INTRODUCTION: Nail changes are frequent clinical findings in patients with cutaneous psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, often causing significant impairments in quality of life. Numerous targeted therapies have been previously studied for treatment of nail psoriasis, however, newer agents have not been captured in prior systematic reviews. With over 25 new studies published since 2020, the landscape of nail psoriasis systemic treatments is rapidly evolving, warranting analysis of recently approved therapies.
METHODS: An updated systematic review of all PubMed and OVID database studies assessing efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for nail psoriasis was performed, with the goal of incorporating clinical data of recent trials and newer agents, namely brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies reporting at least one of the nail psoriasis clinical appearance outcomes (Nail Psoriasis Severity Index, modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index).
RESULTS: A total of 68 studies on 15 nail psoriasis targeted therapeutic agents were included. Biological agents and small molecule inhibitors included TNF-alpha inhibitors (adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab), IL-17 inhibitors (ixekizumab, brodalumab, secukinumab), IL-12/23 inhibitors (ustekinumab), IL-23 inhibitors (guselkumab, risankizumab, tildrakizumab), PDE-4 inhibitors (apremilast), and JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib). These agents all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in nail outcome scores, compared with placebo or with baseline values, at weeks 10-16 and weeks 20-26, with some studies assessing efficacy up to week 60. Safety data for these agents were acceptable and consistent with known safety profiles within these timepoints, with nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, injection site reactions, headache, and diarrhea being the most reported adverse events. Specifically, the newer agents, brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab, showed promising outcomes for treatment of nail psoriasis on the basis of current data.
CONCLUSION: Numerous targeted therapies have shown significant efficacy in improving nail findings in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Data from head-to-head trials have shown greater efficacy of ixekizumab over adalimumab and ustekinumab, as well as brodalumab over ustekinumab, while prior meta-analyses have demonstrated superiority of ixekizumab and tofacitinib to other included agents at various assessed timepoints. Further studies on the long-term efficacy and safety of these agents, as well as randomized controlled trials involving comparison with placebo arms, are needed to fully analyze differences in efficacy of newer agents compared with previously established therapies.
Objective: To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and an inadequate response to at least one disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD). Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2020. The active drugs included three JAK inhibitors and eight bDMARDs while the control drugs included placebo or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs). Outcomes include American College of Rheumatology 20% response (ACR20), Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28), Health Assessment Questionnaire–Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and discontinuations for adverse events (AEs). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) using network meta-analysis with random effects. Results: Eighty-eight RCTs with 31,566 patients were included. All JAK inhibitors and bDMARDs were more effective than placebo in ACR20 (ORs ranging between 3.05 and 5.61), DAS28 (WMDs ranging between −1.91 and −0.80) and HAQ-DI (WMDs ranging between −0.34 and −0.21). Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib showed relatively good efficacy in these three outcomes according to their relative ranking. Notably, tocilizumab was more effective than other active drugs in DAS28 (WMDs ranging between −1.11 and −0.49). Compared with the lower recommended doses, increasing the doses of JAK inhibitors (baricitinib 4 mg versus 2 mg, tofacitinib 10 mg versus 5 mg and upadacitinib 30 mg versus 15 mg) cannot provide significant additional benefits. In terms of discontinuations for AEs, all active drugs showed no significant difference compared with placebo except certolizumab pegol [OR 1.65, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.06–2.61] and rituximab (3.17, 1.11–10.80). Conclusions: Tocilizumab, certolizumab pegol and upadacitinib may have relatively good efficacy in patients with RA after treatment failure with csDMARDs. RA patients taking a JAK inhibitor may have a preference for a lower recommended dose.
