The safety of ustekinumab treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and latent tuberculosis infection

Disseminated Mycobacterial Infection With Reactive Polyarthritis (Poncet's Disease) During Immune-suppressive Treatment Including Ustekinumab for Pediatric Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pediatric inflammatory bowel disease is increasing. tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors medicines improved the prognosis of affected subjects. Nonetheless, a proportion of patients do not respond or lose response to treatment. Newer biologics, like ustekinumab, have been approved for adults. The pediatric off-label use of these drugs is increasing, despite limited safety evidence. We report a case of disseminated mycobacterial infection (MI) presenting with reactive polyarthritis (Poncet's disease, PD) in a girl with Crohn's disease receiving various immunosuppressants, including ustekinumab.

CASE REPORT

A 12-year-old girl with Crohn's disease was admitted for acute-onset migratory polyarthritis of large and small joints and opioid-resistant pain. She had recently received adalimumab and methotrexate and was currently under treatment with ustekinumab. She was vaccinated with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin and screened for tuberculosis before starting immunosuppressants. Interferon-gamma release assay, Mantoux test and chest computed tomography scan were negative. Disseminated MI with PD was diagnosed following positive cultures for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex in blood and intestinal biopsies (with negative in synovial fluid and gastric aspirate). Whole-exome sequencing did not identify any genetic susceptibility to MI. Antituberculosis treatment eradicated MI.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with inflammatory bowel disease receiving combination immunosuppressive treatments including tumor necrosis factor alpha inhibitors and anti-IL-12/23 agents are at higher risk for MI. Disseminated MI should be considered and ruled out in these patients when presenting with pulmonary, extrapulmonary or unusual clinical manifestations, like PD. The collection of multiple specimens (including intestinal biopsies) for mycobacterial culture is recommended when mycobacterial disease is suspected.

Treatment of Psoriasis Patients with Latent Tuberculosis Using IL-17 and IL-23 Inhibitors: A Retrospective, Multinational, Multicentre Study

BACKGROUND

Tuberculosis has a major global impact. Immunocompetent hosts usually control this disease, resulting in an asymptomatic latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Because TNF inhibitors increase the risk of tuberculosis reactivation, current guidelines recommend tuberculosis screening before starting any biologic drug, and chemoprophylaxis if LTBI is diagnosed. Available evidence from clinical trials and real-world studies suggests that IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors do not increase the risk of tuberculosis reactivation.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate psoriasis patients with treated or untreated newly diagnosed LTBI who received IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors and the tolerability/safety of tuberculosis chemoprophylaxis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, observational, multinational study from a series of 14 dermatology centres based in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece and Brazil, which included adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis and newly diagnosed LTBI who were treated with IL-23 or IL-17 inhibitors between January 2015 and March 2022. LTBI was diagnosed in the case of tuberculin skin test and/or interferon gamma release assay positivity, according to local guideline, prior to initiating IL-23 or IL-17 inhibitor. Patients with prior diagnosis of LTBI (treated or untreated) or treated active infection were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 405 patients were included; complete/incomplete/no chemoprophylaxis was administered in 62.2, 10.1 and 27.7% of patients, respectively. The main reason for not receiving or interrupting chemoprophylaxis was perceived heightened risk of liver toxicity and hepatotoxicity, respectively. The mean duration of biological treatment was 32.87 ± 20.95 months, and only one case of active tuberculosis infection (ATBI) was observed, after 14 months of treatment with ixekizumab. The proportion of ATBI associated with ixekizumab was 1.64% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0-5.43%] and 0% for all other agents and 0.46% (95% CI 0-1.06%) and 0% for IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors, respectively (not statistically significant).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of tuberculosis reactivation in patients with psoriasis and LTBI does not seem to increase with IL-17 or IL-23 inhibitors. IL-17 or IL-23 inhibitors should be preferred over TNF antagonists when concerns regarding tuberculosis reactivation exists. In patients with LTBI considered at high risk for developing complications related to chemoprophylaxis, this preventive strategy may be waived before initiating treatment with IL-17 inhibitors and especially IL-23 inhibitors.

Risk of Tuberculosis and Hepatitis B Reactivation in Patients With Crohn's Disease on Ustekinumab: A Nationwide Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Ustekinumab (UST) was approved in China for moderate-to-severe Crohn's disease (CD) in 2020. The prevalence rates of tuberculosis and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are high in China, and no guideline clearly states that tuberculosis chemoprophylaxis or prophylactic anti-HBV therapy should be prescribed before UST administration. This study aimed to assess the risk of tuberculosis and HBV reactivation in CD patients with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) and previous HBV infection receiving UST.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was carried out at 68 hospitals in China to assess 721 adult CD cases administered UST between May 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021. CD and concurrent LTBI or HBV carrier were included. Hepatitis B serology, T-SPOT.TB, and tuberculin skin tests were performed at baseline. The primary outcome was tuberculosis or HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

Patients with CD-concomitant LTBI or who were HBV carriers receiving UST therapy were retrospectively enrolled from 15 hospitals in China. A total of 53 CD with LTBI patients and 17 CD with HBV carrier patients receiving UST were included. Treatment and follow-up durations were 50 ± 20 weeks and 50 ± 15 weeks in the LTBI and HBV carrier groups, respectively. A total of 25 CD patients with LTBI underwent chemoprophylaxis and 28 did not. A total of 11 HBV carriers had antiviral prophylaxis and 6 did not. No patient experienced tuberculosis or HBV reactivation or liver dysfunction during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

UST was safe for treatment of CD because no patient developed tuberculosis, persistent hepatitis, or acute liver failure during therapy, whether with a prophylactic regimen or not, based on our sample size and limited follow-up time.

Safety of Immunomodulatory Systemic Therapies Used in the Management of Immune-Related Cutaneous Adverse Events

Immune-related cutaneous adverse events (ircAEs) commonly occur in patients on treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors and can significantly reduce patient quality of life. These are often treated with immunomodulatory agents, including glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and biologics. While often effective at managing symptoms, these therapies can cause several adverse events which may limit their use. In addition, immunomodulatory agents should be used with particular caution in patients receiving immunotherapy, as the efficacy of the oncologic regimen may potentially be undermined. In this review, we summarize the safety of systemic therapies that are used in the management of ircAEs, with a particular focus on the resultant risk of secondary tumor progression in patients with active cancer.

