Burden of disease and treatment patterns in patients with vitiligo: findings from a national longitudinal retrospective study in the UK.

BACKGROUND: UK studies examining vitiligo burden and vitiligo-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To describe the incidence and prevalence of vitiligo, the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with vitiligo, vitiligo burden, HCRU, incidence of mental health comorbidities and management strategies, including treatment patterns. METHODS: This retrospective study used UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Hospital Episode Statistics databases to analyse patients with vitiligo from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2021. RESULTS: Among 17 239 incident patients, mean incidence of vitiligo was 0.16 (2010-2021) per 1000 person-years [PY; range 0.10 (2020-COVID-19) to 0.19 (2010/2013/2018)]; among 66 217 prevalent patients, prevalence increased from 0.21% (2010) to 0.38% (2021). The most common comorbidities recorded after vitiligo diagnosis were diabetes (19.4%), eczema (8.9%), thyroid disease (7.5%) and rheumatoid arthritis (6.9%). Mental health diagnoses recorded at any time included depression and/or anxiety (24.6%), depression (18.5%), anxiety (16.0%) and sleep disturbance (12.7%), and recorded after vitiligo diagnosis in 6.4%, 4.4%, 5.5% and 3.9%, respectively. Mental health comorbidities were more common in White (e.g. depression and/or anxiety 29.0%) than in Black (18.8%) and Asian (16.1%) patients. In adolescents, depression and/or anxiety was most commonly diagnosed after a vitiligo diagnosis than before (7.4% vs. 1.8%). Healthcare resources were used most frequently in the first year after vitiligo diagnosis (incident cohort), typically dermatology-related outpatient appointments (101.9/100 PY) and general practitioner consultations (97.9/100 PY). In the year after diagnosis, 60.8% of incident patients did not receive vitiligo-related treatment (i.e. topical corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, oral corticosteroids or phototherapy), increasing to 82.0% the next year; median time from diagnosis to first treatment was 34.0 months (95% confidence interval 31.6-36.4). Antidepressants and/or anxiolytics were recorded for 16.7% of incident patients in the year after diagnosis. In 2019, 85.0% of prevalent patients did not receive vitiligo-related treatments. CONCLUSION: Most patients were not on vitiligo-related treatments within a year of diagnosis, with the time to first treatment exceeding 2 years, suggesting that vitiligo may be dismissed as unimportant. New effective treatments, early initiation and psychological intervention and support are needed to reduce the vitiligo burden on patients.

Vitiligo is a chronic disease in which cells that produce the skin pigment called melanin are attacked, resulting in white or pale patches of skin. It is diagnosed in an estimated 0.2­0.8% of people in Europe. This study aimed to describe how many new cases of vitiligo were recorded between 2010 and 2021 in the UK and the overall percentage of people with vitiligo. Linked national general practitioner (GP) and hospital-based records containing information on medical diagnoses, admissions and hospital visits were used. Records of other diseases and conditions, including mental health conditions, in combination with healthcare service use and treatment prescribed to patients with vitiligo, were studied to describe the impact of living with vitiligo. It was found that 0.16 new cases of vitiligo were recorded per 1000 person-years (for example, 0.16 new cases would have been recorded if 1000 people were followed for 1 year or if 100 people were all followed for 10 years) between 2010 and 2021. In 2021, 0.4% of the population studied had vitiligo. In the 5 years after a new diagnosis of vitiligo, the most common other diseases recorded were diabetes (19%), eczema (9%), thyroid disease (8%) and rheumatoid arthritis (7%), and the most common mental health conditions were depression and/or anxiety (25%). In the year after diagnosis, GP and dermatology outpatient visits were the most common type of medical services used. In 2019, 85% of all individuals with vitiligo were not receiving any vitiligo-related treatment (such as creams or phototherapy). It took approximately 34 months from diagnosis of vitiligo to the start of first treatment. The results suggest that new effective treatments and psychological interventions are needed to reduce the burden of vitiligo.

Protocolised non-invasive compared with invasive weaning from mechanical ventilation for adults in intensive care: the Breathe RCT.

