Pharmacotherapeutic group: Immunosuppressants, interleukin inhibitors, ATC code: L04AC16.
Mechanism of action
Guselkumab is a human IgG1λ monoclonal antibody (mAb) that binds selectively to the interleukin 23 (IL-23) protein with high specificity and affinity. IL‑23 is a cytokine that is involved in inflammatory and immune responses. By blocking IL-23 from binding to its receptor, guselkumab inhibits IL‑23‑dependent cell signalling and release of proinflammatory cytokines.
Levels of IL‑23 are elevated in the skin of patients with plaque psoriasis. In in vitro models, guselkumab was shown to inhibit the bioactivity of IL‑23 by blocking its interaction with cell surface IL‑23 receptor, disrupting IL‑23‑mediated signalling, activation and cytokine cascades. Guselkumab exerts clinical effects in plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis through blockade of the IL‑23 cytokine pathway.
Myeloid cells expressing Fc-gamma receptor 1 (CD64) have been shown to be a predominant source of IL-23 in inflamed tissue in psoriasis. Guselkumab has demonstrated in vitro blocking of IL-23 and binding to CD64. These results indicate that guselkumab is able to neutralise IL-23 at the cellular source of inflammation.
Pharmacodynamic effects
In a Phase I study, treatment with guselkumab resulted in reduced expression of IL‑23/Th17 pathway genes and psoriasis‑associated gene expression profiles, as shown by analyses of mRNA obtained from lesional skin biopsies of patients with plaque psoriasis at Week 12 compared to baseline. In the same Phase I study, treatment with guselkumab resulted in improvement of histological measures of psoriasis at Week 12, including reductions in epidermal thickness and T‑cell density. In addition, reduced serum IL‑17A, IL‑17F and IL‑22 levels compared to placebo were observed in guselkumab-treated patients in Phase II and Phase III plaque psoriasis studies. These results are consistent with the clinical benefit observed with guselkumab treatment in plaque psoriasis.
In psoriatic arthritis patients in Phase III studies, serum levels of acute phase proteins C-reactive protein, serum amyloid A, and IL-6, and Th17 effector cytokines IL-17A, IL-17F and IL-22 were elevated at baseline. Guselkumab decreased the levels of these proteins within 4 weeks of initiation of treatment. Guselkumab further reduced the levels of these proteins by Week 24 compared to baseline and also to placebo.
Clinical efficacy and safety
Adult plaque psoriasis
The efficacy and safety of guselkumab was assessed in three randomised, double-blind, active controlled Phase III studies in adult patients with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, who were candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy.
VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2
Two studies (VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2) evaluated the efficacy and safety of guselkumab versus placebo and adalimumab in 1829 adult patients. Patients randomised to guselkumab (N=825) received 100 mg at Weeks 0 and 4, and every 8 weeks (q8w) thereafter through Week 48 (VOYAGE 1) and Week 20 (VOYAGE 2). Patients randomised to adalimumab (N=582) received 80 mg at Week 0 and 40 mg at Week 1, followed by 40 mg every other week (q2w) through Week 48 (VOYAGE 1) and Week 23 (VOYAGE 2). In both studies, patients randomised to placebo (N=422) received guselkumab 100 mg at Weeks 16, 20 and q8w thereafter. In VOYAGE 1, all patients, including those randomised to adalimumab at Week 0, started to receive open-label guselkumab q8w at Week 52. In VOYAGE 2, patients randomised to guselkumab at Week 0 who were Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 responders at Week 28 were re-randomised to either continue treatment with guselkumab q8w (maintenance treatment) or receive placebo (withdrawal treatment). Withdrawal patients re-initiated guselkumab (dosed at time of retreatment, 4 weeks later and q8w thereafter) when they experienced at least a 50% loss of their Week 28 PASI improvement. Patients randomised to adalimumab at Week 0 who were PASI 90 non-responders received guselkumab at Weeks 28, 32 and q8w thereafter. In VOYAGE 2, all patients started to receive open-label guselkumab q8w at Week 76.
Baseline disease characteristics were consistent for the study populations in VOYAGE 1 and 2 with a median body surface area (BSA) of 22% and 24%, a median baseline PASI score of 19 for both studies, a median baseline dermatology quality of life index (DLQI) score of 14 and 14.5, a baseline investigator global assessment (IGA) score of severe for 25% and 23% of patients, and a history of psoriatic arthritis for 19% and 18% of patients, respectively.
