as sensitivity analyses. PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI < 2 responders re-randomized to placebo at week 28 and followed up until week 64 were included. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates of the 64-week relapse rate were calculated. The log-rank test to compare KM curves from responders to tildrakizumab 100 and 200 mg was used. Independent predictors of relapse were explored. Results Median time to loss of PASI 75/PASI 90/PASI < 2 response from week 28 was 142/111/112 days with tildrakizumab 100 mg and 172/140/113 days with tildrakizumab 200 mg, respectively (all not significant). Around 20% of patients did not relapse (either maintained a PASI 75 response or were lost to follow-up) during the 36-week period. Increase in body mass index (BMI) (hazard ratio, HR [95% confidence interval, CI] for loss of PASI 75 response: 1.0345 [1.0112-1.0582]) and increase in disease duration (HR [95% CI]: 1.0151 [1.0028-1.0275] for loss of PASI 75 response) were associated with an increased risk of relapse, regardless of the relapse definition. Conclusions When treatment is interrupted, tildrakizumab provides durable maintenance of efficacy with a median time to loss of PASI 75 response of 5-6 months, irrespective of the dose. Interventions on modifiable risk factors for relapse, such as BMI, may improve personalized long-term psoriasis management.

Atopic dermatitis is a common, chronic and recurrent inflammatory skin disease, which often appears in childhood but can last into adulthood. It negatively impacts patients, their families and society in general. There is a therapeutic unmet need, with patients requiring new drugs that are safe and effective. The increasing knowledge of the pathophysiology of AD and the role of the Janus kinase (JAK) and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway in the development and maintenance of AD, has led to the development of agents blocking this intracellular signaling pathway, the JAK inhibitors. Baricitinib shows high selectivity for JAK1 and JAK2, making it appealing for the treatment of this condition. Phase II and phase III trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of baricitinib in the treatment of AD, and the results have been encouraging, showing a good efficacy and a favorable safety and tolerability profile. At the end of 2020, EMA approved baricitinib for the treatment of adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who are candidates for systemic therapy, increasing the therapeutic option for this debilitating disease.

Background Drug survival analysis of biologic agents in psoriasis is of extreme importance, as it allows not only the evaluation of objective clinical outcomes (such as effectiveness and safety) but also of factors that are associated with patients' adherence to treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the drug survival of the most recent biologic agents approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis-ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab, guselkumab, and risankizumab-and to identify clinical predictors that can influence the drug survival of these drugs. Methods This retrospective multicentric cohort study from 16 dermatology centers in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Canada, and the United States included patients that started IL-12/23, IL-17 (IL-17A and IL-17R) and IL-23 inhibitors for the treatment of psoriasis between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2019. Survival analysis was performed using a Kaplan-Meier estimator, to obtain descriptive survival curves, and proportional hazard Cox regression models. Results A total of 3312 treatment courses (total patients: 3145) were included in the study; 1118 (33.8%) with an IL-12/23 inhibitor (ustekinumab), 1678 (50.7%) with an IL-17 inhibitor [911 (27.5%) on secukinumab, 651 (19.7%) on ixekizumab, 116 (3.5%) on brodalumab], and 516 (15.5%) with an IL-23 inhibitor [398 (12.0%) on guselkumab, 118 (3.5%) on risankizumab]. At 18 months, the cumulative probability of survival was 96.4% for risankizumab, 91.1% for guselkumab, 86.3% for brodalumab, 86.1% for ustekinumab, 82.0% for ixekizumab, and 79.9% for secukinumab. Using ustekinumab as reference, drug survival of guselkumab was higher (HR 0.609; 95% CI 0.418-0.887) and that of secukinumab was lower (HR 1.490; 95% CI 1.257-1.766). In the final multivariable model, secukinumab, female sex, higher BMI, and prior exposure to biologic agents significantly increased the risk of drug discontinuation, whereas risankizumab was protective. Conclusion In this multinational cohort with 8439 patient-years of follow-up, the cumulative probability of drug survival for all drugs was >79% at 18 months. Prescribed biologic, female sex, higher BMI, and previous exposure to biologic agents were predictors of drug discontinuation. Drug survival of guselkumab and risankizumab was higher than that of ustekinumab, and secukinumab was lower.