BACKGROUND: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) is a life-saving intervention. Following resolution of the condition that necessitated IMV, a spontaneous breathing trial (SBT) is used to determine patient readiness for IMV discontinuation. In patients who fail one or more SBTs, there is uncertainty as to the optimum management strategy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using non-invasive ventilation (NIV) as an intermediate step in the protocolised weaning of patients from IMV. DESIGN: Pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group randomised controlled trial, with cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING: A total of 51 critical care units across the UK. PARTICIPANTS: Adult intensive care patients who had received IMV for at least 48 hours, who were categorised as ready to wean from ventilation, and who failed a SBT. INTERVENTIONS: Control group (invasive weaning): patients continued to receive IMV with daily SBTs. A weaning protocol was used to wean pressure support based on the patient's condition. Intervention group (non-invasive weaning): patients were extubated to NIV. A weaning protocol was used to wean inspiratory positive airway pressure, based on the patient's condition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was time to liberation from ventilation. Secondary outcome measures included mortality, duration of IMV, proportion of patients receiving antibiotics for a presumed respiratory infection and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients (invasive weaning, n = 182; non-invasive weaning, n = 182) were randomised. Groups were well matched at baseline. There was no difference between the invasive weaning and non-invasive weaning groups in median time to liberation from ventilation {invasive weaning 108 hours [interquartile range (IQR) 57-351 hours] vs. non-invasive weaning 104.3 hours [IQR 34.5-297 hours]; hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89 to 1.39; p = 0.352}. There was also no difference in mortality between groups at any time point. Patients in the non-invasive weaning group had fewer IMV days [invasive weaning 4 days (IQR 2-11 days) vs. non-invasive weaning 1 day (IQR 0-7 days); adjusted mean difference -3.1 days, 95% CI -5.75 to -0.51 days]. In addition, fewer non-invasive weaning patients required antibiotics for a respiratory infection [odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.00; p = 0.048]. A higher proportion of non-invasive weaning patients required reintubation than those in the invasive weaning group (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.24). The within-trial economic evaluation showed that NIV was associated with a lower net cost and a higher net effect, and was dominant in health economic terms. The probability that NIV was cost-effective was estimated at 0.58 at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. CONCLUSIONS: A protocolised non-invasive weaning strategy did not reduce time to liberation from ventilation. However, patients who underwent non-invasive weaning had fewer days requiring IMV and required fewer antibiotics for respiratory infections. FUTURE WORK: In patients who fail a SBT, which factors predict an adverse outcome (reintubation, tracheostomy, death) if extubated and weaned using NIV? TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15635197. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 48. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Patients who become very unwell may require help from a breathing machine. This requires the patient to be given drugs to put them to sleep (sedation) and have a tube placed through their mouth directly into the windpipe (tube ventilation). This can be life-saving, but may cause harm if used for long periods of time. Non-invasive ventilation (mask ventilation) provides breathing support through a mask that covers the face. Mask ventilation has several advantages over tube ventilation, such as less need for sedation, and it enables the patient to cough and communicate. In previous studies, switching patients from tube to mask ventilation when they start to get better seemed to improve survival rates and reduce complications. The Breathe trial tested if using a protocol to remove tube ventilation and replace it with mask ventilation is better than continuing with tube ventilation until the patient no longer needs breathing machine support. The trial recruited 364 patients. Half of these patients were randomly selected to have the tube removed and replaced with mask ventilation and half were randomly selected to continue with tube ventilation until they no longer needed breathing machine support. The mask group spent 3 fewer days receiving tube ventilation, although the overall time needing breathing machine help (mask and tube) did not change. Fewer patients in the mask group needed antibiotics for chest infections. After removing the tube, twice as many patients needed the tube again in the mask group as in the tube group. There were no differences between the groups in the number of adverse (harm) events or the number of patients who survived to leave hospital. Mask ventilation was no more expensive than tube ventilation. In conclusion, mask ventilation may be an effective alternative to continued tube ventilation when patients start to get better in intensive care.

Interpreting small treatment differences from quality of life data in cancer trials: an alternative measure of treatment benefit and effect size for the EORTC-QLQ-C30.

BACKGROUND: The EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a widely used health related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire in lung cancer patients. Small HRQoL treatment effects are often reported as mean differences (MDs) between treatments, which are rarely justified or understood by patients and clinicians. An alternative approach using odds ratios (OR) for reporting effects is proposed. This may offer advantages including facilitating alignment between patient and clinician understanding of HRQoL effects. METHODS: Data from six CRUK sponsored randomized controlled lung cancer trials (2 small cell and 4 in non-small cell, in 2909 patients) were used to HRQoL effects. Results from Beta-Binomial (BB) standard mixed effects were compared. Preferences for ORs vs MDs were determined and Time to Deterioration (TD) was also compared. RESULTS: HRQoL effects using ORs offered coherent interpretations: MDs >0 resulted in ORs >1 and vice versa; effect sizes were classified as 'Trivial' if the OR was between 1 ± 0.05 (i.e. 0.95 to 1.05); 'Small': for 1 ± 0.1; 'Medium': 1 ± 0.2 and 'Large': OR <0.8 or >1.20. Small HRQoL effects on the MD scale may translate to important treatment differences on the OR scale: for example, a worsening in symptoms (MD) by 2.6 points (p = 0.1314) would be a 17 % deterioration (p < 0.0001) with an OR. Hence important differences may be missed with MD; conversely, small ORs are unlikely to yield large MDs because methods based on OR model skewed data well. Initial evidence also suggests oncologists prefer ORs over MDs since interpretation is similar to hazard ratios. CONCLUSION: Reporting HRQoL benefits as MDs can be misleading. Estimates of HRQoL treatment effects in terms of ORs are preferred over MDs. Future analysis of QLQ-C30 and other HRQoL measures should consider reporting HRQoL treatment effects as ORs.