Treat-to-target in dermatology:A scoping review and International Eczema Council survey on the approach in atopic dermatitis

Treat-to-target (T2T) is a pragmatic therapeutic strategy being gradually introduced into dermatology after adoption in several other clinical areas. Atopic dermatitis (AD), one of the most common inflammatory skin diseases, may also benefit from this structured and practical therapeutic approach. We aimed to evaluate existing data regarding the T2T approach in dermatology, with a specific focus on AD, as well as the views of International Eczema Council (IEC) members on the potential application of a T2T approach to AD management. To do so, we systematically searched for peer-reviewed publications on the T2T approach for any skin disease in the PubMed and Scopus databases up to February 2022 and conducted a survey among IEC members regarding various components to potentially include in a T2T approach in AD. We identified 21 relevant T2T-related reports in dermatology, of which 14 were related to psoriasis, five to AD, one for juvenile dermatomyositis and one for urticaria. In the IEC member survey, respondents proposed treatable traits (with itch, disease severity and sleep problems getting the highest scores), relevant comorbidities (with asthma being selected most commonly, followed by anxiety and depression in adults), recommended specialists that should define the approach in AD (dermatologists, allergists and primary care physicians were most commonly selected in adults), and applicable assessment tools (both physician- and patient-reported), in both adult and paediatric patients, for potential future utilization of the T2T approach in AD. In conclusion, while the T2T approach may become a useful tool to simplify therapeutic goals and AD management, its foundation in AD is only starting to build. A multidisciplinary approach, including a wide range of stakeholders, including patients, is needed to further define the essential components needed to utilize T2T in AD.</p

How to use the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema Core Outcome Set for atopic dermatitis trials: a users’ guide

BackgroundThe Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has agreed upon the Core Outcome Set (COS) for use in atopic dermatitis (AD) clinical trials, but additional guidance is needed to maximize its uptake.ObjectivesTo provide answers to some of the commonly asked questions about using the HOME COS; to provide data to help with the interpretation of trial results; and to support sample size calculations for future trials.Methods and resultsWe provide practical guidance on the use of the HOME COS for investigators planning clinical trials in patients with AD. It answers some of the common questions about using the HOME COS, how to access the outcome measurement instruments, what training/resources are needed to use them appropriately and clarifies when the COS is applicable. We also provide exemplar data to inform sample size calculations for eczema trials and encourage standardized data collection and reporting of the COS.ConclusionsBy encouraging adoption of the COS and facilitating consistent reporting of outcome data, it is hoped that the results of eczema trials will be more comprehensive and readily combined in meta-analyses and that patient care will subsequently be improved

Measuring atopic eczema symptoms in clinical practice: The first consensus statement from the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema in clinical practice initiative

Background: Measuring patient-centered outcomes in clinical practice is valuable for monitoring patients and advancing real-world research. A new initiative from the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) group aims to recommend what might be recorded for atopic eczema patients in routine clinical care. Objectives: Prioritize outcome domains to measure atopic eczema in clinical practice and select valid and practical outcome measurement instruments for the highest-priority domain. Methods: An online survey of HOME members identified and ranked 21 possible health domains. Suitable instruments were then selected for the top-prioritized domain at the HOME VI meeting, using established consensus processes informed by systematic reviews of instrument quality. Results: Patient-reported symptoms was the top-prioritized domain. In accordance with psychometric properties and feasibility, there was consensus that the recommended instruments to measure atopic eczema symptoms in clinical practice are the POEM, the PO-SCORAD index, or both. The numeric rating scale for itch received support pending definition and validation in atopic eczema. Conclusion: Following the first step of the HOME Clinical Practice initiative, we endorse using the POEM, the PO-SCORAD index, or both for measuring atopic eczema symptoms in clinical practice. Additional high-priority domains for clinical practice will be assessed at subsequent HOME meetings

Priority research questions in atopic dermatitis : an International Eczema Council eDelphi consensus

Recent advances in understanding the complex pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis (AD, also known as eczema or atopic eczema), coupled with the development of new treatments, have led to increased interest from multiple stakeholders. There is a need to prioritize areas for research to inform a coordinated approach to advancing science and patient care

Psychometric evaluation of the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS), and Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS)

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by pruritus, skin pain, and sleep impacts, which are only reportable by patients themselves. The goal of this research is to evaluate the reliability, validity, and interpretability of the scores from three patient-reported outcome measures within the context of a clinical trial for adolescents and adults with moderate to severe AD. METHODS: Data from a Phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational clinical trial for individuals 12-75 years of age with moderate to severe AD (AD Up [ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03568318]) were used to assess the reliability, validity, and interpretability of scores on the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the Atopic Dermatitis Symptom and Impact Scales (ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS). Analyses were conducted separately for the adult and adolescent subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 882 participants included in the psychometric analyses, the majority were adults ( = 769, 87.2%), male ( = 536, 60.8%), and white ( = 630, 71.4%). Multi-item scores from the ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS had good internal consistency reliability, and most scores demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability. Scores from the three questionnaires demonstrated adequate validity, exhibiting correlations with other conceptually related outcome assessments and score differences between clinically distinct subgroups. Finally, the score interpretation analyses provide estimates for meaningful within-person change and between-groups difference thresholds that may be useful for future research in adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence that the scores produced by the Worst Pruritus NRS, ADerm-SS, and ADerm-IS are reliable and construct-valid when completed by adults and adolescents with moderate to severe AD in a clinical trial setting. The results presented here expand upon the previous qualitative evidence of these tools and provide further support for their use in future clinical studies. While results are specific to clinical trials, next steps would be to evaluate the use of these questionnaires in clinical practice. This can provide clinicians and dermatologists a window into the patient\u27s disease experience outside of the clinic, aid in shared decision making, and support a patient-centric approach to management of moderate to severe AD

