Dermatology: Practical and Conceptual Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 1 Secukinumab Treatment in Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa in Real-World Clinical Settings: A Multicenter Study Ece Erbağcı1, Özge Sevil Karstarlı Bakay2, Fatma Aslı Hapa3 1 Uşak University Training and Research Hospital, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Uşak, Turkey 2 Pamukkale University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Denizli, Turkey 3 Izmir Democracy University Buca Seyfi Demirsoy Training and Research Hospital, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Izmir, Turkey Key words: Secukinumab, Hidradenitis Suppurativa, Real-World, Treatment Citation: Erbağcı E, Karstarlı Bakay OS, Aslı Hapa F. Secukinumab Treatment in Patients With Hidradenitis Suppurativa in Real-World Clinical Settings: A Multicenter Study. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5826/dpc.1501a4915 Accepted: October 26, 2024; Published: January 2025 Copyright: ©2024 Erbağcı et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial License (BY-NC-4.0), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/, which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited. Funding: None. Competing Interests: None. Authorship: All authors have contributed significantly to this publication. Ethical Approval: Izmir Democracy University Buca Seyfi Demirsoy Training and Research Hospital Non-Interventional Research Ethics Committee- 2024/252. Corresponding Author: Ece Erbağcı, Uşak University Training and Research Hospital, Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Uşak, Turkey. E-mail: ece.erbagci@gmail.com Introduction: Treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) remains a challenge in clinical practice for dermatologists. Although the effectiveness and safety of secukinumab (SEC) in the treatment of HS have been demonstrated in phase III studies, real-world data is limited. Objectives: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of SEC treatment in HS patients in real-world settings. Methods: Adult patients who were diagnosed with HS and used SEC for at least 3 months were included in the study. Results: A total of 31 patients were included in the study; 14 of them (45.2%) were female. The mean age was 39.32 ± 10.26 years, and the mean disease duration was 11.77 ± 7.99 years. Nine (29%) patients were biologic-naive and 10 (32.3%) were adalimumab-naive. Disease severity was Hurley I in 7 patients (22.6%), Hurley II in 9 patients (29%), and Hurley III in 15 patients (48.4%). The Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) was achieved in 20 patients (64.5%) in the third month of treatment. SEC treatment was discontinued due to primary ineffectiveness in 9 (29%) ABSTRACT 2 Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 Introduction Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, inflammatory, re- current, and debilitating skin follicular disease that typically appears after puberty with painful deep-seated, inflamed le- sions in the apocrine gland-bearing areas of the body, most commonly the axillary, inguinal, and anogenital regions [1]. The underlying pathogenic mechanism of HS mainly in- volves the formation of follicular hyperkeratosis first, caus- ing plugging and dilation that results in follicle rupture with subsequent inflammation, abscess, and sinus tract formation [1, 2]. HS immunopathogenesis is complex and still being studied, but several cytokines appear to be especially im- portant. IL-17 levels are increased in serum and in damaged skin of HS patients compared with healthy control subjects, and they correlate with disease severity [3, 4]. Therefore, blockade of the IL-17 pathway may be a promising treat- ment for HS. Secukinumab (SEC) is a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-17A, and its effectiveness and safety in the treatment of HS were demonstrated in the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE phase III randomized clinical trials [5]. Adalimumab, an anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitor, was the first biologic drug approved for the treatment of HS. Recently, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also approved SEC for use in adults with