User login
Include quality of life measures in evaluating treatment success of psoriasis
No matter what the disease, physician judgment of disease severity correlates poorly with the patient’s quality of life, Dr. Joel Gelfand said during a presentation at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar.
“Patients with similar objective findings have varying health-related quality of life,” said Dr. Gelfand, professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Dermatologists have several tools to measure quality of life and treatment, with varying levels of validation. For example, the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory measures symptoms including redness, itching, scaling, burning, stinging, cracking, flaking, and pain (J Dermatolog Treat. 2013 Oct;24[5]:356-60).
The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is commonly used in clinical trials of psoriasis therapeutics and is frequently used in clinical practice in Europe, Dr. Gelfand said. The DLQI asks about symptoms, feelings, daily activities, leisure time, work/school functioning, and relationships, as well as the treatment itself.
He and his associates used this tool in a study of psoriasis patients seen in routine clinical follow-up in dermatology practices across the United States. The study found that approximately 19% of those who were almost clear (compared with 2% of those who were clear) met DLQI criteria for a treatment change (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014 Oct;71[4]:633-41). European guidelines, he added, suggest that patients achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score between 50 and 75 and a DLQI greater than 5 should modify their treatment regimens (Arch Dermatol Res. 2011 Jan; 303[1]: 1-10).
Dr. Gelfand described his clinical approach to psoriasis and evaluating quality of life in patients, which involves a global assessment (conducted by a medical assistant) with both a physical and emotional component.
First, patients are asked to think about how severe their physical symptoms of psoriasis have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. Next, patients are asked to think about how severe their psoriasis-related emotional symptoms (such as embarrassment, frustration, depression) have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. The patient’s responses help direct treatment plans.
Another reason to attend to quality of life in psoriasis patients: suicide risk. Suicide risk in psoriasis patients has not been well studied, said Dr. Gelfand, whose PubMed search of “psoriasis and suicide” in September yielded only 48 hits. However, one study of 217 patients who completed the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression showed that almost 10% reported a wish to be dead, and almost 6% reported active thoughts of suicide (Int J Dermatol. 1993 Mar;32[3]:188-90).
Another large study that used data from the National Health Service in England included 119,304 patients with psoriasis and found a high risk for suicide attempts and/or suicide in these patients (J R Soc Med. 2014 Feb 13;107[5]:194-204). High risk also was noted for patients with eczema, diabetes, epilepsy, asthma, and inflammatory joint disease, he said. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s research on suicide risk factors includes medical conditions such as psoriasis, as well as demographic factors with rates being higher in middle-aged white males.
Dr. Gelfand disclosed serving as an investigator and/or consultant for multiple companies including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Coherus, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Valeant.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
No matter what the disease, physician judgment of disease severity correlates poorly with the patient’s quality of life, Dr. Joel Gelfand said during a presentation at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar.
“Patients with similar objective findings have varying health-related quality of life,” said Dr. Gelfand, professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Dermatologists have several tools to measure quality of life and treatment, with varying levels of validation. For example, the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory measures symptoms including redness, itching, scaling, burning, stinging, cracking, flaking, and pain (J Dermatolog Treat. 2013 Oct;24[5]:356-60).
The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is commonly used in clinical trials of psoriasis therapeutics and is frequently used in clinical practice in Europe, Dr. Gelfand said. The DLQI asks about symptoms, feelings, daily activities, leisure time, work/school functioning, and relationships, as well as the treatment itself.
He and his associates used this tool in a study of psoriasis patients seen in routine clinical follow-up in dermatology practices across the United States. The study found that approximately 19% of those who were almost clear (compared with 2% of those who were clear) met DLQI criteria for a treatment change (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014 Oct;71[4]:633-41). European guidelines, he added, suggest that patients achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score between 50 and 75 and a DLQI greater than 5 should modify their treatment regimens (Arch Dermatol Res. 2011 Jan; 303[1]: 1-10).
Dr. Gelfand described his clinical approach to psoriasis and evaluating quality of life in patients, which involves a global assessment (conducted by a medical assistant) with both a physical and emotional component.
First, patients are asked to think about how severe their physical symptoms of psoriasis have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. Next, patients are asked to think about how severe their psoriasis-related emotional symptoms (such as embarrassment, frustration, depression) have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. The patient’s responses help direct treatment plans.
Another reason to attend to quality of life in psoriasis patients: suicide risk. Suicide risk in psoriasis patients has not been well studied, said Dr. Gelfand, whose PubMed search of “psoriasis and suicide” in September yielded only 48 hits. However, one study of 217 patients who completed the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression showed that almost 10% reported a wish to be dead, and almost 6% reported active thoughts of suicide (Int J Dermatol. 1993 Mar;32[3]:188-90).
Another large study that used data from the National Health Service in England included 119,304 patients with psoriasis and found a high risk for suicide attempts and/or suicide in these patients (J R Soc Med. 2014 Feb 13;107[5]:194-204). High risk also was noted for patients with eczema, diabetes, epilepsy, asthma, and inflammatory joint disease, he said. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s research on suicide risk factors includes medical conditions such as psoriasis, as well as demographic factors with rates being higher in middle-aged white males.
Dr. Gelfand disclosed serving as an investigator and/or consultant for multiple companies including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Coherus, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Valeant.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
No matter what the disease, physician judgment of disease severity correlates poorly with the patient’s quality of life, Dr. Joel Gelfand said during a presentation at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar.
“Patients with similar objective findings have varying health-related quality of life,” said Dr. Gelfand, professor of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Dermatologists have several tools to measure quality of life and treatment, with varying levels of validation. For example, the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory measures symptoms including redness, itching, scaling, burning, stinging, cracking, flaking, and pain (J Dermatolog Treat. 2013 Oct;24[5]:356-60).
The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) is commonly used in clinical trials of psoriasis therapeutics and is frequently used in clinical practice in Europe, Dr. Gelfand said. The DLQI asks about symptoms, feelings, daily activities, leisure time, work/school functioning, and relationships, as well as the treatment itself.
He and his associates used this tool in a study of psoriasis patients seen in routine clinical follow-up in dermatology practices across the United States. The study found that approximately 19% of those who were almost clear (compared with 2% of those who were clear) met DLQI criteria for a treatment change (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014 Oct;71[4]:633-41). European guidelines, he added, suggest that patients achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score between 50 and 75 and a DLQI greater than 5 should modify their treatment regimens (Arch Dermatol Res. 2011 Jan; 303[1]: 1-10).
Dr. Gelfand described his clinical approach to psoriasis and evaluating quality of life in patients, which involves a global assessment (conducted by a medical assistant) with both a physical and emotional component.
First, patients are asked to think about how severe their physical symptoms of psoriasis have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. Next, patients are asked to think about how severe their psoriasis-related emotional symptoms (such as embarrassment, frustration, depression) have been over the past week on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being no symptoms and 10 being the worst. The patient’s responses help direct treatment plans.
Another reason to attend to quality of life in psoriasis patients: suicide risk. Suicide risk in psoriasis patients has not been well studied, said Dr. Gelfand, whose PubMed search of “psoriasis and suicide” in September yielded only 48 hits. However, one study of 217 patients who completed the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression showed that almost 10% reported a wish to be dead, and almost 6% reported active thoughts of suicide (Int J Dermatol. 1993 Mar;32[3]:188-90).
Another large study that used data from the National Health Service in England included 119,304 patients with psoriasis and found a high risk for suicide attempts and/or suicide in these patients (J R Soc Med. 2014 Feb 13;107[5]:194-204). High risk also was noted for patients with eczema, diabetes, epilepsy, asthma, and inflammatory joint disease, he said. In addition, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s research on suicide risk factors includes medical conditions such as psoriasis, as well as demographic factors with rates being higher in middle-aged white males.
Dr. Gelfand disclosed serving as an investigator and/or consultant for multiple companies including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Coherus, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Valeant.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM SDEF LAS VEGAS DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
Biologic-naive psoriasis patients get biggest boost with treatment
LAS VEGAS – Biologic-naive psoriasis patients had stronger responses to treatment than those who were previously treated and switched from one biologic to another, according to a systematic review of 15 studies in adults with psoriasis.
In a real-world setting, patients who fail treatment with a tumor necrosis factor–alfa (TNF-alfa) inhibitor or ustekinumab may be switched from one treatment to another, Steven R. Feldman, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C., said in a poster presented at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar. “However, there is conflicting evidence of reduced effectiveness in later lines of treatment,” he added.
In four of the studies, biologic-naive patients showed significantly better responses when given anti-TNF agents than patients who had been treated with a biologic. Another study showed that the reduced effectiveness of adalimumab treatment was associated with the number of previous treatments with anti-TNFs (hazard ratio, 1.63). Another study found an association between previous treatment with etanercept and loss of response and serious adverse effects (HR, 4.32).
The other nine studies suggested some evidence of effectiveness for treatment with anti-TNFs or ustekinumab as later lines of treatment for psoriasis patients, but most of the studies (six of nine) did not include information on whether the results were statistically significant.
