Efficacy and safety of the oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor povorcitinib (INCB054707) in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa in a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Janus kinase 1 inhibition may alleviate hidradenitis suppurativa (HS)-associated inflammation and improve symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of povorcitinib (selective oral Janus kinase 1 inhibitor) in HS. METHODS: This placebo-controlled phase 2 study randomized patients with HS 1:1:1:1 to receive povorcitinib 15, 45, or 75 mg or placebo for 16 weeks. Primary and key secondary end points were mean change from baseline in abscess and inflammatory nodule count and percentage of patients achieving HS Clinical Response at week 16. RESULTS: Of 209 patients randomized (15 mg, n = 52; 45 mg, n = 52; 75 mg, n = 53; placebo, n = 52), 83.3% completed the 16-week treatment. At week 16, povorcitinib significantly reduced abscess and inflammatory nodule count from baseline (least squares mean [SE] change: 15 mg, -5.2 [0.9], P = .0277; 45 mg, -6.9 [0.9], P = .0006; 75 mg, -6.3 [0.9], P = .0021) versus placebo (-2.5 [0.9]). More povorcitinib-treated patients achieved HS Clinical Response at week 16 (15 mg, 48.1%, P = .0445; 45 mg, 44.2%, P = .0998; 75 mg, 45.3%, P = .0829) versus placebo (28.8%). A total of 60.0% and 65.4% of povorcitinib- and placebo-treated patients had adverse events. LIMITATIONS: Baseline lesion counts were mildly imbalanced between groups. CONCLUSION: Povorcitinib demonstrated efficacy in HS, with no evidence of increased incidence of adverse events among doses.

Outcome Measures for the Evaluation of Treatment Response in Hidradenitis Suppurativa for Clinical Practice: A HiSTORIC Consensus Statement.

Importance: Although several clinician- and patient-reported outcome measures have been developed for trials in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), there is currently no consensus on which measures are best suited for use in clinical practice. Identifying validated and feasible measures applicable to the practice setting has the potential to optimize treatment strategies and generate generalizable evidence that may inform treatment guidelines. Objective: To establish consensus on a core set of clinician- and patient-reported outcome measures recommended for use in clinical practice and to establish the appropriate interval within which these measures should be applied. Evidence Review: Clinician- and patient-reported HS measures and studies describing their psychometric properties were identified through literature reviews. Identified measures comprised an item reduction survey and subsequent electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) consensus rounds. In each consensus round, a summary of outcome measure components and scoring methods was provided to participants. Experts were provided with feasibility characteristics of clinician measures to aid selection. Consensus was achieved if at least 67% of respondents agreed with use of a measure in clinical practice. Findings: Among HS experts, response rates for item reduction, e-Delphi round 1, and e-Delphi round 2 surveys were 76.4% (42 of 55), 90.5% (38 of 42), and 92.9% (39 of 42), respectively; among patient research partners (PRPs), response rates were 70.8% (17 of 24), 100% (17 of 17), and 82.4% (14 of 17), respectively. The majority of experts across rounds were practicing dermatologists with 18 to 19 years of clinical experience. In the final e-Delphi round, most PRPs were female (12 [85.7%] vs 2 males [11.8%]) and aged 30 to 49 years. In the final e-Delphi round, HS experts and PRPs agreed with the use of the HS Investigator Global Assessment (28 [71.8%]) and HS Quality of Life score (13 [92.9%]), respectively. The most expert-preferred assessment interval in which to apply these measures was 3 months (27 [69.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: An international group of HS experts and PRPs achieved consensus on a core set of HS measures suitable for use in clinical practice. Consistent use of these measures may lead to more accurate assessments of HS disease activity and life outcomes, facilitating shared treatment decision-making in the practice setting.

