BACKGROUND: Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a chronic, rare, and potentially life-threatening skin condition characterized by flares comprising widespread sterile pustules and systemic inflammation. Both the rarity and heterogeneity of the disease have made GPP classification and standardization of clinical criteria challenging. Before the approval of spesolimab (IL-36R antibody) in 2022, there were no approved treatments in the USA or Europe for GPP flares. Treatment for GPP has amounted to off-label use of medicines approved to treat plaque psoriasis. Our aim was to describe the sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns of patients with GPP in Spain.
METHODS: Non-interventional, descriptive, multi-center, retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with GPP in Spain.
RESULTS: 56 patients (50% women) were included, with a mean (standard deviation, SD) age at diagnosis of 53.7 (20.5) and a mean (SD) time of follow-up of 3.7 (3.1) years. In 80% of patients, GPP diagnosis was associated with a flare and 67.3% had known risk factors for GPP (such as previous diagnosis or family history of plaque psoriasis, comorbidities, smoking or stress). Hypertension and plaque psoriasis were the most frequent comorbidities (44.6% each). The number of GPP flares per patient-year was 0.55 with (range 0-4) a mean (SD) body surface area involvement of 21.3% (19.1). The most frequent manifestations of GPP flares were pustules (88.5%), erythema (76.9%), and scaling (76.9%). Additionally, 65.4% of patients had plaque psoriasis, 53.8% had unspecified skin lesions, and 30.8% experienced pain. The treatments used for GPP flares were off-label conventional systemic drugs (75%), mostly corticosteroids, cyclosporine, and acitretin. In the periods between flares, off-label biologics were used in 56.5% of patients. During the study period, 9 patients (16.1%) had at least one complication and 5 of them required hospitalization.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first multicenter study in Spanish GPP patients. Most patients were in their fifties, with personal or family history of plaque psoriasis, stress, smoking and a wide range of comorbidities and complications. Even though the number of flares per patient/year was 0.55, there was variability between patients. Both off-label conventional systemics and off-label biologics were used for flare management without a clear treatment pattern.

BACKGROUND: Long-term tezepelumab treatment in the DESTINATION study (NCT03706079) resulted in reduced asthma exacerbations, reduced biomarker levels, and improved lung function and symptom control in patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the time course of changes in biomarkers and clinical manifestations after treatment cessation after 2 years of tezepelumab treatment.
METHODS: DESTINATION was a 2-year, phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of tezepelumab treatment in patients (12-80 years old) with severe asthma. Patients received their last treatment doses at week 100 and could enroll in an extended follow-up period from weeks 104 to 140. Change over time in key biomarkers and clinical outcomes were assessed in tezepelumab vs placebo recipients for 40 weeks after stopping treatment.
RESULTS: Of 569 patients enrolled in the extended follow-up period, 426 were included in the analysis (289 received tezepelumab and 137 placebo). In the 40-week period after the last tezepelumab dose, blood eosinophil counts, fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, and Asthma Control Questionnaire-6 scores gradually increased from weeks 4 to 10, with a gradual reduction in pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second such that blood eosinophil counts, fractional exhaled nitric oxide levels, and clinical outcomes returned to placebo levels; however, none of these outcomes returned to baseline levels. Total IgE levels increased later from week 28 and remained well below placebo and baseline levels during the 40-week period after the last tezepelumab dose.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis reveals the benefits of continued tezepelumab treatment in the management of patients with severe, uncontrolled asthma, compared with stopping treatment after 2 years.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03706079.

UNASSIGNED: Biologic therapies play a crucial role in the treatment of severe asthma. Tezepelumab, a human monoclonal antibody (mAb), inhibits thymic stromal lymphopoietin, a pivotal factor in the pathophysiology of asthma. Although randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of Tezepelumab, evidence gaps remain in real-world scenarios.
UNASSIGNED: We sought investigate Tezepelumab\'s response in a clinical setting, focusing on patients who previously failed to other asthma mAbs.
UNASSIGNED: Real-life study with severe uncontrolled asthma patients despite mAb treatment, requiring a switch to Tezepelumab. Follow-up was done four to six months after initiation of Tezepelumab. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the response in patients with poor response or intolerance to other mAbs.
UNASSIGNED: Nine patients were followed up during 7 months. Patients were predominantly middle-aged females with eosinophilic or eosinophilic-allergic phenotypes. Patients had a median failure rate of 2 mAbs (IQR 2-3), with an uncontrolled asthma (median of 2 severe exacerbations the previous year, airflow obstruction and 78% corticosteroid dependence). Tezepelumab demonstrated after 4 to 6 months of treatment reduce corticosteroid dependence (complete withdrawal in 2/7 patients), no exacerbations in 6/9, symptoms control improvement (Asthma Control Test score improved in 5/9) and modulate lung function (improving in 3/9 patients). These findings align with clinical trial results, suggesting Tezepelumab\'s potential in real-world settings.
UNASSIGNED: In real-world scenarios, despite the study\'s limitations, our results underscore Tezepelumab\'s promise as a therapeutic option for uncontrolled severe asthma, and may be useful for non-responders to other mAbs. Further studies are needed to corroborate these findings.

