## 5 Conclusions  
We found no differences in CNVs between different psoriasis phenotypes. The absence of genetic mechanisms to explain the marked clinical differences and therapeutic response to the same treatments found between these subgroups in clinical practice suggests that there must be epigenetic mechanisms (DNA methylation, microRNAs, histone modifications) involved in such differences. The study of epigenetics in the different clinical forms of psoriasis could provide a more comprehensive understanding of this disease, potentially leading to new therapeutic targets for each of the clinical forms. In summary, these results may help to predict which patients could develop psoriasisform reactions. Nevertheless, the clinical relevance of these results should be confirmed using larger cohorts and different techniques. **Supplementary Materials:** The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jpm12091452/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jpm12091452/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jpm12091452/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jpm12091452/s1)), Figure S1: Conumee plots of the CNVs located along the whole genome. Example of the conumee plot of a patient with idiopathic psoriasis (A) and with induced palmoplantar gustulosis (B). Blue lines represent segments with the same CNV state, and dots represent bins. Green dots are CNV gains, and red dots are CNV losses. **Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, A.S.-T., A.R. and M.C.O.-B. ; methodology, J.G.-M., A.S.-G. and M.C.O.-B. ; software, A.S.-G.; validation, A.S.-G. and [PERSON]-M.; formal analysis, [PERSON]-M., A.S.-G. and M.C.O.-B. ; investigation, [PERSON]-M., [PERSON]-G. and M.C.O.-B. ; resources, R.B.-E., E.D., F.A.-S., E.M.-A. and M.L.-V.; data curation, J.G.-M. and A.S.-G.; writing--original draft preparation, M.C.O.-B. ; writing--review and editing. A.R., A.S.-T., A.S.-G., R.B.-E., E.M.-A., M.L.-V., J.G.-M., E.D., F.A.-S. and M.C.O.-B. ; visualization, M.C.O.-B. ; supervision, E.D. and F.A.-S.; project administration, R.B.-E.; funding acquisition, R.B.-E., F.A.-S. and E.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. **Funding:** This research was funded by Instituto de Salul Carlos III (PI 2017/0348) and Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria La Fe (IIS-La Fe), Valencia (Spain). **Institutional Review Board Statement:** The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board Ethics Committee for Clinical Research of Hospital Universitario de la Fe (Valencia, Spain). **Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. **Data Availability Statement:** The datasets use and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. **Acknowledgments:** We would like to thank [PERSON] for their valuable comments on this manuscript. **Conflicts of Interest:** [PERSON] has been a consultant or investigator in clinical trials sponsored by the following pharmaceutical companies: Abbott, Alter, Chemo, Farmalider, Ferrer, GlaxoSmithK-line, Gilead, Janssen-Cilag, Kern, Normon, Novartis, Servier, Teva, and Zambon. [PERSON] has potential conflicts of interest (advisory board member, consultant, grants, research support, participation in clinical trials, honoraria for speaking, and research support) with the following pharmaceutical companies: AbbVie (Abbott), Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, MSD, Lilly, and Celgene. [PERSON] has potential conflicts of interest as she has participated in clinical trials or as a consultant with [PERSON] (Abbott), Galderma, Janssen-Cilag, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, Novartis, Lilly, Almirall, and Celgene. [PERSON] has potential conflicts of interest (honoraria for speaking and research support) with Janssen-Cilag and Leo Pharma.