scholarly journals OP0107 Pain still remains a high unmet need among psoriatic arthritis patients receiving existing biologic treatment: results from a multi national real-world survey

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
PG Conaghan ◽  
V Strand ◽  
R Alten ◽  
E Sullivan ◽  
S Blackburn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Biologic Treatment ◽  
World Survey

scholarly journals Biologic use in psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis patients: a descriptive epidemiological study using linked, routine data in Wales, UK

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roxanne Cooksey ◽  
Muhammad Azizur Rahman ◽  
Jonathan Kennedy ◽  
Sinead Brophy ◽  
Ernest Choy
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Ankylosing Spondylitis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Biologic Treatment ◽  
Patient Journey ◽  
Presenting Symptoms ◽  
Patient Pathways

Abstract Objectives Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are chronic diseases associated with significant morbidities. National and international management guidelines include treatment with biologic therapies to improve outcomes and quality-of-life. There are limited real-world data on patient journey from symptom onset to diagnosis and treatment in the UK. We use real-life, linked health data to explore patient pathways and impact of biologics on patient outcomes. Methods Data from the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage databank in Wales were used to assess diagnosis and treatment of patients, aged 18 years or over with at least one ICD-10 code present for PsA/AS in rheumatology clinic data and at least one READ code present in primary care records. We investigated the use of biologics while exploring demographics, comorbidities and surgical procedures of 641 AS patients and 1,312 PsA patients. Results AS patients were significantly younger at diagnosis and were predominantly male. The average time from presenting symptoms to diagnosis of AS and PsA was 7.9 ± 5.5 and 9.3 ± 5.5 years, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving biologic treatment was significantly higher in AS (46%) compared with PsA patients (28.8%); of these, 23.1% of AS and 22.2% of PsA patients stopped/switched a biologic. There was a significant reduction in primary care involvement, sick notes and disability living allowance for both AS and PsA patients following biologic initiation. Conclusion This real-world descriptive study confirms that patients treated with biologics have reduced disability and time off work despite being initiated approximately 13 years post-first symptoms and 6 years post-diagnosis.

scholarly journals Biomarkers predictive of treatment response in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2110140
Author(s):  
Conor Magee ◽  
Hannah Jethwa ◽  
Oliver M. FitzGerald ◽  
Deepak R. Jadon
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Treatment Response ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Response To Treatment ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Psoriatic Disease ◽  
Subsequent Response

Aims: The ability to predict response to treatment remains a key unmet need in psoriatic disease. We conducted a systematic review of studies relating to biomarkers associated with response to treatment in either psoriasis vulgaris (PsV) or psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library from their inception to 2 September 2020, and conference proceedings from four major rheumatology conferences. Original research articles studying pre-treatment biomarker levels associated with subsequent response to pharmacologic treatment in either PsV or PsA were included. Results: A total of 765 articles were retrieved and after review, 44 articles (22 relating to PsV and 22 to PsA) met the systematic review’s eligibility criteria. One study examined the response to methotrexate, one the response to tofacitinib and all the other studies to biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Whilst several studies examined the HLA-C*06 allele in PsV, the results were conflicting. Interleukin (IL)-12 serum levels and polymorphisms in the IL-12B gene show promise as biomarkers of treatment response in PsV. Most, but not all, studies found that higher baseline levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were associated with a better clinical response to treatment in patients with PsA. Conclusion: Several studies have identified biomarkers associated with subsequent response to treatment in psoriatic disease. However, due to the different types of biomarkers, treatments and outcome measures used, firm conclusions cannot be drawn. Further validation is needed before any of these biomarkers translate to clinical practice.

scholarly journals AB0809 HOW WELL ARE BIOLOGICS RETAINED IN PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS - A REAL WORLD STUDY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1706.1-1706
Author(s):  
I. Jawad ◽  
M. K. Nisar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Real World ◽  
Biologic Therapy ◽  
Health Economy ◽  
Nice Guidelines ◽  
Drug Survival ◽  
Gi Symptoms ◽  
Conventional Dmards ◽  
Significant Difference

