Psoriasis

The investigational interleukin-17 inhibitor brodalumab was safe and effective in a small phase III Japanese study of adults with two rare and severe types of psoriasis, generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) and psoriatic erythroderma (PsE). The results were published in the British Journal of Dermatology.

The 52-week open label studyevaluated the safety and efficacy of brodalumab in 30 Japanese adults (mean age 48 years) with GPP (12 patients) and PsE (18 patients). Brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against human IL-17RA that blocks the biologic activities of IL-17, was administered by subcutaneous injection. Efficacy was assessed via Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI) scores, the primary endpoint (Br J Dermatol. 2016 April 23. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14702).

A high proportion of patients with either disease achieved “improved” or “remission” CGI scores at weeks 2, 12, and 52, reported Dr. Kenshi Yamasaki, of the department of dermatology at Tohoku University, Miyagi, Japan, and his associates

At week 52, almost 92% of those with GPP and 100% of those with PsE had achieved “improved” or “remission” scores. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis, which occurred in one-third of patients. Infection-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2, no adverse events were fatal, and none of the five serious adverse events noted were considered to be attributable to treatment, they added. Although anti-brodalumab neutralizing antibodies were not detected, one patient tested positive for anti-brodalumab binding antibodies.

Noting that treatment with brodalumab has been associated with significant improvements in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in phase II and III studies, “results from this study confirm that brodalumab can improve patient symptoms not long after treatment is initiated,” in patients with GPP and PsE, the authors concluded. While acknowledging the study limitations, including the open label design and a small sample size, they added, “IL-17RA blocking will be a promising therapeutic target in patients with GPP and PsE.”

The safety profile and low expression of anti-brodalumab antibodies indicated that brodalumab was suitable for long-term use, they said.

The study was funded by Kyowa Hakko Kirin. All authors disclosed ties to pharmaceutical companies, including the funding source; one author is an employee of the company.

The investigational interleukin-17 inhibitor brodalumab was safe and effective in a small phase III Japanese study of adults with two rare and severe types of psoriasis, generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) and psoriatic erythroderma (PsE). The results were published in the British Journal of Dermatology.

The 52-week open label studyevaluated the safety and efficacy of brodalumab in 30 Japanese adults (mean age 48 years) with GPP (12 patients) and PsE (18 patients). Brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against human IL-17RA that blocks the biologic activities of IL-17, was administered by subcutaneous injection. Efficacy was assessed via Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI) scores, the primary endpoint (Br J Dermatol. 2016 April 23. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14702).

A high proportion of patients with either disease achieved “improved” or “remission” CGI scores at weeks 2, 12, and 52, reported Dr. Kenshi Yamasaki, of the department of dermatology at Tohoku University, Miyagi, Japan, and his associates

At week 52, almost 92% of those with GPP and 100% of those with PsE had achieved “improved” or “remission” scores. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis, which occurred in one-third of patients. Infection-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2, no adverse events were fatal, and none of the five serious adverse events noted were considered to be attributable to treatment, they added. Although anti-brodalumab neutralizing antibodies were not detected, one patient tested positive for anti-brodalumab binding antibodies.

Noting that treatment with brodalumab has been associated with significant improvements in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in phase II and III studies, “results from this study confirm that brodalumab can improve patient symptoms not long after treatment is initiated,” in patients with GPP and PsE, the authors concluded. While acknowledging the study limitations, including the open label design and a small sample size, they added, “IL-17RA blocking will be a promising therapeutic target in patients with GPP and PsE.”

The safety profile and low expression of anti-brodalumab antibodies indicated that brodalumab was suitable for long-term use, they said.

The study was funded by Kyowa Hakko Kirin. All authors disclosed ties to pharmaceutical companies, including the funding source; one author is an employee of the company.

The investigational interleukin-17 inhibitor brodalumab was safe and effective in a small phase III Japanese study of adults with two rare and severe types of psoriasis, generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) and psoriatic erythroderma (PsE). The results were published in the British Journal of Dermatology.

The 52-week open label studyevaluated the safety and efficacy of brodalumab in 30 Japanese adults (mean age 48 years) with GPP (12 patients) and PsE (18 patients). Brodalumab, a human monoclonal antibody against human IL-17RA that blocks the biologic activities of IL-17, was administered by subcutaneous injection. Efficacy was assessed via Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI) scores, the primary endpoint (Br J Dermatol. 2016 April 23. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14702).

A high proportion of patients with either disease achieved “improved” or “remission” CGI scores at weeks 2, 12, and 52, reported Dr. Kenshi Yamasaki, of the department of dermatology at Tohoku University, Miyagi, Japan, and his associates

At week 52, almost 92% of those with GPP and 100% of those with PsE had achieved “improved” or “remission” scores. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis, which occurred in one-third of patients. Infection-related adverse events were grade 1 or 2, no adverse events were fatal, and none of the five serious adverse events noted were considered to be attributable to treatment, they added. Although anti-brodalumab neutralizing antibodies were not detected, one patient tested positive for anti-brodalumab binding antibodies.

