Andrea Chiricozzi1, Anna Balato2, Curdin Conrad3, Andrea Conti4, Paolo Dapavo5, Paulo Ferreira6, Francesca Maria Gaiani7, Luiz Leite8, Piergiorgio Malagoli7, Pedro Mendes-Bastos6, Matteo Megna9, Francesco Messina10, Alessia Nidegger3, Giulia Odorici4, Salvatore Panduri11, Stefano Piaserico12, Leonardo Piscitelli13, Francesca Prignano13, Simone Ribero5, Joana Valerio8, Tiago Torres14. 1. Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy. 2. Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy. 3. Department of Dermatology, Lausanne University Hospital CHUV and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Dermatology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena, Modena, Italy. 5. Medical Sciences, Section of Dermatology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 6. Hospital CUF Descobertas, Lisboa, Portugal. 7. Dermatology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. 8. Clínica Médica Belém, Lisboa, Portugal. 9. Department of Dermatology, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy. 10. Department of Dermatology, University of Padua, Padova, Italy. 11. Department of Dermatology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. 12. Department of Dermatology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy. 13. Department of Dermatology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 14. Dermatology, Ctr Hosp Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
Objective: This European, multicentric, retrospective study aimed to collect data on secukinumab effectiveness in a real-world setting.Research design and methods: All psoriatic patients starting secukinumab between January 2016 and February 2017 in 11 European centers were followed until February 2018 and retrospectively evaluated.Main outcome measures: Secukinumab effectiveness was assessed by relative improvement from baseline of the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) and absolute PASI score modifications throughout 52 weeks of therapy. Additionally measures assessing effectiveness were used, including improvements of body surface area (BSA) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Results: Out of the 330 patients with potentially 52-week treatment duration, naïve to biologics patients showed greater probability to achieve PASI score of ≤1, ≤2, ≤3, and ≤5 at week 12, compared to bio-experienced patients (45.86% vs. 27.17%, 62.42% vs. 42.42%, 73.89% vs. 57.80%, and 84.08% vs. 74.57%, respectively). The greater effectiveness of secukinumab treatment in bio-naïve patients was confirmed at week 24 and 52.Conclusions: In this real-world experience, secukinumab was proven effective in treating psoriasis patients throughout a 52-weeks observation period, with higher response in bio-naïve patients. This study may contribute to defining the clinical profile of secukinumab best-responders.
Objective: This European, multicentric, retrospective study aimed to collect data on secukinumab effectiveness in a real-world setting.Research design and methods: All psoriaticpatients starting secukinumab between January 2016 and February 2017 in 11 European centers were followed until February 2018 and retrospectively evaluated.Main outcome measures: Secukinumab effectiveness was assessed by relative improvement from baseline of the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) and absolute PASI score modifications throughout 52 weeks of therapy. Additionally measures assessing effectiveness were used, including improvements of body surface area (BSA) and Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Results: Out of the 330 patients with potentially 52-week treatment duration, naïve to biologics patients showed greater probability to achieve PASI score of ≤1, ≤2, ≤3, and ≤5 at week 12, compared to bio-experienced patients (45.86% vs. 27.17%, 62.42% vs. 42.42%, 73.89% vs. 57.80%, and 84.08% vs. 74.57%, respectively). The greater effectiveness of secukinumab treatment in bio-naïve patients was confirmed at week 24 and 52.Conclusions: In this real-world experience, secukinumab was proven effective in treating psoriasispatients throughout a 52-weeks observation period, with higher response in bio-naïve patients. This study may contribute to defining the clinical profile of secukinumab best-responders.
Authors: Marloes E Van Muijen; Sarah E Thomas; Hans M M Groenewoud; Marisol E Otero; Paul M Ossenkoppele; Marcellus D Njoo; Sharon R P Dodemont; Else N Kop; Maartje A M Berends; Marjolein I A Koetsier; Johannes M Mommers; John E M Körver; Ron A Tupker; Marjolein S De Bruin-Weller; Lizelotte J M T Weppner-Parren; Bas Peters; Marloes M Kleinpenning; Astrid L A Kuijpers; W Peter Arnold; Paula P M Van Lümig; Juul M P A Van den Reek; Elke M G J De Jong Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Antonio Costanzo; Filomena Russo; Marco Galluzzo; Luca Stingeni; Roberta Scuderi; Leonardo Zichichi; Manuela Papini; Luisa Di Costanzo; Andrea Conti; Martina Burlando; Andrea Chiricozzi; Francesca Maria Gaiani; Cristina Mugheddu; Maria Letizia Musumeci; Paolo Gisondi; Stefano Piaserico; Paolo Dapavo; Marina Venturini; Gianluca Pagnanelli; Paolo Amerio; Concetta Potenza; Ketty Peris; Franca Cantoresi; Sara Trevisini; Francesco Loconsole; Annamaria Offidani; Santo Raffaele Mercuri; Viviana Lora; Francesca Prignano; Marta Bartezaghi; Giovanni Oliva; Elisabetta Aloisi; Roberto Orsenigo Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2021-10-21 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Federico Pirro; Giacomo Caldarola; Andrea Chiricozzi; Martina Burlando; Marco Mariani; Aurora Parodi; Ketty Peris; Clara De Simone Journal: Clin Drug Investig Date: 2021-09-18 Impact factor: 2.859
Authors: Bruce Strober; Dhaval Patil; Robert R McLean; Melissa Moore-Clingenpeel; Ning Guo; Eugenia Levi; Mark Lebwohl Journal: Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) Date: 2022-05-13
Authors: D Thaçi; K Eyerich; A Pinter; M Sebastian; K Unnebrink; S Rubant; D A Williams; P Weisenseel Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2021-08-17 Impact factor: 11.113