Secukinumab efficacy in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa assessed by the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4): A post hoc analysis of the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE trials

Christos C. Zouboulis,Athanassios Kyrgidis,Afsaneh Alavi,Gregor B. E. Jemec,Antonio Martorell,Angelo V. Marzano,Hessel H. van der Zee,Magdalena B. Wozniak,Angela Llobet Martinez,Torben Kasparek,Teresa Bachhuber,Christine‐Elke Ortmann,Iryna Lobach,Nicolas Thomas,Shoba Ravichandran,Thrasyvoulos Tzellos
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.20369
2024-10-21
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Abstract:Given that both dynamic IHS4 and dichotomous IHS4‐55 use validated method of quantifying lesion types including draining tunnels, these results indicate that IHS4 and IHS4‐55 can detect changes in response to treatment in clinical trial setting. DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; HiSCR, hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response; HS, hidradenitis suppurativa; PBO, placebo; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks; SEC, secukinumab 300 mg. Introduction The International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4) is a validated tool that measures inflammatory lesions, including draining tunnels, in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS). Objective To evaluate secukinumab efficacy using IHS4 in patients with moderate to severe HS. Methods Data from the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE trials, which assessed subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 2 (SECQ2W) and 4 (SECQ4W) weeks in adults with moderate to severe HS, were analyzed. Assessments included changes from baseline in IHS4 and severity classification up to Week 52; IHS4‐55, IHS4‐75, IHS4‐90 responses (55%, 75% and 90% reduction in IHS4) and concordance between IHS4‐55 and HS clinical response (HiSCR), at Weeks 16 and 52. Results In total, 1084 patients (SECQ2W = 361; SECQ4W = 360; placebo = 363) were analyzed. At Week 16, SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated a numerically higher reduction in IHS4 from baseline versus placebo (adjusted mean [95% CI]: −10.80 [−12.30 to −9.30] and −9.46 [−10.96 to −7.96] vs. −4.92 [−6.43 to −3.41]); the reduction was maintained until Week 52 in both dose regimens. A greater proportion of patients achieved IHS4‐55 with SECQ2W (43.4%) and SECQ4W (39.5%) versus placebo (31.5%) at Week 16, with further improvement at Week 52. Similar trends were observed for IHS4‐75 and IHS4‐90 responses. While no patients had mild disease based on IHS4 (80.7% had severe and 19.3% had moderate HS) at baseline, a greater proportion of patients were categorized as having mild disease at Week 16 in the SECQ2W (25.9%) and SECQ4W (24.0%) groups versus placebo (16.4%); this trend continued up to Week 52 in both dose regimens. Strong concordance (>85%) was observed between IHS4‐55 and HiSCR. Conclusions Both SECQ2W and SECQ4W demonstrated efficacy in improving treatment response as measured by IHS4 and reducing disease severity versus placebo at Week 16 and these improvements were sustained through Week 52. These findings support that the dynamic and dichotomous IHS4 can efficiently detect treatment response changes in clinical trial settings.
dermatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?