Risk of Reactivation of Latent Tuberculosis in Psoriasis Patients on Biologic Therapies: A Retrospective Cohort from a Tertiary Care Centre in Northern Italy

Psoriatic patients with latent tuberculosis infection and properly treated active tuberculosis need careful management when prescribing modern biological drugs. Although data and guidelines regarding tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors advise caution and initiation of prophylactic therapy in patients with latent tuberculosis infection, the same indications do not seem to find equal force for interleukin (IL)-23 and IL-17 inhibitors. In order to evaluate the risk of reactivation in patients with latent tuberculosis infection or properly treated active tuberculosis, an observational retrospective study was conducted on the population referred to our centre at Dermatologic Clinic of University of Turin, Italy. In the last 10 years at the clinic 19 psoriatic patients were found to be at risk of tuberculosis reactivation: 10 patients were QuantiFERON- TB-positive at baseline, 2 became positive during treatment, 6 reported prior tuberculous infection, and 1 was QuantiFERON-TB-negative at baseline and developed disseminated tuberculosis during treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factor-α. Overall, 10.5% of this group of patients developed active tuberculosis; however, stratifying by biologic therapy, zero cases were observed among patients treated with anti-IL-17, -23, or -12/23 over a relatively long follow-up (48.1 months) A review of the available literature following our experience confirms the increased risk of tuberculosis reactivation with tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Concerning anti-IL-23 and IL-17 drugs, available data showed high safety in patients at risk of tuberculosis reactivation. Screening of patients who should be taking IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors is recommended for public health purposes. In case of a positive result with these therapies, consulting with an infectious diseases specialist is suggested in order to weigh up the risks and benefits of prophylactic treatment.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation and Mycobacterial Infections Associated With Ustekinumab: A Retrospective Study of an International Pharmacovigilance Database

Background: Reports were recently published on hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr), tuberculosis (TB), and atypical mycobacterial infection (AMI) in patients with ustekinumab treatment. However, the literature is limited to case reports and series. The study was aimed to investigate their relationships by using an extensive population-based database.

Methods: Using the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database, we collected all cases of HBVr, TB, and AMI between 1 January 2009 and 30 September 2021, for ustekinumab and other drugs. Disproportionality was analyzed using the reporting odds ratio (ROR), which was considered significant when the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was >1.

Results: Of the 18,760,438 adverse cases reported to FAERS for all drugs, 56,581 cases had been exposed to ustekinumab. Adverse events of HBVr, TB, and AMI were reported in 21, 210, and 20 cases, respectively. The ROR for HBVr with ustekinumab was 2.33 (95% CI, 1.52–3.58), for TB was 5.09 (95% CI, 4.44–5.84), and for AMI was 2.09 (95% CI, 1.35–3.24). In the ustekinumab exposure group, no death occurred in patients with HBVr, but one patient experienced life-threatening liver failure. For those with TB, 24 cases experienced hospitalization and 2 deaths occurred. No death occurred in patients with AMI but eight experienced hospitalization.

Conclusion: We identified positive signals between ustekinumab exposure and HBVr, TB, and AMI in FAERS. Although these complications are rare, clinicians using ustekinumab should be aware of the risks.

Review article: latent tuberculosis in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases receiving immunosuppression-risks, screening, diagnosis and management

BACKGROUND

One quarter of the world's population has latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Systemic immunosuppression is a risk factor for LTBI reactivation and the development of active tuberculosis. Such reactivation carries a risk of significant morbidity and mortality. Despite the increasing global incidence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and the use of immune-based therapies, current guidelines on the testing and treatment of LTBI in patients with IBD are haphazard with a paucity of evidence.

AIM

To review the screening, diagnostic practices and medical management of LTBI in patients with IBD.

METHODS

Published literature was reviewed, and recommendations for testing and treatment were synthesised by experts in both infectious diseases and IBD.

RESULTS

Screening for LTBI should be performed proactively and includes assessment of risk factors, an interferon-gamma releasing assay or tuberculin skin test and chest X-ray. LTBI treatment in patients with IBD is scenario-dependent, related to geographical endemicity, travel and other factors. Ideally, LTBI therapy should be used prior to immune suppression but can be applied concurrently where urgent IBD medical treatment is required. Management is best directed by a multidisciplinary team involving gastroenterologists, infectious diseases specialists and pharmacists. Ongoing surveillance is recommended during therapy. Newer LTBI therapies show promise, but medication interactions need to be considered. There are major gaps in evidence, particularly with specific newer therapeutic approaches to IBD.

CONCLUSIONS

Proactive screening for LTBI is essential in patients with IBD undergoing immune-suppressing therapy and several therapeutic strategies are available. Reporting of real-world experience is essential to refining current management recommendations.

Brazilian Society of Rheumatology 2020 guidelines for psoriatic arthritis

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic and systemic immune disease characterized by inflammation of peripheral and/or axial joints and entheses in patients with psoriasis (PsO). Extra-articular and extracutaneous manifestations and numerous comorbidities can also be present. These recommendations replace the previous version published in May 2013. A systematic review of the literature retrieved 191 articles that were used to formulate 12 recommendations in response to 12 clinical questions, divided into 4 sections: diagnosis, non-pharmacological treatment, conventional drug therapy and biologic therapy. These guidelines provide evidence-based information on the clinical management for PsA patients. For each recommendation, the level of evidence (highest available), degree of strength (Oxford) and degree of expert agreement (interrater reliability) are reported.