“More real-world evidence and future research in studies with large sample sizes are needed to further understand the role of anti-TNF and ustekinumab as later-line treatment in psoriasis management,” Dr. Feldman said.
He disclosed relationships with multiple companies, including study sponsor Novartis; one of the study coauthors is affiliated with Novartis. SDEF and this organization are owned by the same parent company.
LAS VEGAS – Biologic-naive psoriasis patients had stronger responses to treatment than those who were previously treated and switched from one biologic to another, according to a systematic review of 15 studies in adults with psoriasis.
In a real-world setting, patients who fail treatment with a tumor necrosis factor–alfa (TNF-alfa) inhibitor or ustekinumab may be switched from one treatment to another, Steven R. Feldman, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C., said in a poster presented at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar. “However, there is conflicting evidence of reduced effectiveness in later lines of treatment,” he added.
In four of the studies, biologic-naive patients showed significantly better responses when given anti-TNF agents than patients who had been treated with a biologic. Another study showed that the reduced effectiveness of adalimumab treatment was associated with the number of previous treatments with anti-TNFs (hazard ratio, 1.63). Another study found an association between previous treatment with etanercept and loss of response and serious adverse effects (HR, 4.32).
The other nine studies suggested some evidence of effectiveness for treatment with anti-TNFs or ustekinumab as later lines of treatment for psoriasis patients, but most of the studies (six of nine) did not include information on whether the results were statistically significant.
“More real-world evidence and future research in studies with large sample sizes are needed to further understand the role of anti-TNF and ustekinumab as later-line treatment in psoriasis management,” Dr. Feldman said.
He disclosed relationships with multiple companies, including study sponsor Novartis; one of the study coauthors is affiliated with Novartis. SDEF and this organization are owned by the same parent company.
LAS VEGAS – Biologic-naive psoriasis patients had stronger responses to treatment than those who were previously treated and switched from one biologic to another, according to a systematic review of 15 studies in adults with psoriasis.
In a real-world setting, patients who fail treatment with a tumor necrosis factor–alfa (TNF-alfa) inhibitor or ustekinumab may be switched from one treatment to another, Steven R. Feldman, MD, professor of dermatology at Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C., said in a poster presented at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s annual Las Vegas Dermatology Seminar. “However, there is conflicting evidence of reduced effectiveness in later lines of treatment,” he added.
In four of the studies, biologic-naive patients showed significantly better responses when given anti-TNF agents than patients who had been treated with a biologic. Another study showed that the reduced effectiveness of adalimumab treatment was associated with the number of previous treatments with anti-TNFs (hazard ratio, 1.63). Another study found an association between previous treatment with etanercept and loss of response and serious adverse effects (HR, 4.32).
The other nine studies suggested some evidence of effectiveness for treatment with anti-TNFs or ustekinumab as later lines of treatment for psoriasis patients, but most of the studies (six of nine) did not include information on whether the results were statistically significant.
“More real-world evidence and future research in studies with large sample sizes are needed to further understand the role of anti-TNF and ustekinumab as later-line treatment in psoriasis management,” Dr. Feldman said.
He disclosed relationships with multiple companies, including study sponsor Novartis; one of the study coauthors is affiliated with Novartis. SDEF and this organization are owned by the same parent company.
AT SDEF LAS VEGAS DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Biologic-naive psoriasis patients had stronger responses to treatment than those who were previously treated and switched from one biologic to another.
Data source: A systematic review of 15 observational studies of adults with psoriasis evaluating anti-TNF agents or ustekinumab as second-line or later-line treatments.
Disclosures: Dr. Feldman disclosed relationships with multiple companies, including study sponsor Novartis; one of the study coauthors is affiliated with Novartis.
Study offers reassuring data on certolizumab use in pregnancy
VIENNA – Data from a large prospective registry of pregnancy outcomes in women on certolizumab are reassuring to date, Alexa B. Kimball, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“This unique dataset of pregnancies exposed to a single agent suggests that exposure is really not a problem, although we’ll continue to collect prospective data and anticipate doing so in women with psoriasis going forward,” said Dr. Kimball, professor of dermatology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Certolizumab is a tumor necrosis factor–alpha inhibitor currently approved in the United States for the treatment of Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. It is now in clinical trials for psoriasis, and Dr. Kimball said she expects that it will eventually receive an indication for that disease as well. In the interim, she switches her psoriasis patients who are pregnant or plan to become so to either off-label certolizumab or etanercept (Enbrel). She does the same for her psoriatic arthritis patients, although in that situation certolizumab is on-label therapy.
The reason she turns to etanercept or certolizumab in pregnancy or anticipated pregnancy is that these two biologics, unlike others, don’t cross the placenta in the third trimester.
“I’m concerned about the selective uptake of other monoclonal antibodies in the third trimester. We do see in babies born to moms exposed to these other drugs – like ustekinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab – that the baby’s drug blood levels at birth are higher than the mom’s, so you have potentially put them at some risk for infections unnecessarily and maybe have affected how their immune system develops. So if a woman comes to me who is pregnant and on a biologic agent I would either stop treatment in the second trimester or switch to etanercept or certolizumab,” the dermatologist said.
Of the 256 pregnancies prospectively followed in the UCB certolizumab registry, 80.9% resulted in live births, and 10.2% ended in spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. In addition, the induced abortion rate was 8.6%, and there was a single stillbirth.
Of note, the mean age at pregnancy was 31 years, and 29% of the women became pregnant at age 35 or older. In contrast, the mean age at first pregnancy in the general population is 26, and only about 10% are 35 or older. These data are consistent with Dr. Kimball’s own clinical experience, which is that women with moderate to severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis often have trouble conceiving, and if they eventually succeed it’s often at a more advanced age.
The rate of maternal complications in this series was unremarkable: preeclampsia in 3.5%, infection in 3.9%, disease flare in 5.1%, and gestational diabetes in 3.1%. The median gestational age at birth was 39 weeks. The rate of early preterm birth before 32 weeks was 3.5%, with 12.6% of babies arriving at 32-36 weeks. Considering these are older moms being treated for serious underlying systemic inflammatory diseases, these numbers look good, according to Dr. Kimball.
Most women were exposed to certolizumab during the first trimester at least, and many were on the drug throughout pregnancy.
She said about one-third of psoriasis patients experience improvement in their skin diseases during pregnancy.
“If they’re doing really well, I see no reason to keep them on systemic therapy during pregnancy. But I will say that I see a lot of very bad postpartum flares, and I’m quite cautious about that. For the women with psoriatic arthritis there may not be a choice; you may need to continue to treat them all the way through their pregnancy to keep from getting permanent joint destruction,” the dermatologist said.
Dr. Kimball reported receiving research grants from and serving as a consultant to UCB and numerous other pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – Data from a large prospective registry of pregnancy outcomes in women on certolizumab are reassuring to date, Alexa B. Kimball, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“This unique dataset of pregnancies exposed to a single agent suggests that exposure is really not a problem, although we’ll continue to collect prospective data and anticipate doing so in women with psoriasis going forward,” said Dr. Kimball, professor of dermatology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Certolizumab is a tumor necrosis factor–alpha inhibitor currently approved in the United States for the treatment of Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. It is now in clinical trials for psoriasis, and Dr. Kimball said she expects that it will eventually receive an indication for that disease as well. In the interim, she switches her psoriasis patients who are pregnant or plan to become so to either off-label certolizumab or etanercept (Enbrel). She does the same for her psoriatic arthritis patients, although in that situation certolizumab is on-label therapy.
The reason she turns to etanercept or certolizumab in pregnancy or anticipated pregnancy is that these two biologics, unlike others, don’t cross the placenta in the third trimester.
“I’m concerned about the selective uptake of other monoclonal antibodies in the third trimester. We do see in babies born to moms exposed to these other drugs – like ustekinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab – that the baby’s drug blood levels at birth are higher than the mom’s, so you have potentially put them at some risk for infections unnecessarily and maybe have affected how their immune system develops. So if a woman comes to me who is pregnant and on a biologic agent I would either stop treatment in the second trimester or switch to etanercept or certolizumab,” the dermatologist said.
Of the 256 pregnancies prospectively followed in the UCB certolizumab registry, 80.9% resulted in live births, and 10.2% ended in spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. In addition, the induced abortion rate was 8.6%, and there was a single stillbirth.
Of note, the mean age at pregnancy was 31 years, and 29% of the women became pregnant at age 35 or older. In contrast, the mean age at first pregnancy in the general population is 26, and only about 10% are 35 or older. These data are consistent with Dr. Kimball’s own clinical experience, which is that women with moderate to severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis often have trouble conceiving, and if they eventually succeed it’s often at a more advanced age.
The rate of maternal complications in this series was unremarkable: preeclampsia in 3.5%, infection in 3.9%, disease flare in 5.1%, and gestational diabetes in 3.1%. The median gestational age at birth was 39 weeks. The rate of early preterm birth before 32 weeks was 3.5%, with 12.6% of babies arriving at 32-36 weeks. Considering these are older moms being treated for serious underlying systemic inflammatory diseases, these numbers look good, according to Dr. Kimball.
Most women were exposed to certolizumab during the first trimester at least, and many were on the drug throughout pregnancy.
