Real-world data on the efficacy and safety of apremilast in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 1173-1179 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Papadavid ◽  
N. Rompoti ◽  
K. Theodoropoulos ◽  
G. Kokkalis ◽  
D. Rigopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Severe Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
World Data

scholarly journals Real-world efficacy of biological agents in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis: An analysis of 75 patients in Taiwan

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0244620
Author(s):  
Yu-Chen Chen ◽  
Yi-Ting Huang ◽  
Chao-Chun Yang ◽  
Edward Chia-Cheng Lai ◽  
Cheng-Han Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Data ◽  
Real World ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Biological Agents ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
Severe Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Asian Populations

Background Real-world clinical data on psoriasis patients receiving different biological agents is needed, especially in Asian populations. Objectives Our aim is to compare and analyze the efficacy and safety profile of four biological agents (etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab and secukinumab) in a real-world setting in Taiwan. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of all patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≥ 10) who received etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab or secukinumab between January 2011 and December 2018 in a tertiary hospital in Taiwan. Results A total of 119 treatment episodes in 75 patients were included in this study. Ustekinumab was used in 49 treatment episodes, followed by secukinumab in 46 treatment episodes, adalimumab in 14 treatment episodes and etanercept in 10 treatment episodes. The proportion of the biologic-naïve was highest in etanercept (100%) and lowest in secukinumab (23.9%). The PASI-75, -90 and -100 were the highest in secukinumab (91.3%, 82.6%, 41.3%, respectively), followed by ustekinumab (79.6%, 44.9%, 16.3%), adalimumab (64.3%, 28.6%, 7.1%) and etanercept (50.0%, 30.0%, 0%). The rate of adverse events that required treatment was highest for secukinumab (15.2%), followed by adalimumab (14.3%), ustekinumab (8.2%), and etanercept (0%), including 4 cases of infections, 2 cases of cardiovascular diseases and 4 cases of cancers. Conclusions This real world data showed differential efficacy and safety of the four biological agents.

Real-world data on the efficacy and safety of apremilast in Japanese patients with plaque psoriasis

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chika Ohata ◽  
Bungo Ohyama ◽  
Fumi Kuwahara ◽  
Eri Katayama ◽  
Takekuni Nakama
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data

scholarly journals Effective and Safe Treatment of Psoriatic Disease with the Anti-IL-23p19 Biologic Tildrakizumab: Results of a Real-World Prospective Cohort Study in Nonselected Patients

Dermatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Katharina A. Drerup ◽  
Claudia Seemann ◽  
Sascha Gerdes ◽  
Ulrich Mrowietz
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Real World ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Registry Data ◽  
Comparable Efficacy ◽  
Routine Practice ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Severe Plaque Psoriasis

<b><i>Background:</i></b> After registration of drugs, evidence about efficacy and safety is solely based on data of phase 2/3 clinical trial programs. A major drawback is the selection of patients following inclusion/exclusion criteria. There is a considerable time and knowledge gap between study and registry data that evaluate real-world evidence (RWE). To close this gap, prospective cohort data are helpful. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Soon after tildrakizumab, an interleukin 23p19-inhibitor, was registered for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis, a prospective single-center cohort study was established to evaluate efficacy and safety of tildrakizumab in daily practice. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Following approval of tildrakizumab, patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis eligible for systemic treatment were included into the Kiel Tildra Cohort (KTC) and followed using routine assessments of efficacy, psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), body surface area (BSA), dermatology life quality index (DLQI), itch (visual analog scale), and safety. Data of the KTC were compared to the respective phase 3 clinical trials. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The KTC included 150 patients differing substantially from those in the trial program. There was a high rate of previous systemic (87.3%) and biologic (31.8%) therapy and of comorbidity in the KTC as compared to the phase 3 studies. Due to the best practice approach, baseline PASI was lower in the KTC, but DLQI was similar in both groups. At the time of this analysis, 126 patients completed week 28, 92 patients week 52, and 58 patients week 76, respectively. There was a constant improvement in PASI, BSA, DLQI, and itch from baseline until week 76. There was no clinically meaningful laboratory abnormality. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Patients treated in routine practice with tildrakizumab differed substantially from the phase 3 studies. Despite systemic pre-treatment and increased comorbidity, tildrakizumab showed comparable efficacy and safety in the KTC. Prospective cohort studies are a suitable tool to generate RWE before registry data become available.

Efficacy and Safety of Apremilast Monotherapy for Moderate to Severe Psoriasis: Retrospective Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arvin Ighani ◽  
Jorge R. Georgakopoulos ◽  
Linda L. Zhou ◽  
Scott Walsh ◽  
Neil Shear ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Real World ◽  
Plaque Psoriasis ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Oral Drug ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Full Spectrum ◽  
Severe Plaque Psoriasis

Background: Apremilast is a new oral drug for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis that reduces inflammation by inhibiting phosphodiesterase 4. Its efficacy and safety data are limited; hence, real-world outcomes are important for elucidating the full spectrum of its adverse events (AEs) and expanding generalizability of clinical trial findings. Objective: Assess the efficacy and safety of apremilast monotherapy in real-world practice. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted in 2 academic dermatology practices. Efficacy was measured as the proportion of patients achieving a ≥75% reduction from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI-75) or a Psoriasis Global Assessment (PGA) score of 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) at 16 weeks. Safety was measured as the proportion of patients reporting ≥1 AE at 16 weeks. Results: Thirty-four patients were included. Efficacy: 19 patients (55.9%) achieved PASI-75 or PGA 0/1. Safety: 23 patients (67.6%) experienced ≥1 AEs. Five patients (14.7%) withdrew treatment prior to week 16 due to AEs. One patient withdrew treatment due to mood lability and depression. Common AEs included headache (32.4%), nausea (20.6%), diarrhoea (14.7%), weight loss (8.8%), and loose stool (8.8%). Conclusion: Apremilast monotherapy had higher efficacy with similar safety outcomes in the real world compared to clinical trials. There were higher proportions of reported headaches compared to clinical trials. This study supports the apremilast monotherapy clinical trial findings, suggesting that it has an acceptable safety profile and significantly reduces the severity of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study.

scholarly journals Application of Real-World Data to External Control Groups in Oncology Clinical Trial Drug Development

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy A. Yap ◽  
Ira Jacobs ◽  
Elodie Baumfeld Andre ◽  
Lauren J. Lee ◽  
Darrin Beaupre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Drug Development ◽  
Real World ◽  
External Control ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Precision Oncology ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess overall survival are considered the “gold standard” when evaluating the efficacy and safety of a new oncology intervention. However, single-arm trials that use surrogate endpoints (e.g., objective response rate or duration of response) to evaluate clinical benefit have become the basis for accelerated or breakthrough regulatory approval of precision oncology drugs for cases where the target and research populations are relatively small. Interpretation of efficacy in single-arm trials can be challenging because such studies lack a standard-of-care comparator arm. Although an external control group can be based on data from other clinical trials, using an external control group based on data collected outside of a trial may not only offer an alternative to both RCTs and uncontrolled single-arm trials, but it may also help improve decision-making by study sponsors or regulatory authorities. Hence, leveraging real-world data (RWD) to construct external control arms in clinical trials that investigate the efficacy and safety of drug interventions in oncology has become a topic of interest. Herein, we review the benefits and challenges associated with the use of RWD to construct external control groups, and the relevance of RWD to early oncology drug development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document