Determining Severity Strata for Three Atopic Dermatitis Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires: Defining Severity Score Ranges for the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale and the Atopic Dermatitis Symptom and Impact Scales (ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS)

INTRODUCTION: Three patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires-Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS), and Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS)-were developed to assess the symptoms and impacts of atopic dermatitis (AD). Severity strata for these PROs are needed to aid in their interpretation. METHODS: Using data from a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial (NCT03568318) of patients with moderate-severe AD (age ≥ 12 years), equipercentile linking analyses were conducted to define severity strata applying the Patient Global Impression of Severity as an anchor. Analyses were conducted separately for adults and adolescents, and then harmonized between the two age groups. RESULTS: The sample included 769 adults and 113 adolescents. For the WP-NRS, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3 with mild, 4-7 with moderate, and 8-10 with severe. For the ADerm-SS Skin Pain, 0 was associated with absent, 1 with minimal, 2 with mild, 3-6 with moderate, and 7-10 with severe. For ADerm-SS 7-Item Total Symptom Score (TSS-7), 0-1 was associated with absent, 2-11 with minimal, 12-22 with mild, 23-47 with moderate, and 48-70 with severe. For ADerm-IS Sleep, 0 was associated with absent, 1-3 with minimal, 4-6 with mild, 7-20 with moderate, and 21-30 with severe. For ADerm-IS Daily Activities, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-7 with mild, 8-25 with moderate, and 26-40 with severe. For ADerm-IS Emotional State, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-8 with mild, 9-22 with moderate, and 23-30 with severe. CONCLUSIONS: These severity strata provide score interpretations of the WP-NRS, ADerm-SS, and ADerm-IS, translating these scores to simple and intuitive outcomes, which can inform clinical studies and clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03568318

Determining Severity Strata for Three Atopic Dermatitis Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires: Defining Severity Score Ranges for the Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale and the Atopic Dermatitis Symptom and Impact Scales (ADerm-SS and ADerm-IS)

INTRODUCTION: Three patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires-Worst Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale (WP-NRS), Atopic Dermatitis Symptom Scale (ADerm-SS), and Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (ADerm-IS)-were developed to assess the symptoms and impacts of atopic dermatitis (AD). Severity strata for these PROs are needed to aid in their interpretation. METHODS: Using data from a global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial (NCT03568318) of patients with moderate-severe AD (age ≥ 12 years), equipercentile linking analyses were conducted to define severity strata applying the Patient Global Impression of Severity as an anchor. Analyses were conducted separately for adults and adolescents, and then harmonized between the two age groups. RESULTS: The sample included 769 adults and 113 adolescents. For the WP-NRS, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3 with mild, 4-7 with moderate, and 8-10 with severe. For the ADerm-SS Skin Pain, 0 was associated with absent, 1 with minimal, 2 with mild, 3-6 with moderate, and 7-10 with severe. For ADerm-SS 7-Item Total Symptom Score (TSS-7), 0-1 was associated with absent, 2-11 with minimal, 12-22 with mild, 23-47 with moderate, and 48-70 with severe. For ADerm-IS Sleep, 0 was associated with absent, 1-3 with minimal, 4-6 with mild, 7-20 with moderate, and 21-30 with severe. For ADerm-IS Daily Activities, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-7 with mild, 8-25 with moderate, and 26-40 with severe. For ADerm-IS Emotional State, 0 was associated with absent, 1-2 with minimal, 3-8 with mild, 9-22 with moderate, and 23-30 with severe. CONCLUSIONS: These severity strata provide score interpretations of the WP-NRS, ADerm-SS, and ADerm-IS, translating these scores to simple and intuitive outcomes, which can inform clinical studies and clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03568318

Real-life experience with chlormethine gel for early-stage mycosis fungoides with emphasis on types and management of cutaneous side-effects#

Background Real-life efficacy data on the recently approved once daily application of chlormethine gel (CG) for mycosis fungoides (MF) is limited, and detailed characterization of the side effects and their management are strikingly sparse. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and particularly the side effect profile of CG in early-stage MF patients in a real-life setting. Methods We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of 66 early-stage MF adult patients treated with CG in 2016–2019. Results Treatment with a once-daily application (52%), or at lower frequencies (48%), in some with topical corticosteroids (TCS) (40%), resulted in an overall response rate of 50%, with no significant difference between stage IA and IB. Cutaneous side effects (56%) included irritant or allergic contact dermatitis (36%, mostly mild/moderate and manageable by reducing application frequency and/or adding TCS or interrupting treatment), unmasking effect (9%), hyperpigmentation (14%), and pruritus (9%). Withdrawal due to side effects occurred in 19.6% of patients (15% for contact dermatitis). Conclusion In real-life management, flexible regimens of CG sometimes with TCS, show efficacy in early-stage MF and may reduce the rate of contact dermatitis, the main treatment-limiting side effect. Practical recommendations with emphasis of the types, time of appearance, and management of side effects are provided