Of all patients included in VOYAGE 1 and 2, 32% and 29% were naïve to both conventional systemic and biologic therapy, 54% and 57% had received prior phototherapy, and 62% and 64% had received prior conventional systemic therapy, respectively. In both studies, 21% had received prior biologic therapy, including 11% who had received at least one anti‑tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) agent, and approximately 10% who had received an anti‑IL‑12/IL‑23 agent.
The efficacy of guselkumab was evaluated with respect to overall skin disease, regional disease (scalp, hand and foot and nails) and quality of life and patient reported outcomes. The co‑primary endpoints in VOYAGE 1 and 2 were the proportion of patients who achieved an IGA score of cleared or minimal (IGA 0/1) and a PASI 90 response at Week 16 versus placebo (see Table 4).
Overall skin disease
Treatment with guselkumab resulted in significant improvements in the measures of disease activity compared to placebo and adalimumab at Week 16 and compared to adalimumab at Weeks 24 and 48. The key efficacy results for the primary and major secondary study endpoints are shown in Table 4 below.
| Table 4: Summary of clinical responses in VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2 |
| | Number of patients (%) |
| | VOYAGE 1 | VOYAGE 2 |
| | Placebo (N=174) | guselkumab (N=329) | adalimumab (N=334) | Placebo (N=248) | guselkumab (N=496) | adalimumab (N=248) |
| Week 16 | | | | | | |
| PASI 75 | 10 (5.7) | 300 (91.2)a | 244 (73.1)b | 20 (8.1) | 428 (86.3)a | 170 (68.5)b |
| PASI 90 | 5 (2.9) | 241 (73.3)c | 166 (49.7)b | 6 (2.4) | 347 (70.0)c | 116 (46.8)b |
| PASI 100 | 1 (0.6) | 123 (37.4)a | 57 (17.1)d | 2 (0.8) | 169 (34.1)a | 51 (20.6)d |
| IGA 0/1 | 12 (6.9) | 280 (85.1)c | 220 (65.9)b | 21 (8.5) | 417 (84.1)c | 168 (67.7)b |
| IGA 0 | 2 (1.1) | 157 (47.7)a | 88 (26.3)d | 2 (0.8) | 215 (43.3)a | 71 (28.6)d |
| Week 24 | | | | | | |
| PASI 75 | - | 300 (91.2) | 241 (72.2)e | - | 442 (89.1) | 176 (71.0)e |
| PASI 90 | - | 264 (80.2) | 177 (53.0)b | - | 373 (75.2) | 136 (54.8)b |
| PASI 100 | - | 146 (44.4) | 83 (24.9)e | - | 219 (44.2) | 66 (26.6)e |
| IGA 0/1 | - | 277 (84.2) | 206 (61.7)b | - | 414 (83.5) | 161 (64.9)b |
| IGA 0 | - | 173 (52.6) | 98 (29.3)b | - | 257 (51.8) | 78 (31.5)b |
| Week 48 | | | | | | |
| PASI 75 | - | 289 (87.8) | 209 (62.6)e | - | - | - |
| PASI 90 | - | 251 (76.3) | 160 (47.9)b | - | - | - |
| PASI 100 | - | 156 (47.4) | 78 (23.4)e | - | - | - |
| IGA 0/1 | - | 265 (80.5) | 185 (55.4)b | - | - | - |
| IGA 0 | - | 166 (50.5) | 86 (25.7)b | - | - | - |
| a p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and placebo. b p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and adalimumab for major secondary endpoints. c p < 0.001 for the comparisons between guselkumab and placebo for the co‑primary endpoints. d comparisons between guselkumab and adalimumab were not performed. e p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and adalimumab. |
Response over time
Guselkumab demonstrated rapid onset of efficacy, with a significantly higher percent improvement in PASI as compared with placebo as early as Week 2 (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients achieving a PASI 90 response was numerically higher for guselkumab than adalimumab starting at Week 8 with the difference reaching a maximum around Week 20 (VOYAGE 1 and 2) and maintained through Week 48 (VOYAGE 1) (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Percent of patients who achieved a PASI 90 response through week 48 by visit (patients randomised at week 0) in VOYAGE 1
In VOYAGE 1, for patients receiving continuous guselkumab treatment, the PASI 90 response rate was maintained from Week 52 through Week 252. For patients randomised to adalimumab at Week 0 who crossed over to guselkumab at Week 52, the PASI 90 response rate increased from Week 52 through Week 76 and was then maintained through Week 252 (see Figure 2).