Background/Objectives: This article compares the effectiveness of baricitinib (BARI) 4 mg (oral, Janus kinase [JAK] 1/2 inhibitor) versus other targeted synthetic/biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, in combination with methotrexate (MTX), in moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis patients with inadequate response (IR) to MTX. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the interventions of interest. Bayesian network meta-analyses (NMA) were used to compare American College of Rheumatology (ACR) responses at 24 weeks. A series of prespecified sensitivity analyses addressed the potential impact of, among others, baseline risk, treatment effect modifiers, and trial design on treatment response. Results: Nineteen RCTs were included in the NMA (primary analysis). For ACR20, BARI 4 mg + MTX was found to be more effective than adalimumab (ADA) 40 mg + MTX (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.33), abatacept (ABA) 10 mg + MTX (IV/4 weeks) (OR 1.45), infliximab (IFX) 3 mg + MTX (IV/8 wks) (OR 1.63), and rituximab (RTX) 1000 mg + MTX (OR 1.63). No differences were found on ACR50. For ACR70, BARI 4 mg + MTX was more effective than ADA 40 mg + MTX (OR 1.37), ABA 10 mg + MTX (OR 1.86), and RTX 1000 mg + MTX (OR 2.26). Sensitivity analysis including 10 additional RCTs with up to 20% of patients with prior biologic use showed BARI 4 mg + MTX to be more effective than tocilizumab (TCZ) 8 mg + MTX on ACR20 (OR 1.44). Results for all sensitivity analyses were consistent with the direction and magnitude of the primary results. Key limitations include the time span in which trials were conducted (1999-2017), during which patient characteristics and treatment approaches might have changed. Conclusion: This NMA suggests that BARI 4 mg + MTX is an efficacious treatment option in the MTX-IR population as evidenced by the robustness of results.
Introduction: Biologics and traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are generally used in treating patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Previous studies have presented abundant data and information about the efficacy of such treatments, but the results were incomplete and inconclusive. This network meta-analysis was conducted to compare and assess the efficacy and safety of 15 therapies employing biologics and DMARDs for RA patients. Material and methods: Six outcomes (American College of Rheumatology 20% response rate (ACR20), ACR50, ACR70, remission, adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs)) were used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different treatments. The node-splitting method was used to assess the inconsistency, and the rank probabilities of the therapies were estimated by surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Besides, Jadad scale was used to evaluate the methodological quality of eligible studies. Results: A total of 67 randomized controlled trials with 20,898 patients met the inclusion criteria. Most of the therapies presented better performance than conventional DMARDs (cDMARDs) and placebo in ACR20, ACR50 and ACR70. Conversely, the safety of cDMARDs and placebo seemed to be superior in AEs and SAEs. Also, tocilizumab (TCZ) and TCZ + methotrexate (MTX) showed better remission in pain compared to other treatments. Overall, certolizumab pegol (CZP) + MTX and TCZ + MTX had higher probability than the other treatments in efficacy outcomes. Conclusions: We recommend CZP + MTX as the optimal drug therapy because it has the highest ranking in efficacy outcomes and relatively low risk of adverse events. TCZ + MTX is recommended as an alternative. Abatacept (ABT) and cDMARDs are not recommended due to their low efficacy.
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of available targeted immunomodulators for moderate-to-severe psoriasis has not been evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of targeted immunomodulators for adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.
METHODS: Systematic literature review of placebo-controlled and head-to-head randomized trials of eight targeted immunomodulators that evaluated clinical benefits or harms. The primary outcome was a 75% improvement on the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index ("PASI 75"). We also conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) adjusted for placebo response to perform indirect comparisons between agents.
RESULTS: In the NMA, the targeted immunomodulators ordered by an increasing relative risk (demonstrating greater likelihood) of achieving PASI 75 relative to placebo were: apremilast (6.2), etanercept (9.6), adalimumab (13.0), ustekinumab (14.0), secukinumab (15.4), infliximab (16.2), brodalumab (17.3), and ixekizumab (17.9). Ixekizumab, brodalumab, and infliximab were all statistically superior to ustekinumab, adalimumab, etanercept, and apremilast; results were similar to head-to-head studies where data were available.
LIMITATIONS: Much of the evidence is short-term (10-16 weeks); limited direct comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS: The Interleukin-17A inhibitors are more effective in achieving clearance than ustekinumab, which are, in turn, generally more effective than etanercept, adalimumab, and apremilast.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of brodalumab compared with approved biologic therapies and apremilast for moderate-to-severe psoriasis.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane for randomized controlled trials reporting induction phase responses. The primary analysis examined the proportion of patients achieving Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) 50, 75, 90 or 100 responses using a random-effects Bayesian multinomial likelihood model with probit link, with and without adjustment for variation in study-level placebo responses.
