Superior effect of adalimumab versus secukinumab on ultrasound-confirmed synovitis in psoriatic arthritis: comprehensive evidence from musculoskeletal ultrasound and clinical assessments.

Yiyi Wang, Yue Xiao, Lingyan Zhang, Furong Li, Hongxiang Hu, Xiya Peng, Jingya Gao, Min Yang, Wei Yan, Li Qiu, Wei Li
{"title":"Superior effect of adalimumab versus secukinumab on ultrasound-confirmed synovitis in psoriatic arthritis: comprehensive evidence from musculoskeletal ultrasound and clinical assessments.","authors":"Yiyi Wang, Yue Xiao, Lingyan Zhang, Furong Li, Hongxiang Hu, Xiya Peng, Jingya Gao, Min Yang, Wei Yan, Li Qiu, Wei Li","doi":"10.1080/09546634.2024.2411849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background and objectives:</b> Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory musculoskeletal disorder affecting 30% of psoriatic patients. Effective treatment, especially with biologics like IL-17 and TNF inhibitors, is vital for improving patient outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of secukinumab and adalimumab in PsA patients through clinical and ultrasonographic evaluations.<b>Materials and methods:</b> We enrolled 116 PsA patients, with 58 patients receiving secukinumab and 58 receiving adalimumab. Regular follow-ups were conducted at weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving at least a 20% improvement in the ACR response (ACR20) at week 12, with additional evaluations for axial arthritis, enthesitis, skin involvement, minimal disease activity, health assessment questionnaire, and ultrasound changes.<b>Results:</b> There was no significant difference in ACR20 response between the two groups at week 12 (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.26-1.37, <i>p</i> = 0.22). However, secukinumab demonstrated superior efficacy in achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)90 (OR: 2.25, 95%CI: 1.07-4.74, <i>p</i> = 0.03), while adalimumab showed better improvement in ultrasound synovitis count (β: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.09-1.79, <i>p</i> = 0.03) and synovitis PD signal (β: 0.20, 95%CI: 0.03-0.36, <i>p</i> = 0.02).<b>Conclusions:</b> In conclusion, both treatments were highly effective for PsA, with secukinumab being more suitable for severe skin involvement and adalimumab for significant ultrasound-confirmed synovitis.</p>","PeriodicalId":94235,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of dermatological treatment","volume":"35 1","pages":"2411849"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of dermatological treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2024.2411849","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory musculoskeletal disorder affecting 30% of psoriatic patients. Effective treatment, especially with biologics like IL-17 and TNF inhibitors, is vital for improving patient outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of secukinumab and adalimumab in PsA patients through clinical and ultrasonographic evaluations.Materials and methods: We enrolled 116 PsA patients, with 58 patients receiving secukinumab and 58 receiving adalimumab. Regular follow-ups were conducted at weeks 4, 12, 24, and 52. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving at least a 20% improvement in the ACR response (ACR20) at week 12, with additional evaluations for axial arthritis, enthesitis, skin involvement, minimal disease activity, health assessment questionnaire, and ultrasound changes.Results: There was no significant difference in ACR20 response between the two groups at week 12 (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.26-1.37, p = 0.22). However, secukinumab demonstrated superior efficacy in achieving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI)90 (OR: 2.25, 95%CI: 1.07-4.74, p = 0.03), while adalimumab showed better improvement in ultrasound synovitis count (β: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.09-1.79, p = 0.03) and synovitis PD signal (β: 0.20, 95%CI: 0.03-0.36, p = 0.02).Conclusions: In conclusion, both treatments were highly effective for PsA, with secukinumab being more suitable for severe skin involvement and adalimumab for significant ultrasound-confirmed synovitis.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿达木单抗与赛库单抗对银屑病关节炎超声确诊滑膜炎的卓越疗效:来自肌肉骨骼超声和临床评估的综合证据。
背景和目的:银屑病关节炎(PsA)是一种慢性炎症性肌肉骨骼疾病,影响 30% 的银屑病患者。有效的治疗,尤其是使用 IL-17 和 TNF 抑制剂等生物制剂,对改善患者预后至关重要。本研究旨在通过临床和超声评估,比较secukinumab和阿达木单抗对PsA患者的疗效:我们招募了116名PsA患者,其中58人接受了secukinumab治疗,58人接受了阿达木单抗治疗。在第 4、12、24 和 52 周进行定期随访。主要结果是第12周时ACR反应(ACR20)至少改善20%的患者比例,并对轴关节炎、腱鞘炎、皮肤受累、最小疾病活动度、健康评估问卷和超声变化进行额外评估:两组患者在第12周时的ACR20反应无明显差异(OR:0.59,95% CI:0.26-1.37,P = 0.22)。然而,赛库单抗在实现银屑病面积和严重程度指数(PASI)90(OR:2.25,95%CI:1.07-4.74,p = 0.03)方面显示出更优越的疗效,而阿达木单抗在超声滑膜炎计数(β:0.94,95%CI:0.09-1.79,p = 0.03)和滑膜炎PD信号(β:0.20,95%CI:0.03-0.36,p = 0.02)方面显示出更好的改善效果:总之,两种治疗方法对PsA都非常有效,secukinumab更适用于严重的皮肤受累,而阿达木单抗则适用于经超声证实的明显滑膜炎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and safety of sofpironium in treatment of primary hyperhidrosis: a systematic review. Efficacy and safety of 308-nm Excimer lamp combined with Tacrolimus 0.1% ointment vs Tacrolimus 0.1% ointment as monotherapy in treating children with limited vitiligo: a randomized controlled trial. The wide variety of methotrexate dosing regimens for the treatment of atopic dermatitis: a systematic review. Comparing Mohs micrographic surgery and wide local excision in the management of head and neck dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans: a scoping review. The primary role of sebum in the pathophysiology of acne vulgaris and its therapeutic relevance in acne management.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1