Withdrawal of biologic therapy in psoriasis and prospects of clinical response recovery
https://doi.org/10.21518/ms2025-356
Abstract
Interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors, including guselkumab, demonstrate high efficacy and a sustained clinical response in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. However, in real-world clinical practice, patients often experience unplanned treatment interruptions due to medical, social, or logistical reasons. This review examines the causes of treatment discontinuation, its clinical consequences, and the prospects for remission recovery upon therapy reinitiation. Data from the VOYAGE 2 study and subsequent analyses have shown that discontinuation of IL-23 inhibitor therapy leads to a gradual loss of clinical effect, with the median time to PASI 90 loss ranging from 15 to 27 weeks. Nevertheless, reinitiation of guselkumab therapy restores a high level of clinical response in 80% or more of patients. Sustained remission after treatment interruption is associated with continued suppression of key cytokines along the IL-23/Th17 axis, including IL-17A, IL-17F, and IL-22. Despite the potential for regaining clinical effect, planned discontinuation of IL-23 inhibitors is not recommended due to the high risk of disease relapse and loss of disease control. However, the selective targeting of IL-23 enables modulation of pathogenic Th17 and Th22 cell populations, preserving the possibility of “resetting” the immune response after interruption. Unlike other therapeutic options, IL-23 inhibitors are less likely to deplete immunological memory and rarely result in a permanent loss of response. The accumulated evidence underscores the importance of an individualized treatment approach and the rational selection of therapeutic targets in the management of psoriasis.
About the Authors
O. V. Zhukova
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; Moscow Scientific and Practical Center of Dermatovenereology and Cosmetology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga V. Zhukova - Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor, Head of the Department of Dermatovenerology, Allergology and Cosmetology at the Medical Institute, PFUR named after Patrice Lumumba; Chief Medical Officer, MSPC of Dermatovenereology and Cosmetology.
6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198; 17, Leninskiy Ave., Moscow, 119071
S. I. Artemyeva
Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba; Moscow Scientific and Practical Center of Dermatovenereology and Cosmetology
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sofya I. Artemyeva - Assistant of the Department of Dermatovenerology, Allergology and Cosmetology at the Medical Institute, PFUR named after Patrice Lumumba; 6, Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198, Russia; Researcher of the Department of Clinical Dermatovenereology and Cosmetology, Dermatovenerologist, MSPC of Dermatovenereology and Cosmetology.
Miklukho-Maklai St., Moscow, 117198; 17, Leninskiy Ave., Moscow, 119071
References
1. Zhukova OV, Artemyeva SI. IL-23 Inhibitors in psoriasis treatment: Current perspectives and emerging horizons. Meditsinskiy Sovet. 2025;19(2):59–64. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21518/ms2025-030.
2. Chat VS, Ellebrecht CT, Kingston P, Gondo G, Bell S, Cordoro KM et al. Vaccination recommendations for adults receiving biologics and oral therapies for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: Delphi consensus from the medical board of the National Psoriasis Foundation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2024;90(6):1170–1181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2023.12.070.
3. Sánchez-García V, Hernández-Quiles R, de-Miguel-Balsa E, Giménez-Richarte Á, Ramos-Rincón JM, Belinchón-Romero I. Exposure to biologic therapy before and during pregnancy in patients with psoriasis: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37:1971–1990. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.19238.
4. Murray S, Augustyniak M, Murase JE, Fischer-Betz R, Nelson-Piercy C, Peniuta M, Vlaev I. Barriers to shared decision-making with women of reproductive age affected by a chronic inflammatory disease: a mixedmethods needs assessment of dermatologists and rheumatologists. BMJ Open. 2021;11(6):e043960. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043960.
5. Maccari F, Fougerousse AC, Esteve E, Frumholtz L, Parier J, Hurabielle C et al.; GEM RESOPSO and the AJDerm. Crossed looks on the dermatologist’s position and the patient’s preoccupations as to psoriasis and pregnancy: preliminary results of the PREGNAN-PSO study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019;33(5):880–885. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.15423.
6. Johansen CB, Laurberg TB, Egeberg A, Jensen UA, Hansen AL, Skov L et al. Awareness and Expectations Surrounding Family Planning and Pregnancy Among Danish Patients with Chronic Inflammatory Disease of the Skin or Joints: Results from an Online Survey. Rheumatol Ther. 2021;8(3):1419–1433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40744-021-00348-2.
7. Kimball AB, Guenther L, Kalia S, de Jong EMGJ, Lafferty KP, Chen DY et al. Pregnancy Outcomes in Women With Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis From the Psoriasis Longitudinal Assessment and Registry (PSOLAR). JAMA Dermatol. 2021;157(3):301–306. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.5595.