She said about one-third of psoriasis patients experience improvement in their skin diseases during pregnancy.
“If they’re doing really well, I see no reason to keep them on systemic therapy during pregnancy. But I will say that I see a lot of very bad postpartum flares, and I’m quite cautious about that. For the women with psoriatic arthritis there may not be a choice; you may need to continue to treat them all the way through their pregnancy to keep from getting permanent joint destruction,” the dermatologist said.
Dr. Kimball reported receiving research grants from and serving as a consultant to UCB and numerous other pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – Data from a large prospective registry of pregnancy outcomes in women on certolizumab are reassuring to date, Alexa B. Kimball, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“This unique dataset of pregnancies exposed to a single agent suggests that exposure is really not a problem, although we’ll continue to collect prospective data and anticipate doing so in women with psoriasis going forward,” said Dr. Kimball, professor of dermatology at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
Certolizumab is a tumor necrosis factor–alpha inhibitor currently approved in the United States for the treatment of Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. It is now in clinical trials for psoriasis, and Dr. Kimball said she expects that it will eventually receive an indication for that disease as well. In the interim, she switches her psoriasis patients who are pregnant or plan to become so to either off-label certolizumab or etanercept (Enbrel). She does the same for her psoriatic arthritis patients, although in that situation certolizumab is on-label therapy.
The reason she turns to etanercept or certolizumab in pregnancy or anticipated pregnancy is that these two biologics, unlike others, don’t cross the placenta in the third trimester.
“I’m concerned about the selective uptake of other monoclonal antibodies in the third trimester. We do see in babies born to moms exposed to these other drugs – like ustekinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab – that the baby’s drug blood levels at birth are higher than the mom’s, so you have potentially put them at some risk for infections unnecessarily and maybe have affected how their immune system develops. So if a woman comes to me who is pregnant and on a biologic agent I would either stop treatment in the second trimester or switch to etanercept or certolizumab,” the dermatologist said.
Of the 256 pregnancies prospectively followed in the UCB certolizumab registry, 80.9% resulted in live births, and 10.2% ended in spontaneous abortion or miscarriage. In addition, the induced abortion rate was 8.6%, and there was a single stillbirth.
Of note, the mean age at pregnancy was 31 years, and 29% of the women became pregnant at age 35 or older. In contrast, the mean age at first pregnancy in the general population is 26, and only about 10% are 35 or older. These data are consistent with Dr. Kimball’s own clinical experience, which is that women with moderate to severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis often have trouble conceiving, and if they eventually succeed it’s often at a more advanced age.
The rate of maternal complications in this series was unremarkable: preeclampsia in 3.5%, infection in 3.9%, disease flare in 5.1%, and gestational diabetes in 3.1%. The median gestational age at birth was 39 weeks. The rate of early preterm birth before 32 weeks was 3.5%, with 12.6% of babies arriving at 32-36 weeks. Considering these are older moms being treated for serious underlying systemic inflammatory diseases, these numbers look good, according to Dr. Kimball.
Most women were exposed to certolizumab during the first trimester at least, and many were on the drug throughout pregnancy.
She said about one-third of psoriasis patients experience improvement in their skin diseases during pregnancy.
“If they’re doing really well, I see no reason to keep them on systemic therapy during pregnancy. But I will say that I see a lot of very bad postpartum flares, and I’m quite cautious about that. For the women with psoriatic arthritis there may not be a choice; you may need to continue to treat them all the way through their pregnancy to keep from getting permanent joint destruction,” the dermatologist said.
Dr. Kimball reported receiving research grants from and serving as a consultant to UCB and numerous other pharmaceutical companies.
AT THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The rate of major congenital malformations in a large prospective series of pregnancies in women on certolizumab was reassuringly low at 4.2%, with no pattern of malformations being seen.
Data source: This was a report on maternal and fetal outcomes of 256 prospectively followed pregnancies in women on certolizumab.
Disclosures: The presenter reported receiving research funds from and serving as a consultant to UCB, which markets certolizumab and maintains the pregnancy registry.
What good are biosimilars if patients won’t use them?
BOSTON – Biosimilar versions of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs have arrived in the United States, but even the best, most efficacious drugs are worthless if patients don’t want to take them.
“The science is important, the medicine is important, but at the end of the day, acceptance and use is what’s going to measure success,” said Seth D. Ginsberg, at a biosimilars symposium sponsored by Corrona, a business that provides registry data and consulting services to biopharmaceutical companies.
He illustrated the value of biologic agents with this anecdote: “When we got started long, long ago, we used to hold patient events,” he said “and we usually set up for 100. The instructions to meeting planners were right before the event that it was protocol to pull the front 25, the front-right quarter of chairs. Why? To make room for those who can’t walk, to make room for the wheelchairs,” he said.
“Today, if we have one wheelchair at an event, it’s an outlier, and I can’t think of a better way to summarize the impact that biologics have had on our lives,” he said.
Biosimilar confidence
His group has launched “Operation: Biosimilar Confidence” which is designed to educate patients and physicians about the clinical value and scientific underpinnings of biosimilars, as well as the thorough development, review, and regulatory processes involved.
The goal of the project is to instill confidence in patients by helping them to understand the manufacturer’s safety track record, reliability of the biosimilar supply chain, and the availability to them of support services, if they make the switch to a biosimilar.
“Generics don’t have equivalent patient-support programs, and the projection is theoretically that [biosimilar] manufacturers won’t either. We will not accept that. We are going to do everything we can for those patients, to advocate for the continuation of the support programs that we rely on as patients,” he said.
Patient concerns
Surveys of patient concerns about biosimilars have highlighted four key areas:
- What is the manufacturer’s overall safety record in both biologic agents and small-molecule therapies?
- Supply-chain logistic – Will the manufacturer commit to consistent production and supply?
- Will biosimilar manufacturers provide patient support at levels equal to those offered by innovator biologic makers, and what kind of support will be available – phone, websites, social media, copays, etc.?
- Payer ethics – Will payers offer lower copays, deductibles, or premiums, and are payers as concerned as patients about product safety, supply chain, and support?
The implementation strategy for the campaign will focus on speaking directly to patients through CreakyJoints.org, partner Global Healthy Living Foundation, patient and physician organizations, social and conventional media, advertising, and one-on-one encounters.
“We have to talk directly and indirectly to employers and employee-advocacy groups. We have to let these big self-insured employers understand what the perspective of the patient is and what life is like thanks to these medicine, and why biosimilars are a critical component to the success of living with these conditions,” he said.
Advocates also have to work with the media to create “a surround-sound message that reaches all audiences with additional frequency.”
“We cannot allow Wall Street Journal business analysts to dictate the conversations about biosimilars. Why? They’re looking at one thing, and only one thing, and they’re ignoring the patient perspective,” Ginsberg said.
Lastly, patient groups need to work closely with payers, physician groups, and manufacturers to ensure that biosimilars can be smoothly integrated into the healthcare system, he emphasized.
“I want to be crystal clear here: We can’t wait for biosimilars. Bring it on! We want them,” he said.
BOSTON – Biosimilar versions of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs have arrived in the United States, but even the best, most efficacious drugs are worthless if patients don’t want to take them.
“The science is important, the medicine is important, but at the end of the day, acceptance and use is what’s going to measure success,” said Seth D. Ginsberg, at a biosimilars symposium sponsored by Corrona, a business that provides registry data and consulting services to biopharmaceutical companies.
He illustrated the value of biologic agents with this anecdote: “When we got started long, long ago, we used to hold patient events,” he said “and we usually set up for 100. The instructions to meeting planners were right before the event that it was protocol to pull the front 25, the front-right quarter of chairs. Why? To make room for those who can’t walk, to make room for the wheelchairs,” he said.
“Today, if we have one wheelchair at an event, it’s an outlier, and I can’t think of a better way to summarize the impact that biologics have had on our lives,” he said.
Biosimilar confidence
His group has launched “Operation: Biosimilar Confidence” which is designed to educate patients and physicians about the clinical value and scientific underpinnings of biosimilars, as well as the thorough development, review, and regulatory processes involved.
The goal of the project is to instill confidence in patients by helping them to understand the manufacturer’s safety track record, reliability of the biosimilar supply chain, and the availability to them of support services, if they make the switch to a biosimilar.
“Generics don’t have equivalent patient-support programs, and the projection is theoretically that [biosimilar] manufacturers won’t either. We will not accept that. We are going to do everything we can for those patients, to advocate for the continuation of the support programs that we rely on as patients,” he said.
Patient concerns
Surveys of patient concerns about biosimilars have highlighted four key areas:
- What is the manufacturer’s overall safety record in both biologic agents and small-molecule therapies?
- Supply-chain logistic – Will the manufacturer commit to consistent production and supply?
- Will biosimilar manufacturers provide patient support at levels equal to those offered by innovator biologic makers, and what kind of support will be available – phone, websites, social media, copays, etc.?
- Payer ethics – Will payers offer lower copays, deductibles, or premiums, and are payers as concerned as patients about product safety, supply chain, and support?
The implementation strategy for the campaign will focus on speaking directly to patients through CreakyJoints.org, partner Global Healthy Living Foundation, patient and physician organizations, social and conventional media, advertising, and one-on-one encounters.