Long-term efficacy and safety of ustekinumab for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: A 9-year real-life experience from a tertiary referral center in Turkey

There is a paucity of data on long-term (≥5-year) outcomes of ustekinumab therapy for psoriasis in real-life clinical practice. This observational, retrospective study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety profile of ustekinumab in 52 adult patients with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis who were treated with ustekinumab for at least 28 weeks and a maximum of 105 months in our tertiary referral center in Turkey, between 2010 and 2019. Response to therapy was assessed using Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine significant associations (p-value <0.05) with response to treatment. The PASI50, PASI75, PASI90, and PASI100 response rates were 97.8%, 88.9%, 53.3%, and 35.5%, respectively, at year 1 and 100%, 80.0%, 60.0%, and 40.0%, respectively, at year 5. Non-obesity was independently associated with PASI90 response at year 2 (p = 0.043), while biologic-naivety was independently associated with PASI90 responses at year 2 (p = 0.047) and year 3 (p = 0.021). An absolute PASI score of ≤3 was achieved by 82.2% and 80.0% of the patients at year 1 and year 5, respectively. Nine patients received adjuvant therapy and nine underwent ustekinumab dose escalation. These strategies were effective for recapturing clinical response in most patients. Ustekinumab was generally well-tolerated with no dose-related and cumulative toxicity, or drug interaction over a mean of 33.5 ± 21.1 months. The main reasons for discontinuation were secondary failure and loss to follow-up. Our 9-year real-life clinical experience demonstrates that ustekinumab is an efficacious and safe treatment option for long-term therapy of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Biologic Treatment Algorithms for Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis with Comorbid Conditions and Special Populations: A Review

The emergence of data from clinical trials of biologics, the approval of new biologics, and our improved understanding of psoriasis pathogenesis have increased the therapeutic possibilities for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Biologics currently approved for the treatment of psoriasis include tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin (IL)-17 inhibitors, ustekinumab (an IL-12/23 inhibitor), and IL-23 inhibitors. Data from clinical trials and studies of the safety and efficacy of biologics provide essential information for the personalization of patient care. We discuss the benefits and disadvantages of biologics as a first-line treatment choice, update treatment recommendations according to current evidence, and propose psoriasis treatment algorithms. Our discussion includes the following comorbid conditions: psoriatic arthritis, multiple sclerosis, congestive heart failure, inflammatory bowel disease, hepatitis B, nonmelanoma skin cancer, lymphoma, and latent tuberculosis. We make evidence-based treatment recommendations for special populations, including pediatric patients, patients with coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), and pregnant and breastfeeding patients with psoriasis. Ultimately, individualized recommendations that consider patient preferences, disease severity, comorbid conditions, and additional risk factors should be offered to patients and updated as new trial data emerges.

Pooled Safety Results Through 1 Year of 2 Phase III Trials of Guselkumab in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the safety of guselkumab (monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin [IL]-23p19) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) through 1 year (1Y) of the phase III DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2 trials.

METHODS

Patients with active PsA (n = 1120; biologic-naïve except 118 patients treated with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in DISCOVER-1) were randomized to subcutaneous guselkumab 100 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or at Week 0, Week 4, then every 8 weeks (Q8W); or placebo. At Week 24, patients in the placebo group switched to guselkumab 100 mg Q4W. Treatment continued through 1Y and 2 years for DISCOVER-1 and DISCOVER-2, respectively. In this pooled analysis, patients with ≥ 1 adverse event (AE) through 1Y were standardized for 100 patient-years [100 PYs] of follow-up.

RESULTS

Through Week 24, adverse events (AEs) were consistent between patients treated with placebo and guselkumab (Q4W + Q8W). AEs were 142.8/100 PYs and 150.6/100 PYs, serious AEs were 7.1/100 PYs and 4.4/100 PYs, and AEs leading to study agent discontinuation were 4.1/100 PYs and 3.8/100 PYs, respectively. Through 1Y in patients treated with guselkumab, no uveitis, active tuberculosis, opportunistic infections, or inflammatory bowel disease were observed, and low rates of malignancy and major adverse cardiovascular (CV) events were observed. Injection-site reactions occurred in 1.7%, and antibodies to guselkumab in 4.5% of patients treated with guselkumab through 1Y; the vast majority of antibodies to guselkumab were nonneutralizing. Serum hepatic transaminase elevations (more common with Q4W than Q8W dosing) and decreased neutrophil counts were generally mild, transient, and did not require treatment discontinuation, with minimal change from Week 24 to 1Y.

CONCLUSION

Guselkumab 100 mg Q4W and Q8W were well tolerated in patients with PsA, with no new safety concerns through 1Y of the phase III DISCOVER trials. Guselkumab safety through 1Y in patients with PsA is consistent with that established in patients with psoriasis who were treated with guselkumab.

Association of Secukinumab Treatment With Tuberculosis Reactivation in Patients With Psoriasis, Psoriatic Arthritis, or Ankylosing Spondylitis

Question

What is the association of secukinumab with active tuberculosis (TB) development, TB reactivation, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) activation?

Findings

In this pooled cohort study of 12 319 patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis, spontaneous reporting of new LTBI while undergoing secukinumab treatment was rare. No active cases of TB or LTBI reactivation were reported.

Meaning

The findings of this study provide a broader understanding of the safety of secukinumab and appear to support its long-term use in chronic systemic inflammatory conditions.

Importance

Approximately one-quarter of the global population have latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), and tuberculosis (TB) is accountable for more than 1.5 million deaths annually. Methotrexate, cyclosporine, and tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may be associated with increased risk of TB and LTBI reactivation, although data are limited on the risks of TB with use of newer biologics.

Objective

To assess the association of secukinumab with reporting of active TB development, TB reactivation, and LTBI activation as an adverse event (AE) in patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, or ankylosing spondylitis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This pooled cohort study pooled data from 28 clinical trials of secukinumab used in psoriasis (17 phase 3 or 3b and 2 phase 4 trials), psoriatic arthritis (5 phase 3 trials), and ankylosing spondylitis (4 phase 3 trials). A search of the Novartis Secukinumab Compound Pool Database was conducted for the 28 trials. All trial participants who had received at least 1 approved subcutaneous dose of secukinumab (150 mg or 300 mg) were included. Before randomization in these trials, patients underwent screening for TB. Patients with active TB were excluded, and patients with LTBI were treated according to local guidelines. Data were analyzed from the start of treatment in the individual studies through December 25, 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reporting of active TB or LTBI as an AE over a 5-year period using exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIR; incidence rates per 100 patient-years).

