Clinical Edge Journal Scan

Commentary: Comparisons Among PsA Therapies, May 2024

Dr. Chandran scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Author and Disclosure Information

 

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD

Papers on psoriatic arthritis (PsA) published this month have focused on the clinical characteristics of PsA and pharmacologic treatment. Persistent inflammation leads to joint damage that is initially evident on imaging. Hen and colleagues evaluated 122 newly diagnosed, disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)–naive patients with early PsA from the Leeds Spondyloarthropathy Register for Research and Observation cohort using conventional radiography and ultrasonography. Overall, 4655 hand and feet joints were assessed in 122 patients, of whom 24.6% had bone erosions at baseline; higher disease activity was observed in patients who did vs those who did not have bone erosions (P < .05). The prevalence of erosions was less in patients who had PsA symptoms < 8 months vs > 24 months (17.5% vs 24.3%, respectively). The agreement between conventional radiography and ultrasonography was high, with conventional radiography detecting more erosions. Thus, joint damage is seen early in patients with PsA; making a diagnosis within 8 months of symptoms is likely to lead to less joint damage and better outcomes.

Bimekizumab is a novel biologic therapy that inhibits interleukin (IL)–17A and IL-17F and is efficacious in the treatment of psoriasis, PsA, and axial spondyloarthritis. In the absence of a formal head-to-head study, matching-adjusted indirect comparison is a method to evaluate comparative effectiveness. Warren and colleagues ran a study that included biological DMARD-naive patients and patients with inadequate response to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi-IR) with PsA who received bimekizumab (160 mg every 4 weeks; 431 and 267 patients, respectively) and guselkumab (100 mg every 4 weeks or every 8 weeks; 495 and 189 patients, respectively). They demonstrate that in biological DMARD-naive patients, bimekizumab was associated with a greater likelihood of achieving ≥70% improvement in American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response and minimal disease activity outcome at week 52 compared with guselkumab. Similar outcomes were observed in the TNFi-IR subgroup. Thus, bimekizumab may be more effective than guselkumab in PsA. Formal head-to-head studies comparing bimekizumab vs guselkumab are required.

With the availability of multiple targeted therapies for PsA, choosing the most effective and safe drug for a patient is difficult, especially in the absence of many head-to-head clinical trials. To help address this problem, Lin and Ren conducted a network meta-analysis of head-to-head active comparison studies in PsA. They included 17 studies in their analysis and demonstrated that Janus kinase inhibitors had the highest probability of achieving ACR 20/50/70 response. Treatment with IL-17A inhibitors was more likely than TNFi therapy to lead to resolution of enthesitis and dactylitis and achieving combined ACR 50 and Psoriasis Area Severity Index 100 response. Patients receiving phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors were least likely to have adverse events. They conclude that when both efficacy and safety are considered, IL-17A inhibitors may be the better agent for initial therapy for PsA. IL-17A inhibitors are indeed safe and efficacious in PsA; more direct head-to-head comparisons as well as strategy trials are required to determine choice of first and subsequent therapy in PsA.

Infections are the most important adverse effects of targeted therapies. The risk for infection in PsA in real-world settings is not well known. In a cohort study that included 12,071 patients with PsA from the French national health insurance database who were new users of targeted therapies (adalimumab, etanercept, golimumab, certolizumab pegol, infliximab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, ustekinumab, and tofacitinib), Bastard and colleagues demonstrated that the incidence of serious infections in users of targeted therapies was 17.0 per 1000 person-years. Compared with new users of adalimumab, the risk for serious infections was significantly lower in new users of etanercept (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] 0.72; 95% CI 0.53-0.97) and ustekinumab (wHR 0.57; 95% CI 0.35-0.93). Thus, the overall risk for serious infections is low, with etanercept and ustekinumab being safer treatment options than adalimumab.

Recommended Reading

Risankizumab Offers Long-term Protection Against PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Durable Improvements Across PsA Disease Domains with Guselkumab
MDedge Rheumatology
Enthesitis or Dactylitis Remission Associated with Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes in PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Deucravacitinib Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes in PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Bone Erosions Highly Prevalent in Early, Untreated PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Real World Study Confirms Efficacy of Risankizumab in PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Meta-Analysis Identifies IL17A Inhibitor as a Better Treatment Option in Biologic-Naive Patients with PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Clinical Characteristics of Severe PsA
MDedge Rheumatology
Second Ustekinumab Biosimilar Gets FDA Approval
MDedge Rheumatology
Combined Pediatric Derm-Rheum Clinics Supported by Survey Respondents
MDedge Rheumatology