Background The multi-morbid burden and use of systemic immunosuppressants in people with psoriasis may confer greater risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes but data are limited. Objective Characterize the course of COVID-19 in psoriasis and identify factors associated with hospitalization. Methods Clinicians reported psoriasis patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19 via an international registry, PsoProtect. Multiple logistic regression assessed the association between clinical/demographic characteristics and hospitalization. A separate patient-facing registry characterized risk-mitigating behaviours. Results Of 374 clinician-reported patients from 25 countries, 71% were receiving a biologic, 18% a non-biologic and 10% no systemic treatment for psoriasis. 348 (93%) fully recovered from COVID-19, 77 (21%) were hospitalized and nine (2%) died. Increased hospitalization risk was associated with older age (multivariable-adjusted OR 1.59 per 10 years, 95% CI 1.19-2.13), male sex (OR 2.51, 95% CI 1.23-5.12), non-white ethnicity (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.24-8.03) and comorbid chronic lung disease (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.52-9.83). Hospitalization was more frequent in patients using non-biologic systemic therapy than biologics (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.31-6.18). No significant differences were found between biologic classes. Independent patient-reported data (n=1,626 across 48 countries) suggested lower levels of social isolation in individuals receiving non-biologic systemic therapy compared to biologics (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.94). Conclusion In this international moderate-severe psoriasis case series, biologics use was associated with lower risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization than non-biologic systemic therapies, however further investigation is warranted due to potential selection bias and unmeasured confounding. Established risk factors (being older, male, non-white ethnicity, comorbidities) were associated with higher hospitalization rates. Clinical Implications We identify risk factors for COVID-19-related hospitalization in psoriasis patients, including older age, male sex, non-white ethnicity and comorbidities. Use of biologics was associated with lower hospitalization risk than non-biologic systemic therapies.

No abstract

There are no studies which directly compare efficacy in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) response of secukinumab and ixekizumab. The main aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of both drugs used to treat moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis patients over 52 weeks. Secondary objectives were to identify which factors related to prior biologic treatment influenced their efficacy and analyze data obtained at 12 weeks. A retrospective observational study was carried out, in which a group of the first 59 patients treated with secukinumab after its commercialization, was compared with another group of the first 29 patients treated with ixekizumab. The PASI 75, 90, and 100 response obtained at 52 weeks was 64.4%, 49.2%, and 41.4% for secukinumab and 75.9%, 62.1%, and 41.4% for ixekizumab, respectively, with no statistically significant differences. Regarding previous biological treatment, both treatments showed a decrease in efficacy as the number of prior biologics increases. No differences were found between secukinumab and ixekizumab in bio‐naïve or bio‐experienced patients, with the exception of a higher PASI 75 response at week 52 for ixekizumab in those patients with two or more previous biologics (P = .039) Secukinumab and ixekizumab have demonstrated high efficacy and safety, with no statistically significant differences.

The aim of this study was to analyse the levels of anxiety, depression, and quality of life of individuals living with acne patients (cohabitants). The study included patients, cohabitants, and controls; a total of 204 participants. Patients’ health-related quality of life was measured with the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), while cohabitants’ quality of life was measured with the Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI). The psychological state of all participants was measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Presence of acne impaired the quality of life of 89.4% of the cohabitants. The FDLQI scores of cohabitants were significantly associated with the DLQI scores of the patients (r p = 0.294; p = 0.044). Anxiety and depression levels in cohabitants were significantly higher than in controls ( p < 0.01). In conclusion, acne may have a negative impact on quality of life and psychological well-being of patients and their cohabitants.