Which outcomes have been measured in hand eczema trials? A systematic review:A systematic review

The considerable heterogeneity of outcomes and measurement instruments in hand eczema trials substantially limits the evidence synthesis concerning therapeutic and preventive interventions. Therefore, the Hand Eczema Core Outcome Set (HECOS) initiative is developing a core outcome set for future trials. The first objective was to identify outcomes that were measured in previous trials, to group them in domains, and to identify their measurement instruments. We conducted a systematic review of controlled and randomized controlled hand eczema trials published since 2000. Sixty-one eligible studies were identified. Each assessed one or more of 47 outcomes in the "skin" domain. Eighteen trials (30%) additionally focused on preventive behaviour in risk occupations. Quality of life was measured in 13 studies (21%). Thirty-two distinct named instruments were applied, but 223 measurements (62%) were conducted with unnamed instruments. Only 32 studies (52%) defined a primary outcome. Twenty-nine trials (48%) provided some information on adverse events, but none gave any references concerning relevant methods. Our review confirms the need to harmonize outcome measurements in hand eczema trials. The findings form the basis for a consensus process to generate a core outcome set to improve the explanatory power and comparability of future hand eczema studies.</p

The feasibility of an allergy management support system (AMSS) for IgE-mediated allergy in primary care

Background: The allergy management support system (AMSS) was developed to assist general practitioners (GPs) to handle the increasing burden of allergic diseases and facilitates the diagnosis and management of allergy. The aim of this cluster-randomized controlled pilot study was to test the feasibility of this AMSS for primary care. Methods: GPs received diagnostic and management recommendations generated by the AMSS in addition to sIgE-test results (intervention) or GPs received sIgE-test results only (control). The AMSS recommendations are based on the previously developed patient-completed AMSS questionnaire and sIgE-test results. The AMSS was considered feasible when > 70% of the AMSS recommendations were sent to the GP within ten working days of sIgE-testing. GPs completed a questionnaire on their diagnosis and management before (T1) and after (T2) receiving sIgE test results. Agreement and disagreement concerning diagnosis, medication and referrals between GPs and AMSS was investigated at T1 and T2. A total agreement score between GPs and AMSS was calculated. GPs in the intervention group completed a questionnaire to evaluate the utility of the AMSS. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the motivation of GPs who did not include patients in this pilot study. Results: Twenty-seven GPs included 101 patients. Forty-two patients (72%) completed the AMSS questionnaire in the intervention group. The majority of the AMSS recommendations (93%) were returned to the GP within 10 working days after sIgE-test results were known [mean (SD) 4.7 (4.0) working days]. GPs in the intervention group reported largely following the AMSS recommendations in 71% of cases. The total agreement scores concerning diagnosis were significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the intervention group than the control group [mean (SD); 0.9 (1.8) vs - 0.8 (1.0)]. The agreement concerning medication or referral between GPs and AMSS did not differ between the intervention and the control group. GPs in the intervention group were reasonably positive about the AMSS. Not enrolling patients was not caused by anticipated ineffectiveness of the AMSS. Conclusion: The AMSS can be considered to be feasible for primary care. GPs tend to follow the AMSS recommendations. The AMSS may contribute to the empowerment of GPs to better manage allergy patients in primary care.Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN36780877. Registered 23 November 2017 (retrospectively registered)

European patch test results with audit allergens as candidates for inclusion in the European Baseline Series, 2019/20:Joint results of the ESSCA(A) and the EBSB working groups of the ESCD, and the GEIDAC(C)

Background In 2019, a number of allergens (haptens), henceforth, "the audit allergens," were considered as potential additions to the European Baseline Series (EBS), namely, sodium metabisulfite, 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, Compositae mix II (2.5% or 5% pet), linalool hydroperoxides (lin-OOH), limonene hydroperoxides (lim-OOH), benzisothiazolinone (BIT), octylisothiazolinone (OIT), decyl glucoside, and lauryl glucoside; Evernia furfuracea (tree moss), was additionally tested by some departments as well. Objectives To collect further data on patch test reactivity and clinical relevance of the audit allergens in consecutive patients across Europe. Methods Patch test data covering the audit allergens in 2019 and 2020 were collected by those departments of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies testing these, as well as further collaborators from the EBS working group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD), and the Spanish Grupo Espanol de Investigacion en Dermatitis de Contacto y Alergia Cutanea. As patch test outcome, reactions between day (D) 3 and D5 were considered. Results Altogether n = 12 403 patients were tested with any of the audit allergen. Positive reactions were most common to lin-OOH 1% pet. (8.74% [95%CI: 8.14-9.37%]), followed by lin-OOH 0.5% pet., and lim-OOH 0.3% pet (5.41% [95% CI: 4.95-5.89%]). Beyond these terpene hydroperoxides, BIT 0.1% pet. was the second most common allergen with 4.72% (95% CI: 4.2-5.28%), followed by sodium metabisulfite 1% pet. (3.75% [95%CI: 3.32-4.23%]) and Compositae mix 5% pet. (2.31% [95% CI: 1.84-2.87%]). For some allergens, clinical relevance was frequently difficult to ascertain. Conclusions Despite many positive patch test reactions, it remains controversial whether lin- and lim-OOH should be tested routinely, while at least the two preservatives BIT and sodium metabisulfite appear suitable. The present results are a basis for further discussion and ultimately decision on their implementation into routine testing among the ESCD members

