Etanercept and Methotrexate as Monotherapy or in Combination for Psoriatic Arthritis: Primary Results From a Randomized, Controlled Phase III Trial

Association of clinical variables with methotrexate response in patients with psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Methotrexate (MTX) is widely used as first-line treatment in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Despite the variable efficacy of MTX in PsA compared to newer therapeutic agents, its affordability and availability make it crucial, especially in resource-limited healthcare settings. Identification of factors associated with MTX non-response could facilitate early redirection to more effective therapy. This study aimed to identify baseline clinical, demographic, and psychosocial variables associated with non-response 3 months after MTX initiation in a real-world, treatment-naïve PsA patient cohort.

METHOD

Recently diagnosed, disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug-naïve PsA patients were included. Treatment response was defined by attaining minimal disease activity 3 months after initiation of MTX monotherapy. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed, including sensitivity analysis. Missing variables were imputed through multiple imputations.

RESULTS

In total, 287 patients were included, of whom 199 (69%) were non-responders. The median dose of MTX was 19.5 (interquartile range 15-25) mg/week. Worse baseline functioning (Health Assessment Questionnaire) [odds ratio (OR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13-0.60], higher tender joint count in 68 joints (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84-0.97), and higher depression scores (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-0.99) were associated with a lower response rate to MTX at 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the need for a comprehensive approach to managing patients with PsA. This involves addressing modifiable risk factors, such as depression, alongside controlling PsA disease activity. Further research is warranted to evaluate whether this integrated strategy could improve treatment efficacy and overall patient outcomes.

Psoriatic arthritis: A comprehensive review for the dermatologist-Part II: Screening and management

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a common comorbidity of psoriasis occurring in up to one-third of patients. Dermatologists hold an essential role in screening patients with psoriasis for PsA, since as many as 85% of patients develop psoriasis before PsA. Early detection and treatment of PsA are important for both short- and long-term patient outcomes and quality of life. Many factors must be weighed when selecting the appropriate therapy for PsA. One must consider the 'domains of disease' that are manifested, the disease severity, patient comorbidities, patient preferences (routes of dosing or frequency, as examples) as well as factors often outside of patient-physician control, such as access to medications based on insurance coverage and formularies. As many patients will have involvement of multiple domains of psoriatic disease, selecting the therapy that best captures the patient's disease is required. In this review, we will address PsA screening, diagnosis, therapeutic approach to psoriatic disease, comorbidity considerations, and comanagement.

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors for psoriatic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic arthritis affecting people with psoriasis. If untreated, it may lead to disability. Recommended drugs are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids, conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs). Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) are the first choice bDMARDs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of TNFi in adults with psoriatic arthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization trials portal up to 28 March 2024.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with PsA, comparing TNFi to placebo, physiotherapy, NSAIDs, corticosteroids, and cs/b/tsDMARDs. Major outcomes included clinical improvement, minimal disease activity, physical function, health-related quality of life, radiographic progression, serious adverse events, and withdrawals due to adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary comparison was TNFi versus placebo. The primary time point was 12 weeks for clinical improvement; 24 weeks for minimal disease activity, function, quality of life, and radiographic progression; and the end of the trial period for serious adverse events and withdrawals due to adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs randomizing 7857 participants. Four studies compared TNFi to methotrexate and one to ustekinumab in DMARD-naïve participants. In csDMARD-inadequate responders, 11 studies compared TNFi to placebo; four studies compared TNFi to placebo and ixekizumab, bimekizumab, tofacitinib, or upadacitinib; and three studies compared TNFi to ixekizumab, secukinumab, and ustekinumab. Two studies compared different TNFi. We found no studies with b/tsDMARD-inadequate responders (b/tsDMARD-IR). No studies compared TNFi to NSAIDs, corticosteroids, or physiotherapy. Performance (32%), detection (56%) and reporting (80%) biases were at high or unclear risk across studies. Only one study had a low risk of bias in all domains. We limit reporting to the primary comparison, TNFi versus placebo. DMARD-naïve We found no studies comparing TNFi with placebo in DMARD-naïve participants. csDMARD-inadequate responders TNFi probably result in a large clinical improvement compared to placebo. At 12 weeks, 149/1926 (8%) participants in the placebo group showed a clinical improvement (ACR50) compared to 784/2141 (37%) participants in the TNFi group (risk ratio (RR) 5.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.98 to 7.96; I2 = 65%; 14 studies, 4067 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). TNFi probably result in a higher proportion of participants in minimal disease activity. At 24 weeks, 95/1017 (9%) participants in the placebo group were in minimal disease activity compared to 428/1336 (32%) participants in the TNFi group (RR 3.76, 95% CI 2.39 to 5.92; I2 = 72%; 5 studies, 2353 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). At 24 weeks, TNFi may improve function compared to placebo. The mean change in function from baseline (assessed with the Health Assessment Questionnaire; score from 0 to 3, 0 = no disability; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) = 0.35) was -0.14 points with placebo and 0.33 points lower (0.41 lower to 0.25 lower) with TNFi (I2 = 72%; 8 studies, 2949 participants; low-certainty evidence). TNFi probably result in a clinically important improvement in health-related quality of life. The mean change in quality of life from baseline (assessed with the Short Form 36-item Mental Component Summary questionnaire; score from 0 to 100, 100 = best score; MCID = 1.7) was 2.4 points with placebo and 3.29 points higher (2.18 points higher to 4.40 points higher) with TNFi (I2 = 52%; 8 studies, 2928 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). TNFi probably slightly reduce radiographic progression. The mean change in radiographic progression (assessed with the Sharp/Van der Heijde-PsA score; scale from 0 to 528, 0 = no damage) was 0.25 points with placebo and 0.37 points lower with TNFi (0.48 lower to 0.25 lower) (I2 = 32%; 7 studies, 2478 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) at 24 weeks. We downgraded the evidence to moderate certainty for clinical improvement, minimal disease activity, quality of life, and radiographic progression due to risk of bias. For function, we downgraded the evidence to low certainty for risk of bias and imprecision. TNFi may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events, but may slightly increase withdrawals due to adverse events, compared to placebo. At the end of follow-up: 56/1826 participants (3%) given placebo and 69/1900 (4%) participants given TNFi experienced serious adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.42; I2 = 0%; 13 studies, 3866 participants; low-certainty evidence); and 35/1926 (2%) participants given placebo and 65/2140 (3%) given TNFi withdrew due to adverse events (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.33; I2 = 0%; 14 studies, 4066 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the evidence to low certainty for risk of bias and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In csDMARD-inadequate responders, moderate-certainty evidence showed that TNFi probably result in a large clinical improvement, lower disease activity, small decrease in radiographic progression, and better quality of life compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence showed that TNFi may lead to a slight improvement in physical function compared to placebo. Low-certainty evidence suggested that TNFi may lead to a slight increase in withdrawals due to adverse events, whereas they may result in little to no difference in serious adverse events compared to placebo. No trials assessed TNFi compared to placebo in DMARD-naïve participants or in b/tsDMARD-IR.

Imaging in clinical trials for psoriatic arthritis: a scoping review

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory condition principally affecting the skin and musculoskeletal system, associated with comorbidities and decreased quality of life. Imaging is crucial for diagnosis, monitoring progression, and evaluating treatment efficacy; therefore, it plays an important role in PsA clinical trials. In this review, we aimed to characterize how imaging modalities and advances in imaging techniques are being used specifically in the PsA clinical trial literature. Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews, we conducted a comprehensive search of multiple literature databases, from January 1, 2000, to June 27, 2024. We captured 1961 articles and after deduplication, title and abstract screening, and full-text review, 53 studies were included. Radiographs were the most used imaging modality (n = 32/53, 60%), and radiographic progression was frequently measured using the PsA-modified Sharp/van der Heijde score. MRI (n = 16/53, 30%) was used in evaluating peripheral and axial disease, with more recent adoption of validated scoring systems (PsAMRIS and SPARCC). Ultrasound (n = 11/53, 21%), including power Doppler, was used to assess soft tissue inflammation. Standardized scoring systems (e.g. GLOESS) were used in a minority of ultrasound-based studies. Multimodality imaging (n = 7/53, 13%) and CT (n = 2/53, 4%) was uncommon. The development of PsA-specific scoring systems for radiographs and MRI has been instrumental in advancing imaging assessment in PsA. However, their application remains limited, particularly in ultrasound, where further standardization is needed. Future clinical trials should focus on increasing the adoption of PsA-specific scoring systems, exploring advanced techniques (e.g. DCE-MRI), and multi-modal imaging to improve PsA disease monitoring.

