Achieving consensus on patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice for inflammatory skin disorders.

BACKGROUND: International Dermatology Outcome Measures and the American Academy of Dermatology recently agreed on a physician-reported global severity measure to demonstrate quality of care in inflammatory dermatoses. OBJECTIVE: Because patient-reported outcome measures are also important, we aimed to achieve consensus on 1 of these measures for clinical practice. METHODS: Patients and providers participated in a consensus-building study involving a modified-Delphi technique. Voting was focused on identifying a minimal set of assessments for clinical practice, patient global assessments (PtGAs), Skindex instruments, and final instrument selection for quality improvement. RESULTS: Among 53 stakeholders, >70% agreed that identification of patient goals, assessment of treatment harm, and assessment of the adequacy of treatment response were the minimal assessments needed for clinical practice. The most preferred PtGA was a 5-point PtGA (scale 0-4; 0 = clear, 4 = severe) having an optional check-box for worst ever. A new metric to assess change since treatment initiation, which we called a trajectory measure, was proposed. Stakeholders preferred Skindex instruments over PtGAs and a trajectory measure for clinical practice. LIMITATIONS: A small number of patients and caregivers were involved and a consensus was not reached on all items. CONCLUSION: PtGAs as standalone measures do not adequately capture the patient's assessment of disease severity or the effect of care. The combination of a PtGA with a Skindex instrument or another measure of health-related quality of life might provide a more comprehensive evaluation of patients in clinical practice.

Clinicians' perspectives on the integration of electronic patient-reported outcomes into dermatology clinics: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Skin conditions can have profound negative symptomatic and psychological effects. Failure to address these effects can lead to poor treatment adherence and/or patient dissatisfaction. Despite patient-reported outcome (PRO) use being highly recommended, real-world adoption has been slow. OBJECTIVES: To assess clinicians' perceived facilitators and barriers to using PROs in daily practice. METHODS: We conducted in-person semi-structured interviews with 19 clinicians and thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: (1) clinicians' attitudes about the value of Skindex-16 in daily practice, (2) patient attitudes influencing clinicians' use of Skindex-16, and (3) clinicians' perceptions of their ability to use PROs successfully for clinical care. Clinicians recognized benefits to using Skindex-16, such as revealing patients' hidden concerns and highlighting discrepancies with the clinician's severity assessments. Conversely, clinicians also identified limitations, such as time constraints and lack of relevance for some skin conditions. Patient complaints about PRO relevance have influenced clinicians' use of Skindex-16 negatively. Finally, some clinicians recognized the need for more training in score interpretation and implementation strategies for optimal clinical flow. CONCLUSIONS: While most clinicians believed PROs like Skindex-16 can be useful for patient care, barriers need to be addressed to make PROs more practical for routine clinical care.

Prologue: 2020 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA).

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) held its annual meeting in 2020 in an online format due to travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; caused by SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. The virtual meeting was attended by 351 rheumatologists, dermatologists, representatives of biopharmaceutical companies, and patient research partners. Similar to previous years, GRAPPA's annual meeting focused on the 3 overlapping missions of education, research, and clinical care of psoriatic disease. Trainee sessions this year included the annual trainee symposium and a grant-writing workshop. Plenary sessions included updates on COVID-19 and psoriatic disease from multispecialty and patient perspectives, and updates on pustular psoriasis and associated musculoskeletal manifestations. Progress on research and updates were presented for the following groups: Collaborative Research Network, Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group, International Dermatology Outcome Measures, Composite Measures, Education Committee, and Treatment Guidelines. New this year were 3 concurrent workshops on ultrasound assessment of joints and entheses, magnetic resonance imaging of psoriatic arthritis, and pustular psoriasis efficacy endpoints; 6 "Meet the Expert" sessions; and facilitated "poster tours." In our prologue, we introduce the papers that summarize this meeting.

Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Plenary Session From the GRAPPA 2020 Annual Meeting.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; caused by SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has affected the healthcare system on a global scale, and we utilized the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) 2020 annual meeting to examine how COVID-19 might affect patients with psoriatic disease (PsD) and the clinicians who care for them. Pressing issues and concerns identified included whether having psoriasis increased the risk of acquiring COVID-19, vaccine safety, and the acceptability of telehealth. The general message from rheumatologists, dermatologists, infectious disease specialists, and patient research partners was that data did not suggest that having PsD or its treatment significantly increased risk of infection or more severe disease course, and that the telehealth experience was a success overall.

