Practical Management of the JAK1 Inhibitor Abrocitinib for Atopic Dermatitis in Clinical Practice: Special Safety Considerations.

Abrocitinib, an oral, once-daily, Janus kinase (JAK) 1-selective inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD). Abrocitinib has shown rapid and sustained efficacy in phase 3 trials and a consistent, manageable safety profile in long-term studies. Rapid itch relief and skin clearance are more likely to be achieved with a 200-mg daily dose of abrocitinib than with dupilumab. All oral JAK inhibitors are associated with adverse events of special interest and laboratory changes, and initial risk assessment and follow-up monitoring are important. Appropriate selection of patients and adequate monitoring are key for the safe use of JAK inhibitors. Here, we review the practical use of abrocitinib and discuss characteristics of patients who are candidates for abrocitinib therapy. In general, abrocitinib may be used in all appropriate patients with moderate-to-severe AD in need of systemic therapy, provided there are no contraindications, e.g., in patients with active serious systemic infections and those with severe hepatic impairment, as well as pregnant or breastfeeding women. For patients aged ≥ 65 years, current long-time or past long-time smokers, and those with risk factors for venous thromboembolism, major adverse cardiovascular events, or malignancies, a meticulous benefit-risk assessment is recommended, and it is advised to start with the 100-mg dose, when abrocitinib is the selected treatment option.

Real-world clinical, psychosocial and economic burden of atopic dermatitis: Results from a multicountry study.

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD), a relapsing, inflammatory skin disease, is associated with pruritus that can negatively affect patients' quality of life. Understanding the burden of AD is critical for informing and tailoring treatment and disease management to improve patient outcomes. This study characterized global treatment patterns and the clinical, psychosocial and economic burden of moderate-to-severe AD. METHODS: MEASURE-AD was a cross-sectional 28-country study in patients with physician-confirmed moderate-to-severe AD who were either receiving or eligible for systemic therapy for AD. Patients ≥12 years were enrolled between December 2019 and December 2020 while attending routine office or clinic visit. Primary outcomes included Worst Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (WP-NRS; range: 0-10) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; range: 0-30) and Children's DLQI (CDLQI; range: 0-30). Secondary outcomes included physician- and patient-reported clinical, psychosocial and economic burden. RESULTS: Of the 1591 patients enrolled, 1558 (1434 adults and 124 adolescents) fulfilled all patient selection criteria and were included in this analysis. Almost all patients (98.4%) in the total population were using AD medications and more than half (56%) were receiving systemic medication (15% systemic monotherapy). The most used systemic therapies were dupilumab (56.3%), systemic glucocorticoids (18.1%) and methotrexate (16.2%). Mean WP-NRS was 5.3 in the total population, and most patients (≥55%) reported moderate-to-severe pruritus (WP-NRS ≥4). Mean DLQI was 10.8 and mean CDLQI was 9.6. Secondary endpoints demonstrated substantial clinical, psychosocial, and economic burden of disease. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that patients receiving systemic therapy had lower disease burden than those not taking systemic medications. CONCLUSIONS: While systemic therapy lowers overall disease burden, patients with moderate-to-severe AD continue to have substantial multidimensional disease burden and uncontrolled disease. Overall, there is a need for effective disease management, including effective treatments that improve patients' psychosocial outcomes and reduce the economic burden of AD.

Baseline Characteristics of Canadian Patients in the Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR).

