Evaluation of the benefit of thermal spa therapy in plaque psoriasis: the PSOTHERMES randomized clinical trial.

Spa therapy is considered an add-on treatment for psoriasis, but without any objective evaluation in the absence of randomized trials. This multicenter, open-label, randomized trial compared immediate spa therapy versus a control group having usual treatments until study assessments at 4.5 months. Spa therapy was proposed in five French spa resorts with standardized programs. Inclusion criteria were adults with plaque psoriasis, Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) > 10, and stable medical treatment in the last 6 months. The main objective was DLQI ≤ 10 at 4.5 months after inclusion. VQ-Dermato and EQ5D-3L also assessed quality of life (QoL), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) stress, and visual analogue scales (VAS) pain and pruritus. Between January 2015 and November 2018, 128 patients were randomized to either immediate spa therapy (64) (within 34 days, median) or usual treatments (61) until assessment at 4.5 months. Most were first-time spa users (71.2%). Mean DLQI and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index at inclusion were 16.7 and 10.5, respectively. Immediate spa therapy patients achieved the primary objective for 66.1% [95% CI 52.6% > 77.9%] vs 41.4% [95% CI 28.6% > 55.1%] control group patients (p = 0.007). VQ-Dermato scores and pruritus VAS significantly improved. Outcomes at 12-month follow-up of the immediate spa therapy group showed persistent improvement of DLQI, VQ-Dermato, and pruritus. This randomized controlled trial demonstrated that a cure of spa therapy improves QoL and alleviates certain symptoms of psoriasis, in short and long terms. This justifies its integration in the therapeutic strategies for psoriasis. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02098213.

Biological Therapies or Apremilast in the Treatment of Psoriasis in Patients with a History of Hematologic Malignancy: Results from a Retrospective Study in 21 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Few studies addressing the safety and efficacy of biological therapy (BT) or apremilast (APR) in patients with psoriasis with a history of hematologic malignancy (HM) exist. AIM: To describe the tolerance and efficacy of BT and APR in moderate-to-severe psoriasis in patients with a history of in-remission or evolving HM. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective, multicenter chart review of the tolerance and efficacy of BT or APR in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and a clinical history of in-remission or evolving HM. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients with severe psoriasis and a history of HM were included in France by the GEM Resopso study group. Of the 16 patients treated with one or more BT lines, none showed recurrence of their HM which was considered as stable or in remission, and only 2 patients showed an evolution of their HM which had been considered as stable at the beginning of treatment. In the 10 patients treated with APR, the HM of one patient who also received BT worsened. The 3 evolutions did not impact the treatment with BT or APR. Tolerance was very satisfactory, with a low occurrence of infections. Regarding efficacy, only one patient treated with APR did not achieve any notable clinical improvement. CONCLUSION: Despite supportive data regarding tolerance, the heterogeneity of the analyzed population and limited available data, BT and APR should be used with caution in this patient population and investigations on larger cohorts should be conducted to further assess their tolerance in this patient population.