Noting that treatment with brodalumab has been associated with significant improvements in patients with plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in phase II and III studies, “results from this study confirm that brodalumab can improve patient symptoms not long after treatment is initiated,” in patients with GPP and PsE, the authors concluded. While acknowledging the study limitations, including the open label design and a small sample size, they added, “IL-17RA blocking will be a promising therapeutic target in patients with GPP and PsE.”

The safety profile and low expression of anti-brodalumab antibodies indicated that brodalumab was suitable for long-term use, they said.

The study was funded by Kyowa Hakko Kirin. All authors disclosed ties to pharmaceutical companies, including the funding source; one author is an employee of the company.

CHICAGO – Improvement in psoriasis was associated with a significant reduction in coronary plaque burden within 1 year in a pilot study conducted at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Joseph B. Lerman reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“If you look at psoriatic plaque on the skin, it’s spewing out cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor–alpha and interleukin-17 which are highly linked to atherosclerosis. What we’ve found is that if you treat those plaques and reduce the severity of psoriasis, we’ve noticed small but statistically significant regression in the early noncalcified plaque. It’s a very exciting observation,” said Mr. Lerman, a medical student at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

He presented an observational study involving 50 consecutive patients with mild to moderate psoriasis of roughly 20 years duration and a median baseline Framingham Risk Score of 4. They underwent measurement of coronary plaque burden by coronary CT angiography at baseline and 1 year later.

During the study year, 33 patients showed significant improvement in their psoriasis as reflected in a decline in their mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from 5.6 to 3.1. Those patients also showed significant improvement in their total and noncalcified plaque burden, with total plaque burden adjusted for luminal attenuation declining from 126 mm² to 117 mm². The association remained significant even after adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the use of statin therapy, body mass index, and the use of systemic psoriasis therapies, including biologic agents.

Importantly, the reduction in plaque burden appeared to be largely concentrated in the subgroup of 31 patients on methotrexate or a biologic. And while this was a naturalistic observational study, the investigators have followed up with a prospective study of psoriasis patients placed on tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and confirmed that they, too, experienced a reduction in coronary plaque as measured by coronary CT angiography.

The investigators plan to expand the size of the study in order to confirm the findings. Mr. Lerman said the next question they would like to address is, how early does a measurable reduction in coronary plaque burden occur in response to clinical improvement in psoriasis? In order to explore this, the investigators will have to obtain institutional approval of a new investigative protocol which permits more frequent use of coronary CT angiography. At present the imaging study can be conducted only once per year due to the radiation exposure.

Mr. Lerman was involved in the psoriasis study while participating in the National Institutes of Health Medical Research Scholars Program. Senior investigator in the pilot study was Dr. Nehal Mehta, chief of the Section of Inflammation and Metabolic Disease at NHLBI in Bethesda, Md.

Mr. Lerman reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

CHICAGO – Improvement in psoriasis was associated with a significant reduction in coronary plaque burden within 1 year in a pilot study conducted at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Joseph B. Lerman reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“If you look at psoriatic plaque on the skin, it’s spewing out cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor–alpha and interleukin-17 which are highly linked to atherosclerosis. What we’ve found is that if you treat those plaques and reduce the severity of psoriasis, we’ve noticed small but statistically significant regression in the early noncalcified plaque. It’s a very exciting observation,” said Mr. Lerman, a medical student at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

He presented an observational study involving 50 consecutive patients with mild to moderate psoriasis of roughly 20 years duration and a median baseline Framingham Risk Score of 4. They underwent measurement of coronary plaque burden by coronary CT angiography at baseline and 1 year later.

During the study year, 33 patients showed significant improvement in their psoriasis as reflected in a decline in their mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from 5.6 to 3.1. Those patients also showed significant improvement in their total and noncalcified plaque burden, with total plaque burden adjusted for luminal attenuation declining from 126 mm² to 117 mm². The association remained significant even after adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the use of statin therapy, body mass index, and the use of systemic psoriasis therapies, including biologic agents.

Importantly, the reduction in plaque burden appeared to be largely concentrated in the subgroup of 31 patients on methotrexate or a biologic. And while this was a naturalistic observational study, the investigators have followed up with a prospective study of psoriasis patients placed on tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and confirmed that they, too, experienced a reduction in coronary plaque as measured by coronary CT angiography.

The investigators plan to expand the size of the study in order to confirm the findings. Mr. Lerman said the next question they would like to address is, how early does a measurable reduction in coronary plaque burden occur in response to clinical improvement in psoriasis? In order to explore this, the investigators will have to obtain institutional approval of a new investigative protocol which permits more frequent use of coronary CT angiography. At present the imaging study can be conducted only once per year due to the radiation exposure.

Mr. Lerman was involved in the psoriasis study while participating in the National Institutes of Health Medical Research Scholars Program. Senior investigator in the pilot study was Dr. Nehal Mehta, chief of the Section of Inflammation and Metabolic Disease at NHLBI in Bethesda, Md.