Figure 2: Percent of patients who achieved a PASI 90 response by visit in the open-label phase in VOYAGE 1
The efficacy and safety of guselkumab was demonstrated regardless of age, gender, race, body weight, plaques location, PASI baseline severity, concurrent psoriatic arthritis, and previous treatment with a biologic therapy. Guselkumab was efficacious in conventional systemic naive, biologic naive, and biologic exposed patients.
In VOYAGE 2, 88.6% of patients receiving guselkumab maintenance treatment at Week 48 were PASI 90 responders compared to 36.8% of patients who were withdrawn from treatment at Week 28 (p < 0.001). Loss of PASI 90 response was noted as early as 4 weeks after withdrawal of guselkumab treatment with a median time to loss of PASI 90 response of approximately 15 weeks. Among patients who were withdrawn from treatment and subsequently re-initiated guselkumab, 80% regained a PASI 90 response when assessed 20 weeks after initiation of retreatment.
In VOYAGE 2, among 112 patients randomised to adalimumab who failed to achieve a PASI 90 response at Week 28, 66% and 76% achieved a PASI 90 response after 20 and 44 weeks of treatment with guselkumab, respectively. In addition, among 95 patients randomised to guselkumab who failed to achieve a PASI 90 response at Week 28, 36% and 41% achieved a PASI 90 response with an additional 20 and 44 weeks of continued treatment with guselkumab, respectively. No new safety findings were observed in patients who switched from adalimumab to guselkumab.
Regional disease
In VOYAGE 1 and 2, significant improvements were seen in scalp, hand and foot, and nail psoriasis (as measured by the Scalp specific Investigator Global Assessment [ssIGA], Physician's Global Assessment of Hands and/or Feet [hfPGA], Fingernail Physician's Global Assessment [fPGA] and Nail Psoriasis Severity Index [NAPSI], respectively) in guselkumab-treated patients compared to placebo treated patients at Week 16 (p < 0.001, Table 5). Guselkumab demonstrated superiority compared to adalimumab for scalp and hand and foot psoriasis at Week 24 (VOYAGE 1 and 2) and Week 48 (VOYAGE 1) (p ≤ 0.001, except for hand and foot psoriasis at Week 24 [VOYAGE 2] and Week 48 [VOYAGE 1], p < 0.05).
| Table 5: Summary of regional disease responses in VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2 |
| | VOYAGE 1 | VOYAGE 2 |
| | Placebo | guselkumab | adalimumab | Placebo | guselkumab | adalimumab |
| ssIGA (N)a | 145 | 277 | 286 | 202 | 408 | 194 |
| ssIGA 0/1b, n (%) |
| Week 16 | 21 (14.5) | 231 (83.4)c | 201 (70.3)d | 22 (10.9) | 329 (80.6)c | 130 (67.0)d |
| hfPGA (N)a | 43 | 90 | 95 | 63 | 114 | 56 |
| hfPGA 0/1b, n (%) |
| Week 16 | 6 (14.0) | 66 (73.3)e | 53 (55.8)d | 9 (14.3) | 88 (77.2)e | 40 (71.4)d |
| fPGA (N)a | 88 | 174 | 173 | 123 | 246 | 124 |
| fPGA 0/1, n (%) |
| Week 16 | 14 (15.9) | 68 (39.1)e | 88 (50.9)d | 18 (14.6) | 128 (52.0)e | 74 (59.7)d |
| NAPSI (N)a | 99 | 194 | 191 | 140 | 280 | 140 |
| Percent Improvement, mean (SD) |
| Week 16 | ‑0.9 (57.9) | 34.4 (42.4)e | 38.0 (53.9)d | 1.8 (53.8) | 39.6 (45.6)e | 46.9 (48.1)d |
| a Includes only patients with ssIGA, fPGA, hfPGA score ≥ 2 at baseline or baseline NAPSI score > 0. b Includes only patients achieving ≥ 2grade improvement from baseline in ssIGA and/or hfPGA. c p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and placebo for the major secondary endpoint. d comparisons between guselkumab and adalimumab were not performed. e p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and placebo. |
Health related quality of life / Patient reported outcomes
Across VOYAGE 1 and 2 significantly greater improvements in health related quality of life as measured by Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and in patient reported psoriasis symptoms (itching, pain, burning, stinging and skin tightness) and signs (skin dryness, cracking, scaling, shedding or flaking, redness and bleeding) as measured by the Psoriasis Symptoms and Signs Diary (PSSD) were observed in guselkumab patients compared to placebo patients at Week 16 (Table 6). Signs of improvement on patient reported outcomes were maintained through Week 24 (VOYAGE 1 and 2) and Week 48 (VOYAGE 1). In VOYAGE 1, for patients receiving continuous guselkumab treatment, these improvements were maintained in the open-label phase through Week 252 (Table 7).
