October 2026 Dermatology Headlines: PASI Data and Label Changes

By Daniel Okafor

At week 16, oral prifemilast produced PASI 75 responses in as many as 57.4% of participants with psoriasis, compared with 10.8% receiving placebo.

The Nov. 3, 2026 HCPLive Month in Review series gathered eight October dermatology headlines to summarize significant news from the preceding month. Its scope extended beyond psoriasis to hidradenitis suppurativa, atopic dermatitis, lupus and alopecia areata. The roundup grouped drug efficacy, regulatory labeling, long-term treatment patterns and patient advocacy under one clinical lens.

What did oral prifemilast show?

Oral prifemilast is a PDE4B-selective inhibitor. In the reported psoriasis comparison, week-16 PASI 75 reached 57.4% with prifemilast, while placebo reached 10.8%. Roughly 57 of every 100 participants in the active group reached that threshold, versus about 11 of every 100 on placebo.

The headline figure speaks to short-term skin improvement. It does not establish comparative safety, longer-term durability, or which patients benefited most, because the roundup provides no such results. The supportable conclusion is narrower: prifemilast showed a much higher PASI 75 rate than placebo at week 16.

The roundup identifies the regimen, endpoint and assessment week, but it does not report the trial phase or enrollment size for prifemilast. That leaves the magnitude promising while leaving several development and treatment-selection questions unresolved.

The takeaway: prifemilast posted a large placebo-separated result at week 16, but the roundup stops short of the longer-term evidence needed for a fuller benefit-risk picture.

What drove treatment choices in ENCOMPASS-PP?

The ENCOMPASS-PP discrete choice experiment included 202 patients with psoriasis. Within that cohort, skin clearance and route of administration drove treatment choices.

The reported endpoint was treatment preference, not comparative clinical efficacy. In practical terms, the experiment suggests that patients weighed the prospect of clearer skin and how treatment would be delivered when making choices.

The result should not be read as proof that one administration route or treatment produced better outcomes than another. Its relevance lies in showing which attributes mattered to this group of 202 patients.

The takeaway: among 202 patients, clearance and delivery route were the decisive preference signals in the experiment.

How did the risankizumab label change?

The FDA updated the risankizumab label to make pretreatment tuberculosis evaluation a matter of clinical judgment across all indications, including psoriasis.

This is a labeling change, not a new drug approval or an efficacy dataset. It gives prescribers latitude to individualize the evaluation rather than apply one approach to every indication. The summary supplies no new universal testing protocol.

The update changes how the label frames evaluation; it should not be read as a blanket exemption from pretreatment assessment. The decision now sits with the clinician’s judgment for each patient.

The takeaway: clinicians now exercise judgment on pretreatment TB evaluation within risankizumab’s labeled indications.

What did the final VALUE data show?

Final VALUE data compared risankizumab with other biologics over 37 months in patients with psoriasis and comorbid psoriatic arthritis. The roundup reports fewer medication changes with risankizumab than with the comparator biologics.

Fewer changes represent a treatment-persistence signal, but the roundup gives no absolute change rates or sample size. Readers therefore cannot judge the size of the advantage from this summary. Still, the duration is substantial: 37 months covers just over three years, not a single study visit.

The practical question is whether fewer medication changes translate into steadier disease management and a better patient experience. The source does not report those outcomes, so persistence remains the clearest measured advantage.

The takeaway: the final 37-month comparison reported fewer medication changes with risankizumab than with other biologics.

What did patient advocates want clinicians to understand?

Psoriasis advocates Nitika Chopra and Ayesha Patrick addressed common misconceptions in the roundup. They also discussed how patients can speak up and offered simple tips for clinicians.

On World Psoriasis Day, the two advocates turned to the experience of feeling dismissed and to what dermatologists should know about skin-of-color care. Their contribution shifts attention from a single treatment score to the quality of the clinical conversation and whether patients feel heard.

Their recommendations matter because adherence and treatment decisions do not occur in isolation. The roundup connects clinical choices with communication, patient confidence and the ability to raise concerns during care.

The takeaway: patient advocacy in this roundup asks for clearer communication, practical ways to speak up and more attentive skin-of-color care.

What did ORKA-001 achieve in EVERLAST-B?

ORKA-001 is a half-life-extended IL-23p19 antibody. In the phase 2b EVERLAST-B psoriasis trial, the high-dose group recorded PASI 100 in 61% of patients at week 16.

That is a stringent endpoint: about 61 of every 100 high-dose participants reached PASI 100 at the same checkpoint. The phase 2b designation places the result in mid-stage development, and the reported percentage applies specifically to the high-dose group at week 16.

The roundup does not provide details on placebo response, safety, or durability beyond week 16, so those questions remain unanswered. Its strongest supportable conclusion is that ORKA-001 produced the reported PASI 100 rate in this high-dose arm.

The takeaway: ORKA-001 delivered a 61% PASI 100 rate at week 16 in the high-dose arm of a phase 2b trial.

What should clinicians carry forward?

The October roundup links three kinds of evidence. Prifemilast and ORKA-001 offer short-term PASI results; risankizumab brings a changed labeling framework and 37-month medication-change data; Chopra and Patrick center the patient experience of dismissal and skin-of-color care.

The next question is whether the week-16 PASI gains persist beyond the reported checkpoint. For prifemilast and ORKA-001, that means longer follow-up, complete safety information, and clearly defined dose use. For risankizumab, it means seeing how individualized TB evaluation works in practice. For care delivery, it means measuring whether communication practices change after advocates’ recommendations.

The practical takeaway is simple: pair drug numbers with duration, labeling guidance and the patient experience.