The Impact of Post-inflammatory Pigment Alteration After Psoriasis: Novel Data from the VISIBLE Study.

BackgroundRisankizumab has demonstrated durable, high rates of efficacy in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis as assessed by the achievement of relative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) improvement and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1.ObjectivesThe aim of this post hoc analysis is to assess the achievement of absolute PASI thresholds and related improvements in health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis treated with (i) risankizumab compared with ustekinumab, and (ii) long‐term (>52 weeks to 172 weeks) risankizumab.MethodsData from patients randomised to 150 mg risankizumab or 45 or 90 mg ustekinumab in replicate randomised controlled trials UltIMMa‐1 and UltIMMa‐2 were analysed for the achievement of absolute PASI thresholds PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0, time to achieve these thresholds, and combined PASI and DLQI endpoints. Data from pat ients initially randomised to risankizumab who continued on risankizumab in the open‐label extension study LIMMitless were analysed for the achievement of absolute PASI levels, mean DLQI scores, and DLQI 0/1.ResultsSignificantly greater proportions of patients treated with risankizumab compared with ustekinumab achieved PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0, as well as combined endpoints for absolute PASI and DLQI [(PASI ≤ 3 and DLQI ≤ 5) or (PASI ≤ 1 and DLQI 0/1)]. The median time to first achieve PASI ≤ 3, PASI ≤ 1, and PASI = 0 was significantly lower for risankizumab‐treated patients compared with ustekinumab‐treated patients. Among patients treated with long‐term risankizumab, more than 90% achieved PASI ≤ 3 though week 172 and more than 80% achieved DLQI 0/1. Low absolute PASI scores corresponded with low mean absolute DLQI scores through week 172 of continuous risankizumab treatment.ConclusionsRisankizumab treatment demonstrated high rates of rapid and durable efficacy as measured by absolute PASI thresholds and improvements in patient HRQoL.

Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 is suggested to be the new standard endpoint for randomized controlled trials of biologics for psoriasis, whereas treatment guidelines often still refer to PASI 75. To analyse in a real-world setting: firstly, what factors are associated with higher levels of treatment response to biologics; secondly, the health-related quality of life gains associated with different response levels in clinical practice. Biologically naïve patients with PASI, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and EuroQol (EQ)-5D outcomes before (maximum 6 months) and after (3-12 months) switch to biologics during registration in the Swedish National Registry for Systemic Treatment of Psoriasis (PsoReg) were included (n = 515). Patient characteristics associated with higher treatment response were analysed by regression analyses. Improvements in absolute PASI, DLQI and EQ-5D were assessed in different PASI percentage response levels. High PASI percentage response was associated with higher PASI before switch and lower body mass index. DLQI and EQ-5D improved within all responder groups (P < 0·001). The magnitude of improvements in DLQI (P = 0·02) differed between responder groups. The mean (SD) DLQI improvements for PASI 75<90 responders, PASI 90<100 responders and patients achieving complete skin clearance (PASI 100) were 9·9 (7·4), 11·5 (7·0) and 8·0 (6·1), respectively. PASI percentage change is largely dependent on absolute PASI before switch. Patients in clinical practice lack 'baseline' PASI values as they may switch directly from one treatment to another or stay successfully treated for a longer time period. Treatment goals such as PASI 90 are thus not suitable for treatment guidelines or for follow-up in clinical practice. What's already known about this topic? Randomized clinical trials of biologics as well as treatment guidelines include treatment goals based on a percentage improvement compared with baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), such as PASI 75 or PASI 90. Few studies have assessed which factors are associated with high skin clearance rates, or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improvements associated with different levels of skin clearance in clinical practice. What does this study add? A high absolute PASI before switch to biologics and low body mass index are associated with higher PASI percentage response. Few patients with baseline PASI >30 achieved complete skin clearance (CSC). All responder groups achieved significant HRQoL improvements. Patients achieving CSC (PASI 100) had lower absolute PASI before switch and lower improvements in absolute PASI and HRQoL than patients with almost cleared skin. What are the clinical implications of this work? Relative measures based on PASI percentage, such as PASI 75 or PASI 90, are not suitable for treatment guidelines or for follow-up in clinical practice.

BackgroundTwo randomized controlled trials (reSURFACE 1 and 2) have demonstrated the effectiveness of tildrakizumab, a high‐affinity, humanized, IgG1κ, anti‐interleukin‐23 monoclonal antibody, for treating moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis in the first 28 weeks.ObjectivesTo examine the efficacy of tildrakizumab and its impact on quality of life (QoL) in patients with different levels of week‐28 Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) improvement.MethodsPatients treated with tildrakizumab 100 mg or 200 mg from baseline to week 28 were pooled from reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 and classified into five mutually exclusive week‐28 PASI improvement groups for each dose: PASI 0–49, 50–74, 75–89, 90–99 and 100. Mean PASI improvement and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 over time were examined for each group.ResultsOf 1156 patients, 575 were in the 100‐mg and 578 in the 200‐mg cohorts, respectively. At week 28, 8.3%, 14.3%, 23.8%, 30.4% and 23.1% in the 100‐mg and 4.0%, 18.1%, 19.6%, 29.1% and 29.3% in the 200‐mg cohort achieved PASI < 50, 50–74, 75–89, 90–99 and 100, respectively. Patients with PASI < 50 at week 28 could be identified as early as week 8, and those with week‐28 PASI ≥ 90 had approximately 50% PASI improvement by week 4. Among patients achieving PASI > 50 at week 28 who continued the same dose of tildrakizumab to week 52, mean PASI improvement was maintained or improved over time. Similar results were observed for both doses. Higher proportions of patients achieved DLQI 0/1 in higher week‐28 PASI groups, and DLQI 0/1 was maintained or improved to week 52. However, not all patients with PASI 100 had DLQI 0/1.ConclusionPatients unlikely to respond to tildrakizumab could be identified by week 8, and those likely to achieve a PASI ≥ 90 response could be identified as early as week 4. Week‐28 PASI improvement level correlated with QoL improvement.