“We have to talk directly and indirectly to employers and employee-advocacy groups. We have to let these big self-insured employers understand what the perspective of the patient is and what life is like thanks to these medicine, and why biosimilars are a critical component to the success of living with these conditions,” he said.
Advocates also have to work with the media to create “a surround-sound message that reaches all audiences with additional frequency.”
“We cannot allow Wall Street Journal business analysts to dictate the conversations about biosimilars. Why? They’re looking at one thing, and only one thing, and they’re ignoring the patient perspective,” Ginsberg said.
Lastly, patient groups need to work closely with payers, physician groups, and manufacturers to ensure that biosimilars can be smoothly integrated into the healthcare system, he emphasized.
“I want to be crystal clear here: We can’t wait for biosimilars. Bring it on! We want them,” he said.
BOSTON – Biosimilar versions of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs have arrived in the United States, but even the best, most efficacious drugs are worthless if patients don’t want to take them.
“The science is important, the medicine is important, but at the end of the day, acceptance and use is what’s going to measure success,” said Seth D. Ginsberg, at a biosimilars symposium sponsored by Corrona, a business that provides registry data and consulting services to biopharmaceutical companies.
He illustrated the value of biologic agents with this anecdote: “When we got started long, long ago, we used to hold patient events,” he said “and we usually set up for 100. The instructions to meeting planners were right before the event that it was protocol to pull the front 25, the front-right quarter of chairs. Why? To make room for those who can’t walk, to make room for the wheelchairs,” he said.
“Today, if we have one wheelchair at an event, it’s an outlier, and I can’t think of a better way to summarize the impact that biologics have had on our lives,” he said.
Biosimilar confidence
His group has launched “Operation: Biosimilar Confidence” which is designed to educate patients and physicians about the clinical value and scientific underpinnings of biosimilars, as well as the thorough development, review, and regulatory processes involved.
The goal of the project is to instill confidence in patients by helping them to understand the manufacturer’s safety track record, reliability of the biosimilar supply chain, and the availability to them of support services, if they make the switch to a biosimilar.
“Generics don’t have equivalent patient-support programs, and the projection is theoretically that [biosimilar] manufacturers won’t either. We will not accept that. We are going to do everything we can for those patients, to advocate for the continuation of the support programs that we rely on as patients,” he said.
Patient concerns
Surveys of patient concerns about biosimilars have highlighted four key areas:
- What is the manufacturer’s overall safety record in both biologic agents and small-molecule therapies?
- Supply-chain logistic – Will the manufacturer commit to consistent production and supply?
- Will biosimilar manufacturers provide patient support at levels equal to those offered by innovator biologic makers, and what kind of support will be available – phone, websites, social media, copays, etc.?
- Payer ethics – Will payers offer lower copays, deductibles, or premiums, and are payers as concerned as patients about product safety, supply chain, and support?
The implementation strategy for the campaign will focus on speaking directly to patients through CreakyJoints.org, partner Global Healthy Living Foundation, patient and physician organizations, social and conventional media, advertising, and one-on-one encounters.
“We have to talk directly and indirectly to employers and employee-advocacy groups. We have to let these big self-insured employers understand what the perspective of the patient is and what life is like thanks to these medicine, and why biosimilars are a critical component to the success of living with these conditions,” he said.
Advocates also have to work with the media to create “a surround-sound message that reaches all audiences with additional frequency.”
“We cannot allow Wall Street Journal business analysts to dictate the conversations about biosimilars. Why? They’re looking at one thing, and only one thing, and they’re ignoring the patient perspective,” Ginsberg said.
Lastly, patient groups need to work closely with payers, physician groups, and manufacturers to ensure that biosimilars can be smoothly integrated into the healthcare system, he emphasized.
“I want to be crystal clear here: We can’t wait for biosimilars. Bring it on! We want them,” he said.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM A BIOSIMILARS IN RHEUMATOLOGY SYMPOSIUM
FDA: Etanercept first biologic approved for pediatric psoriasis
Etanercept has been received Food and Drug Administration approval for treating chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in children and adolescents, aged 4-17 years, making this the first biologic and first systemic treatment approved in the United States for pediatric psoriasis.
Etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor blocker marketed as Enbrel, was approved in 1998 for treating moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and has been approved for several other indications since then, including psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe psoriasis in adults, and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis in patients aged 2 years and older.
Etanercept has been received Food and Drug Administration approval for treating chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in children and adolescents, aged 4-17 years, making this the first biologic and first systemic treatment approved in the United States for pediatric psoriasis.
Etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor blocker marketed as Enbrel, was approved in 1998 for treating moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and has been approved for several other indications since then, including psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe psoriasis in adults, and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis in patients aged 2 years and older.
Etanercept has been received Food and Drug Administration approval for treating chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis in children and adolescents, aged 4-17 years, making this the first biologic and first systemic treatment approved in the United States for pediatric psoriasis.
Etanercept, a tumor necrosis factor blocker marketed as Enbrel, was approved in 1998 for treating moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis and has been approved for several other indications since then, including psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe psoriasis in adults, and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis in patients aged 2 years and older.
Close monitoring of psoriasis patients can delay PsA onset
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – A patient with psoriasis can develop crippling psoriatic arthritis (PsA) within 5 to 10 years of diagnosis, but monitoring patients for signs of trouble can help prevent the onset of PsA, according to Alan Menter, MD.
Even a simple foot examination can make a huge difference, noted Dr. Menter, chief of the division of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis Research Institute at Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. “At every visit, you and I should be looking for early signs of joint disease,” he said at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s Women’s & Pediatric Dermatology Seminar. “We should not let these patients develop any joint disease because we have drugs that can prevent joint destruction.”
Dr. Menter pointed out that PsA is a disease that is distinct from psoriasis. “It’s linked to psoriasis, but genetically, there are differences,” he said, “and immunologically, what goes on in skin is not identical.”
He provided the following pearls regarding diagnosing PsA:
• Be on the lookout for “sausage fingers” and “sausage toes,” both signs of PsA. “You and I are very visual people, and we can see a swollen toe or finger very easily,” Dr. Menter said. “I take the shoes off every psoriasis patient at every visit and run my thumb and index finger down the Achilles. I look for a swollen Achilles – classic enthesitis.” In some cases, swollen big toes in psoriasis patients may be misdiagnosed as gout instead of PsA, he noted.
• Ask patients about how their joints feel when they wake up in the morning: Do they have swelling and tenderness? “That’s an early marker of psoriatic arthritis disease,” Dr. Menter said. In contrast, in a patient with osteoarthritis, “the more they use their joints, the worse it gets.”
• The severity of psoriasis has nothing to do with the severity of PsA. “You can have 50% of the body covered with psoriasis but no arthritis,” he said. “Or you can have someone with one patch of psoriasis on the scalp with devastating joint disease.”
• Be aware that there are five PsA subtypes that can occur in combination with each other:
1. Dactylitis. This is the form that causes the “sausage digit.”
2. Asymmetric oligoarthritis. This is the type most commonly seen on presentation, when there are few joints affected.
3. Symmetric arthritis. This form is more common in females and difficult to differentiate from rheumatoid arthritis.
4. Distal interphalangeal joint arthritis. This type is often linked to dactylitis and nail dystrophy.
5. Arthritis mutilans. This is more common in females, linked to long disease duration, and present in an estimated 5% of cases.
Dr. Menter suggested that dermatologists refer suspected cases of PsA to a rheumatologist. Since patients may have to wait 6-10 weeks for an appointment, he recommended that dermatologists consider NSAIDs, such as the over-the-counter naproxen and prescription meloxicam and celecoxib in the meantime. Dermatologists may also consider bringing up the use of methotrexate and biologics, he said.
Dr. Menter disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by Frontline Medical Communications.
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – A patient with psoriasis can develop crippling psoriatic arthritis (PsA) within 5 to 10 years of diagnosis, but monitoring patients for signs of trouble can help prevent the onset of PsA, according to Alan Menter, MD.
Even a simple foot examination can make a huge difference, noted Dr. Menter, chief of the division of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis Research Institute at Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. “At every visit, you and I should be looking for early signs of joint disease,” he said at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s Women’s & Pediatric Dermatology Seminar. “We should not let these patients develop any joint disease because we have drugs that can prevent joint destruction.”
Dr. Menter pointed out that PsA is a disease that is distinct from psoriasis. “It’s linked to psoriasis, but genetically, there are differences,” he said, “and immunologically, what goes on in skin is not identical.”
He provided the following pearls regarding diagnosing PsA:
• Be on the lookout for “sausage fingers” and “sausage toes,” both signs of PsA. “You and I are very visual people, and we can see a swollen toe or finger very easily,” Dr. Menter said. “I take the shoes off every psoriasis patient at every visit and run my thumb and index finger down the Achilles. I look for a swollen Achilles – classic enthesitis.” In some cases, swollen big toes in psoriasis patients may be misdiagnosed as gout instead of PsA, he noted.
