Presidential Round Table: A Report from the GRAPPA Annual Meeting

In preparation for strategic planning of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), a special session titled the Presidential Round Table took place during the GRAPPA annual meeting in Stockholm, Sweden, in July 2015. During this session, past, current, and incoming presidents of GRAPPA reflected on GRAPPA’s history and provided insights about GRAPPA’s future, followed by general discussion by the membership

GRAPPA 2015 Research and Education Project Reports

At the 2015 annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), attendees were presented with brief updates on several ongoing initiatives, including educational projects. Updates were presented on the treatment recommendations project, the development of simple criteria to identify inflammatory musculoskeletal disease, new patient/physician Delphi exercises, and BIODAM (identifying biomarkers that predict progressive structural joint damage). The publication committee also gave a report. Herein we summarize those project updates

International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) Group 2016 New York Meeting: Meeting Summary and Data from the Psoriasis Working Group

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) Group was established to develop validated and standardized patient-centered outcome measures in dermatology that meet the needs of stakeholders and can be used in clinical practice as well as clinical research. At this meeting, we aimed to define the final core domain set to be assessed in psoriasis clinical research and to identify which of the current psoriasis assessment instruments appropriately address those domains. Specifically, we sought to ascertain stakeholder input on domain match and feasibility of multiple psoriasis instruments. We presented 19 physician-reported and 23 patient-reported outcome measures at the meeting. Stakeholders anonymously voted on the validity and feasibilibity of each instrument. Validity was rated as: green (good), amber (fair), red (poor), and white (not enough information). Feasibility was rated as: green (feasible), amber (concerns about some aspects of feasibility), red (not feasible), and white (not enough information). Eighteen physician-reported and 20 patient-reported instruments received a favorable green or amber rating for validity from the majority of voters. Seventeen physician reported and 19 patient-reported instruments received a green or amber rating for feasilibty from the majority of voters. A significant proportion of the psoriasis instruments received a good or fair vote for measuring their intended psoriasis domains in a feasible manner. We will continue to refine our voting methodology and incorporate patient input into our process of defining psoriasis domains and developing validated instruments