Pustular Psoriasis and Associated Musculoskeletal Disorders.

Pustular psoriasis (PsO) is an uncommon variant of PsO that may present in a generalized or localized fashion with or without musculoskeletal or systemic inflammatory involvement.Generalized pustular PsO (GPP) presents as a widespread acute or subacute pustular eruption that may be familial and is often associated with severe flares and systemic inflammation. The palmoplantar pustulosis variant is localized to palms and soles, whereas acrodermatitis continua of Hallopeau is localized to the nail apparatus. Patients with pustular PsO may have overlapping plaque PsO and may develop psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Pustulosis is also a feature of both synovitis, acne, pustulosis, hyperostosis, osteomyelitis (SAPHO) syndrome and chronic non-bacterial osteomyelitis. At the 2020 Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) annual meeting, members were given an overview of the cutaneous features of pustular PsO, SAPHO, and recent insights into the genetics of GPP, leading to new targeted drug therapies and the development of validated endpoints.

Instruments Measuring Physical Function for Psoriatic Arthritis Endorsed at GRAPPA 2020 Annual Meeting: Updates of the GRAPPA-OMERACT Working Group.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Working Group provided updates at the 2020 GRAPPA annual meeting on its work toward developing a core outcome set for PsA. Working groups were set up for the 4 prioritized domains: enthesitis, fatigue, structural damage, and physical function. Two instruments for measurement of physical function were provisionally endorsed: (1) the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and (2) the physical functioning domain in the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey.

Measuring psoriatic arthritis symptoms: A core domain in psoriasis clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The International Dermatology Outcome Measures established a set of core domains to be measured in all psoriasis trials. This set requires that symptoms of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) be measured in all psoriasis studies. OBJECTIVE: To identify the approach to PsA screening and the most appropriate outcome measure for capturing PsA symptoms. METHODS: Following guidelines (ie, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments, Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative, and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Handbook), we conducted a consensus-building study that included patients, physicians, industry partners, and patient association representatives. The process consisted of a literature review and quality appraisal of measures for PsA symptoms, a pre-Delphi exercise, a Delphi survey, and a consensus meeting. RESULTS: Among the 297 expert participants in the Delphi survey, 87.5% agreed that all patients in a psoriasis trial should be screened for PsA with a validated screening tool. Regarding the measurement of PsA symptoms, the preferred instrument was the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease-9 (PsAID9), with the Routine Assessment Patient Index Data-3 (RAPID3) representing an acceptable alternative. LIMITATIONS: Only International Dermatology Outcome Measures members participated in the consensus meeting. CONCLUSION: The overwhelming majority of expert stakeholders agreed that all psoriasis trial participants should be screened for PsA, with PsA symptoms measured by using PsAID9 (or alternatively with RAPID3).

Patient-reported outcomes of adalimumab, phototherapy, and placebo in the Vascular Inflammation in Psoriasis Trial: A randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data about the impact of narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy on patient-reported measures of health-related quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of adalimumab and phototherapy on health-related quality of life. METHODS: We examined patient-reported outcomes from a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT01553058). The Dermatology Life Quality Index and EQ-5D-3L were evaluated every 4 weeks. RESULTS: We enrolled 97 patients: 30.9% were female, mean age was 43.5 years (standard deviation, 14.0), and median Psoriasis Area and Severity Index score was 16.7 (interquartile range, 13.9-21.6). At week 12, patients being treated with adalimumab (odds ratio [OR], 2.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-8.17) and phototherapy (OR, 8.83; 95% CI, 2.47-31.57) were more likely to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in the Dermatology Life Quality Index compared with those receiving placebo. There were higher odds of achieving the minimal clinically important difference for the EQ-5D-3L Index score when comparing phototherapy versus placebo (OR, 9.78; 95% CI, 2.99-31.95) and phototherapy versus adalimumab (OR, 4.07; 95% CI, 1.42-11.70). LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, secondary analysis, generalizability. CONCLUSION: Phototherapy and adalimumab both improve skin-related quality of life and overall health-related quality of life compared with placebo in patients with psoriasis; however, patients treated with phototherapy achieved more improvement in overall health-related quality of life compared with patients treated with adalimumab.

