Phototherapy for atopic dermatitis: A survey of European practice.

BACKGROUND: Phototherapy is used to treat atopic dermatitis (AD). Evidence for its efficacy, impact on quality of life, cost-effectiveness and short- and long-term safety with real-life usage is weak. OBJECTIVES: We established a taskforce to examine how phototherapy is currently being used as a treatment for AD across the United Kingdom and Europe to inform our understanding and guide future research into management of patients with AD using UV-based phototherapies. METHODS: An anonymous electronic multiple-response survey exploring phototherapy prescribing practices and experience of phototherapy modalities was developed by the study authors and sent to members of phototherapy networks from the United Kingdom and Europe. Responses were received between February and July 2021. RESULTS: About 144 respondents from 27 European countries completed the survey. NBUVB was the most widely used [n = 138 (96%)]. Home-based NBUVB was available in 8/27 countries (25/144 respondents, 17%). Oral psoralen-UVA (PUVA) was more widely available than bath PUVA (n = 106, 74% vs. n = 60, 42%) and used mainly in adult patients. 49/144 (34%) of respondents had access to UVA1. Phototherapy would be considered instead of systemic treatment in 96% of adults and 82% of children for NBUVB, versus 40% of adults and 3% of children for PUVA. Starting doses, standard dosing increments, length of treatment courses, lifetime limits for treatments and thresholds for performing annual skin assessments varied between responders. CONCLUSIONS: NBUVB was the most widely used phototherapy for AD in adult and paediatric patients, while PUVA and UVA1 were less used. Prescribing practices varied considerably, highlighting the lack of consensus practice in many different aspects of phototherapy for the treatment of AD in children and adults. This indicates that further studies are required to determine optimal phototherapeutic regimens for AD and informs our understanding of parameters that should be included in future high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCT) of phototherapy.

Real-world reported adverse events related to systemic immunomodulating therapy in patients with atopic dermatitis: Results from the TREAT NL (TREatment of ATopic eczema, the Netherlands) registry.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the (long-term) safety of systemic immunomodulating therapies in atopic dermatitis (AD) generated by real-world data is sparse. OBJECTIVES: To describe real-world reported adverse drug reactions (AEs) related to systemic immunomodulating therapy in patients with AD and to compare the incidence rates of AEs with the Summaries of Product Characteristics (SmPCs). METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective multi-centre cohort study, using the TREAT NL registry. All severe AEs, AEs of special interest and serious AEs in adult and paediatric patients on systemic immunomodulating treatment (ciclosporin, methotrexate, azathioprine, mycophenolic acid, dupilumab, tralokinumab, baricitinib and upadacitinib) were assessed. Incidences rates of all (potentially) drug-related AEs were standardized in patient years and compared to the cumulative incidences in the associated SmPCs. RESULTS: We collected 422 patient years of safety data from 266 patients, of whom 129 (48.5%) reported a total of 224 (potentially) drug-related AEs. Compared to dupilumab's SmPC, higher incidence rates were found for four AEs (reported ≥5 times): eosinophilia, blepharitis, dry eyes and head and neck erythema (i.e. dupilumab facial redness). A higher incidence rate of fatigue was found in patients on oral methotrexate in our cohort compared to the SmPC. Two new drug-related AEs (reported ≥5 times) were found in patients on dupilumab, including non-infectious conjunctivitis and meibomian gland dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world reported AEs captured in AD patient registries can add information on the estimated incidence of AEs and benefit clinical decision aids. Future studies using data derived from the TREAT NL registry combined with data from other registries within the TREAT Registry Taskforce will provide more information on (rare) AEs associated with immunomodulating therapy in AD patients.

The Eczema Area and Severity Index: An update of progress and challenges in its measurement of atopic dermatitis after 20 years of use.