BACKGROUND: Biologic therapies have demonstrated benefits for individuals with severe asthma, including reduced daily symptoms and severe exacerbations. However, data describing patient perspectives on these treatments are limited. This study sought to understand the preferences and priorities of Canadians with severe asthma in the context of novel biologic treatment options.
METHODS: Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted among Canadians with severe asthma from July to August 2022. Purposeful sampling included individuals with and without biologic therapy experience. All participants described daily life with severe asthma, experiences and priorities related to asthma treatment and their impressions of biologics. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to explore patterns in the data.
RESULTS: Among 18 individuals included, 10 were currently taking or had prior experience with biologic treatment for asthma. Those who had never been treated with biologics were unfamiliar with them, considering treatment, or believed that they may not be eligible. Four themes were developed to convey the perspectives of participants on biologics: (1) life-changing benefits, but not for all; (2) navigating barriers to being prescribed and remaining adherent to biologic treatments; (3) treatment administration preferences are not only about convenience; (4) concerns about safety and the unknown as a source of treatment hesitancy.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the clinical benefits of biologics align with patient perceptions of achieving good asthma control. However, treatment gaps persist among individuals who do not experience a meaningful improvement in their asthma symptoms and those who face barriers accessing biologics. People with severe asthma attributed importance to greater availability of at-home treatment options, improved access to financial support to cover treatment costs and support to address safety concerns. This research provides insight into patient-based treatment priorities and preferences for biologics, which may help inform decision-making related to emerging therapies for severe asthma.
For people with severe asthma, biologics are a treatment option that can be taken in addition to their regular medication. In this study, we asked 18 Canadians with severe asthma about how having severe asthma affects their lives, their current and previous asthma treatments, and their views on biologics. Ten people in this study were currently taking or had previously taken biologics for severe asthma. We found that biologics can be life changing. Also, people with severe asthma can find it difficult to get on and stay on biologics. They would like financial and educational support when considering biologics and prefer to take biologics at home, if possible. This study helps us understand the priorities and preferences related to biologics of patients with severe asthma.

Takayasu arteritis (TAK) is complicated disorder without reliable biomarkers. Here, we aimed to explore TAK-associated factor panels and their changes after biologic treatment. Five factor panels were identified: 1. systemic inflammation: C3, ESR, CRP, PLT, IL-6, C4, and IgG; 2. vascular inflammation: YKL40, IL-16, PTX3, and CCL2; 3. immune regulation panel: IL-10, IFN-γ, CCL5, and MMP1; 4. angiogenesis and fibrosis: FGF, PDGFAB, and VEGF; and 5. vascular remodeling: CD19+ B cell ratio, MMP3, and leptin. Panel 1 parameters were closely related to disease activity, while Panel 5 parameters, particularly CD19+ B cell ratio and leptin, were significantly higher in ischemic patients. After treatment, tocilizumab had a stronger inhibitory effect on Panel 1 parameters, PTX3, and YKL-40, while adalimumab led to an increase in IL-16, CCL2, and leptin levels. Altogether, these data expanded our knowledge regarding molecular background in TAK development and shed light on precise treatment in future studies.

BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GOA) is associated with disabling shoulder pain that affects everyday life. Its management comprises various treatment approaches, both conservative and surgical. Regenerative medicine has gained a major role in the conservative treatment of osteoarthritis. Intra-articular injection of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADMSCs) is a widely used regenerative medicine approach. The aim of this retrospective study was to report the safety and clinical outcomes of intra-articular injection of ADMSCs in patients with GOA over 36-months.
METHODS: This retrospective observational study involved patients with chronic shoulder pain resistant to standard conservative treatment and a diagnosis of concentric GOA, who received an intra-articular injection of autologous micro-fragmented adipose tissue (μFAT). The values of the Constant-Murley score (CMS), the visual analog scale (VAS), and the simple shoulder test (SST), collected at baseline and at 12, 24, and 36 months, were analyzed to assess treatment efficacy. The single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) was used to rate patient satisfaction. The Friedman test was used to compare observations of CMS, VAS, and SST values repeated on the same subjects. The significance threshold was set at 0.05.
RESULTS: The participants were 65 patients with a mean age of 54.19 years and a nearly equal gender distribution. Most had mild concentric GOA classified as Samilson-Prieto grade 1. The mean follow-up duration was 44.25 months. The postoperative clinical scores showed significant improvement. At 36 months, the CMS was 84.60, the VAS score was 3.34, and the SST score was 10.15 (all p < 0.0001). The SANE score at 36 months indicated that 54 patients (83.08%) were completely satisfied with the treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: ADMSC treatment exerted favorable effects on the clinical outcomes of patients with GOA, providing pain relief and improving shoulder function. Our data support its use as a conservative treatment option for osteoarthritis.

UNASSIGNED: Benralizumab is a biologic add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can reduce the rate of asthma exacerbations, but data on the associated medical utilization are scarce. This retrospective study evaluated the economic value of benralizumab by analyzing healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and medical costs in a large patient population in the US.
UNASSIGNED: Insurance claims data (11/2016-6/2020) were analyzed. A pre-post design was used to compare asthma exacerbation rates, medical HRU and medical costs in the 12 months pre vs. post index (day after benralizumab initiation). Patients were aged ≥12 years, with ≥2 records of benralizumab and ≥2 asthma exacerbations pre index, and constituted non-mutually exclusive cohorts: biologic-naïve, biologic-experienced (switched from omalizumab or mepolizumab to benralizumab), or with extended follow-up (18 or 24 months).
UNASSIGNED: In all cohorts (mean age 51-53 years; 67-70% female; biologic-naïve, N = 1,292; biologic-experienced, N = 349; 18-month follow-up, N = 419; 24-month follow-up, N = 156), benralizumab treatment reduced the rate of asthma exacerbation by 53-68% (p < .001). In the biologic-naïve cohort, inpatient admissions decreased by 58%, emergency department visits by 54%, and outpatient visits by 58% post index (all p < .001), with similar reductions in exacerbation-related medical HRU in other cohorts. Exacerbation-related mean total medical costs decreased by 51% in the biologic-naïve cohort ($4691 pre-index, $2289 post-index), with cost differences ranging from 16% to 64% across other cohorts (prior omalizumab: $2686 to $1600; prior mepolizumab: $5990 to $5008; 18-month: $3636 to $1667; 24-month: $4014 to $1449; all p < .001). Medical HRU and cost reductions were durable, decreasing by 64% in year 1 and 66% in year 2 in the 24 month follow-up cohort.
UNASSIGNED: Patients treated with benralizumab with prior exacerbations experienced reductions in asthma exacerbations and exacerbation-related medical HRU and medical costs regardless of prior biologic use, with the benefits observed for up to 24 months after treatment initiation.
Benralizumab is a biologic approved as an add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma. Previous real-world studies and clinical trials have shown that benralizumab can reduce the rate of asthma exacerbations and systemic corticosteroid use. However, there is little information on the economic value of benralizumab in real-world patient populations. This study showed that patients with severe asthma in the United States had lower rates of asthma exacerbations after starting treatment with benralizumab. The patients also had fewer asthma exacerbation-related hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and outpatient visits as well as lower medical costs related to asthma exacerbations compared with before the treatment. These benefits were observed in patients who had never taken and those who had been previously treated with biologic therapies, and for up to 24 months after starting benralizumab treatment. These results show that the clinical value of benralizumab translates into reduced medical utilization for patients with severe asthma.

The present multi-center, long-term, real-life study made an attempt to assess the efficacy of risankizumab in the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. The study comprised 185 patients from 10 Polish dermatologic departments undergoing risankizumab treatment. The disease severity was measured using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) before the start of the risankizumab treatment and next at the defined timepoints, i.e., 4, 16, 28, 40, 52 and 96 weeks of treatment. The percentage of patients achieving PASI90 and PASI100 responses as well as the PASI percentage decrease at the defined timepoints were calculated, and correlations with clinical characteristics and therapeutic effect were analyzed. The number of patients evaluated at the defined timepoints was: 136, 145, 100, 93, 62, and 22 at 4, 16, 28, 40, 52 and 96 weeks of treatment, respectively. At 4, 16, 28, 40, 52 and 96 weeks, the PASI90 response was achieved in 13.2%, 81.4%, 87.0%, 86.0%, 88.7% and 81.8% of patients, whereas the PASI100 response was achieved in 2.9%, 53.1%, 67.0%, 68.8%, 71.0% and 68.2% of patients, respectively. Our study revealed a significant negative correlation between a decrease in the PASI and the presence of psoriatic arthritis as well as the patient\'s age and duration of psoriasis at several timepoints throughout the observation period.