Patients' willingness to accept adverse event and cost tradeoffs from oral nicotinamide for reduced risk of non-melanoma skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-immunosuppressed patients with a history of multiple non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) taking oral nicotinamide supplementation experienced a 23% decrease in annual NMSC risk in a randomized clinical trial. Patient preferences for risks and costs associated with nicotinamide are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To understand how patients prioritize NMSC reduction, infection risk, and cost. METHODS: A sample of adults with history of ≥2 NMSC within the past five years undergoing Mohs procedure completed a discrete-choice experiment comprising two hypothetical treatments-characterized by varying reductions in NMSC incidence, increased severe infection risk, and cost-and no treatment. The data were analyzed with random-parameters logit models. RESULTS: A total of 203 subjects (mean age 71.5 years, 65.5% males) participated. For a 23% annual reduction in NMSC incidence, a 26% [95% CI: 8%-45%] annual increase in severe infection risk and $8 [95% CI: $2-14] monthly cost was acceptable. Outcomes across analyzed subgroups (before vs. during COVID pandemic, site of interview, less vs. more prior NMSCs) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Patients were unwilling to accept high severe infection risks to obtain the reduction in NMSC incidence observed in a nicotinamide trial, suggesting that routinely recommending nicotinamide may run counter to some patients' preferences.

Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Diagnosis and Management in the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease characterized by abscesses and inflammatory nodules, and occasionally tunnels and scars, in the axillae, groin, and inframammary areas. OBJECTIVE: HS can be challenging to diagnose because it mimics localized soft-tissue infection. The process of differentiating HS from soft-tissue infection is discussed. Patients with HS frequently visit emergency departments (EDs) for acute management of pain and drainage from HS lesions. This review updates emergency and urgent care physicians on how to educate and initiate treatment for patients with HS, and to coordinate care with dermatologists and other physicians early in their disease course. DISCUSSION: Recent updates on the epidemiology, diagnosis, and management of HS are reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Practice variations between how care for HS is provided in the ED setting and what HS treatment guidelines recommend are identified.

Validation of the Physician's Global Assessment of Fingernail Psoriasis by Rheumatologists Treating Psoriatic Arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the content validity and reliability of the Physician's Global Assessment of Fingernail Psoriasis (PGA-F) by rheumatologists treating patients with psoriatic arthritis. METHODS: There were 3 stages of analyses with 3 clinician cohort groups. Stage 1 (concept confirmation) included rheumatologist qualitative data (cohort 1) to establish content validity, acceptability, utility, and feasibility of the PGA-F in assessing nail severity. Quantitative information regarding the response category utilization in nail abnormalities was assessed by photographs. Stage 2 (inter-rater reliability) involved quantitative analysis of PGA-F data from study investigators, including rheumatologists, involved in a phase III clinical study (cohort 2) and a cohort of newly recruited rheumatologists (cohort 3). Stage 3 included known-groups validity. RESULTS: Qualitative analyses identified consensus that the PGA-F severity levels are comprehensive of real-world patient symptoms and the instrument is simple to use and understand. Psychometric analyses support the PGA-F as a clinical outcome assessment tool. Inter-rater reliability showed rheumatologist agreement across the fingernail psoriasis severity spectrum. They were monotonically ordered by the hypothesized severity structure with excellent fit to the clinicians who evaluated them. Agreement on the rank order of the severity of the photographs in this target rheumatologist population was consistent with previous reports by dermatologists. CONCLUSIONS: The PGA-F was shown to be usable by rheumatologists to measure patients along the full range of the fingernail psoriasis severity spectrum, have a strong relationship with a conceptually similar reference measure, differentiate among patients based on fingernail psoriasis severity, and detect category severity change over a 24-week period.

Clinical Epidemiology and Management of Hidradenitis Suppurativa.

Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic immune-mediated inflammatory skin disease with a prevalence of 0.1-1%, characterized by nodules and abscesses in the axillae, groin, and inframammary areas, sometimes developing into tunnels (or fistulas) and scars. Because hidradenitis suppurativa is more common in women and in those aged 18-40 years, obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) have the opportunity to diagnose, educate, initiate treatment, and coordinate care with ancillary health care professionals. The recently published North American treatment guidelines, along with management information for patients with hidradenitis suppurativa who are pregnant or breastfeeding, are summarized. By diagnosing and optimizing hidradenitis suppurativa treatment early in the disease course, ob-gyns can reduce morbidity, with the potential to favorably alter disease trajectory.

What causes hidradenitis suppurativa ?-15 years after.

