Treatment preferences in spinal muscular atrophy: A swing weighting study for caregivers of patients with SMA types 1 and 2.

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a genetic neuromuscular disorder characterized by skeletal muscle weakness and atrophy. Patients with SMA types 1 and 2 develop severe disabilities conferring substantial patient and caregiver burden. Caregiver treatment characteristic preferences are useful for informing treatment choices and improving adherence. We aimed to identify drivers of SMA treatment preference from the perspective of caregivers of patients with SMA types 1 or 2 in the United States. We quantified the relative importance of different treatment characteristics and compared preferences for hypothetical treatment scenarios. Treatment attributes and attribute levels elicited were based on a literature search and interviews with caregivers and health care professionals. The most important treatment characteristics from the perspective of health care professionals and caregivers were identified and used in a survey to quantify relative importance for caregivers. Caregivers completed surveys regarding their preferences using swing weighting methodology. These results were used to estimate the relative value of four hypothetical SMA treatment scenarios exploring different modes of treatment administration. The swing weighting survey, completed by 20 caregivers, demonstrated that the attributes driving treatment preference were reduction in permanent ventilation needs and risk of severe adverse events, followed by treatment access (including cost coverage and availability), increased ability to sit without support, and less treatment administration burden. The hypothetical SMA treatment scenarios with the highest relative value offered an easier mode of administration, lowest risk of severe adverse events, less need of permanent ventilation, and highest ability of patients to feed and sit without support. Our findings suggest that caregivers prefer a treatment with reduced clinical burden and risk in which the cost is covered and treatment is available in the short term. These results can provide important contextual information for decision-makers and help promote patient-centered care for patients with SMA.

Expert consensus on systemic therapy for plaque psoriasis with limited skin involvement in JAPAN: Results from a DELPHI study.

Our objective was to establish consensus on (1) which patients with plaque psoriasis and limited skin involvement (body surface area [BSA] <10%) are suitable for systemic treatment, and (2) a definition of 'topical therapy failure'. A steering committee refined 13 statements drawn from literature related to the study objectives. An independent panel of 45 clinical experts from Japan indicated their agreement to each statement using a 10-point Likert scale (Round 1; strong consensus, ≥70% of responses = 7-10 and median value ≥8). The steering committee reviewed Round 1 results and refined the statements for Round 2, as necessary. In Round 2, the panel indicated their agreement to each statement using a 3-point scale (strong consensus, ≥70% of responses and median value of 3) and were shown Round 1 responses before voting. Forty-five clinicians participated in Round 1 and 41 of those (91%) participated in Round 2. Consensus was achieved on the criteria of eligibility for systemic treatment among patients with limited skin involvement as disease involvement at special or difficult to treat areas, psoriasis-induced psychological distress, uncontrolled symptoms (e.g., scaling, bleeding, pruritus, insomnia) affecting their social life, psoriatic arthritis, or failure of topical therapy. Consensus on criteria for topical failure were persistent symptoms (e.g., itchiness, pain) and plaques, poor patient satisfaction with treatment, a need to increase medication quantity or application time after treatment with two topicals for 4 weeks; or if the Psoriasis Area Severity Index score of >3 or Physician Global Assessment Score of ≥2 after 8 weeks treatment. Our Delphi panel proposes criteria to help physicians identify patients with psoriasis and limited skin involvement who would benefit from systemic therapy and suggests a definition for topical therapy 'failure' which could indicate a move to systemic treatment is warranted.

Challenges in mapping European rare disease databases, relevant for ML-based screening technologies in terms of organizational, FAIR and legal principles: scoping review.

Background: Given the increased availability of data sources such as hospital information systems, electronic health records, and health-related registries, a novel approach is required to develop artificial intelligence-based decision support that can assist clinicians in their diagnostic decision-making and shorten rare disease patients' diagnostic odyssey. The aim is to identify key challenges in the process of mapping European rare disease databases, relevant to ML-based screening technologies in terms of organizational, FAIR and legal principles. Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the PRISMA-ScR checklist. The primary article search was conducted in three electronic databases (MEDLINE/Pubmed, Scopus, and Web of Science) and a secondary search was performed in Google scholar and on the organizations' websites. Each step of this review was carried out independently by two researchers. A charting form for relevant study analysis was developed and used to categorize data and identify data items in three domains - organizational, FAIR and legal. Results: At the end of the screening process, 73 studies were eligible for review based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with more than 60% (n = 46) of the research published in the last 5 years and originated only from EU/EEA countries. Over the ten-year period (2013-2022), there is a clear cycling trend in the publications, with a peak of challenges reporting every four years. Within this trend, the following dynamic was identified: except for 2016, organizational challenges dominated the articles published up to 2018; legal challenges were the most frequently discussed topic from 2018 to 2022. The following distribution of the data items by domains was observed - (1) organizational (n = 36): data accessibility and sharing (20.2%); long-term sustainability (18.2%); governance, planning and design (17.2%); lack of harmonization and standardization (17.2%); quality of data collection (16.2%); and privacy risks and small sample size (11.1%); (2) FAIR (n = 15): findable (17.9%); accessible sustainability (25.0%); interoperable (39.3%); and reusable (17.9%); and (3) legal (n = 33): data protection by all means (34.4%); data management and ownership (22.9%); research under GDPR and member state law (20.8%); trust and transparency (13.5%); and digitalization of health (8.3%). We observed a specific pattern repeated in all domains during the process of data charting and data item identification - in addition to the outlined challenges, good practices, guidelines, and recommendations were also discussed. The proportion of publications addressing only good practices, guidelines, and recommendations for overcoming challenges when mapping RD databases in at least one domain was calculated to be 47.9% (n = 35). Conclusion: Despite the opportunities provided by innovation - automation, electronic health records, hospital-based information systems, biobanks, rare disease registries and European Reference Networks - the results of the current scoping review demonstrate a diversity of the challenges that must still be addressed, with immediate actions on ensuring better governance of rare disease registries, implementing FAIR principles, and enhancing the EU legal framework.