During the 28th Congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) held in Madrid in October 2019, an industry hub was dedicated to the long-term management of psoriasis. Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease primarily involving the skin that affects up to 4% of the European population, the majority of whom present with chronic plaque psoriasis. Topical therapies are well established in the first-line treatment of psoriatic plaque flares. Nevertheless, as psoriasis is a chronic disease, long-term control should be considered. The aim of the session was to provide expert opinion on the benefit of long-term maintenance therapy in chronic plaque psoriasis and introduce the concept of pro-active management to decrease the number of relapses and improve patient quality of life. The current guidelines and recommendations were reviewed, as well as the available data on published clinical trials. There is still an important role for topical therapy in psoriasis and current recommendations suggest a maintenance regimen for psoriasis. Adherence optimization and proactive management of relapse can be key factors for obtaining clinical outcomes in topical long-term therapy. Calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate foam is the only topical formulation with long-term data as a twice-weekly proactive treatment approach for up to 52 weeks for chronic plaque psoriasis.

Biobadaderm is a multicenter prospective cohort that was created to evaluate the safety of systemic therapy for psoriasis patients.2 Once a year, reports are created. In 2018, a signal regarding symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI) was detected.

Background: Registry studies broadly describing the safety of systemic drugs in psoriasis are needed. Objective: To describe the safety findings of the systemic drugs acitretin, adalimumab, apremilast, cyclosporine, etanercept, infliximab, methotrexate, secukinumab, and ustekinumab used for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in patients included in the Spanish Registry of Adverse Events for Biological Therapy in Dermatological Diseases (BIOBADADERM) Registry. Methods: The incidence rate ratio (IRR) and adjusted IRR (including propensity scores) of identified adverse events for each drug, using methotrexate as reference, were determined by means of a prospective cohort. Results: Our study included 2845 patients (8954 treatment cycles; 9642 patient-years). Ustekinumab and secukinumab had the lowest rate of adverse events for several of the system organ classes, with a statistically significant decreased rate ratio (IRR of = 5). Limitations: Observational study, drug allocation not randomized, depletion of susceptibles, and prescribed doses not registered. Conclusion: Our data provide comparative safety information in the real-life setting that could help clinicians selecting between available products.

Background Little has been published on the real-world effectiveness and safety of apremilast in psoriasis. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and drug survival of apremilast at 52 weeks in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis or palmoplantar psoriasis in routine clinical practice. Methods Retrospective, multicentre study of adult patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis or palmoplantar psoriasis treated with apremilast from March 2016 to March 2018. Results We studied 292 patients with plaque psoriasis and 85 patients with palmoplantar psoriasis. The mean (SD) Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score was 10.7 (7.0) at baseline and 3.0 (4.2) at 52 weeks. After 12 months of treatment, 73.6% of patients had a PASI score of 3 or less. In terms of relative improvement by week 52, 49.7% of patients achieved PASI-75 (>= 75% reduction in PASI score) and 26.5% achieved PASI-90. The mean physician global assessment score for palmoplantar psoriasis fell from 4.2 (5.2) at baseline to 1.3 (1.3) at week 52. Overall drug survival after 1 year of treatment with apremilast was 54.9 %. The main reasons for treatment discontinuation were loss of efficacy (23.9%) and adverse events (15.9%). Almost half of the patients in our series (47%) experienced at least one adverse event. The most common events were gastrointestinal problems. Conclusions Apremilast may be a suitable alternative for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis and palmoplantar psoriasis. Although the drug has a good safety profile, adverse gastrointestinal effects are common.

