BACKGROUND: For psoriatic patients who need to receive nonlive or live vaccines, evidence-based recommendations are needed regarding whether to pause or continue systemic therapies for psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate literature regarding vaccine efficacy and safety and to generate consensus-based recommendations for adults receiving systemic therapies for psoriasis and/or psoriatic arthritis receiving nonlive or live vaccines.
METHODS: Using a modified Delphi process, 22 consensus statements were developed by the National Psoriasis Foundation Medical Board and COVID-19 Task Force, and infectious disease experts.
RESULTS: Key recommendations include continuing most oral and biologic therapies without modification for patients receiving nonlive vaccines; consider interruption of methotrexate for nonlive vaccines. For patients receiving live vaccines, discontinue most oral and biologic medications before and after administration of live vaccine. Specific recommendations include discontinuing most biologic therapies, except for abatacept, for 2-3 half-lives before live vaccine administration and deferring next dose 2-4 weeks after live vaccination.
CONCLUSIONS: Studies regarding infection rates after vaccination are lacking.
CONCLUSIONS: Interruption of antipsoriatic oral and biologic therapies is generally not necessary for patients receiving nonlive vaccines. Temporary interruption of oral and biologic therapies before and after administration of live vaccines is recommended in most cases.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

This evidence- and consensus-based guideline on the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris was developed following the EuroGuiDerm Guideline and Consensus Statement Development Manual. The first part of the guideline includes general information on the scope and purpose, health questions covered, target users and strength/limitations of the guideline. Suggestions for disease severity grading and treatment goals are provided. It presents the general treatment recommendations as well as detailed management and monitoring recommendations for the individual drugs. The treatment options discussed in this guideline are as follows: acitretin, ciclosporin, fumarates, methotrexate, adalimumab, apremilast, brodalumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, guselkumab, infliximab, ixekizumab, risankizumab, secukinumab, tildrakizumab and ustekinumab.

BACKGROUND: Rare autoinflammatory diseases (AIDs) including Cryopyrin-Associated Periodic Syndrome (CAPS), Tumor Necrosis Receptor-Associated Periodic Syndrome (TRAPS) and Mevalonate Kinase Deficiency Syndrome (MKD)/ Hyper-IgD Syndrome (HIDS) are genetically defined and characterized by recurrent fever episodes and inflammatory organ manifestations. Early diagnosis and early start of effective therapies control the inflammation and prevent organ damage. The PRO-KIND initiative of the German Society of Pediatric Rheumatology (GKJR) aims to harmonize the diagnosis and management of children with rheumatic diseases nationally. The task of the PRO-KIND CAPS/TRAPS/MKD/HIDS working group was to develop evidence-based, consensus diagnosis and management protocols including the first AID treat-to-target strategies.
METHODS: The national CAPS/TRAPS/MKD/HIDS expert working group was established, defined its aims and conducted a comprehensive literature review synthesising the recent (2013 to 2018) published evidence including all available recommendations for diagnosis and management. General and disease-specific statements were anchored in the 2015 SHARE recommendations. An iterative expert review process discussed, adapted and refined these statements. Ultimately the GKJR membership vetted the proposed consensus statements, agreement of 80% was mandatory for inclusion. The approved statements were integrated into three disease specific consensus treatment plans (CTPs). These were developed to enable the implementation of evidence-based, standardized care into clinical practice.
RESULTS: The CAPS/TRAPS/MKD/HIDS expert working group of 12 German and Austrian paediatric rheumatologists completed the evidence synthesis and modified a total of 38 statements based on the SHARE recommendation framework. In iterative reviews 36 reached the mandatory agreement threshold of 80% in the final GKJR member survey. These included 9 overarching principles and 27 disease-specific statements (7 for CAPS, 11 TRAPS, 9 MKD/HIDS). A diagnostic algorithm was established based on the synthesized evidence. Statements were integrated into diagnosis- and disease activity specific treat-to-target CTPs for CAPS, TRAPS and MKD/HIDS.
CONCLUSIONS: The PRO-KIND CAPS/TRAPS/MKD/HIDS working group established the first evidence-based, actionable treat-to-target consensus treatment plans for three rare hereditary autoinflammatory diseases. These provide a path to a rapid evaluation, effective control of disease activity and tailored adjustment of therapies. Their implementation will decrease variation in care and optimize health outcomes for children with AID.

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the US population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care, providing recommendations based on the available evidence. The treatment of psoriasis with biologic agents will be reviewed, emphasizing treatment recommendations and the role of the dermatologist in monitoring and educating patients regarding benefits as well as associated risks.

