4.8 Article

Efficacy and safety of infliximab monotherapy for plaque-type psoriasis: a randomised trial

Journal

LANCET
Volume 357, Issue 9271, Pages 1842-1847

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04954-0

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Currently available treatments for moderate to severe psoriasis are either incompletely effective in some patients, or are associated with toxic effects. Since tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha) is thought to have a role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis, we did a double-blind, randomised trial to assess the clinical benefit and safety of infliximab-a monoclonal antibody against TNF-alpha. Methods 33 patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis were randomly assigned intravenous placebo (n=11), infliximab 5 mg/kg (n=11), or infliximab 10 mg/kg (n=11) at weeks 0, 2, and 6. Patients were assessed at week 10 for the primary endpoint (score on the physician's global assessment [PGA]). Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings Of the 33 patients enrolled, three dropped out. Nine of 11 (82%) patients in the Infliximab 5 mg/kg group were responders (good, excellent, or clear rating on PGA), compared with two of 11 (18%) In the placebo group (difference 64% [95% CI 20-89], p=0.0089), and ten of 11 (91%) patients in the infliximab 10 mg/kg group were responders (difference from placebo 73% [30-94], p=0.0019). The median time to response was 4 weeks for patients in both infliximab groups. There were no serious adverse events, and infliximab was well tolerated. Interpretation In this controlled trial, patients receiving the anti-TNF-alpha agent infliximab as monotherapy experienced a high degree of clinical benefit and rapid time to response In the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis compared with patients who received placebo. These findings suggest that TNF-alpha has a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available