Background:Biologics have led to a sea change in the management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with unprecedented improvement in the signs, symptoms and radiographic damage, resulting in improvement in functionality and quality of life. However longitudinal data for their retention and tolerability is sparse.Objectives:Our objective was to evaluate real-world biologic therapy duration and reasons for discontinuing treatment.Methods:We conducted a retrospective analysis of our PsA electronic register from 1994 up to and including April 2019 at our university teaching hospital. We had access to full patient records including details on co-morbidities, drugs and disease management.Results:335 patients were identified with PsA. 58% of them were female with mean age of 46 yr (13-81). 113 (33.7%) patients had been treated with a biologic with 105 (93%) continuing at the time of analysis. 60 individuals were prescribed combination therapy with DMARDs. Mean age was 43.3 years (13-81) with 56% women. The biologics sample was ethnically diverse including 80% White Caucasian patients, 17% Asian and others (3%). Significant co-morbidities included cardiovascular disease (18.6%) and diabetes (4.4%). Eight different biologics were in use with adalimumab being the most prescribed (67%).35 (30.9%) patients had stopped biologics at some point with 76 episodes of cessation. 6% of our sample had discontinued two or more biologic treatments. The mean duration before biologic therapy was discontinued was 18.2 months (8 days to 9.5 years), which was almost twice as long as the average period before discontinuing a DMARD (9.9 months). Main reasons for stopping treatment included 23% each due to GI symptoms, neurological causes, cutaneous symptoms and other side effects. The remaining 8% reported fatigue as the reason for stopping therapy.Conclusion:To our knowledge this is the first dedicated retrospective review of a large real world PsA cohort comparing drug survival and tolerability of biologics against DMARDs. Biologic therapies are well tolerated in psoriatic arthritis. There is no significant difference amongst various modes of action. Over a quarter of the patients discontinue the drug owing to intolerance with mean drug survival of 18 months. In contrast nearly two-thirds were intolerant of DMARDs and stopped within ten months. Thus both the rate and duration of biologic retention is significantly better than conventional DMARDs. This has significant economic impact as NICE guidelines require an adequate trial of two DMARDs for six months prior to advanced therapy. However, this approach is unlikely to be cost effective as the disease progresses whilst patients struggle with DMARDs prescription and thus delay biologics which are more likely to be tolerated and retained longer. Hence there is an urgent need to review NICE guidelines to allow earlier employment of biologics in the treatment paradigm with significant benefits to both patients and the health economy.Disclosure of Interests:Issrah Jawad: None declared, Muhammad Khurram Nisar Grant/research support from: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB, Consultant of: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB, Speakers bureau: Muhammad Nisar undertakes clinical trials and received support (including attendance at conferences, speaker fees and honoraria) from Roche, Chugai, MSD, Abbvie, Pfizer, BMS, Celgene, Novartis and UCB

scholarly journals SAT0432 EFFECT OF SEX ON DISEASE CHARACTERISTICS AND DISEASE IMPACT IN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS (PsA): INSIGHTS FROM THE REAL-WORLD, OBSERVATIONAL MULTINATIONAL PsABio COHORT

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1171.1-1173
Author(s):  
M. T. Nurmohamed ◽  
I. Van der Horst-Bruinsma ◽  
A. W. Van Kuijk ◽  
S. Siebert ◽  
P. Bergmans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Physical Functioning ◽  
Real World ◽  
Comprehensive Treatment ◽  
Diagnosis Delay ◽  
Health State ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Disease Characteristics ◽  
Disease Impact

Background:Female sex has been associated with more severe disease and poorer treatment outcomes in PsA. These observations are often based on small populations or national cohorts/registries.Objectives:To investigate the effects of sex on disease characteristics and disease impact in PsA, using data of 929 consecutive patients (pts) from PsABio.Methods:PsABio is a real-world, non-interventional European study in PsA pts treated with UST or TNFi based on their rheumatologist’s choice. Observed male and female baseline (BL) data were described and compared using 95% CI.Results:Women in PsABio (n=512 [55%]) were numerically older than men (mean [SD]: 50.5 [12.7] / 48.7 [12.3] years, respectively). Women were more obese (BMI >30), % (95% CI): F: 35 (30, 39), M: 24 (20, 29), men more overweight (BMI >25–30): F: 31 (27, 36), M:51 (46, 57). Age at diagnosis, delay from first symptom to diagnosis, and disease duration were similar for both sexes.Women entered PsABio more often on 3rd line treatment, whereas men started on 1st-line biologic treatment more often (F/M 1st line 47%/55%; 2nd line 34%/33%; 3rd line 20%/12%). Numerically, concomitant MTX was given more often to women vs men (32% vs 27%). At BL, 60% of women and 64% of men were on NSAIDs; 7.9% and 2.5% on antidepressant drugs. Women had significantly more comorbidities, with numerically more cardiovascular disease and anxiety/depression, and 3 times more IBD.Women had significantly higher 68 tender joint counts (TJC): 13.0 vs 10.4, while 66 swollen joint counts were not significantly different: 5.8 vs 5.5. Axial or combined axial-peripheral disease was similarly frequent, in 29% of women and 26% of men (Figs. 1, 2).Clinical Disease Activity index for PSoriatic Arthritis (cDAPSA) was higher in women (31.8 vs 27.3); pt-reported levels of pain, global disease activity (VAS scales) and higher TJC contributed to this. While enthesitis prevalence (based on Leeds Enthesitis Index) was comparable, men had significantly more frequent dactylitis, nail disease and worse skin psoriasis. At BL, 3.4% of women vs 7.1% of men, were in MDA.Regarding physical functioning (HAQ-DI), impact of disease (PSAID-12) and quality of life (EQ5D-3L health state), women with PsA starting a biologic (b)DMARD, expressed significantly greater negative impact and more limitations due to their disease (Fig. 2).Conclusion:In routine care, women with PsA starting a bDMARD presented with worse outcomes over a range of assessments compared with men (higher pt-reported pain and disease activity, TJC, and worse physical functioning and QoL), while men had worse dactylitis and psoriasis. Follow-up analysis will report whether the effects of biologic therapy are different in both sexes. The increased prevalence of associated features related to pain and impact on functioning and QoL may indicate the need for a more comprehensive treatment approach for women to avoid unnecessary and premature bDMARD stop or switch.Acknowledgments:This study was funded by Janssen.Disclosure of Interests:Michael T Nurmohamed Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Consultant of: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celltrion, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen, Eli Lilly, Menarini, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mundipharma, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, USB, Irene van der Horst-Bruinsma Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Pfizer, UCB Pharma, Arno WR van Kuijk Grant/research support from: Janssen, Stefan Siebert Grant/research support from: BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Paul Bergmans Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson, Employee of: Janssen, Kurt de Vlam Consultant of: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau and honoraria, Elisa Gremese Consultant of: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, UCB, Roche, Pfizer, Beatriz Joven-Ibáñez Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Tatiana Korotaeva Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Consultant of: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, BIOCAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer, UCB, Wim Noel Employee of: Janssen Pharmaceuticals NV, Petros Sfikakis Grant/research support from: Grant/research support from Abvie, Novartis, MSD, Actelion, Amgen, Pfizer, Janssen Pharmaceutical, UCB, Elke Theander Employee of: Janssen-Cilag Sweden AB, Josef S. Smolen Grant/research support from: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Consultant of: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Celltrion, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, ILTOO, Janssen, Novartis-Sandoz, Pfizer Inc, Samsung, Sanofi, Laure Gossec Grant/research support from: Lilly, Mylan, Pfizer, Sandoz, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document