Mr. Lerman reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

CHICAGO – Improvement in psoriasis was associated with a significant reduction in coronary plaque burden within 1 year in a pilot study conducted at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Joseph B. Lerman reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

“If you look at psoriatic plaque on the skin, it’s spewing out cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor–alpha and interleukin-17 which are highly linked to atherosclerosis. What we’ve found is that if you treat those plaques and reduce the severity of psoriasis, we’ve noticed small but statistically significant regression in the early noncalcified plaque. It’s a very exciting observation,” said Mr. Lerman, a medical student at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

He presented an observational study involving 50 consecutive patients with mild to moderate psoriasis of roughly 20 years duration and a median baseline Framingham Risk Score of 4. They underwent measurement of coronary plaque burden by coronary CT angiography at baseline and 1 year later.

During the study year, 33 patients showed significant improvement in their psoriasis as reflected in a decline in their mean Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score from 5.6 to 3.1. Those patients also showed significant improvement in their total and noncalcified plaque burden, with total plaque burden adjusted for luminal attenuation declining from 126 mm² to 117 mm². The association remained significant even after adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, the use of statin therapy, body mass index, and the use of systemic psoriasis therapies, including biologic agents.

Importantly, the reduction in plaque burden appeared to be largely concentrated in the subgroup of 31 patients on methotrexate or a biologic. And while this was a naturalistic observational study, the investigators have followed up with a prospective study of psoriasis patients placed on tumor necrosis factor inhibitors and confirmed that they, too, experienced a reduction in coronary plaque as measured by coronary CT angiography.

The investigators plan to expand the size of the study in order to confirm the findings. Mr. Lerman said the next question they would like to address is, how early does a measurable reduction in coronary plaque burden occur in response to clinical improvement in psoriasis? In order to explore this, the investigators will have to obtain institutional approval of a new investigative protocol which permits more frequent use of coronary CT angiography. At present the imaging study can be conducted only once per year due to the radiation exposure.

Mr. Lerman was involved in the psoriasis study while participating in the National Institutes of Health Medical Research Scholars Program. Senior investigator in the pilot study was Dr. Nehal Mehta, chief of the Section of Inflammation and Metabolic Disease at NHLBI in Bethesda, Md.

Mr. Lerman reported having no financial conflicts of interest.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

According to a study by Ji et al published online on February 11 in the International Journal of Impotence Research, men with psoriasis may be more prone to erectile dysfunction (ED) than those without this skin disease, and their odds of sexual difficulties are even higher if they are depressed or have other health problems such as diabetes mellitus or high blood pressure.

The investigators evaluated 191 psoriasis patients and 191 healthy men. Of the 191 patients with psoriasis, 52.9% had symptoms of ED compared with 40.3% of the control group, reflecting an age-adjusted odds ratio of 1.965 in favor of the psoriasis group. A univariate analysis of the psoriasis cohort demonstrated that age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, and depressive symptoms were risk factors for ED. A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that increasing age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depressive symptoms were independent risk factors for ED in those with psoriasis. More severe depressive symptoms increased the risk of ED, especially moderate to severe ED.

Ji et al noted that ED is a predictor of future cardiovascular disease; therefore, it is important to identify ED early in treatment to evaluate cardiovascular issues in psoriasis patients. They noted that screening of ED may become a part of routine care in the management of psoriasis patients.

What’s the issue?

Even though it was a small study from one location, it still sheds light on many important issues. Psoriasis and its comorbidities appear to increase the risk for ED. In addition, ED also may be an indicator of cardiovascular disease.

How will these data impact your evaluation of psoriasis patients?

We want to know your views! Tell us what you think.

According to a study by Ji et al published online on February 11 in the International Journal of Impotence Research, men with psoriasis may be more prone to erectile dysfunction (ED) than those without this skin disease, and their odds of sexual difficulties are even higher if they are depressed or have other health problems such as diabetes mellitus or high blood pressure.

The investigators evaluated 191 psoriasis patients and 191 healthy men. Of the 191 patients with psoriasis, 52.9% had symptoms of ED compared with 40.3% of the control group, reflecting an age-adjusted odds ratio of 1.965 in favor of the psoriasis group. A univariate analysis of the psoriasis cohort demonstrated that age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, and depressive symptoms were risk factors for ED. A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that increasing age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depressive symptoms were independent risk factors for ED in those with psoriasis. More severe depressive symptoms increased the risk of ED, especially moderate to severe ED.

Ji et al noted that ED is a predictor of future cardiovascular disease; therefore, it is important to identify ED early in treatment to evaluate cardiovascular issues in psoriasis patients. They noted that screening of ED may become a part of routine care in the management of psoriasis patients.

What’s the issue?

Even though it was a small study from one location, it still sheds light on many important issues. Psoriasis and its comorbidities appear to increase the risk for ED. In addition, ED also may be an indicator of cardiovascular disease.

How will these data impact your evaluation of psoriasis patients?

We want to know your views! Tell us what you think.

According to a study by Ji et al published online on February 11 in the International Journal of Impotence Research, men with psoriasis may be more prone to erectile dysfunction (ED) than those without this skin disease, and their odds of sexual difficulties are even higher if they are depressed or have other health problems such as diabetes mellitus or high blood pressure.