RESULTS: A total of 54 studies were included. Based on PASI 100 response, the most efficacious therapies were brodalumab 210mg every two weeks (Q2W) and ixekizumab. Brodalumab 210mg Q2W was significantly more efficacious than adalimumab, apremilast, brodalumab 140mg Q2W, etanercept, infliximab, secukinumab and ustekinumab. Results were consistent for PASI 50, 75 and 90 outcomes and all sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with pivotal trials which indicate that high levels of complete clearance can be achieved with brodalumab. Based on existing evidence, induction-phase efficacy of brodalumab is similar to ixekizumab and superior to other approved therapies, including anti-TNFs, apremilast, secukinumab and ustekinumab.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) pharmacotherapy may impact mental health outcomes by improving pain and stiffness, potentially by targeting inflammatory processes common to RA and depression. The objectives of this review were to ascertain the frequency of mental health assessments in RA pharmacotherapy trials, quantify the efficacy of RA pharmacotherapy for mental health outcomes, and explore the clinical and demographic factors related to mental health outcomes. Effective pharmacotherapy alone is unlikely to substantially improve mental health outcomes in most patients with RA. Integrated mental health care provided within routine clinical practice is essential to optimize mental and physical health outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Compare the benefits and harms of drug therapies for adults with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) within 1 year of diagnosis, updating the findings on early RA from the 2012 review.
DATA SOURCES: English-language articles identified through MEDLINE®, Cochrane Library, Embase®, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, gray literature, the previous 2012 review, expert recommendations, reference lists of published literature, and supplemental evidence data requests from January 2011 to October 5, 2017.
REVIEW METHODS: Literature was synthesized qualitatively in narrative form and summary tables within and between corticosteroids and classes of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Additionally, combination treatment strategies were examined. We conducted network meta-analysis for five outcomes: American College of Rheumatology 50-percent improvement (ACR50), remission based on Disease Activity Score (DAS), radiographic joint damage, all discontinuations, and discontinuations due to adverse events. Eligibility for network meta-analyses required the following: (1) patients with early RA had not attempted prior treatment with methotrexate (MTX), (2) doses of treatments were within ranges approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), (3) length of followup was similar, and (4) studies were double-blinded randomized controlled trials of low or medium risk of bias.
RESULTS: We analyzed 49 studies: 41 RCTs and 8 observational studies reported in 124 published articles. All included studies enrolled patients with moderate to high disease activity at baseline as measured with mean or median DAS 28 scores. A combination of corticosteroids plus MTX achieved higher remission rates than with MTX monotherapy (low strength of evidence [SOE]). Combination therapy with TNF (tumor necrosis factor) or non-TNF biologics plus MTX improved disease control, remission, and functional capacity compared with monotherapy with either MTX or a biologic (low to moderate SOE). Network meta-analyses found higher ACR50 response for combination therapy of biologics plus MTX than for MTX monotherapy (range of relative risk, 1.20 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04 to 1.38] to 1.57 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.88]). In available data, consisting mostly of clinical trials, no significant differences emerged between any DMARDs for rates of discontinuation attributable to adverse events or serious adverse events (low SOE for adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, infliximab, or abatacept with MTX, and moderate SOE for rituximab or tocilizumab with MTX). Data about subgroups (based on disease activity, prior therapy, demographics, and the presence of other serious conditions) were insufficient. No difference in findings were noted in MTX naïve and resistant populations. We found no studies of biosimilars for patients with early RA.
CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative synthesis and network meta-analyses suggest that the combination of MTX with TNF or non-TNF biologics improves disease activity and remission when compared with biologic monotherapy or a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD) monotherapy in patients with moderate to high disease activity at baseline as measured with mean or median DAS 28 scores. Overall rates of adverse events and discontinuation were similar among patients given csDMARDs, TNF biologics, and non-TNF biologics. We did not find eligible studies of biosimilars.
Antecedentes: Se han planteado preocupaciones en relación con un mayor riesgo de eventos cardiovasculares adversos mayores (MACE) (infarto de miocardio, accidente cerebrovascular o muerte cardiovascular) en pacientes tratados con agentes anti-interleucina (IL) -12 / 23 para moderados a severos psoriasis. OBJETIVO: Examinar el riesgo de MACE en pacientes adultos con psoriasis en placas expuestos a terapias biológicas mediante un metanálisis de ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA). MÉTODOS: i) Fuentes de datos: Se realizaron búsquedas sistemáticas en la Biblioteca Cochrane, MEDLINE y EMBASE, Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos, Agencia Europea de Medicamentos, plataformas de búsqueda en línea de compañías farmacéuticas individuales y 5 registros de ensayos (hasta el 31 de marzo de 2016). Ii) Selección de estudios: ECA que informan sobre eventos adversos en adultos con psoriasis en placas que reciben al menos una dosis autorizada de terapia biológica, terapia sistemática convencional o placebo. Iii) Síntesis de datos: odds ratios de ORP con intervalos de confianza del 95% Y se utilizaron estadísticas I (2) para evaluar la heterogeneidad utilizando RevMan5.3. RESULTADOS: En total, se incluyeron 38 ECA con 18.024 pacientes. No MACEs se observaron en 29 estudios, mientras que 9 ECA informó de 10 pacientes que experimentan MACEs. No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en el riesgo de MACE asociados con el uso de terapias biológicas en general (OR 1,45; IC del 95%: 0,34-6,24); Inhibidores del factor de necrosis tumoral α (adalimumab, etanercept e infliximab) (OR 0,67; IC del 95%: 0,10-4,63); Agentes anti - IL - 17A (secukinumab y ixekizumab) (OR1.00, 95CI% 0,09 - 11,09) o ustekinumab (OR4,48, 95% CI 0,24 - 84,77). No se observó heterogeneidad en estas comparaciones. CONCLUSIONES: La limitada evidencia existente sugiere que las terapias biológicas con licencia no están asociadas con MACE durante los cortos períodos controlados aleatorios en ensayos clínicos. Este artículo está protegido por derechos de autor. Todos los derechos reservados.