Results

A total of 12 319 patients were included, of whom 8819 patients had psoriasis (71.6%; 5930 men [67.2%]; mean [SD] age, of 44.9 [13.5] years), 2523 had psoriatic arthritis (20.5%; 1323 women [52.4%]; mean [SD] age, 48.8 [12.1] years), and 977 had ankylosing spondylitis (7.3%; 658 men [67.3%]; mean [SD] age, 42.3 [11.9] years). In the total population, 684 patients (5.6%) had tested positive for LTBI at screening. Over 5 years, LTBI as an AE during secukinumab treatment was reported in 13 patients (0.1% of 12 319). Of these 13 patients, 6 had a prior positive LTBI test result, and 7 were newly diagnosed as having LTBI. Four of the 7 patients had psoriasis (EAIR, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.07), 1 had psoriatic arthritis (EAIR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.11), and 2 had ankylosing spondylitis (EAIR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.28). No cases of active TB were reported.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that LTBI reported as an AE after secukinumab treatment was uncommon and appeared to support the use of secukinumab in chronic systemic inflammatory conditions.

Use of IL-23 Inhibitors for the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: A Comprehensive Review

Psoriasis is a common inflammatory skin disease with multiple comorbidities, including psoriatic arthritis and coronary artery disease, that can severely impact an individual’s quality of life and daily functioning. In recent years, enhanced understanding of the pathogenesis of psoriasis, especially the role of T helper 17 cells, has resulted in the development of new classes of biologic drugs targeting modulators along its disease pathway. Among these, inhibitors of interleukin-23 (e.g., ustekinumab, guselkumab, tildrakizumab, and risankizumab) have emerged as safe and effective options for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis; ustekinumab and guselkumab have additionally been approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. Selective interleukin-23 inhibitors require less frequent dosing than interleukin-17 inhibitors and may possess a more favorable risk profile without an increased risk of candidiasis or inflammatory bowel disease. Overall, these highly effective medications are contributing to a rising standard for psoriasis outcomes through resolution of skin lesions and joint manifestations and improvement of patient quality of life.

Tuberculosis and targeted synthetic or biologic DMARDs, beyond tumor necrosis factor inhibitors

Patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARD) have an increased risk for tuberculosis (TB). The use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and glucocorticoids in these patients has been associated with an increased prevalence of latent TB reactivation. Over the last few years, several biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs), other than TNFi (e.g. rituximab, abatacept, tocilizumab, secukinumab) and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) [e.g. apremilast, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors] have been used for the treatment of patients with ARD. For many of these drugs, especially the newer ones like JAK inhibitors or antibodies against interleukin (IL)-23, most data stem from randomized clinical trials and few are available from real life clinical experience. We sought to review the current evidence for TB risk in patients with ARD treated with tsDMARDs or bDMARDs, other than TNFi. It seems that some of these drugs are associated with a lower TB risk, indirectly compared with TNFi treatment. In fact, it appears that rituximab, apremilast and inhibitors of IL-17 and IL-23 might be safer, while more data are needed for JAK inhibitors. As seen in TNFi, risk for TB is more pronounced in TB-endemic areas. Screening for latent TB must precede initiation of any tsDMARDs or bDMARDs. The growing use of non-TNFi agents has raised the need for more real-life studies that would compare the risk for TB between TNFi and other treatment modalities for ARD. Knowledge about the TB-safety profile of these drugs could help in the decision of drug choice in patients with confirmed latent TB infection or in TB endemic areas.

Infectious Complications of Biological and Small Molecule Targeted Immunomodulatory Therapies

The past 2 decades have seen a revolution in our approach to therapeutic immunosuppression. We have moved from relying on broadly active traditional medications, such as prednisolone or methotrexate, toward more specific agents that often target a single receptor, cytokine, or cell type, using monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins, or targeted small molecules. This change has transformed the treatment of many conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, cancers, asthma, and inflammatory bowel disease, but along with the benefits have come risks. Contrary to the hope that these more specific agents would have minimal and predictable infectious sequelae, infectious complications have emerged as a major stumbling block for many of these agents. Furthermore, the growing number and complexity of available biologic agents makes it difficult for clinicians to maintain current knowledge, and most review articles focus on a particular target disease or class of agent. In this article, we review the current state of knowledge about infectious complications of biologic and small molecule immunomodulatory agents, aiming to create a single resource relevant to a broad range of clinicians and researchers. For each of 19 classes of agent, we discuss the mechanism of action, the risk and types of infectious complications, and recommendations for prevention of infection.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection in psoriatic patients treated with biologics: Real-world data from 18 Japanese facilities

Although rare, tuberculosis has been reported with biologic treatment against psoriasis in Japan, a tuberculosis medium-burden country. Mycobacterial infection often develops after a long incubation period and might not have been adequately identified in clinical trials or post-marketing surveillance. To determine the real-world incidence of tuberculosis in psoriatic patients treated with biologics, we conducted a retrospective, multicenter, observational study in 18 facilities in Western Japan. Psoriatic patients who visited a participating facility between 2010 and March 2017 and received biologic reagents were enrolled. Information on sex, age at first biologic treatment, results of interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) for Mycobacterium tuberculosis, treatment history with isoniazid, and onset of active and/or latent tuberculosis was collected. A total of 1117 patients (830 men and 287 women) were enrolled. The mean duration of biologic treatment was 3.54 years. Sixty-five patients (5.8%) showed positive IGRA results at screening. Active tuberculosis developed in two patients after the administration of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (both involved miliary tuberculosis). Latent tuberculosis was observed in two patients treated with anti-interleukin-12/23p40 antibody. The incidence rate of tuberculosis, including latent tuberculosis, in this survey was 0.36%. Although the incidence rate of tuberculosis was low considering the observation period of biologic treatment, active tuberculosis was found in both the screening-negative group and a screening-positive subject after isoniazid prophylaxis (both miliary tuberculosis), concluding that negative screening or isoniazid treatment does not always assure that an individual has no tuberculosis. Hence, dermatologists still need to pay careful attention to tuberculosis at every patient visit.