• Ask patients about how their joints feel when they wake up in the morning: Do they have swelling and tenderness? “That’s an early marker of psoriatic arthritis disease,” Dr. Menter said. In contrast, in a patient with osteoarthritis, “the more they use their joints, the worse it gets.”
• The severity of psoriasis has nothing to do with the severity of PsA. “You can have 50% of the body covered with psoriasis but no arthritis,” he said. “Or you can have someone with one patch of psoriasis on the scalp with devastating joint disease.”
• Be aware that there are five PsA subtypes that can occur in combination with each other:
1. Dactylitis. This is the form that causes the “sausage digit.”
2. Asymmetric oligoarthritis. This is the type most commonly seen on presentation, when there are few joints affected.
3. Symmetric arthritis. This form is more common in females and difficult to differentiate from rheumatoid arthritis.
4. Distal interphalangeal joint arthritis. This type is often linked to dactylitis and nail dystrophy.
5. Arthritis mutilans. This is more common in females, linked to long disease duration, and present in an estimated 5% of cases.
Dr. Menter suggested that dermatologists refer suspected cases of PsA to a rheumatologist. Since patients may have to wait 6-10 weeks for an appointment, he recommended that dermatologists consider NSAIDs, such as the over-the-counter naproxen and prescription meloxicam and celecoxib in the meantime. Dermatologists may also consider bringing up the use of methotrexate and biologics, he said.
Dr. Menter disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by Frontline Medical Communications.
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – A patient with psoriasis can develop crippling psoriatic arthritis (PsA) within 5 to 10 years of diagnosis, but monitoring patients for signs of trouble can help prevent the onset of PsA, according to Alan Menter, MD.
Even a simple foot examination can make a huge difference, noted Dr. Menter, chief of the division of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis Research Institute at Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas. “At every visit, you and I should be looking for early signs of joint disease,” he said at the Skin Disease Education Foundation’s Women’s & Pediatric Dermatology Seminar. “We should not let these patients develop any joint disease because we have drugs that can prevent joint destruction.”
Dr. Menter pointed out that PsA is a disease that is distinct from psoriasis. “It’s linked to psoriasis, but genetically, there are differences,” he said, “and immunologically, what goes on in skin is not identical.”
He provided the following pearls regarding diagnosing PsA:
• Be on the lookout for “sausage fingers” and “sausage toes,” both signs of PsA. “You and I are very visual people, and we can see a swollen toe or finger very easily,” Dr. Menter said. “I take the shoes off every psoriasis patient at every visit and run my thumb and index finger down the Achilles. I look for a swollen Achilles – classic enthesitis.” In some cases, swollen big toes in psoriasis patients may be misdiagnosed as gout instead of PsA, he noted.
• Ask patients about how their joints feel when they wake up in the morning: Do they have swelling and tenderness? “That’s an early marker of psoriatic arthritis disease,” Dr. Menter said. In contrast, in a patient with osteoarthritis, “the more they use their joints, the worse it gets.”
• The severity of psoriasis has nothing to do with the severity of PsA. “You can have 50% of the body covered with psoriasis but no arthritis,” he said. “Or you can have someone with one patch of psoriasis on the scalp with devastating joint disease.”
• Be aware that there are five PsA subtypes that can occur in combination with each other:
1. Dactylitis. This is the form that causes the “sausage digit.”
2. Asymmetric oligoarthritis. This is the type most commonly seen on presentation, when there are few joints affected.
3. Symmetric arthritis. This form is more common in females and difficult to differentiate from rheumatoid arthritis.
4. Distal interphalangeal joint arthritis. This type is often linked to dactylitis and nail dystrophy.
5. Arthritis mutilans. This is more common in females, linked to long disease duration, and present in an estimated 5% of cases.
Dr. Menter suggested that dermatologists refer suspected cases of PsA to a rheumatologist. Since patients may have to wait 6-10 weeks for an appointment, he recommended that dermatologists consider NSAIDs, such as the over-the-counter naproxen and prescription meloxicam and celecoxib in the meantime. Dermatologists may also consider bringing up the use of methotrexate and biologics, he said.
Dr. Menter disclosed relationships with multiple pharmaceutical companies, including AbbVie, Allergan, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer.
SDEF and this news organization are owned by Frontline Medical Communications.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM SDEF WOMEN'S & PEDIATRIC DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR
PsA bone loss measurement: A surrogate for radiographic progression?
An advanced computer assisted digital x-ray radiogrammetry technique that measures bone thickness has the potential to be a surrogate marker of radiographic progression in psoriatic arthritis, according to a report in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
The method uses software called BoneXpert to sensitively differentiate between the different stages of disease manifestation affecting bone integrity. Digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) with BoneXpert has a clinical advantage over standard techniques such as radiographs through its ability to be integrated into a picture archiving and communication system that allows direct image analysis and quantification of bone loss, according to the study authors, led by Alexander Pfeil, MD, of Jena (Germany) University Hospital – Friedrich Schiller University.
The researchers used the computer-assisted diagnosis software to measure the metacarpal index (MCI) and its cortical thickness score (MCI T-score) in the metacarpal bones of 104 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who fulfilled the CASPAR criteria. All patients were treated either with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:248. doi: 10.1186/s13075-016-1145-4).
In the total PsA cohort, the MCI T-score showed a significantly reduced negative value of –1.289. “The reduced MCI T-score was clearly associated with a reduced bone mineral density of the metacarpal bones in PsA,” the investigators wrote.
For all scores, the researchers found a severity-dependent reduction for the BoneXpert parameters of MCI, MCI T-score, T, and Bone Health Index.
The strongest reductions were seen for MCI and T using the Proliferation Score (MCI: –28.3%; T: –31.9%) and the Destruction Score (MCI: –30.8%; T: –30.9%) of the Psoriatic Arthritis Ratingen Score.
A reduced MCI and T-score was directly associated with cortical thinning and the periarticular demineralization of the metacarpal bones, and highlighted a direct association with bone destruction and bone proliferation in PsA, the investigators said.
“The measurement of periarticular bone loss can be considered a complementary approach to verify PsA-related bony changes and a surrogate marker for PsA progression,” the researchers suggested.
The technique’s high reproducibility can also be used to optimize an appropriate individual therapeutic strategy, they added.
The study had no specific funding source, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.
An advanced computer assisted digital x-ray radiogrammetry technique that measures bone thickness has the potential to be a surrogate marker of radiographic progression in psoriatic arthritis, according to a report in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
The method uses software called BoneXpert to sensitively differentiate between the different stages of disease manifestation affecting bone integrity. Digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) with BoneXpert has a clinical advantage over standard techniques such as radiographs through its ability to be integrated into a picture archiving and communication system that allows direct image analysis and quantification of bone loss, according to the study authors, led by Alexander Pfeil, MD, of Jena (Germany) University Hospital – Friedrich Schiller University.
The researchers used the computer-assisted diagnosis software to measure the metacarpal index (MCI) and its cortical thickness score (MCI T-score) in the metacarpal bones of 104 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who fulfilled the CASPAR criteria. All patients were treated either with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:248. doi: 10.1186/s13075-016-1145-4).
In the total PsA cohort, the MCI T-score showed a significantly reduced negative value of –1.289. “The reduced MCI T-score was clearly associated with a reduced bone mineral density of the metacarpal bones in PsA,” the investigators wrote.
For all scores, the researchers found a severity-dependent reduction for the BoneXpert parameters of MCI, MCI T-score, T, and Bone Health Index.
The strongest reductions were seen for MCI and T using the Proliferation Score (MCI: –28.3%; T: –31.9%) and the Destruction Score (MCI: –30.8%; T: –30.9%) of the Psoriatic Arthritis Ratingen Score.
A reduced MCI and T-score was directly associated with cortical thinning and the periarticular demineralization of the metacarpal bones, and highlighted a direct association with bone destruction and bone proliferation in PsA, the investigators said.
“The measurement of periarticular bone loss can be considered a complementary approach to verify PsA-related bony changes and a surrogate marker for PsA progression,” the researchers suggested.
The technique’s high reproducibility can also be used to optimize an appropriate individual therapeutic strategy, they added.
The study had no specific funding source, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.
An advanced computer assisted digital x-ray radiogrammetry technique that measures bone thickness has the potential to be a surrogate marker of radiographic progression in psoriatic arthritis, according to a report in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
The method uses software called BoneXpert to sensitively differentiate between the different stages of disease manifestation affecting bone integrity. Digital x-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) with BoneXpert has a clinical advantage over standard techniques such as radiographs through its ability to be integrated into a picture archiving and communication system that allows direct image analysis and quantification of bone loss, according to the study authors, led by Alexander Pfeil, MD, of Jena (Germany) University Hospital – Friedrich Schiller University.
The researchers used the computer-assisted diagnosis software to measure the metacarpal index (MCI) and its cortical thickness score (MCI T-score) in the metacarpal bones of 104 psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who fulfilled the CASPAR criteria. All patients were treated either with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:248. doi: 10.1186/s13075-016-1145-4).
In the total PsA cohort, the MCI T-score showed a significantly reduced negative value of –1.289. “The reduced MCI T-score was clearly associated with a reduced bone mineral density of the metacarpal bones in PsA,” the investigators wrote.
