Disease severity, treatment patterns, and quality of life in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis routinely managed with systemic treatment: results of the CRYSTAL observational study in Central and Eastern European countries.

Psoriasis is a common, life-long skin disease with a significant negative health and societal impact. Data on rates of disease control and treatment strategies are lacking in Central and Eastern European countries. We aimed to describe the real-world disease severity, control, and treatment strategies for psoriasis in patients from Central and Eastern European countries. CRYSTAL (EUPAS36459) was a cross-sectional, retrospective study in adults (18-75 years) from Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, and Russia. We enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis receiving continuous systemic treatment for ≥24 weeks. We used the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) to describe disease severity and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to assess quality of life (QoL) and collected other outcomes [psoriasis work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI-PSO), patient satisfaction] at enrollment. Analyses were descriptive. A total of 690 patients were included in the analyses. Median disease duration was 11.8 years. Current treatment was monotherapy for most patients (95.8%) with either biological (BIO group; 88.4%) or conventional (NON-BIO group; 7.4%) agents. Mean (± standard deviation) absolute PASI scores were 3.5 ± 5.7, 3.1 ± 5.3, and 6.6 ± 7.4 in the overall population, the BIO group, and the NON-BIO group, respectively. Among patients treated with monotherapy, absolute PASI scores ≤1, ≤3, and ≤5 were observed for 44.1%, 72.0%, and 82.6% of BIO patients and 21.6%, 33.3%, and 49.0% of NON-BIO patients. Mean DLQI total score was 3.3 ± 5.1; higher scores were noted for higher absolute PASI. The most impacted WPAI-PSO domain was presenteeism; for all domains, impact increased with increased absolute PASI. A total of 91.8% of BIO patients and 74.5% of NON-BIO patients were satisfied with the current treatment. We observed a better disease control in BIO than NON-BIO patients. However, around half of BIO patients did not reach clear skin status and reported an impact on QoL. An improvement in treatment strategies is still needed in Central and Eastern European countries to optimize outcomes of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Real-World Clinical, Psychosocial, and Economic Burden of Atopic Dermatitis: Results From the ESSENTIAL AD Multicountry Study.

INTRODUCTION: Limited real-world evidence exists about the burden of atopic dermatitis (AD) in patients receiving systemic or non-systemic therapies in clinical practices. ESSENTIAL AD was an observational study that aimed to fill this information gap. METHODS: ESSENTIAL AD enrolled (September 2021-June 2022) adult patients with physician-confirmed AD that was routinely managed with systemic and non-systemic treatment in a real-world setting from 15 countries in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Primary outcome variables were Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD), and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) assessed during one office visit. RESULTS: A total of 799 enrolled patients fulfilled selection criteria and were included in the study. Patients mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 36.3 (14.4) years, 457 (57.2%) were female, and the majority of patients were white (647 [81.0%]). Mean (SD) time since AD diagnosis was 17.6 (15.2) years (median 16.5; interquartile range [IQR] 3.3-26.8). The mean (SD) EASI, SCORAD, and DLQI total scores were 11.3 (11.3 [median 8.1; IQR 3.6-15.8]), 37.8 (17.9 [median 35.5; IQR 24.2-49.0]), and 10.6 (7.2 [median 10.0; IQR 5.0-15.0]), respectively. Patients receiving systemic treatment had significantly higher disease burden (mean [SD] EASI 13.3 [13.0]; median [IQR] 9.6 [3.9-17.9]) versus non-systemic treatment (mean [SD] 9.3 [8.7]; median [IQR] 6.8 [3.0-13.2]; P < 0.0001). Results were similar for SCORAD (39.9 [19.6] vs 35.6 [15.7]; median [IQR] 38.6 [24.7-53.1] vs 32.6 [23.9-44.6]; P = 0.0017), and DLQI total scores (11.4 [7.4] vs 9.9 [6.9]; median [IQR] 11.0 [5.0-16.0] vs 9.0 [5.0-14.0]; P = 0.0033, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with AD continue to have substantial disease burden despite treatment with systemic therapy, suggesting that a need for effective disease management remains, including effective therapies that improve psychological outcomes and reduce economic burden of AD, in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.

Patients with atopic dermatitis often suffer from debilitating symptoms that impact their everyday lives. Although several treatment options are available, many patients continue to experience symptoms of disease. The ESSENTIAL AD study assessed burden of atopic dermatitis in patients receiving systemic and/or non-systemic therapies in real-life clinical practices across 15 countries in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. The results of the study demonstrated that adult patients with atopic dermatitis continue to have substantial disease burden regardless of treatment with systemic therapy or non-systemic therapy. The findings suggest that optimal management of atopic dermatitis needs to be reassessed in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, especially as new, more effective treatment options become available to patients.

The design of clinical trials to support the switching and alternation of biosimilars.

INTRODUCTION: Loss of exclusivity for biological therapeutics opens the door for biosimilar development. Biosimilars must demonstrate structural, functional, and clinical similarity with a currently approved biological originator product. A therapeutic alternative for biologic-naive patients, a single switch from an originator to biosimilar has also been studied in clinically stable patients; further, switching therapy multiple times (alternating) between an originator and a biosimilar has been investigated. Because biosimilars are not identical to originators and no robust clinical data have convincingly demonstrated that switching or alternating therapy of stable patients is safe and efficacious, there is an imperative need to understand the characteristics of well-designed clinical trials to support these practices. Areas covered: Clinical trials of biosimilars are reviewed, with an emphasis on trial designs that incorporate therapy switching, including the NOR-SWITCH study as an example. Expert opinion: As currently designed, biosimilar clinical trials provide insufficient information to support switching or alternating between originator products and their biosimilars. Lack of regulatory guidance contributes to this void. More robust data are required to inform the safety and efficacy of switching or alternating therapies, particularly regarding immunogenicity risks. Studies that also include alternations of therapy are needed to address these knowledge gaps.