This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Dermatologic Disorders  • Neoplasms  • Psoriasis  • Dermatologic Procedures  • Phototherapy  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Cohort-Based Perspective

María Jones-Caballero, MD, PhD; Jane Unaeze, MD; Pablo F. Peñas, MD, PhD; Robert S. Stern, MD

Arch Dermatol. 2007;143(7):846-850.

Objective  To compare characteristics of patients enrolled in a long-term multicenter cohort trial who had used biological therapies for treatment of psoriasis with those who had not used these agents.

Design  Retrospective analysis of users vs nonusers of biological therapies.

Setting  Database from the PUVA Follow-up Study, a multicenter, 30-year study of patients originally treated with psoralen UV-A (PUVA) for moderate to severe psoriasis.

Patients  A total of 521 patients who completed the last cycle of follow-up of the PUVA Follow-up Study.

Main Outcome Measures  Demographic data, severity data (physician global assessment), type of biological therapy used, patients' opinions about their therapy, and their best treatment.

Results  Seventy-four of 521 patients (14%) used biological therapies: 65% etanercept (n = 48), 22% infliximab (n = 16), 11% efalizumab (n = 8), and 8% alefacept (n = 6). Users of biological therapies were younger, had more formal education, and were more likely to have had a greater extent of psoriasis at entry than the other cohort members. In 1998, those who used biological treatments were more likely than other cohort members to have been assessed as having severe psoriasis. In 2004, no significant difference was noted. Users of etanercept considered this agent to be as effective as methotrexate and more effective in clearing their skin and having fewer adverse effects than PUVA or UV-B. The proportion of patients originally enrolled in the 16 centers who had used biological agents varied greatly (0%-33%).

Conclusion  After short durations of therapy, patients' opinions about biological agents tended to be positive.

Author Affiliations: Department of Dermatology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (Drs Jones-Caballero, Peñas, and Stern), and Harvard Medical School (Drs Unaeze and Stern), Boston, Massachusetts; and Department of Dermatology, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain (Drs Jones-Caballero and Peñas).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Success of Goeckerman Treatment in 2 Patients With Psoriasis Not Responding to Biological Drugs
Temitope F. Soares and Mark D. P. Davis
Arch Dermatol. 2007;143(7):950-951.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Poor Adherence to Treatments: A Fundamental Principle of Dermatology
Saba M. Ali, Robert T. Brodell, Rajesh Balkrishnan, and Steven R. Feldman
Arch Dermatol. 2007;143(7):912-915.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Poor Adherence to Treatments: A Fundamental Principle of Dermatology
Ali et al.
Arch Dermatol 2007;143:912-915.
FULL TEXT