For all scores, the researchers found a severity-dependent reduction for the BoneXpert parameters of MCI, MCI T-score, T, and Bone Health Index.
The strongest reductions were seen for MCI and T using the Proliferation Score (MCI: –28.3%; T: –31.9%) and the Destruction Score (MCI: –30.8%; T: –30.9%) of the Psoriatic Arthritis Ratingen Score.
A reduced MCI and T-score was directly associated with cortical thinning and the periarticular demineralization of the metacarpal bones, and highlighted a direct association with bone destruction and bone proliferation in PsA, the investigators said.
“The measurement of periarticular bone loss can be considered a complementary approach to verify PsA-related bony changes and a surrogate marker for PsA progression,” the researchers suggested.
The technique’s high reproducibility can also be used to optimize an appropriate individual therapeutic strategy, they added.
The study had no specific funding source, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.
FROM ARTHRITIS RESEARCH & THERAPY
Key clinical point:
Main finding: In the total PsA cohort, the MCI T-score showed a significantly reduced negative value of –1.289.
Data source: A cohort of 104 PsA patients fulfilling the CASPAR criteria who were taking nonsteroidal inflammatory drugs or disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
Disclosures: The study had no specific funding source, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Erratum
Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:
Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.
The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.
Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:
Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.
The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.
Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:
Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.
The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.
Tildrakizumab for psoriasis scores high marks in phase III
VIENNA – The investigational interleukin-23 p-19 subunit inhibitor tildrakizumab achieved PASI 90 improvement rates approaching 60% in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis at week 28 of the pivotal phase III reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 trials, Kristian Reich, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Moreover, the PASI 100 rate at week 28 in the two clinical trials was 24% with tildrakizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, at the 100-mg dose and 30% at 200 mg.
It was at these highest efficacy thresholds that the p-19 inhibitor really separated itself from etanercept (Enbrel) in reSURFACE 2, where the two biologics went head-to-head in randomized fashion. Patients on etanercept had a PASI 90 rate at week 28 of 31%, roughly only half that of tildrakizumab at the higher dose.
Guselkumab was the other IL-23 p-19 inhibitor that was a featured attraction at the EADV congress, with 48-week outcomes presented from the 837-patient, pivotal phase III VOYAGE 1 trial. Although caution is always warranted in comparing results across clinical trials because of differences in study populations, guselkumab achieved better top-end efficacy numbers than did tildrakizumab: a PASI 90 of 73.3% at 16 weeks and 80.2% at 24 weeks, along with PASI 100 responses of 34.4% at 16 weeks and 44.4% at 24 weeks.
“I believe there will be characteristics of the new drugs beyond efficacy that will come into play when making treatment decisions: Is dosing every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks? What is the price? What is the outcome after 1 year? I think it’s too early to close the book in trying to understand what these different drugs do, but these phase III results do give us the insight that IL-23 p-19 is actually the sweet spot in psoriasis. By targeting it we are able to keep the disease under control with drugs that are very convenient to use,” Dr. Reich said.
He added that his psoriasis patients really appreciate the convenience of quarterly as opposed to more frequent dosing of biologics, and he does, too.
reSURFACE 1 is a 64-week, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States, Canada, and Europe in which 772 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg or to placebo. reSURFACE 2 is a 64-week trial in which 1,090 patients were randomized 2:2:1:2 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg, placebo, or etanercept at 50 mg twice weekly for the first 12 weeks and once weekly thereafter. At week 12 in both trials, patients on placebo were rerandomized to tildrakizumab at 100 or 200 mg for the duration. Participants averaged a baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity index score of 20, a body weight of 88 kg, and disease involvement over 31% of their body surface area.
Tildrakizumab was dosed in a regimen that’s the same as for ustekinumab (Stelara), which inhibits IL-12 as well as IL-23: one subcutaneous injection at baseline, another 1 month later, and every 12 weeks thereafter.
Dr. Reich presented results of the two pivotal trials through week 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints in both studies were the PASI 75 response and proportion of subjects with a Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or minimal disease, compared with placebo at week 12. In hindsight, he said, those were not the best endpoints to have employed.
“We have here a drug that takes a little while to get to full throttle. The primary endpoint selected here at week 12 does not show efficacy data that really separates tildrakizumab from a drug like Stelara. But at week 28 you move toward levels of PASI 90 and PASI 100 response that we really want to see,” the dermatologist said.
Combining the results of reSURFACE 1 and 2, the PASI 75 response rate at week 12 – after only two doses – was 63% in the 100-mg arm and 64% at 200 mg. But the rates kept climbing thereafter such that by week 28 the PASI 75 rates were 77% and 78%.
Fifty-seven percent of patients on tildrakizumab at 100 mg had a PGA score of 0 or 1 at week 12, as did 6% of placebo-treated controls. By week 28, 66% of patients on the lower dose of the p-19 inhibitor had a PGA of 0 or 1. Rates in patients on tildrakizumab at 200 mg were 57% and 66% at 12 and 28 weeks, respectively.
Rates of adverse events of special interest in new biologic agents, including severe infections, malignancies, and major cardiovascular events, were similarly low across all study arms.
“My feeling is that looking at week 12 and week 28 safety data is of limited value. All I can say here is that through week 28 in these two studies I don’t see a safety signal. But for me, the real insight will have to come from larger studies with longer follow-up,” Dr. Reich said.
Asked why he thinks tildrakizumab is a slow starter, with only middling efficacy at the 12-week mark before subsequently picking up steam, he said it’s probably not a matter of the wrong doses being selected for reSURFACE 1 and 2, since the outcomes with 100 and 200 mg are fairly similar. More likely, the monoclonal antibody takes a bit longer to bind to its target and neutralize it than do some of the other biologics.
“It could be that if you dosed tildrakizumab at weeks 0, 2, and 8 as induction therapy you’d hit the mark at 12 weeks,” he added.
The reSURFACE trials are funded by Sun Pharma and Merck. Dr. Reich reported having received research grants from and serving as a consultant to Merck and numerous other pharmaceutical companies interested in new treatments for inflammatory skin diseases.
VIENNA – The investigational interleukin-23 p-19 subunit inhibitor tildrakizumab achieved PASI 90 improvement rates approaching 60% in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis at week 28 of the pivotal phase III reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 trials, Kristian Reich, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Moreover, the PASI 100 rate at week 28 in the two clinical trials was 24% with tildrakizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, at the 100-mg dose and 30% at 200 mg.
It was at these highest efficacy thresholds that the p-19 inhibitor really separated itself from etanercept (Enbrel) in reSURFACE 2, where the two biologics went head-to-head in randomized fashion. Patients on etanercept had a PASI 90 rate at week 28 of 31%, roughly only half that of tildrakizumab at the higher dose.
Guselkumab was the other IL-23 p-19 inhibitor that was a featured attraction at the EADV congress, with 48-week outcomes presented from the 837-patient, pivotal phase III VOYAGE 1 trial. Although caution is always warranted in comparing results across clinical trials because of differences in study populations, guselkumab achieved better top-end efficacy numbers than did tildrakizumab: a PASI 90 of 73.3% at 16 weeks and 80.2% at 24 weeks, along with PASI 100 responses of 34.4% at 16 weeks and 44.4% at 24 weeks.
“I believe there will be characteristics of the new drugs beyond efficacy that will come into play when making treatment decisions: Is dosing every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks? What is the price? What is the outcome after 1 year? I think it’s too early to close the book in trying to understand what these different drugs do, but these phase III results do give us the insight that IL-23 p-19 is actually the sweet spot in psoriasis. By targeting it we are able to keep the disease under control with drugs that are very convenient to use,” Dr. Reich said.
He added that his psoriasis patients really appreciate the convenience of quarterly as opposed to more frequent dosing of biologics, and he does, too.
reSURFACE 1 is a 64-week, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States, Canada, and Europe in which 772 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg or to placebo. reSURFACE 2 is a 64-week trial in which 1,090 patients were randomized 2:2:1:2 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg, placebo, or etanercept at 50 mg twice weekly for the first 12 weeks and once weekly thereafter. At week 12 in both trials, patients on placebo were rerandomized to tildrakizumab at 100 or 200 mg for the duration. Participants averaged a baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity index score of 20, a body weight of 88 kg, and disease involvement over 31% of their body surface area.
Tildrakizumab was dosed in a regimen that’s the same as for ustekinumab (Stelara), which inhibits IL-12 as well as IL-23: one subcutaneous injection at baseline, another 1 month later, and every 12 weeks thereafter.
Dr. Reich presented results of the two pivotal trials through week 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints in both studies were the PASI 75 response and proportion of subjects with a Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or minimal disease, compared with placebo at week 12. In hindsight, he said, those were not the best endpoints to have employed.
“We have here a drug that takes a little while to get to full throttle. The primary endpoint selected here at week 12 does not show efficacy data that really separates tildrakizumab from a drug like Stelara. But at week 28 you move toward levels of PASI 90 and PASI 100 response that we really want to see,” the dermatologist said.
