2007Journal of Dermatological TreatmentRequires access

Etanercept and efalizumab treatment for high‐need psoriasis. Effects and side effects in a prospective cohort study in outpatient clinical practice

Maartje A. M. Berends, R.J.B. Driessen, Annechien M. G. Langewouters, J.B.M. Boezeman, Peter C.M. van de Kerkhof, Elke M. G. J. de Jong

Open publisher page 31 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of 2005, etanercept and efalizumab are officially registered and reimbursed for the treatment of recalcitrant psoriasis in The Netherlands. OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of the efficacy, safety and adverse events of etanercept and efalizumab treatment in daily practice. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out for patients treated with etanercept or efalizumab between February 2005 and March 2006. RESULTS: Over the past 13 months 45 individuals were treated with etanercept and 17 subjects were treated with efalizumab. The cohort represented a high-need population. At week 12, 82% of the subjects treated with 2 x 50 mg etanercept/week and 71% of the subjects treated with 2 x 25 mg etanercept/week reached a PASI-50. Efficacy of etanercept treatment was comparable to the results of clinical trials. For efalizumab, efficacy in responding patients was also comparable to clinical trial data, but the percentage of dropouts was substantial. During biologic treatment, safety was preserved and mainly mild adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Etanercept and efalizumab are effective and safe treatments of psoriasis, even in a high-need population. Etanercept was able to sustain the clinical improvement throughout 24 weeks, whereas efalizumab was not in 47% of subjects.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of 2005, etanercept and efalizumab are officially registered and reimbursed for the treatment of recalcitrant psoriasis in The Netherlands. OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of the efficacy, safety and adverse events of etanercept and efalizumab treatment in daily practice. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out for patients treated with etanercept or efalizumab between February 2005 and March 2006. RESULTS: Over the past 13 months 45 individuals were treated with etanercept and 17 subjects were treated with efalizumab. The cohort represented a high-need population. At week 12, 82% of the subjects treated with 2 x 50 mg etanercept/week and 71% of the subjects treated with 2 x 25 mg etanercept/week reached a PASI-50. Efficacy of etanercept treatment was comparable to the results of clinical trials. For efalizumab, efficacy in responding patients was also comparable to clinical trial data, but the percentage of dropouts was substantial. During biologic treatment, safety was preserved and mainly mild adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Etanercept and efalizumab are effective and safe treatments of psoriasis, even in a high-need population. Etanercept was able to sustain the clinical improvement throughout 24 weeks, whereas efalizumab was not in 47% of subjects.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 31 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of 2005, etanercept and efalizumab are officially registered and reimbursed for the treatment of recalcitrant psoriasis in The Netherlands. OBJECTIVE: The evaluation of the efficacy, safety and adverse events of etanercept and efalizumab treatment in daily practice. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out for patients treated with etanercept or efalizumab between February 2005 and March 2006. RESULTS: Over the past 13 months 45 individuals were treated with etanercept and 17 subjects were treated with efalizumab. The cohort represented a high-need population. At week 12, 82% of the subjects treated with 2 x 50 mg etanercept/week and 71% of the subjects treated with 2 x 25 mg etanercept/week reached a PASI-50. Efficacy of etanercept treatment was comparable to the results of clinical trials. For efalizumab, efficacy in responding patients was also comparable to clinical trial data, but the percentage of dropouts was substantial. During biologic treatment, safety was preserved and mainly mild adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Etanercept and efalizumab are effective and safe treatments of psoriasis, even in a high-need population. Etanercept was able to sustain the clinical improvement throughout 24 weeks, whereas efalizumab was not in 47% of subjects.

Key concepts: Efalizumab, Etanercept, Medicine, Psoriasis, Adverse effect, Population, Clinical trial, Prospective cohort study

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Etanercept and efalizumab treatment for high‐need psoriasis. Effects and side effects in a prospective cohort study in outpatient clinical practice — Research Paper | ScholarLens