How to use the HOME Core Outcome Set for atopic dermatitis trials - a users' guide

The Harmonizing Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has agreed upon the core outcome set for use in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials, but additional guidance is needed to maximise uptake of the core set. This article provides answers to some of the commonly asked questions about using the HOME core outcome set. It also provides data to aid interpretation of trial results and to support sample size calculations for future trials. By encouraging adoption of the core outcome set and facilitating consistent reporting of outcome data, we hope that results of eczema trials will be more comprehensive and readily combined in meta-analyses and patient care will be improved

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: consensus on how and when to measure the core dataset for atopic eczema treatment research registries.

BackgroundComparative, real-life and long-term evidence on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE) is limited. Such data must come from well-designed prospective patient registries. Standardization of data collection is needed for direct comparisons and data pooling.ObjectivesTo reach a consensus on how and when to measure the previously defined domain items of the TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce core dataset for research registries for paediatric and adult patients with AE.MethodsProposals for the measurement instruments were based on recommendations of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative, the existing AE database of TREATgermany, systematic reviews of the literature and expert opinions. The proposals were discussed at three face-to-face consensus meetings, one teleconference and via e-mail. The frequency of follow-up visits was determined by an expert survey.ResultsA total of 16 experts from seven countries participated in the 'how to measure' consensus process and 12 external experts were consulted. A consensus was reached for all domain items on how they should be measured by assigning measurement instruments. A minimum follow-up frequency of initially 4 weeks after commencing treatment, then every 3 months while on treatment and every 6 months while off treatment was defined.ConclusionsThis core dataset for national AE research registries will aid in the comparability and pooling of data across centres and country borders, and enables international collaboration to assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy used in patients with AE. What's already known about this topic? Comparable, real-life and long-term data on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in patients with atopic eczema (AE) are needed. There is a high diversity of outcomes and instruments used in AE research, which require harmonization to enhance comparability and allow data pooling. What does this study add? Our taskforce has reached international consensus on how and when to measure core domain items for national AE research registries. This core dataset is now available for use by researchers worldwide and will aid in the collection of unified data. What are the clinical implications of this work? The data collected through this core dataset will help to gain better insights into the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in AE and will provide important information for clinical practice. Standardization of such data collection at the national level will also allow direct data comparisons and pooling across country borders (e.g. in the analysis of treatment-related adverse events that require large patient numbers)

Definition of treatment goals for moderate to severe psoriasis: a European consensus

Patients with moderate to severe psoriasis are undertreated. To solve this persistent problem, the consensus programme was performed to define goals for treatment of plaque psoriasis with systemic therapy and to improve patient care. An expert consensus meeting and a collaborative Delphi procedure were carried out. Nineteen dermatologists from different European countries met for a face-to-face discussion and defined items through a four-round Delphi process. Severity of plaque psoriasis was graded into mild and moderate to severe disease. Mild disease was defined as body surface area (BSA) ≤10 and psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) ≤10 and dermatology life quality index (DLQI) ≤10 and moderate to severe psoriasis as (BSA > 10 or PASI > 10) and DLQI > 10. Special clinical situations may change mild psoriasis to moderate to severe including involvement of visible areas or severe nail involvement. For systemic therapy of plaque psoriasis two treatment phases were defined: (1) induction phase as the treatment period until week 16; however, depending on the type of drug and dose regimen used, this phase may be extended until week 24 and (2) maintenance phase for all drugs was defined as the treatment period after the induction phase. For the definition of treatment goals in plaque psoriasis, the change of PASI from baseline until the time of evaluation (ΔPASI) and the absolute DLQI were used. After induction and during maintenance therapy, treatment can be continued if reduction in PASI is ≥75%. The treatment regimen should be modified if improvement of PASI is <50%. In a situation where the therapeutic response improved ≥50% but <75%, as assessed by PASI, therapy should be modified if the DLQI is >5 but can be continued if the DLQI is ≤5. This programme defines the severity of plaque psoriasis for the first time using a formal consensus of 19 European experts. In addition, treatment goals for moderate to severe disease were established. Implementation of treatment goals in the daily management of psoriasis will improve patient care and mitigate the problem of undertreatment. It is planned to evaluate the implementation of these treatment goals in a subsequent programme involving patients and physicians

Classifying atopic dermatitis: a systematic review of phenotypes and associated characteristics.

Atopic dermatitis is a heterogeneous disease, accompanied by a wide variation in disease presentation and the potential to identify many phenotypes that may be relevant for prognosis and treatment. We aimed to systematically review previously reported phenotypes of atopic dermatitis and any characteristics associated with them. Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched from inception till 12 February 2021 for studies attempting to classify atopic dermatitis. Primary outcomes are atopic dermatitis phenotypes and characteristics associated with them in subsequent analyses. A secondary outcome is the methodological approach used to derive them. In total, 8511 records were found. By focussing only on certain clinical phenotypes, 186 studies were eligible for inclusion. The majority of studies were hospital-based (59%, 109/186) and cross-sectional (76%, 141/186). The number of included patients ranged from seven to 526 808. Data-driven approaches to identify phenotypes were only used in a minority of studies (7%, 13/186). Ninety-one studies (49%) investigated a phenotype based on disease severity. A phenotype based on disease trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum was investigated in 56 (30%), 22 (12%) and 11 (6%) studies respectively. Thirty-six studies (19%) investigated morphological characteristics in other phenotypes. Investigated associated characteristics differed between studies. In conclusion, we present an overview of phenotype definitions used in literature for severity, trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum, including associated characteristics. There is a lack of uniform and consistent use of atopic dermatitis phenotypes across studies