Best practices on immunomodulators and biologic agents for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia

The Asia-Pacific Working Group on Inflammatory Bowel Disease was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asia-Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving inflammatory bowel disease care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn's and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influences the treatments of ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease and provides guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of inflammatory bowel disease workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all-encompassing, and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

Best practices on immunomodulators and biologic agents for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease in Asia

The Asia-Pacific Working Group on inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) was established in Cebu, Philippines, under the auspices of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology with the goal of improving IBD care in Asia. This consensus is carried out in collaboration with Asian Organization for Crohn’s and Colitis. With biologic agents and biosimilars becoming more established, it is necessary to conduct a review on existing literature and establish a consensus on when and how to introduce biologic agents and biosimilars in the conjunction with conventional treatments for ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) in Asia. These statements also address how pharmacogenetics influence the treatments of UC and CD and provide guidance on response monitoring and strategies to restore loss of response. Finally, the review includes statements on how to manage treatment alongside possible hepatitis B and tuberculosis infections, both common in Asia. These statements have been prepared and voted upon by members of IBD workgroup employing the modified Delphi process. These statements do not intend to be all-encompassing and future revisions are likely as new data continue to emerge.

Risk of tuberculosis reactivation associated with traditional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs and non-anti-tumor necrosis factor biologics in patients with rheumatic disorders and suggestion for clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Two classes of biologics, anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and non-anti-TNF targeted, are currently available for the treatment of rheumatic diseases.

AREAS COVERED

Discussion on the need for LTBI diagnosis in rheumatic patients treated csDMARDs and non-anti-TNFs through a review of the literature. The literature, updated to 15 April 2019, on tuberculosis (TB) reactivation risk in patients exposed to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) and non-anti-TNF biologics was reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

An increased risk of TB reactivation in patients receiving csDMARDs (except sulphasalazine) resulted, while a review of clinical trials, and Periodic Safety Update Reports from pharmaceutical Companies evidenced a very low or absent risk for non-anti-TNF biologics. Hence, a contradiction emerges considering that latent TB infection (LTBI) screening is recommended for non-anti-TNF candidates but not for csDMARDs. Concerning the low TB incidence countries, several actions could be undertaken, including to screen all patients independently on the treatment, to omit the procedure in non-anti-TNF candidates, or to perform the LTBI investigations only in high-risk patients. According to WHO guidelines, LTBI screening in low TB risk countries seems unnecessary, except in high TB risk subjects.

A review of vedolizumab and ustekinumab for the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases

Recent advancement in the understanding of the pathophysiology of inflammatory bowel disease has seen an expansion in therapeutic options. Vedolizumab, a selective α4β7 inhibitor, and ustekinumab, an IL 12/23 p40 inhibitor, have provided the much-awaited out-of-class alternatives for patients who have failed or who are intolerant to anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) therapy. However, questions remain as to how we may best use these novel therapeutic agents. We evaluate the evidence available from randomized controlled trials and postmarketing cohort studies and discuss their safety, efficacy, and limitations, in relation to anti-TNF therapy, in optimizing the treatment outcomes.

The state of the art on treatment of Crohn's disease

Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic, progressive, and destructive disease of the gastrointestinal tract. Although its incidence appears to be stable or decreasing in most countries in the North America and Europe, the incidence is rising rapidly in Asian countries. Immunomodulators and biologics are increasingly used to avoid long-term bowel damage and subsequent disability. Therapeutic drug monitoring facilitates optimizing thiopurines and anti-TNFs use. New biologic agents targeting various pathological pathways of CD are blooming in recent years, and the high cost of biologics and expiration of patents for several biologic agents have driven the utility of biosimilars for CD treatment. Here, the literature regarding the efficacy, safety, and withdrawal of the drugs, as well as the evolution of therapeutic targets will be reviewed.

Targeting p19 as a treatment option for psoriasis: an evidence-based review of guselkumab

Further understanding of psoriasis pathogenesis has led to the development of effective biologic medications. Guselkumab (GUS) is a subcutaneously administered monoclonal antibody that targets the p19 cytokine subunit in IL-23 and IL-39 and is US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in adult patients. This review evaluates the pharmacology, safety and efficacy of GUS in patients with psoriasis. We performed a literature review by searching online databases including PubMed and Google Scholar. In clinical trials, GUS improved diseases including psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and specific areas of disease (scalp, feet, hands and fingernails). In the Phase III trials VOYAGE 1 and 2, more GUS than adalimumab (ADM) patients experienced a ≥90% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score (PASI90) (VOYAGE 1: 80.2% vs 53.0%; VOYAGE 2: 75.2% vs 54.8%; P<0.001 for both) and Investigator Global Assessment score of 0 or 1 (VOYAGE 1: 84.2% vs 61.7%; VOAYGE 2: 83.5% vs 64.9%; P<0.001 for both) at Week 24. GUS was also successful in treating patients unresponsive to ADM and ustekinumab in the VOYAGE 2 and NAVIGATE trials, respectively. While long-term data are necessary, GUS appears to have a favorable side effect profile with most common adverse effects including nasopharyngitis and upper respiratory tract infections. GUS is a well-tolerated and effective medication for patients with psoriasis. Continued study of GUS and the p19 subunit will help to determine GUS's ultimate place in therapy.

Ustekinumab for the treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: a drug evaluation and literature review

INTRODUCTION

Psoriasis (PsO) is an inflammatory disorder characterized by proliferation of keratinocytes, and it may be associated with a systemic inflammatory articular disorder, psoriatic arthritis (PsA). The presentations of PsO and PsA are heterogeneous, and our understanding of pathogenesis has led to a better understanding of the role of the interleukin (IL)-23/T-helper 17 (Th17) axis. Areas covered: Ustekinumab is a monoclonal antibody against IL-12 and IL-23. The pathogenesis of PsO and PsA is a multifactorial process involving genetic, environmental, and lifestyle factors. IL-23 signaling and activation of Th17 cells leads to a self-perpetuating inflammatory loop resulting in continuous keratinocyte proliferation and synovitis. Treatment options are varied, ranging from topical therapy to injection of targeted biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). Evidence on the use of ustekinumab in the management of PsO is strong, but it is not as impressive in management of PsA. Expert opinion: IL-12/23 inhibition appears to be a good first-line option for plaque PsO, but efficacy in PsA does not compare favorably to IL-17 inhibition. In general, poorer responses to therapy with any bDMARD in PsA cohorts highlight psoriatic disease heterogeneity. Until new knowledge can remedy the failure of monotherapy, synergistic methods may have to be explored, including combination biologic therapy.

