Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of therapies for psoriatic arthritis on patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Head-to-head clinical trials are common in psoriasis, but scarce in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), making treatment comparisons between therapeutic classes difficult. This study describes the relative effectiveness of targeted synthetic (ts) and biologic (b) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) through network meta-analysis (NMA). DESIGN: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted in January 2020. Bayesian NMAs were conducted to compare treatments on Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey including Mental Component Summary (MCS) and Physical Component Summary (PCS) scores. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE (including Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily),Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patients with PsA receiving tsDMARDS, bDMARDs or placebo were included in the SLR; there was no restriction on outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent researchers reviewed all citations. Data for studies meeting all inclusion criteria were extracted into a standardised Excel-based form by one reviewer and validated by a second reviewer. A third reviewer was consulted to resolve any discrepancies, as necessary. Risk of bias was assessed using the The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical effectiveness quality assessment checklist. RESULTS: In total, 26 RCTs were included. For HAQ-DI, SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores, intravenous tumour necrosis factor (TNF) alpha inhibitors generally ranked higher than most other classes of therapies available to treat patients with PsA. For almost all outcomes, several interleukin (IL)-23, IL-17A, subcutaneous TNF and IL-12/23 agents offered comparable improvement, while cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, phosphodiesterase-4 and Janus kinase inhibitors often had the lowest efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: While intravenous TNFs may provide some improvements in PROs relative to several other tsDMARDs and bDMARDs for the treatment of patients with PsA, differences between classes of therapies across outcomes were small.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Patients with a History of Treated Solid Tumours: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: Patients with treated solid tumours (TSTs) are a highly heterogeneous population at an increased risk for malignancy compared with the general population. When treating psoriasis in patients with a history of TSTs, clinicians are concerned about the immunosuppressive nature of psoriasis therapies, the possibility of augmenting cancer recurrence/progression, and infectious complications. No direct, high-level evidence exists to address these concerns. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework supporting healthcare professional and patient discussions on the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in patients with previously TSTs. Our goal was to address the clinically important question, "In patients with TSTs, does therapy with systemic agents used for psoriasis increase the risk of malignancy or malignancy recurrence?" METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial and real-world data were absent. We reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in patients with TSTs. Recommendations on systemic psoriasis therapies in patients with TSTs were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified five indirect indicators of iatrogenic immunosuppression informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) overall survival, (2) rate of malignancies with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (3) rate of infections with psoriasis and systemic psoriasis therapies, (4) common disease biochemical pathways for solid tumours and systemic psoriasis therapies, and (5) solid organ transplant outcomes. On the basis of review of the totality of this data, we provided inference-based conclusions and ascribed level of support for each statement. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to considering new therapies for psoriasis, an understanding of cancer prognosis should be addressed. Patients with TSTs and a good cancer prognosis will have similar outcomes to non-TST patients when treated with systemic psoriasis therapies. For patients with TSTs and a poor cancer prognosis, the quality-of-life benefits of treating psoriasis may outweigh the theoretical risks.

Patients with previously treated cancer have a higher chance of cancer recurrence compared with the general population. With cancer incidence rising worldwide, doctors across medical specialities will need to treat other medical conditions, including inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis, in these patients. Effective systemic therapies for psoriasis reduce immune cell activity. Accordingly, there are concerns that treatments for psoriasis could worsen cancer recurrence/progression and infectious complications. There is not enough quality evidence to make broad recommendations for treating other inflammatory conditions in patients with a history of cancer. To guide patient and doctor discussions, we asked: what are effective and safe treatments when patients with treated solid tumours need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis? We focused on patients with solid tumours and excluded blood and skin cancers. Our panel of experts, including 12 dermatologists and 3 medical oncologists, reviewed direct and indirect evidence to answer this question. Considering the totality of evidence reviewed, the expert panel drafted and rated their level of support for opinion statements on important considerations in treating patients with psoriasis who have a history of solid tumours. By making inferences on systemic psoriasis therapies in this heterogeneous population, we take the onus off individual physicians to review the indirect data. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent. To support treatment decisions, doctors should have a guided conversation with the patient and their family on a case-by-case basis about the risks and benefits of treatment.

