Fiche publication
Date publication
décembre 2009
Auteurs
Membres identifiés du Cancéropôle Est :
Pr AUBIN François
,
Pr HUMBERT Philippe
Tous les auteurs :
Saccomani C, Penz S, Guerre-Schmidt R, Riou MO, Pelletier F, Puzenat E, Mermet I, Levang J, Humbert P, Aubin F
Lien Pubmed
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The course of biological therapy (BT) in clinical practice may differ markedly from treatment schedules in clinical trials. Treatment modifications and patient characteristics can affect treatment safety and efficacy. In addition, long-term results concerning the use of BT in clinical practice are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To report our experience of BT in terms of short- and long-term efficacy and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The retrospectively analysed cohort consisted of psoriasis patients receiving BT between 2004 and 2008. Patients in clinical trials were excluded. Mean body surface area (BSA) and Dermatology Life Quality Index were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients undergoing 86 courses of BT were enrolled. Thirty-three patients were treated with efalizumab, 21 with infliximab and 32 with etanercept. During the study period, 40% of patients were switched to another BT. The number of patients attaining BSA-75 at 3and 6months respectively was 38% and 75% for efalizumab, 62% and 61% for infliximab, and 36% and 61% for etanercept. After 24months of follow-up, only 33% of patients (34% of patients with efalizumab, 52% with infliximab and 22% with etanercept) were still following their initial BT, with treatment being discontinued in 52% of patients due to adverse events or treatment failure. DISCUSSION: Our study confirms the efficacy and feasibility of BT in clinical practice. However, the high frequency of BT discontinuation for adverse events or non-response led to sequential therapy using different biological treatments.
Référence
Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2009 Dec;136(12):877-82