The investigators evaluated 191 psoriasis patients and 191 healthy men. Of the 191 patients with psoriasis, 52.9% had symptoms of ED compared with 40.3% of the control group, reflecting an age-adjusted odds ratio of 1.965 in favor of the psoriasis group. A univariate analysis of the psoriasis cohort demonstrated that age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, and depressive symptoms were risk factors for ED. A multivariate logistic regression model indicated that increasing age, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depressive symptoms were independent risk factors for ED in those with psoriasis. More severe depressive symptoms increased the risk of ED, especially moderate to severe ED.

Ji et al noted that ED is a predictor of future cardiovascular disease; therefore, it is important to identify ED early in treatment to evaluate cardiovascular issues in psoriasis patients. They noted that screening of ED may become a part of routine care in the management of psoriasis patients.

What’s the issue?

Even though it was a small study from one location, it still sheds light on many important issues. Psoriasis and its comorbidities appear to increase the risk for ED. In addition, ED also may be an indicator of cardiovascular disease.

How will these data impact your evaluation of psoriasis patients?

We want to know your views! Tell us what you think.

Patients with severe psoriasis were nearly 70% more likely to develop abdominal aortic aneurysms compared with the general population, according to a Danish population-based cohort study.

The findings augment existing evidence linking psoriasis and cardiovascular diseases, wrote Dr. Usman Khalid of Copenhagen University Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. The report was published online April 14 in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology.

While the mechanisms for the link are unclear, “emerging evidence suggests that AAA is a focal representation of a systemic disease with a distinct inflammatory component, rather than a mere consequence of atherosclerosis,” wrote Dr. Khalid and his associates.

Several case series have linked AAA with other autoimmune disorders, including systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, they noted. Their study comprised nearly 5.5 million adults in Denmark between 1997 and 2011. The researchers identified 59,423 patients with mild psoriasis and 11,566 patients with severe psoriasis (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2016 April 14. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.116.307449).

The incidence of AAA in the reference population was 3.72 cases per 10,000 person-years, with an average follow-up period of 14.4 years. In contrast, the incidence of AAA in patients with mild psoriasis was 7.30 cases per 10,000 person-years, and the rate in patients with severe psoriasis was 9.87 cases of per 10,000 person-years, with average follow-up periods of 5.7 years. Both mild and severe psoriasis were significantly associated with AAA after the researchers accounted for age, sex, comorbidities, medications, socioeconomic status, and smoking, with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.20 (95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.39) and 1.67 (95% CI, 1.21-2.32), respectively.

The historical view that AAA is caused mainly by atherosclerosis has largely been upended, the researchers noted. Instead, AAA appears to be a multifactorial process involving inflammation, matrix degradation, thrombosis, and aortic wall stress. Furthermore, inflammation in both AAA and psoriasis is centrally mediated by T-helper-17 cells and interleukin-17. Together, the data suggest that shared inflammatory mechanisms link psoriasis and AAA, especially because the association correlates with psoriatic disease activity, they said. “This finding clearly requires independent replication, and the clinical consequences are unclear at present.”

The LEO Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation funded the study. Dr. Khalid had no disclosures. Four coinvestigators reported financial ties with Abbott, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and several other pharmaceutical companies.

Patients with severe psoriasis were nearly 70% more likely to develop abdominal aortic aneurysms compared with the general population, according to a Danish population-based cohort study.

The findings augment existing evidence linking psoriasis and cardiovascular diseases, wrote Dr. Usman Khalid of Copenhagen University Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. The report was published online April 14 in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology.

While the mechanisms for the link are unclear, “emerging evidence suggests that AAA is a focal representation of a systemic disease with a distinct inflammatory component, rather than a mere consequence of atherosclerosis,” wrote Dr. Khalid and his associates.

Several case series have linked AAA with other autoimmune disorders, including systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, they noted. Their study comprised nearly 5.5 million adults in Denmark between 1997 and 2011. The researchers identified 59,423 patients with mild psoriasis and 11,566 patients with severe psoriasis (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2016 April 14. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.116.307449).

The incidence of AAA in the reference population was 3.72 cases per 10,000 person-years, with an average follow-up period of 14.4 years. In contrast, the incidence of AAA in patients with mild psoriasis was 7.30 cases per 10,000 person-years, and the rate in patients with severe psoriasis was 9.87 cases of per 10,000 person-years, with average follow-up periods of 5.7 years. Both mild and severe psoriasis were significantly associated with AAA after the researchers accounted for age, sex, comorbidities, medications, socioeconomic status, and smoking, with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.20 (95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.39) and 1.67 (95% CI, 1.21-2.32), respectively.

The historical view that AAA is caused mainly by atherosclerosis has largely been upended, the researchers noted. Instead, AAA appears to be a multifactorial process involving inflammation, matrix degradation, thrombosis, and aortic wall stress. Furthermore, inflammation in both AAA and psoriasis is centrally mediated by T-helper-17 cells and interleukin-17. Together, the data suggest that shared inflammatory mechanisms link psoriasis and AAA, especially because the association correlates with psoriatic disease activity, they said. “This finding clearly requires independent replication, and the clinical consequences are unclear at present.”

The LEO Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation funded the study. Dr. Khalid had no disclosures. Four coinvestigators reported financial ties with Abbott, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and several other pharmaceutical companies.