BACKGROUND: The Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR) is a global, prospective, longitudinal, disease-based registry. It serves as a post-marketing safety commitment with a focus on patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy. OBJECTIVES: To describe the baseline disease demographics and clinical characteristics of a Canadian subgroup of participants enrolled in PSOLAR. METHODS: Baseline demographic/disease characteristics, medical histories, and previous psoriasis treatments for Canadian patients in PSOLAR were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There were 1896 patients analyzed in the Canadian subgroup at 37 clinical sites, accounting for 15.7% of the global PSOLAR population. Baseline disease and clinical characteristics were as expected for a moderate to severe psoriasis population and were generally similar to the global PSOLAR population. Two distinctions were noted in the Canadian subgroup versus those enrolled globally: a higher proportion of patients were overweight/obese (84.7% vs. 80.4%) and male (61.4% vs. 54.7%). In addition, the Canadian subgroup had numerically higher historical peak disease activity (PGA score 3.35 vs. 3.1) and longer disease duration (22.3 years vs. 17.5 years). Canadian PSOLAR patients reported a variety of comorbidities, including psoriatic arthritis (31.5%), hypertension (34.6%), hyperlipidemia (24.3%), mental illness (24.1%), and inflammatory bowel disease (1.6%). CONCLUSION: The Canadian subgroup of PSOLAR patients was generally similar to those enrolled globally with respect to baseline disease demographics and clinical characteristics. Multiple comorbidities are noted in the Canadian subgroup, underscoring the need for a holistic approach to the treatment of psoriatic patients.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Patients with a History of Treated Solid Tumours: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with treated solid tumours (TSTs) are a highly heterogeneous population at an increased risk for malignancy compared with the general population. When treating psoriasis in patients with a history of TSTs, clinicians are concerned about the immunosuppressive nature of psoriasis therapies, the possibility of augmenting cancer recurrence/progression, and infectious complications. No direct, high-level evidence exists to address these concerns. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework supporting healthcare professional and patient discussions on the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in patients with previously TSTs. Our goal was to address the clinically important question, "In patients with TSTs, does therapy with systemic agents used for psoriasis increase the risk of malignancy or malignancy recurrence?" METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial and real-world data were absent. We reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in patients with TSTs. Recommendations on systemic psoriasis therapies in patients with TSTs were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified five indirect indicators of iatrogenic immunosuppression informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) overall survival, (2) rate of malignancies with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (3) rate of infections with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (4) common disease biochemical pathways for solid tumours and systemic psoriasis therapies, and (5) solid organ transplant outcomes. On the basis of review of the totality of this data, we provided inference-based conclusions and ascribed level of support for each statement. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to considering new therapies for psoriasis, an understanding of cancer prognosis should be addressed. Patients with TSTs and a good cancer prognosis will have similar outcomes to non-TST patients when treated with systemic psoriasis therapies. For patients with TSTs and a poor cancer prognosis, the quality-of-life benefits of treating psoriasis may outweigh the theoretical risks.

Patients with previously treated cancer have a higher chance of cancer recurrence compared with the general population. With cancer incidence rising worldwide, doctors across medical specialities will need to treat other medical conditions, including inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis, in these patients. Effective systemic therapies for psoriasis reduce immune cell activity. Accordingly, there are concerns that treatments for psoriasis could worsen cancer recurrence/progression and infectious complications. There is not enough quality evidence to make broad recommendations for treating other inflammatory conditions in patients with a history of cancer. To guide patient and doctor discussions, we asked: what are effective and safe treatments when patients with treated solid tumours need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis? We focused on patients with solid tumours and excluded blood and skin cancers. Our panel of experts, including 12 dermatologists and 3 medical oncologists, reviewed direct and indirect evidence to answer this question. Considering the totality of evidence reviewed, the expert panel drafted and rated their level of support for opinion statements on important considerations in treating patients with psoriasis who have a history of solid tumours. By making inferences on systemic psoriasis therapies in this heterogeneous population, we take the onus off individual physicians to review the indirect data. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent. To support treatment decisions, doctors should have a guided conversation with the patient and their family on a case-by-case basis about the risks and benefits of treatment.

Clinical Implications of Targeting the JAK-STAT Pathway in Psoriatic Disease: Emphasis on the TYK2 Pathway.

