Efficacy comparison of ustekinumab between anti‐tumor necrosis factor‐α drug‐naïve and anti‐tumor necrosis factor‐α drug‐resistant Japanese psoriasis cases

Ustekinumab is highly efficacious for psoriasis; however, it has not been fully clarified whether previous failure in anti‐tumor necrosis factor‐α (TNF‐α) therapy affects the treatment response with ustekinumab. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of ustekinumab in anti‐TNF‐α‐naïve and anti‐TNF‐α‐resistant cases and compared the clinical efficacies of adalimumab and ustekinumab in biologic naïve cases. Thirty‐five patients with plaque psoriasis who showed resistance to conventional therapies were enrolled; 26 patients, who had never been treated with biologics, were allocated to ustekinumab or adalimumab; nine patients who failed to achieve psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) 50 at week 16 with one or two TNF‐α antagonists were switched to ustekinumab. The end of the study was defined as 52 weeks after starting the first biologic for anti‐TNF‐α‐naïve patients and after switching to ustekinumab for anti‐TNF‐α‐resistant patients. The primary outcome measurement was the percentage of patients achieving PASI75 at week 16. In patients treated with ustekinumab, 87.5% of anti‐TNF‐α‐naïve and 77.8% of anti‐TNF‐α‐resistant cases achieved a PASI75 response at week 16, and no statistically significant difference was found between the treatment response rates (P = 0.60). When comparing the treatment efficacy of ustekinumab and adalimumab among anti‐TNF‐α‐naïve patients, there was also no statistically significant difference in PASI75 achievement rates (87.5 vs. 83.3%, P = 0.79). Our study suggests that ustekinumab can be considered as a first‐line biologic for psoriasis and a rescue therapy for anti‐TNF‐α‐resistant cases.     

Adalimumab in severe plaque psoriasis of childhood: A multi‐center,retrospective real‐life study up to 52 weeks observation

The objective of this study is to determine drug effectiveness and safety of the tumor necrosis factor‐alpha blocker monoclonal antibody adalimumab in a real‐life cohort of 54 children and/or adolescents with severe plaque psoriasis. Retrospective, multicenter analysis over a 52‐week period is discussed in this study. Efficacy was determined by the percentage of patients achieving Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI 75) and PASI 90 at weeks 16, 24, and 52 and the response in biologic‐naïve versus non‐naïve patients. Safety was assessed by the number of patients experiencing at least one adverse event. At week 16, 29.6% of patients achieved a 90% PASI score reduction (PASI 90), while 55.5% of patients achieved a 75% PASI score reduction (PASI 75). Effectiveness was sustained through week 24, since PASI 90 response increased to 55.5% and PASI 75 response increased to 74.0% of patients. The PASI response rates did not differ between biologic‐naïve and non‐naïve patients. The drug was well tolerated and no serious infections were observed. Adalimumab was effective and safe in this cohort of children with severe plaque psoriasis in a 52‐week observation. Effectiveness did not differ between biologic‐naïve and non‐naïve patients.     

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab when added to inadequate therapy for the treatment of psoriasis: results of PRIDE, an open-label, multicentre, phase IIIb study

Background Adalimumab is an effective treatment for chronic plaque psoriasis. Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of adalimumab for psoriasis patients who did not adequately respond to prior psoriasis therapy. Methods PRIDE (an Open‐Label Access PR ogram to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of Adalimumab When Added to I naDE quate Therapy for the Treatment of Psoriasis) was a multicentre, Phase IIIb study in Canada. Patients with active moderate‐to‐severe plaque psoriasis who failed to respond to, or were intolerant of, prior therapies received adalimumab 80 mg at Week 0 followed by adalimumab 40 mg every other week Weeks 1 through 23. The primary efficacy measure was PASI (Psoriasis Area Severity Index) 75 response at Week 16. Secondary efficacy measures included PASI 90/100 and percentage change from baseline PASI score. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were recorded. Results A total of 203 patients were enrolled at 26 sites. Baseline characteristics were: male, 61.1%; mean age, 45.5 years; mean PASI score, 20.0; previous exposure to biologics, 38.4%. At Week 16, PASI 75/90/100 responses were achieved by 70.9%/49.3%/24.1% of patients, respectively. Mean percentage PASI score decrease from baseline to Week 16 was 79.5%. Mean percentage PASI improvement and response rates were maintained through Week 24. Nasopharyngitis and upper respiratory tract infection were the only AEs to occur in ≥5% of patients. Nine patients experienced serious AEs; four were considered possibly or probably related to adalimumab. Conclusion Adalimumab was safe, well‐tolerated and effective for treatment of active plaque psoriasis in patients who had not adequately responded to prior therapy.     

