Drug survival of adalimumab, ustekinumab and secukinumab in patients with psoriasis: a prospective cohort study from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR).

BACKGROUND: Real-world biologic drug survival is an important proxy measure for effectiveness. Predictors of drug survival may help patients with psoriasis choose between biologic therapies. OBJECTIVES: (i) To assess the relative drug survival of adalimumab, ustekinumab and secukinumab in patients with psoriasis. (ii) To investigate predictors of biologic drug survival. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed in the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR) between November 2007 and August 2019. We performed survival analysis and fitted a flexible parametric survival model for biologic discontinuation due to ineffectiveness. RESULTS: In total 9652 patients were included: 5543 starting on adalimumab (57·4%), 991 on secukinumab (10·3%) and 3118 on ustekinumab (32·3%). The overall drug survivals of adalimumab, secukinumab and ustekinumab in year 1 were 0·78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0·77-0·79], 0·88 (95% CI 0·86-0·91) and 0·88 (95% CI 0·87-0·89), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratios (adjHRs) for discontinuation of adalimumab and secukinumab compared with ustekinumab were 2·11 (95% CI 1·76-2·54) and 0·67 (95% CI 0·40-1·11), respectively. The presence of psoriatic arthritis predicted for survival in the adalimumab and secukinumab cohorts (adjHR 0·67, 95% CI 0·51-0·88 and 0·70, 95% CI 0·40-1·24, respectively), but for discontinuation in the ustekinumab cohort (adjHR 1·42, 95% CI 1·12-1·81). Previous exposure to biologic therapies predicted for discontinuation in the ustekinumab and secukinumab cohorts (adjHR 1·54, 95% CI 1·26-1·89 and 1·49, 95% CI 0·91-2·45, respectively) and for survival in the adalimumab cohort (adjHR 0·71, 95% CI 0·55-0·92). CONCLUSIONS: Secukinumab and ustekinumab have similar sustained drug survival, while adalimumab has a lower drug survival in patients with psoriasis. Psoriatic arthritis and previous biologic experience were predictors with differential effects between the biologic therapies. What is already known about this topic? There is conflicting evidence over the real-world drug survival of secukinumab in patients with psoriasis. Data from registries to date suggest that secukinumab has a lower drug survival than that reported from clinical trials. What does this study add? This study found that secukinumab and ustekinumab had similar sustained drug survival in the real world, while the drug survival of adalimumab was lower, suggesting that the real-world drug survival of secukinumab is higher than previously reported. We found that psoriatic arthritis and previous biologic experience had differential effects on drug discontinuation in the three biologic cohorts. These predictors may help patients and clinicians choose the most appropriate biologic therapy

Risk of hospitalization and death due to infection in people with psoriasis: a population-based cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is associated with risk factors for serious infections, but the independent relationship between psoriasis and serious infection is as yet unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether people with psoriasis have a higher risk of hospitalization due to any infection, respiratory infections, soft-tissue and skin infections, or a higher risk of death due to infection. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of people (≥ 18 years) with psoriasis using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD GOLD) linked to Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and Office for National Statistics (ONS) mortality records between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2016, and matched with up to six comparators on age, sex and general practice. Hospitalization was ascertained from HES records; death was ascertained from ONS mortality records. Stratified Cox proportional hazard models were estimated, with stepwise adjustment in different models for potential confounders or mediators between psoriasis and serious infection. RESULTS: There were 69 315 people with psoriasis and 338 620 comparators who were followed up for a median (interquartile range) of 4·9 (5·9) and 5·1 (6·3) years, respectively. People with psoriasis had a higher incidence rate of serious infection [20·5 per 1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20·0-21·0, n = 7631] compared with those without psoriasis (16·1 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 15·9-16·3, n = 30 761). The fully adjusted hazard ratio for the association between psoriasis and serious infection was 1·36 (95% CI 1·31-1·40), with similar results across the other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Psoriasis is associated with a small increase in the risk of serious infection. Further research is needed to understand how psoriasis predisposes to a higher risk of infection

A standardization approach to compare treatment safety and effectiveness outcomes between clinical trials and real‐world populations in psoriasis

Background: Patients recruited in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for biologic therapies in psoriasis are not fully representative of the real‐world psoriasis population. Objectives: Firstly, to investigate whether patient characteristics are associated with being included in a psoriasis RCT. Secondly, to estimate the differences in the incidence of severe adverse events (SAEs) and the response rate between RCT and real‐world populations of patients on biologic therapies for psoriasis using a standardization method. Methods: Data from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR) were appended to individual participant‐level data from two RCTs assessing ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis. Baseline variables were assessed for association of being in an RCT using a multivariable logistic regression model. Propensity score weights were derived to reweigh the registry population so that variables had the distribution of the trial population. We measured the C‐statistic of the model with trial status as the dependent variable, and the risk differences in the incidence rate of SAEs in the first year and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) after 6 months in the BADBIR cohort before and after weighting. Results: In total 6790 registry and 2021 RCT participants were included. The multivariable logistic regression model had a C‐statistic of 0.82 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81–0.83]. The risk differences for the incidence rate of SAEs and the proportion of patients with PASI < 1.5 were 9.27 (95% CI −3.91–22.5) per 1000 person‐years and 0.95 (95% CI −1.98–4.15), respectively. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RCTs of biologic therapies in patients with psoriasis are not fully representative of the real‐world population, but this lack of external validity does not account for the efficacy–effectiveness gap

Global reporting of cases of COVID-19 in psoriasis and atopic dermatitis: an opportunity to inform care during a pandemic.

We wish to bring your attention to the PsoPROTECT (Psoriasis Patient Registry for Outcomes, Therapy and Epidemiology of Covid-19 infecTion) and SECURE-AD (Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion-Atopic Dermatitis) registries; two urgent global initiatives that address an unmet need for delineating the determinants of COVID-19 outcomes in the common cutaneous immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) psoriasis and atopic dermatitis

Risk mitigating behaviours in people with inflammatory skin and joint disease during the COVID-19 pandemic differ by treatment type:a cross-sectional patient survey

BACKGROUND: Registry data suggest that people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) receiving targeted systemic therapies have fewer adverse coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes compared with patients receiving no systemic treatments. OBJECTIVES: We used international patient survey data to explore the hypothesis that greater risk-mitigating behaviour in those receiving targeted therapies may account, at least in part, for this observation. METHODS: Online surveys were completed by individuals with psoriasis (globally) or rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) (UK only) between 4 May and 7 September 2020. We used multiple logistic regression to assess the association between treatment type and risk-mitigating behaviour, adjusting for clinical and demographic characteristics. We characterized international variation in a mixed-effects model. RESULTS: Of 3720 participants (2869 psoriasis, 851 RMDs) from 74 countries, 2262 (60·8%) reported the most stringent risk-mitigating behaviour (classified here under the umbrella term 'shielding'). A greater proportion of those receiving targeted therapies (biologics and Janus Kinase inhibitors) reported shielding compared with those receiving no systemic therapy [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·35-1·97]. The association between targeted therapy and shielding was preserved when standard systemic therapy was used as the reference group (OR 1·39, 95% CI 1·23-1·56). Shielding was associated with established risk factors for severe COVID-19 [male sex (OR 1·14, 95% CI 1·05-1·24), obesity (OR 1·37, 95% CI 1·23-1·54), comorbidity burden (OR 1·43, 95% CI 1·15-1·78)], a primary indication of RMDs (OR 1·37, 95% CI 1·27-1·48) and a positive anxiety or depression screen (OR 1·57, 95% CI 1·36-1·80). Modest differences in the proportion shielding were observed across nations. CONCLUSIONS: Greater risk-mitigating behaviour among people with IMIDs receiving targeted therapies may contribute to the reported lower risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes. The behaviour variation across treatment groups, IMIDs and nations reinforces the need for clear evidence-based patient communication on risk-mitigation strategies and may help inform updated public health guidelines as the pandemic continues

Describing the burden of the COVID-19 pandemic in people with psoriasis: findings from a global cross-sectional study.

Indirect excess morbidity in the COVID-19 pandemic may arise from public health risk-mitigation efforts such as stay-at-home orders and re-purposing of healthcare services1 . Increased mental health disorders and shortfalls in the care of long-term conditions are described

Association between Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors and the Risk of Hospitalization or Death among Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease and COVID-19

Importance: Although tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors are widely prescribed globally because of their ability to ameliorate shared immune pathways across immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), the impact of COVID-19 among individuals with IMIDs who are receiving TNF inhibitors remains insufficiently understood. Objective: To examine the association between the receipt of TNF inhibitor monotherapy and the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death compared with other commonly prescribed immunomodulatory treatment regimens among adult patients with IMIDs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a pooled analysis of data from 3 international COVID-19 registries comprising individuals with rheumatic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis from March 12, 2020, to February 1, 2021. Clinicians directly reported COVID-19 outcomes as well as demographic and clinical characteristics of individuals with IMIDs and confirmed or suspected COVID-19 using online data entry portals. Adults (age ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, or psoriasis were included. Exposures: Treatment exposure categories included TNF inhibitor monotherapy (reference treatment), TNF inhibitors in combination with methotrexate therapy, TNF inhibitors in combination with azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine therapy, methotrexate monotherapy, azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine monotherapy, and Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitor monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death. Registry-level analyses and a pooled analysis of data across the 3 registries were conducted using multilevel multivariable logistic regression models, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics and accounting for country, calendar month, and registry-level correlations. Results: A total of 6077 patients from 74 countries were included in the analyses; of those, 3215 individuals (52.9%) were from Europe, 3563 individuals (58.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 48.8 (16.5) years. The most common IMID diagnoses were rheumatoid arthritis (2146 patients [35.3%]) and Crohn disease (1537 patients [25.3%]). A total of 1297 patients (21.3%) were hospitalized, and 189 patients (3.1%) died. In the pooled analysis, compared with patients who received TNF inhibitor monotherapy, higher odds of hospitalization or death were observed among those who received a TNF inhibitor in combination with azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine therapy (odds ratio [OR], 1.74; 95% CI, 1.17-2.58; P =.006), azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine monotherapy (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.30-2.61; P =.001), methotrexate monotherapy (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.57-2.56; P <.001), and Jak inhibitor monotherapy (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.21-2.73; P =.004) but not among those who received a TNF inhibitor in combination with methotrexate therapy (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.85-1.63; P =.33). Similar findings were obtained in analyses that accounted for potential reporting bias and sensitivity analyses that excluded patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis based on symptoms alone. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, TNF inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared with other commonly prescribed immunomodulatory treatment regimens among individuals with IMIDs