scholarly journals Newer Biologics for the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anusree Subramonian ◽  
Melissa Walter

Eight systematic reviews with network meta-analysis were identified that compared newer biologics with older biologics in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. There was extensive overlap of primary studies across the systematic reviews and network meta-analyses. Newer biologics such as secukinumab, ixekizumab, brodalumab and risankizumab were more favourable compared to older biologics (adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab) in reaching 90% or 100% skin clearance, as measured with the Psoriasis Area Severity Index. The risk of side effects was similar between the newer and older biologics.

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 561-572
Author(s):  
Weiguang Xue ◽  
Paranjoy Saharia ◽  
Emma Gray ◽  
Shoghag Khoudigian-Sinani ◽  
Véronique Gaudet ◽  
...  

Background Several treatments for plaque psoriasis are available, but it remains challenging for physicians to make informed treatment decisions due to a lack of head-to-head trials. Objectives This network meta-analysis (NMA) compares the efficacy of brodalumab to other biologic agents in Canada for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before October 2017 was conducted to populate the NMA. Comparators included etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, and placebo. The primary outcome was the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) response at the end of induction phase. A random effects Bayesian multinomial likelihood and probit link model analyzed PASI 75, 90, and 100 responses. Inconsistency and heterogeneity were assessed. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore potential effect modifiers like baseline PASI score, age, and weight. Results A total of 43 RCTs were included. Brodalumab 210 mg had significantly better PASI response than etanercept, ustekinumab, adalimumab, secukinumab, and guselkumab and comparable responses to infliximab and ixekizumab. Relative risk of PASI 90 response for brodalumab varied from 2.84 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 2.35-3.52, P < .05) to 0.99 (95% CrI: 0.88-1.11, ns) compared to etanercept and ixekizumab. This was similar across PASI 75 responses, but a larger relative risk between brodalumab and all comparators except ixekizumab was observed for PASI 100. No significant heterogeneity or inconsistencies were identified. The results were consistent across sensitivity analyses, indicating robustness of the results. Conclusion Brodalumab 210 mg has efficacy superior to most biologic agents for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Canada.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 228-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ankit Mittal ◽  
Sunil Dogra ◽  
Tarun Narang ◽  
Aman Sharma

Background: Tacrolimus, a congener of cyclosporine, has replaced cyclosporine as a first-line treatment for most transplant patients due to its superior efficacy and safety. Tacrolimus has not been extensively studied for the treatment of psoriasis. Objectives: To study the efficacy and safety of oral tacrolimus in adult patients with severe refractory plaque psoriasis. Methods: This was an open-label pilot study. Patients with severe plaque type psoriasis who were unresponsive to at least 1 systemic treatment were treated with oral tacrolimus. Results: Thirty patients were treated. After 12 weeks, improvement in mean Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) score was 80.37% ( P < .001), PASI 75 was observed in 19 of 26 (73.1%) patients, and PASI 90 was observed in 11 of 26 (42.3%) patients. No severe side effects were noted. Conclusion: Oral tacrolimus is an effective and safe option for the short-term treatment of severe plaque psoriasis.


Author(s):  
Roberto Ravasio ◽  
Antonio Costanzo ◽  
Silvia Antonelli ◽  
Alessia Maiorino ◽  
Serena Losi

Background: Interleukin (IL) inhibitors achieve greater levels of efficacy than older systemic therapies. We calculated the number needed to treat (NNT) of ixekizumab compared with other IL inhibitors approved in Italy for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Methods: The clinical efficacy was evaluated in terms of NNT, based on the results of a recent network meta-analysis (NMA) by the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The NMA investigated many systemic and biological treatments, but this analysis compared only the efficacy of the following IL inhibitors – brodalumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab and ustekinumab – for patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. Drugs were compared and ranked according to effectiveness considering the PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) 90 score. Results: One-hundred and forty trials (51,749 patients) were included in the NMA. Considering the proportion of patients who achieve PASI90, ixekizumab showed the lowest NNT among all comparators (ixekizumab 2.01 [2.46-3.00]; risankizumab 2.05 [2.50-3-05]; guselkumab 2.16 [2.68-3.36]; secukinumab 2.40 [2.90-3.51]; brodalumab 2.61 [3.18-3.88]; ustekinumab 3.44 [4.12-4.95]; tildrakizumab 3.10 [4.15-5.59]. Conclusion: The findings show that ixekizumab is the most effective option (NNT) for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huan He ◽  
Wenwen Wu ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Meng Zhang ◽  
Ning Sun ◽  
...  