A Phase 2 Trial of Guselkumab versus Adalimumab for Plaque Psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effect of specific anti-interleukin-23 therapy, as compared with established anti-tumor necrosis factor therapies, for the treatment of moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: In a 52-week, phase 2, dose-ranging, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-comparator trial, we compared guselkumab (CNTO 1959), an anti-interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody, with adalimumab in patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. A total of 293 patients were randomly assigned to receive guselkumab (5 mg at weeks 0 and 4 and every 12 weeks thereafter, 15 mg every 8 weeks, 50 mg at weeks 0 and 4 and every 12 weeks thereafter, 100 mg every 8 weeks, or 200 mg at weeks 0 and 4 and every 12 weeks thereafter) through week 40, placebo, or adalimumab (standard dosage for psoriasis). At week 16, patients in the placebo group crossed over to receive guselkumab at a dose of 100 mg every 8 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a Physician's Global Assessment (PGA) score of 0 (indicating cleared psoriasis) or 1 (indicating minimal psoriasis) at week 16. RESULTS: At week 16, the proportion of patients with a PGA score of 0 or 1 was significantly higher in each guselkumab group than in the placebo group: 34% in the 5-mg group, 61% in the 15-mg group, 79% in the 50-mg group, 86% in the 100-mg group, and 83% in the 200-mg group, as compared with 7% in the placebo group (P≤0.002 for all comparisons). Moreover, the proportion was significantly higher in the 50-mg, 100-mg, and 200-mg guselkumab groups than in the adalimumab group (58%) (P<0.05 for all comparisons). At week 16, the proportion of patients with at least a 75% improvement in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index scores was significantly higher in each guselkumab group than in the placebo group (P<0.001 for all comparisons). At week 40, the proportion of patients with a PGA score of 0 or 1 remained significantly higher in the 50-mg, 100-mg, and 200-mg guselkumab groups than in the adalimumab group (71%, 77%, and 81%, respectively, vs. 49%) (P<0.05 for all comparisons). Between week 0 and week 16, infections were observed in 20% of the patients in the guselkumab groups, 12% in the adalimumab group, and 14% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this phase 2 trial suggest that guselkumab may be an effective therapy for plaque psoriasis and that control of psoriasis can be achieved with specific anti-interleukin-23 therapy. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; X-PLORE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01483599.).

Efficacy and Safety of Apremilast in Systemic- and Biologic-Naive Patients With Moderate Plaque Psoriasis: 52-Week Results of UNVEIL.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with moderate plaque psoriasis are undertreated despite broadening treatment options. In the phase IV UNVEIL study, oral apremilast demonstrated efficacy and safety in systemic-naive patients with chronic moderate plaque psoriasis with lower psoriasis-involved body surface area (BSA; 5%-10%) during the 16-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase. We describe efficacy and safety of apremilast in this population through week 52 in UNVEIL.

METHODS: Patients with moderate plaque psoriasis (BSA 5%-10%; static Physician's Global Assessment [sPGA] score of 3 [moderate]) and naive to systemic therapies for psoriasis were randomized (2:1) to receive apremilast 30 mg twice daily or placebo for 16 weeks. At week 16, patients continued on apremilast (apremilast/apremilast) or were switched from placebo to apremilast (placebo/apremilast) through week 52 (open-label apremilast treatment phase). Efficacy assessments included the product of sPGA and BSA (PGAxBSA) (mean percentage change from baseline; ≥75% reduction from baseline [PGAxBSA-75]), sPGA response (achievement of score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear]), and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; mean change from baseline).