| Table 6: Summary of patient reported outcomes at week 16 in VOYAGE 1 and VOYAGE 2 |
| | VOYAGE 1 | VOYAGE 2 |
| | Placebo | guselkumab | adalimumab | Placebo | guselkumab | adalimumab |
| DLQI, patients with baseline score | 170 | 322 | 328 | 248 | 495 | 247 |
| Change from baseline, mean (standard deviation) |
| Week 16 | ‑0.6 (6.4) | ‑11.2 (7.2)c | ‑9.3 (7.8)b | ‑2.6 (6.9) | ‑11.3 (6.8)c | ‑9.7 (6.8)b |
| PSSD Symptom score, patients with baseline score > 0 | 129 | 248 | 273 | 198 | 410 | 200 |
| Symptom score = 0, n (%) |
| Week 16 | 1 (0.8) | 67 (27.0)a | 45 (16.5)b | 0 | 112 (27.3)a | 30 (15.0)b |
| PSSD Sign score, patients with baseline score > 0 | 129 | 248 | 274 | 198 | 411 | 201 |
| Sign score = 0, n (%) |
| Week 16 | 0 | 50 (20.2)a | 32 (11.7)b | 0 | 86 (20.9)a | 21 (10.4)b |
| a p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and placebo. b comparisons between guselkumab and adalimumab were not performed. c p < 0.001 for comparison between guselkumab and placebo for major secondary endpoints. |
| Table 7: Summary of patient reported outcomes in the open-label phase in VOYAGE 1 |
| | guselkumab | adalimumab-guselkumab |
| Week 76 | Week 156 | Week 252 | Week 76 | Week 156 | Week 252 |
| DLQI score > 1 at baseline, n | 445 | 420 | 374 | 264 | 255 | 235 |
| Patients with DLQI 0/1 | 337 (75.7%) | 308 (73.3%) | 272 (72.7%) | 198 (75.0%) | 190 (74.5%) | 174 (74.0%) |
| PSSD Symptom Score, patients with baseline score > 0 | 347 | 327 | 297 | 227 | 218 | 200 |
| Symptom score = 0, n (%) | 136 (39.2%) | 130 (39.8%) | 126 (42.4%) | 99 (43.6%) | 96 (44.0%) | 96 (48.0%) |
| PSSD Sign score, patients with baseline score > 0 | 347 | 327 | 297 | 228 | 219 | 201 |
| Sign score = 0, n (%) | 102 (29.4%) | 94 (28.7%) | 98 (33.0%) | 71 (31.1%) | 69 (31.5%) | 76 (37.8%) |
In VOYAGE 2, guselkumab patients had significantly greater improvement from baseline compared to placebo in health related quality of life, anxiety and depression, and work limitation measures at Week 16, as measured by the 36item Short Form (SF36) health survey questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ), respectively. The improvements in SF36, HADS and WLQ were all maintained through Week 48 and in the open label phase through Week 252 among patients randomised to maintenance therapy at Week 28.
NAVIGATE
The NAVIGATE study examined the efficacy of guselkumab in patients who had an inadequate response (ie, who had not achieved a 'cleared' or 'minimal' response defined as IGA ≥ 2) to ustekinumab at Week 16. All patients (N=871) received open label ustekinumab (45 mg ≤100 kg and 90 mg >100 kg) at Weeks 0 and 4. At Week 16, 268 patients with an IGA ≥ 2 score were randomised to either continue ustekinumab treatment (N=133) q12w, or to initiate guselkumab treatment (N=135) at Weeks 16, 20, and q8w thereafter. Baseline characteristics for randomised patients were similar to those observed in VOYAGE 1 and 2.