Long-Term Survival of Methotrexate as First-Line Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis and Undifferentiated Arthritis

Background/Objectives: In the era of biotechnological drugs, methotrexate (MTX) still represents the first-line treatment in chronic inflammatory arthritis, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and undifferentiated arthritis (UA). The aim of our study was to evaluate the persistence of MTX as a first-line treatment in a group of patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a database of outpatients diagnosed with RA, PsA, or UA who visited our Rheumatology Clinic from January 2014 to January 2022. Key demographic and clinical data, including information on comorbidities and treatments, were routinely collected. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves were used to determine the persistence of MTX during follow-up. Results: A total of 242 patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis who initiated MTX as first-line therapy and had available clinical data were included. Of these, 130 (53.7%) had RA, 82 (33%) had PsA, and 30 (16.3%) had UA. Overall, the survival rate of MTX at 24 months of follow-up was approximately 60%, while at 48 months and 96 months, it was 40% and 20%, respectively. A statistically significant difference was found between RA and PsA compared to UA (Chi-square test = 14.84; p = 0.001). When comparing the KM survival curves of MTX between male and female patients, obese and non-obese individuals, as well as older (age ≥ 50 years) and younger patients (age < 50 years), no statistically significant differences were observed in any of the comparisons. Conclusions: Our study confirmed the efficacy and overall safety of MTX in RA and PsA, with good persistence even over the long term.

Biological therapy for psoriatic arthritis: current state and future perspectives

Psoriatic arthritis is a medical condition that lies at the intersection of various fields of medicine, and its therapy always requires a comprehensive, holistic approach. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) constitute an extremely effective treatment method for PsA, provided that appropriate principles for patient qualification for the drug are followed, along with subsequent monitoring of the response to treatment. Based on their mechanisms of action, four main groups of bDMARDs used in PsA can be distinguished (TNF inhibitors, IL-12/23 and IL-23 inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4 agonists). Clinical trials are ongoing in search of registration for additional bDMARDs, and the tasks for doctors and scientists worldwide include patient education, increasing treatment accessibility, and optimizing its costs.

A review and recommendations on the management of psoriatic arthritis in Australia 2024

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a progressive, systemic inflammatory disease. It can lead to serious joint damage and disability, increased cardiovascular risk and reduced quality of life. Six experts met to develop the recommendations for the management of PsA in Australia. The final recommendations are approved by all panel members. Management and treatment recommendations have been made under six subheadings: Recommendations for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and glucocorticoids; Disease-modifying treatment; Screening and monitoring; Family planning; Symptom treatment and extra-articular manifestations; Comorbidities and lifestyle considerations. Our recommendations for the management of PsA in Australia draw heavily on the established global guidelines. These recommendations aim to assist clinicians to make informed, patient-centric choices when delivering treatment to people with PsA.

IL-23 inhibition for chronic inflammatory disease

Biological monoclonal antibody drugs inhibit overactive cytokine signalling that drives chronic inflammatory disease in different organ systems. In the last 10 years, interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitors have attained an important position in the treatment of psoriatic skin and joint disease as well as inflammatory bowel diseases. Addressing an upstream pathological mechanism shared between these disorders, this drug class has high efficacy rates and a durable response that extends dosing intervals up to 3 months. Pooled clinical trial data show objective disease improvement for more than 70% of patients with psoriasis and up to 50% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The first antibody inhibitor for IL-23A targeted a p40 subunit shared with IL-12. Subsequently, even greater improvement was established for inhibitors of the p19 protein unique to IL-23A. IL-23 p19 inhibitors elicit clinical response in both bio-naive and bio-exposed patients and show superiority to tumour necrosis factor α inhibitors in plaque psoriasis. Reported differences in efficacy between p19 inhibitors suggest that individual drug action might be modulated by antibody affinity. Although long-term safety data are accumulating, rates of serious adverse events and infections for interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitors are similar to the rates for placebo across approved indications.

Infections in psoriatic arthritis: association with treatment

Serious infections (SIs) remain one of the most significant comorbidities in patients with inflammatory arthritides including psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Apart from methotrexate (MTX) and biologics such as tumor necrosis factor (TNFi), interleukin-12/23 (IL-12/23i), and IL-17 inhibitors (IL-17i), traditionally used for the treatment of PsA, recently biologics such as IL-23i and targeted synthetic agents like JAK inhibitors (JAKi) have been introduced in the daily clinical practice for the treatment of this disease. Although overall the incidence of SIs in patients with PsA treated with these agents is lower compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis, still a number of unresolved issues regarding their safety remain. Current evidence is reassuring regarding the safety profile of conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, such as MTX. The increased risk for reactivation of latent infections, such as tuberculosis and hepatitis B virus (HBV) with the use of TNFi, is well described; nevertheless, it is significantly ameliorated with the appropriate screening and prophylaxis. Regarding IL-12/23i and IL-17i, there are no significant safety signals, except from an increased incidence of usually mild Candida infections with the latter class. Newer biologics such as IL-23i and targeted synthetic agents like JAKi have been recently introduced in the daily clinical practice for the treatment of this disease. While IL-23i has not been shown to increase the risk for common or opportunistic infections, a well-established association of JAKi with herpes zoster warrants the attention of rheumatologists. In this narrative review, we summarize the infectious complications of available treatment options by drug class in patients with PsA.

Debate at the GRAPPA 2023 Annual Meeting: Should Methotrexate Be the First Systemic Therapy in Psoriatic Disease?

Despite substantial evidence that methotrexate (MTX) has inferior efficacy, safety, and tolerability compared to newer systemic therapies, MTX remains one of the most commonly prescribed first-line systemic therapies for psoriatic arthritis worldwide and for psoriasis in some countries. At the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2023 annual meeting in Dublin, Ireland, Drs. William Tillett and Joseph Merola engaged in debate over whether MTX should be the first systemic therapy used in psoriatic disease (PsD). Each presented evidence-based arguments, incorporating multiple data sources, including clinical trials, in support for and against MTX's status as first-line systemic therapy for PsD. This article summarizes their debate for the broader PsD community.

[Head-to-head studies on psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis]

Given the ever-increasing number of approved therapies for the treatment of psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), head-to-head (H2H) comparative studies are essential. These are aimed primarily at a comparative analysis of treatment effectiveness. In both PsO and PsA, biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARD) have been shown to be superior to conventional therapies in H2H studies. In PsO interleukin 17 (IL-17) and IL-23 inhibitors proved superiority compared to tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (etanercept and adalimumab) in several studies. Ustekinumab was more effective than etanercept, but less effective than IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Only a few H2H studies have been published on the treatment of PsA. In the Spirit H2H study ixekizumab was superior to adalimumab using a combined endpoint of arthritis and psoriasis response (ACR-50 and PASI-100). When looking at arthritic symptoms only (ACR-20), secukinumab was not significantly superior to adalimumab in the EXCEED study but was superior in terms of the effect on skin involvement (PASI90). Other H2H studies focused on the treatment of enthesitis (ECLIPSA study), the efficacy of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition (SELECT-PSA-1) or the additional administration of methotrexate to bDMARD treatment (MUST study). The H2H data have been incorporated into the treatment guidelines and have led to IL-17 and IL-23 inhibition being preferred over TNF inhibition in cases of relevant skin involvement in PsA.

Treatment strategies for Spondyloarthritis: Implementation of precision medicine - Or "one size fits all" concept?

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a term to describe a group of chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases, which have common pathophysiological, genetic, and clinical features. Under the umbrella term SpA, two main groups are subsumed: axial SpA (radiographic axSpA and non-radiographic axSpA) and peripheral SpA (with the leading representative being psoriatic arthritis (PsA) but also arthritis associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), reactive arthritis, and undifferentiated pSpA). The key clinical symptom in axSpA is chronic back pain, typically with inflammatory characteristics, which starts in early adulthood, while the leading clinical manifestations of peripheral SpA (pSpA) are arthritis, enthesitis, and/or dactylitis. Furthermore, extra-musculoskeletal manifestations (EMMs) (acute anterior uveitis, psoriasis, and IBD) can accompany axial or peripheral symptoms. All these factors need to be taken into account when making treatment decisions in SpA patients. Despite the major advances in the treatment landscape over the past two decades with the introduction of biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) and most recently targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs), a relevant proportion of patients still does not achieve the desired state of remission (=absence of disease activity). With this implementation of new treatment modalities, clinicians now have more choices to make in the treatment algorithms. However, despite generalized treatment recommendations, all factors need to be carefully considered when deciding on the optimal treatment strategy for an individual patient in clinical practice, aiming at an important first step towards personalized treatment strategies in SpA. In this narrative review, we focus on the efficacy of approved and emerging treatment options in axSpA and PsA as the main representative of pSpA and discuss their selective effect on the different manifestations associated with SpA to provide guidance on drivers of treatment decisions in specific situations.

Monotherapy or combination therapy in PsA: current aspects

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is an immune-mediated inflammatory disease with heterogeneity regarding its clinical features, mainly affecting the skin and the musculoskeletal system; additionally, extra-musculoskeletal manifestations and comorbidities are common, adding complexity to its treatment. In the last decades, a plethora of therapeutic options have been available, including conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), biological DMARDs (bDMARDs), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs), and many recommendations have been published regarding the proper use of them in patients with PsA. In rheumatoid arthritis, the combination of conventional with bDMARDs or tsDMARDs is a common and recommended practice, whereas in PsA there is scarce data about the benefit of this combination. This review summarizes all the available data from randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and registries about the value of this therapeutic strategy.