Patients with severe psoriasis were nearly 70% more likely to develop abdominal aortic aneurysms compared with the general population, according to a Danish population-based cohort study.

The findings augment existing evidence linking psoriasis and cardiovascular diseases, wrote Dr. Usman Khalid of Copenhagen University Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. The report was published online April 14 in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology.

While the mechanisms for the link are unclear, “emerging evidence suggests that AAA is a focal representation of a systemic disease with a distinct inflammatory component, rather than a mere consequence of atherosclerosis,” wrote Dr. Khalid and his associates.

Several case series have linked AAA with other autoimmune disorders, including systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis, they noted. Their study comprised nearly 5.5 million adults in Denmark between 1997 and 2011. The researchers identified 59,423 patients with mild psoriasis and 11,566 patients with severe psoriasis (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2016 April 14. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.116.307449).

The incidence of AAA in the reference population was 3.72 cases per 10,000 person-years, with an average follow-up period of 14.4 years. In contrast, the incidence of AAA in patients with mild psoriasis was 7.30 cases per 10,000 person-years, and the rate in patients with severe psoriasis was 9.87 cases of per 10,000 person-years, with average follow-up periods of 5.7 years. Both mild and severe psoriasis were significantly associated with AAA after the researchers accounted for age, sex, comorbidities, medications, socioeconomic status, and smoking, with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.20 (95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.39) and 1.67 (95% CI, 1.21-2.32), respectively.

The historical view that AAA is caused mainly by atherosclerosis has largely been upended, the researchers noted. Instead, AAA appears to be a multifactorial process involving inflammation, matrix degradation, thrombosis, and aortic wall stress. Furthermore, inflammation in both AAA and psoriasis is centrally mediated by T-helper-17 cells and interleukin-17. Together, the data suggest that shared inflammatory mechanisms link psoriasis and AAA, especially because the association correlates with psoriatic disease activity, they said. “This finding clearly requires independent replication, and the clinical consequences are unclear at present.”

The LEO Foundation and the Novo Nordisk Foundation funded the study. Dr. Khalid had no disclosures. Four coinvestigators reported financial ties with Abbott, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bayer, and several other pharmaceutical companies.

A biosimilar version of the anti–tumor necrosis factor–alpha agent Remicade has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, making it the first biosimilar drug approved by the agency for inflammatory diseases and just the second biosimilar it has approved.

The agency said in its April 5 announcement that the biosimilar drug, to be marketed as Inflectra, will have the same indications as Remicade: moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in patients aged 6 years and older who have had an inadequate response to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis that has inadequately responded to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in combination with methotrexate; active ankylosing spondylitis; active psoriatic arthritis; and chronic, severe plaque psoriasis.

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/ FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The drug, given the generic name of infliximab-dyyb under the agency’s nomenclature for biosimilar products, earned its approval as a biosimilar by showing it has no clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety and effectiveness from Remicade. According to FDA regulations, biosimilar products can have only minor differences in clinically inactive components and must have the same mechanism(s) of action (to the extent that it is known) and route(s) of administration, dosage form(s), and strength(s) as the reference product; and can be approved only for the indication(s) and condition(s) of use that have been approved for the reference product.

Inflectra’s approval is only as a biosimilar, not as an interchangeable product. The agency has yet to define the regulatory requirements for interchangeability that are necessary to meet the requirements of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009. That Act states that an approved biosimilar “may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product.” A statement about implementation of the Act on the FDA website explains that for interchangeability, “a sponsor must demonstrate that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient and, for a biological product that is administered more than once, that the risk of alternating or switching between use of the biosimilar product and the reference product is not greater than the risk of maintaining the patient on the reference product.”

Like Remicade, Inflectra will come with a boxed warning and a Medication Guide that describes important information about its uses and risks, which include serious infections (tuberculosis, bacterial sepsis, invasive fungal infections, and others), lymphoma and other malignancies, liver injury, blood problems, lupuslike syndrome, psoriasis, and in rare cases, nervous system disorders.

Inflectra is manufactured by Celltrion, based in South Korea, for Illinois-based Hospira. Inflectra’s label can be found here.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

A biosimilar version of the anti–tumor necrosis factor–alpha agent Remicade has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, making it the first biosimilar drug approved by the agency for inflammatory diseases and just the second biosimilar it has approved.

The agency said in its April 5 announcement that the biosimilar drug, to be marketed as Inflectra, will have the same indications as Remicade: moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in patients aged 6 years and older who have had an inadequate response to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis that has inadequately responded to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in combination with methotrexate; active ankylosing spondylitis; active psoriatic arthritis; and chronic, severe plaque psoriasis.

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/ FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The drug, given the generic name of infliximab-dyyb under the agency’s nomenclature for biosimilar products, earned its approval as a biosimilar by showing it has no clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety and effectiveness from Remicade. According to FDA regulations, biosimilar products can have only minor differences in clinically inactive components and must have the same mechanism(s) of action (to the extent that it is known) and route(s) of administration, dosage form(s), and strength(s) as the reference product; and can be approved only for the indication(s) and condition(s) of use that have been approved for the reference product.