After randomisation, the primary endpoint was the number of post randomisation visits between Weeks 12 and 24 at which patients achieved an IGA score 0/1 and had ≥ 2 grade improvement. Patients were examined at four-week intervals for a total of four visits. Among patients who inadequately responded to ustekinumab at the time of randomisation, significantly greater improvement of efficacy was observed in patients who switched to guselkumab treatment compared to patients who continued ustekinumab treatment. Between 12 and 24 weeks after randomisation, guselkumab patients achieved an IGA score 0/1 with ≥ 2 grade improvement twice as often as ustekinumab patients (mean 1.5 vs 0.7 visits, respectively, p < 0.001). Additionally, at 12 weeks after randomisation a higher proportion of guselkumab patients compared to ustekinumab patients achieved an IGA score 0/1 and ≥ 2 grade improvement (31.1% vs. 14.3%, respectively; p = 0.001) and a PASI 90 response (48% vs 23%, respectively, p < 0.001). Differences in response rates between guselkumab and ustekinumab treated patients were noted as early as 4 weeks after randomisation (11.1% and 9.0%, respectively) and reached a maximum 24 weeks after randomisation (see Figure 3). No new safety findings were observed in patients who switched from ustekinumab to guselkumab.
Figure 3: Percent of patients who achieved an IGA Score of cleared (0) or minimal (1) and at least a 2‑grade improvement in IGA from week 0 through week 24 by visit after randomisation in NAVIGATE
ECLIPSE
Efficacy and safety of guselkumab were also investigated in a double-blind study compared to secukinumab. Patients were randomised to receive guselkumab (N=534; 100 mg at Week 0, 4 and q8w thereafter), or secukinumab (N=514; 300 mg at Week 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and q4w thereafter). The last dose was at week 44 for both treatment groups.
Baseline disease characteristics were consistent with a population of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with a median BSA of 20%, a median PASI score of 18, and an IGA score of severe for 24% of patients.
Guselkumab was superior to secukinumab as measured by the primary endpoint of PASI 90 response at Week 48 (84.5% versus 70.0%, p < 0.001). Comparative PASI response rates are presented in Table 8.
| Table 8: PASI response rates in ECLIPSE |
| | Number of patients (%) |
| | guselkumab (N=534) | secukinumab (N=514) |
| Primary Endpoint | | |
| PASI 90 response at Week 48 | 451 (84.5%)a | 360 (70.0%) |
| Major Secondary Endpoints | | |
| PASI 75 response at both Week 12 and Week 48 | 452 (84.6%)b | 412 (80.2%) |
| PASI 75 response at Week 12 | 477 (89.3%)c | 471 (91.6%) |
| PASI 90 response at Week 12 | 369 (69.1%)c | 391 (76.1%) |
| PASI 100 response at Week 48 | 311 (58.2%)c | 249 (48.4%) |
| a p < 0.001 for superiority b p < 0.001 for non-inferiority, p=0.062 for superiority c formal statistical testing was not performed |
Guselkumab and secukinumab PASI 90 response rates through Week 48 are presented in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Percent of patients who achieved a PASI 90 response through week 48 by visit (Patients randomised at Week 0) in ECLIPSE
Paediatric population
Paediatric plaque psoriasis
The safety and efficacy of guselkumab were assessed in one multicentre, randomised, placebo- and active biological comparator-controlled study (PROTOSTAR) in 120 paediatric patients 6 to 17 years of age with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who were candidates for phototherapy or systemic therapy and were inadequately controlled by phototherapy and/or topical therapies. PROTOSTAR was conducted in two parts. Part 1 consisted of a 16-week randomised, placebo and active comparator-controlled period followed by an uncontrolled period of withdrawal and retreatment or initiation of treatment with guselkumab through Week 52. Part 2 consisted of an open-label guselkumab arm through Week 52.
Enrolled patients had an IGA score of ≥3 (“moderate”) on a 5‑point scale of overall disease severity, a PASI ≥12, and a minimum affected BSA of ≥10%, and at least one of the following: 1) very thick lesions, 2) clinically relevant facial, genital, or hand/foot involvement, 3) PASI ≥20, 4) BSA >20%, or 5) IGA=4. Patients with guttate, erythrodermic, or pustular psoriasis were excluded.
