Orismilast in moderate-to-severe psoriasis: Efficacy and safety from a 16-week, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, dose-finding, and phase 2b trial (IASOS).

BACKGROUND: Orismilast is a novel oral phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) B/D inhibitor being investigated as a potential treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of orismilast modified-release formulation in moderate-to-severe psoriasis. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized (1:1:1:1 to 20, 30, 40 mg orismilast or placebo, twice daily), double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2b, 16-week, dose-ranging study evaluated orismilast in adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (NCT05190419). Efficacy end points were analyzed using multiple imputation. RESULTS: Of 202 randomized patients, baseline characteristics were balanced across arms, except greater severe disease proportions for orismilast vs placebo. Orismilast showed significant improvements in the primary end point, percentage change in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), from baseline to week 16 (orismilast -52.6% to -63.7% and placebo, -17.3%; all P <.001). Greater proportions receiving orismilast achieved PASI75 (39.5%-49.0%; P <.05) and PASI90 (22.0%-28.3%; P <.05 for 20 and 40 mg) vs placebo (PASI75, 16.5% and PASI90, 8.3%) at week 16. Safety findings were as expected with PDE4 inhibition; dose-dependent tolerability effects observed. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, disease severity imbalance between groups, limited duration and diversity in study population. CONCLUSION: Orismilast demonstrated greater efficacy vs placebo and a safety profile in line with PDE4 inhibition.

Maintained improvement in physician- and patient-reported outcomes with baricitinib in adults with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis who were treated for up to 104 weeks in a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients who completed the originating studies, BREEZE-AD1 (NCT03334396), BREEZE-AD2(NCT03334422), and BREEZE-AD7 (NCT03733301), were eligible for enrollment in the multicenter,phase-3, long-term extension study BREEZE-AD3 (NCT03334435). METHODS: At week 52, responders and partial responders to baricitinib 4 mg were re-randomized (1:1) into the sub-study to dose continuation (4 mg, N = 84), or dose down-titration (2 mg, N = 84). Maintenance of response was assessed from week 52 to 104 of BREEZE-AD3. Physician-rated outcomes included vIGA-AD (0,1), EASI75, and mean change from baseline in EASI. Patient-reported outcomes included DLQI, P OEM total score, HADS, and from baseline: WPAI (presenteeism, absenteeism, overall work impairment, daily activity impairment) and change from baseline in SCORAD itch and sleep loss. RESULTS: With continuous treatment with baricitinib 4 mg, efficacy was maintained up to week 104 in vIGA-AD (0,1), EASI75, EASI mean change from baseline, SCORAD itch, SCORAD sleep loss, DLQI, P OEM, HADS, and WPAI (all scores). Patients down-titrated to 2 mg maintained most of their improvements in each of these measures. CONCLUSION: The sub-study of BREEZE AD3 supports flexibility in baricitinib dosing regimens. Patients who continued treatment with baricitinib 4 mg and down-titrated to 2 mg maintained improvements in skin, itch, sleep, and quality of life for up to 104 weeks.

The effect of immunomodulators on seroconversion after BNT162b2 and AZD1222 vaccines in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Biologic and nonbiologic immunomodulators, used to treat immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), could impair the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines and thus vaccine effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to investigate the association between biologic and nonbiologic immunomodulators and seroconversion following the first and second dose of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with IMIDs. METHODS: Serum samples were collected following the first or second dose of the BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccines from patients receiving biologic and/or nonbiologic immunomodulators for one or more of psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease or systemic lupus erythematosus. Seroconversion was defined as a positive Roche Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S (spike protein subunit S1/receptor binding domain) immunoassay (≥ 0.8 U mL-1). Association between immunomodulator exposure and seroconversion was assessed using logistic regression, adjusting for age and sex. RESULTS: After excluding those with prior COVID-19, post-first vaccine dose samples from 193 participants and post-second dose samples from 312 participants were included in the analysis. Following the first vaccine dose, 17.6% (n = 34) of participants did not seroconvert. Seroconversion was reduced for those on nonbiologic [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12-0.69] or combined nonbiologic and biologic treatment (adjusted OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.045-0.45) compared with those on biologic monotherapy. Subgroup analysis demonstrated reduced odds of seroconversion in those on methotrexate (adjusted OR 0.097, 95% CI 0.19-0.49) or prednisolone treatment (adjusted OR 0.044, 95% CI 0.002-1.00) relative to tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor monotherapy. No participants receiving rituximab (n < 5) seroconverted after the first vaccine dose. Following the second vaccine dose, 1.6% of all participants did not seroconvert. Non-seroconversion was associated with receiving rituximab (n = 3 of 4) compared with those receiving other therapies (n = 2 of 308, P < 0.001). Post hoc analyses demonstrated that non-seroconversion was associated with age [adjusted OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.037-0.93 for those aged 60 years and over (reference category age 18-39 years)], but not sex, ethnicity or vaccine type. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with nonbiologics, particularly methotrexate, is associated with impaired seroconversion following two BNT162b2 or AZD1222 vaccine doses, in patients with IMIDs. These findings are consistent with those of other published studies. While this could indicate reduced protection against COVID-19, the immunological parameters that correlate most closely with vaccine effectiveness need to be defined to reach this conclusion.