Early psoriatic arthritis: clinical and therapeutic challenges

INTRODUCTION

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic immunoinflammatory disease of the enthesis and adjacent synovium, skin, and nail, which early diagnosis may be crucial for starting a prompt therapeutic intervention. Theoretically, early treatment offers the advantage of acting on the reduction of the articular damage progression since initial phases of the disease.

AREAS COVERED

This review explores the challenges of clinical-diagnostic aspects and the underlying pathophysiology of early PsA phases, as well as the evidence evaluating the impact of early intervention on disease outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Main instruments for early PsA diagnosis include recognizing synovial-entheseal inflammatory signs at onset, improving screening PsA high-risk subjects, and increasing disease knowledge of physicians and patients with psoriasis or familial history. PsA continues to significantly impact on the Quality of Life of patients affected by the disease, making necessary to deeply study clinical manifestations, risk factors, and underlying immunoinflammatory mechanisms, as well as to identify biomarkers for early identification. Additionally, it remains a need to increase more evidence on understanding how early treatment of PsA and of psoriasis might influence the course of the disease.

Early psoriatic arthritis: when is the right time to start advanced therapy?

Despite significant advances in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the last two decades, remission remains elusive and there is no cure. Evidence from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) confirming enhanced response and outcome from earlier treatment intervention suggests the plausibility of the window of opportunity in the pathogenesis of RA. Yet, data are lacking in PsA. Although treatment response may be enhanced in shorter disease duration, it is unknown how this early intervention may impact long-term outcomes. Furthermore, it remains to be demonstrated whether there is a best treatment strategy and time of intervention. Crucially, the main hurdle when aiming for early treatment intervention is the ability to achieve a timely diagnosis that highlights the need to focus research efforts on characterizing the very early disease stages including the transition to PsA in the at-risk psoriasis population.

No difference in clinical parameters and drug retention in PsA patients receiving b/tsDMARD monotherapy versus combination with methotrexate: data from the RABBIT-SpA registry

BACKGROUND

The potential benefit of methotrexate (MTX) in combination with biologic (b) and targeted synthetic (ts) disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is still a matter of debate.

OBJECTIVES

To compare clinical and patient reported characteristics as well as drug retention rates in PsA patients receiving b/tsDMARD monotherapy or in combination with MTX.

METHODS

RABBIT-SpA is a prospective longitudinal cohort study including axSpA and PsA patients. In this analysis, PsA patients were stratified into two groups: starting b/tsDMARD as monotherapy or in combination with MTX. Treatment retention was compared by drug survival analysis.

RESULTS

69% of the patients (n=900) started b/tsDMARD as monotherapy while 31% were treated in combination with MTX (n=405). At baseline, clinical domains like skin, nail and joint affection, dactylitis, enthesitis and axial involvement were similar between the groups. Only the patients' satisfaction concerning tolerability of the previous treatment was significantly better in the combination group at treatment start. Drug retention rates did not differ between the groups (p=0.4). At 6/12 months, 66%/48% of patients in monotherapy and 67%/48% in the combination group were still on their original treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any clinical parameters with notable influence on the choice of b/tsDMARD mono or MTX-combination therapy in PsA. Drug retention rates are similar between mono and combination therapy. It seems that the decision to continue MTX at initiation of b/tsDMARDs is mostly based on the subjective tolerability of MTX treatment.

Enthesitis in a European registry-based cohort of patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors: clinical burden, patient-reported outcomes, and treatment response

OBJECTIVE

To explore the registration of enthesitis among biologic-naïve patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) initiating tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) treatment across 12 European registries, compare the disease burden and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients with and without enthesitis, and assess the enthesitis treatment response.

METHOD

Demographics, clinical characteristics, and PROs at first TNFi (TNFi-1) initiation (baseline) were assessed in patients with PsA, diagnosed by a rheumatologist, with versus without assessment of entheses and between those with versus without enthesitis. Enthesitis scores and resolution frequency were identified at follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 10 547 patients in the European Spondyloarthritis (EuroSpA) Research Collaboration Network initiating TNFi, 1357 underwent evaluation for enthesitis. Eight registries included a validated scoring system for enthesitis. At baseline, 874 patients underwent entheses assessment [Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score (MASES) 485 patients, Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) 389 patients]. Enthesitis was detected by MASES in 170/485 (35%, mean score ± sd 3.1 ± 2.4) and by SPARCC in 236/389 (61%, 4 ± 3.4). Achilles enthesitis was most frequent, by both MASES (unilateral/bilateral 28%/9%) and SPARCC (48%/18%). MASES/SPARCC baseline and follow-up scores for TNFi-1 were available for 100/105 patients. Of these, 63 patients (63%) (MASES) and 46 (43.8%) (SPARCC) achieved resolution of enthesitis. The site-specific enthesitis resolution was overall lower at SPARCC sites (peripheral; 63-80%) than at MASES sites (mainly axial; 82-100%) following TNFi-1. Disease activity and PROs were worse in patients with versus without enthesitis.

CONCLUSION

Entheseal assessments are only registered in a minority of patients with PsA in routine care. When assessed, enthesitis was common, and a substantial proportion demonstrated resolution following treatment with TNFi-1.

The protocol of a clinical effectiveness trial comparing standard step-up care, early combination DMARD therapy and early use of TNF inhibitors for the treatment of moderate to severe psoriatic arthritis: the 3-arm parallel group SPEED randomized controlled trial

Objectives

The aim of the Severe Psoriatic arthritis - Early intervEntion to control Disease trial is to compare outcomes in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients with poor prognostic factors treated with standard step-up conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), combination csDMARDs or a course of early biologics.

Design

This multicentre UK trial was embedded within the MONITOR-PsA cohort, which uses a trial within cohort design.

Methods and analysis

Patients with newly diagnosed PsA and at least one poor prognostic factor (polyarthritis, C-reactive protein >5 mg/dL, health assessment questionnaire >1, radiographic erosions) were randomized equally and open-label to either standard care with 'step-up' csDMARD therapy, initial therapy with combination csDMARDs (methotrexate with either sulfasalazine or leflunomide) or to early biologics induction therapy (adalimumab plus methotrexate). The primary outcome is the PsA disease activity score at week 24.

Ethics

Ethical approval for the study was granted by the South Central Research Ethics Committee (ref 18/SC/0107).

Discussion

Treatment recommendations for PsA suggest more intensive therapy for those with poor prognostic factors but there are no studies that have previously used prognostic factors to guide therapy. Applying initial intensive therapy has shown improved outcomes in other inflammatory arthritides but has never been tried in PsA. Combination csDMARDs have shown some superiority over single therapies but there are limited data and concerns about side effects. Early use of biologics has also been shown to be superior to methotrexate but these drugs are costly and not usually funded first line. However, if a short course of biologics can rapidly suppress inflammation allowing treatment to be withdrawn and response maintained on methotrexate, this may be a cost-effective model for early use.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03739853) and EudraCT (2017-004542-24).

Risk of infections in psoriatic arthritis or axial spondyloarthritis patients treated with targeted therapies: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the risk of global infections in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis encompassing ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nr-axSpA) treated with targeted therapies.

METHODS

Medline and Cochrane databases were systematically searched up to March 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in patients with PsA or axial spondyloarthritis treated with biologic or targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs). Global infections (any infections reported, including bacterial, viral and fungal infections, except serious infections) were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included serious infections defined as life-threatening infections or any infection requiring intravenous antibiotics or hospitalization. The relative risk of infections was determined by meta-analysis of RCTs.

RESULTS

A total of 60 RCTs were included (20,418 patients), encompassing 17 b/tsDMARDs, compared with placebo, conventional synthetic drugs (csDMARDs) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). An increased risk of any infection for patients exposed to these drugs was found (RR 1.15, 95% CI [1.06-1.25]), mainly with high doses and longer duration of treatment. Most infections were respiratory tract or ear, nose, and throat (ENT) infections. Subgroup analyses showed a statistically significant increased risk of infections for axial spondyloarthritis patients (RR 1.32, 95% CI [1.14-1.52]), but not for PsA patients (RR 1.05, 95% CI [0.97-1.14]). Infection risk was highest with TNF inhibitors (RR 1.23, 95% CI [1.11-1.37]) and IL-17 inhibitors (RR 1.30, 95% CI [1.07-1.59]). No increased risk of serious infections was shown.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to serious infections, the risk of global infections is moderately increased with b/tsDMARDs in spondyloarthritis, and is associated in particular with use of TNF and IL-17 inhibitors.

Real-world evaluation of persistence, effectiveness and usage patterns of tofacitinib in treatment of psoriatic arthritis in Australia

OBJECTIVES

To describe treatment patterns and persistence of tofacitinib, interleukin 17 inhibitors (IL-17Ai) and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Data from adult patients with PsA and who had received at least one prescription of tofacitinib, IL-17Ai or TNFi between May 2019 and September 2021 were sourced from the Australian OPAL dataset. Persistence, analysed via Kaplan-Meier methods, and propensity score matching between tofacitinib and bDMARD (IL-17Ai and TNFi) groups were conducted.

