Effectiveness, safety and quality-of-life effects of guselkumab and ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis: Week 104 results from the non-interventional, prospective, German multicentre PERSIST study.

BACKGROUND: PERSIST was a prospective, non-interventional, real-world study of guselkumab and ustekinumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Germany. OBJECTIVES: To examine effectiveness, safety and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes to Week (W) 104 of treatment with guselkumab and ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: Patients (≥18 years of age) received guselkumab or ustekinumab as per routine clinical practice. Outcomes to W104 were examined separately in guselkumab and ustekinumab recipients. An ad hoc exploratory analysis of outcomes with guselkumab versus ustekinumab was also performed following propensity score matching. RESULTS: Overall, 302 and 313 patients received guselkumab and ustekinumab, respectively. Patients in both cohorts experienced improvements in disease activity and QoL that were maintained to W104, with 64.7% and 63.6% of guselkumab- and 54.6% and 64.4% of ustekinumab-treated patients achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response and a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 score, respectively. Propensity score matching yielded well-balanced baseline characteristics except for prior biologic use, which was higher in guselkumab versus ustekinumab recipients (51.7% vs. 32.0%). Achievement of PASI ≤1 at W104 was more common in guselkumab versus ustekinumab recipients (58.7% vs. 49.7%). The W104 PASI90 response rate was 65.6% with guselkumab and 56.0% with ustekinumab; corresponding rates for PASI100 were 44.3% and 28.5%. In guselkumab recipients, response rates were higher in biologic-naïve versus biologic-experienced patients (PASI90, 77.1% vs. 53.4%; PASI100, 55.0% vs. 33.0%). A high level of response for QoL outcomes was observed for both treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Ustekinumab and guselkumab led to improvements in physician-assessed and patient-reported outcomes that were sustained for up to 2 years, with no new safety signals identified. Following propensity score matching, greater improvements in PASI outcomes were observed with guselkumab versus ustekinumab. Improvements with guselkumab were highest in biologic-naïve patients, highlighting the value of early treatment.

Early disease intervention with guselkumab in psoriasis leads to a higher rate of stable complete skin clearance ('clinical super response'): Week 28 results from the ongoing phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, GUIDE study.

BACKGROUND: Guselkumab is an interleukin (IL)-23 inhibitor with demonstrated efficacy in patients with psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the impact of early disease intervention on clinical responses following 28 weeks of guselkumab treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Correlate clinical response and disease duration data with serum biomarker data. METHODS: GUIDE is a phase IIIb randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre study of adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. In study part 1, patients with a short disease duration (SDD [≤2 years]) or a long disease duration (LDD [>2 years]) received guselkumab 100 mg at Week (W) 0, 4, 12, and 20. Those achieving complete skin clearance at W20 and W28 were defined as a super responder (SRe). A multivariable logistic regression analysed the association between baseline factors and the likelihood of becoming an SRe. The relationship between clinical response, disease duration and serum biomarker data was assessed at W0 and 4. RESULTS: In total, 880 patients were enrolled (SDD/LDD = 40.6%/59.4% of patients). More SDD than LDD patients achieved absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) = 0 at W28 (51.8% vs. 39.4%) and were SRes (43.7% vs. 28.1% [overall 34.4%]). SDD patients also achieved PASI = 0 quicker than LDD patients (median 141 vs. 200 days). Disease duration and prior biologic use had the greatest impact on becoming an SRe, with no strong association among these independent variables. At baseline, there were no significant differences in the serum biomarker levels of IL-17A, IL-17F, IL-22 and ß-defensin 2 between SDD and LDD patients, or between SRe and non-SRe patients. Guselkumab rapidly decreased these markers of systemic inflammation across all patient groups analysed at W4. Guselkumab was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Guselkumab efficacy was consistent across subpopulations, on the skin and systemically. The proportion of SRes was higher in SDD than LDD patients, indicating early treatment intervention may improve clinical outcomes.