In Part 1, 92 patients 6 to 17 years of age were randomised to receive subcutaneous injection of either guselkumab (n=41) or placebo (n=25) at Week 0, 4, and 12, or an active biological comparator (n=26) weekly. In Part 2, 28 additional adolescent patients 12 to 17 years of age were enrolled to receive subcutaneous injection of guselkumab at Week 0, 4, and every 8 weeks thereafter. In the guselkumab group, patients with a body weight less than 70 kg received 1.3 mg/kg administered with the 45 mg/0.45 mL pre-filled pen, and patients with a body weight of 70 kg or more received 100 mg administered with the pre-filled syringe.
The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved a PASI 75 response and the proportion of patients who achieved an IGA score of 0 (“cleared”) or 1 (“minimal”) at Week 16. Secondary endpoints included but were not limited to the proportion of patients who achieved a PASI 90 response, an IGA score of 0 (“cleared”) or a PASI 100 response at Week 16.
Of the 92 patients in the controlled part of the study, baseline demographic characteristics were generally comparable across treatment groups. Overall, over 55% were male, 85% were white, the mean body weight was approximately 57.3 kg, and the mean age was 12.9 years with 33% of the patients less than 12 years.
The baseline disease characteristics were generally comparable across treatment groups with median baseline BSA of 20%, median baseline PASI score of approximately 17, and baseline IGA score of severe for 20% (placebo) and 24% (guselkumab) of patients, and a history of psoriatic arthritis for <5% of patients.
Overall skin disease
Treatment with guselkumab resulted in significant improvements in the outcome measures of disease activity compared to placebo at Week 16. The key efficacy results for the study endpoints are shown in Table 9 below.
| Table 9: Summary of endpoints at week 16 in PROTOSTAR |
| | Placebo (N=25) n (%) | Guselkumab (N=41) n (%) | P-value |
| IGA scores of cleared (0) or minimal (1) | 4 (16.0%) | 27 (65.9%) | <0.001 |
| IGA scores of cleared (0) | 1 (4.0%) | 16 (39.0%) | 0.004 |
| PASI 75 responders | 5 (20.0%) | 31 (75.6%) | <0.001 |
| PASI 90 responders | 4 (16.0%) | 23 (56.1%) | 0.003 |
| PASI 100 responders | 0 | 14 (34.1%) | 0.002 |
Beyond the 16-week placebo-controlled period in Part 1 of PROTOSTAR, the guselkumab-treated patients who achieved PASI 90 at Week 16 were withdrawn from treatment. Loss of PASI 90 response was noted as early as 12 weeks after withdrawal of guselkumab treatment with a median time to loss of PASI 90 response of approximately 24 weeks. Of the guselkumab-treated patients who failed to achieve a PASI 90 response at Week 16, 72.2% of patients that received an additional 32 weeks of continued guselkumab treatment were PASI 75 responders at Week 52, and 61.1% achieved a PASI 90 response at Week 52.
In patients randomised to placebo at Week 0 who failed to achieve a PASI 90 response at Week 16 and crossed over to receive guselkumab 95.0% and 65.0% achieved PASI 75 and PASI 90 response, respectively, at Week 52.
In the open-label Part 2 of PROTOSTAR, 92.9% and 82.1% of adolescent patients receiving continuous guselkumab treatment achieved PASI 75 and PASI 90 response, respectively, at Week 52.
Health-related quality of life outcomes
Change from baseline in the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) score at Week 16 showed a significantly greater improvement in the CDLQI score in the guselkumab group compared with the placebo group.
Change from baseline in the Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) score at Week 16 also showed a numerically greater improvement in the FDLQI score in the guselkumab group compared with the placebo group (see Table 10).
| Table 10: Summary of health-related quality of life outcomes at week 16 in PROTOSTAR |
| | Placebo (N=25) | Guselkumab (N=41) | P-value |
| Change from baseline in CDLQI | | | |
| LSMean (95% CI)a | -1.88 (-3.81, 0.05) | -7.28 (-8.87, -5.68) | <0.001 |
| Change from baseline in FDLQI | | | |
| LSMean (95% CI)a | -0.60 (-2.75, 1.55) | -6.04 (-7.83, -4.25) | <0.001b |
| a LSMean = least squares mean b p-value for FDLQI is nominal |