15354 Response to treatment with secukinumab in obese patients with moderate to severe psoriasis

Biologics for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis is a chronic disease impacting quality of life (QoL). This network meta-analysis (NMA) compared efficacy and safety of all biologics approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis to better inform providers on mid-term outcomes, with a focus on the interleukin-23 p19 inhibitor tildrakizumab.

METHODS

MEDLINE®, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) from inception through January 2024. RCTs comparing biologics against placebo or each other reporting Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1, or Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 responses and safety outcomes (adverse events [AEs] or serious AEs [SAEs]) were sought. Bayesian NMAs were performed at week 28 as the primary time point of interest. Analyses were also performed at weeks 12 and 16. Findings were expressed as risk ratios (RR; efficacy outcomes), risk differences (RD; safety outcomes), and numbers needed to treat (NNT) with 95% credible intervals.

RESULTS

Of 7418 publications screened, 187 describing 124 RCTs of 12 biologics were included in the systematic literature review, and 103 RCTs were included for NMA. All treatments demonstrated improved efficacy and QoL vs. placebo at week 28. Tildrakizumab efficacy at week 28 was comparable to risankizumab and guselkumab, respectively, for PASI 75 (RR 8.74 vs. 8.92 and 8.91), PASI 90 (RR 14.09 vs. 14.81 and 14.77), and PGA 0/1 (RR 9.34 vs. 10.29 and 10.23). No biologics exhibited an increased risk of SAEs vs. placebo; tildrakizumab exhibited no increased risk vs. placebo for AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The investigated biologics demonstrated improved efficacy and QoL relative to placebo at week 28, with no increased risk of SAEs vs. placebo through week 16. At week 28, efficacy of tildrakizumab, risankizumab, and guselkumab was comparable. Limitations include lack of placebo comparators after week 12 or 16, which could affect results.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Bimekizumab and Other Biologics in Moderate to Severe Plaque Psoriasis: Updated Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Biologic treatments have made complete skin clearance in moderate to severe plaque psoriasis a real possibility. Although clinical trials demonstrated the superiority of bimekizumab over secukinumab, adalimumab, and ustekinumab, direct comparisons with other biologics are not available. This systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate the 1-year efficacy and safety of bimekizumab versus other biologic systemic therapies for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

We conducted an SLR to retrieve published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and PsycINFO on 13 January 2022. Two NMA types were used to analyse the long-term achievement of 100% improvement from baseline in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 100): (1) NMA of cumulative clinical benefits, based on the area under the curve, from week 0 to 52; (2) multinomial NMA at weeks 44‒60. Binomial NMA was used to evaluate long-term serious adverse events (SAEs).

RESULTS

The SLR identified 38 RCTs, of which 19 were included in the NMA. Bimekizumab 320 mg administered every 4 weeks to week 16 then every 8 weeks (Q4W/Q8W) showed a greater cumulative average number of days of PASI 100 response compared with all other biologics. These differences were statistically significant versus all biologics, except risankizumab 150 mg. The multinomial NMA demonstrated that interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23 inhibitors were the most efficacious treatments. No significant differences were found in long-term occurrence of SAEs.

CONCLUSION

Bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W/Q8W was superior to most other treatments in maintaining complete skin clearance during the first year of treatment. It demonstrated a greater cumulative average number of days with completely clear skin while displaying a comparable safety profile compared with all other biologics.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2022: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 12 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 179, and randomised participants to 62,339, 67.1% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.6 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (56%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (152) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (65/179) had high risk of bias, 24 unclear risk, and most (90) low risk. Most studies (138/179) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23, and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 49.16, 95% CI 20.49 to 117.95), bimekizumab (RR 27.86, 95% CI 23.56 to 32.94), ixekizumab (RR 27.35, 95% CI 23.15 to 32.29), risankizumab (RR 26.16, 95% CI 22.03 to 31.07). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab and ixekizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than secukinumab. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than brodalumab and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab, and brodalumab), and anti-IL23 drugs except tildrakizumab were significantly more likely to reach PASI 90 than ustekinumab, three anti-TNF alpha agents, and deucravacitinib. Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab. Adalimumab, tildrakizumab, and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with very low- to moderate-certainty evidence for all the comparisons. The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.6 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was very low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Systemic pharmacological treatments for chronic plaque psoriasis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease with either skin or joints manifestations, or both, and it has a major impact on quality of life. Although there is currently no cure for psoriasis, various treatment strategies allow sustained control of disease signs and symptoms. The relative benefit of these treatments remains unclear due to the limited number of trials comparing them directly head-to-head, which is why we chose to conduct a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biologics for people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis using a network meta-analysis, and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their efficacy and safety.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update of the living systematic review, we updated our searches of the following databases monthly to October 2021: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of systemic treatments in adults over 18 years with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, at any stage of treatment, compared to placebo or another active agent. The primary outcomes were: proportion of participants who achieved clear or almost clear skin, that is, at least Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90; proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) at induction phase (8 to 24 weeks after randomisation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted duplicate study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and analyses. We synthesised data using pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare treatments and rank them according to effectiveness (PASI 90 score) and acceptability (inverse of SAEs). We assessed the certainty of NMA evidence for the two primary outcomes and all comparisons using CINeMA, as very low, low, moderate, or high. We contacted study authors when data were unclear or missing. We used the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to infer treatment hierarchy, from 0% (worst for effectiveness or safety) to 100% (best for effectiveness or safety).

MAIN RESULTS

This update includes an additional 19 studies, taking the total number of included studies to 167, and randomised participants to 58,912, 67.2% men, mainly recruited from hospitals. Average age was 44.5 years, mean PASI score at baseline was 20.4 (range: 9.5 to 39). Most studies were placebo-controlled (57%). We assessed a total of 20 treatments. Most (140) trials were multicentric (two to 231 centres). One-third of the studies (57/167) had high risk of bias; 23 unclear risk, and most (87) low risk. Most studies (127/167) declared funding by a pharmaceutical company, and 24 studies did not report a funding source. Network meta-analysis at class level showed that all interventions (non-biological systemic agents, small molecules, and biological treatments) showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than placebo. Anti-IL17 treatment showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 compared to all the interventions, except anti-IL23. Biologic treatments anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and anti-TNF alpha showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than the non-biological systemic agents. For reaching PASI 90, the most effective drugs when compared to placebo were (SUCRA rank order, all high-certainty evidence): infliximab (risk ratio (RR) 50.19, 95% CI 20.92 to 120.45), bimekizumab (RR 30.27, 95% CI 25.45 to 36.01), ixekizumab (RR 30.19, 95% CI 25.38 to 35.93), risankizumab (RR 28.75, 95% CI 24.03 to 34.39). Clinical effectiveness of these drugs was similar when compared against each other. Bimekizumab, ixekizumab and risankizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than other anti-IL17 drugs (secukinumab and brodalumab) and guselkumab. Infliximab, anti-IL17 drugs (bimekizumab, ixekizumab, secukinumab and brodalumab) and anti-IL23 drugs (risankizumab and guselkumab) except tildrakizumab showed a higher proportion of patients reaching PASI 90 than ustekinumab and three anti-TNF alpha agents (adalimumab, certolizumab and etanercept). Ustekinumab was superior to certolizumab; adalimumab and ustekinumab were superior to etanercept. No significant difference was shown between apremilast and two non-biological drugs: ciclosporin and methotrexate. We found no significant difference between any of the interventions and the placebo for the risk of SAEs. The risk of SAEs was significantly lower for participants on methotrexate compared with most of the interventions. Nevertheless, the SAE analyses were based on a very low number of events with low- to moderate-certainty for all the comparisons (except methotrexate versus placebo, which was high-certainty). The findings therefore have to be viewed with caution. For other efficacy outcomes (PASI 75 and Physician Global Assessment (PGA) 0/1), the results were similar to the results for PASI 90. Information on quality of life was often poorly reported and was absent for several of the interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review shows that, compared to placebo, the biologics infliximab, bimekizumab, ixekizumab, and risankizumab were the most effective treatments for achieving PASI 90 in people with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on the basis of high-certainty evidence. This NMA evidence is limited to induction therapy (outcomes measured from 8 to 24 weeks after randomisation), and is not sufficient for evaluating longer-term outcomes in this chronic disease. Moreover, we found low numbers of studies for some of the interventions, and the young age (mean 44.5 years) and high level of disease severity (PASI 20.4 at baseline) may not be typical of patients seen in daily clinical practice. We found no significant difference in the assessed interventions and placebo in terms of SAEs, and the safety evidence for most interventions was low to moderate quality. More randomised trials directly comparing active agents are needed, and these should include systematic subgroup analyses (sex, age, ethnicity, comorbidities, psoriatic arthritis). To provide long-term information on the safety of treatments included in this review, an evaluation of non-randomised studies and postmarketing reports from regulatory agencies is needed. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. Living systematic reviews offer a new approach to review updating, in which the review is continually updated, incorporating relevant new evidence as it becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

Therapeutic drug monitoring in dermatology: the way towards dose optimization of secukinumab in chronic plaque psoriasis

Background

Despite the favourable efficacy profile of secukinumab, clinicians encounter varying clinical responses among patients potentially associated with under‐ and overdosing. As biologics are expensive, their rational use is crucial and evident. Therapeutic drug monitoring could guide clinicians in making decisions about treatment modifications.

Aim

In this multicentre, prospective study, we aimed to develop and validate a secukinumab immunoassay and searched for the therapeutic window in patients with psoriasis.

Methods

We determined secukinumab concentrations at trough in sera from 78 patients with psoriasis at multiple timepoints (Weeks 12, 24, 36, 48 and 52; after Week 52, measurements could be taken at an additional three timepoints) during maintenance phase, using an in‐house secukinumab immunoassay consisting of a combination of MA‐SEC66A2 as capture antibody and MA‐SEC67A9, conjugated to horseradish peroxidase, as detecting antibody. At each hospital visit, disease severity was assessed using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI).

Results

After quantification, 121 serum samples were included for dose–response analysis. Based on a linear mixed‐effects model, secukinumab trough concentrations were found to decrease with increasing body mass index (BMI). Based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, we concluded that the minimal effective secukinumab threshold was 39.1 mg/L in steady state, and that this was associated with a 92.7% probability of having an optimal clinical response (PASI ≤ 2 or reduction in PASI of ≥ 90%).

Conclusions

Monitoring and targeting a secukinumab trough concentration of 39.1 mg/L may be a viable treatment option in suboptimal responders. In patients with higher BMI, weight‐based dosing may be needed in order to prevent underdosing.