A new generation of biologics targeting IL-23/Th17 pathway has been developed. This study aimed to assess the short-term effectiveness and safety of these new agents using a network meta-analysis. Twenty seven randomized clinical trials (n=10,629) were identified by a comprehensive systematic literature review (PROSPERO 2015:CRD42015025472). Quality of evidence was assessed following Cochrane compliant rules and GRADE approach. Efficacy and safety outcomes at weeks 10-16 were compared using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a frequentist framework to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) of direct and indirect comparisons among the therapeutic options. There were 6 direct drug-to-drug comparisons in the network, with a high degree of consistency between the direct and the indirect evidence. From the available evidence, infliximab 5mg.kg-1 every eight weeks (OR: 118.89; 95%CI: 60.91-232.04) and secukinumab 300mg every four weeks (OR: 87.07;95%CI: 55.01-137.82) are shown as among the most effective short-term treatment, but are ranked as the biologic most likely to produce any adverse event (AE) or an infectious AE, respectively. Ustekinumab 90mg every twelve weeks, the third most efficacious (OR: 73.67; 95%CI: 46.97-115.56), was the only agent that did not show increased risk of adverse events when compared with placebo. Treatment recommendations should also consider long term outcomes and costs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Nail changes are frequent clinical findings in patients with cutaneous psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, often causing significant impairments in quality of life. Numerous targeted therapies have been previously studied for treatment of nail psoriasis, however, newer agents have not been captured in prior systematic reviews. With over 25 new studies published since 2020, the landscape of nail psoriasis systemic treatments is rapidly evolving, warranting analysis of recently approved therapies.
METHODS:
An updated systematic review of all PubMed and OVID database studies assessing efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for nail psoriasis was performed, with the goal of incorporating clinical data of recent trials and newer agents, namely brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies reporting at least one of the nail psoriasis clinical appearance outcomes (Nail Psoriasis Severity Index, modified Nail Psoriasis Severity Index).
RESULTS:
A total of 68 studies on 15 nail psoriasis targeted therapeutic agents were included. Biological agents and small molecule inhibitors included TNF-alpha inhibitors (adalimumab, infliximab, etanercept, certolizumab, golimumab), IL-17 inhibitors (ixekizumab, brodalumab, secukinumab), IL-12/23 inhibitors (ustekinumab), IL-23 inhibitors (guselkumab, risankizumab, tildrakizumab), PDE-4 inhibitors (apremilast), and JAK inhibitors (tofacitinib). These agents all demonstrated statistically significant improvements in nail outcome scores, compared with placebo or with baseline values, at weeks 10-16 and weeks 20-26, with some studies assessing efficacy up to week 60. Safety data for these agents were acceptable and consistent with known safety profiles within these timepoints, with nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infections, injection site reactions, headache, and diarrhea being the most reported adverse events. Specifically, the newer agents, brodalumab, risankizumab, and tildrakizumab, showed promising outcomes for treatment of nail psoriasis on the basis of current data.
CONCLUSION:
Numerous targeted therapies have shown significant efficacy in improving nail findings in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Data from head-to-head trials have shown greater efficacy of ixekizumab over adalimumab and ustekinumab, as well as brodalumab over ustekinumab, while prior meta-analyses have demonstrated superiority of ixekizumab and tofacitinib to other included agents at various assessed timepoints. Further studies on the long-term efficacy and safety of these agents, as well as randomized controlled trials involving comparison with placebo arms, are needed to fully analyze differences in efficacy of newer agents compared with previously established therapies.