Background: The response time-course information of biologics and small targeted molecules for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis which helps clinicians to understand the onset of action and maintenance of effect are unclear. Quantitative information about the efficacy comparation of different systemic agents are needed.Methods: Model-based meta-analysis was conducted and longitudinal models were developed by applying two clinical end points commonly reported in the clinical trials of psoriasis: the proportion of patients achieving ≥75% reduction from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI75) and the proportion of patients achieving ≥90% reduction from baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score (PASI90).Results: A total of 80 trials of thirteen biological agents and four small targeted molecules covering 235 treatment arms and 40323 patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were included in this analysis. The drugs were divided into five classes of biologics and three classes of small molecules. Two longitudinal models of PASI75 and PASI90 were used to describe the time-varying drug effect and dose-effect relationship. The typical response-time courses for PASI75 and PASI90 increased over time and finally reached to the platform. For PASI75 end point at week 12, of all the therapeutic drugs, risankizumab administered as 150 mg at week 0, week 4, and q12w showed the most efficacious with PASI75 was 85.95% (95%CI, 75.71–92.60%), followed by ixekizumab administered as 160 mg at week 0, and q4w with PASI75 was 85.9% (95%CI, 76.12–92.79%). As for PASI90 end point at week 12, ixekizumab 160 mg at week 0, and q4w showed the greatest percentage of person achieved PASI90 (67.2%; 95%CI, 49.91–77.2%), followed by risankizumab 150 mg at week 0, week 4, and q12w (65.5%; 95%CI, 47.8–75.7%). What’s more, the risankizumab provided the highest response of PASI90 at week 16 and week 24.Conclusions: This study provided a quantitative efficacy comparation of 17 systemic agents for psoriasis in term of efficacy only and that safety was not considered. Risankizumab and ixekizumab showed superiority for both the two end points.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 3607
Author(s):  
Hoofar Shokravi ◽  
Hooman Shokravi ◽  
Norhisham Bakhary ◽  
Mahshid Heidarrezaei ◽  
Seyed Saeid Rahimian Koloor ◽  
...  

