Effectiveness of systemic treatments on pruritus associated with atopic dermatitis: A systematic review in pediatric patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Itch is one of the hallmarks of atopic dermatitis (AD), which has a significant impact on the quality of life of pediatric patients with AD and their caregivers. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the antipruritic effects of systemic AD treatments in pediatric patients with AD. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched, including studies providing original data on the effects of systemic treatment on pruritus in pediatric patients (<18 years) with AD. Placebo-controlled trials reporting a Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale 4 (PP-NRS4) response were included in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 studies were included, with most evidence available for dupilumab. Overall, marked improvements of pruritus (50% or greater reduction in pruritus outcome measurements) were found for treatment with cyclosporin A (2-16 years), dupilumab (6 months-17 years), abrocitinib, and upadacitinib (both 12 and 17 years). Nemolizumab (12-17 years) may be promising in reducing pruritus in pediatric patients; however, data are limited. Only five randomized controlled trials could be included in our meta-analysis, in which dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib showed a significantly higher probability of achieving a PP-NRS4 response compared with placebo. Our study was limited by a lack of homogeneity of included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Cyclosporin A, dupilumab, abrocitinib, and upadacitinib are all effective in decreasing pruritus and, therefore, in improving the quality of life in children with AD. As more systemic treatments for AD become available, it will be imperative to incorporate patient-oriented treatment goals such as reduction of pruritus into therapeutic decision-making.

Direct Comparison of Real-world Effectiveness of Biologics for Psoriasis using Absolute and Relative Psoriasis Area and Severity Index Scores in a Prospective Multicentre Cohort.

Real-world evidence, directly comparing the effectiveness of interleukin (IL)17-inhibitors, IL23-inhibitors, tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α)-inhibitors and an IL12/23-inhibitor in psoriasis, is scarce. The aim of this study was to directly compare the first-year effectiveness of biologic therapies for psoriasis, corrected for confounders. This prospective, multicentre cohort study assessed BioCAPTURE data on etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, and guselkumab in 1,080 treatment episodes of 700 patients with psoriasis. The course of the mean absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and the proportion of patients who achieved PASI90/PASI75 were compared using linear mixed models and mixed logistic regression models respectively, corrected for baseline PASI, biologic naivety, and weight. Patients treated with adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, or guselkumab all had a significantly lower mean PASI after 12 months compared with etanercept, and significantly higher overall odds of reaching PASI90 than those treated with etanercept. Patients treated with ixekizumab or guselkumab also had higher probabilities of reaching PASI90 than adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab. Relative to randomized controlled trials, the proportions of patients who reached PASI90/75 were lower in this real-world study.

Unmet Personal Patient Needs in Psoriasis Patients with Low Disease Activity on Adalimumab, Etanercept or Ustekinumab.

BACKGROUND: Personal treatment goals have been systematically investigated in psoriasis patients with active but not in controlled disease. OBJECTIVES: To explore patient needs in psoriasis patients with controlled disease due to biologic therapy with adalimumab, etanercept or ustekinumab. METHODS: Treatment needs in patients on adalimumab, etanercept or ustekinumab with a stable low disease activity for ≥ 6 months and preferably a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) < 5, were explored with the Patient Needs Questionnaire (PNQ). Goal importance was expressed as overall mean importance score, percentage of patients that reported a goal to be quite/very important, and per PNQ subscale. Data were analysed separately for treatment, gender, age group (< 50 vs. ≥ 50 years), biologic naivety and willingness to participate in a pragmatic dose-reduction strategy. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were included. 'To be free of itching', 'to be healed of all skin defects' and 'to have confidence in the therapy' were rated quite/very important in 78.5% of the patients, followed by 'to have no fear the disease will progress' (75.4%) and 'to get better skin quickly' (75.4%). Goals related to the subscale 'confidence in healing' were still of high importance in controlled disease. Least importance was attributed towards social goals. For female patients, it was significantly more important than for males to 'feel less depressed' and 'be comfortable showing yourself more in public'. CONCLUSIONS: Psoriasis patients with controlled disease still report substantial treatment needs, with high importance ascribed to confidence in healing. To apply personalized medicine, treatment needs should be explored on an individual level.

In psoriasis patients, a large reduction in disease severity can lead to a significant improvement in health-related quality of life. In addition to quality-of-life measurements, individual treatment goals can be assessed to evaluate patients' preferences regarding their psoriasis treatment. As opposed to patients with more severe psoriasis, unmet treatment needs in psoriasis patients with stable, low disease activity have barely been reported. In this study, the personal treatment aims of patients with controlled disease due to treatment with adalimumab, etanercept or ustekinumab were explored using the Patient Needs Questionnaire. Sixty-five patients with sustained low disease activity for ≥ 6 months were included. We found that despite low disease activity, these patients still have substantial patient needs. Patients attributed the highest importance to goals on confidence in healing, in contrast to social goals, which were valued of least importance. For female patients, it was significantly more important to 'feel less depressed' and 'be comfortable showing yourself more in public' compared to male patients. Previous treatment with biologic therapy was not associated with an altered attitude towards specific treatment goals. Our population with low disease activity seemed to award a lower level of importance to all treatment goals compared to groups of patients with more severe psoriasis that have been described in literature. Since treatment goals differ per patient, individual treatment could be optimized by actively inquiring about the patient's personal treatment goals. Clinicians should be aware that even in patients with controlled disease, substantial personal treatment needs remain.

The Skin May Clear But the Arthritis Won't Disappear: Focusing on Concomitant and New-Onset Psoriatic Arthritis in a Daily Practice Cohort of Psoriasis Patients on Biologic Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Previously identified risk factors for psoriatic arthritis (PsA); nail dystrophy and scalp lesions are highly prevalent in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Therefore, these variables may not be useful as predictors for PsA in this population. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the predictive value of demographic and clinical characteristics for development of PsA in a cohort of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, currently treated with biologics. Furthermore, we reported the incidence of new-onset PsA in this population and described the characteristics of patients that developed PsA during biologic treatment. METHODS: Demographics and treatment characteristics of psoriasis patients currently using biologic therapy were extracted from the BioCAPTURE database (n=427). Poisson regression was used to calculate incidence rates. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with PsA onset. Patient and treatment characteristics of patients that developed PsA during biologic treatment were described. RESULTS: The incidence of PsA was 1.0 (95% CI 0.8-1.2) per 100 psoriasis-years. Except for a lower risk for PsA in male gender (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34-0.98, p-value 0.04), no clinical factors were significantly associated with an altered risk of developing PsA. During biologic therapy, 32 patients (9.4%) newly developed PsA. In this group, 53.8% had PASI<5 at PsA diagnosis. The incidence rate of PsA was 1.6 (95% CI 1.1-2.2) per 100 years on biologic therapy. CONCLUSION: Clinical risk factors might be inaccurate to predict PsA onset in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis on biologics. Even with low disease activity, psoriasis patients on biologics are still prone to develop PsA.