Cytokines in the interleukin (IL)-23/IL-17 axis are central to psoriasis pathogenesis. Janus kinase (JAK) signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) regulates intracellular signalling of several cytokines (including IL-12, 23, 22, 6, 17, and interferon (IFN)-γ) in the IL-23/IL-17 axis, and, as a result, has become a therapeutic target for psoriasis treatment. Although several JAK1-3 inhibitors, with varying degrees of selectivity, have been developed for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, use in psoriasis is limited by a low therapeutic index as anticipated by signals from other disease indications. More selective inhibition of the JAK family is an area of interest. Specifically, selective tyrosine kinase (TYK)2 inhibition suppresses IL-23/IL-17 axis signalling, and at therapeutic doses, has a favorable safety profile compared to therapeutic doses of JAK1-3 inhibitors. Phase III efficacy and safety data for the selective allosteric TYK2-inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis is promising. Furthermore, phase II clinical trials for ropsacitinib (PF-06826647), a selective TYK2 inhibitor, and brepocitinib (PF-06700841), a JAK1/TYK2 inhibitor, have also demonstrated efficacy and an acceptable safety profile in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Other novel TYK2 allosteric inhibitors, NDI-034858 and ESK-001, are currently being investigated in adult patients with plaque psoriasis. This article reviews the details of the JAK-STAT pathway in psoriasis pathophysiology, the rationale for selective targeting of JAKs in the treatment of psoriasis, and provides clinical perspective on clinical trial data for JAK and TYK2 inhibitors.

Phosphodiesterase-4 Inhibition in the Management of Psoriasis.

Psoriasis is a common chronic immune-mediated disease with many comorbidities and impacts on quality of life. Among the treatments for psoriasis, phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) inhibitors are emerging with expanding options. PDE4 inhibitors play a pivotal role in the inflammatory cascade by degrading cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP), contributing to pro-inflammatory mediator production. Apremilast, an oral PDE4 inhibitor, is approved for psoriasis. While effective, its adverse effects can limit its utility. Roflumilast, a topical PDE4 inhibitor, was also recently approved for psoriasis and shows promise in clinical trials. Crisaborole, a PDE4 inhibitor approved for atopic dermatitis, has also been studied in psoriasis. This review summarizes evidence from randomized clinical trials regarding the efficacy and safety of PDE4 inhibitors in psoriasis treatment. By highlighting their potential benefits and limitations, this review provides valuable insights for clinicians and researchers aiming to optimize psoriasis management.

Selective TYK2 Inhibition in the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Chronic Plaque Psoriasis

Moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis may be difficult to control using current therapies, which has led to development of a novel class of therapy, selective tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitors, to address this unmet need. Oral deucravacitinib is a first-inclass selective TYK2 inhibitor, which has shown efficacy in moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis from two phase III pivotal trials (POETYK PSO-1 and PSO-2), whereby response rates were significantly higher with deucravacitinib vs. placebo or apremilast for Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 75 and static Physician's Global Assessment (sPGA) 0/1. Deucravacitinib was generally well tolerated and safe compared to placebo and apremilast. Although deucravacitinib is a type of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor, it only blocks specific cytokine-driven responses, potentially reducing off-target effects more commonly associated with other JAK inhibitors on the market. Incidence rates of serious adverse events, such as serious infections, malignancies, thrombosis, cardiovascular events, creatinine kinase elevation, hematologic changes, and lipid profile abnormalities were absent or low.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in People Living with Controlled HIV: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have a similar prevalence of psoriasis as the general population, though incidence and severity correlate with HIV viral load. Adequately treating HIV early renders the infection a chronic medical condition and allows PLHIV with a suppressed viral load (PLHIV-s) to live normal lives. Despite this, safety concerns and a lack of high-level data have hindered the use of systemic psoriasis therapies in PLHIV-s. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework that supports healthcare professionals and patients discussing the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in PLHIV-s. Our goal was to address the primary question, are responses to systemic therapies for the treatment of psoriasis in PLHIV-s similar to those in the non-HIV population? METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial data were absent. In this instance, we reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in PLHIV. Recommendations on systemic treatment for psoriasis in PLHIV were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified seven indirect indicators of immune function informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) functional assays, (2) vaccine response, (3) life expectancy, (4) psoriasis manifestations, (5) rate of infections, (6) rate of malignancies, and (7) organ transplant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related benefits and risks when treating a patient with systemic psoriasis therapies are similar for non-HIV patients and PLHIV with a suppressed viral load and normalized CD4 counts. Prior to initiating psoriasis treatment in PLHIV, HIV replication should be addressed by an HIV specialist. Exercise additional caution for patients with a suppressed viral load and discordant CD4 responses on antiretroviral therapy.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) develop psoriasis as often as everyone else. We asked: what are effective and safe treatments when PLHIV need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis?HIV infection attacks the immune system. When HIV is not treated, the immune system declines. A less effective immune system makes it harder for the body to fight infections and certain cancers. Psoriasis is a skin condition caused by overactive immune cells. Effective psoriasis treatments reduce immune-cell activity. There are some concerns that treatments for psoriasis may not work and could worsen infections or cancers.To answer the question, we gathered 11 dermatologists and 4 HIV specialists. We reviewed the international scientific literature on PLHIV and psoriasis. The absence of direct evidence and volume of information to review made the process challenging. The end results were worthwhile.We concluded that people who are diagnosed early and take antiretroviral therapy to control their HIV infection (PLHIV-c) can live long, healthy lives. Accordingly, we determined that PLHIV-c can likely expect the same safety and efficacy for systemic psoriasis treatments as the general population. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis through consultation with the patient and treating physician(s).Pillars of modern medicine are evidence-based care and collaborative decision-making. Too often, neither care provider nor patient are adequately informed. We have tried to fill one information gap for PLHIV and psoriasis. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent.

Real-World Moderate-to-Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Decrease in Disease Burden With Adalimumab.

BACKGROUND: Real-world knowledge of the burden of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) on patients remains limited. OBJECTIVES: To measure the impact of adalimumab on moderate-to-severe HS patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work productivity. METHODS: In 23 Canadian centres, 138 adults with moderate-to-severe HS requiring a change in ongoing therapy were treated with adalimumab for up to 52 weeks as per the physician's practice. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were obtained at baseline, weeks 24 and 52 to measure overall HRQoL, HS severity, levels of anxiety and depression, impact and symptoms of HS, work productivity and activity impairment. A post-hoc analysis further explored the PROMs by abscess and inflammatory nodule (AN) count at baseline (≤5, low; 6-10, medium; ≥11, high). RESULTS: From baseline to weeks 24 and 52, all PRO overall scores improved significantly (P ≤ .0023). The number of patients reporting "good disease control" and "complete disease control" increased from 9.7% to 66.4% over 52 weeks. The score in Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3) pain attribute meaningfully decreased over 52 weeks (mean difference ≥.05). The HS symptoms skin "tenderness" and "itchiness" improved the most. Work productivity loss and activity impairment improved by approximately 20% over 52 weeks. Disease burden improved more in 24 week responders with low and medium AN counts at baseline than in those with high AN count or in 24 week nonresponders. CONCLUSION: At week 24 and maintained at week 52 in a real-world setting, adalimumab meaningfully improved HRQoL, work productivity, and activity impairment in moderate-to-severe HS patients.