Apremilast is a small-molecule inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 4 with an intracellular mechanism of action that increases levels of cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) indicated for the oral treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis and for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis. Efficacy of apremilast in moderate-to-severe psoriasis has been demonstrated in the pivotal trials, with a 30% PASI-75 response rate at week 16, an efficacy that was maintained through week 52. Apremilast also achieved significant responses in disease involving specific sites, such as palmoplantar, nail and scalp psoriasis, improved patient quality of life, and achieved rapid improvements in pruritus. The findings of some of the real world series indicate that the PASI-75 response may be higher in patients with a lower baseline PASI than that observed in the pivotal trials, enhancing the importance of using the absolute PASI score as a marker of therapeutic success rather than a relative PASI index in this setting. Apremilast has demonstrated good safety and tolerability in both clinical trials and clinical practice series. The most frequent adverse effects were diarrhea (17.3%), nausea (15.7%), upper respiratory tract infections (15.5%), nasopharyngitis (14.4%), tension headache (9.0%) and headache (6.3%). The rate of adverse events recorded in the clinical practice series has been lower compared to the clinical trials.

Experience in the use of apremilast in clinical practice complements the information available from pivotal clinical trials.Following a review of the literature, a panel of dermatologists with expertise in the management of psoriasis considered 5 scenarios in which the evidence supporting the use of apremilast to treat moderate psoriasis is insufficient or controversial. These scenarios were then assessed using a Delphi questionnaire.Consensus was reached on 96 (67%) of the 143 items (positive in 85 and negative in 11). The therapeutic goal for apremilast should be based on 4 outcomes: clinical response, symptoms, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. The scenario in which the use of apremilast was considered to have the greatest possibility of success was in patients with stable moderate psoriasis. Most of the clinicians considered apremilast to be an appropriate treatment when conventional therapies fail or are contraindicated, preferably before the prescription of biologic therapy. Consensus was reached that apremilast is an appropriate treatment for psoriasis in difficult locations, such as the scalp or the palms and soles. It was also agreed that apremilast requires less prescreening and monitoring than other conventional and biologic systemic therapies.Apremilast could be a treatment option for patients with a different profile to that of clinical trial participants. The limitations of this proposal are the absence of consensus on the definition of moderate psoriasis, the lack of real-world evidence on the use of apremilast, and certain aspects related to tolerability.

Background: The management of HIV-positive patients with psoriasis is controversial and limited to individual cases or short series of patients. Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of conventional and biologic immunosuppressive drugs in the treatment of patients with psoriasis and concomitant HIV infection. Methods: A retrospective multicenter study was conducted. The study included data from 2008 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were: HIV adult patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, HIV viral load determinations at baseline and at least after 6 months of treatment, and systemic immunosuppressive treatment for at least 6 months. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: Twenty-three patients with plaque-type psoriasis and HIV infection (five with AIDS) were included. Median follow-up time was 3.2 years. The main drugs used were etanercept, methotrexate, and ustekinumab. In most cases, viral load and CD4 cell count not only remained stable but also improved throughout the follow-up. Six patients presented severe adverse events during the follow-up, four of them in the AIDS stage. At the end of the follow-up period, 76.5% of the patients had achieved a PASI 75. Conclusion: Biologic drugs, both anti-TNF alpha agents and ustekinumab, seem to have an acceptable safety profile and high effectiveness in HIV-positive patients.

Background: The possibility of monitoring serum drug levels has opened the door to optimising biologic therapy. To consolidate this advance, it is imperative to demonstrate an adequate correlation between serum drug levels and clinical course.Objectives: To investigate whether a correlation exists between adalimumab levels and clinical response measured as absolute PASI.Methods: In a prospective cohort study, we enrolled 51 patients with psoriasis treated with adalimumab for at least 16s. Patients received approved doses of adalimumab, but after 52 s the dosing interval could be modified according to clinical criteria. Excellent response was defined as PASI 3, appropriate response as PASI >3 and 5 and inappropriate response as PASI>5. Correlations were calculated using Spearman's correlation test.Results: A total of 92 serum samples from 51 patients were analysed. Significant differences were found in serum trough levels between patients achieving an excellent response (6.46g/mL), versus an appropriate (2.5g/mL) and an inappropriate response (2g/mL). The therapeutic range for adalimumab serum levels was from 3.30 to 7.30g/mL.Conclusions: We found an adequate correlation between drug serum levels and PASI scores. Monitoring of absolute PASI and serum levels can provide a personalised and cost-effective evaluation.

