Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Biologic therapies have transformed the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis but are associated with long-term treatment burden and substantial healthcare costs. Dose spacing, defined as extending dosing intervals in patients with controlled disease, has emerged as a potential optimization strategy. However, data on real-world implementation and clinician perspectives remain limited.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey among Portuguese dermatologists experienced in prescribing biologic therapies for psoriasis. An anonymous, web-based questionnaire assessed clinicians’ perspectives and real-world practices regarding biologic dose spacing, including eligibility criteria, preferred biologic classes, implementation strategies, outcomes after loss of disease control, and limiting clinical factors.</p> Results <p>Seventy-five dermatologists completed the survey (response rate 48.4%). All respondents considered dose spacing feasible. The most frequently cited eligibility criteria were absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≤ 1, body surface area (BSA) ≤ 1%, and a 90% improvement in PASI (PASI 90). Interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors were perceived as the most suitable class for dose spacing (93.3%). In routine practice, dose spacing was applied frequently by 30.7% of respondents and occasionally by 48.0%. Most clinicians (69.3%) required more than 12&#xa0;months of sustained disease control before initiating dose spacing, predominantly using progressive extension of dosing intervals (96.0%). IL-23 inhibitors were the biologics most frequently dose-spaced in current practice. Following loss of disease control, 86.7% reported successful recapture of response after reintroduction of standard dosing. The main factors limiting dose spacing were a history of difficult-to-control psoriasis (77.3%) and concomitant psoriatic arthritis (72.0%).</p> Conclusion <p>Biologic dose spacing is already integrated into clinical practice in Portugal. Further prospective studies are needed to establish standardized criteria and guide safe implementation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Perspectives and Real-World Clinical Practice of Portuguese Dermatologists on Biologic Dose Spacing in Psoriasis: Results from a Nationwide Survey

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月27日

查看全文
  • César Ferreira,
  • Tiago Torres

摘要

Introduction

Biologic therapies have transformed the management of moderate-to-severe psoriasis but are associated with long-term treatment burden and substantial healthcare costs. Dose spacing, defined as extending dosing intervals in patients with controlled disease, has emerged as a potential optimization strategy. However, data on real-world implementation and clinician perspectives remain limited.

Methods

We conducted a national, cross-sectional survey among Portuguese dermatologists experienced in prescribing biologic therapies for psoriasis. An anonymous, web-based questionnaire assessed clinicians’ perspectives and real-world practices regarding biologic dose spacing, including eligibility criteria, preferred biologic classes, implementation strategies, outcomes after loss of disease control, and limiting clinical factors.

Results

Seventy-five dermatologists completed the survey (response rate 48.4%). All respondents considered dose spacing feasible. The most frequently cited eligibility criteria were absolute Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) ≤ 1, body surface area (BSA) ≤ 1%, and a 90% improvement in PASI (PASI 90). Interleukin-23 (IL-23) inhibitors were perceived as the most suitable class for dose spacing (93.3%). In routine practice, dose spacing was applied frequently by 30.7% of respondents and occasionally by 48.0%. Most clinicians (69.3%) required more than 12 months of sustained disease control before initiating dose spacing, predominantly using progressive extension of dosing intervals (96.0%). IL-23 inhibitors were the biologics most frequently dose-spaced in current practice. Following loss of disease control, 86.7% reported successful recapture of response after reintroduction of standard dosing. The main factors limiting dose spacing were a history of difficult-to-control psoriasis (77.3%) and concomitant psoriatic arthritis (72.0%).

Conclusion

Biologic dose spacing is already integrated into clinical practice in Portugal. Further prospective studies are needed to establish standardized criteria and guide safe implementation.