Papp et al. and Leonardi et al. concluded that brodalumab and ixekizumab, respectively, significantly improved plaque psoriasis in 12-week, phase II studies. For difficult-to-treat areas such as the scalp and nails, significant differences from placebo were observed with ixekizumab treatment. These trials were not large enough or of long enough duration to ascertain uncommon adverse events or to assess the risk of infection or cardiovascular events.

Introduction Psoriasis (PsO) is a chronic inflammatory disease of the skin. While skin clearance, as measured by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), is a clinical goal, PsO patients also suffer from reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In the Phase 3 VOYAGE 1 trial, guselkumab (GUS) demonstrated improvements on patient reported outcomes compared with placebo (PBO) and adalimumab (ADA). Here we report an analysis of the estimated time to onset of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in HRQoL, as measured by the Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DLQI) and associated PASI response in GUS-treated patients from VOYAGE 1.&#x0D; Methods The VOYAGE 1 trial enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe PsO who were randomized to receive PBO, GUS, or ADA. The DLQI is a self-report measure for HRQoL ranging from 0 (no impact) to 30 (maximum impact) that assesses the effect of skin problems on 6 HRQoL domains. An accepted MCID in DLQI is 4, previously reported as the smallest difference in DLQI total score that patients’ rate as beneficial. DLQI score and PASI improvement (percent change from baseline) were analyzed at Weeks 0, 8, 16, and 24 for the subset of VOYAGE 1 patients with a baseline DLQI score &gt;4. Earliest time to onset of MCID in mean DLQI and corresponding mean PASI improvement were estimated using linear interpolation for the GUS group between Weeks 0 and 8.&#x0D; Results Among patients randomized to GUS, n=279 (85%) had DLQI &gt;4 at baseline. By first assessment at Week 8 (W8), we observed a reduction in the mean DLQI score from 15.6 (baseline) to 5.0 (W8) with median DLQI decreasing from 15.0 (baseline) to 3.0 (W8). The interpolated onset of MCID in DLQI occurred at 21.1 days (W3) following the initial GUS dose. In GUS-treated patients, the estimated mean PASI improvement corresponding to the onset of MCID in mean DLQI occurring at Week 3 was 29.2%.&#x0D; Conclusions These data indicate that the onset of clinically meaningful improvements in mean DLQI occur as early as after the first dose of GUS in patients with moderate-to-severe PsO.

Psoriasis is a common, chronic inflammatory skin disease which typically follows a relapsing and remitting course, and is associated with joint disease in approximately 25% of patients.1 The significant reduction in quality of life and the psychosocial disability suffered by patients underline the need for prompt, effective treatment, and long-term disease control (reviewed2, 3). Localized, limited disease can usually be managed satisfactorily with topical agents. Those with moderate to severe disease often require systemic treatment. Phototherapy and traditional 'standard' systemic therapies, while often effective, can be associated with long-term toxicity; some are expensive, and some patients have treatment-resistant disease.4 Also, phototherapy is not available to many due to geographical, logistical or other constraints. Patients themselves demonstrate high levels of dissatisfaction with standard approaches to treatment.5, 6 Biologic therapies for psoriasis utilize molecules designed to block specific molecular steps important in the pathogenesis of psoriasis and now comprise a number of well-established, licensed, treatment options for patients with severe disease. Since 2005, when the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD) first published guidance on the use of biologic therapies in psoriasis,7 much has changed. There is a substantial body of new evidence pertinent to the clinical use of these treatments, the U.K. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has approved the use of a number of biologic therapies in severe chronic plaque psoriasis and the BAD Biologic Interventions Register (BADBIR) has been successfully launched. Despite these developments, use of biologic therapy in clinical practice remains limited in the U.K., with a shortfall in funding cited as a significant obstacle to prescribing in approximately 40% of units recently surveyed.8 These guidelines have been revised and updated in accordance with a predetermined scope. This is based on the original scope used in 2005, and extended to include additional areas of practice. Recommendations in this guideline supersede those in the 2005 guideline. The overall objective of these guidelines is to provide up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations on use of biologic therapies (infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, ustekinumab) in adults and children with all types of psoriasis and, where relevant, psoriatic arthritis, for clinical staff involved in the care of patients treated with biologic therapies. Efalizumab remains in the scope of the guideline in relation to safety only, given that the European Medicines Agency has withdrawn the marketing authorization of this drug because of concerns over the development of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). This guidance does not cover agents licensed outside the U.K. (alefacept) or use of biologic therapies for indications other than psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. The guideline working group represents all relevant stakeholders including dermatologists, nurses, rheumatologists and patients. Draft guidance was made available for consultation and review by patients, the BAD membership and the British Dermatological Nursing Group (BDNG). Advice relating to tuberculosis was reviewed and approved by the British Thoracic Society. The guideline has been developed using the BAD's recommended methodology9 and