RESULTS: A total of 136 patients completed the 52-week analysis period (placebo/apremilast, n=50/64; apremilast/apremilast, n=86/121). At week 52, improvements in all efficacy end points observed at week 16 were maintained in the apremilast/apremilast group (mean percentage change from baseline in PGAxBSA: -55.5%; PGAxBSA-75: 42.1%; sPGA response: 33.1%; mean change from baseline in DLQI score: -4.4); similar improvements emerged in the placebo/apremilast group after switching to apremilast. The most common adverse events (≥5% of patients) through week 52 were diarrhea (28.0%), nausea (19.0%), headache (15.2%), nasopharyngitis (10.4%), upper respiratory tract infection (7.1%), vomiting (5.7%), and decreased appetite (5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS: Apremilast was effective in systemic-naive patients with moderate plaque psoriasis with BSA 5%-10%; efficacy was sustained through week 52. No new safety signals emerged with continued apremilast exposure.

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02425826

J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(2):221-228.

THIS ARTICLE HAD BEEN MADE AVAILABLE FREE OF CHARGE.

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN TO ACCESS THE FULL TEXT OF THIS ARTICLE WITHOUT LOGGING IN.

NO PURCHASE NECESSARY.

The effect of secukinumab on moderate-to-severe scalp psoriasis: Results of a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3b study.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-to-severe scalp psoriasis has not been evaluated in prospective trials of patients without moderate-to-severe body psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of secukinumab in moderate-to-severe scalp psoriasis. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind, phase 3b study, 102 patients were randomized 1:1 to subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg or placebo at baseline, weeks 1, 2, and 3, and then every 4 weeks from week 4 to 20. The primary efficacy variable was 90% improvement of Psoriasis Scalp Severity Index (PSSI 90) score from baseline to week 12. RESULTS: At week 12, PSSI 90 (secukinumab 300 mg vs placebo, 52.9% vs 2.0%) and Investigator's Global Assessment modified 2011 scalp responses of 0 or 1 (secukinumab 300 mg vs placebo, 56.9% vs 5.9%) were significantly greater with secukinumab 300 mg than placebo (P < .001 for both). In addition, significantly more patients achieved complete clearance of scalp psoriasis at week 12 with secukinumab 300 mg than placebo (35.3% vs 0%; P < .001). The median time to 50% reduction in PSSI score was 3.29 weeks with secukinumab 300 mg. The safety profile of secukinumab was consistent with previous phase 3 studies. LIMITATIONS: There was no active comparator arm. CONCLUSION: Secukinumab is efficacious and well-tolerated for patients with extensive moderate-to-severe scalp psoriasis.

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) Initiative: A Review and Update.

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) group, comprising patients, physicians, health economists, industry partners, payers, and regulatory agencies, was established to develop unified and validated patient-centered outcome measures in dermatology in response to increasing demand to quantify effectiveness of treatments and performance outcomes among providers. IDEOM has chosen to start with psoriasis outcome measures, and then apply its methodology to other dermatologic diseases. In this paper, we review the background and progress to date of IDEOM, including an update of IDEOM activities as of our 2016 meeting in Washington DC, USA. Briefly, the progress-to-date of a Delphi process to create outcome measures for psoriasis was reviewed, including preliminary data from the first round of Delphi voting. Updates were also heard from industry partners including the National Psoriasis Foundation (NPF) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Furthermore, plans to establish outcome measures for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) were discussed.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(2):119-124.

The Static Physician's Global Assessment of Genitalia: A Clinical Outcome Measure for the Severity of Genital Psoriasis.

Introduction: Genital psoriasis is a common but frequently overlooked manifestation of psoriasis with a considerable impact on patients' quality of life. Currently no validated clinical trial outcome measures exist to assess genital psoriasis severity that meet regulatory agency requirements. Methods: This study describes the development of the static Physician's Global Assessment of Genitalia (sPGA-G) scale, a clinical outcome measure for the assessment of genital psoriasis severity that accounts for the erythematous clinical presentation of genital psoriasis. The reliability of the sPGA-G was evaluated using scores collected from clinician assessments of photographs of genital psoriasis cases. Scores were collected from 10 academic and clinical experts in genital psoriasis and 95 clinician assessors who participated in either in-person (n=28) or online (n=67) sPGA-G training modules. Results: The sPGA-G had a high inter-rater reliability (IRR, measured by Kendall's W) for expert raters (W=0.856, P less than 0.0001), in-person assessors (W=0.822, P less than 0.0001), and online assessors (W=0.678, P less than 0.0001). IRR was also high for all clinical assessors combined, (W=0.714, P less than 0.0001). Discussion: This study demonstrates that the sPGA-G is an intuitive and reliable clinical outcome measure that specifically measures the severity of genital psoriasis. J Drugs Dermatol. 2017;16(8):793-799.