Inflectra’s approval is only as a biosimilar, not as an interchangeable product. The agency has yet to define the regulatory requirements for interchangeability that are necessary to meet the requirements of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009. That Act states that an approved biosimilar “may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product.” A statement about implementation of the Act on the FDA website explains that for interchangeability, “a sponsor must demonstrate that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient and, for a biological product that is administered more than once, that the risk of alternating or switching between use of the biosimilar product and the reference product is not greater than the risk of maintaining the patient on the reference product.”

Like Remicade, Inflectra will come with a boxed warning and a Medication Guide that describes important information about its uses and risks, which include serious infections (tuberculosis, bacterial sepsis, invasive fungal infections, and others), lymphoma and other malignancies, liver injury, blood problems, lupuslike syndrome, psoriasis, and in rare cases, nervous system disorders.

Inflectra is manufactured by Celltrion, based in South Korea, for Illinois-based Hospira. Inflectra’s label can be found here.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

A biosimilar version of the anti–tumor necrosis factor–alpha agent Remicade has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration, making it the first biosimilar drug approved by the agency for inflammatory diseases and just the second biosimilar it has approved.

The agency said in its April 5 announcement that the biosimilar drug, to be marketed as Inflectra, will have the same indications as Remicade: moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in patients aged 6 years and older who have had an inadequate response to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis that has inadequately responded to conventional therapy; moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis in combination with methotrexate; active ankylosing spondylitis; active psoriatic arthritis; and chronic, severe plaque psoriasis.

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/ FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The drug, given the generic name of infliximab-dyyb under the agency’s nomenclature for biosimilar products, earned its approval as a biosimilar by showing it has no clinically meaningful differences in terms of safety and effectiveness from Remicade. According to FDA regulations, biosimilar products can have only minor differences in clinically inactive components and must have the same mechanism(s) of action (to the extent that it is known) and route(s) of administration, dosage form(s), and strength(s) as the reference product; and can be approved only for the indication(s) and condition(s) of use that have been approved for the reference product.

Inflectra’s approval is only as a biosimilar, not as an interchangeable product. The agency has yet to define the regulatory requirements for interchangeability that are necessary to meet the requirements of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009. That Act states that an approved biosimilar “may be substituted for the reference product without the intervention of the health care provider who prescribed the reference product.” A statement about implementation of the Act on the FDA website explains that for interchangeability, “a sponsor must demonstrate that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given patient and, for a biological product that is administered more than once, that the risk of alternating or switching between use of the biosimilar product and the reference product is not greater than the risk of maintaining the patient on the reference product.”

Like Remicade, Inflectra will come with a boxed warning and a Medication Guide that describes important information about its uses and risks, which include serious infections (tuberculosis, bacterial sepsis, invasive fungal infections, and others), lymphoma and other malignancies, liver injury, blood problems, lupuslike syndrome, psoriasis, and in rare cases, nervous system disorders.

Inflectra is manufactured by Celltrion, based in South Korea, for Illinois-based Hospira. Inflectra’s label can be found here.

jevans@frontlinemedcom.com

WASHINGTON – Another population-based study has found a link between severe psoriasis and kidney disease – this one discovering almost a fivefold increase in the risk of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) and a doubling in the risk of glomerular disease.

The findings suggest yet again that psoriasis is a systemic illness, and not something that affects only the skin, Sungat Grewal said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

©Waldemarus/Thinkstock

“Numerous case reports have generated a hypothesis that psoriasis may be associated,” with an increased risk of IgAN, said Ms. Grewal, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. “Our study is the first to test this, and it supports the notion that this is no coincidence. Now we need further research to determine if this association is due to causality or to a shared pathophysiology.”

The link between psoriasis and kidney disease has long been noted, but the first study formally investigating this association was published in 2013 (BMJ. 2013 Oct;347:f5961). The study, also conducted by University of Pennsylvania investigators, used a large patient database in the United Kingdom, matched about 143,000 patients with psoriasis with up to five controls without psoriasis each, and found the risk of chronic kidney disease was nearly doubled for those with severe psoriasis (hazard ratio, 1.93).

A similar finding emerged from Taiwan in 2015. Using the national healthcare database, researchers matched about 4,600 patients with psoriasis with about 923,000 controls. They found that having severe psoriasis was associated with almost a doubling in the risk of chronic kidney disease (HR, 1.90) and almost a tripling in the risk of end stage renal disease (HR, 2.97), after adjusting for age, gender, comorbidities, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (J Dermatol Sci. 2015 Jun;78[3]:232-8).

Ms. Grewal and her coinvestigators used data from The Health Improvement Network in the United Kingdom – the same database used in the 2013 study. The study group comprised 206,000 patients with psoriasis and about 1 million controls.

In the overall group of patients, the risk of IgAN was not significantly increased. Nor was there a significant overall association with glomerular disease. And when the group was divided by disease severity, there were no significant associations with either IgAN or glomerular disease in the group with mild psoriasis.

Among those with severe psoriasis, however, the risk of IgAN was almost five times higher (HR, 4.75) and the risk of glomerular disease was doubled (HR, 2.05).