Introduction: Biologic drugs have revolutionized the treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in recent years because of their high efficacy and low risk of toxicity. However, even within the group of biologic therapies, there are differences related to the different mechanisms of action.Areas covered: We review the main adverse events associated with the biologic agents currently available for the treatment of psoriasis and the new inhibitors targeting the p19 subunit of interleukin (IL) 23 and the IL-17A receptor. This review covers injection site reactions, infections, cardiovascular events, demyelinating disorders, tumours, class effects secondary adverse events, immunogenicity, safety in pregnancy and vaccines efficacy.Expert commentary: More than a decade after the first approval of biologic drugs for use in psoriasis, the good safety profile of these drugs is one of the main justifications and incentives for their long-term use. The emergence of new pharmacological groups has made it possible to avoid some of the class effects of first-generation biologic agents and the new therapies appear to pose less risk of reactivation of latent infections, such as hepatitis B virus and tuberculosis. However, they are associated with new adverse effects related to their mechanism of action, including candidiasis and the risk of exacerbation or onset of inflammatory bowel disease.

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory, lifelong disease with a high prevalence (afflicting approximately 1-5% of the population worldwide) and is associated with significant morbidity. The introduction of biologic therapies has improved the management of this disease. Multiple biologic medicines that block cytokine signaling, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists (adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab) and inhibitors of interleukin (IL)-17 (brodalumab, ixekizumab, and secukinumab), IL-23 (guselkumab), or IL-12/23 (ustekinumab), are approved for the treatment of psoriasis. Despite the clinical benefits associated with use of biologics in psoriasis, many patients are not treated with biologic therapy, and access to treatment may be limited for various reasons, such as high treatment costs. Patents for many biologics have expired or will soon expire, and biosimilar versions of these agents are available or in development. A biosimilar is a biological product that is highly similar to an approved biologic (i.e., originator or reference) product, and has no clinically meaningful differences in safety, purity, or potency when compared with the reference product. Biosimilars may offer less expensive treatment options for patients with psoriasis; they also may increase access to and address problems with underutilization of biologic therapy. Biosimilar development and approval follows a well-regulated process in many countries, with guidelines developed by the EuropeanMedicines Agency, US Foodand DrugAdministration, andWorldHealth Organization. Currently, several anti-TNF biosimilars are available for use in patients with psoriasis, and other monoclonal antibodies are in development. This review provides dermatologists and those who treat and/or manage psoriasis with a working knowledge of the scientific principles of biosimilar development and approval. It also examines real-world experience with biosimilars available for or used in dermatology that will enable physicians to make informed treatment decisions for their patients with psoriasis. Funding: Pfizer Inc.

Information regarding the safety of biological drugs prescribed to psoriasis patients on daily and long-term bases is insufficient. We used data from the BIOBADADERM registry (Spanish Registry of Adverse Events for Biological Therapy in Dermatological Diseases) to generate crude rates of infection during therapy with systemic drugs, including biological drugs (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and ustekinumab) and nonbiological drugs (acitretin, cyclosporine, and methotrexate). We also calculated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) (with propensity score adjustment) of infection, serious infections, and recurrent infections of systemic therapies compared with methotrexate, using Poisson regression. Our study included records of 2,153 patients (7,867.5 person-years). The adjusted RR of overall infection was significantly increased in the groups treated with adalimumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-3.7), infliximab (adjusted RR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.1-2.65), cyclosporine (adjusted RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17-2.15), ustekinumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.08-2.25), and etanercept (adjusted RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02-1.76) compared with methotrexate alone. Cyclosporine had a significant risk of serious infection (adjusted RR = 3.12, 95% CI = 1.1-8.8), followed by adalimumab combined with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 3.28, 95% CI = 0.8-13.5). Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate had the highest risk of infection recurrence (adjusted RR = 4.33, 95% CI = 2.27-8.24).