Choosing First-Line Biologic Treatment for Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis: What Does the Evidence Say?

An advanced understanding of the pathogenesis of psoriasis has led to the development of multiple therapeutic options for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, ustekinumab, interleukin-17 inhibitors, and guselkumab (an interleukin-23 inhibitor recently approved for psoriasis) are commercially available biologic agents for psoriasis. Evidence from clinical trials provides pertinent information regarding the safety and efficacy of biologic agents for psoriasis, which should be integrated into clinical decision making. However, disease presentations, disease severity, and comorbid conditions can complicate the choice of initial treatment, which underscores the importance of providing personalized therapy for patients with psoriasis. Furthermore, each biologic agent offers unique benefits and limitations for the treatment of patients with psoriasis. Here, evidence-based recommendations are presented and discussed regarding first-line biologic therapy options for patients with psoriasis and distinct comorbid conditions or patient-related factors. We discuss the comorbid conditions of psoriatic arthritis, multiple sclerosis, congestive heart failure, inflammatory bowel disease, hepatitis B, and latent tuberculosis. Moreover, we describe treatment recommendations for distinct patient populations with psoriasis, including pediatric patients with psoriasis and patients with psoriasis of childbearing potential and nursing.

Serial QuantiFERON-TB Gold testing in patients with psoriasis treated with ustekinumab

BACKGROUND

There is increasing concern about the risk of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) reactivation during the use of biologics for psoriasis. Although ustekinumab had been documented with low risk of tuberculosis, the long-term follow-up of LTBI as determined by QuantiFERON-TB Gold (QFT-G) testing in patients treated with ustekinumab is limited.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to use serial QFT-G testing as a screening method for detecting LTBI in patients with psoriasis from an intermediate tuberculosis burden country.

METHODS

This retrospective review investigated 134 psoriatic patients in whom ustekinumab was prescribed for at least one year between 2010 and 2016 in National Taiwan University Hospital. All patients underwent annular QFT-G testing during ustekinumab therapy.

RESULTS

Among the 134 enrolled patients, baseline LTBI rate was 13.4% (18/134). Indeterminate QFT-G result was noted in 5.2% (7/134) of patients and 71.4% (5/7) of them turn to be QFT-G negative during the next testing. 81.3% (109/134) of patients had a negative QFT-G at baseline and the seroconversion rate was 7.3% (8/109) in the serial QFT-G. All the patients in the conversion group were referred to a pulmonologist for evaluation and 81.5% (22/27) of them underwent chemoprophylactic therapy while on ustekinumab. No active TB infection was noted during further follow-up with or without chemoprophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that psoriatic patients receiving long-term ustekinumab therapy had a low QFT-G conversion rate (7.3%). The clinical significance of QFT-G conversion remains controversial and needs larger scale trials to investigate.

Factors associated with the choice of the first biologic in psoriasis: real-life analysis from the Psobioteq cohort

BACKGROUND

Decision-making is a complex process. The aim of our study was to assess factors associated with the choice of the first biological treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

METHODS

Data on all patients included in the French prospective, observational, cohort, Psobioteq and initiating a first biologic prescription between July 2012 and July 2016 were analysed. Demographic information and clinical features were collected during routine clinical assessments by the dermatology team at the recruiting centres using a standardized case report form. The primary outcome was the nature of the first biologic treatment. Four groups were identified as follows: adalimumab, etanercept, ustekinumab and infliximab groups. Factors associated with the choice of the first biological agent were determined by a multinomial logistic regression model adjusted on year of inclusion.

RESULTS

The study population included the 830 biological-naïve patients who initiated a first biological agent. The mean age was 46.6 years (±SD 13.9), and 318 patients (38.3%) were female. The most commonly prescribed biologic was adalimumab: 355 (42.8%) patients, then etanercept (n = 247, 29.8%), ustekinumab (n = 194, 23.4%) and infliximab (n = 34, 4.0%). In the multinomial logistic regression analysis, patients were significantly more likely to receive adalimumab if they had a severe psoriasis as defined by baseline PASI or if they had psoriatic arthritis compared to etanercept (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.16-1.07) and ustekinumab (aOR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.04-0.52). Patients were significantly more likely to receive ustekinumab (aOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.04-5.50) if they had a positive screening for latent tuberculosis compared to adalimumab. Younger patients were also more likely to receive ustekinumab. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were more likely to be prescribed ustekinumab or etanercept compared to adalimumab. There was a trend in favour of etanercept prescription in patients with cardiovascular comorbidities, metabolic syndrome and in patients with a history of cancer.

CONCLUSION

We identified patient- and disease-related factors that have important influence on the choice of the first biological agent in clinical practice. Clinicians appear to have a holistic approach to patient characteristics when choosing a biological agent in psoriasis.

Risk of Tuberculosis Reactivation in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Ankylosing Spondylitis, and Psoriatic Arthritis Receiving Non-Anti-TNF-Targeted Biologics

Tuberculosis (TB) still represents an important issue for public health in underdeveloped countries, but the use of antitumor necrosis factor agents (anti-TNF) for the treatment of inflammatory rheumatic disorders has reopened the problem also in countries with low TB incidence, due to the increased risk of TB reactivation in subjects with latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Over the last 5 years, several non-anti-TNF-targeted biologics have been licensed for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis. We reviewed the epidemiology of TB, the role of different cytokines and of the immune system cells involved in the immune response against TB infection, the methods to detect LTBI, and the risk of TB reactivation in patients exposed to non-anti-TNF-targeted biologics. Given the limited role exerted by the cytokines different from TNF, as expected, data from controlled trials, national registries of biologics, and postmarketing surveillance show that the risk of TB reactivation in patients receiving non-anti-TNF-targeted biologics is negligible, hence raising the question whether the screening procedures for LTBI would be necessary.