The 14 authors of the first review article on hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) pathogenesis published 2008 in EXPERIMENTAL DERMATOLOGY cumulating from the 1st International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Research Symposium held March 30-April 2, 2006 in Dessau, Germany with 33 participants were prophetic when they wrote "Hopefully, this heralds a welcome new tradition: to get to the molecular heart of HS pathogenesis, which can only be achieved by a renaissance of solid basic HS research, as the key to developing more effective HS therapy." (Kurzen et al. What causes hidradenitis suppurativa? Exp Dermatol 2008;17:455). Fifteen years later, there is no doubt that the desired renaissance of solid basic HS research is progressing with rapid steps and that HS has developed deep roots among inflammatory diseases in Dermatology and beyond, recognized as "the only inflammatory skin disease than can be healed". This anniversary article of 43 research-performing authors from all around the globe in the official journal of the European Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation e.V. (EHSF e.V.) and the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundation, Inc (HSF USA) summarizes the evidence of the intense HS clinical and experimental research during the last 15 years in all aspects of the disease and provides information of the developments to come in the near future.

Long-term adalimumab efficacy in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa: 3-year results of a phase 3 open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal long-term dosing strategy for adalimumab (ADA) in hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa (HS) was evaluated by pooling the results of the PIONEER phase 3 trials and an open-label extension (OLE) study. OBJECTIVE: To assess the response to and tolerability of long-term administration of ADA in HS. METHODS: The durations of the PIONEER I/II periods A, B, and OLE were 12, 24, and 52 or more weeks, respectively. Patients who entered the OLE and received ADA (40 mg every week continuously) and responders plus partial responders (PRRs) were evaluated. Primary efficacy assessments included measurement of HS clinical response (HiSCR), lesion counts, skin pain, and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Treatment-emergent adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: At week 12, 52.3% of those receiving ADA weekly and 73.0% of PRRs achieved HiSCR. Achievement of HiSCR was maintained through week 168 in 52.3% of patients who received ADA weekly and 57.1% of PRRs. Sustained improvement in lesion counts, skin pain, and DLQI score were also observed. The safety profile throughout the OLE was similar to the profiles observed in the PIONEER studies. LIMITATIONS: The OLE was uncontrolled. CONCLUSION: Continuous weekly dosing with ADA, 40 mg, is a reasonable treatment option for long-term control of moderate-to-severe HS.

Achieving Hidradenitis Suppurativa Response Score is Associated with Significant Improvement in Clinical and Patient-reported Outcomes: Post Hoc Analysis of Pooled Data From PIONEER I and II.

Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), is a validated tool that has been used to assess the efficacy of adalimumab among patients with hidradenitis suppurativa. We evaluated the clinical meaning of HiSCR by relating it to patient-reported outcomes to give further context to its achievement in a post hoc analysis of integrated data from two phase 3 clinical trials (PIONEER I and II). Pooling placebo and active treatment arms, 39% of patients (245/629) achieved HiSCR at week 12. Irrespective of treatment, significantly (p <0.05) more HiSCR responders than non-responders experienced clinically meaningful improvement in Dermatology Life Quality Index (60.5% vs 30.4%), Pain Numeric Rating Scale (46.9% vs 19.9%), hidradenitis suppurativa quality of life (49.4% vs 26.9%), work-related performance (52.6% vs 37.7%), and non-work-related performance (59.5% vs 33.3%). Clinically meaningful outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa are more likely to be attained in patients achieving HiSCR level improvement.

Adalimumab for nail psoriasis: Efficacy and safety from the first 26 weeks of a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous clinical trials have not evaluated improvement in nail psoriasis as a primary end point. OBJECTIVE: This phase 3 trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe fingernail psoriasis and moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to 40 mg adalimumab every other week or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was at least 75% improvement in total-fingernail modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI75) response rate at week 26. Ranked secondary end point scores evaluated at week 26 were total-fingernail NAPSI and modified NAPSI, nail pain, Nail Psoriasis Physical Functioning Severity, Brigham Scalp Nail Inverse Palmo-Plantar Psoriasis Index, and Physician's Global Assessment (fingernail psoriasis). RESULTS: Of the 217 randomized patients (108 received placebo and 109 received adalimumab), 188 (86.6%) completed 26 weeks of treatment (period A) or escaped early to the open-label period. The study met the primary end point (response rate of 3.4% with placebo vs 46.6% with adalimumab [P < .001]) and all ranked secondary end points. The serious adverse event rates (placebo vs adalimumab) in period A were 4.6% versus 7.3%; the serious infections rates were 1.9% versus 3.7%. LIMITATIONS: Patients with less than 5% BSA involvement were not eligible for enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: After 26 weeks of adalimumab treatment, significant improvements were seen in the primary and all ranked secondary end points and in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe nail psoriasis versus with placebo and no new safety risks were identified.