Responses to ustekinumab in the anti‐TNF agent‐naïve vs. anti‐TNF agent‐exposed patients with psoriasis vulgaris

Background Approximately 20–30% of patients with psoriasis treated with anti‐tumour necrosis factor α (TNFα) agents will discontinue treatment within 2 years due to loss of efficacy or side‐effects. Switching to another anti‐TNFα agent produces clinical responses inferior to previously untreated patients. Ustekinumab binds to the p40 subunit of interleukin (IL)‐12 and IL‐23 and provides a mechanism of action independent of TNFα. Objective To investigate the efficacy of ustekinumab in a clinical practice setting and to compare treatment responses to ustekinumab in patients previously treated with TNFα inhibitors and anti‐TNFα‐naïve patients. Methods Patients receiving either ustekinumab (n = 71) or the subcutaneous TNFα inhibitors adalimumab or etanercept (n = 108) were identified through the registry of psoriasis patients in our Institutions. Efficacy effect outcome was a 75% improvement in the psoriasis area severity index (PASI75). Kaplan–Meier statistics evaluated the adherence to the treatments expressed as drug survival rate. Results PASI75 was achieved in 80% of the ustekinumab‐treated patients after a median time of 112 days. There was no difference in efficacy in anti‐TNFα‐naïve patients compared with anti‐TNFα unresponsive patients. Patients treated with ustekinumab showed a superior adherence to treatment in comparison with adalimumab and etanercept. Limitations Patients were non‐randomly assigned to treatment, which potentially may lead to biases. Observation time was short (1 year). Conclusion In clinical practice, the short‐term efficacy and patient adherence to ustekinumab are excellent and comparable to the data obtained in clinical trials. Lack of response to previous anti‐TNF treatment does not impair clinical response to ustekinumab.     

Use of biological drugs in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in Italy: Results from the PSONG survey

This Italian multicenter retrospective study compared the drug survival and efficacy of different anti‐TNF agents in psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients. A database of PsO/PsA patients treated with adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab from May 2013 to May 2014 was analyzed. PASI 75, 90, and 100 was calculated at each time point to evaluate efficacy. Drug survival rate and probability of maintaining PASI response were evaluated. The impact of dependent variables on probability of PASI 75 loss was evaluated by logistic regression. 1,235 patients were included, 577 with PsO and 658 with PsA. Highest survival rates were observed with adalimumab followed by etanercept and infliximab in PsO and PsA patients. The probability of maintaining PASI response was significantly higher for adalimumab followed by infliximab. For PsO patients, the odds of losing PASI 75 was higher in etanercept‐treated patients (OR: 8.1; 95% CI: 4.2–15.6, p < .001) or infliximab (OR: 6.6; 95% CI: 2.6–16.3, p < .001) vs. adalimumab. Likewise, for PsA patients the odds of losing PASI 75 was higher in etanercept‐treated patients (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.4–3.8, p = .01) or infliximab (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1–4.1, p = .018) vs. adalimumab. Adalimumab could be the best therapeutic option over other anti‐TNF agents for the treatment of PsO and PsA patients.     

Adalimumab therapy for psoriasis in real‐world practice: efficacy,safety and results in biologic‐naïve vs. non‐naïve patients

Background Patients and the course of treatment in daily practice are different from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Objectives Primary objective: to analyse the percentage of patients achieving PASI 75. Secondary objectives: PASI 50, PASI 90, PASI 100 responses, the percentage of patients experiencing at least one serious adverse event (SAE) and the response in biologic‐naïve vs. non‐naïve patients. Methods Prospectively collected efficacy and safety data of a cohort of psoriasis patients treated with adalimumab in daily practice between May 2007 and July 2011 were analyzed. Efficacy was determined using an intention‐to‐treat analysis and an as treated analysis, in comparison with the course baseline PASI before the start of adalimumab and the original baseline PASI before the start of any biologic therapy. Results Eighty‐five patients received adalimumab therapy with a mean treatment duration of 1.4 (range 0.02–3.1) years. Compared with the original baseline PASI, PASI 75 response rates at week 12 and 24 were 34% and 38% (ITT). PASI 75 responses were well maintained until week 132. Only the PASI 75 response rate at week 12 differed significantly between biologic‐naïve (56%) and non‐naïve patients (29%). Sixteen patients (19%) experienced 28 SAEs. Seven patients (8%) experienced SAEs considered possibly or probably related to adalimumab. Conclusions In this cohort, PASI75 responses were substantial but lower than in RCTs and other daily practice studies. Efficacy was well maintained during more than 2 years of follow‐up and differed only between biologic‐naïve and non‐naïve patients at week 12. The incidence of SAEs was low but seems higher than observed in RCTs.     

Adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis: Efficacy and safety results from a Phase II/III randomized controlled study

Incidence of psoriasis vulgaris in Asians is estimated at 0.05–0.3%. Studies in North America and Europe demonstrated that adalimumab, a fully human, recombinant, immunoglobulin G₁ monoclonal antibody, was efficacious and well‐tolerated in patients with chronic plaque psoriasis. This 24‐week, placebo‐controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of three different dosing regimens of adalimumab in Japanese patients with moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis (n = 169). Patients were randomized to receive adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow), adalimumab 80‐mg loading dose at week 0 followed by adalimumab 40 mg eow starting at week 2, adalimumab 80 mg eow, or placebo eow given as s.c. injections. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving a 75% or greater improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) score at week 16. At week 16, PASI 75 response rates were significantly greater for all three adalimumab groups (40 mg eow: 57.9%, P < 0.001; 40 mg eow plus loading dose: 62.8%, P < 0.001; 80 mg eow: 81.0%, P < 0.001) versus placebo (4.3%). As early as week 4, the 40‐mg eow plus loading dose and 80‐mg eow groups achieved significantly greater PASI 75 response rates compared with placebo. Injection‐site reactions and hepatic events occurred in greater percentages of adalimumab‐treated patients compared with placebo. Adalimumab therapy demonstrated efficacy and safety at all three dosage regimens. Rapid response rate in patients receiving 40 mg eow plus loading dose supports using an 80‐mg loading dose in the treatment of psoriasis.     

Long‐term outcomes of interruption and retreatment vs. continuous therapy with adalimumab for psoriasis: subanalysis of REVEAL and the open‐label extension study

Background REVEAL was a 52‐week study of adalimumab for moderate to severe psoriasis. At Week 33, adalimumab‐treated patients with sustained responses (PASI ≥75 at Weeks 16 and 33) were re‐randomized to receive adalimumab or placebo. Subsequently, they could receive adalimumab in an open‐label extension (OLE) study. Objective To compare long‐term efficacy and safety of adalimumab 40 mg every other week (eow), given as continuous treatment or with one period of interruption followed by retreatment. Methods Patients who were re‐randomized to adalimumab or placebo at REVEAL Week 33 and received ≥1 dose of OLE adalimumab were analysed as the continuous and retreatment groups, respectively, for >2 years of OLE treatment with adalimumab 40 mg eow. LOCF was used for missing efficacy data. Results At OLE Weeks 0, 12 and 24, PASI 75 response rates were 84%, 84%, 86% with continuous treatment (N = 233) vs. 45%, 71%, 79% with retreatment (N = 227). Thereafter, efficacies were slightly greater for continuous treatment but similar between groups, with PASI 75 response rates at OLE Week 108 of 75% vs. 73% respectively. Retreatment was most effective for patients with ≥PASI 50 responses when retreatment was initiated. Adverse event rates for retreatment were equal to or lower than those for continuous treatment. Conclusions In psoriasis patients with sustained PASI 75 responses to adalimumab, long‐term efficacy of retreatment after a ≤19‐week interruption was similar to efficacy achieved with >3 years continuous treatment. Adalimumab retreatment provided the best results when initiated before responses had declined below PASI 50.     

