CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Potestio Luca: data curation, formal analysis, investigation, visualization, writing‐original draft preparation. Camela Elisa: data curation, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing‐original draft preparation. Tajani Andrea: data curation, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing‐original draft preparation. Fabbrocini Gabriella: conceptualization, validation, visualization, writing‐review & editing, supervision. Megna Matteo: conceptualization, validation, visualization, writing‐original draft preparation, writing ‐ review & editing. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.
ETHICAL APPROVAL
Not required.
Dear Editor,
We read with great interest the article published by Oguz Topal et al. 1 titled “Adherence to systemic therapy in patients with psoriasis during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A multicenter study” reporting that 157 out of 342 (45.9%) patients completely discontinued psoriasis systemic treatment during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Twenty‐one patients (6.1%) referred to the irregular use of medication. In particular, the rate of adherence among patients treated with injection therapy (263, 76.9%) was 84%.
In our experience at the Dermatology Centre of the University of Naples Federico II, only 16 of 965 patients with psoriasis (1.6%) interrupted the biologic treatment during the early pandemic period (February 2020–June 2020). 2 , 3 In particular, 13 of 16 patients (81.3%) voluntarily stopped biologic therapy while the remaining (3/16, 18.8%) after medical advice. Moreover, only 7 of 965 subjects (7.3%) voluntarily delayed the biologic administration. Finally, only one patient (0.1%), undergoing treatment with adalimumab, contracted SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. Even if asymptomatic, the patient suspended biologic treatment for 6 weeks and restarted it after two negative swab results. A comparison between Oguz Topal et al.’s study population and ours is reported in Table 1. Student's t‐test and chi‐squared test were used to assess statistical differences for continuous and categorical variables, respectively (p values <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant). GraphPad Prism 4.0 was used to perform statistical analysis (GraphPad Software Inc.).
TABLE 1.
Comparison between Oguz Topal et al.’s population and ours
| Our study (n = 965) | Oguz Topal et al. (n = 342) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Time of observation | February 2020–June 2020 | May 2021–August 2021 | |
| Demographic features | |||
| State | Italy | Turkey | |
| Sex, M (%) | 565 (58.5) | 182 (53.2) | ns |
| Mean age (years) | 52.5 | 45.9 | N/A |
| Mean disease duration (months) | ‐‐‐ | 192 | N/A |
| Ongoing systemic treatment n (%) | |||
| Anti‐TNF | |||
| Adalimumab | 238 (24.7) | 38 (11.1) | <0.001 |
| Etanercept | 72 (7.5) | 9 (2.6) | <0.05 |
| Infliximab | 1 (0.1) | 4 (1.1) | <0.05 |
| Certolizumab | 0 (0) | 8 (2.3) | <0.001 |
| Anti‐IL12/23 | |||
| Ustekinumab | 244 (25.3) | 37 (10.8) | <0.001 |
| Anti‐IL23 | |||
| Guselkumab | 51(5.3) | 0 (0) | <0.001 |
| Risankizumab | 13 (1.3) | 2 (0.5) | ns |
| Tildrakizumab | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | ns |
| Anti‐IL17 | |||
| Brodalumab | 5 (0.5) | 0 (0) | ns |
| Ixekizumab | 189 (19.6) | 25 (7.3) | <0.001 |
| Secukinumab | 152 (15.7) | 76 (22.2) | <0.001 |
| Other treatments | 0 (0) | 143 (44.1) | <0.001 |
| Treatment compliance n (%) | |||
| Continuation | 942 (97.6) | 164 (48.0) | <0.001 |
| Temporary suspension, dose reduction, and interval extension | 7 (0.7) | 21 (6.1) | <0.001 |
| Interruption | 16 (1.6) | 110 (32.2) | <0.001 |
| Patients with COVID−19 infection n (%) | 1 (0.1) | 20 (5.8) | <0.001 |
Abbreviations: DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; PASI, Psoriasis Area Severity Index.
Our investigated sample was bigger than that of Oguz Topal et al., 1 being comparable for sex and mean age. Moreover, a higher rate of treatment adherence was found in our cohort than in Oguz Topal et al. (97.6% vs. 48.0%). Differently for Oguz Topal et al., higher DLQI and PASI values were not linked to decreased treatment adherence. Telemedicine and informatic support systems developed in our Clinic during the pandemic period (patients were daily contacted by e‐mails and/or phone calls and informed about the safety and effectiveness of psoriasis treatment during the pandemic period), 3 , 4 , 5 the differences between Italian and Turkish government strategies, as well as in COVID‐19 infection incidence rate and the introduction of COVID‐19 vaccination campaign may explain these results.