Poor early response to methotrexate portends inadequate long-term outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis: Evidence from 2 phase 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Most methotrexate-treated psoriasis patients do not achieve a long-term PASI75 (75% reduction from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score) response. Indications of nonresponse can be apparent after only 4 weeks of treatment. OBJECTIVE: To develop a prediction rule to identify patients unlikely to respond adequately to methotrexate. METHODS: Patient-level data from CHAMPION (NCT00235820, N = 110) was used to construct a prediction model for week 16 PASI75 by using patient baseline characteristics and week 4 PASI25. A prediction rule was determined on the basis of the sensitivity and specificity and validated in terms of week 16 PASI75 response in an independent validation sample from trial M10-255 (NCT00679731, N = 163). RESULTS: PASI25 achievement at week 4 (odds ratio = 8.917) was highly predictive of response with methotrexate at week 16. Patients with a predicted response probability <30% were recommended to discontinue methotrexate. The rates of week 16 PASI75 response were 65.8% and 21.1% (P < .001) for patients recommended to continue and discontinue methotrexate, respectively. LIMITATIONS: The CHAMPION trial excluded patients previously treated with biologics, and the M10-255 trial had no restrictions. CONCLUSION: A prediction rule was developed and validated to identify patients unlikely to respond adequately to methotrexate. The rule indicates that 4 weeks of methotrexate might be sufficient to predict long-term response with limited safety risk.

Uncovering burden disparity: A comparative analysis of the impact of moderate-to-severe psoriasis and hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis and hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) exhibit distinct clinical features, but no studies have directly compared the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with moderate-to-severe manifestations of these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To determine which disease is associated with more severe HRQoL impairment. METHODS: Weighted averages of each of the following baseline HRQoL measures were determined and compared between HS and psoriasis populations from 5 clinical trials: Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Total Work Productivity Impairment, Dermatology Life Quality Index; EuroQOL 5D VAS, and Short Form-36 Health Survey. RESULTS: Compared with patients with psoriasis, patients with HS reported higher scores for VAS-pain (54.3 vs 36.1 [P < .0001]), Dermatology Life Quality Index (15.3 vs 11.3 [P < .0001]), EuroQOL 5D VAS (58.8 vs 50.8 [P < .0002]), and Total Work Productivity Impairment (35.4 vs 18.2). Patients with HS had lower Short Form-36 Health Survey scores than did patients with psoriasis (physical, 39.6 vs 49.0; mental, 41.5 vs 47.5 [both P < .0001]). LIMITATIONS: This analysis was performed using published summary data rather than patient-level data, and weighted pooled averages were compared. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HS have a higher HRQoL burden than patients with psoriasis. This study clearly documents the needs of patients with HS and the potential impact of medical, scientific, and societal consensus for the development of more effective HS treatments.

Two Phase 3 Trials of Adalimumab for Hidradenitis Suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa is a painful, chronic inflammatory skin disease with few options for effective treatment. In a phase 2 trial, adalimumab, an antibody against tumor necrosis factor α, showed efficacy against hidradenitis suppurativa. METHODS: PIONEER I and II were similarly designed, phase 3 multicenter trials of adalimumab for hidradenitis suppurativa, with two double-blind, placebo-controlled periods. In period 1, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to 40 mg of adalimumab weekly or matching placebo for 12 weeks. In period 2, patients were reassigned to adalimumab at a weekly or every-other-week dose or to placebo for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a clinical response, defined as at least a 50% reduction from baseline in the abscess and inflammatory-nodule count, with no increase in abscess or draining-fistula counts, at week 12. RESULTS: We enrolled 307 patients in PIONEER I and 326 in PIONEER II. Clinical response rates at week 12 were significantly higher for the groups receiving adalimumab weekly than for the placebo groups: 41.8% versus 26.0% in PIONEER I (P=0.003) and 58.9% versus 27.6% in PIONEER II (P<0.001). Patients receiving adalimumab had significantly greater improvement than the placebo groups in rank-ordered secondary outcomes (lesions, pain, and the modified Sartorius score for disease severity) at week 12 in PIONEER II only. Serious adverse events in period 1 (excluding worsening of underlying disease) occurred in 1.3% of patients receiving adalimumab and 1.3% of those receiving placebo in PIONEER I and in 1.8% and 3.7% of patients, respectively, in PIONEER II. In period 2, the rates of serious adverse events were 4.6% or less in all the groups in both studies, with no significant between-group differences. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with adalimumab (40 mg weekly), as compared with placebo, resulted in significantly higher clinical response rates in both trials at 12 weeks; rates of serious adverse events were similar in the study groups. (Funded by AbbVie; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01468207 and NCT01468233 for PIONEER I and PIONEER II, respectively.).