RESULTS

Of 16,692 patients with PsA, 1486 (n = 406 tofacitinib, n = 416 IL-17Ai and n = 664 TNFi) were included. More females were in the tofacitinib group (75.4%) than in the IL-17Ai (61.1%) and TNFi (64.8%) groups. Overall, 19.2% of tofacitinib patients were first line, compared with 41.8% of IL-17Ai and 62.8% of TNFi patients. In the overall population, the median persistence was 16.5 months (95% CI 13.8 to 19.5 months), 17.7 months (95% CI 15.8 to 19.6 months) and 17.2 months (95% CI 14.9 to 20.5 months) in the tofacitinib, IL-17Ai and TNFi groups, respectively. Persistence was similar in the tofacitinib/IL-17Ai matched population; however, in the tofacitinib/TNFi matched population, persistence was longer in the tofacitinib group (18.7 months, 95% CI 15.6 to 21.4 months) compared with the TNFi group (12.2 months, 95% CI 19.9 to 14.9 months).

CONCLUSIONS

In this Australian real-world dataset, tofacitinib was more frequently used in later lines and among a slightly higher proportion of female patients than IL-17Ai or TNFi. Overall, treatment persistence was similar for tofacitinib, IL-17Ai and TNFi, but tofacitinib exhibited longer persistence than TNFi in a matched population. Key Points • This is the first, large real-world study from Australia investigating the demographics, treatment patterns and comparative treatment persistence of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with tofacitinib and biologic disease-modifying drugs (bDMARDs). • The study suggests that tofacitinib is an effective intervention in PsA with at least comparable persistence to bDMARDs: tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and interleukin-17 A inhibitors (IL-17Ai).

Efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bimekizumab, a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody targeting both interleukin (IL)-17A and IL-17F, could be effective for treating Psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in the management of PsA.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search by August 2023 was performed through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. investigating the efficacy or safety data of bimekizumab in the treatment of PsA. Data was pooled using the random-effects models. Egger tests were used to evaluate potential publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 4 RCTs, involving 892 PsA patients and 467 placebo controls, were included in this analysis. Bimekizumab significantly increased the rates of PASI75 and PASI100 compared with placebos [RR = 7.22, 95% CI (5.24, 9.94), p < 0.001; RR = 10.12, 95% CI (6.00, 17.09), p < 0.001]. The rate of overall adverse events was slightly higher in the bimekizumab group [RR = 1.42, 95% CI (1.05, 1.93) p = 0.023). However, there were fewer adverse severe drug reactions in the bimekizumab group compared to the placebo.

CONCLUSION

Bimekizumab had a significant clinical benefit in managing PsA and an acceptable safety profile.

Effectiveness and safety of biological and target synthetic drugs treatment for psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis (PA) is a chronic inflammatory systemic arthritis that can result in loss of functional capacity and joint deformation. This systematic review assessed the effectiveness and safety of biological and target synthetic drugs for treating PA.

METHODS

We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the use of Adalimumab, Etanercept, Infliximab, Golimumab, Secukinumab, Certolizumab Pegol and Tofacitinib in the main general databases and clinical trial registers databases. The primary outcomes were ACR 50, PsARC, and serious adverse events. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Network meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model and frequentist approach. The CINeMA software was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We included 33 RCTs (n = 11,034). The results from the network meta-analysis for the ACR 50 at 6-months follow-up showed that all drugs were superior to placebo, with Secukinumab (high certainty of evidence), Infliximab (very low certainty of evidence) and Adalimumab (high certainty of evidence) ranking the highest. Regarding the PsARC (at 6-months follow-up), all drugs, except for Golimumab (very low certainty of evidence), were superior to placebo, with Etanercept (low certainty of evidence), Infliximab (low certainty of evidence) and Certolizumab Pegol (low certainty of evidence) being the most effective drugs. There were no significant differences in the risk of serious adverse events between the drugs and placebo. Golimumab (very low certainty of evidence), Secukinumab (low certainty of evidence), and Adalimumab (very low certainty of evidence) ranked the highest for safety.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, based on the balance between efficacy and safety, Secukinumab and Adalimumab may be the preferred options among the evaluated drugs for treating patients with PsA. However, caution is necessary when interpreting the safety findings, as they are supported by evidence of low to very low certainty. Consequently, the balance between benefits and potential risks may change as new safety evaluation studies become available.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42022315577.

Unmet need in rheumatology: reports from the Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting, 2023

The Advances in Targeted Therapies meets annually, convening experts in the field of rheumatology to both provide scientific updates and identify existing scientific gaps within the field. To review the major unmet scientific needs in rheumatology. The 23rd annual Advances in Targeted Therapies meeting convened with more than 100 international basic scientists and clinical researchers in rheumatology, immunology, infectious diseases, epidemiology, molecular biology and other specialties relating to all aspects of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. We held breakout sessions in five rheumatological disease-specific groups including: rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpa), systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), systemic sclerosis (SSc) and vasculitis, and osteoarthritis (OA). In each group, experts were asked to identify and prioritise current unmet needs in clinical and translational research. An overarching theme across all disease states is the continued need for clinical trial design innovation with regard to therapeutics, endpoint and disease endotypes. Within RA, unmet needs comprise molecular classification of disease pathogenesis and activity, pre-/early RA strategies, more refined pain profiling and innovative trials designs to deliver on precision medicine. Continued scientific questions within PsA include evaluating the genetic, immunophenotypic, clinical signatures that predict development of PsA in patients with psoriasis, and the evaluation of combination therapies for difficult-to-treat disease. For axSpA, there continues to be the need to understand the role of interleukin-23 (IL-23) in pathogenesis and the genetic relationship of the IL-23-receptor polymorphism with other related systemic inflammatory diseases (eg, inflammatory bowel disease). A major unmet need in the OA field remains the need to develop the ability to reliably phenotype and stratify patients for inclusion in clinical trials. SLE experts identified a number of unmet needs within clinical trial design including the need for allowing endpoints that reflect pharmacodynamic/functional outcomes (eg, inhibition of type I interferon pathway activation; changes in urine biomarkers). Lastly, within SSc and vasculitis, there is a lack of biomarkers that predict response or disease progression, and that allow patients to be stratified for therapies. There remains a strong need to innovate clinical trial design, to identify systemic and tissue-level biomarkers that predict progression or response to therapy, endotype disease, and to continue developing therapies and therapeutic strategies for those with treatment-refractory disease. This document, based on expert consensus, should provide a roadmap for prioritising scientific endeavour in the field of rheumatology.

The Saudi consensus recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis (2023)

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a complex inflammatory disease characterized by musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal manifestations. It is a distinct disease entity at the interface between rheumatology and dermatology, making it challenging to manage. The diverse clinical presentation and severity of PsA require a multidisciplinary approach for optimal care. Early diagnosis and management are necessary to improving quality of life for patients. In Saudi Arabia, there is currently no unified national consensus on the best practices for managing PsA. This lack of consensus leads to debate and uncertainty in the treatment of the disease, resulting in over or under prescribing of biological agents. To address this issue, a multidisciplinary work group was formed by the Saudi Ministry of Health. This group, consisting of dermatologists, rheumatologists, and pharmacists, aimed to develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for he use and monitoring of biological therapy in PsA management. The work group conducted five consensus workshops between December 2021 to March 2022. Using the nominal group technique, they discussed various aspects of PsA management, including eligibility criteria for biological treatment, monitoring of disease activity, treatment goals, screening, precautions, and management of PsA with biologic therapies. The group also considered special considerations for patients with comorbidities, pregnant and lactating women, as well as pediatric and adolescent populations. The resulting consensus document provides recommendations that are applicable to the Saudi setting, taking into account international guidelines and the specific needs of PsA patients in the country. The consensus document will be regularly updated to incorporate new data and therapeutic agents as they become available. Key Points • In Saudi Arabia, there is a lack of unified national consensus on the optimal management of PsA, therefore, this article aims to provide up-to-date evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal use and monitoring of biologic therapy in the management of PsA in Saudi Arabia. • The consensus development process was undertaken by a multidisciplinary work group of 13 experts, including two dermatologists, six rheumatologists, and five pharmacists. • There is more than one disease activity tool used in PsA disease, depending on the disease domain - peripheral arthritis Disease Activity Index in Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA) or Minimal Disease Activity (MDA), axial PsA Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS), and dactylitis and enthesitis MDA. • The main goal of therapy in all patients with PsA is to achieve the target of remission, or alternatively, low disease activity in all disease domains and improve quality of life (QoL).