Biologic treatments for elderly patients with psoriasis

The number of elderly patients with psoriasis is increasing in Japan. However, biologic treatment is generally considered to be challenging in elderly patients, due to their increased risk of complications compared with younger patients. Our retrospective study aimed to evaluate the safety profile and efficacy of biologics in senior elderly patients (≥75 years old) with psoriasis. The study involved a cohort of 27 patients aged 75-88 years who were being treated with biologics over a period of more than 1 year. Initial biologics administrated to were adalimumab (five cases) and ustekinumab (22 cases). Eight patients discontinued treatment: two developed cancer; one was transferred to hospital; and five others experienced either bone fracture, interstitial pneumonia, cerebral hemorrhage resulting in death, decrepitude or developed hepatopathy following prophylactic tuberculosis treatment. Efficacy, evaluated by the percentage of patients achieving 75% reduction of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score, was 76.9% at week 16 (n = 26), 88.0% at week 24 (n = 25) and 90.5% at week 52 (n = 21). Biologic treatments thus show clear efficacy in elderly patients with psoriasis, however, the increased frequency of adverse events requires rigorous patient observation.

Biologic Agents and Tuberculosis

Treatment with biologic agents, in particular tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors, is associated with an increased risk of tuberculosis (TB), and screening and treatment for latent TB infection (LTBI) in patients undergoing such treatment is therefore indicated. The risk of TB associated with different biologics varies significantly, with the highest relative risks, 29.3 and 18.6, associated with adalimumab and infliximab, respectively. The risk of TB with newer TNF-α inhibitors and other biologics appears to be lower. Performance of LTBI screening tests is affected by immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and immunosuppressive therapy in patients due to commence TNF-α inhibitor treatment. Interferon gamma release assays (IGRAs) have a higher specificity than the tuberculin skin test (TST) in patients with Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccination and have probably a better sensitivity than TST in immunosuppressed patients. LTBI screening programs prior to commencement of anti-TNF-α treatment significantly reduce the incidence of TB, but the optimal screening algorithm, in particular the question of whether a combination of IGRA and TST or a single test only should be used, is a matter of ongoing debate. Use of TST in combination with IGRA is justified to increase sensitivity. Repeat testing for LTBI should be limited to patients at increased risk of TB. If TB develops during anti-TNF-α treatment, it is more likely to be disseminated and extrapulmonary than are other TB cases. Discontinuation of anti-TNF-α treatment in patients diagnosed with TB is associated with an increased risk of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome, which is probably best managed by reintroduction of anti-TNF-α treatment.

Biologics for Targeting Inflammatory Cytokines, Clinical Uses, and Limitations

Proinflammatory cytokines are potent mediators of numerous biological processes and are tightly regulated in the body. Chronic uncontrolled levels of such cytokines can initiate and derive many pathologies, including incidences of autoimmunity and cancer. Therefore, therapies that regulate the activity of inflammatory cytokines, either by supplementation of anti-inflammatory recombinant cytokines or by neutralizing them by using blocking antibodies, have been extensively used over the past decades. Over the past few years, new innovative biological agents for blocking and regulating cytokine activities have emerged. Here, we review some of the most recent approaches of cytokine targeting, focusing on anti-TNF antibodies or recombinant TNF decoy receptor, recombinant IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1Ra) and anti-IL-1 antibodies, anti-IL-6 receptor antibodies, and TH17 targeting antibodies. We discuss their effects as biologic drugs, as evaluated in numerous clinical trials, and highlight their therapeutic potential as well as emphasize their inherent limitations and clinical risks. We suggest that while systemic blocking of proinflammatory cytokines using biological agents can ameliorate disease pathogenesis and progression, it may also abrogate the hosts defense against infections. Moreover, we outline the rational need to develop new therapies, which block inflammatory cytokines only at sites of inflammation, while enabling their function systemically.

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent disease with a major impact on quality of life; therefore, appropriate patient management is mandatory. Given that many issues in psoriasis are controversial and not clearly defined by evidence-based medicine, management of psoriasis is very variable. Expert consensus can generate practical guidelines for optimization of patient care. Much has changed since 2009, when the Consensus Document on the Evaluation and Treatment of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis was published by the Spanish Psoriasis Group (GEP) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV). The objective of the present consensus document is to provide the dermatologist with updated recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. All active members of the GEP of the AEDV were invited to participate in the survey. The final group comprised 46 members from various areas of Spain and with substantial experience in managing psoriasis. A 3-round Delphi process was used to reach consensus. Consistent agreement and consistent disagreement (consensus) required the achievement of at least two of the following three criteria: Criterion 1, which was based on the position occupied by the mean on a scale of 1-9 and an SD <2; Criterion 2, which was based on the median and interquartile range (IQR) on a scale of 1-9; Criterion 3, which considered the percentage of the voting experts on a scale of 1-9. The items studied were definition of severity, therapeutic objectives, indications for systemic treatment and biologic therapy, induction and maintenance periods, therapeutic failure, loss of response, relapse and rebound, continuous and intermittent therapy, screening of patients before treatment, adherence to therapy, follow-up of treatment outcome, combination of drugs, transitioning and associated comorbidities. Consistent agreement or disagreement (consensus) was achieved for 198 items (agreement, 3 criteria 146 items, 2 criteria 43 items; disagreement, 3 criteria 9 items, 2 criteria 0 items) based on the criteria described above. Completion of the Delphi consensus process enabled a broad and experienced group of Spanish psoriasis experts to provide useful and practical guidelines for the management and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, particularly in areas where evidence is lacking.

Prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis taking biologic therapies in a dermatologic private practice in Miami, Florida

BACKGROUND

The reactivation of a latent tuberculosis infection is one of the possible major events that may occur during biologic therapies for inflammatory chronic diseases such as psoriasis. Although its main screening test is regularly used in clinical practice, there are few studies about the prevalence of this silent mycobacterial infection and the rate of positive convertors during treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis receiving biologic therapy by using tuberculin skin test as a screening method and to evaluate the rate of conversion of tuberculin skin test (TST) during the treatment with biologics.

