使用阿普米司特治疗免疫检查点抑制剂银屑病和银屑病关节炎。

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Nilasha Ghosh, Pankti Reid, Jeffrey A Sparks, Kaitlin McCarter, Kyle Ge, Anne R Bass
{"title":"使用阿普米司特治疗免疫检查点抑制剂银屑病和银屑病关节炎。","authors":"Nilasha Ghosh, Pankti Reid, Jeffrey A Sparks, Kaitlin McCarter, Kyle Ge, Anne R Bass","doi":"10.1002/acr.25604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to present effectiveness and tolerability of apremilast in a cohort of 21 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriatic arthritis (ICI-PsA) and/or immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriasis (ICI-PsO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter study combined data from patients treated with apremilast after experiencing ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Patients taking apremilast before ICI initiation and patients with preexisting autoimmune disease before ICI therapy were also included. Response to apremilast was determined as complete, partial, or none as determined by improvement in Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading after drug initiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 21 patients who used apremilast for either ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA, but only five of these patients had de novo ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Of these five patients, four had partial response or improvement in their immune-related adverse event with apremilast, although there were intolerances in three of these patients. Of the 21 total patients, 16 had a relevant preexisting autoimmune disease, indicating a likely flare of the underlying disease with ICI therapy. Flares occurred much sooner for patients with ICI-PsA (4 weeks) compared to patients with ICI-PsO only (39.7 weeks), although the majority of both groups had grade II severity. Among the 13 patients with preexisting disease and no exposure to apremilast before ICI therapy, all patients in the ICI-PsO-only group (100%) responded to apremilast with either a complete or partial response, whereas only 57% of patients in the ICI-PsA group had complete or partial response. Twenty-nine percent of patients in the entire cohort had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerability. Thirty-eight percent of the entire cohort had progression of cancer or death at last follow-up after being on apremilast.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the potential benefit of apremilast for the treatment of ICI-PsO, both de novo and PsO flare, with less of an apparent benefit for ICI-PsA. Thirty percent of patients in the whole group had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerance. Apremilast may be an attractive therapeutic option for either condition given that it is not immunosuppressive, but further prospective observational studies with larger patient numbers are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Apremilast for the Treatment of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis.\",\"authors\":\"Nilasha Ghosh, Pankti Reid, Jeffrey A Sparks, Kaitlin McCarter, Kyle Ge, Anne R Bass\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acr.25604\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of this study was to present effectiveness and tolerability of apremilast in a cohort of 21 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriatic arthritis (ICI-PsA) and/or immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriasis (ICI-PsO).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter study combined data from patients treated with apremilast after experiencing ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Patients taking apremilast before ICI initiation and patients with preexisting autoimmune disease before ICI therapy were also included. Response to apremilast was determined as complete, partial, or none as determined by improvement in Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading after drug initiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 21 patients who used apremilast for either ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA, but only five of these patients had de novo ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Of these five patients, four had partial response or improvement in their immune-related adverse event with apremilast, although there were intolerances in three of these patients. Of the 21 total patients, 16 had a relevant preexisting autoimmune disease, indicating a likely flare of the underlying disease with ICI therapy. Flares occurred much sooner for patients with ICI-PsA (4 weeks) compared to patients with ICI-PsO only (39.7 weeks), although the majority of both groups had grade II severity. Among the 13 patients with preexisting disease and no exposure to apremilast before ICI therapy, all patients in the ICI-PsO-only group (100%) responded to apremilast with either a complete or partial response, whereas only 57% of patients in the ICI-PsA group had complete or partial response. Twenty-nine percent of patients in the entire cohort had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerability. Thirty-eight percent of the entire cohort had progression of cancer or death at last follow-up after being on apremilast.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights the potential benefit of apremilast for the treatment of ICI-PsO, both de novo and PsO flare, with less of an apparent benefit for ICI-PsA. Thirty percent of patients in the whole group had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerance. Apremilast may be an attractive therapeutic option for either condition given that it is not immunosuppressive, but further prospective observational studies with larger patient numbers are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25604\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25604","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是在一组21例免疫检查点抑制剂银屑病关节炎(ICI-PsA)和/或免疫检查点抑制剂银屑病(ICI-PsO)患者中展示阿普米司特的有效性和耐受性。方法:这项多中心研究结合了在经历ICI-PsO和/或ICI-PsA后接受阿普米司特治疗的患者的数据。在ICI开始前服用阿普米司特的患者和在ICI治疗前已有自身免疫性疾病的患者也包括在内。对阿普米司特的反应被确定为完全、部分或无反应,这是通过改善药物起始后不良事件分级的通用术语标准来确定的。结果:有21例患者使用阿普米司特治疗ICI-PsO和/或ICI-PsA,但其中只有5例患者出现了新发ICI-PsO和/或ICI-PsA。在这5名患者中,4名患者的免疫相关不良事件部分缓解或改善,尽管其中3名患者存在不耐受。在21例患者中,16例既往存在相关的自身免疫性疾病,表明ICI治疗可能导致潜在疾病发作。与ICI-PsO患者(39.7周)相比,ICI-PsA患者(4周)发生耀斑的时间要早得多,尽管两组中大多数患者的严重程度都为II级。在13例既往存在疾病且ICI治疗前未接触过阿普雷米司特的患者中,ICI- pso组的所有患者(100%)对阿普雷米司特有完全或部分反应,而ICI- psa组中只有57%的患者有完全或部分反应。在整个队列中,有29%的患者由于无法耐受而不得不停用阿普米司特。整个队列中有38%的人在服用阿普雷米司特后的最后一次随访中癌症进展或死亡。结论:本研究强调了阿普米司特治疗ICI-PsO的潜在益处,无论是新生还是PsO发作,而ICI-PsA的明显益处较少。由于不耐受,整个组中30%的患者不得不停止使用阿普米司特。阿普拉米司特可能是一种有吸引力的治疗选择,因为它不具有免疫抑制作用,但需要进一步的前瞻性观察性研究,需要更多的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Apremilast for the Treatment of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis.