Switching from etanercept to adalimumab is effective and safe: results in 30 patients with psoriasis with primary failure,secondary failure or intolerance to etanercept

Background Knowledge on the sequential treatment of psoriasis with biologics with regard to efficacy and safety is sparse. This also applies to the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients previously treated with etanercept. The relationship between the reasons for discontinuation of etanercept and the response to adalimumab is not clear in psoriasis. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with psoriasis with primary failure, secondary failure or intolerance to etanercept in daily practice. Methods Data were extracted from two prospective registries from all patients with psoriasis with failure on etanercept treatment, who switched to adalimumab therapy. Thirty patients fulfilled these criteria. All patients were naive to biologics when etanercept was initiated. Primary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving a 50% or 75% improvement of the baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score (PASI 50 and PASI 75, respectively) at weeks 12, 24 and 48. Secondary endpoints were the percentage of patients achieving PASI 90, the mean percentage improvement in the PASI score from baseline and the adverse event rate. Results Compared with the baseline PASI score before the start of etanercept, the mean percentage improvement in PASI and the PASI 50/75/90 response rates to adalimumab until week 48 were comparable to those achieved with etanercept. In the patients failing on etanercept, PASI 75 was achieved by 27%, 36% and 54% at weeks 12, 24 and 48 of adalimumab treatment, respectively. The majority of patients showed a beneficial response to adalimumab, irrespective of the reason for discontinuation of etanercept. Previous treatment with etanercept did not increase the adverse event rate nor change the nature of the side‐effects. Conclusions Adalimumab seems to be an effective and safe treatment option for patients with psoriasis who failed on etanercept treatment irrespective of the reason for discontinuation.     

Adalimumab treatment for severe recalcitrant chronic plaque psoriasis

Aim.  To assess the efficacy and safety profile of adalimumab in patients with severe, recalcitrant chronic plaque psoriasis, and to assess short-term overlapping of other systemic treatment with adalimumab to prevent flaring of disease.
Methods.  This was a retrospective study comprising 39 patients with chronic plaque psoriasis treated with adalimumab between October 2005 and January 2008. All had failed treatment with other systemic agents, including biological therapies in 59% of patients. Patients were started on adalimumab 40 mg weekly or fortnightly, as clinically indicated. Severity of psoriasis was assessed by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). Therapeutic response was assessed by 75% improvement on PASI (PASI 75). All adverse events were recorded.
Results.  Results were analysed separately for those treated with adalimumab only and those on combination treatment. PASI 75 was achieved in 38% (8 of 21 patients at week 16), 62% (13 of 21 patients) at week 24, 69% (9 of 13 patients) at week 48% and 71% (5 of 7 patients) at week 72 in the adalimumab-only group, compared with 56% (5 of 9 patients) at week 16, 50% (4 of 8 patients) at week 24, 80% (4 of 5 patients) at week 48% and 67% (2 of 3 patients) at week 72 in the combined group. Of the 39 patients, 15 (38%) achieved a PASI of 0 at some point in their treatment. Adalimumab was well tolerated; 38% of patients experienced side-effects, which were generally mild.
Conclusion.  Adalimumab was effective in a group of patients with psoriasis refractory to other systemic therapies, including biological treatments, and was well tolerated.     

Safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who had inadequate therapeutic response to prior etanercept

BackgroundFew studies exist that evaluate the therapeutic response among switchers of tumor necrosis antagonists in patients with psoriasis, especially Asian patients.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who had inadequate therapeutic response to prior etanercept.MethodsThis is a single-center, open-labeled, retrospective study on the effects of adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis who had inadequate therapeutic responses to prior etanercept. We included 13 patients who had received etanercept for at least 3s months but showed inadequate therapeutic response, as defined by less than 50% improvement in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) 50, compared to baseline after 6 months or less than PASI25 improvement after 3 months in our hospital during 2006–2012. Adalimumab 40 mg was given every other week with a loading dose of 80 mg. Patients were evaluated monthly for safety and effectiveness. PASI, physician global assessment, and scores of scalp lesions were calculated at Weeks 12 and 24. Scalp lesions were assessed separately.ResultsAt Week 12, one patient (7%) had at least PASI90, two (15%) had at least PASI75, four (31%) had at least PASI50, and eight (61.5%) had at least PASI25 response. At Week 24, two patients (15%) had at least PASI90, three (23%) had at least PASI75, six (46%) had at least PASI50, and nine (69%) had at least PASI25 response. No severe adverse events were recorded in our series. For scalp lesion, adalimumab showed similar efficacy to etanercept nonresponders.ConclusionSafety profiles of adalimumab were similar to those of etanercept, and PASI50 was achieved in 46% of patients, who failed prior etanercept therapy, after 24 weeks of adalimumab treatment.     

