Clinical consequences of antibody formation, serum concentrations, and HLA-Cw6 status in psoriasis patients on Ustekinumab

Background: Ustekinumab for the treatment of psoriasis is currently administered in a standard dosing regimen. However, some patients tend to benefit from alternative dosing regimens, a step toward personalized medicine. Methods: To investigate the role of ustekinumab serum concentrations, anti-ustekinumab antibodies [AUA] and HLA-Cw6 status as tools for optimizing ustekinumab treatment, a multicenter prospective cohort study was conducted at an academic hospital with affiliated nonacademic hospitals in Belgium (cohort 1) and 2 academic hospitals in the Netherlands (cohort 2 and 3). Patients with plaque-type psoriasis were eligible if treated with ustekinumab for >16 weeks. Serum samples and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores were obtained at baseline, week 16, 28, 40, 52, and/or >64 of ustekinumab treatment. Results: A total of 137 patients with 229 observations for serum concentrations and AUA and 61 observations for HLA-Cw6 status were included. Presence of AUA (prevalence of 8.7%) was significantly associated with a diminished clinical response (P = 0.032). The median ustekinumab trough concentration was 0.3 mcg/mL (<0.02-3.80). No differences in serum concentrations were observed between moderate to good responders and nonresponders (P = 0.948). Serum trough concentrations were not affected by methotrexate comedication. Prevalence of HLA-Cw6 positivity was 41% with no statistically significant difference in clinical response between HLA-Cw6-positive and HLA-Cw6-negative patients (P = 0.164). Conclusions: The presence of AUA was associated with treatment failure in this patient population; measurement of AUA may therefore be a candidate marker for personalized pharmacotherapy. The clinical utility of ustekinumab serum trough concentrations or HLA-Cw6 status determination remains less clear. Further exploration on the potential of measuring ustekinumab serum concentrations and other biomarkers in predicting therapy outcomes should be encouraged

Initial results of secukinumab drug survival in patients with psoriasis: A multicentre daily practice cohort study

Interleukin 17-antagonist secukinumab demonstrated high efficacy for treatment of psoriasis in randomized controlled trials. However, performance in daily practice may differ from trials. Drug survival is a comprehensive outcome covering effectiveness and safety, suitable for analyses of daily practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate drug survival of secukinumab in a daily practice psoriasis cohort. Data were collected from 13 hospitals. Drug survival was analysed using Kaplan–Meier survival curves, split for reason of discontinuation. In total, 196 patients were included (83% biologic experienced). Overall, 12 and 18 months drug survival of secukinumab was 76% and 67%, respectively, and was mostly determined by ineffectiveness. There was a trend towards shorter drug survival in women and in biologic experienced patients. Thirteen percent of patients experienced at least one episode of fungal infection. This is one of the first studies of drug survival of secukinumab in patients with psoriasis treated in daily practice

Protocol of a scoping review of outcome domains in dermatology

Introduction: Core outcome sets (COSs) are agreed outcomes (domains (subdomains) and instruments) that should be measured as a minimum in clinical trials or practice in certain diseases or clinical fields. Worldwide, the number of COSs is increasing and there might be conceptual overlaps of domains (subdomains) and instruments within disciplines. The aim of this scoping review is to map and to classify all outcomes identified with COS projects relating to skin diseases.Methods and analysis: We will conduct a scoping review of outcomes of skin disease-related COS initiatives to identify all concepts and their definitions. We will search PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library. The search dates will be 1 January 2010 (the point at which Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) was established) to 1 January 2024. We will also review the COMET database and C3 website to identify parts of COSs (domains and/or instruments) that are being developed and published. This review will be supplemented by querying relevant stakeholders from COS organisations, dermatology organisations and patient organisations for additional COSs that were developed. The resulting long lists of outcomes will then be mapped into conceptually similar concepts

The UPDATE trial (UVBPhototherapy in Dermatology for ATopic Eczema):study protocol for a randomized controlled trial of narrowband UVB with optimal topical therapy versus optimal topical therapy in patients with atopic eczema

Background: Narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) phototherapy is commonly prescribed for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE). The efficacy of NB-UVB, however, has not yet properly been established, as current evidence is of low certainty. Our aim is to assess the short-term and long-term (cost-)effectiveness and safety of NB-UVB in adult AE patients by performing a pragmatic, multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint (PROBE) trial. This protocol outlines its methodology. Methods: A pragmatic, multicenter, PROBE trial will be performed with 1:1 randomization of 316 adult patients with moderate-to-severe AE who have inadequate disease control with topical therapy and who are eligible for optimal topical therapy (OTT) or NB-UVB in combination with OTT as a next step. Participants in the interventional arm will receive a minimum of 3 months of OTT combined with 8 to 16 weeks of NB-UVB. The control group receives 3 months of OTT. Following the interventional phase, follow-up will continue for 9 months. Physician-reported and patient-reported outcomes (according to the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) Core Outcome Set) and adverse events are assessed at 4 weeks, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Discussion: The UPDATE trial aims to provide high-quality evidence regarding the (cost-)effectiveness and safety of NB-UVB phototherapy in moderate-to-severe AE patients. Challenges that are addressed in the protocol include the possible bias arising from applying open-label treatment and the necessity of introducing OTT into the study design to prevent a high dropout rate.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05704205. Registered on December 8, 2022.</p

