R G Langley1, T-F Tsai2, S Flavin3, M Song3, B Randazzo3, Y Wasfi3, J Jiang3, S Li3, L Puig4. 1. Department of Dermatology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 2. Department of Dermatology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 3. Dermatology, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Spring House, PA, U.S.A. 4. Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated significant efficacy in phase III psoriasis trials. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who had an inadequate response to ustekinumab. METHODS: In this phase III, randomized, double-blind study, 871 patients receivedopen-label ustekinumab (45 mg or 90 mg) at weeks 0 and 4. At week 16, 268 patients with an inadequate response to ustekinumab [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) ≥ 2] were randomized (double-blind) to guselkumab 100 mg or to continue ustekinumab; 585 of 871 patients (67%) with IGA 0/1 at week 16 continued open-label ustekinumab. The primary end point was the number of visits at which randomized patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement (from week 16) from week 28 to week 40. Improvement ≥ 90% or 100% in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90/100) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) of 0/1 were also assessed. RESULTS: The mean number of visits at which patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvemen (week 28-40) was significantly greater in the guselkumab group vs. the randomized ustekinumab group (1·5 vs. 0·7; P < 0·001); greater proportions of patients in the guselkumab group achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement at week 28 (31·1% vs. 14·3%; P = 0·001) and week 52 (36·3% vs. 17·3%; P < 0·001). Greater proportions of patients treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90, PASI 100 and DLQI 0/1 at week 52. After week 16, 64·4% of patients in the guselkumab group and 55·6% in the ustekinumab group had at least one adverse event (AE); infections were the most frequent AE type. Overall, 6·7% (n = 9) of patients in the guselkumab group had at least one serious AE compared with 4·5% (n = 6) for the ustekinumab group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with ustekinumab who did not achieve an IGA of 0/1 by week 16 derived significant benefit from switching to guselkumab.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, has demonstrated significant efficacy in phase III psoriasis trials. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who had an inadequate response to ustekinumab. METHODS: In this phase III, randomized, double-blind study, 871 patients received open-label ustekinumab (45 mg or 90 mg) at weeks 0 and 4. At week 16, 268 patients with an inadequate response to ustekinumab [Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) ≥ 2] were randomized (double-blind) to guselkumab 100 mg or to continue ustekinumab; 585 of 871 patients (67%) with IGA 0/1 at week 16 continued open-label ustekinumab. The primary end point was the number of visits at which randomized patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement (from week 16) from week 28 to week 40. Improvement ≥ 90% or 100% in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI 90/100) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) of 0/1 were also assessed. RESULTS: The mean number of visits at which patients achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvemen (week 28-40) was significantly greater in the guselkumab group vs. the randomized ustekinumab group (1·5 vs. 0·7; P < 0·001); greater proportions of patients in the guselkumab group achieved IGA 0/1 and at least a two-grade improvement at week 28 (31·1% vs. 14·3%; P = 0·001) and week 52 (36·3% vs. 17·3%; P < 0·001). Greater proportions of patients treated with guselkumab achieved PASI 90, PASI 100 and DLQI 0/1 at week 52. After week 16, 64·4% of patients in the guselkumab group and 55·6% in the ustekinumab group had at least one adverse event (AE); infections were the most frequent AE type. Overall, 6·7% (n = 9) of patients in the guselkumab group had at least one serious AE compared with 4·5% (n = 6) for the ustekinumab group. CONCLUSIONS:Patients treated with ustekinumab who did not achieve an IGA of 0/1 by week 16 derived significant benefit from switching to guselkumab.
Authors: Hannah M Knochelmann; Connor J Dwyer; Stefanie R Bailey; Sierra M Amaya; Dirk M Elston; Joni M Mazza-McCrann; Chrystal M Paulos Journal: Cell Mol Immunol Date: 2018-03-21 Impact factor: 11.530