Poster presented at the 36th Fall Clinical Dermatology Conference | Las Vegas, NV | October 12-15, 2017 

Certolizumab Pegol for the Treatment of Chronic Plaque Psoriasis: DLQI and WPAI Patient-Reported 
Outcomes From an Ongoing Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Active- and Placebo-Controlled Study 
(CIMPACT)
Vincent Piguet,1 Andrew Blauvelt,2 Daniel Burge,3 Luke Peterson,4 Janice Drew,3 Robert Rolleri,4 Jolanta Węgłowska5
1Cardiff University and University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK; 2Oregon Medical Research Center, Portland, OR; 3Dermira, Inc., Menlo Park, CA; 4UCB BioSciences, Inc., Raleigh, NC; 5Niepubliczny Zakład Opieki Zdrowotnej multiMedica, Wrocław, Poland

INTRODUCTION
• Psoriasis affects ~3% of adults in the US1,2 and ~2-6% of adults in Europe3; onset can begin 

at any age, though most patients develop the disease in the third decade of life4

• Psoriasis can have a significant negative impact on the physical, emotional, psychosocial, 
and economic well‑being of affected patients5,6

 – In the US, over 80% of psoriasis patients report that the disease negatively affects their 
emotional state and their enjoyment of life6 

 – Over 90% of unemployed US psoriasis patients report not working solely due to psoriasis 
or psoriatic arthritis, and almost half of working psoriasis patients regularly miss work due 
to the disease6 

 – Quality of life instruments for psoriasis have been useful to assess the impact of psoriasis 
on patients lives and well‑being7,8

• Certolizumab pegol (CZP) is the only PEGylated, Fc-free, anti-TNF biologic and is currently 
under investigation for the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis

• Previously presented data through Week 16 of 3 ongoing, randomized, double-blind, 
placebo‑controlled trials have demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy and a safety 
profile consistent with anti‑TNF therapy9,10

• CIMPACT (NCT02346240) is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of treatment 
with CZP compared with placebo and etanercept (ETN) in adult patients with 
moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis; results of patient-reported outcomes through 
Week 16 for all patients and results through Week 48 for patients initially treated with CZP 
are presented here

METHODS
Study Design
• CIMPACT is an ongoing phase 3, randomized, multinational, parallel-group, placebo- and 

active-controlled trial 
• Patients were randomized 3:3:1:3 to CZP 400 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W), CZP 200 mg Q2W 

(after an initial loading dose of 400 mg at Weeks 0, 2 and 4), or placebo Q2W for 16 weeks or 
ETN twice weekly for 12 weeks (Figure 1)

• At Week 16, CZP‑ and ETN‑treated PASI 75 responders were re‑randomized and continued 
for 32 weeks of maintenance treatment:

 – From CZP 400 mg Q2W to 400 mg Q2W, 200 mg Q2W, or placebo Q2W
 – From CZP 200 mg Q2W to 400 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W), 200 mg Q2W, or placebo 

Q2W
 – From ETN to CZP 200 mg Q2W (after loading dose) or placebo Q2W

• At Week 16, placebo‑treated PASI 75 responders continued placebo Q2W for 32 weeks of 
maintenance treatment

• At Week 16, PASI 75 nonresponders entered an Escape Arm for treatment with CZP 
400 mg Q2W

Figure 1.  Study Design

0

Randomization Re-randomization

16 4840 443212 36Week

Initial Treatment Period
(Double-Blind)

Maintenance Period
(Double-Blind)

1:3:3:3

< PASI 50 – Withdrawn

< PASI 75

< PASI 50 – Open Label Treatment

< PASI 75

< PASI 75

< PASI 75

Placebo Q2W Placebo Q2W

CZP 400 mg Q4W

CZP 200 mg Q2W

CZP 400 mg Q2W

Escape CZP 400 mg Q2W

LD

ETN 50 mg BW Washout

LD CZP 200 mg Q2W

CZP 400 mg Q2W

BW, twice weekly; CZP, certolizumab pegol; ETN, etanercept; LD, loading dose of CZP 400 mg at Weeks 0, 2, and 4 or Weeks 
16, 18, and 20; PASI 50, ≥50% reduction in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI); PASI 75, ≥75% reduction in PASI; Q2W, 
every 2 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks

Patients 
• Eligible patients were ≥18 years of age, had moderate‑to‑severe chronic plaque psoriasis 

for ≥6 months with a Baseline psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) ≥12, affected body 
surface area (BSA) ≥10%, and physician’s global assessment (PGA; 5‑point scale) ≥3

• Patients had to be candidates for systemic psoriasis therapy, phototherapy, and/or 
photochemotherapy

• Patients were excluded if they had erythrodermic, guttate, or generalized pustular forms of 
psoriasis; previous treatment with CZP, ETN, or >2 biologics (including anti‑TNF); or history 
of primary failure to any biologic or secondary failure to >1 biologic

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Study Assessments
• Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI)

 – Validated, skin disease‑specific questionnaire that assesses how disease 
symptoms/treatment affect patient health-related quality of life; higher scores indicate 
lower quality of life (numeric rating scale 0 to 30)

• Work Productivity and Activity Impairment–Specific Health Problem questionnaire (WPAI) 
 – 6‑item, self‑reported survey that covers 4 domains of work/daily activity impairment, 

including:
1.  Absenteeism (work time missed)
2.  Presenteeism (reduced on‑the‑job effectiveness)
3.  Work productivity loss (overall work impairment)
4.  Activity impairment (impairment performing regular daily activities)

 – Questions related to the first 3 domains were to be completed only by patients who were 
employed at the time of the assessment; questions related to the last domain were to be 
completed by all patients

 – WPAI domain scores are impairment percentages; higher numbers indicate greater 
impairment and less productivity

• Assessments at Weeks 16 and 48
 – Change from Baseline (CfB) in DLQI
 – DLQI minimal clinically important difference (MCID; ≥4‑point reduction7) responder rate
 – DLQI 0/1 (absolute score ≤1) responder rate
 – CfB in WPAI

Statistical Analysis
• Efficacy analyses at Week 16 were performed on the Randomized Set (all randomized 

patients)
• Efficacy analyses at Week 48 were performed on the Maintenance Set (patients completing 

the Week 16 visit with ≥1 efficacy measurement during the Maintenance Period)
• Inferential statistics for CfB in DLQI and WPAI at Week 16 were based on analysis of 

covariance (ANCOVA)
• Mean CfB values are presented for continuous variables, and percentages are presented 

for responder variables
• Last observation carried forward (LOCF) imputation was used to impute data for CfB in 

DLQI (Week 16 and 48) and WPAI (Week 16)
• Nonresponse imputation was used for DLQI MCID and DLQI 0/1 analyses 
• Week 48 WPAI data was assessed based on observed cases

RESULTS
Patient Disposition, Demographics, and Baseline Characteristics
• A total of 167, 165, and 57 patients were randomized to CZP 400 mg Q2W, CZP 200 mg 

Q2W, or placebo, respectively (Figure 2)
• Patient demographics and Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (Table 1)

Figure 2.  Patient Disposition

Completed
Week 16

Placebo
N=57

N=55a
(96.5%)

Discontinued 11
Adverse event 4
Lack of efficacy 1
Protocol violation 1
Lost to follow-up 2
Consent w/d 2
Other 1

Discontinued 6
Adverse event 1
Lost to follow-up 1
Consent w/d 3
Other 1

Discontinued 5
Adverse event 1
Lost to follow-up 2
Consent w/d 1
Other 1

Discontinued 1
Other 1

Discontinued 2
Adverse event 1
Consent w/d 1

Discontinued 2
Lost to follow-up 1
Consent w/d 1

Discontinued 4
Adverse event 2
Consent w/d 1
Other 1

Discontinued 2
Consent w/d 1
Other 1

Discontinued 3
Consent w/d 2
Other 1

ETN
N=170

PASI 75 Responder and
Entered Maintenance

Completed 
Week 48

N=44N=22 N=44

CZP 200 mg Q2W
N=165

CZP 400 mg Q2W
N=167

N=159b
(93.5%)