Biological therapies in the systemic management of psoriasis: International Consensus Conference

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated disorder that usually requires long-term treatment for control. Approximately 25% of patients have moderate to severe disease and require phototherapy, systemic therapy or both. Despite the availability of numerous therapeutic options, the long-term management of psoriasis can be complicated by treatment-related limitations. With advances in molecular research and technology, several biological therapies are in various stages of development and approval for psoriasis. Biological therapies are designed to modulate key steps in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Collectively, biologicals have been evaluated in thousands of patients with psoriasis and have demonstrated significant benefit with favourable safety and tolerability profiles. The limitations of current psoriasis therapies, the value of biological therapies for psoriasis, and guidance regarding the incorporation of biological therapies into clinical practice are discussed.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72815/1/j.1365-2133.2004.06070.x.pd

UVB phototherapy in an outpatient setting or at home: a pragmatic randomised single-blind trial designed to settle the discussion. The PLUTO study

BACKGROUND: Home ultraviolet B (UVB) treatment is a much-debated treatment, especially with regard to effectiveness, safety and side effects. However, it is increasingly being prescribed, especially in the Netherlands. Despite ongoing discussions, no randomised research has been performed, and only two studies actually compare two groups of patients. Thus, firm evidence to support or discourage the use of home UVB phototherapy has not yet been obtained. This is the goal of the present study, the PLUTO study (Dutch acronym for "national trial on home UVB phototherapy for psoriasis"). METHODS: We designed a pragmatic randomised single-blind multi-centre trial. This trial is designed to evaluate the impact of home UVB treatment versus UVB phototherapy in a hospital outpatient clinic as to effectiveness, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. In total 196 patients with psoriasis who were clinically eligible for UVB phototherapy were included. Normally 85% of the patients treated with UVB show a relevant clinical response. With a power of 80% and a 0.05 significance level it will be possible to detect a reduction in effectiveness of 15%. Effectiveness will be determined by calculating differences in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and the Self Administered PASI (SAPASI) scores. Quality of life is measured using several validated generic questionnaires and a disease-specific questionnaire. Other outcome measures include costs, side effects, dosimetry, concomitant use of medication and patient satisfaction. Patients are followed throughout the therapy and for 12 months thereafter. The study is no longer recruiting patients, and is expected to report in 2006. DISCUSSION: In the field of home UVB phototherapy this trial is the first randomised parallel group study. As such, this trial addresses the weaknesses encountered in previous studies. The pragmatic design ensures that the results can be well generalised to the target population. Because, in addition to effectiveness, aspects such as quality of life and cost-effectiveness are also taken into consideration, this study will produce valuable evidence to either support or discourage prescription of home UVB phototherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current controlled trials/Nederlands Trial register: ISRCTN83025173. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT0015093

Global reporting of cases of COVID-19 in psoriasis and atopic dermatitis: an opportunity to inform care during a pandemic.

We wish to bring your attention to the PsoPROTECT (Psoriasis Patient Registry for Outcomes, Therapy and Epidemiology of Covid-19 infecTion) and SECURE-AD (Surveillance Epidemiology of Coronavirus Under Research Exclusion-Atopic Dermatitis) registries; two urgent global initiatives that address an unmet need for delineating the determinants of COVID-19 outcomes in the common cutaneous immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) psoriasis and atopic dermatitis

TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: protocol for a European safety study of dupilumab and other systemic therapies in patients with atopic eczema.

BACKGROUND: A long-term prospective observational safety study is essential to characterize fully the safety profile of systemic immunomodulating therapies for patients with atopic eczema. The TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce offers a large platform to conduct such research using national registries that collect the same data using a predefined core dataset. OBJECTIVES: To present a protocol for a safety study comparing dupilumab with other systemic immunomodulating therapies in children and adults with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema, to assess the long-term safety risk of these therapies in a routine clinical care setting. METHODS: We describe a registry-embedded international observational prospective cohort study. Adult and paediatric patients who start treatment with dupilumab or another systemic immunomodulating agent for their atopic eczema will be included. The primary end point is the incidence of malignancies (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) compared between the treatment groups. Secondary end points include other serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest, such as eye disorders and eosinophilia. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol delineates a safety study for dupilumab in adult and paediatric patients with atopic eczema, using a standardized methodological approach across several national registries. The protocol could also be used for other novel systemic immunomodulating therapies, and could provide licensing and reimbursement authorities, pharmaceutical companies and clinicians with safety evidence from a routine clinical care setting. What's already known about this topic? There is a need for long-term data on the safety of systemic immunomodulating therapies in patients with atopic eczema. Regulatory bodies, such as the European Medicines Agency, increasingly stipulate the collection of such data as part of the licensing agreement for new treatments, to assess the new agent's long-term safety profile against established therapies. Large numbers of patients with a long duration of follow-up are necessary in order to detect rare events like malignancies. What does this study add? The TREAT Registry Taskforce offers a platform to conduct such research with a network of multiple national atopic eczema research registries. We present a protocol for an investigator-initiated multicentre safety study comparing dupilumab with other systemic immunomodulating therapies in adults and subsequently adolescents and children with moderate-to-severe atopic eczema. This protocol can be used as a framework for similar studies for other novel systemic immunomodulating therapies across both adult and paediatric populations