A large number of research studies in structural health monitoring (SHM) have presented, extended, and used subspace system identification. However, there is a lack of research on systematic literature reviews and surveys of studies in this field. Therefore, the current study is undertaken to systematically review the literature published on the development and application of subspace system identification methods. In this regard, major databases in SHM, including Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, have been selected and preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) has been applied to ensure complete and transparent reporting of systematic reviews. Along this line, the presented review addresses the available studies that employed subspace-based techniques in the vibration-based damage detection (VDD) of civil structures. The selected papers in this review were categorized into authors, publication year, name of journal, applied techniques, research objectives, research gap, proposed solutions and models, and findings. This study can assist practitioners and academicians for better condition assessment of structures and to gain insight into the literature.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i34-i35
Author(s):  
M Carter ◽  
N Abutheraa ◽  
N Ivers ◽  
J Grimshaw ◽  
S Chapman ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Audit and Feedback (A&F) involves measuring data about practice, comparing it with clinical guidelines, professional standards or peer performance, and then feeding back the data to individuals/groups of health professionals to encourage change in practice (if required). A 2012 Cochrane review (1) found A&F was effective in changing health professionals’ behaviour and suggested that the person who delivers the A&F intervention influences its effect. Increasingly, pharmacists work in general practice and often have responsibility for medication review and repeat prescriptions. The effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F in influencing prescribing behaviour is uncertain. Aim This secondary analysis from an ongoing update of the original Cochrane review aims to identify and describe pharmacist-led A&F interventions and evaluate their impact on prescribing behaviour in general practice compared with no intervention. Methods This sub-review is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020194355 and complies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (2). For the updated Cochrane review, the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group searched MEDLINE (1946 to present), EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library (March 2019) to identify randomised trials featuring A&F interventions. For this sub-review, authors screened titles and abstracts (May 2020) to identify trials involving pharmacist-led A&F interventions in primary care, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) in eligible studies. Review results are summarised descriptively. Heterogeneity will be assessed and a random-effects meta-analysis is planned. Publication bias for selected outcomes and the certainty of the body of evidence will be evaluated and presented. Sub-group analyses will be conducted. Results Titles and abstracts of 295 studies identified for inclusion in the Cochrane A&F review update were screened. Eleven studies (all cluster-randomised trials) conducted in 9 countries (Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Republic of Ireland, UK, Australia, Malaysia, USA) were identified for inclusion (Figure 1). Six studies had low RoB, two had high risk due to dissimilarities between trial arms at baseline and/or insufficient detail about randomisation, and three studies had unclear RoB. Studies examined the effect of A&F on prescribing for specific conditions (e.g. hypertension), medications (e.g. antibiotics), populations (e.g. patients &gt;70), and prescribing errors (e.g. inappropriate dose). The pharmacist delivering A&F was a colleague of intervention participants in five studies. Pharmacists’ levels of skill and experience varied; seven studies reported details of pharmacist training undertaken for trial purposes. A&F interventions in nine studies demonstrated changes in prescribing, including reductions in errors or inappropriate prescribing according to the study aims and smaller increases in unwanted prescribing compared with the control group. Data analyses are ongoing (results will be available for the conference). Conclusion The preliminary results demonstrate the effectiveness of pharmacist-led A&F interventions in different countries and health systems with influencing prescribing practice to align more closely with guidance. Studies measured different prescribing behaviours; meta-analysis is unlikely to include all 11 studies. Further detailed analysis including feedback format/content/frequency and pharmacist skill level/experience, work-base (external/internal to recipients), will examine the impact of specific features on intervention effectiveness. References 1. Ivers N, Jamtvedt G, Flottorp S, Young JM, Odgaard-Jensen J, French SD, et al. Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012(6):CD000259. 2. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemond Qian-Xiu Tan ◽  
Wai Tak Victor Li ◽  
Wing-Zi Shum ◽  
Sheung Chit Chu ◽  
Hang-Long Li ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused recurring and major outbreaks in multiple human populations around the world. The plethora of clinical presentations of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been described extensively, of which olfactory dysfunction (OD) was established as an important and common extrapulmonary manifestation of COVID-19 infection. The aim of this protocol is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on peer-reviewed articles which described clinical data of OD in COVID-19 patients. Methods This research protocol has been prospectively registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42020196202). CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PubMed, as well as Chinese medical databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and WANFANG, will be searched using keywords including ‘COVID-19’, ‘coronavirus disease’, ‘2019-nCoV’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘novel coronavirus’, ‘anosmia’, ‘hyposmia’, ‘loss of smell’, and ‘olfactory dysfunction’. Systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles will be screened according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to extract studies that include new clinical data investigating the effect of COVID-19 on olfactory dysfunction. Included articles will be reviewed in full; data including patient demographics, clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD, methods of olfactory assessment and relevant clinical outcomes will be extracted. Statistical analyses will be performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3. Discussion This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol will aim to collate and synthesise all available clinical evidence regarding COVID-19-related OD as an important neurosensory dysfunction of COVID-19 infection. A comprehensive search strategy and screening process will be conducted to incorporate broad clinical data for robust statistical analyses and representation. The outcome of the systematic review and meta-analysis will aim to improve our understanding of the symptomatology and clinical characteristics of COVID-19-related OD and identify knowledge gaps in its disease process, which will guide future research in this specific neurosensory defect. Systematic review registration PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020196202.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S14
Author(s):  
A. Armstrong ◽  
K. Reich ◽  
R.B. Warren ◽  
V. Taieb ◽  
K. Fahrbach ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document