Fixed-dose combination topical therapy with corticosteroid and vitamin D analog provides effective treatment and possible long-term management of psoriasis. The anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects of corticosteroids and vitamin D analogs in treating psoriasis are well investigated; their complementary effects lead to the disruption of the inflammatory feedback loop underlying psoriasis pathogenesis. Recent preclinical data showed that combination therapy is more effective than monotherapies of the active ingredients in preventing activation of resting pro-inflammatory cells, inducing immunomodulation, reducing inflammatory responses by regulating T cell production, and normalizing keratinocytes. The increased understanding of the mechanism of action of fixed-dose combination therapy from preclinical studies is supported by several clinical studies. As the efficacy of topical therapy is correlated with the skin penetration of the active ingredients, new drug delivery systems have been developed. The fixed-dose combination Cal/BD aerosol foam creates a modified supersaturated formulation when applied to the skin, which is maintained for at least 26 h in the laboratory setting. Clinical studies have demonstrated superior efficacy of fixed-dose combination calcipotriol (Cal) 50 A mu g/g and betamethasone dipropionate (BD) 0.5 mg/g aerosol foam compared with monotherapies of the active ingredients. Furthermore, Cal/BD aerosol foam has shown significantly improved efficacy compared with more traditional formulations, such as Cal/BD ointment and gel, in other studies. Calcipotriol also mitigates risks associated with betamethasone dipropionate and vice versa, resulting in the favorable safety profile observed with fixed-dose combination treatment. Recent data also suggest that fixed-dose combination treatment could provide long-term management of psoriasis, although further clinical investigations are needed. Overall, these data support the value of fixed-dose combination therapy of corticosteroid and vitamin D analog and highlight the added potential of innovative drug delivery for the treatment of psoriasis. LEO Pharma.

Introduction: Biologic medications increase dramatically the burden of a chronic and high prevalent disease like psoriasis. The objective of the study was to quantify the use of dose reduction or dose escalation strategies, not reflected in the drug summary of product characteristics, in clinical practice. Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study of a subset of patients from the Spanish Registry for Systemic Treatments in Psoriasis (BIOBADADERM) treated for over six consecutive months with the same biologic agent. Results: The study included 637 patients. At the cut-off date, the initial dose had been reduced in 223 patients (35%; 95% CI: 31.3-38.9%) and escalated in 46 (7.2%; 95% CI: 5.3-9.5%). When compared with the patients treated with standard doses, the patients on reduced doses had a lower PASI score at the cut-off date (a mean 2.6 versus 1; -1.6 points) and exhibited greater improvement in PASI since the start of biologic therapy (mean reduction over baseline 75% versus 87%). By contrast, the patients receiving an escalated dose had higher PASI scores (2.6 versus 8.0) and showed less improvement in PASI (75% versus 46.8%). Conclusion: Off-label doses of biologic agents for psoriasis are frequent in clinical practice. This information is especially relevant for pharmacoeconomic models.

