Abstract

Comparing effectiveness of biologics in real-world settings will help inform treatment decisions.We sought to compare therapeutic responses among patients initiating infliximab, adalimumab, or etanercept versus ustekinumab during the Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR).Proportions of patients achieving a Physician Global Assessment score of clear (0)/minimal (1) and mean decrease in percentage of body surface area with psoriasis were evaluated at 6 and 12 months. Adjusted logistic regression (Physician Global Assessment score 0/1) and analysis of covariance (percentage of body surface area with psoriasis) were performed to determine treatment factors associated with effectiveness.Of 2541 new users on registry, 2076 had efficacy data: ustekinumab (n = 1041), infliximab (n = 116), adalimumab (n = 662), and etanercept (n = 257). Patients receiving tumor necrosis factor-alpha(-a) inhibitors were significantly less likely to achieve Physician Global Assessment score 0/1 versus ustekinumab (infliximab [odds ratio {OR} 0.396, P < .0001], adalimumab [OR 0.686, P = .0012], etanercept [OR 0.554, P = .0003] at 6 months and infliximab [OR 0.449, P = .0040] at 12 months). Mean decrease in percentage of body surface area with psoriasis was significantly greater for ustekinumab versus adalimumab (point estimate 1.833, P = .0020) and etanercept (point estimate 3.419, P < .0001) at 6 months and versus infliximab (point estimate 3.945, P = .0005) and etanercept (point estimate 2.778, P = .0007) at 12 months.Treatment selection bias and limited data for doing adjustments are limitations.In PSOLAR, effectiveness of ustekinumab was significantly better versus all 3 tumor necrosis factor-a inhibitors studied for the majority of comparisons at 6 and 12 months.

View details for DOI 10.1016/j.jaad.2015.12.017

View details for PubMedID 26853180