Summary of certolizumab pegol in psoriasis including structural features, pharmacokinetics and treatment

Psoriasis pathogenesis involves TNF-α, IL-23 and IL17, against which biologics have been highly effective. Among the five TNF-α inhibitors available for psoriasis, namely infliximab, adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab and certolizumab pegol (CZP), CZP has a unique mechanism of action due to its structure. As CZP lacks the Fc region, it does not cross the placenta and can be safely used in pregnant women. Its PEGylated nature allows for longer distribution time in tissues, potentially leading to a longer-lasting effect compared with other TNF-α inhibitors. In clinical trials, the efficacy of CZP on psoriasis skin symptoms and joint symptoms was comparable to other TNF-α inhibitors, with no discernible differences in safety profiles.

Rasmussen S, Lindström U, Askling J, Michelsen B, Di Giuseppe D, Wallman JK, Gudbjornsson B, Love TJ, Nordström DC, Yli-Kerttula T, Nekvindová L, Vencovský J, Iannone F, Cauli A, Loft AG, Glintborg B, Laas K, Rotar Z, Tomšič M, Macfarlane GJ, Möller B, van de Sande M, Codreanu C, Nissen MJ, Birlik M, Erten S, Santos MJ, Vieira-Sousa E, Hetland ML, Østergaard M. Predictors of DAPSA28 remission in patients with psoriatic arthritis initiating a first TNF inhibitor: results from 13 European registries

OBJECTIVES

In bio-naïve patients with PsA initiating a TNF inhibitor (TNFi), we aimed to identify baseline predictors of Disease Activity index for PsA in 28 joints (DAPSA28) remission (primary objective) and DAPSA28 moderate response at 6 months, as well as drug retention at 12 months across 13 European registries.

METHODS

Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were retrieved and the three outcomes investigated per registry and in pooled data, using logistic regression analyses on multiply imputed data. In the pooled cohort, selected predictors that were either consistently positive or negative across all three outcomes were defined as common predictors.

RESULTS

In the pooled cohort (n = 13 369), 6-month proportions of remission, moderate response and 12-month drug retention were 25%, 34% and 63% in patients with available data (n = 6954, n = 5275 and n = 13 369, respectively). Five common baseline predictors of remission, moderate response and 12-month drug retention were identified across all three outcomes. The odds ratios (95% CIs) for DAPSA28 remission were: age, per year: 0.97 (0.96-0.98); disease duration, years (<2 years as reference): 2-3 years: 1.20 (0.89-1.60), 4-9 years: 1.42 (1.09-1.84), ≥10 years: 1.66 (1.26-2.20); men vs women: 1.85 (1.54-2.23); CRP of >10 vs ≤10 mg/l: 1.52 (1.22-1.89) and 1 mm increase in patient fatigue score: 0.99 (0.98-0.99).

CONCLUSION

Baseline predictors of remission, response and adherence to TNFi therapy were identified, of which five were common for all three outcomes, indicating that the predictors emerging from our pooled cohort may be considered generalizable from country level to disease level.

Safety of biologic therapy in combination with methotrexate in moderate to severe psoriasis: a cohort study from the BIOBADADERM registry

BACKGROUND

Safety is an important consideration in decisions on treatment for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and the study of drug safety is the main purpose of the BIOBADADERM registry. The combination of a biologic agent and a conventional systemic drug [generally methotrexate (MTX)] is a common treatment in clinical practice. However, there is a paucity of evidence from real-world practice on the safety of such combination regimens in the treatment of psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to ascertain whether the use of regimens combining biologic drugs with MTX in the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis increases the risk of adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs (SAEs). We compared monotherapy using tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors with the use of the same drugs in combination with MTX.

METHODS

Using data from the BIOBADADERM registry, we compared biologic monotherapies with therapies that were combined with MTX. We estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) using a random effects Poisson regression with 95% confidence intervals for all AEs, SAEs, infections and serious infections and other AEs by system organ class.

RESULTS

We analysed data from 2829 patients and 5441 treatment cycles, a total of 12 853 patient-years. The combination of a biologic with MTX was not associated with statistically significant increases in overall risk of AEs or SAEs in any treatment group. No increase in the total number of infections or serious infections in patients receiving combined therapy was observed for any group. However, treatment with a TNF inhibitor combined with MTX was associated with an increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal AEs (aIRR 2.50, 95% CI 1.57-3.98; P < 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of AEs and SAEs was not significantly increased in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis receiving different classes of biologic drugs combined with MTX compared with those on biologic monotherapy.

Bimekizumab for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis

INTRODUCTION

Interleukin (IL)-17A and IL-17F have overlapping roles in pro-inflammatory signaling and have been implicated in the pathogenesis of psoriatic disease. Bimekizumab is the first human monoclonal antibody to selectively inhibit IL-17F in addition to IL-17A. Bimekizumab has been studied in several phase II/III trials and has been approved for the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the EU and UK.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search identified clinical trials examining the efficacy and safety of bimekizumab for PsA, which were critically appraised.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical trials of bimekizumab in PsA have demonstrated rapid and sustained treatment responses and depth of response across the multiple disease domains. High levels of efficacy were sustained to 152 weeks in phase IIb trials, and to 52 weeks in phase III trials. Bimekizumab was generally well tolerated. As expected, due to the role of IL-17 in the immune response to fungal pathogens, there was an increase in mild-to-moderate, localized fungal infections with bimekizumab treatment, very few of which led to discontinuation. Studies over longer time periods, with relevant comparators from the IL-17A inhibitor class, and real-world data will be important to further define the role of bimekizumab among currently available treatments for PsA. [Figure: see text].

Combination of methotrexate with oral disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review

Background: Oral conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs), especially methotrexate, are the cornerstone of treating psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The use of csDMARDs with biologics has increased their efficacy in psoriasis. However, the combination of two oral DMARDs in patients with PsA has not been adequately reviewed. In this study, we explore the combinational use of methotrexate with DMARDs in PsA patients. Materials & methods: A review was conducted using Medline (PubMed), Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, covering articles up to February 2023. Results & conclusion: Nine studies comprising 1993 participants were included. The evidence supporting combination therapy remains limited. Combinational therapy could be considered in patients with inadequate response to monotherapy or no access to biologics.

A clinical review of structural damage in psoriatic arthritis for dermatologists: From pathogenesis to ongoing controversies

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that often goes unrecognized in patients with psoriasis. As a result, patients may develop significant structural damage before diagnosis and initiation of adequate treatment. Dermatologists are in an unique position to identify early signs and symptoms of PsA. Here, we briefly review the pathogenesis of PsA, differences in PsA presentation within real-world dermatology practice versus rheumatology clinical trials, and imaging modalities that can be used to assess structural damage. We then discuss several ongoing controversies related to prediction, assessment, and treatment of PsA-related structural damage. Debated questions include the following: (1) Does subclinical enthesitis predict progression from psoriasis to PsA?, (2) Does methotrexate inhibit progression of structural damage?, (3) Does structural damage correlate with clinical disease activity?, and (4) Can progression from psoriasis to PsA be prevented? Evidence presented herein suggests that dermatologists, together with rheumatologists, can play important roles in the early diagnosis and treatment of PsA, thereby potentially preventing irreversible structural damage.

Evaluating the efficacy of biologics with and without methotrexate in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

An important consideration in the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is whether the addition of methotrexate (MTX) to biologics has greater efficacy than biologic monotherapy with respect to efficacy outcomes in these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing biologics by treatment class with and without MTX for treatment of adults with active PsA.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) identified randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials, and a Bayesian NMA compared biologics with and without MTX by treatment class (tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi), interleukin-23 inhibitors (IL-23i) and IL-17i). Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology 20%, 50% and 70% (ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70) improvement response.

RESULTS

The SLR initially identified 31 studies, of which 17 met feasibility criteria for the NMA by containing the 'without MTX' subgroup. For ACR20 efficacy (the most robust assessment examined), all active treatments were significantly better than placebo. No statistically significant differences were demonstrated between biologic monotherapy (for all classes examined) and biologics in combination with MTX for ACR20/50. IL-17i were comparable to IL-23i, and IL-17i were significantly better than TNFi for ACR20. Although limited by fewer trials, TNFi, IL-23i and IL-17i were not statistically different for ACR50/70.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant use of MTX and biologics did not improve ACR efficacy outcomes versus biologic monotherapy. MTX does not appear to be necessary as a background therapy when biologics are used for the achievement of ACR20/50 responses in patients with PsA.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of SDZ ETN, an Etanercept Biosimilar, in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases: Final Results from Multi-Country COMPACT Study

INTRODUCTION

COMPACT, a non-interventional study, evaluated the persistence, effectiveness, safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial-spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with SDZ ETN (etanercept [ETN] biosimilar) in Europe and Canada.

METHODS

Patients (aged ≥ 18 years) who have been treated with SDZ ETN were categorised on the basis of prior treatment status (groups A-D): patients in clinical remission or with low disease activity under treatment with reference ETN or biosimilar ETN and switched to SDZ ETN; patients who received non-ETN targeted therapies and switched to SDZ ETN; biologic-naïve patients who started SDZ ETN after conventional therapy failure; or disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients with RA considered suitable for treatment initiation with a biologic and started on treatment with SDZ ETN. The primary endpoint was drug persistence, defined as time from study enrolment until discontinuation of SDZ ETN treatment.