Practical and Relevant Guidelines for the Management of Psoriasis: An Inference-Based Methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis (Pso) is a common, immune-mediated, chronic-relapsing, inflammatory skin disease. While a great deal is known about Pso and its treatment, there remain several treatment scenarios unaddressed by clinical studies. To be effective, treatment for Pso must alter the activity of one or more immunological pathways important in the pathogenesis of the disease. While the benefit of blocking these pathways may be apparent, there remain uncertainties regarding safety, such as infections, malignancies, and the potential for off-target effects. Existing guidelines and treatment recommendations rely primarily on clinical trial or observational data, none of which adequately address specific clinical challenges. This document describes a methodological framework for generating practical and clinically relevant guidance for situations where direct evidence is rare or absent. Guidelines implementing this framework are currently ongoing. METHODS: We develop a knowledge synthesis approach to guideline development, utilizing clinical trial data where available, and a formalized inferential decision-making process that considers indirect data coupled with structured expert opinion and analysis. This approach is best suited for situations where direct, high-level evidence is lacking. Support for each resultant recommendation is expressed as a quantified assessment of confidence. RESULTS: The topics to be addressed by this set of guidelines are ranked by clinicians and patients as areas of concern, with an emphasis on topics where high-level evidence may have limited availability. CONCLUSION: Through this novel approach, we will derive practical, informative recommendations using the best evidence available in combination with structured expert opinion to guide best practices in complex, real-world settings. Supplementary file2 (MP4 98653 kb).

Clinical guidelines aim to assist doctors in managing their patients' medical conditions. A limitation of current guidelines is that they are frequently based on randomized clinical research trials­often considered the gold standard in medical research. Clinical trials are designed to estimate the safety and effectiveness of treatment. Outside of clinical trials, doctors encounter a range of patient cases excluded from clinical trials. Our group aims to create guidelines for those clinical scenarios not adequately addressed by clinical trials. Examples include patients excluded from clinical trials, the elderly, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and pregnant or breastfeeding women. When clinical trial data is limited, doctors must make decisions nonetheless. In certain clinical situations they are left to their own resources to consult with experts, review the data, and make inferences based on the limited data available. Instead of concluding that there is no data, the topic of interest can be broken down into components that are answerable by different types of research studies. This inference-based approach uses expert opinion and indirect evidence to support an inference-based position on topics where direct clinical data is sparse or insufficient to answer the question. This approach can be used as a complement to clinical trial data informing disease management guidelines.

Improvement of granulomatous skin conditions with tofacitinib in three patients: A case report.

Granulomatous skin conditions are poorly understood inflammatory skin diseases consisting predominantly of macrophages. Granuloma annulare (GA) is the most common granulomatous skin disease and the generalized variant is particularly difficult to treat due to the prolonged course and lack of efficacious treatment options. Necrobiosis lipoidica (NL) is another granulomatous disorder of uncertain etiology. There is a growing body of evidence for the use of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in the management of inflammatory skin diseases. In our report, we describe three patients with recalcitrant granulomatous disease including NL and generalized GA who responded favourably to treatment with the JAK inhibitor tofacitinib. JAK inhibitors may be a beneficial therapeutic option for patients with granulomatous skin diseases that are unresponsive to conventional therapies. Further research is required to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of JAK inhibitors in treating granulomatous skin conditions.

Phosphodiesterase-4 Inhibition in Psoriasis.

Psoriasis is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory disorder. Phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) is an enzyme that mediates inflammatory responses and plays a role in psoriasis pathogenesis. PDE-4 degrades its substrate cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) to adenosine monophosphate (AMP), which subsequently leads to the production of pro-inflammatory mediators. Inhibitors of PDE-4 work by blocking the degradation of cAMP, which leads to a reduction in inflammation. Apremilast is the only approved oral PDE-4 inhibitor for the treatment of psoriasis. While it is effective for some patients, it may be limited by adverse effects in others. A topical PDE-4 inhibitor, roflumilast, is being investigated in psoriasis and showing promising results. Crisaborole, a topical PDE-4 inhibitor approved for use in atopic dermatitis, has also been investigated in psoriasis. This is an updated comprehensive review to summarize the currently available evidence for the PDE-4 inhibitors apremilast, roflumilast and crisaborole in the treatment of psoriasis, with a focus on data from randomized clinical trials.