Use of Systemic Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in People Living with Controlled HIV: Inference-Based Guidance from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

BACKGROUND: People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) have a similar prevalence of psoriasis as the general population, though incidence and severity correlate with HIV viral load. Adequately treating HIV early renders the infection a chronic medical condition and allows PLHIV with a suppressed viral load (PLHIV-s) to live normal lives. Despite this, safety concerns and a lack of high-level data have hindered the use of systemic psoriasis therapies in PLHIV-s. OBJECTIVES: We aim to provide a structured framework that supports healthcare professionals and patients discussing the risks and benefits of systemic psoriasis therapy in PLHIV-s. Our goal was to address the primary question, are responses to systemic therapies for the treatment of psoriasis in PLHIV-s similar to those in the non-HIV population? METHODS: We implemented an inference-based approach relying on indirect evidence when direct clinical trial data were absent. In this instance, we reviewed indirect evidence supporting inferences on the status of immune function in PLHIV. Recommendations on systemic treatment for psoriasis in PLHIV were derived using an inferential heuristic. RESULTS: We identified seven indirect indicators of immune function informed by largely independent bodies of evidence: (1) functional assays, (2) vaccine response, (3) life expectancy, (4) psoriasis manifestations, (5) rate of infections, (6) rate of malignancies, and (7) organ transplant outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related benefits and risks when treating a patient with systemic psoriasis therapies are similar for non-HIV patients and PLHIV with a suppressed viral load and normalized CD4 counts. Prior to initiating psoriasis treatment in PLHIV, HIV replication should be addressed by an HIV specialist. Exercise additional caution for patients with a suppressed viral load and discordant CD4 responses on antiretroviral therapy.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV) develop psoriasis as often as everyone else. We asked: what are effective and safe treatments when PLHIV need systemic therapy (pills or injections) for their psoriasis?HIV infection attacks the immune system. When HIV is not treated, the immune system declines. A less effective immune system makes it harder for the body to fight infections and certain cancers. Psoriasis is a skin condition caused by overactive immune cells. Effective psoriasis treatments reduce immune-cell activity. There are some concerns that treatments for psoriasis may not work and could worsen infections or cancers.To answer the question, we gathered 11 dermatologists and 4 HIV specialists. We reviewed the international scientific literature on PLHIV and psoriasis. The absence of direct evidence and volume of information to review made the process challenging. The end results were worthwhile.We concluded that people who are diagnosed early and take antiretroviral therapy to control their HIV infection (PLHIV-c) can live long, healthy lives. Accordingly, we determined that PLHIV-c can likely expect the same safety and efficacy for systemic psoriasis treatments as the general population. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis through consultation with the patient and treating physician(s).Pillars of modern medicine are evidence-based care and collaborative decision-making. Too often, neither care provider nor patient are adequately informed. We have tried to fill one information gap for PLHIV and psoriasis. This process may help answer questions in other disease populations where direct evidence is scarce or absent.

Cutaneous CpG adjuvant conditioning to enhance vaccine responses.

Adjuvant activity of the Toll receptor 9 agonist CpG 1826 was compared when given subcutaneously (s.c.) together with ovalbumin (s.c.[CpG + Ova]), or when given by either s.c. or intradermally (i.d.) routes two days prior to s.c. ovalbumin. Frequencies of CD8 + effector (TEFF) and central memory (TCM) T cells along with total IgG, IgG2c, and IgG1 titres were measured to ascertain how timing and location of CpG conditioning influenced vaccination outcome. Prior treatment with CpG enhanced TEFF, TCM, as well as total IgG responses. TEFF and TCM responses were greatest when CpG was given intradermally and prior to s.c. ovalbumin, conditions that eliminated the fraction of TCM 'non-responders' observed after s.c.[CpG + Ova] vaccination. IgG responses were polarized toward IgG2c after early s.c. CpG but toward IgG1 after early i.d. CpG. Separating CpG adjuvant and antigen application in time and space can improve vaccination outcome.