RESULTS

Of the 1466 patients recruited, 844 (57.6%) had RA, 334 (22.8%) had axSpA and 288 (19.6%) had PsA. Patients had an ongoing SDZ ETN treatment at the time of enrolment for an observed average of 138 days (range 1-841); 22.7% of patients discontinued SDZ ETN through 12 months of study observation. Overall, all the patients receiving SDZ ETN showed good treatment persistence at 12 months with discontinuation rates of 15.2%, 25.7% and 27.8% in groups A, B and C, respectively. Across all patient groups, no major differences were observed in the disease activity and PRO scores between baseline and month 12. Injection-site reactions were low across the treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

These results support the effectiveness and safety of SDZ ETN treatment in patients with RA, axSpA or PsA in real-life conditions. The treatment persistence rates observed were consistent with previously published reports of patients treated with reference or other biosimilar ETN. No new safety signals were identified.

Sex-related differences in patient characteristics, and efficacy and safety of advanced therapies in randomised clinical trials in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sex-related differences in clinical manifestations and disease outcomes exist in psoriatic arthritis, however, there is limited information on sex-related differences in randomised controlled trials of psoriatic arthritis. We aimed to compare patient characteristics and efficacy and safety of advanced therapies (including biological and targeted synthetic therapies) between male and female patients with psoriatic arthritis participating in randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Medline, Embase, and Central databases, and conference abstract archives, from their inception to June 10, 2022, for randomised controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of advanced therapies in psoriatic arthritis. Two reviewers extracted information on participants' characteristics and rates of American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 and ACR50 response and minimal disease activity (MDA) by sex. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled effects of ACR20, ACR50, and MDA in male versus female patients by drug class.

FINDINGS

We included 54 trials (11 514 [50·9%] of 22 621 participants were female and 11 107 [49·1%] were male). Sex-disaggregated results were reported in a minority of studies (nine [17%] of 54 reported baseline characteristics by sex, 18 [33%] reported efficacy by sex, and two [4%] reported safety endpoints by sex). At baseline, male patients had lower baseline tender joint count (mean difference -3·01 [95% CI -3·83 to -2·18], health assessment questionnaire scores (-0·28 [-0·33 to -0·24]), pain scores (-4·58 [-6·86 to -2·30]), patient global assessment (-3·22 [-5·27 to -1·17]), and physician global assessment (-1·34 [-2·08 to -0·08]) than did female patients. Male patients had higher baseline psoriasis area and severity index scores (mean difference 1·95 [95% CI 0·78 to 3·11]) and C-reactive protein concentrations (2·57 [0·40 to 4·74]) than did female patients. ACR20 response by sex varied across drug classes, with higher rates in males than females with interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors (odds ratio [OR] 1·70 [95% CI 1·38-2·11]), IL-23 inhibitor (1·46 [1·20-1·78]), IL-12 and IL-23 inhibitor (2·67 [1·39-5·09]), and tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (1·55 [1·11-2·18]), but no difference with JAK and TYK2 inhibitors (1·10 [0·87-1·38]). Similarly, ACR50 response rates were higher in male patients versus female patients in all drug classes, with exception of JAK and TYK2 inhibitors (TNF inhibitors, OR 2·17 [95% CI 1·62-2·90]; IL-17 inhibitors, 1·93 [1·56-2·38]; IL-23 inhibitor, 1·71 [1·25-2·34]; IL-12 and 23 inhibitor, 2·43 [1·14-5·20]; and JAK and TYK2 inhibitors, 1·09 [0·73-1·62]). Male patients were more likely to reach MDA with most drug classes, including IL-17 inhibitors (OR 1·99 [95% CI 1·50-2·63]), IL-23 inhibitors (1·79 [1·29-2·50]), TNF inhibitors (2·62 [1·54-4·44]), and JAK and TYK2 inhibitors (1·77 [1·15-2·73]). Risk of bias was low for most studies.

INTERPRETATION

Biological sex of patients with psoriatic arthritis influences their response to advanced therapies, but the effect varies by drug class. Selective reporting might have influenced these results. Future trials should report baseline characteristics and endpoint results by sex.

FUNDING

Canadian Rheumatology Association.

Persistence of Biologics in the Treatment of Psoriatic Arthritis: Data From a Large Hospital-Based Longitudinal Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the trends in biologics use at a specialized center over a period of 20 years.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 571 patients diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis enrolled in the Toronto cohort who initiated biologic therapy between January 1, 2000, and July 7, 2020. The probability of drug persistence over time was estimated nonparametrically. The time to discontinuation of first and second treatment was analyzed using Cox regression models, whereas a semiparametric failure time model with a gamma frailty was used to analyze the discontinuation of treatment over successive administrations of biologic therapy.

RESULTS

The highest 3-year persistence probability was observed with certolizumab when used as first biologic treatment, while interleukin-17 inhibitors had the lowest probability. However, when used as second medication, certolizumab had the lowest drug survival even when accounting for selection bias. Depression and/or anxiety were associated with a higher rate of drug discontinuation due to all causes (relative risk [RR] 1.68, P = 0.01), while having higher education was associated with lower rates (RR 0.65, P = 0.03). In the analysis accommodating multiple courses of biologics, a higher tender joint count was associated with a higher rate of discontinuation due to all causes (RR 1.02, P = 0.01). Older age at the start of first treatment was associated with a higher rate of discontinuation due to side effects (RR 1.03, P = 0.01), while obesity had a protective role (RR 0.56, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Persistence in taking biologics depends on whether the biologic was used as first or second treatment. Depression and anxiety, higher tender joint count, and older age lead to drug discontinuation.

Responsiveness and Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Among Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the responsiveness to therapy and minimum clinically important improvement (MCII) for patient-reported outcome measures in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and to examine the impact of baseline disease activity on the ability to demonstrate change.

METHODS

A longitudinal cohort study was performed within the PsA Research Consortium. Patients completed several patient-reported outcomes, including the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data, the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease 12-item (PsAID12) questionnaire, and others. The mean change in the scores between visits and standardized response means (SRMs) were calculated. The MCII was calculated as the mean change in score among patients who reported minimal improvement. SRMs and MCIIs were compared among subgroups with moderate to highly active PsA and those with lower disease activity.

RESULTS

Among 171 patients, 266 therapy courses were included. The mean ± SD age was 51 ± 13.8 years, 53% were female, and the mean swollen and tender joint counts were 3 and 6, respectively, at baseline. SRMs and MCII for all measures were small to moderate, although greater among those with higher baseline disease activity. BASDAI had the best SRM overall and for less active PsA, and the clinical Disease Activity of PsA (cDAPSA) and PsAID12 were best for those with higher disease activity.

CONCLUSION

SRMs and MCII were relatively small in this real-world population, particularly among those with lower disease activity at baseline. BASDAI, cDAPSA, and PsAID12 had good sensitivity to change, but selection for use in trials should consider the baseline disease activity of patients to be enrolled.

Pharmacologic Treatment Strategies in Psoriatic Arthritis

PURPOSE

The goal of this narrative review was to provide current data on psoriatic arthritis (PsA) therapeutic strategies, supporting treatment decisions with a domain-based approach.

METHODS

This narrative review of treatment strategies for PsA focused on several disease domains (ie, peripheral arthritis, enthesitis, axial disease, dactylitis, skin and nail disease), as well as the so-called "related conditions" of uveitis, Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, international guidelines, and recent congress abstracts.

FINDINGS

Currently, multiple approved treatment options offer a wide range of options, such as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors; inhibitors of interleukin-17 (IL-17), IL-12/23 (IL-12/23), IL-23 (IL-23), and Janus kinase; the phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor apremilast; and the T-cell modulator abatacept. However, no treatment option shows clear superiority concerning efficacy on peripheral arthritis and dactylitis over the others, whereas limited evidence suggests that the IL-17 inhibitor ixekizumab and the IL-12/23 inhibitor ustekinumab may be superior to TNF inhibitors in treating enthesitis. Recent data on enthesitis have also shown promising results for methotrexate. Treatment of axial PsA is mostly derived from axial spondyloarthritis, and more data are needed focusing on this specific subgroup of PsA patients. Thus far, the most important finding from the only randomized controlled trial in this specific population is that the IL-17 inhibitor secukinumab was superior to placebo in terms of clinical and radiologic end-points in axial PsA. Regarding psoriatic skin involvement, head-to-head trials in PsA as well as skin psoriasis showed the superiority of IL-17, IL-23, and IL-12/23 inhibitors over TNF inhibitors. When treating PsA with concurrent uveitis, according to the existing data, monoclonal TNF inhibitor antibodies should be preferred. In PsA and concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, treatment decisions must include the consideration of which specific type of inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis) is present, as some of the agents either lack data or are ineffective in treating these 2 conditions. In both types, IL-17 inhibitors should be avoided. When determining treatment strategy, comorbidities should be carefully assessed, and the corresponding risk profile of the respective treatment modalities should be taken into consideration.