Rare and common variants in CARD14, encoding an epidermal regulator of NF-kappaB, in psoriasis.

Psoriasis is a common inflammatory disorder of the skin and other organs. We have determined that mutations in CARD14, encoding a nuclear factor of kappa light chain enhancer in B cells (NF-kB) activator within skin epidermis, account for PSORS2. Here, we describe fifteen additional rare missense variants in CARD14, their distribution in seven psoriasis cohorts (>6,000 cases and >4,000 controls), and their effects on NF-kB activation and the transcriptome of keratinocytes. There were more CARD14 rare variants in cases than in controls (burden test p value = 0.0015). Some variants were only seen in a single case, and these included putative pathogenic mutations (c.424G>A [p.Glu142Lys] and c.425A>G [p.Glu142Gly]) and the generalized-pustular-psoriasis mutation, c.413A>C (p.Glu138Ala); these three mutations lie within the coiled-coil domain of CARD14. The c.349G>A (p.Gly117Ser) familial-psoriasis mutation was present at a frequency of 0.0005 in cases of European ancestry. CARD14 variants led to a range of NF-kB activities; in particular, putative pathogenic variants led to levels >2.5× higher than did wild-type CARD14. Two variants (c.511C>A [p.His171Asn] and c.536G>A [p.Arg179His]) required stimulation with tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) to achieve significant increases in NF-kB levels. Transcriptome profiling of wild-type and variant CARD14 transfectants in keratinocytes differentiated probably pathogenic mutations from neutral variants such as polymorphisms. Over 20 CARD14 polymorphisms were also genotyped, and meta-analysis revealed an association between psoriasis and rs11652075 (c.2458C>T [p.Arg820Trp]; p value = 2.1 × 10(-6)). In the two largest psoriasis cohorts, evidence for association increased when rs11652075 was conditioned on HLA-Cw*0602 (PSORS1). These studies contribute to our understanding of the genetic basis of psoriasis and illustrate the challenges faced in identifying pathogenic variants in common disease.

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures Group: formation of patient-centered outcome measures in dermatology.

As quality standards are increasingly in demand throughout medicine, dermatology needs to establish outcome measures to quantify the effectiveness of treatments and providers. The International Dermatology Outcome Measures Group was established to address this need. Beginning with psoriasis, the group aims to create a tool considerate of patients and providers using the input of all relevant stakeholders in assessment of disease severity and response to treatment. Herein, we delineate the procedures through which consensus is being reached and the future directions of the project.

Identifying and Managing Complications and Comorbidities in Patients With Psoriasis.

The common comorbidities of cutaneous psoriasis include psoriatic arthritis (PsA), Crohn's disease, uveitis, and depression. In addition, cardiovascular disease risk factors (including metabolic syndrome) are seen more frequently among patients with psoriasis, and strong epidemiologic evidence has demonstrated that psoriasis is independently associated with myocardial infarction. Because these comorbid conditions and other medical complications adversely affect morbidity and mortality in patients with psoriasis, dermatologists can play an important role in promptly identifying and, when necessary, referring patients for further workup and treatment when signs or symptoms of these comorbidities or complications are observed. Semin Cutan Med Surg 34(supp2):S30-S33 © 2015 published by Frontline Medical Communications.

Screening and Monitoring Before and During Systemic Therapy: Recommendations for Patients With Psoriasis.

When patients with psoriasis are candidates for systemic therapy, the list of appropriate agents for each patient should be derived from careful patient and family history and selected laboratory screening protocols so that the potential risks associated with treatment can be minimized. Once a therapeutic choice is made, monitoring strategies also are necessary for early identification and intervention of adverse events that may arise. In addition to appropriate screening and monitoring protocols, communication between patient and clinician is essential to enhance the benefits of therapy and minimize the risks. Semin Cutan Med Surg 34(supp2):S40-S42 © 2015 published by Frontline Medical Communications.