But although the hazard ratios look impressive, the clinical reality shouldn’t spark too much concern, Ms. Grewal said. “To keep things in context, it’s very important to remember that the excess risk of nephropathy attributed to severe psoriasis was still quite small – similar to the chance of a spontaneous pregnancy resulting in triplets.”

Still, she said, the link is intriguing, and something clinicians should keep in mind when managing patients with severe psoriasis.

Ms. Grewal had no financial disclosures. She is a medical student at the Commonwealth Medical College (Scranton, Pa.), and is currently spending a year at the Gelfand Clinical Research Lab at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com

WASHINGTON – Another population-based study has found a link between severe psoriasis and kidney disease – this one discovering almost a fivefold increase in the risk of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) and a doubling in the risk of glomerular disease.

The findings suggest yet again that psoriasis is a systemic illness, and not something that affects only the skin, Sungat Grewal said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

©Waldemarus/Thinkstock

“Numerous case reports have generated a hypothesis that psoriasis may be associated,” with an increased risk of IgAN, said Ms. Grewal, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. “Our study is the first to test this, and it supports the notion that this is no coincidence. Now we need further research to determine if this association is due to causality or to a shared pathophysiology.”

The link between psoriasis and kidney disease has long been noted, but the first study formally investigating this association was published in 2013 (BMJ. 2013 Oct;347:f5961). The study, also conducted by University of Pennsylvania investigators, used a large patient database in the United Kingdom, matched about 143,000 patients with psoriasis with up to five controls without psoriasis each, and found the risk of chronic kidney disease was nearly doubled for those with severe psoriasis (hazard ratio, 1.93).

A similar finding emerged from Taiwan in 2015. Using the national healthcare database, researchers matched about 4,600 patients with psoriasis with about 923,000 controls. They found that having severe psoriasis was associated with almost a doubling in the risk of chronic kidney disease (HR, 1.90) and almost a tripling in the risk of end stage renal disease (HR, 2.97), after adjusting for age, gender, comorbidities, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (J Dermatol Sci. 2015 Jun;78[3]:232-8).

Ms. Grewal and her coinvestigators used data from The Health Improvement Network in the United Kingdom – the same database used in the 2013 study. The study group comprised 206,000 patients with psoriasis and about 1 million controls.

In the overall group of patients, the risk of IgAN was not significantly increased. Nor was there a significant overall association with glomerular disease. And when the group was divided by disease severity, there were no significant associations with either IgAN or glomerular disease in the group with mild psoriasis.

Among those with severe psoriasis, however, the risk of IgAN was almost five times higher (HR, 4.75) and the risk of glomerular disease was doubled (HR, 2.05).

But although the hazard ratios look impressive, the clinical reality shouldn’t spark too much concern, Ms. Grewal said. “To keep things in context, it’s very important to remember that the excess risk of nephropathy attributed to severe psoriasis was still quite small – similar to the chance of a spontaneous pregnancy resulting in triplets.”

Still, she said, the link is intriguing, and something clinicians should keep in mind when managing patients with severe psoriasis.

Ms. Grewal had no financial disclosures. She is a medical student at the Commonwealth Medical College (Scranton, Pa.), and is currently spending a year at the Gelfand Clinical Research Lab at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com

WASHINGTON – Another population-based study has found a link between severe psoriasis and kidney disease – this one discovering almost a fivefold increase in the risk of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) and a doubling in the risk of glomerular disease.

The findings suggest yet again that psoriasis is a systemic illness, and not something that affects only the skin, Sungat Grewal said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

©Waldemarus/Thinkstock

“Numerous case reports have generated a hypothesis that psoriasis may be associated,” with an increased risk of IgAN, said Ms. Grewal, of the department of dermatology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. “Our study is the first to test this, and it supports the notion that this is no coincidence. Now we need further research to determine if this association is due to causality or to a shared pathophysiology.”

The link between psoriasis and kidney disease has long been noted, but the first study formally investigating this association was published in 2013 (BMJ. 2013 Oct;347:f5961). The study, also conducted by University of Pennsylvania investigators, used a large patient database in the United Kingdom, matched about 143,000 patients with psoriasis with up to five controls without psoriasis each, and found the risk of chronic kidney disease was nearly doubled for those with severe psoriasis (hazard ratio, 1.93).

A similar finding emerged from Taiwan in 2015. Using the national healthcare database, researchers matched about 4,600 patients with psoriasis with about 923,000 controls. They found that having severe psoriasis was associated with almost a doubling in the risk of chronic kidney disease (HR, 1.90) and almost a tripling in the risk of end stage renal disease (HR, 2.97), after adjusting for age, gender, comorbidities, and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (J Dermatol Sci. 2015 Jun;78[3]:232-8).

Ms. Grewal and her coinvestigators used data from The Health Improvement Network in the United Kingdom – the same database used in the 2013 study. The study group comprised 206,000 patients with psoriasis and about 1 million controls.

In the overall group of patients, the risk of IgAN was not significantly increased. Nor was there a significant overall association with glomerular disease. And when the group was divided by disease severity, there were no significant associations with either IgAN or glomerular disease in the group with mild psoriasis.