Adalimumab for psoriasis patients who are non-responders to etanercept: open-label prospective evaluation

Background  Targeted biologic therapies have made a significant impact on the treatment for moderate to severe psoriasis. In the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends etanercept, a human recombinant tumour necrosis factor (TNF) receptor fusion protein, for moderate to severe psoriasis patients who have failed conventional therapies. There is, however, no data available on the role of other TNF antagonists for patients who have failed etanercept. Adalimumab, a fully human, anti-TNF monoclonal antibody, is approved for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis.
Objectives  To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab (40 mg weekly) in psoriasis patients who were non-responders to high-dosage etanercept (50 mg twice weekly).
Methods  All patients attending a tertiary referral service for severe psoriasis who were non-responders to high-dosage etanercept [i.e. failed to achieve ≥ 50% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 50) after 12 weeks of treatment] were considered for open-label adalimumab therapy for 12 weeks. Details on clinical course, PASI, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and adverse events were recorded at baseline and weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12.
Results  Four of five patients in this study had reached at least PASI 50 by week 12. Of these, two patients achieved a 75% improvement in PASI (PASI 75). No serious adverse events were reported.
Conclusions  Initial data from this open-label prospective evaluation suggests that weekly adalimumab therapy is an effective treatment for patients with severe psoriasis who had failed to respond to at least 3 months of high-dosage etanercept.     

Plasma trough levels of adalimumab and infliximab in terms of clinical efficacy during the treatment of psoriasis

We examined the relation between adalimumab and infliximab plasma trough levels, anti‐adalimumab and anti‐infliximab antibody formation. We analyzed plasma from 32 adalimumab‐treated and 20 infliximab‐treated psoriasis patients for evaluating trough levels of each drug. The presence of anti‐adalimumab and anti‐infliximab antibodies was analyzed and the severity of psoriasis was evaluated. At week 28, 25 out of 32 and at week 48, 21 out of 30 adalimumab‐treated patients maintained as more than PASI 75. At week 28, 12 out of 20 and at week 48, nine out of 18 infliximab‐treated patients were evaluated as more than PASI 75. In patients treated with 40 mg adalimumab every other week, the mean trough level was 7.62 μg/mL (range, 0.05–10.6) at week 48. In patients treated with 80 mg adalimumab every other week, the mean trough level was 8.61 μg/mL (range, 0.08–13.5) at week 48. Mean trough level of infliximab‐treated cases (4.1–5.2 mg/kg; mean, 4.6) was 4.64 μg/mL (range, 0.03–16.9) at week 48. Anti‐adalimumab antibody was detected in five out of 32 cases and anti‐infliximab antibody was detected in six out of 20 cases, respectively, at weeks 24 and 48. The optimal cut‐off values of adalimumab and infliximab concentration for more than PASI 75 were more than 7.84 μg/mL and more than 0.92 μg/mL, respectively. The trough levels of adalimumab and infliximab in psoriasis patients were positively associated with clinical response and were significantly lower in cases having anti‐adalimumab or anti‐infliximab antibodies.     

Estudio retrospectivo de la eficacia y seguridad de adalimumab en el tratamiento de la psoriasis en la práctica clínica diaria

Introduction

Adalimumab is a fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against TNF-α, which is implicated in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. A retrospective study was carried out to characterize patients with psoriasis who required adalimumab therapy, and to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of this treatment in daily clinical practice.

Patients and methods

We reviewed the clinical histories of 30 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis treated between January 2008 and April 2011.

Results

A total of 13 men and 17 women with psoriasis required adalimumab therapy. Of these, 16 had at least one comorbidity. The most common comorbidities were hypertension, obesity, arthritis and dyslipidemia. All patients showed improvement from baseline in PASI, BSA and PGA scores (P < .001). The median survival to achieve PASI 75, PASI 90 and PASI 100 were 20.1, 31.4 and 57.6 weeks, respectively. Adverse events were observed in 9 patients, requiring treatment withdrawal in 5. At the end of the study, 21 patients continued adalimumab therapy.

Conclusion

Adalimumab proved to be highly effective and safe for the treatment of our patients with psoriasis, who had the most common comorbidities associated with psoriasis, and even in those with prior failure to other systemic and biological therapies. The percentages of PASI 90 and PASI 100 responses were higher than those achieved in pivotal clinical trials. Adalimumab presented a survival rate of 70% at week 89 of treatment.     