Combining the results of reSURFACE 1 and 2, the PASI 75 response rate at week 12 – after only two doses – was 63% in the 100-mg arm and 64% at 200 mg. But the rates kept climbing thereafter such that by week 28 the PASI 75 rates were 77% and 78%.
Fifty-seven percent of patients on tildrakizumab at 100 mg had a PGA score of 0 or 1 at week 12, as did 6% of placebo-treated controls. By week 28, 66% of patients on the lower dose of the p-19 inhibitor had a PGA of 0 or 1. Rates in patients on tildrakizumab at 200 mg were 57% and 66% at 12 and 28 weeks, respectively.
Rates of adverse events of special interest in new biologic agents, including severe infections, malignancies, and major cardiovascular events, were similarly low across all study arms.
“My feeling is that looking at week 12 and week 28 safety data is of limited value. All I can say here is that through week 28 in these two studies I don’t see a safety signal. But for me, the real insight will have to come from larger studies with longer follow-up,” Dr. Reich said.
Asked why he thinks tildrakizumab is a slow starter, with only middling efficacy at the 12-week mark before subsequently picking up steam, he said it’s probably not a matter of the wrong doses being selected for reSURFACE 1 and 2, since the outcomes with 100 and 200 mg are fairly similar. More likely, the monoclonal antibody takes a bit longer to bind to its target and neutralize it than do some of the other biologics.
“It could be that if you dosed tildrakizumab at weeks 0, 2, and 8 as induction therapy you’d hit the mark at 12 weeks,” he added.
The reSURFACE trials are funded by Sun Pharma and Merck. Dr. Reich reported having received research grants from and serving as a consultant to Merck and numerous other pharmaceutical companies interested in new treatments for inflammatory skin diseases.
VIENNA – The investigational interleukin-23 p-19 subunit inhibitor tildrakizumab achieved PASI 90 improvement rates approaching 60% in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis at week 28 of the pivotal phase III reSURFACE 1 and reSURFACE 2 trials, Kristian Reich, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Moreover, the PASI 100 rate at week 28 in the two clinical trials was 24% with tildrakizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, at the 100-mg dose and 30% at 200 mg.
It was at these highest efficacy thresholds that the p-19 inhibitor really separated itself from etanercept (Enbrel) in reSURFACE 2, where the two biologics went head-to-head in randomized fashion. Patients on etanercept had a PASI 90 rate at week 28 of 31%, roughly only half that of tildrakizumab at the higher dose.
Guselkumab was the other IL-23 p-19 inhibitor that was a featured attraction at the EADV congress, with 48-week outcomes presented from the 837-patient, pivotal phase III VOYAGE 1 trial. Although caution is always warranted in comparing results across clinical trials because of differences in study populations, guselkumab achieved better top-end efficacy numbers than did tildrakizumab: a PASI 90 of 73.3% at 16 weeks and 80.2% at 24 weeks, along with PASI 100 responses of 34.4% at 16 weeks and 44.4% at 24 weeks.
“I believe there will be characteristics of the new drugs beyond efficacy that will come into play when making treatment decisions: Is dosing every 8 weeks or every 12 weeks? What is the price? What is the outcome after 1 year? I think it’s too early to close the book in trying to understand what these different drugs do, but these phase III results do give us the insight that IL-23 p-19 is actually the sweet spot in psoriasis. By targeting it we are able to keep the disease under control with drugs that are very convenient to use,” Dr. Reich said.
He added that his psoriasis patients really appreciate the convenience of quarterly as opposed to more frequent dosing of biologics, and he does, too.
reSURFACE 1 is a 64-week, randomized, phase III trial conducted in the United States, Canada, and Europe in which 772 patients were randomized 2:2:1 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg or to placebo. reSURFACE 2 is a 64-week trial in which 1,090 patients were randomized 2:2:1:2 to tildrakizumab at 100 mg or 200 mg, placebo, or etanercept at 50 mg twice weekly for the first 12 weeks and once weekly thereafter. At week 12 in both trials, patients on placebo were rerandomized to tildrakizumab at 100 or 200 mg for the duration. Participants averaged a baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity index score of 20, a body weight of 88 kg, and disease involvement over 31% of their body surface area.
Tildrakizumab was dosed in a regimen that’s the same as for ustekinumab (Stelara), which inhibits IL-12 as well as IL-23: one subcutaneous injection at baseline, another 1 month later, and every 12 weeks thereafter.
Dr. Reich presented results of the two pivotal trials through week 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints in both studies were the PASI 75 response and proportion of subjects with a Physician’s Global Assessment (PGA) score of 0 or 1, meaning clear or minimal disease, compared with placebo at week 12. In hindsight, he said, those were not the best endpoints to have employed.
“We have here a drug that takes a little while to get to full throttle. The primary endpoint selected here at week 12 does not show efficacy data that really separates tildrakizumab from a drug like Stelara. But at week 28 you move toward levels of PASI 90 and PASI 100 response that we really want to see,” the dermatologist said.
Combining the results of reSURFACE 1 and 2, the PASI 75 response rate at week 12 – after only two doses – was 63% in the 100-mg arm and 64% at 200 mg. But the rates kept climbing thereafter such that by week 28 the PASI 75 rates were 77% and 78%.
Fifty-seven percent of patients on tildrakizumab at 100 mg had a PGA score of 0 or 1 at week 12, as did 6% of placebo-treated controls. By week 28, 66% of patients on the lower dose of the p-19 inhibitor had a PGA of 0 or 1. Rates in patients on tildrakizumab at 200 mg were 57% and 66% at 12 and 28 weeks, respectively.
Rates of adverse events of special interest in new biologic agents, including severe infections, malignancies, and major cardiovascular events, were similarly low across all study arms.
“My feeling is that looking at week 12 and week 28 safety data is of limited value. All I can say here is that through week 28 in these two studies I don’t see a safety signal. But for me, the real insight will have to come from larger studies with longer follow-up,” Dr. Reich said.
Asked why he thinks tildrakizumab is a slow starter, with only middling efficacy at the 12-week mark before subsequently picking up steam, he said it’s probably not a matter of the wrong doses being selected for reSURFACE 1 and 2, since the outcomes with 100 and 200 mg are fairly similar. More likely, the monoclonal antibody takes a bit longer to bind to its target and neutralize it than do some of the other biologics.
“It could be that if you dosed tildrakizumab at weeks 0, 2, and 8 as induction therapy you’d hit the mark at 12 weeks,” he added.
The reSURFACE trials are funded by Sun Pharma and Merck. Dr. Reich reported having received research grants from and serving as a consultant to Merck and numerous other pharmaceutical companies interested in new treatments for inflammatory skin diseases.
AT THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Tildrakizumab dosed quarterly at 100 or 200 mg achieved PASI 75 response rates of 63%-64% at week 12 and 77%-78% at week 28.
Data source: reSURFACE 1 and 2: two pivotal, phase III, randomized clinical trials comprising 1,862 patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.
Disclosures: The reSURFACE trials are funded by Sun Pharma and Merck. The presenter reported having received research grants from and serving as a consultant to Merck and numerous other pharmaceutical companies developing treatments for inflammatory skin diseases.
Secukinumab for psoriasis at 4 years: undiminished efficacy and safety
VIENNA – Four-year follow-up of patients on secukinumab for psoriasis shows sustained very high efficacy, with almost 100% of patients who had a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 or 100 response at 1 year maintaining it through 4 years, Robert Bissonnette, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“I must warn you that my presentation will be very boring as compared to what I’ve seen earlier at this meeting, the very cutting edge phase II and phase III data being presented. My presentation doesn’t contain any surprises. However, as a clinician who is using interleukin-17A inhibition in my practice to treat psoriasis patients, that’s probably what I want,” said Dr. Bissonnette, president of Innovaderm Research in Montreal.
“This is the longest-term safety and efficacy data available to date for patients treated with an IL-17 antagonist using an approved dose,” he noted.
Dr. Bissonnette presented 4-year results in the 165 participants who took the approved regimen from the start of the study. These were patients at the serious end of the disease severity spectrum. Their mean baseline PASI score was 23.5, with 33% of their body surface area being affected. Their mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score was 13.1. The mean body mass index was 28.7 kg/m2. A total of 71% of subjects had previously been on systemic therapy. One-third of participants had been on other biologics.
At 1 year, 88.9% of subjects had a PASI 75 response; at 4 years, the PASI 75 rate was 88.5%. Similarly, the PASI 90 rate was 68.5% at 1 year and 66.4% after 4 years. The PASI 100 rate was 43.8% at 1 year and 43.5% at year 4.
After 1 year on secukinumab, patients showed a mean 91.1% improvement, compared with their baseline PASI score. At 4 years, the figure was 90.8%.
Bearing in mind that the average baseline DLQI score at baseline was 13.1, it’s noteworthy that after 1 year on secukinumab, 72.7% of patients had a DLQI of 0 or 1, indicating psoriasis had no impact on their life. At year 4, the rate was 70.8%, Dr. Bissonnette continued.
As an audience member observed, however, the study population decreased from 165 patients to 131 over the course of 4 years. And since this was an “as observed” analysis, outcomes were counted only in those patients still in the study. It’s accepted as a legitimate statistical method, but it casts outcomes in a particularly favorable light.
