4.6 Article

Apremilast, an oral phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor, in the treatment of palmoplantar psoriasis: Results of a pooled analysis from phase II PSOR-005 and phase III Efficacy and Safety Trial Evaluating the Effects of Apremilast in Psoriasis (ESTEEM) clinical trials in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis

期刊

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.02.1164

关键词

apremilast; difficult to treat; ESTEEM; moderate to severe; palmoplantar psoriasis; palms; PSOR-005; soles

资金

  1. Celgene Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Difficult-to-treat palmoplantar psoriasis has a disproportionately negative impact on quality of life. Objective: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of apremilast in palmoplantar psoriasis. Methods: A post hoc analysis of data pooled from phase IIb (PSOR-005) and phase III (Efficacy and Safety Trial Evaluating the Effects of Apremilast in Psoriasis [ESTEEM] 1 and 2) clinical studies was conducted to determine the effect of apremilast 30 mg twice daily versus placebo at week 16 in a subset of patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with active palmoplantar psoriasis (baseline Palmoplantar Psoriasis Physician Global Assessment [PPPGA] score >= 1). Results: Significantly more patients taking apremilast with moderate to severe palmoplantar psoriasis (baseline PPPGA score >= 3) achieved PPPGA score 0 (clear) or 1 (almost clear) compared with placebo at week 16 (48% vs 27%; P = .021). At week 16, 46% of the apremilast group with baseline PPPGA score 1 or higher achieved a PPPGA score of 0 versus 25% of the placebo group (P < .001); 59% of the apremilast group had a PPPGA score of 0 or 1 with 1-point or more improvement versus 39% receiving placebo (P < .001). Limitations: This post hoc analysis was limited to 16 weeks and did not assess palmoplantar pustules, lesion localization, or surface area involvement. Conclusion: Apremilast may be a useful oral treatment option for patients with moderate to severe palmoplantar plaque psoriasis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据