Adalimumab‐induced scalp psoriasis with severe alopecia

In recent years, with the increase usage of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, more side effects have revealed. The incidence of paradoxical psoriasis (psoriasis vulgaris, palmoplantar pustulosis, scalp psoriasis, or their combinations) ranges from 1 to 5%; however alopecia due to anti‐TNF‐α‐induced scalp psoriasis, rarely reported in the literature. We report a 37‐year‐old woman who developed palmoplantar pustulosis and scalp psoriasis with severe alopecia after 2 months of treatment with adalimumab for chronic plaque psoriasis. Biopsies from the palmar and scalp lesions showed psoriasiform changes. Adalimumab treatment was discontinued, and methotrexate was started (15 mg/weekly, subcutaneously) with topical adjuvant agents. A dramatic improvement was seen in both the skin and scalp with complete hair regrowth in 1 month. We conclude that, in anti‐TNF‐α‐induced scalp psoriasis, suspension of anti‐TNF‐α agent and systemic and topical treatments should be considered to avoid scarring alopecia.     

Scalp discoloration from selenium sulphide: revisiting a report of terra firma-forme dermatosis of the scalp

Background Psoriasis is associated with poor health‐related quality of life, including sleep impairment. Objective To assess the extent of sleep impairment, the effect of adalimumab on sleep and other patient‐reported outcomes, and correlations between changes in these outcomes and sleep quality in patients with psoriasis. Methods Patients in the 16‐week, open‐label, Phase IIIb PROGRESS trial had chronic plaque psoriasis and suboptimal response to prior therapy (etanercept, methotrexate or narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy). Adalimumab was self‐injected subcutaneously (80 mg at week 0, then 40 mg every other week from week 1). The focus for this analysis was the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale. Other patient‐reported outcomes included the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Physician’s Global Assessment, a visual analogue scale for psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis (PsA) pain, and the Work Productivity and Activity Index Questionnaire‐Specific Health Problems. Results Patients with psoriasis had impaired sleep at baseline. The degree of sleep impairment was significantly associated with the extent of work productivity for all sleep measures and, for some sleep measures, was associated with DLQI impairment, clinical severity measured by PASI, the presence of PsA, and depression. Adalimumab treatment significantly improved sleep quality by 15% from baseline, as well as DLQI score, pain and work productivity. The improvement in sleep was partially explained (R² = 0·16, P < 0·001) by improvements in the objectively measured psoriasis signs in PASI. Conclusions Adalimumab treatment improved sleep outcomes and other patient‐reported outcomes including health‐related quality of life, work productivity, daily activity and disease‐related pain.     

Adalimumab for psoriasis in Greece: clinical experience in a tertiary referral centre

Background Adalimumab, a fully human, anti‐TNFα monoclonal antibody has been shown to be effective for moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis in clinical trial setting. However, only a limited number of studies reflect everyday clinical experience with this drug. Objectives To provide evidence on the efficacy, dose optimization and safety of adalimumab based on everyday clinical experience in a tertiary referral centre for psoriasis, in Greece. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the records of all patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis who received adalimumab, in our referral centre, between January 2008 and October 2010. Results In total, 52 patients were treated with adalimumab for a mean period of 14 months (range 4–30 months). Mean baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) was 16.7 (range 9–40.3). At 4, 6, 12 and 18 months, PASI75 was attained by 68%, 82%, 89% and 88% of patients respectively. Nineteen of 52 patients (36%) reached a PASI100 at a mean time of 10 months (range 4–18 months). The dose interval between the injections of adalimumab was increased from 2 to 3 weeks for 14 patients (27%) who achieved and sustained a PASI100 after the first year of treatment, without any relapse. The overall rate of adverse events reached 38%, but treatment was discontinued only in two cases (4%). Conclusions Our study demonstrates that adalimumab is effective and safe in patients with moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis in short‐ and long‐term setting. At the same time, it points out novel and interesting issues for further investigation.     