“The main reason for dropouts was for personal reasons,” Dr. Bissonnette explained in response. “Number two was lack of or loss of efficacy. Loss of efficacy over time occurred at an absolute rate of 4%-8% per year.”
Overall, adverse event rates declined over the course of 4 years of follow-up.
“This is reassuring, but I don’t think it’s evidence that adverse events actually decrease over time because of longer use of secukinumab. I think it’s probably due to something we usually see in long-term clinical trials: a phenomenon of underreporting. When patients are treated with a new agent they tend to be very, very conscientious about what’s going on with their well-being. They will report a slight sore throat, a slight congestion. But once they’ve been on treatment for a longer time they’re less likely to report those very minor adverse events,” according to the dermatologist.
The Food and Drug Administration requires clinical trialists to keep careful track of selected adverse events in studies of biologic agents. In 4 years on secukinumab, there were no cases of tuberculosis, neutropenia, major adverse cardiovascular events, or Crohn’s disease. There were two cases of ulcerative colitis in year 2; however, one involved an exacerbation of preexisting disease. Also, two patients developed cancer other than nonmelanoma skin cancer in year 2. The incidence of vulvovaginal candidiasis was 1.8% during years 1 and 2, 0.6% in year 3, and zero in year 4.
Thus, the safety profile was favorable, with no pattern of increasing adverse events with longer medication use, Dr. Bissonnette concluded.
The study was sponsored by Novartis. Dr. Bissonnette reported serving as an investigator for and consultant to Novartis and 16 other pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – Four-year follow-up of patients on secukinumab for psoriasis shows sustained very high efficacy, with almost 100% of patients who had a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 or 100 response at 1 year maintaining it through 4 years, Robert Bissonnette, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“I must warn you that my presentation will be very boring as compared to what I’ve seen earlier at this meeting, the very cutting edge phase II and phase III data being presented. My presentation doesn’t contain any surprises. However, as a clinician who is using interleukin-17A inhibition in my practice to treat psoriasis patients, that’s probably what I want,” said Dr. Bissonnette, president of Innovaderm Research in Montreal.
“This is the longest-term safety and efficacy data available to date for patients treated with an IL-17 antagonist using an approved dose,” he noted.
Dr. Bissonnette presented 4-year results in the 165 participants who took the approved regimen from the start of the study. These were patients at the serious end of the disease severity spectrum. Their mean baseline PASI score was 23.5, with 33% of their body surface area being affected. Their mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score was 13.1. The mean body mass index was 28.7 kg/m2. A total of 71% of subjects had previously been on systemic therapy. One-third of participants had been on other biologics.
At 1 year, 88.9% of subjects had a PASI 75 response; at 4 years, the PASI 75 rate was 88.5%. Similarly, the PASI 90 rate was 68.5% at 1 year and 66.4% after 4 years. The PASI 100 rate was 43.8% at 1 year and 43.5% at year 4.
After 1 year on secukinumab, patients showed a mean 91.1% improvement, compared with their baseline PASI score. At 4 years, the figure was 90.8%.
Bearing in mind that the average baseline DLQI score at baseline was 13.1, it’s noteworthy that after 1 year on secukinumab, 72.7% of patients had a DLQI of 0 or 1, indicating psoriasis had no impact on their life. At year 4, the rate was 70.8%, Dr. Bissonnette continued.
As an audience member observed, however, the study population decreased from 165 patients to 131 over the course of 4 years. And since this was an “as observed” analysis, outcomes were counted only in those patients still in the study. It’s accepted as a legitimate statistical method, but it casts outcomes in a particularly favorable light.
“The main reason for dropouts was for personal reasons,” Dr. Bissonnette explained in response. “Number two was lack of or loss of efficacy. Loss of efficacy over time occurred at an absolute rate of 4%-8% per year.”
Overall, adverse event rates declined over the course of 4 years of follow-up.
“This is reassuring, but I don’t think it’s evidence that adverse events actually decrease over time because of longer use of secukinumab. I think it’s probably due to something we usually see in long-term clinical trials: a phenomenon of underreporting. When patients are treated with a new agent they tend to be very, very conscientious about what’s going on with their well-being. They will report a slight sore throat, a slight congestion. But once they’ve been on treatment for a longer time they’re less likely to report those very minor adverse events,” according to the dermatologist.
The Food and Drug Administration requires clinical trialists to keep careful track of selected adverse events in studies of biologic agents. In 4 years on secukinumab, there were no cases of tuberculosis, neutropenia, major adverse cardiovascular events, or Crohn’s disease. There were two cases of ulcerative colitis in year 2; however, one involved an exacerbation of preexisting disease. Also, two patients developed cancer other than nonmelanoma skin cancer in year 2. The incidence of vulvovaginal candidiasis was 1.8% during years 1 and 2, 0.6% in year 3, and zero in year 4.
Thus, the safety profile was favorable, with no pattern of increasing adverse events with longer medication use, Dr. Bissonnette concluded.
The study was sponsored by Novartis. Dr. Bissonnette reported serving as an investigator for and consultant to Novartis and 16 other pharmaceutical companies.
VIENNA – Four-year follow-up of patients on secukinumab for psoriasis shows sustained very high efficacy, with almost 100% of patients who had a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 or 100 response at 1 year maintaining it through 4 years, Robert Bissonnette, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
“I must warn you that my presentation will be very boring as compared to what I’ve seen earlier at this meeting, the very cutting edge phase II and phase III data being presented. My presentation doesn’t contain any surprises. However, as a clinician who is using interleukin-17A inhibition in my practice to treat psoriasis patients, that’s probably what I want,” said Dr. Bissonnette, president of Innovaderm Research in Montreal.
“This is the longest-term safety and efficacy data available to date for patients treated with an IL-17 antagonist using an approved dose,” he noted.
Dr. Bissonnette presented 4-year results in the 165 participants who took the approved regimen from the start of the study. These were patients at the serious end of the disease severity spectrum. Their mean baseline PASI score was 23.5, with 33% of their body surface area being affected. Their mean Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score was 13.1. The mean body mass index was 28.7 kg/m2. A total of 71% of subjects had previously been on systemic therapy. One-third of participants had been on other biologics.
At 1 year, 88.9% of subjects had a PASI 75 response; at 4 years, the PASI 75 rate was 88.5%. Similarly, the PASI 90 rate was 68.5% at 1 year and 66.4% after 4 years. The PASI 100 rate was 43.8% at 1 year and 43.5% at year 4.
After 1 year on secukinumab, patients showed a mean 91.1% improvement, compared with their baseline PASI score. At 4 years, the figure was 90.8%.
Bearing in mind that the average baseline DLQI score at baseline was 13.1, it’s noteworthy that after 1 year on secukinumab, 72.7% of patients had a DLQI of 0 or 1, indicating psoriasis had no impact on their life. At year 4, the rate was 70.8%, Dr. Bissonnette continued.
As an audience member observed, however, the study population decreased from 165 patients to 131 over the course of 4 years. And since this was an “as observed” analysis, outcomes were counted only in those patients still in the study. It’s accepted as a legitimate statistical method, but it casts outcomes in a particularly favorable light.
“The main reason for dropouts was for personal reasons,” Dr. Bissonnette explained in response. “Number two was lack of or loss of efficacy. Loss of efficacy over time occurred at an absolute rate of 4%-8% per year.”
Overall, adverse event rates declined over the course of 4 years of follow-up.
“This is reassuring, but I don’t think it’s evidence that adverse events actually decrease over time because of longer use of secukinumab. I think it’s probably due to something we usually see in long-term clinical trials: a phenomenon of underreporting. When patients are treated with a new agent they tend to be very, very conscientious about what’s going on with their well-being. They will report a slight sore throat, a slight congestion. But once they’ve been on treatment for a longer time they’re less likely to report those very minor adverse events,” according to the dermatologist.
The Food and Drug Administration requires clinical trialists to keep careful track of selected adverse events in studies of biologic agents. In 4 years on secukinumab, there were no cases of tuberculosis, neutropenia, major adverse cardiovascular events, or Crohn’s disease. There were two cases of ulcerative colitis in year 2; however, one involved an exacerbation of preexisting disease. Also, two patients developed cancer other than nonmelanoma skin cancer in year 2. The incidence of vulvovaginal candidiasis was 1.8% during years 1 and 2, 0.6% in year 3, and zero in year 4.
Thus, the safety profile was favorable, with no pattern of increasing adverse events with longer medication use, Dr. Bissonnette concluded.
The study was sponsored by Novartis. Dr. Bissonnette reported serving as an investigator for and consultant to Novartis and 16 other pharmaceutical companies.
AT THE EADV CONGRESS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: After 1 year on secukinumab, 43.8% of psoriasis patients had a PASI 100 response. After 3 additional years on the interleukin-17A inhibitor, the rate was virtually unchanged at 43.5%.
Data source: This was analysis of 165 psoriasis patients on secukinumab at the approved dose prospectively followed for 4 years in an extension of a phase III clinical trial.
Disclosures: Novartis sponsored the study. The presenter reported serving as an investigator for and consultant to Novartis and 16 other pharmaceutical companies.