Treatment with delgocitinib cream improves itch, pain and other signs and symptoms of chronic hand eczema: Results from the Hand Eczema Symptom Diary in a phase IIb randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Measuring patient-reported outcomes is crucial to fully capture the burden of chronic hand eczema (CHE). OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of delgocitinib cream on itch, pain and nine additional key signs and symptoms reported by patients with CHE using the Hand Eczema Symptom Diary (HESD). METHODS: In a double-blind, phase IIb dose-ranging trial (NCT03683719), 258 adults with mild to severe CHE were randomized to delgocitinib cream 1, 3, 8 or 20 mg/g or cream vehicle twice daily for 16 weeks. Patients assessed 11 signs and symptoms of CHE daily through the HESD using an 11-point numeric rating scale; this was an exploratory endpoint. RESULTS: Delgocitinib cream 20 mg/g was associated with an early and sustained reduction in itch and pain, along with clinically relevant reductions of ≥4 points from baseline to Week 16 in 48.4% and 63.6% of patients, respectively (17.9% and 5.9% with cream vehicle). There were improvements versus cream vehicle in all assessed CHE signs and symptoms (20 mg/g, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Delgocitinib cream reduced itch, pain and other signs and symptoms in patients with CHE. This data correlated with clinician-reported outcomes, indicating that the HESD may be a useful assessment tool for CHE management.

Development and Psychometric Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Assess the Signs and Symptoms of Chronic Hand Eczema: The Hand Eczema Symptom Diary (HESD).

INTRODUCTION: Chronic Hand Eczema (CHE) is an inflammatory skin disease of the hands. The Hand Eczema Symptom Diary (HESD) is a new patient-reported outcome measure of worst severity of core CHE signs/symptoms. This study aimed to evaluate content and psychometric validity of the HESD. METHODS: The HESD was developed based on the literature and concept elicitation interviews. Qualitative cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with CHE patients to assess relevance and understanding of items, response options and recall period. Psychometric properties of the HESD (item performance, dimensionality, reliability, validity, responsiveness and estimation of meaningful change thresholds) were then assessed, first using data from a phase 2b trial (NCT03683719), and confirmed using data from the first 280 participants completing the 16-week treatment phase of a phase 3 trial (NCT04871711). RESULTS: Cognitive debriefing supported item refinement and removal of items and confirmed all items were well understood and relevant to patients. Item properties and dimensionality analyses in the phase 2b data supported removal of additional items, resulting in the 6-item HESD included in the phase 3 trial. Unidimensionality was supported by inter-item correlations (all > 0.70) and Rasch analysis. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.96) and test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient > 0.89) results were very strong. Construct validity was supported by moderate correlations with concurrent measures (0.53-0.64) and significant differences between severity groups (p < 0.001). Large effect sizes for mean change scores in participants that improved and significant differences between change groups indicated the ability to detect change. Anchor-based analyses supported within-individual responder definitions of ≥ 4-points for improvements in 7-day average HESD scores. CONCLUSION: The HESD is the first CHE-specific, patient-reported outcome measure of CHE signs/symptoms developed and validated in line with regulatory guidance. This article provides evidence of strong content validity and psychometric validity and shows improvements of ≥ 4 points on 7-day average HESD scores represent clinically meaningful, important changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03683719, NCT04871711.

Reliability and validity of the Psoriasis Itch Visual Analog Scale in psoriasis vulgaris.

INTRODUCTION: The single-item Psoriasis Itch VAS was developed to measure itch intensity within the last 24 hours in psoriasis vulgaris to assess treatment benefit. Its psychometric properties were explored in two trials. METHODS: Data from two randomized, parallel-group phase 3 trials with subjects suffering from psoriasis vulgaris on the body (n = 426, 463) were analyzed. Cross-sectional distributional properties and construct validity of the Psoriasis Itch VAS as well as longitudinal test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change of the Psoriasis Itch VAS were investigated. All statistical tests were two-tailed. RESULTS: Across both trials, acceptable distributional properties were observed. Convergent-validity correlations between the Psoriasis Itch VAS and other patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes provided strong endorsement for construct validity as did tests of known-groups validity. Longitudinal measurement properties, involving test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change, also offered evidence for the measurement integrity of the Psoriasis Itch VAS. DISCUSSION: Results from the assessment of validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change support the use of the Psoriasis Itch VAS to measure itch intensity in psoriasis vulgaris. Data from two trials provided evidence that the Psoriasis Itch VAS is well-defined and reliable for measuring itch in psoriasis vulgaris to assess treatment benefit (i.e. therapeutic response).

Pharmacokinetic interaction studies of atosiban with labetalol or betamethasone in healthy female volunteers.

OBJECTIVES: In two separate trials, we studied the concomitant administration of atosiban with labetalol and betamethasone to determine any possibility of a clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interaction. DESIGN: Study 1 was an open-label, single dose atosiban, multiple dose labetalol, interaction study. Study 2 was an open-label, randomised, three-period crossover pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: The studies were carried out at the Clinical Pharmacology Unit of AAI Deutschland GmbH & Co KG, Neu-Ulm, Germany. POPULATION: The study population consisted of healthy female volunteers. METHODS: In Study 1, 14 healthy female volunteers participated. On study day 1, a 12-hour intravenous infusion of 114.75 mg atosiban was administered; on days 2-4, participants received labetalol orally (100 mg twice daily), and on study day 5 they received the combined treatment. In Study 2, a total of 18 healthy female volunteers received, on three separate occasions, a 12-hour intravenous infusion of 114.75 mg atosiban, a single intramuscular injection of 12 mg betamethasone or the two drugs in combination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: For Study 1, the outcome parameter for atosiban was area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC); the study parameters for labetalol were AUC, maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and time to C(max) (t(max)). In Study 2, AUC, C(max) and time to C(max) (t(max)) were assessed for atosiban and betamethasone. RESULTS: Labetalol had no clinically relevant influence on the bioavailability (AUC) of atosiban. For labetalol, the co-administration with atosiban did not affect the extent of bioavailability, however, C(max) decreased by 36% and t(max) increased by 45 minutes. The C(min) was not affected by atosiban. The betamethasone and atosiban combination led to similar mean plasma concentration-time curves as the administration of each substance alone. Pharmacokinetic parameters (AUC, C(max), t(max)) did not differ markedly between treatments and all 90% CIs for ratios between treatments were fully within limits (80-125%). The co-administration of atosiban with labetalol or betamethasone resulted in similar tolerability to each substance alone. CONCLUSION: The co-administration of atosiban with betamethasone or labetalol had no clinically relevant influence on their bioavailability or tolerability.