Advertisement

Review of Outcome Measures in Trials and Practice for Psoriasis

  • Payvand KamraniEmail author
  • Arjun M. Bashyam
  • Steven R. Feldman
Psoriasis (J Wu, Section Editor)
  • 9 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Psoriasis

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review was to determine the most frequently utilized outcome measures in clinical trials and to review the scoring criteria, advantages, disadvantages, and application in research and clinical settings, as well as provide an overview of the published guidelines on the use of outcome measures in clinical practice.

Recent Findings

The most frequently utilized physician-reported outcome measurement instruments in clinical trials from 2018 to 2019 were Physician Global Assessment (PGA), Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI), and body surface area. The most frequently utilized patient-reported outcome measurement instruments were Dermatology Quality of Life Index, EQ-5D-5L, and patient global assessment.

Summary

In research, further standardization of outcome measures may allow for more useful comparison of different treatment modalities. In clinical practice, although, the PASI provides a detailed measurement of disease severity, and the PGA score has the advantage of being more clinically useful to physicians and patients.

Keywords

Psoriasis Outcome measures Psoriasis area severity index Physician’s global assessment National Psoriasis Foundation Dermatology quality life index 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Steven Feldman has received research, speaking, and/or consulting support from a variety of companies including Galderma, GSK/Stiefel, Almirall, Leo Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mylan, Celgene, Pfizer, Valeant, Abbvie, Samsung, Janssen, Lilly, Menlo, Merck, Novartis, Regeneron, Sanofi, Novan, Qurient, National Biological Corporation, Caremark, Advance Medical, Sun Pharma, Suncare Research, Informa, UpToDate, and National Psoriasis Foundation. He is founder and majority owner of www.DrScore.com and founder and part owner of Causa Research, a company dedicated to enhancing patients’ adherence to treatment.

Payvand Kamrani and Arjun Bashyam have no conflicts to disclose.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. 1.
    Christophers E. Psoriasis--epidemiology and clinical spectrum. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2001;26(4):314–20.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2230.2001.00832.x.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boehncke WH, Schon MP. Psoriasis. Lancet. 2015;386(9997):983–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61909-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Naldi L. Scoring and monitoring the severity of psoriasis. What is the preferred method? What is the ideal method? Is PASI passe? Facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2010;28(1):67–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2009.03.001.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feldman S, Krueger GG. Psoriasis assessment tools in clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(suppl 2):ii65–i8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poór AK, Rencz F, Brodszky V, Gulácsi L, Beretzky Z, Hidvégi B, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L in psoriasis patients. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(12):3409–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berth-Jones J, Grotzinger K, Rainville C, Pham B, Huang J, Daly S, et al. A study examining inter-and intrarater reliability of three scales for measuring severity of psoriasis: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, Physician’s Global Assessment and Lattice System Physician’s Global Assessment. Br J Dermatol. 2006;155(4):707–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Loo W, Diba V, Chawla M, Finlay A. Dermatology life quality index: influence of an illustrated version. Br J Dermatol. 2003;148(2):279–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Basra M, Fenech R, Gatt R, Salek M, Finlay A. The dermatology life quality index 1994–2007: a comprehensive review of validation data and clinical results. Br J Dermatol. 2008;159(5):997–1035.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Langenbruch A, Radtke M, Gutknecht M, Augustin M. Does the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) underestimate the disease-specific burden of psoriasis patients? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2019;33(1):123–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmitt J, Wozel G. The psoriasis area and severity index is the adequate criterion to define severity in chronic plaque-type psoriasis. Dermatology. 2005;210(3):194–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Langley RG, Feldman SR, Nyirady J, van de Kerkhof P, Papavassilis C. The 5-point Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) scale: a modified tool for evaluating plaque psoriasis severity in clinical trials. J Dermatol Treat. 2015;26(1):23–31.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Langley RG, Ellis CN. Evaluating psoriasis with psoriasis area and severity index, psoriasis global assessment, and lattice system physician’s global assessment. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;51(4):563–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feldman S. A quantitative definition of severe psoriasis for use in clinical trials. J Dermatol Treat. 2004;15(1):27–9.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Po LW. Clinical measures of disease severity and outcome in psoriasis: a critical appraisal of their quality. Br J Dermatol. 1999;141(2):185–91.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Long C, Finlay A, Averill R. The rule of hand: 4 hand areas= 2 FTU= 1 g. Arch Dermatol. 1992;128(8):1129–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stern RS, Armstrong RB, Anderson TF, Bickers DR, Lowe NJ, Harber L, et al. Effect of continued ultraviolet B phototherapy on the duration of remission of psoriasis: a randomized study. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1986;15(3):546–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Armstrong AW, Siegel MP, Bagel J, Boh EE, Buell M, Cooper KD, et al. From the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation: treatment targets for plaque psoriasis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76(2):290–8 This is a consensus paper that provides guidelines on what outcome measurements to use endrosed by the National Psoriasis Foundation. This is important as it is a well-known professional soceity offereing guidance on this topic. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Golbari NM, Porter ML, Kimball AB. Current guidelines for psoriasis treatment: a work in progress. Cutis. 2018;101(3S):10–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Coates LC, FitzGerald O, Merola JF, Smolen J, van Mens LJ, Bertheussen H, et al. Group for research and assessment of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis/outcome measures in rheumatology consensus-based recommendations and research agenda for use of composite measures and treatment targets in psoriatic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2018;70(3):345–55 This paper provided consenses from GRAPPA’s meeting to disucss recommendations for use of measurements and treatment targets. This is important as it provides additional guidelines for which outcome measurements to use. Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mrowietz U, Kragballe K, Reich K, Spuls P, Griffiths C, Nast A, et al. Definition of treatment goals for moderate to severe psoriasis: a European consensus. Arch Dermatol Res. 2011;303(1):1–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Puzenat E, Bronsard V, Prey S, Gourraud PA, Aractingi S, Bagot M, et al. What are the best outcome measures for assessing plaque psoriasis severity? A systematic review of the literature. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010;24:10–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kirby B, Richards HL, Woo P, Hindle E, Main CJ, Griffiths CE. Physical and psychologic measures are necessary to assess overall psoriasis severity. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;45(1):72–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    • Wechter T, Heath M, Aung-Din D, Sahni D, Cline A, Feldman SR. Current psoriasis efficacy outcome measures in clinical trials. Curr Dermatol Rep. 2018;7(4):261–8 This paper is a review paper in which studied the outcome measurements from 2017–2018. The methods was very similar to the methods used for this paper; however, we incorportated clinical practice guidelines and reviewed measurements for 2018–2019. Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pascoe VL, Enamandram M, Corey KC, Cheng CE, Javorsky EJ, Sung SM, et al. Using the Physician Global Assessment in a clinical setting to measure and track patient outcomes. JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151(4):375–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Dermatology Research, Department of DermatologyWake Forest School of MedicineWinston-SalemUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyWake Forest School of MedicineWinston-SalemUSA
  3. 3.Department of Social Sciences & Health PolicyWake Forest School of MedicineWinston-SalemUSA
  4. 4.Department of DermatologyUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations