Risankizumab shows faster response in bio naïve than in bio-experienced psoriatic patients

Immunotherapy in cutaneous melanoma and biologics in psoriatic disease: similarities and differences from a clinical multidisciplinary perspective

INTRODUCTION

Immunomodulating therapies harness the power of the immune system to combat disease. In advanced melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved survival outcomes by activating the immune system to recognize and eliminate cancer cells. In psoriasis, interleukin inhibitors effectively suppress inflammation and improve disease symptoms.

AREAS COVERED

We provide a meta-opinion-based consensus paper on the analogies and differences in treatment mechanisms, duration, frequency between immunotherapy for advanced melanoma and biologics for psoriasis. Combining the current scientific evidence with expert insights, we provide valuable guidance for future research and decision-making processes.

EXPERT OPINION

The development of immunological treatments in melanoma and psoriasis has revolutionized dermatology, but the quest for tailored therapies that maximize efficacy continues. Managing cutaneous exacerbations during melanoma immunotherapy in psoriatic patients remains challenging. Similarly, treating oncologic psoriasis patients resistant to traditional therapies requires individualized approaches. Research is needed to identify response predictors in both conditions and address the sustainability of healthcare systems due to the high cost of biologics. Drug delay studies for psoriasis and longer follow-up evaluations after immunotherapy discontinuation in melanoma are essential for optimizing treatment outcomes and resource allocation.

Interclass Switch between IL17 and IL23 Inhibitors in Psoriasis: A Real-Life, Long-Term, Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Interleukin 23 (IL-23) inhibitors, such as guselkumab, risankziumab, and tildrakizumab, have proved to be highly effective and safe for psoriasis treatment either in bio-naïve or bio-experienced patients. A substantial proportion of patients show a primary or secondary inefficacy to IL-17 inhibitors and can benefit from an alternative line of treatment, like IL-23 inhibitors. To date, no sufficient data are available on the effectiveness of IL-23 inhibitors after an anti-IL-17 agent.

METHODS

Our study includes 48 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis undergoing a switch from IL-17 to IL-23 inhibitors. This trial is registered with SS_DERMO_20.

RESULTS

The mean PASI (Psoriasis Area Severity Index) decreases from 11.6 to 3.3 at week 16, with responses maintained at weeks 28 and 52 (2 and 1.4, respectively), and a PASI100 achievement in more than 24% of patients at 16 weeks and 61.9 at 48 weeks, with no occurrence of serious adverse events. However, almost one in six patients interrupted the IL-23 inhibitors mainly due to primary ineffectivenss.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data support the evidence that an interclass switch among IL-17 inhibitors is a safe and effective therapeutic option for these patients.

Efficacy of anti-IL-23 and anti-IL-17 after adalimumab failure in psoriatic patients

BACKGROUND

Many national guidelines at the European level recommend first-line therapy based on the anti-TNF-alpha adalimumab for treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, mainly for economic reasons. Consequently, patients being treated with newer IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors underwent previous unsuccessful first-line adalimumab-based therapy.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the efficacy and safety of IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors after treatment with adalimumab compared to adalimumab-naive psoriatic patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 1053 psoriatic patients treated with anti-IL17 and anti-IL23 agents, which included 68 and 24 adalimumab-experienced and 399 and 260 bio-naive patients. Efficacy was assessed with mean PASI, PASI90, PASI100, and <3.

RESULTS

Concerning the achieving of PASI100, PASI90 and PASI < 3 in patients treated with anti-IL17 agents, no significant differences were observed between adalimumab-experienced and bio-naive patients. In patients treated with an anti-IL-23 agent, a faster response was observed in bio-naive patients, with PASI < 3 significantly higher than ADA-experienced patients at 16 weeks (77% vs. 58% p = 0.048). In a sub-analysis that evaluated the performance of anti-IL17 and anti-IL23 agents in adalimumab-experienced patients with a history of secondary failure, no significant differences were found. In multivariate analysis of PASI100, only anti-IL-17 therapy appeared to have a negative impact at 52 weeks (OR: 0.54 p = 0.04) independently of previous treatment. For PASI90, type of treatment and bio-naïve status did not seem to have an impact at any time point.

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-IL 23 and anti-IL 17 agents are not significantly different in terms of efficacy in bio-naive patients or as second-line therapy after failure with a biosimilar or originator adalimumab.

Pharmacovigilance of Risankizumab in the Treatment of Psoriasis and Arthritic Psoriasis: Real-World Data from EudraVigilance Database

Risankizumab is a selective, humanized immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) monoclonal anti-body directed against interleukin (IL)-23 protein. The therapeutic indication of risankizumab is moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. The safety profile of risankizumab is currently defined by data obtained with clinical trials used for the authorization of entry into the market. The aim of this study was to expand information on the safety of risankizumab through a descriptive post-marketing analysis of real-world data regarding serious adverse reactions (SARs) to risankizumab found in the EudraVigilance database. The EudraVigilance database system, containing SARs linked to drugs not yet licensed for the market in the European Union (EU), was used. In EudraVigilance, SARs are described in single individual cases safety reports (ICSRs). More frequently reported serious SARs to risankizumab are associated with, in descending order, infections, cancer, nervous system disorders, cardiac disorders, abnormal laboratory results, pulmonary disorders, conditions aggravated, and skin disorders. Despite the classical limitations of this post-marketing study (lack of denominator, no certainty of causal relationship between the drug and the adverse reaction), analysis of real-world data related to SARs to risankizumab confirms the known safety profile of the drug but, at the same time, stimulates to further go into detail about the occurrence as adverse reactions of malignancies and their sex distribution.

Risankizumab for the treatment of active psoriatic arthritis in adults

INTRODUCTION

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic rheumatic disease that displays a variety of clinical manifestations. Although new treatments have emerged over the last 2 decades, challenges remain in controlling inflammation in multiple PsA clinical domains.

AREAS COVERED

Risankizumab, one of the biologic disease modification anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) that target the interleukin (IL)-23 p19 subunit, was recently approved for PsA worldwide. This review primarily highlights the recent clinical trials of risankizumab covering its physiological evaluation, patient-reported outcomes, and safety profiles in patients with PsA. We also provide evidence for anti-IL-23 therapies against extra-articular manifestations and axial symptoms of PsA. Furthermore, potential distinct efficacies and mechanisms of action in anti-IL-23 therapies are discussed. Overall, risankizumab is effective in a variety of clinical signs and symptoms of PsA regardless of prior bDMARDs experience.

EXPERT OPINION

Accumulating evidence shows that anti-IL-23 drugs, including risankizumab, are promising treatments that can be used as first- or second-line therapies for PsA. However, multiple challenges remain, including confirming efficacy for axial symptoms and identifying the phenotype of specific patients who respond better to risankizumab than other drugs. Lastly, future data focusing on the long-term efficacy and safety of risankizumab beyond the 1-year observation period are also needed.

Risankizumab for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis: Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life and Psychological Wellbeing

Biologic treatments are increasingly being used in the management of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (PSO). Risankizumab (RZB) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that specifically blocks the p19 subunit of interleukin 23, which in turn regulates the activation, differentiation, and survival of Th17. RZB has proved their efficacy and their safety compared to anti-TNF. However, studies that assess and compare the improvement in other secondary PROs such as the patient's quality of life are still scarce. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is the sum of physical health, well-being, and participation; it defines the functional effect of a disease or its treatment and how it is perceived by the patient. The objective of this paper is to analyze the literature on the impact of treatment with RZB on the quality of life of patients with PSO and their psychological well-being. A bibliographic search was carried out to identify all the papers published from July 2015 to June 1, 2022, on RZB treatment in psoriasis and its impact on health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, finally twenty articles have been evaluated in full text, of which 8 were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Risankizumab has shown not only to have very relevant data on effectiveness and safety, but all of this is associated with an improvement in quality of life related to health and psychological well-being measured on generic and specific quality of life scales, both in pivotal trials, ad hoc analysis, and data in real clinical practice.

Analysis of Drug Utilization in Patients with Psoriasis: A Real-World Retrospective Study Among the Italian Population

Purpose

An Italian real-world retrospective study was conducted in patients with psoriasis (PSO) to evaluate their characteristics, treatment patterns, and biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (b/tsDMARD) drug utilization.

Patients and Methods

The retrospective analysis was carried out on real-world data collected from administrative databases of selected Italian health-departments; the dataset covered approximately 22% of the Italian population. PSO patients (identified by PSO hospitalization, and/or active exemption code and/or a topical anti-psoriatic medication prescription) were included. In prevalent patients identified during 2017-2018-2019-2020, baseline characteristics and treatment patterns were investigated. Moreover, b/tsDMARD drug utilization (focusing on persistence, monthly dosage, and mean duration between prescriptions) was evaluated in bionaïve patients included during 2015 and 2018.

Results

PSO was diagnosed in 241,552 (in 2017), 269,856 (in 2018), 293,905 (in 2019) and 301,639 (in 2020) patients. At the index date, almost 50% of patients had not received systemic medications, and 2% had received biological treatment. Among the b/tsDMARD-treated patients, a decrease in the use of tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors (60.0-36.4%, from 2017 to 2020) and an increase in the use of interleukin (IL) inhibitors (36.3-50.6%, from 2017 to 2020) were observed. In 2018, the persistence rates of TNF inhibitors and IL inhibitors in bionaïve patients ranged from 60.8-79.7% and 83.3-87.9%, respectively.

Conclusion

This real-world study of PSO drug utilization in Italy showed that a significant number of patients were not treated with systemic medications and only 2% of patients were treated with biologics. An increase in the use of IL inhibitors and a decrease in the prescription of TNF inhibitors over years were found. Patients treated with biologics were highly persistent with treatment. These data provide insight into routine clinical practice for PSO patients in Italy, suggesting that the optimization of treatment for PSO still represents an unmet medical need.