with reference to the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation) instrument.10 Recommendations were developed for implementation in the National Health Service using a process of considered judgment based on the evidence and an awareness of the European product licence of the various treatments. Cochrane, EMBASE and Medline databases were searched between 1990 and June 2009 for clinical trials involving adalimumab, efalizumab, etanercept, infliximab and ustekinumab using an agreed protocol. Two reviewers screened all titles and abstracts independently, and full papers of relevant material were obtained. In relation to efficacy, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of high quality (1+ or more; see Appendix 1) were included for chronic plaque psoriasis, whereas in other clinical phenotypes, given the paucity of published data, all data were included. Data from each paper were extracted by two members of the guideline group using standardized literature evaluation forms in order to create evidence tables. Evidence on safety was extracted from literature on use of biologic agents for any indication in view of the relatively limited data specifically relating to use in psoriasis. The methodological limitations of the safety analysis are detailed in section 15. The guideline was peer reviewed by the Clinical Standards Unit of the BAD (made up of the Therapy & Guidelines and Audit & Clinical Standards Subcommittees) prior to publication. These guidelines have been prepared on behalf of the BAD and reflect the best data available at the time the report was prepared. Caution should be exercised in interpreting the data; the results of future studies may require alteration of the conclusions or recommendations in this report. It may be necessary or even desirable to depart from the guidelines in the interests of specific patients and special circumstances. Just as adherence to guidelines may not constitute defence against a claim of negligence, so deviation from them should not necessarily be deemed negligent. This field of psoriasis biologic therapeutics is in a rapid phase of development, and revision of the scope and content of the guidelines will therefore occur on an annual basis. Where necessary, the guideline will be updated via the BAD website, and a fully revised version is planned for 2012. Most patients with moderate to severe disease achieve satisfactory disease control (i.e. significant or complete clearing of disease) in the short term with at least one of the systemic agents currently available.4 Long-term disease control frequently requires some form of continuous therapy and consequent, predictable risks of toxicity. At present, the risks and benefits of biologic therapies relative to standard systemic therapy are largely unknown. Widespread use of these agents in uncomplicated moderate to severe psoriasis is inappropriate and is not supported by the licensed indications for these drugs. Eligibility criteria should encompass both objective measures of disease severity and the impact the disease has on quality of life. All existing disease severity assessment tools are imperfect11-13 and most require some training to complete. The Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) is a measure of disease severity in chronic plaque psoriasis12 and has been chosen for the purposes of this guideline as it has been widely used in clinical trials including those investigating biologic therapies, and has also been adopted by NICE. A PASI score of ≥ 10 (range 0–72) has been shown to correlate with a number of indicators commonly associated with severe disease such as need for hospital admission or use of systemic therapy,14 and reflects the minimal level of disease severity required for patient inclusion in most of the clinical trials of biologic therapies to date. Where the PASI is not applicable (e.g. pustular psoriasis), body surface area (BSA) affected should be used, with severe disease defined as > 10% BSA affected.14 The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is a validated tool for the measurement of quality of life across all skin diseases, including psoriasis, and has been used in both trial and clinical practice settings.13, 15 A score of > 10 (range 0–30) has been shown to correlate with at least 'a very large effect' on an individual's quality of life.12, 14, 16 When using the PASI and DLQI to determine whether or not a patient should be considered for biologic therapy, clinicians should take into account the applicability of these measures to each individual patient. There are circumstances where the use of these tools fails to give a sufficiently accurate assessment of the clinical situation. With respect to the PASI, this is especially pertinent in patients with localized disease that involves special 'high-impact' sites (genitalia, hands, feet, head and neck) where highly significant functional and/or psychosocial morbidity may exist with a PASI < 10. The DLQI may be a poor indicator of emotional disabilities resulting from psoriasis and the validity of the DLQI (and of other quality of life measures) may also be undermined due to linguistic or other communication difficulties.13 Patients with psoriasis may be considered eligible to receive treatment with any of the licensed biologic interventions when they fulfil the eligibility criteria set out below. However, the decision to proceed with treatment must be made in collaboration with the patient and include a careful assessment of the associated risks and benefits17 Eligibility criteria To be considered eligible for treatment, patients must have severe disease as defined in (a) and fulfil one of the clinical categories outlined in (b): (a) Severe disease defined as a PASI score of 10 or more (or a BSA of 10% or greater where PASI is not applicable) and a DLQI > 10. In exceptional circumstances (for example, disease affecting high-impact sites with associated significant functional or psychological morbidity such as acral psoriasis), patients with severe disease may fall outside