A phase 1b open-label dose-finding study of ustekinumab in young adults with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the safety of ustekinumab (a monoclonal antibody used in psoriasis to target the IL-12 and IL-23 pathways) in a small cohort of recent-onset (<100 days of diagnosis) adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) by conducting a pilot open-label dose-finding and mechanistic study (NCT02117765) at the University of British Columbia. METHODS: We sequentially enrolled 20 participants into four subcutaneous dosing cohorts: (i) 45 mg loading weeks 0/4/16, (ii) 45 mg maintenance weeks 0/4/16/28/40, (iii) 90 mg loading weeks 0/4/16, and (iv) 90 mg maintenance weeks 0/4/16/28/40. The primary endpoint was safety as assessed by an independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) but we also measured mixed meal tolerance test C-peptide, insulin use/kg, and HbA1c. Immunophenotyping was performed to assess immune cell subsets and islet antigen-specific T cell responses. RESULTS: Although several adverse events were reported, only two (bacterial vaginosis and hallucinations) were thought to be possibly related to drug administration by the study investigators. At 1 year, the 90 mg maintenance dosing cohort had the smallest mean decline in C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) (0.1 pmol/ml). Immunophenotyping showed that ustekinumab reduced the percentage of circulating Th17, Th1, and Th17.1 cells and proinsulin-specific T cells that secreted IFN-γ and IL-17A. CONCLUSION: Ustekinumab was deemed safe to progress to efficacy studies by the DSMB at doses used to treat psoriasis in adults with T1D. A 90 mg maintenance dosing schedule reduced proinsulin-specific IFN-γ and IL-17A-producing T cells. Further studies are warranted to determine if ustekinumab can prevent C-peptide AUC decline and induce a clinical response.

Ixekizumab Demonstrates Consistent Efficacy Versus Adalimumab in Biologic Disease-Modifying Anti-rheumatic Drug-Naïve Psoriatic Arthritis Patients Regardless of Psoriasis Severity: 52-Week Post Hoc Results from SPIRIT-H2H.

INTRODUCTION: Ixekizumab, a selective interleukin-17A antagonist, was compared with adalimumab in the SPIRIT-H2H study (NCT03151551) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and concomitant psoriasis. This post hoc analysis reports outcomes to week 52 in patients from SPIRIT-H2H, stratified by baseline psoriasis severity. METHODS: SPIRIT-H2H was a 52-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label, rater-blinded, parallel-group study of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)-naïve patients (N = 566) with PsA and active psoriasis (≥ 3% body surface area involvement). Patients were randomized to ixekizumab or adalimumab (1:1) with stratification by baseline concomitant use of conventional synthetic DMARDs and psoriasis severity (with/without moderate-to-severe psoriasis). Patients received on-label dosing according to psoriasis severity. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients simultaneously achieving ≥ 50% improvement in American College of Rheumatology criteria (ACR50) and 100% improvement in Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI100) at week 24. Secondary endpoints included musculoskeletal, disease activity (defined by composite indices), skin and nail, quality of life and safety outcomes. In this post hoc analysis, primary and secondary endpoints of SPIRIT-H2H were analyzed by baseline psoriasis severity. RESULTS: A greater proportion of patients achieved the combined endpoint of ACR50 + PASI100 and PASI100 with ixekizumab compared with adalimumab at weeks 24 and 52, regardless of baseline psoriasis severity. ACR response rates were similar for ixekizumab and adalimumab across both patient subgroups. For musculoskeletal outcomes, similar efficacy was seen for ixekizumab and adalimumab, but ixekizumab showed greater responses for skin outcomes regardless of psoriasis severity. The safety profiles of ixekizumab and adalimumab were consistent between subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of baseline psoriasis severity, ixekizumab demonstrated greater efficacy than adalimumab with respect to simultaneous achievement of ACR50 + PASI100, and showed consistent and sustained efficacy across PsA-related domains. It also demonstrated higher response rates for skin outcomes. These subgroup analyses highlight the efficacy of ixekizumab in patients with PsA irrespective of the severity of concomitant psoriasis.

Small plaque psoriasis re-visited: A type of psoriasis mediated by a type-I interferon pathway.