METHODS

A total of 445 patients were included in our retrospective study, conducted from January 2006 to September 2012. Tuberculin skin test was performed in all patients prior to treatment and once a year during the follow-up. PPD was considered positive with an induration above 5 mm, following the recommendations of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ America Thoracic Society. Data analysis was obtained with SPSS 20.0.

RESULTS

The prevalence of LTBI in our population before initiating the treatment was 4.5% by using TST screening method. During the treatment, 10 cases that were initially TST-negative became positive. Only one of the patients developed active tuberculosis infection. The other 9 TST-positive patients were detected during the regular annual screening, and no symptoms or findings on chest x-ray were seen. All the patients were treated with isoniazid (INH) for nine months, and biologic therapy was restarted after one month of treatment with INH without development of overt TB infection in any of them during the follow-up period of the study. The mean time to becoming TST positive from start date was 26.7 months (range from 8 months to 5 years). As the PPD was done annually, it is unknown exactly when the patients became TST positive. Prior to initiating treatment, 20 patients were found to be TST positive. All patients had clear chest x-rays and were treated with nine months of INH prior to initiating biologic therapy at least month later.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a screening tool for LTBI is mandatory in patients taking biologic therapies to avoid severe infectious complications. Periodic follow-up is also crucial as positive results may be seen after prolonged use of these agents.

Efficacy and safety of ustekinumab treatment in elderly patients with psoriasis

The ratio of the elderly among psoriasis patients has been increasing. However, satisfactory long-term management of psoriasis for the elderly is challenging because of the more frequent presence of comorbidities, and the higher risk of adverse events from systemic therapeutic agents than younger patients. The use of ustekinumab (UST) appears to be an appropriate systemic treatment because it is considered less likely to cause adverse events than other systemic treatments, as well as necessitating fewer hospital visits. Our retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of UST in elderly patients with psoriasis. The study included 24 patients aged over 65 years (range, 65-88 years; mean, 73.1 years) with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with impaired quality of life. Efficacy and safety were assessed over a 1-year period using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and the Dermatology Live Quality Index (DLQI). The efficacy was evaluated by the proportion of subjects who achieved ≥75% reduction in PASI score (PASI 75). PASI 75 responses were 56.5% at week 16, 59.1% at week 28, and 60.0% at week 52. None of the patients developed any serious infection during the 1-year treatment. The mean DLQI score at weeks 0, 16, 28, and 52 was 7.8 ± 6.0, 2.5 ± 3.4, 1.4 ± 1.7, and 1.2 ± 1.7, respectively. UST showed sufficient efficacy for elderly patients with psoriasis without any serious infection over the 1-year treatment. Our results suggest that UST is the preferable agent for the treatment of elderly patients with psoriasis.

The Association between Clinical Response to Ustekinumab and Immunogenicity to Ustekinumab and Prior Adalimumab

Background

Immunogenicity due to antidrug antibodies (ADA) to tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonists is known to decrease treatment response. However, few studies have investigated ADA in ustekinumab, an interleukin-12 and -23 antagonist, in a clinical setting. This study aimed to investigate the immunogenicity of ustekinumab and its clinical consequences in psoriasis.

Methods

This prospective observational study enrolled 76 patients with plaque psoriasis who were treated with ustekinumab for a minimum of 7 months. Blood samples were drawn just prior to scheduled ustekinumab injection during clinic visits. Levels of anti-ustekinumab antibody (AUA) and serum ustekinumab concentration were measured respectively by radioimmunoassays and enzyme-linked immunoassays respectively, and correlated to clinical data and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI).

Results

AUA was detected in 6.5% of patients after a mean of 13 months of treatment. Patients with positive AUA had significantly lower serum ustekinumab concentrations (0.01 vs. 0.2 mg/L, p<0.001) and lower PASI 50 response than patients without AUA (0% vs. 69%, p = 0.004).The percentage of AUA formation was comparable between patients who had failed previous adalimumab with or without anti-adalimumab antibodies (AAA) (14.3% vs. 12.5%, p = 1.00). However, a higher proportion of switchers without AAA obtaining PASI50 (71.4% vs. 37.5%) and PASI75 response (42.9% vs.12.5%) within 7 months of ustekinumab treatment than with AAA though this difference did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that presence of AUA was significantly associated with treatment failure for ustekinumab, though limited by a small sample size. Also, determining the presence of ADA to antecedent TNF-α antagonists may assist in choosing an optimized subsequent treatment modality achieving treatment success.

Therapeutic Targeting of IL-17 and IL-23 Cytokines in Immune-Mediated Diseases

The discovery of the biological functions of the interleukin-23/-17 axis led to the identification of IL-23 and IL-17 as important participants in the pathogenesis of several immune-mediated diseases. Therapeutic agents targeting these cytokines and/or their receptors have now been developed as potential treatment strategies for common immune-mediated diseases. Anti-IL-17 and anti-IL-12/-23 regimens appear particularly effective in psoriasis, with promising results in spondyloarthropathies also emerging. Overall, these agents appear well tolerated, with adverse-event rates that are commensurate with those in other biologic treatment programs. The strategic utility of these new agents, however, remains uncertain, and further studies will be required to determine their place in the context of existing conventional and biologic immune-modifying agents.

Biologics in dermatology: adverse effects

Biologics are a group of drugs that precisely affect certain specific steps in the immune response and are an extremely useful group when used in an appropriate setting. However, their use can often be a double-edged sword. Careful patient selection and thorough knowledge of adverse effects is a key to their successful use in various disorders. The initial enthusiasm has gradually given way to a more cautious approach wherein a balance is sought between clinical usefulness and expected side effects. The adverse effects of the biologics most commonly used in dermatology have been carefully listed for ready reference. The plausible causes of the adverse reactions are succinctly outlined along with their incriminating factor(s). Besides, in brief, the attention has been focused on their management. The content should provide an essential didactic content for educating the practitioner.