Certainly, the strategy of continuous telephone consultations and the telemedicine system was adopted in our department during the COVID‐19 pandemic period, which has increased and strengthened patients’ adherence to treatment during the COVID‐19 pandemic burden. 4
In our opinion, our telemedicine system allowed the continuous monitoring of patients with psoriasis leading to the reduction in fake news spreading and increasing patients’ compliance to treatment and knowledge about the relationship between COVID‐19, psoriasis, and biologic treatment. 5 , 6
Even if our cohort was bigger than that of Oguz Topal et al., 1 patients treated with other systemic treatments (acitretin, cyclosporine, and methotrexate) were not considered; this factor may influence study results and should be considered a limitation.
To the best of our knowledge, psoriasis treatment adherence, particularly biologics, was evaluated during the COVID‐19 pandemic, 7 confirming the safety and efficacy of these drugs during this period. Thus, suggesting preventive treatment discontinuation is absolutely not advisable.
Moreover, clinicians should continuously guide and assist patients in order to increase the compliance to treatment avoiding autonomous decisions. This attitude should be confirmed also in COVID‐19 vaccination campaign. 8
In conclusion, clinicians should keep in mind their role also in patients’ compliance to treatment considering telemedicine as a useful tool during the COVID‐19 pandemic period.
PATIENT CONSENT
Not required.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Open Access Funding provided by Universita degli Studi di Napoli Federico II within the CRUI‐CARE Agreement. [Correction added on 25 May 2022, after first online publication: CRUI funding statement has been added.]
Potestio L, Camela E, Tajani A, Fabbrocini G, Megna M. Letter to the editor regarding the article “Oguz Topal I, Kara Polat A, Zindancı İ, et al. Adherence to systemic therapy in patients with psoriasis during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A multicenter study. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;10.1111/jocd.14610.”. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022;21:880–882. doi: 10.1111/jocd.14781
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
REFERENCES
- 1. Oguz Topal I, Kara Polat A, Zindancı İ, et al. Adherence to systemic therapy in patients with psoriasis during the COVID‐19 pandemic: a multicenter study [published online ahead of print, 2021 Nov 18]. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021; 21(1):39‐47. 10.1111/jocd.14610 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Camela E, Fabbrocini G, Cinelli E, Lauro W, Megna M. Biologic therapies, psoriasis, and COVID‐19: our experience at the psoriasis unit of the university of naples federico II. Dermatology. 2021;237(1):13‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Potestio L, Camela E, Fabbrocini G, et al. Letter to the editor regarding article "Yalici‐Armagan B, Tabak GH, Dogan‐Gunaydin S, Gulseren D, Akdogan N, Atakan N. treatment of psoriasis with biologics in the early COVID‐19 pandemic: a study examining patient attitudes toward the treatment and disease course. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;00:1‐5". J Cosmet Dermatol. 2021;20(12):4073‐4075. 10.1111/jocd.14550 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Megna M, Ruggiero A, Marasca C, Fabbrocini G. Biologics for psoriasis patients in the COVID‐19 era: more evidence, less fears. J Dermatolog Treat. 2020;31(4):328‐329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Cinelli E, Megna M, Di Guida A, Greco V, Annunziata MC, Fabbrocini G. Teledermatology for patient management, dermatology education and research during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Australas J Dermatol. 2020;61(4):e471‐e472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Megna M, Fabbrocini G, Marasca C. Chronic inflammatory skin diseases and biologics: what to expect after COVID‐19 pandemic? Int J Dermatol. 2020;59(9):1144‐1145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Talamonti M, Galluzzo M, Chiricozzi A, et al. Management of biological therapies for chronic plaque psoriasis during COVID‐19 emergency in Italy. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(12):e770‐e772. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Megna M, Potestio L, Gallo L, et al. Reply to "Psoriasis exacerbation after COVID‐19 vaccination: report of 14 cases from a single centre" by Sotiriou E et al. [published online ahead of print, 2021 Sep 17]. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;36(1):e11‐e13. 10.1111/jdv.17665 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.