An assessment of adalimumab efficacy in three Phase III clinical trials using the European Consensus Programme criteria for psoriasis treatment goals

Background The European Consensus Programme (ECP) established pan‐European consensus definitions of psoriasis disease severity and treatment goals among 19 psoriasis experts from European nations. Objectives To use the ECP treatment goals to retrospectively assess adalimumab efficacy in patients who participated in Phase III clinical trials and met ECP criteria for moderate to severe psoriasis. Methods Three trials were analysed: CHAMPION (n = 108), REVEAL (n = 814) and BELIEVE (n = 364). Moderate to severe psoriasis was defined as Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) score > 10, with either > 10% body surface area involvement or Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score > 10. Treatment goals were achieved with either treatment success (≥ 75% PASI score reduction) or intermediate response (PASI response ≥ 50% and < 75%) with DLQI ≤ 5. Results The percentages of patients who achieved treatment goals at week 16 in CHAMPION, REVEAL and BELIEVE were, respectively, (i) treatment success, 79·3%, 72·1% and 68·2%; (ii) intermediate response, 1·7%, 5·0% and 5·0%; or (iii) either goal, 81·0%, 77·1% and 73·2%. DLQI ≤ 5 at week 16 was achieved by 70·7%, 70·1% and 67·4% of patients, respectively. Differences between the percentages of adalimumab‐ vs. placebo‐treated patients achieving treatment success were statistically significant (P < 0·001) from week 4 and week 8 of REVEAL and CHAMPION, respectively. Conclusions Treatment success was achieved by > 93% of patients who attained treatment goals. At week 16 > 70% of patients achieved ECP treatment goals and met ECP criteria for continued treatment without modification. These results support the utility of ECP treatment goals for the assessment of therapeutic efficacy in moderate to severe psoriasis.     

Biological therapy in genital psoriasis in women

Genital psoriasis (GenPs) is a frequent manifestation of psoriasis, causing distress, especially in women. We prospectively studied a population of 74 psoriatic women with severe and generalized psoriasis eligible to biologic therapy, to examine which biologic therapy is more effective on GenPs and to study possible associations between PASI severity and GenPs. Overall, 25/74 (34%) had GenPs: 6 received Ixekizumab, 7 Ustekinumab, 8 Adalimumab, 2 Secukinumab, 1 Etanercept, 1 Certolizumab. Therapies were administered based on PASI severity, independently from the presence of GenPs. Side effects, PASI score, sPGA‐G scale for GenPs were recorded at time 0 and after 6 month of therapy. The mean sPGA‐G scale value was 2.8 before treatment. After biologic therapy, all patients except one, improved of at least one point. Mostly, patients treated with anti‐IL17 (Secukinumab, Ixekizumab) and anti‐IL12/23 (Ustekinumab) improved. Mean PASI ranged from 10 to 16.3 before treatment. After 6 months of therapy, 4 anti‐TNFα patients, 6 anti‐IL17 and 1 anti‐IL12/23, reached PASI 90. At time 0, no correlation between PASI and sPGA‐G was visible (Pearson r = 0.10, p = .620). From our data, GenPs apparently responds favorably to IL17A inhibitors, but further studies, based on larger numbers of patients, are needed.     

A phase IIIb,multicentre, randomized,double‐blind,vehicle‐controlled study of the efficacy and safety of adalimumab with and without calcipotriol/betamethasone topical treatment in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis: the BELIEVE study

Background Data are lacking on the use of topical therapies in combination with tumour necrosis factor blockers for the treatment of psoriasis. Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab (ADA) with topical calcipotriol/betamethasone (C/B) in patients with psoriasis resembling those treated in routine clinical practice. Methods A 16‐week, randomized, vehicle‐controlled trial was conducted in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis and previous failure, intolerance or contraindications to two or more systemic treatments. All patients received ADA (80 mg, week 0; 40 mg every other week, weeks 1–15) in addition to either topical C/B or drug‐free vehicle applied once daily for 4 weeks, and as needed thereafter. The primary endpoint was 75% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 75) at week 16. Results A total of 730 patients received either ADA + C/B (n = 366) or ADA + vehicle (n = 364). PASI 75 response was initially higher with the combination therapy [14·8% for ADA + C/B vs. 5·8% for ADA + vehicle at week 2 (P < 0·001); and 40·7% vs. 32·4%, respectively, at week 4 (P = 0·021)]. After week 4, the trend was towards a higher response with ADA monotherapy, with no statistical difference in the PASI 75 response at week 16 (64·8% for ADA + C/B vs. 70·9% for ADA monotherapy, P = 0·086). Safety findings were consistent with previous ADA trials. Conclusions ADA + C/B resulted in more rapid and higher efficacy within the first 4 weeks; thereafter, the trend was towards a higher response with ADA monotherapy. There was no statistical difference in the PASI 75 response at week 16. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated.