Taltz 5 year study

[Fred]

This study looked at the effectiveness and safety of Taltz (ixekizumab) over 5 years.

Quote:

---

Introduction:
Ixekizumab proved to be effective and safe for psoriasis treatment in several randomized clinical trials and real-life studies. Nevertheless, long-term real-world experiences are still lacking, with little data up to 4 years of treatment.

Objectives:
To analyse survival, effectiveness and safety of ixekizumab in a real-life cohort of patients affected by moderate-to-severe psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis up to 260 weeks (5 years).

Methods:
We included all patients treated with ixekizumab from December 2017 to March 2021. Drug survival (DS) was analysed in patients at risk for up to 5 years. Cox analysis was adopted to evaluate possible predictive factors of discontinuation. Psoriasis Area Severity Index (meanPASI and PASI100, 90, and ≤3) was used as outcomes of effectiveness on observed patients at 16, 52, 104, 156, 208 and 260 weeks. Logistic regression was performed to identify possible predictive factors of response.

Results:
DS was 65.5% at 260 weeks, with being a super-responder patient (achievement of PASI100 at 16 weeks and maintained at 28 weeks) correlated with less risk of discontinuation. PASI100, 90 and ≤3 was achieved by 54.1%, 60.5% and 73% of observed patients, respectively, at 16 weeks, and by 59.1%, 81.8% and 95.5%, respectively, at 260 weeks. High mean BMI was the only factor strongly associated with less achievement of the outcomes at the earlier time points: PASI100 at 16 weeks (OR 0.93, CI 0.87–0.98, p = 0.014) and at 104 weeks (OR 0.91, CI 0.84–0.98, p = 0.019), PASI90 achievement at 16 weeks (OR 0.94, CI 0.88–0.99, p = 0.028) and 104 weeks (OR 0.91, CI 0.83–0.99, p = 0.027), and PASI ≤3 (OR 0.86, CI 0.76–0.97, p = 0.018) at 104 weeks. No severe adverse events were observed.

Conclusions:
Ixekizumab showed high effectiveness and safety for up to 5 years, with survival of 2/3 of treated patients. Rapid response to treatment is predictive of long-term response.

Source: onlinelibrary.wiley.com

*Early view funding unknown

Taltz (ixekizumab)

[Caroline]

That is looking good for Taltz.

[Fred]

That is looking good for Taltz.

Not one I've tried myself but it's nice to see people getting relief from some of the new treatments.

[Kat]

I tried it, wasn't on it for very long. I didn't mind coming off of it honestly as it was the only injection that "hurt" at times.

A small hurt but still....

What does with survival of 2/3 of treated patients mean exactly? That 1/3 of patient's DIDN'T survive????

[mataribot]

I tried it, wasn't on it for very long.  I didn't mind coming off of it honestly as it was the only injection that "hurt" at times.

A small hurt but still.... 

What does with survival of 2/3 of treated patients mean exactly?  That 1/3 of patient's DIDN'T survive???? 

I am thinking they meant the treatment stopped working for a 1/3 of patients. To me, that's not a great result.

[Caroline]

I tried it, wasn't on it for very long.  I didn't mind coming off of it honestly as it was the only injection that "hurt" at times.

A small hurt but still.... 

What does with survival of 2/3 of treated patients mean exactly?  That 1/3 of patient's DIDN'T survive???? 

I am thinking they meant the treatment stopped working for a 1/3 of patients. To me, that's not a great result.

Well I do think that everyone is different and that each person reacts differently to a treatment. That also means that with every treatment there are people who respond good to it, but that there are also people who will not respond good to it, or will have only a certain period of time where they respond good to it.

Over here at Psoriasisclub we see that happening. Treatments which stop working and switching to other treatments. Fred for instance is one of the living examples of that.

So seen from that direction I think that a 66% positive result on ongoing working treatment is on the contrary a very good figure.

[Fred]

What does with survival of 2/3 of treated patients mean exactly?  That 1/3 of patient's DIDN'T survive???? 

See Caroline and Mata's posts above.

[Kat]

Yes, I figured it was something of that nature, but perhaps they could have worded it a bit better.

And I agree, different treatments work for different people. It "might" have worked for me but I wasn't on it very long. Current dermatologist didn't feel the old dermatologist gave any of the treatments long enough. I do remember my old dermatologist saying there should have been at least a hint of improvement and there was no need to continue.

And it didn't really hurt, but it was the only one that had a little sting to it (for me) which according to the nurse was something she had heard numerous times from others.

[Caroline]

Yes, I figured it was something of that nature, but perhaps they could have worded it a bit better. 

And I agree, different treatments work for different people.  It "might" have worked for me but I wasn't on it very long. Current dermatologist didn't feel the old dermatologist gave any of the treatments long enough.  I do remember my old dermatologist saying there should have been at least a hint of improvement and there was no need to continue. 

And it didn't really hurt, but it was the only one that had a little sting to it (for me) which according to the nurse was something she had heard numerous times from others.

I did see the joke in your reaction…. But I reacted seriously, because Mati also did that…

[Kat]

I agree with Mataribot though, still doesn't sound like a great result.