To develop an evidence-based guideline for the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), as a collaboration between the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF).
We identified critical outcomes in PsA and clinically relevant PICO (population/intervention/comparator/outcomes) questions. A Literature Review Team performed a systematic literature review to summarize evidence supporting the benefits and harms of available pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies for PsA. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology was used to rate the quality of the evidence. A voting panel, including rheumatologists, dermatologists, other health professionals, and patients, achieved consensus on the direction and the strength of the recommendations.
The guideline covers the management of active PsA in patients who are treatment-naive and those who continue to have active PsA despite treatment, and addresses the use of oral small molecules, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, interleukin-12/23 inhibitors (IL-12/23i), IL-17 inhibitors, CTLA4-Ig (abatacept), and a JAK inhibitor (tofacitinib). We also developed recommendations for psoriatic spondylitis, predominant enthesitis, and treatment in the presence of concomitant inflammatory bowel disease, diabetes, or serious infections. We formulated recommendations for a treat-to-target strategy, vaccinations, and nonpharmacologic therapies. Six percent of the recommendations were strong and 94% conditional, indicating the importance of active discussion between the health care provider and the patient to choose the optimal treatment.
The 2018 ACR/NPF PsA guideline serves as a tool for health care providers and patients in the selection of appropriate therapy in common clinical scenarios. Best treatment decisions consider each individual patient situation. The guideline is not meant to be proscriptive and should not be used to limit treatment options for patients with PsA.

Real-world evidence on effectiveness of switching to biosimila r etanercept is scarce. In Denmark, a nationwide guideline of mandatory switch from 50 mg originator (ETA) to biosimilar (SB4) etanercept was issued for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) in 2016. Clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were studied in ETA-treated patients, who switched to SB4 (switchers) or maintained ETA (non-switchers). Retention rates were compared with that of a historic cohort of ETA-treated patients. Switchers who resumed ETA treatment (back-switchers) were characterised.
Observational cohort study based on the DANBIO registry. Treatment retention was explored by Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression (crude, adjusted).
1621 (79%) of 2061 ETA-treated patients switched to SB4. Disease activity was unchanged 3 months\' preswitch/postswitch. Non-switchers often received 25 mg ETA (ETA 25 mg pens/syringes and powder solution were still available). One-year adjusted retention rates were: non-switchers: 77% (95% CI: 72% to 82%)/switchers: 83% (79% to 87%)/historic cohort: 90% (88% to 92%). Patients not in remission had lower retention rates than patients in remission, both in switchers (crude HR 1.7 (1.3 to 2.2)) and non-switchers (2.4 (1.7 to 3.6)). During follow-up, 120 patients (7% of switchers) back-switched to ETA. Back-switchers\' clinical characteristics were similar to switchers, and reasons for SB4 withdrawal were mainly subjective.
Seventy-nine per cent of patients switched from ETA to SB4. After 1 year, adjusted treatment retention rates were lower in switchers versus the historic ETA cohort, but higher than in non-switchers. Withdrawal was more common in patients not in remission. The results suggest that switch outcomes in routine care are affected by patient-related factors and non-specific drug effects.

BACKGROUND: The present review is part of the ESCMID Study Group for Infections in Compromised Hosts (ESGICH) Consensus Document on the safety of targeted and biological therapies.
OBJECTIVE: To review, from an Infectious Diseases perspective, the safety profile of agents targeting tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and to suggest preventive recommendations.
METHODS: Computer-based MEDLINE searches with MeSH terms pertaining to each agent or therapeutic family.
BACKGROUND: Preclinical and clinical evidence indicate that anti-TNF-α therapy (infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, certolizumab pegol and etanercept) is associated with a two-to four-fold increase in the risk of active tuberculosis and other granulomatous conditions (mostly resulting from the reactivation of a latent infection). In addition, it may lead to the occurrence of other serious infections (bacterial, fungal, opportunistic and certain viral infections). These associated risks seem to be lower for etanercept than other agents. Screening for latent tuberculosis infection should be performed before starting anti-TNF-α therapy, followed by anti-tuberculosis therapy if appropriate. Screening for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is also recommended, and antiviral prophylaxis may be warranted for hepatitis B surface antigen-positive individuals. No benefit is expected from the use of antibacterial, anti-Pneumocystis or antifungal prophylaxis. Pneumococcal and age-appropriate antiviral vaccinations (i.e. influenza) should be administered. Live-virus vaccines (i.e. varicella-zoster virus or measles-mumps-rubella) may be contraindicated in people receiving anti-TNF-α therapy, although additional data are needed before definitive recommendations can be made.
CONCLUSIONS: Prevention measures should be implemented to reduce the risk of latent tuberculosis or HBV reactivation among individuals receiving anti-TNF-α therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare and contrast evidence-based CPGs from leading dermatological organizations for the use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in psoriasis.
METHODS: Guidelines from the British National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the British Association of Dermatologists (BAD), the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF), and the Canadian Dermatology Association (CDA) were reviewed and compared.
RESULTS: Various guidelines are similar regarding treatment initiation but have significant differences regarding topics such as continuous versus intermittent therapy, use in erythrodermic and pustular palmoplantar psoriasis and special patient populations.
CONCLUSIONS: TNF inhibitors remain valuable tools in psoriasis therapy, and guidelines for their use may help clinicians use them effectively.