IMPLICATIONS

There are many approved therapeutic options for treating patients with PsA, and additional emerging treatment options are in the pipeline. Individualized treatment decisions for each patient, depending on the leading disease phenotype, underlying comorbidities, and patient preferences, should be made based on shared decision-making.

Real-World Evidence Assessing Psoriatic Arthritis by Disease Domain: An Evaluation of the CorEvitas Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry

OBJECTIVE

Real-world studies assessing treatment response by psoriatic arthritis (PsA) domains are limited. This study aimed to describe the patient characteristics, frequency and combinations of disease domains, disease activity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) by PsA domains in patients who initiated treatment with a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or interleukin-17 inhibitor (IL-17i).

METHODS

Adults with PsA who initiated treatment with a TNFi or an IL-17i between January 2013 and January 2021 and had a 6 (±3)-month follow-up were included. The prevalence of PsA domains, the most common domain combinations, treatment persistence, and unadjusted change in disease activity and PROs from baseline to 6 months for each PsA domain were summarized descriptively.

RESULTS

Of the 1005 eligible patients, 63% were receiving TNFi and 37% were receiving IL-17i. Forty percent of TNFi and 14% of IL-17i initiators received these treatments as first-line therapy. Peripheral arthritis and skin disease were the most common PsA domains identified in 86% and 82% of patients, respectively, and the triad of peripheral arthritis, skin disease, and nail psoriasis was the most common domain combination observed in 14% of patients. More than two thirds (68%) of patients remained on therapy at 6 months' follow-up. Improvements in disease activity and PROs were observed across all PsA domains in those receiving TNFi or IL-17i.

CONCLUSION

This real-world analysis highlights the heterogeneity in domain presentation; therefore, assessing all PsA domains is important for optimal disease management. Improvements in outcomes across all PsA domains demonstrate the effectiveness of TNFi and IL-17i in diverse patient groups exhibiting different phenotypes of PsA.

Nail Psoriasis: An Updated Review of Currently Available Systemic Treatments

Background

Nail psoriasis (NP) has a prevalence that ranges from 10 to 82% among patients with psoriasis (PsO) and is one of the most common difficult to treat site of psoriasis. We performed a thorough review of the literature, exploring evidence regarding all available NP systemic treatments, describing also in detail NP dedicated clinical trials.

Methods

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase prior to February 2023 using a combination of the terms "nail" AND "psoriasis" AND "systemic therapy" AND/OR "systemic treatment". A total of 47 original studies and case reports were reviewed in this article.

Results

Systemic therapies should be considered when the disorder involves more than 3 nails, has extensive skin and joint involvement, and has a significant impact on QoL, due to their best long-term efficacy. In detail, conventional and biologic systemic drugs demonstrated efficacy in recent trials, including acitretin, methotrexate, cyclosporine, apremilast, adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab, bimekizumab, guselkumab, risankizumab and tildrakizumab.

Conclusion

Several therapies have demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of NP; however, the choice of treatment depends not only on the severity of the nail involvement, but also on whether PsA is present, the patient's comorbidities other than PsA, previous treatment history, and the patient's drug preferences.

Inflammatory Cytokines in Psoriatic Arthritis: Understanding Pathogenesis and Implications for Treatment

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a persistent, inflammatory disease that affects individuals with psoriasis, arthritis, and enthesitis. Research has demonstrated that inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-23 (IL-23), and interleukin-17 (IL-17) play a pivotal role in both the onset and progression of PsA. These cytokines are generated by activated immune cells and stimulate the attraction of inflammatory cells to the synovium and joint tissues, resulting in the deterioration of cartilage and bone. The blocking of these cytokines has become a successful treatment strategy for PsA, as biological drugs that inhibit TNF-α, IL-23, and IL-17 have demonstrated notable clinical benefits. The association between PsA and other types of inflammatory cytokines or chemokines, excluding TNF-α, IL-23, and IL-17, has been extensively investigated in numerous studies. These findings may provide a chance for the discovery of novel therapeutic agents targeting other molecules, distinct from the currently approved biologics and targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs. In this review, we discuss the current understanding of the role of inflammatory cytokines in PsA pathogenesis and clinical implications of targeting these cytokines for PsA treatment.

Janus kinase inhibitors for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), a systemic disease, has multi-domain musculoskeletal pathologies along with dermatological manifestations. The current recommendations and the standard of care for the treatment of PsA is to address the domain-based pathologies and the disease severity of the six clinical domains unique to PsA, namely, arthritis of the large and small joints, skin involvement, nail involvement enthesitis, dactylitis and axial disease. With currently available therapies, there are good numbers of primary/secondary non-responders and there are added concerns because of intolerance and adverse effects. In that respect, JAK/STAT inhibitors bring new options for many such patients with psoriasis and PsA. Here, we will discuss currently approved JAK inhibitors for PsA and the others which are in different phases of development, including the TYK2 inhibitors.

Managing psoriatic arthritis in different clinical scenarios

INTRODUCTION

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic, immune-mediated disease characterized by synovio-entheseal inflammation. It is estimated to affect around 30% of patients with psoriasis and significantly reduces patients' physical function and quality of life. There is a growing number of treatment options for PsA, but due to the heterogeneous clinical features of the disease and prevalence of comorbidities, managing PsA can be challenging.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we review current understanding of the disease and available pharmacological options. Based on published treatment guidelines, emerging evidence and clinical experience, we provide our expert opinion on treatment strategies, taking into consideration the predominant disease domain and the presence of comorbidities, which can impact treatment decisions and clinical outcomes.

EXPERT OPINION

Biological and targeted synthetic disease-modifying agents are dramatically improving the lives of patients with PsA. Biosimilar TNF inhibitors offer a particularly versatile and cost-effective option, whilst newer biologics and targeted synthetic molecules that can be used to treat most domains of psoriatic disease are an attractive alternative to TNF inhibitors. Despite a lack of consensus on treatment sequencing and tapering, it is important that PsA patients, especially those with comorbidities, are looked after by a multidisciplinary team to optimize their care.

Changes in musculoskeletal disease activity and patient-reported outcomes in patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with ixekizumab: results from a real-world US cohort

Introduction

Ixekizumab has demonstrated efficacy in pivotal trials in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), both those naïve to prior biologic therapy and those with prior inadequate response or intolerance to biologics; however, minimal information is currently available on the effectiveness of ixekizumab in routine clinical practice. The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical effectiveness of ixekizumab for the treatment of PsA over 6- and 12-month follow-up periods in a real-world setting.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included patients who initiated treatment with ixekizumab from the OM1 PremiOMTM PsA dataset, a dataset of over 50,000 patients with claims and electronic medical record (EMR) data. Changes in musculoskeletal outcomes, such as tender and swollen joint count and patient-reported pain, as well as physician and patient global assessment, as measured using the Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI), and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3) were summarized at 6 and 12 months. The RAPID3, CDAI score, and their individual components were assessed in multivariable regressions adjusting for age, sex, and baseline value. The results were stratified by biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (bDMARD) status (naïve vs. experienced) and monotherapy status (monotherapy vs. combination therapy with conventional synthetic DMARDs). Changes in a 3-item composite score derived from a physician global assessment, patient global assessment, and patient-reported pain score were summarized.

Results

Among the 1,812 patients identified receiving ixekizumab, 84% had prior bDMARD treatment and 82% were monotherapy users. All outcomes improved at 6 and 12 months. For RAPID3, the mean (SD) change at 6 and 12 months was -1.2 (5.5) and -1.2 (5.9), respectively. Patients overall, bDMARD experienced, and monotherapy patients achieved statistically significant mean change in CDAI and all components from baseline to 6 and 12 months in adjusted analyses. Patients experienced an improvement in the 3-item composite score at both time points.

Conclusion

Treatment with ixekizumab was associated with improvements in musculoskeletal disease activity and PROs as assessed by several outcome measures. Future research should assess ixekizumab's clinical effectiveness in the real world across all PsA domains using PsA-specific endpoints.

Therapeutic Effects of Apremilast on Enthesitis and Dactylitis in Real Clinical Setting: An Italian Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Enthesitis and dactylitis are difficult-to-treat features of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), leading to disability and affecting quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate enthesitis (using the Leed enthesitis index (LEI)) and dactylitis at 6 and 12 months in patients treated with apremilast.

METHODS

Patients affected by PsA from fifteen Italian rheumatological referral centers were screened. The inclusion criteria were: (a) enthesitis or dactylitisphenotype; (b) treatment with apremilast 30 mg bid. Clinical and treatment history, including PsA disease activity, were recorded. Mann-Whitney and chi-squared tests were used to assess the differences between independent groups, and Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test assessed the differences between dependent samples. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The Eph cohort consisted of 118 patients (median LEI 3); the Dph cohort included 96 patients with a median dactylitis of 1 (IQR 1-2). According to an intention to treat analysis, 25% and 34% of patients with enthesitis achieved remission (i.e., LEI = 0) in T1 and T2. The remission of dactylitis was 47% in T1 and 44% in T2. The per protocol analysis (patients observed for at least 12 months) showed that both dactylitis and LEI significantly improved in T1 (median LEI 1 (IQR 1-3)) and T2 (median LEI 0 (IQR 1-2)).