this definition but should be considered for treatment (Strength of recommendation D; level of evidence 3) AND (b) Fulfil at least one of the following clinical categories (Strength of recommendation D; level of evidence 3, and formal consensus) where phototherapya and alternative standard systemic therapyb are contraindicated or cannot be used due to the development of, or risk of developing, clinically important treatment-related toxicity. are intolerant to standard systemic therapy are unresponsive to standard systemic therapyb have significant, coexistent, unrelated comorbidity which precludes use of systemic agents such as ciclosporin or methotrexate have severe, unstable, life-threatening disease Eligibility criteria for patients with skin and joint disease patients with active psoriatic arthritis or skin disease that fulfils defined British Society for Rheumatology (BSR)18 or BAD guideline criteria, respectively patients with severe skin psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis who have failed or cannot use methotrexate may need to be considered for biologic treatment given the potential benefit of such treatment on both components of psoriatic disease aPhototherapy may be inappropriate in patients (i) who have exceeded safe exposure limits (150–200 treatments for PUVA, 350 treatments for narrowband UVB19, 20), (ii) who are nonresponsive or relapse rapidly, (iii) who have a history of skin cancer or repeated episodes of severe sunburn, (iv) who are intolerant of UV exposure, especially if skin phototype I (sun-sensitive), or (v) for logistical reasons bStandard systemic therapy includes ciclosporin (2·5 mg kg−1 daily; up to 5 mg kg−1 daily), and in men, and women not at risk of pregnancy, methotrexate [single dose (oral, subcutaneous, intramuscular) of 15 mg weekly; max 25 mg weekly] and acitretin (25–50 mg daily) An adequate response to treatment is defined as either (i) a 50% or greater reduction in baseline PASI (PASI 50 response) (or % BSA where the PASI is not applicable) and a 5-point or greater improvement in DLQI4, 21-23or (ii) a 75% reduction in PASI score compared with baseline (PASI 75 response). Initial response to therapy should be assessed at time points appropriate for the drug in question (Table 1). For patients on tumour necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist treatment with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, treatment may be continued if there has been a sufficient response in at least one of these components (see BSR guidelines18 for definition of disease response in psoriatic arthritis). TNF is a proinflammatory cytokine produced by a wide variety of cell types including keratinocytes. It plays a central role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and a number of other disease states. TNF is released from cells as a soluble cytokine (sTNF) following cleavage from its cell surface-bound precursor (transmembrane TNF, tmTNF). Both sTNF and tmTNF are biologically active, and bind to either of two distinct receptors: TNF receptor 1 (TNFR1, p55) and TNF receptor 2 (TNFR2, p75). This leads to NF-κB activation (which promotes inflammation) and/or cell apoptosis. In addition, tmTNF can itself act as a ligand (via a process of reverse signalling) to induce cell activation, cytokine suppression or apoptosis of the tmTNF-bearing cell. Soluble forms of the TNF receptors also exist and, by binding and neutralizing sTNF, may act as natural TNF antagonists. There are currently two approved groups of biologic agents that target TNF: anti-TNF monoclonal antibodies (adalimumab and infliximab), and sTNF receptors (etanercept). Infliximab is a chimeric human–murine monoclonal antibody (∼ 25% mouse-derived protein) whereas adalimumab is fully human. Etanercept is a genetically engineered fusion protein composed of a dimer of the extracellular portions of human TNFR2 (p75) fused to the Fc domain of human IgG1. All three agents specifically bind both soluble and transmembrane forms of TNF and act by (i) blocking TNFR-mediated mechanisms and (ii) inducing tmTNF (reverse-signalling) events. Etanercept also binds members of the lymphotoxin family [LTα3 (also known as TNF-β) and LTα2β1] although the biological significance of this is unclear. Aside from the latter, there are important differences between the three agents with respect to pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity and structure-based mechanisms of action (only some of which are completely understood).24 It is likely that these differences, in the context of the highly complex biology of TNF, account for observed differences in the efficacy and adverse events profile of TNF antagonists. Lymphocyte function-associated antigen-1 (LFA-1) is a cell surface protein that binds to intracellular adhesion molecule (ICAM) 1–3 and plays a key role in T-lymphocyte recirculation, trafficking to sites of inflammation, antigen presentation by dendritic cells and other activated cells including keratinocytes, and T-cell costimulation. Efalizumab is a recombinant humanized IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the CD11a subunit of LFA-1, which by interfering with LFA-1/ICAM binding inhibits several key steps important in the pathogenesis of psoriasis including T-cell migration into the skin and T-cell activation. More recently, in vivo data have shown that efalizumab induces a state of reversible T-cell 'hyporesponsiveness' including downregulation of a number of T-cell surface molecules unrelated to LFA-1 both in the circulation and in psoriatic plaques.25, 26 Interleukin (IL)-12 and IL-23 are heterodimeric cytokines secreted by activated antigen-presenting cells, and share a common protein subunit, p40. Of relevance to psoriasis, IL-12 activates CD4 and natural killer cells to induce expression of type 1 cytokines (TNF and interferon-γ) while IL-23 stimulates survival and proliferation of a subset of T cells that produce IL-17 (Th17 cells). Recent immunological27 and genetic studies indicate a central role for IL-23 in the pathogenesis of