Infections in Moderate to Severe Psoriasis Patients Treated with Biological Drugs Compared to Classic Systemic Drugs: Findings from the BIOBADADERM Registry.

Information regarding the safety of biological drugs prescribed to psoriasis patients on daily and long-term bases is insufficient. We used data from the BIOBADADERM registry (Spanish Registry of Adverse Events for Biological Therapy in Dermatological Diseases) to generate crude rates of infection during therapy with systemic drugs, including biological drugs (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, and ustekinumab) and nonbiological drugs (acitretin, cyclosporine, and methotrexate). We also calculated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (RRs) (with propensity score adjustment) of infection, serious infections, and recurrent infections of systemic therapies compared with methotrexate, using Poisson regression. Our study included records of 2,153 patients (7,867.5 person-years). The adjusted RR of overall infection was significantly increased in the groups treated with adalimumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.2-3.7), infliximab (adjusted RR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.1-2.65), cyclosporine (adjusted RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.17-2.15), ustekinumab with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.08-2.25), and etanercept (adjusted RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.02-1.76) compared with methotrexate alone. Cyclosporine had a significant risk of serious infection (adjusted RR = 3.12, 95% CI = 1.1-8.8), followed by adalimumab combined with methotrexate (adjusted RR = 3.28, 95% CI = 0.8-13.5). Adalimumab in combination with methotrexate had the highest risk of infection recurrence (adjusted RR = 4.33, 95% CI = 2.27-8.24).

Development of clinical prediction models for good or bad response to classic systemic drugs, anti-TNFs, and ustekinumab in psoriasis, based on the BIOBADADERM cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients likely to have very good or bad results from systemic psoriasis therapy could improve efficiency of therapy. OBJECTIVE: To develop prognostic models for good or bad response to classic systemic drugs, anti-TNFs, and ustekinumab in psoriasis. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression of a prospective multicenter cohort of psoriatic patients in clinical practice (6449 person-years of follow-up). We used as possible predictors demographic characteristics, comorbidities, characteristics of the psoriasis (type, PASI, arthritis), history of past therapy at entry in the cohort, and history of response to previous cycles while in the cohort. We defined good response to a treatment cycle as either cycle end due to disease remission or a cycle longer than 2 years that does not end later due to inefficacy in the follow-up period. Bad response to a treatment cycle was defined as a cycle that is finished due to inefficacy, based on the physician judgment, after more than 3 months of treatment. RESULTS: Patients with fewer previous therapies, lower body mass index, older at start of therapy, and with previous history of good responses to therapy are more likely to have positive results of therapy. However, the predictive characteristics of models are poor. CONCLUSION: Predictive models of clinical response to systemic drugs in psoriasis with the studied variables do not seem to outperform drug selection by a dermatologist.

Use of off-label doses is frequent in biologic therapy for moderate to severe psoriasis: A cross-sectional study in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Biologic medications increase dramatically the burden of a chronic and high prevalent disease like psoriasis. The objective of the study was to quantify the use of dose reduction or dose escalation strategies, not reflected in the drug summary of product characteristics, in clinical practice. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional study of a subset of patients from the Spanish Registry for Systemic Treatments in Psoriasis (BIOBADADERM) treated for over six consecutive months with the same biologic agent. RESULTS: The study included 637 patients. At the cut-off date, the initial dose had been reduced in 223 patients (35%; 95% CI: 31.3-38.9%) and escalated in 46 (7.2%; 95% CI: 5.3-9.5%). When compared with the patients treated with standard doses, the patients on reduced doses had a lower PASI score at the cut-off date (a mean 2.6 versus 1; -1.6 points) and exhibited greater improvement in PASI since the start of biologic therapy (mean reduction over baseline 75% versus 87%). By contrast, the patients receiving an escalated dose had higher PASI scores (2.6 versus 8.0) and showed less improvement in PASI (75% versus 46.8%). CONCLUSION: Off-label doses of biologic agents for psoriasis are frequent in clinical practice. This information is especially relevant for pharmacoeconomic models.