8. Pottinger E, Woolf RT, Exton LS, Burden AD, Nelson-Piercy C, Smith CH. Exposure to biological therapies during conception and pregnancy: a systematic review. Br J Dermatol. 2018;178:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15802.
9. Barenbrug L, Groen M, Hoentjen F, van Drongelen J, Reek JMPAVD, Joosten I et al. Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in women with immune mediated inflammatory diseases exposed to anti-tumor necrosis factor-α during pregnancy: a systemic review and meta-analysis. J Autoimmun. 2021;122:102676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2021.102676.
10. Porter ML, Lockwood SJ, Kimball AB. Update on biologic safety for patients with psoriasis during pregnancy. Int J Womens Dermatol. 2017;3(1):21–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijwd.2016.12.003.
11. Takeuchi S, Kamata M, Uchida H, Nagata M, Fukaya S, Hayashi K et al. Serum infliximab level in an infant delivered from a mother with psoriatic arthritis receiving infliximab. J Dermatol. 2020;47(1):e28-e29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1346-8138.15124.
12. Belinchón I, Velasco M, Ara-Martín M, Armesto Alonso S, Baniandrés Rodríguez O, Ferrándiz Pulido L et al. Management of Psoriasis during Preconception, pregnancy, postpartum, and breastfeeding: a consensus statement. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2021;112(3):225–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ad.2020.10.002.
13. Tirelli LL, Luna PC, Cristina E, Larralde M. Psoriasis and pregnancy in the biologic era, a feared scenario. What do we do now? Dermatol Ther. 2019;32(6):e13137. https://doi.org/10.1111/dth.13137.
14. Kurizky PS, Ferreira CC, Nogueira LSC, da Mota LMH. Treatment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis during pregnancy and breastfeeding. An Bras Dermatol. 2015;90(3):367–375. https://doi.org/10.1590/abd1806-4841.20153113.
15. Reich K, Armstrong AW, Foley P, Song M, Wasfi Y, Randazzo B et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, compared with adalimumab for the treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis with randomized withdrawal and retreatment: Results from the phase III, double-blind, placeboand active comparatorcontrolled VOYAGE 2 trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(3):418–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2016.11.042.
16. Blauvelt A, Papp KA, Griffiths CEM, Randazzo B, Wasfi Y, Shen YK et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab, an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, compared with adalimumab for the continuous treatment of patients with moderate to severe psoriasis: results from the phase III, double-blinded, placeboand active comparator-controlled VOYAGE 1 trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(3):405e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2016.11.041.
17. Reich K, Armstrong AW, Langley RG, Flavin S, Randazzo B, Li S et al. Guselkumab versus secukinumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis (ECLIPSE): results from a phase 3, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;394(10201):831–839. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31773-8.
18. Langley RG, Tsai TF, Flavin S, Song M, Randazzo B, Wasfi Y et al. Efficacy and safety of guselkumab in patients with psoriasis who have an inadequate response to ustekinumab: results of the randomized, double-blind, phase III NAVIGATE trial. Br J Dermatol. 2018;178(1):114–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.15750.
19. Gordon KB, Armstrong AW, Foley P, Song M, Shen YK, Li S et al. Guselkumab Efficacy after Withdrawal Is Associated with Suppression of Serum IL-23Regulated IL-17 and IL-22 in Psoriasis: VOYAGE 2 Study. J Invest Dermatol. 2019;139(12):2437–2446.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2019.05.016.
20. Zhuang J, Zhang F, Zhong Y, Chen Y. A retrospective study of time to relapse following guselkumab withdrawal in patients with psoriasis. Derm Ther. 2023;2023(1):8466545. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/8466545.
21. Huang YH, Hung SJ, Lee CN, Wu NL, Hui RC, Tsai TF et al. Predicting the Time to Relapse Following Withdrawal from Different Biologics in Patients with Psoriasis who Responded to Therapy: A 12-Year Multicenter Cohort Study. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2024;25(6):997–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40257024-00887-8.
22. Sofen H, Smith S, Matheson RT, Leonardi CL, Calderon C, Brodmerkel C et al. Guselkumab (an IL-23-specific mAb) demonstrates clinical and molecular response in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014;133(4):1032–1040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2014.01.025.
23. Teng MW, Bowman EP, McElwee JJ, Smyth MJ, Casanova JL, Cooper AM, Cua DJ. IL-12 and IL-23 cytokines: from discovery to targeted therapies for immunemediated inflammatory diseases. Nat Med. 2015;21(7):719–729. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.3895.
Review
For citations:
Zhukova OV, Artemyeva SI. Withdrawal of biologic therapy in psoriasis and prospects of clinical response recovery. Meditsinskiy sovet = Medical Council. 2025;(14):30-36. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21518/ms2025-356
Views:
18
Email this article 