Biologics in Psoriasis: Updated Perspectives on Long-Term Safety and Risk Management
A Al-Janabi,ZZN Yiu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/PTT.S328575
2022-01-06
Psoriasis: Targets and Therapy
Abstract:A Al-Janabi, 1, 2 ZZN Yiu 1, 2 1 Division of Musculoskeletal and Dermatological Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; 2 The Dermatology Centre, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, M6 8HD, UK Correspondence: ZZN Yiu Dermatology Centre, Salford Royal Hospital, Stott Lane, Manchester, M6 8HD, UK Email Biologics targeting Th1/Th17 cytokines have revolutionised psoriasis treatment. In addition to treatment effectiveness, it is important to define and understand the long-term risks of biologic therapy in order to guide therapy selection and minimise these risks for patients where possible. This review article summarises available evidence from trial data, observational studies and pharmacovigilance registries to explore key long-term risks of biologic treatment, and how these risks might be managed in clinical practice. Keywords: psoriasis, biologics, therapeutics, safety Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease with a global prevalence of up to 2%. 1 It presents with well-defined, red, scaly plaques that can be pruritic or painful and is associated with comorbidities including psoriatic arthritis, hypertension, obesity and diabetes. 2–7 Psoriatic inflammation is primarily T-helper (Th)17 and Th1-driven, and is mediated by cytokines such as tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)-17 and IL-23. 8–11 Systemic treatment options for severe psoriasis include broadly-acting oral immunomodulators, such as methotrexate and ciclosporin, and biologics, which are monoclonal immunoglobulin-G (IgG) molecules (with the exception of etanercept) targeting specific cytokines or receptors involved in psoriasis pathogenesis (Table 1). Table 1 Summary of Unique Biologic Therapies Licensed for Plaque Psoriasis While Phase III trials are crucial in providing evidence for efficacy and safety of therapies, primary outcome measures in psoriasis are usually efficacy endpoints by 12 or 16 weeks. Trial extensions do not typically include comparator arms, and trials usually exclude participants with significant comorbidities who may be at greater risk of adverse events. 24 Furthermore, there may be a significant lag time between drug exposure and development of adverse events such as cancer. This review summarises available trial and observational data for key long-term risks of biologic therapy in psoriasis, and strategies that can be used to minimize risk to patients (Table 2). For the purpose of this article, long-term is defined as 12 months or longer following initiation of therapy. Table 2 Adverse Events of Interest Caused by Biologics Used for Psoriasis and Risk Management Strategies Infection is one of the main causes of biologic discontinuation. 25 Trial data for adalimumab showed an infectious adverse event incidence of 1.2 events per patient-year compared with 0.8 for placebo participants. 12 For risankizumab, combined trial data showed the proportion of patients developing infection was 19–24%, compared with 9–16% for placebo. 22 However, different trials have different safety outcome measures and do not necessarily include long-term data, and are not powered to study particular adverse events of interest such as serious infections. Serious infection is defined as those requiring intravenous antibiotics or resulting in hospitalization or death. A systematic review and meta-analysis (pre-print) of 29,724 psoriasis clinical trial participants found a low rate of serious infection (n=97) at 10–16 weeks with no statistically significant difference at 10–16 weeks when compared with placebo or each other. 26 Strengths of this study included a large combined sample size and exclusion of studies where the majority of participants were being treated primarily for psoriatic arthritis. While the data are reassuring, trial participants may not be representative of real-world populations and observational data also need to be considered. One study of 9038 participants, with a median follow-up time of 2 years, from the British Association of Dermatologists Biologics and Immunomodulators Register (BADBIR) compared serious infection risk in patients receiving etanercept, adalimumab or ustekinumab with non-biologic systemic treatments, and found no significant difference in risk between each other. 27 Another study utilising BADBIR found an increased risk of serious infection on infliximab with an incidence rate (IR) of 47.8 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI] 35.7–64.0) compared with non-biologic systemic agents (IR 14.2, 95% CI -Abstract Truncated-