The Eczema Area and Severity Index is an investigator-assessed instrument reporting clinical signs of atopic dermatitis. The instrument is extensively validated in both adult and paediatric populations and recommended as a core outcome measure to assess clinical signs by the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema initiative in clinical trials and was recently recommended as an option to measure signs in clinical practice. Here, we review the validation of the instrument using standard assessment criteria, explore controversies and challenges to its universal applicability and highlight future electronic adaptations. We find that the instrument demonstrates adequate performance in the measurement properties recommended by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments initiative for instruments reporting clinical signs, is clinically interpretable, and is suitable for all atopic dermatitis severities. Some validation gaps remain. Information reporting on its performance in diverse populations, with emphasis on deeply pigmented skin, is promising though limited. Technological adaptations are demonstrating promising initial validation results and may facilitate remote and/or automated assessments assisting clinical care and decentralized clinical trials in the future. We find no strong evidence limiting its use in trials or clinical practice although questions pertaining to the effect of investigator training remain. We recommend that the Eczema Area and Severity Index be used in all interventional atopic dermatitis trials and be considered alongside other recommended clinical practice severity instruments.

Recommended core outcome instruments for health-related quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity in atopic eczema trials: results of the HOME VII consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has established a core outcome set of domains for atopic eczema (AE) clinical trials. Previous consensus meetings have agreed on preferred instruments for clinician-reported signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index, EASI) and patient-reported symptoms (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, POEM). This paper reports consensus decisions from the HOME VII meeting. OBJECTIVES: To complete the core outcome set for AE by agreeing on core outcome instruments for the domains of quality of life (QoL), long-term control and itch intensity. METHODS: A face-to-face consensus meeting was held in Tokyo, Japan (8-10 April 2019) including 75 participants (49 healthcare professionals/methodologists, 14 patients, 12 industry representatives) from 16 countries. Consensus decisions were made by presentations of evidence, followed by whole and small group discussions and anonymous voting using predefined consensus rules. RESULTS: It was agreed by consensus that QoL should be measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) for adults, the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) for children and the Infant's Dermatology Quality of Life Index (IDQoL) for infants. For long-term control, the Recap of Atopic Eczema (RECAP) instrument or the Atopic Dermatitis Control Test (ADCT) should be used. Consensus was not reached over the frequency of data collection for long-term control. The peak itch numerical rating scale (NRS)-11 past 24 h was recommended as an additional instrument for the symptom domain in trials of older children and adults. Agreement was reached that all core outcome instruments should be captured at baseline and at the time of primary outcome assessment as a minimum. CONCLUSIONS: For now, the core outcome set for clinical trials in AE is complete. The specified domains and instruments should be used in all new clinical trials and systematic reviews of eczema treatments.

Paternal and maternal use of dupilumab in patients with atopic dermatitis: a case series.

Dupilumab is a relatively new treatment option for patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. There is a lack of knowledge about the effects of treatment with dupilumab during conception for both men and women, as well as during pregnancy and lactation in women. We report four patients (two men, two women) who expressed a wish to conceive during treatment with dupilumab in daily practice. Both men conceived during dupilumab treatment, while the two women discontinued dupilumab because of anticipated pregnancy. Apart from disease flares in both of the patients who discontinued treatment, no complications were reported concerning the ability to conceive, the course of the pregnancy or the fetal outcome. We present an overview of the current available literature on dupilumab during conception, pregnancy and lactation, which can guide considerations for patients on dupilumab wishing to conceive a child. Until more data are available, preference should be given to treatment with topical corticosteroids, phototherapy, systemic corticosteroids and ciclosporin.

The European TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce survey: prescribing practices in Europe for phototherapy and systemic therapy in adult patients with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: For many years dermatologists have had access to few therapies for patients with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE). New promising therapies are entering the market but conventional phototherapies and systemic therapies have more well-known safety profiles, lower costs and wider availability. OBJECTIVES: To provide insight into current prescribing practices of conventional phototherapy and systemic immunomodulatory therapies for adults with chronic AE, and the factors influencing these prescribing practices, before biologics and other novel therapeutics become routine clinical practice. METHODS: In this exploratory study dermatologists were invited to participate in an online survey via a mailing list of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and national societies. Data were collected on participant characteristics (including clinical practice data), the use of phototherapies and systemic therapies, and factors influencing their use. RESULTS: From 30 European countries, 238 out of 361 dermatologists willing to participate (65·9%) completed the survey, with 229 meeting the inclusion criteria. For phototherapy (prescribed by 84·7%), most preferred narrowband ultraviolet B as first line (80·9%) and psoralen plus ultraviolet A as second (21·6%). For systemic therapy (prescribed by 95·2%) ciclosporin (54·1%), oral corticosteroids (32·6%) and methotrexate (30·7%) were used first line. Dermatologists relied mostly on personal experience for prescribing phototherapy and systemic therapy. Azathioprine and mycophenolic acid were prescribed by only 135 (59·0%) and 85 (37·1%) participants in total, mostly due to a lack of personal experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into prescribing practices for conventional phototherapy and systemic therapy in Europe and shows that off-label therapies are also preferred as first-line choice of systemic therapy.

Effectiveness of dupilumab treatment in 95 patients with atopic dermatitis: daily practice data.

BACKGROUND: Dupilumab is the first biologic registered for the treatment of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD), and efficacy was shown in phase III clinical trials (primary outcome at week 16 was reached in 38% of patients). Currently, there are limited daily practice data available for dupilumab, especially when it is combined with systemic immunosuppressants. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate dupilumab treatment in daily practice in patients with AD. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we prospectively included all adult patients with AD who had been treated with dupilumab in two university hospitals in the Netherlands. Concomitant systemic immunosuppressive treatment was monitored. Physician-reported outcome measures and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after ≥ 12 weeks of follow-up were analysed. We used a linear mixed-effects model to determine changes in scores during follow-up. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were included. Of these, 62 patients were using systemic immunosuppressants at baseline; the use of systemic immunosuppressants was continued during dupilumab treatment in 43 patients. From baseline to 16 weeks of treatment, the estimated mean Eczema Area and Severity Index score (0-72) decreased from 18·6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 16·0-21·4)] to 7·3 (95% CI 5·4-10·0), and the estimated mean PROMs showed a decrease of 41-66%. Investigator's Global Assessment 0 or 1 (clear/almost clear) was reached in 38% of the patients. Five patients discontinued dupilumab treatment due to side-effects or ineffectiveness. Eye symptoms and orofacial (nonocular) herpes simplex virus (HSV) reactivation were reported in 62% and 8% of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Dupilumab treatment in daily practice shows a clinically relevant improvement of physician-reported outcome measures and PROMs, which is in line with efficacy data from clinical trials. Besides frequently reported eye symptoms and orofacial (nonocular) HSV reactivation, there were no apparent safety concerns. What's already known about this topic? Dupilumab has been shown to be an efficacious treatment for atopic dermatitis in several clinical trials. However, it is known that there may be considerable differences in patient characteristics and treatment responses between clinical trials and daily practice. What does this study add? This study presents the first experience with dupilumab treatment in 95 patients with atopic dermatitis in daily practice in two Dutch university hospitals. Less stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria and follow-up schedules, in contrast to those used in clinical trials, might better represent daily practice. Dupilumab treatment shows a clinically relevant improvement of physician- and patient-reported outcome measures; besides patient-reported eye symptoms (in 59 of 95 patients; 62%) and an apparent increase in orofacial (nonocular) herpes simplex virus reactivation (eight of 95 patients; 8%), there were no other safety concerns during follow-up up to 16 weeks of dupilumab treatment.

Recommended core outcome instruments for health-related quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity in atopic eczema trials: results of the HOME VII consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has established a core outcome set of domains for atopic eczema clinical trials. Previous consensus meetings have agreed upon preferred instruments for clinician-reported signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index - EASI) and patient-reported symptoms (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure - POEM). This paper reports consensus decisions from the HOME VII meeting. OBJECTIVE: To complete the core outcome set for atopic eczema by agreeing upon core outcome instruments for the domains of quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity. METHODS: Face-to-face consensus meeting held in Tokyo, Japan (8th to 10th April, 2019) including 74 participants (47 healthcare professionals/methodologists, 14 patients, 13 industry representatives), from 16 countries. Consensus decisions were made by presentations of evidence, followed by whole and small group discussions and anonymous voting using pre-defined consensus rules. RESULTS: It was agreed by consensus that quality of life should be measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) for adults, the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) for children, and the Infant's Dermatology Quality of Life Index (IDQoL) for infants. For long-term control, the Recap of Atopic Eczema (RECAP) instrument or the Atopic Dermatitis Control Test (ADCT) should be used. Consensus was not reached over the frequency of data collection for long-term control. The peak itch numerical rating scale(NRS)-11 past 24 hours was recommended as an additional instrument for the symptom domain in trials of older children and adults. Agreement was reached that all core outcome instruments should be captured at baseline and at the time of primary outcome assessment as a minimum. CONCLUSIONS: For now, the core outcome set for clinical trials in atopic eczema is complete. The specified domains and instruments should be used in all new clinical trials and systematic reviews of eczema treatments.

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: protocol for a European safety study of dupilumab and other systemic therapies in patients with atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: A long-term prospective observational safety study is essential to characterize fully the safety profile of systemic immunomodulating therapies for patients with atopic eczema. The TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce offers a large platform to conduct such research using national registries that collect the same data using a predefined core dataset. OBJECTIVES: To present a protocol for a safety study comparing dupilumab with other systemic immunomodulating therapies in children and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema, to assess the long-term safety risk of these therapies in a routine clinical care setting. METHODS: We describe a registry-embedded international observational prospective cohort study. Adult and paediatric patients who start treatment with dupilumab or another systemic immunomodulating agent for their atopic eczema will be included. The primary end point is the incidence of malignancies (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) compared between the treatment groups. Secondary end points include other serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest, such as eye disorders and eosinophilia. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol delineates a safety study for dupilumab in adult and paediatric patients with atopic eczema, using a standardized methodological approach across several national registries. The protocol could also be used for other novel systemic immunomodulating therapies, and could provide licensing and reimbursement authorities, pharmaceutical companies and clinicians with safety evidence from a routine clinical care setting. What's already known about this topic? There is a need for long-term data on the safety of systemic immunomodulating therapies in patients with atopic eczema. Regulatory bodies, such as the European Medicines Agency, increasingly stipulate the collection of such data as part of the licensing agreement for new treatments, to assess the new agent's long-term safety profile against established therapies. Large numbers of patients with a long duration of follow-up are necessary in order to detect rare events like malignancies. What does this study add? The TREAT Registry Taskforce offers a platform to conduct such research with a network of multiple national atopic eczema research registries. We present a protocol for an investigator-initiated multicentre safety study comparing dupilumab with other systemic immunomodulating therapies in adults and subsequently adolescents and children with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema. This protocol can be used as a framework for similar studies for other novel systemic immunomodulating therapies across both adult and paediatric populations.

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: consensus on how and when to measure the core dataset for atopic eczema treatment research registries.

BACKGROUND: Comparative, real-life and long-term evidence on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE) is limited. Such data must come from well-designed prospective patient registries. Standardization of data collection is needed for direct comparisons and data pooling. OBJECTIVES: To reach a consensus on how and when to measure the previously defined domain items of the TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce core dataset for research registries for paediatric and adult patients with AE. METHODS: Proposals for the measurement instruments were based on recommendations of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative, the existing AE database of TREATgermany, systematic reviews of the literature and expert opinions. The proposals were discussed at three face-to-face consensus meetings, one teleconference and via e-mail. The frequency of follow-up visits was determined by an expert survey. RESULTS: A total of 16 experts from seven countries participated in the 'how to measure' consensus process and 12 external experts were consulted. A consensus was reached for all domain items on how they should be measured by assigning measurement instruments. A minimum follow-up frequency of initially 4 weeks after commencing treatment, then every 3 months while on treatment and every 6 months while off treatment was defined. CONCLUSIONS: This core dataset for national AE research registries will aid in the comparability and pooling of data across centres and country borders, and enables international collaboration to assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy used in patients with AE. What's already known about this topic? Comparable, real-life and long-term data on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in patients with atopic eczema (AE) are needed. There is a high diversity of outcomes and instruments used in AE research, which require harmonization to enhance comparability and allow data pooling. What does this study add? Our taskforce has reached international consensus on how and when to measure core domain items for national AE research registries. This core dataset is now available for use by researchers worldwide and will aid in the collection of unified data. What are the clinical implications of this work? The data collected through this core dataset will help to gain better insights into the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in AE and will provide important information for clinical practice. Standardization of such data collection at the national level will also allow direct data comparisons and pooling across country borders (e.g. in the analysis of treatment-related adverse events that require large patient numbers).

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: an international Delphi exercise to identify a core set of domains and domain items for national atopic eczema photo- and systemic therapy registries.

BACKGROUND: Evidence of immunomodulatory therapies to guide clinical management of atopic eczema (AE) is scarce, despite frequent and often off-label use. Patient registries provide valuable evidence for the effects of treatments under real-world conditions that can inform treatment guidelines, give the opportunity for health economic evaluation and the evaluation of quality of care, as well as pharmacogenetic and dynamic research, which cannot be adequately addressed in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: The TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce aims to seek international consensus on a core set of domains and items ('what to measure') for AE research registries, using a Delphi approach. METHODS: Participants from six stakeholder groups were included: doctors, nurses, nonclinical researchers, patients, industry and regulatory body representatives. The eDelphi comprised three sequential online rounds, requesting participants to rate the importance of each proposed domain item. Participants could add domain items to the proposed list in round 1. A final consensus meeting was held to ratify the core set. RESULTS: Participants (n = 479) from 36 countries accessed the eDelphi platform, of whom 86%, 79% and 74% completed rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively. At the face-to-face consensus meeting attended by 42 participants the final core set was established containing 19 domains with 69 domain items (49 baseline and 20 follow-up items). CONCLUSIONS: This core set of domains and items to be captured by national AE systemic therapy registries will standardize data collection and thereby allow direct comparability across registries and facilitate data pooling between countries. Ultimately, it will provide greater insight into the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of photo- and systemic immunomodulatory therapies.

Methotrexate and azathioprine for severe atopic dermatitis: a 5-year follow-up study of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic treatment is indicated for moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) refractory to topical treatment. Long-term evidence, up to 5 years, of off-label prescribed methotrexate (MTX) and azathioprine (AZA) is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To investigate long-term effectiveness, safety and drug survival of MTX and AZA. METHODS: In an open-label follow-up phase of a clinical trial, patients were seen every 3 months for 5 years. MTX and AZA doses could be increased or decreased concurrent with daily clinical practice. Primary effectiveness outcomes were mean absolute and relative reduction in SCORing Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index and Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) after 5 years compared with baseline. To assess safety, the type, frequency, severity and relatedness to treatment of adverse events were investigated. Drug survival was analysed by Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Thirty-five of 43 originally included patients participated, of whom 27 completed the follow-up. At year 5, the mean relative reduction in SCORAD index was similar in the MTX and AZA groups: 53% and 54% using descriptive analysis. Twelve serious adverse events occurred in 5 years; for three there was a possible causal relationship. Drug survival demonstrated a longer survival for MTX, but survival in both groups was low after 5 years (MTXn = 5, AZAn = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this relatively small pragmatic study, MTX and AZA seem to be effective and safe as maintenance treatments in moderate-to-severe AD up to 5 years. Few patients in both groups survive on their originally allocated drug although some discontinued because of controlled AD.

Report from the fifth international consensus meeting to harmonize core outcome measures for atopic eczema/dermatitis clinical trials (HOME initiative).

This is the report from the fifth meeting of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema initiative (HOME V). The meeting was held on 12-14 June 2017 in Nantes, France, with 81 participants. The main aims of the meeting were (i) to achieve consensus over the definition of the core domain of long-term control and how to measure it and (ii) to prioritize future areas of research for the measurement of the core domain of quality of life (QoL) in children. Moderated whole-group and small-group consensus discussions were informed by presentations of qualitative studies, systematic reviews and validation studies. Small-group allocations were performed a priori to ensure that each group included different stakeholders from a variety of geographical regions. Anonymous whole-group voting was carried out using handheld electronic voting pads according to predefined consensus rules. It was agreed by consensus that the long-term control domain should include signs, symptoms, quality of life and a patient global instrument. The group agreed that itch intensity should be measured when assessing long-term control of eczema in addition to the frequency of itch captured by the symptoms domain. There was no recommendation of an instrument for the core outcome domain of quality of life in children, but existing instruments were assessed for face validity and feasibility, and future work that will facilitate the recommendation of an instrument was agreed upon.

Evaluation of the measurement properties of symptom measurement instruments for atopic eczema: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms have been identified as a core outcome domain for atopic eczema (AE) trials. Various instruments exist to measure symptoms in AE, but they vary in quality and there is a lack of standardization between clinical trials. Our objective was to systematically evaluate the quality of the evidence on the measurement properties of AE symptom instruments, thereby informing consensus discussions within the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative regarding the most appropriate instruments for the core outcome domain symptoms. METHODS: Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and predefined criteria for good measurement properties on identified development and validation studies of AE symptom instruments, a best evidence synthesis was performed to draw an overall conclusion on quality of the instruments and to provide recommendations. RESULTS: Eighteen instruments were identified and evaluated. When the quality and results of the studies were considered, only five of these instruments had sufficient validation data to consider them for the core outcome set for the core outcome domain symptoms. These were the paediatric Itch Severity Scale (ISS), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Patient-Oriented SCOring Atopic Dermatitis (PO-SCORAD), Self-Administered Eczema Area and Severity Index (SA-EASI) and adapted SA-EASI. CONCLUSIONS: ISS (paediatric version), POEM, PO-SCORAD, SA-EASI and adapted SA-EASI are currently the most appropriate instruments and therefore have the potential to be recommended as core symptom instrument in future clinical trials. These findings will be utilized for the development of a core outcome set for AE.

Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), a core instrument to measure symptoms in clinical trials: a Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) statement.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has defined four core outcome domains for a core outcome set (COS) to be measured in all atopic eczema (AE) trials to ensure cross-trial comparison: clinical signs, symptoms, quality of life and long-term control. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to report on the consensus process that was used to select the core instrument to consistently assess symptoms in all future AE trials. METHODS: Following the HOME roadmap, two systematic reviews were performed which identified three instruments that had sufficient evidence of validity, reliability and feasibility to be considered for the final COS. RESULTS: At the fourth international HOME meeting, there was broad consensus among all stakeholders that the Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) should be used as the core instrument (87·5% agreed, 9·4% unsure, 3·1% disagreed). CONCLUSIONS: All relevant stakeholders are encouraged to use POEM as the chosen instrument to measure the core domain of symptoms in all future AE clinical trials. Other instruments of interest can be used in addition to POEM.

Reporting of symptoms in randomized controlled trials of atopic eczema treatments: a systematic review.

'Symptoms' is a core outcome domain for atopic eczema (AE) trials, agreed by consensus as part of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative. To standardize and validate the core domain symptoms and symptom instruments for AE trials the HOME roadmap is followed. Its first step is to establish if and how symptoms have been measured in published AE treatment trials. Therefore the Global Resource for Eczema Trials database was used to collect all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for AE between January 2000 and April 2014. Study selection and data extraction were performed by three reviewers independently. We identified the use of symptoms in 295 of 378 trials (78%). Symptoms as a primary end point were applied by 147 RCTs (50%). Seventeen different symptoms were measured, but mostly itch and sleep loss. Symptoms were assessed by only 37% of trials by a stand-alone symptom measurement. Overall 63% of RCTs used a composite instrument, and 30 different instruments were identified. The Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) index was the most commonly applied, but only 23% of RCTs reported the SCORAD symptom score separately. This systematic review demonstrates that symptoms, most frequently itch and sleep loss, are commonly reported in AE treatment trials, but are measured using many different instruments. Often symptoms are evaluated as part of a composite instrument, and currently it is not possible to extract symptoms-only data from most published studies. Future trials should report symptom scores to permit meta-analysis of the core outcomes.

Report from the fourth international consensus meeting to harmonize core outcome measures for atopic eczema/dermatitis clinical trials (HOME initiative).

This article is a report of the fourth meeting of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative held in Malmö, Sweden on 23-24 April 2015 (HOME IV). The aim of the meeting was to achieve consensus over the preferred outcome instruments for measuring patient-reported symptoms and quality of life for the HOME core outcome set for atopic eczema (AE). Following presentations, which included data from systematic reviews, consensus discussions were held in a mixture of whole group and small group discussions. Small groups were allocated a priori to ensure representation of different stakeholders and countries. Decisions were voted on using electronic keypads. For the patient-reported symptoms, the group agreed by vote that itch, sleep loss, dryness, redness/inflamed skin and irritated skin were all considered essential aspects of AE symptoms. Many instruments for capturing patient-reported symptoms were discussed [including the Patient-Oriented SCOring Atopic Dermatitis index, Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Self-Administered Eczema Area and Severity Index, Itch Severity Scale, Atopic Dermatitis Quickscore and the Nottingham Eczema Severity Score] and, by consensus, POEM was selected as the preferred instrument to measure patient-reported symptoms. Further work is needed to determine the reliability and measurement error of POEM. Further work is also required to establish the importance of pain/soreness and the importance of collecting information regarding the intensity of symptoms in addition to their frequency. Much of the discussion on quality of life concerned the Dermatology Life Quality Index and Quality of Life Index for Atopic Dermatitis; however, consensus on a preferred instrument for measuring this domain could not be reached. In summary, POEM is recommended as the HOME core outcome instrument for measuring AE symptoms.

Implementation of the HOME core outcome set for clinical trials of atopic eczema-barriers and opportunities: the HOME IX meeting report.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative established a core outcome set (COS) for atopic eczema (AE) clinical trials in 2019. This set encompasses four core outcome domains and corresponding measurement instruments: clinical signs (EASI), patient-reported symptoms (POEM and NRS 11 point for worst itch over the last 24 h), quality of life (DLQI/CDLQI/IDQoLI), and long-term control (Recap or ADCT). Following its roadmap, the HOME initiative is now focused on supporting implementation of the COS. To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of the COS, and to guide the effort to promote COS uptake, a virtual consensus meeting was held over 2 days (September 25-26, 2021) attended by 55 participants (26 healthcare professionals, 16 methodologists, 5 patients, 4 industry representatives, and 4 students). Implementation themes were identified by a pre-meeting survey distributed to HOME members, presentations, and whole-group discussion. Participants were divided into five multi-professional small groups which ranked their top 3 most important themes, followed by whole-group discussion and anonymous consensus voting (consensus criteria: < 30% disagreement). Three most important implementation themes were identified and agreed upon: (1) awareness and stakeholder engagement, (2) universal applicability of the COS, and (3) ensuring minimum administrative burden. Working groups to address these issues are now a priority for the HOME initiative. The results from this meeting will inform the development of a HOME Implementation Roadmap in an effort to support other COS groups planning for effective implementation of their core sets.

Do patient characteristics matter when calculating sample size for eczema clinical trials?

Background: The Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) is the core outcome instrument recommended for measuring patient-reported atopic eczema symptoms in clinical trials. To ensure that the statistical significance of clinical trial results is meaningful, trials are often designed by specifying the target difference in the primary outcome as part of the sample size calculation. One method used to specify the target difference is a score that corresponds to a standardized effect size. Objectives: to assess how the standardized effect size of POEM scores vary across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity. Methods: This study combined data from five UK-based randomized clinical trials of eczema treatments in order to assess differences in self-reported eczema symptoms (POEM) corresponding to a standardized effect size (0.5 SD of baseline POEM scores) across age, gender, ethnicity and disease severity. Results: POEM scores corresponding to 0.5 SD(baseline) were remarkably consistent across participants of varying ages, gender, ethnicity and disease severity from datasets of five UK trials in children (range 2.99-3.45). Conclusions: This study provides information that can support those designing clinical trials to determine their sample size and can aid individuals interpreting trial results. Further exploration of differences in populations beyond the United Kingdom is needed.