psoriasis.28Ustekinumab is a fully human IgG1κ monoclonal antibody which acts as an IL inhibitor by binding with high affinity and specificity to the p40 protein subunit. It thus prevents IL-12 and IL-23 from binding to their IL-12Rβ1 receptor protein expressed on the surface of immune cells. Three large RCTs demonstrate that etanercept is effective in chronic plaque psoriasis.29-31 Onset of action is slower than that seen with the monoclonal antibodies, with clinically significant improvement in disease severity scores evident between 4 and 8 weeks after initiation of treatment.30 Response is dose related, with 34% (25 mg biweekly) and 48% (50 mg biweekly) of patients achieving PASI 75 by 12 weeks (Table 2). Continuing therapy up to 6 months improves response rates further (43% and 57% for 25 mg biweekly and 50 mg biweekly, respectively).29, 30, 32 While there are no RCT data establishing efficacy beyond 6 months, data from a 2-year, open-label etanercept 50 mg biweekly extension study32 (following the phase III study reported by Tyring et al.31) suggest that efficacy is maintained for up to 1 year, with approximately 75% of patients maintaining their PASI 75 response over the ensuing year. Overall, continuous therapy provides better disease control and higher levels of patient satisfaction compared with interrupted therapy. When treatment is stopped, disease relapses slowly: median time to disease relapse as defined by loss of PASI 50 in those who achieved PASI 75 after 24 weeks of continuous etanercept 25 or 50 mg biweekly, was 85 and 91 days, with no evidence of disease PASI scores were with the of patients achieving efficacy after 12 further weeks (i.e. and of PASI 75 achieved this level of efficacy on Aside from objective measures of disease improvement studies also report associated clinically in quality of life reduction in and and of patients in analysis of two of these RCTs that response rates in those over were the as those although in the group were The 25 mg and 50 mg are given that their are that the number of patients achieving PASI 75 at 12 weeks following etanercept 50 mg an RCT compared with was with that seen in other RCTs investigating etanercept 25 mg biweekly and that no significant differences were observed in PASI or DLQI in a of patients open-label etanercept 25 mg biweekly and etanercept 50 mg In the RCTs the of adverse events or adverse events in patients etanercept was no greater than in the control patients, with the of in each treatment RCT has shown efficacy of etanercept 25 mg compared with acitretin mg kg−1 at 24 weeks (see the role of TNF in levels of TNF in patients, and the used for etanercept, response rates may occur in patients, with This is in by published RCT and data cited in the study by et The of etanercept and methotrexate has been shown to be more effective in arthritis than either with no significant additional toxicity. data suggest that the of methotrexate may also etanercept efficacy in psoriasis. A RCT the efficacy and safety of etanercept (25 mg biweekly) in patients on and reported of patients or at 24 weeks on therapy, as compared with those in methotrexate was A reported both efficacy with the of methotrexate in patients on etanercept and loss of efficacy on of methotrexate from patients on Data from a RCT reported that the of etanercept 25 mg with acitretin mg kg−1 is as effective as etanercept 25 mg and that both these interventions are more effective that acitretin These data suggest that in the short term at the may additional efficacy as there is no additional associated toxicity. The patient in the cited RCTs may not be of patients likely to be treated in clinical practice as to the studies required patients only to be considered or have or systemic therapy. However, objective disease severity criteria were the as those currently recommended by the BAD and and PASI scores on to studies were higher from 16 to studies of practice report response rates in patients who have failed systemic therapies, all of which that data from the RCTs can be to clinical 50 There is a of long-term RCT data beyond 6 months, and only limited data on the two published studies one is and both report following one of treatment RCT data indicate that 50 mg biweekly is more effective than 25 mg biweekly, but there are no trial data whether the dose to 50 mg biweekly in patients who to achieve or adequate on 25 mg biweekly results in disease This is especially pertinent given guidance which currently limits treatment to the 25 mg biweekly dose (see Etanercept is licensed for use in moderate to severe psoriasis at either 50 or 25 mg biweekly for the first months, and 25 mg biweekly for up to 24 therapy beyond 24 weeks may be appropriate for some patients has approved use of etanercept in severe plaque psoriasis to defined disease at the 25 mg biweekly dose only, and not the 50 mg dose effective, with therapy to be continued only in those patients achieving disease response at months (Table 1). Etanercept is recommended for the treatment of patients with severe psoriasis who fulfil the disease severity criteria to section (Strength of recommendation level of evidence Etanercept therapy may be at either 50 or 25 mg and disease response assessed at months (Strength of recommendation level of evidence The of which dose to use will on clinical disease body and, in the U.K., the dose that will be (Strength of recommendation level of evidence Patients on etanercept 25 mg may to to etanercept 50 mg as these two are in of efficacy (Strength of recommendation level of evidence In patients who treatment may be continued to clinical although long-term data on efficacy are limited to 2 (Strength of recommendation level of evidence may be risk of disease although there may be a response on therapy (Strength of recommendation level of evidence may be recommended in clinical where it is required for associated or to efficacy (Strength of recommendation level of evidence Three large indicate that infliximab therapy is highly effective in chronic plaque psoriasis (Table