Among those with severe psoriasis, however, the risk of IgAN was almost five times higher (HR, 4.75) and the risk of glomerular disease was doubled (HR, 2.05).

But although the hazard ratios look impressive, the clinical reality shouldn’t spark too much concern, Ms. Grewal said. “To keep things in context, it’s very important to remember that the excess risk of nephropathy attributed to severe psoriasis was still quite small – similar to the chance of a spontaneous pregnancy resulting in triplets.”

Still, she said, the link is intriguing, and something clinicians should keep in mind when managing patients with severe psoriasis.

Ms. Grewal had no financial disclosures. She is a medical student at the Commonwealth Medical College (Scranton, Pa.), and is currently spending a year at the Gelfand Clinical Research Lab at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

msullivan@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com

MAUI, HAWAII – If you’re going to prescribe apremilast for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis – and more and more physicians are doing so because of the drug’s exceptional safety profile – you’d better get familiar with the oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor’s gastrointestinal side effects, Dr. George M. Martin advised at the 2016 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

“One of the biggest hurdles we have to deal with when we prescribe apremilast is the fact that there are these GI side effects,” said Dr. Martin, a dermatologist practicing in Maui and codirector of the rheumatology symposium.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Celgene, which markets apremilast (Otezla), sponsored an analysis of the pattern of diarrhea that emerged in the pooled results of the phase III ESTEEM 1 and 2 trials of apremilast at 30 mg twice daily for psoriasis and the PALACE 1-3 phase III psoriatic arthritis trials.

Diarrhea occurred in 16%-18% of patients on apremilast, a rate roughly threefold greater than in placebo-treated controls. Diarrhea onset was usually within the first 14 days of therapy. When it occurred, the duration was typically about 2 weeks.

“This you can relay to your patients so they’re not surprised if it happens,” the dermatologist said.

It’s a secretory diarrhea, and it is believed to be a classwide effect for the phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE-4) inhibitors. For example, roflumilast (Daliresp), an oral PDE-4 inhibitor used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, has the same diarrhea issues. The mechanism has been worked out: The drug increases intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate, with resultant activation of chloride channels in crypts in the small bowel, which in turn leads to secretion of chloride ions. It takes the large bowel a couple of weeks to adapt. Caffeine causes diarrhea in some individuals through a similar mechanism.

Apremilast-related diarrhea often responds to the time-tested OTC remedies, including bismuth salicylate or fiber supplements. Alternatively, Dr. Martin said he is a fan of the oral prescription agent crofelemer (Fulyzaq) because of its exceptional safety, tolerability, and effectiveness. Plus, many residents of the garden islands of Hawaii like the idea of using a botanical derived from the latexlike sap – known as ‘dragon’s blood – of a South American tree. Crofelemer’s approved indication is the treatment of diarrhea associated with anti-HIV agents.

Diphenoxylate/atropine (Lomotil) is another effective prescription option.

Nausea and/or vomiting occurred in 15%-17% of apremilast-treated patients in the phase III trials. As with diarrhea, if nausea and/or vomiting is going to happen, it occurs early, within the first week or two. Dr. Martin said he finds in his own practice that the nausea/vomiting is less bothersome for patients than the diarrhea. Drug discontinuation due to any GI side effects is rarely necessary.

The nausea/vomiting is usually readily managed by encouraging affected patients to make sure that they’re well hydrated, take their apremilast with food, and eat smaller, more frequent meals. OTC diphenhydramine (Benadryl) is often effective, as are the usual prescription antiemetic agents.

Pharmaceutical industry data indicate apremilast has quickly captured a 17% share of the market for systemic psoriasis therapies. There is a good reason for that, according to Dr. Martin: “Dermatologists have historically been risk averse. And apremilast is arguably the safest systemic agent we have to treat psoriasis. The beauty of apremilast is it requires no laboratory monitoring. That makes it attractive to dermatologists who are concerned about systemic therapy. It’s why there has been a huge jump in adoption of apremilast.”

Apremilast is comparable to methotrexate in terms of efficacy as reflected in week 16 PASI-75 response rates of about 35%, meaning 35% of treated patients obtain at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores, he continued. Apremilast is particularly effective for scalp and nail psoriasis, making it a good option for patients who have psoriasis at those sites but not extensive involvement elsewhere, which might call for the use of a more potent biologic agent.

Surveys indicate that 20% of dermatologists write 80% of all prescriptions for biologic agents used to treat psoriasis. The thinking was that apremilast would appeal to the 80% of dermatologists who have steered clear of the biologics, and that after becoming comfortable with apremilast, they might become more receptive to using biologics for their patients with an inadequate response to the oral PDE-4 inhibitor. That hasn’t happened yet.

“We’re not seeing apremilast function as the gateway drug we thought it would be. It’s just going to take some time for those prescribers either to refer their patients who aren’t getting a good response to the next doctor who’s more adept at treating with biologic agents, or perhaps they themselves will get more involved,” Dr. Martin predicted.

He reported serving on scientific advisory boards for, and/or as a consultant to, nine pharmaceutical companies.

bjancin@frontlinemedcom.com