TNFα-inhibitor-induced psoriasis is mediated by the type-I interferon pathway, of which IFNα, LL37 and IL-36γ are major players. A subset of patients treated with TNFα inhibitors develop small plaque psoriatic lesions. Small plaque psoriasis is similarly observed in patients on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and with concurrent systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) or positive antinuclear antibody (ANA). Small plaque psoriasis is also the predominant phenotype in Asian populations. The association between small plaque psoriasis morphology in various clinical scenarios and the type-I interferon pathway has not been previously studied. A cross-sectional study was conducted of patients who developed small plaque psoriasis and had a biopsy for diagnostic clarification between 2009 and 2017. We obtained skin specimens from 14 adults with small plaque psoriasis: four patients taking anti-TNFα treatment, four patients with antecedent SLE, three patients with concurrent ANA positivity and three patients taking ICI. Controls included three patients with chronic plaque psoriasis. Histology confirmed psoriasiform epidermal hyperplasia with focal lichenoid and spongiotic features. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed higher expression of IFNα-induced MXA, LL37 and IL-36γ in all clinical scenarios of small plaque psoriasis compared to chronic plaque psoriasis. There was decreased CD8 T-cell migration to the epidermis and variability in the number of LAMP3+ cytoplasmic dendritic cells in the dermis of small plaque psoriasis. The findings suggest that small plaque psoriasis is a unique type of psoriasis with a distinct morphology and immune-phenotype, primarily mediated by the type-I interferon pathway. Associating morphology and disease pathogenesis may help identify therapeutic targets for better disease control.

Practical and Relevant Guidelines for the Management of Psoriasis: An Inference-Based Methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Psoriasis (Pso) is a common, immune-mediated, chronic-relapsing, inflammatory skin disease. While a great deal is known about Pso and its treatment, there remain several treatment scenarios unaddressed by clinical studies. To be effective, treatment for Pso must alter the activity of one or more immunological pathways important in the pathogenesis of the disease. While the benefit of blocking these pathways may be apparent, there remain uncertainties regarding safety, such as infections, malignancies, and the potential for off-target effects. Existing guidelines and treatment recommendations rely primarily on clinical trial or observational data, none of which adequately address specific clinical challenges. This document describes a methodological framework for generating practical and clinically relevant guidance for situations where direct evidence is rare or absent. Guidelines implementing this framework are currently ongoing. METHODS: We develop a knowledge synthesis approach to guideline development, utilizing clinical trial data where available, and a formalized inferential decision-making process that considers indirect data coupled with structured expert opinion and analysis. This approach is best suited for situations where direct, high-level evidence is lacking. Support for each resultant recommendation is expressed as a quantified assessment of confidence. RESULTS: The topics to be addressed by this set of guidelines are ranked by clinicians and patients as areas of concern, with an emphasis on topics where high-level evidence may have limited availability. CONCLUSION: Through this novel approach, we will derive practical, informative recommendations using the best evidence available in combination with structured expert opinion to guide best practices in complex, real-world settings. Supplementary file2 (MP4 98653 kb).

Clinical guidelines aim to assist doctors in managing their patients' medical conditions. A limitation of current guidelines is that they are frequently based on randomized clinical research trials­often considered the gold standard in medical research. Clinical trials are designed to estimate the safety and effectiveness of treatment. Outside of clinical trials, doctors encounter a range of patient cases excluded from clinical trials. Our group aims to create guidelines for those clinical scenarios not adequately addressed by clinical trials. Examples include patients excluded from clinical trials, the elderly, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and pregnant or breastfeeding women. When clinical trial data is limited, doctors must make decisions nonetheless. In certain clinical situations they are left to their own resources to consult with experts, review the data, and make inferences based on the limited data available. Instead of concluding that there is no data, the topic of interest can be broken down into components that are answerable by different types of research studies. This inference-based approach uses expert opinion and indirect evidence to support an inference-based position on topics where direct clinical data is sparse or insufficient to answer the question. This approach can be used as a complement to clinical trial data informing disease management guidelines.

A 54-Year-Old Woman with Cutaneous Nodules.

A 54-Year-Old Woman with Cutaneous NodulesA 54-year-old woman presented with chronic cutaneous nodules and plaques. How do you approach the evaluation, and what is the diagnosis?