Quantifying the Effect of Methotrexate on Adalimumab Response in Psoriasis by Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Modeling:When the rhetoric of sharing can backfire

Previously, we showed that the combination of methotrexate and adalimumab treatment leads to less antidrug antibody development. In this study, we quantify the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of adalimumab and evaluate the influence of methotrexate cotreatment. A population PK–PD model was developed using prospective data from 59 patients with psoriasis (baseline PASI = 12.6) receiving adalimumab over 49 weeks. Typical PK and PD parameters and their corresponding interpatient variability were estimated. We performed a covariate analysis to assess whether interpatient variability could be explained by addition of methotrexate and other covariates. In total, 330 PASIs, 252 adalimumab serum concentrations, and 247 antidrug antibody titers were available. Presence of antidrug antibodies (adalimumab group = 46.7%, adalimumab + methotrexate group = 38.7%; P = .031) was correlated with increased adalimumab apparent clearance (P &lt; .001). In the PD model, the use of concomitant methotrexate was borderline to significantly correlated with a decreased half-maximal inhibitory concentration (adalimumab concentration for which clinical response score is reduced by half; P &lt; .10). On the basis of our PK–PD model, concomitant use of methotrexate indirectly increases adalimumab concentration, partially through less antidrug antibodies formation, which may result in better efficacy.</p

Immune-mediated inflammatory disease patients' preferences in adverse drug reaction information regarding biologics

Objectives: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in studies and medical practice to obtain information on patients’ perspectives toward their treatment or disease. However, most study outcomes are primarily directed at healthcare professionals. It was aimed to obtain insight in which type of information immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) patients prefer to receive after participating in the Dutch Biologic Monitor (DBM), a PRO-based prospective cohort event monitoring system focused on adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Methods: A survey was conducted among DBM participants that wanted information about the results. Patients’ preferences were identified using twelve statements and rated with five-point Likert-type scales. Subgroup analyses and differences between statements were performed using Mann-Whitney U Tests. Results: The survey was completed by 591 patients (response rate 67.6%). Most respondents had inflammatory rheumatic diseases (76.8%) and used adalimumab (37.2%) or etanercept (33.2%). Respondents preferred results per IMID over aggregated results (p = <0.001). Information on whether patients with similar IMIDs experience ADRs (average 4.5), which biologics are most likely to cause ADRs (4.4) and whether ADRs disappear (4.4) were most interesting. Conclusion: DBM participants prefer to receive disease-specific information on ADRs that is tailored to their own biologic and IMID, including the outcome of ADRs

International consensus on methotrexate dosing for patients with atopic dermatitis: An eDelphi study

Background Despite the widespread off‐label use of methotrexate (MTX) for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), there is limited high‐quality evidence on dosing regimens and existing guidelines do not provide clear recommendations regarding dosing strategies. Objective The aim of this study was to achieve international consensus among AD experts to standardize the dosing regimen for MTX treatment in adults and children with AD. Methods An electronic Delphi (eDelphi) study was conducted from October 2021 to September 2022. Recruitment was conducted through dermatology societies and AD interest groups. Participation was open to dermatologists and dermatology residents experienced in treating AD patients with MTX. The study consisted of three online rounds. The first round was informed by a systematic review of relevant literature, and subsequent rounds were adjusted based on the results of the previous round. Participants voted on 19 proposals using a 9‐point scale (1–3 disagree, 4–6 neither agree nor disagree, 7–9 agree). Consensus was achieved when at least 70% of participants agreed, and less than 15% disagreed. Proposals that did not reach consensus in the first three rounds were discussed in a consensus meeting, where consensus was defined as less than 30% disagreement. Results In total, 152 participants completed Round 1, 104 (68%) completed all survey rounds, and 43 (28%) joined the consensus meeting. Consensus was achieved on 7 proposals in Round 1, 4 in Round 2 and 6 in Round 3. The final 2 proposals reached consensus during the consensus meeting. Consensus topics include test dose, start dose, maximum dose, administration route, dosing schedule, management of stopping treatment, treatment duration and folic acid supplementation. Conclusions This eDelphi study achieved consensus on 19 proposals related to MTX dosing for adults and children with AD. These results aim to guide prescribing decisions and encourage a standardized global approach to MTX use in AD