Acceptability of 'as needed' biologic therapy in psoriasis: insights from a multi-stakeholder mixed methods study

Br J Dermatol. 2024 Feb 17:ljae068. doi: 10.1093/bjd/ljae068. Online ahead of print.

Abstract

Objectives: Biologic therapies have led to increasing numbers of patients with psoriasis who have clear or nearly clear skin. Current practice is that biologic therapy is continued indefinitely in these patients, contributing to a substantial long-term drug and healthcare burden. 'As needed' biologic therapy in psoriasis may address this, however our understanding of patient and clinician perceptions of this strategy is limited.

Methods: We first conducted UK-wide online scoping surveys of patients with psoriasis and dermatology clinicians to explore their views on 'as needed' biologic therapy. Using topic guides informed by these survey findings, we then carried out qualitative focus groups with patients and clinicians. Themes were identified using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: Of 67 patients and 27 clinicians completing the scoping surveys, 67% (43/64) and 78% (21/27), respectively, supported the use of 'as needed' biologic therapy. Respondents highlighted advantages such as a reduction in healthcare burden and greater ownership of care. Challenges included logistics of 'as needed' drug provision and potential risks of disease flare and drug immunogenicity. Focus groups comprised 15 patients with psoriasis (9 female [60%], average disease duration 32 years [range 9-64 years]) and 9 dermatology clinicians (8 female [89%], average dermatology experience 20 years [range 8-33 years]). Both patients and clinicians felt that an 'as needed' treatment approach will deliver a reduction in treatment burden and present an opportunity for patient-led ownership of care. Both groups highlighted the importance of ensuring ongoing access to medication and discussing the potential impact of psoriasis recurrence. Patient preferences were influenced by their lived experiences, particularly previous difficulties with medication delivery logistics and establishing disease control. Clinician perspectives were informed by personal experience of their patients adapting their own dosing schedules. Clinicians highlighted the importance of targeted patient selection for an 'as needed' approach, ongoing disease monitoring, and prompt re-access to medications upon psoriasis recurrence.

Conclusion: These data indicate that 'as needed' biologic therapy in psoriasis is acceptable for both patients and clinicians. Formal assessment of clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness is warranted, to enable the real-world potential of this approach to be realised.