Objective: The objective of this study was to present effectiveness and tolerability of apremilast in a cohort of 21 patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriatic arthritis (ICI-PsA) and/or immune checkpoint inhibitor psoriasis (ICI-PsO).

Methods: This multicenter study combined data from patients treated with apremilast after experiencing ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Patients taking apremilast before ICI initiation and patients with preexisting autoimmune disease before ICI therapy were also included. Response to apremilast was determined as complete, partial, or none as determined by improvement in Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grading after drug initiation.

Results: There were 21 patients who used apremilast for either ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA, but only five of these patients had de novo ICI-PsO and/or ICI-PsA. Of these five patients, four had partial response or improvement in their immune-related adverse event with apremilast, although there were intolerances in three of these patients. Of the 21 total patients, 16 had a relevant preexisting autoimmune disease, indicating a likely flare of the underlying disease with ICI therapy. Flares occurred much sooner for patients with ICI-PsA (4 weeks) compared to patients with ICI-PsO only (39.7 weeks), although the majority of both groups had grade II severity. Among the 13 patients with preexisting disease and no exposure to apremilast before ICI therapy, all patients in the ICI-PsO-only group (100%) responded to apremilast with either a complete or partial response, whereas only 57% of patients in the ICI-PsA group had complete or partial response. Twenty-nine percent of patients in the entire cohort had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerability. Thirty-eight percent of the entire cohort had progression of cancer or death at last follow-up after being on apremilast.

Conclusion: This study highlights the potential benefit of apremilast for the treatment of ICI-PsO, both de novo and PsO flare, with less of an apparent benefit for ICI-PsA. Thirty percent of patients in the whole group had to discontinue apremilast due to intolerance. Apremilast may be an attractive therapeutic option for either condition given that it is not immunosuppressive, but further prospective observational studies with larger patient numbers are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信