National consensus on biologic dose reduction in psoriasis: a modified eDelphi procedure.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 DERMATOLOGY Journal of Dermatological Treatment Pub Date : 2022-12-14 DOI:10.1080/09546634.2022.2154570
L S van der Schoot, E M Baerveldt, W A van Enst, S P Menting, M M B Seyger, S L Wanders, I van Ee, A H Pieterse, J M P A van den Reek, E M G J de Jong
{"title":"National consensus on biologic dose reduction in psoriasis: a modified eDelphi procedure.","authors":"L S van der Schoot, E M Baerveldt, W A van Enst, S P Menting, M M B Seyger, S L Wanders, I van Ee, A H Pieterse, J M P A van den Reek, E M G J de Jong","doi":"10.1080/09546634.2022.2154570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis is applied in daily practice, although guidelines are lacking. Striving for clear criteria is important, as it leads to a consistent application of dose reduction.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To achieve consensus on criteria for biologic dose reduction in psoriasis patients with stable and low disease activity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online Delphi procedure (eDelphi) was conducted. Dutch dermatologists were invited to participate in a maximum of 3 voting rounds. Proposed statements were selected based on literature review and included criteria for the application of dose reduction and dosing schedules. Biologic dose reduction was defined as 'application of injection interval prolongation'. Proposed statements were rated using a 9-point Likert scale; consensus was reached when ≥70% of all voters rated 'agree' (7-9) and <15% rated 'disagree' (1-3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 27 dermatologists participated and reached a consensus on 15 recommendations over 2 voting rounds. Agreed statements included criteria for dose reduction eligibility, criteria for dose reduction (dis)continuation, and dosing schedules for adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab. Based on the eDelphi outcomes, an algorithm fit for implementation in current practice was developed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Recommendations of this national consensus process can guide clinicians, and consequently their patients, toward consistent application of biologic dose reduction.</p>","PeriodicalId":15639,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dermatological Treatment","volume":" ","pages":"2154570"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dermatological Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2022.2154570","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dose reduction of biologics for psoriasis is applied in daily practice, although guidelines are lacking. Striving for clear criteria is important, as it leads to a consistent application of dose reduction.

Objective: To achieve consensus on criteria for biologic dose reduction in psoriasis patients with stable and low disease activity.

Methods: An online Delphi procedure (eDelphi) was conducted. Dutch dermatologists were invited to participate in a maximum of 3 voting rounds. Proposed statements were selected based on literature review and included criteria for the application of dose reduction and dosing schedules. Biologic dose reduction was defined as 'application of injection interval prolongation'. Proposed statements were rated using a 9-point Likert scale; consensus was reached when ≥70% of all voters rated 'agree' (7-9) and <15% rated 'disagree' (1-3).

Results: A total of 27 dermatologists participated and reached a consensus on 15 recommendations over 2 voting rounds. Agreed statements included criteria for dose reduction eligibility, criteria for dose reduction (dis)continuation, and dosing schedules for adalimumab, etanercept, and ustekinumab. Based on the eDelphi outcomes, an algorithm fit for implementation in current practice was developed.

Conclusions: Recommendations of this national consensus process can guide clinicians, and consequently their patients, toward consistent application of biologic dose reduction.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于减少银屑病生物制剂剂量的全国共识:修改后的 eDelphi 程序。
背景:银屑病生物制剂的减量治疗已在日常实践中应用,但缺乏相关指南。努力制定明确的标准非常重要,因为它能使减量的应用保持一致:目的:就疾病活动稳定且较低的银屑病患者减少生物制剂剂量的标准达成共识:方法:采用在线德尔菲程序(eDelphi)。荷兰皮肤科医生应邀参加了最多 3 轮投票。根据文献综述筛选出建议声明,其中包括剂量减少和用药计划的应用标准。生物制剂剂量减少被定义为 "注射间隔延长"。建议声明采用 9 点李克特量表评分;当≥70% 的投票者评分为 "同意"(7-9)时,即达成共识:共有 27 位皮肤科医生参加了投票,并在两轮投票中就 15 项建议达成了共识。达成共识的声明包括阿达木单抗、依那西普和乌斯特库单抗的减量资格标准、减量(停药)标准和给药时间表。根据 eDelphi 的结果,制定了适合在当前实践中实施的算法:结论:这一全国共识过程中提出的建议可以指导临床医生并进而指导其患者一致应用生物制剂减量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
145
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Dermatological Treatment covers all aspects of the treatment of skin disease, including the use of topical and systematically administered drugs and other forms of therapy. The Journal of Dermatological Treatment is positioned to give dermatologists cutting edge information on new treatments in all areas of dermatology. It also publishes valuable clinical reviews and theoretical papers on dermatological treatments.
期刊最新文献
Boxed warnings for dermatologic JAK inhibitors: are they standardized worldwide? A review of biosimilars in psoriasis: impacts on efficacy, safety, access, and a first-hand look at biosimilar cost savings within the department of veterans affairs Postoperative risk assessment of post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation and the efficacy of delayed prevention following 532 nm Q-switched Nd:YAG laser treatment of solar lentigines: a randomized controlled study. Biodegradable polymers and platelet-rich plasma causing visual impairment: a literature review. Exploring the effect of deucravacitinib in patients with palmoplantar pustular psoriasis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1