Adalimumab treatment optimization for psoriasis: Results of a long-term phase 2/3 Japanese study.

The tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor, adalimumab, is approved to treat moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (40 mg every-other-week or 80 mg every-other-week following inadequate response at 40 mg in Japan). This open-label extension (OLE) trial evaluated the optimal adalimumab dose for long-term efficacy and safety in Japanese patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis following a prior 24-week, phase 2/3, randomized, double-blind study. Of the 169 patients from the phase 2/3 trial, 147 entered the OLE on 40 mg (n = 89) or 80 mg (n = 58) adalimumab every-other-week. Patients on 40 mg with Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) of less than 50 could escalate to 80 mg. At week 52 (28 of OLE), patients entering the OLE on 80 mg were reduced to 40 mg, with the option to re-escalate. For patients entering the OLE on 40 mg, final PASI 50/75/90 response rates were 85.1%/73.3%/60.4%, respectively, including effects of dose escalation. Among patients whose dose was escalated, final PASI 50/75/90 response rates were 70.0%/53.3%/36.7%, respectively. For patients entering the OLE on 80 mg, final PASI 50/75/90 response rates were 92.5%/84.9%/73.6%, respectively, including effects of dose re-escalation. Overall incidence rates of adverse events (AE) and injection-site reaction AE declined over time; rates for serious AE and infections were generally stable. Clinically meaningful efficacy of adalimumab was sustained to 4 years. Dose escalation to 80 mg every-other-week for patients with suboptimal response to 40 mg every-other-week, and dose reduction to 40 mg every-other-week for patients satisfactorily controlled on 80 mg every-other-week, are viable strategies for adalimumab optimization.

Switching to adalimumab for psoriasis patients with a suboptimal response to etanercept, methotrexate, or phototherapy: efficacy and safety results from an open-label study.

BACKGROUND: Strategies for transitioning patients with psoriasis from suboptimal therapy have not been delineated. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the efficacy and safety of transitioning to adalimumab for the treatment of psoriasis in patients with suboptimal response to prior therapy with etanercept, methotrexate (MTX), or narrowband (NB)-ultraviolet (UV)B phototherapy. METHODS: In this 16-week, open-label, phase IIIb trial, patients with chronic plaque psoriasis discontinued suboptimal therapy between 11 and 17 days (etanercept) or between 4 and 10 days (MTX and NB-UVB) before initiating adalimumab (80 mg at week 0, then 40 mg every other week from week 1). The primary end point was the percentage of patients achieving a Physician Global Assessment of "clear" or "minimal" at week 16. RESULTS: At week 16, Physician Global Assessment of "clear" or "minimal" was achieved by 52% of all enrolled patients (79 of 152) and 49%, 61%, and 48% in the etanercept, MTX, and NB-UVB subgroups, respectively. Four patients (2.6%) experienced at least 125% worsening of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score relative to screening value at any study visit. The adalimumab safety profile was consistent with results from other psoriasis clinical trials. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its relatively short 16-week duration, small patient enrollment, and open-label design. CONCLUSION: Patients who had a suboptimal response to etanercept, MTX, or NB-UVB phototherapy experienced a similar, approximately 50% likelihood of achieving a clinically relevant response to adalimumab. Immediate transition to adalimumab from prior suboptimal therapy, with no dosage tapering or overlap, had a low risk of psoriasis flare.

Efficacy and safety of adalimumab among patients with moderate to severe psoriasis with co-morbidities: Subanalysis of results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is associated with a variety of major physical and mental co-morbidities. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incremental burden of co-morbidities on patient-reported outcomes and evaluate the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in psoriasis patients with co-morbidities. STUDY DESIGN: Data were obtained from the initial 16-week, double-blind treatment period of REVEAL (Randomized controlled EValuation of adalimumab Every other week dosing in moderate to severe psoriasis triAL), a randomized, multicenter, phase III clinical trial. INTERVENTION: Patients with moderate to severe psoriasis were randomized in a 2 : 1 ratio to receive adalimumab 80 mg (two 40 mg injections administered subcutaneously) at baseline followed by one 40 mg injection every other week from week 1 to week 15 or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical severity (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index [PASI]) and patient-reported outcomes (Dermatology Life Quality Index [DLQI], Short Form 36 [SF-36] health survey, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] questionnaire) were assessed during the trial. The effect of selected co-morbidities (i.e. hypertension, psoriatic arthritis, hyperlipidemia, obesity, depression, other forms of arthritis, diabetes mellitus, and other cardiovascular diseases) on patient-reported outcomes was evaluated using multivariate analysis of covariance models. Subgroup analyses were performed by co-morbidity type to statistically compare the clinical efficacy, patient-reported outcome benefits, and safety of adalimumab with placebo in the presence of these conditions. RESULTS: Study co-morbidities were each independently associated with significantly greater impairment on at least one general patient-reported outcome measured at baseline (all p < 0.05), with the exception of hyperlipidemia. During the 16-week study, adalimumab patients demonstrated significantly greater PASI 75 response rates (defined as a reduction of at least 75% in PASI scores from baseline) compared with placebo patients for all co-morbidity subgroups. Adalimumab provided consistent improvements in DLQI, SF-36 Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores, and WPAI total scores from baseline to week 16 within co-morbidity subgroups. Rates of serious adverse events (AEs), serious infectious AEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation were comparable between adalimumab and placebo for patients with co-morbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Co-morbidities were associated with additionally impaired health-related quality of life and work productivity in patients with psoriasis. Adalimumab significantly improved efficacy and patient-reported outcomes and was well tolerated in patients with co-morbidities.

Adalimumab treatment is associated with improvement in health-related quality of life in psoriasis: patient-reported outcomes from a phase II randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis substantially impairs the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of patients, and a comprehensive evaluation of treatment includes HRQOL measures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of adalimumab on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis. METHODS: In a Phase II, randomized, controlled trial, the efficacy and safety of two dosages of adalimumab (40 mg weekly or every other week) versus placebo were assessed for 12 weeks in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Patients completed the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey, and EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D) at baseline and 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving a > or =75% reduction in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI 75). Investigators assessed PASI and Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) scores. RESULTS: Adalimumab patients (either dosage) displayed significantly greater improvements versus placebo patients in DLQI, EQ-5D, and SF-36 Mental Component Summary scores, as well as in Bodily Pain, Vitality, Social Functioning, Role-Emotional, and Mental Health domains. The adalimumab 40-mg weekly group also reported significantly greater improvements in SF-36 Physical Component Summary scores versus the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Both adalimumab dosages were efficacious in improving dermatology-specific and general PROs in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis.

Clinical response to adalimumab treatment in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis: double-blind, randomized controlled trial and open-label extension study.

BACKGROUND: Tumor necrosis factor is pivotal in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Adalimumab is a fully human monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 antibody that neutralizes tumor necrosis factor. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 147 patients received adalimumab (40 mg every other week or 40 mg/wk) or placebo. After 12 weeks of blinded therapy, patients taking adalimumab could continue their assigned dosages in a 48-week extension trial; patients taking placebo were switched to adalimumab (40 mg every other week). RESULTS: At week 12, 53% of patients taking adalimumab every other week, 80% of patients taking adalimumab weekly, and 4% of patients taking placebo achieved 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (P < .001). Responses were sustained for 60 weeks. No new safety signals were noted compared with the existing adalimumab clinical safety database. LIMITATIONS: The study was insufficiently powered to detect rare adverse events associated with adalimumab. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab significantly improved psoriasis and was well tolerated for 60 weeks.