Onset of action is with evidence of significant improvement the first 2 weeks of treatment and benefit by 10 when of patients achieve PASI 75 (Table (and in DLQI of This response is largely maintained over time with and achieving PASI 75 at 6 and 12 months, respectively (Table 2). of efficacy with development of antibodies to which in of patients continuous therapy and 5 mg following a standard 2 and 6 continuous therapy at 5 mg kg−1 8 weeks achieved to relapse in the by loss of PASI was as and in the of although data were not An that 50% patients relapse of PASI by There are no published trial data beyond 1 year. study assessed disease using the Psoriasis Severity Index to a a improvement in from baseline was observed at 10 with a of improvement reported at This was maintained of patients with complete of disease the target continued to between weeks 24 and 50 and There are no RCT data on use of methotrexate in with infliximab in psoriasis. In both and psoriatic arthritis, with methotrexate is a licensed and response rates and are at least in these disease levels of infliximab have been reported with methotrexate which may in of mg also the of antibodies to The patient in the cited RCTs may not be of patients likely to be treated in clinical practice. The PASI at baseline was ≥ 10 in all the studies However, of systemic therapy was not an in that most studies required patients to be for systemic therapy and/or failed A of patients in the study by et indicate that baseline PASI > and the of treatments two or more systemic therapies, or biologic no on treatment The of the study investigating continuous infliximab therapy is in that study at patients randomized to receive therapy receive infliximab at PASI 75 was not and in both were reported as Infliximab is licensed for use mg kg−1 8 in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. has approved use of infliximab in patients with severe (PASI ≥ DLQI ≥ with treatment beyond 10 weeks recommended only in those who achieve response Infliximab is recommended for the treatment of patients with severe psoriasis who fulfil the disease severity criteria to section (Strength of recommendation level of evidence Infliximab therapy should be at a dose of 5 mg kg−1 at weeks 2 and 6 and disease response assessed at months (Strength of recommendation level of evidence In patients who mg should be given at to disease control although long-term data are available only up to 1 (Strength of recommendation level of evidence therapy should be given the associated risk of and disease control (Strength of recommendation level of evidence may be recommended in clinical where it is required for associated to efficacy or to the development of antibodies to infliximab (Strength of recommendation D; level of evidence 3) Three large RCTs demonstrate that adalimumab is a highly effective treatment for chronic plaque psoriasis (Table Onset of action is with significant in disease severity evident 2 weeks of treatment and disease response seen between weeks 12 and Response is dose with of patients achieving PASI 75 at 12 with adalimumab mg other (i.e. the licensed dose for psoriasis), and achieving PASI 75 with adalimumab mg relevant in quality of life indicators are also In one a subset of patients who failed to achieve PASI 50 following at least 24 weeks of adalimumab other was to the dose for the of the study 40% of this PASI 50 that dose may further data are available up to 1 year, with no evidence of significant loss of response over time in those patients who and are continued on of response on treatment was also in the phase of the study reported by et those who maintained PASI 75 by were to receive either or a further weeks of adalimumab While time to relapse was not of patients PASI 50 response relative to baseline with a of a in PASI score relative to compared with relapse in those on adalimumab by of this patients who

BackgroundApproximately 30% of patients (pts) with plaque psoriasis (PsO) develop psoriatic arthritis (PsA)1, which is associated with high Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and nail involvement. The Psoriasis Study...

Updates in psoriasis diagnosis and treatment status in China: results from the National Psoriasis Center Registry.

IntroductionReal-world data on the efficacy of risankizumab (RZB) in clinical moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (PsO) are limited. The RAPID study assessed real-world clinical and patient-reported outcomes in RZB-treated PsO patients using data collected from dermatologists in Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Japan, and Poland.MethodsThis ongoing, retrospective chart review collected data from medical records of RZB-treated adults with moderate-to-severe PsO (09/2022–06/2023). Eligible patients received RZB, had ≥ 12 months of medical records after RZB initiation (index date), and had Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Investigator Global Assessment (IGA), or static Physician’s Global Assessment (sPGA) scores ≥ 3 months before and up to 18 months after the index date. The proportion of patients achieving a clear/almost clear PsO (IGA/sPGA = 0/1), PASI ≤ 1, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) = 0/1, and a 90%/100% improvement from baseline in PASI as well as the mean changes in PASI, DLQI, itch, and skin pain scores at 12 and 18 months were reported for patients with non-missing assessments at baseline and 12 months.ResultsMost patients (66.4%) were male, 74.0% were biologic naïve, and 73.0% had scalp PsO. Mean baseline IGA/sPGA was 3.7 ± 0.5, with a mean PASI of 23.3 ± 11.8. After 12 months, 86.1% of patients reported IGA/sPGA ≤ 1, and 75.7% achieved PASI90; these further increased to 91.1% and 80.5% at 18 months. DLQI, itch, and skin pain scores improved over time.ConclusionsThese data demonstrated the durable, real-world effectiveness of RZB in patients with moderate-to-severe PsO through continued improvement in disease and symptom severity over 18 months, with most of the patients reporting clear/almost clear skin.