Dupilumab Drug Survival and Associated Predictors in Patients With Moderate to Severe Atopic Dermatitis Long-term Results From the Daily Practice BioDay Registry

IMPORTANCE Long-term data on dupilumab drug survival in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) are scarce. Furthermore, little is known about the factors associated with drug survival of dupilumab in AD.OBJECTIVE To describe the drug survival of dupilumab in patients with AD and to identify associated predictors.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort studywas based on data from the multicenter prospective daily practice BioDay registry, in which 4 university and 10 nonuniversity hospitals in the Netherlands participated. Analysis included patients (age &gt;= 18 years) participating in the BioDay registry with a follow-up of at least 4 weeks. The first patient treated with dupilumab was recorded in the BioDay registry in October 2017; data lock took place in December 2020, and data analysis was performed from October 2017 to December 2020.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Drug survivalwas analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and associated characteristics by using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis.RESULTS A total of 715 adult patients with AD (mean [SD] age, 41.8 [16.0] years; 418 [58.5%] were male) were included with a 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year overall dupilumab drug survival of 90.3%, 85.9%, and 78.6%, respectively. Characteristics associated with shorter drug survival owing to ineffectiveness were the use of immunosuppressant drugs at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.64; 95% CI, 1.10-6.37) and being a nonresponder at 4 weeks (HR, 8.68; 95% CI, 2.97-25.35). Characteristics associated with shorter drug survival owing to adverse effects were the use of immunosuppressant drugs at baseline (HR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.32-5.48), age 65 years or older (HR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.10-7.87), and Investigator Global Assessment score of very severe AD (HR, 3.51; 95% CI, 1.20-10.28).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study demonstrated a good overall 1-year, 2-year, and 3-year dupilumab drug survival. Patients using immunosuppressive therapy at baseline and those with an absence of treatment effect at week 4 tended to discontinue treatment owing to ineffectiveness more frequently. Using immunosuppressant drugs at baseline, older age, and Investigator Global Assessment score of very severe AD were characteristics associated with an increased risk for discontinuation owing to adverse effects. These data provide more insight and new perspectives regarding dupilumab treatment in AD and can contribute to the optimization of patient outcomes.</p

Development of an allergy management support system in primary care

BACKGROUND: Management of allergic patients in the population is becoming more difficult because of increases in both complexity and prevalence. Although general practitioners (GPs) are expected to play an important role in the care of allergic patients, they often feel ill-equipped for this task. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop an allergy management support system (AMSS) for primary care. METHODS: Through literature review, interviewing and testing in secondary and primary care patients, an allergy history questionnaire was constructed by allergists, dermatologists, GPs and researchers based on primary care and specialists’ allergy guidelines and their clinical knowledge. Patterns of AMSS questionnaire responses and specific immunoglobulin E (sIgE)-test outcomes were used to identify diagnostic categories and develop corresponding management recommendations. Validity of the AMSS was investigated by comparing specialist (gold standard) and AMSS diagnostic categories. RESULTS: The two-page patient-completed AMSS questionnaire consists of 12 (mainly) multiple choice questions on symptoms, triggers, severity and medication. Based on the AMSS questionnaires and sIgE-test outcome of 118 patients, approximately 150 diagnostic categories of allergic rhinitis, asthma, atopic dermatitis, anaphylaxis, food allergy, hymenoptera allergy and other allergies were identified, and the corresponding management recommendations were formulated. The agreement between the allergy specialists’ assessments and the AMSS was 69.2% (CI 67.2–71.2). CONCLUSION: Using a systematic approach, it was possible to develop an AMSS that allows for the formulation of diagnostic and management recommendations for GPs managing allergic patients. The AMSS thus holds promise for the improvement of the quality of primary care for this increasing group of patients

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 &gt; 0.70) and Rasch analysis. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.96) and test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient &gt; 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 &lt; 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.</p