U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Cover of The interleukin 1 receptor antagonist anakinra to reduce disease severity of palmoplantar pustulosis in adults: APRICOT RCT and PLUM mechanistic study

The interleukin 1 receptor antagonist anakinra to reduce disease severity of palmoplantar pustulosis in adults: APRICOT RCT and PLUM mechanistic study

Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation, No. 9.2

, , , , , , , , , , , , and .

Author Information and Affiliations
Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; .

Headline

Daily injections of anakinra did not show change in disease activity compared with placebo when assessed by the Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index at 8 weeks.

Abstract

Background:

Palmoplantar pustulosis is a rare, debilitating, chronic skin disease involving the hands and feet, and there are limited treatment options. Mechanistic findings suggest that interleukin 1 may be a pathogenic driver.

Objective:

To determine whether or not anakinra [Sobi (Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB), Stockholm, Sweden], an interleukin 1 receptor antagonist, delivers therapeutic benefit in palmoplantar pustulosis.

Design:

A Phase IV, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with two stages and an adaptive element (24 participants in stage 1, 64 participants in total) with an open-label extension.

Setting:

Sixteen hospitals across England, Scotland and Wales.

Participants:

Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a diagnosis of palmoplantar pustulosis and a disease duration of > 6 months and of sufficient impact and severity to require systemic therapy.

Interventions:

Participants were randomised (1 : 1) to daily self-administered subcutaneous injection of either anakinra or a placebo for 8 weeks.

Main outcome measures:

The primary outcome was the Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index score measured at 0, 1, 4, 8 and 12 weeks, with the primary end point at 8 weeks adjusted for baseline. Secondary outcomes included other investigator-assessed efficacy measures of disease severity, safety measures and participant-reported measures of efficacy and impact.

Results:

A total of 64 participants (mean baseline Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index score of 17.8, standard deviation 10.5) received anakinra (n = 31) or the placebo (n = 33). In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, which estimated the effect of the treatment policy, the mean treatment group difference at 8 weeks after adjustment for baseline Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index score was –1.65 (95% confidence interval –4.77 to 1.47; p = 0.300), in favour of anakinra relative to placebo, but was not statistically significant. Similarly, secondary investigator-assessed outcomes did not show statistical superiority of anakinra: the baseline-adjusted mean difference in fresh pustule count (palms and soles) between the anakinra group and the placebo group was 2.94 (95% confidence interval –26.44 to 32.33), in favour of placebo, and the mean difference in total pustule count was –30.08 (95% confidence interval –83.20 to 23.05), in favour of anakinra. Participant-assessed outcomes were consistent with these objective findings: the baseline-adjusted mean difference in Dermatology Life Quality Index between the anakinra group and the placebo group was 0.52 (95% confidence interval –2.04 to 3.07), in favour of placebo, and the mean difference in Palmoplantar Quality-of-Life Index was 1.27 (95% confidence interval –3.04 to 5.57), in favour of placebo. However, the proportion of participants who strongly agreed that treatment was worthwhile was greater in the anakinra group (12/29, 41%) than in the placebo group (4/28, 14%), a difference in proportion of 27% (95% confidence interval 5% to 49%). In the complier-average causal effect analysis, the baseline-adjusted mean treatment group difference in the week 8 Palmoplantar Pustulosis Area and Severity Index score in individuals who received ≥ 50% of injections was –2.30 (95% confidence interval –6.54 to 1.93; p = 0.287) and in those who received ≥ 90% of injections was –3.80 (95% confidence interval –10.76 to 3.16; p = 0.285), in favour of anakinra. No serious infections, significant neutropenia or other serious adverse events occurred. Injection site reactions were more frequent for those receiving anakinra (19/31, 61%) than for those receiving placebo (1/33, 3%).

Conclusions:

There was no evidence that anakinra was superior to placebo. For the treatment of palmoplantar pustulosis, interleukin 1 blockade is not a useful intervention.

Limitations:

The sample size was calculated to detect a large effect size. Treatment adherence was lower than expected. It cannot be ruled out that there was some selection bias towards less severe or unstable participants entering the trial given that the trial was placebo controlled with a required washout period.