active moderate-to-severe HS [6, 7]. However, there are few real-world studies on the effectiveness and safety of SEC in HS treatment. Objectives In our study, we aimed to share our real-world data on the efficacy and safety of SEC treatment in HS patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter study to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of SEC treatment in HS patients in a real-world setting. SEC has been available in our coun- try since 2018. Therefore, hospital electronic record sys- tems were retrospectively scanned between 1.1.2018 and 1.3.2024 (end date of inclusion in the study). Adult patients (age ≥18 years) who were diagnosed with HS and used SEC for at least 3 months during the specified date range were included in the study. From the past medical records, patient age, sex, body weight (kg), height (cm), body mass index (BMI), smoking status, comorbidities, age at disease onset, duration of dis- ease, duration of medication (SEC) use, additional treat- ments used for HS (if any), previous treatments (systemic antibiotics, immunosuppressants, acitretin, surgery, etc.), ar- eas of HS involvement, disease severity (Hurley stage), and adverse effects (if any) with SEC treatment were noted. The Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), which is a validated treatment endpoint for HS, is defined as a ≥50% reduction in inflammatory lesion count (sum of abscesses and inflammatory nodules) and no in- crease in abscesses or draining fistulas when compared with baseline [8]. The primary endpoint to evaluate the effective- ness of SEC in our study was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved a HiSCR response at 3 months of treatment. As a loading dose of SEC, 300 mg subcutaneously was administered to all patients once a week for 5 weeks, and then the maintenance dose was started. The local ethics committee approved the study proto- col. Statistical analyses were made in the SPSS for Windows Version 23.0 package program. Numerical variables were summarized as mean ± standard deviation (SD), median, min-max values, and categorical variables were summarized as numbers and percentages. Appropriate parametric or non-parametric statistical tests were used according to the distribution and types of variables. The significance level was taken as P < 0.05. Results A total of 31 patients diagnosed with HS who used SEC for at least 3 months were included in the study; 14 (45.2%) were female. The mean age was 39.32 ± 10.26 years, the mean disease duration was 11.77 ± 7.99 years, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 28.59 ± 5.83 kg/m2. Thirteen (41.9%) patients were smokers, and 1 (3.2%) was an ex-smoker. The most common comorbidity was psoriasis (35.5%), followed patients, secondary ineffectiveness in 1 (3.2%) patient, adverse effects in 1 (3.2%) patient, and loss of follow-up in 1 (3.2%) patient. Paradoxical pyoderma gangrenosum was observed as an adverse effect in 1 patient that resolved after discontinuing SEC and starting infliximab. Conclusions: SEC appears to be an effective and safe treatment option for HS, especially when used in the early and mild stages of the disease and in biologic-naive patients. Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 3 by arthritis (32.3%), diabetes (9.7%), and hypertension (9.7%). Nine (29%) patients were biologic-naive, and 10 (32.3%) were adalimumab-naive. Disease severity was Hurley I in 7 patients (22.6%), Hurley II in 9 patients (29%), and Hurley III in 15 patients (48.4%). The most common area of involvement was the pelvic (96.8%), followed by the axilla (93.5%) and inframammary (35.5%), respectively. Characteristics of the patients are shown in Table 1. The dose of SEC was 150 mg/28 days in 1 patient (due to the accompanying diagnosis of ankylosing spondylitis), 300 mg/28 days in 19 patients, 300 mg/14 days in 10 patients, and 300 mg/28 days initially and then 300 mg/14 days (due to secondary ineffectiveness) in 1 patient. The mean duration of SEC use was 12.06 ± 10.51 (min: 3–max: 48) months. As additional treatment combined with SEC, 12 (38.7%) patients used oral antibiotics, 9 (29%) patients used metho- trexate, and 2 (6.5%) patients used zinc gluconate. HiSCR was achieved in 20 patients (64.5%) in the third month of treatment. SEC treatment was discontinued due to primary ineffectiveness in 9 (29%) patients, secondary ineffectiveness in 1 (3.2%) patient, adverse effects in 1 (3.2%) patient, and loss of follow-up in 1 (3.2%) patient. Paradoxical pyoderma gangrenosum was observed as an adverse effect that caused treatment discontinuation in one patient. A 48-year-old man with HS developed pyoderma gangrenosum after 13 months of SEC treatment. The patient, who had no other disease that could explain the etiology of pyoderma gangrenosum, im- proved after SEC treatment was discontinued and infliximab was started. Patients who achieved HiSCR were compared with those who did not achieve it in terms of their clinical char- acteristics. In patients who achieved HiSCR, disease sever- ity was milder (P = 0.044), disease duration was shorter (P = 0.04), duration of SEC use was longer (due to discon- tinuation of treatment in those who did not achieve HiSCR) (P = 0.032), use of additional combined oral antibiotics was less (P = 0.007), and naivety to previous biologic drugs (P = 0.012) and adalimumab (P = 0.005) was higher. While all biologic-naive patients achieved HiSCR, 11/22 (50%) of biologic-experienced patients achieved HiSCR. Although our number of cases in the study was very limited, we did not detect any statistically significant difference in terms of clini- cal and demographic data between biologic-experienced pa- tients and biologic-naive patients (statistics are not shown). No statistically significant relationship was found between HiSCR achievement and age, sex, BMI, smoking status, age at disease onset, areas of involvement, and SEC dose. To further analyze the relationships with HiSCR, a multivari- ate analysis was performed using logistic regression with a model including all clinical and demographic variables. The multivariate analysis was then repeated with a second model that included only those variables that showed a significant or near-significant association (P ≤ 0.25) with HiSCR re- sponse in univariate analysis (smoking status, Hurley stage, disease duration, biologic and adalimumab naivety). How- ever, no significant relationship was found between vari- ables and HiSCR in both models, probably due to the small number of patients. Therefore, the linear analysis results are shown in Table 1. Conclusions The results of our study support the idea that SEC is an effec- tive treatment option for HS in real-world clinical settings. HiSCR was achieved in 20 (64.5%) of our 31 cases. We ob- served that the response to treatment was better in the early stages of the disease, in those with less severe disease, and in biologic-naive patients. In the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE phase III studies, SEC treatment in adult patients with HS was compared with placebo at doses of 300 mg/4 weeks and 300 mg/2 weeks. The proportion of patients with HiSCR at the 16th week of treatment was 45% in the SEC 300 mg/2 weeks group, 42% in the SEC 300 mg/4 weeks group, and 34% in the placebo group in the SUNSHINE study. In the SUNRISE study, this proportion was 42% in the SEC 300 mg/2 weeks group, 46% in the SEC 300 mg/4 weeks group, and 31% in the placebo group. The proportion of patients achieving HiSCR in the SEC treatment groups was sustained, with a trend toward improvement up to week 52 in both studies. In both trials, treatment with both SEC regimens was well tolerated. The most frequently reported adverse events were headache, nasopharyngitis, and worsening of HS. No new treatment-emergent adverse events were identified up to week 52 [5]. In the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE studies, when sub- group analysis was performed according to the patients biological experience, it was found that biologic-naive pa- tients tended to show greater treatment effectiveness, simi- lar to our study [9]. However, this analysis also noted that biologic-experienced patients had more severe Hurley stage, longer disease duration, and a higher rate of previous HS surgery than biologic-naive patients [9]. Additionally, in real-world experience, biological agents tend to be preferred for more severe disease that is unresponsive to conventional treatment. Therefore, when interpreting the difference in clinical response, it is necessary to consider that this may be related to the biological experience as well as HS severity, disease duration, previous treatment history, or a mixture of all these. Case series, case reports, and retrospective studies on the real-world effectiveness and safety of SEC in HS are avail- able in the literature. In the open-label pilot study of Prussick et al, 9 patients with moderate to severe HS were administered 4 Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 Table 1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients According to HiSCR. HiSCR (+) (N = 20, 64.5%) HiSCR (-) (N = 11, 35.5%) P Total (N = 31, 100%) Age, years Mean ± SD Min - max 37.05 ± 9.11 20-54 43.45 ± 11.36 25-68 0.97 39.32 ± 10.26 20-68 Sex Female, N (%) Male, N (%) 11 (55) 9 (45) 3 (27.3) 8 (72.7) 0.258 14 (45.2) 17 (54.8) Body weight, kg Mean ± SD Min - max 87.1 ± 21.67 55-130 85 ± 16.34 65-120 0.782 86.35 ± 19.68 55-130 Height, cm Mean ± SD Min - max 173.65 ± 11.05 155-191 173.55 ± 6.56 161-186 0.977 173.61 ± 9.58 155-191 Body mass index (BMI), kg/m2 Mean ± SD Min - max 28.8 ± 6.3 19-40.8 28.2 ± 5.12 22.6-37.9 0.887 28.59 ± 5.83 19-40.8 Smoking status No, N (%) Yes, N (%) Ex-smoker, N (%) 13 (65) 7 (35) - 4 (36.4) 6 (54.5) 1 (9.1) 0.153 17 (54.8) 13 (41.9) 1 (3.2) Hurley stage I, N (%) II, N (%) III, N (%) 7 (35) 6 (30) 7 (35) - 3 (27.3) 8 (72.7) 0.044 7 (22.6) 9 (29) 15 (48.4) Age of the disease onset, years Mean ± SD Min - max 27.55 ± 9.19 13-51 27.82 ± 9.29 15-46 0.939 27.65 ± 9.07 13-51 Duration of the disease, years Mean ± SD Min - max 9.6 ± 6.4 2-30 15.73 ± 9.34 3-37 0.04 11.77 ± 7.99 2-37 Duration of secukinumab use, months Mean ± SD Min - max 15.15 ± 11.75 3-48 6.45 ± 3.96 3-14 0.032 12.06 ± 10.51 3-48 Secukinumab (SEC) dosage 150 mg/28days, N (%) 300 mg/28days, N (%) 300 mg/14days, N (%) 300mg/28 days and then 300 mg/14 days, N (%) 1 (5) 13 (65) 5 (25) 1 (5) - 6 (54.5) 5 (45.5) - 0.452 1 (3.2) 19 (61.3) 10 (32.3) 1 (3.2) Areas of involvement Scalp, N (%) Axillary, N (%) Inframammary, N (%) Trunk, N (%) Pelvic, N (%) 1 (5) 19 (95) 7 (35) 1 (5) 20 (100) 2 (18.2) 10 (90.9) 4 (36.4) 3 (27.3) 10 (90.9) 0.281 1 1 0.115 0.355 3 (9.7) 29 (93.5) 11 (35.5) 4 (12.9) 30 (96.8) Comorbidities Arthritis, N (%) Ankylosing spondylitis, N (%) Psoriatic arthritis, N (%) Rheumatoid arthritis, N (%) Psoriasis, N (%) Diabetes mellitus, N (%) Hypertension, N (%) 7 (35) 3 (15) 2 (10) 2 (10) 10 (50) 1 (5) 2 (10) 3 (27.3) 2 (18.2) 1 (9.1) - 1 (9.1) 2 (18.2) 1 (9.1) 1 0.121 0.281 1 - - - 10 (32.3) 5 (16.1) 3 (9.7) 2 (6.5) 11 (35.5) 3 (9.7) 3 (9.7) Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 5 HiSCR (+) (N = 20, 64.5%) HiSCR (-) (N = 11, 35.5%) P Total (N = 31, 100%) Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, N (%) Chronic spontaneous urticaria, N (%) Familial mediterranean fever, N (%) Multiple sclerosis, N (%) Alopecia universalis, N (%) 1 (5) 2 (10) 2 (10) 1 (5) - - - - - 1 (9.1) - - 1 (3.2) 2 (6.5) 2 (6.5) 1 (3.2) 1 (3.2) Additional treatments combined with SEC Oral antibiotics, N (%) Zinc gluconate, N (%) Methotrexate, N (%) 4 (20) 2 (10) 8 (40) 8 (72.7) - 1 (9.1) 0.007 - 0.106 12 (38.7) 2 (6.5) 9 (29) Previous treatments Adalimumab, N (%) Oral antibiotics, N (%) Intralesional steroid, N (%) Surgery, N (%) Acitretin, N (%) Isotretinoin, N (%) Methotrexate, N (%) Dapsone, N (%) Cyclosporine, N (%) Etanercept, N (%) Infliximab, N (%) Golimumab, N (%) 10 (50) 8 (40) 1 (5) - - 1 (5) 8 (40) - 1 (5) 4 (20) 2 (10) 1 (5) 11 (100) 7 (63.6) 2 (18.2) 2 (18.2) 1 (9.1) 2 (18.2) 1 (9.1) 1 (9.1) - - 3 (27.3) - 0.005 0.208 0.281 - - 0.281 0.106 - - - 0.317 - 21 (67.7) 15 (48.4) 3 (9.7) 2 (6.5) 1 (3.2) 3 (9.7) 9 (29) 1 (3.2) 1 (3.2) 4 (12.9) 5 (16.1) 1 (3.2) Previous exposure to biologics Naive, N (%) Non-naive, N (%) 9 (45) 11 (55) - 11 (100) 0.012 9 (29) 22 (71) SEC discontinued No, N (%) Primary ineffectiveness, N (%) Secondary ineffectiveness, N (%) Adverse effects, N (%) Loss of follow-up, N (%) 19 (95) - 1 (5) - - - 9 (81.8) - 1 (9.1) 1 (9.1) 19 (61.3) 9 (29) 1 (3.2) 1 (3.2) 1 (3.2) HiSCR = Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response; SD = standard deviation; SEC = secukinumab. 300 mg/4 weeks of SEC following a loading dose. Six of nine patients (67%) achieved HiSCR at 24 weeks. No serious adverse effects were observed [10]. In the open-label study of Casseres et al, following the loading dose, SEC was ad- ministered to 9 patients at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks and to 11 patients at a dose of 300 mg/2 weeks. Seventy percent (14/20) of all patients achieved HiSCR by week 24. No se- rious adverse effects were observed [11]. These results were similar to our study. In the single-center study of Reguiai et al, SEC was used in 20 patients with HS at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks follow- ing the loading dose. HiSCR was achieved in 75% (15/20) of patients at the 16th week of treatment. After SEC treat- ment, no recurrence was observed after a mean follow-up of 14 months (range 3 to 36 months). No patient required rescue Table 1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Patients According to HiSCR. (continued) therapy. In this study, it was observed that smoking status, weight, and HS severity did not affect the treatment results. Two patients with no personal or family history of inflam- matory bowel disease developed Crohn disease after 3 and 5 months of treatment, respectively [12]. In the single-center studies reported by Melgosa Ramos et al from Spain, SEC was used at a dose of 300 mg every 14 or 28 days in 23 patients with HS. Considering only pa- tients who reached the different follow-up evaluation periods, 17/21 (73.9%) reached HiSCR at week 16, 15/21 (71.4%) at week 24, 10/14 (71.4%) at week 36, and 10/12 (83.3%) at week 52. No severe adverse effects were reported [13]. In their single-center study, Martora et al used SEC at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks following the loading dose in the treatment of moderate to severe HS in 4 biologic-naive 6 Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 of obesity and smoking is higher in patients with the coex- istence of psoriasis and HS than in patients with psoriasis alone [24]. Therefore, this association may be an indicator of increased inflammatory burden. The other most common co- morbidities in our study population were arthritis (32.3%), diabetes (9.7%), and hypertension (9.7%). HS has been as- sociated with many comorbid diseases, such as diabetes, met- abolic syndrome, cardiovascular diseases, mental illnesses, inflammatory bowel disease, spondylo-arthropathies and other immune-mediated diseases [25]. Therefore, it is import- ant to question patients about these common comorbidities and take them into consideration in treatment selection. In our study, paradoxical pyoderma gangrenosum as an adverse effect that caused discontinuation of treatment with SEC was observed in one case. Apart from this, no serious adverse effects were observed. Drug-induced paradoxical pyoderma gangrenosum is a very rare adverse effect. In the literature, paradoxical pyoderma gangrenosum induced by SEC has been reported in only two cases with HS [26, 27], and there are a few case reports reported in cases where SEC was used for psoriasis [28-31]. The clinical condition of the cases generally improved with SEC discontinuation and anti-inflammatory drug changes, as in our case. Upregulation of IL-23 is observed in pyoderma gangrenosum lesions, and targeted treatments with ustekinumab, an IL-12/23 antibody, have resulted in beneficial clinical outcomes [29, 32, 33]. IL-23-induced activation of plasmacytoid and dermal den- dritic cells results in T helper 17 cells releasing IL-17A, which then acts on epidermal keratinocytes, resulting in a feed- forward inflammatory response. However, inhibiting IL-17A may paradoxically increase IL-23 production, trig- gering the development of pyoderma gangrenosum [34]. Limitations of our study include small sample size, lack of a control group, and open-label design. In addition, due to the retrospective design of our study, we could not use other com- monly used scoring systems such as the dermatological quality of life index, Sartorius scoring, and the international hidradeni- tis suppurativa severity scoring system other than Hurley stag- ing and HiSCR. However, despite its limitations, our study is valuable because it is one of the most comprehensive studies on the real-world experience of SEC treatment in patients with HS. In line with the data of our study and previous literature, SEC appears to be an effective and safe treatment option for HS, especially when used in the early and mild stages of the disease and in biologic-naive patients. References 1. Goldburg SR, Strober BE, Payette MJ. Hidradenitis suppurativa: Epidemiology, clinical presentation, and pathogenesis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(5):1045-58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019 .08.090 PMID:31604104 patients (adalimumab was contraindicated) and 17 patients who were secondary unresponsive to adalimumab. Seven of 21 patients failed to complete 52 weeks of treatment. Of the 14 patients who completed 52 weeks of treatment, 57.1% (8/14) achieved HiSCR at week 16 and 71.4% (10/14) at week 52 [14]. In the retrospective multicenter study re- ported by Ribero et al from Italy, SEC was used at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks following the loading dose in 31 patients with HS (Hurley II or III) who were contraindicated or un- responsive to anti-TNF. 17 patients completed 28 weeks of target therapy. The HiSCR was achieved only by 10% of pa- tients (3/31) at week 5, by 26% of patients (8/24) at week 16, and by 41% of patients (7/17) at week 28 [15]. In the study of Roccuzzo et al, 24 adult patients with HS (Hurley II or III) who were switched from adalimumab to SEC due to primary or secondary failure and/or unacceptable adverse effects. Six (25%) patients achieved HiSCR at 3 months and 13 (56.5%) at 6 months of treatment. Patients with Hurley stage II had a better response to treatment than those with Hurley III [16]. These results supported the effectiveness of SEC in cases un- responsive or contraindicated to adalimumab. In the multicenter real-world study of Haselgruber et al, 28 of 67 patients with moderate-severe HS (41.79%) achieved HiSCR at 24 weeks with SEC treatment. SEC was used at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks or 300 mg/2 weeks following the loading dose. They defined therapeutic burden as the cumu- lative sum of previous systemic treatment cycles (whether bi- ological or not) plus the total number of previous surgical interventions that the patient had undergone for HS before initiating SEC. They observed a negative correlation between therapeutic burden and achieving HiSCR at week 24 with SEC [17]. This correlation, similar to the results of our study, drew attention to the concept of a window of opportunity in the management of HS in the early stages of the disease. In the single-center study reported by Abu Rached et al from Germany, 13 of 42 patients with moderate-severe HS (41.9%) achieved HiSCR response at 16 weeks with SEC treatment. SEC was used at a dose of 300 mg/4 weeks, in- creased to 300 mg/2 weeks if necessary. Adverse events were reported in 6 patients (14.3%), and treatment discontinu- ation occurred in 3 patients (7.1%). Median tobacco pack years and HS inguinal involvement was significantly lower in patients who achieved HiSCR [18]. Data on the effectiveness and safety of SEC in patients with HS have been reported in several case reports [19-23]. However, information on real-world data is still limited. The most common comorbidity in our study population was psoriasis (35.5% of cases). This is, of course, due to the fact that SEC is given priority in treatment selection in cases where HS and psoriasis occur together. Large population studies have shown that the prevalence of HS in patients with psoriasis is higher than in controls, and the prevalence Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 7 A 52-Week Real-Life Study. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2024;17:159-66. DOI: 10.2147/ccid.S449367 PMID:38283798 PMCID:PMC10821645 15. Ribero S, Ramondetta A, Fabbrocini G, et al. Effectiveness of Secukinumab in the treatment of moderate-severe hidradeni- tis suppurativa: results from an Italian multicentric retrospec- tive study in a real-life setting. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;35(7):e441-e2. DOI:10.1111/jdv.17178 PMID:33594790 16. Roccuzzo G, Repetto F, Giordano S, et al. Anti-IL17 Secuki- numab in hidradenitis suppurativa: A long-term drug survival analysis. Exp Dermatol. 2024;33(7):e15140. DOI: 10.1111 /exd.15140 PMID:39032087 17. Haselgruber S, Fernández-Crehuet-Serrano P, Fernández- Ballesteros MD, et al. Insights into the Window of Opportunity and Outcome Measures in Patients with Moderate to Severe Hi- dradenitis Suppurativa Treated with Secukinumab: A Real-World Study. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s13555- 024-01209-w PMID:38896382 PMCID:PMC11264522 18. Abu Rached N, Haven Y, Ocker L, Stockfleth E, Bechara FG. Real-world data about secukinumab in hidradenitis suppurativa: tobacco pack years an underestimated factor. Clin Exp Derma- tol. 2024. DOI: 10.1093/ced/llae386 PMID:39305502 19. Marasca C, Megna M, Balato A, Balato N, Napolitano M, Fabbrocini G. Secukinumab and hidradenitis suppurativa: Friends or foes? JAAD Case Rep. 2019;5(2):184-7. DOI: 10.1016 /j.jdcr.2018.12.002 PMID:30740502 PMCID:PMC6357542 20. Thorlacius L, Theut Riis P, Jemec GBE. Severe hidradenitis suppurativa responding to treatment with secukinumab: a case report. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179(1):182-5. DOI: 10.1111 /bjd.15769 PMID:28654150 21. Schuch A, Fischer T, Boehner A, Biedermann T, Volz T. Success- ful Treatment of Severe Recalcitrant Hidradenitis Suppurativa with the Interleukin-17A Antibody Secukinumab. Acta Derm Venereol. 2018;98(1):151-2. DOI: 10.2340/00015555-2794 PMID:28902952 22. Jørgensen AR, Yao Y, Thomsen SF. Therapeutic Response to Secukinumab in a 36-Year-Old Woman with Hidradenitis Sup- purativa. Case Rep Dermatol Med. 2018;2018:8685136. DOI: 10.1155/2018/8685136 PMID:29850284 PMCID:PMC592 6496 23. Villegas-Romero I, Collantes-Rodríguez C, Valenzuela-Ubiña S, Jiménez-Gallo D. Moderate to Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa Successfully Treated With Secukinumab. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2020;111(8):696-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ad.2019.07.007 PMID:32553985 24. Kridin K, Shani M, Schonmann Y, et al. Psoriasis and hidrad- enitis suppurativa: A large-scale population-based study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2023;88(5):e231-e6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2018 .11.036 PMID:30502412 25. Nguyen TV, Damiani G, Orenstein LAV, Hamzavi I, Jemec GB. Hidradenitis suppurativa: an update on epidemiology, pheno- types, diagnosis, pathogenesis, comorbidities and quality of life. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2021;35(1):50-61. DOI: 10.1111 /jdv.16677 PMID:32460374 26. Avcı C, Akın G, Akarsu S, Lebe B. Pyoderma gangrenosum and Behçet’s-like disease induced by secukinumab: a paradoxical drug reaction. J Dermatolog Treat. 2023;34(1):2235040. DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2023.2235040 PMID:37449310 27. Clemente-Hernández B, Álvarez-Salafranca M, Muelas-Rives I, Ollero-Domenche L, Gracia-Cazaña T, Gilaberte Y. Multi- focal pyoderma gangrenosum induced by secukinumab in a 2. Vossen A, van der Zee HH, Prens EP. Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Systematic Review Integrating Inflammatory Pathways Into a Cohesive Pathogenic Model. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2965. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02965 PMID:30619323 PMCID: PMC6302105 3. Melnik BC, John SM, Chen W, Plewig G. T helper 17 cell/regu- latory T-cell imbalance in hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa: the link to hair follicle dissection, obesity, smoking and autoim- mune comorbidities. Br J Dermatol. 2018;179(2):260-72. DOI: 10.1111/bjd.16561 PMID:29573406 4. Matusiak Ł, Szczęch J, Bieniek A, Nowicka-Suszko D, Szepietowski JC. Increased interleukin (IL)-17 serum levels in pa- tients with hidradenitis suppurativa: Implications for treatment with anti-IL-17 agents. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(4):670-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.10.042 PMID:28041632 5. Kimball AB, Jemec GBE, Alavi A, et al. Secukinumab in moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (SUNSHINE and SUNRISE): week 16 and week 52 results of two identical, mul- ticentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trials. Lancet. 2023;401(10378):747-61. DOI: 10.1016/s0140- 6736(23)00022-3 PMID:36746171 6. Novartis Europharm Limited. Cosentyx® (secukinumab): summary of product characteristics [Available from: https:// www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/overview/cosentyx-epar -medicine-overview_en.pdf. 7. Novartis Europharm Limited. Cosentyx® (secukinumab) Biologic License Application (BLA): 761349 [Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2023/125 504s066,761349s004lbl.pdf. 8. Kimball AB, Jemec GB, Yang M, et al. Assessing the validity, responsiveness and meaningfulness of the Hidradenitis Suppu- rativa Clinical Response (HiSCR) as the clinical endpoint for hidradenitis suppurativa treatment. Br J Dermatol. 2014;171(6): 1434-42. DOI: 10.1111/bjd.13270 PMID:25040429 9. Zouboulis CC, Passeron T, Pariser D, et al. Secukinumab in pa- tients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa based on prior biologic exposure: an efficacy and safety analysis from the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE phase III trials. Br J Der- matol. 2024;190(6):836-45. DOI: 10.1093/bjd/ljae098 PMID: 38470171 10. Prussick L, Rothstein B, Joshipura D, et al. Open-label, investigator- initiated, single-site exploratory trial evaluating secukinumab, an anti-interleukin-17A monoclonal antibody, for patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa. Br J Dermatol. 2019;181(3):609-11. DOI: 10.1111/bjd.17822 PMID:30801662 11. Casseres RG, Prussick L, Zancanaro P, et al. Secukinumab in the treatment of moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa: Results of an open-label trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020;82(6):1524-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.02.005 PMID:32044410 12. Reguiaï Z, Fougerousse AC, Maccari F, Bécherel PA. Effective- ness of secukinumab in hidradenitis suppurativa: an open study (20 cases). J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(11):e750-e1. DOI: 10.1111/jdv.16605 PMID:32401354 13. Melgosa Ramos FJ, García Ruiz R, Estébanez Corrales A, Mateu Puchades A. Long-term secukinumab efficacy in patients with moderate to severe hidradenitis suppurativa: A retrospec- tive single-centre case series (23 patients). J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2023;37(4):e517-e9. DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18685 PMID: 36268711 14. Martora F, Marasca C, Cacciapuoti S, et al. Secukinumab in Hidradenitis Suppurativa Patients Who Failed Adalimumab: 8 Original Article | Dermatol Pract Concept. 2025;15(1):4915 31. Jin K, Matsuzaki Y, Akasaka E, Nakano H, Sawamura D. Pyoderma gangrenosum triggered by switching from adali- mumab to secukinumab. J Dermatol. 2019;46(3):e108-e9. DOI:10.1111/1346-8138.14611 PMID:30192400 32. Benzaquen M, Monnier J, Beaussault Y, Rouby F, Berbis P. Pyo- derma gangrenosum arising during treatment of psoriasis with adalimumab: Effectiveness of ustekinumab. Australas J Dermatol. 2017;58(4):e270-e1. DOI:10.1111/ajd.12545 PMID:28660635 33. Guenova E, Teske A, Fehrenbacher B, et al. Interleukin 23 expres- sion in pyoderma gangrenosum and targeted therapy with usteki- numab. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147(10):1203-5. DOI:10.1001/ archdermatol.2011.168. PMID:21680759 34. Alavi A, French LE, Davis MD, Brassard A, Kirsner RS. Pyoderma Gangrenosum: An Update on Pathophysiology, Diag- nosis and Treatment. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2017;18(3):355-72. DOI:10.1007/s40257-017-0251-7. PMID:28224502 patient with hidradenitis suppurativa. Indian J Dermatol Vene- reol Leprol. 2024:1-3. DOI: 10.25259/ijdvl_329_2024 PMID: 39152828 28. Orita A, Hoshina D, Hirosaki K. Pyoderma gangrenosum caused by secukinumab successfully treated with risankizumab: a case report and literature review. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2022;47(7): 1372-4. DOI: 10.1111/ced.15183 PMID:35298047 29. Petty AJ, Whitley MJ, Balaban A, Ellington K, Marano AL. Pyoderma gangrenosum induced by secukinumab in a patient with psoriasis successfully treated with ustekinumab. JAAD Case Rep. 2020;6(8):731-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdcr.2020.06.011 PMID:32715064 PMCID:PMC7369520 30. Wollina U, Schönlebe J, Fürll C. Pyoderma gangrenosum induced by secukinumab-A late paradoxical drug reaction. Dermatol Ther. 2020;33(1):e13161. DOI: 10.1111/dth.13161 PMID: 31705566