BACKGROUND

PERSIST was a prospective, non-interventional, real-world study of guselkumab and ustekinumab in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Germany.

OBJECTIVES

To examine effectiveness, safety and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes to Week (W) 104 of treatment with guselkumab and ustekinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

Patients (≥18 years of age) received guselkumab or ustekinumab as per routine clinical practice. Outcomes to W104 were examined separately in guselkumab and ustekinumab recipients. An ad hoc exploratory analysis of outcomes with guselkumab versus ustekinumab was also performed following propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Overall, 302 and 313 patients received guselkumab and ustekinumab, respectively. Patients in both cohorts experienced improvements in disease activity and QoL that were maintained to W104, with 64.7% and 63.6% of guselkumab- and 54.6% and 64.4% of ustekinumab-treated patients achieving a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 90 response and a Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) 0/1 score, respectively. Propensity score matching yielded well-balanced baseline characteristics except for prior biologic use, which was higher in guselkumab versus ustekinumab recipients (51.7% vs. 32.0%). Achievement of PASI ≤1 at W104 was more common in guselkumab versus ustekinumab recipients (58.7% vs. 49.7%). The W104 PASI90 response rate was 65.6% with guselkumab and 56.0% with ustekinumab; corresponding rates for PASI100 were 44.3% and 28.5%. In guselkumab recipients, response rates were higher in biologic-naïve versus biologic-experienced patients (PASI90, 77.1% vs. 53.4%; PASI100, 55.0% vs. 33.0%). A high level of response for QoL outcomes was observed for both treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Ustekinumab and guselkumab led to improvements in physician-assessed and patient-reported outcomes that were sustained for up to 2 years, with no new safety signals identified. Following propensity score matching, greater improvements in PASI outcomes were observed with guselkumab versus ustekinumab. Improvements with guselkumab were highest in biologic-naïve patients, highlighting the value of early treatment.