Literature DB >> 25260564

Comparative effectiveness of less commonly used systemic monotherapies and common combination therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis in the clinical setting.

Junko Takeshita1, Shuwei Wang2, Daniel B Shin3, Kristina Callis Duffin4, Gerald G Krueger4, Robert E Kalb5, Jamie D Weisman6, Brian R Sperber7, Michael B Stierstorfer8, Bruce A Brod9, Stephen M Schleicher10, Andrew D Robertson11, Kristin A Linn12, Russell T Shinohara12, Andrea B Troxel12, Abby S Van Voorhees13, Joel M Gelfand3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of psoriasis therapies in real-world settings remains relatively unknown.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the effectiveness of less commonly used systemic therapies and commonly used combination therapies for psoriasis.
METHODS: This was a multicenter cross-sectional study of 203 patients with plaque psoriasis receiving less common systemic monotherapy (acitretin, cyclosporine, or infliximab) or common combination therapies (adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab and methotrexate) compared with 168 patients receiving methotrexate evaluated at 1 of 10 US outpatient dermatology sites participating in the Dermatology Clinical Effectiveness Research Network.
RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, patients on acitretin (relative response rate 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-3.41), infliximab (relative response rate 1.93; 95% CI 1.26-2.98), adalimumab and methotrexate (relative response rate 3.04; 95% CI 2.12-4.36), etanercept and methotrexate (relative response rate 2.22; 95% CI 1.25-3.94), and infliximab and methotrexate (relative response rate 1.72; 95% CI 1.10-2.70) were more likely to have clear or almost clear skin compared with patients on methotrexate. There were no differences among treatments when response rate was defined by health-related quality of life. LIMITATIONS: Single time point assessment may result in overestimation of effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of therapies in clinical trials may overestimate their effectiveness as used in clinical practice. Although physician-reported relative response rates were different among therapies, absolute differences were small and did not correspond to differences in patient-reported outcomes.
Copyright © 2014 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dermatology Life Quality Index; Physician Global Assessment; biologics; combination therapy; comparative effectiveness; psoriasis; quality of life; systemic treatments

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25260564      PMCID: PMC4271825          DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.08.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol        ISSN: 0190-9622            Impact factor:   11.527


  15 in total

1.  The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

Authors:  Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-10-20       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  What's the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes.

Authors:  J Zhang; K F Yu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-11-18       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Translating the science of quality of life into practice: What do dermatology life quality index scores mean?

Authors:  Yan Hongbo; Charles L Thomas; Michael A Harrison; M Sam Salek; Andrew Y Finlay
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 8.551

4.  Comparison of drug survival rates for adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab in patients with psoriasis vulgaris.

Authors:  R Gniadecki; K Kragballe; T N Dam; L Skov
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 9.302

5.  Infliximab induction and maintenance therapy for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a phase III, multicentre, double-blind trial.

Authors:  Kristian Reich; Frank O Nestle; Kim Papp; Jean-Paul Ortonne; Robert Evans; Cynthia Guzzo; Shu Li; Lisa T Dooley; Christopher E M Griffiths
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Oct 15-21       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Methotrexate vs. ciclosporin in psoriasis: effectiveness, quality of life and safety. A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  I Flytström; B Stenberg; A Svensson; I-M Bergbrant
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2007-11-06       Impact factor: 9.302

7.  Methotrexate versus cyclosporine in moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis.

Authors:  Vera M R Heydendael; Phyllis I Spuls; Brent C Opmeer; Corianne A J M de Borgie; Johannes B Reitsma; Wouter F M Goldschmidt; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jan D Bos; Menno A de Rie
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-08-14       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 8.  Biologic survival.

Authors:  Kristin Noiles; Ronald Vender
Journal:  J Drugs Dermatol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.114

9.  The prevalence of previously diagnosed and undiagnosed psoriasis in US adults: results from NHANES 2003-2004.

Authors:  Shanu Kohli Kurd; Joel M Gelfand
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2008-11-20       Impact factor: 11.527

10.  A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the addition of methotrexate to etanercept in patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

Authors:  A B Gottlieb; R G Langley; B E Strober; K A Papp; P Klekotka; K Creamer; E H Z Thompson; M Hooper; G Kricorian
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 9.302

View more
  6 in total

1.  National Psoriasis Foundation Priorities for Patient-Centered Research: Proceedings from the 2016 Conference.

Authors:  Ladan Afifi; Lindsey Shankle; April W Armstrong; Marc Boas; Alisha Bridges; Vivian Chiguil; Frank Doris; Kristina Callis Duffin; Eric Fielding; Roy Fleischmann; Joel M Gelfand; Matthew Kiselica; Catherine Kiselica; Brian LaFoy; John J Latella; Junko Takeshita; Sarah Truman; Marilyn T Wan; Vickie Wilkerson; Jashin J Wu; Michael P Siegel; Wilson Liao
Journal:  J Psoriasis Psoriatic Arthritis       Date:  2017

2.  Real-World Biologic Adherence, Persistence, and Monotherapy Comparisons in US Patients with Psoriasis: Results from IBM MarketScan® Databases.

Authors:  Craig Leonardi; Baojin Zhu; William N Malatestinic; William J Eastman; Jiaying Guo; Mwangi J Murage; Casey Kar-Chan Choong; Russel Burge; Andrew Blauvelt
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 4.070

3.  Biologic therapy adherence, discontinuation, switching, and restarting among patients with psoriasis in the US Medicare population.

Authors:  Jalpa A Doshi; Junko Takeshita; Lionel Pinto; Penxiang Li; Xinyan Yu; Preethi Rao; Hema N Viswanathan; Joel M Gelfand
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2016-03-04       Impact factor: 11.527

4.  Patient satisfaction with treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in clinical practice.

Authors:  K Callis Duffin; H Yeung; J Takeshita; G G Krueger; A D Robertson; A B Troxel; D B Shin; A S Van Voorhees; J M Gelfand
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 9.302

5.  Comparative effectiveness of biological therapies on improvements in quality of life in patients with psoriasis.

Authors:  I Y K Iskandar; D M Ashcroft; R B Warren; M Lunt; K McElhone; C H Smith; N J Reynolds; C E M Griffiths
Journal:  Br J Dermatol       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 9.302

6.  Position statement for a pragmatic approach to immunotherapeutics in patients with inflammatory skin diseases during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and beyond.

Authors:  J Beecker; K A Papp; J Dutz; R B Vender; R Gniadecki; C Cooper; P Gisondi; M Gooderham; C H Hong; M G Kirchhof; C W Lynde; C Maari; Y Poulin; L Puig
Journal:  J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 6.166

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.