N=159
(96.4%)
N=159
(96.4%)

Escapec
N=53

Escapec
N=53

Escapec
N=85

Escapec
N=85

Escapec
N=49

Escapec
N=49

N=43
(97.7%)
N=43

(97.7%)
N=20

(90.9%)
N=20

(90.9%)
N=40

(90.9%)
N=40

(90.9%)
N=23

(92.0%)
N=23

(92.0%)
N=49

(100%)
N=49

(100%)

N=50 N=49dN=25

N=162
(97.0%)
N=162
(97.0%)

Escapec
N=36

Escapec
N=36

N=47
(94.0%)
N=47

(94.0%)

Screened
N=733

Randomized
N=559

aPlacebo-treated PASI 75 responders at Week 16 (N=2) continued placebo
bETN‑treated PASI 75 responders at Week 16 (N=74) were re‑randomized to placebo (N=24) or CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=50)
cPASI 75 nonresponders at Week 16 entered the Escape Arm for treatment with CZP 400 mg Q2W
dTwo patients completed Week 16 but did not enter Maintenance Period (1 loss to follow‑up; 1 consent withdrawn)
■, CZP 400 mg Q4W; BW, twice per week; CZP, certolizumab pegol; ETN, etanercept; PASI 75, ≥75% reduction in psoriasis 
area and severity index; Q2W, every 2 weeks;  
Q4W, every 4 weeks; w/d, withdrawn

Table 1.  Patient Demographics and Baseline Disease 
Characteristics

 
Placebo 
(N=57)

CZP 200 mg 
Q2W 

(N=165)

CZP 400 mg 
Q2W 

(N=167)

Demographics
Age (years), mean ± SD 46.5 ± 12.5 46.7 ± 13.5 45.4 ± 12.4

Male, n (%) 34 (59.6) 113 (68.5) 107 (64.1)

White, n (%) 57 (100) 158 (95.8) 162 (97.0)

Employed, n (%) 49 (86.0) 117 (70.9) 123 (73.7)

Geographic Region, n (%)
North America
Central/Eastern Europe
Western Europe

10 (17.5)
36 (63.2)
11 (19.3)

  26 (15.8)
107 (64.8)
  32 (19.4)

  27 (16.2)
109 (65.3)
  31 (18.6)

Weight (kg)
Mean ± SD
Range

93.7 ± 29.7
  55.0 – 198.5

89.7 ± 20.6
 49.0 – 171.1

86.3 ± 20.0
  41.8 – 152.0

BMI (kg/m2)
Mean ± SD
Range

31.2 ± 8.5
 19.6 – 57.4

29.8 ± 6.1
  18.3 – 53.0

28.9 ± 5.9
  15.4 – 45.1

Baseline disease characteristics
Duration of psoriasis at 
screening (years) 

Mean ± SD
Range

18.9 ± 12.9
  0.8 – 54.6

19.5 ± 13.2
  0.5 – 63.7

17.8 ± 11.5
  0.5 – 56.9

Concurrent psoriatic arthritis, n 
(%) 12 (21.1) 27 (16.4) 24 (14.4)

PASI
Mean ± SD
Range

19.1 ± 7.1
  12.0 – 43.1

21.4 ± 8.8
  12.0 – 55.5

20.8 ± 7.7
   12.0 – 58.5

BSA (%), mean ± SD 24.3 ± 13.8 28.1 ± 16.7 27.6 ± 15.3

PGA, n (%)
3: moderate
4: severe

40 (70.2)
17 (29.8)

114 (69.1)
  51 (30.9)

113 (67.7)
  54 (32.3)

Prior biologic use,a n (%)
anti-TNF
anti-IL17

11 (19.3)
  5 (  8.8)
  8 (14.0)

44 (26.7)
  4 (  2.4)
38 (23.0)

48 (28.7)
  4 ( 2.4)
35 (21.0)

DLQI, mean ± SD 13.2 ± 7.6 12.8 ± 7.0 15.3 ± 7.3

WPAI domain scores, mean ± SD
Absenteeism
Presenteeism
Work productivity loss
Activity impairment

  7.0 ± 24.1
18.4 ± 22.9
25.1 ± 29.7
26.1 ± 25.1

  9.5 ± 24.9
21.1 ± 24.7
28.6 ± 31.2
29.8 ± 28.8

  5.8 ± 16.6
28.4 ± 26.7
31.9 ± 29.5
35.1 ± 26.6

aPatients may have had exposure to >1 prior biologic but ≤2 per exclusion criteria
BMI, body mass index; BSA, body surface area; CZP, certolizumab pegol; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; IL, interleukin; 
PASI, psoriasis area and severity index;  
PGA, physician’s global assessment; Q2W, every 2 weeks; SD, standard deviation; TNF, tumor necrosis factor; WPAI, Work 
Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire‑Specific Health Problem

 

Patient-Reported Outcomes
DLQI

Baseline to Week 16

• At Week 16, patients treated with CZP 400 mg Q2W and CZP 200 mg Q2W demonstrated 
clinically meaningful improvements in DLQI vs placebo (Figure 3)

• At Week 16, CZP-treated patients demonstrated numerically greater improvement in 
both DLQI MCID (Figure 4A) and DLQI 0/1 (Figure 4B) responder rates compared with 
placebo-treated patients; the CZP 400 mg Q2W group had numerically greater improvement 
compared with the CZP 200 mg Q2W group

Figure 3.  DLQI Mean Scores at Baseline and Week 16

13.2
12.1

Baseline Week 16
Placebo (N=57)

12.8

4.7

Baseline Week 16

15.3

4.3

Baseline Week 16
CZP 200 mg Q2Wa (N=165b) CZP 400 mg Q2W (N=167)

Mean CfB -1.1 -8.1** -11.0**18

16

14

12

8

6

4

10

2

0

M
ea

n 
S

co
re

**p<0.0001 vs placebo based on adjusted least squares mean difference from an ANCOVA model with treatment group, 
region, and prior biologic exposure (yes/no) as factors and Baseline DLQI score as a covariate using LOCF imputation
aCZP 200 mg Q2W patients received a loading dose of CZP 400 mg at Weeks 0, 2, and 4
b1 patient did not have DLQI mean score values
ANCOVA, analysis of covariance; CfB, change from Baseline; CZP, certolizumab pegol; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; LOCF, 
last observation carried forward; Q2W, every 2 weeks

Figure 4.  DLQI Minimal Clinically Important Differencea and 
DLQI 0/1 Responder Rates at Week 16

29.8%

Placebo
(N=57)

68.5%

83.8%

CZP 200 mg
Q2Wb

(N=165)

CZP 400 mg
Q2W

(N=167)

10.5%

Placebo
(N=57)

38.2%
46.1%

CZP 200 mg
Q2Wb

(N=165)

CZP 400 mg
Q2W

(N=167)

100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

A. DLQI MCID
100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

B. DLQI 0/1

a≥4‑point reduction from Baseline
bCZP 200 mg Q2W patients received a loading dose of CZP 400 mg at Weeks 0, 2, and 4
Based on nonresponse imputation
CZP, certolizumab pegol; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; LOCF, last observation carried forward; Q2W, every 2 weeks

Baseline to Week 48

• Better maintenance of response was observed at Week 48 for those patients re‑randomized 
from CZP 400 mg Q2W or CZP 200 mg Q2W to either dose of CZP compared with placebo 
in DLQI (Figure 5A), DLQI MCID (Figure 5B), and DLQI 0/1 (Figure 5C); the greatest 
responses were noted in subjects treated with CZP 400 mg Q2W during both the Initial and 
Maintenance Periods

Figure 5.  DLQI Scores and Responder Rates at Week 16 and 
Week 48

1.5

Wk 16

5.7

Wk 48
Placebo

3.3

Wk 48

2.6

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

2.3

Wk 48

2.8

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q4W

2.4

Wk 16

12.9

Wk 48
Placebo

3.8

Wk 48

2.8

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

1.1

Wk 48

1.9

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q2W

77.3%

Wk 16

40.9%

Wk 48
Placebo

65.9%

Wk 48

72.7%

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

79.5%

Wk 48

84.1%

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q4W

72.0%

Wk 16

32.0%

Wk 48
Placebo

78.0%

Wk 48

94.0%

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

95.9%

Wk 48

98.0%

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q2W

72.7%

Wk 16

13.6%

Wk 48
Placebo

54.5%

Wk 48

47.7%

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

59.1%

Wk 48

50.0%

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q4W

68.0%

Wk 16

4.0%

Wk 48
Placebo

50.0%

Wk 48

50.0%

Wk 16
CZP 200 mg Q2W

77.6%

Wk 48

59.2%

Wk 16
CZP 400 mg Q2W

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

M
ea

n 
S

co
re

A. Mean DLQI Score
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

M
ea

n 
S

co
re

100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

B. DLQI Minimal Clinically Important Differencea Responder Rates
100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

C. DLQI 0/1 Responder Rates
100

80

60

40

20

0

R
es

po
nd

er
 R

at
e 

(%
)

CZP 200 mg Q2W CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=44)

CZP 400 mg Q4W (N=44)

Placebo Q2W (N=22)

CZP 400 mg Q2W CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=50)

CZP 400 mg Q2W (N=49)

Placebo Q2W (N=25)

a≥4‑point reduction from Baseline
Missing data handled using LOCF imputation and no statistical comparisons were performed at Week 48
CZP, certolizumab pegol; DLQI, Dermatology Quality of Life Index; LOCF, last observation carried forward; Q2W, every 2 
weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks

WPAI

Baseline to Week 16

• As assessed by WPAI, patients receiving either CZP dose had improvements in 
absenteeism, presenteeism, work productivity loss, and activity impairment at Week 16 
(Figure 6); greater improvements were generally observed in subjects receiving CZP 
400 mg Q2W

Baseline to Week 48

• Patients initially treated with CZP and re‑randomized to the same or different dose of CZP 
maintained improvement across WPAI domains at Week 48 (Figure 7)

Figure 6.  Mean Absolute Change from Baseline in WPAI 
Domain Scores at Week 16

WPAI Domains

Placebo (N=57) CZP 200 mg Q2Wa (N=165) CZP 400 mg Q2W (N=167)

4.6

-3.3* -1.5*

Absenteeism

3.5

-10.4*

-18.4**

Presenteeism

7.4

-13.3**
-18.3**

Work productivity loss

2.8

-17.1**
-21.4**

Activity impairment

20

0

-20

-40M
ea

n 
A

bs
ol

ut
e 

C
ha

ng
e 

Fr
om

 B
as

el
in

e
(

 Im
pr

ov
em

en
t)

n= 49 117 123 49 117 123 49 117 123 57 164 167

*p<0.05, **p<0.0001 vs placebo; p‑values are nominal and are based on adjusted least squares mean difference from an 
ANCOVA model with treatment group, region, prior biologic exposure (yes/no) as factors and Baseline WPAI score as a 
covariate using LOCF imputation
aCZP 200 mg Q2W patients received a loading dose of CZP 400 mg at Weeks 0, 2, and 4
ANCOVA, analysis of covariance; CZP, certolizumab pegol; LOCF, last observation carried forward; Q2W, every 2 weeks; 
WPAI, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire‑Specific Health Problem

Figure 7.  Mean Absolute Change from Baseline in WPAI 
Domain Scores at Week 48

WPAI Domains WPAI Domains

2.6

-2.5

-12.6

Absenteeism

-5.0
-8.5

-18.5

Presenteeism

-5.4

-10.9

-28.8

Work 
productivity loss

-32.5

-18.9
-21.3

Activity 
impairment

20

0

-20

-40

M
ea

n 
A

bs
ol

ut
e

C
ha

ng
e 

Fr
om

 B
as

el
in

e
(

 Im
pr

ov
em

en
t)

CZP 200 mg Q2W CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=44)

CZP 400 mg Q4W (N=44)

Placebo Q2W (N=22)

CZP 400 mg Q2W CZP 200 mg Q2W (N=50)

CZP 400 mg Q2W (N=49)

Placebo Q2W (N=25)

3.1

-4.2

1.5

Absenteeism

-22.0 -20.7

-26.8

Presenteeism

-13.0

-22.1
-24.9

Work 
productivity loss

-4.7

-24.4

-30.2

Activity 
impairment

20

0

-20

-40

M
ea

n 
A

bs
ol

ut
e

C
ha

ng
e 

Fr
om

 B
as

el
in

e
(

 Im
pr

ov
em

en
t)

n= n=6 27 27 6 27 27 6 27 27 12 36 40 10 27 38 10 27 38 10 27 38 15 41 48

Statistical comparisons not performed at Week 48
Based on observed cases
CZP, certolizumab pegol; Q2W, every 2 weeks; Q4W, every 4 weeks; WPAI, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment 
Questionnaire‑Specific Health Problem

CONCLUSIONS
• In the Initial Treatment Period, CZP-treated patients had clinically 

meaningful improvements in DLQI, with a greater proportion of subjects 
achieving DLQI MCID and/or DLQI 0/1 compared with placebo

• Reduction in impairment while working and in daily activities, as assessed 
by WPAI, were improved in the CZP treatment groups at Week 16 
compared with placebo

• Improvements in DLQI and WPAI were generally maintained through Week 
48 in all CZP maintenance groups

 – DLQI 0/1 responder rates were maintained or improved throughout the 
Maintenance Treatment Period

 – Improvement in DLQI 0/1 responder rate and WPAI domains was most 
pronounced in the group that received CZP 400 mg Q2W in both the 
Initial and Maintenance Periods

• These results indicate that longer‑term treatment with CZP has a positive 
impact on patient quality of life and functioning

• Given the substantial burden of disease experienced by patients with psoriasis, 
CZP has the potential to be an important new treatment option for patients with 
moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis

References
1. Rachakonda et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014;70(3):512‑6. 2. Kurd et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60(2):218‑24. 3. 

Danielsen et al. Br J Dermatol. 2013;168(6):1303‑10. 4. Farber et al. Dermatologica. 1974;148(1):1‑18. 5. Langley et al. 

Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64 Suppl 2:ii18‑23. 6. Armstrong et al. PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52935. 7. Basra et al. Dermatology. 

2015;230(1):27‑33. 8. Ali et al. Br J Dermatol. 2017;176(3):577‑93. 9. Gottlieb et al. Oral presentation at: 75th Annual 

Meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology; March 3-7, 2017; Orlando, FL. Abstract 5077. 10. Lebwohl et al. 

Poster presentation at: 13th Annual Maui Derm for Dermatologists; March 20‑24, 2017; Maui, HI. Abstract 3120.

Acknowledgements 
This study and all costs associated with the development of this poster were funded by Dermira, Inc. Dermira and 

UCB are in a strategic collaboration to evaluate the efficacy and safety of certolizumab pegol in the treatment of 

moderate‑to‑severe plaque psoriasis. Medical writing support was provided by Prescott Medical Communications Group 

(Chicago, IL).

Author Disclosures
VP: Consulting honoraria and/or speaker fees: AbbVie, Almirall, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. Support to VP 

Department: AbbVie, Almirall, Alliance, Beiersdorf UK Ltd, Biotest, Celgene, Dermal, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Genus Pharma, 

GlobeMicro, Janssen‑Celag, LaRoche‑Posay, L’Oreal, LEO Pharma, Meda, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samumed, Sinclair 

Pharma, Spirit, Stiefel, Thornton Ross, TyPham, UCB. AB: Consulting and/or honoraria: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer 

Ingelheim, Celgene, Dermira, Inc., Genentech, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sandoz. DB, JD: 

Employees of Dermira, Inc. LP, RR: Employees of UCB BioSciences, Inc. JW: Investigator and/or speaker: Amgen, 

Celgene, Coherus, Dermira, Inc., Eli Lilly, Galderma, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Merck, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sandoz, UCB. 


	FC17PosterDermiraPiguetCertolizumabPegol.pdf