These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparative effectiveness of less commonly used systemic monotherapies and common combination therapies for moderate to severe psoriasis in the clinical setting.
    Author: Takeshita J, Wang S, Shin DB, Callis Duffin K, Krueger GG, Kalb RE, Weisman JD, Sperber BR, Stierstorfer MB, Brod BA, Schleicher SM, Robertson AD, Linn KA, Shinohara RT, Troxel AB, Van Voorhees AS, Gelfand JM.
    Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol; 2014 Dec; 71(6):1167-75. PubMed ID: 25260564.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of psoriasis therapies in real-world settings remains relatively unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the effectiveness of less commonly used systemic therapies and commonly used combination therapies for psoriasis. METHODS: This was a multicenter cross-sectional study of 203 patients with plaque psoriasis receiving less common systemic monotherapy (acitretin, cyclosporine, or infliximab) or common combination therapies (adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab and methotrexate) compared with 168 patients receiving methotrexate evaluated at 1 of 10 US outpatient dermatology sites participating in the Dermatology Clinical Effectiveness Research Network. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, patients on acitretin (relative response rate 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-3.41), infliximab (relative response rate 1.93; 95% CI 1.26-2.98), adalimumab and methotrexate (relative response rate 3.04; 95% CI 2.12-4.36), etanercept and methotrexate (relative response rate 2.22; 95% CI 1.25-3.94), and infliximab and methotrexate (relative response rate 1.72; 95% CI 1.10-2.70) were more likely to have clear or almost clear skin compared with patients on methotrexate. There were no differences among treatments when response rate was defined by health-related quality of life. LIMITATIONS: Single time point assessment may result in overestimation of effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of therapies in clinical trials may overestimate their effectiveness as used in clinical practice. Although physician-reported relative response rates were different among therapies, absolute differences were small and did not correspond to differences in patient-reported outcomes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]