CONCLUSION

Eph and Dph PsA patients treated with apremilast experienced a significant improvement in enthesitis and dactylitis activity. After 1 year, enthesitis and dactylitis remission was achieved in more than one-third of patients.

Consensus on targeted drug therapy for spondyloarthritis

Spondyloarthritis (SpA) is a group of chronic inflammatory diseases that predominantly involve the spine and/or peripheral joints. The clinical manifestations of SpA are highly heterogenous and complicated with various comorbidities. SpA is a disabling disease and adversely affects the quality of life of patients. Many new medications that target cytokines or pathways specific for the pathogenesis of SpA have been developed and they are becoming increasingly important in the treatment of SpA. However, identifying the target patient population and standardizing the usage of these drugs are critical issues in the clinical application of these "targeted therapeutic drugs". Under the leadership of National Clinical Research Center for Dermatologic and Immunologic Diseases (NCRC-DID), managed by Peking Union Medical College Hospital, the "Consensus on targeted drug therapy for spondyloarthritis" has been developed in collaboration with the Rheumatology and Immunology Physicians Committee, Chinese Medical Doctors Association, Rheumatology and Immunology Professional Committee, Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine, and Chinese Research Hospital Association Rheumatology and Immunology Professional Committee. This consensus has been developed with evidence-based methodology and has followed the international standard for consensus development.

Real-World Experience of Methotrexate in the Treatment of Skin Diseases: an Italian Delphi Consensus

BACKGROUND

After decades of use, methotrexate displays an established safety and efficacy profile in both in-hospital and outpatient settings. Despite its widespread use, there is surprisingly little clinical evidence to guide daily practice with methotrexate in dermatology.

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for clinicians in daily practice for areas in which there is limited guidance.

METHODS

A Delphi consensus exercise on 23 statements was carried out on the use of methotrexate in dermatological routine settings.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on statements that cover six main areas: (1) pre-screening exams and monitoring of therapy; (2) dosing and administration in patients naïve to methotrexate; (3) optimal strategy for patients in remission; (4) use of folic acid; (5) safety; and (6) predictors of toxicity and efficacy. Specific recommendations are provided for all 23 statements.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to optimize methotrexate efficacy, it is essential to optimize treatment using appropriate dosages, carrying out a rapid drug-based step-up on a treat-to-target strategy and preferably using the subcutaneous formulation. To manage safety aspects appropriately, it is essential to evaluate patients' risk factors and carry out proper monitoring during the course of treatment.

Biologics and Biosimilars in Psoriasis

Psoriasis is a chronic, debilitating, relapsing, inflammatory dermatosis, which affects approximately 2-3% of the population. The burgeoning research on pathogenesis of psoriasis has opened up new directions in management of this common condition. The introduction of biologics has given additional elements to the arsenal of psoriatic disease treatments. TNF-α inhibitors, IL-12/23 inhibitors, IL-17 inhibitors, CD-6 inhibitor proved highly efficient and have a good safety profile in numerous clinical trials. Biosimilar drugs are structurally almost similar to their reference biologic and are also made from living organism. Long-term follow-up and post-marketing surveillance are required to understand, long-term efficacy, adverse events of these powerful potent molecules.

Methotrexate treatment in early psoriatic arthritis in comparison to rheumatoid arthritis: an observational nationwide study

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to compare the proportions of patients with newly diagnosed psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) remaining on methotrexate (regardless of other disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-changes), and proportions not having started another DMARD (regardless of methotrexate discontinuation), within 2 years of starting methotrexate, as well as methotrexate effectiveness.

METHODS

Patients with DMARD-naïve, newly diagnosed PsA, starting methotrexate 2011-2019, were identified from high-quality national Swedish registers and matched 1:1 to comparable patients with RA. Proportions remaining on methotrexate and not starting another DMARD were calculated. For patients with disease activity data at baseline and 6 months, response to methotrexate monotherapy was compared through logistic regression, applying non-responder imputation.

RESULTS

In total, 3642/3642 patients with PsA/RA were included. Baseline patient-reported pain and global health were similar, whereas patients with RA had higher 28-joint scores and evaluator-assessed disease activity. Two years after methotrexate start, 71% of PsA vs 76% of patients with RA remained on methotrexate, 66% vs 60% had not started any other DMARD, and 77% vs 74% had not started specifically a biological or targeted synthetic DMARD. At 6 months, the proportions of patients with PsA versus RA achieving pain-scores ≤15 mm were 26% vs 36%; global health ≤20 mm: 32% vs 42%; evaluator-assessed 'remission': 20% vs 27%, with corresponding adjusted ORs (PsA vs RA) of 0.63 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.85); 0.57 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.76) and 0.54 (95% CI 0.39 to 0.75).

DISCUSSION

In Swedish clinical practice, methotrexate use is similar in PsA and RA, both regarding initiation of other DMARDs and methotrexate retention. On a group level, disease activity improved during methotrexate monotherapy in both diseases, although more so in RA.

Targeted Therapies in Psoriatic Arthritis-An Update

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a systemic inflammatory condition characterised by multiple clinical manifestations. Over the last decade, significant progress has been made in understanding the pathobiology of the disease. An expanded set of targeted therapies have emerged and have shown efficacy in PsA. Nevertheless, there is still a substantial subset of patients who experience no response or only a partial response to currently licensed therapies. The heterogeneous nature of the disease, together with a varying level of severity at presentation and disease activity during follow-up, brings tremendous challenges to devising management strategies. While there are certain pathophysiological similarities between PsA and rheumatoid arthritis (RA), it has become clear that there are discriminating features between these two conditions at the clinical, cellular, and molecular levels. However, there is a degree of overlap in the clinical approach when treating both PsA and RA, given that many biological and targeted therapies have proven efficacy for both pathologies. With an increasing understanding of the relevance of the IL-23/IL-17 axis in PsA, pharmacological agents blocking this pathway have provided promising possibilities for patients with PsA.

Comparison between methotrexate and apremilast in Psoriatic Arthritis-a single blind randomized controlled trial (APREMEPsA study)

To compare the efficacy of methotrexate and apremilast in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). This Single blinded (physician), parallel group, randomized controlled trial was conducted at a single centre between October 2019 and December 2020. Adult PsA patients (age > 18 years), fulfilling CASPAR criteria, not on methotrexate/apremilast in last 3 months and never receiving bDMARDs or, JAK inhibitors, having active articular disease (one or more swollen joint or, having one or more tender entheseal point) were recruited. Primary outcome measure was rate of major cDAPSA response at week 24 and secondary outcome measures were ACR 20 response, change in PASI score, Maastricht enthesitis score, Leeds dactylitis index, and health assessment questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and number of adverse events at week 24 between methotrexate and apremilast groups. A total of 31 patients were recruited (15 in the apremilast arm and 16 in the methotrexate arm) amongst whom 26 patients completed 24 weeks follow up (13 patients in the apremilast arm and 13 patients in the methotrexate arm). Median cDAPSA score at baseline was 23 (9) in the apremilast group and 20 (21) in the methotrexate group. No difference in major cDAPSA response at week 24 was observed between apremilast and methotrexate arm (20% vs. 37.5%; p = 0.433). In the secondary outcome measures, there was no significant differences between both the groups. Both the drugs were safe without any serious adverse events. There was no significant difference between methotrexate and apremilast in terms of efficacy as measured by cDAPSA and ACR20 responses.

Psoriatic Arthritis: Pathogenesis and Targeted Therapies

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA), a heterogeneous chronic inflammatory immune-mediated disease characterized by musculoskeletal inflammation (arthritis, enthesitis, spondylitis, and dactylitis), generally occurs in patients with psoriasis. PsA is also associated with uveitis and inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis). To capture these manifestations as well as the associated comorbidities, and to recognize their underlining common pathogenesis, the name of psoriatic disease was coined. The pathogenesis of PsA is complex and multifaceted, with an interplay of genetic predisposition, triggering environmental factors, and activation of the innate and adaptive immune system, although autoinflammation has also been implicated. Research has identified several immune-inflammatory pathways defined by cytokines (IL-23/IL-17, TNF), leading to the development of efficacious therapeutic targets. However, heterogeneous responses to these drugs occur in different patients and in the different tissues involved, resulting in a challenge to the global management of the disease. Therefore, more translational research is necessary in order to identify new targets and improve current disease outcomes. Hopefully, this may become a reality through the integration of different omics technologies that allow better understanding of the relevant cellular and molecular players of the different tissues and manifestations of the disease. In this narrative review, we aim to provide an updated overview of the pathophysiology, including the latest findings from multiomics studies, and to describe current targeted therapies.