IntroductionWith newer biologics, the achievement of complete skin clearance has become an attainable treatment goal for patients with plaque psoriasis. We evaluate how improvements in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) responses, particularly at incremental improvements approaching complete skin clearance (PASI 100), translate into improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and patient-perceived symptoms.MethodsData from the BE RADIANT phase 3b trial (NCT03536884) and its open-label extension (OLE), pooled across all study visits and treatments over 16 weeks (randomised patients) and 2 years (patients entering the OLE), were analysed using mixed-effects logistic regression models. Proportions of patients achieving a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) of 0/1, DLQI item scores of 0, and Psoriasis Symptoms and Impacts Measure (P-SIM) item scores of 0 for itching, scaling, and skin pain at specific PASI improvement levels were estimated.ResultsSeven hundred and forty-three patients were randomised to treatment; 654 entered the OLE. Using 16-week pooled data, there were incremental improvements in the proportions of patients estimated by our model to achieve DLQI 0/1 with PASI 100 compared with 95% (PASI = 95%) and 90% (PASI = 90%) improvements in PASI (93.0%, 89.3%, and 83.8% achieving DLQI 0/1, respectively). Estimated proportions achieving DLQI item scores of 0 had the greatest increases at higher PASI improvement levels for Items 1 (itchy, sore, painful, or stinging skin), 2 (embarrassment), and 4 (choice of clothing). Estimated proportions of patients achieving P-SIM = 0 were also higher for PASI 100 (itching: 61.7%; scaling: 82.2%; skin pain: 96.9%) than for PASI = 95% (50.8%; 72.3%; 95.7%) and PASI = 90% (39.8%; 59.5%; 94.0%). Similar benefits of incremental PASI improvements were estimated using 2-year data.ConclusionsComplete skin clearance translated into the greatest benefits to HRQoL and patient-perceived symptoms, over and above skin clearance between 90% and 100%, highlighting the importance of targeting PASI 100 as a treatment outcome for patients with psoriasis.Trial Registration NumberNCT03536884.Complete skin clearance is associated with the greatest benefits to health-related quality of life and perceived symptoms for patients with psoriasis: KeyResults and Conclusions (MP4 72828 kb)Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-024-01261-6.

Background: Relative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) improvement, also called ‘PASI response’, is recommended in major guidelines for assessment of treatment response in psoriasis patients. However, under certain circumstances it has some limitations, e.g. when baseline values are missing or during long-term treatment. Improvement of health-related quality of life (HrQoL) can be measured by the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI).Objective: To evaluate the association of HrQoL and relative and absolute PASI outcomes during therapy.Material and methods: Data of plaque psoriasis patients of two clinical trials (CLEAR and SCULPTURE) were pooled. The rates of patients achieving DLQI 0/1 at week 16 were compared for different categories of absolute PASI and PASI response values. The correlation of DLQI and absolute or relative PASI goals was assessed over 52 weeks.Results: One thousand and fifty-four patients with available assessments of PASI and DLQI were included. 76% of the patients with an absolute PASI ≤ 2 (N = 548) and patients with a 90% improvement in PASI (N = 559) achieved DLQI 0/1 at week 16. Achievement of DLQI 0/1 was equally reflected by absolute PASI and PASI response.Conclusion: Absolute PASI appeared to be a feasible alternative to PASI response for determining treatment success, reflecting HrQoL improvements in an equal manner.

Recent advances in biologic treatments have made clear skin a realistic treatment goal for psoriasis. However, clear skin may not uniformly translate to an absence of impact on patients' quality of life. This retrospective observational study aimed to elucidate the factors influencing patient‐reported outcomes in patients with psoriasis who have demonstrated successful clinician‐reported outcomes on using biologics. A total of 96 patients who have achieved a ≥75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scores with ≥6 months of biologic treatment were included. Their median PASI score was 0.4, with 37.5% having achieved PASI 100 (clear skin). Furthermore, 47.9% reported no impact of psoriasis on their quality of life (Dermatology Life Quality Index [DLQI] score 0 or 1), while 52.1% reported a negative impact (DLQI score ≥2). Notably, 28.1% of the participants had a history of biologic treatment failure, defined as the inability to achieve or sustain a 75% PASI improvement with the previously used biologic agent. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed a positive association between achieving PASI 100 and reporting no impact of psoriasis on quality of life (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.49–10.91, P = 0.007). Conversely, prior biologic treatment failure was negatively associated with reporting no impact of psoriasis on quality of life (aOR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02–0.65, P = 0.023). Furthermore, among patients with clear skin, those with experience of previous biologic treatment failure reported significantly lower quality of life than those without such experience (P = 0.033). In conclusion, minimal residual skin lesions and prior biologic treatment failure were associated with poorer patient‐reported outcomes in patients with psoriasis. Opting for a biologic agent with the highest predicted efficacy, rather than pursuing a “step‐up” approach with a higher possibility of treatment failure, may be a more suitable strategy in the biologic treatment of psoriasis.

Data on treatment outcomes in patients with psoriasis who have skin of color are limited. Brodalumab has shown efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life associated with brodalumab in patients with skin of color participating in two phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled studies (AMAGINE-2/-3). Patients were self-categorized into racial subgroups (black, Asian, or white) or the non-mutually exclusive ethnic subgroup Hispanic/Latino. Patients were randomized to receive brodalumab 210mg every 2weeks (Q2W) or ustekinumab (45mg in patients weighing ≤ 100kg and 90mg in patients weighing > 100kg) for 52weeks. Skin clearance was monitored using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and Static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were summarized by treatment and racial and ethnic subgroup. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). During the 12-week induction phase, 613 patients received ustekinumab (black, n = 20; Asian, n = 24; white, n = 551; Hispanic/Latino, n = 68) and 1236 patients received brodalumab 210mg Q2W (black, n = 36; Asian, n = 39; white, n = 1116; Hispanic/Latino, n = 132). At week 52, a total of 590 patients received continuous ustekinumab (black, n = 19; Asian, n = 23; white, n = 532; Hispanic/Latino, n = 64) and 339 patients were re-randomized to continue receiving brodalumab 210mg Q2W (black, n = 10; Asian, n = 7; white, n = 308; Hispanic/Latino, n = 40). Among patients who received brodalumab 210mg Q2W, skin clearance response rates were similar across racial and ethnic subgroups at week 12 and week 52; rates of 75%, 90%, and 100% improvement in PASI from baseline were also higher, as was sPGA score ≤ 1, than in patients who received ustekinumab across all racial and ethnic subgroups. Rates of TEAEs and ≥ 5-point improvement in DLQI score were similar across racial and ethnic subgroups. Brodalumab 210mg Q2W is well tolerated and efficacious across diverse racial and ethnic subgroups in patients with psoriasis, including black, Asian, white, and Hispanic/Latino patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01708603 (AMAGINE-2); NCT01708629 (AMAGINE-3).

IntroductionTreating plaque psoriasis (PsO) with guselkumab (GUS) promotes skin clearance and is associated with improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety, and depression. It is unclear whether improvements in patient-reported outcomes are due to resolution of skin symptoms or the direct result of GUS treatment.MethodsTwo phase 3, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled studies randomized patients with moderate-to-severe PsO to GUS, placebo (crossing over to GUS at week 16), or adalimumab. Post hoc mediation analyses examined direct and indirect effects of GUS, versus adalimumab, on Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) or Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) after adjusting for indirect effects mediated by skin clearance, evaluated via Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), to determine the direct effect of GUS on dermatology HRQoL, depression, and anxiety.ResultsCompared with adalimumab, the natural direct effect (NDE) of GUS on change in DLQI from baseline was − 2.04 (P < 0.001), using PASI improvement as a mediator, indicating 89.2% of the total treatment effect was due to direct effects of GUS; using PASI 90 as a mediator, NDE of GUS was − 1.43 (P < 0.001), with 62.2% of the total treatment effect attributed to direct effects of GUS. Compared with adalimumab, 25.5% of change in HADS anxiety score was mediated through PASI improvement (NDE − 0.74; P = 0.002), indicating 74.5% of the total effect was independent of PASI improvement. Similarly, 24% of treatment effect was mediated through PASI 90 (NDE − 0.76; P = 0.002). Comparable proportions of the total improvement in HADS depression scores were due to direct and indirect effects of GUS mediated through PASI improvement (direct, 50.2%; indirect, 49.8%) or PASI 90 (direct, 59.5%; indirect, 40.5%).ConclusionsGUS-mediated improvements in anxiety, depression, and overall HRQoL are not solely mediated by resolution of PsO signs, suggesting GUS use has a potential direct effect on anxiety and depression.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the comprehensive impact of family history of psoriasis, lesion size, disease severity, and the possibility of joint involvement on patients' quality of life(QoL). Data from 5961 patients with psoriasis recruited from 440 hospitals throughout China were analyzed. The effects of family history of psoriasis, Body Surface Area(BSA), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index(PASI), and Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool(PEST) on their Dermatology Life Quality Index(DLQI) were studied using a moderated chained mediated effects test. A total of 912 patients (15.30%) had a family history of psoriasis, and 5071 patients (85.10%) had plaque psoriasis. In patients with plaque psoriasis, the variables of family history, PASI, PEST, and DLQI were positively correlated with each other. Additionally, in patients with other types of psoriasis, PASI was positively correlated with PEST and DLQI. Age was positively correlated with PASI and PEST and negatively correlated with DLQI in patients with plaque psoriasis; their Body Mass Index(BMI) and disease duration were in positive correlation with PASI and PEST. The mediation effect of PASI and PEST between family history and DLQI was remarkable in patients with plaque psoriasis and not in those with other types of psoriasis. BSA moderated the association between family history and PASI in patients with plaque psoriasis. PASI and PEST play a chain mediating role in the relationship between family history and DLQI in patients with plaque psoriasis, and high levels of BSA increase the ability of family history to positively predict PASI in plaque psoriasis, thereby affecting the patient's QoL.