ABSTRACT
Introduction: Psoriasis in elderly patients is considered to be of emerging clinical relevance because of the increase in the aged segment of the population. Psoriasis in such a group raises significant management challenges. There is an age-related immunosuppression, a high frequency of comorbidities, and polypharmacy, which enhances the potential risk of drug interactions or side effects when an additional systemic treatment must be administered. Despite the aging of the general population, clinical studies focusing on treatment of geriatric psoriasis are limited. Patients > 65 years are often not included in randomized clinical trials. As a result, the geriatric population affected by moderate-to-severe psoriasis is usually under-treated.
Areas covered: This review focuses on the use of systemic treatments in elderly psoriatic patients and their efficacy and safety data, analyzing the available literature evidences.
Expert opinion: Conventional agents should be carefully evaluated in each patient considering the possible organ impairment, comorbidities, concomitant medications and contraindications. Apremilast is an appropriate treatment for elderly patients. Biologics represent a safe option for a long-term management of psoriasis. Etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, and brodalumab have not been associated to a higher risk of adverse events in the elderly.
Article highlights
Evidence on the efficacy and safety of antipsoriatic systemic treatments in the elderly is limited.
Patients over 65 years were often not included in randomized clinical trials
Elderly patients affected by moderate-to-severe psoriasis are often under-treated
Significant clinical or molecular differences between psoriasis in elderly and non-elderly have not demonstrated.
Apremilast and biologics are appropriate in the long-term management of elderly patients.
This box summarizes key points contained in the article.
Declaration of interest
The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.
Reviewer Disclosures
Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial relationships or otherwise to disclose.