Background: limited data exist on transitioning patients with psoriasis from conventional systemic agents to biologics. Objectives: the TRANSIT study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two methotrexate-to-ustekinumab transition strategies. Methods: patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and inadequate methotrexate response were randomized 1 : 1 to receive ustekinumab with immediate (arm 1) or 4-week gradual (arm 2) methotrexate withdrawal. Patients weighing ≤ 100 kg or > 100 kg received ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg, respectively. The primary endpoint was the frequency of adverse events (AEs) at week 12. Secondary endpoints included additional safety, efficacy and patient-reported outcomes. We report the 12-week efficacy and safety results. Results: overall, 244 patients in arm 1 and 245 in arm 2 were randomized and received ustekinumab. Four patients per arm discontinued the trial by week 12. At week 12 in arms 1 and 2, respectively, 61% and 65% of patients experienced an AE, 2·9% and 2·4% had a serious AE, and 1·2% and 0·4% had an AE leading to ustekinumab discontinuation. In arms 1 and 2, respectively, median Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score decreased from 15·2 and 15·4 at baseline to 2·9 and 2·8 at week 12; 58% and 62% of patients achieved a 75% reduction from baseline in PASI score (PASI 75) at week 12; median baseline Dermatology Life Quality Index fell from 8 and 9 at baseline to 1 (both arms) at week 16. Conclusions: ustekinumab was well tolerated and effective in patients who had an inadequate response to methotrexate. Both transition strategies resulted in similar week 12 safety and efficacy outcomes.

Background: There are limited long-term, ‘real-world’ data on ustekinumab, or the effect of dose adjustment in suboptimal responders. Objectives: We describe 52-week data from TRANSIT, which initiated ustekinumab by licensed regimen and investigated exploratory dose adjustment. Methods: Patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and inadequate methotrexate response received ustekinumab, with immediate or gradual methotrexate withdrawal. Outcomes were similar between treatment arms at week 12 (primary endpoint), so week 52 data were pooled. Patients weighing ≤ 100 kg or > 100 kg were administered ustekinumab 45 or 90 mg, respectively. Patients weighing ≤ 100 kg without 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) response at weeks 28 or 40 received a dose adjustment to 90 mg. The primary analysis used observed data. Results: Overall, 391 and 98 patients received ustekinumab 45 and 90 mg, respectively. Forty-four patients (9%) discontinued before week 52 (0·4% due to adverse events). At week 52 (in the overall population), 369 patients (83%) achieved a PASI score ≤ 5, and 341 patients (77%) achieved PASI 75; the median PASI score decreased from 15 at baseline to 1·8. At weeks 28 and 40, 84 and 31 patients, respectively, did not achieve PASI 75 and received a dose adjustment; by week 52, 35/82 (43%) and 15/31 (48%) of these patients, respectively, achieved PASI 75 (two discontinued between weeks 28 and 40). Conclusions: Ustekinumab showed sustained 1-year efficacy and was well tolerated when initially administered according to label. Adjusting the ustekinumab dose to 90 mg may result in clinically meaningful improvement in response in patients weighing ≤ 100 kg with suboptimal initial response.

Background Both the safety and efficacy of biologic therapy may be affected in the presence of highly prevalent chronic viral hepatitis. Objectives To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ustekinumab and antitumour necrosis factor therapy in patients with psoriasis and concomitant chronic viral hepatitis. Methods This was a retrospective, multicentre study. Twenty-five patients with psoriasis and concurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) (20 patients) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) (five patients) infection who had received at least one biologic agent (etanercept, 21 treatments; adalimumab, four; ustekinumab, four; infliximab, two) were included. Clinical, imaging and laboratory data were recorded. Results In the case of HCV infection, the majority of the patients did not exhibit increases in their viral load or serum liver tests. Aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase were doubled from the baseline measurement in only one patient treated with etanercept. Two other cases exhibited viral load increases during the follow-up period. In total, 18 of the 26 treatments achieved a 75% improvement in their Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) score during the follow-up period. Two patients treated with etanercept were diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma. In the case of HBV infection, all of the patients were being treated with antiviral therapy, and none presented significant variations in viral load or serum liver enzymes. All patients achieved a PASI 75 during follow-up. Conclusions Biologic therapy was effective and safe for the majority of our patients with HCV and HBV infection, although there may be a risk of reactivation or aggravation. We describe the first cases to receive ustekinumab. The use of biologics should be limited to those cases in which the risk-benefit ratio is justified.