Future work:

Palmoplantar pustulosis remains an area of high unmet need and further research is recommended to (1) identify new drug targets, (2) determine the contributory role of drug exposure (including pharmacokinetics and adherence) and (3) validate outcome measures in palmoplantar pustulosis.

Trial registration:

This trial is registered as ISCRTN13127147 and EudraCT 2015-003600-23.

Funding:

This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a MRC and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 9, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library for further project information.

Contents

About the Series

Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation
ISSN (Print): 2050-4365
ISSN (Electronic): 2050-4373

Declared competing interests of authors: Suzie Cro reports grants from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) during the conduct of the study. Victoria Cornelius reports being an Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Funding Committee member (2019–20) outside the submitted work. Francesca Capon reports grants from Boehringer Ingelheim (Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany) and consultancy fees from AnaptysBio (San Diego, CA, USA) outside the submitted work. Jonathan Barker reports personal fees from Amgen Inc (Thousand Oaks, CA, USA), Almirall S.A. (Barcelona, Spain), AbbVie (Lake Bluff, IL, USA), Celgene Ltd (Summit, NJ, USA), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd (London, UK), Lilly UK (Basingstoke, UK), Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb (New York, NY, USA), Janssen Pharmaceuticals (Beerse, Belgium), Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Mumbai, India) and UCB (Slough, UK), and grants from AbbVie, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim and Janssen, outside the submitted work. David Burden reports personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Janssen and AbbVie outside the submitted work. Christopher Griffiths reports grants from Almirall S.A., Celgene, Eli Lilly and Company (Indianapolis, IN, USA), Janssen, Novartis, Sandoz UK Ltd (Camberley, UK) and UCB, and personal fees from Almirall S.A., Amgen, Celgene, BMS, LEO Pharma UK (Maidenhead, UK), Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, AbbVie and Boehringer Ingelheim during the conduct of the study. Helen Lachmann reports Swedish Orphan Biovitrum AB (Stockholm, Sweden) funds for a research nurse. Helen McAteer reports grants from AbbVie, Almirral, Amgen, Celgene, Dermal Laboratories (Hitchin, UK), Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma UK, UCB and from T&R Derma (Linthwaite, UK) outside the submitted work. Prakash Patel reports grants from EME programme (part of NIHR) during the conduct of the study. Andrew Pink reports personal fees from AbbVie, Lilly UK, Sanofi (Paris, France), LEO Pharma UK, Novartis, Almirall, UCB, Janssen and from BMS outside the submitted work. Nick Reynolds reported receiving lecture fees from AbbVie (to Newcastle University), payment for medical advisory board meeting and lectures fees from Almirall (to Newcastle University), contributing to a clinical trial from AnaptysBio (to Newcastle upon Tyne Hospital), lecture fees from Celgene (to Newcastle University), lecture fees from Janssen (to Newcastle University), grants and serving as a paid member of a medical advisory board from Novartis, and lecture fees from UCB Pharma Ltd (to Newcastle University) outside the submitted work. Richard Warren reports grants from AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma UK, Lilly, Medac Pharma (Stirling, UK), Novartis, Pfizer Inc. (New York, NY, USA) and UCB, and personal fees from AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma UK, Lilly, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Avillion LLP (Uxbridge, UK), Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Catherine Smith reports non-personal pecuniary relationships with AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline plc (Brentford, UK), Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., Regeneron® (Tarrytown, NY, USA), Sanquin (Amsterdam (the Netherlands), Qiagen (Crawley, UK), MedImmune, LLC (Gaithersburg, MD, USA), Celgene, LEO Pharma, UCB Pharma, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim outside the submitted work.

Article history

The research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the EME programme as project number 13/50/17. The contractual start date was in November 2015. The final report began editorial review in December 2020 and was accepted for publication in June 2021. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The EME editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors’ report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.

Last reviewed: December 2020; Accepted: June 2021.

Copyright © 2022 Cro et al. This work was produced by Cro et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaption in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. For attribution the title, original author(s), the publication source – NIHR Journals Library, and the DOI of the publication must be cited.
Bookshelf ID: NBK579221PMID: 35377574DOI: 10.3310/MXPK2427

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (5.7M)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

Similar articles in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...