BACKGROUND: Real-life studies evaluating the long-term efficacy of guselkumab in moderate-to-severe psoriasis in China are limited and not available.
METHODS: In this real-life study, we retrospectively examined a total of 27 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis treated with guselkumab [100 mg, subcutaneous (s.c.)] with a follow-up period of at least 52 weeks in a real-life setting conducted at the Department of Dermatology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University and Department of Psoriasis, Dalian Dermatosis Hospital. The primary endpoint of the study was long-term effectiveness [reduction of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score, improvement of Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)], safety, and tolerability of guselkumab.
RESULTS: Guselkumab treatment decreased the mean PASI score from 12.46 ± 6.34 at baseline to 4.03 ± 3.25 (P < 0.001) and 0.77 ± 1.25 (P < 0.001) at 12 and 52 weeks. At 12 weeks, PASI 75, 90, and 100 response was achieved in 44.4%, 18.5%, and 11.1% of patients, respectively. At 1 year, PASI 75, 90, and 100 response was achieved in 88%, 72%, and 48% of patients, respectively. At 52 weeks, 96% of patients achieved a PASI score of ≤ 3 and 80% of patients achieved DLQI (0/1). No patients withdrewed from the study due to primary or secondary ineffectiveness or failure to adhere to the medication. During the follow-up period, only two adverse events were reported (tinea capitis and diarrhea).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that guselkumab is an appropriate therapeutic option in routine clinical practice, particularly when treating sophisticated patients with comorbidities or who failed to previous biologic therapy.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated patient characteristics and treatment patterns according to weight in pediatric patients with psoriasis in a real-world setting.
METHODS: Primary care and specialist physicians treating pediatric patients with psoriasis aged 6-17 years in five European countries were surveyed in the 2019-2020 Adelphi Real World Pediatric Psoriasis Disease Specific Programme. At least two patients with current or previous biologic use were included per physician. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns were analyzed overall and for patients weighing 25-50 kg or more than 50 kg.
RESULTS: Data from 772 patients weighing 25-50 kg and 1147 weighing more than 50 kg were analyzed. Median age at diagnosis was significantly less in lighter than heavier patients (10.0 vs. 14.0 years; p < 0.001), as was median disease duration (2.2 vs. 3.0 years; p < 0.001). Topical treatments were prescribed in 59.0% of patients overall (70.3% of lighter and 51.4% of heavier patients; p < 0.001), and were used to treat mild rather than moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Conventional systemic use was low (10.8% of patients overall) and predominantly for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. In this biologic-enriched sample, most biologics (78.2%) were prescribed in older (> 13 years) patients. Biologic use increased with line of therapy (6.6% of first-line, 18.0% of second-line, 33.7% of third-line, 44.7% of fourth-line treatments).
CONCLUSIONS: Biologics are predominantly prescribed in older (> 13 years) and heavier (> 50 kg) patients, with little first- or second-line use. The low use of biologics in European pediatric patients with psoriasis may represent an unmet treatment need, as topical or conventional systemic agents remain the main treatment option for moderate or severe psoriasis in these patients through the treatment pathway.
This study looked into types of treatments according to body weight in children with psoriasis, since approved dosing regimens for some treatments are based on body weight. Primary care and specialist physicians treating children with psoriasis aged 6–17 years in five European countries completed a survey. Patient information for those receiving specific types of psoriasis treatments were collected. Of the children included, 772 weighed 25–50 kg and 1147 weighed more than 50 kg. Most children received treatments applied to the skin, such as creams and ointments; this occurred in 70% of lighter patients and in 51% of heavier patients. Conventional treatments taken via the mouth were prescribed in a few patients (11% [overall]), while newer biologic drugs were taken to a greater extent in heavier (30%) than lighter (16%) patients. Most biologics (78%) were prescribed in older (> 13 years) patients. Biologic use increased with the number of failed previous treatments, comprising 7%, 18%, 34%, and 45% of first, second, third, and fourth treatments, respectively. We conclude that children with psoriasis who are treated with biologic drugs are predominantly older and heavier, and have more severe psoriasis. Prescriptions for biologics are given after many other treatments have been tried.