ArticleDermatology and therapy2025
Treating Generalized Pustular Psoriasis (GPP): Timing and Rationale for Biologic Treatment Switching-A Japanese e-Delphi Survey.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety recommendations on laboratory and blood count values for early mobilization in critically ill adults: an expert consensus.Critical care science · 2026Article
- Combination therapy with spesolimab and apremilast for refractory generalized pustular psoriasis: a case report.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGeneralized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a chronic, inflammatory disease characterized by the sudden and recurrent development of widespread sterile pustules on the skin. The treatment of GPP includes non-biologic and biologic therapies. In Japan, biologic agents are being increasingly used as first-line treatment, with more biologics approved in Japan than in other countries. A previous secondary data-based study utilizing data in the Medical Data Vision database and the Japan Medical Data Center in Japan demonstrated heterogeneity in real-world biologic treatment patterns, with at least one switch during the follow-up period (mean n switches 3.8; mean length of follow-up 3.3 years) for approximately one third of patients with GPP treated with a biologic drug. The aim of this study was to evaluate where consensus lies among experts regarding switching biologic treatments for patients with GPP in Japan.
methodsA Delphi exercise that consists of three survey rounds was performed with ten Japanese dermatologists. Participants were asked to respond to questions related to experts' experience with specific biologics, experience with switching, timing of switches and importance of specific criteria (drivers) when making the decision to switch. The consensus threshold was 70%.
resultsBased on the results of the Delphi exercise, most experts rarely (60%) or never (20%) switch a biologic agent and only 20% switch often during acute symptoms/GPP flare driven by the short time of the flare; this result may be different during the maintenance phase. Lack of efficacy, loss of efficacy due to long-term use, side effects, contraindications, new products with better efficacy and safety evidence, risk of infection, and lack of adherence play an important role in making the decision to switch.
conclusionSwitches may occur for patients on biologics when flares occur (loss of effectiveness) or when there is insufficient response (lack of effectiveness). The decision to switch a biologic is impacted by several other criteria, including safety and the availability of more efficacious and better tolerated therapies. Overall, there is still an unmet need for robust evidence to inform GPP treatment choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.