Infection risk of dermatologic therapeutics during the COVID-19 pandemic: an evidence-based recalibration.

Recommendations were made recently to limit or stop the use of oral and systemic immunotherapies for skin diseases due to potential risks to the patients during the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we attempt to identify potentially safe immunotherapies that may be used in the treatment of cutaneous diseases during the current COVID-19 pandemic. We performed a literature review to approximate the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, including available data on the roles of relevant cytokines, cell subsets, and their mediators in eliciting an optimal immune response against respiratory viruses in murine gene deletion models and humans with congenital deficiencies were reviewed for viral infections risk and if possible coronaviruses specifically. Furthermore, reported risk of infections of biologic and non-biologic therapeutics for skin diseases from clinical trials and drug data registries were evaluated. Many of the immunotherapies used in dermatology have data to support their safe use during the COVID-19 pandemic including the biologics that target IgE, IL-4/13, TNF-α, IL-17, IL-12, and IL-23. Furthermore, we provide evidence to show that oral immunosuppressive medications such as methotrexate and cyclosporine do not significantly increase the risk to patients. Most biologic and conventional immunotherapies, based on doses and indications in dermatology, do not appear to increase risk of viral susceptibility and are most likely safe for use during the COVID-19 pandemic. The limitation of this study is availability of data on COVID-19.

Recurrent sterile abscesses in a case of X-linked neutropenia.

Cutaneous manifestations are common in monogenic immune disorders, including both infectious and non-infectious etiologies. We report follow-up of a case initially published in Pediatric Dermatology in 2001 of a 13-year-old boy with a history of inflammatory skin lesions and neutropenia who developed neutrophilic dermatoses precipitated by G-CSF. Whole exome sequencing performed at 36 years of age revealed a gain-of-function mutation in the WAS gene, leading to a diagnosis of X-linked neutropenia. This case report provides closure on a decades-long diagnostic odyssey and underscores the importance of genetic sequencing in patients who present with unusual dermatologic findings.

Skin Exposure to Narrow Band Ultraviolet (UVB) Light Modulates the Human Intestinal Microbiome.

The recent worldwide rise in idiopathic immune and inflammatory diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS) and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) has been linked to Western society-based changes in lifestyle and environment. These include decreased exposure to sunlight/UVB light and subsequent impairment in the production of vitamin D, as well as dysbiotic changes in the makeup of the gut microbiome. Despite their association, it is unclear if there are any direct links between UVB light and the gut microbiome. In this study we investigated whether exposing the skin to Narrow Band Ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) light to increase serum vitamin D levels would also modulate the makeup of the human intestinal microbiota. The effects of NB-UVB light were studied in a clinical pilot study using a healthy human female cohort (n = 21). Participants were divided into those that took vitamin D supplements throughout the winter prior to the start of the study (VDS+) and those who did not (VDS-). After three NB-UVB light exposures within the same week, the serum 25(OH)D levels of participants increased on average 7.3 nmol/L. The serum response was negatively correlated to the starting 25-hydroxy vitamin D [25(OH)D] serum concentration. Fecal microbiota composition analysis using 16S rRNA sequencing showed that exposure to NB-UVB significantly increased alpha and beta diversity in the VDS- group whereas there were no changes in the VDS+ group. Bacteria from several families were enriched in the VDS- group after the UVB exposures according to a Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) prediction, including Lachnospiracheae, Rikenellaceae, Desulfobacteraceae, Clostridiales vadinBB60 group, Clostridia Family XIII, Coriobacteriaceae, Marinifilaceae, and Ruminococcus. The serum 25(OH)D concentrations showed a correlation with the relative abundance of the Lachnospiraceae, specifically members of the Lachnopsira and Fusicatenibacter genera. This is the first study to show that humans with low 25(OH)D serum levels display overt changes in their intestinal microbiome in response to NB-UVB skin exposure and increases in 25(OH)D levels, suggesting the existence of a novel skin-gut axis that could be used to promote intestinal homeostasis and health. Clinical Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03962673. Registered 23 May 2019 - Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03962673?term=NCT03962673&rank=1.