| Popis: |
Raphaella Cohen-Sors,1 Anne-Claire Fougerousse,2 Ziad Reguiai,3 Francois Maccari,2 Emmanuel Mahé,4 Juliette Delaunay,5 Aude Roussel,2 Maud Amy de la Breteque,4 Caroline Cottencin,6 Antoine Bertolotti,7 Hélène Kemp,8 Guillaume Chaby1 1Dermatology Department, Amiens-Picardie University Hospital Center, Amiens, France; 2Dermatology Department, Military Teaching Hospital Bégin, Saint-Mandé, France; 3Dermatology Department, Polyclinic Courlancy, Reims, France; 4Dermatology Department, Argenteuil Hospital, Argenteuil, France; 5Dermatology Department, University Hospital, Angers, France; 6Dermatology Department, University Hospital, Lille, France; 7Dermatology Department, University Hospital, Saint-Pierre, Ile de la Réunion, France; 8Hematology Department, Amiens-Picardie University Hospital Center, Amiens, FranceCorrespondence: Guillaume Chaby Email chaby.guillaume@chu-amiens.frBackground: Few studies addressing the safety and efficacy of biological therapy (BT) or apremilast (APR) in patients with psoriasis with a history of hematologic malignancy (HM) exist.Aim: To describe the tolerance and efficacy of BT and APR in moderate-to-severe psoriasis in patients with a history of in-remission or evolving HM.Methodology: A retrospective, multicenter chart review of the tolerance and efficacy of BT or APR in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis and a clinical history of in-remission or evolving HM.Results: Twenty-one patients with severe psoriasis and a history of HM were included in France by the GEM Resopso study group. Of the 16 patients treated with one or more BT lines, none showed recurrence of their HM which was considered as stable or in remission, and only 2 patients showed an evolution of their HM which had been considered as stable at the beginning of treatment. In the 10 patients treated with APR, the HM of one patient who also received BT worsened. The 3 evolutions did not impact the treatment with BT or APR. Tolerance was very satisfactory, with a low occurrence of infections. Regarding efficacy, only one patient treated with APR did not achieve any notable clinical improvement.Conclusion: Despite supportive data regarding tolerance, the heterogeneity of the analyzed population and limited available data, BT and APR should be used with caution in this patient population and investigations on larger cohorts should be conducted to further assess their tolerance in this patient population.Keywords: biological therapies, apremilast, psoriasis, hematological malignancies |
